Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: RalphH on April 12, 2023, 10:40:40 AM
-
The Fraser River has seen water levels drop a meter, resulting in levels not recorded in over 112 years.
The decline comes after the region's rivers and streams were pushed to new highs in 2021 that caused widespread damage — including to wildlife
story and video:
https://bc.ctvnews.ca/fraser-river-water-hits-lowest-level-in-over-a-century-1.6351726
-
Yup, I have seen a lot of beach I have never seen before while scouring the Fraser/Harrison this winter/spring.
-
not all doom and gloom
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/air-land-water/water/river-forecast/2023_apr1.pdf
-
I feel like this is kind of a bait article, it's low because snow has just barely started to melt. Snowpack is pretty decent this year.
-
I feel like this is kind of a bait article, it's low because snow has just barely started to melt. Snowpack is pretty decent this year.
That's exactly what it is.
You can't turn on the mainstream news anymore without someone trying to shove climate change propaganda down your throat.
Anyone who's lived on the west coast for a few years knows this sort of thing happens when early spring is cold. We are on track for a very cold April, so this isn't surprising. On top of that, BC had a pretty dry winter. We didn't get anywhere near the usual rain that we usually do.
-
ah what joy! With the return of spring so returns the anti-climate science drama queens!
There's been a lot of talk on how low both the Harrison and Fraser Rivers are. The launch at Kilby is high and dry. Trout don't seem to move in until it higher than that, at least in my experience. So whatever nonsense one may believe, some of us are affected.
(https://i.imgur.com/gc8UU7W.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/WXIpAAM.jpg)
-
This is no different than California 6 months ago.
There are literally 100s and 100s of articles from last fall that stated California would take decades to recover from the drought they were in. Some said that California would never recover and that the drought was here to stay.
The climate change fear mongering was relentless.
And here we are in April 2023....the California drought is all but completely wiped out with enough snow water in the mountains to fill the Great Lakes.
There are communities all over California that are dreading the spring run off in the coming weeks and months for the real possibility of catastrophic flooding.
Just like California, the Harrison/Fraser will be full in a few weeks or so. There is nothing to worry about here.
The continuous climate change fear mongering from the woke crowd is nauseating.
-
Regardless of your world view, there is validity to the article and the current low water levels aren't just due to a dry spring or late melt.
I did a quick search of historical Fraser River levels at Hope. For the past 10 years for the months of Jan, Feb March, the water levels rarely dipped below 3m; it was averaging well in excess of 3.0 for that time frame.
For the same time period in 2023, the water had just one blip above 3.0m in January. For the rest of the 3 month time frame, it was averaging around 2.6-2.7m.
So yes, the Fraser is lower than historical levels.
(I'm not a data scientist, I just play one on TV)
-
Regardless of your world view, there is validity to the article and the current low water levels aren't just due to a dry spring or late melt.
I did a quick search of historical Fraser River levels at Hope. For the past 10 years for the months of Jan, Feb March, the water levels rarely dipped below 3m;
For the past 10 years ??? And you're telling us here that you did a historical search on seasonal water levels??? Were you able to make this post without laughing???
Any respectable researcher on anything to do with climate, water levels, snow/rainmelt, etc, etc, would never post a opinion based on 10 years of sample size data and call it 'historical' research.
So yes, the Fraser is lower than historical levels.
If you are only going to give us 10 years of data, please don't call it 'historical levels'.....my goodness......
(I'm not a data scientist, I just play one on TV)
You didn't have to tell anyone that. Real unbiased scientists don't come to these types of conclusions on a 10 year sample size.....
-
My goddess, you are still the same rude arse that you were two years ago.
“Historical” just refers to the data type that I used, as opposed to real time.
And 10 years was all I had time to dig back into. Sorry…
-
Everything is climate change and no way was my comments anti climate change.
How long have we been recording to really say this may of be a regular 1/100 year event.
Ps I believe the since showing the earth is warming and how humans impacted it
-
My goddess, you are still the same rude arse that you were two years ago.
“Historical” just refers to the data type that I used, as opposed to real time.
And 10 years was all I had time to dig back into. Sorry…
My intention was not to be rude, but the data you posted was completely useless in regards to the topic.
-
Everything is climate change and no way was my comments anti climate change.
How long have we been recording to really say this may of be a regular 1/100 year event.
Ps I believe the since showing the earth is warming and how humans impacted it
my apologies if you thought that comment was directed at you specifically or even as part of a group as that was not my intention at all.
-
I don't want the troll to drag this off topic. While we have seen a lot of firsts and records in the last several years,conclusions on 'climate change' have to be based on statistical analysis of a number of events not just one. i had no intention that posting the article was to support any climate change agenda or my opinions on those or to contradict or disprove the opinions of anybody else. Hence my drama queen comment.
As far as the article being bait - many many media article headlines are 'bait', like 'click bait'. They are intended to draw you to read to watch it. Other public comments such as Pierre Poilievre's statement that the 'Chinese Government financed Trudeau Foundation has to be investigated', is also bait.
-
As far as the article being bait - many many media article headlines are 'bait', like 'click bait'. They are intended to draw you to read to watch it.
True enough. I agree that some headlines are clickbait to get views, but many others are titled and written in a way to indoctrinate you. That is a fact in journalism and media that simply no one can even argue anymore.
Unfortunately, once you've been indoctrinated....soon after you lose the ability to recognize when you someone is trying to indoctrinate you. Perhaps some are easy to indoctrinate right from the start.
A prime example of indoctrination is many woke people today that have been indoctrinated into thinking that man somehow has the ability to actually change the weather or climate....which is complete nonsense.
-
This is no different than California 6 months ago.
There are literally 100s and 100s of articles from last fall that stated California would take decades to recover from the drought they were in. Some said that California would never recover and that the drought was here to stay.
The climate change fear mongering was relentless.
And here we are in April 2023....the California drought is all but completely wiped out with enough snow water in the mountains to fill the Great Lakes.
There are communities all over California that are dreading the spring run off in the coming weeks and months for the real possibility of catastrophic flooding.
Just like California, the Harrison/Fraser will be full in a few weeks or so. There is nothing to worry about here.
The continuous climate change fear mongering from the woke crowd is nauseating.
Huh? Has Lake Mead filled up? Southern California gets a significant portion of it's water from Lake Mead. Fact is it is the largest user of water from the Colorado River. Most of the rains storms occurred well north of there. The agricultural areas that draw old water from deep wells also aren't going to helped much since rain doesn't replenish that water.
-
Huh? Has Lake Mead filled up? Southern California gets a significant portion of it's water from Lake Mead. Fact is it is the largest user of water from the Colorado River. Most of the rains storms occurred well north of there. The agricultural areas that draw old water from deep wells also aren't going to helped much since rain doesn't replenish that water.
Lake Mead is in eastern Nevada/Arizona. I'm talking about the California specific watersheds.
And....if you properly research Lake Mead, you will quickly realize that there is nothing natural about it anymore. The drawdown is so overused now that there is no natural way to obtain proper data there anymore. Regardless of snowmelt or rainfall, the removal of water has been only increasing. Here is a fact. Lake Mead hasn't been full since 1983, even though there have been some very good water years since then.
Sorry, but your Lake Mead example doesn't work here.....
Edit: another fact is that Arizona had one of the most robust monsoon seasons last summer ever.....It barely put a dent in helping Lake Mead recover. The Lake Mead lack of water is a 'water use' problem....NOT a climate problem.
-
Lake Mead is in eastern Nevada/Arizona. I'm talking about the California specific watersheds.
And....if you properly research Lake Mead, you will quickly realize that there is nothing natural about it anymore. The drawdown is so overused now that there is .
I don't think you even bothered to read what I asked. You just regurgitate what you read on some climate misinformation website.
California takes the most water (58%) from the Colorado via Lake mead. It has the highest priority in the agreement. Parts of other Southwestern states are being cutoff from Colorado River water. For southern California it can't be replaced. That 's where the problem is. Ditto for the deep water that irrigates most of California's high profit export agriculture. Nevada & California - states that both get substantial water from Lake Mead and the Colorado both have good water conservation regimes. Arizona was among the worst in the US until the last few years and they reformed their water use rules.
-
Unfortunately, once you've been indoctrinated....soon after you lose the ability to recognize when you someone is trying to indoctrinate you. Perhaps some are easy to indoctrinate right from the start.
A prime example of indoctrination is many woke people today that have been indoctrinated into thinking that man somehow has the ability to actually change the weather or climate....which is complete nonsense.
LOL! ;D. How ridiculous.
-
In order to cement my status as a bona fide data scientist, I took some time this evening to run "historic" water level queries, for the Fraser River at Hope going back 80 yrs to 1944. (caveat: some data was missing for the winter months in the early 1950's)
Only in one year (2001) did the monthly water level ever get below 3.0 m. In that year, the water got below 3.0 for about six wks but the three month average (Jan-Mar) would have been greater than 3.0
Compare that to 2023 Jan to March when the river only had one blip above 3.0m and averaged around 2.7m.
The persistent low flows can't be attributed to a snowpack that hasn't started to melt.
Draw your own conclusions...
-
Is it weather related or humans increasing take of groundwater.
And if snow pack for the Fraser watershed is near 100% of normal.
Then that leaves what lack of rainfall in areas that it rains and does not snow
-
There is scant mention of "climate change " in the article, just a comment by Marvin Rosenau, a "Fish and Wildlife" Instructor at BCIT that "he is concerned the instability seen in recent years is a direct result of climate change." Out of that one person asserts a laser focus and spins a conspiracy that include myself as "Indoctrinated" and woke (words he clearly does not comprehend").
While measured water levels are absolutes - they are solid numbers, I'm not sure they are 100% comparable over an extended period. The measurement regime has certainly changed on the Vedder/Chilliwack since Nov 2021.
As before I posted the article as one of interest & get attacked by one individual who spins it into being part of a grander conspiracy. I can draw my conclusions. hopefully most others can as well.
-
Wow, didn't really expect such a simple topic to go off the rails so fast.
Way more to add, but that would only fuel the fire by being taken out of context anyways.
-
There is scant mention of "climate change " in the article, just a comment by Marvin Rosenau, a "Fish and Wildlife" Instructor at BCIT that "he is concerned the instability seen in recent years is a direct result of climate change." Out of that one person asserts a laser focus and spins a conspiracy that include myself as "Indoctrinated" and woke (words he clearly does not comprehend").
That's how indoctrination works. It is usually 'scant'. Indoctrination is rarely something that is shoved in your face all at once. It's fed to you little by little over time until the subtleties of it have done their job.
that include myself as "Indoctrinated" and woke (words he clearly does not comprehend").
I absolutely comprehend what 'woke' means, but I'll let Pierre Poilievre answer the question for you as he was asked to define it on Mar 30th of this year. His answer was absolutely brilliant.
Here is an exact quote of what he said:
“It (Woke) is designed to divide people by race, by gender, by ethnicity, by religion, by vaccine status, and any other way they can divide people into groups,”
“Then you can justify having a government that can control all those groups.”
That's exactly what the farce of man made climate change was designed to do. CONTROL
Pierre Poilievre knows that just like anyone else with their eyes open.
As for the meaning of 'indoctrination'.....if you understand 'woke', you can definitely comprehend the meaning of 'indoctrination'.
-
In order to cement my status as a bona fide data scientist, I took some time this evening to run "historic" water level queries, for the Fraser River at Hope going back 80 yrs to 1944. (caveat: some data was missing for the winter months in the early 1950's)
Only in one year (2001) did the monthly water level ever get below 3.0 m. In that year, the water got below 3.0 for about six wks but the three month average (Jan-Mar) would have been greater than 3.0
Compare that to 2023 Jan to March when the river only had one blip above 3.0m and averaged around 2.7m.
The persistent low flows can't be attributed to a snowpack that hasn't started to melt.
Draw your own conclusions...
That's a little bit better. 80 years of research at least has a little meat on the bone. 10 years does NOT
Ok....let's look at this as best we can.
1. We are talking about a difference of about 30 centimeters in water levels. A crazy new record? No. Significant enough to mention? Yes
2. The Fraser watershed at this time of year has pretty much zero water being removed anywhere in the watershed, and the little that might be would not vary enough to make a difference in winter.
The first things we would look at for this time of year is snowmelt and fall/winter rainfall.
The Fraser watershed over that period was very dry. The snowmelt is late. Also, the low/mid elevation snowmelt is late....and that quite often makes the biggest difference. Put that together with a dry fall/winter....and I'm not surprised that even over 80 years we have record low waterflows for early April. I'm really not surprised at all.
If that isn't enough though.....what else is left? Not much.
In fact the only thing I can think about here is perhaps the large amount of forest fires in the last few years have left a lot of the watershed slopes really bare...in turn not holding as much of the winter water as we'd expect. So in late fall/early winter......the water all ran off then instead of being held in the normally forested slopes...
But I can't provide data that is concrete on that.
Bottom line is that water just doesn't disappear in the cool season. I truly believe it is a combination of a drier fall/winter with a very delayed snowpack in all elevations.
-
Gee SuperBobby you're like the LOoney Tunes Singing and Dancing frog. There is no stopping you! ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80UjzxfNugs
oh and thanks for sharing those wise words from Pierre Poilievre, that man is truly a real snollygloster!
-
well bobby, there's this pretty simple 'woke climate change test' you can attempt. You run a hose from your exhaust pipe into the vehicles interior. Get inside the vehicle and turn said vehicle on. If nothing happens to you, in say 30 minutes. climate change is in fact fake.
-
That's how indoctrination works. It is usually 'scant'. Indoctrination is rarely something that is shoved in your face all at once. It's fed to you little by little over time until the subtleties of it have done their job.
I absolutely comprehend what 'woke' means, but I'll let Pierre Poilievre answer the question for you as he was asked to define it on Mar 30th of this year. His answer was absolutely brilliant.
Here is an exact quote of what he said:
“It (Woke) is designed to divide people by race, by gender, by ethnicity, by religion, by vaccine status, and any other way they can divide people into groups,”
“Then you can justify having a government that can control all those groups.”
That's exactly what the farce of man made climate change was designed to do. CONTROL
Pierre Poilievre knows that just like anyone else with their eyes open.
As for the meaning of 'indoctrination'.....if you understand 'woke', you can definitely comprehend the meaning of 'indoctrination'.
Quoting Pierre Follyvre.... the guy that has never had a real job in his life... Now that is funny.....
-
Ok....let's look at this as best we can.
Ralph is correct. The long term reliability of the height/discharge measurements at Hope is suspect. The federal/provincial water managers would know. I’ve sat in on briefing presentations by the River Forecast Centre. Smart people.
Couple of brief comments:
When you look at the average flow/height of this year compared to previous years, the average decline is much greater than 30 cm. The article mentioned one metre. That’s much closer to the truth.
The decline started in the fall. Sept was running comparable to other years, then it started to drop and by Nov it was running below 3m. I was at Kilby in mid Nov. the launch was high and dry then too. The current Fraser River levels has nothing to do with seasonal snow melt.
-
The decline started in the fall. Sept was running comparable to other years, then it started to drop and by Nov it was running below 3m. I was at Kilby in mid Nov. the launch was high and dry then too. The current Fraser River levels has nothing to do with seasonal snow melt.
Ok. I only mentioned as far back as late fall. You're right. The decline absolutely started in September. You could even say that July and August were to blame too as there was literally no rain and summer was super hot.
But let's look at Sept and Oct in BC last year. The whole province was bone dry by this time. Some areas didn't even see a drop of rain until the very end of Oct. Even November was drier than normal after that.
What also happened in early Nov throughout the interior Fraser watershed? The answer is that we got a very quick prolonged freeze.
So a very dry soil froze. Some places even had shallow layer of frozen snow on top of the dry soil.
Also, most of Nov and Dec were below average temperatures, so the little rain that happened probably just ran off or evaporated with the cold dry low humidity.
So when you put the whole thing together....you are partially correct because the late snow melt is not solely responsible....but when you put the whole scenario together....it's a perfect storm for the lowest water levels in 80 years. Again....I'm not surprised by this.
-
oh and thanks for sharing those wise words from Pierre Poilievre, that man is a truly a real snollygloster!
Of course you aren't a fan of Pierre Poilievre. I wouldn't expect you to be. Indoctrinated people vote for the likes of JT or Jagmeet Singh because they've been told to.
Pierre Poilievre is a man of logic
Pierre Poilievre is a man full of common sense
Pierre Poilievre is a man who understands basic economics.
Pierre Poilievre is a man who despises special interest groups, but instead believes in equality for everyone
Pierre Poilievre is a man who believes in freedom of speech
Pierre Poilievre is a man who loves his country and wants to see ALL the people in it do well.
Pierre Poilievre is a man who understands that the traditional family unit is vital in the success and longevity of a nation.
Pierre Poilievre is a man who goes to bat for the working middle class (the one and only demographic in the country that actually pays the bills...something you've never understood)
Pierre Poilievre is a man who like the rest of us is far from perfect, but he is at least someone that the working middle class can relate to.
You Ralphy boy....are NONE of those things.
-
lytton burns down, 100 year floods that decimated local rivers, record heat wave that killed over 600 people, island rivers being closed for fishing for half the summer, major glaciers declining. i could go on and on but it doesn't matter to these folks.
the turn "woke" as now evolved to anything conservatives don't like.
pierre's answer to woke was the stupidest thing ive ever heard.
im a realist and will admit the pierre has a shot at this election. if you look at the history of canadian pm's they seem to last about 10 years before the opposition takes back power.
-
Your deep feelings for the man are clear. I hope he thanked for the Valentine's card. May you both be happy!
Of course you aren't a fan of Pierre Poilievre. I wouldn't expect you to be. Indoctrinated people vote for the likes of JT or Jagmeet Singh because they've been told to.
Pierre Poilievre is a man of logic
Pierre Poilievre is a man full of common sense
Pierre Poilievre is a man who understands basic economics.
Pierre Poilievre is a man who despises special interest groups, but instead believes in equality for everyone
Pierre Poilievre is a man who believes in freedom of speech
Pierre Poilievre is a man who loves his country and wants to see ALL the people in it do well.
Pierre Poilievre is a man who understands that the traditional family unit is vital in the success and longevity of a nation.
Pierre Poilievre is a man who goes to bat for the working middle class (the one and only demographic in the country that actually pays the bills...something you've never understood)
Pierre Poilievre is a man who like the rest of us is far from perfect, but he is at least someone that the working middle class can relate to.
You Ralphy boy....are NONE of those things.
-
My feelings are hurt because "Harrsion" is misspelled in the subject and I find it totally disrespectful to George Harrison and Harrison Ford.
-
Of course you aren't a fan of Pierre Poilievre. I wouldn't expect you to be. Indoctrinated people vote for the likes of JT or Jagmeet Singh because they've been told to.
Pierre Poilievre is a man of logic
Pierre Poilievre is a man full of common sense
Pierre Poilievre is a man who understands basic economics.
Pierre Poilievre is a man who despises special interest groups, but instead believes in equality for everyone
Pierre Poilievre is a man who believes in freedom of speech
Pierre Poilievre is a man who loves his country and wants to see ALL the people in it do well.
Pierre Poilievre is a man who understands that the traditional family unit is vital in the success and longevity of a nation.
Pierre Poilievre is a man who goes to bat for the working middle class (the one and only demographic in the country that actually pays the bills...something you've never understood)
Pierre Poilievre is a man who like the rest of us is far from perfect, but he is at least someone that the working middle class can relate to.
You forget to mention that your boy Pierre Folly. has never in his life had a actual real job... LOL
What would Pierre Folly know about the working middle class when he has never in his life even worked at a regular job? Life long politicians should be avoided... they are snake oil salesmen.
-
You forget to mention that your boy Pierre Folly. has never in his life had a actual real job... LOL
Did you hear that from CBC?
-
You forget to mention that your boy Pierre Folly. has never in his life had a actual real job... LOL
not only that but he is actually Pierre Elliot Trudeau's secret love child! PP and JET are half brothers which explains PP's Biblical hate for JET. Not only that but also because JET had a couple of real jobs before he entered politics.
-
It to bad that there is literally no explanation in the article for why its low
-
Did you hear that from CBC?
Do you only get your info from Fox News ?
-
Do you get your info from tinfoil head set you constructed...?
The saddest thing about someone who is indoctrinated is that they are so busy getting more indoctrinated that they don't have time to learn the practical things in the world....like the fact that they stopped making tin foil back in the 1940s.
But you wouldn't know that because you spend your days listening to Justin Trudeau and Bill Gates fear monger us about how we need to stop the cows from farting or the world will become uninhabitable by 2050....or whatever other BS they are serving that particular week.
-
The saddest thing about someone who is indoctrinated is that they are so busy getting more indoctrinated that they don't have time to learn the practical things in the world....like the fact that they stopped making tin foil back in the 1940s.
But you wouldn't know that because you spend your days listening to Justin Trudeau and Bill Gates fear monger us about how we need to stop the cows from farting or the world will become uninhabitable by 2050....or whatever other BS they are serving that particular week.
I don't spend my days listening to anyone actually. Much more enjoyable to be outside just participating / recreating in our beautiful BC environment. I actually feel sorry for those that only want to tear apart our wonderful country. We won the lottery when we were born in this wonderful country.
-
Everything is climate change and no way was my comments anti climate change.
How long have we been recording to really say this may of be a regular 1/100 year event.
Ps I believe the since showing the earth is warming and how humans impacted it
it's mentioned in the 3rd paragraph.
as to is this a 1 in 100 year event or 1 in 500 or whatever isn't strictly determined by the number of years on record. It's done by statistical analysis. One way to look at is how many standard deviations from the mean or average of all the annual minimum measurements; 2/3rds would fall within 1 standard deviation, 95% within 2, 99.9% within 3. So the chance of getting a result more than 3 standard deviations from the mean is more than 1 in 1000. Make sense?
-
The rivers in Europe are even lower. But there, there is evidence that it has happened at least a few times before, hundreds of years before humanity could have had any impact on climate. Here we just don't have enough evidence.
The good news is that the freshet is coming.
-
True enough. I agree that some headlines are clickbait to get views, but many others are titled and written in a way to indoctrinate you. That is a fact in journalism and media that simply no one can even argue anymore.
Unfortunately, once you've been indoctrinated....soon after you lose the ability to recognize when you someone is trying to indoctrinate you. Perhaps some are easy to indoctrinate right from the start.
A prime example of indoctrination is many woke people today that have been indoctrinated into thinking that man somehow has the ability to actually change the weather or climate....which is complete nonsense.
.....not going to waste a lot of effort here... just take your woke and indoctrination fascist right wing bs terms pack them in a suitcase and kick rocks...
-
I just woke up. What did I miss? 👀
-
I just thought you were on another lunch break.
-
Haha… ;D I haven’t had a lunch break like that since, but I have had many house chore sessions requested… I meant, ordered, by the boss.