The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa (FDLB), Minnesota, analyzed the hydrologic and hydraulic conditions within the Stoney Brook watershed. The Stoney Brook watershed covers an area of 100.8 square miles in Carlton and St. Louis counties with most of the watershed within the Fond du Lac Reservation. Wild rice, which is harvested by the FDLB, naturally grows in the lakes on the Fond du Lac Reservation and is susceptible to damage from increased water-levels after substantial rainfall events. Channel modifications and frequency rainfall events were simulated to assess lake level conditions that could mitigate potential damages to the wild rice yields. The channel modifications were also used to evaluate options for improving conveyance and floodplain storage in the watershed. The study area consists of 77.9 square miles of the watershed with the downstream boundary located 2.4 miles downstream from the USGS streamgage Stoney Brook at Pine Drive near Brookston, Minn. (USGS station 04021520; U.S. Geological Survey, 2023). A hydrologic model was used to simulate precipitation runoff and outflow hydrographs from delineated subwatersheds in the Stoney Brook watershed. A two-dimensional hydraulic model was used to simulate streamflows, volume accumulation, lake water-levels, and inundation duration and depths. The hydrologic model was developed using Hydrologic Engineering Center–Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC–HMS) computer program (version 4.3; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2022) for the simulation of single rainfall events. A total of 14 subwatersheds were used in the HEC–HMS model to represent the 77.9 square mile study area within the Stoney Brook watershed. The HEC–HMS model was calibrated using streamflow time series from the USGS streamgage Stoney Brook at Pine Drive near Brookston, Minn. (USGS station 04021520; U.S. Geological Survey, 2023) to two high-flow events: April 21–30, 2008, and June 19–July 1, 2012. The calibrated HEC–HMS model used 24-hour duration design rainfall events consisting of precipitation frequencies of 1-, 2-, 5-, and 10-year recurrence intervals (100-, 50-, 20-, and 10-percent annual exceedance probabilities) for the simulation of channel modification alternatives in the hydraulic model. The hydraulic model was developed using Hydrologic Engineering Center–River Analysis System (HEC–RAS) computer program (version 6.4.1; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2023). The HEC–RAS model was calibrated using streamflow time series from the USGS streamgage Stoney Brook at Pine Drive near Brookston, Minn. (USGS station 04021520; U.S. Geological Survey, 2023) to two high-flow events: April 21–30, 2008, and June 19–July 1, 2012. Channel modification alternatives were developed in the HEC–RAS model as terrain modifications and were intended to improve flow conveyances and storage and wetland coverage within the floodplain. These terrain modifications include breaches in the bank spoils, reconnecting the original channel to Stoney Brook, and clearing the original channel of soil deposition and debris. The HEC–HMS with HEC–RAS scenarios were simulated using flows from 1-, 2-, 5-, and 10-year recurrence interval (100-, 50-, 20-, and 10-percent annual exceedance probabilities) precipitation events distributed over a 24-hour duration. The HEC–RAS model was used to determine differences in hydraulic characteristics such as: peak water-surface elevations in the lakes, peak flows, volume accumulation, and inundation durations and depths. This data release contains a zip file that includes the HEC–HMS and HEC–RAS model run files, model performance and calibration metrics, and model outputs used in this study. References Cited: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2018, Hydrologic Engineering Center Hydrologic Modeling System HEC–HMS 4.3. User’s Manual: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers software release, accessed October 10, 2022, at

Water-surface elevations along the stream reach were estimated by steady-state hydraulic modeling, assuming unobstructed flow, and using streamflows and hydrologic conditions anticipated at the USGS streamgage (station number 04206425). The hydraulic model reflects the land-cover characteristics and any bridge, dam, levee, or other hydraulic structures existing as of September 2023. _README_Contents-Directory.txt 1. model-software-version.txt (file) Identifies the modeling software, version, and website. 2. modelgeoref.txt (file) Includes reference to the model documentation report, data release, and bounding box coordinates. 3. Source (directory) Contains the URL to the installer files. 4. Model (directory) Contains the model input and output files for the hydraulic model.

This dataset contains U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) developed hydraulic models, USGS developed hydrology data, US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) supplied data (topography/bathymetry and structure data for pre removal conditions), and USGS field surveyed data at nine dam-removal and culvert-retrofit sites in the northeastern United States (Olson and Simeone, 2021). The hydrology, the USFWS supplied and USGS field data are used to support the development of one-dimensional and two-dimensional U.S. Army Corps of Engineer (USACE) Hydrologic Engineering Center’s River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) models for both the pre- and post-dam removal and culvert-retrofit conditions. The referenced models were used to evaluate fish passage and flood risk along the simulated reaches in the various states simulated. The HEC-RAS hydraulic models include data for the models and model output files. This data release consists of four child items and a file listing the name and location of each of the modeled areas and purpose of each model (file “Site_Details.xlsx”). This data release supports the following publication which contains further information and descriptions of the data contained in this release: Olson, S.A., and Simeone, C.E., 2021, Hydraulic modeling at selected dam-removal and culvert-retrofit sites in the northeastern United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2021–5056, 37 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20215056.

