463. Los Angeles, Colorado River water forecast committee, April 16, 1947 (folder 1 of 2)

(1)

3/4*. Y., tfz: s

Pahl

UNITED STATZ.5 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

DIVISION or PUBLIC DOCUMENTS WASHINGTON 25, 0. C.

oFt-tetAL. LIGINESS

•

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOtO PAYMENT OF POSTAGE,

$300 iGPO,

Colorado. State College of Agriculture & Mecn Arts Dept of Civil Engineering

Fort Collins

(2)

tr4/ 44-4 'Iti4x4e.t41--

ti2

c tr/i7

-•

Az„ 4.4 6/

/

1 47;

Alsze-dfr-t—t-66-c-•

•

THIRD ANNUAL MEETING of the

COLORADO RIVER WATER FORECAST COMMITTEE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUILDING LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

April 16, 1947

Room 1006

STENOTYPE CONVENTION REPORTING COMPANY

26 O'Farrell Street 1151 South Broadway

(3)

*

S

•

26 O'FARRELL STREET 1151 SOUTH BROADWAY

(4)

2

3

4

The Third Annual Meeting of the Colorado River

Water Forecast Committee convened VNednesday morning,

April 16, 1947, at 9:15, in Room 1006, State of California

Building, Los Angeles, California, Ir. R. L. Parshall

presiding.

Lidt. PARSHALL: You know it is mighty easy to

waste thirty minutes getting started, as we have already

done, but it has not been lost. Many of us have not had

the opportunity to see each other, possibly since our last

meeting a year ago and, naturally, we have to be polite and

visit awhile, and then return for another visit with them,

and first thing you know, we are thirty minutes behind.

After reaching Los Angeles yesterday, I was

informed that ir. Clyde, Chief of the Jivision of Irrigation

of the Soil Conservation Service was, because of press of

business, obliged to return to Utah and couldn't be here

with us. And so, for his opening remarks, as listed

in the

program at 9:00 olclock, I would like to carry on with

them by giving you just a word or two in his place.

I suspect that he would have something to say,

naturally, about the objective of our orecast Committee.

Well, I think all of us are more or less aware that we are

here for the purpose of comparing notes and attempting to

arrive at the answer of what will be the run off from the

Colorado Aiver at Bright Angel station. Then that, of

course, would have very direct relation with the filling of

(5)

2 Lake Mead. That is the correlary.

Some of us are spending considerable time in

attempting to solve this problem, and we have as many

methods as we have men interested in the problem. We are

going to have variation, of course, in our results,

naturally. The main objective of the groups is to review

the findings of others and also gain some idea as to the

methods used.

It isn't the intention, of course, at this meeting

to go too much in detail for the reason that we haven't the

time. I imagine if I was spurred on some, I might talk

from now until noon about different ways of getting at the

problem, but that isn't the idea.

We want everyone to have his day in court and

present his findings. If there is anything unusual about

the methods used, we will hear those. The report which

we hope to be able to reach later, covering the meeting,

will include the diagrams and tables and curves and pretty

much detail in the description. At our leisure later on

then we will pick up the fine points.

This is our third meeting and, fortunately, we

have had the privilege to meet in this same room, which is

suitable for this group and convenient. In passing, I

should like to mention that Harry Blaney, our senior engineer

of the Division of Irrigation, has been the contact man

here in this city. Harry, we appreciate your efforts very

(6)

3 much.

Our meeting last year was productive, I would say,

but unfortunately we couldn't get started in time to ask

our good friends to prepare anything very elaborate as far

as the program was concerned. So, we sent our letters

mentioning that we would hold the meeting and discuss the

problem jointly, as completely as we could without a stated

program. This time, however, we think we are doing better,

and we arranged .:or a program, as outlined in these folders.

In order that we can best understand the results

of the forecast, which will be made later in the morning,

we propose to have a sort of brief bird's-eye view of the

snow conditions over the headwaters of the Colorado River.

That would include parts of Colorado, areas in New Mexico,

Utah, and of course, Arizona, that would be affected.

We have asked Mr. Clyde E. Houston of our Division

in Reno, Mr. Furhiman, of Utah, and. Mr. Stockwell of our

office in Fort Collins, to discuss the situation Covering

the general conditions throughout the Colorado River Basin.

After you have listened to them, you will get some idea

then of what we might expect.

Then later, I find myself here on the program to

tell you something about the runoff forecast of several

tributary streams at the headwaters of the Colorado. Then

we have George Lewis. He is going to

70

in for a little

have presented before the group, in as much detail as time

will permit, the forecasts of several who have figures of

the runoff in the Colorado River at Bright Angel for the

period April-July, 1_947.

We are going to be particularly concerned this

morning, so to speak, with this aspect, and the afternoon

will be given over to more or less of the general features

of the problem as a whole.

Then, too, if you will turn to the back of your

program you will see a little announcement there about what

we have in mind for this evening.

...Announcement is made of the plans for the

evening entertainment...

Now we shall concern ourselves with the reports

covering the present general snow conditions in these

various Colorado Basin states. I am calling at this time

upon Mr. Clyde E. Houston, engineer, of Reno. He is with

our Division, and he will tell us something now about the

snow conditions in Colorado and Nevada. Mr. Houston.

MR. CLYDE E. HOUSTON (Reno, Nevada): Thank you,

Mr. Parshall. Gentlemen, I have a couple of maps up here

for Colorado and Nevada, although it covers just a srrall

portion of the state contributing to the Colorado River. I

think that most of you might be interested in knowing what

your neighbor's condition is at this time, and I shall make

this report very brief.

26 O'FARRELL STREET 1151 SOUTH BROADWAY SAN FRANCISCO 8, CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES 15, CALIFORNIA

(8)

...Mr. Houston gives his report, which should be

inserted here...

MR. HOUSTON: Does anyone have any questions? If

not, I thank you.

MR. PARSHALL: Thank you, Clyde. It is unfortunate

for us that the whole area of the Colorado River Basin can't

be abundantly blessed with prospects for water. The

varia-tion is rather wide as far as snow cover is concerned, the

upper basin being in a much better condition than the lower

or southwest area.

Continuing with this particular subject, we now

shall hear from "Professor" Fuhriman, of Utah, who will

give us a bird's-eye view of the conditions in his state.

MR. D. is FUHRIMAN (Logan, Utah):

Thank you,

Mr. Parshall.

...Mr. Fuhriman gives his report, which should be

inserted here...

MR. FUHRIMAN: If you have any questions, I would

be glad to answer them. (No questions).

MR. PARSHALL: Thank you, "Professor". To finish

up this general topic, we will ask Major Stockwell of our

office in Fort Collins to tell us something about the

situation in Colorado and New Mexico of the Colorado River.

MR. H. J. STOCKWELT, (FORT COLLINS, COLORADO):

...Mr. Stockwell gives his report, which should be

Inserted here...

(9)

6 MR. STOCKWELL: I shall be glad to answer any

questions you may have.

MR. PARSHALL: Well, now, that is in general the

picture covering the watershed of the Colorado River. I

wonder if there might be some questions at this time on

anything that has been mentioned? (No questions). If not,

we will proceed with the program.

We will discuss the matter of the forecasting of

runoff in these tributary streams, including, of course,

the Colorado River and Glenwood Springs.

...Vr. Parshall, Senior Irrigation Engineer of

the Soil Conservation Service, Fort Collins, Colorado, gives

his report, which should be inserted here...

MR. PARSHALL: For the record now, I am going to

present my contribution for these forecast figures as

8,46o t000.

I find that Mr. George Lewis, for the City of

Los Angeles, the Hydrographer in the Department of Water

and Power, is going to present to us an analysis of the

tributary forecasts. Then, when we get through with that,

we are going to start in with the part of the program having

to do with the forecasting, which interests the Bureau of

Reclamation and the Metropolitan District and the Water

Department here and others among these forecasters.

We are going to have a figure from the entire

group here, which will, of course, be it. You know that the

SAN FRANCISCO 8, CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES 15, CALIFORNIA

(10)

24

25

26

7 more we get in there, the greater the number to divide by.

If we divide by thirty or forty, we are going to come a lot

closer to it than if we had only two of us forecasting.

So, we are going to have about thirty or forty

forecasts coming in, and that ought to just about settle the

question.

Well, George, may we hear from you.

MR. GEORGE A. LEWIS (LOS ANGELES, CALIFOhNIA):

Mr. Parshall and gentlemen,

...Mr. Lewis gives his report, which should be

inserted here...

MR. PARSHALL: We are running very close to

schedule. I should like to suggest that we take five

minutes' recess before the continuation of our program.

...The meeting recessed for five minutes...

...The meeting resumes at 10:45 a.m....

MR. PARSHALL: We have a very fine attendance

here this morning.

...An announcement is made regarding attendance...

The rest of the morning we are going to devote to

the runoff in the Colorado River at Bright Angel.

We have asked Mr. V tter of the Bureau of

Recla-mation to engineer this part of the program and either he or

his assistant will present the forecast of the River,

according to their methods.

Mr. Jesse Honnold of the Bureau of Reclamation in

(11)

8 Denver has a contribution, and Major Stockwell from our

office at Fort Collins also will present something to you.

I notice again that I an supposed to make an offer

too. We have Mr. Elder, engineer of the Metropolitan Water

District of Los Angeles; Mr. Prier and Mr. Transtrom and

Mr. Lang, all of Los Angeles also have something to offer.

Then, too, we are not unmindful that we are going

to have a composite summary of this, and I am going to ask

Major Stockwell and George Lewis to act as tellers and pass

these sheets out to you.

I would like to say at this time that on the

graph sheet, up in the right-hand corner, is a line for your

name. The records will not show that your name is concerned.

If you want to use an alias, though t that will be all right.

You write your name and put your figure up there, and we

will check them and find out what the picture is. Then you

leave these on the table. The purpose of that is to create

some interest by getting your forecast.

...Mr. Parshall gives the details in connection

with making out the forecast...

MR. PARSHALL: In addition, we will give you a

tabulation of the averages of the correlation of the snow

coverage and of the past ten years' record, counting 1.947,

too, which is at this time 17.3.

...Mr. Parshall relates the method of obtaining

averages...

STENOTYPE CONVENTION "PING COMPANY

26 O'FARRELL STREET

1151 SOUTH BROADWAY

(12)

9 MR. PARSHALL: I am asking Carl Vetter to carry

on from here for the rest of the morning, so, Carl, I will

let you take care of it.

MR. CARL VETTER (Boulder City, Nevada): Thank you,

very much, Mr. Parshall.

I would like to precede my very few remarks this

morning with a little personal note. I want you to know,

Ralph, that we all appreciate very much having this

oppor-tunity to get together once a year. You know, Ralph, that

anybody who has anything to do with forecasting the flow

of the Colorado River gets affected by some sort of

inferior-ity complex. We all think we are a bunch of liars, and it

is rather comforting to get together once a year and find

that we don't stand alone.

I understand this year, Ralph, that you are going

to be tough on us. You requested that these various people

send in to my office the brief outline of the method that

be used for making a forecast of the Colorado River at

Bright Angel and getting a figure. I was out of town and

Mr. Kaser was good enough to summarize these various

$(041)61' .SS Nit s

ns.

I have them here, however, I don't think they

cover the full list, so there will be something in addition.

I will just mention very briefly what I have received here-,

and I would like to call on each of these people and ask

them to come up and give their storage content figures.

(13)

10 Mr. Kaser has listed balavr, I think in the order

they came in, the people on this part of the program. The

first one is Yr. Transtrom of the Department of Water and

Power of the City of Los Angeles, who has made a forecast

for the calendar year 401947.

We have, in our office, shied away a little bit

from trying to forecast anything by a twelve-month period.

