California snow

[yikes]

The picture on the left is from 2/5/2019. The picture on the right is from 2/5/2018.



Images taken from space in 2018 and 2019 show two very different Californias - SFGate

 

[scotty macfly]

Oh, I do hope that hits Colorado. The more snow here the better.

 

[dennyk]

Must be a glitch in the global warming thing!

Denny

 

[Bigfly]

Just to share......I push snow for a living at Alpine resort. There's not that much snow here so don't get all excited.
Climate change causes more moisture aloft.....mostly warm from Hawaii, so much of the "snow" was rain that ran off.
Rivers of water on the streets and very slidy conditions. Moisture not to be used later, and later is all that counts.
I know that's counter intuitive but there you go.
The most I've heard is 114% OVER last years total (Which was paltry). I judge by how much we have in the lot, or around town....when the street signs disappear, I'll let you know.They never subtract from the snow totals, after it rains, just pump it up more. So they sound pretty silly to locals because we can SEE what we have. The weather man called for 10ft drifts..........we got two feet.....
Went fishing yesterday...easy approach to the water, that won't happen if we get going with winter.

Pacific Northeast, Water Vapor Loop: GOES West

Jim

 

[yikes]

Just to share......I push snow for a living at Alpine resort. There's not that much snow here so don't get all excited.

That's odd, this morning Alpine's own website banner says that they got 7.5 feet of snow in the last 7 days. Are we referring to the same area?

Here's the snowpack report from CEDC, saying central Sierra is 126% of average for this date (2/9). However, there is prognosis of a Pineapple Express next week that could melt away much of the snowpack.

 

[Bigfly]

Never believe a resort snow total.......
Would I LIE to a forum member? NO!
When you live by snow marketing, the truth can get stretched a bit. A foot a day would be 7 feet and I wouldn't be able to go fish right?
It is the same resort. Alpine/squaw.
Do you remember how wonder bread builds bodies 12 ways?
This is no different. People who believe what the read/hear are at risk of disappointment in life.
It is only starting to look like winter to locals. What is a local? Someone who lives in snow for 30-40 years.
Not a meteorologist far away or the news people who try so hard to tell you what's true........
If this sounds strident a little, it's because we get tired of hearing how bad ass the storm is going to be, and it amounts to diddly. Like last night!!!!!! That and seeing all the people coming to ski this morning with mostly wind hold on the chairs.......why didn't the resort mention that the lifts mostly won't run in the wind.....! Because they want the money.
At $160+ a person.
Did my 9hr shift last, had my nap, and now I'm going fishing. In this "bad-ass storm".

Ill just post this again......this is all I need to predict our weather...you can see the warm influence. From HI.
Here's today's...
Pacific Northeast, Water Vapor Loop: GOES West
Now if that crescent of high pressure was to fade away....we might get some snow.

See you on the water.

Jim

 

[tcorfey]

There is a vast difference in the Sierras when you access snow pack. It varies significantly by elevation and location.
I downloaded the latest data from the NOHRSC website which has over 100 sensors throughout the sierras.
Looking at those numbers I can understand Bigfly's frustration with the numbers reported by the media because Tahoe area really does not have a lot of snowpack but other areas and elevations do. In some instances the sensors are within the same zip code but vary in readings by as much as 50" depending on thier elevation.

Taking averages by elevation:
Under 6000' down to 3000' average snowpack is around 24" with a high of 75" and a low of 4.5" Truckee is listed at 5888'
Under 7000' down to 6000' average snowpack is around 74" with a high of 193" and a low of 20"
Under 8000' down to 7000' average snowpack is around 90" with a high of 180" and a low of 38"
Under 9000' down to 8000' average snowpack is around 103" with a high of 200" and a low of 45"
Above 9000' average snowpack is around 105" with a high of 179" (Bishop Pass) and a low of 8.9" (Ellery Lake)

If I calculate on Median rather than just average snowpack then the numbers change:
Under 6000' is 18.5"
Under 7000' is 60"
Under 8000' is 82"
Under 9000' is 100"
Above 9000' is 92"

If I sort by Latitude (no consideration for elevation)
36n is averaging 85" (South of Mammoth)
37n is averaging 102" (Yosemite down to Mammoth)
38n is averaging 81" (Central Sierras below Tahoe above Yosemite)
39n is averaging 65" (Tahoe / Truckee falls in this range)
40n is averaging 30" (North of Tahoe)

Using all sensors the Average is 80" and the Median is 76".

