Estimating peak-flow frequency statistics for selected gaged and ungaged sites in naturally flowing streams and rivers in Idaho

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Idaho Transportation Department, updated regional regression equations to estimate peak-flow statistics at ungaged sites on Idaho streams using recent streamflow (flow) data and new statistical techniques. Peak-flow statistics with 80-, 67-, 50-, 43-, 20-, 10-, 4-, 2-, 1-, 0.5-, and 0.2-percent annual exceedance probabilities (1.25-, 1.50-, 2.00-, 2.33-, 5.00-, 10.0-, 25.0-, 50.0-, 100-, 200-, and 500-year recurrence intervals, respectively) were estimated for 192 streamgages in Idaho and bordering States with at least 10 years of annual peak-flow record through water year 2013. The streamgages were selected from drainage basins with little or no flow diversion or regulation. The peak-flow statistics were estimated by fitting a log-Pearson type III distribution to records of annual peak flows and applying two additional statistical methods: (1) the Expected Moments Algorithm to help describe uncertainty in annual peak flows and to better represent missing and historical record; and (2) the generalized Multiple Grubbs Beck Test to screen out potentially influential low outliers and to better fit the upper end of the peak-flow distribution. Additionally, a new regional skew was estimated for the Pacific Northwest and used to weight at-station skew at most streamgages. The streamgages were grouped into six regions (numbered 1_2, 3, 4, 5, 6_8, and 7, to maintain consistency in region numbering with a previous study), and the estimated peak-flow statistics were related to basin and climatic characteristics to develop regional regression equations using a generalized least squares procedure. Four out of 24 evaluated basin and climatic characteristics were selected for use in the final regional peak-flow regression equations.

Overall, the standard error of prediction for the regional peak-flow regression equations ranged from 22 to 132 percent. Among all regions, regression model fit was best for region 4 in west-central Idaho (average standard error of prediction=46.4 percent; pseudo-R²>92 percent) and region 5 in central Idaho (average standard error of prediction=30.3 percent; pseudo-R²>95 percent). Regression model fit was poor for region 7 in southern Idaho (average standard error of prediction=103 percent; pseudo-R²