Hurricane season started June 1st, and with it an unprecedented 10 year long drought of U.S. landfalling hurricanes that are Category 3 or higher.
Bonnie, the second tropical storm of the 2016 season, drenched parts of the Atlantic coast from Georgia to Rhode Island with up to 8 inches this past Memorial Day weekend. What’s ahead for the hurricane season of 2016? It has been a decade since the last major hurricane, Category 3 or higher, has made landfall in the United States. This is the longest period of time for the United States to avoid a major hurricane since reliable records began in 1850. According to a NASA study, a 10-year gap comes along only every 270 years.
The National Hurricane Center calls any Category 3 or more intense hurricane a “major” storm. It should be noted that hurricanes making landfall as less than Category 3 can still cause extreme damage, with heavy rains and coastal storm surges. Such was the case with Hurricane Sandy in 2012.
Timothy Hall, a research scientist who studies hurricanes at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York and colleague Kelly Hereid, who works for ACE Tempest Re, a reinsurance firm based in Connecticut, ran a statistical hurricane model based on a record of Atlantic tropical cyclones from 1950 to 2012 and sea surface temperature data.
The researchers ran 1,000 computer simulations of the period from 1950-2012 – in effect simulating 63,000 separate Atlantic hurricane seasons. They also found that there is approximately a 40% chance that a major hurricane will make landfall in the United States every year.
These visualizations show hurricane tracks from 1980 through 2015. Green tracks are storms that did not make landfall in the U.S.; yellow tracks are storms that made landfall but were not Category 3 or higher; and red tracks are Category 3 or higher hurricanes that did make landfall.
1. Over the past 10 years there have been 69 Atlantic hurricanes but during that time no hurricanes of Category 3 or higher have hit the U.S. coastline. Such a string of lucky years is likely to happen only once in 270 years, according to a NASA study.
2. Storms less than Category 3, such as Sandy in 2012, can still be dangerous.
3. But what about this upcoming hurricane season? Statistical analysis indicates that for any given year there is a 40% chance of a Category 3 or higher hurricane landing across the U.S. coastline.
But remember it only takes one storm in your area. Be prepared this summer.
“Hurricane season started June 1st, and with it and unprecedented 10 year long drought of U.S. landfalling hurricanes that are Category 3 or higher.”
Should that be ” an unprecedented ”
[fixed -mod]
” Bonnie ” was NOT a hurricane; just a rain storm ; with precipitation of less than a meter in some locations.
Likewise, ” Sandy ” was NOT a hurricane when it rained on parts of the East Coast. ON its way from Africa, Sandy did make H status, and was extensive in area.
But when disasters fail to occur you have to start naming the mundane, just to get some attention.
For the record, the catastrophic drought high Temperature in Silicon Valley today, did not exceed the + 136 deg. F record set somewhere on earth previously; so IF it had, it WOULD NOT have been unprecedented.
G
Please can somebody in Sacramento; or wherever Moonbeam Brown does live, inform the Governor of California, that ” RAIN ” in California, most often comes out of the Pacific Ocean; when and if, and maybe only if, it GETS WARM out in the Pacific Ocean.
Sometimes, such bringers of anti-drought to California are called El Ninos (that’s Mexican), and we just had one, which is why we just had an anti-drought.
Conversely; when and if, and maybe only if it gets cold out in the Pacific Ocean, that interferes with the free evaporation of water from the Pacific Ocean, which can and usually does then not come over California, and not deposit rain on this traditional desert State.
And we don’t actually want those La Ninas (also Mexican) to be depositing water all over the 370,000 mirrors of the free clean green renewable Natural Gas fired insolar power station down at Ivanpah which is out in the desert (not on one of the golf courses) down where Jerry lives.
We are back to normal California Weather and Climate too Governor Brown, and we want to keep it that way, so stop trying to grow grass, out in the desert to bore little holes into.
G
The Weather Channel is naming rainy days now–and trying to make you believe they are “emergencies.”
I should hope the precip was less than a meter–that’s nearly 40 inches, in our measure. Here in Virginia, Bonnie was spotty and irregular with her generosity; at my house the gauge swelled to 1.02″ of rain, though further west I think they got more. Nothing unusual, in any event.
Here in Colorado I’ve noticed someone has started naming snowstorms.
By naming them I suppose we are to conclude there is something unusual. about snowstorms in Colorado.
Clearly this hurricane drought is proof of climate change because this is a break from what is to be expected. Climate change is by definition a break from what is to be expected. So, with climate change we can expected a lot of hurricanes but because there are none this is proof of climate change.
Exactly. Whatever weather happens is proof of climate change because without climate change we wouldn’t have weather.
I blame the change in naming convention for the hurricane drought. During the changeover to mixed gender names there was a dating frenzy, but now the men are exerting a moderating influence.
Female hurricanes kill more people than male hurricanes.
Wow, It’s not even a week since Hurricane season started and already it has rained.
First we demoted Pluto to non planet status, so now non hurricanes are being named so they can be like Pluto and be named nobodies
OOoops !! All of a sudden they are discovering that Pluto is a damn side more interesting than they had previously thought. Maybe it should be re-instated to hurricane status.
Tropical storm my a****. It’s rain in the tropics !
G
Statistical analysis indicates that for any given year there is a 60% chance of a Category 3 or higher hurricane not landing across the U.S. coastline.
….since they have such an impeccable history of predictions
A slight excerpt from your post didn’t post; and that was the clause ” for any given year ” ….. ‘ up to and including 2016 prior to Jun 04 2016. ‘ …..
We know it fell out of your post, because the statistical analysis you imply you did could NOT have included any observational data, and real numbers for any date or year post 06/04/2016. Gots to have real numbers to do statistical analyses !
g
LOL….good catch george!
It’s not a forecast, it’s a statement about what has historically happened.
I fear that this streak is going to end this year. I feel for the potential victims; I hope emergency preparedness is at a high standard.
I also fear for the spin that would undoubtedly occur.
The CAGW faithful are praying for a CAT3 or better hurricane, with all the devastation it brings, so they can use it as proof of their agenda. The fact that there has been a drought of CAT3+ hurricanes has barely been reported in the MSM. It will be quickly forgotten once a major hurricane does make landfall.
“When I heard about Katrina, I applauded”
Joergen Randers jr.
Co-author of “The Limits to Growth”, 1972
Watch them make hay with the current flooding in France and other parts of Europe.
The US south and east coast areas need hurricanes and tropical storms. It is part of Ma Nature’s way to recharge aquifers and make things grow.
I think that next year will be the year in which we may experience more tornadoes and hurricanes. There is a correlation between ENSO changes and tornadoes and hurricanes, imo.
1 / (0.6^10) = 165 (not 270)
It appears that they used 11 years, rather than 10, for their “Such a string of lucky years is likely to happen only once in 270 years” calculation.
This post is from the current press release not from the paper. The press release rounded the chance of landfall and dropped off the confidence intervals. The paper is available here http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1002/2015GL063652/full
In the paper they assume that hurricane landfall is a bernoulli process, which is definitely not trivially true.
In the paper it is assumed that hurricane landfall is a Bernoulli process, this is not trivially true. A Bernoulli process means that the outcome of a single variable is independent of all other variables, i e that the probability of a major landfall in a given year is completely independent of a landfall in any other years. This actually seems unlikely, since hurricane activity is e. g. much affected by ENSO, and the probability of a Nino/Nina in a given year is definitely not independent of the ENSO state in the previous/next year.
And when a major storm hits the U.S., whether this year or next or whenever, it’ll be described as unprecedented … in some way.
Meanwhile, Texas doesn’t need a hurricane of any category … they’re already drowning with massive flooding … and in a couple years it’ll probably be a drought that’ll be their problem.
According to quite a few climatologists, Texas entered a perma-drought a couple of years ago and will be in for quite some time due to climate change. All that rain is an illusion and those cars being swept down the rivers is CGI animation.
…for 2 years in a row, now.
Two years in a row is still weather; not climate.
g
Yeah but if you average those recent years of drought with the last two years of rain it all comes out nice and even. So statistically the last few years had nothing out of the ordinary happen.
I live in the Houston area (5 miles from the Brazos River). Back a couple hundred years ago this whole area was a swamp inhabitated by alligators, cannibals and pirates. Nature constantly works to bring back those wonderful old times.
Seem to remember reading that back before all the dams and reservoirs were built, there were times the flooding on the Brazos and Colorado drainage would be so extreme that the two rivers would actually meet in places on the coastal plain. North central Texas is glad for the rain, but enough is enough. Can’t store any more and the excess will keep going your way.
Here are more heavy rainfalls…http://newsworms.com/2016/06/03/floods-wreak-havoc-in-france-germany-after-incessant-rain.html
“1 / (0.6^10) = 165 (not 270)” I made the same calculation with the same result. Or to say the same thing another way there is a 99.395% chance of at least one cat 3 or better in a ten year period. So is there a legitimate reason they made the calculation based on 11 years? I think I’m missing something [and I hate that feeling].
Just a guess:
The 40% (or 60% the other way) number is from ACE Tempest, the 270 year number is from NASA.
The two different groups come up with numbers which agree to within a factor of 2x, seems reasonable.
Is this what is happening here?
When there is a hurricane drought it’s just luck, but if one does hit, hoo-boy, that is manmade global warming/climate change (take your pick) right there, yessirree bob. Warmist logic.
Then it’s bohica catastrophic man made global warming/climate change.
‘This is the longest period of time for the United States to avoid a major hurricane since reliable records began in 1850. According to a NASA study, a 10-year gap comes along only every 270 years.’
Huh? 2016 – 1850 gives a 166 year record. So where does the 270 years come from, computer models?
Math.
Correction: Climate Math.
There are less reliable records going much farther back.
But consider the source:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v460/n7257/full/nature08219.html
Letter to Nature by Mann, et al., 2009, “Atlantic hurricanes and climate over the past 1,500 years”.
Hurricane Fran came through Raleigh NC in 1996 and had downgraded to a 1 by then, but caused incredible damage. We lost power for 12 days and are in the heart of the city. There are a huge number of large old oaks in the city and there were an estimated 35,000 lost in the city limits alone. Large chippers were brought in and ran for weeks.
Catastrophic hurricanes lose a lot of their ultra high wind strength in the first 12-18 hrs after landfall, but these things take seemingly forever to dissipate. If they slow down, they drop incredible amounts of water over a relatively small area and if they plow on, the combination of wind/rain does its damage over a larger area.
I had never been through a hurricane until Fran (several more since), but the incessant high winds with the occasional higher gusts along with the sideways rain is scary. And if you live along a body of salt water in its path watching it go up 3 meters in a couple of hours is darn impressive as well.
The only good thing is the very high winds of a hurricane are generally confined to a relatively small area on the eastern side, so the odds of getting a direct hit are somewhat diminished. But anyone not evacuating an area likely to be hit is fool.
Hey, we’re neighbors! Drop me a line, rbabcock. http://www.sealevel.info/contact.html
Those who will now, undoubtedly, use hurricane activity in the continental U.S.as some kind of indicator for the global climate state should reflect on the fact that the area of the continental U.S. subject to tropical cyclone activity covers less than 1% of the Earth’s surface.
I sincerely hope that SE Texas doesn’t get any hurricanes or TS this year. We have so much water now…
We have flooding in Texas without a hurricane. Of course, the previous drought was attributed to global warming, so the floods must be global warming, too. Versatile thing, global warming.
Indeed, increasing duration of exceptional drought and increasing occurrences of extreme precipitation events are happening, as predicted by IPCC models. Increasing the energy in a system increases the system’s extrema.
I believe Texas had an extreme multiple-year drought in 1917, and 1951, and the recent multiple-year drought of the last few years, and all were all broken by very heavy rainfall, just like we are seeing now.
Of course the models are the only place such a thing can be found.
Out here in the real world it’s well known that a warmer world is a less stormy one.
TA,
You are correct, although the 1917 drought lasted only two years, the 1950-57 event was the worst on record in Texas. However, my point was that the events were increasing globally, not that they never happened before in a particular area.
MarkW,
Depends on what you mean by less stormy. If you are talking about likelihood of tropical cyclones, that is true, except for the energy of the most powerful storms, and is predicted by models. If you mean occurrences of extreme precipitation events, considering rate and quantity of precipitation, then you are incorrect.
Versatile thing, global warming.
Yes; that’s the beauty of it.
Because of living on the gulf coast, watching weather is what I often do. It takes me two full days to prepare my land for a storm. 3 greenhouse have to come down, trees trimmed where needed, and all items, (400 plus potted plants, 3 barbq pits, and lawn furniture), moved to the south side fence that is protected by the water canal 10 foot high bank. Bags of ice in 2 fridge,s, and 3 bags in freezer. 4 bags in coolers for items required for 3 days with out power. After that all items need to be cooked and eaten. Fill all containers with water, including bath tubs. prep generator to maintain freezers, fridges and water well pump. There is always 20 plus gallons of gas on hand. And enough propane to cook for a month. IKE left nothing but branches on the ground.
No wonder Ike was a problem for you. You had three times the greenhouse effect. LOL
I’m up in Temple, TX
Did I miss something in that video of hurricane tracks? I did not see any red tracks and I watched it twice once at full screen size.
Same here. Color me confused.
Here is one prediction which may have come good
vukcevic | January 30, 2012 at 5:57 am |
According to the NOAA’s assessment the Atlantic hurricane activity is directly related to the Equatorial Atlantic’s SST; neither of which is predictable.
However that not may be the case.
Comparing the NOAA’s Atlantic Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) index with the ‘Atlantic Hurricane probability index’ based on the North Atlantic other historical data (also available from the NOAA) it could be concluded that the hurricane activity will (on average) stay just above the normal for at least a decade.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/AHA.htm
curryja | January 30, 2012 at 6:29 am |
I have a draft post on decadal scale hurricane projections, I’ll post this in april or so when people are starting to think about hurricanes. I agree with Vukcevic’s prediction
https://judithcurry.com/2012/01/29/assessing-climate-data-record-transparency-and-maturity/
(the other one is for the SC24max )
“Hurricane season started June 1st, and with it an unprecedented 10 year long drought of U.S. landfalling hurricanes that are Category 3 or higher.”
The 10 year long drought started on June 1st?
The major hurricane drought began Oct. 25, 2005 as Wilma left south Florida. So it is actually 10 years and eight months long as of June 1st
I like to say the U.S. has just experienced 10 hurricane seasons without a major hurricane making landfall. We are about to see if that number will grow to 11!
SR
Another Gore prediction gone wrong.
Sandy was only a hurricane when it was out at sea. It weakened and was a mere tropical storm before coming ashore.
I can call a tropical storm “mere” having grown up in Louisiana, south of I-10.
Not to seem to be jumping on what you said, but severe weather is severe and life potentially life threatening. How “severe” it to those in it can depend what they are used to dealing with.
I know where you’re coming from. A year or so ago I was mildly amused at the hype TWC was giving an ice storm in Atlanta. I was born and raised where snow and ice are not uncommon. I know how to drive (and when not to try to drive) in such conditions. Those born and raised in the South don’t. Some died because of that.
40+ years ago I almost died in a “mere” tropical storm in Texas. If the old VW Bug didn’t actually float….
It’s the hyping of someone’s backyard grill’s or the power grid’s CO2 emissions as the cause of such events that needs to be debunked. If Man’s not “The Cause”, then there is no cause to control Man.
Again. I don’t mean to seem to “jumping on you”. But you’re comment and the post’s comment I quoted brought back being in the a seat of that VW those 40+ years ago.
We don’t want to make light of weather’s threat to lives but of what how other’s are using weather to threaten the rights of those lives.
Hmmm…. There are those who track the time the MSM spends on “conservative” vs “liberal” stories.
I wonder if any of them track the time “The Storm Channel” spends on past tornadoes/hurricanes vs current ones?
Any bets that the quieter the current season the more they remind of an event from a past season?
(What made me think of that was while channel surfing recently (last night?) I stumbled across them talking about Katrina yet again.
As I said elsewhere, I do miss the old and real “The Weather Channel”.
Looks like NASA was able to get their dartboard up and running again. Living in FL my entire life (with the exception of a brief 9.5-year USAF stint), we endure the breathless “WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!” specials every year, as hurricane season kicks off. It’s a crap shoot and anyone who says they can predict how many hurricanes there are going to be is no better than the snake oil salesmen of yesteryear. There’s a reason that NASA/NOAA have been naming every gathering of more than three clouds hanging out on a corner and smoking cigarettes over the last decade— their funding depends on serving and pushing the agenda of the CAGW cabal.
PS: Has anyone actually ever done a comparative study between throwing darts at a board and the NASA hurricane prediction models? (Or any other “climate models”?) Just curious.
B.C. predicting the number of hurricanes shouldn’t be as hard as throwing a dart. The number of hurricanes will almost certainly be more than zero and less than 25. But realistically will be be between 3-20 . All the predictors allow themselves a range, and then are allowed to update their predictions mid season. A willing media never question the previous predictions and if the actual number of hurricane is outside the range the media still says the prediction was remarkable accurate. I find it hard to see how they can go wrong if they predict from 6-11 huracans give or take 2 and the media allows mid season corrections.
You climate skeptics don’t understand the difference between a prediction and a projection.
See – we projected that Hurricanes would be more probable.
The absence of hurricanes is not evidence that we were wrong.
It’s just that an increase in the probability of hurricanes has coincided with a decrease in the number of actual landfalling cat3+ hurricanes.
Anyway, you have just cherry picked the end date (i.e. now) and the start date (i.e. when we made a big load of predictions after hurricane Katrina). And you’ve cherry picked the location (i.e. where we said there would be more hurricanes. On the coast of North America.)
Anyway, we can show that Big Oil has funded a concerted campaign designed to divert hurricanes into the mid Atlantic. etc… (sarc)
indefatigablefrog,
I don’t know to whose prediction, projection, whatever, you are referring, but it is not that of the IPCC. The consensus is for a likely increasing intensity of the most powerful storms, not the frequency, which may actually decline, although they are less certain of that.
