GLACIO-HYDROLOGICAL PARAMETERS OF THE MASS BALANCE OF LEMON GLACAER, JUNEAU lCEFiELD,‘ ' ALASKA, 196567 mesis for the Degree of M. S. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY CHESTER R. ZENONE 1972 . V 'WmT" flLllllllllllzlfllllll ”WWI 1lllllzlIlillllllllllflllllllll :L m‘" ' 1 321 3110 27 9895 . 4L Mic. {Q19 Universmy 9113me .313 1.1 E11 rm... .1! BACK OF IOOK 'VMBOB ABSTRACT GLACIO-HYDROLOGICAL PARAMETERS OF THE MASS BALANCE OF LEMON GLACIER, JUNEAU ICEFIELD, ALASKA, 1965-67 BY Chester R. Zenone As the initial segment of a ten-year program of glacio—hydrological research, this study covers the years 1965, 1966, and 1967 and has been conducted on the Lemon Glacier on the southwestern periphery of the Juneau Ice- field in the Northern Boundary Range near Juneau, Alaska. The objective was to delineate the role of geomorphological (orographical) and allied meteorological and hydrological factors on the long-term regime (mass balance) of this glacier through systematic recording of basic parameters using standard glaciological and glacio-meteorological techniques. These included measurements on the main accum— ulation néyé at 4000 feet elevation, of temperature, wind, precipitation, cloud cover, duration of sunshine and radiation on a 3-hourly basis during the spring to autumn melting period for comparison with contemporaneous recordings of ablation, transient snow-line and néyéLline positions and hydrometric records at a stream gage site near the glacier Chester R. Zenone terminus. The data are abetted by synoptic weather records at a USWB sea-level station, where continuous data during other months of the year permit extrapolation of the extent of the effective ablation season as it relates to the glacier's liquid water balance. Good correlation is achieved between hydrometric data and ambient temperatures when atmospheric conditions produce temperatures above 40°F. Below this temperature, correlations tend to break down, although some divergence in pattern can be explained by plotting such influences as wind directions and velocities. Similarly, the propagation of seasonal melt—water is found to be consonant with cumu- lative ablation and the hydrometric discharge at the glacier's terminus. Anomalies in this correlation are suggested to be the result of runoff propagated by rainfall rather than direct melt and in some cases by the catastrOphic self-dumping of ice-dammed water bodies within the glacier system. A regional cooling, beginning to show significant effects on this glacier by the mid—1960's, is documented by the records of snowfall and glacier stratigraphy. The data are consistent when viewed against the longer-range sequence of records obtained over the quarter century preceding this study, plus data in more recent years obtained from the Lemon Glacier and from other sites on the Juneau Icefield and on the nearby coast. The results Chester R. Zenone support the value of the Lemon Glacier as a regional proto- type for monitoring ice mass and hydrological regimes of middle latitude glaciers and the related secular trends in climate which are affecting other glacier watersheds in Alaska and elsewhere in North America. As this research is being continued through the International Hydrological Decade (1965-74), it will be followed by further reports. The present study and its related data plots have thus been prepared to serve as a baseline for more refined analyses which are planned after addition of subsequent measurements at the same field sites. With respect to the follow-on research, these present efforts have identified marked variations in precipitation from sector to sector in the Northern Boundary Range making it advisable to obtain more detailed comparative measure- ments in adjacent areas. From this a clearer regional pattern of retained accumulation (net gain) and liquid water discharge (net loss) can be recognized within which the type of data obtained in this study can be most usefully fitted. Another conclusion derived from this investigation is that both in small-scale and large-scale studies of this kind, a total systems approach is quite essential. There- fore, with respect to the Lemon Glacier system, all factors affecting the long-term mass, liquid and heat balance must continue to be taken into account toward a complete under- standing of the trends revealed by this preliminary assess- ment. GLACIO-HYDROLOGICAL PARAMETERS OF THE MASS BALANCE OF LEMON GLACIER, JUNEAU ICEFIELD, ALASKA, 1965-67 BY Chester R. Zenone A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Geology 1972 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This writer is indebted to the Glaciological and Arctic Sciences Institute at Michigan State University for its sponsorship of this research in cooperation with the Institute of Water Research at Michigan State University through contract with the Federal Office of Water Resources Research, Department of Interior. Also gratefully noted are the facilities and financial support of the Foundation for Glacier and Environmental Research, Pacific Science Center, Seattle, Wn. Especially acknowledged is the use of the Camp 17 field station and the various scientific instruments and equipment made available there through the Foundation's Juneau Icefield Research Program (JIRP). To Dr. Maynard M. Miller special appreciation is extended for his role in suggesting this research and in arranging the financial support, including some supplemental aid from the Research Committee of the National Geographic Society. Sincere acknowledgment is also given for his encouragement, guidance and field help, as well as sugges- tions in the manuscript. To the other members of the research guidance committee, kind acknowledgment is also made: to Dr. James Harrington, Dr. Sam Romberg, and Dr. Hugh F. Bennett. ii To the U. S. Geological Survey (Juneau Office), the U. S. Forest Service (Institute of Northern Forestry), and the U. S. Weather Bureau (Juneau Airport) thanks are also due for help in the acquisition of key hydrometric and precipitation data. Special mention is made of the personal assistance of Vern Berwick of the Geological Survey, Joseph Bauer of the Weather Bureau, Austin E. Helmers and Dr. Douglas N. Swanston of the Forest Service, and Dr. James Bugh and other members of the summer and spring field teams of the Juneau Icefield Research Program. I am also indebted to my field companions during some phases of this project: Louis Acker, Dan Bishop, Donald Larson, Dr. Alfred Pinchak, Roger Peebles, Barry W. Prather, Richard M. Shaw, Van Sund- berg, Donald Thomas, Steve Walasek, Dr. Patrick Welsh and especially Scott Hulse. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . II. III. IV. V. Location and Description of Area. . . Regional Climatic Environment. . . . Research Facilities and Sponsoring Agencies . . . . . . . . . . PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS. . . . . . . FLUCTUATIONS OF LEMON GLACIER IN HISTORIC TIME 0 O O C O O O I O O I I I THE PRESENT STUDY. . . . . . . . . The Area-Elevation Relationship . . . Meteorological Measurements . . . . Temperature . . . . . . Precipitation . . . . . Cloud Cover . . . . . . Duration of Sunshine . . . Total Sky, Solar and Reflected Radiation. . . . . . Windspeed and Direction . . Water Balance Measurements. . Mass Balance Measurements . . . . Firn Stratigraphy and Test— Pit Data . Rammsonde Profiles. . . . . . . Ablation Records . . . . . . . Névé?line Positions, 1965—67 . . . Duration of Annual Ablation Seasons, 1965-67 . . . . . . . . . ANALYSIS OF HYDRO-METEROLOGICAL AND MASS BALANCE DATA . . . . . . . . . . Ablation Rates and the Interdependence of Meteorological Factors . . . . . iv Page ii vi ix 10 12 l3 l4 l4 l6 19 20 20 22 22 23 23 26 28 30 32 35 36 Chapter Page Temperature vs. Ablation Rate . . . . 39 Windspeed, Turbulent Heat Transfer and Ablation Rates . . . . . . . . 40 Incident Radiation and Cloud Cover vs. Ablation Rates . . . . . . . . 42 Lemon Creek Runoff and Glacier Mass Balance Considerations . . . . . . 44 VI GLACIO-CLIMATIC TRENDS AND SUMMARY COMMENTS . 48 GLOSSARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 ILLUSTRATIONS AND FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . 60 APPENDICES o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 9 6 Figure 1. 3A. 3B. 3C. 3D. 8A. 8B. 8C. 9A. 9B. LIST OF FIGURES Juneau Icefield, Alaska-Canada, Location Map . Part of Juneau B-2 U. S. Geological Survey Sheet (1:63, 360), showing Location of Study Area and Research Camps . . . . . Lemon-Ptarmigan Glacier System, 13 August 1948 (Photography by M. M. Miller). . . . Lemon Glacier, 4 October 1967 (Photograph by A. E. Helmers) . . . . . . . . . . Lemon Glacier Icefall and Terminus, July 1966 (Photograph by M. M. Miller). . . . . . Storage Precipitation Gage (on Lemon-Ptarmigan Ridge) near Camp 17 (Photograph by M. M. Miller) 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O Area-elevation relationships, Lemon Glacier . Mean Daytime Temperatures at Camp 17, July- August, 1966-67 . . . . . . . . . . Daily maximum and minimum temperatures at Camp 17, Summer Months, 1965-67. . . . Maximum Daily Temperatures: Juneau Airport y§_Camp 17, Summer Months, 1966-67. . . Total Precipitation: Camp 17 XE Juneau Airport, July-August, 1966—67. . . . . . Mean Monthly Precipitation at Juneau Airport, 1943-67. 0 O O O O O O O C O O Mean Annual Total and January and July Preci- pitation at Juneau Airport, 1943-67 . . Meteorological Data for Camp l7--July 1965 (Temp., Precip., Radiation, Sunshine). . . Meteorological Data for Camp l7--August 1965 (Temp., Precip., Radiation, Sunshine). . . Vi Page 61 62 63 63 64 64 65 66 67 68 69 69 7O 71 72 Figure Page 10. Average Daily Cloud Cover at Camp 17-- Summer, 1966 . . . . . . . . . . . 73 11. Duration of Sunshine at Camp l7--Summer, 1966. 74 12. Average Daytime Windspeed at Camp 17--Summer, 1966, 1967. . . . . . . . . . . . 75 13. Comparative Density and Water-equivalence of Test-Pit No. 2(B) on Lemon Glacier on Lemon Glacier on 7 July and 6 August, 1966 . 76 14. Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers Observation Sites--Summer, 1966. . . . . . . . . 77 15. Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers Observation SiteS—-Winter’ 1967. o o o o o o o o 78 16. Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers Observation Sites--Summer, 1967. . . . . . . . . 79 17. Névé-lines on Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers, September, 1967 . . . . . . . . . . 80 18. Ablation Rates on Lemon Glacier gs Trends of Meteorological Parameters at Camp 17-- Summer, 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . 81 19. Ablation Rates on Lemon Glacier XE Trends of Meteorological Parameters at Camp 17—- Summer, 1966 . . . . . . . . . . . 82 20. Abaltion Rates on Lemon Glacier XE Trends of Meteorological Parameters at Camp 17-- Summer, 1967 . . . . . . . . . . . 83 21. Snow and Firn Ablation on the Lemon Glacier-— July and August, 1966-67 (Total Ablation at Three Elevation Levels) . . . . . . . 84 22. Lemon Glacier Ablation Rates on Five Transects in Névé Zone XE Changes in Cloud Cover-- Summer, 1966 . . . . . . . . . . . 85 23. Comparative Mean Temperatures (0°F) at Camp 17 z§_Ablation Rates on the Lemon Glacier in July-August, 1966, 1967. . . . 86 24. Cumulative Ablation Curves on the Lemon Glacier in July, August, 1966, 1967 . . . . . . 87 vii Figure 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. Mean Monthly Discharge Ra Gage Site, 1951-61 . . tes at Lemon Creek Comparison of Summer Daily Discharge Rates on Lemon Creek, 1965, 1966 Melt-season Precipitation Lemon Creek during 1965 Melt-season Precipitation Lemon Creek during 1966 Melt-season Precipitation Lemon Creek during 1967 Comparative Névé-line and Trends on the Juneau Ic 1946-65 (after F.G.E.R. Seasonal Snowfall Trends, Alaska, 1943-71, Based and 5-year Averages. . View of Camp 17 Research for the Long-term Glaci Research Program, 1965- Sector Precipitation Map Juneau Icefield (after Forestry, U. S. Forest Large-scale Map of Lemon viii , and 1967 . . . . and Discharge of and Discharge of and Discharge of Net Accumulation efield (Site 10B) ) . . . . . . . Juneau Airport, on l-year, 3-year, Station, Base Camp o-hydrological 74 (F.G.E.R. photo) . for Maritime Area of Institute of Northern Service). . . . . Glacier System. . . Page 88 89 9O 91 92 93 94 95 Pocket Pocket Appendix A. LIST OF APPENDICES METEOROLOGICAL DATA. . . . . . . . . A-l thru A-12: Monthly Summary Weather ‘ Forms--Summers, 1965-67, Partial Data for January and March, 1967 . . A-l3: Lemon-Ptarmigan Ridge Precipitation Data, 1967 . . . . . . . . . A-l4: Lemon-Ptarmigan Glacier Area Precipitation Data, 1967. . . . . A-15: Mean Temperatures (°F) at JIRP Camp 17 and at Juneau Airport . . . A-l6: Juneau City, January and Annual Mean Temperatures and Precipitation, 1944-68 . . . . . . . . . . A-l7: Juneau Airport, January and Annual Mean Temperatures and Precipitation, 1944-68 . . . . . . . . . . GLACIOLOGICAL DATA, PART I . . . . . . B-l thru B-3: Englacial Temperature Data, Winter and Spring 1966, 1967 . . . B-4 thru B-9: Testpit Stratigraphy, 1966--Field Season. . . . . B-10 thru B-22: Testpit Stratigraphy, l967--Field Season. . . . . . GLACIOLOGICAL DATA, PART II . . . . . C-l thru C-8: Lemon Glacier Data . . . . C-9: Ptarmigan Glacier Data. . . . . . C-10: Total Firn Ablation on Lemon Glacier. C-ll: Firn Ablation Rates 23 Factors Affecting Ablation on Lemon Glacier . GLACIOLOGICAL DATA, PART III. . . . . . D-l: Sites and Dates of 1966-1977 Rammsonde Records. . . . . . . . . . . HYDROLOGICAL DATA . . . . . . . . . E—l thru B—4: 1965-67 Summer Discharge Records, Lemon Creek Gaging Site . . ix Page 97 98 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 119 125 138 139 147 148 149 151 151 152 153 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In recent years it has become increasingly clear that glaciers are indeed unique and useful integrators of climatic change (Ahlmann, 1957). With this in view, observations that would permit a close assessment of the relationships between glacier mass balance and local meteorological and hydrological parameters were made during the period July, 1965 through mid-September, 1967 on Lemon Glacier in Southeastern Alaska.l Field Operations were continuous from about mid-July through August in 1965, mid- June through mid-September in both 1966 and 1967, in January and February, 1967, and for two weeks in March-April, 1967. At other times in 1966 and 1967, observations were made on a periodic basis—-approximately every two to three weeks. At the outset of this study, it was hoped that the research could be carried out in greater detail than previous lLemon Creek Glacier is the name used on U. S. Geological Survey tOpographic sheets (Juneau B-1 and B-2, 1:63, 360 series). In this presentation, however, the shorter name Lemon Glacier is used, as there are three distinct glaciers serving as the source for Lemon Creek rather than this one alone. The other two are the northern tributary, Thomas Glacier, and the southern tributary, Ptarmigan Glacier (Fig. 2 and pocket map, Fig. 34). investigations of its type, both on Lemon and other glaciers. To a certain extent, this aim was accomplished on the Lemon Glacier (Miller, 1967). More closely-spaced and more fre- quently checked observation sites were employed than in the study of this ice mass reported by Heusser and Marcus (l964a&b) and by Marcus (1964). Also observations and collection of data were extended over periods of winter and spring accumulation as well as during the summer ablation season. When considered in conjunction with a glacio- hydrological study conducted simultaneously on Ptarmigan Glacier, the smaller valley glacier immediately adjacent and west of Lemon Glacier (Fig. 34), the information presented should facilitate historical comparisons and add to the continuing record of data which will be useful in forecasting future water budget trends. On a broader scale, this study provides information on a well-defined and completely self-contained glacier system that is serving as a control location for a larger and longer-term investi- gation of glacio-climatic relationships on the Juneau Ice— field, as well as for other costal glacier systems in Southeastern Alaska. Location and Description of Area Lemon Glacier is a small valley glacier in the Northern Boundary Range of Alaska-Canada, and situated on the southernmost edge of the Juneau Icefield in Southeastern Alaska. It is located about four miles north-northeast of Alaska's capitol city, Juneau (Fig. 1). The glacier's area is well-defined by exposed rock (at the end of summer) and is about four miles long and one and one-half miles across at its broadest point (Figs. 3A and 3B). It flows generally northward, with a westerly turn at an icefall near its terminus (Fig. 3C). Its total surface extends between the elevation of 1500 feet at its terminus and 4900 feet (460-1490 m) on its highest névé. There is a very small area of about one-half square mile which drains southward from a divide at 4000 feet at the southern edge of the glacier. This small portion may be ignored in gross mass budget calculations. The Lemon Glacier was first selected for special study in 1950 by Dr. Maynard Miller of the Juneau Icefield Research Program because of its accessibility and its simple configuration and size. The plan was for a long— term investigation because these factors would enable field parties to study it most effectively. For a few weeks in the summer of 1950, and again in 1951, the Juneau Icefield Research Program maintained a meteorological station on the nunatak between Thomas and Lemon Glaciers (first desig- nated as Camp 16, later changed to Camp l7—B, as shown on Fig. 2). For reference to the early data see Miller (1954 and 1955a). Besides the regular S-hour overland foot route to the glacier via Salmon Creek valley, a new and somewhat longer route which was negotiable in winter, was established in the summer of 1966. This route extends upward through timberline from the end of Lemon Creek trail and approaches the glacier from the west via Ptarmigan Glacier (v. Figs. 2 and 34). Regional Climatic Environment The climate in the vicinity of the Lemon Glacier is dominantly controlled by marine influences. Strong differ- ences in t0pography and elevation cause great changes in local weather over short horizontal distances. The effect of orogrOphical winds is especially pronounced. Because U. S. Weather Bureau stations in Southeastern Alaska are all located at or near sea level, year-round climatic sum- maries for higher areas (i.e. on the Juneau Icefield) must be largely based on extrapolation. Some of this has been faciliated by earlier radiosonde records (Miller, 1963 and Marcus, 1964). Mild temperatures, heavy precipitation, and generally cloudy conditions are typical factors in the weather of Southeastern Alaska. January temperatures are usually near or only slightly below freezing at sea level, while the summer temperatures are normally between 50 and 60°F (10- 15°C). The annual march of temperature at selected stations in Southeastern Alaska (with Seattle and Fairbanks data added for comparison with middle and high latitude positions) is shown on the following graph (after Marcus, 1964, Figure 20 -- " 68 .. Seattle 10 q-Ketchikan .°- A. 50 .9 c Q 1. o O ' Q ,\ ." Yakataga '. 5’ 0 0- ,.- "UV", .'-. .. 32 an E -- Fairbanks Juneau E g: '10 +1- _ 14 2: E. .- -2o .. .. 4 ALIJLAALL411;._J J F M A M J J A S O N D Months Precipitation ranges between 60 and 200 inches (190 and 508 cm) a year. Snowfall is also heavy along the North Pacific coast, generally increasing with latitude and up to certain levels also with elevation. Under present climatic conditions, at sea level the snow accumulation season extends roughly from early November to mid-April. On the glacier the solid precipitation period extends from late September or early October into early June. Winds during the summer months are dominantly south to southeast. These winds accompany the low pressure cyclonic storms that frequently pass through the area. When continental high pressure systems build up to dominate the coastal areas between storms, the winds usually shift to a northerly direction. Research Facilities and Sponsoring Agencies The main financial support for this study was pro- vided by the U. S. Department of the Interior, Federal Office of Water Resources Research (Zenone, et al., 1966; Miller, 1967), and by the National Geographic Society through its Alaskan Glacier Commemorative Project adminis- tered by the Foundation for Glacier and Environmental Research (Miller, 1969b). Some pilot funds for initiating the study were provided by the College of Natural Science at Michigan State University via the Glaciological and Arctic Sciences Institute. The Institute of Northern Forestry, U.S. Forest Service has provided equipment and personnel assis- tance. But the main facilities and logistics, plus addi- tional funding, were provided by the Foundation for Glacier and Environmental Research of Seattle, Washington, and its long-term Juneau Icefield Research Program (JIRP). These include six permanent buildings at Camp 17 (elev. 4200 feet) on the Lemon-Ptarmigan Glacier ridge, two at Camp 17A (elev. 2500 feet), a hydrological research station at the terminus of the Ptarmigan Glacier, and a route cabin at 1500 feet elevation above Lemon Creek which proved to be of invaluable use during the summer field season and especially for trail use and emergency occupation on the periodic winter and spring trips up the Lemon Creek trail. Additional temporary camp facilities were installed at Camp 17B on the nunatak between the Lemon and Thomas Glaciers. All these facilities are being expanded for the further field work planned on the total system of the Lemon, Ptarmigan and Thomas Glaciers (Fig. 2). All scientific equipment, oversnow vehicles, radio gear, skis, snow-shoes, extra cold-weather clothing and other equipment for survival and glacier travel were provided by the Foundation. CHAPTER II PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS A review and analysis of previous work on the Lemon Glacier is presented by Miller (1954), Heusser and Marcus (1964), and by Marcus (1964). Beginning in 1953, for a period of several years the Juneau Icefield Research Program, supported by the Office of Naval Research, switched some of its emphasis from the much larger Taku Glacier system in the central Juneau Ice- field area to the Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers. Thereafter special efforts were concentrated on the Lemon Glacier, up through 1958, leading to completion of this early project's final report to the Office of Naval Research in 1958 (JIRP Contract ONR No. 83001). Between 1958 and 1964, annual aerial surveys were made at the end of each summer by Dr. M. M. Miller for JIRP. Detailed ground research on the Lemon Glacier was reactivated in 1965. These studies were again under the aegis of the long-term Juneau Icefield Research Progarm (Bugh, l965a&b). From the 1953-58 measurements of annual net accumu- lation retained in late summer, and the ablation measure— ments conducted throughout each of these summers, mass budget (balance) figures have been calculated for this early five—year interval. During that period, the mass budgets (balances) were found to be generally negative, except for the 1954-55 mass balance which was strongly positive (12.6 x 106m3, water equivalent volume). Of the negative budget years, 1957—58 was strongly so (-8.96 x 106m3). Over the five-year period, the net deficit was determined as 10.32 x 106m3. Among these early detailed studies carried out on the Lemon Glacier was a micrometeorological proqram by Hubley (1955, 1957) which considered the surface energy exchange problem during the ablation season. Also a gravimetric determination of ice thickness on the glacier was made by Thiel, et a1. (1957). Further geophysical work has been accomplished coincident with the present study (v. Poulter, et al., 1967). A large scale (l:10,000) photogrammetric map of Lemon Glacier, was also produced from aerial photographs taken in September, 1957, and sub- sequently compiled with a S—meter contour interval by J. B. Case (1957 and 1959). Another map, surveyed by phototheodolite at the outset of the present study in 1965, at the same scale and with a lO—meter contour interval for volume and topographic comparisons, is in preparation by G. Gloss, G. Konecny, and A. Chrzanowski (1965, also see Konecny,l966). CHAPTER III FLUCTUATIONS OF LEMON GLACIER IN HISTORIC TIME A geobotanical study by Heusser and Marcus (1964) and Marcus (1964) provide an historical framework for useful reference allied with other studies of the Juneau Icefield Research Program on the Lemon Glacier. Down—valley posi- tions of the terminus were recorded on the basis of vegeta- tional changes. These positions were dated using dendro— chronological methods also develOped on JIRP by Lawrence (1950a). Though sharp trimlines and well—defined terminal amirecessional moraines are not found in Lemon Creek valley, probably due to frequent avalanching from the sides of this narrow, steep valley, the above authors believed sufficient evidence was present to indicate the area into which the glacier advanced, and its fluctuation within that area. A trimline, presumably representing an eighteenth century position (circa 1750 according to Heusser) is found along a ridge transverse to the valley and marking the most recent ice maximum. Down-valley from this ice maximum, vegetation is composed of old hemlock and spruce with a thick forest litter. Basal peat from a muskeg 375 meters 10 11 down-valley from this glacial limit was dated by radiocarbon means at 10,300:600 years. This indicates that Lemon Glacier has not advanced more than 375 meters beyond its recent terminal maximum for at least the last 10,000 years. Dated positions of the terminus since the eighteenth century maximum indicates two episodes of relatively slow wastage followed by more rapid retreat. During the 140 years after the 1750 maximum ice extent, terminal retreat was 675 m. However, from about 1891 to 1902, pronounced loss resulted in another 75 m retreat of the terminus. From then until 1929, slow wastage caused only 150 m retreat. Rapid wastage had been in effect since 1929, causing terminal retreat of about 1000 m. Observations during the period of the present study indicate that the terminal zone continues to eXperience down-wastage and gradual recession under present climatic conditions. Since the 1750 maximum, Lemon Glacier has lost at least 25 per cent of its area, more than half of which has been lost since 1929. This pattern is characteristic of other small middle-elevation glaciers on the maritime side of the Juneau Icefield. The behavior of Lemon Glacier also appears to parallel the regime trend of nearby larger valley glaciers since the mid-eighteenth century. Such adjacent glaciers draining the western side of the Juneau Icefield include the Herbert, Eagle, and Mendenhall Glaciers (Lawrence, 1950b, and Lawrence and Elson, 1953). CHAPTER IV THE PRESENT STUDY Since the object of this research is to gain a fuller understanding of the parameters affecting glacier mass budget (balance), especially in terms of the local meteorological conditions and relationships, the funda- mental meteorological elements were measured which can lead to the establishment of such relationships. To the above objective, the meteorological program on the Lemon Glacier consisted of basic 3-hourly observa- tions of the pertinent weather elements of temperature, humidity, precipitation, Windspeed and direction, cloud cover, duration of sunshine and radiation fluctuations at the observation sites. Daily maximum and minimum thermo— meter readings were made and the net incoming solar and sky radiation were continuously recorded with a Belfort pyrheliometer. Field measurements of the nature and varia— tion in reflected radiation were also obtained. The data collected concerning glacier mass balance include daily snow, firn and ice ablation rates, snow-pack and firn—pack density and water equivalence, and net incre- ments of annual accumulation and seasonal névéPline posi- tions on each glacier at the close of the summer ablation 12 13 season. As well, totalized precipitation data were obtained at the main camp on the Lemon Glacier covering each full year of the 1966—67 period (Fig. 3D; also v. Helmers,1967). In the following sections, the individual elements and variations will first be considered and examined, after which any indicated correlations will be discussed. Then brief consideration will be given to the general mass budget problem as it relates to the key meteorological parameters. Before discussing the meteorological factors, the area- elevation relationship is reviewed. The Area—Elevation Relationship As shown in Figure 4, the Lemon Glacier's main ; accumulation zone lies at elevations well above 3900 feet. This zone, at present the key positive factor in the mass balance of this ice mass, lies above the current mean névé; line (approx. 3500 feet) indicated by records obtained during the three years of this study. Figure 4 also shows that 70 per cent of the glacier's area lies above the mean névéeline (i.e., the average over the preceding 10 years) and thus the glacier as a whole, in spite of the slow down- wasting of its terminal zone, is seen to be in a relatively healthy state. On Figure 4 is also noted the positions (elevations) of the main test pits for measuring the annual accumulation stratigraphy. 14 Meteorological Measurements Daily and monthly meteorological data from Camp 17 (v. Fig. 2) are given in Appendix A. Representative seg- ments are graphed in figures referenced under each individual element covering periods between 7 July, 1965 and 12 Septem- ber, 1967. Specific details are as follows. Temperature Temperature readings were obtained with standard mercury (maximum) and alcohol (minimum) thermometers mounted in a U. S. Weather Bureau type of meteorological shelter located on a rock ridge at 4200 feet elevation near Camp 17. The daily maximum, minimum and mean daytime temperatures for the periods of occupation of the station are given in Appendix A. For periods of extended continuous occupation of Camp 17, the data are graphed in Figures 5 and 6. Mean daytime temperature statistics represent the average of six observations, taken at 3—hour1y intervals from 0700 to 2200 hours daily. The following table summarizes the mean maximum and minimum and mean daytime temperatures at Camp 17 for those summer months in 1965, 1966, and 1967 for which com- plete records are available. Maximum temperature recorded over the several years of this study was 72°F in early June, 1966. However, maximum temperature on cloudless summer days was found generally to reach only into the low 60's. The minimum annual temperature recorded was -15°F, in January and in March of 1967. The 15 nightly minimum temperature during the summer at Camp 17 seldom drOpped as low as the freezing point, 32°F (v. Fig. 6). TABLE l.--Camp 17 Summer Temperature Summary: 1965 to 1967.* 1965 1966 1967 Mean Daily Maximum July 52 48.5 45 August 49 43 47 Mean Daytime (0700-2200) July 47 44.5 41.5 August 45.5 40 44 Mean Daily Minimum July 41 40.5 36.5 August 45.5 40 44 *Temperatures in °F. For comparison of sealevel temperatures with those attained at Camp 17, daily maximum temperatures for both Camp 17 (elevation 4200 feet above m.s.l.) and the U. S. Weather Bureau station at Juneau Airport (elevation 20 feet) are noted in Figure 7, covering most of the summers of 1966 and 1967. The temperature difference between the Juneau Airport station and Camp 17 does not strictly adhere to the normal dry adiabatic lapse rate of 5.4°F/l,000 feet (1°C/100m). Such adherence should not be expected, however, because of the usually high moisture content of the air in this vicinity (release of heat upon condensation of water vapor slows down 16 the rate of cooling), and also because of the strong and locally varied orographic, topographic, and other other geomorphic influences. In Figure 7 it is seen, however, that temperature trends at the Juneau Airport station generally parallel those at Camp 17. This relationship supports the extrapolation of high level meteorological factors in closely adjacent coastal areascfifdominant mari- timity from data collected at or near sea level. In this case, the Juneau Airport lies but 7 miles map distance from Camp 17. Precipitation Rainfall was collected and measured in standard U. 8. Weather Bureau type 8-inch rain gages. In addition to the master reference gage near the instrument shelter at Camp 17, a similar gage was monitored in the summer of 1967 near the summit of Vesper Peak (4505 ft.) immediately north of the camp. Also three other standard gages were operated on the ridge immediately west of Ptarmigan Glacier during this same field season. The data from these gages are included in appropriate tables of Appendix A. Mention is also made of the U. S. Weather Bureau gages at Juneau and the totalizing precipitation gage at Camp 17 (Fig. 3D). For the months of complete record, July through August in 1966 and 1967, August proved to be the wettest month in both years. In July, 1967, there was more than twice the rainfall as in July, 1966, i.e., 15.28 vs 7.24 inches. Rainfall for August was found to be nearly the 17 same in both years (Fig. 8A). The relative rainfall totals, again greater in August than in July, paralleled those at Juneau Airport, at which base station this same pattern has been observed by the U. S. Weather Bureau for at least the last 24 years (Fig. 8B). Average annual precipitation totals, plus those for January and July at the Juneau Air- port since 1943, are presented in Fig. 8C. The 24-hour summary of total monthly and annual precipitation, shown in these figures, reveals a general increase in total pre- cipitation from the months of June through September. The established long-term trend at the Juneau Airport was also corroborated at Camp 17 during these same months over the shorter three-year period of this study. This fact suggests that future Juneau Airport precipitation records will be useful in approximating precipitation trends on the Lemon Glacier, a consideration to be discussed in the summary comments at the end of this report. More valuable, however, was installation of the large, totallizing storage preci- pitation gage near Camp 17 in September, 1966 (Fig. 3D). This gage was installed by A. Helmers of the U. S. Forest Service's Institute of Northern Forestry, in co-operation with the Juneau Icefield Research Program. Ever since it has provided valuable total precipitation data, especially in the late autumn, winter and spring months when the research station could not be easily occupied (Helmers, 1967). 18 At Camp 17, snowfall during the summer months was found to be light and occurred only during June and in August, with July being exempt. In 1966, a light snowfall was experienced on 11 August at the Camp 17 site (elevation 4200 ft.), but heavier snow was observed on some of the higher surrounding peaks on other occasions in August. On l-3 September, 1966, however, as much as one foot of new snow fell on the upper névé of the Lemon Glacier at an elevation of 4000 feet, some of which remained when summer operations were suspended on 18 September in that year. On 28-29 June, 1967, five inches of snow fell at Camp 17. Except for light snows covering peaks above 5000 feet on the 23 August, 1967, no other appreciable solid precipitation was recorded On the Lemon Glacier névé’during the summer of 1967, at least through the period of station record to 12 September. Also in this field season, the late season field party reported that no new snow had accum- ulated at Camp 17 as of the end of summer on 21 September (Miller, personal communication). A trace of new snow fell, however, over the next two weeks, i.e., until 4 October, as recorded by the JIRP aerial photographs taken on that date (v. Fig. ZB). Previous JIRP records, however, have indicated that usually by the end of the third week of September winter snow conditions begin to prevail on the glacier's higher névés and surrounding peaks. In test pits excavated on the Lemon Glacier in March, 1967, retained winter snow accumulation was measured 19 between 14.5 to 18 feet (4.5 to 5.5 m). Winter test pit data during the period of study are given in Appendix B. Also the seasonal neVéLline positions and the lengths of the effective ablation seasons were determined, as dis- cussed later with respect to the mass balance determina- tions. A summary of meteorological data for Camp 17 covering the months of July and August 1965 is given in Figures 9A and 9B. These plots compare temperature, pre- cipitation and radiation and duration of sunshine for these summer months. Cloud Cover The records of cloud cover obtained in this study represent tenths of the sky obscured by clouds. These, again, represent the average of six 3-hourly observations each day. Both a complete overcast and a period in which the station was in fog would be recorded as 10/10 cloud cover. At Camp 17, which is the key observation site for such data, a high overcast condition was found to be a rarity during summer months. As a rule this control site enjoys either sunshine, with high broken clouds and unlimited visibility, or it experiences heavy fog at ground level, often reducing visibility to less than 300 feet. The base of these fogs, however, was often observed to rest at less than 200 feet below the station (as seen on ridge flanks on the Ptarmigan Glacier slope). 20 With respect to periods of extended continuous record over the summer months of the three years of this study, the average daily cloud cover is plotted in Figure 10. The clearest weather (least cloud cover) in the Lemon Glacier area occurs in the late winter and spring months from February to June, which are also often the months of lowest precipitation and coldest weather. Duration of Sunshine Duration of sunshine was recorded with a Campbell- Stokes Duration of Sunshine Recorder. This is a British instrument employing a magnifying glass sphere through which direct sunlight burns a paper strip. The paper burns only when the sun is completely unobstructed by clouds (CAVU). On days with a generally broken cloud condition, or with small patches of fog drifting over the glacier, the record became sporadic and difficult to interpret. For this reason, only days of unquestionable record are included in the plots (e.g., Figs. 9 and 10). These records are most useful when the meteorological condition was CAVU. Such clear days in June and July were found to bring as much as 17 hours of sunshine to the Camp 17 and Lemon Glacier area. As an example the summer of 1966 sun duration data are presented in Figure 11. Total Sky and Solar and Reflected Radiation Incoming total sky and solar radiation were recorded with a pyrheliometer manufactured by the Belfort Instruments 21 Co. To measure radiation, this instrument employs two bi- metallic stirps, one highly polished and the other blackened. These record a temperature difference which is prOportional to incident radiation. The temperature difference creates a weak electric current which drives the recording pen through a series of linkages. The unit value of radiation is gram calories per cm2 per unit time (usually in Langleys, or gm cal/cmz/min). For this study, total daily values were computed (Langleys/day) and are presented on the meteoro- logical data sheets, with the radiation values for July and August, 1965, rated in Figures 9A and 9B. In these two figures the incoming radiation totals are seen, as expected, to be highest for oloudless days, i.e., days of greatest duration of sunshine. Great differ- ences in radiation values were found to arise between days of complete cloud cover or total fog condition at the base station (Camp 17). These differences are presumed to be the result of substantial variations in relative humidity, as has been discussed by Dobar (1967a). A brief record of the reflected total sky and solar radiation and calculation of its albedo (reflected coeffici- ent) were also obtained over a few days in August 1965 (Dobar, 1967a) as a preamble to later research on this important tOpic (v. Gieger, 1966; Wendler and Streten, in Miller, 1971). —'——— 22 Windspeed and Direction Windspeed was determined with cup-type anemometers. Both a hand-held model and a remote sensing unit with cups mounted on the roof of the science laboratory building at Camp 17 were used. Some of these data for 1966 and 1967 are graphed in Figure 12. The records so plotted represent average ranges of Windspeed for the six daytime readings as well as the dominant wind direction over the summers of these years. Cyclonic low pressure cells lying off the coast of Southeastern Alaska much dominate the summer weather in the Lemon Glacier area. These cellular systems generate an almost constant southeasterly wind which brings the seem- ingly incessant light to moderate rainfall to the Camp 17 area and the Lemon Glacier névé. Infrequent periods of clear weather during the summer are almost without exception accompanied by light northerly winds. This situation during summer months has been reported in JIRP reports from all of the field stations on the Juneau Icefield over the past 20 years. Water Balance Measurements A complete hydrological (liquid water) analysis of this glacier system over a number of years is being pre- pared in separate reports by Dr. M. M. Miller and A. E. Helmers, as contributions to the long-term Juneau Icefield Research Program. Therefore, my present emphasis is given 23 to a summary of data collected only in this preliminary phase. Added to this are a few corollary comments and interpretations with respect to the water budget as it allies to the mass (ice) budget (more appropriately termed the water valance vs. mass balance) of this glacier system. These are given in the summary discussion. As background information, the mean monthly Lemon Creek discharge rates during each year from 1951 to 1961 are noted in Figure 25. Appendix E contains a tabulation of daily discharge values for Lemon Creek for the summer months of the present study, June to September 1965, 1966 and 1967. Some of the data are graphed in Figures 26 through 29. These and subsequent records as provided by the U. S. Geological Survey (v. ref- erence list) should be quite helpful in the detailed follow- on analyses noted above. Mass Balance Measurements Firn Stratigraphy and Test Pit Data In order to pinpoint the essential measurements for mass balance calculations, that is the water equivalence of the snow-pack and firn-pack, stratigraphic pits were dug every few weeks for comparison at various sites on the Lemon Glacier. The elevations of key pits, as illustrated by the 1966 sites, is noted on the hypsometric curve in Figure 4. The map positions of these test pits both for the 1966 and 1967 field seasons are noted in Figures 14, 15 and 16. 24 Each test pit was excavated down to the level of the previous summer's ablation surface (v. Miller, 1955). This surface was delineated in almost every pit by a coarse, yellowish dust horizon of granular firn on the pit walls. Occasionally, larger dirt particles could be seen incor- porated within this late-summer ablation horizon, as well as undulating ice layers or strata marking the buried position<3frelict suncups generated by the end of summer. Measurements in test pits were made following the guidelines of Ostrem and Stanley (1966). Continuous vertical samples, each of 20 centimeters length, were taken using a tube of 500 cm3 volume. The samples were weighed, this weight vs. the known volume giving the water equivalence. Unfortunately this method does not yield information on variations of snow or firn density with depth unless a particular 20 cm. increment contains no ice strata or other diegenetic ice. But by taking the samples in a vertical profile and including the diagenetic lenses and strata, the critical figure of total water equivalence was obtained. Figure 13 illustrates the stratigraphy in a pit on upper Lemon Glacier néVé and shows typical values of average density for each 20 cm. sample. It also shows cumulative water equivalences calculated from these densities. The stratigraphy of key test-pit walls is also given in the tables of Appendix B. Recorded here are the thickness and depth from the surface of all ice strata and 25 horizontal lenses having thicknesses of more than 2 cm. As it is not within the scope or purpose of this study, no attempt is made to trace or discuss the develOpment of such diagenetic ice. Adequate study of this phenomenon has been presented in other JIRP reports (v. Leighton, 1952; Miller, 1963). Suffice it to say that the occurrence of diagenetic structures is highly irregular and that a record of the thickness and number of them at three locations along a single wall of a test pit can result in three very different vertical profiles. Even very thick (5 to 10 cm.) ice strate are not always continuous over the 8- to lO-square meter area covered by a single test pit. Thus interpretive care must be invoked where determinations of annual mass density are desired. The depth and thickness of the coarse, granular layer of firn marking the previous summer's ablation surface is also noted in the tables of Appendix B. In at least one pit, #4(D) on the upper Lemon Névé, the ablation surface for two previous summers was delineated representive, useful information on retained accumulation over a period of several years. In test pits excavated during the late-winter operations in March, 1967, the englacial temperature was also measured at regular depth intervals in the snow-pack (v. App. B). Two pits, one each on the Lemon Glacier and on the Ptarmigan Glacier, were dug at locations which were snow— or firn-free at the close of the 1966 summer ablation season. At depth, temperatures in these-pits increased 26 from the sub—freezing ambient temperature at the snow sur- face to a value of —0.5°C. to 0°C., i.e., essentially the freezing point at the buried snow-ice interface. The depths of this interface varied from 3.5 to 5.5 meters (v. App. B; C-lO for Lemon Glacier and C-18 for Ptarmigan Glacier). This is characteristic of glaciothermally temperate condi— tions generally found on other low and intermediate eleva— tion glaciers along the maritime flank of the Juneau Icefield. At the end of March, 1967, in pits dug at locations where new snow overlay firn of the previous years, the tem— peratures at the snow-firn interface were well below freezing, e.g., —3.5°C. in Pits #1 on the upper Lemon Glacier Neva. This indicates that the winter cold wave had penetrated well into the older firn by March 28th in that spring. Sub—freezing conditions, however, are not presumably at great depth in the firn-pack because of the temperate nature of glaciers at this elevation in south coastal Alaska. The temperate character of the Lemon Glacier is further indicated by the only slightly sub-freezing con- ditions occurring at all measured depths during this study. Rammsonde Profiles Rammsonde (Swiss ram penetrometer) profiles were obtained at a number of sites on both the Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers. The locations of these sites are also given on the maps of Figures 14, 15, and 16. Most of these profiles were taken during the summer of 1966, although a few were 27 obtained in January and March, 1967, and some check profiles obtained for comparison in the summer of 1967. In the summer of 1965, Bugh (1965b) also obtained late July and late August profiles at the mid-glacier site (3950 ft.) on the Lemon Glacier. Ram penetrometer profiles are taken to aid in the interpretation of annual firn-pack segments and in time- changes in the firnification process affecting the seasonal snow-pack stratigraphy. The Swiss Federal Institute for SnowanxiAvalanche Research has developed an equation which relates snow-pack resistancestD penetration rates of pene- trometer heads and this in turn to the density of snow or firn @150 v. Niedringhaus, 1965; and Waterhouse, 1966). The technique has proved quite useful in other phases of the Juneau Icefield Research Program, especially in delineation of the diagnostic depth—hoar stratum and generally the determination of depths and character of annual firn—packs (v. previous JIRP reports and also Egan, 1966). The interpretation of ram penetrometer profiles in the Lemon Glacier study is also beyond the purpose of this preliminary report. For reference, however, all of the ram profile records are on file at the Glaciological and Arctic Sciences Institute, Department of Geology, Michigan State University. It is anticipated that their interpre- tation will be included in the ten—year summary report on this total study over the years 1965—74. 28 The general location of ram profile sites and the dates of measurement are given in a table of appended data (App. D). Unless thick ice strata prevented it, the pro— files were usually extended the full 4—meter depth allowed by the ram tubes. Ablation Records Ablation, defined as all losses by the evaporating and melting of snow, firn and ice, insofar as it is expressed by lowering of the glacier surface, was measured employing a network of small diameter wooden stakes and dowels. These were implanted in the glacier surface at locations shown in Figures 14, 15, and 16. Although more sophisticated measurement techniques can be applied if high precision is required, dowels or wands, even if they sometimes must be replaced because of breakage, proved to give sufficiently reliable ablation data for purposes of this study. Stakes were checked at frequent intervals, especially in snow, so that sinking effects (largely due u>melting caused by heat conduction downward by the stake itself) could be minimized. To determine if stakes were sinking, adjacent wooden dowels, some with and others without wooden plates nailed to their lower ends, were set into the snow or firn. No measurable sinking of those stakes without attached wooden plates was observed, so most of the data were derived from simple lines of stakes. In 1966, five cross—glacier ablation profiles were established at five elevation levels on the Lemon Glacier 29 I ne é} The stakes in each profile were set at approximately the same elevation above m.s.l. During that summer it was found that among stakes on a given profile, no measurable difference in the rate of ablation was calculated over a 3-, 7- or even l4-day period. Therefore, in 1967 the cross-glacier profile network was abandoned and a single down-glacier profile of ablation stakes was used on the glacier's longitudinal axis. The stakes in this profile were close enough together so that at least two stakes could be used to average ablation at any given elevation. This also provided adequate comparison with the 1966 mea- surements, both daily and cumulative. No reliable ablation data in bubbley glacier ice from below the Lemon Glacier névé—line were obtained in 1966. An effort was made to use wooden stakes for this purpose, but after a few days, because of excessive abla- tion rates in this lower glacier sector these were found to be floating in the "melted—out" holes. In 1967, abla- tion on exposed bubbley glacier ice below the néVé;line was more effectively determined by measuring the change in depth of holes drilled into the ice. Measurement of these depths was obtained on the shaft of the ice auger. When making such measurements, it was necessary to assure that the auger tip was at the bottom of the hole and not held up by encrustations of ice along the sides. In previous JIRP studies LaChapelle (1955) found that if the holes are 30 redrilled often enough to keep them approximately two meters deep, melting would not occur at the bottom, allowing it to serve as a reliable reference level. For the summer of 1967 measurements at three ice- ablation sites (A, B, and C) were located above the icefall at elevations of 3650, 3250, and 3175 feet. Also a line of five ice-ablation holes was established below the terminal icefall at an elevation of approximately 2000 feet and close to the snout of Lemon Glacier (Fig. 3C). The location of these sites is shown in Figure 16. The pertinent ablation records are listed in Appendix C. NévéLline Positions, 1965—1967 In 1966 and 1967, ablation of snow and firn on Lemon Glacier produced a distinct end of summer névéLline which trended diagonally and in a southeasterly direction across the glacier from an elevation of about 3600 feet (1100m.) on its western edge to an elevation of 3750 feet (ll45m.) on its eastern margin. The névéLlines (more prOperly termed the transient snowlines if before mid—summer-—see glossary) for mid-August, 1948 and for early October, 1967, are dis- tinctly shown in the photographs of Figures 3A and 3B. The 1967 névé—line is also delineated on the map of Figure 17. This position was mapped on 8 September 1967 by A. Pinchek and L. Acker using a Brunton pocket transit and a small altimeter. Also shown are the 1967 seasonal and semi- permanent névéLlines on the Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers. 31 The boundary between these (1965—66 and 1966—67) firn—pack wedges was easily distinguished on the ground by the greater amount of dust and other fine debris producing darker layers in the older firn—pack. The approximate mid-glacier névéL line positions on the Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers for the years 1965, 1966, and 1967 are tabulated as follows: 1 _—-.—‘ Semiipermanent Year Seasonal Névélline NevéLline Lemon Glacier 1967 3700' 3600' 1966 3600' 3600' 1965 3400' 3400' Ptarmigan Glacier 1967 4000' 3950' 1966 3800' 3800' 1965 below 3700' below 3700' The snow—free areas of the Lemon Glacier were about equal at the close of the ablation seasons in both 1966 and 1967. The 1966 and 1967 névéLlines on Lemon Glacier were slightly lower in elevation than the highest recorded in the earlier five-year (1953-58) investigation, as previously discussed. During that earlier study, the highest néVé;line recorded was 3950 feet (1200m.) in 1958. The close of the ablation season in 1955 resulted in the lowest névélline in tfluat same five—year period, at 2875 feet (875m.). (Although tllis three-year period is too short to draw conclusions 32 from, the névéeline position in 1968 was slightly higher than 1967, indicating a deficit mass balance. But since 1968 there has been a notable lowering of the névéLline, consistent with a regional cooling trend which began to effect the area during the mid-1960's and elsewhere over the Juneau Icefield). Also from the above we note that on the Ptarmigan Glacier, the 1966 névé-line was roughly at the 3800-foot (1160m.) elevation, and in 1967 the névéLline generally paralleled the 4000-foot (1220m.) contour line. This relatively higher névé—line on the Ptarmigan Glacier, where ablation rates are comparable to those on the Lemon Glacier (v. tables, App. C) is probably related to the narrower geometry of the glacier and the lesser total snow accumu- lation on the western side of the Lemon-Ptarmigan ridge. The narrow width of the Ptarmigan Glacier also should be expected to result in greater heating effects from radia- tion and convection off of the enclosing rock walls of this considerably smaller ice mass. The orographical effects, hence local climatic influences on these two glaciers, are also somewhat different. Duration of Annual Ablation Seasons, 1965—67 In any attempt to calculate the mass budget of a glacier from data which do not span the entire ablation season (which is the case here), an extrapolation must be made of the duration of that ablation season. To derive 33 such information, three techniques have been invoked in this study: interpretation of aerial photographs taken on dates near the critical times of beginning and end of an ablation season, evaluation of spot field observations by JIRP per- sonnel, and by reference to the U. S. Weather Bureau meteor- ological records at the Juneau Airport over periods when the field camps were not occupied. A note of explanation is necessary with respect to the Juneau Airport records. Using an average lapse rate of 4°F/1000 ft, as a guideline (lying between the wet- and dry—adiabatic rates), temperatures at the 4000-foot level were extrapolated from the Juneau Airport data. Thus it was judged when mean daily temperatures at the airport remained generally above approximately 48°F., that above freezing (hence melting) conditions would obtain on the main névé'of the upper Lemon Glacier at approximately 4000 feet. Table 2, page 34, gives estimated dates of the begin— ning and end of the annual melt season and the effective ablation seasons (v. Glossary). The approximate duration of the effective ablation season in months in each of these three years is also indicated. Later this information will be shown to be significant with respect to the annual periods of runoff indicated in Figures 26 through 29. 34 TABLE 2.--Lemon Glacier Ablation Periods, 1965—1967. Estimate of Annual Extrapolated Effective Ablation Season** Year Melt Period* Period Duration 1967 after 4 April ca. 1 May 5.3 mos. to to 26 September 10 Oct. 1966 1 May (?) late May 4.4 mos. to to 22 September 10 Oct. 1965 ca. 9 April May 15—20 4.9 mos. 28 September 12 Oct. *Based on aerial and ground observations. These estimates are with respect to conditions over the whole range of elevations on the névé. **Based on analysis of Juneau Airport and Camp 17 weather records. CHAPTER V ANALYSIS OF HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL AND MASS BALANCE DATA As the present investigation is a principles study, with a chief aim to establish and define the basic rela- tionships between meteorological parameters and mass balance on this typical middle-elevation maritime glacier, it also relates to seasonal and longer-term shifts in the North Pacific Low which have such fundamental influence on the climate of this coast. To this end, it is important that this three-year study has involved considerably more obser- vation sites than the previous investigations of the Lemon Glacier.‘ Although sufficient areal coverage was obtained to permit the calculation of short-term mass balances, this culminating analysis is reserved for the more detailed follow-on reports covering many more years. Even the gross total mass balance statistics for the Lemon Glacier over the five-year interval 1953-58 (Heusser and Marcus, and Marcus, 0p. cit.) will be added to the continuing accrual 0f data to round out the consecutive sequence of measure- ments made by various JIRP personnel covering not only the International Hydrological Decade, 1965-74, but a signifi- cantly longer period, 1953—74. This longer-term analysis 35 36 is also planned because of the need for important supple- mentary micrometeorological measurements. Thus, in the following pages which concern mainly the 1965-67 data, attention is primarily given to the basic relationships between the meteorological, hydrological, and mass balance measurements obtained over the shorter period of record covered by this particular study. Ablation Rates and the Interdependence of Meteorological Factors With respect to those periods over which synOptic meteorological data and simultaneous mass balance values were obtained, Figures 18, 19, and 20 portray the 1965, 1966, and 1967 summer ablation rates on snow and firn sur- faces of the Lemon Glacier. These are plotted for compar- ison with the corresponding summer trends of meteorological conditions which have been described. A pertinent illustra- tion of such comparison is given in Figure 22, showing ablation rates on five transects across the Lemon Glacier Névé’plotted against changes in temperature and cloud cover over the summer of 1966. Here these parameters are seen rather neatly to parallel each other. The method of presentation of the meteorological parameters for more refined interpretation needs to be discussed. It is recoqnized that direct plottings do not always reveal such close agreement and also that the running mean smoothing technique may introduce spurious fluctuations with respect to true variations on a smoothed curve. This 37 is why a liner regression analysis is in order for some of these data. However, even a careful plotting of raw data, especially short period and annual running means, can reveal the maj E trends in some particular parameters. Such is graphically illustrated in Figure 23, which shows good correlations between temperature and ablation data covering the whole summers of 1966 and 1967, when the tem— peratures are graphed on 7—day, ll-day, and lS-day running means. This is not to say that for refined interpretations, the regression analyses will not be additionally helpful in the subsequent and more detailed interpretations which are to follow this preliminary report. At this juncture, the apparent correlations indicate ambient temperatures to be most representative of incoming solar energy, and hence this is assumed to be a dominant factor influencing ablation. This conclusion is supported by reconsideration and comparison of the data presented in Figures 5 and 21. These plots show that higher average monthly temperatures in summer at the Camp 1? station parallel higher total ablation on the Lemon Glacier. Accept- ing the average temperature as a dominant factor influencing the average of ablation, it would appear (Fig. 23) that the ll-day running mean of daily temperature gives the best fit to the ablation trend. This has also been documented at the same elevation at a slightly more continental location on the upper Taku Glacier (Camp 10) about 30 miles to the northeast (Miller, 1963, Figs. 46 and 47). For comparison, 38 the other meteorological parameters measured at Camp 17 between 1965 and 1967 have also been graphed in this manner, i.e., all based on ll-day running means. In each of the integrated figures (18, 19 and 20), the daily trends of temperature, incident radiation, and average cloud cover show excellent correlation and so are assumed to be closely interrelated parameters. Again, it is noted that a later regression analysis of these and other data given in Appendix A will attempt to refine the more precise degree of this interrelation. Also graphed in Figures 18 to 20 are the daily windspeed means which show less obvious correlation with the other parameters. In those days, however, which were characterized by rela- tively severe southeasterly storms (e.g., early September, 1966, and again in September, 1967), a fairly direct cor- relation is demonstrated between increased wind velocity, increased cloud cover, and decreased radiation and temper- ature. The specific relationship of ablation to wind is considered in the turbulent heat transfer discussion below. For the mass balance considerations in Figure 24 cumulative ablation curves for the Lemon Glacier's main névé zone at 3850 to 3950 feet (1140-1240m.) are also xplotted for the summers of 1966 and 1967. In this the last two summers of this study are shown to be quite comparable in terms of melt-water propagation affecting runoff, at least during July and August. This aspect, too, will be reconsidered in the summary discussion. 39 Temperature vs. Ablation Rate Recorded temperatures represent the basic measure of heat available and used in melting snow, firn and ice at a glacier's surface. On temperate glaciers, therefore, it can be anticipated that the higher the temperature over a given period, the higher the rate of ablation over the same period. For such direct and simple correlation, how- ever, all other factors would have to be equal, which situation does not often pertain in nature. Further examination of Figures 18 to 20 reveals that, in general, as the smoothed temperature curve rises and falls, the rate of ablation generally increases and decreases. Perfect agreement does not exist over some periods, however, and this also must be explained. To illustrate the situation, we can refer to Figure 19 for 1966 in which there is generally a close correlation, i.e., the period 15 July to 3 August displaying an ablation rate of 6.2 cm/day; the period 3 August to 18 August a much lower rate of ablation (4.5 cm/day); and the period 18 August to 2 September a return to slightly higher rates (4.8 cm/day). In fact over this total 50-day interval of rela- tively stormy summer weather, the ll-day running mean curve of daily temperature reveals a general decrease, represent- ing a cooling toward autumn conditions. Yet superimposed on this downward temperature trend is a slight temperature rise associated with increased ablation rates for the 40 period 18 August to 2 September. Similar patterns are seen in Figures 18 and 20. A different situation is indicated, however, by analysis of the 1967 summer curves in Figure 20. It is particularly of interest that here too, we are dealing with a relatively stormy interval over the period 5-30 August, one in which increasing ablation corresponded with decreasing temperature. These temperatures, however, as opposed to those measured in late August and early September 1966, were between 41° and 45°F, which is 5° or so warmer than in the comparable late summer period of 1966. It is significant that the ablation trends in these two periods are quite Opposite, even though the temperature trends are the same. This illustrates the kind of situation where detailed micrometeorological measurements can help. The available basic data, however, are adequate for the pur— poses of the current study as long as a total systems analysis is applied through which the effects of other key meteorological factors are recognized. This situation is well illustrated by the discussion next below. Windspeed, Turbulent Heat Transfer and AbIation Rates In the foregoing consideration which points up some opposing correlations in temperature and ablation during two comparable stormy periods, and in the light of not having detailed heat balance information at the ice surface, it is suggested that a basic explanation lies in the 41 difference in magnitude of temperatures involved, i.e., in the difference in energy intensities represented. In Figures 19 and 20 the trends and magnitude of temperature curves for the pertinent intervals in 1966 and 1967 are compared. It has been shown in earlier glacio-meteorological research on this icefield (Leighton, 1952) that ambient temperatures below 40°F. exert negligible affect on ablation. In the present consideration with respect to our 1967 meteorological records the decreasing temperatures of late summer are seen to be accompanied by significant increases in wind velocities. Therefore, the crux of the inverse ablation correlation appears, at least in part, to be related to much higher than usual summer wind velocities as well as the seasonal ambient temperatures recorded in the late summer Of 1967. The foregoing suggestion has corroboration in the study of heat energy exchanges at the surface of Lemon Glacier carried out by Hubley in the mid-1950's (1957). In that study it was concluded that turbulent heat transfer was the most important single factor in ablation. Increased surface air turbulence at the glacier surface is obviously associated with the stronger winds that accompany summer storms passing over Lemon Glacier. Hubley was cautious, however, in pointing out that this explanation is but a very general one and that more refined and complete heat balance research is yet needed. The data presented in this present study also suggest that the relationships are not simple nor always obvious between the factors of windspeed 42 and turbulence alone, and that there are many "anomalies" that will require explanation through more detailed research on the other glacio-meteorological parameters involved (v. Streten and Wendler, 1968). Incident Radiation and Cloud Cover vs. Ablation Rates The comparison of curves of incident radiation with those of average daily cloud cover, as given in Figures 18— 20, reveal that in general, the lesser the cloud cover at an Observation site, the greater is the incident radiation at the surface at the same site. Here again some of the correlation appears simple and direct, and indeed on clear days solar radiation should be expected to reach the sur- face relatively unimpeded, except for minor atmospheric scattering related to abnormal water vapor conditions or dust or smoke components which may develop. Also when high overcast or low fog conditions exist, back scatter by minute water particles greatly reduces the amount of radi— ation reaching the ground. This is borne out by the Lemon Glacier field and laboratory observations of Dobar (1967a) who, during the 1965 summer, found that variations in ground fog density, presumably representing differences in relative humidity, seemed to have pronounced influence on the amount of solar radiation reaching the glacier surface. Hubley (1957) also demonstrated that on the Lemon Glacier, the albedo or reflective ability of the snow/ice surface increases with increasing cloudiness. Thus absorbed 43 insolation on overcast days is only about 50 per cent of that absorbed on clear days, with the result that notably higher daily ablation rates should be expected to be asso- ciated with lesser proportions of average cloud cover, which situation this current study bears out. Hubley also found that daily insolation on horizontal surfaces under overcast skies was 60 per cent of that received under clear skies. All of this verifies and corroborates the direct correla— tions suggested by plotted records of cloud cover and ablation in this 1965 through 1967 study. Simple calculations, based on the above percentages of absorbed incident radiation under the two extreme sky conditions, reveal that on overcast days the amount of ' energy available to melt snow, firn or ice is only about 30 per cent that available on clear days. This conclusion is also well illustrated and substantiated by the plotted curves. It is cautioned, however, that the albedo under these two conditions (clear sky vs. high overcast or low fog) cannot always be compared simply because it also varies with the sun angle and hence the time of day (Dobar, 1967a; Miller, 1971). The albedo is expressed as a total energy flux, i.e., as a Total Flux Reflected/Total Flux Incident. From the nature of this expression, it will always be greater on overcast days. Because only incoming radiation could be measured in the 1966-67 seasons, no further evaluation is warranted. This does not mean that the radiation balance measurements 44 are assigned a secondary role. Instead they are considered absolutely essential for the more refined measurements and analyses planned for later phases of this project. In fact, specific research on this aspect was conducted in connection with a micro-metrological program on the Lemon Glacier during the summer of 1968 (Miller, 1971). Lemon Creek Runoff and Glacier Mass Balance Considerations In Figure 26 daily hydrometric discharge rates are shown for Lemon Creek over extended periods of the summers of 1965, 1966 and 1967 (also v. App. E). These hydrological data are from the U. S. Geological Survey Surface Water Records of Alaska (1965—67) and represent records from the USGS stream gage on Lemon Creek (Fig. 2). It is mentioned also that in 1967 a gaging station and a recording ground water well was installed on the tributary Ptarmigan Creek for comparison of runoff from Ptarmigan Glacier (also v. Fig. 2 and Miller, 1969a). When compared with ablation rates and trends during the summers of 1965, 1966, and 1967 the Lemon Creek hydro- metric information suggests that the general trends of curves of daily discharge down Lemon Creek (Figs. 27, 28, and 29) in these same summers show fair correlation with trends Of ablation on the glacier over corresponding periods. It can be specifically shown that the high point on the discharge curve, in late July, 1966 (Fig. 28), cor— reSponds to a high point on the ablation rate curve during 45 the same interval. The narrow peaks superimposed on the gross curve seemingly reflect the high and oftimes sudden precipitation of stormy periods. These peaks are accentu- ated as the ablation season prOgresses. This is not only because of increased storminess as autumn approaches (v. Fig. 8B), but is also a result of the greater area of ex- posed ice in late summer, i.e., that over which water propagated by rainfall produces direct runoff instead of percolating to depth. As such water drains off with minimal response-time lag at the terminus, it is quickly reflected in the stage recorder of the outlet stream. Some of the peaks of discharge shown after mid- summer, 1967, have been suggested by Miller (1969a) to relate to observed sudden lowerings of an ice-impounded marginal lake on the southwestern margin of the Lemon Glacier Névé. This phenomenon has been reported as "glacier bursts" (Jokulhlaups) on Icelandic glaciers and the causal relation— ship may be similar here. These so—called Jokulhlaups are self-dumping catastropic releases of water impounded in and on the glacier. The dates of their suspected occurrence are noted in Figure 29. Because of the environmental hazard which outbursts of glacier-dammed water could represent, they are worthy of detailed consideration. A special investi— gation of this aspect of the hydrological regime of this glacier was initiated in 1968 (Miller, 1971; Smithsonian Institution, 1971). 46 Further to the analysis of the hydrometric records at least in the broadest sense, the 4.9, 4.4, and 5.3 month periods of the effective ablation season in 1965, 1966, and 1967 which have been previously discussed are commensurate with extrapolated limits of the maip_period of intensive hydrological discharge shown in Figures 28 and 29. This emphasizes only the months of excessive melting and runoff and not the early season and late season weeks when but minor flow is involved. That such a relationship exists between runoff maxima and melting firn maxima has been corroborated by the studies of Andress (1962), Miller (1963, Figs. 48 and 50, 1971) and Helmers (1967). Although it may appear obvious that the greater the total melt on a glacier, the greater should be the dis- charge of its runoff stream, there are complications in the correlations because of rainfall as opposed to strictly melt-water effects. Thus it is difficult precisely to relate discharge rates and total runoff volumes to changes in a glacier's mass balance without complete, reliable and con- secutive precipitation data over the full melting season. Such is planned in even more detail for subsequent phases of this research program, using where possible instrumented precipitation recorders. In this it will have to be kept in mind that unusually high total annual runoff values associated with high ablation rates might still parallel a highly positive mass balance if that year's net accumulation were indeed excessive. 47 Specific at-site accumulation on the Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers is, of course, a highly variable factor because of orographic effects, wind drift deposits, and so forth. To establish a significant total mass balance rela- tionship which is truly meaningful to long-range glacier budget predictions, maps of accumulation thickness over the total glacier for a period of a number of years should also be constructed. These maps should then be compared with the corresponding melt—season runoff values and cumula— tive: ablation totals for Lemon Glacier. In the meantime, selective late spring and end-of-summer stratigraphy mea- surements at a few representative sites on the flattest névé areas can provide a fair estimate of trends. To this end, the test pit measurements Obtained can serve as a useful index for the 1965—67 period. CHAPTER VI GLACIO-CLIMATIC TRENDS AND SUMMARY COMMENTS A review of the total array of meteorological para- meters and their influence on accumulation and ablation Of Lemon Glacier has revealed some direct and useful correla- tions. It has been shown that the trend of any one para- meter can often provide a guide to what the trend of other parameters should be. In effect, by looking at details of one factor in this study to date, the others have been approximated. It is anticipated that the more refined and continuous year-around hydrological measurements and analyses of related meteorological information which have subsequently been obtained by A. E. Helmers, Dr. J. Bugh, and Dr. M. M. Miller, as part of the long-range acquisition of data for this and allied projects, will support and enlarge the basic correlations presented here. The integra— tion of earlier records obtained by Miller, Egan, Andress, and other researchers on the Juneau Icefield Research Program will also add long-term depth and further reliabi- lity to the interpretations. Substantial examples of the above are given by the main Juneau Icefield névé—line and retained accumulation sequence for 1946 to 1965 presented in Figure 30, and the 48 49 snowfall record to date in Figure 31. Respectively, these two figures illustrate the pre—l965 accumulation and néVéL line trends on the adjacent Taku Glacier of the Juneau Icefield, and the annual winter season snowfall at the Juneau Airport station for the period 1943-71, thus extend- ing this part of the regional record backward several decades prior to this study and forward to the present. The current conditions that have been discussed and which are leading to a healthier regime on the Lemon Glacier are well corroborated by the changes revealed by incorporation of these preceding and subsequent data. And they add credence to the interpretaion of pronounced warming during the 1940's and 1950's, significantly followed by the secular cooling trend which has been recognized in this study and indeed by other research (v. Hamilton, 1965). This current trend is particularly well documentedlmythe 5-year running mean plot in Figure 31. A provisional map of district variations in annual precipitation given in Figure 33 (pocket) also provides a working model for future reference. This map is from re- gional estimates made in connection with some forest hydrology studies by Dan Bishop of the Institute of Northern Forestry at the U. S. Forest Service in Juneau, Alaska (Miller, personal communication). In 1966—67, Mr. Bishop assisted in field measurements on our Lemon Glacier project and so is familiar with the Juneau Icefield Research Program statistics. Although it is clear that 50 some of his referenced data are only gross values based on selected site measurements and hence are not precise figures, the map's significance lies in recognition of pronounced differences in annual total precipitation which do occur in different sectors or local watersheds of the Northern Boundary Range as a result of marked variation in the parameters of geographical position and elevation. Exemplifying this is the 100 inches (254 cm.) of water equivalent precipitation per year known for the Juneau and Douglas Island area, as Opposed to the 140 inches (356 cm.) recorded down Gastineau Channel from Thane; the 60 to 80 inches (203 cm.) recorded up-channel in the lower Mendenhall Valley and Juneau Airport sector; the 150 inches (381 cm.) per year indicated for the Mt. Juneau ridge area; the 200 inches (508 cm.) per year extrapolated from JIRP data for the south maritime flank of the main Juneau Ice- field, including the Lemon Glacier; and the 180 inches (457 cm.) recorded at JIRP camps in the high maritime interior and southeastern sectors of the Juneau Icefield. On the north continental flank of the range, annual pre- cipitation is recorded at little more than 10 inches (25.4 cm.w.e.) per year at Atlin. In the future, regime trends on the "prototype" Lemon Glacier, when compared with mea- sured glacio-hydrologic trends in other areas in this part of Alaska and the adjoining inland sectors of Canada will have to take into account this distribution and gradient precipitation. All of this points up the need for further 51 and more complete regional data of the type this study has identified. In this context, plans are underway for syno- ptic studies of a comparable-sized inland and more contin— ental climate glacier in the Atlin region as noted in Figures 1 and 33. For such comparative future research the facilities at Camp 17 on the Lemon Glacier provide an excellent base of field operations (Fig. 32). Thus the continuing accrual of detailed field measurements on the liquid and mass budgets not only on this glacier but on others in the region can have important environmental value. New emphasis on the Lemon Glacier's heat budget up through 1971 (Miller, 1971) has already provided significant additional information towards under- standing the state of health of this particular glacier and has as well borne out some of the main conclusions suggested in this study. Although there are now five years of fairly consecutive and detailed records ready for analysis, it is anticipated that the ten—year record up through the International Hydrological Decade (1965-74) will be of considerably greater interpretive significance. It is out of this approach that the total regime of the Lemon Glacier system will eventually be understood. It is hoped that the information, plotted data, records, ideas and maps presented in this format, although covering only the initial several years of a much larger study, will nevertheless serve as a useful baseline for the more refined and larger objectives. 52 The analyses to date at least substantiate the value of using the Lemon Glacier system (v. large-scale map in pocket, Fig. 34) as a prototype for long-range glacio-hydrometric measurements which, once the differ- ences in climatic character of the various sectors are delineated for the region as a whole, may serve as a repre- sentative model for much of the Alaskan Panhandle and adjoining areas of Canada (Ostrem, 1966). This should also then add significantly to the comparative monitoring and evaluation of mass and liquid water balances on other representative glaciers in the middle and high latitudes of North America. GLOSSARY* Annual Melt-Period Includes those intervals of time in which air tem- perature at the snow surface is persistently above the freezing point. This condition can pertain in late spring and early autumn, even when englacial temperatures within the snow or firn-pack may be sub—freezing. Effective Ablation Season That part of the annual melt-period when the snow- pack of the previous winter's accumulation is fully isothermal at 0°C., i.e., the glaciothermally tem- perate condition over essentially the summer melting period, in which the englacial percolation of liquid water is not impeded by freezing. Defined by age, i.e., density; new snow density 0.1 to 0.3; old snow density, 0.3 to 0.45. Firn is a density of 0.45 to 0.74; firn-ice is a density of 0.74 to 0.85. Greater densities represent glacier Derived from the German adjective fern, meaning material retained "from last year." It most usually refers to old glacier snow metamorphosed to a density of 0.45 or above (up to 0.74 above which density there are no longer interconnected air spaces), and which has survived at least one ablation season. Snow ice. Firn Bubbley Glacier Ice Defined By age, i.e., density of 0.85 to 0.91 (mean 0.90); aerated white-appearing ice below the névé; line. Ice of greater than 0.91 is referred to as dense glacier ice. Diagenetic Ice That formed by refreezing of percolating melt—water usually found in firn-packs as part of the strati- graphy, i.e., ice strata, ice lenses, ice columns, etc. *All terms are as defined in Taku Glacier Evaluation Study, Foundation for Glacier Research, M. M. Miller (1963); asov. Miller (1955b). 53 54 Névé Used here as a geographical term having an areal connotation; refers only to the glacier's accumula— tion area covered by perennial firn, i.e., that lying entirely within the zone of accumulation (again, as noted above, firn refers to the substance of the material itself; neve to the area in which firn is found). NévéFline A general reference term only. More specifically, the most stable position of the névéeline over a period of several years is referred to as the semi- permanent neVéSline. It may lie at a lower eleva— tion than the seasonal névéLline noted below. Transient Snow-Line The outer limit of the retained winter snow cover (density less than 0.45) in the névé. Its final elevation at the end of the annual ablation season becomes the seasonal névé—line which may be either above or below Thence burying) the semi-permanent néVé¥line. BIBLIOGRAPHY 55 B I BL I OGRAPHY Ahlmann, H. Wzson. 1957. Glacier Variations and Climatic Fluctuations, Bowman Memorial Lectures, Series 3, Amer. Geogr. Soc., 51 pp. Andress, E. C. 1962. Névé'studies on the Juneau Icefield, Alaska, with special reference to glacio—hydrology on the Lemon Glacier. Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 174 pp. Bugh, J. E. 1965a. Glacio-hydrological Studies on Lemon Creek Glacier near Juneau, Alaska. Proceedings, 15th Alaska Science Conference, AAAS_TaEstract). Bugh, J. E. 1965b. Field report on preliminary glacio— hydrological and mass budget measurements on the Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers near Juneau, Alaska during 1965. Ms. report of Juneau Icefield Research Program (JIRP), Foundation for Glacier and Environ- mental Research. Case, J. B. 1957. Map of Lemon Creek Glacier, Alaska, 1:10,000; Sheet #1 in Nine Glacier Maps: N.W. North America, Spc. Pub. No. 34, Amer. Geogrt Soc. (1960). Case, J. B. 1959. Mapping of glaciers in Alaska. Photogr. Engr., v. 24, no. 5, p. 815. Dobar, W. I. 1967a. Comparative Lemon Glacier and labora- tory test albedo measurements as a function of relative humidity. Ms. report on work supported via National Geographic Society Alaskan Glacier Commemorative Project, Summer Phase, 1965. Dobar, W. I. 1967b. Albedo measurements program, 1965, on the Juneau Icefield, F.G.E.R. Ms. report on work supported via NGS Alaskan Glacier Commemorative Project. (Also see citation of these measurements in Miller, 1971.) Egan, C. P. 1966. Firn stratigraphy and névé¥regime trends on the Juneau Icefield, Alaska, 1925-65. Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University. 56 57 Geiger, Rudolf. 1966. The Climate Near the Ground. Revised ed., Harvard University Press, 611 pp. Gloss, G.; E. Konecny; and A. Chrzanowski. 1965. Protogram- metric and glacier movement surveys in the Taku District, Alaska. Proc. 16th Alaska Science Confer- ence, AAAS, pp. 108:109. Hamilton, T. D. 1965. Alaskan temperature fluctuations and trends: An analysis of recorded data. Arctic, vol. 18, no. 2, June, p. 105. Helmers, A. E. 1967. Field report on glacio-hydrological studies near Juneau, Alaska. Proc. 17th Alaska Science Conference, AAAS (abstract). Hubley, R. C. 1955. Measurements of diurnal variations in snow albedo on Lemon Creek Glacier, Alaska. J. of Glac., vol. 2, no. 18, p. 560. . 1957. An analysis of surface energy during the ablation season on Lemon Creek Glacier, Alaska. Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union, vol. 38, no. 1, p. 68. Heusser, C. J. and M. G. Marcus. 1964a. Surface movement, hydrological change and equilibrium flow of Lemon Creek Glacier, Alaska. J. of Glaciology, vol. 5, no. 37, p. 61. . 1964b. Historical variations of Lemon Creek Glacier, Alaska. J. of Glaciology, vol. 5, no.37, p. 77. Konecny, G. 1966. Applications of photogrammetry to surveys of glaciers in Canada and Alaska. Can. J. of Earth Sci., vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 747-798. (Sym- pos1um on Glacier Mapping, Ottawa, Canada, 1965.) Lawrence, D. B. 1950a. Estimating dates of recent glacier advances and recession rates by studying tree growth layers. Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union, vol. 31, no. 2, p. 343. . 1950b. Glacier fluctuation for six centuries in Southeastern Alaska and its relation to solar activity. Gepgraph. Rev., vol. 40, p. 191. . 1958. Glaciers and vegetation in Southeastern Alaska. Amer. Scientist, Summer, June, p. 89. Lawrence, D. B. and J. A. Elson. 1953. Periodicity of deglaciation in North America since the Late Wiscon- sin Maximum. Geografiska Annaler, XXXV,no. 2, p. 83. 58 Leighton, F. B. 1952. Summer meltwater in the Taku Glacier Marcus, Miller, Ostrem, Firn. Scientific observations of the Juneau Icefield Project, Alaska, 1949 Field Season. Ed. by M. M. Miller, JIRP Report No. 6, July, pp. 23-48. M. G. 1964. Climate—glacier studies in the Juneau Icefield region, Alaska. Res. Paper NO. 88, Univ. of Chicago, Dept. of Geog., 128 pp. M. M. 1954. Juneau Icefield Research Project (JIRP) Alaska, 1950 Summer Field Season, JIRP Report No. 7, American Geog. Soc. . 1955a. Juneau Icefield Research Project, Alaska, 1951 Summer Field Season, JIRP Report NO. 10. Unpub— lished, ms. available, Foundation for Glacier Research. . 1955b. A nomenclature for certain englacial structures. Acta Geographica, vol. 14, pp. 291—299. . 1963. Taku Glacier evaluation study, State of Alaska. Dept. of Highways and U. S. Dept. of Com— merce, Bureau of Pubiic Roads, 200 pp. with figures. . 1964. Inventory of terminal position changes in Alaska costal glaciers since the 1780's. Proc. Amer. Philo. Soc., vol. 108, no. 3. . 1967. Progress Report: A principles investiga- tion of the combined hydrological and mass budget of a critical glacier basin on the rim of the North Pacific High, Alaska-Canada Boundary Range. Inst. of Water Research, Michigan State University, 18 pp. . 1969a. Glacio-hydrology of the Lemon-Ptarmigan— Thomas Glacier System, Juneau Icefield, Alaska. Symposium on the Hydrology of Glaciers. Glac. Soc. and IUGG, Cambridge, England, Sept. (abstract). . 1969b. The Alaskan Glacier Commemorative Project. Nat. Geog. Soc. Research Reports, 1964 to 1968 vols. 1964 pp. 135-152; 1965 pp. 181—194. . 1971. A principles study of factors affecting the hydrological balance of the Lemon-Ptarmigan Glacier system and its watershed, S. E. Alaska, 1965-1969. Inst. of Water Research Report, Michigan State University, 200 pp. with figures. Gunnar. 1966. Mass balance studies on glaciers in Western Canada. Geogr. Bu11., vol. 8, no. 1, p. 81. 59 ,dstrem, Gunnar and A. Stanley. 1966. Glacier Mass Balance Measurements. A manual for field work, Dept. of Mines and Tech. Surveys, Glaciology Sect., Ottawa, Canada, 81 pp. Poulter, T. C.; B. W. Prather; and R. M. Shaw. 1967. Seismic exploration of the Taku and Lemon Glaciers, Alaska. Mich. Acad. of Sci., Arts and Ltrs. 7lst Ann. Mtg., March (abstractjl Smithsonian Institution. 1971. Glacier lake drainage near Juneau, Alaska. Annual Report, 1970, pp. 85-89. Streten, N. A. and G. Wendler. 1968. The midsummer heat balance of an Alaskan maritime glacier. Jour. of Glac., vol.7, pp. 431-440. Thiel, E.; E. LaChapelle and J. Behrendt. 1957. The Thickness of Lemon Creek Glacier, Alaska, as Determined by Gravity Measurements.Trans. Amer. GeOphys. Union, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 745-749. U. S. Geological Survey Water Supply Papers No. 1466, 1486, 1500, 1570, 1640, 1720 and 1740. (Discharge records for Lemon Greek for years 1951 through 1960.) U. S. Geological Survey Water Resources Data for Alaska (yearly from 1961 through 1967, including discharge records for Lemon Creek). Zenone, C. R.; A. E. Helmers; and M. M. Miller. 1967. Research during the Hydrological Decade on the Lemon— Ptarmigan Glacier System, Alaska. Abstract of paper presented at Mighpygpad.upf Sci., Arts and LtrsLL 7lst Annual Mtgs., March. ILLUSTRATIONS AND FIGURES 60 61 THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY RANGE ALASKA -CANADA CANADA # .9 < 96 13 ,, \ N p "WV/Iv .9 7mm 63‘ «an / maucn " rnsucu , 0 g . 7 W \zsoevmw % .2. r «‘3‘ ’ . TULSEQUAH A p \l‘ ' , \ _ \fimowr queues I ‘ >)r,g,1<.~- , , p cm Q ' . °‘, GASTINEAU “I! ' CHANEL a Mi: ’0 - JUNEAU \ MU NDADE ’87:? «A. a ‘, \ \ 4” g enemas ADHIRALTY Is. mnnumoun. aounonv 58' CW l8. . 1 Q “-5 fl w a.” 58' FIG. I N L\\ “‘3 V \-. <9 0 62 ‘-o » I . ‘ \\ .\|; ( ' ll ‘ ‘ .-. .a Y 1": ‘ s .“ ,-~ \ ’. §R \K J "\\' ‘ _‘\ .' ‘ x‘ I \- ‘3. k ‘25. .- . \ . I l'. \, a lo ',I .I .' ‘. 1‘ {..‘I o n- \ - ‘ in 1_; In- "1 \ / ’ \ a [fir I ‘ § - ‘ /./. 7 . _— , ,w \ \. {Ill \. A - I ’_ Wm; ' ‘ ' J 1‘ ‘ V ‘- E Thomas GI. / ' . /,. \ I..\. I I ‘ ‘ ,' ‘7 .. ,« / , Camp 173 b \: 1 ~‘ 7” I\ M?‘ v — \ -' ~‘\ \ N _ \‘ ‘ -- Nan! ’- \— .' \ "\‘ \\.\\\ . v \ 5,“, ‘ . r I .‘H '9- ' ‘. , ‘ in Sta. ,‘}"\ G i 3, M \\ '- . r~ f‘ ' // 2- (XVI '\ 4 \. 4““ " j G ‘1': Sta. "' F535“ . . A, 1 . l, , . g 38 8 . q u 1. . '-. ,. _/ r -I 539. t . {0“ \ 21 ° 22 ._ V; ‘2‘; Ir J ;\r/ \ NN‘ E w- «3 xxx 0v , , ~ . KN ‘ ‘. {f \1 x. ‘:—, _ ’- ‘.‘ \\\ asset W" m“! :2 xi- 1 '\ «{8;\ “A" - ((0 1‘ ' i) " :3 , . \ ‘ .~ 4 in "‘ v- \ :53] ' ' / 1 fi ”fi 5 >33 \3 . p — A“. * J) I 1‘ ’ , ' . | : _ I ‘ 5‘ ' . , V . \ "I ?:‘ _ x \ '§~' ‘\‘. , 3 L ‘ M‘ “rifle I ’ "J ,f: 3m \’ «a; ~”’ [9% ,A ~‘, J~\\\ \ “\r— _ [Av - f ‘/ ‘\\ -— ~ « ‘ Q" . ‘509 F“ / /F‘\\v [:1 QQ ( \ "I \. \ ‘ ,, \ ~ \ .- ‘91:, -. - . \ju‘ . ‘\\\ O \. - . a. \\%L{\\'\ FIRE 2 MP 0F swam TIP 0F mm 105th 3mm mm (P Lam ND PTAmIGM mass M) ms 17, 17A pm 173. sour 1:63:360 ; R2 63 13 August 1948 FIG. 3A.-—Lemon-Ptarmigan Glacier System, (Photography by M. M. Miller). D D. . R n ‘, , . “g. O " . ~7 ‘1 .4 q ' ‘.o ' - A ‘ Q “‘1'. . n . - . ‘ ~ c '5 ‘ ‘ ' t ‘ - « " c ' 4 . .- {’1" ‘2 v . a“, 1. mon Glacier, 4 October 1967 (Photography FIG. 3B.--Le by A. E. Helmers). 64 s \‘gt ‘ r 94 ’c_ “\§.D" Q. 52". 1. FIG. 3C.—-Lemon Glacier Icefall and Terminus, July 1966 (Photograph by M. M. Miller). m . Vi .' 2" I I. I I. l FIG. 3D.--Storage Precipitation Gage (on Lemon-Ptarmigan Ridge ) near Camp 17 (Photograph by M. M. Miller). FT. ELEVATION 65 FIG. 4 - AREA-ELEVATION RELATIONSHIPS, 4500 4000 3500 LEMON G LAC IER _ MAIN ACCUM. ZONE MEAN NE’VE’ LINE I965’67 3000 0" TEST PITS, I966 2500 _ 2000 I500 I I l l O 20 4O 60 80 PERCENT OF GLACIER'S AREA IOO 663 Ema 92 g .533 92 52. .mmm 8Q Scam—H“. .5 $5 .EBE 5% 92:3 28.: um EBE AWN m. m b _ . $5034 .Té. nmxw_ 9,,- i <5 9.09: 26.29: .Imwm :1, — aanlvaadwal IDGS 10 I966 20 IO 67 O 20 Io go .. 50. 4o _. '50 7a., CL wcartxmatuk I967 SEPT AT C1- 1'? AUG AND Mmmum TEMPERATURES ----- MI». 3m. flax . JUN FIG». 6 - DAILY MAXIMUM 68 - MMInuM DAN-Y Tuaruxwaas : SquAu Manor y; C-I‘I FIG» 7 \966 I9 67 tun HHHI 314 um: H» \ 0"---“ b P- IIIIIII \ Ir “ ‘0"“"‘\ auhllo ' ' "J‘ ‘ m .flIIL {lull DDV NIL. «Ian... "J' v I I0 pm .4 uxar<¢ma£uk 53"? Ana SUI. JUN my \‘I AORMT 69 FIG.8A - Tow-u. PRECIPITATION: Cm? I"I y_s Sunem: AIRPORT cm I £47 I r. m T : — '2 3 I 2 ' I F 9. I E IO—I ' E AIfiPoRT : maven- 5 I w " I \\ o f I \ I I! .J a J 5 J I! .I a I :J =9 h 2 a 2 I n 2 I?! 4 I966 ‘96-? FIQ.BB - Mam Momnw Pnecm'rmon AT Swarm Amber, I64'5- dab IO— ._Io 3.? \J A .. 3 2' s- -5 E \ \SE 6 \ 5% ‘S\ \ \ \- O \ 7 \ b \\ o JFMAMJJASOND 7O 1271j. . F7T1Y‘1"1""'I‘“’.‘I"f"r"71—~f— TOTAL PRECIPITATION JUNEAU AIRPORWTAIASKAIeIeVZOII.) 68 64 I I j T I 50- 56- 52- 48- TOTAL PRECIP. - INCHES 44* 40» U 35F1IIIIJII‘ILILJJII.IIIIIII__i._ll '43 '45 '47 '49 SI '53 '55 '57 59 '61 '63 '65 67 9 JOHN. PRECIPITATION, JANUARYZ JUIY.-JUNEAU AIRPORT, AIAIIIAI'eIzIzoIr.) JANUARY TOTAL PRECIP. - INCHES Q l 1 l l J 1 L L 1 1 1 ; n 1 l L l l 4 1 I 141 0 '43 45 '47 '49 SI 53 55 '57 '53 W '53 '55. '57 . Y E A R FIG..8C‘ 1943‘68 TEMPERATURE & PRECIPITATION TRENDS ~ AT THE JUNEAU AIRPORT, ALASKA. TEMPERATURE 0’? +\ U! D O U C 600 500 300 200 CAL cufz DAY'1 20 S 10 HOUR 1.0 INCHES 71 Maximum Temperature \ I" Mean 1' ‘\ I Daytime Minimum Incoming solar radiation I I \ 7' I I \\ Duration of Sunshine "7 / ;, E 6% ’ [CRZCH 10 F 15 20 25 3o ’ Precipitation §§ T= trace MAINT- T T T \IXIniTnT.lll 10 Is' 20 25 30 DATE FIGURE 9A: VEIEOROLOGICAL DATA-MLY.1965-CAMP17 TEMPERATURE O'F CAL CM'2 DAY"1 HOURS INCHES 7O 60 . 404 30 500 400. 300. 200 lOOI Maximum '72 Ambient Temperature Incoming solar radiation 20+ Duration of sunshine 10' '{< E§1§SFEISEE§I§§ 0 7 §N\ ,4 Lmi 1 1 l 7 g 7 LEA; I 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 ll 2.? 1 1.0, '§ F'I 'E o o o o Precipitation H h 0.5. = trace 2 g 0 1 1.1 1 1 j 1 1 #1 l L 1 1 1 1 1 L 17 l 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 19 21 23 25 27 FIGURE SI B: METEOROLOGICALIDATA - AUGUST. 1965 - CAMP l7 73 IotoS Io _. S ._ “° é—— No RECORD —-) Humble—I) o I I T l IO 29 ‘50 Io ’; x .0 I966 u. 0 I0 _ E 2 :7 s_ 3 8 If. a 5 a II: no So Io 7.0 so To 20 ‘50 '0 a 3 Io _ a c 3 5 _ I: o '2 O _ I0 20 so I0 20 30 IO 20 30 To SUN SUI. AUG SEPT FIGUE' 10 AVERAGE DAILY CLUJD COVER. CN’P 17 . JUNE-SEPTEMBER. 1965-1967 Suusam E Hon 8% or 74 Theoretical Curve 29.-T- s. f s \ N “‘ \S-J \ \0 d s _ 0- IO 20 SUN SUI... RUG FIGURE 11 DJRATIO‘I (I: SUNSHINE. CAN3 1?. 1966 SE PT 75 30. I969 ”T I0_ ’1‘ a. 5 o l I T F F I l l 0 lo 29 59 IO 20 so to Io In «I o. 3 2 so_ I961 3 204 O I T l I T I I l Io 1° to no no to no '0 JUN 3m. ADC $EPT FISHER AVERNIDAYTIIENIIDSPEEDATCN‘PIZmNDlW (cm) snow depth 76 0.5 1.0 gm/cm3 density 50 150 cm. cum. w. eq. 0 I l I I _ 7 July 66 \ .\.\ \ ablati n \ su rface \ 400..A ' \ 1.0 gm/cm3 density 150 cm. Cum. w. cq y/ 6 august 66 0.. 2O \\. \. \. H// 'I o 9. 0| \' - su rface '\ L l l 4005 FIGLRE 13 DENSITY AND WATER EGIJIVALEMIE (I: TEST-PIT No 2B (N LEI‘DN GLACIER 77 ,____4 ablation stake profiles 0 test pits 0 ram profiles -——->Z 1 2km 1'mi FIGLRE lLI LEP'DN AND PTAMIGNJ GLACIER OBSERVATIO‘J SITES, SLWER. 1%6 78 % 8- 9 7A0. gx 7o \ $2 6. N 5 0. £70 . 4, 3Aooa 1A:2A |‘ 001 o 11 3km \ ‘ ‘iml C47 ,. accum-ablation stakes 0 test pits 0 ram profItes FIGURE 15 LB’DN AND PTAMIGAN GLACIER OBSERVATIG‘J SITES, WINTER. 1%7 79 e" 01 m 0 00.»- ’ r‘r‘i . .000 DJ > C-17 llmi . ablation stakes 0 test pits x ice ablation holes ‘ 8-in. rain gages ° ram profiles FIGURE 16 um AND PTAMICAN GLACIER OBSERVATION SITES, 31m, 1967 80 199‘! sem "I - permtnen t. névé—h'n e .. . . . . i961 seasona\ ne'vé-h'ne N ‘ a l Srk | ICE | \ \ \ _ \ \ e ‘ \ ‘ w... \ ‘ 4 ~ \ .. . \ I .0 ““50 “ “en; loss-cc. ., . / I mm '3 \966- 61 , f; FIRM I I. / “0‘ I .09.. / lfibb- QT _ .. .. '. .. / Fl!» ‘\."c °" 3°. 5...: ...'° ’ ‘ x, ...... I FIGURE 17 LEMN M) PTAMIGAN GIACIER EVE-LIFE POSITIG‘IS, 1%7 81 to So to 2.9 2; 8 "3’ I I I I ° ‘ ® 5 a- U - 3. ” [EB n 3 a- -50 7; -4s 2‘ 5 no 3 ‘3 lino.7 L35 .3. 3 400.. 2 CI 9 lg 200.. Io ' _ o 1" i 5 to... 2 (E) g S ‘ _l a Z 3 o r F r T l lo 20 39 IO 20 1mm] AUGUST FIG. l8 - AQLAnou Raves on LEMON Gunman ‘5 Titan» or MsrsonowcmAL. Pananexens A1- CAnP I7 (.,©,© § ® «see on “-0“ awn-um menus) TenPeumuQi ('F) Guano Covaa (tom‘oc m) JUN JUL AUG SEPT to to So In In to II: I. 5‘ B 1 i I I l l l I f q o $ _ ® _ ‘ LJ—g U - q Ttnrikmuai ('F) cuoo Cum mime: my) 2 9. 2 Z—l -50 3 < ‘1 o _ -45 —” A r E 500 -35 'l T 5 J 400- 3 2 EM)q © E P 200 _ é a ,3 .... _ @ .. ,7 O A 1 i? u 7‘1 § (9 3 lo- 0 2 3 ° I I I I I I I I Io 1° 39 1O 29 to ‘° to 3° ‘0 :Iuvu SUI. we 5"" FIG. I9 - Autumn muss on Leno» GLAcIr-II u» Tunas or: MITEOROLOGIQAL Pnuanuans In Cum? \‘l (@,©.© ¢ @ ”55° °” “'W RUNNNC nan-ts) A 3”” JUL we. saw . Io to so Io 2:: So In 2° 3° Io ',. 8 I I I I I I I I I t a - 5 a _ ® ———— J _ 3 ‘ J—-—’ z: " -I c j .. 2 _. - So 4..- F 9 Goo _ — 40 I l: 500 — g '55 5 J 3 4°. 4 J , 69 g 9° ‘ or a 2.. - m 9 3 too _ @ .0 M J: s , o '50 — ’1? 0. I J 1° - 3 ® 3 I0 .. Z ‘3 O I l I l l I I I I II: 1.0 30 Io to 3o lo 20 30 I0 SUN JUL AUG SEPT Fl6.20 - AELATION RATES on Lane» Gunmen u mean: or METEOROLOGnAL Pam-menus A1- Camp I1 (©’©’ @§® Into on II-ony Immune. new“) CF) Tmnwmuu Guano Coven (Iowa? sky) 84 FIGZI -SNOW ABLATION ON LEMON GLACIER 1140 m. I = 100 cm. ablation bug. -_1235 -1205 1140 m. 44 ‘0 32 48 44 40 36 68 44 48 60 36 48 66 4O 36 AILA'I‘IOII (CH/DAY) ABLATION (CH/DAY) AILATION (CM/DAY) AILATION (CM/DAY) c: h‘ ha ha a- U! o- ~I AILATIOI (CH/DAY) OHNUDbUION OHNUJ~UION HNWbUION OHNUG‘MON 85 I Profile A - 900 K MEAN DAYTIME TEMPERATURE 'F q : b _ . \o l mm cum com ._. Profile B - 950 M . 0.. F‘d Z/N I : :iq \K/K‘N * Profile C - 1150 H 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 JUNE JULY AUGUST ] Profile D - 1215 H Profek " RH \\,// 1 ‘ v fii ' u v r v I If ' r I ' 10 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 3O 5 10 15 20 25 30 JUNE JULY AUGUST l 1 Profile 3 - 1235 H \ _*—____ I h J . I P’/ L ‘ p—i—l \ ' f I 1 r I T r I V 1 V ' 20 25 3O 5 10 15 20 25 3O 5 10 15 20 25 30 JUNE JULY AUGUST FIGllE 22 WMIERAEATICNRATESCNFIVETRMSECTSINIEVEZUEVS. (El-WES INQflDCWER.SlWER.1%5. 86 Kev/“01181 qv‘no Kapluonatqv‘mo .2 mmNfiI EESMZ .m> 5.. ES 2 E 99 Q32 2%: £53an mm EBE on aid .._n_ 89 I BR E HE 5:3 54323 .8 .82 .528" .. 52. E E5; 29m: 75 96$qu 6:». HmDUD< ON 3 b WAR. om ON OH p r v p b L b 0 mm I mousuuuomaou caozu H .. N a I 3 m L ¢ . coma how 3 . .. .. I me I o . L m 4 came muons ..\J... . / acuuuanz e I I on a L 52 r 3 «Mann—Emma .5592 .52. S on ON S on om OH o r n P b P b h L b n p b - mm a L mounumuoaaou angina... .. N . T 3 m .. came hwvumfi coma ha I , Q .. v .3 L‘ lm¢ I F 7 w, n .. I so am < . . . o a S . .uv e2 flow came mucus no mo 87 A: 9S. .. 93 .E 8mm I 8mm Ema $9. 68H .Bmz .. 5:; 2“ 585m 55 76 EB 72.2.5 £55 3 H52". $83 on on 2 on 8 S L n L p P Ll — p — P o I 2: I 8N Adm 038 z 32 3 833.2 o>tzs§o xy/ ISM ex 33 I 23 am=e=< on ON S on 8 S P P P P _ h _ p — — O 32 II I I! I I I 2: I I8~ \IQII I I I IzmI I can mesa Ah; 088 z 3: um 833% 2,3238 I as con (no) noun“ mmmmo (no) Izouflav mums g“ 1000 p U '- 1957 1956 1955 1954 fit! 3""! “MI “"330 '0“ 9M”?! '1" 3 9 mm 60mm; «nu IIIIIIIOV ($33) lOevHJSIa am i 57“ MI 330 I0» 130 £135 UM IInr w m 57w 831 NIT 330 MIN ‘LIJOO 88 1961 1960 1959 1958 3 IcIcficI-Iwag IIvlw All‘lN’JW ( IO - .- (I d .J.‘ JCEVHJSIO Tm ”\ON . 130 *dJS “JPN lfll‘ ~Nflf A7 adv 21W 831 NVf 310 ACN 130 dlS ‘Jl‘iV ‘lnf an vAVW NV MW * 831 N1! * 33 IAON l 130 * dJS ”30v 101‘ NM AVW , lldv llVW * iii *NVI‘ . 310 »l‘.0ll l 130 (US "Jnv » lflf INIif >A7W lddv IBVW +831 >NVI' i m FIGIK 25 NEW DISCHARGE RATES AT LEl’DN GEEK STREN’I CAGE SITE. 1951 - 1961 DISCHARGE (CPS) 89 1000 «I 800 d 1 600.. 400- 200.. I l T 10 20 30 10 20 30 JULY AUGUST 1000] 800 'I .00- 400 .l 200 «- l T I l I ] ‘l T T l 10 20 3o 10 20 30 10 20 30 10 JUNE JULY AUGUST sum" 1000f 800 - 600 _ 1967 400 .- 200 .— l I l l 15 I I I l I 10 20 30 10 20 30 10 20 3O 10 JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPT FIGlRE 26 SUM-IR DAILY DISC-ARE RATES O‘l LET’D‘I CREEK. 1%5-l%7 90 moo. .. anmi 2622. 2 Cdmv 20.22285“. 5:5 «.353: $350 cantata.» .533. 33 ~23 >5... 4:22 on as 0. ON a. on on o. On On 0. On an o. On ON a. 0m an o. On ON 0. L — . _ b _ P — b p _ — _ p _ _ — . L _ _ p _ _ _ . mom. I xwwmu 225.. .._o 35:55 :20 Rd: 08. (88mm) (Sub) 1:0ou mud ‘SfiVHNIQ 91 1222.630 rite $.00. I 23.6 3.3135 5.40 mN 0E (9mm) ( San) pom-mam gem-mam 92 .59. I uuosci 3313.. p4 n26 Nq 23.22.30!— 520 a; .3088 «3:23» .533. Fun 023 t: 4.5 33233200390030.332339330.83.! - n r L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . p b p _ L . L P If . _ I. Z . . _ _ P . p P p k _ _ . . _ _ _ _ u .. _ — _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ .K/aazaion a; \ w .3. aiufiion 3.8. 2.6 P3. I vulcu 23.0.. :0 gaga >410 GN 0..”— 5 3.3.! (cm) (9.9:) aeuvuano NoILVMd VD‘I‘I’ L11. fi ) "OOT ELEVAIIoII (METERS ‘ I O O L t I 150-' [ (CM) .3 O O I b '0 o o v...» .0. d p 93 1950 1960 I l L I I I L I I I I l I I J #1 V V T A fie—suns» uévé- LINE {swan MEAN ‘IO-YEAII MIMI “5 -YEAR MEAN 10 " YEAR MEAN - 3800 '- 3600 r3400 4*- 3200 .- 3000 r ”2800 " " 2600 r ‘- 2400 ’1‘ .-40 g NET Accunuunou 3 I ~50- g L ‘ 4 # f ‘ ' ‘ l ' ‘ ' 1 T ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' fl 1950 I960 new. 30 mm IévE-LIIE pm IEI AcunLATIaI mm (II IIIE TAKU EASIER. BIG-1% ELEVATION (FT) 94 Annual Accumulallon Saaaonal Snowfall 300* (alngla aaaaon valuaa) lOO-I O 2 0 I204 .E. .04 Thraa-yoar Avataga Snowlall 160-1 (amlbulad to mlddla aaaaon) I I I204 I I O 2 0 E 00< loo-T Flu-yaw Avaraga Snowlall (amlbulad to Inlddla aaaeon) I I I20~ ’ O a ‘ 0 E .0- x?ééééfééééésééséééésasésén 5;:33'3: a:=::33:a:3=:2333:::§ a : FIG. 31.-~Seasonal Snowfall Trends, Juneau Airport, Alaska 1943-71, based on l-year, 3-year and 5-year averages. 95 .Aouonm .m.m.u.mv enummma .emumoum soummmmm Hmoawoaouomnnoaumaw snmuumcoq 0:» you memo mmmm ~833m noumwmmm ha memo mo smfl>uu.mm .me _. I . . . .. , . . .. ,....w._mu..v. . .1 0. .vs . I . I or, . APPENDICIES RECORDS AND FIELD DATA: Lemon and Ptarmigan Glaciers 1965-1967 96 APPENDIX A METEOROLOGICAL DATA 97 JUNEAU ICEFIELD RESEARCH PROGRAI-A II‘ILII_II‘I' I’- 'Z‘Uls’u‘ 5’1.” «MY ‘IIHIZ. [’II‘IF - R_f.C;'_\3_:."/'.3 —-_l-..---..- . --.—-.—.....--oo IO- 4 3 —|_e_s 47 1505 ~-.—— - ‘0 I; Yo I 43 (on; I I I .94». 4% 5_9_._S SITI. cs CAMP NO. 17 __,__,___,_ DATE JULY1_..J_36 5.-.. E """T O ‘ 4.185-..- .-... {222-.._':__':°TF"3';E:‘—'3-§L13":TLL“:.-_“L'Z-mf "" '1-|_“: ._ '.‘..":.’.’.'.'_‘:.. ,—_—.:_"”::_'T‘:_:.:;.-..--. I; a’ .40: :01 ' I 2‘ "'H . I Hones “Pi—“2., " 'f { ‘3 2 2: 'NCHEE’ I 'N' I C: t {I Z I 7: : 'I 2.! U U ‘ ' .5 7. L.‘ ?* U‘I‘ *‘ P434 £.| 325° >53! 9'5 2 II II I - Zo ég " ' E J-‘-‘I"° ’0? I“ 1 < ' II " x c o . .4 ,U , .4 rtl U u, , < U) .. I < I s 3 s55 : 9] 5 3 a! 5 5: g a s z t 3 § 2 {EDIE E 2v. - L 991-13.. Lam. 115.014! ya I ‘3-«I—3‘9—‘53—1945 9 I 003‘ -.L9;&_I_L_SE.-.I 3%. I 420 = 3:119:9323924-910.21-11.0911, g. .|___34.__I 25‘ i I‘“’1/*““°2"'55‘_5‘2"” 3 0.05 . 131—19}. ' I E I I »« . . ~ , 313.3,.-.'_S_.6_.5J155_._§3—.._ __-Z>____9.Ic_bzz.._-__ _‘_-_o_-.7=I 1.151.? 1'2 4 I 497...} 14.1-192.4313,_5§15..I__I_____o_ _____ __ 'I-nII E J] ,5 g 4.(o_4_.__§, 3:-..321J3135915 $351 a o 3 £9424: E _II a I :92 :3 019141391395 I.._-Ei_—?.-_-J=.__9_.JL—.9. 1-11...- 1.31;! I _._,§,.§-1,II_.__,_9____;_.I,__3gso__.__Ii 1.112-! I |___-,... II n I " "'1: fag-11-1 I . _I 1i ..-_,,|__. 1%. 4-1.1! I_____I PROCRAI‘fI BjLL 'II'II 0......- -—————..—-..—o--*~’au- -.--_—.—4 on: ALLC§____‘I_355__ E” mm..- m 1 \ RED; L— f‘ ATH- I... .IVI /\R Y INI' I Q! 99 \/ ICE‘IELD RESEARCH -. .9.-. u—- a..- MQflWL L JUNEAU I7 mep No. w - . vf\ I I .IIII a L -. ...... I LILILI I.I.I.II . - I..-- .- -L_ ...n 7 . . L2 A L. 3 no _I L S I 5 . . L L L 0 IL L L L . :1. . 9.5.1105 3 5.I55. 980 82:05. R.;-0. L. L. .WI ZO.h<.OI.W,II\I/I.I< I I I L. L L L L . Lmas-83.33563575.3.131.;Lsag.§aflaqsII . . LLFJQzu_z..<5': am .1 I 5 -'~' 2 _E_:°<--;9.__1_::‘::=.:_:”..1I.:._:2.11:444II..._.—--~——-—-~--—~ :7: ~:::- .::'.~_;-'.'..:J—=‘-'-'- -—--- “"""‘I I I 1..-I._. I I __ II I ____:‘2 I I I I 1 1 3 1; 1 I .I 1 3 1 AI Ii 1 s 1 - I I—-—-I i 1. 1 I1 I—“G I I " I I ME I. 1'). I " II EVE—gigs, “532. O I 0 I I'D-35"I 'i 15 1‘ 591 JI 1“—"°° _ i o I I Qj-...._NE I . II 1 9 _I:39¢I __4_<2_I _i. LQ- TR I I- I. II V; I 548 II 3' """" I I I TR__,|__..-_..‘! _S__I_Q__ L5:. I‘ ; I0_ I50I_37 405 I0 I 'I j IE§£II 8 i_ 543 I 1’ II ”L “SOL -3>_:b_:I_ 4I- S__ "—3—”l—QJOQ-‘I-“fiI-i-mk __E_§E-.II By?- J 302. _' II I2 _:I 419 L55 L5_8_S_ ____$_-I 0.1] U 0.3—II} II L413‘ 651 I IS ‘3 I._45i 22|§2=$__:>~I-—9——~ ~--I ~29 4.1 1::;:11"T_12__-_§99-—I 1’1. I i 5I_46_._S 3_.I Q—-.--- " "’ i 3:...” =- 575 3" I__ 1 110-25i1 .55. L......-..4--—— -—--~- . I. 15 I_qg,_ I54SI129 SI-___I.c_> I J:§9_-I_...-.I.2Q IIIOSE— I O i .270 I “TIC-J: 44_ 05on 57__ 1o .__Q-.‘4‘L-I————-I—2Q T31 I:SE:I o I 4‘9- II—f/ _IfIfl BI 33. EIBQS __.I;_I___,.O_:2-_9_-—- 5 II IyZ 402 Ij 3g <1 i 0.51 i 114 .ILS‘3Q-...$§-.- I: 3__I4___?_._ I_2_g_.s_51-_§I 9 1 O, I T I235. I ‘51; I up": I 4'14 II 2W0 I4
  • .-_$I 51.3 -51- E O [—1]— I°Insz o 29’Ls. If“ 23 __§£2.-I,.52_-_S.L_§§_ IO ‘I’R_ I5- -i-‘ _II 512-14: i377 41-I 5' " -I—-IQ—- - L 1 II 531 I? 25 i - ‘ - 4 31010 11 I ...... —-.———-- ‘ - S- II '2- L—I .1 II‘Z‘3__ §1§I3>5 _.§‘~.EQ§~——5--I-'-9‘QB“I“I::I .sn.‘ <4”?— I “Ii—~51 11""? L45 3?- 575—4 9’ T3 I‘m—“f ’“" 4 I 7 I 51532.1: pt..."— .I LIQLLS..I.L.EZI;..1 "' .' ' ’8 I 43 56 4-L—- —--§‘—"’ *Q'_- --—-1 I I w II I 25?. ___.. I - “'—“ I I_ TR,“ _ _ Lfl:5_. -_.&——-.———- ---— - 1. {139 I595 55.51.-..42- .— 1 'Jp-JSII s I -- ___21£4...1I {1 __ 54.44514451—9- ° °“’ ’i "1 '1“ "'1"— inn—.441 112:3- 1-1 _1_ I 11 .1" ~-------*‘1 1 11c53:1_,_1 1 I 1 1 1.1 1 .__.________-..11 @321qu I —- 4 I ’ __... ' *C-i7 opened for summer I O GRAM DATL’ _JUL‘X__J_96_6___ EL F VA f:’-'* _4_:85__-___. 7 \ P?- c FORM g """‘—- - "" ““‘fi c!- /‘-.'H' i.“ —a c. U M M ."‘x I"! Y W i' 101, n :3 \/ THL- ICEFIELD RESEARCH N" Jr. I L51 JUNEAU Sr”. as CAMP NO. l2 I a 0 t I O I E z a. A 4.11.14-94-47 3.437.114} ._1.1 A: 1- .. d - -_ .1. ”1w. . 0“ 04000 J “7.57.6aqfl51rn 195.392 “no :079 ”49 Lm3§95537b072ag9 .2 "w... zeiaé _ ”w m %m£n mwmfifls Sawflfig 2 255.55 .Smlmmv 2.23 “a L g11::iLJ LEL ..... !|_:tLi;‘1 . _ 4— _ m _ _ . H m , m a y y any; V452 ”v.1 um _ _ .wUzEzmflzoooéSo.9fl14534@00005Mfi54oooo_o 29.—2.340 1 . \. \J . . H _ <4 _ $ . . _ _ . . _ fl _ _ _|ullll' Ti-.- LIIIILIII .l.||l|l-llu9..luloll-ll I.Illalillllfail II. II. 1' .llnlul .l... £1.11! all]?! illlullllnIYHHIJHnHll'llvl n- .‘.ix..-.!.IJ.!_iz-- iii: '71.! .2. - Ayn—:1 ‘1“: 141 w! 1.” Iii. JJ---.-J # L _ 20.....Umm.o m. C; Hw_ “g ‘IJ N, .W. _E" E _ IN. E ”N“ E. E .W_ E E E: m E SW N: i fig” 2% wzgwfigfifi N” is s is: _ nlul..l||J«.l|..ll.l.l l plo.ilut..|l I.IITIIJ Ilhrali qu ILitlumllJlllu_lllw|-.v..llnmill.ll. ii . I.IHII. lllnll... m...IH.||It||||||,||II| -I.. “ID“. I-“ ml u . m ralllll.|. Ir. ..-l|" nllll II!‘.'IIL.."l...ll'—IY.I|”II"—llla.l'fl|llL|l.l nl'. III'.|IIIII_I|I I.II-III J'n' III ._M mid 85m I 5m a mfla 53mg 31.63:“ififibmfiafiiiia: Farm w. _ a; a mm mm . . T. . . . . :8 _ .nA .. _m_. .N .8. ._ \n 0: 8w 5 m“-.m..w...3iw<..im m. pHQHELLULfimflmme infirm m LMWM.-.Ti_mM Mm t.-..: -.-..,,.9_.flm-_w3:- m..-_:fl - -1; . _---_---J, _ _ _ _ u. _ _ “I as; _ w :m: a: :01. . fl . 13.1.. -i -- - qr?! 1.....:.*--.1.1L.. .. _. ‘72.“ I. .m ‘ . _ _ . u :5 m __ L _ a; : igm $34.2? :5 .EUsLQRRQQRRRJzM ooooooa 5 R .ovoe.3_L_&. :m . WWTTQ _I_\.TO“QQ TAO TOOO O_Qlw|r_.}i:l m. m i.e-,; n . _ M _ w 1. .l IIIIII Ill Ill.||.. ll -llm---u.ll.. l 3. II: III. m. S _ ~ _ _ _ uw gad_$mmmgwamm42s7&jaw&bmp22\2im990m .l U0 » U . _ _ z < . >WHL” .I! l w ”1 m _.II_I L _|_I.I.I.J. : A8S-8BV z .9 :1 o. b ‘ _ «o a . . a :2. o_ .5 5‘ _ _.s_.s_9 * .Qrdu‘ml Z.I OzcfiozII>a|>-,: 33 < I I; o i.. E.E§-_-;4_.I___\I_\LII o I 2_§__II I___~3 I 3§___52 45.5 <2 Ta II 2.54! E II 2% ____43_3_II I...5 52213252221I ?>_ 9 _..JI_5_-.2 I_S>_E__.II :5 5.2.5 II I__§_-.55I_52_ 5L 4 o @917. L512.“ - 1220 .515 I I.-_:7_..I..$.I_ -I_‘.I.Zz-.I .415...___9._..._.C2..<2§_-_I.__.-.__-_I:_>.__-,II; L5: I.I- II’a. I 227 I, I__.8__ Ilw‘ilI .5_.5._I I: I~_I_~1_55I_5$-_.-I.5'I ..I II-.I_3L_-I.2.5...S.I_52I.5I'2_.s.__3_I__©..2I I _-__IIII >II..E__II 7V7. I 57?. I I?__i'“-.-I 5@.I__5&_I_.58._..19_L_§20.5 I ,-._- I Io-15I-I.._S.E=_ II.__ _.o .I.___.297__I ii-.I§.-I ' 85L :5. L51 5..-..1...l__<.>.2:s..I _._. I_I_Q.;I.§I.._.E._:II____Q._ I 43.2.; §I__ Iv Ing SgISIS Lo I c.99I I__6—_I_qI,__s_,-_II o I ”0’2.“ LIL I595 57 585 _LQ_I____Q.29_I._._ _LQ-IEII w II o I I50 II_,_.I_3.-I33§.I_55_;§_39.;S_ (o I o u I- 5:9 I .I_.5_E...II 4V2 455—1 fin” I44» 58L {1},“ ID I OSQ_I______J_Q_:I_SI_I_.SE_,_HII Q H95 I_“2.O_I.5LS_ SI 38.5 Io I.I‘2. I -.L'2:.I§_>I..I_.§_V.~.I_II o I I’;Q3___ II 3‘ I59 I 3?. 32.5. 9 0 IS I _Lgfl I_I___yg__II 3,}; I ELI II__32 I__4_I__I 55 $2.55 IO 04L I_I_'Z_;IB_II___ :3,ng o I 122 II U}..- .95.- 4‘0 Jo 53?- In IQ>I I SEE. II o I - II Izfligiri- 751.5 583, I0 “mm“...I 8- IOI I wJI o I 192132__.II i? 35 57.5 54 52.5 Io TR _Ls-IOII w _II o I I59 II II 25 4'7 34 44 __ 4L _g;___I____ _Ia—nI NE II I’2. I 44'? II I:___’]_'__ 48 40 44.5 (a o -I..._..I15-_'2$I AIS—II I2 _I 489 ‘ fl’ .23 42, 42S 45.-__Ip..__-_1‘5-._.I-.*:.._I_...._1=_I.52.= 52I.....2..2.I=._2.2L 22L 2.... ..I...s......-;2§ .I....2§..I -52--..I _____ 21 -._II IIC.:*:._I_._...I_-._| I-‘b‘l I _ I II II” I II I.II- A _..:I45_ ISerreIo . __ ' -L--- I_...._..I..I.-_.-..II ________ I.-- ._-,----II PROGRAM \I-SI’S- - . . —.————-—-— ----—-.._—_.- -.- -——.._—.-—- - V U M M AF: '\ :: Dm- .SEEI._19.CS.C-1- E» :— mm 38.5-- SCEFSELD RESEARCH 103 hwmm JUNEAU No. 17 CR C-\ NIP SITS. i . SSHSSS. S SSSSIS S- SSSSSSS SSS S SS S S SS S SSSSS IS SSS“ H... .3 ----J _SSSJSS ..S -. .-.-.-..-.- - .S -- S S , - -.- SS. ._ A ... _ 5959.9S4JJ4. . w _. n D ._ 9 8 73 .5 b S S . _ r0 . .. MW 70. SEC/SSE U ad NW” D. Io % Mm HIS: Tm ow an. mo. ab. Fm. :Sy. 2 _‘ .w . . n . . ..AA» SST S SLSSucSSSS S_Sn# SSS SlSI—SSSSLSSS SSIS SSSSIS SSnmSlS” . . .. . ’ R UZZGZDW m Q g S lb. . 2 _m 5 .. u w 2075230 _ _ w _ _w m I H T m ‘ . m . _ ... S S SS S -SSS S S SS S SSS ”Lu—.HSMIHIH.“ ....SSSSSS S -..SS.S.......IH.S.HHS._HSSS..HS.SSSSS JSh.HJSJSUPSWH..-HH.SHQSHMSS.SS S.-”--.Sm SSS. S S. _-S.S _M u u .. solubio . _E E E. E. E E. .w .E. E. . _ _E . .. . 2.2. >< H. w. ...... N. s 3. s S..».E. s 5. a. 5.5 s. E.... _ . . S. .ISITS... ...SS-SSS.SS.SS S S... S S- SSS.SSSS.S.SS. SSSJSwS.S.S.-S.SS-U.H SSH. SSSSS ”SSS-SS1. SSS. SS.S..S-S_SS..S-S_S..S_SS.SSMSSS. S.S.SS..SL_..S.S SS.S S. fl _ . .. . .HS93$.1fl%mmme§m§mgfl.mfim.... . . . .m;;.2.epLy. .Sgfiiflmwmgij..L SSSS..SLVT. ..HWH--SSSH ...-nu- --.-Huh HLSLSSSfi SS. S-S_S..I .ShHS S..SSS s. SS.S. SS _ _. . . . . _. _ . .m .m SS_<.rO.S ..W T. 2m AQTS . .O. .0. _ . . . _ __ _. M 3 “ ... . ?_ SL I S -S.S-.S_SS.SL S-.: SSS. S¢S_S S SSS S. ._SSSSJS_. -S SS... SSMSSM ..-SSIS.S..S.SSSSSS. -..SS S.. S . . . . . . . S c». . . .. ._ ._ S ..(K ; 9. fl. _ o. . _ O 0 OJ. fl SOS. ..e ....4.4.S. _ . 9.x b2.a .. _. . _Mm ......usau...o .___.%_o.m.T.Tom_oo.Q£m “ .. ._ . _. m SICOSr .. Om m _ m w _ _ . m L _ _ M .. _ Mr S. .SSA,SSS1 S.S SSS SSSSSS. .SSSI _ . S. SS— : T . _ . . . . . . _ ..m. Sea-6..OQ-ommJegs-mwlmmamasfiw . . _ . m uo< __.. _ l_ w “ . _ hm _SL _. _ .. S . .SS.SSS.S..SS_, _. _. _ ...ST _ _ ._ . . .. . _ Aoowfi OOrOu..AS 5.5 4.. .34 5.5. 53.5 b8.2_%_.5 . _ _ _ . . . . _ ...-Eta:......SQSSQEEQ......Smfi... . _ _ S SSS . .S .. SSSSS SS SSSSSSuS .... _ _ _ ___....._ ......E . S. ...... S.. .fiSmScuSzSJT SSS.S"S.S...S ..S USMWS. 5“ vS.S SSS.S.SSSS-S.SSSS..SS. m ._ . .. _ to. S b. _ . .. ..S...:-.>..%._§_ _ _._.:_.s..._ fizz}. . . . .. __ . . SLS SSSSSSSS S S- SSS SL S.» S..---S..S.SS-. S.SSS SSS-S SS SS.SS_S SJSSSS__ SS_SmL. . _ . . _ _ . . . . S . .1... .... _ . :- 5 ...“2.3.4 5.6.7 T..9.m.umn.r_MmrfinwmwmmLard? 5.7. a“... fin? 5.x .S S S l S.. S. .S. S S---IFS. S. S. .. -. .-. S-....S_--S-S....Sh.hS.SS ..SS. --.-S.---..,_-..-S--...S,.SSS..S..S.- S. “HESS-Sr... -_ SS_ SS” DENOTES MO RECO RD) — REACHHJ G. 5—4. L— oesTrcm/eo By meS 0F- $6M $HELTEQ NkGS-ST 1N$TRUMENT coo - LOO MPH #6 S 4 I 4P "‘ -60..-- - .4 O G R /- Sv 7 \ RS -.—-‘ DATL -JAN‘__1967___ EL: v.\S:o:a - 'S M’S € EC): -. — -.. ......‘_—._._—o.———---———n-— ‘- 5S S’SS'RFS' ‘S’ W St. ATS SC 1'.‘ US» 8 104 ’ SCEESELD RESEARCH ---..- .. -—-.—_.-- -~- MQS‘S'S'S SLY S JUNEAU ’17- CR CAMP No. tJSTS. S....S_. --.Y .-:-S -SSS-...S- . .-. S. S J- S- S.... -..SS . . SS S....SJSS ...S S _. ,S. m . ./.// Fm 7.0_k<_o<~u . fl . / M. , . .. .SS SSSSSS SSS-y S- . . \S algmzam . 7.0....(EDO . . . ... . . . . . . . Ir ISSS\..SSSSJS S SIASS .SSSS ISSJSLSJS_S SS.S .20...0mz.D_ . E...E .. m. SE . .SM...S.R-.SSS:S ,.. --SSSS.....S.SS .S.SS.SS.SS.SS.S.S . .. .. . _ b m. I. .. , A P 2 _ V. S a M C. _2./ .>< U” . . . w wt (4 SN. Mm... SD. L .w 7 _.S .S SS SSSSS..S SS.-SS SSSSS SSSS S S SSSSS SSSISS S SSS! SSS SS. n S ISSII S SS SI S S S I . S ' I S I II S. o. 0.. m2 (Cora. o. o. o SS,SShSS.SS. S.S S SS nS’S S.SSS. S. ISL S S ..I I721m S INCHCS E 0 cf 6 5 S 8 .. So _ 5 , _ S A S S r M... WODOJO .1 S ’2. U ...UK‘I U><. -. AOONNSS. OOrOv FSQZuS—S z O C SEQSWSSW. . S SSS-S.SS,._SJ.-Q wSIDS..SCS#Sm.SSMSw._SW.. .-S. ------ .15. .. ------ 4. -lo I . . . . . _ _ MFQEUSP 2:2. 6 _b_?_ 2 4 _SSSSS Q Jam-LS. .o . . . .u m . . S.. S SSS..SSS S SJSS S... . .WoF...EuSP .XCE m W _ m2“. mu.“ _ mm m T SAW. 7.-“ z . SS SSSS SS.S SS.S L. S... _. ._ . . . . . . . . .S. _ .... n... (D ......l 2 «J A. 5.6 7.8 (J. O.S..7_..-J ..,S..:JM.,C.../.O.JunJ Pu“. _“ ._ _S _S. _S *S TS. S .S S S .S. .2). 9. ,/ .....HSSH- -SSSS .-SSSSSSSSSrSS S..--S S. -. S-.-S S. -S..- SS... ...--S.S-.-...S.S--_ ..-_ S-. -- . .. S.. -- _.-: OGRAM \ 3 ‘S‘SSLX SUSVS.‘~.’SAS":‘S’ \S*.*:3:A'rS-SESSF§‘_S_/SS om MAB.CS_-L'__19_6]E....VSSSOSAJBS---_ 105 . SCEESELD RESEARCH ...-an” ac ...-”--v Mf‘ S“: JUNEAU ’17 SSTS. Crx‘ CAKSP NO. S S S S S S I S S S S I S _ _ S — .. SSSSSS .-.SSS...- S S SIS“... ..SSSDSS .....SSS_ .mnm, . A _ “ “Defer. Labia . “N 07.0. r<_o< _ — _ _ _ M... S Ow (on 7. 3:014. an... a _ _ _ ... m. . _ 2255.55; _m x . . _ _. . _ ..c S.. . SSSSSS. SSSSSS SSS SS-SSSSSSSSSSSSSS.-SSSS.-S.S. ..SSS . _ E . . _ .. . _ _. _ . S . IF . . w. uzZ..m..23m ‘ .11 .. SSr S 11 SS... S...) S..! m o S. . SShS : .0 SS) S..???S Sta 3 .. '5.SS.S’S ll (SJ. m _ H ZOE/«EDD ” _ . . . .. .. . _ _ S. _ . _ _ __SSSSSSSS S! S .I .LSS SSS SSSI! s SS. SSF. SS SIS—I S S S.SsSlS SS SLSS .SS SS.~.SSS,SS IS SIESSSSI HSSSHH.S.HISSSSH_SSSHSSI SSS-HIS SSHSHSSHSlmflSS. .... ....E....Sm-.-.S S ......S.-- SSSSS....:...:S-.-.-SSEUM.L_-.....S.S. ...... .... ..:... I ... .. __ .. _ . mm. _N .N.N.NNMNMNN. _. . of .> .. _ . E. _E. E. E E E 3...: .M. F2 ._ . >> < . . ~ . . u H . _ _ fl . :SL . - SSISS..-SSS-.S S S. -S SSS SSS.S| SSS SSS.S.S.S.S...SS.. SSS.SS.S S.S.S.S.. m“ SSS“.SS.S.SSIS L SSL S S.SSS S SHSSM SFS.SSwSILS~ S.SS.S*S.ShSUSOISSS.~S .gzdsam. _ . ..wwflmufla§_fiwfii_. ..r . _ . __w,m&_;..m_5_&:m.5”5.m. : . M .... 3. .... SSLSSS S CSLS.SS_S...-S...M..-.....SS.S..P._ SLSSLSSSF- ...”Swn .-...m..S.S.SSS - S S S _S - S SS. ._ _ . . _ _ . . . m . _ .. _ .m um ,. ./_,voowv,vooof/ 0.0. ._ . J<.r0. .. _ _ . . _ _ ~ . _ _ _. If T . . . u . . S . ...ISL.S . . . . .. _.SS SSSSS.. SSSSSSSSSSSSSS.S SSSS_SS.SS SS . . SSS..SS..S ._ —— 'IIII I a a as .2sz .. ___.____. _ m. E ....UufiKu 7 WSSSSS SLESSS SSS- S..... m m _ .IDSSSSS‘LLI. . S A . SS S.. «S |.S SSS- * .. _ _ . __.___ L. S SI._ SSSSSS SSSSS S _ .-S._SSS.SSS_SSLSS “a o . & .mODOJU u" ..o ‘E ...L... (a L 8 . L. 9 . o o o 2- _ o l u0< “— _ -. .. --.-.... 1 _ . J<.~O-_S ... m m _ _ . .S AOONNSOOVOVx _ _ _ _ w ~ . . _. _ _ S S. S S.. _ 5 m F.12rulma Z< _ . _ i m . _ _ .L m m” i 1Li1li. . i. L . 2 moon“ oorou = . L 5.. :2. 5‘ A _. _ M. 5. ..2 .. 5:3. _. . : .. L .5.L. 2224.05,. .9... .12.5 F.L2u.~.z_1 ozfg’ozg>al>_§s 33 < {10 2 2 2..4 59 10 0.01 1 1-2-1. __i__§_\..1_ii 440 1‘ 3 —_ 54 599 10 1.50 imgj 12-11 i,__1_..s__il 9'20 :LJ__.3>€>. .54 57-5 10... 0.5&-i-._R.-_118-1o i w i, 242 11...}... 421.52.123.51. 9.. 04.2.i -..31__52-_-1.J...s.v._11 4:201 '1-..6_._- i.’;3.':’>_-3>.¢2.5 1o 0.89.- ‘i20 25-.._§E-ii - —‘ 1-...’...:...1.§1..5 .52; 1.5-1 1 _, 112-15.1.52 i— i ..L.5.1.J.5:a_i.4.7..5. ‘1 i,35_i__5_81_i $7239; 10 o .51 ' 4 -":'> (o ‘- C 4.1. L)“ ..: o—..- ...— | f-.‘.3.---.5.0..LZ>1§.fl3.S_ 0.310 | i319- E _ 1 -- __ ;1_1_§_ 49 -— 41 1o c551 1 _1__2_2_.__ 9912.11 1 "m Limit ~54. 352-: 8 Trs._.i-.__.-1.a.-. -1. _1..,__-.11.______1___.§§... 1 13-3.)”: 325 41 9 o.og-_1-._._1_z2;:1_-1.§_v21.1 5.991 1--.L?... 41 55 53.-.____10 0.11 |_ i15_2oL_9§91_,_' 2129 :1 L:.‘3..1..~‘r... 55 58-5. to 0.31“: i 120 21 _ I ' i '1.-:‘.}-_i_.£11._i 56 52’ 10 1.7.11- --- .19—1:1 _i Egmii 1 “- 144 i 5'1 91.5 10 0.34! u..- —. “—..-0o _--: _-— _ I _-- . _ ._ .- . ' ‘i . ‘4” IL..€~;.-.1.5.§.--.59..L51§.& 2 o.1s,1____Jg_:5_i_ i 59:. —- 1 11 5.34.1 55.29.59. . 1 .-__,__ 1 . 159.0 1 m 11 1on 582 11 EL.f3 {—5.81 44 52.5 2 o i. _1_<_>;_5___1 51.1.11 15 594 1; '11.- .1 1.4.5..“ 44 1o ,_._Q._$8 I .._i_1o-1.:-1..i-..§§_11 21.1 11 - i! ELK-.7 E45159 4‘5. 10 .1 32.05 --...31520i SE __i__ 254» , ’° -154 J58 41 __.__:> ....... 0. .q7_.1--..-_1,5;15,|1 5.12.} i 5992 .i _ .<.9__.1_e1.5..1.21_:>.._<1.1_.1 1o 1.42.19. ...... 19:52.1.C9 1 1 4.21. . 1 iifii‘ilifliiyosimé. -1 ' .1- _1 JUNEAU 108.' ' : iCEFiEL D R ESEARCH PROGRN‘A 1.111131: 1 111 _._‘1___ 521.41.41.121/ 11123131116?" R3111.“ $111. OR CAMP NO. 17 DATE: AUG.___19_G_7__ EL‘ -V"T' 0“ $6.55...— 1'::::.:.‘::;:::::.:.;:_._ . .. -.::;;-:;1-_:-:7.;-:::_—.-;. ..- :‘1-—-- ~-—-...—:_-......__- . .... E F“ 2' F271? @1199 Hum-1&5 i 1.11.: :9“) 0 1 L HOURS cA"/7°:_A.;i 191312131111, ... 1.5035216? 13 i: - . zoéga’azi‘si’fi 13:211. 3 < E 99135212531211.2355 2 o >. >. 23<0'1-0.11-m1 44 10 _. Te ..E..15_-2.5i-1 512 ii VzJ 245 i; 8 1:11.. -- 44 LO “15.7.9211 .izo-so 51;. ‘1 1‘ 124 .‘i 1__9_145 591 41 10 \ f {95:29. 5g"... 1 — i i'....9_.J' 41 L: 40 10 1.24 [_5-1oii 59.11 i 14c. 1 E:...L.L_Lél.i_5_(o_ 40- 10 i om i 319:5, 1-91911 i r13,__1 ié.-if._1_.412_.i.3>_8..i_5.oa 10 i 0.15 ii_1$__ '2 Mviii _j 15'). i i1_.i.°.._i..4.| i328.$i 41>..i to 0.29 1§;2_cb___1\1_191 119 i 11_-i_4_9i 31 ij‘Li 4O 10 o.2o_.15-Qd1i Nwi! __:— __ ii ‘5. i 44 LSJQL 41 8 0.02 i ilz-Ai ..__J_\_L\4~Lii____,_______1__ 520 £1.15; .521.::'>:a_154-s .>._ ‘o 15; _191 _s.1=.._ii_ 15%. i 554 i. L7 58'48 i55-5__-.2_i Q 115- 491,. SE iL 15%.».1 _(ooo .11 ii__}_3_,i44 315147. __1_o___i_______ 0.11.1 -___ 13.19-49-95.“ 11.9._Ei 1.19.--- 45,, so. 42.- 10 i 9.141 1212-119 91:." 121.0 11 i3._20 44'i “ 4‘ 10 i 1.54-i ,i2§:3_5;__ __%E i! ____f.a_g>_____iI 'i__3.i__i_§_1_i-5§_.5__§_9_‘_ 10 i 1.10 i__5-15{__-__s__Ei L 1_‘ ii dL__-’-‘~._Q_imf>jgmj§ ID i 0.87 __ i—101 _, SF. J1 i 1810 ii L2.:-__9£>.-i5§=§_39;5 a i O.'_?._)_ -.L— i 0. 1i i N” i 538 ' 1.3.4.- _9-L-1r_3>.‘o ...ZDQ- -.__ O.-i__9:b'.7 _._i_1g;_7.91' SE... ii i 2‘ p____ii i 3.5...i 49.1.3.3. 311.13.-..19. _..2_-..0.‘1>_..| ..-- 125-.501. -i se .11 1 - ii ,‘i:2_3 41 i375 4o 10 .___1._'2:1__ij_____l_19__.3,9_i _§,_E_ ii _i__3§___ij “.31 i Gioi 5'? ”1.7;- 5 037 i_______ i5;__1oi 351 _i 410 ii EL.2.-3_-i..4fe 59 45.§_-_-§--_..Q.Q?.-_i_-__.LLQ-zoii SE i '2_§§.._ii 11.39 '59 -40 5'5 _.5-.__Tfa--_i....11.5_-25 i—Esi 1.4.70 .53 ii-.§9._i 01:9 4'5 £155 10 032. ___1 Ego-‘5 . 3E i i J_Q___ii 11.3.1.9- 94.71._.4<_>.._.i-3_4._1 --.19... “22.3 1.....- 139.29.?1.2.11.1--....mn.i.._.1é...._i‘ 1111-16 1 120.12. 1--...1 11 1 “~ 1 11 133.161.1311-:29L9141. . -1 ‘ ..L --.- -,___.__1;i.-__...!____ _._,__- _- - -11 «Two DAY TOTAL. [“1 1 Vi C: \ D f’ PHOG1 I -..o DATL‘ P,SEE.T.--196.Z.. EL ‘~ V" T 50““ .418 WHJDRESEARC1 i 1’ ‘— r: AT i-i '- d ' 1111011111131” 511111111111“! Wi; 109, 1CE1 JUNEAU 111, CR CAMP NO. _17 § :3 % uz_ImZme 1U o ZOE-(«DO V2 _ . . unfliflfli iiiiii11...-..1111111111111111H1H11i11.11111-1111-n1n1u.11 iii—i i1ii~111i.i 11.111111111111 11711111111111 111n1 11w. .1.1-u.111i.-11111111H111111 ”11.11 . A .. . z . _ .20 ..b 252.02.... _ .U. 70.r/.o/C“0J._nmv.11.m_n1 3.1013. _ _ _ _ a .. .A .. . _ me __ - . . .. iiiiiibilii 1111111. J1|1111111liliiJ illiii-1iiioii . .. . _ . _ . .. .. . 1... . ......— .— -—.—-o—-——-.-———— .———— n—IIIiI'll I.II I .u '1"! I‘l".l||‘|. Iliul" ’11] ii ll 'clL.II'| ill-l .Ill.‘ III... ' 1 ...—---'-- 7.....-—.——---.—-.-—.---——-—_ 1 ‘-.--.-— .--—---—_ i “.1 11iimiui i1J.II .iu11i‘ “1'11“” ii“! _I1 111-1111111111 ll Gill 1 16 11.1.1- III i 1 111:. ii 111! .” v.0..10mm.11.0 .rc E... rhrrmm: E. .1..._ EM .1... $$:Ww%u ..M ...»... _ m “11. 1.. i1__ . .. S.rb . . .. 21... <...-1.1. 1.1.1.1.-.. -..- 1.. .- . .1 11.-11.111.11.111 1.1.11. . , . . .... . . . _ 1. _ . . i..i.ii1| 111 ..--1 1 -1... 11.11.11.- 1.d.15.1+.d19..1d M16. 11 i 11.-1L1 . 11-1 1.1. . . ..H,mc..1n-..m.1.s.g........1.”52_w. ...." : .. . _ _ .. . . S O . . _ . M 7...; 3.1 .. m1. %. K. m... m. 31.14.11. 6.16“”.W..- .. .11_i”11_i111.ii1.11_-i .1- 1.11_.1-.1.111_.11i..i..i 11111111111111- -111111111 1111.11.111H-11|.1I111111~n1w 1.11 1H1: - .. 11.1 _ . . . . . . . . ... . _ 2117 n) _ _ . u 1. _ _ _ _ . , . 1J . . ..N ...}..m. . _. ... _.il ii...1i Vii iL..I||.i i..1iiiriLi iii.i~i i . 1ii1lrii .. s 12:21... .11omfi1o.b.z.4.b_ . . _ . m _ ,- I . _ .. . . i- 3 11 O O Q 0 O Q . . _ .. m ...-Sb .. . . o 1 _ . _ ...i i. ii . iiiii1i.i i 1 1111-1111 1111 1 .- m . 1 .. 1 .. . . . .... 190.0...om9w90mpw74m _. . 0 uu< . .\ i L 1| ... I.II 1- . _Li .ii .. .. i . .iii.ii 1111 .i. . .11. ...--M13...ss.....m... . . .. _. . 95.3.2.9 101.733.354.10. . ..- .. 5 5 5 fl 5 . .5. . 1.11 .... 11 ..ii 1. _ i .i i.iiii _ i i i i .. .m .1. g . . a. 8. 4. S . I. . . w u. .7... .. _ . b . q! . L 11 11 _ .. _.i. 1.1 I1 11-1.1111 .i 1.1 Ii 1 i 1.. ,1ii1.11..i1ii .. .... .1. 1.0. .... . .11.. _ _ ..:... ...- ...5. .. ... w. 4%..4. 4.3m... .. 41m. . _ . .11....1 ..o .. _ u _. .-i_111 1.i_1l_1i_i_111.i.111i. ii ._ m 11 111111- 1.11111..11 ...1 .. . . . . . .. _ . . . . . . . . _ . . . ... ._ ...-KO .. 1.9.__AJ_1H_.J_6_. _Ou_.0._0.11m.)..1u....p..3..»U.../_OUWAJ 0.1.2 _11_A.._.3.~J“~/_OO53.0.1...1v .. .. . _ . . .1711: 11.11 .1. 1171.11.11 2. .7..?. 2 .2 2 .2 7. 2 ...-55.. . ..1 1i11-1111.. 1..-- .1 .1--. 1-.F--_-11.i1-.-1..1-.1-.-.-.1.11..1-.i.11.11.11.111.--. 11.-... .1.1.-.....--...-1-.1....-.......1..1. 110 APPENDIX A-l3.--Lemon-Ptarmigan Ridge Precipitation Data, 1967 Inches of Precipitation Location Vesper Park Lemon Glac. Ptar. C-17 (4) (1) (2) (3) Date July 2 Gages buried in snow 8 3.23 5.01 4.88 11 .52 .65 .51 20 2.01 2.03 2.01 22 1.22 1.38 1.71 28 3.07 4.14 4.27 Aug. 1 1.20 1.17 1.95 3 1.51 1.53 1.78 12 5.04 7.31 5.60 23 7.74 8.83 6.39 5.93 Sept. 4 6.74 8.82 12.67 10 4.05 6.38 6.00 4.46 Precipitation gages were standard 8-inch USWB rain gages (l) and (2)--These gages were buried flush with the snow surface and emptied each time precipitation was recorded. Gage (1) on Lemon Glac. was East of the C-17 ridge and Gage (2) on Ptarmigan Glac. West of the ridge. Prevailing summer winds and rainstorms are from the Southeast. (3)--Located near the Meterological Instrument shelter at C-l7. Figures for this gage show total precipitation collected at this site between the two dates when the 'precipitation at the on-glacier sites was measured. (4)--Located about 40 m.NW of Vesper Peak, approx. 5 m. below the ridge crest. 111 APPENDIX A-14.--Lemon-Ptarmigan Glacier Area Precipitation Data, 1967. Gage on Vesper peak installed 1 August; Gages on W. Ptarmigan ridge installed 30 July; Figures in inches of precipitation. West Ptarmigan Ridge (8 to N) Location . Vesper Peak (1) (2) ' (3) Date August 13 5.93 6.88 6.28 4.47 23 6.43 8.01 7.61 5.82 26 3.14 4.05 3.82 2.41 Sept. 4 7.25 7.24 8.22 6.11 9 5.17 5.30 3.51 10 4.46 112 APPENDIX A-15.--Mean Temperatures (°F) at JIRP Camp 17 and at Juneau Airport. Date Camp l7a Juneau Airportb 1965 July 7-13 47.0 55.4 August 1-27 45.5 55.1 1966 June 7-30 40.5 52.4 July 44.5 56.2 August 40.0 52.4 Sept. 1-15 37.0 50.2 1967 June 12-30 45.5 54.8 July 41.5 53.8 August 44.0 55.1 Sept. 1—12 38.0 52.3 aElevation approx. 4200 feet. bAt sea level on Gastineau Channel. 113 APPENDIX A-16.--Juneau City, January and Annual Mean Temperatures and Precipitation, 1944-68 January Mean Temp. °F Annual Mean Temp. °F 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 34.2 29.7 29.8 30.8 26.2 18.5 26.8 24.6 14.0 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 43.1 43.3 43.5 41.5 42.4 40.8 43.3 42.9 incomplete data 11 (eleven) Year Running Means - Average Temperature °F 1944-1954 47.83 1952-1962 48.15 1945-1955 47.53 1953-1963 47.73 1946-1956 47.58 1954-1964 46.95 1947-1957 47.93 1955-1965 46.31 1948-1958 48.20 1956-1966 45.79 1949-1959 48.34 1957—1967 45.40 1950-1960 48.71 1958-1968 44.63 1951-1961 48.45 TOTAL Annual Precipitation--Inches 1950 62.06 1960 100.31 1951 66.63 1961 120.51 1952 102.64 1962 100.09 1953 103.68 1963 99.36 1954 81.73 1964 106.62 1955 85.20 1965 79.32 1956 100.46 1966 96.68 1957 66.75 1967 83.52 1958 90.52 1968 82.47 1959 102.93 114 APPENDIX A-l7.-—Juneau Airport, January and Annual Mean Temperatures and Precipitation, 1944-68. January Mean Temp. °F Annual Mean Temp. °F 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 30.5 26.7 27.7 29.3 23.1 8.6 23.1 18.6 6.8 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 40.8 40.5 41.5 40.2 39.3 37.2 39.7 39.3 incomplete data 11 (eleven) Year Running Means - Average Temperature °F 1944-1954 1945-1955 1946-1956 1947-1957 1948-1958 1949-1959 1950-1960 1951-1961 40.17 39.76 39.57 39.61 39.66 39.76 40.00 40.28 1952-1962 1953-1963 1954-1964 1955-1965 1956-1966 1957-1967 1958-1968 40.46 40.55 40.42 40.37 40.31 40.43 40.25 Eleven-Year Running Means-- Annual Precipitation (inches) Total Annual Precipita- tion (inches) 1951-1961 1952-1962 1953-1963 1954-1964 1955-1965 1956-1966 1957-1967 1958-1968 53.57 55.76 55.00 53.34 55.95 56.81 55.18 55.90 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 57.77 68.11 61.83 57.39 58.28 47.88 58.30 50.07 48.02 APPENDIX B GLACIOLOGICAL DATA, PART I 1966 and 1967 Test--Pit Measurements (Englacial Temperatures and Firn Stratigraphy) 115 APPENDIX B—1.--Lemon Glacier Data--1966. Test Pit 1: Location--Upper Lemon Névé at approximately 3950 ft. Conditions--11 in.new snow (2.32 w.e.) on packed surface; Ambient Temperature 0°C. Snow-pack temperatures from top of wind packed surface, taken on 3 April 1966. Depth Temperature Density gm/cc feet cm. °F °C 0.5 15 29.0 -l.7 - 1.0 30.5 29.0 -1.7 0.217 1.5 46 29.0 -1.7 - 2.0 61 29.0 -1.7 0.239 2.5 66 29.0 -l.7 - 3.0 92 28.5 -2 0.213 3.5 107 27.5 —2.3 0.306 4.0 123 27.0 -2.6 0.291 4.5 139 25.0 -4.0 - 5.0 153 23.5 -4.5 0.305 6.0 185 - - 0.344 7.0 216 - - 0.366 8.0 247 - - 0.362 Re stratigraphy: the snow pack was essentially homogeneous, except for a 1.9 cm. ice lens at a depth of 94 cm. In a shallow pit located 5 meters from the test pit, an ice layer or lens was encountered at this (95 cm) depth. However, the existence of a discontinuous ice stratum was suggested by resistance offered by the snOWpack when some of the accumulation stakes were placed in the test pit area. 116 117 APPENDIX B-2.--Lemon Glacier Data--l967. Test Pit l: Location--Upper Lemon neve at approx. 3950 ft. Conditions--15-25 cm. powder snow over wind-packed surface; Ambient Temperature -5°C, Visibility obscured by snow. Snow—Pack Temperatures (Depths from Top of Wind-Packed Surface) Depth (cm Temperature (°C) 20 -13.5 40 -14.5 60 -l3.5 80 -1l.5 100 -10 120 - 8.5 140 - 8 160 - 7.5 180 - 7 200 - 6.5 220 - 6 240 - 6 260 - 5.5 280 - 5 300 - 4.5 320 - 4.5 340 - 4.5 360 - 4 380 - 3.5 400 - 3 420 - 3.5 440 - 2.5 Date: 28 March, 1967 118 APPENDIX B-3.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1967. Test Pit 7A: Location--Lower Lemon neve at approx. 3100 ft. Conditions—-Thin ice crust at surface over- lying layer of low density snow; Ambient Temperature -9°C; CAVU with light winds. Snow-Pack Temperatures Depth (cm) Temperature (°C) 20 -l3.5 40 -10.5 60 - 80 - 100 - 120 - 140 — 160 - 180 - 200 - 220 . - 240 - 260 — 280 - 300 - 320 - 340 - 460 - 380 - 400 - 420 - 440 - 460 - 480 - 500 - 520 - 535 (in glacier ice) - o 00.0 o 00 U1 U1U1U1U1 U1 mm 0 U1 0 mm \Dr—IHNMNNNwwwc-Abmmmmmmmmq\loo 0 U1 0 U1 Date: 26 March, 1967 APPENDIX B-4.--Lemon Glacier Data, Continuous Vertical Density Profile and 119 1966. Test Pit 2(B): Cumulative Water Equivalence; Location-- Approx. Elev. 1150 m (3775 ft) on lower neve. Depth Interv. (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .49 9.8 20-40 .53 20.4 40-60 .54 31.2 60-80 .53 41.8 80-100 .55 52.8 100-120 .55 63.8 120-140 .54 74.6 140-160 .54 85.4 160-180 .56 96.6 180-200 .58 108.2 200-220 .61 120.4 220-240 .54 131.2 240-260 .59 143.0 260-280 .57 154.4 280-300 .57 165.8 300-320 .58 177.4 320-340 .61 189.6 340-360 .59 201.4 360-380 .58 213.0 380-400 .52 223.4 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 25 107 234 328 349 discontinuous yellowish firn Date: 7 July, 1966. 120 APPENDIX B-5.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1966. Test Pit 2(b): Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence; Location: Approx. Elev. 1150 m (3775 ft) on lower névé. Depth Interv. (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .56 11.2 20-40 .57 22.6 40-60 .60 34.6 60-80 .58 46.3 80-100 .59 58.0 100-120' .60 70.0 120-140 .59 81.8 140-160 .61 94.0 160-180 .59 105.8 180-200 .59 117.6 200-220 .59 129.4 220-240 .60 141.4 240-260 .66 154.6 260-280 .58 166.2 280-300 .56 177.4 300-320 .59 189.2 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 10 1-2 35 5 discontinuous 66 1-5 interlayered with firn 196 l_'7 II II I! 224 3 H II II 254 2_3 " II II 292 3-4 yellowish granular firn and ice Date: 6 August, 1966 121 APPENDIX B-6.-—Lemon Glacier Data, 1966. Test Pit 3(C): Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence; Location: Approx. Elev. 1215 m (3985 ft) on upper névé. Depth Interv. (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .48 9.6 20-40 .52 ~ 20.0 40-60 .50 30.0 60-80 .50 40.0 80-100 .53 50.6 100-120 .60 62.6 120-140 .53 73.2 140-160 .57 84.6 160-180 .56 95.8 180-200 .55 106.8 200-220 .57 118.2 220-240 .62 130.6 240-260 .56 141.8 260-280 .58 153.4 280-300 .57 164.8 300-320 .58 176.4 320-340 .58 188.0 340-360 .56 199.2 360-380 .57 210.6 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm 22 2-3 111 1-3 185 1-3 200 1-5 221 3-4 256 6 Three 1-cm lenses interlayered with firn 277 1-3 340 2-3 Yellowish, granular firn and ice Date: 13 July, 1966 122 APPENDIX B-7.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1966. Test Pit 3(C): Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence; Location: Approx. Elev. 1215 m (3985 ft) on upper névé. Depth Interv. (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .59 11.8 20-40 .60 23.8 40-60 .59 35.6 60-80 .66 48.8 80-100 .57 60.2 100-120 .56 71.4 120-140 .60 83.4 140-160 .59 95.2 160-180 .61 107.4 180-200 .62 119.8 200-220 .59 131.6 220-240 .56 143.4 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 31 2 39 2 73 4 88 1-4 Interlayered with firn 120 1-3 Discontinuous 186 2-4 203 1-4 Yellowish granular firn with ice lenses Date: 5 August, 1966. 123 APPENDIX B-8.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1966. Test Pit 4(D): Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence. Location: Approx. Elev. 1225 m (4020 ft) on upper névé Depth Interv. (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 (cm) 0-20 .56 11.2 20-40 .54 22.0 40-60 .56 33.2 60-80 .57 44.6 80-100 .56 55.8 100-120 .58 67.4 120-140 .60 79.4 140-160 .60 91.4 160-180 .60 103.4 180-200 .63 116.0 200-220 .61 128.0 220-240 .58 139.8 240-260 .59 151.6 260-280 .60 163.6 280-300 .61 175.8 300-320 .61 188.0 320-340 .65 201.0 340-360 .61 213.2 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 19 1-2 55 1-2 98 1-2 199 0-4 Discontinuous 283 1-3 304 1-5 329 7 Yellowish granular firn with 2-3 cm ice lens Date: 14 July, 1966 124 APPENDIX B-9.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1966. Test Pit 4(D): Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence. Location: Approx. Elev. 1225 m (4020 ft) on upper névé. Depth Interv. (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .54 11.8 20-40 .60 23.8 40-60 .63 36.4 60-80 .57 47.8 80-100 .58 59.4 100-120 .56 70.6 120-140 .60 82.6 140-160 .61 94.8 160-180 .57 106.2 180-200 .58 117.8 200-220 .55 128.8 220-240 .58 140.4 240-260 .55 151.4 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 117 2 133 1-3 150 3-4 180 3 Irregular (sun-cupped?) surface; yellowish 208 1-2 215 3 252 4-5 Yellowish granular firn (1964 summer ablation surface?) Date: 6 August, 1966 125 APPENDIX B—10.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1967. Test Pit 1: Location: Upper Lemon névé at Approx 3950 ft. Conditions: 15-25 cm. Powder Snow over Wind-Packed Surface; Ambient Temperature -5°C, Visibility Obscured by Snow. Snow-Pack Temperatures (Depths from Top of Wind-Packed Surface): Depth (cm) Temperature (°C) 20 - 13.5 40 - 14.5 60 - 13.5 80 - 11.5 100 - 10 120 - 8.5 140 - 8 160 - 7.5 180 - 7 200 - 6.5 220 - 6 240 - 6 260 - 5.5 280 - 5 300 - 4.5 320 - 4.5 340 - 4.5 360 - 4 380 - 3.5 400 - 3 420 - 3.5 440 - 2.5 Date: 28 March, 1967 126 APPENDIX B-11.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1967. Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence (Test Pit 1). Depth Interval (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .42 8.4 20-40 .46 17.6 40-60* .36 24.8 60-80 .36 32.0 80-100 .37 39.4 100-120 .37 46.8 120-140** .40 54.8 140-160 .43 63.4 160-180 .42 71.8 180-200 .41 80.0 200-220 .43 88.6 220-240 .42 97.0 240-260 .45 106.0 260-280 .46 115.2 280-300 .46 124.4 300-320 .46 133.6 320-340 .47 143.0 340-360 .49 152.8 360-380 .48 162.4 380-400 .48 172.0 400-420 .47 181.4 420-440*** .44 190.2 440-460 .48 199.8 * From 52-55 cm. depth--3 to 4 thin ice layers ** At 136 cm. depth--t0p of 1 cm. ice layer. *** Coarse, granular depth hoar began at depth of 420 cm., extended downward to thin, undulating, slightly yellowish ice layers at approx. 455 cm. Date: 28 March, 1967 127 APPENDIX B-l2.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1967. Test Pit 3A: Location--Upper Lemon névée¢.approx. 4000 ft.; Conditions--Wind-Packed Surface; Ambient Temperature at C-l7,-12°C, Visibility Obscured by Blowing Snow, Winds 30-40 kts. Depth (cm) Temperature (°C) 30 -10 60 - 90 - 120 - 150 - 180 - 210 - 330 - U10N\I\I\ICDKD Test Pit 5: Location--Middle Lemon névéhatapprox. 3800 ft.; Conditions--Wind-Packed Surface; Ambient Temperature of -31°C at C-17, CAVU, Winds 30-40 kts. Depth (cm) Temperature (°C) 30 -12.5 60 -10.5 90 - 9 120 - 8 150 - 7.5 180 - 7.5 210 - 7 240 - 7 270 - 6.5 300 - 6.5 330 - 6 360 - 5.5 Also at Test Pit 5: One (1) centimeter ice layer at depth of 48 cm. Ram penetrometer encountered impenetrable layer at 450 cm. from the surface (two trials). Date: 26 March, 1967. 128 APPENDIX B-l3.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1967. Test Pit 7A: Location: Lower Lemon neve at Approx. 3100 ft. Conditions: Thin Ice Crust at Surface Overlying Layer of Low Density Snow; Ambient Temperature -9°C, CAVU with Light Winds. Snow-Pack Temperatures Depth (cm) Temperature (°C) 20 - 40 - 6O ‘ 80 ' 100 - 120 - 140 - 160 ‘ 180' - 200 ‘ 220 - 240 - 260 ' 280 ‘ 300 - 320 ’ 340 ' 350 ’ 380 ‘ 400 ' 420 ' 440 ' 460 ' 480 ' 500 ’ 520 ' 535 (in glacier ice) ' HF- anU1m OHHNNNNNwwWQ-bhmmmmmmdhmflflmow U1 U1 UlU'lU'IU'l U1 0 U1 U1 U1 0 U1 Date: 26 March, 1967. APPENDIX B-14.--Test Pit 7A: 129 Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence. Depth Interval (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .30 6.0 20-40 .33 12.6 40-60 .37 20.0 60-80 .36 27.2 80-100 .40 35.5 100-120 .39 43.3 120-140 .42 51.7 140-160 .48 61.3 160-180 .49 71.1 180-200 .49 80.9 200-220 .44 89.7 220-240 .44 98.5 240-260 .46 107.7 260-280 .50 117.7 280-300 .47 127.1 300-320 .49 136.9 320-340 .51 147.1 340-360 .50 157.1 360-380 .50 167.1 380-400 .50 177.1 400-420 .52 187.5 420-440 .44 196.3 440-460 .47 205.7 460-480 .46 214.9 480-500 .50 224.9 500-520 .50 234.9 to glacier ice at 535 cm. A coarse, granular ice occurred from depth of 420 cm. No "dirty layer" or any other ablation surface indicators were found in the snOWpack. Thus, this area was completely snow free at the close of the 1966 ablation season. Date: This site lies in a zone just below a steeper slope which divides it from a higher, relatively flat névé zone. The site is also in the direct path of northeasterly winds which deflate snow from other higher areas and deposit it here, thus adding to the "true precipitation." 26 March, 1967. APPENDIX B-15.--Lemon Glacier Data, 130 1967. Test Pit 1: Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence. Location: Approx. Elev. 4050 ft. at Crest of Glacier. Depth Interval (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .57 11.4 20-40 .57 22.8 40-60 .57 34.2 60-80 .58 45.8 80-100 .55 56.8 100-120 .58 68.4 120-140 .57 79.8 140-160 .57 91.2 160-180 .57 102.6 180-200 .57 114.0 200-220 .59 125.8 220-240 .59 137.6 240-260 .56 148.8 260-280 .58 160.4 280-300 .62 172.8 300-320 .57 184.2 320-340 .62 196.6 340-360 .72 211.0 360-367 .90 (ice) 217.3 Stratigraphy: Ice Lenses Generally Thicken Toward the North Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 15 3 39 1-3 discontinuous 46 6 61 2-3 66 2-7 110-115 4 or 5/ 0.5 each 140-150 5-7 340 8 360 7 367 5-7 Yellowish granular firn Date: 2 July, 1967 131 APPENDIX B-l6.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1967. Test Pit 1: Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence. Location: Approx. Elev. 4050 ft. at Crest of Glacier. Depth Interval (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .64 12.8 20-40 .57 24.2 40-60 .62 36.6 60-80 .57 48.0 80-100 .56 59.2 100-120 .53 69.8 120-140 .58 81.4 140-160 .60 93.4 160-180 .61 105.6 180-200 .63 118.2 200-220 .58 129.8 220-240 .59 240-260 .60 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 189 2 214 2 216 6, Yellowish firn (1965-66 surface) 254 Possible 1964-65 surface? Date: 3 August, 1967 132 APPENDIX B-l7.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1967. Test Pit 1: Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence; Location: Approx. Elev. 4050 ft. at Crest of Glacier. Depth Interval (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .59 11.8 20-40 .58 23.4 40-60 .62 35.8 60-74 .65 48.8 20 cm. spl. from 1965-66 snOWpack .60 20 cm. Spl. from 1964-65 snOWpack .62 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 50 1-3 74 7 cm. yellowish, granular firn, with 2 cm. ice at 75 cm. depth 1966 Ablation surf. 115 2-3 cm. yellowish, granular firn, with 1 cm.ice 1965 Ablation surf. Date: 24 August, 1967 APPENDIX B-l8.--Lemon Glacier Data, 133 1967. Test Pit 4(E): Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence. Approx. névé of Glacier Location-- Eleva. 3850 ft. at Intermediate Depth Interval (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .51 10.2 20-40 .55 21.2 40-60 .61 33.4 60-80 .56 44.6 80-100 .60 56.6 100-120 .60 68.6 120-140 .60 80.6 140-160 .62 93.0 160-180 .68 106.6 180-200 .57 118.0 200-220 .55 129.0 220-240 .59 140.8 240-260 .60 152.8 260-280 .58 164.4 280-300 .55 175.4 300-320 .57 186.8 320-340 .56 198.0 340-360 .56 209.0 360-380 .62 221.6 380-400 .58 233.2 400-420 .61 245.4 420-440 .56 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 50 66 110 156 223-240 425 Discontinuous Lenses of 2 cm 7 cm of yellowish, granular firn 7 3 1-4 3 3 5- Date: 12 July, 1967 134 APPENDIX B-l9.--Lemon Glacier Data, 1967. Test Pit 5(B): Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence. Location: Approx. Elev. of 3675 ft. on lower névél Depth Inter. (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .54 10.8 20-40 .55 21.8 40-60 .56 33.0 60-80 .56 44.2 80-100 .58 55.8 100-120 .62 68.2 120-140 .58 79.8 140-160 .52 90.2 160-180 .56 101.4 180-200 .55 112.4 200-220 .60 124.4 220-240 .56 135.6 240-260 .58 147.2 260-280 .56 158.4 280-300 .57 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 32 1-2 Discontinuous 92 1-4 115 1-7 142 1-3 211 2 275 10 Yellowish, granular, firn Date: 28 July, 1967 135 APPENDIX B-20.--Ptarmigan Glacier Data. Test Pit A: Location--Upper Ptarmigan névé’atapprox.4000 ft; Conditions--25 cm. of New Powder Snow above Wind-Packed Surface; Ambient Temp —7 to -9°C: CAVU with Light Wind. Snow-Pack Temperatures (Depths from Top of Powder Snow Surface); Depth (cm) Temperature (°C) 30 -14.5 60 -14.5 90 ~13 120 -11 150 - 9.5 180 - 8.5 210 - 7.5 240 - 7.5 ca. 600* - 4' ca. 700* - 3 Continuous Vertical Density Profile and Cumulative Water Equivalence: Depth Interval (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H2O Eq. (cm) 0-20** .43 8.6 20-40 .41 16.8 40-60 .34 23.6 60-80*** .34 30.4 80-100 .36 37.6 100-120 .38 45.2 120-140 .37 52.6 140-160 .41 60.8 160-180 .41 69.0 180-200 .43 77.6 200-220 .49 87.4 ca. 620-650**** .49 -- *These temperatures were measured in 7.62 cm (3 in.) hand augered cores immediately after they were brought to the surface. **Measured from top of wind-packed surface. ***A 1 cm. ice lens occurred at a depth of 66 cm. ****Determined from a core obtained by hand angering. The core contained three 1-cm. ice lenses. Further notes on Site A: A 2-3 cm. "dirty layer" was found in a coarse-granular snow-ice core recovered from an approximate depth of 620-650 cm. below the wind-packed surface. This dirty layer is believed to mark the 1966 summer ablation surface. An accumulation stake with 220 cm. above the surface was placed near the test-pit (Stake marked "A"). Date collected: 29 March, 1967. 136 APPENDIX B—21.--Ptarmigan Glacier Data. Test Pit C--Location: Upper Ptarmigan néve’ at approx. 3800 ft. Conditions: Wind- Packed Surface; Ambient Temperature -19°C, CAVU with ' 15-20 kt. Winds. Snow—Pack Temperatures Depth (cm) Temperature (°C) 20 - 4O - 60 - 80 - 100 - 120 - 140 - 160 — 180 - 200 - 220 - 240 - 260 - 280 - 300 - 320 — 340 - 360 - 369 (glacier ice) - U'lU1 U‘l U'l P‘H H m m M w»w w b»h.b-D.UIUIG\0\GDO o p m m U1 Further Notes on Site C: At approx. 5 meters south of Test Pit C, a Swiss Ram Penetrometer encountered glacier ice at a depth of 364 cm. Ice was also recovered from a core obtained with a hand driven 7.62 cm (3 in.) S.I.P.R.E. corcr. Data collected: 25 March, 1967 S.I.P.R.E. Coring Results: 30 March, 1967 (l) Location--200 meters west of Test Pit C, 3750 ft. elev. Ice encountered in core @ 380-400 cm. from wind-packed surface (20-25 cm. powder snow above that surface) (2) Location--200 to 250 meters east of Test Pit C, 3850 ft. elev. Greater than 4.5 meters of snow since beginning of 1966-67 accumulation season (drilling terminated because of difficulty lifting equipment back to surface). Fifteen cm. of new powder snow at this site. 137 APPENDIX B-22.--Ptarmigan Glacier Data. Test Pit: Upper névé of glacier, 10 m SE of ablation stake #7, elev. 1265 m (4150 ft). Continuous vertical density profile and cumulative water equivalence. Depth Interv. (cm) Density (g/cc) Cum. H20 Eq. (cm) 0-20 .56 11.2 20-40 .58 22.8 40-60 .61 35.0 60-80 .60 47.0 80-100 .59 58.8 100-120 .59 70.6 120-140 .61 82.8 140-160 .60 94.8 160-180 .61 107.0 180-200 .61 119.2 220-240 .61 131.4 240-260 .60 143.4 260-271 .60 155.4 .57 161.7 Stratigraphy Depth from Surface (cm) Ice Lens Thickness (cm) 40 1-5 168 1-3 Discontinuous 205 2 272 2 "Dirty" layer 272-280 8 Yellowish, granular firn Date: 29 July, 1967 APPENDIX C GLACIOLOGICAL DATA, PART II Ablation Records 138 APPENDIX C-l.--Lemon Glacier Data. Ablation Rates (cm/day) for Summer, 1966. Time Interval Total Abl.(cm) ' Rate of Abl. (cm/day) Ablation Profile A: Nos. 40-46, Elev. approx. 900 Meters Stakes emplaced 19 June, 1966 June 19-25 22 3.5 25-Ju1 l 26 Jul. 1-9 33 9-14 24 5.0 Ablation Profile B: Nos. 60-68, Elev. approx. 950 Meters. Stakes emplaced 14 June, 1966 June 14-19 34 7.0 19-Ju1 l 43 3.5 Jul. 1-9 33 . 4.0 9-14 19 14-22 54 7.0 22-Aug. 4 77 6.0 Ablation Profile C: Nos. 80-89, Elev. approx. 1150 Meters Stakes emplaced 11 June,l966 June ll-l9 41 l9-Ju1 l 38 3.0 Jul. 1—14 45 14-22 49 22-Aug 4 ‘ 77 Aug 4-19 63 19-30 57 5.0 139 140 APPENDIX C-2.--Lemon Glacier Data. Ablation Rates (cm/day) for Summer, 1966. Time Interval Total Abl. (cm) Rate of Abl. (cm/day) Ablation Profile D: Nos. 100-108, Elev. approx. 1215 Meters. Stakes emplaced 8 June, 1966 June 8-17 47 5.0 17-25 21 3.0 25-Ju1 5 34 3.5 Jul. 5-14 38 4.0 14-19 27 5.5 19-Aug. 3 91 6.5 Aug 3-18 60 4.0 18-Sept. 1 62 4.5 Ablation Profile E: Nos. 110-114, Elev. approx. 1225 Meters. Stakes emplaced 15 June, 1966 June 15-25 44 25-Ju1 5 34 Jul. 5-14 40 4.5 14-19 35 19-Aug. 4 89 6.0 Aug 4-18 62 18-Sept. l 68 5.0 141 APPENDIX C-3.--Lemon Glacier Data. Mean Daily Ablation Rates, June-September, 1966. Ablation Profile Approx. Elev. (m) Abl./Day (cm) A (#40-46) 900 4.0 B (#60-68) 950 5.0 C (#80-89) 1150 5.0 D (#100-108) 1215 4.5 E (#110-114) 1225 5.0 142 APPENDIX C-4.--Late Summer Mass Budget Measurements on Lemon Glacier, 1966. 2 Sept.--Remaining depth of previous year's accumulation: Pit Site B - 170 cm. Pit Site C - 80 cm. Pit Site D - 125 cm. 7-8 Sept.--Snow storm left the following average depths of new snow (direct measurement): Center of ablation profile #100- 108 - 29 cm. " " " #110-114 - 10 cm.* II II II II # 80" 88 _ 7 cm. 8-14 Sept.--Ab1ation after snowstorm Center of ablation profile #110-114 - 27 cm.** " #100-108 II H II II # 8 0_ 8 8 27 cm.*** 20 cm.**** * Probably not a very reliable figure. Previous systematic measurements of the ablation stakes were made six days before the storm (1 Sept), and measurements after the storm support the conclusion that high winds both during and after actual snow fall caused extensive redistribution. Thus, actual new snow depths on the ablation surface were highly variable. * When the area was last observed on 14 Sept., some of the "pre-snowstorm" ablation surface was exposed, but much of it was still covered by new snow. *** A thin covering of new snow remained on 14 Sept. **** New snow had completely melted a few days after the storm, so the ablation figure applies almost totally to "old snow." 143 APPENDIX C-5.--Lemon Glacier Data. Ice Ablation Rates from 2 August to 17 August, 1967. Stake No. ‘ Elevation ft. (m) Ablation (cm/day) A 3650 (1110) 10.0 B 3250 (992) 15.5 C 3175 (967) 10.0 144 APPENDIX C-6.--Lemon Glacier Data. Ice Ablation Rates below Lemon Glacier Icefall (elev. of line of stakes approx. 2000 feet). Stakes emplaced 9 July, 1967. Period 1 2 3 4 9 July to 19 July 5.0 6.5 6.5 6.5 7. 19 July to 22 July 5.0 4.5 6.0 6. 19 July to 4 August 6.0 22 July to 4 August 6.5 6.5 5.0 6. 4 August to 11 August 8.5 8.5 7.0 6.5 7. 11 August to 23 August 5.5 5.5 5.0 5.0 6. 23 August to 4 Sept 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 7. NOTE: Stake No. 3 was in clear, blue ice; others were in "bubbly glacier ice". Measurements given in centimeters/day. 2145 .ummm Ha co cmcgmsmu 30am nopoomfi no .so mma.. .ummm HH so cmcfimsmu 30cm souooma no .26 mm . 0.0 0.0 m.m 0 0.0 0.0 «n 0.0 0.5 b 0.0 0.0 0.v 0 0.0 0.0 m.v m.v AS omoav Om 0.0 0.0 m.v 00 0.0 0.0 m.v m.v mm 0.0 0.0 m.v 0.0 «m 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.v AE mmaav 0 0.0 0.0 Hv 0.0 0.0 0.0 m.v mv 0.0 0.0 0.0 0w 0.0 0.0 0.0 m.v mw «$0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 m.v AE mnaav mv 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.v 0v m.v 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.v ow rm.¢ 0.0 0.0 0.0 m.v 0.0 0.0 m.m mv 0.0 0.0 0.0 m.v 0.v 0.0 0.m «m 0.0 0.0 m.v m.m 0.0 0.v mm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 N 0.> 0.0 0.0 0.v 0.m 0.0 m.m 0H 0.0 0.0 0.0 ma 0.5 0.h 0.0 m.v 0.v 0.0 m.m AE 00NHO H .02 wxmum ummm HH mam om mam 0H 692 m sass mm sass H mass ma mass HH Hm>umucH made on mam 0m 0» 05¢ 0H 0» 05¢ m 0» H50 mm on kHSb m on wsdh Ha on an: 0m . .nooa .uosasm Mom Ammo\sov 30cm «0 magma cogumana .muma coflumflga “whomam coquuu.suo xHozmmma 146 APPENDIX C-8.--Lemon Glacier Data. Total Monthly Snow Ablation. Elevation Date 1140 m. 1205 m. 1235 m. (3750 ft.) (3950 ft.) (4050 ft.) 1967 July 157 149 141.5 August 183.5 216 211 1966 July 163 175 165 August 153 146.5 157 Figures in centimeters. 147 APPENDIX C-9.--Ptarmigan Glacier Data. Ablation Rates (cm/day) for Summer, 1966. Ablation Profile A: 3 stakes, elev. approx. 3400' (1035 m) Stake No. 10 11 12 Time Interval June 21-25 3.5 June 25-July 2 July 2-10 4.0 Ablation Profile B: 4 stakes, elev. approx. 3800-3900' (1160-1190 m) Stake No. 20 21 22 23 Time Interval June 12-17 1.0 1.0 1.0 June 17-21 11.5 9.0 10.0 June 21-25 5 4.0 June 25-July 2 2.5 7 3.0 3.0 July 2-10 5 4.0 Ablation Profile C: 3 stakes, elev. approx. 3900-4100' (1190-1250 m) Stake No. 30 31 32 Time Interval June 21-25 June 25-July 3 July 3-10 148 APPENDIX C-10.--Total Firn Ablation on Lemon Glacier. Elevation Time 1140 m 1205 m 1235 m (3750 ft) (3950 ft) (4050 ft) 1965 July 8-31 105 120 August 1-12 63 1966 July 163 175 165 August 153 146.5 157 Sept. 8-14 20 27 27 1967 July 157 149 141.5 August 183.5 216 211 Sept. 1-15 71.5 All figures in centimeters. APPENDIX C-11.-- 149 Firn Ablation Rates XE Factors Affecting Ablation on Lemon Glacier. Rate of Mean Mean Average Ablation Daytime Daily Daily (cm/day)* Temp. (°F) Rad'n2 Cloudiness (cal/cm ) ($5) 1965 July 7-31** 4.52 47 382 60 Aug. 1-12** 5.24 48 355 60 1966 July 5.42 44.5 396 75 August 4.90 40 240 81 Sept. 8-14 4.15 39.5 241 74 1967 July 4.82 41.5 410 84 August 6.57 44 255 74 Sept. l-ll*** 4.75 38 127 90 * Average rate over elevation range 1140 m - 1235 m unless otherwise ** Average *** Average noted. rate over elevation range 1100 m - 1200 m. rate over elevation range 1175 m - 1200 m. APPENDIX D GLACIOLOGICAL DATA, PART III Rammsonde Profiles 150 APPENDIX D-1 Sites and Dates of 1966-1967 Rammsonde Records (See Figs. 1966 1967 13, 14, 15). -- Ptarmigan Glacier June 7 and 17 - 4 sites on a line E-W west from C-17 June 25 - 3 sites on a longitudinal profile on lower névé Lemon Glacier June 9, 19, 27 - 7 sites on a longitudinal profile July 5, 12 from elevation 3200 ft. to elevation August 4, 25 4000 ft. —- Ptarmigan Glacier I January 24 - 1 site on upper neve March (24-30) - 1 site on upper névé Lemon Glacier January 24 - 3 sites on upper névé March (24-30) - 3 sites from upper to lower névé June 13 I July 24 - 1 site (stake #1) on upper nevé August 24 Original records on file at the Foundation for Glacier and Environmental Research. 151 APPENDIX E HYDROLOGICAL DATA (1965-67 Summer Discharge Records from the Lemon Creek Gaging Station; Juneau Icefield, Alaska) 152 APPENDIX E- 1 Information on Lemon Creek near Juneau, Alaska (from U.S. Geological Survey Surface Water Records of Alaska): Gage Location -- on left bank k mile upstream from Canyon Creek, 4% miles upstream from mouth, and 6 miles north of Juneau. Drainage Area -- 12.1 sq. miles Records Available -- August 1951 to November 1953, and July 1954 to September 1967. Gage -- Water-stage recorder, elevation of gage 650 ft. Average Discharge -- 14 years (to 1965), 156 cfs (112,900 acre-ft./yr.) Extremes -- Maximum discharge, 2,800 cfs on 13 August 1961; minimum not determined. Remarks -- Records good except for periods of no gage- height record and those for winter months, which are poor. Large diurnal fluctuation caused by glacier melt at the source. 153 154 APPENDIX E-2.--Discharge of Lemon Creek, in Cubic Feet Per Second, 1965. Day May June July Aug. Sept. 1 27 185 348 416 555 2 40 205 404 370 505 3 29 141 464 334 520 4 26 172 560 303 432 5 20 192 476 320 362 6 21 129 373 334 472 7 26 125 424 352 565 8 22 163 480 380 436 9 17 236 460 373 348 10 16 198 432 388 289 11 17 266 428 460 248 12 16 198 416 396 227 13 16 143 432 282 205 14 16 143 468 227 175 15 18 168 392 310 151 16 25 257 328 384 202 17 28 266 278 565 257 18 27 188 248 525 392 19 33 185 239 535 515 20 42 182 248 460 917 21 51 141 266 356 620 22 50 127 356 376 530 23 53 175 352 370 444 24 57 190 488 342 540 25 91 159 366 296 338 26 112 151 286 224 239 27 120 151 356 198 218 28 147 180 392 195 266 29 137 185 388 266 185 30 124 239 396 819 165 31 161 396 668 TOTAL 1,585 5,440 11,940 11,824 11,318 Mean 51.1 181 385 381 377 155 APPENDIX E-3.--Discharge of Lemon Creek, in Cubic Feet per Second, 1966. Day May June July Aug. Sept. 1 23 71 230 656 480 2 54 108 254 656 359 3 52 205 233 535 310 4 39 251 210 448 752 5 63 230 200 412 492 6 88 251 210 404 345 7 119 272 221 424 275 8 118 292 233 460 208 9 77 263 266 540 200 10 57 224 260 428 159 11 82 208 266 412 161 12 76 202 251 362 149 13 61 178 260 362 300 14 57 185 310 570 428 15 45 198 373 496 420 16 44 370 472 448 432 17 46 404 448 535 342 18 53 345 436 456 306 19 51 334 440 396 510 20 45 257 424 505 328 21 37 230 420 452 352 22 42 202 416 359 221 23 37 180 480 877 248 24 30 168 535 945 352 25 27 165 540 540 388 26 27 178 464 370 692 27 30 192 535 352 560 28 27 205 668 303 468 29 31 200 620 263 373 30 39 192 565 296 656 31 56 605 452 TOTAL 1,633 6,760 11,845 14,714 11,266 Mean 52.7 225 382 475 376 156 APPENDIX E-4.--Discharge of Lemon Creek, Cubic Feet per Second, 1967.* Day May June July Aug. Sept. 1 38 161 380 448 550 2 41 159 356 540 854 3 43 163 331 448 764 4 39 163 366 392 476 5 41 172 370 352 384 6 33 155 328 334 370 7 30 145 408 359 484 8 35 163 338 635 630 9 45 190 286 791 610 10 68 198 266 640 400 ll 66 208 320 605 282 12 63 230 359 464 480 13 61 272 359 468 662 14 68 324 345 505 1030 15 96 436 362 456 1080 16 82 373 362 359 698 17 80 420 314 356 662 18 76 452 286 388 996 19 58 432 260 625 777 20 71 432 342 746 384 21 102 404 432 752 251 22 76 384 408 550 215 23 67 388 448 408 370 24 66 428 412 338 236 25 68 400 356 595 245 26 71 376 356 662 334 27 92 472 515 610 362 28 125 570 580 480 227 29 135 510 468 535 165 30 163 448 356 540 145 31 149 396 590 * These are provisional records as of 15 January, 1968, provided by U.S. Geological Survey at Juneau, Alaska. ’ ulldmg _:/, )‘ fk-Mlgd M' 0 *Eng lnee ‘ to V \/ " ‘ 3' “ .1 ‘ obandzoned ANN ‘ _ 3'." 3 3.36515 ‘- 3 I“ :‘ 4750*: l km: 4304,; [32,0 ~- ‘ ...... * < ..:...“ l r5 — View“ -‘ ... \ft‘ -. 3 \. ‘ " i 1 (form) '* HQ; . ‘ V (c ‘rhn \(J) P S; _, orc 1pm Q/ s] g . . Huland‘ 7/ 1 ' AI’ (I’ _ M “M ‘ 7., l " l’ l ‘3 743‘ , , .‘ ‘ .t 6350 4 j .\ -s ' I ‘fil,\ -~. ’ I "6. ‘. , r,” _ 1 a, :‘E #:1732543 1 1711. l ...“ 5g fi/W‘, 63921 ft - . \‘ um ’ . "x / \ H. (H60 , , 2- J Ii l 130‘. - -_ 34065 ‘I " - 0’ ‘\-" 1.2.1.1111111111111111134‘ [#llilLLlJlllltlleJJJ‘, 335:3 ’ l ' 1: . ‘ » ' ’ . Ivan; fi 46,8 \ _:‘7. {'43) \ '\ . ' .- y ’ M ’ r I? fl J ( ' y _.l ' .1 k 5083 4350 \ I " H _ 7 .4 o “- 3 3 _, l A! » -_ ’ ' “96’ 3‘ ‘ A”. ‘ :1 t .\ L; '2 r’ ,4 "_ ‘ ' ,4 N‘ I" >-\ 5550 I ".' - .4 't )3"! ’ 3°50 . . ring - 1 W “ “l ‘ bold‘ ’11 ’ . l Inf, 2765' 5424'. and 3274 ’~ , 3390 O :1. "\J Q / ' 2372a 1622 1 3 ,‘ 3- .l'( , ,' f ‘ “ .J" N. u. ( 1“ 'i‘v'; , (1‘ 3 a, _\ {-.. " . ‘- .3 4 'M- '7 I ’2836_ l \ l ‘3 ' 7 , _- ./ 1_L«11.1111111111111111111411-[1111 x :0»: muff , J 4 l - 109 f( . " mn'V' J: BARILUT COVE ”J5'° "0 $3» ;- 00 ' ss - . - (our...) 312")! 3 $111,? BFTRWEA; c I , ” GUSIAVUS (”m3 ' ‘ f!4150_ ‘ ”“5" W?" ..... 750. cob-n. (5% . ' 3‘ 2690 \K - :' 1‘ ‘1 r C ‘in I - 1 1 -.: . A )1 -7 . l 3'0 1650‘ \\§‘ ' Magnum (llxlunmmin nl as um (I as: ..:“ '20-'50 i _. . _ \ 7° exmls at ground levo-l between t . . T ‘ 132.1; 1 K x _,- ( . ' \ llemmuncr lsland and hull 3299' I v 13,/3‘"? .. ‘3‘1’iugggi... ' 2' - ’ 1‘ . ’ ‘ ... . . __ _i ... . _ 1 _:_ - r r ‘ _ - Q . . ‘ ' 3 I . " ~ budding. ' bunldmg' v\ Itch-m 3 (341' 1‘ K i I -' ‘3 I >. 3 - p. .n’irL . kg 0. l-MJIS': : - ‘ , H " " ‘ ' . 3 ’ 49211 nanotcdi 4 I" "‘7 ° | Elfin Cove %a-. HHN (DOVE .' 00 2169/ ~ oust: at M! level _in thus vu ml ;\ #5ka cabins “\‘x .. oo-lS SISTERS ISIAND 33} mo SSR E-.‘. :9." Hawk Int '1", HAWK INLtT @232 (ohm .. , .1 ‘/“'4'650 " '* - 3 . \ REP 00 100 METERS E35 E F1034 SCAL E T I RRRRRRRR G O O N ..L UUUUUU ‘H z"- C /\/y\\// T LLLL AAAAAA DDDDD i . x. A“ W/ . \\I/ m. /, >x @flmfiews in mm Lcemmmm CF®®B§ / . \ i/ O _ /. / (x .-./l , - H/ n. x J” . j. n, / \ .mx/Kw/g. fl/X/f . \«x/A 6 IV {I ,..\1 K / y; / '500 I090 500 m. ,,,o,,..._,...,.// // f2 3 UADRANGLES CONTOUR INTERVAL 25 METERS -APTED FROM uses JUNEAU B-I .43-a C (IHIHHIIHHIIIMlWlll”HIHIHUIUIIIIHHIIIHIIHHHI 1279895