[Maple Leaf]

Unfortunately, a good amount of high elevation precipitation has been rain, not snow.  Additionally with the increase in temperatures what snow there is come spring, melts off much faster than what was the norm 20 years ago, based upon what I have encountered cross country skiing.

Does that really matter?  As long as the reservoirs have room, can't they take the runoff in March rather than May?  If the reservoirs are essentially at 100% of capacity some time in the spring, isn't California in good shape?

Rate of snow melt does matter.  A fast snow melt will send more water down into the natural drainage courses of the landscape, hence you have more flooding, and erosion both of which increases the amount of sediment in the streams, reservoirs, and estuaries.  A fast snow melt will also reduce the amount of water that makes its way into the underground aquifers.  A slow snow melt is what Mother Nature designed for.

---

I was struck by this graphic at MercuryNews.com (Calif. Feb 1 snowpack level, 1950-now)
https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/16621706/embed

My eye wants to detect two patterns.  One is a rough cycle of very low years.  1963, 1976-77, 1991, <skip>, 2014  about every 13-14 years (so not in sync with solar cycle).
The other is that heaviest rain years seem mostly surrounded by drier years, but that could just be statistically expected.
I expect if these patterns were in the data, someone would have pointed them out and named them.

---

The 30-day and 90-day predictions for California precipitation still look as they did a month ago. (30-day was issued January 18)

Ouch. At the 90-day link above, you can see long range predictions for each 3-month period (example: March-April-May, April-May-June, etc) for the next year.  It's going to be a hot one for California, and worse for much of the rest of the country.  Next "near average" 3-month period for California begins in November.

[Maple Leaf]

Unfortunately, a good amount of high elevation precipitation has been rain, not snow.  Additionally with the increase in temperatures what snow there is come spring, melts off much faster than what was the norm 20 years ago, based upon what I have encountered cross country skiing.

Does that really matter?  As long as the reservoirs have room, can't they take the runoff in March rather than May?  If the reservoirs are essentially at 100% of capacity some time in the spring, isn't California in good shape?

Rate of snow melt does matter.  A fast snow melt will send more water down into the natural drainage courses of the landscape, hence you have more flooding, and erosion both of which increases the amount of sediment in the streams, reservoirs, and estuaries.  A fast snow melt will also reduce the amount of water that makes its way into the underground aquifers.  A slow snow melt is what Mother Nature designed for.

---

I was struck by this graphic at MercuryNews.com (Calif. Feb 1 snowpack level, 1950-now)
https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/16621706/embed

My eye wants to detect two patterns.  One is a rough cycle of very low years.  1963, 1976-77, 1991, <skip>, 2014  about every 13-14 years (so not in sync with solar cycle).
The other is that heaviest rain years seem mostly surrounded by drier years, but that could just be statistically expected.
I expect if these patterns were in the data, someone would have pointed them out and named them.

---

The 30-day and 90-day predictions for California precipitation still look as they did a month ago. (30-day was issued January 18)

Ouch. At the 90-day link above, you can see long range predictions for each 3-month period (example: March-April-May, April-May-June, etc) for the next year.  It's going to be a hot one for California, and worse for much of the rest of the country.  Next "near average" 3-month period for California begins in November.