Because, as we all already know, hot SST’s can make a severe hurricane more severe, even if less frequent.
But, hot SST’s can NOT make a Cat 2 hurricane more severe thereby making it a Cat 3 landfall, thereby increasing the frequency of Cat 3+’s.
Yep, it all makes complete sense.
I love all these theories within theories.
More and more epicycles.
Sorry – I seem to be stuck in sarc!!
Climate has changed greatly over millions of years without man’s help. There is absolutely NO proof that increased C02 causes global warming, only theories and models. Some scientists believe a warming earth is a cause of degassing and increases C02 levels not the other way around. The climate change hysteria is a way to rationalize redistribution of wealth.
waiting for the other shoe to drop
that this drought is all our fault
fossil fuel emissions are to blame
incidentally, the data i have do not show any trends in north atlantic hurricanes or western pacific typhoons in the period 1945-2014
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2630932
Tom in Florida (from another tom in Florida) Nothing extraordinary ever happens. Try as I might I can’t get this concept through to people, beside a few on here. A 9ft tall man and 3ft tall man makes the average is 6ft even though neither one is 6ft tall. Everyday the weatherman says it is warmer, or colder or drier than “normal” never really stopping to think that a “normal ” day likely has never existed.
Now we are taking a manmade construct, global mean temperature, and blaming it for every weather abnormality we can find, never stopping to realize that abnormalities are normal.
They’re just abusing statistical terminology. It’s not like anyone hasn’t done it before and most people don’t understand the lie.
An observation can be +/- 6 sigma and still be “normal”.
“The researchers ran 1,000 computer simulations of the period from 1950-2012 ” I am not sure why you are calling the computer modelers at Goddard “researchers” gives a bad name to all legitimate researchers.
It’s really hard to get away with “charlatans” or any other truly descriptive representation of them. Researchers is safe from a libel/slander perspective.
On the radio I heard that Tampa hasn’t been directly hit with a hurricane since 1921. Someone said this meant that it is due to be hit. I guess that is one interpretation but another interpretation is that it is very rare for Tampa to be directly hit by a hurricane, it is also possible that hurricanes have no idea where Tampa is and really don’t care one way or another about hitting it or any other place directly.
Tom Trevor,
You might want to investigate “normal distribution”.
Why Slipstick? Do huracanes know what “normal’ is? Humans love to assign name and numbers to things but nature doesn’t
“Hurricane drought” seems a poor choice for a headline; I don’t know what you call it, maybe a “mixed metaphor”? Hurricanes don’t cause drought, so what you really have is a hurricane deficit maybe? A shortage of hurricanes? There must be a phrase that doesn’t cause instant cognitive dissonance? Conceptual lockup?
Hurricane drought? It hurts just thinking about it.
Hurricane Dearth?
Exactly the word I was searching for. Thanks.
Sandy did little. The Nor’easter it hooked up with was the malefactor!
I lived through Sandy. It was the most rain I have ever seen in my life. HUGE flooding, a stalled out, huge tropical storm is very deadly and Sandy killed people. Bridges were destroyed all over the place and my own place was isolated for a week due to no access out of the mountains.
Hurricane hookups. Has any social media site spotlighted this new trend?
I agree with mpcraig up thread that this is going to be the year to end the drought. My reasoning: above average sea temperatures near the Caribbean and La Nina developing, to reduce the wind shear.
Rich.
Hmm. If there is a 40% chance per year of a Class 3+, wouldn’t the odds of that not having occurred in 10 years be the upwards of 1 in 10,000 (0.4^10) rather than 1 in 270?
No. 40% is the chance it will happen, 60% is the chance it will not. You calculated the chance that there will be one or more every year for ten years. Very low.
If and only if the past predicts the future, but the past doesn’t predict the future, if it did most people would be far richer than they are.
usually long “droughts got averaged out towards the mean again. i wouldn’t be surprised to see a “record landfalling major hurricanes in the US” somewhere along the next years….
As I have been saying now for how many years???? The UN just slides in and under the guise of ecology takes the US away from the USA piece by piece??? and everyone stays asleep. (remember this? http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/ Excerpt: ““This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.”).
What did you do? Hit delete or say “oh that is a conspiracy theory? The chickens are coming home to roost…and we are just about ready to be fried up. And the BIGGEST joke on the USA? The TAXPAYERS have paid for their own demise!! Abby
http://idahoansforliberty.com/columbia-river-treaty-mean-death-idaho/
The Columbia River Treaty could mean the death of Idaho
⇩ Help us spread Liberty by sharing! ⇩
Written by Karen Schumacher
With the new United Nations (UN) and federal government grand plan to steal what remains of our land through the ruse of ecosystem management, there is one grand daddy that will take all of Idaho in one fell swoop.
