Heading 1
February and March in California were marked by substantial precipitation events, closing some of the water year deficit from the dry fall. However, despite the recent gains, it is essential to recognize that California as a whole remains below normal for total water year precipitation due to the exceedingly dry conditions at the start. Recency bias is the tendency to weigh recent events or information more heavily than past events when making decisions or forming judgments. It gives disproportionate importance to the most recent data, experiences, or opinions, often overshadowing older information. We see this manifest in recent media headlines, portraying the current water year as “wet” and even comparing it to WY.2223.When sorting through headlines, it becomes imperative to rely on data-driven analysis for an accurate understanding. The data speaks for itself: the precipitation received in the past two months was significant, but the current water year is still below normal.
March is a notoriously fickle month for California precipitation, but the storm door remains open for the Golden State, where precipitation has been plentiful for a second straight year.
Heading 2
Apart from recency bias, the prevailing “wet year” narrative may stem from certain regions experiencing exceptional levels of precipitation, notably Central and Southern Coastal California. The question arises: why did the CAP model struggle in these two geographies this year? Since the CAP forecast provides one forecast for our vast and varied state, it is unrealistic to expect that the forecast- downscaled to the regional level- will verify in every region every year.
Heading 3
Text
