2017 Utah Snowpack

[Scott P]

The 3 out of the 6 data points has a "-M" which means "missing data"

This year's data is not missing. It's the average that is missing. This is because those three stations are new and there aren't enough years to compile an average or median.

Therfore those places are counted as a 0%, which GREATLY reduces that average to what we are seeing. But the other 3 locations with data just seem to be a few inches from average. So that 2% isn't right, but it is certainly not normal. It's REAL average is probably ranging from 70-75%.

You must be looking at the wrong columns (?). The last three columns are for accumulated precipitation since October 1 (the beginning of the water year), not the current snowpack. The current snowpack is in column 3 and the average snowpack is in column 4.

Missing data is not counted as 0%; it is excluded from the percentage calculation.

2% is correct. This is based on the three stations that have no missing data.

Column 3 (current snowpack) for stations with no missing data: 0 + 0.2 + 0 = 0.2

Column 4 (average snowpack) for stations with no missing data: 6.8 + 2.7 + 0.8 = 10.3

0.2 / 10.3 = 0.02 = 2%

[jman]

This year's data is not missing. It's the average that is missing. This is because those three stations are new and there aren't enough years to compile an average or median.


No. You must be looking at the wrong columns. The last three columns are for accumulated precipitation since October 1 (the beginning of the water year), not the current snowpack. The current snowpack is in column 3 and the average snowpack is in column 4.

Missing data is not counted as 0%; it is excluded from the percentage calculation.

2% is correct. This is based on the three stations that have no missing data.

Column 3 (current snowpack) for stations with no missing data: 0 + 0.2 + 0 = 0.2

Column 4 (average snowpack) for stations with no missing data: 6.8 + 2.7 + 0.8 = 10.3

0.2 / 10.3 = 0.02 = 2%

Good thing I'm not a meteorologist! People would most likely die because of my reporting...

And when I did the averages, I got somewhere around .21 percent with those zeroes added in, so it made sense about the 2% to me.

But I see my issue - I was taking those averages from the "precip" column rather than SWE. Big difference.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scott Card]

In March I asked the following question to KSL Weather ask-a-question- place.

"Is there a date that weather guru's look at as the "all clear" date or drop dead date when you look at the percentage and realize that the water year will likely be okay or not? I guess another way to ask the same question is what is the snow pack season?"

Mr. Kevin Eubank from KSL, himself, answered my question as follows:

Scott, April 1^st is the date that water experts use to gauge the snowpack situation. This year has been exceptional…we reached the April 1^st averages in many basins on March 1^st, one month early.

Kevin Eubank

Apparently, as far as water year goes, we were done worrying in March and the precip since then is gravy!

[Scott P]

Apparently, as far as water year goes, we were done worrying in March and the precip since then is gravy!

April 1 is used because it's the average date of the maximum snowpack in Utah. In Colorado, it's April 9.

That doesn't mean snowpack can't peak early or later, but the average is used to assess the situation.

Utah doesn't seem to have an equivalent graph, but here's is Colorado's. Sometimes, such as in 2015 the April 1 snowpack looks dismal, but that year a snowy May meant that by late May snowpack was above normal. Of course the reverse can be true as well.



Still, April 1 (or 9th for Colorado) makes a good date to look at since peak snowpack usually happens around that date.

[accadacca]