This is a line coverage of average annual runoff in the conterminous United States, 1951-1980. Surface runoff Average runoff Surface waters United States

Two maps, compiled at 1:1,000,000 scale, depict mean annual runoff, precipitation, and evapotranspiration in the part of the United States east of Cleveland, Ohio and north of the southern limit of glaciation. The maps are mutually consistent in that runoff equals precipitation minus evapotranspiration everywhere. The runoff map is based on records of streamflow from 503 watersheds in the United States and southernmost Canada, adjusted to represent 1951-80 and supplemented by records of precipitation at 459 stations. Precipitation at each station was partitioned into point estimates of runoff and evapotranspiration, which were constrained such that the evapotranspiration estimates varied smoothly across the region and decreased with increasing latitude and altitude, and the runoff estimates were consistent with measured runoff from nearby watersheds. A point estimate of runoff was allowed to equal mean runoff in a nearby watershed, or to be somewhat higher (or lower) if a compensating departure from mean watershed runoff could be inferred in distant parts of the watershed on the basis of altitude or regional trends. Then, precipitation contours were drawn to parallel runoff contours but differ from them by the magnitude of nearby estimates of evapotranspiration. These maps may slightly underrepresent mean precipitation and evapotranspiration in areas of high relief because most precipitation stations in such areas are in valleys. These 3 coverages were used to produce Open-File Report 96-395. Additional information about methodology can be found in this report

Two maps, compiled at 1:1,000,000 scale, depict mean annual runoff, precipitation, and evapotranspiration in the part of the United States east of Cleveland, Ohio and north of the southern limit of glaciation. The maps are mutually consistent in that runoff equals precipitation minus evapotranspiration everywhere. The runoff map is based on records of streamflow from 503 watersheds in the United States and southernmost Canada, adjusted to represent 1951-80 and supplemented by records of precipitation at 459 stations. Precipitation at each station was partitioned into point estimates of runoff and evapotranspiration, which were constrained such that the evapotranspiration estimates varied smoothly across the region and decreased with increasing latitude and altitude, and the runoff estimates were consistent with measured runoff from nearby watersheds. A point estimate of runoff was allowed to equal mean runoff in a nearby watershed, or to be somewhat higher (or lower) if a compensating departure from mean watershed runoff could be inferred in distant parts of the watershed on the basis of altitude or regional trends. Then, precipitation contours were drawn to parallel runoff contours but differ from them by the magnitude of nearby estimates of evapotranspiration. These maps may slightly underrepresent mean precipitation and evapotranspiration in areas of high relief because most precipitation stations in such areas are in valleys. These 3 coverages were used to produce Open-File Report 96-395. Additional information about methodology can be found in this report

Two maps, compiled at 1:1,000,000 scale, depict mean annual runoff, precipitation, and evapotranspiration in the part of the United States east of Cleveland, Ohio and north of the southern limit of glaciation. The maps are mutually consistent in that runoff equals precipitation minus evapotranspiration everywhere. The runoff map is based on records of streamflow from 503 watersheds in the United States and southernmost Canada, adjusted to represent 1951-80 and supplemented by records of precipitation at 459 stations. Precipitation at each station was partitioned into point estimates of runoff and evapotranspiration, which were constrained such that the evapotranspiration estimates varied smoothly across the region and decreased with increasing latitude and altitude, and the runoff estimates were consistent with measured runoff from nearby watersheds. A point estimate of runoff was allowed to equal mean runoff in a nearby watershed, or to be somewhat higher (or lower) if a compensating departure from mean watershed runoff could be inferred in distant parts of the watershed on the basis of altitude or regional trends. Then, precipitation contours were drawn to parallel runoff contours but differ from them by the magnitude of nearby estimates of evapotranspiration. These maps may slightly underrepresent mean precipitation and evapotranspiration in areas of high relief because most precipitation stations in such areas are in valleys. These 3 coverages were used to produce Open-File Report 96-395. Additional information about methodology can be found in this report

