The file is now ASCII DOS text.  If this doesn't work then I'll have to fax it
 to you.

Pam


 
WS4
WS7
WS6
WS1
WS3
WS2
WS5
WS9
SH2
SH1
SH3
WS10


11/4/85
170.15
176.54
189.8
8
197.6
5
192.93
----
---
213.86
208.00
260.40
237.96
127.28


7/19/96
117.63
101.18
91.84
116.2
3
118.79
138.36
156.86
116.43
----
----
----
----


10/15/54
120.77
----
----
140.6
3
125.99
177.00
143.25
----
----
----
----
----


6/6/81
114.87
80.74
90.59
106.5
8
94.69
----
----
47.72
---
----
----
----


1/19/96
106.18
142.75
121.2
5
126.3
8
157.36
134.73
161.70
136.60
----
----
----
----


acreage >
95.70
59.86
55.20
74.40
84.68
38.30
89.96
28.61
62.40
94.40
96.40
37.56



                                                                           
These discharges are in csm (cubic ft/sec/sq.mile), so to convert to cfs (cubic ft/sec) you need to convert the acreages to square miles
and then multiply the csm by the square miles.  Where the discharge is listed as ----, there's no data for that date.  Generally what that
means is that use of the weir or flume was temporarily or permanently discontinued.  The weirs and flumes were overtopped in 1985,
but we did some cross sectional surveys on the landscape to estimate flows from that, so the 1985 numbers are estimates, but I think
they are pretty good.  I didn't know if these other flows would be useful, but they were generally the next highest flows, at least for
WS4 the control watershed.  WS9 is off the Fernow, about 10 miles away.  On a topo map, it would be on the Clover watershed.  SH1,
2, and 3 also are off the Fernow. They are on the South Haddix watershed, which is probably about 5 miles or so south of Parsons.  
There are 120 degree V-notch weirs on all watersheds except WS10 and the SH sites.  WS10 has a 2-ft flume.  SH1 and SH3 have 3-ft
flumes and SH2 has a 2-ft flume.  You probably don't care about how they're gauged, but I thought I'd include it just in case.   Except
for WS4 and WS10, these watersheds have had some type of cutting experiments and/or other manipulations that have been done on
them since 1950.  If you need to know the land use histories, let me know and I'll send you that info.  In general, however, the cutting
experiments have not been much different than you would find on most watersheds in the Appalachians.  The exceptions would be
WS6 and WS7 which were clearcut, herbicided and then WS7 was allowed to regrow and WS6 was planted to Norway spruce.

Sorry I'm so late in getting this to you.  The computer was down for a bunch of days getting some new hard drives or something
installed in them, so we couldn't send or get mail.  Then I went on leave for a few days because I have some use or lose time.  Let me
know if you need anything else or if you need any other info on these data.  Hope everything's going well for you.  Pam