U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Pamphlet accompanies maps

Scientific Investigations Map 3231

Prepared in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs 

Flood-Inundation Maps for the White River at Newberry, Indiana

Flood stage 8 Flood stage 23 Flood stage 25
Cover: Highway 57 Bridge over the White River, at Newberry, Ind. 

(Photograph by Chad Menke, USGS, June 10, 2008.) Insets show map 

sheets 1, 16, and 18, flood stages, 8, 23, and 25 feet respectively.
Flood-Inundation Maps for the White River 

at Newberry, Indiana 

By Kathleen K. Fowler, Moon H. Kim, and Chad D. Menke 

Prepared in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs

Pamphlet accompanies maps 

Scientific Investigations Map 3231

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials 

as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.

Suggested citation:

Fowler, K.K., Kim, M.H., and Menke, C.D., 2012, Flood-inundation maps for the White River at Newberry, Indiana: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3231, 22 sheets, scale 1:20,000, plus 8 p. pamphlet.
iii

Contents

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

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

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................1

Study Area Description ........................................................................................................................3

Previous Studies ..................................................................................................................................3

Constructing Water-Surface Profiles .........................................................................................................3

Hydrologic and Steady-Flow Data .....................................................................................................3

Topographic and Bathymetric Data ...................................................................................................4

Energy Loss Factors .............................................................................................................................4

Model Calibration and Performance .................................................................................................4

Development of Water-Surface Profiles ...........................................................................................6

Inundation Mapping ......................................................................................................................................6

White River at Newberry, Indiana, Flood-Inundation Maps on the Internet ..............................6

Disclaimer for Flood-Inundation Maps .............................................................................................6

Uncertainty Associated with Inundation Maps ...............................................................................6

Summary..........................................................................................................................................................7

References Cited............................................................................................................................................8

Figures

1. Map showing location of study reach for the White River and location of USGS 

streamgage and National Weather Service forecast site .....................................................2

Tables

 1. USGS streamgage and miscellaneous site information for the White River at 

Newberry, Indiana ........................................................................................................................3

 2. Comparison of measured water-surface elevations at USGS streamgage 03360500, 

White River at Newberry, Indiana, with water-surface elevations output from 

the hydraulic model ......................................................................................................................5

 3. Comparison of hydraulic-model output and surveyed high-water-mark elevations 

from the flood of June 2008 for the White River at Newberry, Indiana ...............................5

 4. Stages and water-surface elevations, in feet, with corresponding discharge 

estimates at USGS streamgage 03360500, White River at Newberry, Indiana, 

for simulated water-surface profiles .........................................................................................7
iv

Map Sheets

Seperate documents available on Web only

 1–22. Flood-inundation maps for the White River at Newberry, Indiana, at the U.S. Geological 

Survey streamgage 03360500 for a corresponding stage of:

 1. 8.00 ft and an elevation of 473.15 feet (NAVD88)

 2. 9.00 ft and an elevation of 474.15 feet (NAVD88)

 3. 10.00 ft and an elevation of 475.15 feet (NAVD88)

 4. 11.00 ft and an elevation of 476.15 feet (NAVD88)

 5. 12.00 ft and an elevation of 477.15 feet (NAVD88)

 6. 13.00 ft and an elevation of 478.15 feet (NAVD88)

 7. 14.00 ft and an elevation of 479.15 feet (NAVD88)

 8. 15.00 ft and an elevation of 480.15 feet (NAVD88)

 9. 16.00 ft and an elevation of 481.15 feet (NAVD88)

 10. 17.00 ft and an elevation of 482.15 feet (NAVD88)

 11. 18.00 ft and an elevation of 483.15 feet (NAVD88)

 12. 19.00 ft and an elevation of 484.15 feet (NAVD88)

 13. 20.00 ft and an elevation of 485.15 feet (NAVD88)

 14. 21.00 ft and an elevation of 486.15 feet (NAVD88)

