A 

Floods in Indiana: 

Technical Manual for Estimating 

Their Magnitude and Frequency 

Floods in Indiana: 

Technical Manual for Estimating 

Their Magnitude and Frequency 

By L. G. D'avis 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 710 

Pn3_pa1·ed in coope1·ation with the 

Indiana Department of Natu1·al Resources, D,ivision of Water 

1974 
United States Department of the Interior 

ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary 

Geological Survey 

V. E. McKelvey, Director 

Library of Congress catalog-card No. 74-600190 

Free on application to the U.S. Geological Survey, National Center, Reston, Va. 22092 
CONTENTS 

Page 

Abstract ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1 

[ntroduction ------------------------------------------------------------- 1 

Purpose and scope --------------------------------------------------- 1 

Acknowledgments _ __ _ _ ___ __ ___ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ____ _ ____ _ ___ __ __ _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ _ _ _ 1 

Basic data -------------------------------------------------------------- 2 

Peak-discharge data -------------------------------------------------- 2 

Flood-frequency curves _____ -------------------------------------- _ --- 2 

Regional analysis -------------------------------------------------------- 3 

Multiple-regression method -------------------------------------------- 3 

Watershed cha1·acteristics _____________________________ ---------------- 6 

Regression models _ ___ _ ___ _____ _ _ ___ _ _ __ __ _ __ _ _ ___ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ 7 

Main-stem streams __ _ _ ___ _ _ _ __ __ _ ___ _ _ __ __ _ __ __ _ __ ___ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ ___ __ 12 

Illustrative examples -------------------- ___ __ _____ _______ _______ ____ _ 13 

Limits of application ----------------------------------------------------- 16 

Summary --------------------------------· ------------·------------------ 17 

References -------------------------------------------------------------- 17 

FIGURE 1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6-9. 

ILLUSTRATIONS 

Map showing gaging-station locations ----------------------

Map showing physiography and principal watershed boundaries 

Graph showing relationship of drainage density to drainage 

area by physiographic regions ---------------------------

Map showing average annual excess precipitation -----------

Map showing major hydrologic soil groups ------------------

Graphs showing: 

6. Qt peak discharges versus river distance for Wabash 

River ------------------------------------------ 7. Qt peak discharge versus river distance for White River 

8. Qt peak discharge versus river distance for East Fork 

White River ------------------------------------ 9. Standard error of regression models versus recurrence 

Page 

5 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

interval ---------------------------------------- 14 

10. Log-probability plot of computed t-year discharges for South 

Hogan Creek near Dillsboro ----------------------------- 16 

11-28. Graphical solutions for regression equations for models 1, 2, 

and 3 ------------------------------------------------- 29 

TABLES 

Page 

TABLE 1. Probability of a flood of given recurrence interval being exceeded 

during the indicated time periods ------------------------------ 3 

2. Regression coefficients for model 1 ------------------------------ 7 

3. Regression coefficients for model 2 ------------------------------ 9 

4. Regression coefficients for model 3 ------------------------------ 9 

5. Regression coefficients for model 4 ------------------------------ 13 

6. T-year peak discharges at gaging stations, in cubic feet per second__ 20 

7. Selected watershed characteristics and maximum floods at gaging 

stations ---------------------------------------------------- 26 

III 
GLOSSARY 

Annual peak discharge. The highest peak discharge in a water year. 

Cubic feet per second (ft3/s). The rate of discharge repres·enting a volume of 1 cubic 

foot of water passing a given point during 1 s.econd and is equivalent to 7.48 

gallons per second, 448.8 gallons p€r minute, or 0.028 cubic metres per second. 

Discharge. The rate of flow of water in a stream at a given place and within a given 

period of time. 

Drainage area. An area from which surface runoff is carried away by a single drainage 

system. Also called water shed, drainage basin. 

Evapotranspiration. The amount of precipitation that returns to the atmosphere as 

vapor by the combined action of evaporation and transpiration by plants. 

Flood. A relatively high flow, as measured by either gage height or discharge, which 

usually overtops the natural banks along some reaches of a stream. 

Flood peak. The maximum rate of flow, usually expressed in cubic feet per second, that 

occurred during a flood. 

Frequency. The number of occurrences of a certain phenomenon in a given period of 

time. 

Gaging station. A particula1· site on a stream where systematic observations of gage 

height and discharge are obtained. The station usually has a recording gage for 

continuous measurement of the elevation of the water surface in the channel. 

Geomorphic factors. Physical characteristics of watersheds that are the result of 

fluvial processes and have a direct effect on the magnitudes of floods. 

Geomorphology. The study of landform development and fluvial processes in various 

climatic regions. 

Physiographic region. Areas where soils and drainage have been developed on geologically similar materials. 

Precipitation index. An amount of precipitation that directly affects peak discharge. In 

this study it is the average annual precipitation minus the sum of average annual 

evapotranspiration and mean annual sno"\\-iall (water equivalent). 

Probability. The likelihood or chance that a flood or storm will occur or that the magnitude of a flood or storm will be equaled or exceeded. 

Qt. The discharge for a recurrence interval of t-years. It is the annual maximum peak 

flow that will be exceeded every t-number of years on the average. 

Recurrence interval. The average interval of time within which a given flood will be 

exceeded once. Also called return period. 

Regression equation. An equation derived by methods of regression. It is a mathematical 

relationship between a dependent variable and one or more independent variables. 

Regulated stream. A stream that has been subjected to control by rese1·voirs, diversions, 

or other manmade hydraulic structures. 

Return period. See recurrence interval. 

Standard error of regression. Refers to the standard error of estimate of the dependent variable. It is the standard deviation of the residual errors about a regression line used to predict the dependent variable converted to an ave1·age percentage. Approximately two-thirds of the data values for the dependent variable are 

included within one standard error of estimate. 

Time of concentration. The time required for storm runoff from the most remote part 

of a watershed to reach the outlet or point of discharge on the sti·eam, after the 

beginning of runoff. 

Water year. A continuous 12-month period from October 1 to September 30, during 

which streamflow data are collected, compiled, and reported. 

Watershed. See drainage area. 

IV 
FACTORS FOR CONVERTING ENGLISH UNITS TO 

INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM (SI) UNITS 

The following factors may be used to convert the English units published herein to 

the International System of Units (Sl): 

English units 

inches (in.) 

feet (ft) 

miles (mi) 

feet per mile (ft/mi) 

square miles (mF) 

miles per square mile (mi/mF) 

cubic feet per second (fta/s) 

Multiply by 

25.4 

.305 

1.61 

.189 

2.59 

.621 

.028 

To obtain SI units 

millimetres (mm) 

metres (m) 

kilometres (km) 

metres per kilometre (m/km) 

square kilometres (km2 ) 

kilometres per square kilometre (km/km2 ) 

cubic metres per second (m3 /s) 

v 

Floods in Indiana: Technical Manual for Estimating 

Their Magnitude and Frequency 

By L. G. Davis 

ABSTRACT 

This manual provides methods for estimating the 

magnitude and frequency of floods on unregulated and 

unurbanized streams in Indiana that drain at least 15 

square miles ( 38.8 square kilometres) . The methods 

provide the design engineer with a means of estimating flood frequencies without having to analyze the 

records at individual streamflow sites. 

The estimating equations in this manual are based 

on relations between floods of specific return periods 

and selected watershed characteristics. The most significant factors for estimating flood peaks in Indiana 

were found to be drainage area and precipitation index. 

The shape of a watershed was also found very significant in development of the regional equations. Other 

variables used in the regional equations are physical 

characteristics that further explain differences in the 

magnitudes of floods from the waltersheds. 

The regional equations are multivariate regression 

equations that relate peak discharges of 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 

50-, and 100-year recurrence intervals to watershed 

characteristics and are essentially for natural streams. 

In this study, if 25 percent or more of the drainage 

area of a stream is above a reservoir, it was considered 

to be regulated, and flood peaks from it were not included in the analysis unless it could be determined 

that flood peaks were not materially affected, as in the 

case of several streams below small water-supply reservoirs. The equations also do not apply to streams that 

are affected by a high degree of urbanization. 

INTRODUCTION 

PURPOSE AND SCOPE 

Adequate regulatory, planning, and design 

activities along rivers and streams depend upon 

the ability to define the magnitude and frequency of floods that are apt to occur. The purpose of this manual is to present and illustrate 

a method for estimating flood discharges at ungaged sites on natural flowing streams in the 

1 

State of Indiana. The method may also be applied to compute peak-discharge frequency 

curves at gaged sites where an insufficient number of flood peaks have been observed. 

Flood discharges at gaged sites where an adequate number of flood peaks have been observed 

are shown in table 6. Values from the station 

frequency curves, in general, are the most reliable estimators of future floods at those sites. 

The log-Pearson Type III distribution function, which was used to fit log-probability frequency curves to observed peak discharges at 

the gaging stations, is described in the report. 

Frequency-discharge data, watershed characteristics, and other pertinent data are tabulated 

in tables 6 and 7 for each of the 149 gaging stations used in the study. 

Relations from this study are better defined 

than those from previous studies because of the 

improvement in techniques of regional analyses 

and the expansion of the flood-peak data base. 

Data deficiencies are identified, and needs for 

further studies are included in the summary. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

This manual is the product of a cooperative 

agreement with the Indiana State Department 

of Nat ural Resources. 

Technical assistance was provided by personnel of the Indiana State Department of Natural 

Resources. Personnel from the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Ohio River Basin Commission are 

thanked for their interest and participation at 

several meetings held during the course of the 

study to discuss results of the analysis. 
BASIC DATA 

PEAK-DISCHARGE DATA 

Peak discharges from 149 gaging stations in 

Indiana having at least 10 years of record were 

used as the basic data from which the floodfrequency relations in this manual were developed. Locations of these gaging stations are 

shown in figure 1, and the geographic coordinates for each station are listed in table 6. Annual peak discharges through the 1971 water 

year were used in the analysis of the flood data. 

Annual peaks that were affected by regulation 

were omitted based on the criteria that if 25 

percent or more of the drainage area at a gage 

was above a reservoir, flood peaks at that gage 

were considered to be affected. 

In accordance with recommendations of the 

U.S. Water Resources Council, Hydrology Committee (1967), the log-Pearson Type III distribution function was used to fit observed data 

to log-probability frequency curves. This distribution is defined by three statistical parameters in equation form: 

Log Q=M +KS, where M is the mean of the 

logs of the annual peaks at a gaging station, K is a function of the skew of the 

computed frequency curve, and S is the 

standard deviation about the mean of the 

logs. 

The log-Pearson Type III computation and 

frequency plot was done by computer for each 

gaging station. The computer operation is performed in the following manner : 

1. An array of N annual flood peaks at a gaging station are transformed into an array 

of corresponding logarithmic values. 

X1, Xz, ..................... . X;;. 

2. The mean of the logarithms is computed 

M=~x. N 

3. The standard deviation is computed 

S ~X -(lX) /N_ 

N-1 

4. The skew coefficient is computed 

N~(X-M ) g 

(N-1) (N-2)S 

5. The logarithms of discharges at selected recurrence intervals are computed 

Log Q=M+KS (U.S. Water (1) 

2 

Resources Council, Hydrology 

Committee, 1967.) 

K is taken from tables that relate computed values of g to selected recurrence 

intervals. 

6. The antHog of log Q is computed to get the 

flood discharge of Q. 

FLOOD-FREQUENCY CURVES 

The flood-frequency curves for the individual 

gaging stations are then obtained by plotting 

the discharges computed from equation (1) for 

the selected recurrence intervals on log-probability coordinates. The actual curve is a 

continuous line that averages the plotted 

discharges. 

The frequency curve at a gaging station is 

used to determine floods of specific recurrence 

intervals or probabilities, such as the 50-year 

flood or its equivalent, the 0.02 probability. At 

stations where one or more floods of a rare 

frequency have been observed, the computed 

frequency curve may not conform to the array 

of observed peak~s. This is the so-called outlier 

problem. At stations where this problem occurred, the outlier was removed and the frequency 

curve was recomputed. The outlier was assigned 

a realistic recurrence interval based on historical data at the site or nearby sites and plotted 

on the recomputed curve, and the curve was 

adjusted, if necessary, by graphical inspection. 

Extension and definition of the station frequency curves were based on the following minim urn years of record needed to define floods of 

selected recurrence interval: 

Years 

Re~currence interval --------- 10 25 50 100 

Minimum length of record _ __ 10 15 20 25 

The recurrence interval is the average interval of time in which the given flood (50-year in 

this case) will be exceeded once. However, a 

flood of this magnitude could occur in consecutive years. The relationship of recurrence interval to probability is shown in table 1. The table 

shows that there is a 40 percent probability 

that a flood greater than a 50-year flood could 

occur in any 25-year period. 

The probability that a 50-year flood will be 

exceeded in the next 10 years is computed by: 

P= 1-(1-1/t) 11 where n=10, t=50 

P= 1-(1- iJ 10= 1-(0.82) =18 percent. 
TABLE !.-Probability of a flood of gi·ven recurrence 

interval being exceeded during the indicated time 

periods 

Recurrence Probabilities for indicated time periods, in years interval 

(years) 5 10 25 50 100 

5 ------ 0.67 0.89 0.996 1 1.0 11.0 

10 ------ .41 .65 .94 .995 11.0 

25 ------ .18 .34 .64 .87 .983 

50 ------ .10 .18 .40 .64 .87 

100 ------ .015 .10 .22 .40 .63 

1 These probabilities are less than 1, but for all practical pur- poses may be taken as unity. 

REGIONAL ANALYSIS 

Because streamflow records are not available 

at most sites where information is needed, data 

from gaging stations must be interpreted and 

applied to these sites. Since flood-frequency 

data at individual gaging stations have very 

limited transfer capability, estimates of flood 

characteristics at ungaged sites should be based 

on a regional analysis of gage data. A regional 

analysis has the advantage of developing floodfrequency relations that are applicable to an 

entire region, rather than to a single station, 

by considering records for all stations in a 

region. 

The watershed characteristics that produce 

floods are analyzed, and relations that define 

flood characteristics are then developed and 

may be applied to ungaged sites. In this study 

it was found that flood characteristics of most 

streams in Indiana are highly related to differences in hydrology of the three general physiographic regions of the State. In addition to 

drainage area and precipitation, specific geomorphic parameters such as drainage density 

and relief are the dominant factors that influence floods on small streams. On large streams, 

the geomorphic factors are less pronounced because of the integrated effect of drainage from 

many small streams with dissimilar geomorphology. Floods on the large streams are more 

influenced by channel control, and factors such 

as channel slope and length are dominant 

factors. 

