Trying some stuff that I don’t want to do on my employer’s production server. Nothing to see here. Move along.
jfleck at inkstain
A few thoughts from John Fleck, a writer of journalism and other things, living in New Mexico
Trying some stuff that I don’t want to do on my employer’s production server. Nothing to see here. Move along.
This is only a pretend comment.
So, here’s a graphic representation of the data in the table:
The r-squared is really high: 0.80
But look at the data grouped pre-/post-Drinking Water Project (which effectively started in 2009):
Avg Diversion
Avg Depletion
2000-08
105,078.72
73,715.47
2009-12
62,767.89
67,487.10
% Reduction
40.27
8.45
A significant reduction in groundwater pumping has had a much less significant impact on depletions, which have flattened even though GW pumping continues to trend downward. The USGS analysis (around 2005?) of the potential San Juan Chama impacts on aquifer restoration assumed that GW pumping would go down to 10% of total production, or about 10,000 af …
Just trying this again – graph of the ISC data. If this doesn’t work, I’ll give up