# Predicting future runoff?



## GlennD (Oct 10, 2013)

I would like to know the exact cfs per day on every river in the state if you don't mind. Id prefer a calendar through 2054ish.


----------



## quinoa (Jul 5, 2009)

The short of the long of it all goes like this. Winter comes, it gets cold. Snow falls from the sky. We ski. Spring comes, it warm up. Snow starts to melt and run off. We boat. The more snow, the more water. This you can count on. Future weather predictions you can't.


----------



## zbaird (Oct 11, 2003)

I think you were after the intelligent people that had some real factors that perhaps you have not considered. Unfortunately, I think the title (and the fact that its the buzz) has led you to these less than helpful responses. I wish I had time to think about some other considerations for the project but I'm sure anything I may consider valid has been considered. Good luck finding some more brain power with time to geek out on this shit more than you!! Whatever you do predict, you'll have to get down to the Ark this year. Its been awhile.


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

Thanks Zach, I realized my mistake and am trying to remove this thread.

Lesson learned, don't use MB text window as a scratch pad to compose a rough draft.

How is your homestead progressing?


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

I'll agree with ZB that the previous topic was not the best and changed it to something more on topic.

Then NRCC COLORADO BASIN RIVER FORECAST CENTER is pretty good, if anyone knows an equivalent for the eastern side of the divide please post it.

-AH


----------



## zbaird (Oct 11, 2003)

Place looks a hell of a lot different than last time you were down


----------



## kayakingkate (Mar 16, 2004)

If you are looking to add in variables on melt I would look at temperature (with some kind of capture of spread from high to low- is it re-freezing at night- for how long etc), cloud cover, wind and dust conditions. Warm, sunny wind storms on dirty snow seem to evaporate up the snowpack painfully quick. 

Temps below freezing at night slow it down significantly although perhaps this needs to be transformed for time length of freeze- if it hits 31 for 20 minutes that's nothing like if it hits 24 for a full hour and the time from 32 - 24 and back up.


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

Please Zach, watch your language and the use of the word "hell". I don't want to develop an online reputation of being associated with inappropriate expressions

I'd love to see your place. I'm sure it now has a beautiful great room window overlooking the Arkansas River in your back yard. Your piece of heaven on earth now complete. Can you cast fly's from your back deck as we once joked about?


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

Kayaking Kate,

Thanks for input regarding temps, "dust-in-crust" and wind influences on runoff.

On page two of my report I plot for each western state daily average temperatures at high country SNOTEL stations. In Colorado for example the average minimum, average average and average maximum daily temperature were calculated using daily values from 114 SNOTEL sites that have an average elevation of 10,188'. And as a reminder, SNOTEL sites record the status of that giant reservoir from which all runoff originates. These temps are plotted as dashed red lines.

Granted, a state is a very large area to fiddle with using daily average temperatures to analyze thermal induced runoff but it tends to work surprising well! Passing weather fronts show up as warming and cooling events. Cloudy/rainy days result in a pinching together of average minimum and average maximum lines and sunny/clear days with cold nights broaden the daily temperature variation. I considered including average barometric pressure but that is easily guesstimated by the temperature range for the day and precipitation inches for the day. Likewise, after analyzing solar values they were determined to also be somewhat redundant.

On the graph I include as a faint horizontal red line the critical temperature 32 degrees Fahrenheit. As you pointed out, when a days average minimum temperature(nearly always the night time temp) is above the 32 degree line runoff greatly increases. For that matter, when daily temperature averages are above freezing any precipitation can be generally assumed to be rain on snow pack which really kicks runoff into gear. And for the big runoff event, warm rain on snow-pack is easily deduced using the state graphs. 

Concerning the duration of time below freezing,, that to a great extent can be determined by how much below freezing the state wide average minimum is, e.g. an overnight low average temp of 31 degrees likely was a consequence of much shorter duration of time below freezing than an average minimum temperature of perhaps 20 degrees.

Average wind velocity for an entire state might be possible and would be a very worthy addition. Warm winds and wind induced sublimation play havoc on snow-pack. It would be easily plottable by using the right axis of the graph which I already employ for temperature and daily inches of precipitation. This axis ranges from 0 to 100. I do need to mention that the report and graphs are generated in Microsoft Excel which is very limiting. If I generated the graphs in perhaps Grapher or R-Plot much more(anything imaginable!) would be possible such as symbolizing prevailing wind direction.

But calculating prevailing wind direction as a state wide value would be problematic. I tried to do exactly that for just three weather stations equally spaced around the perimeter of a playa lake in the Altiplano of Argentina and failed hopelessly. Guess what, in effect, generally the playa lake literally "breathed", either winds move toward the playa or away from the playa. Neat story but as a whole the general prevailing wind direction resulted in a zero direction conclusion when calculated as a daily average.

As you point out, "Dust-in-crust" has a huge influence on rate of melt. I don't know where to get values of particulates on the surface of snow-pack. I don't recall that SNOTEL site data includes such data. There might be a measure of albedo. I must remember to check. If I found albedo in the data I would need to see how the measure is influenced by cloud cover, etc. I would likely need to be very selective with the values I use. 

Hence, many of your great ideas and observations can be interpreted with some degree of imagination from the state and basin graphs on page two and verified by consulting the table on page one. I will work on wind speed and research measures of "Dust-in-crust".

Thanks for your ideas.


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

KayakingKate,

If you will personal message me and provide your name I will add your name to my list of contributors to the thought processes represented in the daily flow report. Or, do you prefer to be known as KayakingKate?


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

Thank you Andy for helping me recover from a premature posting by changing the subject of that post. Version 0.000 of that post questioned whether it is worth self-indulging regarding future flow predictions. I have had many rewarding interactions since then that suggests this topic is very fulfilling and enjoyable.

You mention forecasting of river flow for the Colorado River Basin and question if there is a equivalent for other western regions. Yes, there is. In columns 32, 33 and 34 of the flow report are hyperlinks represented by symbols "1", "2" and "3". These hyperlinks are various flavors of NOAA/National Weather Service short and long term flow/runoff forecasts. Some NOAA river basin forecasts products are better than others.

Andy, Several time you have contributed to a collective understanding of runoff forecasting. I have benefited from your contributions. We have met, we have talked,, please allow me to add your name as a contributor to my understanding of river flow processes.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Ron,

Thanks for including me and passing on the info for other basins, Ron! Yes, I think we have met. Do/did you own Geotours? 

You should also take into consideration the soil moisture content and relative humidity. Another thing would be whether there's been a "pink dust" episode as this will increase the melt rate. Night-time cloud cover prevents re-freezing and day time cover slows melting. I'd bet that the NRCC has a pretty sophisticated method for predicting runoff in the spring. They're not exact but get it pretty close.

Good luck!

-AH


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

Andy,

I'd love to be able to be associated with GeoTours but that is a different dude. Actually, I spent time at Down River Equipment socializing as I transitioned from Geologist/Earth Science Data Processing Consultant to full retirement. Our conversations were brief. Usually on opposite sides of the cash register.

I think they go by NRCS now instead of NRCC. On each state line(gray)of the data table on page one of the report is a link to the NRCS office for that state. On that NRCS page can be found a broad range of data, reports and maps. I have various other links to significant NRCS products peppered around the flow report. Usually by now they start issuing a "Runoff Forecast" which I hyperlink to on Row 1 column 21. It will be delayed this year due to the government "strike(?)". It takes a bit of head scratching to understand it.

Soil moisture might be difficult and I'd have to research further it's relationship with runoff. Obviously, if the soil is bone dry to a great depth then minor amounts of melt would go nowhere. Better yet, soil saturation as measured from 0 to 100 percent would be ideal and easy to plot because of the 0 to 100 axis I already employ on the state graphs. 

Relative humidity is relatively kinda redundant to precipitation inches which is the true value of interest. However, it is easy to add since I already have an axis ranging from 0 to 100. I'll look into calculating a state wide average daily humidity. It would be a good way to validate the passing of a frontal system if precipitation and temperature are not sufficient enough.

KayakingKate mentioned "dust-in-crust" and it was kicked around last night.

Some of the factors you mentioned can be interpreted with imagination using temperatures, precipitation and SWE. For example, a narrow temperature range with precipitation is a cloudy day. Comparing state graphs will quickly give you a feel for this approach such as Washington state where it has been cloudy and snowy in the high country for the last two weeks versus Wyoming where is has been colder and less cloudy. 

Something I've totally been forgetting to mention is the green line on the state graphs which is the SWE(snow water equivalent). This line represents the total inches of water in the snow-pack at all of the states SNOTEL sites. How it responds to the other graphed meteorological values is critical to understanding current high country conditions. During precipitation events when it is colder all of the inches are snow and the SWE responds accordingly. When temperatures are above freezing at the high country SNOTEL site precipitation falls as rain and the SWE takes a big dip and the USGS Streamflow Index responds positively because of the melt and consequent runoff. I guess I need to discuss the USGS Streamflow Index someday but basically it defines fluctuations in flow as measures at all USGS gaging stations in the state.

In the broadest sense the two week trend of SWE and temperatures on these graphs can be used to declare that spring has sprung! This green line will trend upward all winter until it teeters for a few weeks and then it will begin to reverse slope downward. That is when the beginning of spring runoff is recorded in the data. Of course this change in slope occurs very early in Arizona and progressively later state by state as you go northward. Likewise, temperature trends will become reliably/consistently positive. For people who don't have anything better to do, like being retired, it is fun to watch spring sprunging in tables and graphs. As it in the data it is easy to imagine flowers sprouting, birds chirping, bears rousing and young peoples hearts going pitter-patter(in anticipation of the beginning of a new boating season).


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

I submitted querys to the SNOTEL station data base. Values for humidity, windspeed/direction and soil moisture returned spotty to nonexistent. 

I sent an email to our fellow Buzzer at the Utah NRCS office. They are working during this shutdown. Turns out very, very few SNOTEL sites have sensors to record this data. Oh well.

I guess I could get this data from the National Weather Service but their are very few stations in each state. Wunderground might be another source.


----------



## jbolson (Apr 6, 2005)

Another factor to consider is the removal of water for irrigation, how much and when.


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

Below is a brief explanation of components of the flow report using the Salt River as an example.

Column 54 and 55 of the daily flow report are specific to the Salt River. In column 37 is a sunshine symbol that hyperlinks to a National Weather Service forecasts. For row 54 the forecast is for the high country SNOTEL station I've defined to be of greatest interest. For row 55 the forecast is for the Chrysotile gaging station. 

Both forecasts are for favorable weather to preserve the snow-pack until warmer temperature will melt the snow-pack and become runoff. The season will likely be relatively small in flow, short in duration and seasonally early. This seems to be the new normal for the Salt as suggested by the raster hydrograph immediately linked to by clicking on symbol "4" in column 35. With a keen eye, perhaps just my imagination, the hydrograph show the Salt season skewing leftward(earlier) and decreasing in flow.

Supporting this conclusion is Beau Uriona (NRCS SLC-Utah Data Collection Office) Snow-to-Flow Runoff "Predictor"(if I may). The game with this crystal ball predictor is to compare current conditions with previous years. The Snow-to-Flow tool is immediately hyperlinked by clicking on symbol "0" in column 31. As opened the tool displays current conditions and statistical classifications of average and probability. By toggling previous years data and comparing it to current conditions crystal ball predictions can be risked. Don't forget that the data selector menu scrolls to allow access to all historical data not immediately visible. Another critical hint is to experiment between "Linear" and "Log" plot vertical scales. For the Salt especially, you want to toggle to "Log" scaling otherwise CFS flows in the 100's and 1000's are lost in the dust at the bottom of the plot.

A critical consideration when crystal balling requires linking to the Climate Prediction Center's Temperature and Precipitation Outlooks hyperlinked via row columns 32, 33 and 34. The three month January-March Outlook for the Salt high-country is likely warmer than average temperature and wetter than average precipitation. How this effects snow-pack and runoff will be interesting.

If you want to obtain even more detailed snow pack conditions you can hyperlink the SNOTEL station of greatest interest, Hannagan Meadows, as identified on row 54, column 22. At this hyperlink you can query all available data for that SNOTEL site.

Regional weather conditions can be also assessed by clinking on "Wunder". This link will generate a regional map centered on the river basin. As opened the map will display current temperatures and wind data for all weather stations in the region. With experience this map allows access to many other weather parameters and the ability to drill into details recorded by each station.


----------



## waterdude (Apr 20, 2017)

The short answer is you need to solve countless the water and energy balances to be able to make any predictions for future runoff, and this requires an unbelievable amount of data. Not to say it's impossible, but its highly improbable to project future runoff conditions with any real degree of certainty given both uncertainty intrinsic to watershed modeling and the compounding of that uncertainty by increasing amounts of parameters...let's not also forget about the complexity of a heterogenous landscape (which only gets worse at smaller scales going from basin ->watershed -> river -> reach). 

AFAIK the most basic model (that doesn't use a supercomputer) available to reasonably "predict" runoff that matches observed flow records is VIC (VIC Model - Overview) , but must warn you this would be a challenge that even the best hydrologic modeler with a PhD would struggle with let alone a novice. 










Here for example are some of the base, coupled parameters to Variable Infiltration Model with some of the data that informs them. 

Sensible Heat (temp, humidity)
Latent Heat (solar rad)
Wind (i.e turbulent flux, to estimate Evapotrans)
Snow depth/density/distribution (SWE, remote sensing)
Precipitation (large errors here due to variability in rainfall)
Soil Moisture & ET
Soil Depth/density/layers/thickness. 
Topography (elevation, slope, aspect)
Groundwater storage/input 
Hydrologic residence and routing
Historic flow records (to calibrate model, absolutely required for any "futurecasting")

The point is....you're going down a deep rabbit hole here...and am not sure its going to get you anywhere other than frustrated. While appreciate the idea of doing this along with the obvious benefits to the rafting community, not to mention how much I would love to be able to predict flows or future "river seasons". But even by holding advanced degrees in hydrology, to me it's just not a feasible goal to predict future runoff given the tools currently available along with lack thereof available data to support them at scale necessary to benefit river runners. The only thing you _might_ be able to do, is create a rough relationship between snow/precipitation, air and snow temp, and discharge as well as the "lag time" in flows increasing from rising temps or daily warming. But even that would be highly specific to the river and require integrating all the contributing drainages, which could require more flow data than is available. At best, you might be able to predict how soon (day<week) discharge might peak...which is something I've been trying to figure out for the Escalante for quite awhile, with no success.


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

Yep, Waterdude, you know it. Big job for big boxes in the basements of government labs and research institutes. I used to work for Control Data Corporation back in the early-mid 1980's and one hat I wore besides supporting the HEC models was installing and optimizing FORTRAN Code for maximal performance on CDC supercomputers. Occasionally, I was assigned to performance programming for the marketing department's bench-marking efforts to rewrite sample code to try to outperform Crays from weather models, crop forecasting models, optics modeling, wave form scatter models(think stealth), etc. I know what the floor-to-ceiling stacks of printout of code looks like to take raw data from source to finish for real-time data supercomputer modeling. Even back then some of the original coders of models I worked with were retired.

This boastful thread was never intended for public consumption. I was jotting down "crude"(in more than one way) initial thoughts in a MB text box. It slipped through my finger tips and got posted as I was shutting down my computer blindly clicking "save" on over a dozen open windows. I tried to delete the thread early the next AM when I realized my mistake. Emailing "Contact Us" failed and I guess AndyH is the monitor and he helped me recover somewhat but regrettably did not delete the thread. I'm glad now he didn't because many good things came of it especially your input Waterdude.

Anyway, now I'm left with pie on my face knowing very well that my initial claims of real-time "forecasting" of runoff was never intended and totally bogus(we both know it).

What my real intentions are is the real time plotting of readily accessible, most critical parameters that are useful for empirical predictions. I believe I'm effectly presenting those cause-and-effect parameters in a usually as humble as possible fashion(perhaps even at times tongue-in-cheek). I frequently call it Crystal Balling.

So, as arm-chain forecasters, the best we can do is to use these critical parameters, interact them the best we can, factor in other online sources and using personal experience try to make crystal ball predictions. Time will tell how pointless they might be. (But next year we'll do better!)

I look forward to the day when we river runners have our own desktop supercomputers with high resolution data and highly evolved models so that we can end up with accurate forecasts. (But would that take the fun out of it?) But, just like with our crystal ball forecasting even with supercomputers all it takes is some butterfly somewhere to flap it's wing and blow our forecasts all to hell. 

Back in my day we used to say, "Well, we can accurately tell you tomorrows weather but the computer runs won't complete until next week". You say, Waterdude, with regard to accurate runoff forecasting, we are not even at that point. So we are left to our own devices.

Waterdude, Thanks for "real"ing me in. Do you have any comments on the empirical, using casually available data, "collective consciousness" approach to soapbox forecasting of river runoff. Your input would be valuable and my feelings would only be mildly hurt if you said that the process is full of it. But, I'd just likely wipe the tears and endeavor to persevere.


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

Waterdude,

If you will personal message me and provide your name I will add your name to my list of contributors to the thought processes represented in the daily flow report. For now you will identified in tomorrows report as Mountain Buzz contributor "Waterdude".

Thanks again,
Ron


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

_*"The only thing you might be able to do, is create a rough relationship between snow/precipitation, air and snow temp, and discharge as well as the "lag time" in flows increasing from rising temps or daily warming. But even that would be highly specific to the river and require integrating all the contributing drainages, which could require more flow data than is available. At best, you might be able to predict how soon (day<week) discharge might peak...which is something" *_

Gee, the thoughts never quit. Thanks for the stimulation Waterdude. Better than adderall or something like that. Not that I'd know.

Your statement above pretty much summarized what our best outcome might be. Add on top of that potential flow and duration. But even these are likely beyond our ability for one river much less all rivers of interest to Western Rivers in the flow report. But, we can make perhaps broad bush statements of interest.

Lag time is variable but to a great extent for most reaches of river is almost a constant. That constant might be a value to put in a cell on the spreadsheet. However, for perhaps Westwater, lag from the San Juan's would be perhaps a day shorter than from the backside of the Front Range.

I'm definitely going to avoid the term "forecast". "Prognostication" is a much better term. Shall we all prognosticate together and have some fun?


----------



## GeoRon (Jun 24, 2015)

Actually, the report illustrates lag time in two ways. 

On page two there is a hydrograph of all of the significant gauges for the Salmon River basin. I guess I need to add a gauge up around Stanley. I'm planning on adding a similar gauge for the Colorado River basin. 

On page one the color coding of changes in flow, orange tones for decreasing flow and blue tones for increasing flow. The rivers in Colorado are organized by basin north to south. The offset in blue tones works well to define lag.


----------