It is bad enough to try to forecast the spring runoff, that

is the runoff from April 1 through July. If we start to

talk about the runoff for the remainder of the year, I think

it is just pure crystal-gazing. In this spring runoff after

all, we have our snow measurements and our past

precipi-tation measurements which, to a large extent, have gone into

either soil moisture or to some extent are still in the

ground.

We can say something somewhat intelligent about

what that accumulated moisture will mean in runoff, but to

guess what rain is going to fall in August and in October

is something that we have shied away from a little-brit

That

has beeeme a little bit like crystal gazing.

That is the

function of the Weather Bureau, which is beginning to do a

great deal of work on this. It is following the same pattern.

I hope that we can get -got Mr. Transtrom to reduce these

yearly forecasts for the calendar year to the spring runoff

by applying some certain percentage, so that we all will

talk about the same period of time, that is the time from

(14)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

11 April 1 through July. That is the spring runoff. It is the

runoff that takes place before our late summer and early

fall rains.

I would like to get Mr. Transtrom to start the

ball rolling and to tell us a little bit about the forecast

he has.

MR. H. L. TRANSTROM (Los Angeles, California)

...Mr. Transtrom gives his report, which should

be inserted here...

ER. VETTER: Thank you very much, Mr. Transtrom.

I realize that the one who comes up here first is at a

disadvantage. Those who come later will get the benefit

of the previous guesses.

The next forecaster is Mr. C. H. Prier, also of

0 the Department of Water and Power. Mr. Prier has been

making some snow forecast surveys. Mr. Prier.

MR. C. H. PRIER (Los Angeles, California):

...Yr. Priiir gives his report, which should be

inserted here...

MR. VETTER: Thank you very much, Mr. Prier.

The next name I have is that of Mr. H. J. Stockwell

of Fort Collins, with the Soil Conservation Service.

MR. H. J. STOCKWELL (Fort Collins, Colorado):

...Mr. Stockwell gives his report, which should

be inserted here...

MR. VETTER: Thank you very much, Mr. Stockwell.

(15)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

12 Well, I feel that the next one is on the spot.

Mr. Parshall.

MR. R. L. PARSHALL (Fort Collins, Colorado):

...Mr. PARSHALL gives his report, which should be

Inserted here...

MR. VETTER: Next we have Mr. Honnold of the

Bureau of Reclamation in Denver. He will give us some snow

survey data. Mr. Honnold.

MR. HONNOLD (Denver, Colorado):

...Mr. Honnold gives his rerort, which should be

inserted here...

MR. VETTER: Thank you very much, Lit. Honnold.

MR. PARSHALL: Now, about a diagram which you

have. No doubt you have your figure posted and your name

written on your sheet. I am asking Mr. Lewis and Mr.

Stock-well to assist in collecting these. We will continue

collecting these while the program is continuing.

MR. VETTER: Mr. Partial, of course, thinks that

an eleven-million acre feet forecast of January 1, is a good

one, but he also suggest that we record

forecast as of

April l and that it be on the record as eight million four

hundred sixty for that.

Now, this completes the data we received in

Boulder City. However, we also have done some work ourselves

on the subject of forecast

4.445 Mr. Kaser, who is in charge of

our forecasting, among other things in Boulder City, would

(16)

13 like to tell you how he has gone about it and the figure

he has arrived at.

ER. R. F. KASER (Boulder City, Nevada): First

I will get our forecast up here on the board too. (He

writes down the figures on the board). Mr. Honnold is passing

some of our :orecast memoranda around. Unfortunately, I

didn't anticipate the attendance here, and we are a few

short. Maybe you can get together so you can all see them.

You will find there that we commit ourselves in writing, so

we will have to stay with that figure. It is based on three

different methods wh4eh, for some reason, all three methods

give the same figure, and that is nine million three hundred

thousand for the April-July period.

Nothftgures

-on-the -board there-

I wlit-explarin

1141V--1.3-4terw,

WO-

tistat

. Last year, I

believe, Mr. Stanley from our office appeared at the meeting

and discussed the method using 40w accumulated

.precipi-tation, where we determined that the use of thirteen

preci-pitation stations, for which we have records since 1913,

gave us the best correlation with *kw runoff.

P

This

we

consider our best method, br-u.sIng the

'ort'oci

loin period -mainly. We use thirteen stations. I will read

!*

460oe

to you,efroem rt.*

r

or, frirltf #11

...He reads the list of stations mentioned above...

MR. KASER: We baave.maa4 a statistical method of

Aely;

analysis whereby we compute the leasrline and the probability

(17)

25

based on

Air DPI wkic14

A 9'1

it

4, 119""fleNiebi ,

14 past occurrences. You will notice that 47 0047?raw

-

,roptr++

accwiriviiii#ed pretik

the chart wOmPirttha-map showing the stations fist

During the past year we have worked on this

method somewhat. amowef the main things we have added isiele

the year 1946, and we computed our correlations. We find

that that has resulted in some improvements, although it

Isn't amoything to change the results particularly.

-841-4m+r Fehruerbecast, he correlation

factor, for some of you not familiar with statistics, is a -4

f7v

mt# p* )4. iti-effitt-tipes 4ego/ of ivses tr1gt1,,.1e

compared

tactor3f- cihe hUndied pommisitti'

e 444-44 mearis"that-ali-pOihts

would fall uAder the least square line.

Qmoieme

,thirty-three year basis, not including 1936,

we

correlation of.82 pareent. That was an-the- beala

OP

February through July. The method we used Jwiliwto

includeriall of the runoff from 41.41. to July. "law, for 4Alte

purposes of comparison, we have ohoww-e -change through

\July and theee-figures can be directly applied. That

raises our coefficient of correlation to.84 percent, and

it lowers the nine-out-of-ten range from 3.4 million

acre-feet down to eme- million acre-acre-feet.

On the old basis/'we had40;4spreeMt correlation,

and we still have it on the new basis. However, afrthe

nine-out-of-ten range4

0 ,4t is changed from 3.5 to

acre-feet. Th4Wdata seems to indicate that the February 1

26 forecast based on the accumulated precipitation seemeti-443# be

(18)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1? 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

1 ₅

as good as the March I forecast.

will go ahead on the April I forecast. The only

change in that is the addition of another,

volam4 because we

were already forecasting

Oft-OR

April through July period.

The coefficient of correlation is .86 7 with a spread of

two million acre-feet.

Viimw-1,4*-1,0-4m-ta he May 1 forecastr-whitetrowwwwill

oeriee on the old basis,

ior had a correlation coefficient of

.901 and by changing frodSApril tcY July, we get a correlation

,6

coefficient 4010. .92, and the Imend varies to the period. It

Is better to consider the wbole period. If you happen to

have Airt;

1tApril 44em., part of titet runoff has already

occurred.) That seems to me to be the reason why the

coefficient increases,when-o*epyth+mt .1, flgured on an April

NNW,

iou will notice on thasewearthe bottom joirt

4-W04Mo-diagram on each of these ch7t,

s

,t,AW10.40mmg the amoirwsw

water content of the snow plotted on April-July runoff. On

our February 1 and March 1 charts, we show no least square

line. It is a shotgun pattern, and we didn't consider it

worthwhile to try to forecast it on that- boe4s.

When we come to April 1, however we have changed

nt.141 odj

our --iter•es and, for some reason, we find that the ItTarch

_A

Increase gammo-4414 Iviedpeese in the water content of snow.

That is determined by the difference of the average water

011 content

:40 April 1 and March 1. It gives a much better

(19)

d(Ot

111 f

Mwmff than ithe water content alone. Using -ewr method,:art

giri

41.!late, /0 rr,# r2

,0.?

lwvt

we get a correlation Coefficient of

N

That

is the same range we had ow the April precipitation

We have recently thought up a new method lest which

I would like to offer w-immmeq,

for your consideration. We

don't know whether eleven years is long enough to adequately

determine its merit, but it is probably as good

'at other

methods using that period. This method is to add the March

increase in water'to tne c.ocumulatimg precipi*ation from

16 October 1 to the end of Laren and to correlate that sum

with the April-July runoff.

By this mummet we get a correlation coefficient

of Wm*

with only 29 acre-feet differeme. So far that

appears to be the narrowest range that we have

en able

to compute. If that is the case, it may be that that

method will,when we have more years of records, show up

so that we will have more faith in it. As long as we are

discussing the possible accuracy of the eleven-year record,

we might point out that.as a test an whether or not this

last eleven years is representative of a longer period we

have taken the accumulated precipitation for the last

der cc/

co4

eleven years and compared some of the same things eampu4e4

4ft that period with 'elite data for the thirty-four year period.

The least square line, as indicated by 4he-4mmo-mkAikiew*

indicates that the eleven year period would show runoff of

between three hundred thousand and five hundred thousand

(20)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

17 acre-feet less for the same precipitation than would the

thirty-four period. That wou4d indicate that there is a

trend for slightly less runoff in recent years, however

it isn'

t efteugh- to be seen.

The eleven year data yields the same nine out of

ten probility range. That is the 2.1 million acre-feet.

Another test

QA,

this reeent method where we add

the March increase to the October through March precipitation

drops the year 1946 out,

ot WorresultingAlWow in a

ten-year period. The correlation ge coefficient drops from 92

to,89, which shows that as we accumulate more years of

eeprelat4on l the amovnt I.

inoireeself.

That, I might say, is a little oppe,

sed te the

method of multiple correlation that we hadt

sometime

haek. 'We decided that

4e

eleven-year period, as far as we

are concerned, is too short to use for multiple correlation.

Regarding that, when we correlated the May-July runoff

with the May 1 quotient of snow content and the April loss

in content, using 44e multiple metpod. we got a correlation

txf

coefficient of 96. That was dona-Awing mine-years -end

E

thirty-four years

. We will add some more

yew's- to

it. Fram

tokk(

910,6J, thai is quite a significant drop. The nine

-out of ten

range goes up to eight million acre-feet,

SO 'w• it

is safest to depend on sample correlations for the short

period.

Another interesting sArody that we have mode in the

(21)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

18 past year is the snow survey data. It appears

to us that

fort

water measured as snow 1011 May I can't show

up at the Bright

Angel station for several days. For that reason

there may

be ad.4t4e..ronee-in the periods from April 1 through

,74

July,

which will yield s. better correlation. We tried

titet by

iS040000044

of five days, andoer

find that by using the

April 1

ampOgAt of snow wi-th- the April-July runoff,

we get a

corre-lation coefficient of #441Will, 2e1P-AINA4,1,1-.-

for April 6,

.57 fiteat for April 11 through April

16, we get .59 and for

_it, 7

-

2 April 16 through April 21, we 'get .50. There

le about a

fifteen day lag and, if we drop that runoff

out, since

presumably it couldn't have come from the

water which was

,

proL,,'

measured as snow on April 1, we can tioteet

a slight 01469%

br

'

Bt

i .11 isn't enough to awation.e''

Now, on the May 1 snow measurements, we get

some-what the same result

,In using May 1 through July. You

get-a fget-actor of .80 which increget-ases to .84 on

May 11 through

July. Then it drops off, indicating that

the4eriod is

only ten days in May, am* it was fifteen in

April. That is

Do pr;,

_{1q per,Pd ,F/w44 he Krf(eJ"eq !r}

th

Afay

the

-yes

of or

comfpUtetions.

We have been, at least I myself, a little

bothered

about using this March increase in water content

of snow.

I thought that I might be able to work out

a correlation

between fall precipitation and a factor to

be subtracted to

represent the loss, due to any and all sources

between the

water measured as snow tit the subsequent runoff.

However,

(22)

19 the studies made so far haven't yielded anything. We have

got some irprovement, but nothing to approach the result

we get using the March increase. We are also working no*

on a method where/we try to compute the lommmwt-ef acre-feet

of water that is stored as snow on the upper basin$ for

snow measurement methods. That measurement we, try to add

th.wt-44is the snow course data, which gives directly the

water content,, 11-60 Weather Bureau observations have the

depth of snow on the ground and any other observations that

we may have to have.

