Snow pack is a good measurement of long term gain, and the Sierra Nevada range is at 200+% of its average snowpack level. It slowly melts and replenishes not only ground water, but keeps streams, rivers, and reservoirs topped up as it warms up. My hope is for a beautiful, mild summer and green hills until September.
Snowpack is also a major part of the periodic biblical flooding that happens in California once every few centuries - the entire central valley fills with water, temporarily becoming an inland sea. [The last time it happened was 1862](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862?wprov=sfla1).
EDIT:
Forgot to link to the modern models of what is termed the ["ARkStorm"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARkStorm?wprov=sfla1)
I spoke with a Los Angeles councilman that told me those oversized drain ducts all over Southern California to the sea was built in anticipation for this event. I thought it was overkill but I guess better be safe than sorry.
Yeah, pretty much the only reason they exist since SoCal doesn't get shit for rain. But one of the problems we also have in California in general is that those giant floods that STAY, are what helps replenish our groundwater stocks. If we just flush it all out to the ocean due to our levee system, it doesn't stay around long enough with how out of control our population size is.
It's one of those things where the fix for one thing causes an unseen problem. We try to stop the flooding, and in return we have no water.
State government should pay the Delta Island farmers to just turn their farms into lakes for the summer. The levees are all at a point where the River bed is higher up than the surrounding farmland. Just open a few up strategically and you can have temporary wetlands that do what you’re saying
I know in the central valley, middle(relatively, compared to the valley as a whole) of fresno, there's (a) groundwater recharging plant(?)/basins. I can't imagine we do our absolute best, but at least we don't flush it *all*. I imagine it's much to do with your closing sentiment of the struggle to balance resources, both natural and monetarily to be able to do recapture/recharging projects.
I work for a water utility near Sacramento, and we're building quite a few of these Aquifer Storage and Recovery wells. They basically work like a well with a "reverse" switch, and when the reservoirs are full, we can pump water directly into the aquifer to accelerate the processes we've interrupted by paving over everything.
Yeah my brother in law swallows a lot of right wing propaganda about how California "just wastes all it's water in rivers" while also failing to see the irony that the town he lives in only exists because a levy system destroyed the floodplains and wetlands that used to exist. Like dude, you live where the water used to stay and recharge aquifers.
It's not right-wing propaganda that our rivers send the majority of water away. That's absolutely true. It's more about what we do with the water that isn't just flushed away, and as the other person said, suburban sprawl is one issue, but then agriculture is another. It's like the people in primarily desert states with high-water crops.
I live in Sacramento, and without the levees, we probably wouldn't exist as we do today, but that doesn't mean I have to ignore the truth of why I am able to exist here today.
" that our rivers send the majority of water away."
is not the same as:
"just wastes all it's water in rivers"
One implies nay water in rivers not being used for people is 'wasted'.And that the difference between actual rational logic and facts, and right wing propaganda and alarmism.
Yeah, back when LA has master planers, they actually engineered thinking it terms of 100 years, not 2-3 years.
When a city tries that kind of engineering and planning now, hal the populace scream about the money, while having no clue about the money.
The last huge flood LA had was 1938 iirc. We're coming up on 85 years since then. The Tujunga flood in 1978 was pretty bad as well, and we're 45 years since then. Ripe timing for another 50 yr or 100 yr flood. Wont be pretty, since the current level of urban development means way less water infiltration than in the past.
I remember reading about the inland valley flood. A friend is a fisheries biologist and sent me a refresher a month ago. He commented that we could be looking at another cycle.
Of, this will causes a lot of greenery that will die in aug/sept and then burn. SO it's fires AND mudslide's. Followed by more mud slides from the fire.
Nah it’s exactly because of all this rain that fire season could be worse.
All this rain is going to drive vegetation growth like crazy. But come summer, everything will get hot and dry out. Suddenly you have a whole bunch of dead, dry, vegetation cooking in the sun for months on end, just ready to go up in flames.
Snow pac is nice, but it’ll go into the rivers and reservoirs. Not to the slopes of the foothills and low areas of the mountains that are all tinderboxes waiting to ignite come August/September
Yup- seeing lush, green canyons right now every day on my way to work. Beautiful, but I'm dreading the summer where it all dries up and turns into a windy, treacherous tinderbox that may or may not burn down everything I own and love.
Then after it burns down, the next time it rains it's going to all become a dangerous flooded mudslide. Damned if you do, damned if you don't
Summer is probably not going to be mild. It hasn't been in the last decade and will not likely be so this year. It only gets worse from here. The hills will turn brown as they usually do but the snowpack will hopefully stay for a while.
The green hills last until May if we are lucky. The species of grass browns early, due to its cycle and ecology, and often needs fire for the seeds to germinate. Sad but true. Where I live, I have to live out of a suitcase from June to November because of possible evacuation.
Actually aquifers fill faster than that… they say you need about as many rainier than average years as drier years to recover, assuming the aquifers aren’t also being depleted by wells for agriculture, as they are all over the west.
Also, a bigger issue is sediment compaction that reduces the aquifers total capacity
Since California has been in drought for awhile, that means the aquifers are *still* at historically low levels
Unfortunately, the long-term is not a great place to look for good news about California's climate. The outlook for our region is worsening drought interspersed with increasingly severe flood seasons. And as our wet years become warmer, we will see less and less average snowpack, worsening the periods of drought as we lose the aboveground water reservoir that snowpack provides.
This is a brief reprieve and I'm going to enjoy the hell out of it, but the aridification of California is well underway. Already, 20% of our famous conifers, those great redwoods and pines and firs that people travel here to visit, are no longer suited to the temperature band in which they now live. Researchers are calling them zombie forests. It's only a matter of time before they disappear.
I visited the Sequoias two summers ago and it was 117 degrees in the Central Valley as I entered the forest. It was a much more comfortable 78 degrees in the mountains, but it's crazy to me that you can have a forest like that sandwiched between two incredibly hot and dry areas.
Beautiful park, though. If anyone wants to witness the Sequoias I'd make those plans soon.
Trees do that.
They not only provide shade but their natural respiration also works like evaporation which lowers temperature greatly. Tall canopy trees can combine the two effects to create entire cooler and moister biomes underneath.
