USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr99229

Water-resources investigations in Wisconsin, 1999

Abstract

The statewide average precipitation of 31.23 inches for the 1998 water year was 0.42 inches less than the normal annual precipitation of 31.65 inches for water years 1961-90. Average precipitation values ranged from 69 percent of normal at both the Willow Reservoir WVI weather station in north central Wisconsin and Crivitz High Falls WPS weather station in northeast Wisconsin to 141 percent of normal at the Dodgeville 1 NE WWTP and Muscoda weather stations in southwest Wisconsin (from tables provided by Lyle Anderson, Program Assistant, UW-Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey, written commun., 1999). Runoff differed for rivers throughout the State and ranged from 54 percent in northwest Wisconsin to 146 percent in southeast Wisconsin. Runoff was lowest (54 percent of the average annual runoff from 1975-98) for the Nemadji River near South Superior and highest (146 percent of the average annual runoff from 1976-79, 1981-98) for the Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa station which monitors a small urban basin (drainage area is 18.2 square miles) in southeastern Wisconsin. Departures of runoff in the 1998 water year as a percent of long-term average runoff in the State (determined using stations with drainage areas greater than 150 square miles and at least 20 years of record) are shown in Figure 4. Annual discharges for the individual water years (1916-98) at the Oconto River near Gillett, Jump River at Sheldon, and Sugar River near Brodhead are shown in Figure 5. The comparison of monthly and annual discharges for the 1998 water year to discharge for a 83-year base period at the same three gaging stations are shown in Figure 6. Low flows occurred at 21 gaging stations where the annual minimum 7-consecutive day average flows (Q7) had recurrence intervals of 5 or more years. Precipitation was well below normal from July through September in northern Wisconsin. Monthly precipitation values were 4.46, 5.69, and 4.24 inches below normal in northwestern, north central, and northeastern Wisconsin, respectively, in the July through September period (from tables provided by Lyle Anderson, Program Assistant, UW-Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey, written commun., 1999). The precipitation for the April to October period was

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 42.49192° to 47.07757° latitude; -92.888035° to -86.805415° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D. E. Maertz. 1999. Water-resources investigations in Wisconsin, 1999. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr99229

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona