River ice in Alaska: "pretty good proxy for climate change in the 20th century"

Don’t forget the late (and missed) John Daly’s comment on this event:
http://www.john-daly.com/nenana.htm

Having troubles with this here computer code stuff today?

In 1960 the ice broke on 2 May and in 2008 the ice broke on 6 May.
I extrapolate from this that winter is getting longer and it must have been pretty warm back in 1960.

“the earliest calendar date the ice broke was April 20 in both 1940 and 1998”

Why not just take the cowards way out, and focus on when breakup occurs?
I hear it’s a bid deal and the pot prize can be huge.

Your blog seems broken to me? is it just me? loads of htlm stuff and broken tables?
Looking at this http://www.nenanaakiceclassic.com/Both.htm
, I’d go for the 30th of April (ten bucks.)

Looking at the dates 2008 was about in the middle of the range
1 20-Apr 1940 1998
2 21-Apr
3 22-Apr
4 23-Apr 1993
5 24-Apr 1990 2004
6 25-Apr
7 26-Apr 1926 1995
8 27-Apr 1988 2007
9 28-Apr 1943 1969 2005
10 29-Apr 1939 1953 1958 1980 1983 1994 1999 2003
11 30-Apr 1917 1934 1936 1942 1951 1978 1979 1981 1997
12 1-May 1932 1956 1989 1991 2000
13 2-May 1960 1976 2006
14 3-May 1919 1941 1947
15 4-May 1944 1967 1970 1973
16 5-May 1929 1946 1957 1961 1963 1987 1996
17 6-May 1928 1938 1950 1954 1974 1977 2008
18 7-May 1925 1965 2002
19 8-May 1930 1933 1959 1966 1968 1971 1986 2001
20 9-May 1923 1955 1984
21 10-May 1931 1972 1975 1982
22 11-May 1918 1920 1921 1924 1985
23 12-May 1922 1937 1952 1962
24 13-May 1927 1948
25 14-May 1949 1992
26 15-May 1935
27 16-May 1945
28 17-May
29 18-May
30 19-May
31 20-May 1964
32 21-May
33 22-May

And when you cut all four legs off a bullfrog, they become stone deaf and ignore your command for them to jump !
I thought Austen’s comment about water levels in the river was very pertinent. It is along the same line as the break-up of the Larsen-B ice shelf. It sits on the East face of the Antarctic Peninsula, jutting out into the Southern ocean towards South America, so the whole Atlantic Ocean goes sloshing through there every day with the tidal bulge, not to mention the terrific storms the area is known for, and all that roiled water goes slamming right in under the Larsen-B ice shelf. So why wouldn’t it break up every now and then.
This is one of those, ‘butterfly wings beating in a Brazillian Jungle, and causing a subsequent tornado in Kansas’ anecdotal distractions. Great fun for the Alaskans, and more power to them; but hardly even local climate evidence, let alone global. Stuff changes; always has, always will.
George
PS Pretty picture though Anthony, and thanks for sharing; but another one of those grasping at straws last ditch stands of the MMGWCC fanatics.

One point I hadn’t realized before is that the frozen river is down stream of Fairbanks, Alaska’s second largest city, with an urban population of 51,926. So it isn’t a crystal clear wilderness stream but one that is subject to urban influences. I have no idea how they keep the streets of Fairbanks ice free but any run off from that would be one small factor for instance…

“Levels of GCRs appear to have a relationship to the state of the stratospheric polar vortex and, more indirectly, to the state of the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO). The polar vortex circles the globe at around 450N, and has widespread climatic effects over the Northern Hemisphere. Higher levels of GCRs are one of several factors that appear to be associated with a stronger, colder polar vortex.”
Link http://www.hartnell.cc.ca.us/faculty/mercurio/download.html

I was just looking at the population numbers for Fairbanks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairbanks,_Alaska
It appears that the city has spread fairly dramatically and there is now a county with a population close to 100000.
http://factfinder.census.gov/
Perhaps there is someone with some local statistical information that would allow us to plot indicators of any UHI or other local effects – e.g., # building permits, miles of road, tons of road salt, sewage volume, etc.