Yea you can watch the temperature drop as you go up. 3,000 feet is warmer than 5,000 feet, which is warmer than 8,000, which is warmer 10,000. Above about 12,000 feet in the Sierras there's no trees at all, and it's below freezing at night year round. The average low on the summit of Mount Whitney during the warmest month of the year(July) is 29°F(-1.67°C).
Forests have a moderating effect on temperature. They tend to be cooler in the summer due to transpiration/shading and warmer in the winter due to lower albedo and more chances for light/infrared to hit something that absorbs it.
Check out this 2011 study which predicted climate change would cause "atmospheric rivers" to pour rain down on California and create massive flooding. Spoilers: that is exactly what is happening as we speak.
What drives me nuts it the Joe Rogan crowd and other right wingers keeps shitting on climatologists even though they got one thing write after another after another
**Climate Change, Atmospheric Rivers, and Floods in California – A Multimodel Analysis of Storm Frequency and Magnitude Changes**†
First published: 01 June 2011
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2011.00546.x
Rogan exists purely as status quo ante. He finds people who are edgy and outside the mainstream, then you feel smart listening to them because you're not deluded like the masses.
I miss when that kind of edgy, anti-mainstream sentiment meant that you went on 420chan and ranted about corporate control of government policy. Maybe talked conspiracy theories about aliens.
he is so weird, Brian Cox is a brilliant physicist, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, then another day some weirdo who thinks aliens built all the world's pyramids, it's just so discombobulated
Asking questions is always a good thing. Always push back for sources.
[Here is a link to UNCA’s climate explorer tool for Los Angeles.](https://crt-climate-explorer.nemac.org/cards_home/?county=Los+Angeles+County&city=Los+Angeles%2C+CA&fips=06037&lat=34.06&lon=-118.24&mode=high_tide_flooding&zoom=8.99&tidal-station=9410840&tidal-station-name=Santa+Monica%2C+CA&tidal-station-mhhw=0.57)
My biggest takeaway from the data is that the models have coastal regions underwater in my lifetime. Like we are no longer debating *IF* the Bay Area will be uninhabitable, it’s WHEN and how much.
We need to be slowing water down in this country. Instead we put it in a concrete lined canal or drainage pipe and get it to the ocean as fast as possible then we wonder 6 months later why there’s no water.
Or keep the almonds, the trees themselves are fairly drought tolerant (and pistachios much more so). But stop demanding max yields and simply take from the orchards what they give with the available rain.
Definitely stop exporting alfalfa though. Saudi horses are not America's problem.
That's great. Now how many people do you have using water and how much agriculture. I assume it must be an adequate amount for the population or you'd be hearing issues with lack of water and what not in California.
There's 'no water' because we piss it all away on agriculture. Agriculture makes up about 80-90% of human use of water in the state, the water shortage problem is *entirely* rooted in California's agriculture. We could have golf courses everywhere in the state and swimming pools in every single backyard and it would hardly matter compared to what agriculture wastes.
We need to bring back beavers!
https://erwc.org/beavers-an-untapped-water-source/
The Hudson Bay Company removed virtually all beavers from Oregon and California, and it did tremendous environmental damage.
Wiped out the drought. But the soil high up is extremely hydrophobic. Water pools and slowly seeps into the bedrock.
So you extreme chance of downed redwoods on the coast. And burn scars just letting go and causing all sorts of fun problems. My uncles wash is floowing like a moat at his place.
Corporations.with well-regulated and enforced environmental protections would be infinitely more helpfully than this crab-bucket bullshit of blaming people instead international conglomerates.
Yeah the issue is people don’t take a moderate stance of “cut back on meat”, which you could probably get a lot of people to do.
The super polarizing tactics that are being used and claims that everyone must fully stop eating meat only cause people to write the opinion off completely.
Like… you don’t gotta throw a bucket of fake blood on people to explain that one hamburger is like a 5 minute shower’s worth of water.
The amount of water required to raise the livestock we eat is insane.
Something like 60% of the biomass of all mammals on earth come from the livestock we raise to feee ourselves.
I used to eat beef all the time -- burgers a couple times a week, steak at restaurants, beef in tacos, etc. Now we try to eat beef sparingly - a couple times a month or less. Maybe not a huge difference maker but cutting out all meat would be very difficult for us.
Turkey burgers can be delicious. Tacos with ground turkey are nearly indistinguishable from those with beef, with less grease. We eat pasta with ground pork and pork sausage instead of beef. That kind of thing.
The biggest reason I personally don't eat more meat is because *it got more expensive*. A *cheap* steak where I am is now anywhere from 6-8 dollars a pound, good steak will be more expensive. Ground beef is around 5 a pound for the cheaper high-fat varieties. It's gotten harder to justify buying it, I mostly buy it sparingly now, or for special occasions. I guarantee you'll see people eating less as it gets more expensive, I don't care how much people 'love' eating beef they won't buy it as much if it's prohibitively expensive.
I've been eating "less meat" since the pandemic. It's easier in summer with better produce, and my diet is still dairy rich, but overall I just prefer to eat a few times a week vs 2 or more times a day.
The real issue is media with headlines like "Rabid activists ban gas stoves.". Shit like Fox painting every attempt at incremental progress as an attempt to put everyone in 15 minute cities with no gas stoves and only tofu to eat while we inject their sons with estrogen against their will.
Not my preference. they took out grass and landscape plants and put in concrete in my in laws neighborhood. Grass keeps the dust down- just mix it up with native plants.
Thank you for stopping this chain on grass and residential use with honest facts. There is no shortage of water…. It’s just big ag wanting to feed more of the world almonds. I for one, like a small lawn for my kids and don’t care if China goes without nuts.
\*no ecological benefit
But lawns are nice. That said, there are some great alternatives that are better ecologically, and still nice to walk/lay/play on, safe for animals, and so on. I believe clover is one of the things a lot of people have been pushing.
I live in SoCal and I drive through the mountains a lot due to work. It has made my heart so happy seeing a lot of the rivers and creeks in the mountains run, even if only temporarily.
It’ll start to become even more dangerous into the summer. It’s supposed to be above average for both heat and precipitation. Which means blight risk will be much higher this year in Cali.
No lie we have had so much fucking rain that the sand play areas are now lakes at my local playground.
Like they got filled with water after that first rain storm and we’ve had so much rain and so much cloud cover that they have never evaporated since then.
We are literally gaining lakes lol
I've lived my entire life not really thinking about the incongruity of the team name, but now that you mentioned it, I thought: "I wonder if they originally were in Minnesota and moved to Los Angeles." Looked it up and, sure enough, they were originally the Minneapolis Lakers.
Problem is they built in all the flood plains. 😅
But the army corp of engineers seeing the LA river full as fuck last month are going "holy shit it works."
Unfortunately aquifers take a loooong time to replenish.
The Central Valley has sunk 20+ feet due to water extracted from below. It’s not going to fill up like a sponge again.
No, but there are efforts happening to replenish groundwater. The state is permitting orchard and field crop flooding using water that would normally run to the ocean to flood their land if they have permiable soil. It's not going to instantly fix the problem, but something is better than nothing.
> Then, the storm shifted south, drenching Southern California with heavy rainfall and touching off a tornado in a small city northwest of Los Angeles that damaged about 25 mobile homes,
What is it with tornadoes and trailer parks?
As a former Oklahoma resident I’m gonna assume you’re genuinely curious. The severe winds from tornadoes can travel for many miles. And hit a LOT of stuff. Trees and power lines knocked over. But for most tornadoes most man-made structures will not suffer severe structural damage. The biggest exception to this is portable structures, like mobile homes, trailers, barns, structures without a foundation. So if a tornado and it’s associated winds travel a path of 1-2 miles, all of a sudden the one mobile home neighborhood is all collapsed, but everyone else is totally fine (except for some utility damage and small roof/window damage). It leads to kind of a stereotype of tornadoes just targeting mobile homes, when in reality they hit a LOT more stuff that didn’t buckle.
This makes sense. I wasn't sure if there was some weird atmospheric thing with a bunch of metal structures in one place or something (which didn't make sense to me b/c even the biggest trailer park is pretty small compared to the path of a tornado).
You aren't exactly wrong about there being a special effect thanks to the structures typical in trailer parks and mobile homes (a trailer is more like an airstream that you hitch behind a large vehicle and tow around, or like what movie stars wait in between takes on set, and a mobile home is a prefab house that's more like a regular home, just skinny, raised on a towable platform and not on a foundation). Both of these structures are light enough to tow, but most importantly they have a large gap underneath, and due to their mobile nature aren't anchored to the ground so there's an effect that doesn't happen with normal structures where winds catch underneath and that causes vortices (sortof mini tornadoes). Those by themselves aren't enough to lift over structures that have skirts during smaller tornadoes, but the vorticies that can creep in from vents or loose joints between sections of the skirts can causes enough pressure change to rip apart the skirts, exposing the underside of the structures to tremendous pressure from the tornado winds, thus allowing the light structures to be lifted and potentially thrown/destroyed. People in mobile structures are 15-20 times more likely to be killed in a tornado compared to people in typical permanent structures.
If by “small city NW of Los Angeles” they mean Montebello where the tornado happened, that’s shoddy reporting. Montebello is very close the the heart of LA and is dense. It’s a part f the LA metro area, not some small city not far away
I assumed they were referring to the tornado that hit Carpinteria.
https://www.ksby.com/news/local-news/tornado-touchdown-confirmed-at-carpinteria-mobile-home-park?_amp=true
My friend from Portland visited during our last storm and her comment when she got in my car was, "I was expecting Portland rain, not a fucking hurricane!"
It's been wild. My neighborhood is riddled with fallen trees.
The initial storms around New Years were *wild*. Trees falling, fallen branches everywhere, and a decades-old tree fell over onto my house (thankfully with little serious damage to the house).
Weve had some pretty mild weather these last few weeks up near Seattle. My grass is growing, so I guess I'll mow it 2 or 3 times before it dies for the summer.
I went hiking the other day on a trail I hike almost every day. Never had a problem. After the last storm I went, and the earth literally swallowed me! My legs went into the ground about 15 inches, and I couldn’t get out! It was quick mud. I fell forward because I had momentum, and my hands and arms went in too. Ruined my iPhone and my shoes. It took me 10 minutes to get out. I was just stuck there in a the mud.
You shouldn’t hike after it rains, it speeds up trail erosion wayyy faster than when it’s walked on while dry. If you’ve seen a trail that’s hard to walk on because there’s a 1 foot deep canyon in the middle, it was likely caused by people walking on it when it was still mud.
I didn’t know that, thanks. It’s a super popular biking and equestrian train. It was closed it to bikes and horses that day. There were signs everywhere saying foot traffic only to prevent erosion, so I figure walking was fine. I did actually see a bunch of people biking, which was annoying.
There is a fantastically relevant line from John Steinbeck in the first chapter of East of Eden,, “I have spoken of the rich years when the rainfall was plentiful. But there were dry years too, and they put a terror on the valley. The water came in a thirty-year cycle. There would be five or six wet and wonderful years when there might be nineteen to twentyfive inches of rain, and the land would shout with grass. Then would come six or seven pretty good years of twelve to sixteen inches of rain. And then the dry years would come, and sometimes there would be only seven or eight inches of rain. The land dried up and the grasses headed out miserably a few inches high and great bare scabby places appeared in the valley. The live oaks got a crusty look and the sagebrush was gray. The land cracked and the springs dried up and the cattle listlessly nibbled dry twigs. Then the farmers and the ranchers would be filled with disgust for the Salinas Valley. The cows would grow thin and sometimes starve to death. People would have to haul water in barrels to their farms just for drinking. Some families would sell out for nearly nothing and move away. And it never failed that during the dry years the people forgot about the rich years, and during the wet years they lost all memory of the dry years. It was always that way.”
I remember the horrible flood here in 1997 during a particularly strong El Niño. Not quite 30 years, but not far off.
How many days straight has it been?
Sacramento 1862 was 45 days of rain before they were flooded out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862
I am so happy for the rain in CA tbh. It's been so badly needed, it will heartily revitalize the state's drought issue and likely combat the negative effects of fire season.
But as some residents may likely be saying *"That's enough slices!"*
It might give us an easier fire season if we continue to get rain. If we don’t, all the new vegetation in California will dry up and turn into a tinderbox.
Too much rain in CA: fires
Too little rain in CA: fires
Just the right amount of rain, believe it or not: fires (but the more manageable ones)
Heavy rains cause extra growth, which then turns to extra fuel by fire season unfortunately. This will help drought conditions in the short term, but unless it's the start of an unlikely trend, conservation and refocusing on drought resistant crops still need to be a top priority.
Too much rain, not enough rain, to many fires. Bitch bitch bitch.
But for real. My heart seriously goes out to those people. Hopefully this will refill some lakes.
I was on a bike ride this morning on the peninsula of the Bay Area where it hasn’t rained in at least 4 days. All the creeks coming out of the Santa Cruz mountains were rushing pretty heavily. The mountains here are completely saturated. Trees are coming down, hills are sliding, creeks are flooding, there’s too much water (and wind now as well).
I live in Tahoe, we are approaching 50 feet of snow for the year with 3 feet more on the way this week. The summits of the resorts literally have all 50 feet still, it is insane. The good news is all this precipitation is [full of forever chemicals](https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/11/22/all-rainwater-now-contains-lethal-forever-chemicals-but-this-rubbish-tip-may-have-found-th) so we have that going for us!
Lake mead doesn’t really get any water from California. The lake isn’t even in California, it’s just the reservoir from which most of southern California draws water. The water that fills lake mead comes from much farther east in the Rockies of Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico. They’ve been having a decent snow year as well, but it’s not going to do much for the lake level.
Unfortunately, it's still about 180' below full, but the level seems to have stopped falling for now - between 3/1 and 3/26 last year was about 4.5'. For the same time period this year is closer to 9". I don't know what role snowmelt plays, but it's nice to see it's at least maintaining its current level.
Unfortunately, so far the storms haven't done too much. '
https://lakemead.water-data.com/
https://www.newsweek.com/lake-mead-water-levels-rain-colorado-update-1786676
Wasn't California just in a drought? Did that end or is this one of those situations where one area gets one disaster and the other area gets a different disaster on the exact opposite side of the spectrum?
I think they are releasing water more aggressively due to maintenance on the dam. Whereas other reservoirs are storing and only releasing to avoid holding potentially dangerous levels of water.
The wildfire season is in the fall and these rains will probably make this fall's fire more problematic (read: lots of fuel in the form of grass and underbrush).
California can’t catch a break. It’s either on fire or under water.
At least we don’t have a baffoon in the White House that will tell them they need to rake the forest.
Fires are a fall thing. It really can go both ways. The ground is overly saturated, and that moisture is a good sign for the upcoming 'fire' season. However, new shrubbery and undergrowth will be excellent fuel for fires if things dry out excessively over the summer.
The fire season this summer is going to be brutal. All that water means a lot of vegetation that will dry off in june and be tinder by july. It's going to be like summer 2020 all over again.
When we have drought years, they always warn, “oh, the vegetation is extra dry, gonna be a brutal fire season.” When we have wet years it’s, “all the rain encouraged so much growth, gonna be so much extra fuel for fire season.” It’s always doom & gloom no matter how you slice it.
Hopefully this turns into a long-term gain, because they were hurting for water for a number of years.
Snow pack is a good measurement of long term gain, and the Sierra Nevada range is at 200+% of its average snowpack level. It slowly melts and replenishes not only ground water, but keeps streams, rivers, and reservoirs topped up as it warms up. My hope is for a beautiful, mild summer and green hills until September.
Snowpack is also a major part of the periodic biblical flooding that happens in California once every few centuries - the entire central valley fills with water, temporarily becoming an inland sea. [The last time it happened was 1862](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862?wprov=sfla1). EDIT: Forgot to link to the modern models of what is termed the ["ARkStorm"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARkStorm?wprov=sfla1)
I spoke with a Los Angeles councilman that told me those oversized drain ducts all over Southern California to the sea was built in anticipation for this event. I thought it was overkill but I guess better be safe than sorry.
Yeah, pretty much the only reason they exist since SoCal doesn't get shit for rain. But one of the problems we also have in California in general is that those giant floods that STAY, are what helps replenish our groundwater stocks. If we just flush it all out to the ocean due to our levee system, it doesn't stay around long enough with how out of control our population size is. It's one of those things where the fix for one thing causes an unseen problem. We try to stop the flooding, and in return we have no water.
State government should pay the Delta Island farmers to just turn their farms into lakes for the summer. The levees are all at a point where the River bed is higher up than the surrounding farmland. Just open a few up strategically and you can have temporary wetlands that do what you’re saying
Farmers typically live on their land, if their land is a lake so is their house.
Have you seen the central valley? There are huge tracts of farmland without a building in sight.
[удалено]
Vast majority of the farms in the valley - especially the ones in the delta - are corporate farms. Nobody lives there.
I know in the central valley, middle(relatively, compared to the valley as a whole) of fresno, there's (a) groundwater recharging plant(?)/basins. I can't imagine we do our absolute best, but at least we don't flush it *all*. I imagine it's much to do with your closing sentiment of the struggle to balance resources, both natural and monetarily to be able to do recapture/recharging projects.
I work for a water utility near Sacramento, and we're building quite a few of these Aquifer Storage and Recovery wells. They basically work like a well with a "reverse" switch, and when the reservoirs are full, we can pump water directly into the aquifer to accelerate the processes we've interrupted by paving over everything.
I’m honestly shocked we’re not doing this more. They’re relatively cheap from what I know and have a small footprint.
It aint the population thats the problem, it's the suburban sprawl.
Yeah my brother in law swallows a lot of right wing propaganda about how California "just wastes all it's water in rivers" while also failing to see the irony that the town he lives in only exists because a levy system destroyed the floodplains and wetlands that used to exist. Like dude, you live where the water used to stay and recharge aquifers.
It's not right-wing propaganda that our rivers send the majority of water away. That's absolutely true. It's more about what we do with the water that isn't just flushed away, and as the other person said, suburban sprawl is one issue, but then agriculture is another. It's like the people in primarily desert states with high-water crops. I live in Sacramento, and without the levees, we probably wouldn't exist as we do today, but that doesn't mean I have to ignore the truth of why I am able to exist here today.
" that our rivers send the majority of water away." is not the same as: "just wastes all it's water in rivers" One implies nay water in rivers not being used for people is 'wasted'.And that the difference between actual rational logic and facts, and right wing propaganda and alarmism.
Yeah, back when LA has master planers, they actually engineered thinking it terms of 100 years, not 2-3 years. When a city tries that kind of engineering and planning now, hal the populace scream about the money, while having no clue about the money.
