A Very Strong Cold Front Will Cross the Northwest on Tuesday

The Northwest is known for its weak cold fronts, since the relatively warm Pacific Ocean warms, near-surface, cold Arctic air before it arrives in our region.

But sometimes conditions allow us to get a relatively strong cold front, with a sharp temperature decline and profound wind shift...and this will happen tomorrow afternoon and evening.

A strong cold front that will bring substantial snow to the mountains and further ease any drought worries.

Let me show you the latest forecasts!

The predicted sea-level pressure (brown lines), near-surface temperatures (colors), and winds (arrows) at 5 PM Tuesday are shown below.   A strong front (indicated by the red dashed lines) has reached the Washington coast.

A profound wind shift (from southwesterly to northwesterly) is associated with the front, with cold air (blue) behind.  Mama Mia!  This is a spicy front.

The front is even stronger aloft, as shown by the predicted temperatures at 850 hPa (about 5000 ft) the next day (the front is crossing eastern Oregon at this time).  Dark blue is cold air. Cold enough for snow in all the mountains!

A simulated radar image for Tuesday evening shows an intense line of precipitation with the front (look for the thin yellow line that crosses the coast near Hoquim and extends to near Bellingham).  Pro-tip:  You will not want to be outside when this line is over you.

The line will be associated not only with heavy precipitation, but also with a dramatic wind shift and temperature decline.

To illustrate, here are the predicted temperatures at Hoquiam, on the Washington Coast, for the next few days.   Frontal passage drops the temperature from 49F to 39°F- a substantial decline on the coast.  On the western slopes of the Cascades, the temperature drop will be roughly TWICE that amount.

All this means snow in the mountains.   Below is the predicted snowfall through Thursday at 5 PM.  A foot or more in some locations!  A huge benefit this time of the year.

This surge of cold air originated over the Arctic and pushed southward into Alaska and then across the Gulf of Alaska.   Interestingly, the Gulf of Alaska is substantially cooler than normal (see below, blue indicates cooler than normal), which allows the chilly air to reach us with less ocean warming.

Finally, here in Seattle, the strong front will bring blustery winds tomorrow afternoon (see plot from Seattle windwatch below at 11 AM).  With the new leaves on the trees, there could be some scattered power outages near the coast and Puget Sound.  

Enjoy the weather show tomorrow!

When a "Drought" NOT a Drought?

This year, the Washington State Department of Ecology and others (e.g., the Seattle Times) are claiming we are in a drought emergency.

In several of my recent blogs, I explained why I think they are wrong. 

Precipitation has been above normal, reservoirs are full, substantial snowpack is in place (about 50% of normal), soils are moist, current forecasts are for substantial spring precipitation, and there is little evidence of any impacts of the low snowpack on water supplies or agriculture.  

Remember, a key aspect of a drought is that it has to have substantial IMPACTS. 

To quote the drought.gov website:

A drought is a prolonged period of abnormally low rainfall or, generally, a severe deficiency of moisture, resulting in water shortages for people, agriculture, and ecosystems.

Droughts need to have impacts, and the negative impacts of the high precipitation/low snowpack situation this year will be minimal 

It would be interesting to evaluate the track record of drought advocates in government, the media, and climate advocacy groups.

So let's do it!

Consider last year (2025).

The Department of Ecology put out a drought EMERGENCY declaration in early April and expanded it greatly on June 5, 2025:

The Seattle Times and other media outlets had several drought stories, becoming increasingly ominous over time, about the serious drought threat (see sample below).

In my blog last year, I argued against the extreme drought mania, providing the actual water supply numbers, which suggest little or no impact.   But the dire warnings continued and amplified.

A year later, we know the truth:  there was no problem with water supply for the population, and Washington Agriculture flourished.    The dire warnings were totally wrong.

Seattle's water supply?  Never got close to low-reservoir conditions in 2025 (dashed lines below).  Other major water supply reservoirs (e.g., Tacoma, Everett, etc) were similar.

How about the 2025 crops?

Apples?  There was a RECORD-EQUALING harvest of excellent quality (color and size).

Cherries? A strong, bumper crop with some of the best quality in years, with a long season.  Excellent quality and big fruit.

Potatoes?  The 2025 crop was characterized by high quality and excellent growing conditions, with a similar yield to 2024.   Chris Voigt, Executive Director at the Washington Potato Commission, noted that 2025 lacked extended periods of heat and overall had ideal weather conditions for potatoes.  

Wheat? USDA’s Small Grains Summary, Washington, noted that the state produced 141.5 million bushels of wheat in 2025, which is down 1.5% from 2024, but still 12% above the five-year average. 

Raspberries?   Last year’s total production exceeded 60 million pounds, which will be the highest harvest since 2018.  

I could discuss more crops, but you get the message.  2025 was an excellent year for Washington State agriculture, with little evidence of drought impacts.

Did drought greatly reduce Northwest hydropower output (see U.S. government analysis below)?

 Nope.   According to Federal data, NW hydropower was close to the long-term average, with a nice recovery from 2025.

The bottom line in all this is that there was little evidence of drought over our region based on impacts, and such impacts are required to call a situation a drought.

Some locations are fortunate to receive more precipitation than is required, and we are lucky to be in such a place.

For me, a more interesting question is why Washington State officials don't understand this basic fact?  

And why are Seattle Times reporters not completing the simple research that indicates that last year's drought warnings were without any basis in terms of impacts?

I bet you guess why such deceptive, scary language is being used by those responsible for informing us.  

But whatever the motive, it is very harmful, resulting in unnecessary worry and leading to bad decisions (like the wasteful, corrupting Washington State CCA, which preferentially hurts low-income people while enriching special interest groups).