WSP04710 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I :1 II I I I I I I I I I I n r, ~ , CJ 8 U.,.)V"J.. State-Level Drought Planning: Current Status would be expected to occur about 2.3 percent of the time, or about 1 year in 50. The severity of this emerging drought was already quite apparent on this SPI map, but not on the PDSI map. Early identification of emerging drought conditions is one of the key elements of an effective response plan because it allows decisionmakers at various levels to take more timely action. As the summer progressed, the States in the drought-stricken region and various Federal agencies became more aware of the virtues of the SPI and, as a result, these maps were often used in conjunction with the PDSI in routine climatic assessments by the National Wea,ther Service and others. State-Level Drought Planning: Current Status The number of States with drought plans has grown from 3 in 1982 to 28 in. 1996 (figure 9), In 1991, 23 States had drought plans (Wilhite, 1991a). In addition to the States that now have plans, five States (Alabama, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Texas, and New Mexico) are at various stages of plan development. Texas undertook a comprehensive feasibility study in 1994 to consider an appropriate drought management plan (Water Demand/Drought Manage- ment Technical Advisory Committee, 1994). This study recognized the need for a Statewide plan and recommended the development of a drought planning and response framework as part of the State water plan. No action on this recommendation had taken place before the 1996 drought. In response to the 1996 drought, Oklahoma has initiated long-term drought planning activities, and New Mexico is seeking legislative funding and authority to develop a drought plan. Alabama and Louisiana initiated drought planning efforts before the 1996 drought. Two additional States allocate drought planning authority to regional (Florida) or local (California) authorities. Constraints to plan development were discussed by Wilhite and Easterling (1987), Wilhite (1992), and Wilhite (1996). Although the increase in the number of State drought plans is an extremely positive sign, these plans are still largely reactive (i.e., drought response versus drought mitigation plans), treating drought in an emergency response mode. This pattern of State-level drought planning is quite complex and cannot be explained adequately on the basis of drought climatology alone. A State's decision to develop (or not to develop) a drought plan is based on specific climatological, political, economic, environmental, and demographic factors. Wilhite and Rhodes (1994) constructed a typology of State behavior in an attempt to explain the pattern of drought plans that existed in the early 15