From the “children just won’t know what drought is” department.
A few years ago, some genius politicians, spurred on by some equally genius “climate scientists” told the citizens of California that we were now in a “permanent drought” situation. Of course, the NYT bought this drivel, and made it a headline.
We here at WUWT called bullshit on it, and now we can say “told you so” with impudence. A mere 1% of the entire state of California is now in a drought situation, according the the U.S. Drought Monitor website.
Just compare the previous first weeks of March:
California maps here: https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA
Of course, we’ll still have shrill fools that will screech “climate change!” the next time the soil gets a bit dry, but for those people, there’s this lesson in California climate history:
From 2014, spot the portion caused by “man-made climate change”:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Manmade climate is like a box of chocolates: you never know what you’re going to get.
But you can bet it will be unprecedented in it’s badness! Even if it’s good, it’s a bad good.
You think you’re kidding, but we have seen those articles posted here. A period of no statistically significant warming or cooling, and some wacko (probably Ben Santer) bemoaning how bad that was because people would become complacent, maybe even not do anything about Global Warming!!!
Whatever happens, blame Trump. And CO2.
I thought it was the Russians! What happened to the Russians?
The Russians WANT global warming! Then Siberia will become the breadbasket of the world :-).
Probably Crunchy Frog or Spring Surprise…
Plus many!
See http://www.montypython.net/scripts/crunchy.php for the script.
Auto
lol good times;-) ++++
Whatever you get will always converge towards socialism above all.
“Manmade climate is like a box of chocolates…”, except that with a box of chocolate, you know you won’t get a stinking mound of BS.
No time to count blessings. California needs to start injecting reclaimed/storm runoff water into the aquifers on a large scale. We have the technology and been using it sparingly for decades. There will be more drought periods …. it’s historical.
A comprehensive plan to install a state wide system of small reservoirs, farm ponds and cisterns to trap excess water so it will be available later is prudent — so it won’t be done, probably. Over the last decade or so I have personally seen in Oklahoma many of the simple anti-Dust Bowl passive measures bulldozed and replaced with urban sprawl (lines of windbreak trees and many farm ponds, for example)…
It is a lot easier to blame climate change than it is to actually manage water resources. The drought will be back by Jul or Aug when all of the fresh water is allowed to run off to the ocean.
Too bad, too.
It’ll be needed to fight fires.
When the math is wrong, any climate change is blame on humans and not natural variations
in Aus they called it KeyLine ag
and it worked
regen ag with cell grazing also works as do “unapproved by govt” land reclamations
when our govt find them in use and working?
they force the land owners to cease and desist and hound them off their land
Peter Andrews being one more recent example
the snowmelt and runoff will be massive and so much will be utterly wasted again
Can’t see any serious money being spent on drought resilience, there are no headlines to be had from adequate water supply, and drought is a vote winner for a certain party.
Ya, better California spend billions on high speed rail infrastructure. That brings out the electorate.
so havent the damned smelt all dried up yet?
about time they replaced the dams and reservoirs
In 2014 California voters approved Prop 1. This was a bond measure to finance billions of dollars in water infrastructure projects including new reservoirs. Not a penny has been spent.
Reminder: California is controlled top to bottom by democrats.
I wouldn’t be sure it hasn’t been spent. Nor would I bet on ever seeing any “…water infrastructure projects…”. The state is run by Democrats, after all.
You mean “mannmade” climate .
ja. ja.
the big drought simular to the Dust Bowl drought is on its way, just like every 87 years,
but as far as I know it will only be applicable to the great plains of America,
not California.
Much as you would like to wish it away, I think it won’t.
The Dust Bowl drought 1932-1939 was one of the worst environmental disasters of the Twentieth Century anywhere in the world. Three million people left their farms on the Great Plains during the drought and half a million migrated to other states, almost all to the West. The main problem is that this very same area is currently counted as the bread basket of the whole world, largely determining the price of wheat… 87 years earlier we had a similar problem in the USA, the drought time apparently being one of the causes of the decimation of the Bison….
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286971648_Drought_in_the_western_Great_Plains_1845-56_Impacts_and_implications
There is also some evidence of a serious drought in Virginia in 1755 causing the government to take some special tax measures.
