Geology topics

Steven R. Fassnacht

Publications and source records attributed to Steven R. Fassnacht.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2023

Snowpack relative permittivity and density derived from near-coincident lidar and ground-penetrating radar

Depth-based and radar-based remote sensing methods (e.g., lidar, synthetic aperture radar) are promising approaches for remotely measuring snow water equivalent (SWE) at high spatial resolution. These approaches require snow density estimates, obtained from in-situ measurements or density models, to calculate SWE. However, in-situ measurements are operationally limited, and few density models have seen extensive evaluation. Here, we combine near-coincident, lidar-measured snow depths with ground-penetrating radar (GPR) two-way travel times ( twt ) of snowpack thickness to derive >20 km of relative permittivity estimates from nine dry and two wet snow surveys at Grand Mesa, Cameron Pass, and Ranch Creek, Colorado. We tested three equations for converting dry snow relative permittivity to snow density and found the Kovacs et al. (1995) equation to yield the best comparison with in-situ measurements (RMSE = 54 kg m −3 ). Variogram analyses revealed a 19 m median correlation length for relative permittivity and snow density in dry snow, which increased to >30 m in wet conditions. We compared derived densities with estimated densities from several empirical models, the Snow Data Assimilation System (SNODAS), and the physically based iSnobal model. Estimated and derived densities were combined with snow depths and twt to evaluate density model performance within SWE remote sensing methods. The Jonas et al. (2009) empirical model yielded the most accurate SWE from lidar snow depths (RMSE = 51 mm), whereas SNODAS yielded the most accurate SWE from GPR twt (RMSE = 41 mm). Densities from both models generated SWE estimates within ±10% of derived SWE when SWE averaged >400 mm, however, model uncertainty increased to >20% when SWE averaged <300 mm. The development and refinement of density models, particularly in lower SWE conditions, is a high priority to fully realize the potential of SWE remote sensing methods.

Colorado↗

USGS2023

Snow surface roughness across spatio-temporal scales

The snow surface is at the interface between the atmosphere and Earth. The surface of the snowpack changes due to its interaction with precipitation, wind, humidity, short- and long-wave radiation, underlying terrain characteristics, and land cover. These connections create a dynamic snow surface that impacts the energy and mass balance of the snowpack, blowing snow potential, and other snowpack processes. Despite this, the snow surface is generally considered a constant parameter in many Earth system models. Data from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Cold Land Processes Experiment (CLPX) collected in 2002 and 2003 across northern Colorado were used to investigate the spatial and temporal variability of snow surface roughness. The random roughness (RR) and fractal dimension (D) metrics used in this investigation are well correlated. However, roughness is not correlated across scales, computed here from snow roughness boards at a millimeter resolution and airborne lidar at a meter resolution. Process scale differences were found based on land cover at each of the two measurement scales, as appraised through measurements in the forest and alpine.

Colorado↗

USGS2023

High resolution SnowModel simulations reveal future elevation-dependent snow loss and earlier, flashier surface water input for the Upper Colorado River Basin

Continued climate warming is reducing seasonal snowpacks in the western United States, where >50% of historical water supplies were snowmelt-derived. In the Upper Colorado River Basin, declining snow water equivalent (SWE) and altered surface water input (SWI, rainfall and snowmelt available to enter the soil) timing and magnitude affect streamflow generation and water availability. To adapt effectively to future conditions, we need to understand current spatiotemporal distributions of SWE and SWI and how they may change in future decades. We developed 100-m SnowModel simulations for water years 2001–2013 and two scenarios: control (CTL) and pseudo-global-warming (PGW). The PGW fraction of precipitation falling as snow was lower relative to CTL, except for November–April at high elevations. PGW peak SWE was lower for low (−45%) and mid elevations (−14%), while the date of peak SWE was uniformly earlier in the year for all elevations (17–23 days). Currently unmonitored high elevation snow represented a greater fraction of total PGW SWE. PGW peak daily SWI was higher for all elevations (30%–42%), while the dates of SWI peaks and centroids were earlier in the year for all elevations under PGW. PGW displayed elevated winter SWI, lower summer SWI, and changes in spring SWI timing were elevation-dependent. Although PGW peak SWI was elevated and earlier compared to CTL, SWI was more evenly distributed throughout the year for PGW. These simulated shifts in the timing and magnitude of SWE and SWI have broad implications for water management in dry, snow-dominated regions.

Colorado↗

USGS2018

Geometric versus anemometric surface roughness for a shallow accumulating snowpack

When applied to a snow-covered surface, aerodynamic roughness length, z 0 , is typically considered as a static parameter within energy balance equations. However, field observations show that z 0 changes spatially and temporally, and thus z 0 incorporated as a dynamic parameter may greatly improve models. To evaluate methods for characterizing snow surface roughness, we compared concurrent estimates of z 0 based on (1) terrestrial light detection and ranging derived surface geometry of the snowpack surface (geometric, z 0 G ) and (2) vertical wind profile measurements (anemometric, z 0 A ). The value of z 0 G was computed from Lettau’s equation and underestimated z 0 A but compared well when scaled by a factor of 2.34. The Counihan method for computing z 0 G was found to be unsuitable for estimating z 0 on a snow surface. During snowpack accumulation in early winter, z 0 varied as a function of the snow-covered area (SCA). Our results show that as the SCA increases, z 0 decreases, indicating there is a topographic influence on this relation.

Geosciences↗

USGS2018

Snow sublimation in mountain environments and its sensitivity to forest disturbance and climate warming

Snow sublimation is an important component of the snow mass balance, but the spatial and temporal variability of this process is not well understood in mountain environments. This study combines a process‐based snow model (SnowModel) with eddy covariance (EC) measurements to investigate (1) the spatio‐temporal variability of simulated snow sublimation with respect to station observations, (2) the contribution of snow sublimation to the ablation of the snowpack, and (3) the sensitivity and response of snow sublimation to bark beetle‐induced forest mortality and climate warming across the north‐central Colorado Rocky Mountains. EC‐based observations of snow sublimation compared well with simulated snow sublimation at stations dominated by surface and canopy sublimation, but blowing snow sublimation in alpine areas was not well captured by the EC instrumentation. Water balance calculations provided an important validation of simulated sublimation at the watershed scale. Simulated snow sublimation across the study area was equivalent to 28% of winter precipitation on average, and the highest relative snow sublimation fluxes occurred during the lowest snow years. Snow sublimation from forested areas accounted for the majority of sublimation fluxes, highlighting the importance of canopy and sub‐canopy surface sublimation in this region. Simulations incorporating the effects of tree mortality due to bark‐beetle disturbance resulted in a 4% reduction in snow sublimation from forested areas. Snow sublimation rates corresponding to climate warming simulations remained unchanged or slightly increased, but total sublimation losses decreased by up to 6% because of a reduction in snow covered area and duration.

Water Resources Research↗

USGS2016

Comparison of methods for quantifying surface sublimation over seasonally snow-covered terrain

Snow sublimation can be an important component of the snow-cover mass balance, and there is considerable interest in quantifying the role of this process within the water and energy balance of snow-covered regions. In recent years, robust eddy covariance (EC) instrumentation has been used to quantify snow sublimation over snow-covered surfaces in complex mountainous terrain. However, EC can be challenging for monitoring turbulent fluxes in snow-covered environments because of intensive data, power, and fetch requirements, and alternative methods of estimating snow sublimation are often relied upon. To evaluate the relative merits of methods for quantifying surface sublimation, fluxes calculated by the EC, Bowen ratio–energy balance (BR), bulk aerodynamic flux (BF), and aerodynamic profile (AP) methods and their associated uncertainty were compared at two forested openings in the Colorado Rocky Mountains. Biases between methods are evaluated over a range of environmental conditions, and limitations of each method are discussed. Mean surface sublimation rates from both sites ranged from 0.33 to 0.36 mm day −1 , 0.14 to 0.37 mm day −1 , 0.10 to 0.17 mm day −1 , and 0.03 to 0.10 mm day −1 for the EC, BR, BF and AP methods, respectively. The EC and/or BF methods are concluded to be superior for estimating surface sublimation in snow-covered forested openings. The surface sublimation rates quantified in this study are generally smaller in magnitude compared with previously published studies in this region and help to refine sublimation estimates for forested openings in the Colorado Rocky Mountains.

Hydrological Processes↗