or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Snowpack and drought in the west
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Snowpack and drought in the west - Page 2

post #31 of 82

On a brighter note

Hey did you notice that CNN has been covering acual news for the past two days. I guess someone had to set fire to sothern CA to get us a break from the never ending spew of politics
post #32 of 82
I don't have a dumbotron.

I did notice maps.google.com has some pretty neat updates.
post #33 of 82
I'm in full agreement with pattongb. I have tons of snowfall data from 97 areas in North America going back 40 years, and there is NO TIME TREND, up or down, over that period at ski elevations, with the single exception of Whistler's base. The warming of the past 35 years has only been enough to change the rain/snow mix at that particular location.

These snowpack projections are taken by hydrologists who are trying to measure water availability in downstream reservoirs, typically in April. To the extent that the measuring sites are lower than the ski areas, and if April 1 is not the maximum snowpack time (very likely at lower elevation), this data is totally irrelevant to skiing.

Is the Colorado River Basin water overallocated? Yes. Should we cut down oil use and send fewer $ to Islamowhatever regimes in the Mideast? Yes. But have warming temperatures had any effect on North American ski areas' snowfall yet? Absolutely not. And if there is an effect in the future it will come mainly from a rise in the rain/snow line, as at the Whistler base. If that rain/snow line ever reaches any ski area in Colorado, we'll have far more serious problems to worry about.
post #34 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGASkiDawg View Post
Yup those burning and collapsing towers were just a scientific prediction from a disputed model that never came true:
Um....is there any possible way to infer more from my statement than your lame attempt of sanctimonious subterfuge?

I was pointing out that the Global Warming 'hysteria' is the exact same tool that Neocons use to rile up sentiment against the 'Islamofacist' movement. Nothing more, nothing less. To put words in my mouth infering something else is nothing less than irresponsible and deceptive. You will have to try harder than that to make a point here.

Oh, and I'm with Tony that snow totals do not appear to have changed *yet* from 20th century totals. At least not yet.

TelePhrophet
post #35 of 82




This year doesn't look so bad.
post #36 of 82
The NOAA projections look less good than that for this year.
post #37 of 82
I look at it pragmatically. The weather will be what it is - we have no control over it.
post #38 of 82
Actually, we do have quite a bit of control over it, both directly and indirectly. See: well funded cloud seeding programs in the West. See also: IPCC.
post #39 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
Actually, we do have quite a bit of control over it, both directly and indirectly. See: well funded cloud seeding programs in the West. See also: IPCC.
It would be interesting though if there would be a need to seed clouds in the winter so slopes would have more snow. As many do not like snow I think there would be a lot of angry taxpayers if the meteoerologists caused it to snow. :
post #40 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulR View Post
It would be interesting though if there would be a need to seed clouds in the winter so slopes would have more snow.
Where do you live?

Vail has been funding cloud-seeding for 30 years.
post #41 of 82
Hey mods - could you please move this trainwreck of a thread over to TGR where it belongs? Or at least allow me to use words like "d#%$*@#", M%$#@!@$*^%" and "Stupid L*%$#@#$%"? And phrases such as "Bite my #$%^&%, you %&&$@$&* %%$#@$%&&%!" or "Listen, ^^$@#%, why don't you go #%^%$ your %##!" without getting banned?
post #42 of 82
oh yeah - I forgot:
post #43 of 82
It would be really, really funny if mods could move threads all the way across the intertubes.
post #44 of 82
:
post #45 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Crocker View Post
To the extent that the measuring sites are lower than the ski areas, and if April 1 is not the maximum snowpack time (very likely at lower elevation), this data is totally irrelevant to skiing.

But have warming temperatures had any effect on North American ski areas' snowfall yet? Absolutely not. And if there is an effect in the future it will come mainly from a rise in the rain/snow line, as at the Whistler base. If that rain/snow line ever reaches any ski area in Colorado, we'll have far more serious problems to worry about.
There has been an effect on North American ski area. Take a look at Taos. Look at the length of the seasons and the ski resorts in CA. Look at the Pacific North West (not last year). It's a comin.

The east has been affected and each year builds on the warmth of years past. Most people acknowledge Global warming. I think it's a mistake to say that ski areas won't suffer. The higher the mountain, the less threatened. Warmer temps could increase snow fall in some places.
post #46 of 82
Here’s a conundrum for those who see a simple anthropogenic global warming reason for all maladies.
It is believed by many that global warming will produce more tropical cyclones. It is also believed by many that the California fires were caused by global warming.
However, this season, despite predictions, has been one of the least active hurricane seasons in the last 30 years. The moisture deficit from the storms that never came forms a bullseye over the burned area.
Both floods and droughts get attributed to increases in CO2. These things seldom that simple.


http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2268

post #47 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfydog View Post
Here’s a conundrum for those who see a simple anthropogenic global warming reason for all maladies.
Who was that, again?

This isn't the forum for making up random straw men. You'll find that one towards the bottom of your list of forums.
post #48 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
The NOAA projections look less good than that for this year.

Could you post some data or links? "Less good" is a bit tough to quantify.
post #49 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post
. Look at the length of the seasons and the ski resorts in CA. Look at the Pacific North West (not last year). It's a comin.
.
Again, have you got some data?

Here' Mt Rainier snowfall:

post #50 of 82
Can you sumarize for us? Can't read it plus your input would be beneficial.
post #51 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfydog View Post
Could you post some data or links? "Less good" is a bit tough to quantify.
I should have said less good for me.

I will post a link when I find it. There was a thread with it here or at TGR in the last week.
post #52 of 82

No drought of emotion and opinion here

Of course there are climate cycles which have occurred on earth. It has been a while since man has not had an effect on those cycles. my hypothesis: there is no way that man's activities on the planet are without effect. conclusion: man had better be f'ing careful what he does! a couple somewhat related facts and questions about snowpack, which is where you really get my attention. that and human extinction, in that order precisely. facts: there is a nation-state funded cloud seeding program in place. they use the full resources of their huge military's artillery and a portion of their national airforce to seed clouds. We are experiencing a cloud-seed-gap of unprecedented proportion. a new use for star wars apparatus? Question for you scientists: if the atmosphere is wrung out in one hemisphere, is there less atmospheric moisture in the other hemisphere? I really don't know. Another fact: a friend of mine leads expeditions into the Arctic Circle. He says that they have switched from skis to kayaks. fortunately he is expert in both modes of travel. and now, not a fact but a baseless supposition: it must be impossible for the dynamics of man's occupation of the earth not to have an effect on virtually every system on earth. the earth is a closed system, all things interact, nothing that happens is without impact on the entire system. a conscious approach to life is essential for every occupant of the planet. my supposition. is there any science that supports that, you scientists out there? I have a bumper sticker to design this winter: skiers and polar bears, both befuddled just trying to do their thing.
post #53 of 82

so what is the point

that nothing happening has anything to do with man's actions on the planet so we should not bother ourselves do discuss more responsible action, so long as we can keep skiing that is? I am lost with these "scientific" assertions with an ax to grind. It's science or it's opinion. we are gonna' need footnotes here pretty soon. and if you are pretending to know the science, be kind enough to convey your qualifications to the group. the BS factor is soaring, and it's hard to see through the crap on the cosmic windshield. one thing is certain, the status quo favors the big money mongers. a responsible, rational, science based approach to life is going to decrease profits across the board, at least for a while.
post #54 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post
Can you sumarize for us? Can't read it plus your input would be beneficial.
Right click on the image, then use your computer skills to enlarge it.

I don't see a trend of less snowfall in the PNW.
If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it.

I change my opinion based upon the most reliable data. I think that is reasonable.
post #55 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post
I am lost with these "scientific" assertions with an ax to grind. It's science or it's opinion. we are gonna' need footnotes here pretty soon. and if you are pretending to know the science, be kind enough to convey your qualifications to the group. the BS factor is soaring, .
I"m sorry if I neglected to present my qualifications to the group. I somehow assumed that after 2000 posts they all knew I was full of crap.

I have a decent science background. I am not great with the mathematics of climatology, but I read technical articles on a daily basis and hope I am not pretending, or "bs' ing" on an unusual level. I have minimal ax to grind, as I am a political liberal and a real conservationist, who just wants to see good science to go with our policies and concerns.
PM me to discuss.

My obscurred windshield has kept me from seeing your posts. If they involve climatology, France, anachrononistically narrow skis, World Cup cross country or food and lodging in the PNW send some links my way.

Or just put me on ignore.
post #56 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfydog View Post
..then use your computer skills...


Some areas will see increases in snow fall. PNW might be a good example of that. That area is low enough to see warmth and rain, too.

We have seen warmth move across the interior - BC. I bet we'll see more of that.

The altitude in Co offers protection, but if dry air persists all around the south west eventualy it could take a toll.

As North America experiences warming, most ski areas will be affected, over time. Most of the posters on Epic seem to agree that there is Golbal Warming, but disagree on the cause. Is it logical that next year will continue to be warm and maybe even warmer?
post #57 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post


Most of the posters on Epic seem to agree that there is Golbal Warming, but disagree on the cause. Is it logical that next year will continue to be warm and maybe even warmer?
It is well documented that there has been warming. There are reasons to be optimistic about this year.

First there is not a single sunspot at the moment:





Climate follows the sunspot cycle better than CO2




Second, a nice La Nina is setting up. Look at the cold blue off the coast of S. America




Third, the earths' albedo, the amount of light it reflects back into space seems to be going up. This is a poorly understood phenomenon, but potentially a very strong climate control.

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com...resting-story/


So, while there are some reasons to think every year will be warmer than the last, there are some good things going on which could bring us some snow.
post #58 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
The NOAA projections look less good than that for this year.
Here's some discussion I found reconciling the various long term forcasts:

"As a Meteorologist, anytime I needed to be humbled, I would take a stab at predicting how the next winter in Montana would go. There are always elements that you need for such a forecast that are only predictable at most two weeks in advance. The official NOAA outlook for this winter is EC (Equal Chances) which is code for “we don’t have enough skill in this scenario to make a forecast in that region”. I looked at the history of La Nina winters in Montana and half were mild and dry and the other half were cold and wet. I can understand why CPC went with EC given the history. It all hinges on how the jet stream over the pacific establishes itself this winter. Accuweather seems to think that a zonal jet pattern will dominate which would mean mild and dry winter for Montana. This is also the tendency with a moderate to strong La Nina. Of course, there is always an exception to the rule and it happens every year."
post #59 of 82
Yes, well, in any case a La Niña year correlates to a high chance of suckage for me.
post #60 of 82
Do certain types of Human activity create Gobal Warming? Is that the question?: On a Macro scale prolly not much. On the Micro scale yes. However, climatic information tends to point towards an ever changing cyclic trend of Warm and Cold. Gosh if I'd just been born 10,000 years ago,now that was a good ski era.:
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Snowpack and drought in the west