| Site ID: |
|
|
529 |
|
|
|
|
Lat. |
48.8368 |
|
USA |
|
|
North
Dakota |
|
|
|
| River: |
|
|
Red River (of the North) |
|
|
Long. |
-97.1811 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Site name: |
|
Pembina |
|
|
|
Contributing
area: |
82837 |
km2 |
Ratio to Comparison
Station: |
0.92 |
|
|
|
|
| Latest measurement: |
12-Nov-09 |
|
|
|
Mean annual
runoff: |
88 |
mm |
(2003-2007) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hydrologic status: |
|
2 |
Normal flow |
Total runoff
this year: |
78 |
mm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Latest M/C ratio: |
|
1.10 |
|
|
|
Seven day
total: |
1 |
mm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Estimated current discharge: |
241 |
m3/sec |
|
Percent of
mean 7-day total: |
113.7 |
% |
(today's value compared to
mean for same period, 2003-2007) |
|
|
| Ice-cover determination: |
M<-9000 |
|
5 yr
recurrence flood: |
1251 |
m3/sec |
(from Log Pearson III analysis) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Status Codes: 1 = Low
flow, 2 = Normal flow, 3 = Flood, 4 = Major Flood |
|
1410 |
m3/sec |
(from Gumbel Extreme Value analysis) |
|
|
|
|
| Comparison Station Information: |
# USGS 05092000 RED RIVER OF THE NORTH AT
DRAYTON, ND |
Contributing
Area: |
34800 |
sq mi |
90129 |
sq km |
|
|
| (Data from this gaging station are used for the calibration to
discharge, with an adjustment for different contributing areas) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Notes: |
Rating equation is based
on comparison of 4-day running means |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Discharge and runoff, based on satellite remote sensing (NASA
AMSR-E data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (For U.S, sites, nearby ground station discharge may also be
shown) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-Present |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002-Present |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Annual |
|
|
|
Monthly Total Runoff (mm),
computed from above satellite-based discharge data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Runoff |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (mm) |
|
|
|
Jan |
Feb |
Mar |
April |
May |
June |
July |
Aug |
Sept |
Oct |
Nov |
Dec |
|
|
|
| 32 |
|
|
2002 |
no data |
no data |
no data |
no data |
no data |
no data |
no data |
5.6 |
7.5 |
7.1 |
6.1 |
6.0 |
|
|
|
| 76 |
|
|
2003 |
5.8 |
4.8 |
5.4 |
7.1 |
8.3 |
8.2 |
6.3 |
6.6 |
6.5 |
6.7 |
4.4 |
6.1 |
|
|
|
| 78 |
|
|
2004 |
5.3 |
5.0 |
5.5 |
11.5 |
5.5 |
6.7 |
6.3 |
6.2 |
6.8 |
7.2 |
5.9 |
5.6 |
|
|
|
| 87 |
|
|
2005 |
5.3 |
4.8 |
5.3 |
10.4 |
10.0 |
16.9 |
2.1 |
6.3 |
6.1 |
7.9 |
6.4 |
5.9 |
|
|
|
| 101 |
|
|
2006 |
5.3 |
4.8 |
5.9 |
35.1 |
16.4 |
6.1 |
6.1 |
6.9 |
7.8 |
6.9 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
| 96 |
|
|
2007 |
5.3 |
4.8 |
7.5 |
10.5 |
11.6 |
11.1 |
8.3 |
7.8 |
7.5 |
8.2 |
6.7 |
7.0 |
|
|
|
| 78 |
|
|
2008 |
5.3 |
5.0 |
5.3 |
5.8 |
7.8 |
8.0 |
6.3 |
6.7 |
7.2 |
8.0 |
6.9 |
5.4 |
|
|
|
| 117 |
|
|
2009 |
5.3 |
4.8 |
6.2 |
31.1 |
23.0 |
10.5 |
9.5 |
6.7 |
8.3 |
8.0 |
3.9 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mean Annual Runoff: |
86 |
|
Standard Deviation: |
10.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trend in Annual
Runoff: |
2.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Discharge is estimated directly via a rating equation from
the remote sensing data (M/C ratio) shown below. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|