Area Snowpack Levels Hit Five-Year Highs
Prince George, BC – Snowpack levels in our region of the province are the highest they’ve been in the past five years, or so, according to the Head of the BC River Forecast Centre.
David Campbell says manual surveys at the beginning of the month found levels in the Upper Fraser basin to be 149-percent of normal.
"The last time we had fairly high levels was back in 2007 and we’re sitting at pretty similar levels to 2007," says Campbell. "At a number of sites, both automated and some of the manual sites, we are seeing historic high levels."
He says the high snowpack levels don’t necessarily spell trouble in terms of spring flooding – with the weather during the melt period being a key determinant.
Campbell says, "At this point, (the River Forecast Centre) is keeping a watchful eye in terms of how it continues to develop and then, also, it’s something that we actively monitor during the melt season is how that snow is melting and really being able to provide some sort of real-time forecast for whether we anticipate flooding conditions."
The snow surveys have detected a north-south divide this year, with snowpack levels to the north of Kamloops being higher than normal, while those to the south have normal or drier than normal conditions, particularly in the Okanagan and South Thompson areas.
Comments
Holy Crap! We had better borrow a wad of cash and start building dykes.
So tell me, someone, is there any value to this information as far as warnings that can be issued and preparations we have to do? Or is this just going to give the usual suspects along the rivers some more sleepless nights this early in the year?
Who ever stopped the removal of gravel from being removed from the river bed as it is the perfect soloution to prevent spring flooding. This would especially be effective where the Nechako meets the Fraser river. Every year the rivers b ring in fresh gravel that fill the river beds and our brilliant council borrows more money to build heigher dikes. This is just a no brainer!! We certainly do not need to go more into debt by borrowing more money to build up the banks of the rivers. River gravel is washed or cleaner than pit run gravel and it is more central making it cheaper than hauling it in from various pits through out the region.
Do you understand the song and dance you have to perform if you do ANYTHING that involves a river or a lake or a creek? And the little fishys contained within? Start with an idea. Take it to city council, then take it to Victoria, then take it to about a half dozen related ministries In Ottawa. Start now and they can send your info back along with your OAP cheque. Governments move like glaciers. (Not counting the one in the Himalayas).
“Who ever stopped the removal of gravel from being removed from the river bed as it is the perfect soloution to prevent spring flooding. This would especially be effective where the Nechako meets the Fraser river. Every year the rivers b ring in fresh gravel that fill the river beds and our brilliant council borrows more money to build heigher dikes. This is just a no brainer!!”
It is a no brainer in the real sense. Do yourself and some of the rest of us a favour, read the report by people who make studying river currents and their scouring actions their life’s work. And then read some others who do he same thing. Maybe, just maybe, your seat of the pants association with gravel removal on the shores of the river and reduced flooding will be shot down. But hey, not likely, eh?
The removal of gravel on the south side of the Nechako and the west side of the Fraser where they meet just north of the railway bridge will not have any effect on the flow of the water in the channel that carries the bulk of the water and is located near the northern shore of the Nechako.
As it states in the report, what would be some assistance is the opening up of the southern-most channel which runs through the park that has the new bridge over it and where all other bridges were taken out by the high water. That channel emerges just before the park’s shelter to the east.
That is the channel that DFO was protecting at one time as a riparian area that should remain untouched. Whether they are of the same mind or not at this time, I do not know. If they are, then someone has to work with the Feds on getting that resolved. I do not know whether anything is in the works there.
In fact, this is just another project going on in this City that very little info is readily available.
Whose City is this anyway? Why is this stuff not out in the open on the web site with an explanation of what is going on and what is contemplated?
gus, ask the city communications office that questoin.
There were many recommendations in the report that Gus refers to. Not the least of which were protection for areas like the North side of the River, side channels on the North Side of Pulp Mill road, diking, at Morning Place, South Fort George, and Lansdowne, futher South. All these areas are a risk, in fact those in South Ft George more so than others.
Why is their no protection for any area other than River Road. Who are we protecting. CN Rail?? They are a National Railway, and flood protection of their property is their responsibility.
Lakeland Mills. Why them and not other taxpayers??
Brink Forest Prods. He actually built a new plant adjacent to the river, so one would assume he is not worried about flooding.
Imperial Oil Bulk Storage facility closed down last year.
Winton Global Closed down a number of years ago.
That leaves one house on the North side of River road, and then Interior Warehousing, and Kline Bros.
East End of third and fourth. The City has been pumping this water during floods for years, and could continue to do so.
What benefits have we got from the upgrade to River Road last year along with new drainage system, etc; We havent even been able to evaluate how successful the upgrade on this road to the 200 year flood plain has been, and we are already talking about dikes.
So I ask again. What are we protecting. If we stop the water from seeping under River Road to the South side, then it has to go somewhere else.
My guess would be, it will flood the hell out of the Museum, the Park, and the Northside, thus causing all kinds of problems for people living on Pulp Mill Road.
This dike is not a solution. In fact it could cause more problems than it solves.
This issue is about getting grant money from the Feds/Prov, adding money from the City, and going on a spending spree.
Thats all it is.
Well, if the size of my snow-shovelling arm is any indication, then, yes. We have hit a 5 year high! :)
I hope this doesn’t result in flooding. Seems we are getting a wetter climate up here lately… more precip.
On the other hand, I remember back in the early 90’s when I had snowbanks covering the front windows of my mobile home and the temp’s reached -40 without windchill… this year hasn’t been nearly as bad as that.
There was many recommendations. They didn’t come up with a plan either way but it cost us a lot of money. It appears to me that the City is being very foolish jumping at this dike thing because there is no guarantee that it will help.
It appears they put all the recommendations in a hat and picked one out. River road isn’t the ony place that froods, in fact, South Fort floods more often in the spring. The Nachako problem is a winter flood, which doesn’t happen very often. Councillor Frank Everitt says he has never supported the Alternate Approval process as it “leaves a stigma that we are trying to do something we couldn’t possibly sell, so it is viewed as being underhanded.” It is underhanded.
Comments for this article are closed.