2019_KittitasCountyHMP_Volume 1_For Adoption

Home Browse Search

CHAPTER 9. DROUGHT 9-7 also suggests that increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations may benefit water use efficiency in plants, possibly mitigating potential effects of drought. The best advice to water resource managers regarding climate change is to start addressing current stresses on water supplies and build flexibility and robustness into any system. Flexibility helps to ensure a quick response to changing conditions, and robustness helps people prepare for and survive the worst conditions. With this approach to planning, water system managers will be better able to adapt to the impacts of climate change. 9.5. EXPOSURE All people, property and environments in the Kittitas County planning area would be exposed to some degree to the impacts of moderate to extreme drought conditions. 9.6. VULNERABILITY Drought produces a complex web of impacts that spans many sectors of the economy and reaches well beyond the area experiencing physical drought. This complexity exists because water is integral to the ability to produce goods and provide services. Drought can affect a wide range of economic, environmental and social activities. The vulnerability of an activity to the effects of drought usually depends on its water demand, how the demand is met, and what water supplies are available to meet the demand. The Washington State Hazard Mitigation plan defines counties as being vulnerable to drought if they meet at least five of the following criteria: • History of severe or extreme drought conditions: 1. The county must have been in serious or extreme drought at least 10-15 percent of the time from 1895 to 1995. • Demand on water resources based on: 2. Acreage of irrigated cropland. The acreage of the county’s irrigated cropland must be in top 20 in the state. 3. Percentage of harvested cropland that is irrigated. The percentage of the county’s harvested cropland that is irrigated must be in top 20 in the state. 4. Value of agricultural products. The value of the county’s crops must be in the top 20 in the state. 5. Population growth greater than the state average. The county’s population growth from 2000 to 2006 must be greater than state average of 8.17 percent. • A County’s inability to endure the economic conditions of a drought, based on: 6. The county’s median household income being less than 75 percent of the state median income of $51,749 in 2005. 7. The county being classified as economically distressed in 2005 because its unemployment rate was 20 percent greater than the state average from J anuary 2002 through December 2004. As summarized in Table 9-1, Kittitas County is among nine counties in the state that meet at least five of the criteria and are considered to be vulnerable to drought.