- Associated Press - Wednesday, January 2, 2013

ST. LOUIS — When his drought-stricken Nebraska farm was blanketed with several inches of snow, Tom Schwarz welcomed the moisture. But it wasn’t nearly enough.

He had hoped for a wet, snowy winter. Instead, he has watched with worry as the sky spits mostly flakes that don’t stick.

“I just shudder to think what it’s going to be if we don’t get snow,” Mr. Schwarz said. “A friend told me it would take 150 inches of snow to get us back to normal precipitation.”

Despite getting some big storms last month, much of the U.S. is still desperate for relief from the nation’s longest dry spell in decades. And climatologists say it will take an absurd amount of snow to ease the woes of farmers and ranchers.

The same fears haunt firefighters, water utilities and many communities across the country.

Winter storms have dropped more than 15 inches of snow on parts of the Midwest and East in recent weeks. Climatologists say it would take at least 8 feet of snow — and likely far more — to return the soil to its pre-drought condition in time for spring planting. A foot of snow is roughly equal to an inch of water, depending on density.

Many areas are begging for moisture after a summer that caused water levels to fall to near-record lows on lakes Michigan and Huron. The Mississippi River has declined so much that barge traffic south of St. Louis soon could come to a halt. In the West, firefighters worry that a lack of snow will leave forests and fields like tinder come spring, risking a repeat of the wildfires that burned some 9.2 million acres in 2012.

Scores of cities that already have enacted water restrictions are thinking about what they will do in 2013 if heavy snows and spring rains don’t materialize.

For a while, it seemed no snow would come. Midwestern cities including Chicago, Milwaukee and Des Moines, Iowa, had their latest first snows on record. How much would it take to make things right?

“An amount nobody would wish on their worst enemy,” said David Pearson, a National Weather Service hydrologist in Omaha, Neb. “It’s so out of this world it wouldn’t make much scientific sense [to guess]. It would take a record-breaking snowfall for the season to get us back on track.”

That’s why Mr. Schwarz is worried about his 750 acres near Lexington in south-central Nebraska. To save his corn last summer, he pulled water from deep wells and other sources in his irrigation district, but the alfalfa he couldn’t irrigate died, something that has never had happen before.

The soil was so dry he didn’t even try to sow winter wheat, a crop planted in the fall that goes dormant over winter, relying on snow as a protective blanket.

“If we don’t get snow, we’d better get rain this spring or we’re done,” Mr. Schwarz said.

The 150 inches — more than 12 feet — isn’t likely to materialize. That would be about four times the average winter snowfall in Chicago, a city famous for its storms. Mr. Schwarz’s area usually gets about 29.5 inches of snow during the winter. As of Dec. 27, it had just 6.5 inches.

Even if a massive storm developed, the temperature would have to be right for farmers to benefit. If snow melts on frozen ground, the water will run off into rivers and streams, instead of being absorbed into the soil.

Runoff would be welcome in Sioux Falls, S.D., which was among countless communities that clamped down on water use last summer as rivers and lakes that supply power plants and households grew shallower.

AP writers Scott Bauer, Matt Volz and Mead Gruver contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide