Reply to “Comments on ‘Flash Flood Verification: Pondering Precipitation Proxies

We applaud Gourley and Vergara for their thorough investigation of the relationship between precipitation and flash flood reports, as well as their inclusion of information from advanced hydrologic model output. We conducted some additional analysis to identify the reasons for the substantial differ...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of hydrometeorology 2021-03, Vol.22 (3), p.749-752
Main Authors: Schumacher, Russ S., Herman, Gregory R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
CORRESPONDENCE
Datasets
Decision analysis
Flash flood warnings
Flash flooding
Flash floods
Flooding
Floods
Hydrologic models
Hydrology
Methods
Precipitation
Rain
Resolution
Temporal resolution
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We applaud Gourley and Vergara for their thorough investigation of the relationship between precipitation and flash flood reports, as well as their inclusion of information from advanced hydrologic model output. We conducted some additional analysis to identify the reasons for the substantial differences between their findings and ours. The primary reason for the differences was found to be temporal sampling. The high temporal resolution of theMRMSdataset, as well as their use of “rolling” accumulation periods, explains most of the discrepancies. For guidance related to real-time warning decisions for flash flooding, Gourley and Vergara’s analyses provide an important new guide and we recommend the use of their results for this purpose. For other applications, including model postprocessing and for precipitation datasets with lower temporal resolution, our results will continue to prove useful.
ISSN:1525-755X
1525-7541
DOI:10.1175/JHM-D-20-0275.1