A 1 in 10 year storm event is expected to hit Northern California this weekend. Rainfall totals could easily be twice the average precipitation for January.
An atmospheric river will take aim with heavy precipitation, high snow levels and soils that are already saturated from recent storms. Precipitation starts Saturday, but the brunt of the storm will be Sunday & Monday. Forecasters say this will exceed stream and river flood levels last seen in 2005.
Snowfall ahead of the storm will be significant, then likely melt with the second warmer event Sunday:
Rainfall amounts over the weekend are likely to be heavy in the Sierra Nevada Foothills and higher mountain areas.
This is going to be some of the more significant flooding we’ve seen in the past decade. Areas may flood that haven’t seen impacts for several years.
According to Dr. Ryan Maue:
If this isn’t the end of the California drought then it’s the beginning of the end of the end. 7-day NCEP WPC liquid equivalent precip:
Unfortunately, California’s outdated reservoir system will likely not capture but a fraction of that water for later use.
From the NWS Sacramento Forecast Discussion:
Deep atmospheric moisture becomes focused over the Northern California Sunday resulting in periods of moderate to heavy rain with snow levels
above 8000 feet. Flood watch in place to cover potential flooding of urban areas, small streams and creeks, and unregulated rivers in the foothills and West Slopes of the Sierra Nevada, such as the Cosumnes. Heaviest precipitation appears to be focused over southern portions of the Sacramento Valley and Northern San Joaquin Valley, Motherlode, and Sierra Nevada Sunday into Sunday night. Models point to a second atmospheric river setting up over the area Tuesday into Wednesday with more significant precip. Have expanded the Flood Watch to include this.
Heavy precip looks to continue along the Motherlode and West Slopes of the Sierra Nevada Monday morning with lighter precip elsewhere across the CWA. Storm QPF Saturday through Monday ranges from 2 to 6 inches in the Central Valley, 3 to 8 inches in the foothills and Coastal/Shasta mountains, and 7 to 14 inches for the Western Plumas mountains and Sierra Nevada. Precipitation amounts this high have not been seen since the storms of December 2005 and could surpass the average monthly total for many areas.
Colder air pushes into the area Monday with lowering snow levels.
Wet pattern continues into the extended period as the next land- falling moisture plume moves into Norcal on Tue, to be followed by another plume on Thu. Precipitation lingers on Wed as Norcal will be in between weather systems (TPW plumes). Slight ridging ahead of the approacing Eastern Pacific trough is expected to shift the precip Northward onto the Northern CA coast with orographic effects prevailing over the Sierra on Tue. WAA ahead and associated with the moisture plume is expected to raise snow levels Tue/Tue nite. Then, a dip in snow levels Tue nite into Wed as the precip begins to diminish. Modest fluctuations in snow levels expected with a more modest moisture plume on Thu. With that said, snow levels are expected to remain below pass levels so this will be a couple of snowier weather systems with greater snow impacts, but less runoff. However, with rivers and streams still elevated from previous rains, additional rainfall over the foothills and Valley will continue the potential for flooding.
You do realise, that this 1 in 10 year storm will be upscaled, to a 1 in 100 year storm – by the MSM.
We can also expect the word ‘worst ever’ to be repeated ad nauseam.
Sepfer 1964…..
My father was a PG&E lineman. I remember lifting him out of the car and carrying him into the house too fatigued to but weep in 1964.
………..and experts will asssure you it is caused by climate change.
No, fossil fuels… Climate change, what is that? Cold hot, dry warm, dry flood, snow rain, no ice need for icebreakers…ZZZZZzzzzzzz…….
Also “unprecedented”.
But at the same time, “the new norm”
Yeah, I really get a chuckle form reporters who call something unprecedented since….the last time it happened.
“You keep using that word “unprecedented”. I don’t think it means what you think it means.”
I think it’s inconceivable that it’s unprecedented and here’s the proof. Enjoy.
James Bull
What is it about highway 80; “The 80 to you socalers)”, that can turn a 5-10 year storm suddenly into a 10-25 year storm.
Izzere some kind of storm barrier built along “the 80” ??
g
In silicon valley we get 10-25 year storms every year.
No big deal. Just clean the leaves out of the gutter.