This dataset contains U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) developed hydraulic models, USGS developed hydrology data, US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) supplied data (topography/bathymetry and structure data for pre removal conditions), and USGS field surveyed data at nine dam-removal and culvert-retrofit sites in the northeastern United States (Olson and Simeone, 2021). The hydrology, the USFWS supplied and USGS field data are used to support the development of one-dimensional and two-dimensional U.S. Army Corps of Engineer (USACE) Hydrologic Engineering Center’s River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) models for both the pre- and post-dam removal and culvert-retrofit conditions. The referenced models were used to evaluate fish passage and flood risk along the simulated reaches in the various states simulated. The HEC-RAS hydraulic models include data for the models and model output files. This data release consists of four child items and a file listing the name and location of each of the modeled areas and purpose of each model (file “Site_Details.xlsx”). This data release supports the following publication which contains further information and descriptions of the data contained in this release: Olson, S.A., and Simeone, C.E., 2021, Hydraulic modeling at selected dam-removal and culvert-retrofit sites in the northeastern United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2021–5056, 37 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20215056.

The hydrogeologic framework for the Lake Michigan Basin model was developed by grouping the bedrock geology of the study area into hydrogeologic units on the basis of the functioning of each unit as an aquifer or confining layer within the basin. Available data were evaluated based on the areal extent of coverage within the study area, and procedures were established to characterize areas with sparse data coverage. Top and bottom altitudes for each hydrogeologic unit were interpolated in a geographic information system for input to the model and compared with existing maps of subsurface formations. Fourteen bedrock hydrogeologic units, making up 17 bedrock model layers, were defined, and they range in age from the Jurassic Period red beds of central Michigan to the Cambrian Period Mount Simon Sandstone. Each hydrogeologic unit is referred to as its model layer number as represented in the report U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Report 2009-5060 (SIR2009-5060). They are listed below for reference as to the model layer number, and the hydrogeoloigc unit name. Dataset values represent the bottom of the layer. LSD Land surface L1_3 Quaternary unit (Bottom of Quaternary unit is Layer 3 in the model) L4 Jurassic unit L5 Upper Pennsylvanian unit L6 Lower Pennsylvanian unit L7 Michigan Formation unit L8 Marshall Formation unit L9 Devonian-Mississippian unit L10_12 Silurian-Devonian unit (Bottom of Silurian-Devonian unit is Layer 12 in the model) L13 Maquoketa Formation unit L14 Sinnipee Formation unit L15 St. Peter Formation unit L16 Prairie du Chien-Franconia unit L17 Ironton-Galesville unit L18 Eau Claire unit L19_20 Mt Simon Formation unit (Bottom of Mt Simon Formation unit is Layer 20 in the model) The Lake Michigan Basin groundwater model is discretized into a grid of 391 by 261 cells. The model has 20 layers: 3 that simulate the glacial and unconsolidated sediments and 17 that simulate the bedrock units. The model provides additional detail in the area of greatest interest, in this case, the Lake Michigan Basin, by use of smaller grid spacing in the innermost model domain compared with the grid spacing at the model boundaries. The smallest interior grid cells are 5,000 by 5,000 ft. At the model boundaries, the size of grid cells reaches approximately 68,930 ft (13 mi) from north to south by 116,490 ft (22 mi) from east to west. The grid cells each have values for the altitude to the bottom of each layer. The layer numbers are from top to bottom of the aquifer system. Three hydrogeologic units are represented by the multiple layers

