Stage 3 Water Restrictions (it's getting serious, folks!) (San Antonio, El Paso: mineral rights, leasing)

[smitty12]

Originally Posted by AnthonySA

I couldn't tell you without researching. I've been here since 2002 and this is the first time I've seen us reach Stage 2. From my understanding though, we did reach stage 2 last in 2000.

Your not going to be able to make a direct comparison like that, the stages changed in 2007. 650 used to be the Stage 1 threshold, and 640 the Stage 2.

In 2000 it did drop below 640, but then it only caused Stage 2 restrictions, now we will be in Stage 3 at under 640.

One thing to keep in mind is that the drop does tend to slow down a lot as the Aquifer get lower, many springs either dry up, or run with much less pressure meaning less water is running out naturally. Spring flows are usually more than the pumped flow.

Picture below starts right after the 1950s drought as you can see spring flow has been mostly higher since then. (So has rainfall)

If you look at at a chart of rainfall, aquifer level, and pumping levels only the rainfall and aquifer level correlate. Changing Pumping levels has a marginal at best effect on aquifer level due to spring flows.

[AnthonySA]

Originally Posted by smitty12

Your not going to be able to make a direct comparison like that, the stages changed in 2007. 650 used to be the Stage 1 threshold, and 640 the Stage 2.

In 2000 it did drop below 640, but then it only caused Stage 2 restrictions, now we will be in Stage 3 at under 640.

One thing to keep in mind is that the drop does tend to slow down a lot as the Aquifer get lower, many springs either dry up, or run with much less pressure meaning less water is running out naturally. Spring flows are usually more than the pumped flow.

Picture below starts right after the 1950s drought as you can see spring flow has been mostly higher since then. (So has rainfall)

If you look at at chart of rainfall, aquifer level, and pumping levels only the rainfall and aquifer level correlate. Changing Pumping levels has a marginal at best effect on aquifer level due to spring flows.

Great post... appreciate the graph.

[hello13685]

wCat, I don't think that the scientists are speculating at this point. I think we are well beyond that stage.

Anthony, your explanations helped a lot, thanks. They taught me new info and I'm appreciative (e.g., the info about desert and the Gulf). It was my understanding, however, that climate scientists have concluded that climate change has made/will make the drought tendencies at 30 degrees that you mention much more severe than they otherwise would have been.

[Lil]

I love it! I am tickled to have landed on this thread. When it comes down to water rationing; we find out what we all prize the most in our landscapes. I am a passionate gardener; and when it comes down to deciding what I will save through this drought and what won't, is so conflicting. First, I love my trees; I have planted soooo many (Since the builders don't leave didley) and they are finally providing me with shade. The St. Augustine was the first thing I ripped out - that grass will die during a drought - the Bermuda goes dormant. I like my roses - those Knock-outs are holding their own. I am all for hand watering; except I don't have the time to get it all in with-in the two hours that I am told to do it! Oh well, what will be next to bite the dust........I feel like I have moved to El Paso all over again..... Always a new challenge...

[Lil]

Very informative Post!

[wCat]

Originally Posted by hello13685

wCat, I don't think that the scientists are speculating at this point. I think we are well beyond that stage.

Hello..."speculating" was your word, not mine. Go back and read your post.

[wCat]

Smitty....great post!! wonderful graphics! very informative!!!

[smitty12]

Originally Posted by hello13685

I'd love a local meteorologist to speculate about WHY we have these stubborn high pressure ridges over much of the southern U.S., but they won't. Any mention of climate change would ruffle the feathers of the conservative viewership.

Maybe because they understand Occam's Razor.... It is much more likely that this is part of the normal long term weather of the area.

http://www.gbra.org/Documents/Reports/TreeRingStudy.pdf (broken link)

If you look at the record you will see many periods of 10 years or longer where average rainfall was around 13 inches (We had 13.76 inches last year, 7.34 so far this year) :

Most significant droughts early 1710s, 1750s, 1840s, 1880s, 1950s. We aren't even close to droughts of those scales, Considering we had 47 inches of rain in 2007.

Any forecaster who speculated that this is caused by "Global Warming" would look pretty stupid since the data does not back that up.

The data I've seen has Global Warming causing more El Nino's which tend to give us much more rain. See 2007 rainfall above and article below. If anything this drought could be speculated to be caused by cooling conditions which evaporate less gulf water, it does not help the case for warming.

2007 El Nino Pushing Superheated Globe to New Record

[smitty12]

Originally Posted by wCat

Hello..."speculating" was your word, not mine. Go back and read your post.

She doesn't want to them speculate on the fact of global warming, just that this drought is somehow caused by it. Or using short term weather to fear monger... That is how it works, any short term weather that can be speculated to support the case for global warming among the "little people" should be hyped. But short term weather like record lows should be dismissed as normal variability.

By short term I mean patterns less that a few years. There are no short term trends that can be proven to support or deny global warming. That is a long term issue, that can only be proven or not over a long period of time. Speculating on the causes of short term weather is just that speculating.

I'm not saying there isn't a Global Climate change problem, but it can not be seen in short term weather trends pro or con. Having Local weathermen speculate on it would be disingenuous.

[AnthonySA]

Originally Posted by smitty12

Maybe because they understand Occam's Razor.... It is much more likely that this is part of the normal long term weather of the area.

http://www.gbra.org/Documents/Reports/TreeRingStudy.pdf (broken link)

If you look at the record you will see many periods of 10 years or longer where average rainfall was around 13 inches (We had 13.76 inches last year, 7.34 so far this year) :

Most significant droughts early 1710s, 1750s, 1840s, 1880s, 1950s. We aren't even close to droughts of those scales, Considering we had 47 inches of rain in 2007.

Any forecaster who speculated that this is caused by "Global Warming" would look pretty stupid since the data does not back that up.

The data I've seen has Global Warming causing more El Nino's which tend to give us much more rain. See 2007 rainfall above and article below. If anything this drought could be speculated to be caused by cooling conditions which evaporate less gulf water, it does not help the case for warming.

2007 El Nino Pushing Superheated Globe to New Record

Oh man.... you just opened up a whole can of worms in this post! Teleconnections

I'll followup with a far more detailed post, but it's gonna take quite a while.

PS: Thanks for the tree ring data. Very interesting stuff indeed.