If you follow my reasoning, we can assume major food shortages in the world in the decade to come……due to natural climate change, not man-made climate change…
The Northern Plains obviously have a somewhat different climate from the Southern Plains. Here in Western Canada the 30’s were also hot and dry. Almost certainly hotter than recent weather. The drought and crop failures here in the North were substantially aggravated by framing practices of the time.
Nowadays, farmers are much more likely to use zero-till techniques and leave stubble in the field to trap snow over winter while not tilling also reduces moisture losses. As such, a repeat of the scale of crop loss seen in the 30’s is unlikely. This should apply as far South as a significant winter snow line exists.
Farther South than that I couldn’t say how bad it might be. I don’t know how they grow crops down there as it is.
Another big difference between the 1930’s and now is the establishment of the freeway system, an improved railway system, big ships, lots of aircraft and airports as well as excellent communications. Getting food from A to B will be less of a problem both nationally and internationally …. the entire world is unlikely to suffer a drought.
Also use of adequate fertilizers and leaving crop residues for soil carbon. The dust bowl farmers had “mined the soil” nutrients the previous 30-50 years and the soil carbon and structure were gone. Nothing to hold moisture and soil.
John,Alex &
Interesting perspectives from all of you. Thanks. I hope you are right and that you will survive the odd 10 years of dimished precipitation.
Perhaps you must just understand what imho is causing the coming drought times in Europe and USA. .
Most of the sats and data sets show that earth is still warming. However, my data set is showing the opposite. It is cooling. Especially minimum temperatures are dropping.
Click on my name to read my rpeort on that.
Simple physics tells me that as the temperature differential between the poles and equator grows larger due to the cooling from the top, very likely something will also change on earth. Predictably, there would be a small (?) shift of cloud formation and precipitation, more towards the equator, on average. At the equator insolation is 684 W/m2 whereas on average it is 342 W/m2. So, if there are more clouds in and around the equator, this will amplify the cooling effect due to less direct natural insolation of earth (clouds deflect a lot of radiation). Furthermore, in a cooling world there is more likely less moisture in the air, but even assuming equal amounts of water vapor available in the air, a lesser amount of clouds and precipitation will be available for spreading to higher latitudes. So, a natural consequence of global cooling is that at the higher latitudes it will become both cooler (winters) and warmer (drier summers). It is happening already, is it not? Europe had one of its driest summers ever. USA had one of the worst winters.
We here in the South Africa are still in drought time but I think / hope that the worst is already over.
Not quite that simple. We have neighbors here in Sask. who used much the same tech used today in 2002, and never took their combines out of the shed that fall. Never threshed an acre on a 12000 acre farm. They’d be gone now too if it were not for crop insurance. And farmers here are actually actively trying to chop up stubble and residue to facilitate that zero till seeding, and to warm up the cold soil in the spring.
O Olson
I take it from your reply that you had not much precipitation last summer?
O Olson
I take it from your reply [to John] that you had not much precipitation last summer?
[note that Olson’s original reply was to John]
oh. I think I understand it now. There was no crop in 2002 due to drought conditions?
The “dust bowl” phenomenom and its effects on the human population was much less about drought than it was poor soil conservation practices and generally poor farming practices. Drought comes and goes. but the soil will stay put and not create a “dust bowl” if proper farming practices are followed.
Indeed. even is we were to have a drought like the 1930s, we wouldn’t have a repeat of the “dust bowl” due to better farming and conservation practices and better irrigation technology.
John Endicott
again, indeed, I hope you are right.
I noticed in Holland, [the land made from water] that they struggled with a much lower water level in the soil due to the drought conditions last summer, causing all sorts of problems. Irrigation might not work that well if the water level falls too low?
The dust bowl drought is caused by the low movement of the gulf stream moving up through Texas. It happened from 2004 to 2011. It lasts 7 years in most areas and 11 years in others. Has already completed its cycle.
tom
I doubt that very much
If you can provide some more evidence?
here is my argument:
http://virtualacademia.com/pdf/cli267_293.pdf
watch table II
average flooding of the Nile: ca 87 years
[more rain in around the equator = less rain going up higher lats]
watch table III
US droughts (twice) : ca. 90 years.
the GB cycle can vary from 87 – 90 years but the current cycle is 87
hence my argument [based on my own dat set / measurements]
here:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/11/californias-permanent-drought-is-now-washed-away-by-reality/#comment-2652329
Could someone please explain to me how the “Scientists “can tell which
bit of CO2 is natural, and which bit is mad by us humans ?
MJE
First you take a sample of air and put it in a sealed container. About 1 cubic meter will do. Then using a quasi-lateral eyeballitiscope you guesstimate what the concentration of CO2 could be. Then you take that number and multiply it by 400 then subtract 180. This number will make as much sense as whatever anyone else tells you
As I put it to warmunists: if the ocean is going to rise 1 meter, but only 60% of recent warming is caused by man, doesn’t that mean you should only build a dyke that is 60 cm?*
I mean, you don’t want to mess with nature, so you have to allow 40 cm of that rise to naturally flood, right?
* yes they are made up numbers. Aren’t they all?
Separating man-made CO2 from natural is easy-peasy; where the REAL talent lies is in identifying CO2 from China as compared to the US. Yes, China emits twice the CO2 as the US, but we’re told time and again it’s All Our Fault because – on a per-person basis – we emit twice as much. Mother Nature is hurt much more, apparently, by our output than the double amount from China.
They estimate how much CO2 was been generated from the burning of fossil fuels, the amount of which is readily known. But wait, this ends up being far larger than the increase we’ve observed, so the rest of the determination is made by considering that CO2 levels would not have changed, if not for man. This is despite the fact that the Industrial Revolution started increasing atmospheric CO2 coincidental with the warming following the LIA and that the response of CO2 concentrations to temperature is well established by the ice cores.
Michael
Yes, it’s very simple, but this is done only by people much smarter than you and I:
The bad stuff is what we worry about. All the rest is natural.
I told you you wouldn’t understand.
It’s the hot CO2, not the cold stuff…
Natural CO2 is colored green for easy recognition.
This is simplified to fit in a smaller space.
I read somewhere that these scientists tried separating where the isotopes of C13, C14 and C15 came from different sources and flora of different species prefer one over the others. But those species will take in every isotope that makes up a Carbon Dioxide molecule to build its cellular structures. So all Fossil Fuels have a mixture of all the Carbon Isotopes in them, just as all life on Earth does. There’s no way to separate where the CO2 came from with any accuracy.
What they do is take the amount of Carbon in a liter of gasoline and calculated the amount of gasoline that was burned by humans in a year, to say humans added X amount of CO2 to the Atmosphere from gasoline. They do that with coal and all other forms of fossil fuels to get their gigatons of Carbon we added to the environment.
Because all the natural sources are unknown how much they contributed from flora and fauna respiration or the soil respiration or the volcanic activity and everything else. We can just estimate that over 99% is natural in comparison to whatever we contribute from those fossil fuels we burn. That this small percentage is taken in by flora that’s eaten by fauna or burned as fuel or made into building materials is all part of the Carbon Cycle that’s been increasing because of our contributions. Are all natural sources and we just help it do it faster than nature was doing it.
Ah Pah Dam
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ah_Pah_Dam
would be a solution to drought years. Alas, the prevalent mood today is about removing the existing Klamath river dams, not building new one.
With more rain coming to the Inter-Mountain West and the Pacific NorthWest on Wednesday. ALthough the cold setup across Texas and the plains will make for bad tornado conditions though the second half of the week for the folks there.
But it is not just California that is benefiting from the rain and snow pack in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The Upper Colorado River Basin snow pack is doing quite well and could surpass 2017’s banner year by the average peak snow pack date of April 6.
The steep snow pack growth of last week has leveled-off the past 2 days with a break in the action, that is set to resume later this week. And every area in the SnowTel tracking of the Upper Colorado River basin is currently running above 100% for this point in the water year.
https://www.usbr.gov/UC_SnowMap/
(from this USBR web page you can also use to pull down menu to see the water levels at all the major reservoirs in the Upper Colorado River basin.)
