scholarly journals Historic Rainfall and Record-Breaking Flooding from Hurricane Florence in the Pee Dee Watershed

2020 ◽  
pp. 28-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa Griffin ◽  
Mark Malsick ◽  
Hope Mizzell ◽  
Leah Moore
Keyword(s):  
North Carolina ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
Heavy Rain ◽  
Statistical Probability ◽  
Antecedent Conditions ◽  
Long Duration ◽  
Pee Dee ◽  
Extreme Flooding ◽  
Flooding Events ◽  
Eastern North Carolina

For the third time in four years, record-breaking flooding occurred in South Carolina. Hurricane Florence, which made landfall near Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina, on September 14, 2018, moved slowly across South Carolina from September 14–17, 2018. Over those four days, heavy rain fell over portions of the Pee Dee Watershed and eastern North Carolina, with over 30 inches of rain measured by an observer in Swansboro, North Carolina. Most of the excessive rainfall was confined to the Pee Dee region, with reported totals of over 24 inches in Horry County, while closer to the Savannah River Valley observers measured less than an inch of rain. Unlike the more recent flooding events across the state, not as many rainfall records were set during this event. The amount of rainfall at various locations, and at different time intervals (1-day, 2-day, 3-day, and 4-day), had a statistical probability of occurrence of 0.1%, or 1 in 1,000 chance of happening in any given year, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 14 (Bonnin et al., 2004). The rainfall associated with Hurricane Florence produced a long duration and significant flood that impacted many of the same communities still recovering from the October 2015 floods and Hurricane Matthew in 2016. Many of the rivers and streams within the Pee Dee Watershed experienced major or extreme flooding, with six stream gauges reaching record peaks, some surpassing the records set in 2016. This report provides an overview of the antecedent conditions, a synoptic summary of the event, and documentation on the meteorological and hydrological impacts observed across the Palmetto State.

scholarly journals Hydraulic Geometry Curves in the Pee Dee Watershed

2015 ◽  
pp. 63-69
Author(s):  
Smoot Z.T. ◽  
A.D. Jayakaran ◽  
D.M. Park ◽  
D.R. Hitchcock
Keyword(s):  
North Carolina ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
Catchment Area ◽  
Stream Restoration ◽  
Hydraulic Geometry ◽  
Bankfull Discharge ◽  
Pee Dee ◽  
Water Conveyance ◽  
Pee Dee River ◽  
Stream Instability

Hydraulic bankfull geometry or regional curves are a useful metric for evaluating stream stability and planning stream restoration projects. Streams and tributaries within the Middle Pee Dee River Basin (MPDRB) in South Carolina drain an agrarian and forested landscape characterized by water conveyance structures, such as active and historical ditches which support forestry and agriculture. While streams in the region are generally stable, pockets of this landscape are beginning to face increasing pressure from development with signs of stream instability apparent in several locations as evidenced by streams in and around the urbanizing areas around Darlington and Florence, SC. In order to provide a foundation for potential stream restoration projects in the area, 15 sites in the MPDRB were selected on the basis of catchment area, in categories of small (km2), small-medium (50-500 km2), medium (500-1000 km2), and large (>1000 km2). Bankfull geometries, channel substrate, flow and water temperature were measured at all the sites and a set of regional hydraulic geometry curves developed. The frequency of bankfull flows that occurred over the period of sampling were also estimated to document floodplain connectivity. Results suggest that bankfull dimensions in the MPDRB were well correlated with bankfull discharge and drainage area. The results showed that hydraulic geometry in the region were similar to those measured in a similar physiographic region in North Carolina. The study also shows that streams in the MPDRB experience bankfull exceeding flows much more frequently than streams in other parts of the country, but at a frequency that is comparable to streams in the coastal plains of North Carolina.

scholarly journals Characterization of Isolates of Phytophthora infestans from Tomato and Potato in North Carolina from 1993 to 1995

Plant Disease ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 83 (7) ◽  
pp. 633-638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawn E. Fraser ◽  
Paul B. Shoemaker ◽  
Jean B. Ristaino
Keyword(s):  
North Carolina ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
Phytophthora Infestans ◽  
Mating Type ◽  
The United States ◽  
Western North Carolina ◽  
New Genotype ◽  
The Us ◽  
Eastern North Carolina ◽  
Allozyme Genotype

Eighty-five isolates of Phytophthora infestans from 33 tomato and 8 potato fields in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee were collected from 1993 to 1995 and tested for mating type, sensitivity to metalaxyl, and allozyme genotype at glucose-6-phosphate isomerase (Gpi) and peptidase (Pep) loci. One isolate collected from potato in eastern North Carolina in 1994 was the A1 mating type, whereas all other isolates from potato and tomato were the A2 mating type. Six isolates were sensitive to metalaxyl (<40% growth at 1.0 μg of metalaxyl per ml), nineteen isolates were intermediate in sensitivity to metalaxyl (>40% growth at 1.0 μg of metalaxyl per ml and <40% growth at 100 μg of metalaxyl per ml), and sixty isolates were resistant to metalaxyl (<40% growth at 1.0 and 100 μg of metalaxyl per ml). Four different allozyme genotypes at the Gpi and Pep loci were identified. The single A1 isolate found on potato in eastern North Carolina had the dilocus allozyme genotype Gpi 86/100, Pep 92/100 and was identified as the US-1 genotype. Fifty-five isolates had the dilocus allozyme genotype Gpi 100/111, Pep 100/100 and were classified as the US-7 genotype, whereas twenty-four isolates were Gpi 100/111/122, Pep 100/100 and were classified as the US-8 genotype. Two isolates that were sensitive to meta-laxyl and seventeen isolates that were intermediate in sensitivity to metalaxyl were found among the US-7 and US-8 genotypes. In addition, five isolates had the allozyme genotype Gpi 100/100, Pep 92/100 (similar to the previously reported US-6 genotype), but they were the A2 mating type and either sensitive or intermediate in response to metalaxyl. These isolates composed a new genotype not previously reported in the United States and were designated as US-18. The US-7 genotype was more frequent on tomato in western North Carolina and the US-8 genotype was present on potato in eastern North Carolina, indicating that different inoculum sources are responsible for epidemics on the two crops in different regions of the state.

Use of the AMA Guides in State Workers' Compensation Systems: 2009 Update

2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 13-16
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Jenny Walker
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
North Carolina ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
South Dakota ◽  
Rhode Island ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
Specific Guideline ◽  
Compensation Systems

Abstract The AMAGuides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) is the most widely used basis for determining impairment and is used in state workers’ compensation systems, federal systems, automobile casualty, and personal injury, as well as by the majority of state workers’ compensation jurisdictions. Two tables summarize the edition of the AMA Guides used and provide information by state. The fifth edition (2000) is the most commonly used edition: California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Vermont, and Washington. Eleven states use the sixth edition (2007): Alaska, Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Wyoming. Eight states still commonly make use of the fourth edition (1993): Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, South Dakota, Texas, and West Virginia. Two states use the Third Edition, Revised (1990): Colorado and Oregon. Connecticut does not stipulate which edition of the AMA Guides to use. Six states use their own state specific guidelines (Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, and Wisconsin), and six states do not specify a specific guideline (Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Virginia). Statutes may or may not specify which edition of the AMA Guides to use. Some states use their own guidelines for specific problems and use the Guides for other issues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document