Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Auburn On North Fork near Auburn damsite 1,295 <br />Placerville On South Fork 1,890 <br />Nevada City North catchment divide 2,600 <br />Lake Spaulding North catchment divide 5,153 <br />Tahoe City East of divide by Lake Tahoe 6,230 <br />a Used to estimate basin average precipitation. <br /> <br />.093 <br /> <br /> <br />TABLE 2.1 Weather Stations Used to Estimate Basin Average Precipitationa <br />Gauge Location Elevation (ft MSL) <br />Represa Near Folsom Dam 295 <br /> <br />Weighta <br />.040 <br /> <br />.090 <br /> <br />.204 <br /> <br />.261 <br /> <br />.312 <br /> <br />River flood volumes in a physically plausible manner, and then add to that model an <br />indicator ("dummy") variable having a value of 1 for the period 1956-1997-0 <br />otherwise. If the value of the estimated linear coefficient on this indicator, equal to <br />the intercept shift or shift in mean during this period, is statistically significant, it <br />would be interpreted as evidence for a shift in hydrologic regime. <br />The basic model estimation results can be interpreted to indicate that <br />variation in three-day event precipitation accounts for 75% of the interannual <br />variation in three-day flood volumes. The addition of three-day storm temperature at <br />higher elevations increases explanatory power by an additional 8.3% to 83.3%. <br />Addition of variables for date of occurrence and antecedent precipitation does not <br />significantly improve the model. When the period indicator is added to the model, <br />explanatory power is increased by only 0.3%, and the t statistic for the period <br />indicator in this equation, which has already accounted for the influence of <br />precipitation and temperature, has a P value somewhat above 0.10. This suggests <br />that any residual variation in flood volume magnitudes "explained" by period effects . <br />in a linear model already accounting for the influences of event precipitation and <br />temperature, albeit crudely specified, is not statistically significant. <br /> <br />Historical Activities in the American River Basin <br /> <br />Before considering the historical and paleoflood data for the American <br />River, it is instructive first to review the history of land use practices in the American <br />River basin. Of particular impottance are the activities associated with gold mining <br />in the region, which began with the discovery of gold in 1848. Although the impacts <br />of these activities on flood hydrology are not well known, it is impottant to consider <br />them when evaluating the relevance of historical and paleoflood data. <br />Initial gold mining activities involved small placer claims along Sierra <br />streams and probably had relatively minor effects. Hydraulic mining began in <br />California in 1853, and by the mid-I 860s giant hydraulic mines were in place. These <br />mines had enormous impacts on the streams, particularly with respect to sediment <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />30 <br /> <br />Improving American River Flood Frequency Analyses <br />