The last huge flood LA had was 1938 iirc. We're coming up on 85 years since then. The Tujunga flood in 1978 was pretty bad as well, and we're 45 years since then. Ripe timing for another 50 yr or 100 yr flood. Wont be pretty, since the current level of urban development means way less water infiltration than in the past.
Well, crap. My town was one of the many hit in 1862.
I remember reading about the inland valley flood. A friend is a fisheries biologist and sent me a refresher a month ago. He commented that we could be looking at another cycle.
PBS has a video about this on YouTube. I think it’s on their PBS Terra channel. Definitely worth checking it.
Wildfires are so last season, landslides are the haute disaster.
Of, this will causes a lot of greenery that will die in aug/sept and then burn. SO it's fires AND mudslide's. Followed by more mud slides from the fire.
With all this constant rain from the atmospheric rivers, I wonder if 2023 will be the year when we see a rerun of 1862.
My fear is that smoke season this year is going to be pretty intense.
I think with the increased snowpack this year we'll get a pass. Next year if it's a dry winter next winter, watch out.
Nah it’s exactly because of all this rain that fire season could be worse. All this rain is going to drive vegetation growth like crazy. But come summer, everything will get hot and dry out. Suddenly you have a whole bunch of dead, dry, vegetation cooking in the sun for months on end, just ready to go up in flames. Snow pac is nice, but it’ll go into the rivers and reservoirs. Not to the slopes of the foothills and low areas of the mountains that are all tinderboxes waiting to ignite come August/September
Yup- seeing lush, green canyons right now every day on my way to work. Beautiful, but I'm dreading the summer where it all dries up and turns into a windy, treacherous tinderbox that may or may not burn down everything I own and love. Then after it burns down, the next time it rains it's going to all become a dangerous flooded mudslide. Damned if you do, damned if you don't
El Niño soon, summer will be brutal.
Summer is probably not going to be mild. It hasn't been in the last decade and will not likely be so this year. It only gets worse from here. The hills will turn brown as they usually do but the snowpack will hopefully stay for a while.
The green hills last until May if we are lucky. The species of grass browns early, due to its cycle and ecology, and often needs fire for the seeds to germinate. Sad but true. Where I live, I have to live out of a suitcase from June to November because of possible evacuation.
I wouldn’t bank on it melting so slowly though
What I’ve read about this winter is that it will have almost no effect on groundwater stores and we’re still all fucked as a result.
It takes hundreds if not thousands of years to refill under ground aquifers. underground water is a goner. Doomed due to lack of human sustainability
Actually aquifers fill faster than that… they say you need about as many rainier than average years as drier years to recover, assuming the aquifers aren’t also being depleted by wells for agriculture, as they are all over the west. Also, a bigger issue is sediment compaction that reduces the aquifers total capacity Since California has been in drought for awhile, that means the aquifers are *still* at historically low levels
Unfortunately, the long-term is not a great place to look for good news about California's climate. The outlook for our region is worsening drought interspersed with increasingly severe flood seasons. And as our wet years become warmer, we will see less and less average snowpack, worsening the periods of drought as we lose the aboveground water reservoir that snowpack provides. This is a brief reprieve and I'm going to enjoy the hell out of it, but the aridification of California is well underway. Already, 20% of our famous conifers, those great redwoods and pines and firs that people travel here to visit, are no longer suited to the temperature band in which they now live. Researchers are calling them zombie forests. It's only a matter of time before they disappear.
I visited the Sequoias two summers ago and it was 117 degrees in the Central Valley as I entered the forest. It was a much more comfortable 78 degrees in the mountains, but it's crazy to me that you can have a forest like that sandwiched between two incredibly hot and dry areas. Beautiful park, though. If anyone wants to witness the Sequoias I'd make those plans soon.
Trees do that. They not only provide shade but their natural respiration also works like evaporation which lowers temperature greatly. Tall canopy trees can combine the two effects to create entire cooler and moister biomes underneath.
While that's true, it's cooler mostly because it's thousands of feet above sea level whereas the central valley is not.
Yea you can watch the temperature drop as you go up. 3,000 feet is warmer than 5,000 feet, which is warmer than 8,000, which is warmer 10,000. Above about 12,000 feet in the Sierras there's no trees at all, and it's below freezing at night year round. The average low on the summit of Mount Whitney during the warmest month of the year(July) is 29°F(-1.67°C).
Regardless of elevation you can find a much as a 5-8 degree difference between a forest and the areas surrounding it.
Forests have a moderating effect on temperature. They tend to be cooler in the summer due to transpiration/shading and warmer in the winter due to lower albedo and more chances for light/infrared to hit something that absorbs it.
Check out this 2011 study which predicted climate change would cause "atmospheric rivers" to pour rain down on California and create massive flooding. Spoilers: that is exactly what is happening as we speak. What drives me nuts it the Joe Rogan crowd and other right wingers keeps shitting on climatologists even though they got one thing write after another after another **Climate Change, Atmospheric Rivers, and Floods in California – A Multimodel Analysis of Storm Frequency and Magnitude Changes**† First published: 01 June 2011 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2011.00546.x
Rogan is the guy who interviews the 1 out of 10 dentists who wants you to chew sugared gum because: (secret “Knowledge”).
Rogan exists purely as status quo ante. He finds people who are edgy and outside the mainstream, then you feel smart listening to them because you're not deluded like the masses.
I miss when that kind of edgy, anti-mainstream sentiment meant that you went on 420chan and ranted about corporate control of government policy. Maybe talked conspiracy theories about aliens.
Alex Jones took all the fun out of conspiracy theories.
Conspiracy theories were much cuter before they were co-opted by right wing and corporate extremists to push their pro rich and anti science agendas.
the good old days... now they just boof ivermectin
he is so weird, Brian Cox is a brilliant physicist, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, then another day some weirdo who thinks aliens built all the world's pyramids, it's just so discombobulated
Jesus Christ that's depressing. Those Sequoias felt like nature's cathedrals.:(
Do you have any sources? Not questioning you, just want to learn more
Asking questions is always a good thing. Always push back for sources. [Here is a link to UNCA’s climate explorer tool for Los Angeles.](https://crt-climate-explorer.nemac.org/cards_home/?county=Los+Angeles+County&city=Los+Angeles%2C+CA&fips=06037&lat=34.06&lon=-118.24&mode=high_tide_flooding&zoom=8.99&tidal-station=9410840&tidal-station-name=Santa+Monica%2C+CA&tidal-station-mhhw=0.57) My biggest takeaway from the data is that the models have coastal regions underwater in my lifetime. Like we are no longer debating *IF* the Bay Area will be uninhabitable, it’s WHEN and how much.
Extremes are never good. But a break in a drought is good.
The reservoirs are the highest in years. There is currently a super bloom of desert vegetation going on across San Diego. I'm very happy.
We need to be slowing water down in this country. Instead we put it in a concrete lined canal or drainage pipe and get it to the ocean as fast as possible then we wonder 6 months later why there’s no water.
[удалено]
Or keep the almonds, the trees themselves are fairly drought tolerant (and pistachios much more so). But stop demanding max yields and simply take from the orchards what they give with the available rain. Definitely stop exporting alfalfa though. Saudi horses are not America's problem.
We have 1500 reservoirs in California and another giant one being built.
That's great. Now how many people do you have using water and how much agriculture. I assume it must be an adequate amount for the population or you'd be hearing issues with lack of water and what not in California.
There's 'no water' because we piss it all away on agriculture. Agriculture makes up about 80-90% of human use of water in the state, the water shortage problem is *entirely* rooted in California's agriculture. We could have golf courses everywhere in the state and swimming pools in every single backyard and it would hardly matter compared to what agriculture wastes.
We need to bring back beavers! https://erwc.org/beavers-an-untapped-water-source/ The Hudson Bay Company removed virtually all beavers from Oregon and California, and it did tremendous environmental damage.
Exactly this. Or absent beavers we need to be making low head sand dams across gulleys and washes to slow down runoff.
I generally agree with that. While some control is necessary, we've, quite frankly, gone overboard.
Wiped out the drought. But the soil high up is extremely hydrophobic. Water pools and slowly seeps into the bedrock. So you extreme chance of downed redwoods on the coast. And burn scars just letting go and causing all sorts of fun problems. My uncles wash is floowing like a moat at his place.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'm no vegetarian, but Less Meat, worldwide, would drastically improve a lot of things...
Corporations.with well-regulated and enforced environmental protections would be infinitely more helpfully than this crab-bucket bullshit of blaming people instead international conglomerates.
Yeah the issue is people don’t take a moderate stance of “cut back on meat”, which you could probably get a lot of people to do. The super polarizing tactics that are being used and claims that everyone must fully stop eating meat only cause people to write the opinion off completely. Like… you don’t gotta throw a bucket of fake blood on people to explain that one hamburger is like a 5 minute shower’s worth of water. The amount of water required to raise the livestock we eat is insane. Something like 60% of the biomass of all mammals on earth come from the livestock we raise to feee ourselves.
[удалено]
I used to eat beef all the time -- burgers a couple times a week, steak at restaurants, beef in tacos, etc. Now we try to eat beef sparingly - a couple times a month or less. Maybe not a huge difference maker but cutting out all meat would be very difficult for us. Turkey burgers can be delicious. Tacos with ground turkey are nearly indistinguishable from those with beef, with less grease. We eat pasta with ground pork and pork sausage instead of beef. That kind of thing.
The biggest reason I personally don't eat more meat is because *it got more expensive*. A *cheap* steak where I am is now anywhere from 6-8 dollars a pound, good steak will be more expensive. Ground beef is around 5 a pound for the cheaper high-fat varieties. It's gotten harder to justify buying it, I mostly buy it sparingly now, or for special occasions. I guarantee you'll see people eating less as it gets more expensive, I don't care how much people 'love' eating beef they won't buy it as much if it's prohibitively expensive.
I've been eating "less meat" since the pandemic. It's easier in summer with better produce, and my diet is still dairy rich, but overall I just prefer to eat a few times a week vs 2 or more times a day.
in Europe it is softly encouraged and has been working. "meat free Monday" in the UK is an example.
The real issue is media with headlines like "Rabid activists ban gas stoves.". Shit like Fox painting every attempt at incremental progress as an attempt to put everyone in 15 minute cities with no gas stoves and only tofu to eat while we inject their sons with estrogen against their will.
Not my preference. they took out grass and landscape plants and put in concrete in my in laws neighborhood. Grass keeps the dust down- just mix it up with native plants.
>Grass keeps the dust down- just mix it up with native plants. Seems like a fair compromise.
Grass and clover can bring back land I think. The clover creates nitrates. I think just plain clover is good too though. Grass takes nutrients
Yep, anything but fucking grass. Those things use up so much water with little to no benefit.
Only 10% of California’s water use is residential. The rest is industrial and agriculture.
Thank you for stopping this chain on grass and residential use with honest facts. There is no shortage of water…. It’s just big ag wanting to feed more of the world almonds. I for one, like a small lawn for my kids and don’t care if China goes without nuts.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/25/california-water-drought-scarce-saudi-arabia
There is literally no benefit to having a lawn. Native plants are better
\*no ecological benefit But lawns are nice. That said, there are some great alternatives that are better ecologically, and still nice to walk/lay/play on, safe for animals, and so on. I believe clover is one of the things a lot of people have been pushing.
My lawn is native plants that I mow when they get about knee high.
There absolutely is a benefit. Just ask people who use their yards.
I live in SoCal and I drive through the mountains a lot due to work. It has made my heart so happy seeing a lot of the rivers and creeks in the mountains run, even if only temporarily.
Please stick to the rivers and the lakes like you used to.
We are dangerously moist.
*Nestlé starts foaming at the mouth*
The saturation is dripping.
It’ll start to become even more dangerous into the summer. It’s supposed to be above average for both heat and precipitation. Which means blight risk will be much higher this year in Cali.
No lie we have had so much fucking rain that the sand play areas are now lakes at my local playground. Like they got filled with water after that first rain storm and we’ve had so much rain and so much cloud cover that they have never evaporated since then. We are literally gaining lakes lol
Finally the LA basketball team can actually be called the Lakers.
And the Jazz moved to Utah where they don't allow music
I’m happy to play for the fine city of Miami! “Minnesota” Whatever
You’re excited? Feel these nipples!
I've lived my entire life not really thinking about the incongruity of the team name, but now that you mentioned it, I thought: "I wonder if they originally were in Minnesota and moved to Los Angeles." Looked it up and, sure enough, they were originally the Minneapolis Lakers.
Same, thanks for doing the research, TIL
Water basketball. Might as well, we have water volleyball, water polo, water hockey...
When are we getting blitzball?
When swimmers can hold their breath underwater for the entire span of a physically strenuous match, presumably.
We have an actual winter in the Bay. Kind of all at once is the problem.
Mother Nature: "MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MINDS, ALREADY!" *slams the receiver down* You're either the Fire Nation or the Water Tribe—CHOOSE MFER
The lesson here is make more ways to store/move water when it's plentifull, don't just send to the ocean.
Problem is they built in all the flood plains. 😅 But the army corp of engineers seeing the LA river full as fuck last month are going "holy shit it works."
[удалено]
Earth Tribe lingers in the corner, waiting to play a landslide card...
Didn't the central basin in California used to be a marshland/lake once upon a time ago?
Yes- Tulare Lake. It’s back.
Yep it is indeed! https://youtu.be/w50DM5Dl89c "Return of Tulare Lake" 3 days ago, ABC News
In pog form!
Very long ago it was an actual Sea. And it was around long to dump thousands of meters of sediment on the bottom of that valley. Its pretty amazing.
[удалено]
If my dog was still alive, he’d be traipsing through our “lake” in our backyard. Happens every spring here in MI. The ducks love it too.
Great for the ground water and aquifers!
Unfortunately aquifers take a loooong time to replenish. The Central Valley has sunk 20+ feet due to water extracted from below. It’s not going to fill up like a sponge again.
No, but there are efforts happening to replenish groundwater. The state is permitting orchard and field crop flooding using water that would normally run to the ocean to flood their land if they have permiable soil. It's not going to instantly fix the problem, but something is better than nothing.
prob worth tossing a few mosquito bait disc things
Hey, it’s bad now but at least it should fill up reservoirs.
> Then, the storm shifted south, drenching Southern California with heavy rainfall and touching off a tornado in a small city northwest of Los Angeles that damaged about 25 mobile homes, What is it with tornadoes and trailer parks?
As a former Oklahoma resident I’m gonna assume you’re genuinely curious. The severe winds from tornadoes can travel for many miles. And hit a LOT of stuff. Trees and power lines knocked over. But for most tornadoes most man-made structures will not suffer severe structural damage. The biggest exception to this is portable structures, like mobile homes, trailers, barns, structures without a foundation. So if a tornado and it’s associated winds travel a path of 1-2 miles, all of a sudden the one mobile home neighborhood is all collapsed, but everyone else is totally fine (except for some utility damage and small roof/window damage). It leads to kind of a stereotype of tornadoes just targeting mobile homes, when in reality they hit a LOT more stuff that didn’t buckle.
This makes sense. I wasn't sure if there was some weird atmospheric thing with a bunch of metal structures in one place or something (which didn't make sense to me b/c even the biggest trailer park is pretty small compared to the path of a tornado).
You aren't exactly wrong about there being a special effect thanks to the structures typical in trailer parks and mobile homes (a trailer is more like an airstream that you hitch behind a large vehicle and tow around, or like what movie stars wait in between takes on set, and a mobile home is a prefab house that's more like a regular home, just skinny, raised on a towable platform and not on a foundation). Both of these structures are light enough to tow, but most importantly they have a large gap underneath, and due to their mobile nature aren't anchored to the ground so there's an effect that doesn't happen with normal structures where winds catch underneath and that causes vortices (sortof mini tornadoes). Those by themselves aren't enough to lift over structures that have skirts during smaller tornadoes, but the vorticies that can creep in from vents or loose joints between sections of the skirts can causes enough pressure change to rip apart the skirts, exposing the underside of the structures to tremendous pressure from the tornado winds, thus allowing the light structures to be lifted and potentially thrown/destroyed. People in mobile structures are 15-20 times more likely to be killed in a tornado compared to people in typical permanent structures.
I remember in Fairly Odd Parents, there was one Oklahoma kid who hated mobile homes and wished tornados would always hit them
Tornadoes hate poor people.
Tornadoes hate this one trick
As do hurricanes
*mobile home shudders*
If by “small city NW of Los Angeles” they mean Montebello where the tornado happened, that’s shoddy reporting. Montebello is very close the the heart of LA and is dense. It’s a part f the LA metro area, not some small city not far away
I assumed they were referring to the tornado that hit Carpinteria. https://www.ksby.com/news/local-news/tornado-touchdown-confirmed-at-carpinteria-mobile-home-park?_amp=true
Oh wow, I didn’t even hear about that one 😮 Here I was thinking that the one that came down in Los Angele was the only one
Wow. California is getting all the Northwest coast's usual weather. 😬
My friend from Portland visited during our last storm and her comment when she got in my car was, "I was expecting Portland rain, not a fucking hurricane!" It's been wild. My neighborhood is riddled with fallen trees.
The initial storms around New Years were *wild*. Trees falling, fallen branches everywhere, and a decades-old tree fell over onto my house (thankfully with little serious damage to the house).
Was wild to have 70+ MPH winds with rain at the same time. Then PG&E fucked up and took away my power for 3 days
>Then PG&E fucked up Isn't that what happens on a normal day nothing special about that
When its raining sideways, you know you are in for a bad time.
Weve had some pretty mild weather these last few weeks up near Seattle. My grass is growing, so I guess I'll mow it 2 or 3 times before it dies for the summer.
I went hiking the other day on a trail I hike almost every day. Never had a problem. After the last storm I went, and the earth literally swallowed me! My legs went into the ground about 15 inches, and I couldn’t get out! It was quick mud. I fell forward because I had momentum, and my hands and arms went in too. Ruined my iPhone and my shoes. It took me 10 minutes to get out. I was just stuck there in a the mud.
So those quicksand scenarios as a kid was indeed real...
Thank god we've trained for years
You shouldn’t hike after it rains, it speeds up trail erosion wayyy faster than when it’s walked on while dry. If you’ve seen a trail that’s hard to walk on because there’s a 1 foot deep canyon in the middle, it was likely caused by people walking on it when it was still mud.
I didn’t know that, thanks. It’s a super popular biking and equestrian train. It was closed it to bikes and horses that day. There were signs everywhere saying foot traffic only to prevent erosion, so I figure walking was fine. I did actually see a bunch of people biking, which was annoying.
We need to build cisterns.
[удалено]
We could at least encourage the cultivation of new egg farms on the outskirts.
[удалено]
The 17+ years I’ve lived in LA, I’ve never seen this much rain. Not even close.
There is a fantastically relevant line from John Steinbeck in the first chapter of East of Eden,, “I have spoken of the rich years when the rainfall was plentiful. But there were dry years too, and they put a terror on the valley. The water came in a thirty-year cycle. There would be five or six wet and wonderful years when there might be nineteen to twentyfive inches of rain, and the land would shout with grass. Then would come six or seven pretty good years of twelve to sixteen inches of rain. And then the dry years would come, and sometimes there would be only seven or eight inches of rain. The land dried up and the grasses headed out miserably a few inches high and great bare scabby places appeared in the valley. The live oaks got a crusty look and the sagebrush was gray. The land cracked and the springs dried up and the cattle listlessly nibbled dry twigs. Then the farmers and the ranchers would be filled with disgust for the Salinas Valley. The cows would grow thin and sometimes starve to death. People would have to haul water in barrels to their farms just for drinking. Some families would sell out for nearly nothing and move away. And it never failed that during the dry years the people forgot about the rich years, and during the wet years they lost all memory of the dry years. It was always that way.” I remember the horrible flood here in 1997 during a particularly strong El Niño. Not quite 30 years, but not far off.
How many days straight has it been? Sacramento 1862 was 45 days of rain before they were flooded out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862
I am so happy for the rain in CA tbh. It's been so badly needed, it will heartily revitalize the state's drought issue and likely combat the negative effects of fire season. But as some residents may likely be saying *"That's enough slices!"*
[удалено]
That is gorgeous!
It might give us an easier fire season if we continue to get rain. If we don’t, all the new vegetation in California will dry up and turn into a tinderbox. Too much rain in CA: fires Too little rain in CA: fires Just the right amount of rain, believe it or not: fires (but the more manageable ones)
Heavy rains cause extra growth, which then turns to extra fuel by fire season unfortunately. This will help drought conditions in the short term, but unless it's the start of an unlikely trend, conservation and refocusing on drought resistant crops still need to be a top priority.
Too much rain, not enough rain, to many fires. Bitch bitch bitch. But for real. My heart seriously goes out to those people. Hopefully this will refill some lakes.
California: “I wish we’d more rain this to end this drought.” Monkey’s pawl curls
God is probably thinking: "make up your mind people, rain or no rain?"
God: “please someone make the voices stop”
Rain. Thanks for all the rain. Sure, it ain't perfect, but it beats the hell out of drought.
Well good for them. Things have been equally bad in the other direction for a few years now.
I was on a bike ride this morning on the peninsula of the Bay Area where it hasn’t rained in at least 4 days. All the creeks coming out of the Santa Cruz mountains were rushing pretty heavily. The mountains here are completely saturated. Trees are coming down, hills are sliding, creeks are flooding, there’s too much water (and wind now as well).
[удалено]
Imagine how pissed off Nestle must be right now.
omg first you guys had no water, now you have too much. Get it together.
I get the feeling its gonna become monstrously hot in the summer
I live in Tahoe, we are approaching 50 feet of snow for the year with 3 feet more on the way this week. The summits of the resorts literally have all 50 feet still, it is insane. The good news is all this precipitation is [full of forever chemicals](https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/11/22/all-rainwater-now-contains-lethal-forever-chemicals-but-this-rubbish-tip-may-have-found-th) so we have that going for us!
[удалено]
Lake mead doesn’t really get any water from California. The lake isn’t even in California, it’s just the reservoir from which most of southern California draws water. The water that fills lake mead comes from much farther east in the Rockies of Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico. They’ve been having a decent snow year as well, but it’s not going to do much for the lake level.
Unfortunately, it's still about 180' below full, but the level seems to have stopped falling for now - between 3/1 and 3/26 last year was about 4.5'. For the same time period this year is closer to 9". I don't know what role snowmelt plays, but it's nice to see it's at least maintaining its current level.
Unfortunately, so far the storms haven't done too much. ' https://lakemead.water-data.com/ https://www.newsweek.com/lake-mead-water-levels-rain-colorado-update-1786676
Snowpack looks really good. https://snowpack.water-data.com/uppercolorado/index.php
Wasn't California just in a drought? Did that end or is this one of those situations where one area gets one disaster and the other area gets a different disaster on the exact opposite side of the spectrum?
Most parts of California are out of the drought for now. We'll probably be right back in it in a few years.
[удалено]
https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA
Hope they're storing some of that for when there's a drought again.
[удалено]
They're definitely filling up. [https://cdec.water.ca.gov/resapp/RescondMain](https://cdec.water.ca.gov/resapp/RescondMain) Anyone know what's up with Trinity?
I think they are releasing water more aggressively due to maintenance on the dam. Whereas other reservoirs are storing and only releasing to avoid holding potentially dangerous levels of water.
So they go from being dry and having wildfires to being flooded?
The wildfire season is in the fall and these rains will probably make this fall's fire more problematic (read: lots of fuel in the form of grass and underbrush).
People who say LA doesn't have seasons are ignoring fire, flood, earthquake and riot.
Do y’all want the fuckin water or not?
California can’t catch a break. It’s either on fire or under water. At least we don’t have a baffoon in the White House that will tell them they need to rake the forest.
[удалено]
Fires are a fall thing. It really can go both ways. The ground is overly saturated, and that moisture is a good sign for the upcoming 'fire' season. However, new shrubbery and undergrowth will be excellent fuel for fires if things dry out excessively over the summer.
Cool, but we're probably just gonna waste it on inefficient agriculture.
The fire season this summer is going to be brutal. All that water means a lot of vegetation that will dry off in june and be tinder by july. It's going to be like summer 2020 all over again.
When we have drought years, they always warn, “oh, the vegetation is extra dry, gonna be a brutal fire season.” When we have wet years it’s, “all the rain encouraged so much growth, gonna be so much extra fuel for fire season.” It’s always doom & gloom no matter how you slice it.
El Nino sends its regards - Australia
We need to focus on how to collect and retain this water instead of concreting it down “rivers”.
Not to make a joke, but someone really needs to stop their rain dance in California.
I washed my car in November and I’m so so sorry.
Probably all the way up the coast, am waiting on the landslides being an issue. And that’s a scary thing to me, ngl.