Click here to read the discussion. Here’s an excerpt:

ENSO Alert System Status: El Niño Watch

Synopsis: There is an approximately 50-60% chance of El Niño within the late Northern Hemisphere winter and early spring, with ENSO-neutral slightly favored thereafter.

Equatorial sea surface temperatures (SST) remained above average in the western and central Pacific during January 2015 and cooled across the eastern Pacific. Accordingly, the latest weekly Niño indices were +0.5°C in the Niño-3.4 region and +0.9°C in the Niño-4 region, and closer to zero in the Niño-3 and Niño-1+2 regions. Subsurface temperature anomalies across the eastern half of the equatorial Pacific also averaged near zero during the month. However, an extensive area of positive subsurface anomalies persisted near the Date Line, while negative anomalies were prevalent closer to the surface east of 110°W. During the last couple of weeks of January, several aspects of the tropical Pacific atmosphere showed some movement toward El Niño. However, for the month as a whole, the equatorial low-level winds were mostly near average across the Pacific, while upper-level easterly anomalies continued in the east-central Pacific. Also, convection remained below average near the Date Line and enhanced in the western equatorial Pacific. While the tropical Pacific Ocean is at the borderline of El Niño, the overall atmosphere-ocean system remains ENSO-neutral.

Similar to last month, most models predict a weak El Niño (3-month values of the Niño-3.4 index between 0.5°C and 0.9°C) during the Northern Hemisphere late winter and spring. The forecaster consensus also favors Niño-3.4 SST index values in excess of 0.5°C within the coming season. However, climatologically, ocean-atmosphere coupling tends to weaken into the spring, which increases uncertainty over whether El Niño conditions will emerge. In summary, there is an approximately 50-60% chance of El Niño within the late Northern Hemisphere winter and early spring, with ENSO-neutral slightly favored thereafter.

Click on a thumbnail graphic to display a gallery of snowpack data from the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Here’s the latest snowpack news release from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (Brian Domonkos):

Looking back at Colorado’s mountain snowpack over the course of January, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find promising water supply outlooks for spring and summer 2015. At the very end of December a dry spell began that persisted through the entire month of January, with the only relief being a few brief periods of active weather. While actual observed snowpack values in no way decreased over the course of January 2015, the snowpack percents of normal in every basin across the state did decline, in some cases drastically. The North Platte and combined Yampa/White River basins experienced deficits in snowfall which decreased snowpack percents of normal 23 and 26 percentage points respectively over the course of January. The combined Yampa/White watersheds saw the lowest snow accumulation in the calculated period of record back to 1986. According to statewide SNOTEL data, 1986 was the only drier January going back 29 years. January 1992 saw the same snow accumulation totals as this January with an increase of only 1.4 inches of snow water equivalent. “With nearly one third of the winter remaining, Colorado is running short of time to catch up.” commented Brian Domonkos, Colorado Snow Survey Supervisor. He went on to mention, “Statewide snowfall would need to amount to 124% of normal from now until mid- April to achieve normal snowpack peak levels.”

There are a few bright spots around the state. Watersheds that still retain an above normal snowpack include the Blue River at 122% as well as a few other sub-watersheds within the Colorado and South Platte River basins. Of the major basins, the South Platte, Colorado, and Arkansas all remain near normal at 97%, 95% and 94% respectively.

January is an important month for mountain precipitation over the course of the average year. The month of April typically provides the most mountain precipitation at 3.6 inches, followed by March at 3.4 inches, and January coming in the third highest at 3.2 inches. This January provided only 1.4 inches of mountain precipitation, 45% of the average. The South Platte saw the greatest precipitation totals compared to normal at 62% of average.

In terms of normal, statewide reservoir storage is only slightly below where it was last month, down one percentage point to 104% of average. The South Platte, combined Yampa, White & North Platte and Colorado River basins are riding higher than normal on carry over storage from the 2014 water year at 119%, 117%, and 116% of average respectively.

As always spring and summer outlooks for streamflow volumes vary greatly across the state, but the bulk are below normal between 60% and 85% of average.

