Applications of climate forecast information in water resources management: opportunities and challenges in the Yakima R. basin, Washington Andy Wood Julie Vano Shrad Shukla Anne Steinemann Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Washington NOAA Climate Prediction Application Science Workshop Chapel Hill, NC, March 2008

CPASW Challenge! Climatologically benign future meeting location?

Using NOAA Climate Forecasts with Hydrological Assessments to Reduce Drought Vulnerabilities and Improve Water Management Project Goals: 1) Explore model-based hydrologic drought indicators as triggers for management: soil moisture, SWE, streamflow (Wood) 2) Interact with water users and managers to integrate climate and hydrologic forecasts in decision-making (Steinemann) http://www.hydro.washington.edu/forecast/sarp/ http://www.hydro.washington.edu/forecast/sarp/

Research Activities (2nd goal) Motivation Drought among most costly natural disasters Drought in Washington agriculture losses more than $400 million in 2001 and $300 million in 2005 Climate and hydrologic forecast information helps avoid drought impacts Research Activities (2nd goal) Explore current uses of NOAA climate information in water resources management Understand user perspectives & decisions and identify service gaps highlight decision focus give example: if manager makes a decision that is contingent on season ahead climate, but does not use available climate forecasts, what is his/her perspective on those forecasts (ie their utility or relationship to the decision), and what are opportunities for extending the climate service. (not so much about making a better forecast, but about making existing forecasts more relevant) Photo courtesy of http://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/html/yakima.html

Linkages between Climate / Hydrologic Information and Decisions Examples decision required information climate / hydrology existing forecast information success / gap water allocations for summer irrigation on March 1, April-July runoff NRCS/RFC runoff volume forecast ENSO climatology + accurate most years + easy to understand + location specific - no monthly disaggregation set spawning flow levels; must keep constant by Nov 1, Nov-Dec inflow, precip or even just Nov 1-15 precip CPC medium range precipitation forecast; CPC seasonal precipitation forecast + shows direction of forecast clearly - no idea whether they’re any good - probability maps hard to translate to precip amts.

Overview Yakima River Basin hydrology and water use Climate-related Decisionmaking TALKING POINTS: Photo courtesy of http://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/html/yakima.html

Yakima River Basin Hydrology Elevation 8184 ft to 340 ft Temp and precip 22-76F, 80-140 in at 2300 ft 90F, 0-10 in at 350 ft 60 - 80% precip in October-March Water supply during growing season in lower basin primarily from snowmelt, depends on reservoirs for storage Six USBR reservoirs with storage capacity of ~1 million acre-ft, ~25% unregulated runoff Managed system vulnerable to drought with increasing water use and changing snowpack TRANSTION TO NEXT SLIDE: This water is used in many ways… REFERENCES: (USBR, 2002) http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?wa4154: KENNEWICK, WASHINGTON (454154) http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?wa4406: LAKE KACHESS, WASHINGTON (454406) Precipitation varies considerably across the basin throughout the year. Mean-annual precipitation ranges from 140 inches in the higher mountains of the northwestern part of the basin to less than 10 inches throughout the lower Yakima Valley. The amount of precipitation that occurs during the period of Oct ober to March period, both the arid and alpine parts of the basin ranges from 61-81% of the annual precipitation. The variation in annual precipitation can be large. The geographic variability of mean annual precip 1951-1980 in high mts between 80-140 inches in lower between 0-10 inches (USBR 2002, pg 2-2) Water quality, generally high in upper basin. Degrades downstream. Many reaches in Federal Clean Water Act 303(d) list. Issues of turbidity, pesticides, low dissolved oxygen, elevated temperatures, metals, fecal coliform, low flows, and pH. Air temps, inversely related to altitude. Min and Max occur in Jan and July. Values above from LAKE KACHESS (1971-2000 Monthly Climate Summary, Average Min in Jan and Average Max in July) -Reserviors been in place since 1930s -Irrigation project serves 465,000 acres -Basin drains about 4 million acres (Basin drains about 6150 sq miles) -Yakima River flows about 215 miles -Estimated unregulated runoff of Yakima Basin (1961-1990) is 3.97 million acre-ft FROM POSTER, AGU 2006 -The USBR Yakima Project supports approximately 464,000 irrigated acres (via four irrigation districts -- Roza, Yakima-Tieton, Sunnyside Valley and Kittitas -- and the Wapato Division). -Most of the water in the Yakima River comes from snowmelt, and is caught in a series of reservoirs to ensure sufficient water supply throughout the season.