Two maps, compiled at 1:1,000,000 scale, depict mean annual runoff, precipitation, and evapotranspiration in the part of the United States east of Cleveland, Ohio and north of the southern limit of glaciation. The maps are mutually consistent in that runoff equals precipitation minus evapotranspiration everywhere. The runoff map is based on records of streamflow from 503 watersheds in the United States and southernmost Canada, adjusted to represent 1951-80 and supplemented by records of precipitation at 459 stations. Precipitation at each station was partitioned into point estimates of runoff and evapotranspiration, which were constrained such that the evapotranspiration estimates varied smoothly across the region and decreased with increasing latitude and altitude, and the runoff estimates were consistent with measured runoff from nearby watersheds. A point estimate of runoff was allowed to equal mean runoff in a nearby watershed, or to be somewhat higher (or lower) if a compensating departure from mean watershed runoff could be inferred in distant parts of the watershed on the basis of altitude or regional trends. Then, precipitation contours were drawn to parallel runoff contours but differ from them by the magnitude of nearby estimates of evapotranspiration. These maps may slightly underrepresent mean precipitation and evapotranspiration in areas of high relief because most precipitation stations in such areas are in valleys. These 3 coverages were used to produce Open-File Report 96-395. Additional information about methodology can be found in this report

Two maps, compiled at 1:1,000,000 scale, depict mean annual runoff, precipitation, and evapotranspiration in the part of the United States east of Cleveland, Ohio and north of the southern limit of glaciation. The maps are mutually consistent in that runoff equals precipitation minus evapotranspiration everywhere. The runoff map is based on records of streamflow from 503 watersheds in the United States and southernmost Canada, adjusted to represent 1951-80 and supplemented by records of precipitation at 459 stations. Precipitation at each station was partitioned into point estimates of runoff and evapotranspiration, which were constrained such that the evapotranspiration estimates varied smoothly across the region and decreased with increasing latitude and altitude, and the runoff estimates were consistent with measured runoff from nearby watersheds. A point estimate of runoff was allowed to equal mean runoff in a nearby watershed, or to be somewhat higher (or lower) if a compensating departure from mean watershed runoff could be inferred in distant parts of the watershed on the basis of altitude or regional trends. Then, precipitation contours were drawn to parallel runoff contours but differ from them by the magnitude of nearby estimates of evapotranspiration. These maps may slightly underrepresent mean precipitation and evapotranspiration in areas of high relief because most precipitation stations in such areas are in valleys. These 3 coverages were used to produce Open-File Report 96-395. Additional information about methodology can be found in this report

Two maps, compiled at 1:1,000,000 scale, depict mean annual runoff, precipitation, and evapotranspiration in the part of the United States east of Cleveland, Ohio and north of the southern limit of glaciation. The maps are mutually consistent in that runoff equals precipitation minus evapotranspiration everywhere. The runoff map is based on records of streamflow from 503 watersheds in the United States and southernmost Canada, adjusted to represent 1951-80 and supplemented by records of precipitation at 459 stations. Precipitation at each station was partitioned into point estimates of runoff and evapotranspiration, which were constrained such that the evapotranspiration estimates varied smoothly across the region and decreased with increasing latitude and altitude, and the runoff estimates were consistent with measured runoff from nearby watersheds. A point estimate of runoff was allowed to equal mean runoff in a nearby watershed, or to be somewhat higher (or lower) if a compensating departure from mean watershed runoff could be inferred in distant parts of the watershed on the basis of altitude or regional trends. Then, precipitation contours were drawn to parallel runoff contours but differ from them by the magnitude of nearby estimates of evapotranspiration. These maps may slightly underrepresent mean precipitation and evapotranspiration in areas of high relief because most precipitation stations in such areas are in valleys. These 3 coverages were used to produce Open-File Report 96-395. Additional information about methodology can be found in this report

This dataset includes 1km resolution monthly timescale estimates of the contributions to the quick-flow runoff component of the water budget over the time period from 1895-2017. These estimates were developed with a regression for surface runoff data generated from a USGS-developed hydrograph separation program (PART) run on streamflow data from 1301 gaged watersheds as a function of surficial geology type (USGS), precipitation (PRISM), slope (NHD), and soil hydraulic conductivity (STATSGO). The quantities for quick-flow runoff do not include inter-pixel transfers, so do not capture within-watershed variations due to such transfers such as downstream runoff accumulation, but rather represent the portion of the precipitation entering each cell that ultimately contributes to the quick-flow runoff component. Methods are fully described in an article in the Journal of Hydrology; this dataset will be updated with the complete article citation when available.

