No famine years: 1903/1904-1911/1912 and 1959/1960-1967/1968

[gymengineer]

Official DC Seasonal Snow Totals:

 

1903-04    20.2

1904-05    41.0    

1905-06    25.7    
1906-07    28.3    
1907-08    18.3    
1908-09    36.0    
1909-10    20.0    
1910-11    39.8    
1911-12    21.8    

 

1959-60    24.3    
1960-61    40.3    
1961-62    15.0    
1962-63    21.4    
1963-64    33.6    
1964-65    17.1    
1965-66    28.4    
1966-67    37.1    
1967-68    21.4    

 

I see that the '60's have been analyzed in our recent threads (like in the PD1 thread) and also in past threads. I'm trying to locate similar discussion about the 1903-1912 period but the search function on this board is kind of unwieldy for that kind of search. So the question: Was the 1903-1912 "abundance of snow" period caused by a similar set of decade-long trends as the 1960's? If not, what was the decadal trend that yielded snow season after season?

[snow.]

Official DC Seasonal Snow Totals:

 

1903-04    20.2

1904-05    41.0    

1905-06    25.7    

1906-07    28.3    

1907-08    18.3    

1908-09    36.0    

1909-10    20.0    

1910-11    39.8    

1911-12    21.8    

 

1959-60    24.3    

1960-61    40.3    

1961-62    15.0    

1962-63    21.4    

1963-64    33.6    

1964-65    17.1    

1965-66    28.4    

1966-67    37.1    

1967-68    21.4    

 

I see that the '60's have been analyzed in our recent threads (like in the PD1 thread) and also in past threads. I'm trying to locate similar discussion about the 1903-1912 period but the search function on this board is kind of unwieldy for that kind of search. So the question: Was the 1903-1912 "abundance of snow" period caused by a similar set of decade-long trends as the 1960's? If not, what was the decadal trend that yielded snow season after season?

 

very good and tough question and hopefully one HM, Don and others might chime in on

 

This was NOT a blocky period...This was a strongly +NAO/+AO regime....And the PAC was more hostile than helpful..by all accounts the pattern should have sucked...

 

But 2 things jump out at me....The ENSO events were mostly weak...4 weaker ninas, 3 weaker ninos and 2 neutrals....This is not unlike the 59-68  period which also had weaker ENSO events (other than 65-66)...or 76-82...which was also cold and fairly snowy..Having a really active ENSO regime is not good for cold and consequently snow, except for those rare years when we can get a mod-strong nino event with blocking/cold

 

And it was really cold....a very cold period...and we know cold gives us more snow in the means...why so cold?  I'm not sure...

 

I think we had a couple big storms, but most were of the <8" variety....so we nickeled and dimed our way "60-61" style

 

my guess is we did better in the annoying northern stream events because we were colder....clippers, front end thumps, miller B's, and  capitalized more in the +PNA periods...we may very well have not had much of a southern stream

 

Other factors - DCA, UHI, AGW and I think we may have had a different prevalent storm track, and I am not sure why...but I would render that we were more like Philly, RIC more like us when it came to storm track....still...as good as that period was, those 18-25" years are probably 12-16" years now based on nothing other than warming and DCA

 

Now there are probably other major factors, which is why some mets may be able to add their 2 cents...other oscillations, circulations..sun, space, volcanic activity, etc etc

[WVclimo]

The AMO was in its cold phase, I think as negative as we have measured in our period of record ? That, along with the -PDO probably contributed greatly to the colder winters. Not many strong ENSO events to override the influence of a cold Atlantic also.

[uncle W]

I've been driving thru DC on my way to Florida since 1981 every year and the construction of buildings along I95 has been explosive...The UHI must have doubled in the last 30 years...not to mention traffic with car emissions...

[gymengineer]

very good and tough question and hopefully one HM, Don and others might chime in on

 

This was NOT a blocky period...This was a strongly +NAO/+AO regime....And the PAC was more hostile than helpful..by all accounts the pattern should have sucked...

 

But 2 things jump out at me....The ENSO events were mostly weak...4 weaker ninas, 3 weaker ninos and 2 neutrals....This is not unlike the 59-68  period which also had weaker ENSO events (other than 65-66)...or 76-82...which was also cold and fairly snowy..Having a really active ENSO regime is not good for cold and consequently snow, except for those rare years when we can get a mod-strong nino event with blocking/cold

 

And it was really cold....a very cold period...and we know cold gives us more snow in the means...why so cold?  I'm not sure...

 

I think we had a couple big storms, but most were of the <8" variety....so we nickeled and dimed our way "60-61" style

 

my guess is we did better in the annoying northern stream events because we were colder....clippers, front end thumps, miller B's, and  capitalized more in the +PNA periods...we may very well have not had much of a southern stream

 

Other factors - DCA, UHI, AGW and I think we may have had a different prevalent storm track, and I am not sure why...but I would render that we were more like Philly, RIC more like us when it came to storm track....still...as good as that period was, those 18-25" years are probably 12-16" years now based on nothing other than warming and DCA

 

Now there are probably other major factors, which is why some mets may be able to add their 2 cents...other oscillations, circulations..sun, space, volcanic activity, etc etc

Really interesting, thanks. So that furthers the idea that what we are used to recently is not where we've been in the past. Almost a decade of "cold" winter seasons is pretty inconceivable now let alone no season below 18" for nine in a row. 

 

Your "nickle and dime" statement reminds of a really good thread on Eastern- the one you started about how hard it is to nickle-and-dime to a 20" season at DCA. That's true for no 6"+ storms, but once you lift the threshold to 8", then, yes, it's possible to regularly go above a 20" seasonal total. Although, of course in the DC area, 8"+ starts getting into the major storm category.  

 

I'm not sure about any major storms during that period other than the Taft Inaugural storm.

[snow.]

Really interesting, thanks. So that furthers the idea that what we are used to recently is not where we've been in the past. Almost a decade of "cold" winter seasons is pretty inconceivable now let alone no season below 18" for nine in a row. 

 

Your "nickle and dime" statement reminds of a really good thread on Eastern- the one you started about how hard it is to nickle-and-dime to a 20" season at DCA. That's true for no 6"+ storms, but once you lift the threshold to 8", then, yes, it's possible to regularly go above a 20" seasonal total. Although, of course in the DC area, 8"+ starts getting into the major storm category.  

 

I'm not sure about any major storms during that period other than the Taft Inaugural storm.

 

In addition to Taft, December 1909, December 1910, January 1904, March 1911 all had big events....Ian might have more specifics...

[WinterWxLuvr]

I'm going with these years as my top analogs for this year.

[Huffwx]

My theory on the 60's-- which have like 4 of the top 10 in LYH and ROA.

 

-PDO but spiked to +PDO in winter. Had advantage of "colder" regime with winter advantage +PDO. 

[EastCoast NPZ]

What I'd like to know is how ENSO conditions were measured/determined in the early 1900s?

[Huffwx]

What I'd like to know is how ENSO conditions were measured/determined in the early 1900s?

 

 

Floating babies in the ENSO regions. 

[EastCoast NPZ]

Floating babies in the ENSO regions. 

 

Bouyancy of warmer water < cold water, so less floating babies = nino.  Got it.