Climate Prediction Center Three-Month Outlooks Division 74 http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/

Water Use in Yakima Basin - Agriculture Yakima County 5th in nation Ag production Higher value crops, less stress tolerant Fisheries, spring and fall Chinook salmon, summer Steelhead, Coho salmon Hydroelectric, nine power plants Public water supply, population growth POTIENTAL TALKING POINTS: -Yakima River Basin, home to the state's most valuable irrigated crops -Prevailing trend to higher value, less stress tolerant crops, away from grain -Stream flow increasingly managed for instream flows for fish, spawning grounds for endangered salmon species -45% perennial: orchards, hops, mint SLIDE TRANSITION: Increasingly more water use - managing for more AG DETAILS: Ag represents 8.4% of region’s total sales revenue. Yakima County a leading ag county in the nation, 1st in production of many crops, and 5th in total ag production. Perennial crops require an adequate annual water supply. Spant stress in these crops attributable to water shortages can result in severe economic hardship to grower because of lower production and reduced crop quality that may render than unmarketable, which occred in 1994 (worst year on record), and to a lesser degree in the mid 1970s. Water storages can also damage plants enough to require rootstock replacement which requires high replanting costs and continued economic losses for several years. Prevailing trend to convert from stress-tolerate crops to the higher value crops. Timber, cattle, fish and wildlife habitat, and recreation are major uses for nothern and western parts of basin, while irrigated ag is the main ecomony of the lower basin The 300 million-dollar apple crop in the Yakima Valley of Washington State is at risk every year in the early spring. Cold weather can freeze the blossoms and kill them. In order to survive, growers have to install crop protection systems to guard against frost. For years, they placed rows of oil burning heaters around the edges of their fields. (http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/socasp/weather1/stewart.html) FISH DETAILS: Yakama Nation Treaty water right for fish (USBR, 2002) SOAC - System Operations Advisory Committee Quakenbush decision - protection of fish resources HYDROELECTRIC DETAILS: 9 hydroelectric power plants and nine hydraulic pump plants in the basin. These are operated by Reclamation, irriation districts, a private individaul and PacificCorp (Wapatox). Only the Wapatox facilities have a right senior to the project. All others operate on flows subordinate to irrigation and storage. PUBLIC SUPPLY DETAILS: Domestic, municipal and industrial (all captured under public supply) Population, percent change, April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2006 4.7%, http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/53077.html Meeting Notes from 2 Aug 2007: I was told (by a friendly older women - unfortunately, I did not get her name): --Yakima’s biggest visitor attractions are (1) sunshine and (2) wine --There are lots of people moving here from W. Washington (to escape the rain), Bend, OR (to escape the prices), and CA (to retire… it’s inexpensive and the sunshine is guaranteed). --To meet these needs, there have been lots of development including two golf courses (one 9-hole, one 18-hole) and at least 4 different new developments that easily came to her mind. They are also revitalizing their downtown (putting in cobblestone streets) and have a ‘doctor university’ coming to town. Photos courtesy of http://www.visityakima.com and http://www.wineyakimavalley.org

