Rain Vs. Snow [Part 2]

Fish Icon
When snow makes up a larger fraction of total precipitation, prediction of irrigation-season water supply is more precise
Home » Blog » Rain Vs. Snow [Part 2]
Snowy river with trees

This is the second installment of a five-part series investigating the various effects of receiving more precipitation as rain versus snow in the Henry’s Fork watershed. This installment was originally included in a daily water report sent March 5, 2024.

The big takeaway:

Today’s message is simple: when snow makes up a larger fraction of total precipitation, prediction of irrigation-season water supply is more precise.

The details:

One of the fundamental characteristics of water management in mountainous regions of the western U.S. is our ability to precisely predict water supply for the upcoming summer irrigation season. This high degree of predictability—historically, at least—is inherited from the dominance of summer-time streamflow by snowmelt. When peak snow water equivalent (SWE) occurs in April, the summer’s water supply is just sitting there on the ground, where we can easily measure it and therefore predict streamflow for the upcoming 6 months. Prediction of runoff timing is a little trickier, but traditionally, we have been able to predict total volume pretty well.

In extensive modeling of streamflow in the subwatersheds of the Henry’s Fork, Dr. Christina Morrisett found that in looking backwards at total summertime streamflow with complete data in hand, streamflow is best predicted by models that contain both SWE and summertime precipitation as inputs, along with some other climatic variables. However, in early April, when we need to predict water supply for irrigation and other needs for the upcoming summer, we do not know how much it is going to rain during the spring and summer and so need to predict streamflow only with SWE and other predictors that are known at the beginning of April.

It turns out that in water years in which SWE makes up a larger fraction of total precipitation, these models are more precise in predicting upcoming summer streamflow. In the 1989–2023 data set, the median fraction of precipitation accumulated in peak snowpack is 77%. For years with greater-than-median snow fraction, peak SWE explains 89% of the variability in upcoming April–September streamflow. For years with less-than-median snow fraction, peak SWE explains only 73% of variability in April–September streamflow. For the data set as a whole, SWE explains 82% of the variability in streamflow. Thus, as rain makes up a larger fraction of total precipitation, the precision in predicting streamflow from peak SWE goes down. The graph below shows that the scatter of points around the prediction curve is lower in the years with higher snow fraction.

One obvious observation from the graph (and from intuition) is that when the snow fraction is lower (rain fraction is higher), total streamflow is a little higher. More rain in the spring and summer will generally increase streamflow a little bit relative to what it would have been based on snowpack alone. So, if in those rainy years we end up with a little more water than expected, what is the harm in that?

The answer has two parts. First, early-spring predictions are used by water managers to inform irrigators of their likely water supply, prior to planting. Agricultural producers make key decisions based on the anticipated water supply, and deviations from that supply in either direction can result in less-than-optimal cropping decisions. Second, early-spring predictions are critical to determining basin-wide springtime reservoir operations to balance multiple objectives. Having more water than expected because of spring rain usually results in less predictable reservoir operations, which are not optimal for water users, anglers, or hydropower operators. Anglers can readily understand this, as unexpected flow changes at Palisades Dam or Island Park Dam in the spring and early summer can disrupt fishing conditions during desirable hatches.

With respect to Island Park Reservoir in particular, when trying to maximize storage in the spring, runoff from a big rain must be passed through a full reservoir, requiring increased outflow. On the other hand, leaving room in the reservoir to capture that runoff risks losing some storage if rain doesn’t materialize, to the long-term detriment of both water users and fisheries. As I mentioned yesterday—and as is apparent from today’s graphic—the years with higher rainfall fractions are the years of lower water supply, when predictions and reservoir operations are most critical to optimizing water use. As rain makes up a larger fraction of precipitation, more precise management will be even more critical to make limited supply go farther, at the same time that our ability to predict supply and implement more careful management decreases.

Facebook
LinkedIn
Pinterest

Recent Posts

Person holding a rainbow trout.
Research and Monitoring
Rob Van Kirk

Water Year 2025: Everything you wanted to know and a lot more!

Every year since 2017, the Henry’s Fork Foundation Science and Technology Team has produced an annual technical report that documents all of our data collection and analysis activities for the year. Water and irrigation year 2025 was a very active year for the team, given one of the hottest and driest summers on record, our 11th year of aquatic invertebrate sampling, and the 20th year of monitoring the rainbow trout spawning run in the Buffalo

Read More »
Water Supply
Otto Lang

Monitoring the Upper Snake Snowpack: Updates from the Field

Hello! My name is Otto Lang, and I am a postdoctoral researcher with Boise State University and the Henry’s Fork Foundation. I’m working alongside Rob Van Kirk at the HFF, Lejo Flores, Professor in Geosciences at Boise State University, and Sarah Newcomb at Trout Unlimited. Together, we are in the midst of a two-year WaterSMART project funded by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to improve predictions of snow water supply across the Upper Snake River

Read More »
2 people in gear taking water samples
Research and Monitoring
Rob Van Kirk

Henry’s Fork Aquatic Invertebrate Trends, 2015-2025

To address angler concerns about decreased hatches, particularly at Last Chance and the upper Ranch, and holistically assess ecological function throughout the mainstem Henry’s Fork, we implemented a statistically rigorous, quantitative study of aquatic invertebrates in 2015. This followed implementation of a watershed-wide water-quality monitoring program in 2014 and prompted subsequent expansion of stream gaging. After our 11th year of sampling in 2025, we had a set of 56 independent observations of macroinvertebrates collected at

Read More »
Aquatic Insects
Rob Van Kirk

Fish of the Month: Year 11

As it is the afternoon of December 31, I am closing the year with my annual fish-of-the-month blog, this one at the end of my 11th year of catching a fish in my home waters in each month of the year. To spare you the math, that’s 132 consecutive months of catching a wild trout or whitefish (and in some years I’ve fair-caught suckers and shiners, too) within a three-hour drive of my home in

Read More »