Click here to read the report. Here’s an excerpt (Click on a graphic for a larger view):

Click here to go to the US Drought Monitor website. Here’s an excerpt:

Summary

Temperatures were normal to above normal for most areas west of the Missouri River. The greatest departures from normal were over the central Rocky Mountains, where temperatures were 9-12 degrees Fahrenheit above normal. The eastern United States recorded temperatures below normal, with most areas 3-6 degrees Fahrenheit below normal for the week, and in New England, temperatures were 9-12 degrees Fahrenheit below normal. A strong storm system developed in the southwest and ejected onto the southern plains and into the Midwest. This was a storm with a great deal of moisture and it brought above-normal precipitation from Arizona up to Illinois. Portions of eastern Iowa to Chicago recorded over 12 inches of snow, with some areas approaching 20 inches for the event. The southeast, Mid-Atlantic, upper Midwest, and west coast remained dry with most areas slightly below normal for precipitation this week…

The High Plains

A warm week over the region, with temperature departures of 3-6 degrees Fahrenheit above normal common over the entire region. Much of Kansas and Nebraska were impacted by the same storm that brought precipitation to the southern plains and Midwest. The greatest precipitation was recorded over southeast Nebraska and northeast Kansas, which allowed for the improvement of D0 conditions this week…

The West

Consistent with what has been all too common over the west, temperatures were again well above normal for the week. The greatest departures from normal were over Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and Nevada, where temperatures were 9-12 degrees Fahrenheit above normal for the week. Most other areas were 3-6 degrees Fahrenheit above normal. Arizona and New Mexico picked up some good precipitation, but this did little for snow accumulation in the upper elevations as there was more rain than snow. California remained dry as well as much of Washington and Oregon. The consistent issue in the west this current water year is the lack of snowfall, even in the highest elevations. The majority of the precipitation has fallen as rain, which has impacted many groups who count on snow for their livelihoods. Many valley locations are showing adequate rain this winter, but the same cannot be said for the upper elevations and their snow totals. This has made depicting drought quite difficult, as the runoff associated with the upper elevation snowpack is vital. With the precipitation in the region this week, improvements were made to southwest Arizona, southern Nevada, and southern California, where the impact of the summer monsoon along with the current precipitation has allowed for improvements. Areas of southwest New Mexico also were improved as the short-term precipitation has allowed conditions to start improving in the long term as well. D0 was expanded in Colorado this week to include more of the central portion of the state…

Looking Ahead

Over the next 5-7 days, the warm temperatures over the western half of the United States will continue. Much of the area with see daily high temperatures 6-12 degrees Fahrenheit above normal, with the greatest departure from normal high temperatures over eastern Colorado and western Kansas. Overnight lows are also expected to be above normal over most of the United States with overnight lows 6-18 degrees Fahrenheit above normal. The greatest departures from normal are expected over the northern Rocky Mountains. The area around the Great Lakes and New England is expected to be cooler than normal during this time with departures of 3-6 degrees Fahrenheit below normal for maximum and minimum temperatures. Precipitation chances look impressive from central California north toward Oregon and Washington. Amounts are projected to be quite high at this time, but with the warm weather, much of this precipitation is expected as rain, except at the highest elevations. This system is expected to impact most of the northwestern United States and into the northern Rocky Mountains. Precipitation is also expected to impact the Gulf Coast and along the eastern seaboard, into New England. Amounts of up 1-2 inches are projected at this time.

The 6-10 day outlook has warm temperatures likely to continue over the western two-thirds of the country while the best chances for below normal temperatures is expected over Alaska, New England, the Great Lakes region and along the east coast. Precipitation projections are showing that the greatest chance of above normal precipitation is over the northern plains and upper Midwest. The best chances for below normal precipitation take place over the southeastern United States and northern Alaska, especially over the lower Mississippi valley and Gulf Coast as well as in California and the Great Basin.

Click on the graphic for a larger view. Infographic via Circle of Blue.

Here’s the link to the report announcement from Western Water Assessment, the University of Colorado, and Colorado State University.

From Colorado Public Radio (Megan Arellano):

Vulnerability is not just a question of how climate change will affect resources in the state, it’s also a question of how well Colorado is prepared to deal with changes,” said Eric Gordon, co-lead editor of the report and a researcher with the Western Water Assessment.

Longer and more intense droughts are likely across the state, so growing crops with irrigation is going to be “a little more difficult,” said Gordon. Even cattle eat less during hot weather, which means ranching will probably be impacted as well.

Additionally, the report notes that public schools on the Front Range haven’t needed to be air conditioned in the past. As temperatures rise, that change could be “expensive to address,” says the report.

Below, more on four vulnerable state sectors:

Water: The state’s reservoirs can provide some buffering against some expected increases in water demand and decreases in flow, but entities with junior rights or little storage are especially vulnerable to future low flows.

Agriculture: Rising temperatures, heat waves and droughts can reduce crop yield and slow cattle weight gain. Colorado farmers and ranchers are already accustomed to large natural swings in weather and climate, but may find it especially challenging to deal with expected changes in water resources.

Recreation: Climate projections show that Colorado’s springtime mountain snowpack will likely decline by 2050, with potential impacts on late-season skiing. Spring runoff season may also be earlier and shorter, which could affect rafting. But the recreation industry and some Colorado communities are already making changes that could help them adapt to a warmer future. For example, Telluride ski area now markets itself as Telluride Ski & Golf.

Transportation: As temperatures increase, rail speeds must drop to avoid track damage, leaving the freight and passenger rail industries vulnerable to slowdowns or the need for expensive track replacements.

From the Loveland Reporter-Herald (Charlie Brennan):

Colorado could see more infectious disease, negative impacts on the elderly and people living in poverty, as well as stresses to water, cattle and crops as byproducts of future climate change, according to a comprehensive new report commissioned by the Colorado Energy Office.

“The important takeaway is, here’s what’s important to Colorado,” said Eric Gordon, co-lead editor of the 176-page report and managing director of the Western Water Assessment at the University of Colorado. “We’re not talking about things that have nothing to do with us, like sea level rise. This is what’s important to Colorado and what we should be worrying about.”

The exhaustive report includes chapters devoted to seven separate sectors where the state might show vulnerability to climate change — ecosystems, water, agriculture, energy, transportation, outdoor recreation and public health.

Dennis Ojima, co-lead editor of the report and a professor in the Ecosystem Science and Sustainability Department at Colorado State University, noted the degree to which each of those sectors can be seen as intertwined with the others.

For example, Ojima said, “In a warmer climate, we need more irrigation and more energy to support that, and more air conditioning in our area in the summer requires more energy, but also more water for cooling. These multiple constraints start occurring when you start looking at the whole state of the system.”

Among noteworthy findings of the report:

Climate projections show that Colorado’s springtime mountain snowpack will likely decline by 2050, with potential impacts on late-season skiing. Spring runoff season may also be earlier and shorter, which could affect rafting.

The state’s reservoirs can provide buffering against some expected increases in water demand and decreases in flow, but entities with junior rights or little storage are especially vulnerable to future low flows.

Rising temperatures, heat waves and droughts can reduce crop yield and slow cattle weight gain. Colorado farmers and ranchers are already accustomed to large natural swings in weather and climate but may find it particularly hard to deal with expected changes in water resources.

The report, presuming a conservative level of future greenhouse gas emissions, nevertheless forecasts a 2.5- to 5.5-degree increase in statewide temperatures by mid-century, relative to a 1971-2000 baseline. Also, Colorado will be more prone to extreme precipitation events in winter, but not necessarily during the summer.

The report states that impacts on public health are complex and hard to anticipate, but climbing temperatures may mean more frequent episodes of bad air quality and more common heatstroke, plague, West Nile virus and hantavirus.

Temperatures in Colorado have been rising, especially in summer, and that trend is expected to continue, along with increases in the frequency and intensity of heat waves and wildfire.

Even public schools in many Front Range cities are vulnerable to these changes, the report stated. Historically, schools in the state have not often required cooling, so many do not have air-conditioned classrooms.

Boulder County, in fact, is spending $37.7 million from a $576.5 million construction bond issue passed in November to provide air conditioning to eight schools that don’t have it (five of which hold summer sessions).

‘How do we use this report to move forward?’

The report was lauded by Stephen Saunders, president of the Louisville-based Rocky Mountain Climate Organization.

“This first-ever state-specific synthesis of existing information on how climate change may affect us here will be very valuable to the state government, to local governments, and indeed to all Coloradans,” Saunders said. “Now, the question is, how do we use this report to move forward?”

Saunders added, “The report itself points to the importance of preparedness actions by the state government, local governments and others to reduce our risks of future impacts. We believe those state government actions should include both a comprehensive state-government-wide preparedness plan, and specific actions by individual state agencies to factor climate change risks into their plans and management actions.”

In its concluding chapter, titled “Moving Toward Preparedness,” the report cites the Boulder County Climate Change Preparedness Plan for its overarching principles and suggests they should be integrated into “all forms of planning” to provide resilience in the face of future climate impacts.

Some of those principles are ensuring flexibility, removing barriers to adaptation, recognizing the need for leadership and collaboration, plus preparing for multiple possible climate futures.

From the Fence Post (Nikki Work):

The report, called the Colorado Climate Change Vulnerability Study, was compiled by representatives of the Western Water Assessment, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, the University of Colorado-Boulder, Colorado State University and National Center for Atmospheric Research. According to a press release from the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, the report was compiled using existing data and literature. The researchers then found issues in a variety of sectors, including public health, water, agriculture, recreation and transportation.

“Vulnerability is not just a question of how climate change will affect resources in the state, it’s also a question of how well Colorado is prepared to deal with changes,” said report co-lead editor Eric Gordon in the release. Gordon is a researcher with the Western Water Assessment.

The report discusses the warming trend in Colorado and the effects it could have. Examples of potential problems include reduced crop yield, cattle feeding, drought, less available water to those with junior rights and/or little storage, a decrease in snowpack, possible increases in the prevalence of West Nile Virus and the necessity of slower rail speeds to avoid infrastructure damage.

“We also know vulnerabilities change over time, as environmental and socio-economic conditions change,” said the report’s co-lead editor and professor at CSU Dennis Ojima in the release. “It will be important to keep an eye on this changing landscape of vulnerability.”

The full report is available at http://wwa.colorado.edu/climate/co2015vulnerability/.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

If this were a postcard winter, it would be the kind in which a polar bear in sunglasses was enjoying a tropical drink and a lot of the words in the message were crossed out and scribbled over.

On paper, everything looks pretty average. But there have been twists of extreme cold and higher-than-normal temps, snowpack that built up early and began to dwindle and the typical uncertainty of how things will play come springtime.

Snowpack for Colorado as a whole was just 81 percent of median as of Tuesday, but that’s no indication of how it will turn out or even of how it is in any given part of the state.

Most of the snowpack is clustered over the central mountains at the top of watersheds that feed into the Arkansas, Colorado and South Platte basins — all of which are almost at normal levels.

The outlying parts of the state are drier than normal.

“What’s unusual is that we normally see very cold weather in the December-February time period,” said Charles Kuster, who watches the weather closely in the Leadville area. “This year, I’ve only recorded 26 days with lows of 0 degrees (Fahrenheit), and the average is usually about 60 days of those type of temperatures.”

The high temperature in Leadville was 50 degrees on Jan. 26, and the lows were 7 degrees above average overall.

That has played havoc with a snowpack that built up generously in November and December, but suffered in January. Kuster recorded just a foot of snow last month, about 17 inches below normal.

“We’ve had very warm nights for this time of year,” he said. “Normally that’s not a factor. But even with the low sun angle, we’re seeing some melting. It’s unusual to have significant melting this time of year.”

Still, some sites in the Leadville area remain well above normal, such as Fremont Pass, which is sitting at 123 percent of median in snowpack and 124 percent of average precipitation since October.

The Rio Grande basin is just at 65 percent of median snowpack, the driest area of the state.

Colorado’s Southeastern corner still is in severe drought, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency’s three-month outlook is calling for aboveaverage precipitation and below-average temperatures for Southeastern Colorado.<,/blockquote>

West Drought Monitor January 27, 2015

Statewide snowpack January 30, 2015

Arkansas Basin High/Low graph January 30, 2015

Upper Colorado River Basin High/Low graph January 30, 2015

Gunnison Basin High/Low graph January 30, 2015

Laramie and North Platte Basin High/Low graph January 30, 2015

Upper Rio Grande River Basin High/Low graph January 30, 2015

San Miguel, Dolores, Animas, and San Juan Basin High/Low graph January 30, 2015

South Platte River Basin High/Low graph January 30, 2015

Yampa and White Basin High/Low graph January 30, 2015

Click here to go to the NIDIS website hosted by the Colorado Climate Center to read the latest briefing.

From The Aspen Times (Scott Condon):

Aspen’s January snowfall was the second lowest amount for the month since 1935, according to the record keepers at the Aspen Water Treatment Plant.

Only 5.26 inches of snow were recorded for the month, according to a report filed Monday by Laura Taylor.

“Average snowfall for this month is 25.74 inches,” Taylor wrote. “This minimal snowfall is the second lowest recorded here since January 1935. Back in 1961, the lowest snowfall for January was recorded at 5.0 inches.

The water treatment plant is on Doolittle Drive, near Castle Creek, at an elevation of 8,148 feet. Snowfall amounts at different locations around the Aspen metro area usually vary, but the water-treatment plant is the official National Weather Service station.

The station’s records show Aspen has received less than 10 inches of snow in January only five times since 1935 prior to this year. There were 5 inches in 1961, 6.5 inches in 1974, 9.9 inches in 1981, 9.25 inches in 1985-86 and 7.75 inches in 2002-03…

Joe Ramey, a forecaster and meteorologist for the National Weather Service in Grand Junction, said precipitation was a mixed bag for western Colorado in January. Durango enjoyed one-half inch above average in total precipitation for the month, and Grand Junction also was above average, he said. Below-average precipitation was more common, he said.

“There’s been a big ridge just out to our west all of January,” Ramey said. “That ridge is really the culprit.”

That ridge of high pressure deflected storms to the north and to the south of the Aspen area. In the short term, Aspen could pick up a few inches of snow over the next few days from a series of weak disturbances, Ramey said. A wet spring is forecasted in the desert southwest and into the Colorado Rockies during March and into April.

“We’re hanging onto this wet spring” in the forecast, Ramey said.

Despite the lack of snowfall in January, the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s automated weather station near the headwaters of the Roaring Fork River said the snowpack there was 109 percent of average Monday.

Click on a thumbnail graphic for a gallery of snowpack data from the Natural Resources Conservation Service.