Predictions for Water Year 2003

The probability of a water shortage is based on estimates of river basin runoff from monthly USDA NRCS Idaho Water Outlook Reports, historical basin wide reservoir storage accumulation during drought years, the previous year’s October 31st reservoir storage carry over, and an irrigation district’s historical storage water requirements during non-drought years.  An irrigation district’s storage water allocation is based on the amount of basin wide storage water and not on an individual irrigation district’s account, thus the results do not reflect specific carry over amounts of an irrigation district.  The probability of a water shortage may be greater or less depending upon actual storage water carry over for a specific irrigation district.  The approach does not directly consider winter water savings contracts for storage held by some irrigation districts.  However, these storage contracts fill every year and are reflected in the historical data used to estimate storage water allocation.  How well the predictions reflect a particular irrigation district’s situation should be evaluated by consulting with the District Manager.

 The severity of a water shortage represents an upper limit of how substantial a shortage in storage water allocation could be for an irrigation district.  Severity is calculated as the maximum expected shortfall in storage water required for an irrigation district divided by the irrigation district mean annual diversion.  The severity represents an extreme upper limit to a water supply shortage that has a remote chance of occurring but serves to cap the magnitude of the situation.  Any water shortage will likely be much less than that represented by the severity.

 

 

The values represented in the table below are based entirely on historical data and mathematical relationships that may not necessarily fit every irrigation district’s situation.  How well the predictions reflect a particular irrigation district’s situation should be evaluated by consulting with the District Manager.  These estimates are merely a guide for risk management planning and should not be used for any purpose other than risk management planning.

 

Table shows the canal predictions of water shortage for each month of 2003. The first column is the estimated probability that a shortage will occur. The second column is the estimated severity of that shortage.

Canals that irrigate  less than 2000 acres or canals that are part of larger systems are not predicted, look at the larger system if possible.

Monthly data will be added as the streamflow predictions are published, usually by the 10th of the month.

 

District 1 Upper Snake

January, 2003 February, 2003 March, 2003 April, 2003
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
A & B Irrigation 13 % 33 % 17 % 39 % 12 % 23 % 4 % 0 %
Aberdeen 33 % 36 % 42 % 39 % 39 % 32 % 29 % 19 %
Blackfoot 8 % 0 % 11 % 0 % 9 % 0 % 5 % 0 %
Burgess 54 % 12 % 65 % 13 % 66 % 11 % 62 % 9 %
Butte & Market Lake 29 % 59 % 37 % 64 % 34 % 51 % 24 % 27 %
Consolidated Farmers 48 % 26 % 59 % 27 % 59 % 23 % 54 % 17 %
Corbett 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Danskin 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
E. Labelle 21 % 0 % 22 % 0 % 22 % 0 % 21 % 0 %
Egin 18 % 2 % 23 % 2 % 21 % 1 % 15 % 0 %
Enterprise (Falls R) 30 % 28 % 38 % 30 % 35 % 24 % 27 % 13 %
Enterprise (Snake R) 46 % 44 % 57 % 46 % 57 % 40 % 50 % 28 %
Falls Irrg AF 4 % 2 % 6 % 8 % 3 % 0 % 0 % 0 %

 Irrigation District

January, 2003 February, 2003 March, 2003 April, 2003
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
Falls River 21 % 6 % 26 % 7 % 24 % 4 % 17 % 0 %
Farmers Friend  (Snake R) 43 % 2 % 49 % 2 % 48 % 1 % 45 % 1 %
Farmers Friend   (Teton R) 67 % 19 % 75 % 20 % 75 % 18 % 72 % 14 %
Farmers Own 78 % 67 % 90 % 69 % 93 % 63 % 93 % 52 %
Gooding  Res #2 14 % 3 % 18 % 4 % 16 % 2 % 11 % 0 %
Great Western & Porter 3 % 0 % 4 % 0 % 2 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Harrison 41 % 17 % 51 % 18 % 50 % 15 % 43 % 10 %
Idaho 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Independent 64 % 46 % 77 % 48 % 79 % 43 % 78 % 34 %
Island 28 % 4 % 35 % 4 % 34 % 3 % 28 % 1 %
Island Ward 55 % 36 % 67 % 38 % 68 % 33 % 64 % 25 %
Kennedy 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Lenroot 38 % 21 % 47 % 22 % 46 % 19 % 37 % 12 %

 Irrigation District 

January, 2003 February, 2003 March, 2003 April, 2003
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
Marysville 51 % 50 % 62 % 53 % 62 % 46 % 57 % 34 %
Milner Low Lift 3 % 0 % 5 % 2 % 2 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Minidoka N&S 27 % 25 % 34 % 28 % 31 % 22 % 20 % 11 %
New Lava Side 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Osgood 3 % 0 % 5 % 1 % 2 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Parks & Lewisville 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Peoples 14 % 13 % 18 % 15 % 14 % 9 % 6 % 0 %
Reid 14 % 1 % 18 % 1 % 16 % 0 % 11 % 0 %
Rexburg 30 % 4 % 38 % 4 % 36 % 3 % 28 % 2 %
Rigby 43 % 7 % 53 % 7 % 52 % 6 % 46 % 4 %
Riverside 26 % 0 % 26 % 0 % 26 % 0 % 26 % 0 %
Rudy 60 % 48 % 72 % 50 % 73 % 45 % 70 % 35 %
Salem Union 38 % 27 % 48 % 29 % 47 % 24 % 38 % 16 %

  Irrigation District

January, 2003 February, 2003 March, 2003 April, 2003
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
Snake River Valley 29 % 18 % 37 % 20 % 35 % 16 % 26 % 8 %
St. Anthony Union 2 % 0 % 3 % 0 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Sunnydell 53 % 20 % 64 % 21 % 65 % 19 % 61 % 14 %
Teton 27 % 5 % 35 % 6 % 32 % 4 % 22 % 2 %
Teton Island 33 % 6 % 42 % 7 % 40 % 6 % 30 % 3 %
Texas 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Twin Falls N 27 % 19 % 35 % 20 % 32 % 16 % 21 % 8 %
Twin Falls S 28 % 6 % 36 % 6 % 34 % 5 % 25 % 3 %
Twin Groves 50 % 18 % 60 % 19 % 60 % 16 % 55 % 12 %
W. Labelle & Long Island 23 % 2 % 29 % 3 % 26 % 2 % 16 % 1 %
Watson 29 % 0 % 31 % 0 % 31 % 0 % 30 % 0 %
Wilford 27 % 2 % 33 % 2 % 32 % 1 % 27 % 0 %
Woodville 25 % 36 % 33 % 39 % 29 % 30 % 19 % 14 %
Yellowstone 7 % 0 % 9 % 0 % 8 % 0 % 6 % 0 %
 

 

Boise Irrigation District January, 2003 February, 2003 March, 2003 April, 2003
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
Ballentyne 27 % 0 % 21 % 0 % 21 % 0 % 21 % 0 %
Boise City 25 % 0 % 21 % 0 % 20 % 0 % 20 % 0 %
Boise Valley 44 % 0 % 41 % 0 % 41 % 0 % 43 % 0 %
Bubb 2 % 0 % 3 % 0 % 3 % 0 % 3 % 0 %
Canyon County 21 % 0 % 18 % 0 % 17 % 0 % 17 % 0 %
Capitol View 2 % 0 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Davis 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Eagle Island Canals 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Eureka #1 1 % 0 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Farmers Union 5 % 5 % 6 % 5 % 6 % 6 % 8 % 0 %
Little Pioneer 11 % 0 % 8 % 0 % 7 % 0 % 7 % 0 %
Middleton 5 % 0 % 6 % 0 % 6 % 0 % 8 % 0 %
New Dry Creek 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
 Irrigation District January, 2003 February, 2003 March, 2003 April, 2003
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
New Union 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
New York 30 % 9 % 28 % 11 % 27 % 12 % 30 % 0 %
Phyllis 3 % 9 % 4 % 10 % 4 % 11 % 5 % 1 %
Ridenbaugh 15 % 21 % 16 % 22 % 15 % 22 % 11 % 17 %
Rossi Mill 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Sebree 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
Settlers 7 % 0 % 8 % 1 % 8 % 2 % 11 % 0 %
Thurman Mill 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %

 

 

The estimated probability of a water shortage and associated severity are based on historical non-drought year irrigation district water usage.  As such, the effects of irrigation district drought mitigation measures are not reflected in the values shown in the table below.  An irrigation district may reduce water delivery rates once the district’s natural flow water right is cutoff and they begin drawing on their storage water account. This in effect forces conservation of the irrigation district’s water supply and extends the length of the irrigation season to every water user’s benefit.  Purchasing storage water from the rental pool or other water user’s is also a mitigation measure not reflected in the values show in the table below.  Thus, the effect of water supply shortage may be much less than indicated by the values in the table below if district wide drought mitigation measures are taken.

 

 

Return to Home HERE

Field Trial Results for Reducing Water Use

Links for more information

Drought Mitigation Ideas

Economics

Return to Predictions HERE

Predictions for 2006 HERE

Predictions for 2005 HERE

Predictions for 2004 HERE

Predictions for 2002 HERE

Predictions for 2001 HERE

Predictions for 2000 HERE

Predictions for 1999 HERE