 15. 22.00 ft and an elevation of 487.15 feet (NAVD88)

 16. 23.00 ft and an elevation of 488.15 feet (NAVD88)

 17. 24.00 ft and an elevation of 489.15 feet (NAVD88)

 18. 25.00 ft and an elevation of 490.15 feet (NAVD88)

 19. 26.00 ft and an elevation of 491.15 feet (NAVD88)

 20. 27.00 ft and an elevation of 492.15 feet (NAVD88)

 21. 28.00 ft and an elevation of 493.15 feet (NAVD88)

 22. 29.00 ft and an elevation of 494.15 feet (NAVD88)
v

Conversion Factors

Inch/Pound to SI

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

square foot (ft2

) 0.0929 square meter (m2)

square mile (mi2

) 2.590 square kilometer (km2)

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3

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

Hydraulic gradient

foot per mile (ft/mi) 0.1894 meter per kilometer (m/km)

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to either (1) stage, the height above an arbitrary 

datum established at a streamgage, or (2) elevation, the height above the North American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to either the 

North American Datum of 1927 (NAD 27) or the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83) 

as noted.
vi

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the agencies that have cooperated in the funding for the operation 

and maintenance of the gages used for this study, especially the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Louisville District, and the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission. Special thanks are 

given to the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs for their cooperation in this study 

and to the National Weather Service for their continued support to the USGS flood-inundation 

mapping initiative. 
Flood-Inundation Maps for the White River at 

Newberry, Indiana 

By Kathleen K. Fowler, Moon H. Kim, and Chad D. Menke

Abstract

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 4.9-mile reach of 

the White River at Newberry, Indiana (Ind.), were created by 

the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the 

Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood 

Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.

gov/osw/flood_inundation/, depict estimates of the areal extent 

of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) 

at USGS streamgage 03360500, White River at Newberry, 

Ind. Current conditions at the USGS streamgage may be 

obtained on the Internet (http://waterdata.usgs.gov/in/nwis/

uv?site_no=03360500). The National Weather Service (NWS) 

forecasts flood hydrographs at the Newberry streamgage. 

That forecasted peak-stage information, also available on the 

Internet, may be used in conjunction with the maps developed 

in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation. 

For this study, flood profiles were computed for the White 

River reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater 

model developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The 

hydraulic model was calibrated by using the most current 

stage-discharge relation at USGS streamgage 03360500, 

White River at Newberry, Ind., and high-water marks from a 

flood in June 2008. The calibrated hydraulic model was then 

used to determine 22 water-surface profiles for flood stages at 

1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from bankfull to approximately the highest recorded water 

level at the streamgage. The simulated water-surface profiles 

were then combined with a geographic information system 

digital elevation model (derived from Light Detection and 

Ranging (LiDAR) data) in order to delineate the area flooded 

at each water level.

The availability of these maps, along with Internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage at 

Newberry, Ind., and forecasted stream stages from the NWS, 

provide emergency management personnel and residents with 

information that is critical for flood response activities such 

as evacuations and road closures as well as for post-flood 

recovery efforts.

Introduction 

The town of Newberry, Indiana, Ind., is a small rural 

community with an estimated population of 193 (U.S. Census 

Bureau, 2010). Newberry has experienced severe flooding 

numerous times, most recently in 2002, 2005, and 2008. The 

majority of flood damages have occurred along the White 

River, which flows through the town. Flood plains within 

Newberry are moderately developed and contain a mix of 

residential and commercial structures, along with agricultural 

areas.

Prior to this study, Newberry officials have relied on 

several information sources to make decisions on how to 

best alert the public and mitigate flood damages. One source 

of information is the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Greene 

County dated April 29, 2004 (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2007). A second source is USGS streamgage 

03360500, White River at Newberry, Ind., from which current 

and historical water levels (stage) can be obtained. A third 

source is the National Weather Service’s forecast of peak stage 

at USGS streamgage 03360500, White River at Newberry, 

Ind., through their Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service 

(AHPS) Web site. Although USGS current stage and NWS 

forecast stage information is particularly useful for residents in 

the immediate vicinity of a streamgage, it is of limited use to 

residents farther upstream or downstream because the watersurface elevation is not constant along the entire stream channel. Also, FEMA and State emergency management mitigation 

teams and property owners typically lack information related 

to water depth at locations other than near USGS streamgage 

or NWS flood-forecast points. 

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to describe the development 

of a series of estimated flood-inundation maps for the White 

River at Newberry, Ind. The maps and other useful flood information are available on the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping 
2 Flood-Inundation Maps for the White River at Newberry, Indiana

Science Web site and the NWS AHPS Web site. Internet users 

can select estimated inundation maps that correspond to (1) 

current stages at the USGS streamgage, (2) the NWS forecasted peak stage, or (3) other desired stream stages.

The scope of the study was limited to the White River 

reach extending 2.3 mi upstream of the Highway 57 Bridge 

and 2.6 mi downstream of the same bridge (fig. 1). To develop 

flood-inundation maps, a hydraulic model of the White River 

reach was built that provided water-surface profiles for various flood stages. Tasks specific to construction of the watersurface profiles were (1) examination of current and historical 

data from the streamgage on the White River (table 1), (2) 

collection of hydrologic and steady-flow data, (3) collection of topographic, geometric (for structures/bridges), and 

bathymetric data throughout the study reach, (4) determination 

of energy-loss factors (roughness coefficients) in the stream 

channel and flood plain, (5) model calibration and evaluation, 

and (6) computation of water-surface profiles using the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers’ hydraulic modeling software 

HEC–RAS (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2010). 

Maps depicting estimated flood-inundation areas were 

then produced from the results of the modeled water-surface 

profiles. Production of estimated flood-inundation maps corresponding to targeted water-surface elevations at the gages 

(stages) was completed by using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ HEC–GeoRas computer program (U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, 2009). HEC–GeoRas is a tool used for processing 

geospatial data in a Geographical Information System (GIS). 

An interface tool was then developed that links to USGS 

real-time streamgage information and NWS forecasted peak 

stage to facilitate the online display of user-selected floodinundation maps. 

87°04' 87°02' 87°

38°56'

03360500

Newberry

FRANKLIN STREET

COUNTY ROAD 500S

SECOND STREET

COUNTY ROAD 650S

57

BROAD STREET

57

RAIL ROAD

White

River

First

Creek

EXPLANATION

57

USGS streamgage 

 and number

Limit of study area

State route marker

Flow arrow—Indicates

 direction water flow

03360500

INDIANA

Study area

0 0.5 1 2 MILES

0 0.5 1 2 KILOMETERS

Doans Creek

W003 D O R C

Projection: Transverse Mercator

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983

Orthophotography from Indiana Spatial Data Portal,

National Agriculture Imagery Program 2010, available at http://gis.iu.edu/ 

38°57'

38°55'

Figure 1. Location of study reach for the White River and location of USGS streamgage and National Weather Service forecast site.
Constructing Water-Surface Profiles 3

Methods used are generally cited from previously published reports. If techniques varied significantly from previously documented methods due to local hydrologic conditions 

or available data, they are described in detail in this report. 

Twenty-two maps were produced for water levels referenced 

to the water-surface elevation (stage) at USGS streamgage 

03360500, White River at Newberry, Ind., and ranging from 

approximately bankfull to nearly the maximum observed 

water level at the streamgage. 

Study Area Description

The White River reach near the town of Newberry is in 

southwest Indiana in the Wabash Lowland physiographic section of the Southern Hills and Lowlands Region (Gray, 2000). 

The drainage area is 4,682 mi2 at the upstream end of the study 

reach, 4,688 mi2 at USGS streamgage 03360500, White River 

at Newberry, and 4,690 mi2, at the downstream extent of the 

study reach. The headwaters originate in Randolf County, and 

the stream flows generally southwestward before entering the 

town limits. Doans Creek is the one major tributary (drainage area of 26.9 mi2

) to the White River study reach. It joins 

the main stem just before it flows through Newberry and is 

upstream of the study extent. Generally, the area has extensive 

flood plains with broad terraces and is underlain by outwash 

sand. The study reach is approximately 4.9 mi long and has 

an average top-of-bank channel width of about 350 ft and an 

average channel slope of 0.00026 (1.4 ft/mi). Most of the land 

contiguous to the study reach is classified as agricultural. The 

study area includes some residential and commercial development, although population decreased 6.3 percent from 206 to 

193 between 2000 and 2010 (Town of Newberry, Ind., 2011) 

http://www.city-data.com/city/Newberry-Indiana.html. The 

study reach has one major road, State Highway 57, crossing 

the main channel and adjacent flood plain.

Previous Studies 

The current FIS for Greene County (Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 2007) was completed by EarthTechAECOM, Inc. The White River near Newberry was studied 

by approximate methods. A flood hazard boundary map for 

Newberry was revised in 1976.

Constructing Water-Surface Profiles

The water-surface profiles used to produce the 22 floodinundation maps in this study were computed by using HEC–

RAS, version 4.1.0 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2010). 

HEC–RAS is a one-dimensional step-backwater model for 

simulation of water-surface profiles with steady-state (gradually varied) or unsteady-state flow computation options. The 

HEC–RAS analysis for this study was done using the steadystate flow computation option.

Hydrologic and Steady-Flow Data

The study area hydrologic network consists of one USGS 

streamgage (fig. 1; table 1), which has been in operation since 

1928. This gage has a continuous record of measured water 

level (stage) and computed streamflow. Water-surface elevations corresponding to the stages are referenced to the North 

American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) in this report. 

The USGS gage is equipped with satellite radio transmitters 

that allow data to be transmitted routinely on the Internet 

within an hour of collection. Flow data can be accessed at 

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/in/nwis/current/?type=flow by clicking on station number 03360500.

Table 1. USGS streamgage and miscellaneous site information for the White River at Newberry, Indiana. 

[mi2, square miles; NAD 27, North American Datum of 1927; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; ft, feet]

Streamgage 

name

Streamgage 

number

Drainage 

area (mi2

)

Latitude 

(NAD 27)

Longitude 

(NAD 27)

Period of 

record

Datum of 

gage 

(NAVD 88)

Maximum recorded 

flood elevation 

(NAVD 88) and date

White River at 

Newberry, Indiana

03360500 4,688 38o 55' 39" 87o 00' 41" September 

1928 to 

present

465.15 ft 493.74 ft on June 9, 2008 

(corresponds to a gage 

height of 28.59 ft)
4 Flood-Inundation Maps for the White River at Newberry, Indiana 

The steady-flow data necessary for the hydraulic model 

consisted of flow regime, boundary conditions (normal depth), 

and peak-discharge information. The steady-flow data for the 

model were obtained from field measurements of streamflow 

at USGS streamgage 03360500, White River at Newberry, Ind. 

All computations used discharge values with known stages 

from actual streamflow measurements or the stage-discharge 

relations at the gage. 

Topographic and Bathymetric Data

Channel cross sections were developed from USGS 

field surveys that were conducted in November 2011. These 

cross sections provide detailed channel elevation data below 

the water surface and were collected by using hydroacoustic instrumentation to measure water depth and Differential 

Global Positioning System (DGPS) instrumentation to determine horizontal position. LiDAR data were used to obtain 

digital elevation data for the portions of the cross sections that 

were above the water surface at the time of the surveys. The 

LiDAR data for the White River at Newberry were collected 

and post-processed by Aero-Metric, Inc., Sheboygan, Wisconsin (Wis.), in 2010. The original LiDAR data have horizontal 

accuracy of 1.02 ft with horizontal resolution of 3.9 ft and 

vertical accuracy of 0.37 ft at a 95-percent confidence level. 