Interactions with decisionmakers Attend monthly USBR River Operations meetings Understand how decisions made people most involved relevant meetings, reports, other resources Understand current water management Total Water Supply Available (50%, 100%, 150% of average) uses of and impressions of forecasts stigma of past events (eg, 2001, 1977) major concerns for future TALKING POINTS: -Build connections, attend USBR River Operations Meetings (show interest, reduce miscommunication) -Outline who the ‘stakeholders are -Importance of face-to-face interactions -Graduate student has a unique position - easy to ask questions -La Nina predictions and shortterm weather forecasts -Margin within which managing… less room for error, very intereste -TWSA: multiple regression analysis uses correlations with precipitation, streamflow, snow measures, forecasts are made for precipitation levels of 50, 100 and %150 normal. TRANSITON.. These stigma of past events and major future concerns can really help in guiding what products they will see as most useful… to better understand this, once we were able to know who was making the decision, be began asking questions, primarily… DETAILS ON TWSA: Max, Min, and Avg all from 1981-2000 and 2007 values of: (1) System Unregulated Flow Volume (system of reservoirs, sum of inflows), (2) Observed Flow Volume (system of reservoirs, sum of outflows), (3) Parker Unregulated Flow Volume (Yakima River NR Parker mean daily natural discharge), (4) Parker Observed Flow Volume (Yakima River NR Parker mean daily regulated discharge) (5) Yakima System Diversions (5 major irrigation diversions above Parker) (6) Yakima System Storage (Reservoir system storage, mean daily reservoir volume) IMPRESSION OF FORECASTS: CL said later that the long lead outlooks are “a standing joke”, but it appears that they pay some attention to the medium range ones, CL said they did this in cases of needing a tie-breaker sometimes – i.e., extra evidence in favor of making a decision. --For us, I believe the most relevant part of the meeting was when CL talked about seasonal outlooks. When he showed a slide with Climate Prediction Center information (similar to last meeting), it was very interesting to see how it was presented and what the response was, specifically: (1) He said that the La Nina has developed further. He had retrieved this update from the web just this morning. (2) When CL mentioned La Nina, one of the managers said something like, “That’s really scary because the forecast is usually wrong.” This comment got a good laugh. (JV: audience quite skeptical!) (3) CL described Equal Chances as near normal (JV: is this a fair description – or is it that they just are not venturing a forecast… is this distinction even meaningful??) (4) One guy responded to the summer’s prediction that it would be “warm and dry” as “those guys are really sticking their necks out.” (JV: My perspective is that he did not interpret this as warmer and drier than normal, but rather warm and dry like all summers are.) (5) CL transitioned to the next slide by saying something like “moving on to something more in the present” (JV: it felt as if he was saying moving on to something more applicable) PAST, PRESENT, FUTURE MGMT: Past: prior 1970s little drought, 1977 ‘forecast bust’, Reclamation cannot legally release information until March, still skeptical Present: good communication among users, asked to do more with same amount of water, droughts 2001 and 2005 Future: declining April snowpack, growing population, increasing ESA and CWA restrictions, water managers open to new approaches REFERENCES: http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/graphics/photos/ Aerial view of apple and pear orchards near Yakima, Washington, in the Yakima River valley. Note that this isn't the Yakima River, but a canal that feeds from the rive SCRAPS: Identifying key people how get at this… visitors center, established organizations…

Interactions with decisionmakers Primary venue for face-to-face interaction -- the monthly river operations meeting at the USBR Field Office in Yakima, WA. Participants include: forecasters water managers irrigation district managers fisheries biologists NRCS Typical agenda at right  TALKING POINTS: -Build connections, attend USBR River Operations Meetings (show interest, reduce miscommunication) -Outline who the ‘stakeholders are -Importance of face-to-face interactions -Graduate student has a unique position - easy to ask questions -La Nina predictions and shortterm weather forecasts -Margin within which managing… less room for error, very intereste -TWSA: multiple regression analysis uses correlations with precipitation, streamflow, snow measures, forecasts are made for precipitation levels of 50, 100 and %150 normal. TRANSITON.. These stigma of past events and major future concerns can really help in guiding what products they will see as most useful… to better understand this, once we were able to know who was making the decision, be began asking questions, primarily… DETAILS ON TWSA: Max, Min, and Avg all from 1981-2000 and 2007 values of: (1) System Unregulated Flow Volume (system of reservoirs, sum of inflows), (2) Observed Flow Volume (system of reservoirs, sum of outflows), (3) Parker Unregulated Flow Volume (Yakima River NR Parker mean daily natural discharge), (4) Parker Observed Flow Volume (Yakima River NR Parker mean daily regulated discharge) (5) Yakima System Diversions (5 major irrigation diversions above Parker) (6) Yakima System Storage (Reservoir system storage, mean daily reservoir volume) IMPRESSION OF FORECASTS: CL said later that the long lead outlooks are “a standing joke”, but it appears that they pay some attention to the medium range ones, CL said they did this in cases of needing a tie-breaker sometimes – i.e., extra evidence in favor of making a decision. --For us, I believe the most relevant part of the meeting was when CL talked about seasonal outlooks. When he showed a slide with Climate Prediction Center information (similar to last meeting), it was very interesting to see how it was presented and what the response was, specifically: (1) He said that the La Nina has developed further. He had retrieved this update from the web just this morning. (2) When CL mentioned La Nina, one of the managers said something like, “That’s really scary because the forecast is usually wrong.” This comment got a good laugh. (JV: audience quite skeptical!) (3) CL described Equal Chances as near normal (JV: is this a fair description – or is it that they just are not venturing a forecast… is this distinction even meaningful??) (4) One guy responded to the summer’s prediction that it would be “warm and dry” as “those guys are really sticking their necks out.” (JV: My perspective is that he did not interpret this as warmer and drier than normal, but rather warm and dry like all summers are.) (5) CL transitioned to the next slide by saying something like “moving on to something more in the present” (JV: it felt as if he was saying moving on to something more applicable) PAST, PRESENT, FUTURE MGMT: Past: prior 1970s little drought, 1977 ‘forecast bust’, Reclamation cannot legally release information until March, still skeptical Present: good communication among users, asked to do more with same amount of water, droughts 2001 and 2005 Future: declining April snowpack, growing population, increasing ESA and CWA restrictions, water managers open to new approaches REFERENCES: http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/graphics/photos/ Aerial view of apple and pear orchards near Yakima, Washington, in the Yakima River valley. Note that this isn't the Yakima River, but a canal that feeds from the rive SCRAPS: Identifying key people how get at this… visitors center, established organizations…