The spring-summer water flows into Lake Powell and Lake Mead will help their levels, as they are both down from a year ago due to WY2018 being somewhat of a dry year. This coming spring snow pack melt will help immensely on those two reservoirs by the summer.
I’d point out that on the SnowMap, the four western regions are all great basin and have no outlet into the Colorado river basin. I am curious how much Powell and Meade will rise.
The Map divides them up with a bold line if you examine it closely. The center regions are Colorado River water sheds. The South-Eastern regions are Rio Grande and Pecos Rivers.
The Western most of course are Great Basin water shed going nowhere but to a salt lake.
Still the Western Slope of the Rockies is packed with snow and will build some more later this week with 2 more storms coming in in the next 6 days. Good news for Lakes Powell and Mead.
Lake Powell will likely rise at least 40 feet by June from where it is today based on the current snow pack. In 2017, Powell went from 3,594 ft to 3,635 ft (41 feet) with a similar snow pack. So Powell might get past 3,610 by June. 3,700 ft is full pool, so a long way from full.
Lake Mead is completely (almost) on how much water is released from the Glen Canyon Dam that holds back Lake Mead. Which is why political concerns about Mead’s level (which supplies Las Vegas) can be somewhat adjusted with more or less releases from Powell to suit the political winds.
I meant “…Glenn Canyon Dam that holds back Lake Powell.” Not Mead. The mighty Hoover Dam holds back Lake Mead. I miss edit.
That latest image is totally wrong for most of Southern California. In the image linked you can see that San Diego as well as Orange and Riverside counties are between 110-200% of normal rainfall totals for 2019…
http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/anomimage.pl?calJanPpct.gif
For a drought determination, the hydrologists use models to calculate how much precip above average is needed to correct for recorded lack of soil moisture and reservoir levels. It takes a lot of above average rain and snow to correct for a previous dry year or string of years. So not wrong, you’re just comparing two different things.
As an avid skier, I pay attention to the snow. This year, the Sierra’s haven’t had much of the usual Sierra cement and we got a lot of dry Utah powder instead. But then again, there is no average normal and instead, the normal here is bouncing between extremes.
You’re looking in the wrong places. The Tahoe basin is over 180% of normal “snow water equivalent” for today’s date. Powder, cement – don’t matter. It’s the water content that counts in the California’s largest reservoir – the Sierra Nevada snowpack:
https://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ftpref/data/water/wcs/gis/maps/west_swepctnormal_update.pdf
Yes, the water content is very good because there’s a lot of snow. There’s about 208″ still on the ground at this site which is more then the maximum snow depth during 2011 which was close to being a record breaking snow year. One reason is that’s been unusually cold and a larger fraction of the water is still locked up in snow and ice.
https://wcc.sc.egov.usda.gov/nwcc/site?sitenum=574
Anthony wrote: “From the ‘children just won’t know what drought is’ department.”
Another classic opening, Anthony. It made me laugh…still smiling.
Regards,
Bob
These things have a tendency to revert toward normal in a hurry. In 1977 we were told in Utah that the reservoirs were so depleted it would take a decade to refill them. Late Spring of 1978 they were letting water out of said reservoirs.
But when they do revert, it is of course due to…wait for it…climate change!
Remember when the Great Lakes were all going to dry-up because of climate change? Well surprise, surprise, some are now at record levels.
Any guesses as to what that’s being linked to?
I read an article recently that claimed we set a meteorological winter record for rainfall in the US and guess what? It was due to climate change.
“The soggy winter could be a sign of things to come as human-caused climate change continues.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/03/06/winter-weather-usa-slogged-through-wettest-winter-ever-recorded/3083767002/
Yep
2013
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2013/02/06/great_lakes_hit_recordlow_water_levels.html
2017
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/05/01/lake-ontario-the-highest-its-been-since-1993.html
No news items for 2014, 2015 and 2016 as they were completely average and therefore NOT NEWS.
Then you average 2013 to 2017 and get…completely average.
As I’ve said, if more people had better than an average 1970’s sixth grade student’s math skills, they’d be less worried about fewer things.
“Climate science” uses one dubiously unscientific process after the other to get the required political results.
Outside of tree rings and models, though, the worst one is using “average” anything.
As mentioned here in Toronto, last year we had some local flooding due a single spring of above average spring run off. It was a media-driven full on apocalyptic event.
Three years ago we had a single spring of below average spring run off. THAT was also a media-driven full on apocalyptic event.
The two years in between were completely average, and therefore the media ignored them.
Averaging the FIVE complete years gives you…a completely average reading. One that is, at the same time, completely accurate and basically useless.
From what I see coming up the Atlantic Hurricane season will be below average this year. Maybe 1-2 major hurricanes (Cat 3+) and maybe none. The Southwest will probably have a cool April which will put a bite into the tornado season.
If this all comes to fruition, I guess the climate bedwetters will only have the fire season this year. With all the water in the west, it’s possible the undergrowth will be plentiful and make for a lot of fires.
The El Niño is going to hold through the summer which should keep overall global temps on the warm side with all the water vapor it throws into the atmosphere. The Solar Minimum’s effect is still up in the air but the graphs I’ve seen says less zonal jet streams in the winter so we could have some wild winters with increased water vapor and arctic air being pushed deep into the temperate zones.
Also there is a good argument that the temps lag solar minimums by quite a few years. All in all it will be an interesting year or five.
I’m sure President H. Clinton would have released massive recovery and relief funds to California based on that prediction.
The climate nuts will claim their policies solved the drought.
It’s the Official Jerry Brown Fact Check Map.
That 200-year Drought Index graph looks like it could also serve as a graph of the declining IQ of the CAGW Leftist crowd. Back in 1400 A.D. they may still have understood something.
Real damage has been done to the California population due to the overblown fears. One of the reasons given for not building more water reservoirs is politicians believed they would be useless without the water to fill them. Why spend a fortune to build things to catch water when there would be no water?
The sky is not falling? But Chicken Little told me it was!
“The End Of Snow::
https://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ftpref/data/water/wcs/gis/maps/west_swepctnormal_update.pdf
https://www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/nsa/index.html?year=2019&month=3&day=11&units=e®ion=Sierra_Nevada
Those drought maps are based on the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI), which is known to guarantee virtual constant drought in the Western US (Palmer calculated that 48 % of all months had drought there, and 18% had severe drought).
And if you don’t like it there is always the Keetch-Byram Drought index preferred by the Forest Service:
Note that while both have some drought in California, they are in different areas!
Heard it all before.
Here in Victoria Australia, a few years ago now, it was never, ever going to rain again. No use building a dam because it would never fill. Build a Desal Plant instead. Some Billions or dollars later, it opened in 2012 and ……… it rained. The thing has never been used. In fact the only time it was turned on for a test, the power system blew up. Here we are in 2019 and we have had a fairly dry year, Melbourne’s dams are down to around 50% (several years worth) and the Government is talking about turning it on again.
Nice to know California has weather cycles too.
Nice to know we don’t have all the fools either.
We have some wise people too.
About 30 years ago well before we had CAGW, I was talking to an old farmer while overlooking the Hume Dam on the Murray River. One of the largest water storage’s in eastern Australia. It then at 10% capacity. He said even then it had several years worth of water left and “ don’t worry it always rains at the end of a drought” I will never forget that and when I repeat the story most folks look at me a bit strange. But then I say “think about it”
yeah at a HUGE cost to run it
bumping up everyones water bills wether we even use water from it or not.
ie im on a bore supplied town but our water rates are set as if we used melbourne supply.
and i dont even HAVE town water
50% isnt reason to start desal
i suspect it will be a late break but a reasonable rain yr for vic.
I was just reading about the ten mile lake that now exists in Death Valley.
Seems a reporter was trying to get to Furnace Creek, but was not able to because the way was blocked by flooding.
In Death Valley.
Groove on that.
What next, cats making friends with dogs?
Lambs and lions becoming pals?
Socialism in the Land of the Home and the Free of the Brave?
Anthony,
How very unscientific of you. You haven’t waited for the ADJUSTED data, which will clearly show that the drought has got worse (apart from coastal areas, which will be flooded for to sea level rise).
No problem thanks to the ‘heads you lose, tails I win ‘ approach ‘science’ takes all basis are covered and perhaps that is one reason its proponents can very say what would disprove the theory.