The idea is and has been to consider the snow

courses sampling ,e, band.:. We have tried to compute the area

of those bands using the accumulation of the amount of feet

of water that is stored up there. That is still in process

and we aren't far enough along to know how th:*t is going

to turn out. So far some of the individual basins ion't

look too promising. f

We hope that by using the whole basin we may get

(a

significant correlation. So, in summary, we-weta*tVstry

461116 we have planned to use mainly our accumulated

precipi-tation forecast, based on the thirty-four years that we

now have, 1913 through 1946, which gives us, as I show here

(on the board) a range of,

e04

. million acre-feet. That is

the nine out of ten range, not the standard deviation.

As I mentioned before, we get this same fiiure

using the accumulated precipitation based on the thirty-four

(23)

20 peried-ef-yeems, by using the March increase in water

content of snow as you can see on the April I forecast

chart. We-gedis-e/taT4ilmU4.same figure And. then-, when we

;leginw4e combine the two sets of data and work out a

correlation, based on the sum, we also get the same figure

for this year. I don't know if that

INWORS

what it is going

to be, but that is what we have.

MR. VETTER: The time is up, but we have two

more names here, and I was just wondering whether you will

permit us to go over a few minutes to call on these others':

MR. PARSHALL: I think that is a very fine

suggestion. Supposing that we do that and I think we can

clean up this matter in a very few minutes.

MR. VETTER: Yes.

MR. C. C. ELDER: Since I have got it on the list

I don't mind publicizing it. It is .J91. That is from the

work that I did because I was interested in the work that

Dr. Church mentioned and in his comments that I noted after

receiving the transcript of Dr. Church's report of last

year's meeting.

Dr. Church's forecast would have been perfect if

he had used a depletion figure for the Colorado River Basin

of two million one hundred thousand acre-feet, instead of

one-half million acre-feet, as he happened to pick out.

Now, any of us hydrographers knew that it was too high at

the time. The depletion method does become of great

(24)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

21 importance and interest and perhaps they have to be relied

r4

on as such dry years as

happened to be.

I don't consider it of much importance in an

above-normal year, but just as a further comment on that,

there is the further report eg the Goppeletion of the

Colorado River Basin. W-e-will-stArt----at °wry, eall-44- our

eight-poInt-Rftle. That happens to add up to two million

two-hundred thousand acre-feet for the Colorado River Basin

above Grand Canyon.

Last year being dry, it would have hardly been

that average depletion, perhaps five or ten percent below.

So, Mr. Church's work is very closely verified by the

Bureau of Reclamation of one million eight-hundred thousand

acre-feet plus its average of a foot and a half, rather

than the three-acre feet mentioned by Dr. Church which is

used.

Now, I did receive a report et- the Weather Bureau.

I hope there is someone qualified to explain that report

or answer questions on it, because unfortunately in my

mind it raises as many questions as it answered. It did

reveal, however, that a very careful and profound study had

been made, and this nine thousand one hundred acre-feet that

I attached my name to does really rely somewhat on the

Water Bureau and the Weather Bureau report. I may be way

off on what I think the report means, but if there is any

chance of getting that report explained on this program, I

(25)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 _ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

22 am sure that it would help a good many of us.

MR. VETTER: Now, we also have here Mr. Lang of

the Southern Calif-)rnia Edison Company.

MR. WILLIAY A. LANG (Los Angeles, California):

I am sorry that I didn't get our forecast to you in time,

but we usedthe Blue Book when it came out, and we didn't

receive it until Monday afternoon.

...Mr. Lang gives his report, which should be

inserted here...

MR. VETTER: This completes the list that I have

down, but I am sure that in this large attendance there are

others who would like to add to our figures.

...At this point Mr. Stockwell reads the average

of the forecasts...

MR. KASER: For the 1920 to 1944 period en—that

"basis

_{,under present conditions, the average runoff}

_{:and annual}

runoff is ten million eight hundred

thousand.ece,-MR. ELDER: That would mean a correction of about

tGo

twormitio

1 I

otglit tnousand. A

4 t

r

KASER: It is

By

opinion too, but they did

mean the water year and that is the explanation of it. Their

,

-computations,

show

a trend for our—present eenditions for

less runoff.

MR. VETTER: Any others who would like to answer?

We don't quite understand the Weather Bureau report. As

Mr. Kaser said, there is no argument about the percentage

(26)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

23 of normal. We agree about that. I think that they have at

Bright Angel 94 percent normal, and I think we have

97 percent and some others

95. There is no argument about

that. It is the percents normal that we don't understand.

MR. RUPP: These computations were made at Denver,

and the procedure was made according to that of Denver, and

it is the point drawn in the differentiation.

I think that was a correction factor on account

of the earlier record, and the office has attempted to

correct it for the added diversion upstream. I believe

that is the correct amount too. Beyond that, I don't know.

MR. VETTER: Thank you very much. If there

aren't any other suggestions, I guess this is apparently "it".

,htpre are some individual guesses and some anonymous guesses.

We th4nk that this four months. is about sixty percent of

the total. That percentage from 1913 to 1946 has risen to

sixty-seven percent on the longer records.

MR. KASER: Have you any percentage worked out?

MIL VETTER: For the four months out of the twelve?

MR. KASER: No. About all I have on that is

from comparing it with the normal for an eleven-year period

and a thirty-four year period. We are somewhat in between,

and that would'ipe somewhere between twelve million six

hundred thousand and about fourteen million three hundred

thousand. So that would be about thirteen million four

hundred thousand for the year, something like that, to

corresp

(27)

10 11 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

correspond with the nine million'for April through July.

MR. SCOBY: I would like to say a few words on

this.

....Mr. Scoby discusses the forecast method...

MR. VETTER: I will turn the meeting back to

Mr. Parshall.

MR. PARSHALL: It is now 12:25. Our program is

to continue this afternoon, and our first paper is by

Mr. John T. Spencer, Regional Forester of the United States

Forest Service, Denver, Colorado.

I think possibly we had better change that from

1:30 to 2:00 o'clock. We will meet promptly at 2:00 o'clock,

and I now adjourn the meeting. You are dismissed.

Whereupon the meeting adjourned at 12:30...

(28)

25 ...The afternoon session was called to order at

2:10

D

MR. PARSHALL: May we come to order now. I am

asking that Mr. R. A. Work, Supervisor of Snow Surveys of

the Conservation Service in Medford, Oregon, where he is

chief coordinator, take over to carry on. He is coordinator

for these eleven western states. I am asking that Mr. Work

act as chairman this afternoon, and without further adieu

I will turn the meeting over to you.

MR. R. A. WORK (Medford, Oregon): Gentlemen, we

have heard much this morning from those on the receiving

end of waters from the capricious Colorado River,, endjt

would seem very appropriate at this time to hear from one

who has much to do with the generation of these waters in

the forest -am* lands of that great water-producing area

along the Continental Divide

end particularly appropriate

a

iso

to hear from one who with-44a4-isespensibility has much

to do with conduct of the snow survey work. -61ft, I 'mold

Ilke-dbe introduce to you, Lr. John Spencer, Regional

Forester of the United States Forest Service at Denver,

P/r

Colorado.

district forest

rangers have traveled I

-&t

knowthow many thousands of

miles in the past eleven years in conducting these snow

surveys, in which the water-users right here in California

are so much interested. Will you come forward, Mr. Spence/sc.;

MR. JOHN W. SPENCER (Denver,

Colorado):

(29)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

26 ...Mr. Spencer speaks, the report of which should

be inserted here...

MR. WORK: Mr. Spencer, we thank you for a very

powerful and prophetic presentation of this subject. Time

was allotted to you, Lr. Spencer to permit full discussion

from the floor of your paper, and the chairman will now

entertain discussion or comments. (There are none).

As the program progresses, I have no doubt that

4cvc4 t.

papers presented by other speakers will bali4nrwilmt some of

4 1-QQq4t

It

the points that you have

in your paper. I

think the next paper "Remarks on the Control and Use of

Watersheds" will bring out some points regarding the value

of these watersheds as water producers.

The next paper was prepared by W. W. McLaughlin,

formerly chief of the Division of Irrigation of the Soil

Conservation Service and now collaborator with the Division

of Irrigation. :16. McLaughlin was called north to

Sacra-so

mento on some rather urgent business, a&

we are going to

ask 14,A4eT Stockwell to deliver this paper for Mr. McLaughlin.

ER. H. J. STOCKWELL (Fort Collins, Colorado):

...The report of Mr. McLaughlin should be inserted

here...

kR. WORK: Do we have any comments on this

presentation?

SPEAKER: Mr. Scoby made the comment that he

thought the fishing was worth a million dollars.

(30)

23

24

25

26

27 MR. WORK: Well, that must be one of Mr. Spencer's

seven or eight values there. The value of that resource

hee—bern high, but I can say from personal experience that

It is highly overratedp:?...(0~,eriher-,

We will pass on, gentlemen, to the next feature

on the afternoon's program, art—

utility of snow surveys in Wyoming,

and Colorado, three of these states

a symposium on the

New L,exico, California,

being important

con-tributors to the flow of the Colorado.

Unfortunately, Yr. Bishop, state engineer of

Wyoming, could not join us here today, but his remarks

will be presented in brief by our chairman, Mr. Parshall.

MR. PARSHALL: Mr. Work, gentlemen, thank you

very much.

....Parshall speaks, which report should be

inserted here...

ME. WORK: We will pass right on, gentlemen,

reser-ving discussion on this subject until we hear from the last

speaker on the panel.

We are fortunate to have with us today, Li.. John

Bliss, the state engineer of New Mexico. I have no doubt

that Mr. Bliss has it in his mind to duly apologize to

the metropolitan Water District and to the Southern California

Edison Company and, most particularly, to the Los Angeles

Chamber of Commerce for his lack of cooperation in producing

-the—extremely heavy snowfall this year in New Mexico.

(31)

25

26

28 At any rate, we will give you a chance to tell us how that

all came about. Mr. John Bliss.

MR. JOHN BLISS (SANTA FE, NEW MEXICO):

...Yr. John Bliss gives his report, which should

be inserted here...

IR. WORK: Thank you very much, Mr. Bliss.

WiliONThis matter of evaluating the snow surveys

in terms of dollars and cents, -1=Ni:ink, as Mr. Bliss points

out, s,mail6-6.04044,ft4e can better beimmote-where-like forecasts are

for such an ample water supply as to permit the bringing

*;?'

:itAlenci•

#41- It

A

of additiorW boomume7then=71= eawssume-within limits

A

that the elswiregiofteemer.441041s ths.net profit from the

rYlemafiVtef-Vanie 0 744

ttett,,aae 4,1,044-

7`;',.

additional acreage4

not

-othopwise

la4_401a.N11414,_

A

EAR rat4gAng-ort-ampie.4saseaat-sould

repre-pAmt_aamawka4-the value of

• thwamperviow. On the other hand,

there are +nteligit+e values to a forecast of disaster.

-Yen-7. 5046

rf74e,

-thett the farmer and the water user in

cemi 447

anor

general 1,-&-g4.4ton all sorts of precautionary measures,- 004 7444

what might have turned out to be a pretty bad year for the

iFfing00r014,

farmer, ot.44PlivIse eon be salvaged and turn into a fair

A

year ample. His loss isn't as great at it might have been,

ha4-4e been entirely unforewarned.

Now, we are going to hear akeabout the utility

Our. 4g04.1 el

of snowsurveys in California from, may I say,"ten percent"

Paget. At -least we are going to hear from ottr good-friend,

Fred Peril; in charge of the snow surveys in California.

26 O'FARRELL STREET 1151 SOUTH BROADWAY SAN FRANCISCO 8, CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES 15, CALIFORNIA

(32)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

MR. FRED PAGET (Sacramento, California): Thank

4 you. I was sure someone was going to bring up that ten

percent°

w aft I

en

29 --emmmrra-ti.em

(Relates joke at this point).

We are especially fortunate in California in

regard to snow survey work. It started way back in the

dim, distantpast.— Particularly in 1929,

tA,.ertv-dhl

A

t that time it was organized by a man who had visiom

genius, and the ability to direct it,

ir. Staffordf-

i d Take

a bow, Yr. Stafford.

Stafford rises and is applauded...

There is the manwho started the California

program° -altdte JAIHT it for four years and got it fe-irrg..

When I too, it over, it was a cinch.

Now t the utility of snow surveys in California

Is the same as snow surveys in any other state in the Union.

go 6xiti.4-it

NoRe ere-quite so e dowed as California, of course)

The utility is in the knowledge that management

(4

gets. Evermy yearn

NINJA..11,A4,41

re,

.-i;blaiffr

They want to know how much water are ate going to

have,enti....to—whet-4.etp4e4 To tia-▪ a• t

• degree that you can give

them the answer is the degree of the utility of 4,4

4=

snow

(33)

25

26

30 surveyS

Now the snow surveys work out especially well in

California because out here on many of

OUT

streams,

seventy-five percent of

OPUT

water comes from melting snow. In

Colorado it is not too much different

California.

A4L,

Cat.J6-&-61.4

I understand that sixty-six percent of 314,urNwater comes

from melting snow.

We get our better runoff from the melting snow in

the north, perhaps forty percent on the Sacramento. On the

(1,6Na.

time-we don't get as good forecasts as we do lower down

$10,44..Jra—AAN-410

in the state. So, we—h-wre—heer, as far as the utility)is

ck-concerned, a44-estimate. We haven't tried to put a dollar and

entsc tag on this thing. We feel that

ft=i

g

:

°

reat

ALe47;tility,

and we base this belief on 44,st the law of supply and

demand.

If a man gets what he thinks he wants and

-he likes

it when he gets it, he will keep coming back for more. For

the last twenty years, the water using organizations in

California have been coming back for more. In California

the state doesn't try to pay for all of the snow surveys.

We just try to coordinate the program/and let the local

agencies do their own work. -11:=32vme—t4iet,- In the snow survey

work; we are a firm believer in the work of the individual,

'..-r-&'

• Q- -14629 -r:-Q4

i-4'----w4-414-4e414.-40f---443

state and federal agencies. Sortetth

-4-4-ch,

t

x

4ke—&-nee4+Nate--:Uum11-40-W If they can't 4.01:4

iiAig...444,1 they pay some money into our kitty and get someone

K

(34)

to do the work for them. We do the work only where we n

have to t and it is mostly a cooperativel4

.

_{by the agencies}

concerned.

In the first four years of this program, I don't

know just how much private money was put in. Quite a bit

of money was put up by the state to get the thing organized,

and in just a general way, I imagine, from looking through

the files, that about twenty-five percent of the load way'

carried by private money.

- •

•

In the

"

fifth and sixth year, trivate agencies paid every cent of

c..4nON

the

Merter.

_{The state didn't pay a cent.}

Then the state's participation was reestablished

4-S—tr

fifty-fifty

1

-• 4,

;1,t is about half state and half private money.

dad long as that private money 1-Q

we feel that everybody who is throwing into the kitty, is

getting valuetsFor his money. cr>fteeTtie4.7.

I am not going to try to put a price or a value on

X

_.L.v•-c-L

_"

_4-

±t. All I am going to

_{is read you a letter from the}

chief engineer of one of these districts.

31 ly

ALA_

As-.

_{.Here Mr. Paget reads a letter, which should be}

inserted at this point...)

,e4Z01,

Multiply that by the twenty-four organizations who

(35)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

are throwing money into the kitty, and you will get the

_

utility of the snow surveys of Californ1a.'1 Thank you,

Mr. Work.

MR. WORK: We all thank you, Fred.

The last speaker on the panel here will be our

chairman, Li% Parshall, who will give us something on

Ceo

the utility of snow surveys in the state of 48-144ern4er.

MR. PARSHALL: Thank you very much.

r`.s kailst.e.tikd

Fe re wog' t 1 —erk Q

••••lir-e----Parlihirtt- g1VOS•411.3

Peport, will:eh should

32 be lasartectivorcw...

You will visualize that in our area, if our snow

survey reports as issued the first of April, would show

a normal or an above-normal water supply, and we think we

can come at least within reasonable error as far as that

sweeping statement is concerned, and should it prove that the

supplies are normal or better, we might take our little old

river there at Fort Collins, the Beater, as an example. It

has often happened that when the Western Sugar Company

makes its first payment for the delivery of the sugar beets,

there is deposited--we used to have three banks, we now have

two--there in the banks of Fort Collins between four and

six million dollars, within just a few days; We find that

if the water supply is sufficient to mak'e an irrigation

of one application the last two weeks of August or the first

week of September, that it is not unreasonable to assume

that we might get another additional ton of beets per acre.

(36)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

33 This year the contracts for fourteen dollars and fifty cents

for a ton of beets are set on beets that contain sixteen

percent sugar. In our northern area, there are a great

many fields that produce in excess of sixteen percent. We

have had fields run in tonnage from twenty to twenty-five

percent suger per acre.

Now, if the statement that we issue the first of

April said to this farmer, "I am going to pay you more" and

the farmer puts in ten more acres of beets on that

state-ment, he realizes that the forecast on his own figures is

reasonably accurate.

If this proved that the water supply was sufficient

to produce that one extra irrigation late in August, just

how much money does that mean? What I am trying to say,

gentlemen, is that even if these forecast statements would

produce just once for the are even one cents' worth more of

production, and he sells just one crop of sugar beets,

at just one cent more, then we can begin to see that even

in just your small community in Fort Collins, one percent

more on a few million dollars, you have something to show

in one county's crop. Then that man will believe that the

end results of snow survey work amply justifies the expense

which we go through to make this forecast available.

