A Short Primer on Mass Wasting, Courtesy of California's Atmospheric River Storms

I live in California's Great Valley, known to some as the plain old "Central Valley", and most know it as a very flat place. A VERY flat place. Over the four-hundred-mile length of the valley elevations barely rise above 300 feet above sea level, and much of the valley is floodplain. As we emerge from the unrelenting series of atmospheric river storms that dropped near-record (and some record) amounts of precipitation all over the state, one might assume the greatest problem here is flooding. Some areas have indeed been hit very hard, and lives were lost.

One might be surprised to hear that even though the rivers rose, some areas were less affected by the flooding. In the case of my home county, Stanislaus, there were (and continue to be) problems along the lower reaches of the Tuolumne and San Joaquin Rivers, but on the east side of the valley there were few ill effects. Along my usual walkway, the Tuolumne River Parkway Trail in Waterford, the damage was of a type not often associated with a flat valley floor: mass wasting, or mass movement.

The reason has to do with a quirk of the geological history of our region. During the Pleistocene ice ages over the last two million years, glaciers covered perhaps 30% of the Sierra Nevada on repeated occasions. The ice never reached the Great Valley, but the streams of ice ground up vast amounts of rock to sand and mud, and the rivers were swollen with muddy meltwater. Rivers like the Tuolumne and Merced built up vast alluvial fans that resulted in higher elevations near the mountain's edge, on the order of a few tens of feet. That doesn't sound like much, but when the glaciers ebbed, the muddy rivers turned clear, and the rivers began to erode into those old alluvial fans, forming terraces and bluffs.

On the one hand, these bluffs and terraces have protected towns like Modesto and Turlock from river flooding because even the worst of floods cannot overtop the bluffs where most of the region's cities are located. On the other hand, the bluffs are steep and are composed of loosely consolidated sediments. That's the ideal recipe for mass wasting, the downhill movement of loose debris and rock under the influence of gravity. I got an excellent introduction to a variety of mass wasting events after the final storm last week. It was a mess along the trail.

Mass wasting happens because of gravity, but an overaccumulation of water can substantially add to the intensity and degree of movement. The movement takes three forms: falls, flows, and slides. I saw examples of all three this week.

In the picture above, there was so much water built up in the soil that the slope failed rapidly and the fluid mix of silt and water flowed and covered part of the trail below. This is called a mudflow. In different circumstances, especially involving glaciers and erupting volcanoes or desert cloudbursts, mudflows are one of the most dangerous forms of mass wasting. A single volcanic mudflow in Colombia in 1985 killed some 25,000 people. 

A short distance away, the slope was more coherent, but water had added a great deal of weight to an already steepened slope (from the carving of the trail itself), and the slope failed as a single mass that slid downhill as a slump (above). Slumps are usually much slower-moving than a mudflow and thus rarely kill anyone. But they can do considerable damage to homes, roads and other developments. The slump shown above is inconsequential, but I saw a much more serious problem a short ways down the trail... 

The town's water treatment plant has been built on a lower terrace next to the Tuolumne River at the base of the steep bluff. A paved access road was necessary, and they carved it into the slope, oversteepening the upper slopes, and putting additional weight on the slope below the road. A slump has begun forming right next to the road, and is ominously slipping an inch or two a day so far. I don't know if it will stabilize now that we've had some dry weather, but they are going to have to do some mitigation work in coming weeks.

The over-steepened slope above the access road has always been a problem, as rockfalls have been a constant, if minor, problem even in dry weather. The rains made the problem far, far worse, and after the final storm, the road was a real mess. There had been some wild tobacco shrubs whose roots helped hold back the rock, but they could do little to stabilize things in the face of intense rain.

Mass wasting consists of flows, falls, and slides, but one of the most pervasive and efficient forms of mass-wasting is almost mundane in the face of all the drama seen above. Over time all exposed surface weather and develop into a loose ground cover called regolith. If the regolith can support plant life, it is referred to as soil. If any slope exists at all, the soil and regolith will move move downhill imperceptibly over many months or years. Soil creep is not dramatic, but in the big picture it probably moves more material than any other form of mass wasting. It never kills anyone, but it will deform and bulldoze structures built into the slope over time. It's why old barbwire fences on hilly country roads always seem to be tilting over. It can even tilt telephone poles.

