OCR Text |
Show Water Summary Is Made By Ranger A study of weather conditions, snowfall and temperatures has been part of the work of the forest service at Ephraim for a number of years, writes Ranger Wells Thursby. Our records from 1922 until the present date have been taken in about the same manner, and give very good figures for this summary. At present, the weather reports are being made in cooperation with the experiment station, United States weather bureau, Utah Agricultural college, and the forest service. Our records cover December, De-cember, January, February and March of each year since 1922. In studying these figures, and in compiling the records one is always looking ahead to consider probable weather conditions. It therefore creates cre-ates a tendency to predict. My predictions predic-tions at present are that the 1933 snowfall accumulation will be the best during the past 11 years, for which we have records. The snowfall for 1932 was the best recorded since 1922. On the first of February, 1933, the water content of the snow on the ground was 2.13 inches less than that of 1932 on the same date. In 1933 we had only a little lit-tle more than half the snow on January Janu-ary 1 that we had on January 1, 1932. On February 1, 1933, we had made quite a gain. on the deficiency. To bring the 1933 total water content con-tent of snow up to that of 1932, on March 1st, we will need 4.76 inches of water during February of this year. This will necessitate a heavy fall of snow during the month. Measurements during the past .12 years show that 5 inches of water in the snowfall during any one month is possible, but exceptional. At times we have recorded slightly more than 5 inches in one month. The fall of water at the Great Basin Experiment station sta-tion so far this winter has exceeded 5 inches per month. We got no snow until about the middle of December, and during this half month and January Jan-uary we recorded 9.38 inches. Extending this summary a little farther, the figures give us a better break. For 1933 to tie the record year of 1932 on April 1 (April 1 is set as the date best, showing the winter accumulation ac-cumulation of snow), the water content con-tent of the snowfall for February and March must total 8.86 inches. This is possible. For February and March, 1932, our records show 4.11 inches and 4.10 inches, respectively. During January of this year the snow guage recorded 4.66 inches of water. Some of the snow was not recorded, due to high winds and evaporation. Why can't we, then, expect 4.43 inches of water for each month, February and March ? One of the great research men of the country claims there is no appreciable ap-preciable difference in the amount of i annual precipitation over the continent conti-nent as a whole from year to year. We may get our deferred and accumulated accu-mulated capital of precipitation this year. |