Laserfiche WebLink
stream flow from almost 15 area inches in 1860 to 12 inches in 2000 is <br />equally apparent. The most rapid decline in stream flow occurred from 1900 <br />to 1940. Again, it should be noted that the critical observation is the trend <br />that appears to have occurred. Tables 5 to 10 and figures 17 to 22 present <br />similar information by individual forest specie: lodgepole pine, spruce -fir, <br />ponderosa pine, douglas fir, limber pine and aspen. Note that ponderosa and <br />limber pine as well as douglas fir were treated as mixed conifer and modeled <br />using spruce -fir algorithms. Precipitation, aspect, elevation, and interception <br />functions varied accordingly, however, for all species. <br />.6 <br />g 50 <br />40 <br />S <br />d <br />a` 30 <br />N <br />d 20 <br />v <br />c <br />10 <br />A <br />Lodgepole Pine <br />% Increase Precipitation vs % of Basal Area (max) <br />I I I South <br />- - - r - - <br />- East/West' <br />1 I I I I <br />—North <br />I <br />I I I I I <br />I I I l I I <br />I I I I I <br />I I I I I I <br />1 I I I I I <br />1 ! 1 I I 1 I <br />0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 <br />%Basal Area (max) <br />Figure 13: Relationship between the percent increase in precipitation (snow water content) and basal area, <br />expressed as the maximum for complete hydrologic utilization for Lodgepole Pine. <br />Spruce -Fir, Douglas Fir, Ponderosa & Limber Pine <br />% Increase Precipitation vs % of Basal Area (max) <br />60 —.South <br />I I I I I I <br />East/West - <br />40 - - - -r- - I--------------- r - - - -7- — North <br />a30 - - -- - - - - - -- --'-----L----1---------'----- <br />hI I I I 1 I <br />-- T_ - -- 1 1 I I 1 <br />() I 1 I I <br />10 1 ____1____j_- ___I -____ <br />0 <br />0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 <br />% Basal Area (max) <br />Figure 14: Relationship between the percent increase in precipitation (snow water content) and basal area, <br />expressed as the maximum for complete hydrologic utilization for Spruce -Fir. <br />31 <br />