Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 399

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Flooding in Western Washington: The Connection to Atmospheric Rivers*

Neiman, Paul J., Schick, Lawrence J., Ralph, F. Martin, Abel, Mimi R., Wick, Gary A.·2011·Journal of Hydrometeorology

Abstract

This study utilizes multiple decades of daily streamflow data gathered in four major watersheds in western Washington to determine the meteorological conditions most likely to cause flooding in those watersheds. Two are located in the Olympic Mountains and the other two in the western Cascades; and each has uniquely different topographic characteristics. The flood analysis is based on the maximum daily flow observed during each water year (WY) at each site [i.e., the annual peak daily flow (APDF)], with an initial emphasis on the 12 most recent water years between WY1998 and 2009, and then focusing on a 30-year interval between WY1980 and 2009. The shorter time period coincides with relatively complete passive microwave satellite coverage of integrated water vapor (IWV) over the Pacific basin. The combination of IWV imagery and streamflow data highlights a close link between landfalling atmospheric rivers (ARs) and APDFs (i.e., 46 of the 48 APDFs occurred with landfalling ARs). To complement this approach, the three-decade time series of APDFs, which correspond to the availability of the North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR) dataset, are examined. The APDFs occur most often, and are typically largest in magnitude, from November to January. The NARR is used to assess the composite meteorological conditions associated with the 10 largest APDFs at each site during this 30-year period. Heavy precipitation fell during the top 10 APDFs, and anomalously high composite NARR melting levels averaged ~1.9 km MSL, which is primarily above the four basins of interest. Hence, on average, mostly rain rather than snow fell within these basins, leading to enhanced runoff. The flooding on the four watersheds shared common meteorological attributes, including the presence of landfalling ARs with anomalous warmth, strong low-level water vapor fluxes, and weak static stability. There were also key differences that modulated the orographic control of precipitation. Notably, two watersheds experienced their top 10 APDFs when the low-level flow was southwesterly, while the other two basins had their largest APDFs with west–southwesterly flow. These differences arose because of the region’s complex topography, basin orientations, and related rain shadowing.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1175/2011jhm1358.1

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 399

Metadata

Authors
Neiman, P. J., Schick, L. J., Ralph, F. M., Abel, M. R., & Wick, G. A.
Venue
Journal of Hydrometeorology
Published
2011-12
Volume
12
Issue
6
Pages
1337-1358
ISSN
  • 1525-7541 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-755X
OpenAlex
W2022121077
Cited by
399
References
0
FWCI
14.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Flooding in Western Washington: The Connection to Atmospheric Rivers*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/2011jhm1358.1
The paper
Neiman, P. J., Schick, L. J., Ralph, F. M., Abel, M. R., & Wick, G. A. (2011). Flooding in Western Washington: The Connection to Atmospheric Rivers*. Journal of Hydrometeorology. https://doi.org/10.1175/2011jhm1358.1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.