DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT IN THE FOREST AND OPEN AREAS IN THE JIZERA
STUDY AREA AND METHODS
The Jizera Mts. (altitude 750-1085 m) are situated in Northern Bohemia, and are one of the European regions highly affected by atmospheric deposition. As a result the monoculture spruce forest was damaged and started to die. The 7 watersheds (areas of basins vary from 1.87 to 10.6 km2) included in the Czech
Hydrometeorological Institute Experimental Base lie in the upper part of the mountains close to the watershed divide; 5 on the southern slope and 2 on the northern slope (Fig 1).
Fig 1: Location of the studied basins and snow profiles in the Jizera Mts.
Time series of snow measurements performed both under trees and on clearings are available. The position of the profiles is given in Fig 1. The aim of measurements concentrates on two topics: to establish the relationship of areal distribution of snow to altitude and to determine the differences in snow accumulation and snow melting in forests compared to open areas. The number of selected measured localities is influenced by the character of the winter season, i.e. it varies due to the duration of the snow cover and its depth, as well as the accessibility to profiles. Usually 15 to 26 profiles are regularly measured in weekly time intervals, which also includes the paired profiles measured in 8 localities (Hladný et al., 1999). The beginning and the end of the winter monitoring season depends on snow cover formation and melting. The beginning usually starts in November or in December and continues to the end of March or to mid April.
The measurements of snow depth and its water equivalent are performed in snow profiles by a weighing snow sampler. The profiles were chosen to be easily accessible from the road but far enough not to be influenced by wind effects. The profiles are 15 to 20 meters long, at the beginning and at the end marked by poles in order to be easily located in the open terrain, in the forest marked by coloured triangles.
The snow depth is surveyed at 10 points, at 3 of them the density of snow is also measured. The depths of snow are read on the centimetre scale on the outer side of the sample tube; the density is derived from the weight of the samples evaluated with a digital weighing instrument.
The period 1991-1999, when the snow measuring network became already stabilised, was chosen for the analyses. The data analyses include homogeneity testing, assessment of altitude influence on snow water equivalent (SWE), and the quantification of differences between snow cover accumulation and melting in open space and in forested environments where sufficient data are available. In the profiles listed in Table 1, paired profiles are selected which have enough measurements to be statistically evaluated concerning the relationship between forest and open area SWE.
Table 1: The description of the selected paired snow profiles.
Uhlířská 1 clearing 775 South 0 calamagrostis villosa
Uhlířská 2 forest 780 South 0 Spruce 70 70
Kristiánov 16 clearing 805 West 3 calamagrostis villosa
Kristiánov 17 forest 795 South West 10 Spruce 50 65
Jezdecká 20 clearing 775 South West 3 calamagrostis villosa
Jezdecká 21 forest 780 South East 5 Spruce 70 60
Hřebínek 9 clearing 825 West 1 calamagrostis villosa
Hřebínek 10 forest 830 East 2 Spruce 70 55
Kasárenská 33 clearing 920 South 5 calamagrostis villosa
Kasárenská 34 forest 930 South 3 Spruce 30 80
Černá Nisa 4 clearing 820 South East 7 calamagrostis villosa
Černá Nisa 5 forest 830 South 1 Spruce 40 55
Bílé Buky 12 clearing 900 South West 6 calamagrostis villosa
Bílé Buky 13 forest 905 South West 6 spruce, beech 80 70
U Podkovy 14 clearing 875 South West 5 calamagrostis villosa
U Podkovy 15 forest 875 South West 5 Spruce 70 70
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
As mentioned above, snow profiles in the Jizera Mts. are partly measured in so-called ”pairs”, i.e. in the forest and on clearings (open space) in close proximity to each other. The homogeneity testing proves that the double mass curves are more or less without large deviations, both for the period of snow accumulation and snow melting. An example for the profile Jezdecká is given in Fig 2.
0
snow water equivalent [mm] - open area
snow water equivalent [mm] - fore
January and February March and April
Fig 2: Double mass curve of the SWE for the profile Jezdecká (No. 20 and 21).
In Table 2, the selected profiles are statistically evaluated concerning the relationship between the forest and open area SWE. In three cases the number of measurements is sufficient to divide the winter seasons into two parts: January-February (accumulation) and March-April (melting). This rough division was introduced due to the fact that air temperature (which could be a better criterion) was not measured in the observation period.
For each paired site the parameters of the linear regression between the SWE in forest and SWE in open area were computed:
SWEforest = a + b * SWEopen_area (1) The results are listed in Table 2. All correlation coefficients between the SWE in forest and in open areas are significant at the 0.05 % level. The division into winter subseasons makes it easier to interpret the results of the analyses (see below for the profile Jezdecká). However, the results for the whole winter season are also included because they make it possible to derive the snow storage in the forest based on measurements in the open area in the given locality. From Table 2 it also follows that the parameters differ from site to site, and that it would be difficult to derive one equation (relationship) even for such a relatively small region.
In most cases there is also considerable uncertainty in the coefficients of regression (especially the intercept value) – see the upper and lower 95 % intervals for both regression coefficients.
The correlation coefficients between the SWE in open areas and in forests are not significantly related to the geographical conditions or vegetation characteristics of the profile (altitude, slope, age and crown density). The influence of the geographical and vegetation parameters on the regression coefficients is difficult to interpret because one has to differentiate between the period of accumulation and snowmelt, and only three profiles provide enough measurements for such analyses. Data from more profiles will be analysed in the future to clarify this question.
Table 2: Parameters of the dependence between the snow water equivalent (SWE) in open area and forest in the paired profiles in the Jizera Mountains (SWEforest= a + b * SWEopen_area).
The profile Jezdecká (points 20 and 21 on Fig 1) was chosen for a detailed presentation. The course of the SWE in the winter season 1996 is presented in Fig 3, where the accumulation role of forest in the spring period is demonstrated. In Fig 4 the relationship between the SWE in the forest and in clearings for two winter subseasons is demonstrated. The results can be interpreted as follows: the lines in the figure have different slopes and different intercept values for each sub-season. From the intercept value for the period of snowmelt (Table 2) it follows that in spring more snow is preserved in the forest than in clearings.
When the clearings are already free of snow, snow storage in the forest still remains with an expected value of 184.17 mm. The results for the accumulation period substantiate that the snow accumulates earlier
Uhlířská whole season 74 0.900 38.427 22.34 54.510 0.703 0.623 0.783
Jan. and Feb. 35 0.902 34.689 16.720 52.658 0.645 0.535 0.754 Mar. and Apr. 13 0.896 80.983 26.600 135.367 0.706 0.474 0.938 Kristiánov whole season 59 0.899 -3.460 -28.270 21.350 0.847 0.738 0.956 Jan. and Feb. 30 0.938 -9.570 -31.180 12.038 0.756 0.648 0.864 Mar. and Apr. 16 0.881 58.526 -3.723 120.775 0.757 0.524 0.990
Jezdecká whole season 68 0.852 41.74 7,934 75,546 0.880 0,745 1,014
Jan. and Feb. 33 0.907 -16.987 -53,446 19,471 1.054 0,871 1,235 Mar. and Apr. 24 0.822 184.17 136.865 231.476 0.523 0.363 0.683 Hřebínek whole season 32 0.942 -5.448 -30.729 19.833 1.001 0.874 1.141 Kasárenská whole season 26 0.892 18.895 -47.125 84.915 1.261 0.992 1.531 Černá Nisa whole season 20 0.864 -3.629 -53.992 46.734 0.739 0.526 0.953 Bílé buky whole season 21 0.916 -16.603 -74.208 41.001 1.005 0.794 1.216 U podkovy whole season 21 0.891 15.035 -57.432 87.502 0.848 0.589 1.106
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
27.11.95 4.12.95 11.12.95 18.12.95 25.12.95 1.1.96 8.1.96 15.1.96 22.1.96 29.1.96 5.2.96 12.2.96 19.2.96 26.2.96 4.3.96 11.3.96 18.3.96 25.3.96 1.4.96 8.4.96 15.4.96 22.4.96
snow water equivalent [mm
open area forest
Fig 3: Course of the SWE in forest and in open area in winter 1996 in the profile Jezdecká.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
snow water equivalent [mm] - open area
snow water equivalent [mm] - fore
January and February March and April
Fig 4: Relationship between the SWE in forest and in open area in the profile Jezdecká (divided into two sub-seasons).
