My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WMOD00593
CWCB
>
Weather Modification
>
DayForward
>
WMOD00593
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 2:42:09 PM
Creation date
4/30/2008 2:44:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Weather Modification
Contract/Permit #
14-06-D-7052
Title
Ecological Impacts of Snowpack Augmentation in the San Juan Mountains, Colorado
Date
3/1/1976
State
CO
Weather Modification - Doc Type
Report
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
498
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Table 1. Data on weather stations used in this study <br /> <br /> Approximate Distance Record <br />Weather Station Elevation from Coring .sites Period <br />Durango 1991 m 92 km 1885-1974 <br />Pagosa Springs 2005 m 42 km 1941-1974 <br />,Vallecito Dam 2331 m 29 km 1943-1974 <br /> <br />Climatic Correlation Analysis <br /> <br />The possibility of retrieving climatic information <br />from growth layers depends largely on site factors. <br />Years of greater than normal precipitation are more <br />difficult to evaluate since growing conditions are <br />not necessarily enhanced by excess precipitation. <br /> <br />Because of the interrelationships between temperature <br />and precipitation, their effects are not always <br />easily separable. In the San Juan area, a comparison <br />of temperature and precipitation records of several <br />weather stations indicates an inverse relationship: <br />warmer periods are associated with low precipitation, <br />colder periods with high precipitation (Barry and <br />Bradley (this vol'. p. 43). In the Southwest, where <br />moisture is the limiting factor (except at the upper <br />timberline), the growth layer thickness is generally <br />inverse to temperature (Fritts 1972). The relative <br />importance of the temperature and precipitation varies <br />at different times of the year. <br /> <br />Detecting the presence of precipitation in excess of <br />normal requirements for the life processes of trees <br />through growth layer analysis is difficult. In the <br />San Juan Mountains, thick growth layers represent <br />high precipitation. If the climatic regime is <br />reflected in growth layer data prior to cloud seeding, <br />the altered climatic regime due to cloud seeding <br />should be reflected in the growth layers formed during <br />the seeded years. Preliminary evaluation of the <br />regional growth response indicates that the annual <br />increment of wood is greater with increased pre- <br />cipitation. Thus, the mean annual growth layer <br />width should increase with an increase in annual <br />available moisture. An attempt was made to predict <br />the growth layer thickness during the seeded years <br />1971 through 1973. Three seeded years do not <br />constitute a statistically valid sample to conclusively <br />state that such a growth layer increase is correlated <br />with increased precipitation. The proposed method <br />does merit further consideration. <br /> <br />-Trend Analysis: Preliminary Evaluation <br /> <br />Trend analysis is a method of nonparametric correlation <br />for continuous time series (Glock 1942). It requires <br />neither the elimination of secular trends, such as the <br />age curve in trees, nor the estimation of a mean. The <br />analysis gives a measure of the degree of parallel <br />fluctuation between pairs of variables (e.g. tree <br />growth and precipitation, tree growth and temperature) <br />in successive time intervals (Glock 1950). As in <br />other types of correlation, a high coefficient suggests <br />but does not prove relationship. The trend coefficient <br />is useful for preliminary work involving the compari- <br />sOn of many sets of data. <br /> <br />The trend method yields a coefficient, t, which <br />measures the amount of covariation between two <br />variables. The coefficient is given by <br /> <br />t <br /> <br />N <br />E (Xi - Xi_I) (Yi - Yi-1) <br />i=2 <br /> <br />~ I(Xi - Xi_I) (Yi - yi-1)1 <br />i=2 <br /> <br />where N = number of years in record, Xi = value of <br />first variable for ith year, and Yi = value of <br />second variable for ith year. Thus the trend co- <br />efficient takes into account not only the number of <br />cases of correspondence in the direction of variation, <br />but also the degree of that correspondence. The <br />trend coefficient ranges from +1.00 to -1.00 with <br />the extreme values indicating perfect parallel <br />variation and perfect inverse variation, respectively. <br /> <br />The influence of a few departures of high amplitude <br />upon the trend coefficient may be detected by a <br />trend index (i). This is the ratio of the average <br />departure of parallel trends to the average de- <br />parture of opposite trends, i.e. <br /> <br />i <br /> <br />E( + XY) / n+ <br />E( - XY) / n <br /> <br />where E ( + XY) = sum of parallel trends, n + = number <br />of cases of parallel trends, E( -XY) = sum of <br />opposite trend values, and n = number of cases of <br />opposite trend. If i is greater than 1.00, the <br />amplitudes of departures of parallel trends are <br />greater than those opposite. If i is less than <br />1.00, the reverse is true. If the value of i de- <br />parts much from 1.00, then a few departures have an <br />undue influence in determining the value of the <br />trend coefficient. Because the trend coefficient <br />may lead to an erroneous conclusion as to the <br />existence of parallel variation throughout a series, <br />the value of i should always be determined. In <br />instances where i is far above or below 1.00 and <br />the ratio n+/n_ is nearly 1.00, the calculation of <br />the ratio T = t/i provides a better comparison of <br />the relationship between the variables than does t <br />by itself. <br /> <br />J <br /> <br />1 <br />] <br /> <br />Many sets of climatic data were evaluated and com- <br />pared to make selections for the detailed den- <br />droclimatologic analysis. Weather records for six <br />recording stations were used in this evaluation. <br />The precipitation and temperature data for each <br />station were arrayed in sets incorporating 15 <br />months as follows: (1) 3 months of the pre- <br />ceding growing season for each tree ring, (2) 6 <br />months of the winter prior to the growing season for <br />each tree ring, and (3) 6 months during the grow- <br />ing season for each tree ring. The tree ring data <br />represented the three coring stations described <br />previously. The rapidity and ease of direct compari- <br />sons using the trend method allowed the grouping of <br /> <br />72 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.