Although a finer resolution of the digital elevation model 

(DEM) was possible given the accuracy of the LiDAR data, 

the final DEM had a grid-cell size of 10 ft by 10 ft in order to 

decrease the GIS processing time.

Various manmade drainage structures (bridges, culverts, 

roadway embankments, and embankments) in and along the 

White River affect or have the potential to affect water-surface 

elevations during floods along the stream. To properly account 

for these features in the model, structural dimensions for two 

bridges on State Highway 57—one over the main channel and 

another at the northern end of the flood plain—were measured 

and surveyed in the field concurrently with the stream channel 

surveys. A detailed description of the methods used to acquire 

and process the topographic and bathymetric data can be 

found in Bales and others (2007). 

Energy Loss Factors

Field observations and high-resolution aerial photographs 

obtained from the Indiana Spatial Data Portal, National Agricultural Imagery Program 2010 (http://gis.iu.edu/) were used 

to select initial (pre-calibration) channel and flood-plain friction coefficients. These friction coefficients, commonly called 

Manning’s roughness coefficients or Manning’s n values, 

account for energy (friction) loss in the model calculations. 

The final unadjusted Manning’s n values used ranged from 

0.035 to 0.039 for the main channel and 0.07 to 0.12 for the 

overbank areas modeled in this analysis. For the area near the 

Highway 57 Bridges, the n values were adjusted by roughness 

factors (multipliers) that increase or decrease the assigned n 

values at specified areas and or flows. The application of these 

factors resulted in main channel n values ranging from 0.0023 

to 0.062 and overbank n values from 0.0042 to 0.112. The 

very low n values were applied at the two highest flows where 

channel and overbank roughness has less effect. These adjustments were applied because of the complicated hydraulics at 

the two bridge constrictions on Highway 57, the presence of 

an old roadbed just upstream of the highway, and the presence 

of an 1,800-ft-long embankment about 450 ft downstream of 

the highway. Using the adjusted roughness factors in this short 

reach allowed better calibration of the model.

Model Calibration and Performance

The hydraulic model was calibrated to the most current stage-discharge relation at USGS streamgage 03360500, 

White River at Newberry, Ind. Model calibration was accomplished by adjusting Manning’s n values and, in some cases, 

changing the channel cross section or slope until the results 

of the hydraulic computations closely agreed with the known 

flood discharge and stage values. Differences between measured and simulated water levels for specified flows were 

equal to or less than 0.3 ft (table 2). The model was also used 

to simulate the flood of June 9, 2008. The peak stage for this 

flood was 28.59 ft, and the estimated peak discharge was 

138,200 ft3

/s. Differences between measured and simulated 

water levels of the four high-water marks were within 0.20 ft 

(table 3). The results demonstrate that the model is capable of 

simulating accurate water levels over a wide range of flows in 

the basin. Details on techniques used in model development 

and calibration can be found in Bales and others (2007).
Constructing Water-Surface Profiles 5

Table 2. Comparison of measured water-surface elevations at USGS streamgage 

03360500, White River at Newberry, Indiana, with water-surface elevations output from the 

hydraulic model.

[ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988]

Stage (ft)

Measured water-surface 

elevation 

(ft, NAVD 88)

Modeled water-surface 

elevation 

(ft, NAVD 88)

Elevation 

difference 

(ft)

8.00 473.15 472.97 0.18

9.00 474.15 474.17 -0.02

10.00 475.15 475.02 0.13

11.00 476.15 475.85 0.30

12.00 477.15 477.05 0.10

13.00 478.15 477.87 0.28

14.00 479.15 479.05 0.10

15.00 480.15 479.86 0.29

16.00 481.15 481.01 0.14

17.00 482.15 482.13 0.02

18.00 483.15 482.93 0.22

19.00 484.15 483.89 0.26

20.00 485.15 484.94 0.21

21.00 486.15 485.99 0.16

22.00 487.15 487.05 0.10

23.00 488.15 487.87 0.28

24.00 489.15 488.98 0.17

25.00 490.15 490.15 0.00

26.00 491.15 491.21 -0.06

27.00 492.15 492.08 0.07

28.00 493.15 493.27 -0.12

29.00 494.15 494.41 -0.26

Table 3. Comparison of hydraulic-model output and surveyed high-water-mark elevations from the flood of June 2008 for the 

White River at Newberry, Indiana. 