I guess I could do some more analysis but I think we can all understand that snow depth totals vary significantly depending on where you are located and at what elevation. Overall though it looks like CA snowpack is in pretty good shape barring any significant warming trend.

To bring in a visual here is a picture of Donner Summit above Truckee


Here is a picture 16 miles away on the Truckee river in Floriston



Regards,

Tim C.

 

[Bigfly]

Actually the reason I don't buy it, is because I've lived here a long time.
And as I said, they don't subtract the snow that melted from rain, from the total snow measurements.
Get 6" lose two........if we didn't have settling and some rain, we would be deep.
We could also get a bunch of rain before Spring and not have a pack....been there too. 1996-97.
Snowed 3ft and then rained for two days straight from HI.
The next step is LIDAR, and compare the overflight with ground sensors......
Then all the people who don't live in snow can really spew about how much WE have.

Jim

 

[myt1]

If the sensors measure how much snow is on the ground, it seems they do take into account melting snow due to rain.

If the sensor starts at 10 inches, if two inches melt due to rain, then the sensor presumably then says eight inches.

Or isn't it that simple?

Or is this just another instance of being able to say pretty much anything you want using statistics, and or anecdotal oberservation, for that matter.?

 

[yikes]

https://cdec.water.ca.gov/snow/misc/rainOnSnow.html


https://cdec.water.ca.gov/snow/pix/snowmelt.gif

"According to the Corps of Engineers' Snow Hydrology manual, where Mr is the melt, in inches of water, Tr is the mean rain temperature (F), and Pr is the inches of rainfall. Therefore, it would take about 10 inches of rain at 48F to melt one inch of snow water content.
Much of work to develop and verify this equation was done at the Central Sierra Snow Laboratory located at Soda Springs near Donner Summit. Considerable work remains to refine the physical mechanisms of how the rain water migrates through the pack.

Only after prolonged, warm rainfall will snowmelt be a major contributor to runoff. This did occur in February, 1986 and during the first week of 1997."

 

[yikes]

https://cdec.water.ca.gov/snow/misc/rainOnSnow.html


https://cdec.water.ca.gov/snow/pix/snowmelt.gif

"According to the Corps of Engineers' Snow Hydrology manual, where Mr is the melt, in inches of water, Tr is the mean rain temperature (F), and Pr is the inches of rainfall. Therefore, it would take about 10 inches of rain at 48F to melt one inch of snow water content. [Note: not 1 inch of snow, but 1 inch of snow-water-content.]
Much of work to develop and verify this equation was done at the Central Sierra Snow Laboratory located at Soda Springs near Donner Summit. Considerable work remains to refine the physical mechanisms of how the rain water migrates through the pack.

Only after prolonged, warm rainfall will snowmelt be a major contributor to runoff. This did occur in February, 1986 and during the first week of 1997."

 

[tcorfey]

Myt1, you are correct, Because I am on call at night I watch the National Weather Service sensors pretty regularly and they go down depending on rain melt or higher temperatures and they go up when it snows.

I am sure that Bigfly is correct that the ski areas do not ever report a lower snowpack but I do not ever look at them to gauge snowpack because they make their own snow even when there is no snow anywhere else all they need is low temperatures.

Like Bigfly I also call bs when the weather man says to expect the storm to dump up to 7' of snow. That would equate to 8.4" of rain and we just don't normally get storms that big out here. Standard rain to snow conversion is 1" of rain = 10" of snow.

According to the CDEC current rainfall (Northern Sierras average) from the start of the rain season Oct 1st until now is 32.3 inches. Given that we really did not get good snowfall at the lower elevations (below 7000') until mid-january we have had roughly 15" of rain in the form of snow which would translate to 150" of snow if the sensors did not record snow melt. Of course most of the sensors are way below that number and many are less than half of that amount as seen in my previous posting. We only see those kind of big numbers at a few of the really high elevations where it stays colder longer.

You can also see from the pics I captured the other day, lots more snow at the higher elevations than there is down near the town of Truckee and below on the Truckee River. In the pictures (taken during a snow storm) down near the Floriston exit which is just below the Little Truckee River inflow you can still see the scrub and the rocks on the hillside (not to impressive). Like fishing and real estate its location, location, location.

Regards,

Tim C.

 

[Bigfly]

20170221_161527 by James Landis, on Flickr

2017 was the last big winter....we will see how it goes this year.


T corfey

Thanks for getting my back. (Call me to fish sometime...) You would think a first hand acct would be enough.
Like my post about the 96-97 rain event. Three feet of snow here in town in two days, and then 6" of warm rain from Hawaii to bare ground in 24hrs.... Those that live up here study this stuff, it's not about opinion.
It's survival.......
If we get serious snow above 7000ft we can still have a drought.
It's when we get a serious pack at 6000ft and lower are we out of danger of drought..
So, a foot in town is squat. Most of the pack is above town.....that's why I post about winter from the town, not the crest of the Sierras.
On the summit we can get 28 feet in a winter...seven feet isn't worth a report hardly.
After reading the last post it sounded like I harshed Yikes about his comment about snow fall.
Not so, lots of people see resort reports and believe it. I used to. But since I work in resort snow it becomes clear there are better sources of info........
The other morning driving the blower after the storm, the wind blown snow was higher than the cab roof. If I give you a report, you can take it to the bank. Neither blowing it up, or putting it down, I'm trying to be accurate.
As far as making snow,that doesn't count towards the snow total.....barely covers the ground til Dec., just so folks can go play. Heck, we scrape snow from the parking lot (farming) to keep resort going till winter begins.

20170221_162923 by James Landis, on Flickr

Jim

 

[tcorfey]

So if there were any doubters, I just checked the NOHRSC snow monitors in the Sierras. Over the last 24 hours we had a rain event, the snow pack monitors are showing a loss of snow depth between 2" to 12" across the Sierras today.

Good news is the weather man is predicting a cooling trend starting in the morning with the precipitation getting back to snow around 10am and continuing through the afternoon. so there is still hope...

Regards,

Tim C.

 

[yikes]

You would think a first hand acct would be enough...
After reading the last post it sounded like I harshed Yikes about his comment about snow fall.
Not so, lots of people see resort reports and believe it. I used to. But since I work in resort snow it becomes clear there are better sources of info...

Don't worry, I don't feel harshed. I did not understand that the resorts would need to exaggerate their snowpack, especially when webcams and social media can allow people to quickly verify for themselves. I appreciate the local insight.

On the other hand, we are both reviewing available information from two different perspectives:

Yours is looking out the window to see if you will need to plow, or if the snow or runoff will affect your fishing today.

My perspective is from hundreds of miles away, and for a longer-term purpose: I'm wondering if it is going to be a good fishing season this summer. I am posting from the same data sensors that California's water managers look at to make their decisions about when to release impounded water into the tailwaters that I fish. Right now it is saying the main regions of the Sierras already have enough snow water equivalent to essentially equal or exceed our April 1st average.

My larger point is not to question the validity of your local observations; my larger point is that the data indicates water managers will likely make this a great year for fishing.

 

[Bigfly]

20190226_100834 by James Landis, on Flickr

OK.....so now we are starting to accumulate some snow......
The pole in front of my truck is 8ft. The bank is about 16ft.
This is what we expect from a normal winter, but it's still not an outrageous dump yet.
I think this is a bit like those in the lower 48 states, think Eagles are so cool........in AK they are considered about as interesting as pigeons are down here........
To flatlander's it seems a lot of snow, but to Mnt folk, we are just getting started. Expecting another 20" tonight.
I'll keep ya posted.

Jim

 

[myt1]

The Eagles are great.

I love Nick Foles!