Soil creep was not much in evidence as a result of the storms, but it is clear that the trail builders knew it would be a problem over time. That's why many sections of the trail have walls built on the uphill side of the trail, to hold back the process for awhile (see below).

In one week, my modest hiking trail showed off nearly all the major forms of mass wasting, with the only exception (thankfully) of a debris avalanche that is capable of wreaking serious havoc, and solifluction, a form of creep known from artic environments. How did things play out where you live? I've heard a lot of stories of serious damage coming from around the state. I hope you've avoided the worst of it.

Year-end Look at the California Water Situation

 

It's the last day of 2022, and the third year of a stunning drought in California. It's been raining pretty much across the state during December, and there are hopes of alleviating the drought a bit. Let's hope so. The map above from the California Data Exchange Center gives a pretty clear idea of the situation. Reservoirs across the state are for the most part well below normal, and in the case of the biggest (Shasta, Oroville, etc.), still ominously low. I hope to revisit this diagram in a few weeks and see some changes, but we will see.

The long-term predictions earlier this year were for a continuation of dry conditions, so the current onslaught of atmospheric river storms is somewhat of a surprise, albeit a welcome one. But of course, one has to be wary of what one wishes for. There are flood watches up all around the state as one more storm will blow through to end the year.

There is also the cautionary tale of the previous rain year. We had some record storms in October and December last year, and things were looking great, but then January and February were about as dry as can be. I recorded a mere 0.08 inches in those two months.

Still, this year has some promise. From the weather station in the Geotripper backyard 13 miles east of Modesto, we've had 7.14 inches of precipitation in December, the highest total in the 32 years that I've been keeping statistics (I've recorded more than 5 inches in six different years, but never more than 6). Even with the earlier dry months, we should round out 2022 with about 8.6 inches as we move into the critical months of January and February when most of the precipitation should happen.

Despite the rain, I felt a need to check out our local barometer of runoff conditions. The Tuolumne River cannot serve in this capacity because of the numerous reservoirs upstream that very carefully control the daily flow levels. I checked instead at Dry Creek, of which there are many in California. This particular Dry Creek has its headwaters in the lower foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mother Lode, and flows for about 40 miles before joining the Tuolumne River in Modesto. Ironically, there is almost always some water in Dry Creek, obviously from rain runoff during the winter season, but also from irrigation overflow during the dry summer months. Without any substantial flood control structures, it is a good measure of runoff conditions during storms.

The creek was running about 600 cubic feet per second when I got this picture, which is about twice the current flow of the reservoir-controlled Tuolumne River. As can be seen from the discharge graph from the USGS Water Resources site, it has already been well over 1,500 cfs a couple of times in the last week. I haven't seen this much water in the creek in a couple of years.

Of course, the local picture is not the most important statistic. Everything in California's water infrastructure depends on the snow conditions, especially in the Sierra Nevada. Although these atmospheric river storms we are experiencing derive from tropical sources and are warmer than we might want, the current snow conditions are promising. Check out the report:

Let's hope this keeps up. A lot of forests, rivers, animals and people are depending on it.

What are conditions like in your region?

Out on the California Prairies: Taking Stock of California's Most Powerful Storm Ever

There are many ways to describe the power of a storm: monetary damages from flooding, rainfall totals, rise of reservoirs and rivers, and others. So one can argue about which particular storm was the most powerful to ever hit the state. I'm thinking especially of storms like those of 1861-62 that left much of the Central Valley as a vast lake for months, the 1997 floods that overwhelmed some reservoirs in the Sierra, or the 1969 floods that I experienced in Southern California. They were all devastating floods, and yesterday's storm won't be remembered the same way as these disasters, but in two ways this storm apparently was unique. 

The storm was called a "bomb cyclone", a term that meteorologists apparently hate in the same way that geologists hate "supervolcano". In any case, the power of the storm lay in the intense low pressure cyclone spinning in the ocean offshore of California and the Pacific Northwest. The lower the pressure, the higher the pressure gradient force that controls wind speed. The pressure was a record 942 millibars, and this generated hurricane-force winds over the ocean. Inland, vegetation and mountains slowed the gales, but we still had a wild day in the Central Valley, with trees and telephone lines down.

The Tuolumne River at Roberts Ferry Bridge

Storms can be incredibly powerful in terms of winds, but as I've discovered in Death Valley National Park, without a source of moisture, that will be it: powerful winds. But this storm tapped into subtropical moisture from the general vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands. This band of moisture, termed an atmospheric river, carries vastly more water than even the Mississippi. This stream of atmospheric moisture was pushed upward as it encountered the frontal system of the cyclone and it produced a prodigious amount of relatively warm precipitation. A number of all-time records for one day storm totals fell across the state, including downtown Sacramento, which got 5.44", breaking a record that stood since 1880. That represents 69% of all the rain the city received in the entire rain year 2020-21. Blue Canyon in the Sierra Nevada got 10.40", which amounted to almost a third of the entire 2020-21 water year. 

I headed out onto the prairies of the Great Valley and the Sierra Nevada foothills this afternoon to see what the atmospheric storm did to the grasslands. My first stop was to check out the Tuolumne River at Roberts Ferry Bridge (above). The river hadn't changed much, as it takes time for the waters to gather the storm runoff and move downstream, but the river is also controlled by the huge dam at Don Pedro Reservoir, and they'll hold onto as much water as they can. It's currently at 48% of capacity, which is bad, but not as bad as most other Northern California reservoirs (Lake Shasta is at 22% or so).

The biggest effect on the Tuolumne will be in downtown Modesto where Dry Creek joins the bigger river. Dry Creek is a normally...well...dry creek that has headwaters in the foothills north of Modesto Reservoir. It is undammed, so it can occasionally produce large floods that can back up into some residential neighborhoods. It had a minimal flow over the last few weeks of a few cubic feet per second. But I could see that a lot of water was gathering out in the prairie. The picture above shows one of the small tributaries to Dry Creek, and channels like this are present all over the region. By tomorrow Dry Creek may be flowing at close to 900 cubic feet per second.

The prairie for the most part was certainly wet, but there were few visual reminders that a vast amount of rain had fallen overnight. The vernal pools held water and creeks were flowing. But little flooding and soil loss had taken place, with one glaring exception. Tens of thousands of acres of prairie have been uprooted to be be replaced by almond groves. These groves have been planted in nice neat rows up and down the hillsides, providing a convenient avenue for floodwaters to cause intense soil erosion. I passed numerous scenes like that above where mud from the orchards had flowed down the road. It's hard to believe in this day and age that the farmers would be making the kind of mistakes that led to the Dust Bowl in the 1920s in Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas.

Away from the almond groves, the grass roots held the soil in place, and the water was infiltrating underground and flowing gently in the recently dry creek beds to gather and eventually drain into the Tuolumne River. The birds and other life seemed enervated by the moisture and were very active throughout the afternoon. I saw lots of Brewer's Blackbirds, Western Meadowlarks, Savannah Sparrows, Red-tailed and Ferruginous Hawks, American Kestrels, and Ravens. I loved coming across the small herd of horses; I was reminded that horses evolved on these prairies millions of years ago before migrating into Asia. They later became extinct here in North America only to be 'returned' by the Spaniards in the 1500s.

The final thought about today's storm is knowing that after the warm rains that snow would be falling in the high country of the Sierra Nevada. In the webcam from the Yosemite Conservancy we can see that upper Yosemite Valley is now mantled with the cold white stuff. Many wishes that this could be the start of a good water year with a chance to recover somewhat from our devastating drought.

There's a Giant Atmospheric River Storm Pummeling California...So of course I'm Headed to Death Valley to Experience it...

So we here in California are experiencing one of those very intense atmospheric river storms generated when a highly active jet stream dips far to the south and starts to draw up very moist tropical air from the Pacific Ocean. The storms pound the state like a fire hose, dipping to the north and then to the south, and back again. In once sense, such storms are a godsend because they provide the bulk of our water resources.

On the other hand, the timing is...great. We can't reschedule our president's holiday weekend field studies class, so we are headed out to experience the storm firsthand, out in the elements, facing down our fears and all that other character-building stuff. We are headed to Death Valley National Park. Our best hopes lie with the Sierra Nevada's rain-shadow effect on the nation's driest valley.

It's not the first time this has happened of course. In thirty years of field studies trips we've encountered fierce storms a number of times, and it's always...memorable. Such trips give us the best memories and the best stories to tell our children and grandchildren. And all kidding aside, it's awesome to see intense weather events take place in the desert environment.

So it's probably radio silence for the next few days unless you want to follow our travels on Twitter (@geotripper). If I get a phone signal, I will try to post a few pictures. In the meantime, stay dry!

The Difference a Year Makes: Liveblogging the "Deluge" (Hint: There isn't one)

This post is both a look back at ten years of Geotripping, but is also an update on snow and precipitation conditions in California right now, and that picture is not pretty. My backyard rain gauge had amassed a mere 1.22" of rain by the beginning of January, and while January had higher than normal precipitation, I only show 4.66" for the rain year, just a bit over 50% of normal (I think we benefited from a few isolated downpours, as Modesto, just 13 miles away is at 3.09"). During the historic drought of 2011-16, three of the dry years were wetter than this.

I walked the Tuolumne River Parkway Trail today, and for the first time in weeks I could see the Sierra Nevada, the peaks that loom high above Yosemite Valley. The sun reflected off a snowpack that was far different than it was a year ago. The snowpack is only 30% of normal (see below). It's late January and there are a few ski resorts that haven't even opened yet (if they'll even open at all).

Source: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/snowapp/sweq.action

If there is any bright spot in this dismal year it is California's reservoirs. Because of the ample rain and snow last year, most of the reservoirs are at healthy levels, more than 100% of normal (see below). One prominent exception is Oroville Reservoir, which was lowered drastically to allow repairs to the spillways that failed during the height of the storms last year. There is at least some comfort to know that we have some resources to weather another drought, at least for a few years. I would have preferred a few wet years to help replenish our depleted groundwater reservoirs. That is a lasting effect of the drought that may not be fixed any time soon.

Source: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/rescond.pdf

The Tuolumne River Parkway is a changed place. During the deluge last year, river flows were maintained at or near flood levels through July. Much of the river floodplain was underwater for months, and hundreds of trees and shrubs were uprooted and carried downstream, in places leaving behind huge masses of dead vegetation. Riverside vegetation really never had a chance to recover and regrow once the water subsided. The hated invasive weed River Hyacinth is gone, but so are many riparian shrubs. The six month flood was necessary to protect human developments on the river, but it didn't do the habitat much good. I'm hoping that the wholesale redistribution of river gravels will do the Salmon and other river organisms some good. I have run across signs of beaver, otter, raccoon, and foxes on the floodplain in recent days.

I've been going through the Geotripper archives to select some of my favorite blog posts of the last ten years. The first half of 2017 was dominated by my observations of the extraordinarily wet year and the flooding, which I called "Liveblogging the Deluge". I wrote dozens of posts all through the first half of the year, and it was hard to pick any particular ones to illustrate here, so I settled on the one I wrote exactly one year ago. It involved the post-mortem of the first of the major atmospheric river storms that battered the state. Many more were to come...

Thursday, January 26, 2017

Liveblogging the Deluge: The Post Mortem...Storms That Made a Difference

The atmospheric river storms of January have finally subsided, and we are looking at kind of a new landscape across California. We had a couple of sunny days, so we headed up the highway to have a look at Don Pedro Reservoir on the Tuolumne River coming out of Yosemite. When we visited on January 5, the lake stood at 786 feet, which translates to 76% of capacity. That was 114% of normal for this time of year, which was a relief after five years of intense drought.

Don Pedro Reservoir on January 26 after two atmospheric river storms, elevation 813 feet (90% of capacity).

When we arrived yesterday, the lake stood at 813 feet, or 90% of capacity, which is 133% of normal. It is only 17 feet below the level of the dam. It could have been higher, but the dam operators have been maintaining constant outflows in the range of 7,000-9,000 cubic feet per second, a level that is just short of flood stage. Had they not done this, the lake could have overflowed and flooded downstream urban areas as happened in 1997.

Source: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/rescond.pdf

It is a similar picture at the major reservoirs all around California. The monster reservoirs, Shasta and Oroville, are at more than 120% of normal for this time of year. San Luis Reservoir, the critical link in the California Water Project, is 103% of normal, and may fill for the first time in five years. A few are still low, most notably New Melones (68% of normal), and Trinity (84% of normal), but they are way up from where they stood before the storm.

Source: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/rescond.pdf

The picture in my corner of the woods is brighter too. The Tuolumne River is running fast and cold, and in many places it covers practically the entire floodplain, and has done so for several weeks now. I believe that most areas downstream are not affected by the high flows (there is a history after all of flooding, and outflow from Don Pedro is regulated so as to prevent it). Instead the river is flushing itself of invasive hyacinth, which has been threatening numerous creatures and plants. Gravel bars are shifting and accumulated silt is being removed, providing better nesting areas for salmon and other fish species. Silt is being redistributed across the floodplain, rejuvenating the soils of the riparian areas. Groundwater aquifers in the vicinity of the river are being recharged.

Tuolumne River in Waterford, about 8,000 cubic feet per second

My rain gauge has been active. My friends in more humid regions may snicker a bit when I talk of how we've had 7.38 inches of precipitation in January. That might not seem like all that much but in 25 years of recording rainfall in Waterford, only two had greater amounts, 7.58" in 1995, and 8.60" in 2011.  We've had a year where that was the total for the entire season (7.26" in 2014). We've already passed the total rainfall normally received in an average year (14.69" so far compared to 13.92" average for the last 25 years).

But the real story? The snowpack.

At the height of the drought, we had a snowpack that was 5% of normal. 5%! It was both unbelievable and appalling.

Source: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article124305504.html

This year started out with some good healthy storms, but the January events threatened to undo the progress. On the first of January, the statewide average was 70% of normal, which was an improvement over the last five years.The atmospheric rivers began as warm tropical storms that threatened to melt what snow there was. At first they did, but colder arctic are started to move in and the snowpack began to build. After the first set of storms blew through, the statewide snowpack had improved to more than 100% of normal.

And the snow kept falling! The second atmospheric river storm system brought even more snow, and as of today, the snowpack is nearly 200% of normal. If the trend continues (there is NO guarantee of this), we could be on track for a record snowpack. I don't consider it likely, but it would be nice to start recharging the groundwater aquifers that have been severely depleted in recent years.

Source: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/swccond.pdf

The record snowpack should not be seen as evidence that global warming isn't happening. Average temperatures are defiinitely up and have been for several decades. The thing is, snow is snow whether the temperature is 15 degrees or 30 degrees. A not-at-all unusual heat wave could undo the progress in the snow levels. The sky spigot could turn off. After the record flooding of 1997, February and March both provided less than a quarter inch of rain over the entire month. And the drought will never be truly over, as demand outstrips supply even in plentiful years. And little is being done to replenish declining groundwater aquifers.

All in all, though, I'm happier to have plentiful rain rather than crippling drought!

Liveblogging the Deluge: Meanwhile, Back at the Local Dam...Don Pedro Reservoir Today

With all the attention being directed at Oroville Dam today with the broken spillway, it's a bit too easy to forget that similar conditions are being experienced all across Northern California. Several reservoirs are approaching full capacity, including Lake Shasta (96%), and Don Pedro Reservoir (97%). Since it is a few miles upstream of my village, Don Pedro has been the center of my attention since the present series of atmospheric river storms arrived in Northern California.

Source: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/resapp/getResGraphsMain.action

The capacity of Don Pedro is 2.03 million acre-feet (water elevation 830 feet), and the latest measurements I've seen show that the lake rose 6 feet in the last day to just over 825 feet. Inflow continues in the range of 30,000 cubic feet per second, while outflow continues at just below flood level, about 9,200 cubic feet per second. It may very will be that the inflow will decline (in the past day it dropped from 32,000 cfs to 28,000 cfs) just enough that the reservoir will stop rising, but it will be a close thing. I've heard no word about plans for opening the emergency floodgates, but if they do, it will be for only the second time ever. The last time was in 1997. That event carved a new channel through a pasture area that reached a depth of 40 feet. Since that channel is already present, I don't expect there will be too many problems associated with the overflow, but uncontrolled runoff could result in some minor flooding downstream in Modesto. I would appreciate hearing from anyone in the know who can shed light on the plans for the next few days.

In any case, the reservoir is higher than it has been in many years, and room must be made for the coming runoff from the near record snowpack. That means that the Tuolumne is going to be flowing at thousands of cubic feet per second for the next few months. That is an unprecedented situation that may very well change the configuration of the river in some areas.

It's a good thing that we now have a window of good weather, maybe five days before the next storm arrives. We need some time to make more space in the reservoirs.

POSTSCRIPT (2/12/17): As of this morning, the reservoir has risen to 827.27 feet, and is less than 3 feet from being full. The lake has 1,995,000 acre-feet out of a capacity of 2,030,000 acre-feet (98% of capacity). Source: https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/uv?site_no=11287500

February Fights For Flooding Fame: New Atmospheric River Storm Approaching

From https://twitter.com/Weather_West/status/828096290097475584

I'm getting a funny sense of deja vu, like we've been here before. It's the fourth day of the month, and we are looking down the maw of a massive storm, a huge atmospheric river storm that threatens to cause flooding up and down the state of California. The difference is that it is the month of February, not January, and we've already had two sets of storms of historic proportions. And now another is coming. It feels like February is wanting to throw some weight around after the January show.

http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/resapp/getResGraphsMain.action

I've been wrapped up with a variety of housing projects, and hadn't been down to the Tuolumne River of late, but I stopped by yesterday and saw that flows are still in the 9,000 cubic feet per second range (this level is just short of official flood stage). The operators of Don Pedro Reservoir upstream are clearly trying to build up some storage space for the coming round of storms. This appears to be the case at a number of reservoirs around the state, as most are way ahead of normal, and have kept flows high. Of the major reservoirs in northern California, only Folsom (81%), Trinity (85%), and New Melones (73%) are below average, although New Melones is up 5 percent.

http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/snowapp/sweq.action

The snowpack is still very healthy, with a statewide average of 171% of normal for the date compared to 189% a week ago following a week of warmer conditions and little precipitation. The coming storm may once again be a warm one, raising concerns of some rapid snowmelt during the storm and possible flooding downstream.

Locally, the picture is also wet. My backyard rain gauge has gathered 15.16 inches so far, which is more than an inch higher than the average for the entire rain year since I've been measuring, starting in 1991 (my recorded average is 13.92" for 1991-2016). The official total for Modesto so far this year is 11.96", which is just short of the average rainfall for the entire year (12.16"). Modesto's records go back to 1888. The normal rainfall to date for Modesto is 6.98". It's been an interesting year, in that every single month since the start of the rainy season has been well above average. February may get to the average for the entire month by Wednesday. It's going to be an interesting week. Stay dry!

Liveblogging the Deluge: The Post Mortem...Storms That Made a Difference

Don Pedro Reservoir on January 5 before the storms, elevation about 786 feet (76% of capacity).

The atmospheric river storms of January have finally subsided, and we are looking at kind of a new landscape across California. We had a couple of sunny days, so we headed up the highway to have a look at Don Pedro Reservoir on the Tuolumne River coming out of Yosemite. When we visited on January 5, the lake stood at 786 feet, which translates to 76% of capacity. That was 114% of normal for this time of year, which was a relief after five years of intense drought.

Don Pedro Reservoir on January 26 after two atmospheric river storms, elevation 813 feet (90% of capacity).

When we arrived yesterday, the lake stood at 813 feet, or 90% of capacity, which is 133% of normal. It is only 17 feet below the level of the dam. It could have been higher, but the dam operators have been maintaining constant outflows in the range of 7,000-9,000 cubic feet per second, a level that is just short of flood stage. Had they not done this, the lake could have overflowed and flooded downstream urban areas as happened in 1997.

Source: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/rescond.pdf

It is a similar picture at the major reservoirs all around California. The monster reservoirs, Shasta and Oroville, are at more than 120% of normal for this time of year. San Luis Reservoir, the critical link in the California Water Project, is 103% of normal, and may fill for the first time in five years. A few are still low, most notably New Melones (68% of normal), and Trinity (84% of normal), but they are way up from where they stood before the storm.

Source: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/rescond.pdf

The picture in my corner of the woods is brighter too. The Tuolumne River is running fast and cold, and in many places it covers practically the entire floodplain, and has done so for several weeks now. I believe that most areas downstream are not affected by the high flows (there is a history after all of flooding, and outflow from Don Pedro is regulated so as to prevent it). Instead the river is flushing itself of invasive hyacinth, which has been threatening numerous creatures and plants. Gravel bars are shifting and accumulated silt is being removed, providing better nesting areas for salmon and other fish species. Silt is being redistributed across the floodplain, rejuvenating the soils of the riparian areas. Groundwater aquifers in the vicinity of the river are being recharged.

Tuolumne River in Waterford, about 8,000 cubic feet per second

My rain gauge has been active. My friends in more humid regions may snicker a bit when I talk of how we've had 7.38 inches of precipitation in January. That might not seem like all that much but in 25 years of recording rainfall in Waterford, only two had greater amounts, 7.58" in 1995, and 8.60" in 2011.  We've had a year where that was the total for the entire season (7.26" in 2014). We've already passed the total rainfall normally received in an average year (14.69" so far compared to 13.92" average for the last 25 years).

But the real story? The snowpack.

At the height of the drought, we had a snowpack that was 5% of normal. 5%! It was both unbelievable and appalling.

Source: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article124305504.html

This year started out with some good healthy storms, but the January events threatened to undo the progress. On the first of January, the statewide average was 70% of normal, which was an improvement over the last five years.The atmospheric rivers began as warm tropical storms that threatened to melt what snow there was. At first they did, but colder arctic are started to move in and the snowpack began to build. After the first set of storms blew through, the statewide snowpack had improved to more than 100% of normal.

And the snow kept falling! The second atmospheric river storm system brought even more snow, and as of today, the snowpack is nearly 200% of normal. If the trend continues (there is NO guarantee of this), we could be on track for a record snowpack. I don't consider it likely, but it would be nice to start recharging the groundwater aquifers that have been severely depleted in recent years.

Source: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/swccond.pdf

The record snowpack should not be seen as evidence that global warming isn't happening. Average temperatures are defiinitely up and have been for several decades. The thing is, snow is snow whether the temperature is 15 degrees or 30 degrees. A not-at-all unusual heat wave could undo the progress in the snow levels. The sky spigot could turn off. After the record flooding of 1997, February and March both provided less than a quarter inch of rain over the entire month. And the drought will never be truly over, as demand outstrips supply even in plentiful years. And little is being done to replenish declining groundwater aquifers.

All in all, though, I'm happier to have plentiful rain rather than crippling drought!

Liveblogging the Deluge: Atmospheric River Storm Version 2.0

Intellicast radar image of January 18, 2017.

What a strange January it has been. We were hit by the strongest storms in two decades, and there was a spate of flooding and high river flows across much of northern and central California. The storms built up state reservoir levels to a healthy degree, and the snowpack is looking better than it has in many years. The storms were examples of atmospheric river storms, which tap into tropical moisture as they stream across the west coast of the United States, especially California. Such storms are historically the most important source of precipitation across the state.

We had three pulses of precipitation during the event last week, and the first was maybe the most dangerous, as it was particularly warm and dropped heavy rain on the snowpack at elevations as high as 10,000 feet in some areas. This was a recipe for disaster, but luckily the forecasts were accurate enough that most people and communities were aware of the coming floods, and were able to act accordingly. There certainly was damage, but nowhere near the scale of the floods of 1997. The remaining storms added considerably to the snowpack so that by January 14, the statewide snowpack was 150% or more of average. Many of California's reservoirs are at 100% or more of average, with just a few exceptions, including New Melones Lake (67% of normal) and Trinity Lake (82% of normal).

All of this would be a great bit of news in terms of the drought, even if no new storms materialized. But here's the thing: it's about to happen again this week! Another set of atmospheric river storms are taking aim at California, and they will be quite egalitarian, providing a big boost to rain totals in Southern California as well (which got some rain last week, but not to the extent of the north). The first storm is here, and it is raining across the entire state from the Oregon border to Baja.

On the local scene, my backyard rain gauge captured 3.69 inches during the first set of storms, and with a smaller storm earlier in the month, I'd recorded 4.58 inches. That's more than twice the average for January around here, and 0.80 inches has already fallen tonight. 5.38 inches for January makes this the seventh wettest January in the quarter century that I've been measuring. As much as 3 more inches of precipitation is expected in this latest series of storms, so we have the chance of breaking the record for the month (8.60 inches in 2011, according to my records). 

It's worth noting that in 1997, we had the record floods at the beginning of the month, and a second group of intense storms later in January. But after that, literally nothing: 0.25 inches in February, 0.09 inches in March, and 0.19 inches in April. The total precipitation for the year of worst flooding was barely higher than average at 15.43 inches (my local average for 1991-2016 is 13.92 inches).

The Tuolumne River is still running at near flood levels as Don Pedro is drained to make room for coming storms.

It's going to be interesting to see what the rest of the water year holds for us...