So we are about to find out just how badly Apple’s interminable road dig ups in Sunnyvale have screwed up the Wolfe Road storm drainage efficiency. And we have had to endure all that traffic night mares just to provide some grey water for Apple to water its silly rooftop gardens.
G
The jet is prog’ed to set up in a manner it will span from Marin-ish to Big Sur-ish at the coast. Diagonal NE from there. 80 is at the northwestern edge of where the jet is prog’ed to set up.
Women and minorities hurt most.
Your thoughts are unprecedented
“Unprecedented.”
“Historic”.
“Biblical”.
An by the SAME people who told us, a year ago, that California would RUN OUT OF WATER, by this year.
The Eel River should carry away some more of the Northwestern Pacific infrastructure….
Nope. Too far north. The atmospheric river will miss the North Coast.
Hmmm, I wonder. Here is the projected flow for 8 Jan @06:00Z (7 Jan 22:00 PST):
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2017/01/08/0600Z/wind/isobaric/850hPa/overlay=temp/orthographic=-114.24,39.17,967
That new change in heading will bring the rain into Cape Mendocino. Then the storm will move into my neck of the woods in Trinity County before crossing the valley towards the Sierras. The local forecast is 7 days of either rain or snow. Last night was down to 10F which is well below average for the area.
Prepare for MSM reports stating the storm ‘slammed’, ‘hammered’, ‘smashed’ California, etc. It gets tedious.
I love “Make a plan”. What, build an ark? If your home sits in a flood-prone spot, you already planned poorly. “You decided what you were going to do, Charles, some time ago.”
The Weather Network’s Canadian website one day provided a headline about a “catastrophic landslide” in the mountains in the Yukon. If you read the article, it noted that the landslide was caught on a satellite image. Nobody was around when it happened because it was 100 km from the nearest human settlement. If that is catastrophic, I can only imagine what the rains will be billed as.
It was catastrophic for lichens and ptarmigan and the like. Don’t they count?
So I’m looking at the San Jose CA forecast for the next .. 15 days:
Permanent drought:
http://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/35269-1.jpg
Careful,
You might need to Sand Bag to keep that drought out of the house
…. ten year storm following the last year’s ten year drought… could it simply mean that quasi-biannual (Pacific) cycles go on for 10-11 years, when the next solar cycle determines future trends. /sarc ?
“What goes up must come down” said Newton, however Einstein had different view of these matters.
Well, for most applications, Einstein was just too relativistic. /sarc
Careful what you say about Albert’s nephew Istic
There is an old saying here in CA that says almost as much about the entrenched bureaucracy as it does about the logic.
“You can tell when the drought is over when the sign on the office door gets repainted from ‘California Drought Control Board’ to ‘California Flood Control Board’.”
Over-here (UK) they just appoint a minister for drought and since ‘ the god is English’ problem is resolved within days.
“The 1976 United Kingdom heat wave led to the hottest summer average temperature in the UK since records began. At the same time, the country suffered a severe drought. It was one of the driest, sunniest and warmest summers (June/July/August) in the 20th century.
The effect on domestic water supplies led to the passing of a Drought Act by parliament and Minister for Drought, Denis Howell, was appointed ….. days after Denis Howell was appointed ‘Minister for Drought’, severe thunderstorms brought rain to some places for the first time in weeks. September and October 1976 were both very wet months, bringing to an end the great drought of 1975–1976.”
So did Von Braun.
““What goes up must come down” said Newton, however Einstein had different view of these matters.”
So did Von Braun.
Much of what von Braun sent up DID come down. On London.
Just think how much state money, misspent due to hysterical predictions by the Green Brigade, that Governor Brown could have spent on building the necessary reservoir capacity needed to capture far more of these relatively frequent storms and thus avoid the droughts he’s moaning about!
Yeah. I’ll take more reservoirs over “high speed train” any day.
Issue is, the really good up country sites for dams are already taken with existing dams. Now, getting a bit creative, a different reservoir paradigm could work. Namely, build them in lower country. The structure would be like a salt evaporator – an enclosure defined by levees. Low / zero productivity land could be used. For example, the area south of the American River and below the Foothills where lots of tailings and muck from the old hydro gold mining was dumped. That could be dug / graded and turned into a basin for this. There are also played out ag lands where impermeable shallow layers built up salts and are no longer worth irrigating. After some initial work, it might be possible to set something up there that would not burp the salts up into the reservoir after it was filled. In any case, creativity is needed.
I want to be the first to say it, “This is further definitive proof of climate change.”
The ecoloons are certain to be saying it en masse in the days ahead.
Natural, rare, occurences of abnormal weather are always ‘further definitive proof of climate change’ in the minds of the Klimate faithful.
You don’t need a PhD to know that climate changes; even the peasants in 17th Century – 18th Century Europe realised this during the mini-ice age!
Models again…
Patrick MJD January 6, 2017 at 4:20 am
Models again…
———————-
Care to suggest a way of weather forecasting without models? (or seaweed or chiken bones or tea leaves)
We can expect to hear the words “impact” and “impactful” ad nauseam.
Yah mon, we must roll dem bones, you know!
It doesn’t count until they give it a name…..
You know….it’s like Texas…..always a permanent drought….between storms
Yea, and because Texas is so big their rain storms are also very big. I saw once where they had a 20 foot rain….OK, that turned out to be the distance between raindrops! If I say “Go Oklahoma” do I need to add the sarc tag?
Excellent article/discussion of the top weather event on the planet right now.
GFS has a massive amount of rain coming this weekend and next. Over 10 inches for most of northern California between the two. Southern areas get less but will still be welcome relief.
Models hinting at similar atmospheric river flow the following week.
zOMG Xtreme weather everybody! Find some virgins and throw them into the volcano, quick!
BBC news in a panic over the Antarctica’s iceberg.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38522954
From the article: “It is believed that climate warming has brought forward the likely separation of the iceberg but the scientists say they have no direct evidence to support this.”
Belief with no evidence. The whole climate issue in a nutshell right there.
You choose to denigrate the power of “Hope and Change”, sir. The alarmists all have their fingers (and legs) crossed, praying for vindication. I mean, what if the ice doesn’t all melt in the next few years, and the seas don’t rise? There’d be some ‘splainin’ to do, if only it wasn’t for their allies, the mainstream media, who will smooth over the transition to the next phase of climate alarmism (TBA).
Eustace, +many!
brian, are you saying that with the election of Trump, the oceans have stopped rising?
No, Trump has not stopped anything. The seas have been rising steadily for centuries – at a much lower rate than a snail’s pace, about 8 inches in the last 100 years according to EPA:
https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-sea-level
The alarmists claim that we are witnessing a scary *acceleration* of the rising, but the graph does not suggest that, but the satellite data refutes that. Confronted with that data, the alarmists switch to “we are *about* to experience” a rapid, even catastrophic, sea level rise. Because ipso facto “climate change”.
>brian, are you saying that with the election of Trump, the oceans have stopped rising?
I am saying that the oceans aren’t rising.
I have not read of ANY loss of beach front property.
I have read a lot about “sea level rise” really being beach erosion, land erosion, and such.
Don’t take you eco-religion into politics if you don’t want my Christine religion being in politics…Separation of state and religion, a non-constitutional view, applies your all-controlling and profess religion also.
PS Here is typical projection of future sea level rise. Intuitively, actual rise will most likely follow the bottom of the blue projection region, a continuation of the 100-year trend we are riding. Of course the alarmists will insist on the worst case top of the blue region – worse. “You know, because “tipping point” and all that.
http://thebritishgeographer.weebly.com/sea-level-change.html
Interesting that last yr’s El Nino didn’t amount to much CA rain, but this yr’s weak La Nina is. Guess it shows weather is complicated…….
So why hasn’t somebody come up with a computer program to “uncomplicate” things by now??
“Interesting that last yr’s El Nino didn’t amount to much CA rain, but this yr’s weak La Nina is. Guess it shows weather is complicated”
You aren’t kidding!
The El Nino and La Nina are determined by conditions/temperatures in a key location of the tropical Pacific………..but the rest of the Pacific is huge. The Pacific Ocean, overall the next 2 weeks and in November has been acting more like it would in El Nino years, despite the cooler temps in the key Nino 3.4 region.
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/teleconnections/enso/indicators/sst.php
The PDO index that was very high thru the El Nino and plunged in late Summer/early Fall, jumped back up in November but I don’t have the December number.
Also, the warm blob in the Northeast Pacific in the previous La Nina that was helping to reinforce the teleconnection upper level ridging along the West Coast is gone.
La Nina’s often see more upper level ridging along the West Coast of North America, which deflects the firehose jet stream to the north. Next week, that jet will be aimed directly at Northern California and vicinity with an upper level low off the Pacific Northwest Coast.
So. basically the weather is ignoring the temps in the small Nino 3.4 region and getting its cues from the rest of the Pacific.
This is a “wet” La Nina. Meaning, the “rain line” between the typical “PacNW” wet zone and “SW US” dry zone of La Nina cuts across CA. Nor Cal is with PacNW. Meanwhile the rest of CA is with the SW US in this set up.
The winter of 2010-2011 was a moderate La Niña winter, and a series of spring atmospheric rivers resulted in an almost unprecedentedly heavy western US snowpack on 1 June 2011:
http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ftpref/data/water/wcs/gis/maps/archive/20110601/west_swepctnormal_update.pdf
The following are the California major reservoir levels prior to the major rainfall event.
http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/resapp/getResGraphsMain.action
The subject of this thread isn’t the first significant north-central CA rain event in the last few months, and sure enough, most of the reservoirs are already in good shape, especially considering it’s still early winter. Too bad the state hasn’t updated this drought map since 3 January, as a lot of rain entered the soil on 3, 4 and 5 January, setting the stage for the flooding to come:
https://www.drought.gov/drought/california
If this rain stays warm, then there is a lot of snow to melt at this time. I live at 2000 ft elevation, and have almost 6 inches of hardened snow on the ground.
Can I be the first to say this is not a symptom of climate change? Taken in isolation, this is just weather. There would have to be a much longer record of differing weather patterns to give that sort of information. On the other hand, if you get ten year droughts, then huge rainstorms on a regular basis, building big reservoirs would seem to be a good idea. Some Egyptian called Moses persuaded his King of the wisdom of that concept.
Actually, it was a Hebrew called Joseph who persuaded the Egyptian Pharaoh to stockpile food in anticipation of the coming famine. Moses came along about 400 years later.
Thank you Monna, my scriptural knowledge needs reviewing!
That would be Joseph, Moses got the Isrealites out of Egypt.
Sheesh, quit embarrassing yourself.
You may have missed the principle Mark irrespective of my poor recollection of Biblical names and timelines.
It just amuses me how many issues you are ignorant in.
“He who judges without mercy will be mercilessly judged”
Point well taken! Wasn’t Moses though, it was a family ancestor named Joseph. Moses’ problem was a new king that “knew not Joseph.” That guy should have listened to Moses–he lost a lot of his army in a flooding event.
From the time of his birth Moses’ life was in danger from the pharaohs. After Moses killed an Egyptian task master, he had to flee for his life, only to return 40 years later and demand, “Let my people go!”
Also, Mr. Phillips, your point about the drought-rain cycle is very good.
You have, however, apparently read some revisionist history about the drought of Egypt and all of the surrounding region of Joseph the Hebrew’s day. Someone has put her or his own gloss onto the historical record you’ve read.
Here is what the record says:
Pharaoh had a dream. (Genesis 41:1) The meaning of the dream was: Seven years of great abundance are coming throughout the land of Egypt, but seven years of famine will follow them. … The abundance in the land will not be remembered, because the famine that follows it will be so severe. (Genesis 41:29-31)
No water reservoirs were built. The abundance was stored in the form of grain. (Genesis 41:48, 49) Apparently, they had wells for drinking water, but river-fed/rainfall supplied irrigation stopped.
If it bothers you that this record is found in the Hebrew holy scriptures (which, btw, contain much history, as well as religion), you can find records about “Imhotep” (Joseph) in the gentile Egyptians’ records.
Janice,
Imhotep lived 1500 to 2000 years before the biblical character “Joseph”, if such a person ever actually existed, which is doubtful. There is no sign of him in Egyptian records, so if he existed, his dates can’t be nailed down, but it is impossible for him to have lived as long ago as Imhotep.
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/archaeology/1.685420
Before about 800 BC, the OT is myth and legend, not history. After that, parts of it are more or less historical, albeit with spin and some fiction thrown in, and can be checked against ancient archives and archaeology.
Some sign of Semitic tribes in the Nile Delta have been found at about the right time for Exodus, and a stele mentioning what some have interpreted as “Israel” (the northern Hebrew kingdom) from c. 1200 BC. That’s it for extant records and archaeology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele
I think there is a strong probability that this is the beginning of a cool trend setting in, one that may turn into a cold trend before the pattern switches back to warm.
Good God! The PRECIPITATION FORECAST displays values greater than 1 in gradations of yellow and red! What a glaringly blatant push for global warming.
It is ‘understandable’ to use red colour for high temperatures. For precipitations blue colour would be more appropriate.
Red Color
Associated with energy, war, danger. Enhances human metabolism, increases respiration rate, and raises blood pressure. Irritates physical reaction
Blue Colour
Strong blue colour stimulate clear thought. Light blue calms the mind and improves concentration. Also mentally calming.
“Unfortunately, California’s outdated reservoir system will likely not capture but a fraction of that water for later use.”
Unfortunately, California’s screwed up by bureaucrats reservoir system will not capture but a fraction of that water for later use,but the imported delta smelt will be happy. Screw the people. You get what you vote for.
“You get what you vote for.”
Thats what I keep telling people who are worried about losing healthcare and what Mr.Trump will do while in office.
People who are worried about losing “healthcare” because Trump was elected are simply buying into Democrat (or perhaps, merely pro-government medicine) propaganda.
1. Healthcare has suffered since (and because of — given the lack of funding for the mandates, e.g., $500 billion taken from Medicare, impinging on its services and also the unfunded mandates on healthcare providers across the board) the Democrats (not one Republican in the House voted for Obamacare. Not one.) forced Obamacare down the throats of America.
2. Government-run medicine has been the subject of many real-life experiments (see Cuba, see Sweden, see Canada, and on and on) which provide much data strongly indicating that private insurance-based medicine is MUCH higher in quality (and availability).
And further, why are you talking about government-run healthcare on a thread about WATER MANAGEMENT??
It really fascinates mew how socialists assume that unless government provides something, it just isn’t available.
MarkW, we need government to provide the rules. It does not need to pay the health care, but it needs to enforce some rules.
As a child of a Nordic welfare society, I don’t see an extensive public health care a threat. But. It certainly has some downsides, but not necessarily the ones you are afraid of.
In practice, I don’t much use the public service, because my employer has sold my soul to a private company.
What works in Norway with it’s mono-cultural society, can’t work elsewhere.
Hugs, I counter your Norway with the VA.
All major resivours but Melonius will likely be close to full this year. New Melonius is often used to feed the delta.
Calif must however be cautious, not lose flood control.
Our Governor Moonbat even scolded Californians for using much more water than projected 20 years ago…….without any sense of irony……………..after basically saying the doors were open to 10 million illegals.
Hey Everybody!!! Guess what? This is just normal California weather. We have not been in a drought and there is no such thing as normal rainfall. The word drought implies something abnormal in the rainfall patterns and such is far from the case.
All we have, here and everywhere, are averages of rainfall which include years with little rain, like 1976-1977, but also include the bonus rains of 1996-1997. Those averages also include last year’s above average rainfall (which you never heard about) and what looks like a far above average rainfall this year.
Sorry for the buzz kill folks, but this is just normal California weather.
pbh
And I second that!!! As a resident from the Great White North (okay, western Canada, …. , okay, Alberta, Canada), we always laugh, especially in the winter, at the “average” temperature for any given day. With “Alaskan Clippers” (they are known as “Alberta Clippers” in Texas) that can drop the temperature to – 40 C, and with Chinooks that can raise the temperature to + 20 C, yes, you get an “average” of -10 C …..
But that is the normal range for temperature in the winter in this part of the world. Also known as weather.
And hey, the newly imposed “Carbon Tax” appears to be working! Since its inception on January 1, 2017, we have had below average temperatures in Alberta!!! Bloody amazing that the plan could work that quickly!!!!
Oh wait, ….. , it is just weather ……
I like to point out that “normal” as a term is misapplied to weather or climate. There are means and averages in weather and climate, but no norms. Norms are what something is supposed to be. Normal human body temperature is 98.6 F, and substantial departures from that norm are dangerous. Normal eyesight is often characterized as 20/20. Weather doesn’t have norms.
