Irrelevant
Well-known member
Idk... hard to reconcile the two
I mean NW Nevada is 150% normal but in a drought? Eastern Utah is at 200% normal but severe drought? I think the model is wrong.
Drought for the west
- Thread starter rick19Kilo
- Start date
I mean NW Nevada is 150% normal but in a drought? Eastern Utah is at 200% normal but severe drought? I think the model is wrong.
marksjeep
Well-known member
They have a brief explanation of the DM map. Not saying I disagree with you, however.
West
Precipitation was below-normal across the region, especially along the West Coast. Due to weeks of heavy precipitation, from a series of atmospheric rivers, halted most degradations or improvements this week despite the deluge, placing much of the region on a holding pattern. The rain did give reservoirs a much-needed boost, but California’s infrastructure is not set up to make use of such a massive rainfall. Because of California’s system of dams and levees, which try to control surface water flow, underground aquifers are not always able to recharge their overpumped supplies during heavy rain events. When rivers are restricted, less water comes into contact with soil surfaces and less water is therefore able to seep down into aquifers. In the drier areas of the West, moderate (D1) drought expanded into parts of northern Idaho and northwestern Montana due to continued degrading conditions that can be observed in soil moisture, streamflow, and precipitation deficits (up to five inches) for this area. In Utah, much of the state has above normal snowpack but no improvements were made this week based on the current issues with groundwater and depleted reservoirs.
antlerradar
Well-known member
That drought map doesn't look too bad when you compare it to maps not that long ago.
Scott85
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2018
- Messages
- 3,035
I think it’s was just that much drought. California was the dark red before the huge storm dump all that rain and caused all that flooding. They are still in a drought but not that bad. I think we still need a lot more snow/rain to get back to normal.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I would contend there's too much incorporating of old data into current conditions modeling. Where was CA going to put more water? The only place not recharged was deep aquifers and those depletions have more to do with over extraction than drought.
The California Drought is Over. Definitively.
This blog provides updated forecasts and comments on current weather or other topics
cliffmass.blogspot.com
You could flood the whole Central Valley and the Sacramento for a year, and the groundwater would not change much.I would contend there's too much incorporating of old data into current conditions modeling. Where was CA going to put more water? The only place not recharged was deep aquifers and those depletions have more to do with over extraction than drought.
The California Drought is Over. Definitively.
This blog provides updated forecasts and comments on current weather or other topics
Scott85
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2018
- Messages
- 3,035
Great point! I guess that’s why snow is better than rain, it gives the water time to soak in.I would contend there's too much incorporating of old data into current conditions modeling. Where was CA going to put more water? The only place not recharged was deep aquifers and those depletions have more to do with over extraction than drought.
The California Drought is Over. Definitively.
This blog provides updated forecasts and comments on current weather or other topics
Dougfirtree
Well-known member
Good arguments being made on both sides of this discussion. I guess for me, if I'm creating policy on water use, I want data that is factoring in a longer period of time. This could just be a blip.
or someone entered the wrong data or numbers...common mistake on any computer. LOL
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Sure, policies on water use absolutely need to be geared towards long term trends. But to ignore rain/snow is just bad science, just as ignoring the lack of it is equally bad. CA has seen significant recent droughts and will certainly continue to see droughts in the future. CA is not currently in a drought.
mevertsen
Well-known member
No. Not wrong. The drought we have been in the last few years has been really bad. We need several years of these types of averages to truly break the drought. I am in the basin that is the lower Humboldt. 168 percent of normal. Lots of snow but we need many more like this.
Mountain Man
Well-known member
I agree. Something has to break at some point. Either agriculture will wither or cities will need to be abandoned. It’s crazy to think about either of those two scenarios, but the resource cannot sustain the current use. Here is another article on the subject that touches on the political aspects.
Shrinking Colorado River hands Biden his first climate brawl
California, Arizona and Nevada are among the states at odds over how to divide the river's water — a fight among powerful political and economic interests with dire consequences.
www.politico.com
sapperJ24
Well-known member
You are correct.
"On October 1, 2021 the NRCS updated its 30-year normals period from 1981-2010 to 1991-2020. The NRCS uses normals in a variety of products to represent data as a percent of normal. Changing normals impacts percentages and requires users to re-calibrate themselves."
Normals
Irrelevant
Well-known member
What metrics would you use?
The only flaw I see is that aquifers aren't being adequately replenished, but again, there are places where it could rain almost everyday and we'd still lose groundwater to over extraction. That has nothing to do with drought
mevertsen
Well-known member
I've lived in the same water basin since I was 7 years old in 1990.
As these storms have been coming in, my recollection was that we have not had a wet winter like this since the 96/97 winter. Looking at data, that seems to be correct.
The previous real wet year before that, was 1984. The only time Lake Mead has been full was in 1983, the year I was born. In either 1983 or 1984 is when water flowed over the rye patch dam. Hasn't happened before or since.
I know ranchers who have lived in this basin theor entire lives. They agreed this is the wettest in many years. Feet of snow in places I have cut firewood in February many times over the years. Ranchers actually concerned over cows being able to reach the feed. This is a generational set of storms we've had here..
Which has been preceded by dry years So bad animals can't find water. The usage where I am has not changed significantly. The mines donde water but that gets replenished into the basins it comes from through the RIB process.
Leader growth on sagebrush over the years real bad. One stretch was so bad the feed health was so poor, deer antlers would just break. Like chalk.
Hank nailed it. Droughts are not cured in one season. I would argue as well they’re better cured over multiple seasons. Any time you get influxes of moisture more than the ground can handle you’re going to have all kinds of erosion damaging the landscape. Give me four years of 105-125% average than one year of 200%. Of that 200%, more than half is doing more damage than good.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
SD ain't CA or NV. So 4 years of consistently above average precip maybe significantly less likely than where you are.
...
The point I'm trying to make is that if you step back the from human experience and actually measure something, it's hard to point to something that supports still being in a drought. I get that everyone has their own ideas of what a drought is. My Mom will never be convinced, no matter how much data or evidence I send her, that they're not in a permanent serious drought caused by climate change. It's become a religion for her, it's not based on facts but on faith, faith that can still be supported by select observations.
But if you look at the definition for drought provided by NOAA
Meteorolgically - above normal, as shows in previous other figures.
Agriculturally - If you extend over to the parts of the Rockies irrigated with CO river water then sure. But those based on CA reservoirs don't meet this.
Hydrologically - surface waters are met, groundwaters in many places are not, and likely will never be.
Socioeconomically - does not appear to be an immediate issue, unless we're talking about deep GW.
Soil moisture is almost double normal throughout much of the SW.
I get that people seem to want, for reasons I don't understand, for their to be drought. But objectively the current conditions do not support it over a SW regional area.
Technically I guess your right. The SW is an arid desert for the most part.
I still do not understand why there is not de-sal plants on the coast. Except the coastal commission in CA is way out of wack with reality.