This dataset includes 1km resolution monthly timescale estimates of the contributions to the quick-flow runoff component of the water budget over the time period from 1895-2017. These estimates were developed with a regression for surface runoff data generated from a USGS-developed hydrograph separation program (PART) run on streamflow data from 1301 gaged watersheds as a function of surficial geology type (USGS), precipitation (PRISM), slope (NHD), and soil hydraulic conductivity (STATSGO). The quantities for quick-flow runoff do not include inter-pixel transfers, so do not capture within-watershed variations due to such transfers such as downstream runoff accumulation, but rather represent the portion of the precipitation entering each cell that ultimately contributes to the quick-flow runoff component. Methods are fully described in an article in the Journal of Hydrology; this dataset will be updated with the complete article citation when available.

This data release contains daily time series estimates of natural streamflow at 5,439 GAGES-II non-reference streamgages in 19 study regions across the conterminous United States from October 1, 1980 through September 30, 2017, using five statistical techniques: nearest-neighbor drainage area ratio (NNDAR), map-correlation drainage area ratio (MCDAR), nearest-neighbor nonlinear spatial interpolation using flow duration curves (NNQPPQ), map-correlation nonlinear spatial interpolation using flow duration curves (MCQPPQ), and ordinary kriging of the logarithms of discharge per unit area (OKDAR). NNDAR, MCDAR, NNQPPQ, and MCQPPQ estimates were computed following methods described in Farmer and others (2014), with updates to the flow-duration curve modeling which is described in Over and others (2018). OKDAR estimates were computed using pooled variograms for each study region following methods described in Farmer (2016). Daily streamflow estimation was conducted by study region (hydrologic unit code level-2 regions as defined in Falcone, 2011) by building statistical models using 1,385 GAGES-II reference streamgages from mostly undisturbed watersheds as index gages (Russell and others, 2020). Estimates were then made at GAGES-II non-reference streamgages. Location information and basin characteristics for study gages were obtained from the GAGES-II dataset (Falcone, 2011). Observed daily streamflow data were retrieved from the National Water Information System (USGS, 2019). This data release contains 19 separate zip files; one for each study region. Each zip file contains an individual tab-delimited text file for each non-reference streamgage in the study region. A text file summarizing period of record information for each non-reference streamgage is provided (non-reference_gages_summary.csv). This data release also contains a text file (Model_info.csv) of regional regression equations for 27 flow quantiles that were developed in each study region in order to implement the QPPQ methods and a text file (BC_transformations.csv) describing transformations made to the GAGES-II derived basin characteristics prior to use in the regression equations. The five sets of streamflow estimates represent expected natural streamflow conditions with minimal disturbance by human activities, in other words, without the effects of regulation, diversion, land development, or other anthropogenic activities. The observed streamflow records at the non-reference streamgages were compared to the five simulated streamflow records. These performance metrics are provided at each gage for all five statistical methods (NonRef_PMs_byStation.csv) and as summaries by region (NonRef_PM_summaries_byRegion.csv). References cited: Falcone, J.A., 2011, GAGES-II: Geospatial Attributes of Gages for Evaluating Streamflow [digital spatial dataset]: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources NSDI Node web page, https://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getspatial?gagesII_Sept2011. Farmer, W.H., Archfield, S.A., Over, T.M., Hay, L.E., LaFontaine, J.H., and Kiang, J.E., 2014, A comparison of methods to predict historical daily streamflow time series in the southeastern United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5231, 34 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20145231. Farmer, W. H., 2016, Ordinary kriging as a tool to estimate historical daily streamflow records, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 20, 2721-2735, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-2721-2016. Over, T.M., Farmer, W.H., and Russell, A.M., 2018, Refinement of a regression-based method for prediction of flow-duration curves of daily streamflow in the conterminous United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2018–5072, 34 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185072. Russell, A.M., Over, T.M., and Farmer, W.H., 2020, Cross-validation results for five statistical methods of daily streamflow estimation at 1,385 reference streamgages in the conterminous United States, Water Years