Water management decisions have diverse climate information needs Decision calendar helpful for organizing information (cf work by Andrea Ray, Bonnie Colby) – these vary by decisionmaker - e.g., Manager vs. Irrigator Utility of forecasts (P, T, Q) varies greatly throughout the year The following slides give several examples 4 DECISION REALMS: Chris Lynch’s perspective on forecast needs. I asked CL about when having an ideal forecast would be important to decision-making. After our conversation, my perspective is there are basically four decision-making realms: (1) filling the reservoirs as close as possible without flooding in winter and spring, (2) increasing carryover in the fall while still maintaining flows for fish, (3) week-to-week operations in summer, (4) agricultural decisions. Within each of these, the needs seem to be more nuanced, e.g. there is a lot of ‘if then’ or ‘depends on’ situations. See notes below for more (6 Sept 2007 mtg notes) MORE THOUGHTS FROM CHRIS: Who are we most interested in passing information to? CL really controls when water is on or off. But all decisions prior to March re: what to plant, $ from banks, water trading, etc. are not his. He is legally bound not to say anything before then, and it seems that this isn’t likely going to change in the near future. So… in terms of seasonal forecasts, perhaps our audience is more general – the farmers, bankers, etc who need to make decisions prior to March.

Spawning Flows vs Reservoir Refill (early November) decision made climate info considered Decision (by water manager): fix reservoir outflows to a constant during Nov-Dec so that fish can spawn without redds being flooded or dewatered; but keep as much water in storage so as to maximize future refill chances, up to the point of reducing flood control. Information needed: - system: current storage volume - hydrologic: system/channel inflows during Nov & Dec; Apr-July - climate: if hydrologic not available, precip during same periods

Spawning Flows vs Reservoir Refill (early November) decision made climate info considered Information available: - system: current storage volume - hydrologic: Apr-Jul ESP forecasts from RFC (new, not connected yet); internal regressions - climate: CPC MR forecasts; CPC seasonal outlooks Gaps: - hydrologic: trusted, timely MR and Apr-Jul forecasts at relevant sites - climate: gap may be smaller than expected

Spawning Flows vs Reservoir Refill (early November) Climate Information Use Use depends on current situation – in general, if a decision outcome uncertainty range includes adverse consequences, more information is sought. For example, system storage is a critical factor. - Storage good – no worries. - Storage low – both MR and seasonal forecasts become “of interest”. MR forecasts are trusted more, and used as qualitative “tie-breaker” Seasonal forecasts are perused, not really trusted. Seen as “directionally deterministic”.

directional determinism

Decisions may depend on short, medium range and seasonal forecast information at once Basin outflow Yakima system storage The sources of information at different leads are distinct… but decisionmakers intuitively weight and merge information An argument for the so-called “seamless suite”! one event

increasing carryover while preparing to support flows for fish in fall climate/hydrology decision areas increasing carryover while preparing to support flows for fish in fall week-to-week operations in summer e.g.

agricultural decisions in winter for irrigation season climate/hydrology decision areas agricultural decisions in winter for irrigation season Managers: taking an early look at water year, but can’t make public statements until March. Farmers / irrigators / banks: what to plant, $ from banks, water trading decisions.

Gaps? Climate: CPC/WFOs do have forecast products in the realms that this USBR needs, and USBR accesses them. No use of “skill” information  intuitive weighting by USBR Hydrology: RFCs/NRCS have a few flow products that meet USBR needs, but some connections have not been made. No use of “skill” information  intuitive weighting use of multiple sources to assess confidence TALKING POINTS: -Build connections, attend USBR River Operations Meetings (show interest, reduce miscommunication) -Outline who the ‘stakeholders are -Importance of face-to-face interactions -Graduate student has a unique position - easy to ask questions -La Nina predictions and shortterm weather forecasts -Margin within which managing… less room for error, very intereste -TWSA: multiple regression analysis uses correlations with precipitation, streamflow, snow measures, forecasts are made for precipitation levels of 50, 100 and %150 normal. TRANSITON.. These stigma of past events and major future concerns can really help in guiding what products they will see as most useful… to better understand this, once we were able to know who was making the decision, be began asking questions, primarily… DETAILS ON TWSA: Max, Min, and Avg all from 1981-2000 and 2007 values of: (1) System Unregulated Flow Volume (system of reservoirs, sum of inflows), (2) Observed Flow Volume (system of reservoirs, sum of outflows), (3) Parker Unregulated Flow Volume (Yakima River NR Parker mean daily natural discharge), (4) Parker Observed Flow Volume (Yakima River NR Parker mean daily regulated discharge) (5) Yakima System Diversions (5 major irrigation diversions above Parker) (6) Yakima System Storage (Reservoir system storage, mean daily reservoir volume) IMPRESSION OF FORECASTS: CL said later that the long lead outlooks are “a standing joke”, but it appears that they pay some attention to the medium range ones, CL said they did this in cases of needing a tie-breaker sometimes – i.e., extra evidence in favor of making a decision. --For us, I believe the most relevant part of the meeting was when CL talked about seasonal outlooks. When he showed a slide with Climate Prediction Center information (similar to last meeting), it was very interesting to see how it was presented and what the response was, specifically: (1) He said that the La Nina has developed further. He had retrieved this update from the web just this morning. (2) When CL mentioned La Nina, one of the managers said something like, “That’s really scary because the forecast is usually wrong.” This comment got a good laugh. (JV: audience quite skeptical!) (3) CL described Equal Chances as near normal (JV: is this a fair description – or is it that they just are not venturing a forecast… is this distinction even meaningful??) (4) One guy responded to the summer’s prediction that it would be “warm and dry” as “those guys are really sticking their necks out.” (JV: My perspective is that he did not interpret this as warmer and drier than normal, but rather warm and dry like all summers are.) (5) CL transitioned to the next slide by saying something like “moving on to something more in the present” (JV: it felt as if he was saying moving on to something more applicable) PAST, PRESENT, FUTURE MGMT: Past: prior 1970s little drought, 1977 ‘forecast bust’, Reclamation cannot legally release information until March, still skeptical Present: good communication among users, asked to do more with same amount of water, droughts 2001 and 2005 Future: declining April snowpack, growing population, increasing ESA and CWA restrictions, water managers open to new approaches REFERENCES: http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/graphics/photos/ Aerial view of apple and pear orchards near Yakima, Washington, in the Yakima River valley. Note that this isn't the Yakima River, but a canal that feeds from the rive SCRAPS: Identifying key people how get at this… visitors center, established organizations…

Accuracy, usefulness, and limitations of forecast information 69% 19% 10% 2% Temperature Precipitation 28% 30% 22% 20% 48% 71% TALKING POINTS: Equal chances 62 of 144 times for temp, 70 times for precip With seasonal forecasts use ~20 times in career, accuracy unappealing The range of topography the forecasts are covering, why skill might not be so great. Don’t use Heidke skill measures or RMSE Instead % times in right direction This isn’t the only or the best, but here is what I did. Two categories, above or below ACS COMMENTS: (1) the results of the directional skill analysis -- which essentially say the forecasts are useless. I might suggest two things:(a) present results from an evaluation of the hydrologic forecasts -- Dr. Wood can provide you those.(b) do the directional skill analysis on another area -- a different set of observed values -- I assume you can just paste those into your spreadsheet, and get results fairly quickly. Directional Skill: What percentage of time is the forecast in the "right" direction? Above Normal (AN) or Below Normal (BN) CPC Seasonal Forecast Climate Division 74, lead time 0.5 month, 1995-2006 Temp more skillful than precip according to this measure

use of analogues…an opportunity? analogue “forecast” use is widespread in applications world. i.e., this year is like … pros: no “median” line lots of variability can relate directly to past experience cons: can under-represent variability hard to combine with ICs TALKING POINTS: -Build connections, attend USBR River Operations Meetings (show interest, reduce miscommunication) -Outline who the ‘stakeholders are -Importance of face-to-face interactions -Graduate student has a unique position - easy to ask questions -La Nina predictions and shortterm weather forecasts -Margin within which managing… less room for error, very intereste -TWSA: multiple regression analysis uses correlations with precipitation, streamflow, snow measures, forecasts are made for precipitation levels of 50, 100 and %150 normal. TRANSITON.. These stigma of past events and major future concerns can really help in guiding what products they will see as most useful… to better understand this, once we were able to know who was making the decision, be began asking questions, primarily… DETAILS ON TWSA: Max, Min, and Avg all from 1981-2000 and 2007 values of: (1) System Unregulated Flow Volume (system of reservoirs, sum of inflows), (2) Observed Flow Volume (system of reservoirs, sum of outflows), (3) Parker Unregulated Flow Volume (Yakima River NR Parker mean daily natural discharge), (4) Parker Observed Flow Volume (Yakima River NR Parker mean daily regulated discharge) (5) Yakima System Diversions (5 major irrigation diversions above Parker) (6) Yakima System Storage (Reservoir system storage, mean daily reservoir volume) IMPRESSION OF FORECASTS: CL said later that the long lead outlooks are “a standing joke”, but it appears that they pay some attention to the medium range ones, CL said they did this in cases of needing a tie-breaker sometimes – i.e., extra evidence in favor of making a decision. --For us, I believe the most relevant part of the meeting was when CL talked about seasonal outlooks. When he showed a slide with Climate Prediction Center information (similar to last meeting), it was very interesting to see how it was presented and what the response was, specifically: (1) He said that the La Nina has developed further. He had retrieved this update from the web just this morning. (2) When CL mentioned La Nina, one of the managers said something like, “That’s really scary because the forecast is usually wrong.” This comment got a good laugh. (JV: audience quite skeptical!) (3) CL described Equal Chances as near normal (JV: is this a fair description – or is it that they just are not venturing a forecast… is this distinction even meaningful??) (4) One guy responded to the summer’s prediction that it would be “warm and dry” as “those guys are really sticking their necks out.” (JV: My perspective is that he did not interpret this as warmer and drier than normal, but rather warm and dry like all summers are.) (5) CL transitioned to the next slide by saying something like “moving on to something more in the present” (JV: it felt as if he was saying moving on to something more applicable) PAST, PRESENT, FUTURE MGMT: Past: prior 1970s little drought, 1977 ‘forecast bust’, Reclamation cannot legally release information until March, still skeptical Present: good communication among users, asked to do more with same amount of water, droughts 2001 and 2005 Future: declining April snowpack, growing population, increasing ESA and CWA restrictions, water managers open to new approaches REFERENCES: http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/graphics/photos/ Aerial view of apple and pear orchards near Yakima, Washington, in the Yakima River valley. Note that this isn't the Yakima River, but a canal that feeds from the rive SCRAPS: Identifying key people how get at this… visitors center, established organizations…

Preliminary Conclusions NOAA medium range and seasonal climate forecasts are needed in typical western water management Users consider NOAA forecasts in decisionmaking despite a lack of information on their skill Seasonal forecasts a much greater target of skepticism than medium range forecasts “Re-findings”: deterministic interpretations; resolution (temporal / spatial) too coarse for quantitative use. opportunities in communication: e.g., analogues, hidden products Uncertainty - being clear (quote from Jacobs and Pulwarty 2003) “uncertainty is not the hallmark of bad science, it is the hallmark of honest science… This perennial question “Do we know enough to act?” is inherently a policy question not a scientific one” (Hon George Brown) Future Directions continue to interact and explore matches between forecast information and management decisions extend analyses to hydrologic forecasts, hopefully with participation from NW RFC.

Acknowledgements COLLABORATORS Chris Lynch, US Bureau of Reclamation Doug McChesney, WA Dept of Ecology FUNDING NOAA Sector Applications Research Program (SARP) University of Washington Presidential Fellowship (Vano)

awood@3tiergroup.com aww@u.washington.edu Questions? Andy Wood awood@3tiergroup.com aww@u.washington.edu Julie Vano jvano@u.washington.edu Shrad Shukla shrad@hydro.washington.edu Anne Steinemann acstein@u.washington.edu