07-20-2026, 01:49 PM
i just bought flood insurance for my home for the first time in years.
Cal delenda est
Flooding, Lake Lag, California Water situation
Cal delenda est
07-20-2026, 02:54 PM
Tulare Lake was once the largest freshwater body west of the Mississippi River, stretching over 100 miles long and 30 miles wide. It disappeared more than 130 years ago when settlers drained it to convert the wetland into farmland. The basin has since remained largely dry, with the land used for agriculture, roads, and infrastructure.
In spring 2023, the lake returned after a series of atmospheric rivers and record Sierra Nevada snowmelt brought unprecedented rainfall and runoff into the Tulare Basin. Because the valley has no natural outlet, water collected in the old lakebed, refilling it rapidly. Satellite imagery showed the lake expanding from under 100,000 acres to over 120,000 acres in just months.
After 130 Years Gone, Ghost Lake Suddenly Returns and Wipes Nearly 100,000 Acres off the Map
In spring 2023, the lake returned after a series of atmospheric rivers and record Sierra Nevada snowmelt brought unprecedented rainfall and runoff into the Tulare Basin. Because the valley has no natural outlet, water collected in the old lakebed, refilling it rapidly. Satellite imagery showed the lake expanding from under 100,000 acres to over 120,000 acres in just months.
After 130 Years Gone, Ghost Lake Suddenly Returns and Wipes Nearly 100,000 Acres off the Map
Audaces fortuna iuvat
Tulare Lake was once the largest freshwater body west of the Mississippi River, stretching over 100 miles long and 30 miles wide. It disappeared more than 130 years ago when settlers drained it to convert the wetland into farmland. The basin has since remained largely dry, with the land used for agriculture, roads, and infrastructure.
In spring 2023, the lake returned after a series of atmospheric rivers and record Sierra Nevada snowmelt brought unprecedented rainfall and runoff into the Tulare Basin. Because the valley has no natural outlet, water collected in the old lakebed, refilling it rapidly. Satellite imagery showed the lake expanding from under 100,000 acres to over 120,000 acres in just months.
After 130 Years Gone, Ghost Lake Suddenly Returns and Wipes Nearly 100,000 Acres off the Map
In spring 2023, the lake returned after a series of atmospheric rivers and record Sierra Nevada snowmelt brought unprecedented rainfall and runoff into the Tulare Basin. Because the valley has no natural outlet, water collected in the old lakebed, refilling it rapidly. Satellite imagery showed the lake expanding from under 100,000 acres to over 120,000 acres in just months.
After 130 Years Gone, Ghost Lake Suddenly Returns and Wipes Nearly 100,000 Acres off the Map
Audaces fortuna iuvat
07-20-2026, 06:55 PM
cardcrimson dateline='[url=tel:1784572429' Wrote: 1784572429[/url]']
Claude had a field day with the hyperbole (my word) and projections from the article, especially as ocean temps in the Pacific have only been reliably monitored for 50 to 75 years. Tough to project a 1 in 4000 year event with such little base data.
If one of the assumptions is that it double or quadruples the chance of a catastrophic CA flood holds, the state is well overdue for one.
Without getting political, I don't think the state is prepared for one. A while back, I had an interesting conversation with one of the lead experts at Contra Costa Flood Control. Basically when it hits, we are in deep trouble, as much of the county was under water then, and it wasn't as bad as what happened to the Central Valley and the LA Basin. . ..
Actually, it is not tough at all. If you measure the temperature every year for 50 years, you will get a sample mean and standard deviation. If you then get a single measurement, you can calculate quite easily how many standard deviations you are from the mean (that’s the z-score). A measurement 3.5 standard deviations above the mean corresponds to the 99.977th percentile, so you would expect only 0.023% of measurements to be as extreme or more extreme. That is roughly 1 in 4,300 which is where you get the estimate.
Now, that doesn’t mean there aren’t some potential problems:
1) The most obvious is the assumption that temperature distributions are Normally distributed. Reasonable assumption, but there might also reasonably be fat tails. A 50 year history probably doesn’t let you test for deviations from Normality.
2) The estimates of the mean and standard deviation are that, estimates. At a sample size of 50, the standard deviation estimate is generally (95% of the time) within about 20% of the true standard deviation. That means that the estimated z-score could be too high if the estimated standard deviation was too low (you happened to be in a period of less variability than the underlying average). If it turned out that we underestimated the variability by 20%, then it turns out that the “real” z-score (but bear in mind, unknowable, as we can’t measure the underlying distribution) could be inflated by 1/0.8, and would be about 2.8 if recalculated, which translates to a percentile of 99.75% or an approximate frequency of 1 in 400.
3) The mean is also an estimate (though estimating the mean tends to be more accurate than estimating the standard deviation), but 95% of the sample means are within 0.278 standard deviations of the true mean.
4) We are assuming that we are sampling from a single population of temperature measurements, but none of this is true if the mean temperature or variability in temperature is changing over time.
I think it is very reasonable to take the estimate of a 1 in 4000 El Niño with a grain of salt, but also it is not worth quibbling with whether this is a 1 in 4000 event, a 1 in 400 event, or a 1 in 40,000 event. It is a massive anomaly compared to the historical record; a magnitude this large has not been seen before, so the effects are very unpredictable.
BC
cardcrimson dateline='[url=tel:1784572429' Wrote: 1784572429[/url]']
Claude had a field day with the hyperbole (my word) and projections from the article, especially as ocean temps in the Pacific have only been reliably monitored for 50 to 75 years. Tough to project a 1 in 4000 year event with such little base data.
If one of the assumptions is that it double or quadruples the chance of a catastrophic CA flood holds, the state is well overdue for one.
Without getting political, I don't think the state is prepared for one. A while back, I had an interesting conversation with one of the lead experts at Contra Costa Flood Control. Basically when it hits, we are in deep trouble, as much of the county was under water then, and it wasn't as bad as what happened to the Central Valley and the LA Basin. . ..
Actually, it is not tough at all. If you measure the temperature every year for 50 years, you will get a sample mean and standard deviation. If you then get a single measurement, you can calculate quite easily how many standard deviations you are from the mean (that’s the z-score). A measurement 3.5 standard deviations above the mean corresponds to the 99.977th percentile, so you would expect only 0.023% of measurements to be as extreme or more extreme. That is roughly 1 in 4,300 which is where you get the estimate.
Now, that doesn’t mean there aren’t some potential problems:
1) The most obvious is the assumption that temperature distributions are Normally distributed. Reasonable assumption, but there might also reasonably be fat tails. A 50 year history probably doesn’t let you test for deviations from Normality.
2) The estimates of the mean and standard deviation are that, estimates. At a sample size of 50, the standard deviation estimate is generally (95% of the time) within about 20% of the true standard deviation. That means that the estimated z-score could be too high if the estimated standard deviation was too low (you happened to be in a period of less variability than the underlying average). If it turned out that we underestimated the variability by 20%, then it turns out that the “real” z-score (but bear in mind, unknowable, as we can’t measure the underlying distribution) could be inflated by 1/0.8, and would be about 2.8 if recalculated, which translates to a percentile of 99.75% or an approximate frequency of 1 in 400.
3) The mean is also an estimate (though estimating the mean tends to be more accurate than estimating the standard deviation), but 95% of the sample means are within 0.278 standard deviations of the true mean.
4) We are assuming that we are sampling from a single population of temperature measurements, but none of this is true if the mean temperature or variability in temperature is changing over time.
I think it is very reasonable to take the estimate of a 1 in 4000 El Niño with a grain of salt, but also it is not worth quibbling with whether this is a 1 in 4000 event, a 1 in 400 event, or a 1 in 40,000 event. It is a massive anomaly compared to the historical record; a magnitude this large has not been seen before, so the effects are very unpredictable.
BC
07-21-2026, 05:55 AM
(07-20-2026, 09:39 AM)BostonCard Wrote: The Sacramento Bee had a good explanation:
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/a...67041.html
Specifically, the temperature anomaly, which is expected to reach about 3.5 standard deviations above the mean, is a 1 in 4000 year event.
Quote:These sea surface temperatures are almost 3.5 standard deviations above average for this time of year – the equivalent of a once-in-4,000-year event under normal conditions. ...
I appreciate the lesson, BC. You always contribute solid information, Your point #4 (a time-based component to the measure) was the first thing I would have called out.
I read that part of the article differently than how it seems you took it. I read it to say that the CURRENT temperatures are 3.5 standard deviations above the past temperatures at this time. I did not see any justification that the current standard deviations predict the standard deviation of the eventual peak. Common sense would suggest there is a correlation, but that is far from prediction.
So, I'd add another grain of salt: the assumption that the magnitude of an early trend predicts the magnitude of the peak, or even the duration above a threshold. It may. But it may just indicate an earlier peak (ie, a time shift of the whole effect) or a broader but not necessarily higher peak.
Oh, and for those considering flood insurance, maybe you want to get a whole-house generator, and get your tree foliage thinned out and make sure your roof is in good shape. I worry more about the effects of the wind and soaked ground than I do about flooding. But that depends on where one's house is.
(07-20-2026, 09:39 AM)BostonCard Wrote: The Sacramento Bee had a good explanation:
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/a...67041.html
Specifically, the temperature anomaly, which is expected to reach about 3.5 standard deviations above the mean, is a 1 in 4000 year event.
Quote:These sea surface temperatures are almost 3.5 standard deviations above average for this time of year – the equivalent of a once-in-4,000-year event under normal conditions. ...
I appreciate the lesson, BC. You always contribute solid information, Your point #4 (a time-based component to the measure) was the first thing I would have called out.
I read that part of the article differently than how it seems you took it. I read it to say that the CURRENT temperatures are 3.5 standard deviations above the past temperatures at this time. I did not see any justification that the current standard deviations predict the standard deviation of the eventual peak. Common sense would suggest there is a correlation, but that is far from prediction.
So, I'd add another grain of salt: the assumption that the magnitude of an early trend predicts the magnitude of the peak, or even the duration above a threshold. It may. But it may just indicate an earlier peak (ie, a time shift of the whole effect) or a broader but not necessarily higher peak.
Oh, and for those considering flood insurance, maybe you want to get a whole-house generator, and get your tree foliage thinned out and make sure your roof is in good shape. I worry more about the effects of the wind and soaked ground than I do about flooding. But that depends on where one's house is.
07-21-2026, 10:41 AM
I didn’t want to get too into it because it is even more technical/wonky, but the other major assumption that went into the math is that the observations are independent, which they are clearly not; there is a very strong correlation in the near term, and since this is an oscillating pattern, probably a strong inverse correlation over the course of an oscillation.
I have no idea how much these simplifying assumptions affect the calculation of just how common (or rare) the temperature anomaly is. I take this as a back-of-the envelope “assume a spherical cow” kind of simplifying assumptions that makes the calculation much easier (trivial in today’s era of computers and calculators) to convey that this is quite an outlier in terms of ocean temperatures. I think it is fine for a newspaper article; I would not rely on it if I were an insurance adjustor.
BC
I have no idea how much these simplifying assumptions affect the calculation of just how common (or rare) the temperature anomaly is. I take this as a back-of-the envelope “assume a spherical cow” kind of simplifying assumptions that makes the calculation much easier (trivial in today’s era of computers and calculators) to convey that this is quite an outlier in terms of ocean temperatures. I think it is fine for a newspaper article; I would not rely on it if I were an insurance adjustor.
BC
I didn’t want to get too into it because it is even more technical/wonky, but the other major assumption that went into the math is that the observations are independent, which they are clearly not; there is a very strong correlation in the near term, and since this is an oscillating pattern, probably a strong inverse correlation over the course of an oscillation.
I have no idea how much these simplifying assumptions affect the calculation of just how common (or rare) the temperature anomaly is. I take this as a back-of-the envelope “assume a spherical cow” kind of simplifying assumptions that makes the calculation much easier (trivial in today’s era of computers and calculators) to convey that this is quite an outlier in terms of ocean temperatures. I think it is fine for a newspaper article; I would not rely on it if I were an insurance adjustor.
BC
I have no idea how much these simplifying assumptions affect the calculation of just how common (or rare) the temperature anomaly is. I take this as a back-of-the envelope “assume a spherical cow” kind of simplifying assumptions that makes the calculation much easier (trivial in today’s era of computers and calculators) to convey that this is quite an outlier in terms of ocean temperatures. I think it is fine for a newspaper article; I would not rely on it if I were an insurance adjustor.
BC
07-21-2026, 06:48 PM
Claude was indeed calling out the 50 year timeline of historical data. To your point, temp over then millennia as been anything but stable, and the predictions less so. I remember in the 70's, Nat Geo and many scientists were warning about the coming ice age. . . .
As for the 1 in 4000 year event that was implied to potentially drench California like never before, my point is that California has been drenched like never before, on average, about every 150-200 years for at least the last 2000 years. Hyperbole . . . .
As for the 1 in 4000 year event that was implied to potentially drench California like never before, my point is that California has been drenched like never before, on average, about every 150-200 years for at least the last 2000 years. Hyperbole . . . .
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
Claude was indeed calling out the 50 year timeline of historical data. To your point, temp over then millennia as been anything but stable, and the predictions less so. I remember in the 70's, Nat Geo and many scientists were warning about the coming ice age. . . .
As for the 1 in 4000 year event that was implied to potentially drench California like never before, my point is that California has been drenched like never before, on average, about every 150-200 years for at least the last 2000 years. Hyperbole . . . .
As for the 1 in 4000 year event that was implied to potentially drench California like never before, my point is that California has been drenched like never before, on average, about every 150-200 years for at least the last 2000 years. Hyperbole . . . .
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
07-21-2026, 06:59 PM
My point is that you don’t need 4000 years of data to know that an event is a 1 in 4000 anomaly, if certain conditions are met (Normality, stability, independence, etc.). The comment that the temperature in the relevant part of the ocean was 3.5 standard deviations above the fifty year average and that this would be expected to happen approximately 1 in 4000 years is fine.
A 3.5 SD temperature anomaly does not imply a 3.5 SD rainfall anomaly, or at least, it shouldn’t, since many factor other than the temperature of the ocean affect rainfall. If you saw an article implying that we should see 1 in 4000 year rainfall, I think you are correct in skewering it. However, the articles that I’ve seen have been careful to say that that the anomaly refers to temperature, and that typically, El Niños produce heavier rainfall in Southern California, and, at most, speculating that the rainfall might be very heavy. But the articles in the Sacramento Bee that I linked earlier went out of its way to say that this doesn’t always happen, and one of the biggest El Niños in recent history, the “Godzilla” 2015-16 El Niño did not produce outsized rainfall. Here’s the direct quote:
Note that he specifically calls out the relatively small sample size of large El Niño events, which implies that correlating very large temperature anomalies to expected rainfall is fraught.
BC
A 3.5 SD temperature anomaly does not imply a 3.5 SD rainfall anomaly, or at least, it shouldn’t, since many factor other than the temperature of the ocean affect rainfall. If you saw an article implying that we should see 1 in 4000 year rainfall, I think you are correct in skewering it. However, the articles that I’ve seen have been careful to say that that the anomaly refers to temperature, and that typically, El Niños produce heavier rainfall in Southern California, and, at most, speculating that the rainfall might be very heavy. But the articles in the Sacramento Bee that I linked earlier went out of its way to say that this doesn’t always happen, and one of the biggest El Niños in recent history, the “Godzilla” 2015-16 El Niño did not produce outsized rainfall. Here’s the direct quote:
Quote:The 2015-16 El Niño, the strongest on record and dubbed as a “Godzilla” El Niño at the time, did not produce expected drought-busting rains for the state. Swain said this and the tiny sample size of large El Niño events also makes it difficult to communicate the situation.
Note that he specifically calls out the relatively small sample size of large El Niño events, which implies that correlating very large temperature anomalies to expected rainfall is fraught.
BC
My point is that you don’t need 4000 years of data to know that an event is a 1 in 4000 anomaly, if certain conditions are met (Normality, stability, independence, etc.). The comment that the temperature in the relevant part of the ocean was 3.5 standard deviations above the fifty year average and that this would be expected to happen approximately 1 in 4000 years is fine.
A 3.5 SD temperature anomaly does not imply a 3.5 SD rainfall anomaly, or at least, it shouldn’t, since many factor other than the temperature of the ocean affect rainfall. If you saw an article implying that we should see 1 in 4000 year rainfall, I think you are correct in skewering it. However, the articles that I’ve seen have been careful to say that that the anomaly refers to temperature, and that typically, El Niños produce heavier rainfall in Southern California, and, at most, speculating that the rainfall might be very heavy. But the articles in the Sacramento Bee that I linked earlier went out of its way to say that this doesn’t always happen, and one of the biggest El Niños in recent history, the “Godzilla” 2015-16 El Niño did not produce outsized rainfall. Here’s the direct quote:
Note that he specifically calls out the relatively small sample size of large El Niño events, which implies that correlating very large temperature anomalies to expected rainfall is fraught.
BC
A 3.5 SD temperature anomaly does not imply a 3.5 SD rainfall anomaly, or at least, it shouldn’t, since many factor other than the temperature of the ocean affect rainfall. If you saw an article implying that we should see 1 in 4000 year rainfall, I think you are correct in skewering it. However, the articles that I’ve seen have been careful to say that that the anomaly refers to temperature, and that typically, El Niños produce heavier rainfall in Southern California, and, at most, speculating that the rainfall might be very heavy. But the articles in the Sacramento Bee that I linked earlier went out of its way to say that this doesn’t always happen, and one of the biggest El Niños in recent history, the “Godzilla” 2015-16 El Niño did not produce outsized rainfall. Here’s the direct quote:
Quote:The 2015-16 El Niño, the strongest on record and dubbed as a “Godzilla” El Niño at the time, did not produce expected drought-busting rains for the state. Swain said this and the tiny sample size of large El Niño events also makes it difficult to communicate the situation.
Note that he specifically calls out the relatively small sample size of large El Niño events, which implies that correlating very large temperature anomalies to expected rainfall is fraught.
BC
07-21-2026, 08:36 PM
I spent part of today looking at NEXRAD with a meteorologist to figure out that some 2023 rainfall in Ventura County was literally off the charts. Do we believe this? The super bright (intense) radar split the ground-based rain gage uprights. Suffice to say that BC is correct. One can extrapolate AEP (or the inverse, return period) from hardly any data at all. Depending on the distribution assumed, 3rd order moments (like skew) can drive the frequency curve and things like skew can be driven by outliers, so knowing how to treat those, and look at confidence limits (for the 0.00025 AEP event your 95% CI starts to diverge like crazy with the amount of real-world data available). All I know is that we are still helping litigate flood events from 2018, 2019, 2021, 2022 (NYE), and 2023 around the state so nothing is once in forever, especially if your house is wrecked.
I spent part of today looking at NEXRAD with a meteorologist to figure out that some 2023 rainfall in Ventura County was literally off the charts. Do we believe this? The super bright (intense) radar split the ground-based rain gage uprights. Suffice to say that BC is correct. One can extrapolate AEP (or the inverse, return period) from hardly any data at all. Depending on the distribution assumed, 3rd order moments (like skew) can drive the frequency curve and things like skew can be driven by outliers, so knowing how to treat those, and look at confidence limits (for the 0.00025 AEP event your 95% CI starts to diverge like crazy with the amount of real-world data available). All I know is that we are still helping litigate flood events from 2018, 2019, 2021, 2022 (NYE), and 2023 around the state so nothing is once in forever, especially if your house is wrecked.
08-02-2026, 08:59 AM
Newsweek thinks Southern California and the central California Sierra Nevadas are headed for a very wet winter.
Super El Niño Threat Grows: Map Shows At-Risk States This Winter - Newsweek
Super El Niño Threat Grows: Map Shows At-Risk States This Winter - Newsweek
Audaces fortuna iuvat
Newsweek thinks Southern California and the central California Sierra Nevadas are headed for a very wet winter.
Super El Niño Threat Grows: Map Shows At-Risk States This Winter - Newsweek
Super El Niño Threat Grows: Map Shows At-Risk States This Winter - Newsweek
Audaces fortuna iuvat
08-03-2026, 06:21 AM
(08-02-2026, 08:59 AM)Mick Wrote: Newsweek thinks Southern California and the central California Sierra Nevadas are headed for a very wet winter.
Super El Niño Threat Grows: Map Shows At-Risk States This Winter - Newsweek
At least two of those prior events lead to multiple "Pineapple Express" storms and winter flooding, rather than tons of snow. Does California have the ability to store water / recharge the groundwater reserves? I have my doubts. Anyone have a good inflatable / foldable kayak recommendation?
(08-02-2026, 08:59 AM)Mick Wrote: Newsweek thinks Southern California and the central California Sierra Nevadas are headed for a very wet winter.
Super El Niño Threat Grows: Map Shows At-Risk States This Winter - Newsweek
At least two of those prior events lead to multiple "Pineapple Express" storms and winter flooding, rather than tons of snow. Does California have the ability to store water / recharge the groundwater reserves? I have my doubts. Anyone have a good inflatable / foldable kayak recommendation?
08-04-2026, 06:13 AM
From openAI:
California’s groundwater-replenishment actions, August 2021–August 2026
A threshold point: California does not itself operate one unified underground reservoir. Most actual recharge is performed by local groundwater sustainability agencies, irrigation districts, cities, counties, farmers, and water districts. The state’s role has been to finance projects, authorize diversions, waive or streamline regulations, provide equipment, map aquifers, approve recycled-water recharge, and enforce groundwater-sustainability plans.
A literally exhaustive project list would run into the thousands: DWR has compiled nearly 3,000 groundwater-related projects, while local agencies have identified more than 1,500 projects and management actions under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA. What follows is a substantially complete inventory of the state-level steps taken during the five-year period.
1. California dramatically increased funding for groundwater projects
2021–2022 SGMA funding
The 2021 Budget Act provided $180 million in General Fund money for SGMA implementation projects and contemplated another $120 million over the following two fiscal years. DWR then opened a grant program offering more than $350 million for planning and implementation work. In 2022, it awarded approximately $150.5 million through 20 grants in critically overdrafted basins. Not all of this money funded physical recharge; eligible work also included monitoring wells, water-use efficiency, planning and alternative-water-supply studies.
Within the broader program, DWR reported that its 2021 and 2022 awards included $68 million for 42 groundwater-recharge projects, representing nearly 117,000 acre-feet of potential recharge capacity. “Potential capacity” means what the projects could accept under suitable hydrologic conditions—not necessarily how much water entered the ground each year.
2023 SGMA funding round
In September 2023, DWR awarded another $187 million to 32 groundwater subbasins, supporting 103 projects involving recharge, aquifer-storage-and-recovery wells, recycled water, water-use efficiency, monitoring and water-quality work. Examples included:
Because the package included non-recharge work, the entire $187 million should not be counted as recharge construction spending.
State Water Board financing for recycled water, stormwater and recharge
During fiscal year 2022–23, the State Water Board directed more than $200 million to water recycling, stormwater capture and groundwater-recharge projects. The Board estimated that nearly 161,000 acre-feet per year of the resulting new supply would come through projects that recharge groundwater. It also provided $59.1 million for 11 stormwater projects expected to capture about 4,200 acre-feet annually, with groundwater recharge among their benefits.
The state also continued to finance major recycled-water projects that either replenish aquifers directly or replace groundwater pumping. In December 2021, for example, the San Diego Regional Water Board authorized Pure Water Oceanside to inject up to three million gallons per day of advanced-treated recycled water into the San Luis Rey groundwater system before later extraction and final drinking-water treatment.
2. It made groundwater recharge an explicit statewide water-supply objective
California’s August 2022 Water Supply Strategy established a goal of expanding average annual managed groundwater recharge by at least 500,000 acre-feet. The strategy called for:
This was important because it changed recharge from a mainly local SGMA implementation tool into a central element of statewide climate and water-supply policy.
3. It prioritized and temporarily waived regulatory requirements / Executive Order N-7-22
In March 2022, Executive Order N-7-22 directed state agencies to collaborate with tribal, federal and local entities to promote recharge and groundwater storage. It ordered the State and regional water boards to prioritize:
The order also temporarily suspended portions of CEQA for qualifying Flood-MAR and state-funded recharge projects on open and working lands where the necessary state concurrence was obtained. Fish, wildlife and water-right protections were still to be considered.
Fast-track regulatory-assistance pilot
DWR and the State Water Board began a pilot in August 2022 to help local agencies navigate the water-right process. Its first project allowed the Merced Irrigation District and the Merced Irrigation-Urban GSA to seek diversion of up to 10,000 acre-feet from Mariposa Creek during high-flow periods. The pilot was intended to develop a repeatable model for multi-landowner and GSA recharge applications.
First five-year temporary permit
In January 2023, the State Water Board issued California’s first five-year temporary groundwater-storage permit, authorizing the Omochumne-Hartnell Water District to divert 2,444 acre-feet from the Cosumnes River. The longer permit allowed the district to use several wet seasons without applying again each year. The Board simultaneously issued the Merced project its 180-day authorization for up to 10,000 acre-feet.
4. California used the 2023 floods for emergency aquifer recharge
The wet winter of 2022–23 produced the state’s most aggressive recharge intervention during the period. / Executive Order N-4-23
On March 10, 2023, the governor temporarily suspended specified permitting and use requirements so that flood-stage water could be diverted for groundwater recharge without first obtaining the usual state water-right permit. The order imposed conditions concerning flood status, timing, water quality, fish and wildlife, existing water rights and reporting.
Executive Orders N-6-23 and N-7-23
N-6-23 adapted the emergency authority to Tulare Lake Basin flooding. N-7-23 subsequently expanded and extended qualifying diversions in the Tulare Lake and San Joaquin River systems through August 31, 2023, while retaining public-notice, flood-risk and environmental-protection conditions.
Approval of federal floodwater diversions
The State Water Board also approved a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation petition allowing more than 600,000 acre-feet of San Joaquin River floodwater to be diverted for wildlife refuges, underground storage and recharge. By early March 2023, the Board said it had authorized nearly 790,000 acre-feet of diversions for recharge and related purposes since the preceding December. That was authorization—not necessarily the final measured quantity infiltrated.
Temporary equipment and land preparation
DWR obtained emergency funding and supplied or financed:
The initial 2023 effort focused particularly on the Tulare Lake region, where moving floodwater onto suitable land could both reduce flood pressure and replenish shallow aquifers.
5. The Legislature converted emergency authority into temporary statutory authority
In July 2023, Senate Bill 122 added Water Code section 1242.1. Through January 1, 2029, the law provides a pathway to divert floodwater for aquifer recharge without acquiring a water right, when:
The statute does not create permanent ownership of the diverted water or a new water right. It is a limited flood-management authority with recharge as a dual benefit.
6. The state created a multi-year flood-diversion assistance program
Building on the 2023 emergency work, DWR launched the Flood Diversion and Recharge Enhancement Initiative, or FDRE, in December 2023. Contracts executed in June 2024 supported recharge operations through at least June 2026.
The program paid for or assisted with:
The original FDRE allocation has since been exhausted, although Proposition 4 contemplates renewed funding for similar technical assistance.
California’s groundwater-replenishment actions, August 2021–August 2026
A threshold point: California does not itself operate one unified underground reservoir. Most actual recharge is performed by local groundwater sustainability agencies, irrigation districts, cities, counties, farmers, and water districts. The state’s role has been to finance projects, authorize diversions, waive or streamline regulations, provide equipment, map aquifers, approve recycled-water recharge, and enforce groundwater-sustainability plans.
A literally exhaustive project list would run into the thousands: DWR has compiled nearly 3,000 groundwater-related projects, while local agencies have identified more than 1,500 projects and management actions under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA. What follows is a substantially complete inventory of the state-level steps taken during the five-year period.
1. California dramatically increased funding for groundwater projects
2021–2022 SGMA funding
The 2021 Budget Act provided $180 million in General Fund money for SGMA implementation projects and contemplated another $120 million over the following two fiscal years. DWR then opened a grant program offering more than $350 million for planning and implementation work. In 2022, it awarded approximately $150.5 million through 20 grants in critically overdrafted basins. Not all of this money funded physical recharge; eligible work also included monitoring wells, water-use efficiency, planning and alternative-water-supply studies.
Within the broader program, DWR reported that its 2021 and 2022 awards included $68 million for 42 groundwater-recharge projects, representing nearly 117,000 acre-feet of potential recharge capacity. “Potential capacity” means what the projects could accept under suitable hydrologic conditions—not necessarily how much water entered the ground each year.
2023 SGMA funding round
In September 2023, DWR awarded another $187 million to 32 groundwater subbasins, supporting 103 projects involving recharge, aquifer-storage-and-recovery wells, recycled water, water-use efficiency, monitoring and water-quality work. Examples included:
- Expanding an Oakdale Irrigation District recharge facility by a stated 600%.
- Five aquifer-storage-and-recovery wells and a conveyance pipeline in San Benito County.
- Fallowing more than 1,300 acres in Merced County for recharge, habitat and flood reduction.
- Recharge planning and recycled-water studies in the Santa Ynez basin.
Because the package included non-recharge work, the entire $187 million should not be counted as recharge construction spending.
State Water Board financing for recycled water, stormwater and recharge
During fiscal year 2022–23, the State Water Board directed more than $200 million to water recycling, stormwater capture and groundwater-recharge projects. The Board estimated that nearly 161,000 acre-feet per year of the resulting new supply would come through projects that recharge groundwater. It also provided $59.1 million for 11 stormwater projects expected to capture about 4,200 acre-feet annually, with groundwater recharge among their benefits.
The state also continued to finance major recycled-water projects that either replenish aquifers directly or replace groundwater pumping. In December 2021, for example, the San Diego Regional Water Board authorized Pure Water Oceanside to inject up to three million gallons per day of advanced-treated recycled water into the San Luis Rey groundwater system before later extraction and final drinking-water treatment.
2. It made groundwater recharge an explicit statewide water-supply objective
California’s August 2022 Water Supply Strategy established a goal of expanding average annual managed groundwater recharge by at least 500,000 acre-feet. The strategy called for:
- More state financial support.
- Faster water-right permitting.
- Technical assistance for temporary high-flow permits.
- Additional watershed studies to determine when and where water is available.
- Better integration of flood management, reservoir operations and aquifer recharge.
This was important because it changed recharge from a mainly local SGMA implementation tool into a central element of statewide climate and water-supply policy.
3. It prioritized and temporarily waived regulatory requirements / Executive Order N-7-22
In March 2022, Executive Order N-7-22 directed state agencies to collaborate with tribal, federal and local entities to promote recharge and groundwater storage. It ordered the State and regional water boards to prioritize:
- Water-right permits.
- Water-quality certifications.
- Waste-discharge requirements.
- Conditional waivers needed for recharge.
The order also temporarily suspended portions of CEQA for qualifying Flood-MAR and state-funded recharge projects on open and working lands where the necessary state concurrence was obtained. Fish, wildlife and water-right protections were still to be considered.
Fast-track regulatory-assistance pilot
DWR and the State Water Board began a pilot in August 2022 to help local agencies navigate the water-right process. Its first project allowed the Merced Irrigation District and the Merced Irrigation-Urban GSA to seek diversion of up to 10,000 acre-feet from Mariposa Creek during high-flow periods. The pilot was intended to develop a repeatable model for multi-landowner and GSA recharge applications.
First five-year temporary permit
In January 2023, the State Water Board issued California’s first five-year temporary groundwater-storage permit, authorizing the Omochumne-Hartnell Water District to divert 2,444 acre-feet from the Cosumnes River. The longer permit allowed the district to use several wet seasons without applying again each year. The Board simultaneously issued the Merced project its 180-day authorization for up to 10,000 acre-feet.
4. California used the 2023 floods for emergency aquifer recharge
The wet winter of 2022–23 produced the state’s most aggressive recharge intervention during the period. / Executive Order N-4-23
On March 10, 2023, the governor temporarily suspended specified permitting and use requirements so that flood-stage water could be diverted for groundwater recharge without first obtaining the usual state water-right permit. The order imposed conditions concerning flood status, timing, water quality, fish and wildlife, existing water rights and reporting.
Executive Orders N-6-23 and N-7-23
N-6-23 adapted the emergency authority to Tulare Lake Basin flooding. N-7-23 subsequently expanded and extended qualifying diversions in the Tulare Lake and San Joaquin River systems through August 31, 2023, while retaining public-notice, flood-risk and environmental-protection conditions.
Approval of federal floodwater diversions
The State Water Board also approved a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation petition allowing more than 600,000 acre-feet of San Joaquin River floodwater to be diverted for wildlife refuges, underground storage and recharge. By early March 2023, the Board said it had authorized nearly 790,000 acre-feet of diversions for recharge and related purposes since the preceding December. That was authorization—not necessarily the final measured quantity infiltrated.
Temporary equipment and land preparation
DWR obtained emergency funding and supplied or financed:
- Temporary pumps and siphons.
- Equipment to move floodwater from rivers and canals.
- Fish-protection screens.
- Temporary conveyance improvements.
- Clearing of orchards and other agricultural land—called “rip and chip.”
- Development of temporary and permanent recharge basins.
The initial 2023 effort focused particularly on the Tulare Lake region, where moving floodwater onto suitable land could both reduce flood pressure and replenish shallow aquifers.
5. The Legislature converted emergency authority into temporary statutory authority
In July 2023, Senate Bill 122 added Water Code section 1242.1. Through January 1, 2029, the law provides a pathway to divert floodwater for aquifer recharge without acquiring a water right, when:
- A local or regional agency determines and publicly announces that downstream flows pose an imminent flooding risk.
- Required notices and reports are filed.
- Diversions comply with protections for infrastructure, water quality, ecosystems and existing water-right holders.
The statute does not create permanent ownership of the diverted water or a new water right. It is a limited flood-management authority with recharge as a dual benefit.
6. The state created a multi-year flood-diversion assistance program
Building on the 2023 emergency work, DWR launched the Flood Diversion and Recharge Enhancement Initiative, or FDRE, in December 2023. Contracts executed in June 2024 supported recharge operations through at least June 2026.
The program paid for or assisted with:
- Pump rentals and purchases.
- Protective intake screens.
- Land clearing.
- Temporary recharge-basin construction.
- Temporary canal and conveyance improvements.
- Regulatory and project-development assistance.
The original FDRE allocation has since been exhausted, although Proposition 4 contemplates renewed funding for similar technical assistance.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
From openAI:
California’s groundwater-replenishment actions, August 2021–August 2026
A threshold point: California does not itself operate one unified underground reservoir. Most actual recharge is performed by local groundwater sustainability agencies, irrigation districts, cities, counties, farmers, and water districts. The state’s role has been to finance projects, authorize diversions, waive or streamline regulations, provide equipment, map aquifers, approve recycled-water recharge, and enforce groundwater-sustainability plans.
A literally exhaustive project list would run into the thousands: DWR has compiled nearly 3,000 groundwater-related projects, while local agencies have identified more than 1,500 projects and management actions under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA. What follows is a substantially complete inventory of the state-level steps taken during the five-year period.
1. California dramatically increased funding for groundwater projects
2021–2022 SGMA funding
The 2021 Budget Act provided $180 million in General Fund money for SGMA implementation projects and contemplated another $120 million over the following two fiscal years. DWR then opened a grant program offering more than $350 million for planning and implementation work. In 2022, it awarded approximately $150.5 million through 20 grants in critically overdrafted basins. Not all of this money funded physical recharge; eligible work also included monitoring wells, water-use efficiency, planning and alternative-water-supply studies.
Within the broader program, DWR reported that its 2021 and 2022 awards included $68 million for 42 groundwater-recharge projects, representing nearly 117,000 acre-feet of potential recharge capacity. “Potential capacity” means what the projects could accept under suitable hydrologic conditions—not necessarily how much water entered the ground each year.
2023 SGMA funding round
In September 2023, DWR awarded another $187 million to 32 groundwater subbasins, supporting 103 projects involving recharge, aquifer-storage-and-recovery wells, recycled water, water-use efficiency, monitoring and water-quality work. Examples included:
Because the package included non-recharge work, the entire $187 million should not be counted as recharge construction spending.
State Water Board financing for recycled water, stormwater and recharge
During fiscal year 2022–23, the State Water Board directed more than $200 million to water recycling, stormwater capture and groundwater-recharge projects. The Board estimated that nearly 161,000 acre-feet per year of the resulting new supply would come through projects that recharge groundwater. It also provided $59.1 million for 11 stormwater projects expected to capture about 4,200 acre-feet annually, with groundwater recharge among their benefits.
The state also continued to finance major recycled-water projects that either replenish aquifers directly or replace groundwater pumping. In December 2021, for example, the San Diego Regional Water Board authorized Pure Water Oceanside to inject up to three million gallons per day of advanced-treated recycled water into the San Luis Rey groundwater system before later extraction and final drinking-water treatment.
2. It made groundwater recharge an explicit statewide water-supply objective
California’s August 2022 Water Supply Strategy established a goal of expanding average annual managed groundwater recharge by at least 500,000 acre-feet. The strategy called for:
This was important because it changed recharge from a mainly local SGMA implementation tool into a central element of statewide climate and water-supply policy.
3. It prioritized and temporarily waived regulatory requirements / Executive Order N-7-22
In March 2022, Executive Order N-7-22 directed state agencies to collaborate with tribal, federal and local entities to promote recharge and groundwater storage. It ordered the State and regional water boards to prioritize:
The order also temporarily suspended portions of CEQA for qualifying Flood-MAR and state-funded recharge projects on open and working lands where the necessary state concurrence was obtained. Fish, wildlife and water-right protections were still to be considered.
Fast-track regulatory-assistance pilot
DWR and the State Water Board began a pilot in August 2022 to help local agencies navigate the water-right process. Its first project allowed the Merced Irrigation District and the Merced Irrigation-Urban GSA to seek diversion of up to 10,000 acre-feet from Mariposa Creek during high-flow periods. The pilot was intended to develop a repeatable model for multi-landowner and GSA recharge applications.
First five-year temporary permit
In January 2023, the State Water Board issued California’s first five-year temporary groundwater-storage permit, authorizing the Omochumne-Hartnell Water District to divert 2,444 acre-feet from the Cosumnes River. The longer permit allowed the district to use several wet seasons without applying again each year. The Board simultaneously issued the Merced project its 180-day authorization for up to 10,000 acre-feet.
4. California used the 2023 floods for emergency aquifer recharge
The wet winter of 2022–23 produced the state’s most aggressive recharge intervention during the period. / Executive Order N-4-23
On March 10, 2023, the governor temporarily suspended specified permitting and use requirements so that flood-stage water could be diverted for groundwater recharge without first obtaining the usual state water-right permit. The order imposed conditions concerning flood status, timing, water quality, fish and wildlife, existing water rights and reporting.
Executive Orders N-6-23 and N-7-23
N-6-23 adapted the emergency authority to Tulare Lake Basin flooding. N-7-23 subsequently expanded and extended qualifying diversions in the Tulare Lake and San Joaquin River systems through August 31, 2023, while retaining public-notice, flood-risk and environmental-protection conditions.
Approval of federal floodwater diversions
The State Water Board also approved a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation petition allowing more than 600,000 acre-feet of San Joaquin River floodwater to be diverted for wildlife refuges, underground storage and recharge. By early March 2023, the Board said it had authorized nearly 790,000 acre-feet of diversions for recharge and related purposes since the preceding December. That was authorization—not necessarily the final measured quantity infiltrated.
Temporary equipment and land preparation
DWR obtained emergency funding and supplied or financed:
The initial 2023 effort focused particularly on the Tulare Lake region, where moving floodwater onto suitable land could both reduce flood pressure and replenish shallow aquifers.
5. The Legislature converted emergency authority into temporary statutory authority
In July 2023, Senate Bill 122 added Water Code section 1242.1. Through January 1, 2029, the law provides a pathway to divert floodwater for aquifer recharge without acquiring a water right, when:
The statute does not create permanent ownership of the diverted water or a new water right. It is a limited flood-management authority with recharge as a dual benefit.
6. The state created a multi-year flood-diversion assistance program
Building on the 2023 emergency work, DWR launched the Flood Diversion and Recharge Enhancement Initiative, or FDRE, in December 2023. Contracts executed in June 2024 supported recharge operations through at least June 2026.
The program paid for or assisted with:
The original FDRE allocation has since been exhausted, although Proposition 4 contemplates renewed funding for similar technical assistance.
California’s groundwater-replenishment actions, August 2021–August 2026
A threshold point: California does not itself operate one unified underground reservoir. Most actual recharge is performed by local groundwater sustainability agencies, irrigation districts, cities, counties, farmers, and water districts. The state’s role has been to finance projects, authorize diversions, waive or streamline regulations, provide equipment, map aquifers, approve recycled-water recharge, and enforce groundwater-sustainability plans.
A literally exhaustive project list would run into the thousands: DWR has compiled nearly 3,000 groundwater-related projects, while local agencies have identified more than 1,500 projects and management actions under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA. What follows is a substantially complete inventory of the state-level steps taken during the five-year period.
1. California dramatically increased funding for groundwater projects
2021–2022 SGMA funding
The 2021 Budget Act provided $180 million in General Fund money for SGMA implementation projects and contemplated another $120 million over the following two fiscal years. DWR then opened a grant program offering more than $350 million for planning and implementation work. In 2022, it awarded approximately $150.5 million through 20 grants in critically overdrafted basins. Not all of this money funded physical recharge; eligible work also included monitoring wells, water-use efficiency, planning and alternative-water-supply studies.
Within the broader program, DWR reported that its 2021 and 2022 awards included $68 million for 42 groundwater-recharge projects, representing nearly 117,000 acre-feet of potential recharge capacity. “Potential capacity” means what the projects could accept under suitable hydrologic conditions—not necessarily how much water entered the ground each year.
2023 SGMA funding round
In September 2023, DWR awarded another $187 million to 32 groundwater subbasins, supporting 103 projects involving recharge, aquifer-storage-and-recovery wells, recycled water, water-use efficiency, monitoring and water-quality work. Examples included:
- Expanding an Oakdale Irrigation District recharge facility by a stated 600%.
- Five aquifer-storage-and-recovery wells and a conveyance pipeline in San Benito County.
- Fallowing more than 1,300 acres in Merced County for recharge, habitat and flood reduction.
- Recharge planning and recycled-water studies in the Santa Ynez basin.
Because the package included non-recharge work, the entire $187 million should not be counted as recharge construction spending.
State Water Board financing for recycled water, stormwater and recharge
During fiscal year 2022–23, the State Water Board directed more than $200 million to water recycling, stormwater capture and groundwater-recharge projects. The Board estimated that nearly 161,000 acre-feet per year of the resulting new supply would come through projects that recharge groundwater. It also provided $59.1 million for 11 stormwater projects expected to capture about 4,200 acre-feet annually, with groundwater recharge among their benefits.
The state also continued to finance major recycled-water projects that either replenish aquifers directly or replace groundwater pumping. In December 2021, for example, the San Diego Regional Water Board authorized Pure Water Oceanside to inject up to three million gallons per day of advanced-treated recycled water into the San Luis Rey groundwater system before later extraction and final drinking-water treatment.
2. It made groundwater recharge an explicit statewide water-supply objective
California’s August 2022 Water Supply Strategy established a goal of expanding average annual managed groundwater recharge by at least 500,000 acre-feet. The strategy called for:
- More state financial support.
- Faster water-right permitting.
- Technical assistance for temporary high-flow permits.
- Additional watershed studies to determine when and where water is available.
- Better integration of flood management, reservoir operations and aquifer recharge.
This was important because it changed recharge from a mainly local SGMA implementation tool into a central element of statewide climate and water-supply policy.
3. It prioritized and temporarily waived regulatory requirements / Executive Order N-7-22
In March 2022, Executive Order N-7-22 directed state agencies to collaborate with tribal, federal and local entities to promote recharge and groundwater storage. It ordered the State and regional water boards to prioritize:
- Water-right permits.
- Water-quality certifications.
- Waste-discharge requirements.
- Conditional waivers needed for recharge.
The order also temporarily suspended portions of CEQA for qualifying Flood-MAR and state-funded recharge projects on open and working lands where the necessary state concurrence was obtained. Fish, wildlife and water-right protections were still to be considered.
Fast-track regulatory-assistance pilot
DWR and the State Water Board began a pilot in August 2022 to help local agencies navigate the water-right process. Its first project allowed the Merced Irrigation District and the Merced Irrigation-Urban GSA to seek diversion of up to 10,000 acre-feet from Mariposa Creek during high-flow periods. The pilot was intended to develop a repeatable model for multi-landowner and GSA recharge applications.
First five-year temporary permit
In January 2023, the State Water Board issued California’s first five-year temporary groundwater-storage permit, authorizing the Omochumne-Hartnell Water District to divert 2,444 acre-feet from the Cosumnes River. The longer permit allowed the district to use several wet seasons without applying again each year. The Board simultaneously issued the Merced project its 180-day authorization for up to 10,000 acre-feet.
4. California used the 2023 floods for emergency aquifer recharge
The wet winter of 2022–23 produced the state’s most aggressive recharge intervention during the period. / Executive Order N-4-23
On March 10, 2023, the governor temporarily suspended specified permitting and use requirements so that flood-stage water could be diverted for groundwater recharge without first obtaining the usual state water-right permit. The order imposed conditions concerning flood status, timing, water quality, fish and wildlife, existing water rights and reporting.
Executive Orders N-6-23 and N-7-23
N-6-23 adapted the emergency authority to Tulare Lake Basin flooding. N-7-23 subsequently expanded and extended qualifying diversions in the Tulare Lake and San Joaquin River systems through August 31, 2023, while retaining public-notice, flood-risk and environmental-protection conditions.
Approval of federal floodwater diversions
The State Water Board also approved a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation petition allowing more than 600,000 acre-feet of San Joaquin River floodwater to be diverted for wildlife refuges, underground storage and recharge. By early March 2023, the Board said it had authorized nearly 790,000 acre-feet of diversions for recharge and related purposes since the preceding December. That was authorization—not necessarily the final measured quantity infiltrated.
Temporary equipment and land preparation
DWR obtained emergency funding and supplied or financed:
- Temporary pumps and siphons.
- Equipment to move floodwater from rivers and canals.
- Fish-protection screens.
- Temporary conveyance improvements.
- Clearing of orchards and other agricultural land—called “rip and chip.”
- Development of temporary and permanent recharge basins.
The initial 2023 effort focused particularly on the Tulare Lake region, where moving floodwater onto suitable land could both reduce flood pressure and replenish shallow aquifers.
5. The Legislature converted emergency authority into temporary statutory authority
In July 2023, Senate Bill 122 added Water Code section 1242.1. Through January 1, 2029, the law provides a pathway to divert floodwater for aquifer recharge without acquiring a water right, when:
- A local or regional agency determines and publicly announces that downstream flows pose an imminent flooding risk.
- Required notices and reports are filed.
- Diversions comply with protections for infrastructure, water quality, ecosystems and existing water-right holders.
The statute does not create permanent ownership of the diverted water or a new water right. It is a limited flood-management authority with recharge as a dual benefit.
6. The state created a multi-year flood-diversion assistance program
Building on the 2023 emergency work, DWR launched the Flood Diversion and Recharge Enhancement Initiative, or FDRE, in December 2023. Contracts executed in June 2024 supported recharge operations through at least June 2026.
The program paid for or assisted with:
- Pump rentals and purchases.
- Protective intake screens.
- Land clearing.
- Temporary recharge-basin construction.
- Temporary canal and conveyance improvements.
- Regulatory and project-development assistance.
The original FDRE allocation has since been exhausted, although Proposition 4 contemplates renewed funding for similar technical assistance.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
08-04-2026, 06:15 AM
7. California mapped the underground geology needed to place recharge projects intelligently
DWR spent approximately $12 million in Proposition 68 funding on statewide airborne electromagnetic surveys. Helicopter-mounted equipment measured subsurface electrical properties to reveal sands, gravels, clay layers and potential recharge pathways down to roughly 1,000 feet.
Between December 2021 and November 2023, DWR collected nearly 16,000 miles of data in 95 groundwater basins. By March 2024, surveys had been completed in all high- and medium-priority basins. The data were released publicly and incorporated into maps and groundwater tools intended to help agencies avoid putting expensive recharge facilities over impermeable clay or contaminated areas.
DWR then moved into a broader Basin Characterization Program, combining electromagnetic data, well logs, groundwater models and monitoring information. In August 2025 it released a subsurface viewer that allows agencies to examine aquifer structure in map and profile form.
8. It adopted policies to protect recharge land from development and contamination
The final California Water Plan Update 2023 and its September 2024 recharge-area strategy addressed a less visible problem: recharge cannot occur effectively if prime infiltration land is paved, built upon or contaminated.
The state’s recommended actions include:
These are planning guidance and local implementation tools—not a prohibition on developing all recharge land.
9. It used SGMA enforcement to restrain withdrawals and require basin recovery
Reducing pumping is not technically “recharge,” but it is indispensable to rebuilding groundwater reserves. Pouring water into an aquifer while withdrawals remain greater than inflows does not replenish the reserve.
During 2023–25, DWR completed its initial review of sustainability plans for California’s high- and medium-priority basins. Plans found inadequate were referred to the State Water Board. By 2026, 81 basins were operating under approved plans, while several inadequate basins remained under state-intervention procedures.
The Water Board designated the critically overdrafted Tulare Lake Subbasin probationary in April 2024 and the Tule Subbasin probationary in September 2024. Probation can require pumpers to meter or report extraction and pay state fees while local agencies correct deficient plans; the state may eventually impose an interim plan. Litigation temporarily constrained portions of the Tulare Lake process, but the probationary designation remained in place and implementation resumed after a December 2025 appellate decision.
10. It paid farmers to leave groundwater in the aquifer—and use the land for recharge
DWR launched the LandFlex Pilot Program in 2022, awarding $23.3 million to six Central Valley groundwater sustainability agencies. Payments went to participating farms that reduced pumping, protected nearby drinking-water wells and adopted more sustainable land practices.
DWR reports that the program:
The 100,000-acre-foot figure represents water not pumped, rather than 100,000 acre-feet newly injected into the aquifer.
11. California further simplified the process in 2025 / Executive Order N-16-25
In January 2025, the governor temporarily suspended one of section 1242.1’s procedural prerequisites in 39 drought-emergency counties: a local agency no longer had to have already adopted a specified flood-control plan or addressed flood risk in its general plan before activating the statute.
The order also directed DWR to maximize diversions of excess winter flows to storage and ordered DWR, the Water Board, Natural Resources Agency and CalEPA to identify and remove regulatory obstacles where possible. Local public notice of imminent flooding and the statute’s remaining protections continued to apply.
During 2025, the State Water Board shortened typical processing for qualifying five-year recharge permits from as much as a year to approximately four months and maintained a reduced-fee pathway. These permits let agencies operate through five successive wet seasons instead of repeatedly seeking 180-day approvals.
12. It began integrating reservoir forecasting with aquifer recharge
DWR completed Flood-MAR watershed studies for five San Joaquin tributaries—the Calaveras, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced and Upper San Joaquin systems.
The studies examined FIRO-MAR, combining forecast-informed reservoir operations with managed aquifer recharge. The idea is to use improved storm forecasting to:
This remains primarily an operational-planning and investment framework, not a blanket change in reservoir rules.
13. Proposition 4 created the next major funding pool
California voters approved Proposition 4 in November 2024. It authorizes approximately $386.25 million for groundwater storage, groundwater banking, recharge and related conjunctive-use or instream-flow projects. DWR’s preliminary program design contemplates approximately:
As of August 4, 2026, most of this was not yet in constructed projects. DWR had begun workshops and guideline development; the immediate legislative direction included $3.5 million for small GSAs and $6.5 million for technical assistance, while the larger competitive solicitation was still being prepared.
14. It expanded monitoring, reporting and public groundwater data
California now publishes semiannual groundwater-condition updates and near-real-time information through California Groundwater Live. In March 2026, DWR released Bulletin 118–Update 2025, consolidating groundwater levels, storage, recharge, pumping, land subsidence, wells and local project information for 2020–24.
DWR reported that:
These totals reflect local recharge conducted under the broader state-local SGMA system; they should not be interpreted as 7.4 million acre-feet generated solely by new state programs.
Measured results—and an important accounting warning
Water Year 2023 was the standout. DWR reported:
These figures measure different things and cannot be added together. “Permitted” water is authorization; “managed recharge” is water deliberately placed underground; and “net storage increase” includes natural recharge minus pumping and groundwater discharge.
For the 2025–26 wet season, the State Water Board issued nine additional recharge permits—seven five-year and two 180-day permits—authorizing nearly 43,000 acre-feet of underground storage. Two earlier five-year permits remained active.
Overall assessment
California’s most consequential steps have been:
The state has therefore moved well beyond studies and aspirations. But the effort remains highly dependent on wet-year water availability, local conveyance capacity, suitable land, water rights, water quality and basin-level pumping reductions. The extraordinary 2023 recharge gains demonstrate what is possible; they do not establish that California’s chronically overdrafted basins have been fully replenished.
DWR spent approximately $12 million in Proposition 68 funding on statewide airborne electromagnetic surveys. Helicopter-mounted equipment measured subsurface electrical properties to reveal sands, gravels, clay layers and potential recharge pathways down to roughly 1,000 feet.
Between December 2021 and November 2023, DWR collected nearly 16,000 miles of data in 95 groundwater basins. By March 2024, surveys had been completed in all high- and medium-priority basins. The data were released publicly and incorporated into maps and groundwater tools intended to help agencies avoid putting expensive recharge facilities over impermeable clay or contaminated areas.
DWR then moved into a broader Basin Characterization Program, combining electromagnetic data, well logs, groundwater models and monitoring information. In August 2025 it released a subsurface viewer that allows agencies to examine aquifer structure in map and profile form.
8. It adopted policies to protect recharge land from development and contamination
The final California Water Plan Update 2023 and its September 2024 recharge-area strategy addressed a less visible problem: recharge cannot occur effectively if prime infiltration land is paved, built upon or contaminated.
The state’s recommended actions include:
- Mapping existing and potential recharge areas.
- Providing those maps to land-use agencies.
- Incorporating recharge protection into city and county general plans.
- Using zoning and ordinances to preserve suitable land.
- Preventing pesticides, animal waste, septic leakage and hazardous substances from contaminating infiltration areas.
- Using agricultural land repurposing to maintain recharge capacity.
- Integrating stormwater, floodplain, watershed and groundwater planning.
These are planning guidance and local implementation tools—not a prohibition on developing all recharge land.
9. It used SGMA enforcement to restrain withdrawals and require basin recovery
Reducing pumping is not technically “recharge,” but it is indispensable to rebuilding groundwater reserves. Pouring water into an aquifer while withdrawals remain greater than inflows does not replenish the reserve.
During 2023–25, DWR completed its initial review of sustainability plans for California’s high- and medium-priority basins. Plans found inadequate were referred to the State Water Board. By 2026, 81 basins were operating under approved plans, while several inadequate basins remained under state-intervention procedures.
The Water Board designated the critically overdrafted Tulare Lake Subbasin probationary in April 2024 and the Tule Subbasin probationary in September 2024. Probation can require pumpers to meter or report extraction and pay state fees while local agencies correct deficient plans; the state may eventually impose an interim plan. Litigation temporarily constrained portions of the Tulare Lake process, but the probationary designation remained in place and implementation resumed after a December 2025 appellate decision.
10. It paid farmers to leave groundwater in the aquifer—and use the land for recharge
DWR launched the LandFlex Pilot Program in 2022, awarding $23.3 million to six Central Valley groundwater sustainability agencies. Payments went to participating farms that reduced pumping, protected nearby drinking-water wells and adopted more sustainable land practices.
DWR reports that the program:
- Enrolled 4,474 acres on 52 farms.
- Preserved more than 100,000 acre-feet of groundwater.
- Protected approximately 16,500 drinking-water wells.
- Redirected excess 2023 floodwater onto some fallowed land for recharge.
- Reduced pumping near the California Aqueduct to limit subsidence.
The 100,000-acre-foot figure represents water not pumped, rather than 100,000 acre-feet newly injected into the aquifer.
11. California further simplified the process in 2025 / Executive Order N-16-25
In January 2025, the governor temporarily suspended one of section 1242.1’s procedural prerequisites in 39 drought-emergency counties: a local agency no longer had to have already adopted a specified flood-control plan or addressed flood risk in its general plan before activating the statute.
The order also directed DWR to maximize diversions of excess winter flows to storage and ordered DWR, the Water Board, Natural Resources Agency and CalEPA to identify and remove regulatory obstacles where possible. Local public notice of imminent flooding and the statute’s remaining protections continued to apply.
During 2025, the State Water Board shortened typical processing for qualifying five-year recharge permits from as much as a year to approximately four months and maintained a reduced-fee pathway. These permits let agencies operate through five successive wet seasons instead of repeatedly seeking 180-day approvals.
12. It began integrating reservoir forecasting with aquifer recharge
DWR completed Flood-MAR watershed studies for five San Joaquin tributaries—the Calaveras, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced and Upper San Joaquin systems.
The studies examined FIRO-MAR, combining forecast-informed reservoir operations with managed aquifer recharge. The idea is to use improved storm forecasting to:
- Release reservoir water strategically when appropriate.
- Create room for incoming floodwater.
- Time releases so downstream districts can convey water to fields and basins.
- recharge groundwater without compromising flood control, ecosystems or other water uses.
This remains primarily an operational-planning and investment framework, not a blanket change in reservoir rules.
13. Proposition 4 created the next major funding pool
California voters approved Proposition 4 in November 2024. It authorizes approximately $386.25 million for groundwater storage, groundwater banking, recharge and related conjunctive-use or instream-flow projects. DWR’s preliminary program design contemplates approximately:
- $320 million for SGMA implementation grants.
- $20 million for renewed FDRE assistance.
- $20 million for underrepresented-community technical assistance.
- Additional allocations for conveyance and related programs.
As of August 4, 2026, most of this was not yet in constructed projects. DWR had begun workshops and guideline development; the immediate legislative direction included $3.5 million for small GSAs and $6.5 million for technical assistance, while the larger competitive solicitation was still being prepared.
14. It expanded monitoring, reporting and public groundwater data
California now publishes semiannual groundwater-condition updates and near-real-time information through California Groundwater Live. In March 2026, DWR released Bulletin 118–Update 2025, consolidating groundwater levels, storage, recharge, pumping, land subsidence, wells and local project information for 2020–24.
DWR reported that:
- It had allocated more than $500 million in groundwater planning and implementation grants.
- Local agencies had assembled more than 1,500 projects and management actions.
- Reported managed recharge totaled approximately 7.4 million acre-feet during water years 2022–24, averaging about 2.5 million acre-feet annually.
These totals reflect local recharge conducted under the broader state-local SGMA system; they should not be interpreted as 7.4 million acre-feet generated solely by new state programs.
Measured results—and an important accounting warning
Water Year 2023 was the standout. DWR reported:
- 4.1 million acre-feet of managed recharge.
- An 8.7-million-acre-foot increase in groundwater storage.
- More than 1.2 million acre-feet authorized through state permits.
- More than 400,000 acre-feet recharged using the governor’s emergency orders.
These figures measure different things and cannot be added together. “Permitted” water is authorization; “managed recharge” is water deliberately placed underground; and “net storage increase” includes natural recharge minus pumping and groundwater discharge.
For the 2025–26 wet season, the State Water Board issued nine additional recharge permits—seven five-year and two 180-day permits—authorizing nearly 43,000 acre-feet of underground storage. Two earlier five-year permits remained active.
Overall assessment
California’s most consequential steps have been:
- Making floodwater recharge legally and administratively easier, first through executive orders and then Water Code section 1242.1.
- Creating a five-year permit regime so projects are ready before storms arrive.
- Putting hundreds of millions of dollars into local recharge, conveyance, recycled-water and aquifer-storage projects.
- Providing pumps, screens and land preparation, not merely planning grants.
- Mapping the subsurface so recharge facilities can be placed where water will actually infiltrate.
- Constraining groundwater withdrawals through SGMA and LandFlex.
- Establishing a new Proposition 4 funding pipeline for the next generation of projects.
The state has therefore moved well beyond studies and aspirations. But the effort remains highly dependent on wet-year water availability, local conveyance capacity, suitable land, water rights, water quality and basin-level pumping reductions. The extraordinary 2023 recharge gains demonstrate what is possible; they do not establish that California’s chronically overdrafted basins have been fully replenished.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
7. California mapped the underground geology needed to place recharge projects intelligently
DWR spent approximately $12 million in Proposition 68 funding on statewide airborne electromagnetic surveys. Helicopter-mounted equipment measured subsurface electrical properties to reveal sands, gravels, clay layers and potential recharge pathways down to roughly 1,000 feet.
Between December 2021 and November 2023, DWR collected nearly 16,000 miles of data in 95 groundwater basins. By March 2024, surveys had been completed in all high- and medium-priority basins. The data were released publicly and incorporated into maps and groundwater tools intended to help agencies avoid putting expensive recharge facilities over impermeable clay or contaminated areas.
DWR then moved into a broader Basin Characterization Program, combining electromagnetic data, well logs, groundwater models and monitoring information. In August 2025 it released a subsurface viewer that allows agencies to examine aquifer structure in map and profile form.
8. It adopted policies to protect recharge land from development and contamination
The final California Water Plan Update 2023 and its September 2024 recharge-area strategy addressed a less visible problem: recharge cannot occur effectively if prime infiltration land is paved, built upon or contaminated.
The state’s recommended actions include:
These are planning guidance and local implementation tools—not a prohibition on developing all recharge land.
9. It used SGMA enforcement to restrain withdrawals and require basin recovery
Reducing pumping is not technically “recharge,” but it is indispensable to rebuilding groundwater reserves. Pouring water into an aquifer while withdrawals remain greater than inflows does not replenish the reserve.
During 2023–25, DWR completed its initial review of sustainability plans for California’s high- and medium-priority basins. Plans found inadequate were referred to the State Water Board. By 2026, 81 basins were operating under approved plans, while several inadequate basins remained under state-intervention procedures.
The Water Board designated the critically overdrafted Tulare Lake Subbasin probationary in April 2024 and the Tule Subbasin probationary in September 2024. Probation can require pumpers to meter or report extraction and pay state fees while local agencies correct deficient plans; the state may eventually impose an interim plan. Litigation temporarily constrained portions of the Tulare Lake process, but the probationary designation remained in place and implementation resumed after a December 2025 appellate decision.
10. It paid farmers to leave groundwater in the aquifer—and use the land for recharge
DWR launched the LandFlex Pilot Program in 2022, awarding $23.3 million to six Central Valley groundwater sustainability agencies. Payments went to participating farms that reduced pumping, protected nearby drinking-water wells and adopted more sustainable land practices.
DWR reports that the program:
The 100,000-acre-foot figure represents water not pumped, rather than 100,000 acre-feet newly injected into the aquifer.
11. California further simplified the process in 2025 / Executive Order N-16-25
In January 2025, the governor temporarily suspended one of section 1242.1’s procedural prerequisites in 39 drought-emergency counties: a local agency no longer had to have already adopted a specified flood-control plan or addressed flood risk in its general plan before activating the statute.
The order also directed DWR to maximize diversions of excess winter flows to storage and ordered DWR, the Water Board, Natural Resources Agency and CalEPA to identify and remove regulatory obstacles where possible. Local public notice of imminent flooding and the statute’s remaining protections continued to apply.
During 2025, the State Water Board shortened typical processing for qualifying five-year recharge permits from as much as a year to approximately four months and maintained a reduced-fee pathway. These permits let agencies operate through five successive wet seasons instead of repeatedly seeking 180-day approvals.
12. It began integrating reservoir forecasting with aquifer recharge
DWR completed Flood-MAR watershed studies for five San Joaquin tributaries—the Calaveras, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced and Upper San Joaquin systems.
The studies examined FIRO-MAR, combining forecast-informed reservoir operations with managed aquifer recharge. The idea is to use improved storm forecasting to:
This remains primarily an operational-planning and investment framework, not a blanket change in reservoir rules.
13. Proposition 4 created the next major funding pool
California voters approved Proposition 4 in November 2024. It authorizes approximately $386.25 million for groundwater storage, groundwater banking, recharge and related conjunctive-use or instream-flow projects. DWR’s preliminary program design contemplates approximately:
As of August 4, 2026, most of this was not yet in constructed projects. DWR had begun workshops and guideline development; the immediate legislative direction included $3.5 million for small GSAs and $6.5 million for technical assistance, while the larger competitive solicitation was still being prepared.
14. It expanded monitoring, reporting and public groundwater data
California now publishes semiannual groundwater-condition updates and near-real-time information through California Groundwater Live. In March 2026, DWR released Bulletin 118–Update 2025, consolidating groundwater levels, storage, recharge, pumping, land subsidence, wells and local project information for 2020–24.
DWR reported that:
These totals reflect local recharge conducted under the broader state-local SGMA system; they should not be interpreted as 7.4 million acre-feet generated solely by new state programs.
Measured results—and an important accounting warning
Water Year 2023 was the standout. DWR reported:
These figures measure different things and cannot be added together. “Permitted” water is authorization; “managed recharge” is water deliberately placed underground; and “net storage increase” includes natural recharge minus pumping and groundwater discharge.
For the 2025–26 wet season, the State Water Board issued nine additional recharge permits—seven five-year and two 180-day permits—authorizing nearly 43,000 acre-feet of underground storage. Two earlier five-year permits remained active.
Overall assessment
California’s most consequential steps have been:
The state has therefore moved well beyond studies and aspirations. But the effort remains highly dependent on wet-year water availability, local conveyance capacity, suitable land, water rights, water quality and basin-level pumping reductions. The extraordinary 2023 recharge gains demonstrate what is possible; they do not establish that California’s chronically overdrafted basins have been fully replenished.
DWR spent approximately $12 million in Proposition 68 funding on statewide airborne electromagnetic surveys. Helicopter-mounted equipment measured subsurface electrical properties to reveal sands, gravels, clay layers and potential recharge pathways down to roughly 1,000 feet.
Between December 2021 and November 2023, DWR collected nearly 16,000 miles of data in 95 groundwater basins. By March 2024, surveys had been completed in all high- and medium-priority basins. The data were released publicly and incorporated into maps and groundwater tools intended to help agencies avoid putting expensive recharge facilities over impermeable clay or contaminated areas.
DWR then moved into a broader Basin Characterization Program, combining electromagnetic data, well logs, groundwater models and monitoring information. In August 2025 it released a subsurface viewer that allows agencies to examine aquifer structure in map and profile form.
8. It adopted policies to protect recharge land from development and contamination
The final California Water Plan Update 2023 and its September 2024 recharge-area strategy addressed a less visible problem: recharge cannot occur effectively if prime infiltration land is paved, built upon or contaminated.
The state’s recommended actions include:
- Mapping existing and potential recharge areas.
- Providing those maps to land-use agencies.
- Incorporating recharge protection into city and county general plans.
- Using zoning and ordinances to preserve suitable land.
- Preventing pesticides, animal waste, septic leakage and hazardous substances from contaminating infiltration areas.
- Using agricultural land repurposing to maintain recharge capacity.
- Integrating stormwater, floodplain, watershed and groundwater planning.
These are planning guidance and local implementation tools—not a prohibition on developing all recharge land.
9. It used SGMA enforcement to restrain withdrawals and require basin recovery
Reducing pumping is not technically “recharge,” but it is indispensable to rebuilding groundwater reserves. Pouring water into an aquifer while withdrawals remain greater than inflows does not replenish the reserve.
During 2023–25, DWR completed its initial review of sustainability plans for California’s high- and medium-priority basins. Plans found inadequate were referred to the State Water Board. By 2026, 81 basins were operating under approved plans, while several inadequate basins remained under state-intervention procedures.
The Water Board designated the critically overdrafted Tulare Lake Subbasin probationary in April 2024 and the Tule Subbasin probationary in September 2024. Probation can require pumpers to meter or report extraction and pay state fees while local agencies correct deficient plans; the state may eventually impose an interim plan. Litigation temporarily constrained portions of the Tulare Lake process, but the probationary designation remained in place and implementation resumed after a December 2025 appellate decision.
10. It paid farmers to leave groundwater in the aquifer—and use the land for recharge
DWR launched the LandFlex Pilot Program in 2022, awarding $23.3 million to six Central Valley groundwater sustainability agencies. Payments went to participating farms that reduced pumping, protected nearby drinking-water wells and adopted more sustainable land practices.
DWR reports that the program:
- Enrolled 4,474 acres on 52 farms.
- Preserved more than 100,000 acre-feet of groundwater.
- Protected approximately 16,500 drinking-water wells.
- Redirected excess 2023 floodwater onto some fallowed land for recharge.
- Reduced pumping near the California Aqueduct to limit subsidence.
The 100,000-acre-foot figure represents water not pumped, rather than 100,000 acre-feet newly injected into the aquifer.
11. California further simplified the process in 2025 / Executive Order N-16-25
In January 2025, the governor temporarily suspended one of section 1242.1’s procedural prerequisites in 39 drought-emergency counties: a local agency no longer had to have already adopted a specified flood-control plan or addressed flood risk in its general plan before activating the statute.
The order also directed DWR to maximize diversions of excess winter flows to storage and ordered DWR, the Water Board, Natural Resources Agency and CalEPA to identify and remove regulatory obstacles where possible. Local public notice of imminent flooding and the statute’s remaining protections continued to apply.
During 2025, the State Water Board shortened typical processing for qualifying five-year recharge permits from as much as a year to approximately four months and maintained a reduced-fee pathway. These permits let agencies operate through five successive wet seasons instead of repeatedly seeking 180-day approvals.
12. It began integrating reservoir forecasting with aquifer recharge
DWR completed Flood-MAR watershed studies for five San Joaquin tributaries—the Calaveras, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced and Upper San Joaquin systems.
The studies examined FIRO-MAR, combining forecast-informed reservoir operations with managed aquifer recharge. The idea is to use improved storm forecasting to:
- Release reservoir water strategically when appropriate.
- Create room for incoming floodwater.
- Time releases so downstream districts can convey water to fields and basins.
- recharge groundwater without compromising flood control, ecosystems or other water uses.
This remains primarily an operational-planning and investment framework, not a blanket change in reservoir rules.
13. Proposition 4 created the next major funding pool
California voters approved Proposition 4 in November 2024. It authorizes approximately $386.25 million for groundwater storage, groundwater banking, recharge and related conjunctive-use or instream-flow projects. DWR’s preliminary program design contemplates approximately:
- $320 million for SGMA implementation grants.
- $20 million for renewed FDRE assistance.
- $20 million for underrepresented-community technical assistance.
- Additional allocations for conveyance and related programs.
As of August 4, 2026, most of this was not yet in constructed projects. DWR had begun workshops and guideline development; the immediate legislative direction included $3.5 million for small GSAs and $6.5 million for technical assistance, while the larger competitive solicitation was still being prepared.
14. It expanded monitoring, reporting and public groundwater data
California now publishes semiannual groundwater-condition updates and near-real-time information through California Groundwater Live. In March 2026, DWR released Bulletin 118–Update 2025, consolidating groundwater levels, storage, recharge, pumping, land subsidence, wells and local project information for 2020–24.
DWR reported that:
- It had allocated more than $500 million in groundwater planning and implementation grants.
- Local agencies had assembled more than 1,500 projects and management actions.
- Reported managed recharge totaled approximately 7.4 million acre-feet during water years 2022–24, averaging about 2.5 million acre-feet annually.
These totals reflect local recharge conducted under the broader state-local SGMA system; they should not be interpreted as 7.4 million acre-feet generated solely by new state programs.
Measured results—and an important accounting warning
Water Year 2023 was the standout. DWR reported:
- 4.1 million acre-feet of managed recharge.
- An 8.7-million-acre-foot increase in groundwater storage.
- More than 1.2 million acre-feet authorized through state permits.
- More than 400,000 acre-feet recharged using the governor’s emergency orders.
These figures measure different things and cannot be added together. “Permitted” water is authorization; “managed recharge” is water deliberately placed underground; and “net storage increase” includes natural recharge minus pumping and groundwater discharge.
For the 2025–26 wet season, the State Water Board issued nine additional recharge permits—seven five-year and two 180-day permits—authorizing nearly 43,000 acre-feet of underground storage. Two earlier five-year permits remained active.
Overall assessment
California’s most consequential steps have been:
- Making floodwater recharge legally and administratively easier, first through executive orders and then Water Code section 1242.1.
- Creating a five-year permit regime so projects are ready before storms arrive.
- Putting hundreds of millions of dollars into local recharge, conveyance, recycled-water and aquifer-storage projects.
- Providing pumps, screens and land preparation, not merely planning grants.
- Mapping the subsurface so recharge facilities can be placed where water will actually infiltrate.
- Constraining groundwater withdrawals through SGMA and LandFlex.
- Establishing a new Proposition 4 funding pipeline for the next generation of projects.
The state has therefore moved well beyond studies and aspirations. But the effort remains highly dependent on wet-year water availability, local conveyance capacity, suitable land, water rights, water quality and basin-level pumping reductions. The extraordinary 2023 recharge gains demonstrate what is possible; they do not establish that California’s chronically overdrafted basins have been fully replenished.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
08-08-2026, 09:55 AM
NOAA says an 81% chance of a very strong El Nino in the Oct - Dec 2026 time frame with a 97% chance that it will last through the early spring.
El Niño forecast: States expect above average snow and rain this winter
The likely result:
![[Image: AA29F6MU.img?w=1012&h=569&m=6]](https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AA29F6MU.img?w=1012&h=569&m=6)
El Niño forecast: States expect above average snow and rain this winter
The likely result:
Audaces fortuna iuvat
NOAA says an 81% chance of a very strong El Nino in the Oct - Dec 2026 time frame with a 97% chance that it will last through the early spring.
El Niño forecast: States expect above average snow and rain this winter
The likely result:
El Niño forecast: States expect above average snow and rain this winter
The likely result:
Audaces fortuna iuvat
9 hours ago
“We’re expecting likely the highest sea levels ever recorded on the California coast associated with this event,” said Mark Merrifield, director of the UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s Center for Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation.
El Niño could bring highest sea levels ever recorded to the California coast
There was at least one occasion when my brother and a bunch of other high schoolers were taken out of high school to emplace sand bags. Curious to see how high the ocean levels get.
El Niño could bring highest sea levels ever recorded to the California coast
There was at least one occasion when my brother and a bunch of other high schoolers were taken out of high school to emplace sand bags. Curious to see how high the ocean levels get.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
“We’re expecting likely the highest sea levels ever recorded on the California coast associated with this event,” said Mark Merrifield, director of the UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s Center for Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation.
El Niño could bring highest sea levels ever recorded to the California coast
There was at least one occasion when my brother and a bunch of other high schoolers were taken out of high school to emplace sand bags. Curious to see how high the ocean levels get.
El Niño could bring highest sea levels ever recorded to the California coast
There was at least one occasion when my brother and a bunch of other high schoolers were taken out of high school to emplace sand bags. Curious to see how high the ocean levels get.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
6 hours ago
(9 hours ago)Mick Wrote: “We’re expecting likely the highest sea levels ever recorded on the California coast associated with this event,” said Mark Merrifield, director of the UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s Center for Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation.
El Niño could bring highest sea levels ever recorded to the California coast
There was at least one occasion when my brother and a bunch of other high schoolers were taken out of high school to emplace sand bags. Curious to see how high the ocean levels get.
https://www.sfgate.com/california/articl...379217.php
We're running out of sand. Not related to El Nino, but interesting.
(9 hours ago)Mick Wrote: “We’re expecting likely the highest sea levels ever recorded on the California coast associated with this event,” said Mark Merrifield, director of the UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s Center for Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation.
El Niño could bring highest sea levels ever recorded to the California coast
There was at least one occasion when my brother and a bunch of other high schoolers were taken out of high school to emplace sand bags. Curious to see how high the ocean levels get.
https://www.sfgate.com/california/articl...379217.php
We're running out of sand. Not related to El Nino, but interesting.
2 hours ago
(6 hours ago)rogpodge Wrote:(9 hours ago)Mick Wrote: “We’re expecting likely the highest sea levels ever recorded on the California coast associated with this event,” said Mark Merrifield, director of the UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s Center for Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation.https://www.sfgate.com/california/articl...379217.php
El Niño could bring highest sea levels ever recorded to the California coast
There was at least one occasion when my brother and a bunch of other high schoolers were taken out of high school to emplace sand bags. Curious to see how high the ocean levels get.
We're running out of sand. Not related to El Nino, but interesting.
I didn't realize there were hurricanes in the Pacific. My brother lives in Carlsbad, I wonder if he's noted the sand loss?
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(6 hours ago)rogpodge Wrote:(9 hours ago)Mick Wrote: “We’re expecting likely the highest sea levels ever recorded on the California coast associated with this event,” said Mark Merrifield, director of the UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s Center for Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation.https://www.sfgate.com/california/articl...379217.php
El Niño could bring highest sea levels ever recorded to the California coast
There was at least one occasion when my brother and a bunch of other high schoolers were taken out of high school to emplace sand bags. Curious to see how high the ocean levels get.
We're running out of sand. Not related to El Nino, but interesting.
I didn't realize there were hurricanes in the Pacific. My brother lives in Carlsbad, I wonder if he's noted the sand loss?
Audaces fortuna iuvat
1 hour ago
[/quote]
I didn't realize there were hurricanes in the Pacific. My brother lives in Carlsbad, I wonder if he's noted the sand loss?
[/quote]
I think the article meant the remnants of a hurricane. If the hurricane drifts north enough, it will weaken and get caught up in the jet stream and end up in SoCal / Las Vegas / Arizona. It explains some of the (rare) monsoon storms in the summer. By the time it hits the continental US, it is usually just a wind storm that generates surfers waves, and in this case washes away a beach. If the storm stays south enough, it will occasionally reach Hawaii, and if the waters stay warm, causes hurricanes to hit Hawaii.
www.nhc.noaa.gov has good trackers. Also, this year's Atlantic hurricane season has been unusually quiet.
I didn't realize there were hurricanes in the Pacific. My brother lives in Carlsbad, I wonder if he's noted the sand loss?
[/quote]
I think the article meant the remnants of a hurricane. If the hurricane drifts north enough, it will weaken and get caught up in the jet stream and end up in SoCal / Las Vegas / Arizona. It explains some of the (rare) monsoon storms in the summer. By the time it hits the continental US, it is usually just a wind storm that generates surfers waves, and in this case washes away a beach. If the storm stays south enough, it will occasionally reach Hawaii, and if the waters stay warm, causes hurricanes to hit Hawaii.
www.nhc.noaa.gov has good trackers. Also, this year's Atlantic hurricane season has been unusually quiet.
[/quote]
I didn't realize there were hurricanes in the Pacific. My brother lives in Carlsbad, I wonder if he's noted the sand loss?
[/quote]
I think the article meant the remnants of a hurricane. If the hurricane drifts north enough, it will weaken and get caught up in the jet stream and end up in SoCal / Las Vegas / Arizona. It explains some of the (rare) monsoon storms in the summer. By the time it hits the continental US, it is usually just a wind storm that generates surfers waves, and in this case washes away a beach. If the storm stays south enough, it will occasionally reach Hawaii, and if the waters stay warm, causes hurricanes to hit Hawaii.
www.nhc.noaa.gov has good trackers. Also, this year's Atlantic hurricane season has been unusually quiet.
I didn't realize there were hurricanes in the Pacific. My brother lives in Carlsbad, I wonder if he's noted the sand loss?
[/quote]
I think the article meant the remnants of a hurricane. If the hurricane drifts north enough, it will weaken and get caught up in the jet stream and end up in SoCal / Las Vegas / Arizona. It explains some of the (rare) monsoon storms in the summer. By the time it hits the continental US, it is usually just a wind storm that generates surfers waves, and in this case washes away a beach. If the storm stays south enough, it will occasionally reach Hawaii, and if the waters stay warm, causes hurricanes to hit Hawaii.
www.nhc.noaa.gov has good trackers. Also, this year's Atlantic hurricane season has been unusually quiet.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »