My CoCoRaHS site data for this water year is so bizarre. 19.52 inches in Durango, 11% of normal. Of that, 5.67 inches were in October 2025 and 5.72 were in September 2026. That's 58% of the water year's total that fell as rain at the end of the growing season.
I know! It's really weird. If you look at streamflows and snowpack, it was the driest or second driest year on record. If you look at total precipitation, though, it was pretty average.
Great graphs Jonathan! I’m certainly not an expert on graphs but before retiring as a professor of statistics I and my colleague, Hilda Rodriguez, published with SAGE, Building SPSS Graphs to Understand Data. That was way back in 2012.
Your creative “stacked” graphs go a long way in reaching the goal of our publication, that is, to UNDERSTAND data. Our society is swamped with data, and I have always been convinced that a visualization of that mass of numbers contributes mightily to understand all those numerical values.
I humbly award you an A++ for your excellent graphs in an effort to understand the numbers.
Just one little criticism: perhaps you might footnote each graph acknowledging its author/creator (you) as I am sure you deserve credit when others reproduce and publish your work.
There is much discussion about international exports. It is also important to consider the "virtual water" exports when alfalfa et.al is sent outside of the watershed in which it is grown.
For instance, Utah alfalfa grown in the Great Salt Lake watershed then sent to Idaho (Snake River drainage) or the Central Valley of California, then the GSL is diminished. Same for Upper state feed grown in the Colorado River drainage and then sent outside of it.
Nice job of "mastication!" Good summary of the good reasons that alfalfa is grown instead of something else.
But IMHO, one part of our water use adaptation to aridification, caused by combustion products triple glazing the planetary greenhouse, is some amount of fallowing. The farm lobby acts like this is the end of frigging civilization or rural economies or whatever, but not really.
I like planting panels and harvesting electrons on some of that land. One part.
We really don't need massive dairies. Dairies are going out of bizness in Wisconsin. I already get my cheese from the Midwest or New England. I get my low-methane cow burp ice cream from NorCal.
While I'd rather have an alfalfa field in the valley bottom than another shopping mall, I don't think that has to be the only choice. But there is a limit to irrigation efficiency.
The farm lobby, small, large or whatever, is good at spewing sob stories or apocalypse narratives. Recently "the media" picked up on the horrors of the decrease in the cattle population by 15% in 30 years or some period. What virtually none of them noted was that cow/steer weight had gone up by 20%+ in that same period.
This is important information and you let it out so clearly. Plus: I love the humor in your language.
My CoCoRaHS site data for this water year is so bizarre. 19.52 inches in Durango, 11% of normal. Of that, 5.67 inches were in October 2025 and 5.72 were in September 2026. That's 58% of the water year's total that fell as rain at the end of the growing season.
I know! It's really weird. If you look at streamflows and snowpack, it was the driest or second driest year on record. If you look at total precipitation, though, it was pretty average.
god damn this is useful. thanks
Great graphs Jonathan! I’m certainly not an expert on graphs but before retiring as a professor of statistics I and my colleague, Hilda Rodriguez, published with SAGE, Building SPSS Graphs to Understand Data. That was way back in 2012.
Your creative “stacked” graphs go a long way in reaching the goal of our publication, that is, to UNDERSTAND data. Our society is swamped with data, and I have always been convinced that a visualization of that mass of numbers contributes mightily to understand all those numerical values.
I humbly award you an A++ for your excellent graphs in an effort to understand the numbers.
Just one little criticism: perhaps you might footnote each graph acknowledging its author/creator (you) as I am sure you deserve credit when others reproduce and publish your work.
There is much discussion about international exports. It is also important to consider the "virtual water" exports when alfalfa et.al is sent outside of the watershed in which it is grown.
For instance, Utah alfalfa grown in the Great Salt Lake watershed then sent to Idaho (Snake River drainage) or the Central Valley of California, then the GSL is diminished. Same for Upper state feed grown in the Colorado River drainage and then sent outside of it.
Great point, Craig! Thanks!
Nice job of "mastication!" Good summary of the good reasons that alfalfa is grown instead of something else.
But IMHO, one part of our water use adaptation to aridification, caused by combustion products triple glazing the planetary greenhouse, is some amount of fallowing. The farm lobby acts like this is the end of frigging civilization or rural economies or whatever, but not really.
I like planting panels and harvesting electrons on some of that land. One part.
We really don't need massive dairies. Dairies are going out of bizness in Wisconsin. I already get my cheese from the Midwest or New England. I get my low-methane cow burp ice cream from NorCal.
While I'd rather have an alfalfa field in the valley bottom than another shopping mall, I don't think that has to be the only choice. But there is a limit to irrigation efficiency.
The farm lobby, small, large or whatever, is good at spewing sob stories or apocalypse narratives. Recently "the media" picked up on the horrors of the decrease in the cattle population by 15% in 30 years or some period. What virtually none of them noted was that cow/steer weight had gone up by 20%+ in that same period.
Well here in Az we're still fighting about this. Of course we are, it's an election year.......https://tucson.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/article_27c324a4-617d-11ee-9187-73629a22bb0f.html