In 1944 the United States and Canada began talks to jointly manage the Columbia River which crossed the border. Both came to an agreement in 1961 creating a treaty that would provide flood control, generate hydropower, and meet irrigation needs. This treaty, known as the Columbia Treaty, was finalized in 1961 and implemented in 1964. Because the river crossed borders, called transboundary, it was also recognized as an “international treaty”.
In fact, the International Joint Commission (IJC), created from the Boundary Waters Treaty in 1909 to help with treaty negotiations, was involved with the Columbia Treaty. The IJC created the International Columbia River Engineering Board (ICREB) in 1944 to study the Columbia basin waters, soils, population, economics, hydrology, and existing dams, while considering “the basin as a whole, without regard for the international border.”
The agreement stipulated that Canada would provide water storage with dams, then be compensated for water release that generated hydropower. Although not specifically stated as a “basin” treaty, the treaty does reference the Columbia basin.
columbia_river_treaty_storage_projectsThis is a map of the Columbia River and Canadian dams, the river itself just barely touching Idaho. The Montana Libby dam was agreed to by Canada.
This treaty successfully accomplished the goals of controlling flooding, producing hydropower, and irrigation management. In the treaty, for any potential unresolved disputes, the final decision could be referred to the UN International Court of Justice. How about that, no Idaho citizen has a say in the matter, but the UN does.
In 1995 Canada created the Columbia Basin Trust (CBT). Somehow the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC) and the CBT refer to the river as the “International Columbia River“. The NPCC adheres to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) science, you know, that UN organization. One CBT goal was to “…promote the social, economic, and environmental well-being in the Canadian portion of the Columbia River Basin.”, all three Agenda 21 pillars. After GHW Bush signed Agenda 21 (Chapter 18) in 1992, the U.S. Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project began in 1994, under WJ Clinton, incorporating the same three pillars. Meanwhile, Canada also promotes sustainable development, aka Agenda 21.
Although the treaty was intended to run in perpetuity one clause allowed both countries the opportunity to give ten years notice, starting in 2014, for unilaterally renegotiating or terminating the treaty. The flood control aspect expires in 2024, unless both reach agreement to extend it. The 2014/2024 Columbia River Treaty Review began in 2010, four years prior to 2014. The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), operated by the Department of Energy, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) planned workshops for public input. Do you remember being invited?
Ok, so what, they are going to renegotiate the treaty. Well, it now goes way beyond that.
Ecosystem Management
Given the belief that environmental and social factors were not considered in the original treaty, being unfair to Tribes and the environment, negotiations must now include those factors. After all, we must remember our loyalty to Agenda 21 and the UN. The gimmick to do such? Ecosystems. All of these groups, agencies, and governments are now going to massively expand the treaty to include not just the river, but the entire Columbia basin. Here is the 2014/2024 Columbia River Treaty Review basin map. It clearly shows just how much area they plan to incorporate into the treaty with Idaho obliterated. Click here for larger view.
columbia_river_treaty
As explained in the BLM posts, the agenda is now incorporating ecosystems into all decisions. This is the final tool that will kill all sovereignty over state and private land. Every species, habitat, wetland, watershed, river, insect, grass, bush, water drop, and more will need protection…there will be no justification for any one of us to use any land because of ecosystem damage we cause. Plus it gives reason to regulate private land, if you are lucky enough to possess it.
A simple ecosystem definition is “the complex of a community of organisms and its environment functioning as an ecological unit”. Others make it morecomplex in that “…ecosystems themselves represent part of the earth’s biodiversity.”, and humans are destroying this biodiversity. In thisdescription there is no mention of humans in the ecosystem environment.
The Department of Interior (DOI), which manages the BLM, USFWS (pg 31),USFS, NPS (pg 19), BIA, and USGS among other agencies, has declared a more effective “mitigation” policy, defined as “…mitigation that includes the “preservation, enhancement, restoration or creation (PERC)” of areas destroyed in the name of progress.” That means you, human being, you have and continue to destroy land. The effort is “…attempting to establish a department wide mitigation strategy that will protect natural resources as the US prepares for an expected rise in development projects on public land.” This references the Resource Theft in the BLM posts, more land confiscation for the federal government to engage in renewable and other energy projects for land and energy control in partnership with foreign countries to redistribute our wealth. Here is the DOI 2014 mitigation strategy update with the cat out of the bag on renewable energy in the bottom paragraph. The BLM is already applying an Ecosystem Services Framework for Land Use Planning. Shocker. The UN Convention on Biological Diversity lists how federal government agencies are implementing their ecosystem restoration, USFS page 76, EPA watersheds page 83, and USDA agriculture/livestock page 85.
