July 07, 2022, 10:17:45 AM


Due to SPAM attacks, new members must be approved before posting.  Please email jclough@warrenpinnacle.com when registering and your account will be approved.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - YUROK1

Model Formulation & Parameters / Re: Emergent Coast
July 22, 2015, 10:50:58 AM
Thank you for the clarification.
After closer inspection the grey lines within the Riverine tidal polygon are actually strips of Estuarine polygons. The model is suggesting upriver/inland migration of the estuary but seems to be confused possibly by an adjacent side channel, thus causing a strange dynamic. I am not sure why upper boundary of the Riverine Tidal polygon has not migrated upriver/inland? Any suggestions to confirm or remedy this issue would be appreciated.
Model Formulation & Parameters / Re: Emergent Coast
July 14, 2015, 01:08:33 PM
Perhaps you can reference a page number? The reason I asked is that the Tech doc states:

"Aggradation, the creation of land or drying of wetlands when sea levels fall or when accretion rates exceed sea levels, is not included in the current implementation of SLAMM 6. (page 20)

I wanted to make sure that in the case when sea level is falling due to an outpacing rate of uplift (using a negative historical trend value in place of a raster) , that the model will run. 

Model Formulation & Parameters / Estuary migration
July 14, 2015, 12:40:09 PM

In our recent model run the SLAMM outputs for Estuarine and Riverine Tidal  polygons are showing no deviation from existing conditions under a A1B max at 2100 and 2175. Shouldn't  these boundaries be moving inland? What appears to be modeled are grey striations (multiple lines) within the Riverine Tidal polygon, more so at 2100. Is this a glitch in the model?
Model Formulation & Parameters / Emergent Coast
June 03, 2015, 03:11:53 PM
Will the model run if a negative value ( such as -1)  is entered into the Historical trend parameter? I am wondering if the model can work backwards to reflect shifts in wetland structure due receding water levels from  a highly  emergent coastline. Thanks
OK thank you
Model Formulation & Parameters / Re: Fixed SLR
June 03, 2015, 03:07:33 PM
Thank you  :)
Model Formulation & Parameters / Fixed SLR
June 01, 2015, 03:40:16 PM
Is it possible to use  a fixed SLR value,  for example 2.5 meters , and determine when it would be reached under each of the scenarios?
Are there any caveats to modeling beyond the year 2100?
Model Formulation & Parameters / Re: Uplift
April 23, 2015, 02:17:38 PM
If I were to use the Historical Trend parameter, how does this effect the SLR scenario that is chosen(execution options)? Is a custom rate then required?
Model Formulation & Parameters / Re: Uplift
April 23, 2015, 01:46:27 PM
Thanks for your reply, Does using an uplift raster in the file setup offer any advantages over using an adjusted historical trend?
Model Formulation & Parameters / Uplift
April 22, 2015, 05:21:14 PM

I have recently located some local uplift data showing a range   of .1 to 1.0 mm/year here in Klamath CA. I do not have a layer representing this value and I am wondering how I can use the historical Trend Parameter to increase the accuracy of the model?  Would you recommend that I use an average, .5 mm/year, in the Historical trend box?