Prepared in cooperation with the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Simulated Peak Inflows for Glacier Dammed 

Russell Fiord, near Yakutat, Alaska 

Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5234


U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey 
Cover Photograph. Hubbard Glacier damming Russell Fiord, August 24, 1986. Photograph taken by Dennis Trabant, U.S. Geological Survey. 
Simulated Peak Inflows for Glacier

Dammed Russell Fiord, near Yakutat,

Alaska

By Edward G. Neal

In cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5234

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Charles G. Groat, Director

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

For additional information write to: 

Chief, Water Resources Office 

U.S. Geological Survey

Alaska Science Center 

4230 University Drive, Suite 201 

Anchorage, AK 99508-4664 

http://alaska.usgs.gov

Suggested citation: Neal, E.G., 2004, Simulated peak inflows of glacier dammed Russell Fiord, near Yakutat, Alaska: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5234, 10 p.
iii

Contents

Abstract .......................... ............................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction ................... ............................................................................................................................... 1

Approach....................................................................................................................................................... 1

Determination of Daily Mean Inflows to Russell Lake............................................................................ 3

Regression Model of Russell Lake Inflow ................................................................................................ 3

Reliability and Limitation of Estimating Equations.......................................................................... 5

Flood-Frequency Analysis of Annual Maximum Russell Lake Inflows ....................................... 5

Regional Equations for Estimation of Peak Streamflow......................................................................... 8

Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 9

References Cited ........ ............................................................................................................................... 10

Figures

Figure 1. Location of Russell Lake drainage basin, lake-level monitoring site, 

 and streamflow-station sites near Yakutat, Alaska ............................................................... 2

Figure 3. Daily mean inflow into Russell Lake and predicted daily mean inflow from 

Figure 4. (A) Plot of predicted and observed daily mean inflow into Russell Lake, and 

Figure 2. Hubbard Glacier and moraine dam closing the entrance to Russell Fiord ........................ 3

regression equation .................................................................................................................... 4

(B) Graph of residuals for Russell Lake regression equation............................................... 6

Figure 5. (A) Regression plot of Russell Lake daily mean inflow, using Ophir Creek and 

Situk River as predictors, and (B) Graph of residuals for the regression equation.......... 7

Tables

Table 1. Annual synthetic peak inflows occurring between May 15 to October 15 for Russell 

Lake, water years 1992-2002 ..................................................................................................... 8

Table 2. Summary of peak inflow of selected recurrence intervals at Russell Lake, 

Table 3. Peak inflows to Russell Lake for selected recurrence intervals, developed from 

Table 4. Peak inflows to Russell Lake for selected recurrence intervals, developed from 

Alaska .......................................................................................................................................... 8

regional regression equations and using a storage component for the drainage 

basin.............................................................................................................................................. 9

regional regression equations without inclusion of a storage component for the 

drainage basin.............................................................................................................................. 9
iv

CONVERSION FACTORS, VERTICAL DATUM, AND ABBREVIATIONS

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

yard (yd) 0.9144 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

mile, nautical (nmi) 1.852 kilometer (km)

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3

/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F)) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:

°C=(°F - 32)/1.8

Sea Level: In this report “sea level” refers to the National Geodetic Verical Datum of 1929—A 

geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of the United 

States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929. Elevations used in this report are 

referenced to Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) which is a local datum. This datum is 8.2 feet 

below the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929.

WATER YEAR

Water year is the 12-month period, October 1 through September 30. The water year is 

designated by the calendar year in which it ends and which includes 9 of the 12 months. Thus, 

the year ending September 30, 2002, is called the “2002 water year.”
1

Simulated Peak Inflows for Glacier Dammed

Russell Fiord, Alaska

By Edward G. Neal

Abstract

In June 2002, Hubbard Glacier advanced across the 

entrance to 35-mile-long Russell Fiord creating a glacierdammed lake. After closure of the ice and moraine dam, 

runoff from mountain streams and glacial melt caused the 

level in “Russell Lake” to rise until it eventually breached 

the dam on August 14, 2002. Daily mean inflows to the 

lake during the period of closure were estimated on the 

basis of lake stage data and the hypsometry of Russell 

Lake. Inflows were regressed against the daily mean 

streamflows of nearby Ophir Creek and Situk River to 

generate an equation for simulating Russell Lake inflow. 