The USDA, USFS, DOI, and BLM have been working on identifying the Columbia Basin ecosystem risks since 1997. 107 “layers” of information were analyzed using Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Throughout this document every map shows some type of ecosystem destruction, which means the only way to preserve or restore the basin is to control it. In 2003 these same agencies created a memorandum of understanding to “implement” the Interior Columbia Basin Strategy, updated in 2014. The strategy? “A Strategy for Applying the Knowledge Gained by the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project to the Revision of Land Use Plans and Project Implementation”. If the reader takes the time to read this document it becomes very apparent that there is no room for any human to use any of this land as it has to be protected or “restored” from human damage. Page 1 lists all the Idaho areas that will be affected. Ecosystems listed include landscape, habitat, forests, rangelands, riparian and other species, riparian areas, and Tribes.
Since 2002 more GIS and Spatial Data have been collected on the basin for the purpose of eventual full control through ecosystem management. Here are the 8 chapters of ecosystem maps showing the numerous mapping details, including topography, hydrologic, vegetation, landscape, grazing,watershed, riparian, rangeland, ecology, roads, habitat, species, timber, economy, population, and reservations, naming just a few. Now that all of this data has been collected and strategies developed prior to the 2014 renegotiation start date, let the two countries begin talks. And, because the U.S. Department of State has a specific mission to the UN, they supportincorporating ecosystem management strategies into the treaty.
All groundwork has been completed to finalize the takeover of Idaho through a renegotiated treaty using ecosystem management.
United Nations
Agenda 21, Chapter 15 and Agenda 2030, Goal 15 address the need for ecosystem protection and restoration. There is also the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (signed by the U.S. in 1993) which outlines targets for ecosystem management by 2020. Did you read that? 2020, 4 years from now. It would be fair to say they are on the last leg of getting it done. Let’s see what else UN wants for ecosystem management.
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) envisions integrating ecosystem management into “ecosystem services“, providing “specialized expertise” for assessment, management, economics, and governance including international agreements, legislation, and policy. As part of the memorandum of understanding with UNEP, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) supports ecosystem services along with multiple federalagencies promoting the same. UNEP also has several booklets on ecosystem management if you would like to know more.
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) also has an agenda for ecosystem management and created the Biodiversity and Ecosystems Global Framework 2012-2020 for countries to use as a guide. It can be downloaded to read. UNDP provides “technical and policy advice to governments” while promoting “Ecosystem-based Mitigation of & Adaptation to Climate Change”, currently being implemented by the DOI as previously noted. Again a 2020 date for framework implementation.
One other UN organization, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), of which the DOI is a member, has a special Commission on Ecosystem Management, including a Red List of Ecosystems the DOI can use, plus a transboundary water assessment and management program.
Although not signed by the U.S. or Canada, the UN WatercoursesConvention (UNWC) is recognized as the “most authoritative source of international water law”. The UNWC aims to be the global water instrument, the authoritative source of international water law, and create frameworks for water governance arrangements which includes transboundary water and ecosystem protection. If the U.S. signs this convention it will put the Columbia basin under further, and complete, UN rule.
The United States Entity, comprised of the BPA and the USACE, released a document, Regional Recommendation for the Future of the Columbia River Treaty after 2024 on 12/13/13, meeting the UN regionalism goal. One noteworthy recommendation is on page 5, Ecosystem-based Function. This is a scheme concocted by the UN, justified by climate change scare tactics, and is really about taking final control over land, resources and humans. It is also called “Ecosystem-based Adaptation“, ecosystem based management, and can be separated out into different areas such asfisheries, mountains, and even disasters. This UNEP document gives a convoluted, scattered description of ecosystem based management on pages 4-5, almost as if they were trying to figure out how to justify a way to control everything. All four Idaho representatives, Risch, Crapo, Simpson, and Labrador urged the adoption of this treasonous document.
The USGS sits on the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO’s International Hydrological Programme (IHP) with one interesting function, “Recommending U.S. programs for participation in the UNESCO International Hydrological Programme.”, and there are several programs. What this means for the hydropower generated by Columbia River dams is uncertain. It is difficult to ascertain just how the Columbia River Basin became “international“. But, being designated as such, it places the basin under International Waters Governance, as part of the GEF International Waters Governance Project. GEF stands for Global Environment Facility, financed via UNEP. Regardless, it also involves Idaho dams, so it will affect us as well.
In the United Nations World Water Development Report 2016, everything you would want to know about how the UN will control our water is explained. On page 57-58 it describes changing our water use to a “green” economy which means industrializing our agriculture and urban water infrastructure as two examples, using UN business partnerships. This explains the Common Core emphasis on STEM and vocational education, preparing our children for the workforce needs of these industries. Pages 58-61 cover Agenda 2030 Goal 6 and related water goals. The UN will manage water through their Integrated Water Resource Management Plan (IWRM), which the Idaho Water Resource Board follows. Transition to renewable energy investment starts on page 83, addressing hydropower and urban infrastructure, which is why the UN bank partners are buying water utilities in preparation for the takeover. The Idaho Department of Water Resources was given a special mention on this page also. Yes, the UN monitors U.S. and Idaho water. Ecosystems are covered from page 26-28.
The UN believes transboundary waters should be under international rule with focus on the “use, development, protection and conservation of water resources.” Since the Columbia Basin has somehow been declared international, it looks like the river is primed for UN take over.
Briefly on the social pillar. As previously posted in the December, 2015 archives on Tribes being used by the federal government to take land and water from American citizens, Tribal rights are not being ignored in the treaty negotiation, including Idaho Tribes. Emphasis on salmon, tribal resources, and culture will be part of the talks, with full UN backing on Tribal water rights.
Summary
If all of this gobbledegook has left you bored to tears or brain dead, there is a more simple explanation. The UN wants control of water, and they want it bad as water is the most valuable resource needed for everything.
The intent is expanding the treaty to include the full Columbia Basin, not just the original river. With ecosystem management, defined by the UN and implemented by their federal buddies, public land will not only be affected, but private land as well. The goal is taking basin water resources, from basin water drops to storage, then controlling its use in agriculture, industries, and urban infrastructure, among other uses. Forcing Idaho into a “green economy” means expensive technology will be needed for redesigning water use in all areas, and the federal government taking more land for their renewable energy projects. UN business partners, many of them banks, will be investing in this green technology while the federal government will ban land use and take private land away through regulations causing economic devastation, what they are doing to ranchers. Agricultural farmers will be next. Common Core will educate your child to those new industrial technology needs. The UN has multiple water partners supporting this agenda. Ecosystem data is made available to UN business partners so they can take advantage of energy projects once we are stripped of our land.
Idaho will soon die, there will be nothing left of our state. This will truly be the death of Idaho. The UN controls our forests, government agencies implement UN objectives on our land, our cities are being redesigned by the UN (YOU HAVE WITNESSED THE RISE OF STACK N PACK GHETTOS-s), we are being forced off our land into cities, children are being indoctrinated on UN ideology…there is nothing left but ecosystem management to finish us off. Our water will be taken and controlled, we will be told where and how we can enjoy the outdoors, if at all. Jobs will be determined by UN corporate industries. Yet Idahoans don’t listen, state legislators refuse to address this out of the fear it looks like a conspiracy. It is not a conspiracy, it is right there in front of everyone. And we do nothing. Shame on us, shame on us.
We should be in the streets demanding our legislators remove us from every illegal, treasonous, unconstitutional regulation that each corrupt federal agency forces on us, and demand that there will be no implemented UN objective in our state. We should be yelling at the top of our lungs that if this is not done, we will remove each legislator, and keep going through them until we find one that has the courage, and the love of Idaho, to do as we tell them, not ask, tell them. When will we be ready and have the courage to do this? We have 4 short years, the UN has given us the year. When?
Source
Regards,
Kirk McKenzie
Save Rural America
reading
Tom in Texas on June 3, 2016 at 7:49 am
It seems to have died.
http://michellemalkin.com/2016/06/02/california-schemin-bill-that-would-have-criminalized-climate-change-skepticism-dies-for-now/
that bunch of criminals.
‘Tom in Texas’ instead of clear Name.
Fighting Mexican Santa Ana Army.
Does it.
Hazardous cowards.
Next hurricane will bring headlines like: “Hottest year on record spawns worst storm in a decade”.
It’s been more than 10 years NASA. The last major Hurricane (CAT III or higher) to hit US shores was Oct 24th, 2005 when Wilma came ashore as a CAT III in Florida. By this truck drivers reckoning that’s 10 years and a few days over 7 full months or IOW closer to 11 years since the continental US has been struck by one of the big storms.
I sure as heck wouldn’t bet against that record ending this year though. Perhaps even within the next 60 days. Then all of a sudden after a hiatus lasting over a decade there will of course be those that blame climate change when the next one comes ashore here. And more than likely they will be same ones that bought and parroted the line that it has just been plain luck we went so long without a strike.