 |
 |
I agree on all counts Scott, except one: On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Scott Braaten <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > The law of averages says it had to happen soon. I presume you actually mean The Central Limit Theorem, and if so, said theorem actually only proves that the non-occurrence of a below average snowfall year becomes an increasingly unlikely event as time goes on and we hypothetically continue to have above average snowfall years. On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Scott Braaten <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 19:27:27 -0400, Skip King <[log in to unmask]> > >>But... the problem is that it lacked mass - compounded by the fact that >>there was nothing in that snowpack to interrupt the flow of melted water >>through air channels in the snow down to .. the rivers. >> >>I've seen similar "phenomena" over the years. First time I did I >>wondered, much as you do now, how it happened, I asked a few dudes >>who'd know. You know a few dudes who'd know. They'll probably tell you >>same as me. Physics hasn't changed that much since then. >> >>And meantime, I rather suspect you're dealing with a certain amount of >>(justifiable) wishful thinking. Don't feel bad about that, /mi amigo./ >>Whole lotta wishful thinking going on around skiing these days.. on both >>the guest and management side. Tough year for the biz... and those who >>love it. But hey, you can count on one like this every 7 to 10 years >>locally and every 20 to 30 years nationally, and if you stay in the >>skibiz, Scott, you'll see at least one more of these before you retire. > > You are right on the wishful thinking clouding my judgement. I did have a similar > discussion back in March with the senior hydrologist at BTV...Greg Hanson was harping on > the importance of well developed ice layers in the snowpack as a mechanism to slow > melt. It also causes some interesting snow/water measurements because you can get > liquid to pool in some areas on the snowpack and not others based on the strength of the > crusts in the snowpack. So as you were saying, Skip, with nothing to stop or slow the > movement of free water in the snowpack, it just continues to melt itself out. Wishful > thinking can't even stop it haha. > > And regarding the poor snow season...myself and some mountain operations folks were > discussing way back in December how we are due for a poor season and sort of accepted > that fact a while ago. The law of averages says it had to happen soon. We plotted every > year back to 2000-2001 on the Stake graph, and the vast majority are waaaay above the > average on the whole, so a clunker was bound to happen. I just fear that we are still due > for a few clunkers in the near future to balance out the ridiculous snowfall we've been > seeing lately. Even BTV before this winter was averaging 1-2 feet more per winter in the > 2000s than they did in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. > > -Scott > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont. > > To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html -- "I'm a simple man, Hobbes." "You?? Yesterday you wanted a nuclear powered car that could turn into a jet with laser-guided heat-seeking missiles!" "I'm a simple man with complex tastes." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont. To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html