The regression equation was used to produce 11 years of 

synthetic daily inflows to Russell Lake for the 1992-2002 

water years. A flood-frequency analysis was applied to 

the peak daily mean inflows for these 11 years of record 

to generate a 100-year peak daily mean inflow of 235,000 

cubic feet per second. Regional-regression equations also 

were applied to the Russell Lake basin, yielding a 100-

year inflow of 157,000 cubic feet per second.

Introduction

Russell Fiord, commonly referred to as Russell 

Lake during periods of ice dam closure, is near Yakutat in 

southeast Alaska (fig. 1). Hubbard Glacier, which has been 

advancing for more than 100 years, has closed the entrance 

to 35-mile-long Russell Fiord twice during the last 20 

years (in 1986 and 2002) by pushing ice and submarine 

glacial sediments across the fiord mouth (figs. 1 and 2). 

Both of the dams failed before the lake level rose high 

enough for water to spill over a low pass at the southern 

end of the fiord. The floods resulting from the dam failures 

in 1986 and 2002 had maximum peak discharges of about 

4,000,000 ft3

/s and 1,850,000 ft3/s, respectively, making 

them the largest recorded glacial-lake outburst flood events 

in historical time (Trabant and others, 2003). 

If future closures of Russell Fiord were to raise the 

level of the lake to an elevation of about 131 feet above 

sea level, the water would begin to overflow into the 

upper reaches of Old Situk Creek (fig. 1), a tributary to 

the Situk River (Paul, 1988). The Situk River supports a 

world-class sport and commercial fishery near Yakutat. 

Paul (1988) estimated that overflow from Russell Lake 

could increase the average discharge of the Situk River 

by tenfold. Trabant and others (1991) stated, “Analysis of 

recent glacier behavior and current conditions indicates 

that a closure that will eventually result in overflow into 

the Situk is likely to occur within a decade”. While such 

a closure has not yet occurred, the economic, social and 

physical impacts of such a change in the flow of the Situk 

River prompted this evaluation of potential flood flows 

into Russell Lake.

In both 1986 and 2002, the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service 

(USFS), installed a gaging station (USGS Station number 15130000) to record water levels in Russell Lake 

subsequent to the damming of the fiord. These stage data 

are published in Seitz and others (1986) and in Trabant 

and others (2003). In the follow-up study described here, 

potential peak inflows to Russell Lake were computed to 

provide data needed to estimate the potential flood flow 

characteristics should Hubbard Glacier again advance and 

dam the fiord for an extended time. This report presents 

the synthetic peak inflow data, which, when used in conjunction with flood-routing models provided by the Alaska 

Department of Transportation, will be useful to Federal, 

State, and local agencies in preparing contingency plans 

for the potential overflow of glacier-dammed Russell Lake 

into the Situk River drainage near Yakutat. 

Approach

In order to determine peak inflows to Russell Lake, 

daily mean inflows were derived from lake stage data 
2

Russell Lake 

Basin Boundary 

Station No. 

Station No. 

15129600 

Station No. 

15129500 

H U B B A R D

Valerie Glacier

Turner Gl

Haenke Gl

Russell

(Fiord)

Disenchantment Bay

Y A K U T A T B A Y

G U L F O F A L A S K A

Situk River

Old Situk Cr

Ophir Creek

Lake

Hidden Gl

West Nunatak Gl

East Nunatak Gl

(Nunatak Fiord)

G L 

A C I E 

R

C A N A

D A 

UNITED STATES 

Airport 

Osier Island 

covered by ice Haenke

Ice dam location 

139o 139o30' 

60o 

59o 

30' 

0 10 20 30 KILOMETERS 

0 10 20 MILES

Study 

Area 

ALASKA 

Alaska.

Simulated Peak Inflows for Glacier Dammed Russell Fiord, Alaska

15130000 

Variegated Gl

Yakutat 

 Is 

and point of failure 

Figure 1. Location of Russell Lake drainage basin, lake-level monitoring site, and streamflow-station sites near Yakutat, 
Determination of Daily Mean Inflows to Russell Lake 3

Figure 2. Hubbard Glacier and moraine dam closing the entrance to Russell Fiord (photograph by U.S. Forest 

Service, July 7, 2002).

collected during the period of closure in 2002 (fig. 3). 

Daily mean inflows were regressed against streamflow 

data for nearby Ophir Creek and Situk River. The resulting regression equation was used to synthesize daily mean 

inflows to Russell Lake for the 1992-2002 water years, 

the period of concurrent record at Ophir Creek and Situk 

River. A flood-frequency analysis was applied to the 

peak daily mean inflows for each of the 11 water years to 

generate peak daily mean inflows of 2-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, 

200-, and 500-year recurrence intervals. Regional-regression equations also were applied to the Russell Lake basin 

to generate peak daily mean discharges for comparison. 

Determination of Daily Mean Inflows

to Russell Lake

Daily mean inflows to Russell Lake during the 1986 

and 2002 glacial closures of the lake were developed in 

several steps. Hypsometry data were derived from topographic maps to determine water storage volumes corresponding with stage, thus facilitating the development of a 

stage/storage rating. Daily lake storage volumes were differenced between days (midnight to midnight) to provide 

daily changes in storage, which were then converted to 

daily mean inflows. The daily mean inflows calculated in 

this study compared well with those developed by Trabant 

and others (2003).

Regression Model of Russell Lake

Inflow

Daily mean inflows to Russell Lake were regressed 

against daily mean flows of Ophir Creek near Yakutat 

(USGS Station number 15129600), Situk River near 

Yakutat (15129500), Alsek River near Yakutat (15129000) 

and daily precipitation at Yakutat. Significant correlation 

coefficients were developed using the data from these sites 

independently or in step-wise multiple regressions. The 

coefficient of determination (R2

) was reduced and standard 

error increased, however, when the flow of Alsek River 

and precipitation at Yakutat were used as variables in the 

equation. Therefore, the flows of Ophir Creek and Situk 
4 Simulated Peak Inflows for Glacier Dammed Russell Fiord, Alaska

River were the only two independent variables used in the 

generation of the regression equation. The regression equation was developed using the Missing Streamflow Estimation program (MISTE) within the USGS Automated Data 

Processing System (ADAPS) (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2003). 

 Initial regression analyses revealed problems in 

accurately predicting inflows to Russell Lake immediately 

following initial closure of the dam in 2002. Examination 

of aerial photographs taken subsequent to the closure indicated some overflow over the moraine dam was occurring 

throughout most of the period that the Russell Lake stage 

was being recorded. Trabant and others (2003) reported 

relatively small amounts of water spilling over the dam 

during the 2002 closure. In this investigation, however, 

the overflow was great enough to exert a strong influence 

on initial regression models. Inspection of photographs 

taken by the USGS, the National Park Service, and the 

USFS revealed that the amount of the overflow was highly 

variable. Overflow generally decreased from the date of 

the initial closure in June 2002 until about July 21, 2002, 

when the dam closed completely and no overflow was 

visible. A series of photographs is available for inspection 

at www. fs.fed.us/r10/tongass/forest_facts/photogallery/

hubbard_photos.html. The moraine dam was photographed 

less frequently after July 21, 2002, and photographs taken 

August 2, 2002 indicate the closure was probably still 

intact. Sometime between August 2 and August 10, water 

again began to flow over the moraine dam. Photographs 

taken on August 10 indicate flow over the moraine dam, 

which may have continued until the dam failed on August 

14, 2002. Because of the dynamic nature of the fiord 

closure and erosional processes of the moraine dam, it was 

determined that there was no reliable method available to 

estimate discharge over the moraine dam.

To reduce regression error associated with flow over 

the moraine dam the aerial photographs of the closure 

point were examined to identify a period when flow over 

the dam was minimal. It was determined that the period 

July 16 to August 13 was most suitable for use in the 

INFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 

100,000 

80,000 

60,000 

50,000 

40,000 

30,000 

20,000 

10,000 

Observed daily inflow 

Predicted daily inflow from regression equation 

15130000 Russell Lake near Yakutat, Alaska 

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 

JULY AUGUST 

2002 

Figure 3. Daily mean inflow into Russell Lake and predicted daily mean inflow from regression equation.
regression analysis. The following regression equation 

was developed utilizing daily mean streamflow data from 

Ophir Creek and Situk River. It was found that the coefficient of determination increased and the standard error 

decreased with Situk River data was lagged by one day.

QRussell = 16003 + 2798 (QOphir) - 23.806 (QSituk) 

where

QRussell = daily mean inflow into Russell Lake, in 

ft3

/s (cubic feet per second),

QOphir = daily mean discharge of Ophir Creek, in ft3

/s 

and,

QSituk = daily mean discharge of Situk River, in ft3

/s.

The coefficient of determination of the equation is 

0.97 and the standard error 2,410 ft3/s. Plots of the regression analysis are shown in figures 3-5. This equation was 

used to generate synthetic daily mean inflows for Russell 

Lake for the 1992-2002 water years, the years of concurrent record at Ophir Creek and Situk River.

Further attempts to develop an optimum regression 

model involved regressing the Russell Lake inflow data for 

1986 against several stream gages that were operational in 

1986. Again, this inflow hydrograph compared well with 

that developed by Trabant and others (2003) and Seitz 

and others (1986). During the 1986 Russell Fiord closure, 

gaging stations were not being operated on the Situk River 

or Ophir Creek; therefore, regression equations were 

developed using flow data from the following stations as 

predictors:

Power Creek near Cordova (station 15216000)

Klehini River near Klukwan (station 15056560)

Skagway River at Skagway (station 15056100)

Mendenhall River near Auke Bay (station 15052500)

While these stream gaging stations are all located in 

southeast Alaska, none are within 100 miles of the Russell Lake basin. None of these stations either combined 

or independently, yielded regressions suitable for further 

analysis.

Reliability and Limitations of Estimating

Equation

Although the computed value of the coefficient of 

determination of the regression equation is very high 

(0.97), the asymmetric distribution of the 29 daily inflow 

values for Russell Lake used in the analysis suggests that 

the statistical reliability of the equation should be considered to be only fair to poor. The inflows determined for 

Regression Model of Russell Lake Inflow 5

August 12 (88,400 ft3/s) and August 13 (45,800 ft3/s) are 

considerably larger than the other 27 values, which range 

from about 16,000 to 33,000 ft3

/s. Consequently, both the 

slope and intercept of the resulting equation are strongly 

influenced by the two greatest discharges. 

The regression equation may not be applicable 

beyond the range of discharges used to derive the equation. 

Extrapolation beyond the range of computed inflow for 

Russell Lake may yield estimates with large errors. Additional limitations to the predictive capabilities of the equation include seasonal variability in hydrologic relations 

between the predictor sites (Ophir Creek and Situk River), 

moraine/ice-dam overflow, and uncertainty of stable runoff 

contributions from Hubbard Glacier including the possibility of glacial outburst floods contributing inflow to Russell 

Lake. 

Flood-Frequency Analysis of Annual

Maximum Russell Lake Inflows

Annual maximum daily mean inflow values were 

selected from the synthetic inflow record for Russell Lake 

for the 1992-2002 water years and analyzed using the 

USGS program PEAKFQ. PEAKFQ performs statistical 

flood-frequency analyses of annual-peak flows following procedures recommended in Bulletin 17B of the U.S. 

Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data (1982). 

Bulletin 17B procedures characterize the magnitude and 

frequency of instantaneous annual peak flows. Typically 

these procedures are applied to instantaneous peak streamflows; for the purposes of this analysis, however, the maximum daily mean inflows were assumed to be equivalent to 

instantaneous peaks for the Russell Lake drainage.

PEAKFQ generates estimates of annual peak flows 

for recurrence intervals of 1.5, 2, 2.33, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 

200, and 500 years. Although the recurrence interval 

represents the long-term average period between floods of 

a specific magnitude, large floods could occur at shorter 

intervals or even within the same year. The probability of a 

flood of a given recurrence interval occurring in a specified 

time period can be determined using the equation given by 

Zembrzuski and Dunn (1979, p. 22):

P = 1-(1-1/t)

n

, 

where

P = the probability of at least one exceedence within

 the specified time period,

n = the specified time period, 

and

t = the recurrence interval.
6 Simulated Peak Inflows for Glacier Dammed Russell Fiord, Alaska DAILY MEAN RESIDUAL, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND DAILY MEAN INFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

100,000

80,000

60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000 

20,000 

10,000

8,000

6,000 

4,000 

2,000 

0 

-2,000 

-4,000 

-6,000 

15130000 Russell Lake near Yakutat, Alaska 

15130000 

Predicted inflow 

Observed inflow 

Daily residual 

B 

A 

Russell Lake near Yakutat, Alaska 

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 

JULY AUGUST 

2002 

Figure 4. (A) Plot of predicted and observed daily mean inflow into Russell Lake and (B) Graph of 

residuals for Russell Lake regression equation.
Regression Model of Russell Lake Inflow 7

A

B

15130000 Russell Lake near Yakutat, Alaska 

15130000 Russell Lake near Yakutat, Alaska 

REGION OF 

OVER PREDICTION 

REGION OF 

UNDER PREDICTION 

REGION OF 

UNDER PREDICTION 

REGION OF 

OVER PREDICTION 

0 

10,000 

20,000 

30,000 

40,000 

50,000 

60,000 

70,000 

80,000 

90,000 

100,000 

-6,000 

-4,000 

-2,000 

0 

2,000 

4,000 

6,000 

8,000 

RESIDUAL , RUSSELL LAKE INFLOW-PREDICTED,

IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 

PREDICTED INFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 

Russell Lake inflow 

Russell Lake inflow 

10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 

RUSSELL LAKE INFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND 

Figure 5. (A) Regression plot of Russell Lake daily mean inflow, using Ophir Creek and Situk River as 

predictors, and (B) Graph of residuals for the regression equation.

0 
-- --

-- --

8 Simulated Peak Inflows for Glacier Dammed Russell Fiord, Alaska

P can be multiplied by 100 to obtain chance of 

exceedence. For example, the risk of having a flood that 

equals or exceeds the 100-year flood (1 percent chance 

of annual occurrence) in any 50-year period is about 40 

percent, and for any 90-year period, the risk increases to 

about 60 percent.

When using an estimating program such as MISTE 

to generate a statistical flow model, it would be preferable 

to compare modeled flow to actual flow over the range of 

seasons. This would allow for a quantitative analysis of 

the model’s sensitivity to changes in flow conditions with 

changes in season. One would expect seasonal variability 

in the flow relation between inflow to Russell Lake, and 

the flow of Ophir Creek and Situk River, due to differences 

in basin characteristics and climate. Because seasonal 

inflow data for Russell Lake was unavailable, an alternative approach was used to determine if the synthetic peak 

inflow data were reasonable

Ophir Creek and Situk River, which originate within 

the Yakutat Forelands at elevations near sea level, are both 

strongly influenced by warmer maritime climate conditions. The Russell Lake drainage has a mean elevation of 

about 680 feet and cooler climatic conditions, as evidenced 

by glaciers that cover over one-third of the basin. Inspection of the discharge hydrographs for the Alsek River near 

Yakutat (station 15129000) and the Mendenhall River near 

Auke Bay (station 15052500)—two glacially influenced 

streams in approximately the same region—indicate that 

peak flows seldom, if ever, occur in these systems from 

about mid-October through about mid-May of each year. 

Table 1. Annual synthetic peak inflows occurring 

between May 15 to October 15 for Russell Lake, water 

years 1992-2002. [ft3

/s, cubic feet per second]

Water year Date 

(mm/dd/yy)

Inflow

(ft3

/s)

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

10/04/91

10/07/92

10/09/93

09/22/95

09/25/96

09/23/97

09/12/98

09/18/99

09/28/00

10/15/00

08/21/02

172,000

119,000

98,800

162,000

142,000

130,000

133,000

172,000

165,000

205,000

127,000

Most of the precipitation in the elevated regions of these 

drainages falls as snow during this period, thus reducing the probability of the occurrence of large peak flows. 

Therefore, synthetic Russell Lake peak inflows were used 

in the flood-frequency analysis only if they occurred from 

May 15 to October 15. Utilizing these criteria, 11 peak 

flows were selected from the synthetic Russell Lake inflow 

data, one for each of the 1992-2002 water years (table 1).

Results of the flood-frequency analyses generated 

using PEAKFQ are shown in table 2. The 100-year peak 

inflow into Russell Lake is 235,000 ft3

/s and the 95 percent 

confidence limits for a flow of this magnitude are shown to 

be between 201,000 and 320,000 ft3

/s. Although the confidence intervals provided are not directly applicable to the 

Russell Lake inflows — because the peak inflow data were 

generated using a regression equation — they do illustrate 

the range of uncertainty of the flood frequency analysis.

Table 2. Summary of peak inflow of selected recurrance 

intervals at Russell Lake, Alaska. [ft3

/s, cubic feet per second; --, 

not determined]

Bulletin 17B1 inflow estimates 

and corresponding 95 percent 

confidence limits

Annual 

exceedence 

probability

Recurrance 

interval 

(years)

Russell 

Lake 

inflow 

(ft3

/s)

Lower 

(ft3

/s)

Upper 

(ft3

/s)

0.5

0.2

0.1

0.04

0.02

0.01

0.005

0.002

0.6667

0.4292

2

5

10

25

50

100

200

500

1.5

2.33

145,000

173,000

189,000

208,000

222,000

235,000

248,000

264,000

133,000

150,000

130,600

155,000

168,000

182,000

192,000

201,000

209,000

219,000

162,000

203,000

231,000

267,000

294,000

320,000

347,000

382,000

1

U.S. Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data (1982)

Regional Equations for Peak

Streamflow Estimation

Because of the paucity of data available to develop 

reliable regression equations for estimating Russell Lake 

inflows, additional calculations of peak flows were generated on the basis of recently developed regional-regression equations (Curran and others, 2003) for comparison 
Summary 9

with the estimates made using the Russell Lake inflow 

regression equation. Curran and others (2003) provided a 

computer program to compute peak-streamflow frequencies, standard errors of prediction, confidence limits, and 

equivalent years of record for ungaged sites. A critical 

distinction must be made between the values generated 

from synthetic inflow data and those generated using 

regional-regression equations. The flood-frequency analyses completed from the inflow data do not include a storage component for Russell Lake. Therefore, the computed 

inflows will undoubtedly be significantly larger than flows 

measured at the lake outlet, which are likely to be controlled in part by the geometry and hydraulic properties of 

the lake outlet.

Regional regression equations developed by Curran 

and others (2003) include the area of lakes and ponds in 

a drainage basin as a significant variable in the equations. 

The inflow values in tables 3 and 4 were generated with 

the equations developed by Curran and others (2003) using 

the basin characteristics of Russell Lake in conjunction 

with a precipitation of 220 inches and a mean minimum 

January temperature of 15o

F as given by Jones and Fahl 

(1994). Table 3 includes the 75.6 mi2

 surface of Russell 

Lake as the area of lakes and ponds, which represents 

a storage component in the equation. Table 4 does not 

include the area of the lake as a storage component in the 

regional regression equation.

The tables indicate a substantial difference in peak 

flows due to the inclusion of a storage component for Russell Lake. The 100-year flood is reduced by 93,100 ft3

/s 

Table 3. Peak inflows to Russell Lake for selected recurrence intervals, developed from regional regression 

equations1

 and using a storage component for the drainage 

basin.

[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; SE, standard error; %, percent]

Recurrance 

Interval 

(years)

Inflow 

(ft3

/s)

SE 

(+%)

SE

 (-%)

Confidence 

Intervals

5% 95%

2

5

10

25

50

100

200

500

31,800

40,000

45,700

53,000

58,600

63,900

69,700

77,100

46.3

45.6

46.0

47.6

49.3

51.5

54.0

57.8

-31.7

-31.3

-31.5

-32.2

-33.0

-34.0

-35.1

-36.6

16,900

21,400

24,400

27,800

30,100

32,100

34,000

36,200

59,900

74,600

85,800

101,000

114,000

127,000

143,000

164,000

1

Curran and others, 2003

Table 4. Peak inflows to Russell Lake for selected recurrence intervals, developed from regional regression 

equations1

 without inclusion of a storage component for the 

drainage basin.

[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; SE, standard error; %, percent]

Recurrance 

Interval 

(years)

Inflow

 (ft3

/s)

SE

 (+%)

SE

 (-%)

Confidence 

Intervals

5% 95%

2

5

10

25

50

100

200

500

76,400

97,900

113,000

131,000

144,000

157,000

171,000

188,000

47.2

46.5

46.9

48.5

50.3

52.5

55.1

59.0

-32.1

-31.7

-31.9

-32.7

-33.5

-34.4

-35.5

-37.1

40,200

52,000

59,400

67,800

73,300

77,900

82,300

86,900

145,000

185,000

213,000

252,000

284,000

317,000

354,000

405,000

1

Curran and others, 2003

when a storage component for Russell Lake is included in 

the calculations.

Although the magnitude of the 100-year flood generated using the regional-regression equations (without storage component) is substantially lower than the 100-year 

flood generated using the flood-frequency analysis of the 

synthetic inflow data (157,000 ft3

/s as opposed to 235,000 

ft3

/s), the synthetic inflow 100-year discharge does lie 

within the confidence intervals computed for the regionalregression equation 100-year discharge. It is also important 

to note that the drainage area of Russell Lake basin is 744 

mi2

, which is considerably larger than the drainage area of 

any basin used in development of the regional-regression 

equations. 

Summary

In June 2002, Hubbard Glacier advanced across the 

entrance to the 35-mile-long Russell Fiord, creating a glacier-dammed lake. Water flowing into the lake from mountain streams and glacial melt caused the lake level to rise. 

Daily inflows to the lake were derived using stage data 

and Russell Lake hypsometry data. A regression equation 

simulating Russell Lake inflow was developed using the 

daily mean inflows to the lake and daily mean streamflows 

of nearby Ophir Creek and Situk River. The regression 

equation was then used to generate 11 years of synthetic 

inflow data for Russell Lake. A flood-frequency analysis 
10 Simulated Peak Inflows for Glacier Dammed Russell Fiord, Alaska

was applied to the peak daily mean inflows for each of 

the 11 water years to generate a 100-year peak daily mean 

inflow of 235,000 cubic feet per second. Regional-regression equations also were applied to the Russell Lake basin; 

these equations yielded a 100-year peak inflow of 157,000 

cubic feet per second. 

References Cited

Curran, J.H., Meyer, D.F., and Tasker, G.D., 2003, 

Estimating the magnitude and frequency of peak 

streamflows for ungaged sites on streams in Alaska and 

conterminous basins in Canada: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4188, 109 p.

Jones, S.H., and Fahl, C.B., 1994, Magnitude and frequency of floods in Alaska and conterminous basins 

of Canada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigation Report 93-4179, 122p.

Paul, Les, 1988, Situk River flood plain analysis: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Alaska 

Region, R10-MB-30, 12p., 15pl., 3 annotated photosmaps.

 Seitz, H.R., Thomas, D.S., and Tomlinson, Bud, 1986, 

The storage and release of water from a large glacierdammed lake: Russell Lake near Yakutat, Alaska, 1986: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 86-545.

Trabant, D.C., Krimmel, R.M., and Post, Austin, 1991, A 

preliminary forecast of the advance of Hubbard Glacier 

and its influence on Russell Fiord, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

90-4172, 34p.

Trabant, D.C., March, R.S., and Thomas, D.S., 2003, 

Hubbard Glacier, Alaska: Growing and advancing in 

spite of global climate change and the 1986 and 2002 

Russell Lake outburst floods: U.S. Geological Survey 

Fact Sheet FS-001-03, 4p.

U.S. Geological Survey-WRD., 2003, User’s manual 

for the national water information system of the U.S. 

Geological Survey Automated Data Processing System 

(ADAPS): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

03-123 version 4.3.

U.S. Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data, 

1982, Guidelines for determining flood-flow frequency: 

Hydrology Subcommittee Bulletin 17B, 28p. [available 

from the National Technical Information Service as 

report PB-86-157278/AS].

Zembrzuski, T.J., Jr., and Dunn, Bernard, 1979, Techniques for estimating magnitude and frequency of 

floods on rural unregulated streams in New York State 

excluding Long Island: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations 79-83, 82p.