The hydrogeologic framework for the Lake Michigan Basin model was developed by grouping the bedrock geology of the study area into hydrogeologic units on the basis of the functioning of each unit as an aquifer or confining layer within the basin. Available data were evaluated based on the areal extent of coverage within the study area, and procedures were established to characterize areas with sparse data coverage. Top and bottom altitudes for each hydrogeologic unit were interpolated in a geographic information system for input to the model and compared with existing maps of subsurface formations. Fourteen bedrock hydrogeologic units, making up 17 bedrock model layers, were defined, and they range in age from the Jurassic Period red beds of central Michigan to the Cambrian Period Mount Simon Sandstone. Each hydrogeologic unit is referred to as its model layer number as represented in the report U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Report 2009-5060 (SIR2009-5060). They are listed below for reference as to the model layer number, and the hydrogeoloigc unit name. Dataset values represent the bottom of the layer. LSD Land surface L1_3 Quaternary unit (Bottom of Quaternary unit is Layer 3 in the model) L4 Jurassic unit L5 Upper Pennsylvanian unit L6 Lower Pennsylvanian unit L7 Michigan Formation unit L8 Marshall Formation unit L9 Devonian-Mississippian unit L10_12 Silurian-Devonian unit (Bottom of Silurian-Devonian unit is Layer 12 in the model) L13 Maquoketa Formation unit L14 Sinnipee Formation unit L15 St. Peter Formation unit L16 Prairie du Chien-Franconia unit L17 Ironton-Galesville unit L18 Eau Claire unit L19_20 Mt Simon Formation unit (Bottom of Mt Simon Formation unit is Layer 20 in the model) The Lake Michigan Basin groundwater model is discretized into a grid of 391 by 261 cells. The model has 20 layers: 3 that simulate the glacial and unconsolidated sediments and 17 that simulate the bedrock units. The model provides additional detail in the area of greatest interest, in this case, the Lake Michigan Basin, by use of smaller grid spacing in the innermost model domain compared with the grid spacing at the model boundaries. The smallest interior grid cells are 5,000 by 5,000 ft. At the model boundaries, the size of grid cells reaches approximately 68,930 ft (13 mi) from north to south by 116,490 ft (22 mi) from east to west. The grid cells each have values for the altitude to the bottom of each layer. The layer numbers are from top to bottom of the aquifer system. Three hydrogeologic units are represented by the multiple layers

This U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) data release contains model scenario input and output files and nine hydrology and water-quality models developed using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT). The models represent nine watersheds in eastern New York that drain to Lake Erie or the Niagara River and were created, calibrated, and validated for hydrology, sediment, and nutrients as baseline scenarios. Twenty-six additional scenarios were created to explore the effects of agricultural and urban best management practices, point source discharges, and green infrastructure on the water quality of tributaries to Lake Erie/Niagara River. Model documentation and scenario development are described in Merriman and others (2024).

This U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) data release contains model scenario input and output files and nine hydrology and water-quality models developed using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT). The models represent nine watersheds in eastern New York that drain to Lake Erie or the Niagara River and were created, calibrated, and validated for hydrology, sediment, and nutrients as baseline scenarios. Twenty-six additional scenarios were created to explore the effects of agricultural and urban best management practices, point source discharges, and green infrastructure on the water quality of tributaries to Lake Erie/Niagara River. Model documentation and scenario development are described in Merriman and others (2024).

This data release contains supporting materials for a study testing the applicability of an image-derived water-level method at three U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamgage sites around Lake Redstone in Wisconsin (site numbers 05404140, 05404150, and 05404147) during Water Year 2020 (Johnson, et al., 2025). Two types of reference objects were tested in this study: white polyvinyl chloride pipes (PVC), and a concrete wall. The PVC pipes were installed an tested at all three sites and the concrete wall was only tested at one site (co-located with one of the white PVC pipes), for a total of four trials. The top-level contents of the data release include: the hourly time-lapse images collected from each of the three sites (images.zip), the model archive of the R code (model_archive.zip) used to derive water-level data from the time-lapse images, a description of the model archive files and how to use them (Model_Archive_README.txt), the results (results.zip) from running the image-derived water-level method for each trial run, and the collated results for each trial (analysis.zip) each of which also include an image suitability judgement determined for every collected image.

Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses were done for selected reaches of the Grand River, Red Cedar River and Sycamore Creek near Lansing, Michigan. To update and expand a portion of the Federal Emergency Management Agency detailed Flood Insurance Study, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the City of Lansing initiated a cooperative study. The study comprised a 3.2-mile reach of the Grand River, a 30.2-mile reach of the Red Cedar River, and a 12.0-mile reach of Sycamore Creek. Historical streamflow data from multiple streamgages, Grand River at Lansing, MI. (USGS station number 04113000), Red Cedar River at East Lansing, MI. (USGS station number 04112500), Red Cedar River near Williamston, MI. (USGS station number 04111379), and Sycamore Creek at Holt Road near Holt, MI. (USGS station number 04112850) along with regional regression equations were used to estimate instantaneous peak streamflows for floods with 10-, 4-, 2-, 1-, 0.2-percent, and 1-percent plus annual exceedance probabilities. The 1-percent plus flood elevation is defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as a flood elevation derived by using streamflows that include the average predictive error for the regression equation streamflow calculation for the Flood Risk project. This error is then added to the 1-percent annual exceedance probability flood streamflow to calculate the 1-percent plus streamflow. The annual exceedance probability streamflows were then used in a Hydrologic Engineering Center-River Analysis System step-backwater model to determine water-surface elevation profiles and flood-inundation boundaries for the 10-, 4-, 2-, 1-, 0.2-percent, and 1-percent plus annual exceedance probability floods, and a regulatory floodway, along a selected reach of each stream. Each hydraulic model was calibrated to the current stage-streamflow relations at each streamgage. Flood-inundation boundaries for the 1- and 0.2-percent annual exceedance probability floods and a regulatory floodway were mapped for each stream.