[SR, State Road; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988]

Location

High-water mark 

field identification 

number1

High-water mark 

elevation 

(ft, NAVD 88)

Model water-surface 

elevation 

(ft, NAVD 88)

Elevation 

difference 

(ft)

200 ft downstream of 

SR 57 bridge

75 490.83 490.63 0.20

250 ft downstream of 

SR 57 bridge

76 490.52 490.44 0.08

Railroad track 

and berm

78 487.33 487.32 0.01

Railroad track 

and berm

77 487.15 487.28 -0.13

1

Indiana Department of Natural Resources high-water marks for the flood of June 9, 2008, collected June 17, 2008.
6 Flood-Inundation Maps for the White River at Newberry, Indiana 

Development of Water-Surface Profiles

Profiles were developed for a total of 22 stages at 1-ft 

intervals between 8.0 ft and 29.0 ft as referenced to USGS 

streamgage 03360500, White River at Newberry, Ind. Discharges corresponding to the various stages were obtained 

from the most current stage-discharge relation (USGS rating 

no. 56) at the White River gage. 

Discharges for all profiles (table 4) were selected with the 

assumption that within the 4.9-mi study reach there are no significant inflows. The discharges were estimated to be uniform 

and steady throughout the study reach. 

Inundation Mapping

Flood-inundation maps were created for a stream reach 

near Newberry, Ind. The maps were created in a GIS by combining the water-surface profiles and digital elevation model 

data. The DEM data were derived from LiDAR data that were 

collected during April 2010, by Aero-Metric, Inc., Sheboygan, 

Wis. Post-processing of these data was completed by AeroMetric, Inc., on July 14, 2010. The LiDAR data have horizontal accuracy of 1.02 ft with horizontal resolution of 3.9 ft 

and vertical accuracy of 0.37 ft at a 95-percent confidence 

level. Estimated flood-inundation boundaries for each simulated profile were developed with HEC–GeoRAS software 

(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2009). HEC–GeoRAS is a 

set of procedures, tools, and utilities for processing geospatial 

data in ArcGIS using a graphical user interface. The interface allows the preparation of geometric data for import into 

HEC–RAS and processes simulation results exported from 

HEC–RAS (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2010). USGS 

personnel then modified the HEC–GeoRAS results to ensure 

a hydraulically reasonable transition of the boundary between 

modeled cross sections relative to the contour data for the land 

surface (Whitehead and Ostheimer, 2009). The maps show 

estimated flood-inundated areas overlaid on high-resolution, 

georeferenced, aerial photographs of the study area for each of 

the water-surface profiles that were generated by the hydraulic 

model.

White River at Newberry, Indiana, 

Flood-Inundation Maps on the Internet

The flood-inundation maps and current study documentation are available online at the U.S. Geological Survey 

Publications Warehouse (http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/2012/3231). 

Also, a Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site has been 

established to provide a portal for USGS flood-inundation 

study information to the public at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/

flood_inundation/. That Web portal has a link (http://wim.

usgs.gov/FIMI/FloodInundationMapper.html) to an interactive 

mapping application where flood maps can be downloaded in 

several commonly used electronic file formats. In the latter link, each stream reach displayed contains further links 

to NWISWeb graphs of the current stage and streamflow at 

USGS streamgage 03360500 to which the inundation maps 

are referenced. A link also is provided to the NWS AHPS site 

(http:/water.weather.gov/ahps/) where the NWS forecasts river 

stage at Newberry during times of flooding. The estimated 

flood-inundation maps are displayed in sufficient detail to note 

the extent of flooding with respect to individual structures so 

that preparations for flooding and decisions for emergency 

response can be performed efficiently. Roadways and bridges 

were closely reviewed and are shown as shaded (inundated 

and likely impassable) or not shaded (dry and passable) to 

facilitate emergency planning and use. However, buildings 

which are shaded do not reflect inundation but denote that 

bare earth surfaces in the vicinity of the buildings are inundated. When the water depth (as indicated in the Web Mapping 

Application by holding the cursor over an inundated area) in 

the vicinity of the building of interest exceeds that building’s 

height, the structure can be considered fully submerged.

Disclaimer for Flood-Inundation Maps

Inundated areas shown should not be used for navigation, 

regulatory, permitting, or other legal purposes. The USGS 

provides these maps “as-is” for a quick reference, emergency 

planning tool but assumes no legal liability or responsibility 

resulting from the use of this information. 

Uncertainty Associated with Inundation Maps

Although the flood-inundation maps represent the boundaries of inundated areas with a distinct line, some uncertainty 

is associated with these maps. The flood boundaries shown 

were estimated based on water stages (water-surface elevations) and streamflows at USGS streamgage at 03360500, 

White River at Newberry, Ind. Water-surface elevations 

along the stream reaches were estimated by steady-state 

hydraulic modeling, assuming unobstructed flow, and using 

discharges and hydrologic conditions anticipated at the USGS 

streamgage. The hydraulic model reflects the land-cover 

characteristics and any bridge, dam, levee, or other hydraulic 

structures existing as of November 2011. Unique meteorological factors (timing and distribution of precipitation) may cause 

actual discharges along the modeled reach to vary those from 

assumed during a flood and lead to deviations in the water-surface elevations and inundation boundaries shown. Additional 

areas may be flooded due to unanticipated conditions such as 

changes in the streambed elevation or roughness, backwater 

into tributaries along a main stem river, or backwater from 

localized debris or ice jams. The accuracy of the floodwater 

extent portrayed on these maps will vary with the accuracy of 

the digital elevation model used to simulate the land surface. 

Additional uncertainties and limitations pertinent to this study 

are described elsewhere in this report.
Summary 7

Table 4. Stages and water-surface elevations, in feet, with corresponding discharge estimates at USGS streamgage 03360500, 

White River at Newberry, Indiana, for simulated water-surface profiles. 

[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; the drainage area is 4,688 square miles.]

Stage, in feet above gage datum at White River (reference datum 465.15 NAVD 88)

8.0 

(473.15)

9.0 

(474.15)

10.0 

(475.15)

11.0 

476.15)

12.0 

(477.15)

13.0

(478.15)

14.0

(479.15)

15.0

(480.15)

16.0 

(481.15)

17.0

(482.15)

18.0

(483.15)

Discharge (ft3

/s)

7,010 8,502 10,090 11,770 13,350 15,400 17,340 19,360 21,460 23,630 26,100

Stage, in feet above gage datum at White River (reference datum 465.15 NAVD 88)

19.0 

(484.15)

20.0 

(485.15)

21.0 

(486.15)

22.0 

(487.15)

23.0 

(488.15)

24.0 

(489.15)

25.0 

(490.15)

26.0 

(491.15)

27.0 

(492.15)

28.0 

(493.15)

29.0 

(494.15)

Discharge (ft3

/s)

29,250 33,210 37,800 43,150 49,810 57,630 66,270 75,770 87,850 111,000 160,600

If this series of flood-inundation maps will be used in 

conjunction with NWS river forecasts, the user should be 

aware of additional uncertainties that may be inherent or factored into NWS forecast procedures. The NWS uses forecast 

models to estimate the quantity and timing of water flowing 

through selected stream reaches in the United States. These 

forecast models (1) estimate the amount of runoff generated 

by precipitation or snowmelt, (2) simulate the movement of 

floodwater as it proceeds downstream, and (3) predict the flow 

and stage (water-surface elevation) for the stream at a given 

location (AHPS forecast point) throughout the forecast period 

(every 6 hours and 3 to 5 days out during periods of high 

flow). For more information on AHPS forecasts, please see 

http://water.weather.gov/ahps/pcpn_and_river_forecasting.

pdf.

