Predictions for Water Year 2005
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 2005. 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.

Water District 1 (Upper Snake above Twin Falls)

Boise Basin

Other Districts

 

District 1 Upper Snake

January, 2005 February, 2005 March, 2005 April, 2005
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
A & B Irrigation 16 % 43 % 20 % 45 % 51 % 72 % 31% 47%
Aberdeen 38 % 42 % 47 % 43 % 86 % 54 % 71% 44%
Blackfoot 13 % 2 % 16 % 3 % 37 % 6 % 24% 3%
Burgess 59 % 14 % 71 %  14 % 97 % 17 % 91% 14%
Butte & Market Lake 33 % 70 % 42 %  72 % 81 % 93 % 63%  

73%

 

Consolidated Farmers 53 % 28 % 64 % 29 % 94 % 35 % 86% 29%
Corbett 1 % 0 % 1 % 0 % 4 % 0 % 1% 0%
Danskin 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 %
E. Labelle 22 % 0 % 22 % 0 % 25 % 0 % 24% 0%
Egin 22 % 3 % 27 % 3 % 54 % 4 % 41% 3%
Enterprise (Falls R) 35 % 34 % 44 % 34 % 79 % 44 % 64% 35%
Enterprise (Snake R) 51 % 49 % 62 % 52 % 93 % 61 % 84% 51%
Falls Irrg AF 6 % 12 % 8 % 15 % 28 % 41 % 13% 16%

 Irrigation District

January, 2005 February, 2005 March, 2005 April, 2005
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
Falls River 26 % 9 % 32 % 10 % 61 % 14 % 46% 10%
Farmers Friend  (Snake R) 47 %  2 % 53 % 2 % 69 % 2 % 62% 2%
Farmers Friend   (Teton R) 70 % 21 % 78 % 21 % 93 % 23 % 89% 21%
Farmers Own 84 % 73 % 94 % 74 % 100 % 84 % 100% 75%
Gooding  Res #2 20 % 8 % 25 % 7 % 51 % 11 % 37% 7%
Great Western & Porter 5 % 2 % 7 % 3 % 24 % 13 % 11% 3%
Harrison 46 % 19 % 57 % 20 % 90 % 24 % 79% 20%
Idaho 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 1 % 0 % 0% 0%
Independent 68 % 50 % 81 % 51 % 100 % 59 % 98% 51%
Island 34 % 5 % 41 % 5 % 69 % 6 % 57% 5%
Island Ward 60 % 40 % 72 % 40 % 96 % 48 % 90% 41%
Kennedy 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0% 0%
Lenroot 43 % 24 % 53 % 25 % 90 % 31 % 77% 25%

 Irrigation District 

January, 2005 February, 2005 March, 2005 April, 2005
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
Marysville 56  % 57 % 68 % 58 % 95 % 69 % 87% 59%
Milner Low Lift 8 % 6 % 8 % 7 % 27 % 20 % 12% 8%
Minidoka N&S 32 % 31 % 40 % 32 % 80 % 42 % 62% 32%
New Lava Side 0 %  0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0% 0%
Osgood 7 % 4 % 8 % 5 % 29 % 14 % 13% 6%
Parks & Lewisville 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0% 0%
Peoples 19 % 19 % 24 % 20 % 57 % 29 % 38% 20%
Reid 18 % 1 % 22 % 1 % 46 % 3 % 33% 2%
Rexburg 35 % 5 % 43 % 5 % 77 % 6 % 62% 5%
Rigby 46 % 8 % 56 % 8 % 87 % 10 % 76% 8%
Riverside 26 % 0 % 26 % 0 % 27 % 0 % 26% 0%
Rudy 62 % 51 % 74 % 52 % 97 % 61 % 92% 53%
Salem Union 43 % 31 % 54 % 32 % 90 % 40 % 77% 33%

  Irrigation District

January, 2005 February, 2005 March, 2005 April, 2005
Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity Probability of a Shortage Severity
Snake River Valley 34 % 22 % 43 % 22 % 79 % 29 % 63% 23%
St. Anthony Union 3 % 0 % 3 % 0 % 15 % 1 % 5% 0%
Sunnydell 58 % 23 % 70 % 23 % 98 % 27 % 92% 23%
Teton 32 % 7 % 40 % 7 % 78 % 9 % 61% 7%
Teton Island 40 % 8 % 50 % 8 % 87 % 10 % 73% 8%
Texas 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 1 % 0 % 0% 0%
Twin Falls N 33 % 23 % 42 % 24 % 81 % 31 % 64% 24%
Twin Falls S 35 % 7 % 43 % 7 % 79 % 9 % 63% 7%
Twin Groves 56 % 20 % 66 % 21 % 91 % 25 % 83% 21%
W. Labelle & Long Island 25 % 3 % 31 % 3 % 68 % 4 % 49% 3%
Watson 31 % 0 % 33 % 0 % 39 % 0 % 36% 0%
Wilford 30 % 2 % 36 % 2 % 60 % 4 % 49% 3%
Woodville