(whimsical music) - Wyoming's water supply is shaped by rainfall, snowfall, runoff, and infiltration.

And in many areas, concerns are growing about the adequacy of the available ground and surface water supply.

Who makes the forecast and predictions about water in Wyoming?

And what might the future hold?

Wyoming water with Hydrologist, Jim Fahey, next on "Wyoming Chronicle".

(energetic fanfare music) - [Voiceover] Funding for this program is made possible, in part, by the Wyoming Humanities Council, helping Wyoming take a closer look at life through the humanities, thinkwy.org, and by the members of the Wyoming PBS Foundation.

Thank you for your support.

- And as we begin our discussion on "Wyoming Chronicle", all things water in Wyoming, it's my pleasure to be joined by Jim Fahey, Jim is a hydrologist with the National Resources Conservation Service, Jim, welcome to "Wyoming Chronicle".

- Thank you, Craig.

- Jim, it's good it's good to see you again.

We've known each other for quite a while.

and you produce, Jim, the Wyoming Basin and Water Supply Outlook report.

Something that's been produced since, we learned, 1954.

- Yeah, in 1954 I went back, down in the basement, and found- the earliest one was February in 1954, yeah.

- [Craig] So Jim, tell me, who are the consumers of the report that you produce?

Why is that report produced?

We're gonna talk about a lot of things that are in that report, the trends of that report, how it's produced, but who are the consumers of that?

- Main consumers are any water managers across the state, state engineers, any irrigation-ditch canal managers, private reservoirs.

For instance, Viva Naughton out in the Western part of the state, owned by Pacific Corp, uses our forecast religiously.

The Bureau of Reclamation will also use our forecast.

However, the Bureau of Reclamation also runs their own model for water supply, so we do collaborate with them as well.

- So tell us how you forecast, what tools do you use, what is at your disposal to make the forecast?

And then we'll get into, what is the forecast telling us?

- Okay, well basically, the way I forecast is I first- I need to look at the current conditions, and I'm looking at the snow-water equivalent, I'm looking at the precip trends, looking at the temperature trends, antecedent conditions, like soil moisture, to get a feel of what the conditions, physical conditions, all over the basins, before we even look at the model.

- How are you looking at those things?

How's that done?

- It's done- well, it's mainly looking at, you know, the National Water Climate Center has a great website where it displays all the stations, snow-water equivalent.

As well as precip data and temperature data, and then other stuff on the web from different agencies, like the Weather Service, the Climate Prediction Center.

Also, I look at that for trends, and also what's going to happen in the near future, as far as temperatures and precipitation.

And then I collaborate with the National Water Climate Center, those are the ones that run the model out of Portland, Oregon.

And basically it's a statistical model where they're mainly looking at amount of snowpack, versus statistically, the amount of snowpack over the past 30 to 40 years.

And they run the model, and come up with a flow, for- I think we have 20...don't quote me on this, 25 of these forecast points across the state.

And they forecast the amount of flow at those forecast points for the sea- for like the spring and summer season.

And then when I look at those numbers, we collaborate further, that if the numbers, I don't- we, you know, I don't like the numbers, or I do it too high, too low, whatever.

And then we finally come up with a forecast, and then I put that in the report that the users see every month.

- We're showing our viewers the link to your website.

How often do you publish the report?

- Once a month from January through June.

- [Craig] Historically, Jim, how accurate has it been?

What have you learned?

- [Jim] I think the far as like a grade, I think we're doing a fair job with the forecasting.

Again, there's a lot of limitations to the modeling that we can improve, but especially Wyoming, the parameters, especially spring, the model has problems.

Because of the statistical model, it doesn't account for the spring precip that we may or may not get.

And it doesn't account for rapid warmups that we may get, sometimes in the spring and early summer.

So that's a severe limitation to the modeling, so... - Tell me, way back in 1954 to today, I've gotta believe, though, things have really changed.

Things are really different now, and things have improved, though.

- Yeah, in 1954, they were mainly relying on manual snow-course stations, and it did not have precipitation.

And then in the forecast was just- so what the snow, the water in the snow pack, was somebody manually inputted, or measured, and then they relay that to the forecasters.

Whereas now, you have more of a- they didn't really didn't have a model.

And now, we have- we use 30-year norms.

And probably- I don't know if you've heard that term, we just changed over to 1990 to 2020, where we can look at, you know, the history of the snow-water equivalents, and the precipitation averages, where they didn't have that capability back in 1954.

And they weren't really using, per-se, a model, because they didn't have a lot of data to ingest into the model.

So it has changed, right?

- Let's talk about trends.

Tell me about Wyoming's water trends, and how are they now compared, to say, other regional states states around us?

How are things looking in your eyes?

- Craig, you know, we- as we're a headwater state in Wyoming, a lot of it mirrors where like, you know, for instance, to Colorado.

