| Site ID: |
|
|
962 |
|
|
|
|
Lat. |
44.3496 |
|
USA |
|
|
Wisconsin |
|
|
|
| River: |
|
|
Wolf |
|
|
|
|
Long. |
-88.8083 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Site name: |
|
New London |
|
|
Contributing
area: |
7315 |
km2 |
Ratio to Comparison
Station: |
0.31 |
|
|
|
|
| Latest measurement: |
12-Nov-09 |
|
|
|
Mean annual
runoff: |
38 |
mm |
(2003-2007) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hydrologic status: |
|
2 |
Normal flow |
Total runoff
this year: |
104 |
mm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Latest M/C ratio: |
|
1.10 |
|
|
|
Seven day
total: |
1 |
mm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Estimated current discharge: |
3 |
m3/sec |
|
Percent of
mean 7-day total: |
100.0 |
% |
(today's value compared to
mean for same period, 2003-2007) |
|
|
| Ice-cover determination: |
|
|
5 yr
recurrence flood: |
479 |
m3/sec |
(from Log Pearson III
analysis) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Status Codes: 1 = Low
flow, 2 = Normal flow, 3 = Flood, 4 = Major Flood |
|
451 |
m3/sec |
(from Gumbel Extreme Value
analysis) |
|
|
|
|
| Comparison Station Information: |
Tokwe
Confluence D/s C/s (1495240) |
|
|
|
Contributing
Area: |
7280 |
sq mi |
23237 |
sq km |
|
|
| (Data from this gaging station are used for the calibration to
discharge, with an adjustment for different contributing areas) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Notes: |
Comparison station is
placeholder, only; this site is not yet calibrated to actual discharge |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
2002 |
no data |
no data |
no data |
no data |
no data |
no data |
no data |
0.9 |
1.0 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
|
|
|
| 26 |
|
|
2003 |
1.2 |
1.1 |
1.2 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.2 |
3.2 |
10.4 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.0 |
1.2 |
|
|
|
| 15 |
|
|
2004 |
1.2 |
1.1 |
1.2 |
2.3 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
|
|
|
| 45 |
|
|
2005 |
1.2 |
1.1 |
1.2 |
28.1 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
0.2 |
1.2 |
5.8 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
|
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
2006 |
1.2 |
1.1 |
1.2 |
3.0 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.1 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
| 88 |
|
|
2007 |
1.2 |
1.1 |
1.2 |
26.1 |
24.0 |
1.2 |
26.8 |
1.2 |
1.5 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
|
|
|
| 104 |
|
|
2008 |
1.2 |
1.1 |
1.2 |
60.1 |
31.4 |
1.2 |
1.8 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
|
|
|
| 38 |
|
|
2009 |
1.2 |
1.1 |
3.4 |
10.4 |
9.9 |
2.6 |
2.5 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
3.7 |
0.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Discharge is estimated directly via a rating equation from
the remote sensing data (M/C ratio) shown below. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|