I think we are doing a fine work in the work that

we do in Colorado, right on down the Colorado River. It

lands in Lake Mead and in turn comes right down here to

the

(37)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 26

City of Los Angeles.

MR. WORK: We will entertain discussion

from

the floor now on these four very

able presentations. (There

are no questions or contributions

from the

floor).

We are getting a little behind464t

is half past

threemko.but before we go eimad with

theimpbmief the program,

I. -suggest that we have il•eut five

minutes te—s44dr-ertrand.

...The meeting is recessed for

five minutes and

is called to order again at 3:40...

MR. WORK: Without further preliminaries,

we will

pass on to the next paper with a

suggestive title. It

sounds extremely interesting..."Methods

and Results of

Forecasting the Spring Water Supply

in Arizona."

This_jaill be given by Dr. G. E.

P. Smith,

Irrigation Engineer, emeritus,

olo—bire Department of

Irri-gation of the University of Arizona

at Tucson. Dr. Smith.

D. G. . P. SMITH (Tucson 2 Arizona):

...Dr. Smith gives his paper.,, wiliolameheq44+-te

inserted here...

MR.

Thank you very much, Dr. Smith.

That

was a most interesting paper.

Are there any comments?

MR. GARSDALE:

T

wooid like to comment about

Dr. Smith's reference to sublimation.

past observationsinve

been very difficult to correlate,

because our knowledge

was hampered by the icumg-14actga..-44-4he

mechanism of the

(38)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16' 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

35 evaporation process from the snow field. Recent work by

the Forest Service in the spread of forest fires and also

some work by the British in the Sahara Desert show that the

44arroa4e-ef-th-e wind velocities follow a given curve. &fty

the velocity may be ninety miles-an-hour high

in—the-114-2,

-,

4rei+lk

-lemipsdimips fifteen miles-an-hou;lower4, and

may be only

two piles-an-hour at the snow's surface.

Aerodynamic theory has been a4ie-to enablet us to

interpret through wind velocity and also vapor pressure

balance at the dew point, which 40.6 to be observed to

compute the theoretical snow melt or sublimation. The

interpretation of that in terms of watersheds is another

matter, but we are getting closer to a watershed sublimation

to explain what you mentioned. Some of the experiments

in the forest, which Mr. Spencer mentioned,_sbow-t4.

Your use of the pattern method is very interesting.

That is the method the Army used in our operations in

Europe amid they attempted to coordinate all sorts of

methods. Finally thoy-went through all of the files of

weather maps which seemed to be identical in the States

and for the conditions whiekr-gbitey ha

a to work wi4h. Thelr

suaeoss in thftt method has been shown more successful in

any weather. It was the method used on fl-Day calculations.

MR. WORK: Are there any other comments, gentlemen?

Walt,

Ale

to the lateness of the hour, I believe

it will be expedient to refer you to the written record

(39)

r,

elVA 36

of the meeting, which Mr. Parshall later will issue, for

the next paper;

which was to have been presented by

Harry Potts, engineer of the Denver Municipal Water Board

in Denver.

g=

/4 .

+

I m

4 t

4r7-we to

_{to give his paper on tt41,fia-ogrePhic}

Method of Forecasting Runoff."

Now, we—hvm—heart a let44.6-444e—Trugnnticators

ef----Pianatt-r-errti.it is well-known to the prognosticators of

runoff that their forecasts would be of little value, other

than academic, if it were not for the authentic runoff

records which are collected and made available by the

U.S.G.S.

We are fortunate in having with us today,

representatives of the U.S.G.S. I notice on the program

that Mr. Gardiner's office wad. officially to represent

Ah

677,

the U.S.G.S, but I am informed that he is just recovering

0 ivofip,r(

"Cy

A..

from illness. He has son* his assistant, Mr. Heckler, end

e•ti

apt

e

'rer

ne-1.40

_y/e4)

_

t

-the fleet-

after-VOW

to Mr. Heckler.

MR. HECKLER (TUCSON, ARIZONA):

...Mr. Heckler spooks, the report of which should

be inserted here...

MR. PARSHALL: I would like to present Mr. Harlow

Stafford. He is one of the granddaddies of snow survey'r

before he moodomokomplood joined the U.S.G.S. Maybe he

has some comments on the U.S.G.S. program.

MR. STAFFORD: Apropos of the geological survey,

(40)

0 y

zi - 1,

---toY'r) c)e•

Vp Q

wvo

rtivvl, 1

tr ,.,,

i

,

"w

Q

6 r?Ci

(41)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 26

37 I just wanted to take a couple of minutes to give you

some comments on the antecedant runoff.

...Mr. Stafford reads a report, which should be

/

inserted here...

MR. WORK: -that-, Oitntlemen, in justice to those

of you who have late afternoon mild evening engagements, I

4- (

believe Jiver si*'.vi pass by Yr. Merriell's paper. Mr. Merriell

;

was unable to come today, and we asked

Mr.

give his paper. Inasmuch as the the is

leave it for the written record.

i

cel4gekl

e

'to

we will

ar,

Now, I will turn the meeting back to you, Ralph.

MR. PARSHALL: Thank you.

...At this point Mr. Parshall makes various

comments and announcements...

I should like to introduce at this time, Yr. R. A.

Work, of the Irrigation Division of the Soil Conservation

Service. He will discuss with us the future demands of

the snow survey program. Mr. Work.

MR. R. A. WORK (Medford, Oregon):

...At_this point-Mr.-Work gives his report, which

stieCuldThe

inserted

here...

c,e-

fir,

144#4; "ler

if C

MR. PARSHALL: Is there any discussion? (None).

I wish at this time to extent

my

personal thanks

to all who have participated here toda

It has been very

1 ti- Ma, i 014°,4A

Interesting ae4

_L.

because of the nature of the problems -that

Astositer)

_{,t sf}

et“4

we are discussing, les have a lot to discuss.