I'm concerned about the Green River Basin, because of lack of runoff, the last, basically, the last 15, 20 years.

Or low runoff, and that kind of mirrors the overall Colorado basin, low-water regime.

Also, the Upper North Platte is kind of concerning, in the last 5 to 10 years, with lower than average runoffs.

The other parts of the state, they are lower, historically, but not too concerning, especially The Snake, not too concerned with The Snake.

However, this year they did have one of the lowest runoff numbers, historically, this past spring and summer.

- So statistically, you can measure this?

Subjectively, do you put a reason to this?

I mean, I guess I'm asking about climate change.

Is this something that you decide is a cause of this?

Or are there other things that are involved with this?

What are the causes of these changes?

- Well, first of all, we can talk climate change, the way it's affecting the snowpack is- it's not just anecdotally, you can see it in the science.

And also we- you know, there's the sites that we have out there, show temperature data, too.

And you can see the warming of the temperature data, especially the last 15, 20 years.

So, well, I mean, the snowpack has risen.

The main snowpack has risen up to 800, 1,000 feet, so that's- with that, you get less amount that can melt that used to melt before, so you get less runoff.

Kind of a simplistic view, but it makes sense.

- So I want to read you something that you said in 2014.

In my eyes, it isn't so long ago, and I wonder about trends.

I mean, Jim you said this in the news report, you said, Hydrologist Jim Fahey says, "Statewide precipitation levels last month were above 130% of average.

Participation levels last month ranged from 203% of average near the upper Yellowstone Watershed, to 80% near the Cheyenne and Bear Basins."

And that wasn't so long ago, and now trends are alarming.

I guess what I'm wondering is, is that in the news, we've all heard in the last year or so, the trends are alarming.

Yet, things seem to be trending.

And what should we take from the somewhat recent past?

- Well, you quoted precipitation, Craig, and precipitation is a very variable parameter in forecasting runoff.

And it's all about timing, especially in Wyoming.

I don't know, let me not get off topic too much, but far as precipitation, it's the timing is, and I tell this to all the reporters, and anybody I talk to, it's all about the spring precipitation in Wyoming.

That, if we don't get it, we're in trouble, or if we're- time for drought, time for fires, or what have you.

As far as the trends... And we've had a big long drought, the 2000's, that was unprecedented, even for Wyoming.

I mean, we went from 2000 to 2009.

And then we picked up- we picked up some- we had a big water year in 2000, somewhat 2010.

2011 was a very great water year, 2014 wasn't bad.

2016 and '17, for most of the state, was good.

But in-between, we've had some bad years.

I mean, but overall, that last 20 years, because we've had that 10-year, or 9-year cycle, that we didn't- even for Wyoming was dry.

The length of that drought was unprecedented.

- When you look back at that history, were those droughts predicted?

In other words, did we anticipate those to the extent that we can anticipate drought today?

Or is it just something that we have to experience?

And in your confidence factor for the next one year, two years, three years, where are you with Wyoming and drought?

I guess is the question.

- Well, that's a good question, Craig.

I mean, confidence in springtime runoff work, I guess, it can be low at times.

But far as trends, I mean, you know, you look at, for instance, you probably heard the news, the La Nina cycle.

- Sure.

- This might be explained a little bit, or... Is we got it a little- we had a La Nina last year, 2020, 2021. just looked at the wire on the CPC on the internet, and they predict an 87% chance of a La Nina through February, December through March, or whatever it is this coming winter.

And then when you look back at the La Nina years, and the El Nino years, La Nina years, it's...for Wyoming, usually means the Northern part of the state will get wetter and be colder, and this is La Nina.

And the Southern part of the state will we look drier and warmer.

But there's also been a lot of- there's always been a lot of- there's a lot of case, a lot of variability, whereas some years, La Nina, like '16 to '17, was a strong La Nina, and we had a really good water year.

And also, it's unprecedented to have two La Nina years in a row, to produce the same effects, far as we're talking drought.

So it's- I mean, it's very variable.

I don't know if that answers your question or not.

I might be going around and around a bit with it, but... - "Variable" is a good word, I mean, the bottom line is, even today, with all of the technology and all the modeling, it's just really hard to predict.

- It's hard to predict, we're getting better.

But I think, like I said, in the beginning of interview, the inclusion of data up high, the remote sensing, more of ground-truth SNOTELs, which isn't easy to do above the Alpine level, but 11-12-13,000 may help the situation.

And, you know, how is the climate change again?

How has that wildcard affecting our modeling and our prediction capability?

That's yet to be seen.

- Take us behind the scenes, and give us a little more insight in how is snowpack measured today?

Is it more automated than it used to be, is it still a manual process?

Same thing with reservoir capacity, same thing with stream flows and soil moisture.

Or is that more of an automated, skada-like process today?

Or is it still really a manual types?

- No, it's...kinda gets more automated.

We do, still do have... We have, shoot, about 30 manual snow-course across the state, and those are done by various- some are done by NRCS employees, some are done by the state engineer employees.

And those are done, you know, three or four times a year during the winter and early spring.

And then those are incorporated a little bit into the modeling, but again, not as much as they used to be, because of their low elevation.

They're still looked at, but they're not a primary input into the model.

Primary input of the model is the SNOTEL automated network.

And now that we're into 2022, and some of these sites have been in since '78, '79, we've got a pretty good base of data there.

Far as you mentioned, reservoir data, again, most of the data is automated through the US Bureau of Reclamation.

We do get some of the private reservoirs.

We do get a monthly... Like Viva Naughton at Pacific Corp, in Kemmerer, they provide us their storage and their percent of capacity, in like, kind of a spreadsheet once a month.

The bureau kind of just goes up, since it's automated, it just automates into the system.

So we really don't see... Talk to them, you know, in-person much.

Soil moisture, that's a good one.

We wish we had more soil moisture sensors, but we have those attached to some of our SNOTELs, and they are... We put them up like 2, 8, 12, 20 inches in-depth, and they measure the percent of water capacity.

So those are very valuable too, but again, spatially, they're very few, and very, you know, across the state.

Streamflow is, of course, is a big one, because we have to know if our forecasting is verifying.

We rely mostly on the USGS, of course, for streamflow data, as well as the state engineers, and some of the Bureau of Reclamation, that streamflow of data that we use.

So that's practically all automated.

- Jim, Wyoming has a cloud seeding program.

A, do you find it beneficial?

B, do you consider that in any of your forecasting, relative to, you know, its potential in increasing Wyoming water supplies?

- It doesn't- it's only a factor if the... We see the increase in the SNOTELs, or the snow coarseness, on those basins, that are doing weather modification.

So that's really the extent of that, Craig.

- I guess I'll follow up a little bit.

Have you learned whether those technologies are helpful?

- Well, I'd say, you know, talking to different folks, some say it's...they don't see it, any positive effects.

- SNOTEL doesn't give you any relevant, conclusive data about that?

- Yeah, that's- you know, I mean, I know the areas that they do the weather modification, I can't say that I've really researched whether it's increased or decreased the amount of snowpack or snow-water equivalent, so I'll have to- yeah.

- Interesting.

- It would be interesting to see, yeah.

- You know, there's lots of technology out there.

Jim, does your office have all the technology that it needs?

Does it- is there some technology, newer technology, new study tools, what have you, that are out there, is there some things that you wish you had?

Maybe that are on your Christmas wish-list, that would help you do your job a little more efficiently?

- I think if we had maybe more than one model to look at, that would be nice.

You know, like the weather folks have...

Sometimes they have three models that they'll look at.

I mean, European Model, and the GFS Model, and Canadian Model, whatever, what have you, I think it would be nice.

You know, the statistical model we use now is getting to be a little bit inadequate, in my opinion.

Again, we need to have more of a physical-based model that incorporates soil moisture, or what we call antecedent conditions in hydrology.

Temperature trends, and precipitation trends, as we are getting better at climate predictions.

So, I mean, it would be nice to have that incorporated into the model, just to see what kind of flow we get with that kind of a modeling, versus just the statistic model, which we're just relying on what's on the ground, snowpack, what's the water equivalent in the snowpack?

And then when it melts, because we know it's this level, we think it's gonna be this flow, because history has told us that.

So that's- yeah, that'd be a better- another couple of models to look at.

- All of us this summer, Jim, we saw pictures of Lake Mead.

And we talked about this a little bit off-camera.

- Sure.

- What were you thinking, Jim, when you saw those pictures?

I know what I was thinking, but as a hydrologist, what's going through your mind when you look at Lake Mead?

You visited Lake Mead years and years ago, and so did I, and now it's a different place.

And we are a headwater state.

What runs through your mind?

- Well, you know, it mirrors what's happening, and especially the Green River Basin.

We talked the last 20 years, you know, Lake Mead's 20 years in the making, as far as the low-flows we're seeing now.

The last 20 years, the Colorado mirrors with the Green River, 'cause the Green River's a major tributary to the Colorado system.

We've only seen two or three, maybe four, decent spring runoffs in that period.

It just tells me that there's something that's causing us to- is it a climate change?

It could be deficiency of the snow melt.

The amount of snowpack is decreased.

That's what I see as a hydrologist.

And now we're seeing the results.

And I don't know anything about, you know, of course it's been- the water's been used, but I don't worry about how they use it, as a hydrologist water supply forecaster, we're just- we're pinpointing how much water is gonna come into the system, inflow-wise.

And that really hasn't- we haven't seen that.

- Let's get back to Wyoming, if I could, as we kind of wrap things up here.

How are- what are farmers and ranchers asking you today?

What's on their mind?

And let's go maybe around the state.

What areas are people more concerned, less concerned, I guess?

And you've talked about the Green River Basin, as maybe being- folks having the most concerns.

Are there areas that- where people are really concerned about their water future, Jim?

- Well, recently it's been the Bear River Basin, which is just a small sliver on Southwest corner of the state, Uinta County.

And also the Big Horn Basin has really seen a really bad part of the drought this last year, year-and-a-half, I've seen.

'Cause I'm one of the Wyoming Drought Team, and so I see the emails and the concerns from the ranchers and the farmers.

Another area is Northeast Wyoming.

They've really had a bad last couple of years.

The Green is low-flows, but there is not, because of the topography and the climate in the Green, we really don't see too much, as far as, you know, irrigation problems, because there's not a lot of areas, not a lot of irrigable, is that a word, land, to deal with.

But most of it's in the Big Horn, Northeast, yeah, the Northeast part of the state, and then the extreme Southwest part of the state.

- There any policy changes, in your eyes, that can be made that can help Wyoming's water situation?

- Well, that's a loaded question.

How do you mean?

- Anything that you've thought about, any policy topics on your mind that could be helpful to farmers or ranchers, or to others that are consumers of Wyoming's water, that might be a benefit to them down the road?

- Well, I think what I've learned from the NRCS conservationists, and the conservation guys, and the range management managers, is that they're trying to emphasize using more efficient irrigation.

You know, going from, instead of flooding fields, going into pivots and stuff like that.

I don't know about mandating or policy changes, that's kind of out of my realm.

But yeah, use the water a little bit more efficiently, you know, I mean, we use most of our- as you know, Wyoming, most of our surface waters is for agriculture, and most of our drinking water is groundwater.

- Jim, what are students today bringing to the table?

And maybe what is- how does their background maybe differ from yours?

What are they studying to better understand hydrology?

- Well, I think they're using it more, like for instance, GIS technology, that's really increased in the last few years.

And I've seen that from some of the younger generation coming up.

I mean, basic hydrology is basic hydrology.

It's the same, you're gonna learn the same techniques.

But with that, especially that GIS technology, it's, again, with remote sensing, that technology to look at the whole picture, and of the basins, especially with snowpack, I'm looking forward to seeing that happen in the next- in the near future.

- What universities, I guess, study this more than others?

Where is the hotbed of research, relative to hydrology?

Who stands out in your mind?

- Colorado University.

- What do they do?

- They're doing a lot of modeling, different modeling, like I talked about.

- You talked about that earlier.

- Yeah, they're doing different...

In fact, I think that the Climate Center, don't quote me on this, the Water Climate Center is tasking the Colorado University to help them out with their new modeling that's coming up in the next couple of years.

- You told me earlier, everybody asks you, so I'll ask you, what's going to happen this year?

This spring, Wyoming will... - This spring, I think the Northern part of the state's gonna have a normal, to above normal, runoff year.

And then, Central, normal.

Southern part of the state, still with the La Nina conditions, still having a problem with runoff.

- Southwest or Southeast?

- The whole south, Upper Platt, Green, Lower Green, Bear, will have a lower-than-average runoff.

I mean, general terms, 'cause really, it's still early in the game, but that's what we see right now.

And far as the- you know, and I'm looking at the Climate Prediction Center for the winter, it does kind of look like a La Nina with their forecasts, with the Northern part of the state having better chance for colder-than-average temps, and wetter-than-average precipitation.

- For those of us who experienced three feet of snow last spring in our driveway, it's hard to imagine that anybody in Wyoming is short of water, but... - That's right.

(chuckles) - Wyoming's a big state.

- Well, we had 14 inches, and I think we had that 17 inches, maybe somewhere in Casper.

But I had about 12 to 14 in my backyard about two days ago, so... - But it's early.

- It's early, it's really early.

- And so what you're saying, I mean, people in Wyoming really need to look at, really, what happens after what, March 1st, April 1st?

- It's all about the spring, Craig, all about the spring.

- Yep, well, Jim Fahey, thank you so much.

You've been a hydrologist in Wyoming for quite a while.

- Oh yeah, almost 20 years, yeah.

- Appreciate your time and expertise, and thank you so much for joining us on "Wyoming Chronicle".

- Happy to be here, thank you.

Thank you for having me.

(energetic fanfare music) - [Voiceover] Funding for this program is made possible, in part, by the Wyoming Humanities Council, helping Wyoming take a closer look at life through the humanities, thinkwy.org, and by the members of the Wyoming PBS Foundation.

Thank you for your support.