http://www.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF3/317.html
Many references to extensive forest fires in Siberia, Alaska and northern Canada are found in the writings of eighteenth and nineteenth century explorers. Some recognized that lightning was the cause of forest fires, but the explorers frequently attributed the fires to native peoples. Authorities on forest fires, including H. J. Lutz of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, have concluded that early native peoples were, in fact, responsible for many fires.
Some fires were intentionally set to get rid of mosquitos or possibly to increase moose browse. Others were accidental from signal fires or camp fires going out of control.
Indians were not the only starters of fires. In 1915 the “Kennicott fire” was intentionally set by a woodcutter to create fuel wood for use at the Kennicott mine. Sixty-four thousand acres (100 square miles) was burned. In the same year, sparks from a train set a fire that burned 384,000 acres near Chitina.
Prior to 1940, there were a number of large fires in Alaska and Yukon that each burned more than 100,000 acres. Among the biggest were the 1,900,000-acre fire at Lake Iliamna in 1935, the Sheenjak River burn of 312,000 acres in 1937 and the Mosquito Fork Flat fire along the old Valdez-Eagle trail that burned over 900,000 acres in 1922.
In Alaska alone it is estimated that there are about 200 million acres of “burnable” land, of which about half is actually forested. Only about seven percent of the burnable land can be considered commercial forest capable of producing 20 cubic feet per acre (1.4 cubic meters per hectare) or more of wood annually.
Virtually all the northern forest has been burned over during the last 200 years. It is estimated that a million acres each year is burned, on the average.

By this measure, spring comes to central Alaska 10 days earlier than in 1960, said geophysicist Martin Jeffries at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks”
I’m no climate scientist – just a guy who stumbled onto this website and have found it very interesting. My stupid question is: if we”ve been seeing spring come 10 days earlier (on average) than in 1960, do we know if winter has been coming any earlier? thanks.
John v

My 2002 report of the 2002 Nenana Ice Classic, published under the Irish spelling of my name, can be found here:
The Nenana Ice Classic 2002 or How to Lose Money Gambling on Global Warming
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/nenana_ice_classic_2002.htm
With some degree of immodesty I reviewed my words from 2002 and found them to be prophetic!
So what is the significance of the Nenana Ice Classic Proxy? As is the case with most Phenology Proxies, the real answer is probably: not very much. Just as tree rings measure cellulous formation during the growing season and leaf emergence measures prevailing spring temperature and precipitation conditions, the Nenana Ice Classic is measuring the time of ice breakup on the Tanana River at Nenana Alaska, during a 32 day period from late April to late May; nothing more and nothing less. Many events will affect ice breakup, including ice thickness, air temperature, water temperature, water levels and flow rates. To conjecture that a log of the Nenana Ice Classic will prove or disprove the existence of global warming, or global cooling for that matter, is idle speculation with absolutely no basis in fact. This is not to imply that Phenology is without value. Provided the data are accurate, evaluated objectively and their limitations are clearly understood, they can be of great scientific value. The problem with Phenology is that it is now being used advance a political agenda rather than a scientific one. Of course, if the Global Warmers were to publish the full data as illustrated above, they would be due an apology, but on their past record is seems doubtful that one will be needed.
Given that the paper from 2001, was worthy of publication in Science, why have we not heard more about the Nenana Ice Classic in the last seven year? Perhaps this graphic, complete through 2008, will explain.
http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk316/MichaelRonayne/Nenana_Ice_1917_2008.jpg
We live in a world where Science publishes the trivial but politically correct work of Drs. Segarin & Micheli while the very significant work of Drs. Livingston and Penn is rejected.
I am looking forward to the 2009 results for the Nenana Ice Classic.
Mike

BarryW, “Looking at the dates …”
Well, waddya know! A bell curve. Who would have thought it?

Some similar interesting data.
“The first long-term studies of climate change took place along the coast of Hudson Bay at places like Churchill and York Factory. They are part of the longest and most comprehensive set of weather observations in North America, if not the world.
As part of daily activities at any Hudson’s Bay Company trading post, weather patterns, rainfall, and casual observations were recorded and eventually archived by the company. In fact during the early 1800s, there were at least three times as many weather stations in Northern Manitoba as there are today. There is even evidence that a weather station was planned for Cape Merry in the mid-1700s.
Weather records for York Factory and Churchill date all the way back to 1714 and 1718, respectively. The Hudson’s Bay Company kept accurate records to assist in their business decisions regarding the fur trade. Their archives contain journals from over two hundred trading posts throughout the Canadian northwest.
York Factory, as the main depot and administrative center for the Hudson’s Bay Company, has the most complete set of meteorological records. Its first weather entry was made by James Knight on September 6, 1714. ”
snip
Short-term climate change is not a new phenomena. Over the fifteen years between 1720 and 1735, the first snowfall of the year moved from the first week of September to the last. Also, the late 1700s were turbulent years. They were extremely cold but annual snow cover would vary from ‘extreme depth to no cover’. For instance, November 10th 1767 only one snowfall that quickly thawed had been recorded. June 6, 1791 many feet of snow in the post’s gardens. The entry for July 14, 1798 reads ‘…53 degrees colder today than it was yesterday.’
We seem to be running in roughly forty year cycles of warming and cooling – within a longer term warm period. This century has been marked by a warming period (1910-1940) followed by a cooler period through to the 1970s. The latest warming trend began in the late 70s, early 80s.”
snip
http://www.polarbearalley.com/hudson-bay-post-climate-change.html

Shawn Whelan wrote:
“We seem to be running in roughly forty year cycles of warming and cooling – within a longer term warm period. This century has been marked by a warming period (1910-1940) followed by a cooler period through to the 1970s. The latest warming trend began in the late 70s, early 80s.”
Good observations on the cycles, bro. There are many such cycles (which of course the Wall Street Journal conveniently left out):
The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (which has very recently shifted over to its cold phase)
The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. (which is still in its warm phase and helped give us a snow drought in the SE USA). Hey don’t laugh….our snow droughts are 8 inches annually LOL.
The El Nino / Southern Oscillation index (OK he did mention briefly the “La Nina).
So, for the many of the great minds who believe that the atmosphere is greatly affected by the different types of oceanic forcing described above….just so happens probably just as many of those great minds are watching another animal….that is the SUN.
And we are about due for another Grand Minimum (and if Father Sun keeps up his snoozin’ right now…well…..).
So the quote in the WSJ article about trends over a 150 year period, while remarkable, are not totally unexplainable.
This is especially true in light of the fact that many scientists believe that SIGNIFICANT minima in sun activity occur every so often (the exact intervals are being debated right now)….and such events lower the global temperatures.
Some have reported that the solar activity of the past 75 years is its greatest it has been in the past 10,000 years, and thus, that there shows a good correlation as to why all of the warming trends over the same period.
It amazes me the WALL STREET JOURNAL and the BBC and other reputable news organizations…that even they…would be “snowed” by the AGW orthodoxy.
I remember when I as a kid I was taught to believe that the world began in 4004 BC.
There are many people today who STILL believe that.
In similar vein, the New International Church of Anthropgenic Global Warming….seem to think the world BEGAN about 150 YEARS ago when modern records started being kept!
Chris
Norfolk, VA

Roger Sowell,
I think that the ice road metric is utter bollocks. Their link to the modelling project comes up empty, so no help there. The graph should be useful for any oil exploration company planning work in Alaska (winter time only, ground is a soggy mess in the summer) but is so intertwined with changing regulatiory requirements that one cannot infer anything about temperature. Given that we have temperature records for Alaska, many not tainted with UHI or microsite issue, that one wonders why such a unspectacular “proxy” is posted at all.

For the sportsman amongst the readership, wishing to advance the social programs in Nenana Alaska, I am going to share some graphics with you. If anyone scores please remember the Tip Jar on our host’s website.
http://www.surfacestations.org/donate.htm
Any calculations involving ice breakup should be done using Julian dates and times, with all times calculated in Alaskan Standard Time. Not unexpectedly, there is a very strong time-of-day signature associated with breakup as the following graph demonstrates. Could the Sun be melting the ice?
Nenana Ice Classic Breakup By Hour Of Day (1917-2008)
http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk316/MichaelRonayne/Nenana_Breakup_Hour_1917-2008.jpg
Surprisingly between 11PM and Midnight, there is an unexpected increase in ice breakup events. Anyone who has even vacation by a lake in the winter is familiar with ice cracking during the night as it cools and expands. I suspect we are dealing with a similar phenomenon here. If you do decide to wager, don’t forget the witching hour.
The following graphic shows breakup by Julian Day. The highest probability breakup is Julian day 120. There is a cluster of breakup days from 125 to 128. And let us not forget the outliers at days 110 and 141.
Nenana Ice Classic Breakup By Julian Day (1917-2008)
http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk316/MichaelRonayne/Nenana_Breakup_Day_1917-2008.jpg
So when will breakup occur this year? While Alaska had an incredibly cold winter this year, there was a warm spell at the end of January and beginning of February. Currently ice conditions are very similar to 2008. Last year, breakup occurred at 2008/05/06 22:53AST, which was Julian day 127 and hour 23, which is right in the middle of the second high probability cluster refinanced above. I would expect similar results this year for the Julian day but you can pick your own hour. How sure of this am I? Not very, this is why it is called gambling.
I did try many other ways display the data, including correlations with other climate events such as the PDO, but none of them were very convincing. In case any of you are wondering, I have never gambled on Nanana or any other game of chance unless I am donating money to a local charity. My belief is statistics is such that I know that the house is always going to win.
Mike

“”” Oliver Ramsay (15:12:56) :
The meter-thick ice in these northern rivers doesn’t melt away by early May; it is broken up and swept downstream by the melting of snow in the drainage. Soot lying on the sidehills would certainly accelerate the freshet. The Tanana empties into the Yukon a good thousand kilometers from any tidal influence. IMO an early break-up reflects the warmth, sunshine and rain of the previous two or three weeks. “””
So I gather that Alaska has some sort of gravity shielding dome over it that prohibits tidal forces from operating in the State ? That’s a pretty cool trick if you can pull it off.
Here in California, we have lots of places that aren’t near any coast; but they still get their fair share of earthquakes that get triggered during the proper tidal phases. And they pretty much come on schedule just when that USGS outcast Jim Berquist (I think that’s his name) says they will.
Maybe California should ask Obama for a gravity shield too.
George

January 2009 CET was 3.0. Average for the whole series (from 1659) is 4.6.
It was about the 210th warmest.
It was actually the 24th COLDEST since 1914.
Who are these guys?

Roger Sowell,
Loads have got heavier as trucks got more powerful. I have seen loads moved that would never be allowed in the lower 48, loads that had one semi in front and 2 in back pushing.
As far as the Ice Classic goes if we had a lot of snow I bet early, light snow I bet late, runoff breaks the ice up in my opinion.

TonyB
“Where on earth did this come from? Have you got a reference? Are you talking about 2009? I am looking at CET now and that statement is not remotely true.”
I STAND CORRECTED TONYB. (HA HA HA HA toward me then!)
I was paging through all the threads pretty quickly. The first thing I clicked on on THIS thread was the very first three words were the Wall Street Journal and I guess I was not paying attention not noticing that was NOT the main article.
You are correct the WSJ article referenced was 2008. (LOL)
I get bored at work and multitask sometimes and sometimes I speed through things too fast.
But at least I did not mistake October’s global temperature data with Septembers’. (Ha Ha again).
Thanks for pointing that out.
Chris
Norfolk, VA

Thanks as always, Dr. S. for the counterbalancing information.
The quote came from http://www.ilovemycarbondioxide.com/pdf/Willie_Soon-Its_the_Sun_Stupid.pdf
Anyway….keep up the good work

Catlin Arctic Survey
Total distance travelled
28.89 km
Average daily distance
2.9 km
Estimated distance to North Pole
925.63 km
Time on Arctic Ocean
10 days
So in another 300 days they will be there. Back in the 1800’s and the first half of the 20th century the explorers thought nothing of walking hundreds of miles through the Arctic Winter.

It’s interesting to note that for total ice extent in the arctic measured on the JAXA graph 2008 matched 2004 until recently, but from that river the ice thickness is 40-50% more in 2009. Which goes to show I guess how a localised measurement is not a good proxy for climate change in the 20th Century.
Regards
Andy

Don S
The catlin survey is being run by a nearish neigbour of mine. They have carried out enormous preparations and the expertise of Pen Hadow the leader stands scrutiny against the bext arctic exploers in the world.
Their progress is very slow partly because they are pulling a heavy sledge with a radar that measures the thikness of the ice and they are drilling holes.
I seriously doubt the scientific purpose of the expedition however-Pen just wanted to be out in the snow-the sponsors have another agenda.
Measuring the thickness of the ice in a straight line 700 miles long just gives a reference point over a very small area for one date and means nothing unless it is repeated for many years.
The satellite measurements of ice area since 1978 don’t reflect the conditions before that and I think the danger is that people will read too much into the data collected.
This entry from the expeditions diary amused me
“Tuesday, 10th March 2009
Due to intense and fierce weather today, the team has decided to remain at camp.”
Tonyb

PaulM
Yes, that analogy did cross my mind!
No doubt the reason for the publicity tap being turned on and off at will was the involvement of Richard Bransons son on the Kayak expedition.
TonyB

“”” Oliver Ramsay (23:02:27) :
George said:
So I gather that Alaska has some sort of gravity shielding dome over it that prohibits tidal forces from operating in the State ? That’s a pretty cool trick if you can pull it off. “””
Well Oliver, I suppose you did catch that note that someone posted, that we did in fact have a few small shakers in the State of California in the last few days, and on the way home that night, I noted the rising full moon, and I just griinnned; and whispered to myself in the car; “Have a beer on me Jim Berquist !”. “You called another one right on schedule.”
The tidal bore effect is quite apparent for the break up of the Larsen-B ice shelf; but less so for the Tanana River ice. Yes there may not be a water surge to assist; but there still does have to be a tidal bowing of the ice which will influence breakup, if you get new/full moons close to the breakup time.
But I thought the note relating to water levels in the river, was most applicable to the situation.
George

The English would pull sleds around the Arctic for hundreds of miles back in the 1850’s while looking for Franklin. They mapped at thesame time. Amundsen was a lot smarter and used dogsleds. They would build a small igloo in to sleep at night.

The earth is some four and a half BILLION years old. To try and interpret weather history or make a forecast by looking at the period form 1917 to now (or even going back to the 1700s), hardly a dot in geological time, is superfluous. Ice ages have come and gone and the earth will go on warming and cooling as it has done before man was here and it will continue after we are gone.
I do have a couple guesses in the Nenana Ice Classic and I’ll let you know if I win.

May 1, 2009, 8:41 pm.