Summary

A series of estimated flood-inundation maps were developed in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community 

and Rural Affairs for the White River at Newberry, Ind. The 

maps were developed using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ HEC–RAS one-dimensional step-backwater model to 

compute 22 water-surface profiles for a 4.9-mi-long reach of 

the White River. The HEC–GeoRAS program was used to 

delineate estimated flood-inundation areas at 1-ft increments 

of stage as referenced to USGS streamgage 03360500, White 

River at Newberry, Ind. The modeled stages ranged from 

8.0 ft or bankfull to 29.0 ft, which is slightly higher than the 

maximum recorded stage at the White River streamgage. The 

hydraulic model was calibrated and showed good agreement 

between observed and simulated water-surface elevations at 

the streamgage, as well as with four high-water marks that 

were surveyed after the flood of June 9, 2008.

The inundation maps show estimated (shaded) floodinundation areas overlaid on high-resolution, georeferenced, 

aerial photographs of the study area. The maps were modified, 

as required, to remove any inundated areas that were detached 

from the main channel and were erroneously delineated as part 

of the flood extent and to correctly depict inundation of the 

State Highway Route 57 bridge surfaces. In addition to maps 

showing areas of inundation, downloadable GIS raster files 

and keyhole markup language map files (KML) were produced. Interactive use of the maps using the mouse cursor to 

click within the shaded areas can give users a general indication of depth of water at any point.

These maps, available at a USGS Web portal, in conjunction with the real-time stage data from USGS streamgage 

03360500, White River at Newberry, Ind., and NWS floodstage forecasts, can help to guide the general public in taking 

individual safety precautions and can provide local officials 

with a tool to efficiently manage emergency flood operations 

and flood mitigation efforts. 
8 Flood-Inundation Maps for the White River at Newberry, Indiana 

References Cited

Aero-Metric, Inc., 2010, Indiana Flood LiDAR (ARRA) 

Task Order, Remote-sensing Image: Sheboygan, Wis., 

Aero-Metric, Inc. 

Bales, J.D., Wagner, C.R., Tighe, K.C., and Terziotti, Silvia, 

2007, LiDAR-derived flood-inundation maps for realtime flood-mapping applications, Tar River Basin, North 

Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2007–5032, 42 p.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 

2007, Flood insurance study for Greene County, Indiana: Washington D.C., Flood Insurance Study Number 

18055CV000A, 18 p.

Gray, H.H., 2000, Physiographic divisions of Indiana: Bloomington, Ind., Indiana University, Indiana Geological Survey 

Special Report 61, 14 p.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering 

Center, 2009, HEC-GeoRAS, GIS tools for support of 

HEC–RAS using ArcGIS, user’s manual: [variously paged], 

available at http://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hecras/hec-georas_downloads.html.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering 

Center, 2010, HEC–RAS river analysis system, hydraulic 

reference manual, version 4.1: [variously paged], available 

at http://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-ras/hecrasdownload.html.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2010, 2010 Census interactive population search IN-Newberry town: Washington, D.C., available 

at http://2010.census.gov/2010census/popmap/ipmtext.

php?fl=18:1852524.

Whitehead, M.T., and Ostheimer, C.J., 2009, Development 

of a flood-warning system and flood-inundation mapping 

for the Blanchard River in Findlay, Ohio: U.S. Geological 

Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5234, 9 p.

Fowler and others—Flood-Inundation Maps for the White River at Newberry, Indiana—Scientific Investigations Map 3231