In addition to the physical characteristics, 

climatic variations influence flood characteristics. The total amount of precipitation, when 

adjusted for evapotranspiration and snowmelt, 

was found to be very significant in explaining 

differences in flood characteristics of large 

3 

areas. Rainfall intensity, when combined with 

soil permeability, was found to be more important in producing floods from small areas. 

MULTIPLE-REGRESSION METHOD 

Flood-frequency analysis by the multipleregression method identified the most significant watershed and climatic factors that produce floods. A fre,quency curve for each gaging 

station having at least 10 years of record was 

developed by using the log-Pearson Type III 

distribution function, and discharges corresponding to the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year 

recurrence intervals were compiled for each station. Each set of discharges was then regressed 

against various watershed and climatic variables using the model : 

Qt=b A·rBu ............... Du, 

where 

Q is the discharge for a recurrence interval 

oft-years, 

A, B, D are watershed and climatic variables, 

.1~, y, u are regression coefficients, 

b is the regression constant. 

The model relates flood discharges of a specified frequency of occurrence to physical and 

climatic parameters. The independent variables 

(A, B._ .D) in the model are not the only ones 

that influence flood peaks in Indiana; however, 

in this study they were found to be the most 

effective in estimating peak flows with the 

smallest standard error and the least number 

of variables. 

The flood data used in the regression model 

were from natural flowing streams. In addition 

to removing periods of regulation from the station records, some stations were omitted from 

the regression analyses because of effects of 

urbanization and size of drainage area (stations 

with drainage areas less than 15 mi2 (38.8 km2 ) 

were excluded). Only independent variables 

that could be contained in the report or dete~rmined from available maps were considered. 

The number of stations used to develop the 

regression equations were: 

Model 1 _____ 81 stations. 

Model 2 _____ 43 stations. 

Model 3 ____ 144 stations. 

Model 4 _____ 20 stations. 
~ 

87° 86° 85° 

-~:·q 

I I 

,' I Jl I ! 

\ -~ . ,., ·~·~.,1..: 

. \I 

I 

I 

4-178~ 

\,r' I ~.~----l 

4-1790 1 

II I 

,,o~f,l 

I 

I 

41° ! _,_ 

I __ .J I 

.1815i 

\ I • I 

~~~ ·3-32251 

~. 

I 

41° 

40 0 r ~ ~ , v . ( i ~~ / I ( I 5 ~ ~ ~f v-f-1 t: ., ., ....... : I =:;J .. --~~~l lttf 7 .... .,, ., . r 7'~~ . 4oo 
CJl 

• ~C~ I f ): ~, I 1 I I /-, / 1\\ l.J:J?- r~ \\ ~~ ~~ 38° 

86° 

as· 87° 

FIGURE 1.-Loca.tion of gaging s,t'ations used in this study. 

EXPLANATION 

A 3-3525 

85° 

Gaging station and number 

0 10 20 30 MILES I I I I I I I I 

0 10 20 30 40 Kl LOM ETRES 
The log-Pearson frequency discharges are 

shown in table 6 for each station according to 

the minimum length of record for selected recurrence intervals (see page 2). Corre1sponding 

discharge values computed from the regional 

equations presented in this manual are shown 

up to the 100-year recurrence interval. 

WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS 

The watershed and climatic variables in the 

regression equations in this manual may be determined from standard 71J2-minute series U.S. 

Geological Survey topographic maps and from 

included maps and graphs. Because an insufficient record of peak discharges is available from 

gaging stations on small streams, the equations 

should not be applied to watersheds smaller 

than 15 mP (38.8 km2 ). The following watershed and climatic variables were found to be 

significant in the regression models: 

Channel length (L) .-Distance along a stream, 

in miles, from a gaging station (or point of 

discharge) to the watershed divide. It is 

measured with dividers spaced at 0.1 mile 

(0.16 km) on the Geological Survey 71,4-

minute series topographic maps. 

Channel slope (S) .-The difference in elevation 

at points, 10 percent and 85 percent of the 

distance along the channel from a gaging 

station (or point of discharge) to the watershed divide, divided by the distance between 

the two points. Expressed in feet per mile 

and determined from 71j2-minute series topographic maps or from stream profiles available from the Indiana Department of Natural 

Resources. 

Dt·ainage area (A) .-Area of the watershed, in 

square miles, as planimetered from Geological Survey 71f2-minute series topographic 

maps, and tabulated in a report in preparation by the Geological Survey. Index map 

showing maps available from the Geological 

Survey can be obtained free of charge from 

Distribution Branch, U.S. Geological Survey, 

1200 South Eads Street, Arlington, Virginia 

22202. Maps listed in the index can be purchased from this address. 

Drainage density (D) .-Total stream length in 

a watershed, in miles, divided by the drainage area, expressed in miles per square mile. 

Drainage density was measured from county 

6 

drainage maps (Purdue University, 1959) 

with dividers spaced at 0.25 mile (0.40 km). 

It is a geomorphic parameter that is related 

to the physiography of a region. Figure 2 

shows the three general physiographic regions of Indiana and the principal watershed 

divides in the State. Drainage densities 

measured for small watersheds in this study 

relate closely to drainage areas within the 

different physiographic regions as shown in 

figure 3. Because measurement of drainage 

density from the county maps is a rather 

tedious procedure, figures 2 and 3 are provided for estimating drainage densities for 

ungaged sites. Actual variation of measured 

drainage densities from the maps to those 

interpolated from the curves in figure 3 is 28 

percent. To obtain design di,scharges, drainage density should be measured from the 

county drainage maps. 

P1·edpitation index (Pi) .-The areal variation 

in average annual excess precipitation, in 

inches, which is the mean annual precipitation minus the sum of average annual evapotranspiration and mean annual snowfall (water equivalent). This is the average annual 

amount of precipitation that is available for 

runoff. Snowfall is removed from the annual 

total because in flat terrain typical of Indiana, 

snowmelt is usually slow, resulting in low 

peak discharges. It may be determined from 

figure 4. The lines of equal average annual 

excess precipitation are based on data furnished by the National Weather Service. 

Where a stream crosses a line of equal precipitation, a weighted average should be estimated and rounded to the nearest one-half 

inch. 

Soil runoff coefficient (Rc) .-A coefficient that 

related storm runoff to soil permeability by 

major hydrologic soil groups as defined by 

the Agronomy Department, Purdue University, and the U.S. Soil Conservation Service 

(fig. 5). Rc is defined as the ratio of the 

volume of rainfall, Px, to the total volume of 

runoff, R, occurring after the beginning of 

runoff: 

Px 

Rc=-

R 
The soil runoff coefficient was compiled by 

principal soil types and then grouped by hydrologic soil groups as shown by the map. If 

a stream crosses a soil group boundary, an 

areally weighted average should be rounded 

to the nearest one-tenth. 

Watershed 1·elief (R) .-The difference in elevation, in feet, between the highest point on the 

watershed perimeter and the stream at a 

gaging station (or point of discharge). Determined from Geological Survey 71;2-minute 

topographic maps. 

Watershed shape factor (f) .-The ratio of 

stream length to the diameter of a circle having the same area as the watershed. It is not 

an independent variable to use in the regression equations, but is a qualitative parameter that is combined with drainage area to 

determine which set of watershed characteristics best estimate the flood characteristics 

for particular streams. The time of concentration is usually greater and resulting flood 

peaks are lower for elongated watersheds 

than for fan or pear-shaped watersheds. The 

shape is determined by dividing the channel 

length, in miles, by the diameter of a circle, 

in miles, having the same area as the watershed, and is computed by: 

Watershed shape (/)=0.89 LA-1 1 2 

REGRESSION MODELS 

The best models for estimating flood discharges in Indiana were developed by using the 

combination of drainage area and watershed 

shape as an index to determine which factors 

have the most influence on flood peaks for each 

watershed. Generally, for streams that drain 

areas less than 100 mi2 (259 km2 ), the shape 

factor (f) is less than 2.0 and drainage area, 

watershed relief, drainage density, and soil 

runoff coefficient were the most important factors. For streams draining more than 200 mi2 

(518 km2 ) (/) is greater than 2.0, and drainage area, channel slope, channel length, and the 

precipitation index were the factors that had 

the most influence on flood characteristics. For 

streams draining between 100 and 200 mi2 (259 

and 518 km2 ), if (/) was greater than 2.0, factors for the large streams applied. If (/) was 

less than 2.0, factors for the small streams 

applied. 

7 

For estimating flood discharges for streams 

with drainage areas between 100 and 200 mi2 

(259 and 518 km2 ), an adjustment technique is 

recommended based upon size of drainage area. 

This adjustment is expressed by: 

A-100 200-A 

( ) Qt model 1 + ( ) Qt model 2 

100 100 

where Qt model 1 is computed from the regression model shown for large streams (greater 

than 200 mf! or 518 km2 ) and Qt model 2 is 

computed from the regression model shown for 

small streams (<less than 100 mi2 or 259 km2

) 

and A is drainage area. 

Model 1 is the regression equation for large 

streams and has the form : 

Qt=b A.r SY £z Piu 

where 

Qt is the discharge for a recurrence interval 

of t-years 

b is the regression constant, 

A is the drainage area (mi2 ), 

S is the channel slope ( ft/mi) , 

Lis the channel length (mi), 

Pi is the precipitation index (in.), 

;-r, y, z, and u are regression coefficients. 

TABLE 2.-Regression coefficients fm· modell 

Standard 

E!rror 

t-years b X y z It (percent) 

2 ----- 1.16 0.734 0.729 0.277 0.891 26 

5 ----- 1.19 .701 .792 .348 .9·82 26 

10 ----- 1.19 .678 .815 .393 1.037 26 

25 ----- 1.16 .654 .841 .443 1.103 27 

50 ----- 1.12 .632 .858 .489 1.153 28 

100 ----- 1.06 .620 .876 .521 1.198 29 

Model 2 is the regression equation for small 

streams and has the form : 

Qt=b A.T RY nz Rcu 

where 

Qt is the discharge for a recurrence interval 

oft-years, 

b is the _regression constant, 

A is the drainage area (mP), 

R is the watershed relief ( ft) , 

Dis the drainage density (mi/mi 2 ), 

Rcis the soil runoff coefficient, 

x, y, z, and u are regression coefficients. 

Model 3 was developed for all ·streams draining at least 15 mP (38.8 km2 ), using the two 

factors that have the greatest influence on 
INDIANA WATERSHED 

I 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

AREAS 

Lake Michigan 

St Joseph 

Kankakee 

Maumee 

Tippecanoe 

Upper Wabash, 

Logansport 

Mid-Wabash, 

Logansport 

Wabash, below 

Terre Haute 

Upper White, 

West Fork 

Lower White 

West Fork 

Upper White, 

East Fork 

Muscatatuck 

Lower White, 

East Fork 

Patoka 

Whitewater 

Upper Ohio 

Mid-Ohio 

Lower Ohio 

EXPLANATION 

10 

Watershed number 

Curve in 

figure 3 

D 

D 

D 

D 

D 

c 

c 

A 

c 

B 

c 

B 

B 

A 

B 

B 

B 

B 

10 20 30 MILES 

I I I •

1 I I 

10 20 30 40 KILOMETRES 

FIGURE 2.-Principal watersheds and major physiographic regions. 

8 
TABLE 3.-Regression coefficients for model 2 where 

Standard Qt is the discharge for a recurrence intervaJ 

t..years b ~ 71 

2 18.7 0.591 0.351 

5 29.2 .552 .327 

10 38.5 .529 .309 

25 50.7 .508 .289 

50 ------ 59.6 .494 .281 

z u 

0.574 1.47 

.725 1.55 

.803 1.60 

.888 1.66 

.949 1.70 

error 

(percent) 

34 

33 

33 

34 

35 

oft-years, 

b is the regression constant, 

A is the drainage area ( mP), 

Pi is the precipitation index (in.), 

x andy are regression coefficients. 

100 ------ 70.6 .480 .270 1.002 1.74 37 TABLE 4.-Regression coefficients for model ll 

flood characteristics-drainage area and the 

precipitation index. This model is presented for 

making quick estimates, but estimates are not 

as reliable as those computed from models 1 

and 2. 

Model 3 is of the equation form: 

Qt=b A31Pi11 

2 

5 

10 

25 

50 

100 

t-years b 

-------- 1.42 

-------- 1.44 

-------- 1.42 

-------- 1.38 

-------- 1.32 

-------- 1.27 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE KILOMETRES 

50 100 200 

20 

UJ 

_,J 

~ 

UJ 10 

0::: 

<( 

:::> 

0' 

en 

0::: UJ 

Q.. 

en UJ 

_,J 

~ 

~ 

> 1--

u; 

z UJ 0 

UJ 

(!) 

<( 

z 

<( 

0::: 0 

1 

10 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES 

:c y 

0.688 1.882. 

.685 2.001 

.684 2.094 

.684 2.200 

.684 2.281 

.685 2.353 

UJ 

0::: 

1-- UJ 

20~ _,J 

~ 

UJ 

0::: 

<( 

:::> 

0' 

en 

0::: 

10 If 

en UJ 

0::: 

1-- UJ 

~ 

0 

_,J 

~ 

5z 

> 4!::: en 

z UJ 0 

3UJ 

(!) 

<( 

z 

<( 

0::: 

20 

FIGURE 3.-Relationship of drainage density to drainage area by physiographic region for 

streams having drainage areas between 15 and 2100 mf (38.8 and 322 km2). See figure 2 

for location of streams. 

9 

Standard 

error (percent) 

50 

54 

56 

58 

60 

63 
86° 

41.!!-

Line of equal precipitation 

Interval 1 inch 

Inches x 25.4 = millimetres 

0 10 20 30 MILES 

I I I I 1

1 I I 

0 10 20 30 40 KILOMETRES 

FIGURE 4.-Average annual excess precipitation. Based on data from U.S. Weather Service. 

10 
EXPLANATION 

Hydrologic 

soil group 

A 

8 

c 

D 

E 

Soil runoff 

coefficient 

0.30 

0.50 

0.70 

0.80 

1.00 

Hydrologic soil group 

boundary 

38°-

I 

88° 

87" 

:-----------_1 ____ • 

: ~· .... 1.._ 

0 10 20 30 MILES 

I I 1 1 11 I 0 10 20 30 KILOMETRES 

-38° 

FIGURE 5.-Major hydrologic soil groups. Based on data by the Agronomy Department, Purdue 

University, and the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 

11 
MAIN-STEM STREAMS 

Model 4 was developed for the Wabash and 

White Rivers using the watershed factors: 

drainage area, channel slope, and stream length. 

The precipitation index was not found to be 

significant. The model is of the form: 

Qt=b A:JJS1I£Z 

where 

Qt is a peak discharge with a recurrence interval of t-years, 

b is the regression constant, 

A is the drainage area (mi2 ), 

Sis the channel slope (ft/mi), 

Lis the stream length (mi), 

x, y, and z are the regression coefficients. 

This equation should be used to estimate regional flood-frequency discharges on the Wabash and White Rivers: 

Total length to watershed divide ..,._____ is 527 miles (848 km) 

1. Wabash River-from Wabash to the mouth. 

2. White River-from Indianapolis to the 

mouth. 

3. East Fork White River-from Columbus to 

the mouth. 

Computed values from model 4 compare 

closely with the t-year discharges from frequency curves for stations on these rivers (see 

table 6), and t-year peaks computed from model 

4 for points between the gaging stations on 

these streams should be used. Figures 6--8 show 

t-year peak discharges versus distance for these 

streams. 

Model 4 should not be used on the Wabash 

River above Montezuma, because of the effects 

of the flood-control reservoirs that have been 

developed since 1968. 

Q) 

§ 

ro 

(.) 

RIVER DISTANCE, IN KILOMETRES UPSTREAM FROM MOUTH ~ 

0 

z 

280,000 

8 240,000 LLJ 

C/) 

0::: 

LLJ 

a.. 200,000 

1-

LLI 

LLI 

u.. 

(.) 160,000 

iii 

:::> 

(.) 

~ 120,000 ~ 

(!) 

0::: 

<( 

I 

~ 80,000 

0 

40,000 

..c 

1/) 

600 

~ 2 ro <D 3: a.. 

-e 

0 

a. 

1/) 

c 

ro 

00 

0 

....J 

:c 

a. 

Q) 

0 

500 

c 

0 

00 

c 

·:;: 

0 

(.) 

400 

ro 

E 

~ 

N 

2 

c 

0 

~ 

300 

RIVER DISTANCE, IN MILES UPSTREAM FROM MOUTH 

c 

0 

~ > 

0:: 

200 160 

Cl 

z 7000 0 

(.) 

LLI 

C/) 

C/) 

LLI 

5000 g: 

LLJ 

~ 

(.) 

4000 iii 

::::> 

(.) 

z 3000 -~ 

LLI 

(!) 

0::: 

<( 

2000 5 

C/) 

0 

1000 

FIGURE 6.-Q, peak discharges on main stem of Wabash River computed from the regression equation for 

model 4. 

12 
TABLE 5.-Regression coefficients for tnodel 4 

Standard 

error tyear b :x; y z (percent) 

2 -------- 144 0.902 0.382 -0.435 9 

5 -------- 279 .870 .311 -.423 11 

10 -------- 494 .832 .203 -.418 10 

25 -------- 1,114 .826 .077 -.499 10 

50 -------- 2,197 .777 -.058 -.499 9 

100 -------- 2,838 .751 -.099 -.473 9 

Graphic solutions for the regression equations for models 1, 2, and 3 are shown in figures 

11 to 28. 

Figure 9 shows the standard error that can 

be expected from computing t-year discharges 

from the regression models. Generally this error means that for about 67 percent of the estimates, the difference between computed and observed discharges are within plus or minus one 

standard error of estimate. It is an approximate 

measure of the accuracy of the discharges computed using the regression equations. Users of 

this manual should recognize from figure 9 that 

model 3 does not provide estimates as reliable 

as models 1 or 2. 

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES 

Example I.-Estimate the 100-year peak discharge of the Eel River at State Road 5 in 

South Whitley, an ungaged site. 

1. The following quadrangles for determining 

drainage area are South Whitley West, 

South Whitley East, Laud, Columbia City, 

Churubusco, Ege, and Merriam. From the 

topographic maps or from the drainage 

area report, the drainage area is 284 mi2

• 

2. From the maps, the channel length is 28.8 

miles to the watershed divide (Huntertown quadrangle) . 

3. The channel slope is computed by the difference in elevation at mile 2.9 (0.10X28.8) 

and mile 24.5 (0.85X28.8) divided by 

21.6 (24.5-2.9) the distance between the 

two points: 

Elevation at mile 24.5 is 825 ft. 

(Huntertown quadrangle) 

~------Total length to watershed divide is 371 miles (597 km) 

RIVER DISTANCE, IN KILOMETRES UPSTREAM FROM MOUTH 

400 350 300 250 200 150 

0 2oo,ooor-~~~-,L-~~c~-r-r--T--~_,-,-~~~~---T-L~---~~~~ 

z . 0 

0 .:!! t: 

~ I() s 

UJ I§~ ffi 'o:t('t) 

~ ~llr 

~ ~I § ~ UJO 

u I 

~ I 

0 

z 

u.i 

(.!) 

a:: 

c( 

t=lOO 

0 

z 

0 

5000 ~ UJ 

a:: 

UJ 

4000 ~ 

CIJ 

UJ 

a:: 

~ 3000 :I! 

(,) 

m 

:J 

2000 0 

z 

u.i 

1000 (.!) 

a:: 

c( 

:I: 

:I: 

0 

CIJ 

0 

0 

0 UJ 250~_.-~~-~-2~00~-L-L-~-~-1~5-0~-~~~-L-1~00-~~-~~-~50 ° 0 

RIVER DISTANCE, IN MILES UPSTREAM FROM MOUTH 

FIGURE 7.-Qt peak discharges on main stem of White River computed from the regression equation for 

model 4. 

13 
0 

z 

1/) 

~ 

.0 

E 

~ 

0 

(.) 

I 

I 

Total length to watershed divide is 365 miles (587 km) 

I RIVER DISTANCE, IN KILOMETRES UPSTREAM FROM MOUTH 

I 

1/) 

-ro 

0 

.s::. 

(/) 

400 

120,000~--~r---~----~~---r----~----T-~--r---~r---~;-._~-----r----~~--T-----~--~ 

350 300 250 160 

0 

3000 5 

8 100,000 () w w (/) 

(/) 

a:: 

w 

2500 ffi 

c... 80,000 c... 

(/) 

w 1-

w 

w 

u. 

() 

iii 

::::l 

() 

~ 

u.i 

(.!) 

a:: 

<( 

I 

2000 ~ w 

~ 

() 

1500 iii 

::::l 

() 

z 1000 ;:j 

~ 20,000 

(.!) 

a:: 

<( 

500 i3 

0 

~5~0~--~----~----L-----~--~2~0~0----~----L---~~--~----~1~50~--~----~----._----~--~1~00° 

RIVER DISTANCE, IN MILES UPSTREAM FROM MOUTH 

FIGURE 8.--Qt peak discharge·s on main stem of East Fork White River computed from the regression equation for model 4. 

ci 

0 

0:: Model 2 0:: 

UJ 30 

c 

0:: Model 1 

c( 

c 

~ 20 1-

CJ) 

10 Model 4 <main stem streams) 

0 

2 5 10 25 100 

RECURRENCE INTERVAL, IN YEARS 

FIGURE 9.--Standard error versus recurrence interval for t-year peak discharge computed from regression 

equations. 

14 

(/) 

0 
Elevation at mile 2.9 is 783 ft. 

(South Whitley East quadrangle) 

(825-783) feet 

Channel slope 1.9 ft/mi. 

21.6 mHes 

4. From figure 4, the precipitation index is 7.0 

in. 

5. From model 1: 

Q100=1.06 A o.62oso.s76£0.521 Pi1.198 

6. Substituting the proper variables: 

Q100=1.06 (284) o.62o (1.9) o.876 (28.8) o.521 (7.0) 1.198 

Solving the equation: 

Q10o=3,660 ft3 /s (102 m3 /s). 

7. Solving the equation graphically (fig. 16) 

Q10o=3,600 ft3/S (101 m3/s). 

Example 2.-Determine the discharge needed 

for selecting the size of culvert pipe on Willow 

Creek at State Road 3 in Allen County, a tributary to Cedar Creek, for the 25-year recurrence 

interval. 

1. The drainage area as determined from the 

Ege, Garrett, and Huntertown quadrangles is 18.0 mi2. 

2. The watershed relief is 125 feet (945--820). 

3. The drainage density estimated from figures 

2 and 3 is 3.9 mi/mP. Measured from the 

Allen and Noble County drainage maps, 

the drainage density is 3.0 mi/mP. 

4. From figure 5, the soil runoff coefficient (Hydrologic Soil Group B) is 0.50. 

5. From model 2: 

Q25=50. 7 A u.5o8 Ro.289 no.888 Rc1.66. 

6. Substituting the proper variables: 

Q25=50.7 (18.0) 0.508 (125) 0.289 (3.9) 0,888 (0.50) 1.66. 

Solving the equation: 

Q25=940 ft3/S (26.3 m3/S). 

7. Solving the equation, using the measured 

drainage density: 

Q25=745 ft3/S (20.9 m3/s). 

8. Solving the equation graphically (fig. 22) 

Ql00=988 ft3 /s (27, 7 m3 /s). 

Example 3.-Using model 4, compute the 100-

year peak discharge for White River at State 

Road 244 in Morgan County. 

1. From the drainage area report, the drainage area at S. R. 244 is 2,026 mi2. 

2. From the topographic maps, the river distance at S. R. 244 is 212 miles above the 

mouth. The stream length at S. R. 244 is 

determined by: total river length minus 

the distance above the mouth at S. R. 

244-371 miles- 212 miles= 159 miles. 

From model 4, the computed discharge is: 

Q1oo=2,838 (2,026) 0·

751 (3.2)-0.o99 (159) -0.473. 

Q10o=70,000 ft3 /s (1,960 m3 /s). 

3. Solving the equation graphically (fig. 7) the 

estimated 

Q1oo discharge is 73,000 ft3 /s (2,044 m3 /s). 

Example 4.-'\Vhat is the probable recurrence 

interval of the 1970 flood (13,000 ft 3/s) at 

South Hogan Creek near Dillsboro (03-2767) 

with 12 years of record? From the data in 

table 7: 

15 

Drainage area is 38.2 mi2. 

Watershed relief is 449 ft. 

Drainage density i,s 11.0 mi/mP. 

Soil runoff coefficient is 0.90 

Solve the equations for t-year peaks from 

model2: 

Q2 = 4,680 ft3/s 

Q5 = 7,790 

QlO = 10,100 

Q25 = 13,300 

Q50 = 16,200 

Q100 = 19,400 

Plotting the discharges on log-probability coordinates, figure 10, the 1970 flood has an expected recurrence interval of 25 years. 

What is the probability that this discharge 

will be exceeded in the next 12 years? From the 

laws of probability, P, of a peak flow to be exceeded in n years is: 

Pn=1-(1-1/t)n 

Solving for P: 

P 12=1-(1-1/25) 12=1-(0.96) 12 = 39 percent. 

Example 5.-Using the probability equation 

and figure 10, compute the magnitude of a flood 

on South Hogan Creek at Dillsboro that has a 

10-percent p~obability of being exceeded in the 

next 10 years. 

P n=0.10 and n = 10 years 

0.10 = 1-(1-1/t)n 

1-1/t = 0.989 

1/t = 0.011 

t = 90 years 

And from figure 10, the discharge corresponding to a recurrence interval of 90 years is 

19,000 ft3/s. Table 1 may be used to determine 
0 

z 8 10,000 LLI 

(/) 

0::: 

LLI 

a.. 

1-

LLI 

LLI 

LL. 5000 (.) 

ii5 

::J 

(.) 

~ 

u..i 

(!) 

0::: 

c( 

J: 

() 

(/) 2000 Ci 

2 5 10 25 50 100 

500 

0 

z 

0 

(.) 

LLI 

(/) 

200 ffi 

a.. 

(/) 

LLI 

0::: 

1-

LL.I 

~ 

(.) 

100 ii5 

::J 

(.) 

~ 

u..i 

(!) 

0::: 

c( 

J: 

50 ~ 

Ci 

30 

RECURRENCE INTERVAL, IN YEARS 

FIGURE 10.-Log-probability plot of computed t-year discharges for South Hogan Creek near Dillsboro. 

the probability of a flood of a given recurrence 

interval being exceeded during an indicated 

time period. 

Example 6.-It is desired to estimate the 

100-year peak discharge for Deer Creek at S. R. 

29 in Carroll County (an ungaged site) . 

1. From the Geological Survey 7.5-minute toPographic maps: 

Drainage area is 122 mi2 

Channel slope is 4.9 ft/mi 

Channel length is 32.3 miles 

Relief is 182 ft 

2. From figure 4: 

Precipitation index is 9.5 in. 

3. From figures 2 and 3 : 

Drainage density is 5.5 mi/mi2 

4. From figure 5: 

Soil runoff coefficient is 0.70 

5. Using the regression equation for model1: 

Q 100= 1.06 (122) 0.620 ( 4.9) 0.876 (32.3) o.521 (9.5) 1.198 

Q10o= 7,600 ft 3 /s (213 m3 /s) 

6. Using the regression equation for model 2: 

Q1oo= 70.6 (122) 0 ·

4R0 (182) 0 ·

270 (5.5) 1. 002 (0.70) 1 ·

74 

Q10o= 8,570 ft 3/S (240 m3 /s) 

16 

7. Since the drainage area at the site is between 100 and 200 mi2 , the adjustment 

factor is applied: 

A-100 Q1oo= ( ) Q1oo model 1 

100 

200-:-A + ( ) Q1oo model 2 

100 

Q100= 0.22 (7,600) + 0.78 (8,570) 

= 8,360 ft 3 /s (234 m3/s) 

8. The solution is shown graphically in figures 

16 and 22. 

LIMITS OF APPLICATION 

Relations in this manual should not be aPplied to streams affected by regulation or urbanization, nor to streams that drain less than 

15 mi2 (38.8 km2 ). A current project to obtain 

peak discharges for streams between 0.1 and 

20 mi2 (0.25 and 50 km2 ) will provide data for 

a future flood-frequency analysis for small 

streams. At present, however, sufficient data 

have not been collected at these sites to develop meaningful flood-frequency relationships. 
Flood-peak data are also deficient in the areas 

of urbanized streams and streams affected by 

flood-control reservoirs. Future studies are 

needed to define flood-frequency relationships 

for these streams. 

SUMMARY 

The maps, equations, tables, and graphs presented in this manual provide a means of estimating flood-frequency analysis. The watershed 

characteristics presented in the regression 

equations are not the only factors that influence floods in Indiana; however, they represent 

the most effective combination found for explaining peak flows with the smallest standard 

error and the least number of variables. 

The regression equations should be used only 

within the stated limits of application. Additional studies will be necessary in the future as 

flood data become available for regulated 

streams and streams affected by urbanization. 

REFERENCES 

Benson, M. A., 1962, Facto·rs influencing the occurrence 

of floods in a humid region of diverse terrain: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Water-Supply Pap·er 1580-B, 64 p. 

Green, A. R., and Hoggatt, R. E., 1960, Floods in Indiana, magnitude and frequency: U.S. Geol. Survey 

open-file report, 150 p. 

Hardison, C. H., 1969, Accuracy of streamflow characteristics: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 650-D, 

pages D210-214. 

Marie, J. R., and Swisshelm, R. V., Jr., 197(), Evaluatioo of recommendations for the surface-water 

data programs in Indiana: U.S. Geol. Survey openfile report, 27 p, 

17 

Patterson, J. L., and Gamble, C. R., 1968, Magnitude 

and frequency of floods in the United States, Part 

5, Hudson Bay and Upper Mississippi River 

Basins: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 

1678, 546 p. 

Purdue University, 1959, Atlas of county drainage 