Usually altitude is considered to be one of the most significant parameters influencing snow depth and SWE - when the set of stations covers a sufficient range of altitudes. However this is not the case for stations in the Jizera Mts. The minimum snow profile altitude is 775 m, the maximum one is 985 m. The statistical significance of the relationship between altitude and SWE was tested on the level α= 0.05. The average correlation coefficient from a total number of 47 cases is 0.448, and only 8 from 47 relationships are statistically significant.
Results presented in this paper have shown that the relationship between the SWE measured in open areas and in adjacent forests is significant in all analysed profiles. These equations could serve to estimate the snow storage accumulated in the forest based on the measurements in clearings in a given locality.
However, the form of the relationship (regression equation) reveals high variability even in such a relatively small research area, and therefore it is not possible to derive one general equation for a given region.
Data from more profiles will be evaluated to try to relate the regression parameters to the geographical and vegetation conditions.
REFERENCES
Babiaková, G., Kozlík, V. (1969) Contribution to the determination of the snow storage in forested and non forested areas. J. Hydrol. Hydromech., 17, 3, 243-254.
Barták, Z. (1978) Hydrological forecasting system for the protection of environment. Evaluations of snow cover water storage in the Nýrsko reservoir basin in years 1974-1978. Design of representative snow measuring net. (in Czech), Project Research of stochastic and systematic proceedings in hydrology for the need of water management and creation of environment, Part 3, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, pp. 42.
Barták, Z. (1995) Hydrological forecasting in the Nýrsko basin. (in Czech), Works and studies of the Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, 26, Prague.
Hladný, J., Bubeníčková, L., Hancvencl, R., Kulasová, A. et al. (1999) Sensitiveness of inputs for hydrological models in winter seasons. The Jizera Mts. Experimental watershed. Register 1980/1981-1998/1999 of snow measurements. (in Czech), Project VaV/510/2/99 Research of methods and development of forecasting models for the need of protection against floods, Part 6, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, Prague, 178 and 60 pp.
Chamas, V. (1981) Measurement of snow covers depth and their water equivalent in the Josefův Důl basin.
(in Czech), Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, Ústí n. L..
Kantor, P. (1975) Influence of species composition of forest canopy to forming and melting of snow.
(in Czech), Forestry, 23.
Stehlík, J. Bubeníčková, L. (2002) Relationships between the snow water equivalent in the forest and open areas in the experimental basins in the Jizera Mountains, J. Hydrol. Hydromech., 50, 3, 233-246.
Stehlík, J., Bubeníčková, L., Hancvencl, R., Krejčí, J., Kulasová, A., et al. (2001) Sensitiveness of inputs for hydrological models in winter seasons. (in Czech) Project VaV/510/2/99 Research of methods and development of forecasting models for the need of protection against floods, Part 6, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, Prague, 68 pp.
Stehlík, J., Bubeníčková, L., Hancvencl, R., Kulasová, A.(2000) Sensitiveness of inputs for hydrological models in winter seasons. (in Czech), Project VaV/510/2/99 Research of methods and development of forecasting models for the need of protection against floods, Part 6, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, Prague, 29 pp.
Turčan, J. (1977): Evaluation of snow storage in the Kamenice basin for the years 1975-1977. The design of rational snow measuring net. (in Slovak), Report of the Institute of Hydrology, Academy of Sciences, Bratislava.
Zelený, V. (1965) Runoff conditions during snowmelt in the Moravskoslezské Beskydy Mountains.
(in Czech), Journal of Forestry, 4, 339-358.
Zelený, V. (1975) Contribution to the knowledge of the influence of the forest on the distribution of rainfall.
J. Hydrol. Hydromech., 23, 4-5, 332-353.