Tomorrow we in central Virginia are told to expect 4-8″ of snow, with temps dropping to single digits F at night and not reaching freezing again until Tuesday at the earliest. Is that abnormal? No–it’s January, which is when we expect occasional rushes of cold air, with precipitation if there is enough moisture. Yes, the period will be colder than average; but departures from average (in both directions) happen all the time. As for California rain and snow: It fluctuates. That’s what it’s doing now. It’s OK. It’s not Climate Change, it sure as shooting isn’t Global Warming–it’s weather. Wise people get used to it and use the wet times to prepare for the dry times (check the example of Joseph and the Pharaoh’s dreams). If California hasn’t prepared, they’ve brought their problems on themselves.
Average temps should NOT be given as a single figure. That is just not how to report something that normally moves in a range. For weather there is a ‘confined range’. This could be given on a ’50 year basis’. This is very reasonable.
So if the normal range over a particular 50 year period, for example the most recent 50 years, might be for the second week of January, -5 C ±6 degrees, two Sigma, meaning 6 degrees up or down covers what happens with 90% confidence. Thus ‘Average temperature’ for the second week of January is the range of -11 to +1 C.’
When the CBC reports the temperature, they delight in saying “3 degrees above normal” when in fact it is well within the range of ‘normal’ whether that be for a standard deviation of Sigma one or two. They should say, ‘which is well within the normal range for this date.’
The word ‘average’ has no place in such a report. The normal range has meaning, the average does not.
I might venture to say that when “norms” are referred to in weather it is shorthand for “within normal ranges predicted by previous trends”.
That would mean on a winter day that we should expect to be cold but is indeed quite warm will be called abnormal. Of course that expected range is much larger than alarmist would have us believe.
Bingo!
Antiquated California reservoir system. They are in the process of building several, perhaps half a dozen “antiquated” pumped storage units for the electricty that wind and solar produces that can’t be used but must be stored – at a cost, I recall, of over $2 billion per storage facility. Are located up in the mountains, far from the ultimate customer. Can produce about a gigawatt of power for 6 to 8 hours or so, as I recall, before all the water runs out. Losses that are incurred in storing the power in these facilities was given as 25% just for the storage and retrieval costs, not counting transmission losses, which are not trivial
$2 billion per facility – that would pay for a gigawatt molten salt nuclear power plant that would have 100% capacity, 24/7, not just 6 or 8 hours per day and doesn’t require any storage capacity at all, and can be located within the city limits of Los Angeles, losses due to transmission to homes – practically nil. Transmission line costs – very little or no cost compared to what is required for those wind mills and solar panels, spread all over creation. Fuel costs : nil. Operational costs – very low.
Environmental impact – practically nothing compared to the renewable units – especially wind turbines, which require enormous amounts of acreage.
Arthur4563
Well said and I support your numbers.
What about pumping water up the Hoover Dam?
Provided they are allowed to build the transmission lines from those facilities. Odds are the “environmentalists” will go to court over the power lines.
When I first moved to New Jersey, they were in third consecutive year of drought which was being blamed on climate change (and I believed them). A year after I moved in, we had the remnants of a hurricane pass through that corrected the drought almost over night. After the water basin return to normal, my property was never dry — they had to build trenches around the house just to keep the water out.
After that, I learned that three year droughts are common in New Jersey. The more recent one had been nothing on the 1929-1932 drought.
The Princeton professor who would speak on the news all of the time linking climate change to drought was lying through his teeth.
“Forecasters say this will exceed stream and river flood levels last seen in 2005.”
The sunspot cycle was in the exact same position in 2005 as it is now. Coincidence?
http://services.swpc.noaa.gov/images/solar-cycle-sunspot-number.gif
Yes.
That fits right in with the long term pattern. There is a flood pattern where the most likely point of occurrence is at or close to the solar minimum. Examples are 1996/97, 1964/65, 1955/56, and 1946/47. Those were all PNW flood winters. In 2014 I made a forecast that this winter would be a likely candidate for the next PNW flood. Twice over the last 3 months initial conditions set up in the Pacific where a system could have produced heavy rains centered on Oregon, but wind conditions changed to dissipate the concentrated flow.
When I made my prediction in 2014, I stated at the time that the winter of 2016/17 was my first choice over the winter of 2017/18. In terms of where the solar minimum should end up, the winter of 2017/18 is a better fit for the anticipated arrival of the minimum. In either case, looking back at the history of past PNW flood winters shows that the year/s prior to having a flood are always above average rainfall years. Last winter was above average as is this current winters rainfall so far. There is still several months where the right conditions may set up to strike the coast.