Flood Review

Re: Flood Review

Postby Jhunter199 » Mar 27th, 2018, 9:06 am

alanjh595 wrote:
Old Techie wrote:So all the time and money spent on this review, simply confirmed what most of us were saying last year already, before the review.


Too much water, too fast?


Im no flood expert, but isnt that how almost all floods manage to happen...

Too much water, too fast
Jhunter199
Fledgling
 
Posts: 293
Likes: 261 posts
Liked in: 351 posts
Joined: Apr 18th, 2013, 10:11 pm

Re: Flood Review

Postby Urban Cowboy » Mar 27th, 2018, 10:06 am

Old Techie wrote:So all the time and money spent on this review, simply confirmed what most of us were saying last year already, before the review.


Jhunter199 wrote:
alanjh595 wrote:
Too much water, too fast?


Im no flood expert, but isnt that how almost all floods manage to happen...

Too much water, too fast


It was presented as an example of the folly of wasting resources, studying something for which the conclusion is obvious.
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand. Most people listen with the intent to reply.” -Stephen R. Covey
User avatar
Urban Cowboy
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4915
Likes: 5204 posts
Liked in: 7120 posts
Joined: Apr 27th, 2013, 3:47 pm

Re: Flood Review

Postby Frisk » Mar 28th, 2018, 3:24 pm

Greystokes snow monitor east of Kelowna shows the snow pack in that area is still growing and is near record levels (Data recorded since 1969). This area drains into Mission creek.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
You've got to have a little sadness once in a while so you know when the good times come.
Bob Ross

Jflem1983 likes this post.
User avatar
Frisk
Guru
 
Posts: 7893
Likes: 2985 posts
Liked in: 2240 posts
Joined: Apr 24th, 2011, 9:32 am
Location: West Kelowna

Re: Flood Review

Postby WalterWhite » Mar 28th, 2018, 3:42 pm

I think the overall premise that should be emphasized here is “be prepared”. Yes, there is record or close to record snowpacks currently in the surrounding hills that could lead to high levels of freshette, but it will all depend on the weather patterns we experience during the runoff period of now through June. We could see cool temps with minimal precipitation, or high temps with high precipitation, or any number of combinations in between - but there’s obviously no way to guarantee anything. I think the powers that be are extremely gun shy of a repeat performance of last year and are or will be taking every precaution available, but ultimately it’s up to Mother Nature, so be prepared.
Forget Cialis, Viagra, or Levitra. When you need to get it up fast - reach for new and improved Westcorp. Proud official suppliers of Basran's *bleep*
User avatar
WalterWhite
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3210
Likes: 2478 posts
Liked in: 4589 posts
Joined: Jan 31st, 2017, 4:56 pm

Re: Flood Review

Postby Glacier » Apr 2nd, 2018, 11:21 am

Here is a graph showing the two highest snowpack years on record (1998/99 and 1973/74) along with the past two years.

SNOWPILLOWMISSION.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
“Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die”

Frisk likes this post.
User avatar
Glacier
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29146
Likes: 4344 posts
Liked in: 11682 posts
Joined: Jul 6th, 2008, 10:41 pm

Re: Flood Review

Postby andrea-lake » Apr 2nd, 2018, 9:58 pm

As a follow up to the excellent graph of the snowpack in Glacier's post above, the graph below shows how the lake level was managed in the spring of 1974. You can see that in anticipation of a large freshet they drew the lake down to slightly below 1.0 on the left axis (i.e., 341.25 meters).

1974 spring freshet.JPG


This year the snowpack level is already larger than in 1973/74 and has a reasonable probability of exceeding the level in 1998/99. In these circumstances, the lake management rules call for a drawdown to the 1.0 level, similar to what was done in 1974. As of April 2, 2018 the lake is at 1.26 as you can see in the graph below, so we have another 26 cm to go.

Lake level Apr 2nd.JPG

The major inflow from the freshet typically starts the first week of May. However, in the past 10 days the lake has come down 6 cm, so at the current rate of outflow, it will only drop another 18 cm when we really need it to drop 26 cm. This means the rate of discharge at Penticton needs to be increased. It is currently at 49 cubic meters per second (shown in following graph as the orange line on the right axis). To achieve the goal, the discharge rate should perhaps be increased to 65 cubic meters per second.

Penticton Apr 2.JPG


Note: the lake management rules were posted March 31st under "Monitoring the lake level to prevent flood"
viewtopic.php?f=119&t=77601&start=15
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
andrea-lake
 
Posts: 74
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 12 posts
Joined: Mar 18th, 2018, 12:58 pm

Re: Flood Review

Postby the truth » Apr 3rd, 2018, 9:15 am

rain coming, https://www.castanet.net/weather/Kelowna snow melting, drain the swamp before we have another flood
"The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it." -George Orwell
User avatar
the truth
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 17217
Likes: 12108 posts
Liked in: 6992 posts
Joined: May 16th, 2007, 9:24 pm
Location: kelowna

Re: Flood Review

Postby Glacier » Apr 3rd, 2018, 9:18 am

the truth wrote:rain coming, https://www.castanet.net/weather/Kelowna snow melting, drain the swamp before we have another flood

Rain in Kelowna at these temperatures = more snow pack. If we get our rain now, and then it dries up in May, we will likely avoid flooding.
“Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die”
User avatar
Glacier
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29146
Likes: 4344 posts
Liked in: 11682 posts
Joined: Jul 6th, 2008, 10:41 pm

Re: Flood Review

Postby Jflem1983 » Apr 3rd, 2018, 9:27 am

Is it possible we are following the lead set by California. Deliberate mismanagement leading to seasonal states of emergency.


Sure seems that way.

Drain the swamp is rite. Start downtown
Now they want to take our guns away . That would be just fine. Take em away from the criminals first . Ill gladly give u mine. "Charlie Daniels"

You have got to stand for something . Or you will fall for anything "Aaron Tippin"
User avatar
Jflem1983
Guru
 
Posts: 5785
Likes: 12256 posts
Liked in: 3272 posts
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2015, 11:38 am

Re: Flood Review

Postby Frisk » Apr 3rd, 2018, 12:57 pm

More rain and cooler temperatures forecasted, will probably fall as snow in the hills. Makes you wonder if the snow pack will reach record levels, it's getting pretty close.

Image
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
You've got to have a little sadness once in a while so you know when the good times come.
Bob Ross

alanjh595 likes this post.
User avatar
Frisk
Guru
 
Posts: 7893
Likes: 2985 posts
Liked in: 2240 posts
Joined: Apr 24th, 2011, 9:32 am
Location: West Kelowna

Re: Flood Review

Postby Glacier » Apr 3rd, 2018, 2:10 pm

Frisk wrote:More rain and cooler temperatures forecasted, will probably fall as snow in the hills. Makes you wonder if the snow pack will reach record levels, it's getting pretty close.

Here are two different snow pillows. The first is Mission Creek (updated). The current level is the 5th highest it has EVER been there (records began in the 1960s). Only 1999, 1974, 2011, and 1972 were higher, and only 1999 was higher by this date in the year.

The second is the snow pillow in the Coast Mountains near where I used to live. It is currently the 3rd highest it has EVER been there (records began in the 1980s). Only 1991 and 2007 were higher. 1991 absolutely SHATTERS any other year because of the massive snow storm that hit in November. I remember that massive dump of snow in November of 1990 since I was living near this pillow. We had 3 to 4 feet of snow in the valley bottoms (translates into 7 to 10 feet at the snow pillow), which is double the second largest snow dump ever recorded in those parts. School was shut down for days, and they had to get bulldozers to clear the roads.

SNOWPILLOWMISSION.png


CHILCOTINSNOWPACK.png


EDIT: it's interesting comparing the two pillows above. It seems that the Okanagan gets a lot more snow days, but the Chilcotin gets bigger dumps of snow when it does snow.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
“Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die”

Frisk likes this post.
User avatar
Glacier
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 29146
Likes: 4344 posts
Liked in: 11682 posts
Joined: Jul 6th, 2008, 10:41 pm

Re: Flood Review

Postby andrea-lake » Apr 3rd, 2018, 9:18 pm

From the graphs posted above by Glacier, there seems to be a reasonable probability of this year’s snowpack exceeding even the 1998/99 level. The best available evidence seems to suggest we will have a MAJOR FRESHET that goes well beyond the volume expected in a typical high snowpack year.

Procedures to handle such a MAJOR FRESHET were built into the 1974 lake management rules. These rules were reconfirmed in the flood review report of 1998. Both are referenced in my earlier post of March 31st under “Monitoring the lake to prevent flood”
viewtopic.php?f=119&t=77601&start=15

You can see in the chart below that in the event of a MAJOR FRESHET, the legal maximum drawdown allowed by these rules is 341.01 meters. This elevation is 24 cm lower than any of the drawdown levels mentioned in previous forum postings. Those levels were meant for a typical large freshet, not for a MAJOR FRESHET.

1974 recommended levels.JPG


In previous postings of the lake level graph, the goal was a drawdown to 1.0 meters meters on the left axis. In the case of a MAJOR FRESHET as indicated in Glacier’s recent graphs, the drawdown target now becomes 0.74 on the left axis. (see graph below).

Major freshet graph.JPG


Note: to translate the numbers on the left axis above into lake elevation levels, add them to the base line elevation of 340.25 meters, i.e., 1.0 meters on the left axis translates into a lake elevation of 341.25 meters.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
andrea-lake
 
Posts: 74
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 12 posts
Joined: Mar 18th, 2018, 12:58 pm

Re: Flood Review

Postby JoeS » Apr 4th, 2018, 5:22 pm

where was all this info last year?
so flooding last year and down to a puddle this year as a over reaction. really
JoeS
 
Posts: 10
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 1 post
Joined: Mar 8th, 2011, 2:15 pm

Re: Flood Review

Postby normaM » Apr 4th, 2018, 6:12 pm

They spend a day here ( and more to come) making the creek deeper and wider to avoid : flooding:
It did not flood last year, or any other years since they made it lower ( as far as I know from ppl lived here for years)
Or they could have removed the trees from the Creek impacting on the flow
Nope
Here for a few more days
If onion rings are wrong I don't wanna be right
User avatar
normaM
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 18153
Likes: 7433 posts
Liked in: 4894 posts
Joined: Sep 18th, 2007, 7:28 am

Re: Flood Review

Postby Jhunter199 » Apr 4th, 2018, 6:15 pm

Biggest problem I see is that there is no data on how quickly that snow pack will melt... Because no one knows, Yes there's a lot of snow in the hills, but will it flash melt or will it melt and descend at a manageable rate? The lake right now is 99cm below full pool and 34 cm lower than this date last year.
So now they are handed the issue of if the snow doesn't melt quickly everyone will complain that too much water was pulled from the lake... Lose-Lose situation.

2 people like this post.
Jhunter199
Fledgling
 
Posts: 293
Likes: 261 posts
Liked in: 351 posts
Joined: Apr 18th, 2013, 10:11 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Flood Watch 2018

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests