Grand Forks Part II
-
Hopefully this time the NWS can be right and the forecast just shows a steady decline.
-
94NDTA;268434 wrote:
I know, I remember in 97, it went up 3 feet after the peak in a situation almost identical to this.
The watter never went down, then came back up. It just slowly rose... were not gonna get much more water than whats on the dikes now... maybe a couple inches if that. -
Joel;268443 wrote:
The watter never went down, then came back up. It just slowly rose... were not gonna get much more water than whats on the dikes now... maybe a couple inches if that.I wouldnt bet any money on that. Pretty sure we havent even began to crest.
-
Rexwagon;268447 wrote:
I wouldnt bet any money on that. Pretty sure we havent even began to crest.
Just because the government is brainwashing the National guard doesnt mean you know anything darrick. Bring your ass over to my house and tell me the river isnt going down. You were saying earlier about a 43 ft crest like 2 weeks ago when they havent predicted anything over 41 yet. You have no idea wtf your talking about.> harwood39;268457 wrote:
the problem i see is all the snow melt... My alley is a soupy mess as of this afternoon... not a good sign as it means the snow is melting sooner than they wanted...
I dont think snow melt will matter as much as they say, plus sun is the only thing melting the snow. It will start freezing up again in a couple hours. -
the problem is that there is a lot of snow in the valley, gonna melt a lil today from the sun. than melt tomorrow from being warmer and sunny. but we are suppossed to get more snow monday and tuesday followed by 38-42 degree weather wed thurs and fri... not a good thing...
-
I give up.
You guys, even if we get all this snow, its not going to effect the crest.
In 97 we had a RAIN/Freezing rain storm which is the reason why there was a 3 foot spike in the crest.
I'd be hella surprised if this fucker reaches just 41.5 feet, none the less 43. Its all common sense.
-
STiSchucky;268462 wrote:
I give up.You guys, even if we get all this snow, its not going to effect the crest.
In 97 we had a RAIN/Freezing rain storm which is the reason why there was a 3 foot spike in the crest.
I'd be hella surprised if this fucker reaches just 41.5 feet, none the less 43. Its all common sense.
I'm quoting this. We will see if you are right. I hope so.
-
STiSchucky;268462 wrote:
I give up.You guys, even if we get all this snow, its not going to effect the crest.
In 97 we had a RAIN/Freezing rain storm which is the reason why there was a 3 foot spike in the crest.
I'd be hella surprised if this fucker reaches just 41.5 feet, none the less 43. Its all common sense.
QFT
Thank god someone else isnt fucking retarded on this forum -
94NDTA;268463 wrote:
I'm quoting this. We will see if you are right. I hope so.
:icon_rr:Please dont quote me on the flooding part. Im just talkin about the top crest in general. If a dike breaks, I dont want to be held accountable.
-
lol, no I wouldn't hold you accountable to the flood. Based on the amount of water (and snow waiting to melt) out west waiting to enter the river, the warm weather and snow melting (even now) plus the possible 12" of snow coming in a couple days PLUS warm weather after that....
It just seems nothing is going our way, I'm expecting the worse.
-
We had to get 120 inches of snow in 97 to get to 39.xx or whatever.
the rain in the fall is the reason for this flood. the river wont rise much with all the snow thats left to be melted, especially with the hydrologic graph showing a decent curve going down.
-
STiSchucky;268470 wrote:
We had to get 120 inches of snow in 97 to get to 39.xx or whatever.the rain in the fall is the reason for this flood. the river wont rise much with all the snow thats left to be melted, especially with the hydrologic graph showing a decent curve going down.
although its only going down 2 feet in the next seven days. So if they were to show the whole graph like they were before it wouldnt look like much. The graph is kinda deciving
-
I'd say it takes it a hell of a lot longer to desend then to rise, cause the Hudson Bay it flows into, in Canada, is still frozen.
-
ah, some of you guys are kinda stupid. The snow isnt gonna make a bit of difference, sure its gonna put a little water INSIDE the dykes from melting, but it is <1% of what is out there. Therefore, NO DIFFERENCE. Another note, if you were smart at all, you would look downstream to where the water is even coming from. My house, the yard is dry, the ditch is maybe 1/4 full, and the river crested on tuesday and has already went down 3+ft. It takes 4 days for the water to travel the distance to fargo at this velocity, and that is the reason the river leveled off of friday.
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/ahps2/hydrograph.php?wfo=fgf&gage=whnn8&view=1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login