maps of Indiana: Joint Highway Research Project, 

Engineering Bull. Ext. Series no. 97. 

Riggs, H. C., 1968, Frequency curves: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Techniques of Water Resources Inv., book 4, chap. 

A2, 15 p. 

--- 1973, Regional analyses of streamflow characteristics: U.S. Geol. Survey Techniques of Water 

Resource1s Inv., book 4, chap. B3, 15 p. 

Sp·ear, P. R., and Gamble, C. R., 1965, Magnitude and 

frequency of floods in the United States, Part 3-A, 

Ohio River Basin except Cumberland and Tennessee River Basins: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 1675, 630 p. 

U.S. Water Resources Council, 1967, A uniform technique for determining flood flow frequencies: 

Washington, D. C., U.S. Water Resources Council 

Bull. 15, 15 p. 

Wayne, W. J., 1956, Thickness of drift and bedrock 

physiography of Indiana north of the Wisconsin 

glacial boundary: Indiana Dept. of Conserv., Geol. 

Survey, Progres·s Rept. 7. 

Wiitala, S. W., 1965, Magnitude and frequency of floods 

in the United States, Part 4, St. Lawrence River 

Basin: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 

1677, 357 p. 

Wu, I. P., Delleur, J. W., and Diskin, M. H., 1964, 

Determination of peak discharges and design hydrographs for small watershed·s of Indiana: Joint 

Highway Research Project, Indiana State Highway Commission, Purdue University, and the Indiana Flood Control and Water Resources Commission, 106 p. 

TABLES 6 and 7; FIGURES 11-28 
TABLE 6.-T-year peak discharges at gaging stations, in cubic feet per second 

The upper numbers are values of Qt from individual station frequency curves. The lower numbers &Ire values of Qt computed using regres- sion equations. 

Values of Qt from individual station frequency curves are shown according to the following minimum length of record at a gaging station: Recurrence interval ------------------------Q1o Q25 Q5o Q10o Minimum length of record in years ________ 10 15 20 25 

Values of Qt a.re computed from the regression equations shown for: a, Model 1 for drainage a.reas greater than 200 mi2• b. Model 2 for drainage areas less than 100 mi2. c, Model 1 and model 2 by the weighted average (A-1o00/100)Qt model 1+(200-A/100)Qt model 2 for drainage areas between 100 and 200 mi2 (A is drainage area~ d, Model 4 for main stem gaging stations (noted by an *). 

Station No. 

03-2750.00 

03-2755.00 

03-2760.00 

03-2765.00 

03-2767.00 

03-2770.00 

03-2940.00 

03-3025.00 

03-3030.00 

03-3033.00 

03-3221.00 

03-3225.00 

03-3230.00 

03-3235.00 

03-3240.00 

03-3242.00 

03-3243.00 

03-3245.00 

*03-3250.00 

03-3255.00 

03-3260.00 

03-3265.00 

Station name and location 

Whitewater River near Alpine, Ind. Lat 39°34'23", 

long 85°09'27", in SW1,4SE1,4 sec. 14, T. 13 N., 

R. 12 E., Fayette County. 

East Fork Whitewater River at Richmond, Ind. Lat 

39°48'24", long 84°54'26", in NW1,4SW% sec. 8, 

T. 13 N., R. 1 W., Wayne County. 

East Fork Whitewater River at Brookville, Ind. Lat 

39°26'02", long 85°00'12", in NE1,4NE% sec. 20, 

T. 9 N., R. 2 W., Franklin County. 

Whitewater River at Brookville, Ind. Lat 39°24'24", 

long 85°00'46", in NE1,4NW% sec. 32, T. 9 N., 

R. 2 W., Franklin County. 

South Hogan Creek near Dillsboro, Ind. Lat 

39°01'47", long 85°02'17", in SW1,4NW14 sec. 7, 

T. 4 N., R. 2 W., Dearborn County. 

Laughery Creek near Farmers Retreat, Ind. Lat 

38°57'08", long 85°04'15", in NWlA,SE% sec. 2, 

T. 4 N., R. 3 W., Ohio County. 

Silver Creek near Sellersburg. Ind. Lat 38°22'15", 

long 85°43'35", in SW1,4SW1,4 Lot 68, Clark 

Military Grant, Clark County. 

Indian Cre.ek near Corydon, Ind. Lat 38°16' 35", 

long 86°06'35", in SW!A,SE1,4 sec. 6, T. 3 S., R. 

4 E., Harrison County. 

Blue River near White Cloud, Ind. Lat 38°14'15", 

long 86°13'42", in NW1,4SE1,4 sec. 19, T. 3 S., R. 

3 E., Harrison County. 

Middle Fork Anderson River at Bristow, Ind. Lat 

38°08'19", long 86°43'16", in SW1,4NE:14 sec. 27, 

T. 4 S., R. 3 W., Perry County. 

Pigeon Creek at Evansville, Ind. Lat 38°00'14", 

long 87°32'19", in NE1,4NW1,4 sec. 16, T. 6 S., 

R. 10 W., Vanderburg County. 

Wabash River near New Corydon, Ind. Lat 40° 

33'50", long 84°48'10", in NE1,4SE1,4 sec. 3, T. 

24 N., R. 15 E., Jay County. 

Wabash River at Bluffton, Ind. Lat 40°44'30", 

long 85°10'19", in NW1,4NE1,4 sec. 4, T. 26 N., 

R. 12 W., Wells County. 

Wabash River at Huntington, Ind. Lat 40°51'20", 

long 85°29'53", in SW1,4NE1,4 sec. 27, T. 28 N., 

R. 9 E., Huntington County. 

Little River near Huntington, Ind. Lat. 40°54'14", 

long 85°24"22, in NE1,4NW1,4 sec. 9, T. 28 N., 

R. 10 E., Huntington County. 

Salamonie River at Portland, Ind. Lat 40°25'40", 

long 85°02'20", in NE1,4SE1,4 sec. 23, T. 23 N., 

R. 13 E., Jay County. 

Salamonie River near Warren, Ind. Lat 40°42'25", 

long 85°27'13", in SE1,4SE1,4 sec. 12, T. 26 N., 

R. 9 E., Huntington County. 

Salamonie River at Dora, Ind. Lat 40°48'42", long 

85°41'02", in NE1,4NE1,4 sec. 12, T. 27 N., R. 7 

E., Wabash County. 

Wabash River at Wabash, Ind. Lat 40°47'25", long 

85°49'13", in SE1,4NW1,4 sec. 14, T. 27 N., R. 

6 E., Wabash County. _ Mississinewa River near Ridgeville, Ind. Lat 40° 

16'49", long 84°59'44", in SE1,4SE'14 sec. 7, T. 

21 N., R. 14 E., Randolph County. 

Mississinewa River near Eaton, Ind. Lat 40°19'08", 

long 85°19·'10", in NW1,4NE1,4 sec. 31, T. 22 N., 

R. 11 E., Delaware County. 

Mississinewa River at Marion, Ind. Lat 40°34'34", 

long 85°39'34", in SE1,4NE1,4 sec. 31, T. 25 N., 

R. 8 E., Grant County. 

20 

12,600 22,000 28,000 37,000 44,000 52,000 

14,400 2'2,500 27,900 35,300 41,400 48,000 

6,100 10,300 13,300 16,800 19,800 

6,150 9,590 11,900 15,200 17,900 20,800 

9,800 16,200 21,000 28,500 

11,200 17,600 22,000 28,100 33,200 38,700 

29,000 46,000 56,000 68,000 78,000 89,000 

25,500 39,200 48,300 60,700 70,900 82,100 

5,900 10,300 12,600 

4,680 7,790 10,100 13,300 16,200 19,400 

10,500 17,200 22,000 29,500 36,400 44,000 

7,920 12,800 16,300 21,300 25,800 30,400 

7,000 11,200 14,100 18,000 

5,670 8,800 10,900 13,900 16,300 18,800 

7,000 10,400 13,100 17,000 20,300 

6,380 8,410 12,200 15,500 18,300 21,200 

13,200 19,000 22,300 26,000 29,000 31,500 

8,070 13,200 16,900 22,400 27,500 32,500 

2,350 

4,330 

4,200 

4,710 

4,100 

3,260 

4,050 

7,200 

6,200 

6,970 

5,700 

5,410 

5,500 

9,300 12,300 15,000 17,900 

7,700 

8,530 10,700 12,400 14,200 

6,600 

6,650 

7,700 

8,330 

8,600 

9,760 11,200 

5,700 8,200 10,300 13,200 16,000 19,000 

4,820 7,020 8,550 10,600 12,300 14,300 

7,500 10,300 12,400 15,300 17,900 

6,410 9,400 11,500 14,300 16,700 19,100 

3,300 

2,910 

2,250 

1,610 

4,300 

4,120 

2,900 

2,300 

4,700 

4,850 

3,200 

2,730 

5,400 

5,770 

3,310 

5,800 

6,500 

3,770 

6,300 

7,170 

4,250 

6,700 9,200 10,600 13,400 

4,290 6,200 7,480 9,180 10,600 12,000 

7,400 10,500 12,200 14,300 16,000 17,300 

6,040 8,!)00 10,900 13,500 15,700 18,000 

21,000 31,400 38,800 49,000 58,000 68,QOO 

20,300 30,500 38,100 48,900 59,100 69,200 

3,400 

3,730 

5,800 

5,390 

7,700 10,700 13,400 16,500 

6,920 8,700 10,200 11,700 

6,200 10,000 13,000 17,500 21,200 

4,160 6,120 7,450 9,250 10,700 12,200 

11,300 16,800 20,000 24,000 27,400 31,000 

7,720 11,400 13,900 17,000 20,100 23,000 
TABLE 6-T-year peak discharges at gaging stations, in cubic feet per secoru:l----Continued 

Station No. Station name and location Q2 Qs Q1o Q25 Qso Q1oo 

03-3270.00 Mississinewa River at Peoria, Ind. Lat 40°43'24", 10,500 17,200 21,000 25,500 

long 85°57'27", in SWlA,SW% s·ec. 3, T. 26 N., 10,400 15,800 19,500 24,500 28,900 33,400 

R. 5 E., Miami County. *03-3275.00 Wabash River at Peru, Ind. Lat 40°44'35", long 27,500 41,000 50,500 65,000 77,000 89,000 

86°05'45", in SE1,4NE% sec. 32, T. 27 N., R. 4 27,700 41,200 50,800 64,800 77,200 89,800 

E., Miami County. 03-3.280.00 Eel River at North Manchester, Ind. Lat 40°59'5·5", 4,050 5,600 6,600 7,600 8,400 9,200 

long 85°45'50", in NE1,4NE% sec. 5, T. 29 N., 2,840 3,900 4,560 5,400 6,050 6,700 

R. 7 E., Wabash County. 03-3285.00 Eel River near Logansport, Ind. Lat 40°46'5·5". 7,400 10,400 12,400 14,900 16,500 18,200 

long 86°15'50", in NE1,4SE% sec. 14, T. 27 N., 6,850 9,870 11,900 14,600 16,800 19,000 

R. 2 E., Cas.s County. 

*03-32.90.00 Wabash River at Logansport, Ind. Lat 40°44'47", 37,000 52,000 64,000 81,000 96,000 111,000 

long 86°22'3W', in SWlh,NE·% sec. 35, T. 27 N., 34,800 51,600 63,400 80,900 95,600 110,000 

R. 1 E., Cass County. 

03-3295.00 Wabash River at Delphi, Ind. Lat 40°35'26" long 36,000 52,000 6·4,000 81,000 96,000 111,000 

86°41'54", in SEI4SE:t4 sec. 24, T. 25 N. R. 3 W., 35,300 52,300 64,100 80,900 95,600 110,000 

Carroll County. 

03-3297.00 Deer Creek near Delphi, Ind. Lat 40°35'25" long 3,800 6,400 8,600 12,400 16,000 20,300 

86°37'15", in NElA,NE% sec. 27, T. 25 N., R. 2 5,540 8,470 10,500 13,200 15,400 17,800 

W., Carroll County. 03-3305.00 Tippecanoe River at Oswego, Ind. Lat 41 °19'14", 350 500 600 740 860 

long 85°47'21", in NE1A,NE'14 sec. 14, T. 33 N., 620 810 910 1,050 1,150 1,250 

R. 6 E., Kosciusko County. 03-3315.00 Tippecanoe River near Ora, Ind. Lat 41 °09'26", long 3,800 5,400 6,400 7,700 8,800 9,900 

86°33'49", in SEt,4SE14 sec. 6, T. 31 N., R. 1 5,400 7,620 9,120 11,100 12,700 15,000 

W ., Pulaski County. 

03-3323.00 Little Indian Creek near Royal Center, Ind. Lat 360 430 460 

40°52'53", long 86°35'2.6", in NE1,4NW% sec. 13, 190 230 260 290 310 330 

T. 28 N., R. 2 W., White County. 03-3324.00 Big Monon Creek near Francesville, Ind. Lat 40° 1,750 2,160 2,350 

59'03", long 86°51'43", in NW1,4NE% sec. 10, T. 1,360 1,780 2,030 2,350 2,590 2,820 

29 N., R. 4 W., Pulaski County. 

03-3330.00 Tippecanoe River near Delphi, Ind. Lat 40°37'02", 11,600 16,000 19,000 .22,000 24,700 27,000 

long 86°45'39", in NW1A,NE:t4 s·ec. 16, T. 25 N., 11,000 15,600 18,800 23,000 26,600 30,200 

R. 3 W ., Carroll County. 

03-3334.50 Wildcat Creek near Jerome, Ind. Lat 40°26'29", 2,600 3,600 4,100 

long 85°55'08", in NE'%SE1,4 sec. 14, T. 23 N., 2,110 2,880 3,360 3,990 4,480 4,960 

R. 5 E., Howard County. 

03-3335.00 Wildcat Creek at Greentown, Ind. Lat 40°27'00", 2,400 3,800 4,800 6,050 

long 85°57'00", on line between sees. 9 and 10, 2,320 3,210 3,830 4;590 5,220 5,700 

T. 23 N., R. 5 E., Howard County. 

03-3336.00 Kokomo Creek near Kokomo, Ind. Lat 40°26'28". 430 610 740 

long 86°05'20", in NW14SW1,4 sec. 16, T. 23 N., 790 1,190 1,480 1,870 2,190 2,530 

R. 4 E., Howard County. 

03-3337.00 Wildcat Creek at Kokomo, Ind. Lat 40°28'24", long 3,600 5,700 7,000 8,600 

86°09'26", in NE1,4NW1,4 sec. 2, T. 23 N., R. 3 2,730 3,950 4,770 5,850 6,730 7,610 

E., Howard County. 

03-3340.00 Wildcat Creek at Owasco, Ind .. Lat 40°27'50", long 4,500 6,900 8,500 10,500 12,200 14,000 

86°38'15", in SE1,4SE1,4 sec. 4, T. 23 N., R. 2 W., 5,680 8,610 10,700 13,500 15,900 18,300 

Carroll County. 

03-3345.00 South Fork Wildcat Creek ne·ar Lafayette, Ind. Lat 4,500 7,600 10,000 13,400 16,700 20,300 

40°25'04", long 86°46.'05", in SW1,4SW1,4 sec. 21, 6,260 9,790 12,200 15,500 18,300 21,300 

T. 23 N., R. 3 W., Tippecanoe County. 

03-3350.00 Wildcat Creek near Lafayette, Ind. Lat 40°26'26", 9,000 14,000 18,000 23,000 

long 86°49'46", in SE1,4NE1,4 sec. 14, T. 23 N., 10,500 15,700 19,400 24,300 28,600 32,900 

R. 4 W., Tippecanoe County. 

*03-3355.00 Wabash River at Lafayette, Ind. Lat 40°25'19", 50,000 70,000 86,000 110,000 130,000 150,000 

long 86°53'49", in NE·1,4SW1,4 sec. 20, T. 23 N., 56,000 81,700 98,600 124,000 143,000 164,000 

R. 4 W., Tippecanoe County. 

03-3357.00 Big Pine Creek near Williamsport, Ind. Lat 40° 5,200 8,200 10,200 12,300 

19'03", long 87°17'26", in SWt,4SE% sec. 26, T. 4,950 7,360 8,960 11,100 12,900 14,700 

22 N., R. 8 W., Warren County. *03-3360.00 Wabash River at Covington, Ind. Lat 40°08'24", 51,000 76,000 92,000 114,000 135,000 157,000 

long 87°24'20", in NE1,4NW14 sec. 35, T. 20 N., 54,600 80,400 98,300 124,000 145,000 168,000 

R. 9 W ., on Fountain-Warren County line. 

03-3395.00 Sugar Creek at Crawfordsville, Ind. Lat 40°02'56", 10,400 16,500 20,400 24,700 28,000 31,500 

long 86°53'58", in SW1,4NW1,4 sec. 32, T. 19 N., 9,610 14,600 17,900 22,400 26,000 30,000 

R. 4 W., Montgomery County. 

03-3400.00 Sugar Creek near Byron, Ind. Lat 39°55'52", long 14,000 20,400 24,000 28,500 32,000 35,500 

87°07'33", in NW1,4SW1,4 sec. 8, T. 17 N., R. 6 13,100 20f200 25,000 31,600 37,200 43,100 

W., Parke County. 

21 
TABLE 6-T·-yea·r peak discharges at gaging stations, in cubic feet per second-Continued 

Station No. Station name and location Q2 Q5 Q1o Q25 Q50 Q1oo 

*03-3405.00 Wabash River at Montezuma, Ind. Lat 39°47'33", 62,000 92,000 110,000 138,000 162,000 188,000 

long 87°22'26", in SE¥.!NEJ4 sec. 35, T. 16 N., 65,200 96,000 118,000 149,000 175,000 202,000 

R. 9 W., Parke County. 

03-3408.00 Big Raccoon Creek near Fincastle, Ind. Lat 39o 5,100 9,300 13,100 

48'45", long 86°57'14", in NWJ4SW¥.! sec. 22, 3,870 5,730 6,990 8,650 10,100 11,500 

T. 16 N., R. 5 W., Putnam County. 03-3410.00 Raccoon Creek at Mansfield, Ind. Lat 39°41'00", 6,400 10,500 13,700 18,400 

long 87°07'00'', in sec. 8, T. 14 N., R 6 W., Parke 7,730 12,400 15,800 20,500 24,700 29,000 

County. 

03-3412.00 Little Raccoon Creek near Catlin, Ind. Lat 39o 5,700 11,500 16,800 

40'38", long 87°13'38", in NE¥.!NWJ4 sec. 7, T. 4,770 7,170 8,790 10,900 12,800 14,600 

*03-3415.00 

14 N., R. 7 W., Parke County. 

Wabash River at Terre Haute, Ind. Lat 39°28'00", 64,000 94,000 115,000 145,000 170,000 196,000 

long 87°25'08", in NE¥.!SW¥.! sec. 21, T. 12 N., 68,400 101,000 123,000 154,000 180,000 209,000 

*03-3420.00 

R. 9 W., Vigo County. Wabash River at Riverton, Ind. Lat 39°01'13", 62,000 96,000 121,000 155,000 185,000 215,000 

long 87°34'07", in NE¥.!SW¥.! sec. 30, T. 7 N., 64,800 96,200 119,000 150,000 178,000 208,000 

03-3425.00 

R. 10 W., Sullivan County. 

Busseron Creek near Carlisle, Ind. Lat 38°58'26", 3,500 5,100 6,200 7,700 9,200 10,500 

long 87°35'23", in NW¥.!, survey 17, Vincennes 3,100 4,490 5,420 6,660 7,650 8,660 

*03-3430.00 

Tract, Sullivan County. 

Wabash River at Vincennes, Ind. Lat 38°42'26", 56,000 84,000 108,000 140,000 170,000 206,000 

long 87°31'10", in NWt~SWt~ sec. 10, T. 3 N., 63,100 94,000 117,000 148,000 177,000 207,000 

R. 10 W., Knox County. 

03-3470.00 White River at Muncie, Ind. Lat 40°12'15", long 5,200 7,900 9,800 12,300 14,700 16,800 

85°23'14", in SE¥.!NW¥.! Hackley Re·serve Dela- 5,030 7,740 9,610 12,200 14,400 16,600 ware County. 03-3475.00 Buck Creek near Muncie, Ind. La.t 40°08'05", long 850 1,300 1,580 1,970 

85°22'25", in SW¥.!SEJ4 sec. 34, T. 20 N., R. 10 

E., Delaware County. 

1,490 2,250 2,820 3,540 4,150 4,800 

03-3480.00 White River at Anderson. Ind. Lat 40°06'22" long 6,700 10,800 13,600 17,300 20,700 24,000 

85°40'20", in SWli!SW¥.! sec. 7, T. 19 N., R. 8 E., 7,810 12,100 15,000 19,200 22,700 26,400 

Madison County. 03-3485.00 White River near Noblesville, Ind. Lat 40°07'46", 10,800 16,500 20,600 26,000 30,000 34,000 

long 85°57'46", in NE¥.!NEt~ sec. 4, T. 19 N., 13,500 20,600 25,500 32,300 38,100 44,200 

R. 5 E., Hamilton County. 

03-3490.00 White River at Noblesville, Ind. Lat 40°02'50". long 10,300 15,500 19,500 25,500 31,000 36,000 

86°01'00", in SE¥.!SE¥.! sec. 36, T. 19 N., R. 4 E., 13,600 20,900 26,000 33,000 39,000 45,300 

Hamilton County. 03-3495.00 Cicero Creek near Arcadia, Ind. Lat 40°10'34", 1,850 2,850 3,540 4,600 

long 85°59'43", in NWt4NW¥.! sec. 20, T. 20 N., 2,620 3,800 4,430 5,590 6,520 7,380 

R. 5 E., Hamilton County. 03-3497.00 Little Cicero Creek near Arcadia, Ind. Lat 40° 1,260 1,900 2,400 3,100 

10'32", long 86°02'45", in NEJ4NW¥.! sec. 23, 1,250 1,840 2,250 2,790 3,230 3,700 

T. 20 N., R. 4 E., Hamilton County. 

03-3501.00 Hinkle Creek near Cicero, Ind. Lat 40°06'05", long 1,520 2,800 3,750 5,100 

86°05'10", in NWJ4NWJ4 sec. 16, T. 19 N., R. 960 1,540 1,980 2,580 3,080 3,630 

4 E'., Hamilton County. 03-3505.00 Cicero Creek at Noblesville, Ind. Lat 40°03'20'', 3,650 5,500 6,800 8,900 10,900 

long 86°02'30", in NWJ4NEJ4 sec. 35, T. 19 N., 3,780 5,730 6,970 8,730 10,200 11,700 

R. 4 E., Hamilton County. 03-3510.00 White River near Nora, Ind. Lat 39°54'35", long 13,000 20,000 25,000 33,000 40,000 47,000 

86°06'20", in NW¥.!NW¥.! sec. 20, T. 17 N., R. 16,200 24,500 30,200 38,000 44,600 51,500 

4 E., Marion County. 03-3515.00 Fall Creek near Fortville, Ind. Lat 39°57'15", long 2,900 4,550 5,800 7,600 9,200 11,000 

85°52'05", in NW¥.!NEJ4 sec. 5, T. 17 N., R. 6 4,690 7,080 8,700 10,900 12,700 14,600 

E., Hamilton County. 03-3520.00 Lawrence Creek at Fort Benjamin Harrison, Ind. 500 780 980 1,300 

Lat. 39°52'09", long 86°01'25", in S% sec. 36, T. 

17 N., R. 4 E., Marion County. (Not included 

in regression analysis.) 

03-3522.00 Mud Creek at Indianapolis, Ind. Lat 39°53'30" long 860 1,300 1,600 

86°00'57", in SEJ4NE¥.! sec. 25, T. 17 N., R. 4 1,320 1,930 2,350 2,900 3,350 3,820 

E., Marion County. 03-3525.00 Fall Creek at Millersville, Ind. Lat 39°51'07", long 4,250 7,000 8,900 11,800 14,700 17,500 

86°05'15", in NE¥.!NE¥.! sec. 9, T. 16 N., R. 4 E., 6,660 10,300 12,800 16,200 19,100 22,000 Marion County. 

*03-3530.00 White River at Indianapolis, Ind. Lat 39°45'05", 19,500 28,000 34,000 42,000 48,000 56,000 

long 86°10'30", in NW¥.!NWJ4 sec. 14, T. 15 N., 21,900 321200 38,800 47,900 55,500 64,200 

R 3 E., Marion County. 03-3531.20 Pleasant Run at Arlington Ave. at Indianapolis, 880 1,300 1,600 

Ind. Lat 39°46'33", long 86°03'50", in SWJ4NWJ4 sec. 2, T. 15 N ., R. 4 E., Marion County. (Not 

included in regression analysis.) 

22 
TABLE 6--T-year peak discharges at gaging stations, in cubic feet per second-Continued 

Station No. Station name and location Q2 Qs Q1o Qz Qso Q1oo 

03-3531.60 Pleasant Run at Brookville Road at Indianapolis. 

Ind. Lat 39°45'52", long 86°05'43", in NElA,NWlA, 

1,150 1,670 2,030 

sec. 9, T. 15 N., R. 4 E., Marion County. (Not 

included in regression analysis.) 

03-3532.00 Eagle Creek at Zionsville, Ind. Lat. 39°56'56", long 4,800 7,100 9,000 

86°15'22", in SWlA,NWlA, sec. 1, T. 17 N., R. 3,240 4,930 6,090 7,680 9,010 10,400 

2 E., Boone County. 

03-3535.00 Eagle Creek at Indianapolis, Ind. Lat 39°46'33", 5,200 8,600 11,200 14,900 18,300 22,000 

long 86°15'01", in NWlA,NWlA, sec. 6, T. 15 N., 4,760 7,270 8,980 11,300 13,200 15,200 

R. 3 E., Marion County. 

03-3536.00 Little Eagle Creek at Bpeedway, Ind. Lat 39° 1,160 1,560 1,820 

47'15", long 86°13'41", NElA,SWlA, sec. 32, T. 1,080 1,600 1,960 2,400 2,820 3,230 

16 N., R. 3 E., Marion County. 

03-3537.00 West Fork Whitelick Creek at Danville, Ind. Lat 1,740 2,900 3,900 

39°45'36", long 86°30'47", in NW14NE1A, sec. 1,260 1,940 2,440 3,110 3,670 4,270 

10, T. 15 N., R. 1 W., Hendricks County. 03-3538.00 Whitelick Creek at Mooresville, Ind. Lat 39°3-6'28", 9,900 13,500 15,600 

long 86°22'56", in NE1,4SE1A, sec. 35, T. 14 N., 6,690 10,500 13,100 16,700 19,600 22,700 

R. 1 E., Morgan County. 

*03-3540.00 White River near Centerton, Ind. Lat 39°30'02", 26,000 37,000 44,000 54,000 63,000 72,000 

lung 86°24'24", in SWlA,SElA, sec. 3, T. 12 N., 27,500 40,300 48,500 59·,600 69,000 79,700 

R. 1 E., Morgan County. 

03-3545.00 Beanblossom Creek at Beanblossom, Ind. Lat 39° 1,750 3,100 4,150 5,700 7,100 

15'45", long 86°14'55r', in SWlA,NWlA, sec. 31, T. 2,000 3,470 4,560 6,200 7,670 9,270 

10 N., R. 3 E., Brown County. 

03-3550.00 Bear Creek near Trevlac, Ind. Lat 39°16'40", long 

86°20'45", in NE·lA,NE% sec. 30, T. 10 N., R. 

2 E., Brown County. (Not included in regression 

610 1,140 1,560 2,220 2,870 

analysis.) 

03-3560.00 Beanblossom Creek at Dolan, Ind. Lat 39°14'30", 2,850 5,200 7,200 10,500 13,600 17,200 

long 86°29'57", in NWlA,SWlA, sec. 2, T. 9 N., 6,480 10,300 13,000 16,700 20,100 23,500 

R. 1 W., Brown County. *03-3-570.00 White River at Spencer, Ind. Lat 39°16'49" long 29,000 43,000 51,000 62,000 72,000 83,000 

86°45'42", in NE1A,NE14 sec. 29, T. 10 N., R. 3 29,000 42,700 51,600 63,200 73,300 85,100 

W., Owen County. 

03-3575.00 Big Walnut Creek near Reelsville, Ind. Lat 39o 10,400 15,400 18,400 22,500 26,000 

32'11", long 86°58'35", in NWlA,SW% sec. 28, 9,460 15,100 19,000 24,600 29,400 34,500 

T. 13 N., R. 5 W., Putnam County. 03-3580.00 Mill Creek near Cataract, Ind. Lat 39°26'00", long 5,900 8,500 10,000 11,900 13,300 

86°45'48", in NElA,SE% sec. 32, T. 12, N., R. 3 5,770 8,760 10,800 13,500 15,700 18,000 

W., Owen County. 

03-3590.00 Mill Creek near Manhattan, Ind. Lat 39°29'22", 4,300 5,800 6·,800 8,200 9,500 10,700 

long 86°55'50", in SWlA,SE% sec. 11, T. 12 N., 6,750 10,400 12,900 16,400 19,400 22,500 

R. 5 W ., Putnam County. 03-3595.00 Deer Greek near Putnamville, Ind. Lat 39°34'04", 5,800 8,000 9,600 11,900 

long 86°52'00", in SWlA,NW% sec. 16, T. 13 N., 2,750 4,160 5,110 6,410 7,500 8,650 

R. 4 W., Putnam County. 

03-3600.00 Eel River at Bowling Green, Ind. Lat 39°23'02", 13,600 19,700 24,000 30,500 36,000 42,000 

long 87°01'12", in NElA,NElA, sec. 24, T. 11 N., 19,000 29,700 37,100 47,500 56,200 65,700 

R. 6 W ., Clay County. *03-3605.00 White River at NeiW'berry, Ind. Lat 38°55'42", long 36,000 53,000 64,000 78,000 90,000 103,000 

87°01'00", in NElA,NElA, sec. 25, T. 6 N., R. 6 W., 37,300 54,800 66,300 81,200 94,100 109,000 

Greene County. 03-3610.00 Big Blue River at Carthage, Ind. Lat 39°44'38", 4,100 6,200 7,800 9,900 11,700 

long 85°34'33", in SWlA,SW% sec. 18, T. 15 N., 4,520 6,830 8,390 10,500 12,300 14,100 

R. 9 E., Rush County. 

03-3615.00 Big Blue River at Shelbyville, Ind. Lat 39°31'45", 7,800 11,000 13,000 15,600 17,500 19,300 

long 85°46'5:5", in SElA,SE% sec. 31 T. 13 N., R. 9,000 13,900 17,300 22,000 .26,000 30,300 

7 E., Shelby County. 

03-3620.00 Youngs Creek near Edinburg, Ind. Lat 39°25'08", 4,000 6,600 8,200 10,300 11,800 13,100 

long 86°00'18", in SElA,SW% sec. 5, T. 11 N., 3,340 5,000 6,160 7,650 8,970 10,200 

R. 5 E., Johnson County. 03-3625.00 Sugar Creek near Edinburg, Ind. Lat 39°21'39'', 8,900 14,300 18,000 22,500 26,500 30,000 

long 85°59'51", in SWlA,SE% sec. 29, T. 11 N., 9,930 15,500 19,500 25,100 29,900 35,000 

R. 5 E., Johnson County. 

03-3630.00 Driftwood River near Edinburg, Ind. Lat 39°20'21", 16,700 26,000 32,800 41,000 47,000 54,000 

long 85°59'11", in NWlA,SW% sec. 4, T. 10 N., 21,500 33,000 40,700 51,400 60,100 69,600 

03-3635.00 

R. 5 E., Bartholomew County. 

Flatrock River at St. Paul, Ind. Lat 39°25'03", 6,800 11,400 14,600 18,300 21,500 24,600 

long 85°38'03", in SE:IANE% sec. 9, T. 11 N., 8,130 12,900 16,300 21,000 25,100 29,500 

R. 8 E., Shelby County. 

*03-3640.00 East Fork White River at Columbus, Ind. Lat 39° 26,000 39,000 47,000 59,000 69,000 79,000 

12'00", long 85°55'32", in NE1,4NW14 sec. 25, 

T. 9 N ., R. 5 E., Bartholomew County. 

25,000 36,400 43,400 53,600 61,400 70,400 

23 
TABLE 6-T-year peak discharges at gaging stations, in cubic feet per second--Continued 

Station No. Station name and location Q2 Q5 Q1o Q25 Q50 Qloo 

03-3645.00 Clifty Creek at Hartsville, Ind. Lat 39° 16'25", long 4,000 6,700 8,200 10,600 12,500 

85°42'10", in NW%NW% sec. 36, T. 10 N., R. 4,150 6,170 7,480 9,280 10,800 12,400 

7 E., Bartholomew County. 

03-3650.00 Sand Creek near Brewersville, Ind. Lat 39°05'03", 7,700 11,700 14,200 17,900 20,800 

long 85°39'32", in NW%NE% sec. 5, T. 7 N., 8,010 12,700 16,200 20,800 25,000 29,200 

R. 5 E., Jennings County. 

*03-3655.00 East Fork White River at Seymour, Ind. Lat 38° 30,000 49,000 59,000 74,000 85,000 98,000 

58'57", long 85°53'57", in NW%NE% see. 7, T. 26,900 39,700 48,300 60,900 71,500 82,800 

6 N ., R. 6 E., Jackson County 

03-3660.00 Graham Creek near Vernon, Ind. Lat 38°55'47", 6,400 10,500 14,000 19,300 

long 85°33'45", in NW%SE% sec. 30, T. 6 N., 5,890 9,150 11,400 14,600 17,400 20,300 

R. 9 E., Jennings County. 

03-3665.00 Muscatatuck River near Deputy, Ind. Lat 38°48'15", 15,500 22,500 28,000 35,500 42,500 

long 85°40'26", in SW%NE% sec. 7, T. 4 N., 10,800 17,600 22,500 29,500 35,500 42,000 

R. 8 E., Jefferson County. 

03-3670.00 Muscatatuck River near Austin, Ind. Lat 38°46'13", 13,300 20,500 26,500 35,500 43,500 54,000 

long 85°49'21", in NW%SE% sec. 23, T. 4 N., 11,600 18,800 23,900 31,400 38,000 44,900 

R. 6 E., Scott County. 

03-3680.00 Brush Creek near Nebraska, Ind. Lat 39°04'13", 2,000 2,600 3,000 3,460 

long 85°29'10", in NW%NE% sec. 11, T. 7 N., 

R. 9 E., Jennings County. (Not included in re- gression analysis.) 

03-3690.00 Vernon Fork near Butlersville, Ind. Lat 39°02'55", 6,800 10,400 13,400 18,000 22,000 27,000 

long 85°32'40", in NW%SE% sec. 17, T. 7 N., 7,500 11,900 14,900 19,300 23,100 27,100 

R. 9 E., Jennings County. 

03-3695.00 Vernon Fork at Vernon, Ind. Lat 38°58'34", long 14,200 23,000 29,000 39,000 47,000 56,000 

85°37'13", in NW%SE% sec. 10, T. 6 N., R. 8 8,580 13,400 17,800 23,400 28,200 33,300 

E., Jennings County. 

*03-3715.00 East Fork White River near Bedford, Ind. Lat 38° 39,500 57,500 70,000 86,000 102,000 118,000 

46'10", long 86°24'30", in SW%NE:JA, sec. 21, T. 34,700 51,100 61,900 76,700 89,200 104,000 

4 N., R. 1 E., Lawrence County. 

03-3716.00 South Fork Salt Creek at Kurtz, Ind. Lat 38°57'46", 3,760 5,000 5,700 

long 86°12'12", in SW%SW% sec. 9, T. 6 N., 3,280 5,380 6,910 9,060 11,000 13,000 

R. 3 E., Jackson CoUll!ty. 

03-3716.50 North Fork Salt Creek at Nashville, Ind. Lat 39° 4,800 6,500 7,400 

12'06", long 86°14'51", in NW%SW% sec. 19, T. 3,900 5,900 7,240 9,080 10,600 12,300 

9 N ., R. 3 E., Brown County. 03-3720.00 North Fork Salt Creek near Belmont, Ind. Lat 6,000 9,500 11,700 14,700 17,000 19,000 

39°09'00", long 85°20'14", in SW%NW% sec. 5, 5,660 8,770 10,900 13,700 16,400 18,900 

T. 8 N., R. 2 E .. , Brown County. 

03-3727.00 Clear Creek near Harrodsburg, Ind. Lat 39°02'03", 4,550 6,700 8,400 

long 86°34'01", in NE%NW% sec. 19, T. 7 N., R. 3,460 5,340 6,650 8,430 9,970 11,600 

1 W., Monroe County. 

03-3730.00 Salt Creek near Peerless, Ind. Lat 38°56'36", long 11,700 17,400 20,700 24,300 27,500 30,000 

86°30'36", in SE%NW% sec. 22, T. 6 N., R. 1 W., 6,620 9,690 11,800 14,700 17,100 19,600 

Lawrence County. 

03-3732.00 Indian Greek near Springsville, Ind. Lat 38°57'01", 4,260 5,600 6,300 

long 86°40'30", in SE%SW% sec. 18, T. 6 N., 3,810 5,770 7,100 8,910 10,500 12,100 

R. 2 W., Lawrence County. *03-3735.00 East Fork White River at Shoals, Ind. Lat 38° 38,000 55,000 68,000 86,000 104,000 122,000 

40'02", long 86°47'32", in sec. 30, T. 3 N., R. 36,300 53,900 66,400 83,100 98,500 115,000 

3 W., Martin County. 

*03-37 40.00 White River at Petersburg, Ind. Lat 38°30'39", long 70,000 103,000 127,000 157,000 172,000 208,000 

87°17'22", in SE%SW% sec. 15, T. 1 N., R. 8 W., 67,700 98,500 118,000 146,000 167,000 19'3,000 

Pike County. 

03-3745.00 Patoka River near Ellsworth, Ind. Lat 38°26'39", 2,940 4,460 5,600 

long 86°43'31", in SW%SE% sec. 10, T. 2 S., 5,650 9,080 11,400 14,700 17,700 20,700 

R. 3 W ., Dubois County. 03-3755.00 Patoka River at Jasper, Ind. Lat 38°24'49", long 3,900 6,400 8,500 12,000 15,400 

86°52'36", in NW:JA,SE% sec. 20, T. 1 S., R. 4 5,090 7,960 10,100 13,100 15,800 

W., Dubois County. _ 03-3765.00 Patoka River near Princeton, Ind. Lat 38°23'30", 5,400 8,800 11,500 15,600 19,000 23,000 

long 87°32'55", in Location 107, T. 1 S., R. 10 W., 8,350 12,600 15,700 20,200 24,200 28,300 

Gibson County. 

*03-3775.00 Wabash River at Mt. Carmel, Ill. Lat 38°24'07", 132,000 192,000 226,000 27 4,000 315,000 350,000 

long 87°45'10", in SElA,NW% sec. 28, T. 1 S., R. 108,000 158,000 194,000 242,000 282,000 327,000 

12 W., Wabash County. 04-0875.00 Hart Ditch at Munster, Ind. Lat 41 °33'40", long 1,220 1,860 2,300 2,900 3,400 4,000 

87°28'50", in SE%NW% sec. 20, T. 36 N., R. 9 1,090 1,490 1,730 2,050 2,300 2,540 

W., Lake County. 04-0930.00 Deep River at Lake George Outlet at Hobart, Ind. 1,340 2,150 2,700 3,500 4,100 

Lat 41 °32'10", long 87°15'25", in NW%NW:JA, 1,320 1,760 2,040 2,380 2,650 2,910 sec. 32, T. 36 N., R. 7 W., Lake County. 

24 
TABLE 6--T-yea.r peak discharges at gaging stations, in cubic feet per second--Continued 

Station No. Station name and location Q2 Qs Q1o Qz Qso Q1oo 

04-0935.00 Burns Ditch at Gary, Ind. Lat 41 °34'30", long 87° 1,360 2,000 2,400 2,900 3,300 

17'20", in SE1J!NW1,4 sec. 13, T. 36 N., R. 8 W., 1,620 2,250 2,660 3,190 3,610 4,020 

Lake County. 

04-0940.00 Little Calumet River at Porter, Ind. Lat 41 °37'18", 1,020 1,640 2,080 2,680 3,190 3,700 

long 87°05'13", in NE%NE1,4 sec. 34, T. 37 N., 1,310 1,920 2,360 2,900 3,340 3,800 

R. 6 W., Porter County. 04-0945.00 Salt Creek near McCool, Ind. Lat 4r35'48", long 900 1,430 1,SOO 2,350 2,800 3,300 

87°08'40", in SElJ!SElfl sec. 6, T. 36 N., R. 6 W., 1,240 1,760 2,090 2,520 2,870 3,230 

Porter County. 

04-0995.00 Pigeon Creek at Hogback Lake Outlet near Angola, 340 460 530 620 700 780 

Ind. Lat 41°37'24", long 85°05'44", in NE1,4NW14 450 560 630 700 760 820 sec. 36, T. 37 N., R. 12 E., Steuben County. 

04-1002.20 North Branch Elkhart River near Cosperville, Ind. 420 560 650 770 860 

Lat 41 °29'32", long 85°26'54", in SWtA,NE% sec. 960 1,290 1,470 1,710 1,890 2,060 

14, T. 35 N., R. 9 E., Noble County. 

04-1005.00 Elkhart River at Goshen, Ind. Lat 4r35'36", long 2,700 3,800 4,400 5,200 5,800 6,300 

85°50'55", in NE1J!NE1J! sec. 8, T. 36 N., R. 6 4,220 5,890 6,940 8,290 9,340 10,400 

E., Elkhart County. 

04-1010.00 St. Joseph River at Elkhart, Ind. Lat 41°41'30", 9,000 12,800 15,100 18,200 20,800 

long 85°58'30", in SWlJ!NE% ·sec. 5, T. 37 N., 13,000 17,500 20,200 23,500 26,000 28,600 

R. 5 E., Elkhart County. 

04-1780.00 St. Joseph River near Newville, Ind. Lat 41 °23'08", 4,100 5,800 7,000 8,600 9,800 11,200 

long 84°48'06", in SW1,4SW% sec. 18, T. 5 N., 3,790 5,240 6,120 7,240 8,100 8,9·50 

R. 1 E., Defiance County, Ohio. 

04-1790.00 St. Joseph River at Cedarville, Ind. Lat 4r11'46", 4,400 6,000 7,200 8,700 

long 85°01'27", in J. Hackley Res., T. 32 N., R. 4,140 5,690 6,640 7,840 8,770 9,690 

13 E., Allen County. 

04-1795.00 Cedar Creek at Auburn, Ind. Lat 41 °21'57", 860 1,120 1,270 1,440 1,560 1,670 long 

85°03'08", in NElJ!NWtA, sec. 32, T. 34 N., R. 13 1,540 2,150 2,520 3,020 3,410 3,810 

E., Dekalb County. 

04-1800.00 Cedar Creek near Cedarville, Ind. Lat 4r13'08", 2,900 3,900 4,400 5,000 5,400 5,800 

long 85°04'35", in NWlJ!NWlfl sec. 19, T. 32 N., 2,960 4,190 4,930 5,870 6,560 7,270 

R. 13 E., Allen County. 

04-1805.00 St. 7,600 9,700 10,800 Joseph River near Fort Wayne, Ind. Lat 4r 

10'00", long 85°04'00", in NW1J!SE1,4 sec. 4, T. 4,840 6,550 7,600 8,910 9,920 10,900 

31 N., R. 13 E., Allen County. 04-1815.00 St. Marys River at Decatur, 5,200 7,500 8,900 10,700 12,000 13,300 Ind. Lat 40°50'55", 

long 84°56'16", in SW%SW1,4 sec. 27, T. 28 N., 4,540 6,430 7,760 9,300 10,600 12.000 

R. 14 E., Adams County. 

04-1820.00 St. Marys River near Fort Wayne, Ind. Lat 40° 6,100 8,500 10,000 11,700 13,000 14,300 

59'16", long 85°06'03", in A. LaFontaine Res. T. 4,800 6,760 8,070 9,780 11,200 12,600 

29 N ., R. 12 E., Allen County. 

04-1830.00 Maumee River at New Haven, Ind. Lat 41 °05'06", 12,300 15,400 17,400 19,800 

long 85°01'19", in SE·lJ!NElfl sec. 2, T. 30 N., 11,500 16,000 18,800 22,400 25,300 28,200 

R. 13 E., Allen County. 

05-5150.00 Kankakee River near North Liberty, Ind. Lat 41 o 510 600 640 680 700 

33'50", long 86°29'50", in NW1,4NE1,4 sec. 23, 500 630 690 770 840 890 

T. 36 N., R. 1 W., St. Joseph County. 

05-5155.00 Kankakee River at Davis, Ind. Lat 4r24'00'', long 1,160 1,320 1,410 1,530 1,6·20 1,700 

86°42'04", in SE1,4NE1,4. sec. 13, T. 34 N., R. 3 1,790 2,380 2,760 3,230 3,590 3,940 

W ., Starke County. 

05-5160.00 Yellow River near Bremen, Ind. Lat 41 °25'11", 1,130 1,310 1,420 1,570 

long 86°10'14", in NW1J!NW1,4 sec. 10, T. 34 N., 1,100 1,460 1,660 1,910 2,090 2,270 

R. 3 E., Marshall County. 

05-5165.00 Yell ow River at Plymouth, Ind. Lat. 41 °20'25"' 1,980 2,600 3,000 3,500 3,900 

long 86°18'16", in SE1,4NW% sec. 13, T. 33 N., 2,070 2,810 3,260 3,840 4,260 4,690 

R. 2 E., Marshall County. 

05-5170.00 Yellow River at Knox, Ind. Lat 41°18'10", long 2,220 3,010 3,520 4,150 4,620 5,080 

86°37'14", in SWlflSW% sec. 14, T. 33 N., R. 3,510 4,950 5,890 7,120 8,100 9,080 

2 W., Starke County. 

05-5175.00 Kankakee River at Dunns Bridge, Ind. Lat 41 o 3,380 4,060 4,470 4,970 5,330 

13'17", long 86°57'5·2", in NE1,4SE1,4 sec. 15, T. 3,520 4,550 5,200 6,000 6,450 7,210 

32 N ., R. 5 W ., Jasper County. 

05-5180.00 Kankakee River at S·helby, Ind. Lat 41 °10'58", long 4,010 4,820 5,310 5,880 6,300 6,710 

87°20'33", in SW1,4NE1,4 sec. 33, T. 32 N., R. 8 4,270 5,470 6,220 7,130 7,810 8,500 

05-5190.00 

W ., Lake County. 

Singleton Ditch at Schneider, Ind. Lat 41 °12'44", 990 1,110 1,150 1,180 1,190 

long 87°26'44", in SW1,4NW1J! sec. 22, T. 32 N., 920 1,180 1,330 1,520 1,670 1,800 

R. 9 W., Lake County. 

05-5195.00 West Creek near Schneider, Ind. Lat 4P12'52", 960 1,360 1,600 1,860 2,040 

long 87°29'36", in NW1,4NE'1,4 sec. 19, T. 32 N., 780 1,140 1,380 1,700 1,950 2,220 

R. 9 W., Lake County. 

25 
TABLE 6-T-year peak discharges at gaging stations, in cubic feet per second-Continued 

Station No. Station name and location Q2 Qs Q1o Q25 Qso Q1oo 

05-5210.00 Iroquois River at Rosebud, Ind. Lat 41 °02'00", long 230 300 340 390 420 

87°10'49", in NW%SW% sec. 24, T. 30 N., R. 180 340 390 460 500 550 

7 W., Jasper County. 05-5220.00 Iroquois River near North Marion, Ind. Lat 40° 850 1,060 1,220 1,420 1,580 

58'12", long 87°06'50", in NE%NW% sec. 16, 1,020 1,370 1,580 1,840 2,040 2,220 

05-5225.00 T. 29 N., R. 6 W., JaSJper County. 

Iroquois River at Rensselaer, Ind. Lat 40°56'00'', 1,240 1,500 1,670 1,900 2,100 

long 87°07'44", in NW%SE% sec. 29, T. 29 N., 1,150 1,540 1,760 2,070 2,300 2,530 

R. 6 W., Jasper County. 

05-5230.00 Bice Ditch near Sowth Marion, Ind. Lat 40°52'00", 460 630 750 900 1,010 

long 87°05'32", in NE%NW% sec. 22, T. 28 N., 650 950 1,160 1,430 1,640 1,8.70 

R. 6 W., Jasper County. 

05-523·5.00 Slough Creek near Collegeville, Ind. Lat 40°53'30", 1,240 1,780 2,100 2,480 2,740 

long 87°09·'17", in SE%NE;% sec. 12, T. 28 N., 1,270 1,670 1,910 2,230 2,460 2,710 

R. 7 W., Jasper County. 

05-5240.00 Carpenter Creek at Egypt, Ind. Lat 40°51'58", long 940 1,480 1,970 2,760 3,550 

87°12'20", in SE%SW% sec. 15, T. 2S N., R. 7 1,260 1,700 1,990 2,350 2,630 2,930 

W., Jasper County. 

05-5245.00 Iroquois River near Foresman, Ind. Lat 40°52'14", 2,570 3,540 4,2'20 5,100 5,790 

long 87°18'24", in NE%SEI,4 sec. 15, T. 28 N., 2,830 3,790 4,380 5,110 5,650 6,200 

R. 8 W., Newton County. 

,-

TABLE 7.-Selected watershed characteristicsand maxint:zt,m floods at gaging stations 

Length of record: Years of continuous record since gaging station was established: A is the drainage area, in square miles, that contributes directly to surface runoff. S is the m:1in channel slope, in feet per mile. L is the main channel length, in miles. Pi is the precipitation index, in inches. R is the watershed relief, in feet. D is the drainage in- tensity, in mi}tes per square m:de. Rc is the soil runoff coefficient. 

Where the maximum flood at a gaging station exceeds the Q1oo computed from the regression equation, it is shown as a ratio to the computed Q1oo and noted by an *. 

Values for relief, drainage density, and soil runoff coefficient are shown only for drainage areas as much as 200 mi2. The precipitation index is not shown for main stem gaging stations. 

Gj~~~!d!itar~o~his03t::.~·OO, 03-3531.20, 03-3531.60, 03-3550.00, and 03-3680.00 were not used in the regression ,analyses and are not 

Station No. 

03-2750.00 

03-2755.00 

03-2760.00 

03-2765.00 

03-2767.00 

03-2770.00 

03-2940.00 

03-3025.00 

03-3030.00 

03-3033.00 

03-3221.00 

03-3225.00 

03-3230.00 

03-3235.00 

03-3240.00 

03-3242.00 

03-3243.00 

03-3245.00 

03-3250.00 

03-32.55.00 

03-3260.00 

03-3265.00 

03-3270.00 

03-3275.00 

03-3280.00 

03-3285.00 

03-3290.00 

03-3295.00 

03-3297.00 

03-3305.00 

Length of record A s 

43 529 8.7 

23 121 12.8. 

18 380 9.2 

50 1,224 7.3 

11 38.2 26.0 

31 248 6.6 

17 188 5.5 

28 129 6.3 

41 284 3.8 

10 41.915.4 

11 326 2.4 

21 262 3.2 

41 532 2.0 

21 721 2.0 

L 

47.4 

19.5 

52.1 

72.9 

16.6 

63.8 

25.1 

33.2 

77.1 

14.0 

42.0 

63.1 

93.3 

117 

28 263 4.4 28.0 

12 85.6 4. 7 15.6 

15 425 2.4 58.1 

48 557 2.7 85.0 

48 1,768 2.5 140 

25 133 

20 310 

48 682 

19 808 

28 2,686 

42 417 

28 789 

48 3,779 

32 4,072 

28 274 

22 113 

4.6 20.1 

3.0 48.0 

2.9 83.8 

3.3 113 

2.4 158 

2.1 41.9 

2.4 87.1 

2.2 176 

2.2 199 

5.6 50.2 

3.6 22.7 

Pi 

11.5 

11.0 

10.5 

11.0 

13.0 

12.5 

15.0 

16.0 

17.0 

17.5 

14.5 

9.0 

9.0 

9.0 

7.0 

9.5 

9.5 

9.0 

10.0 

10.5 

9.5 

9.5 

7.5 

8.5 

9.5 

7.0 

R D 

Maximum flood Ye81r Discharge R.I. 

Rc (ft 3/s) (years) 

1937 

341 9.5 0.80 1969 

37,100 

15,000 

36,100 

81,800 

16,300 

47,800 

19,600 

26,700 

28,500 

15,000 

12,100 

25 

25 

80 

99 

51 

*1.6 

*1.0 

*1.3 

60 

50 

43 

28 

*1.8 

28 

1959 

1959 

449 11.0 .90 1959 

1959 

265 10.5 .90 1959 

438 8.7 .80 1964 

1959 

435 12.0 .80 1959 

1961 

1959 

1913 

1959 

8,720 

25,000 

14,900 

1950 5,990 29 

5.8 

150 7.5 

.50 1963 3,460 29 

1959 13,200 *1.1 

1943 16,500 68 

1913 90,000 *1.3 

. 80 1958 13,900 *1.2 

Remarks 

Discontinued in 1971. 

Regulate since 1969 by 

Huntington Reservoir. 

Regulated since 1968 by 

Salamonie Reservoir. 

Regulated since 1968 by 

upstream reservoirs . 

1958 19,400 *1.6 Discontinued in 1971. 

95 3.4 

26 

1927 25,000 *1.1 

1958 28,000 45 

1913 115,000 *1.3 

1967 7,940 *1.2 

1943 17,000 52 

1913 140,000 *1.3 

1913 145,000 *1.3 

1943 18,000 *1.0 

.30 1954 700 3 

Regulated since 1968 by 

Mississ-inewa Reservoir. 

Regulated since 1968 by 

upstream reservoirs. 

Do. 

Regulated since 1968. 

Discontinued in 1971. 
TABLE 7.-Selected watershed characteristics and maximum floods at gaging stations-Continued 

Length Maximum flood of YeM" Discharge R.I. Station No. record A s L Pi R D Rc (ft3/s) (years) Remarks 

03-3315.00 28 856 1.6 105 8.0 1950 7,800 5 03-3323.00 ----- 12 35.0 5.5 9.6 8.5 77 2.2 .30 1963 500 *1.3 03-3324.00 ----- 12 152 2.0 19.1 8.0 82 2.3 .70 1965 2,750 86 03-3330.00 ----- 32 1,865 1.5 168 8.5 1959 22,600 23 03-3334.50 10 146 3.3 24.1 9.0 100 2.8 .80 1964 4,160 33 03-3335.00 17 162 3.3 29.6 9.0 111 3.0 .80 1950 6,320 *1.1 Discontinued in 1961. 03-3336.00 12 24.7 4.5 12.7 9.5 72 4.5 .70 1964 1,040 4 03-3337.00 16 242 2.7 44.1 9.0 1959 8,100 *1.1 03-3340.00 28 396 3.3 83.5 9.5 1950 10,200 8 03-3345.00 28 243 7.1 48.8 10.0 1943 17,900 45 03-3350.00 17 794 3.5 102 9.5 1958 25,000 27 03-3355.00 ----- 48 7,267 2.1 220 1913 190,000 *1.2 Regulated since 1968 by 

upstream res,ervoirs. 03-3357.00 16 323 4.4 48.5 9.0 19,59 12,600 45 03-3360.00 32 8,208 1.8 262 1913 200,000 *1.2 Do. 03-3395.00 33 509 5.3 51.2 11.0 1913 36,000 *1.2 03-3400.00 31 670 5.4 72.0 11.0 1957 32,000 27 03-3405.00 44 11,100 1.6 294 1913 230,000 *1.1 03-3408.00 14 132 7.2 35.9 12.0 252 5.4 .70 1957 39,900 *3.5 

03-3410.00 ----- 19 240 6.7 54.1 13.0 1957 38,400 *1.3 Discontinued in 1958. 

03-3412.00 ----- 14 133 11.4 29.1 13.0 344 5.4 .70 1957 53,400 *3.7 Discontinued in 1971. 

03-3415.00 ----- 44 12,200 1.6 320 1913 245,000 *1.2 

03-3420.00 ----- 33 13,100 1.4 373 1913 250,000 *1.2 03-342·5.00 28 228 2.9 30.6 11.5 1950 8,800 *1.0 

03-3430.00 42 13,700 1.3 409 1913 255,000 *1.2 

03-3470.00 40 241 4.7 49.4 11.0 1913 20,000 *1.2 

03-3475.00 17 35.510.2 12.5 10.5 165 5.7 .70 1964 1,780 3 

03-3480.00 41 406 4.4 72.0 11.0 1913 28,000 *1.1 

03-3485.00 54 828 4.1 93.4 11.0 1927 27,200 12 

03-3490.00 25 858 3.9 102 11.0 1964 26,800 11 03-3495.00 17 131 4.0 27.1 10.0 121 5.4 .70 1957 6,720 60 

03-3497.00 16 40.4 6.2 15.0 9'.5 110 4.6 .70 1957 3,980 *1.1 

03-3501.00 16 18.518.7 6.4 9.5 110 6.6 .70 1957 3,920 *1.1 

03-3505.00 21 216 4.0 41.6 10.5 1957 9,800 40 

03-3510.00 42 1,219 3.7 117 10.0 1913 58,500 *1.1 

03-3515.00 30 169 7.2 31.8 11.5 273 5.3 .70 1964 8,750 10 

03-3522.00 13 42.4 6.7 19.3 10.0 127 4.5 .70 19,64 2,010 6 

03-3525.00 42 298 5.3 48.8 11.5 1913 22,000 *1.0 

03-3530.00 42 1,635 3.5 135 1913 70,000 *1.1 

03-3532.00 14 103 15.2 17.4 10.5 153 7.5 .70 1964 12,400 *1.2 

03-3535.00 32 174 6.8 35.1 10.5 264 7.9· .70 1957 28,800 *1.9 Regulated since 19·69 by 

Eagle· Creek Reservoir. 

03-3536.00 12 23.918.8 9.2 11.0 189 4.5 .70 1961 1,940 10 

03-3537.00 13 28.810.6 11.5 11.0 131 6.0 .70 196·2 3,330 31 

03-3538.00 14 212 9.0 35.1 11.0 1963 18,000 32 

03-3540.00 26 2,444 3.1 166 1913 90,000 *1.1 

03-3545.00 20 14.619.8 7.6 13.0 291 11.5 .80 1960 8,140 65 

03-3560.00 25 100 6.2 28.1 13.0 1947 9,420 4 

03-3570.00 46· 2,988 2.8 203 1913 100,000 *1.2 Discontinued in 1971. 

03-3575.00 22 326 6.6 58.8 12.5 1957 27,400 37 

03-3580.00 22 245 5.8 29.5 12.5 1960 11,400 12 

03-3590.00 33 294 5.1 45.0 12.5 1950 8,960 4 Regulated since 1953 by 

Cagles Mill Reservoir. 

03-3595.00 15 59.0 12.6 18.3 12.5 283 7.0 .70 1963 10,700 *1.2 

03-3600.00 40 830 5.8 75.7 13.0 1950 34,000 7 Regulated since 1953 by 

Cagles Mill Reservoir. 

03-3605.00 43 4,688 2.4 253 1913 130,000 *1.2 

03-3610.00 21 184 5.8 30.8 12.0 251 5.2 .70 1963 12,900 60 

03-3615.00 28 421 4.8 57.6 12.5 1963 15,800 7 

03-3620.00 29 107 4.3 30.1 12.0 195 7.0 .70 1952 10,700 *1.0 

03-3625.00 29 474 4.5 81.1 12.0 1956 27,600 34 

03-3630.00 31 1,060 5.9 67.3 12.5 1963 40,500 10 

03-3635.00 41 303 5.7 60.6 12.5 1949 18,500 15 

03-3640.00 24 1,707 3.8 117 1963 52,300 *1.2 

03-3645.00 23 91.410.3 33.7 12.5 401 7.4 .70 1959 11,300 63 

03-3650.00 23 155 8.9 42.3 13.5 410 9.8 .90 1959 19,900 20 

03-3655.00 ----- 44 2,341 2.8 146 1913 120,000 *1.4 

03-3660.00 16 77.2 9.4 32.6 14.0 318 1.5 1.00 1960 18,600 67 

03-3665.00 23 293 7.6 54.7 14.5 1959 52,200 *1.2 

03-3670.00 39 359 6.2 68.8 14.5 1959 53,900 *1.2 Discontinued in 1971. 

03-3690.00 29 85.912.2 29.1 13.5 391 9.0 1.00 1959 26,200 85 

27 
TABLE 7.-Selected watershed characteristics and maximum floods at gaging stations-Continued 

Length Maximum flood 

of Year Discharge R.I. 

Station No. record A s L Pi R D Rc (ft 3/s) (years) Remarks 

03-3695.00 32 198 9.2 43.2 14.0 448 9.1 1.00 1959 56,800 *1.7 

03-3715.00 32 3,861 2.5 207 1913 155,000 *1.5 

03-3716.00 11 38.213.0 10.6 14.0 312 10.0 .80 1968 6,400 8 Discontinued in 1971. 

03-3716.50 10 76.111.6 17.7 13.5 400 8.0 .70 1963 7,500 12 

03-3720.00 25 120 9.0 34.7 13.5 436 9.5 .70 1960 13,300 5 Do. 

03-3727.00 11 48.819.1 13.7 14.5 383, 7.5 .80 1968 8,280 23 

03-3730.00 25 573 2.0 58.2 14.0 1961 25,100 *1.3 Regulated since 1963 by 

Monroe Res·. Disc. 1971. 

03-3732.00 10 60.712.7 16.5 15.0 390 7.0 .80 1964 6,450 7 

03-3735.00 57 4,927 2.0 255 1913 160,000 *1.4 

03-3740.00 44 11,125 1.9 3,15 1913 235,000 *1.2 

03-3745.00 10 171 2.6 52.8 15.5 466 13.7 .80 1964 14,700 25 

03-3755.00 23 262 2.4 72.6 16.0 1913 16,000 56 

03-3765.00 37 822 1.2 143 15.5 1937 18,700 18 

03-3775.00 44 28,600 1.2 509 1913 428,000 *1.3 

04-0875.00 2'9 6'9.2 7.4 22.6 6.5 159 4.0 .50 1959 2,670 *1.0 

04-0930.00 24 125 3.6 29.8 7.0 131 3.2 .50 1954 3,880 *1.3 

04-0935.00 23 160 3.2' 36.0 8.0 173 3.1 .40 1954 3,430 35 

04-0940.00 26 62.9 6.2 14.8 12.0 262 8.0 .40 1954 3,110 35 

04-0945.00 26 78.7 4.7 22.5 8.0 206 6.6 .40 1954 3,180 90 

04-0995.00 26 80.5- 5.2 22.9 4.5 120 3.2 .30 1950 744 43 

04-1002.20 21 142 3.9 26.6 5.5 130 3.5 .30 1956 717 2 Discontinued in 1971. 

04-1005.00 40 594 2.8 65.9 6.0 1950 5,440 4 

04-1010.00 24 3,339 2.2 135 5.0 1950 18,400 6 

04-1780.00 25 609 3.2 74.4 4.5 1950 9,710 *1.1 

04-1790.00 16 762, 2.7 88.2 4.5 1956 10,100 *1.0 

04-1795.00 28 87.3- 8.0 20.1 4.5 193 5.1 .50 1950 1,520 2 

04-1800.00 25 270 6.0 35.8 5.0 1950 4,870 9 

04-1805.00 14 1,060 2.3 98.2 4.5 1913 16,500 *1.5 

04-1815.00 25 621 2.1 79.4 7.5 1959 11,3'00 80 

04-1820.00 41 762 1.7 98.2 7.5 1959 13,600 *1.1 

04-1830.00 15 1,967 2.9 124 5.5 195.0 19,100 11 

05-5150.00 20 116 1.2 23.2, 5.5 100 3.0 .30 1954 686 10 

05-5155.00 47 400 1.3 49.6 6.5 1927 1,700 2 

05-5160.00 16 132 5.0 12.9 7.0 65 2.5 .50 1965 1,650 10 

05-5165.00 23 284 2.2 26.6 8.0 1954 5,390 *1.2 

05-5170.00 28 425 2.3 54.4 8.0 19·54 5,660 9 

05-5175.00 23 1,160 .9 69.6 7.0 1954 5,300 11 

05-5180.00 49 1,578 .9 78.6 6.5 1927 7,.200 28 

05-5,190.00 23 123 3.2 22.2 7.5 137 2.5 .40 1970 1,160 5 

05-519'5.00 20 54.7 2.3 .21.1 7.0 102 6.5 .40 1954 1,840 35 

05-5210.00 23 35.6 2.5 8.9 7.5 44 2.5 .40 19,50 422 15 

05-5220.00 22 144 2.9 15.7 8.0 58 3.5 .40 1958 2,040 50 

05-5225.00 23 203 2.5 18.6 8.0 63 4.5- .40 1958 2,550 *1.0 

05--5-230.00 2,2 21.8 6.4 10.4 8.5 82 3.4 .70 1967 958 5 

05-5235.00 22 83.7 2.2 13.2 8.5 95 2.5- .70 1967 2,390 40 

05-5-240.00 22 44.8 6.4 21.4 8.5- 193 3.0 .70 195-8 3,720 *1.3 

05--5245.00 22 452 2.0 30.7 8.0 1958 5,930 70 

28 
Pi (in.) 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES(A0.734) 

100200 400 600 8001000 2000 

4000 -g 

0 

0 

Q) 

8000 ~ 

Q) 

a. 12,000 ~ 

~ 

..Q 

24,000 0 

Model 1 t =2 

b =1.16 

S (ft/mi) 

FIGURE 11.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 1. 

Pi (in.) 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES(A0.701) 

100 200 400 600 800 1000 2000 

"C 

4000 g 

0 

Q) 

8000 ~ 

Q) 

a. 12,000 ~ 

~ 

Modell 

t =5 

b =1.19 

FIGURE 12.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 1. 

29 
Pi (in.) 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES (A 0.678) 

100 200 400 600 1000 2000 

5000 -g 

0 

(.) 

Q) 

10,000 Ill 

Q) 

a. 15,000 -z 

2 

Model 1 

t =10 

b =1.19 

S (ft/mi) 

1 

FIGURE 13.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 1. 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES (A 0.654) 

100 200 400 600 1000 2000 

S (ft/mi) 

1 

5000 "C 

1: 

0 

(.) 

Q) 

Ill 

.... 

Q) Modell a. 

+-' t =25 Q) 

b = 1.16 2 

(.) 

:0 

~ ::J 

(.) 

Pi (in.) 1: 

.Q 

' 0 

FIGURE 14.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 1. 

30 
DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES (A 0.632) 

100 200 400 600 8001000 2000 

S (ft/mi) 

"0 

1: 

0 

0 

Q) 

lll 

(i; 

a. Model 1 

+-' t =z50 Q) 

~ b = 1.12 

0 

:.0 

:::s 

0 

1: 

Pi (in.) ..Q 

' c 

FIGURE 15.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 1. 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES(A0.620) 

100 200 400 6008001000 2000 

l(mi) 

S(ft/mi) 

Example 6 in text on page 43 

Q/b =7200 

Q 100 = 1.06 X 7200 = 7630 cfs -------=::I .-aJv......-:..........-r 

Pi (in.) 

~. ' , g Example 1 m text 

0 Q/b =3400 

20,000 5l Q100 =3400 X 1.06=3600 cfs 

(i; 

30,000 .e 

Q) 

~ 40,000 0 

:.0 

:::s 50,000 0 

.: 

Model 1 

t =100. 

b =1.06 

FIGURE 16.-Grap.hical solutions for regression equations for model 1. 

31 
o.30 

Rc 

Q.30 

Rc 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES ( A0.59I) 

15 25 50 100 150 200 

R(ft) 

D(mi/mi2) 

"0 

r:: 

0 

u 

Q) 

(/) 

.... 

Q) 

c. 

+"' 

Q) 

~ 

u 

:0 Model 2 :::l 

u t=2 r:: b=18.7 ..a 

........ 

CJ 

FIGURE 17.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 2. 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES(A0.552) 

15 25 50 100 150 200 

Model 2 

t =5 

b=29.2 

R(ft) 

FIGURE 18.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 2. 

32 
Rc 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES (A0-529) 

15 25 50 100 150 200 

"'-

Q) 

a. Model 2 

'=10 

6=38.5 

R(ft) 

FIGURE 19.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 2. 

FIGURE 20.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 2. 

33 

A 0.508 ) 
DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES (A o.494) 

15 25 50 100 150 200 

R (ft) 

0.30 "C 

c 

0 

u 

Q) 

(/) 

.... 

Q) 

a. Model 2 +"' 

Q) 

~ t =50 Rc 

u b =59.6 :.0 

::I 

u 

c 

<)<) ..Q 

........ 

v c 

FIGURE 21.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 2. 

DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES (A 0.480) 

15 25 50 100 150 200 

0.30 

200 

~ Q 100 = 14 X 70.6 =988 cfs 

300 a. 

+"' 

Rc Q) 

400 ~ Model 2 u 

:0 t =100 

500 ::I 

u b =70 .6 c 

<)<) 600 -..Q v (j 

FIGURE 22.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 2. 

34 
40,000 r----...,r---r--"T"""'-------r--------r-------T"------.., 

36,000 

32,000 

Q 28,000 z 

0 

u 

LLJ 

(/) 

c::: 24,000 LLJ 

0.. 

1-

LLJ 

~ 20,000 

Model3 

t=2 

b= 1.42 

ol_~~;;;E;::;t;::::~==~sjo:o=============:ljotoo:==========:ls1o:o=========:2:o[a: DRAINAGE AREA, IN SQUARE MILES (A 0.688) 

FIGURE 23.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 3. 

35 
50,000r---~---r----~----------~--------------~------------~~--------~ 

~ 35,000 

0 

(.) 

LIJ 

U) 

0:: 30,000 LIJ 

a.. 

1-

LIJ 

~ 25,000 

(.) 

iii 

::::l 

(.) 20,000 

z 

Model3 

t=5 

b=l.44 

FIGURE 24.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 3. 

36 

s 
035,000 

z 

0 

u 

LLJ 

(/) 30,000 a:: 

LLJ 

a.. 

1-

~ 25,000 1.1.. 

u 

iii 

a2o,ooo 

~ 

Model3 

f =10 

b=l.42 

Pi (in.) 

FIGURE 25.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 3. 

37 

~?, 

s 
0 

z 

0 

(..) 

UJ 

en 

0::: 

UJ 

a.. 

1-

UJ 

UJ 

LL 

100,000~--~--,---~r---------~~------------~------------~----------~ 

8 

FIGURE 26.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 3. 

38 
Model3 

t =50 

b =1.32 

FIGURE 27.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 3. 

39 

s 
100,000.----.--.----,~----------r-------------~~----------~----------~ 

0 70,000 z 

0 

(.) 

w 

en 

0:: 60,000 w 

a.. 

I-

~ 50,000 LL.. 

~ 

Ill 

B 4o,ooo 

~ 

..0 

' c 30,000 

20,000 

10,000 

Model3 

t=IOO 

b= 1.27 

8 

FIGURE 28.-Graphical solutions for regression equations for model 3. 

-It u.s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 0-585-468/41 

40