April snowier than January

By Jim Stanford on April 22, 2013

Tags: , , ,

Road sign on Pearl Avenue during last week’s 20-degree weather.

With 9 inches of snow reported yesterday and more falling today, April already has surpassed January for snowfall in the Tetons, as a typically dreary mountain spring masquerades for prolonged winter.

The Bridger-Teton Avalanche Center has measured 52 inches of snowfall in Rendezvous Bowl so far this month, compared to 45 inches for all of January, which was plagued by cold drought.

The center ceased issuing avalanche and weather forecasts yesterday but will continue to post automated readings for temperature, wind and snowfall.

The water content of the snowpack in the upper Snake River basin above Jackson Lake now measures 106 percent of average — which is about right, after an average winter.

Props to the spring break-starved prankster who made his or her feelings known about the weather last Tuesday along Pearl Avenue. For the winter weary, relief is on the way, with the National Weather Service calling for sunny and near 60 by the end of the week.

Share

Posted under Environment, Ski Resorts, Sports, Weather

17 Comments so far

  1. Brad April 24, 2013 7:10 pm

    Speaking of weather:

    Word is out that Jim Woodmencey is out at Gables Radio, aka Rich Broadcasting. Who’s next to fall in front of the new broom?

  2. John April 25, 2013 5:19 pm

    Clearly we prefer to rap about spandex and rednecks.

  3. Skip May 4, 2013 10:36 am

    Posts are getting much fewer and further between. Town Council got you that busy, Jim?

  4. Jim Stanford May 8, 2013 4:18 pm

    I was out of town last week, Skip. And every so often I just need to unplug and take a break. But yes, at times much of my mental energy does go into council work. We are busy with budgeting and LDRs at the moment. Will be firing back up here shortly. Thanks!

  5. Skip May 9, 2013 12:05 am

    No worries–this is just my “go to” spot for town news!

  6. Dolph May 10, 2013 4:28 pm

    Jim,

    Why no commentary on the HS butte closure? Perhaps the situation plays well in to town’s desire to move more recreation to Snow King, hence the poor performance on the part of the electeds in resolving the sitch.

    Or maybe the Olivers dont like the increased volume of brown people on the butte, and straight up racism made negotiations muy dificil.

    Well, now that my work here (throwing matches on gas) is done, enjoy the weekend!

  7. Jim Stanford May 13, 2013 9:15 pm

    The mayor and I met with Todd Oliver concerning High School Butte access last week. We presented the best possible case for keeping it open. I cited the original 4 Lazy F Ranch in Moose as an example of the Oliver family’s stewardship and preservation that also allows full public access. I refrained from commenting about the situation because I held out hope Todd would have a change of heart. Apparently, that is not the case. There were several offers from the private/nonprofit sector to buy the property. I’m disappointed there wasn’t more proactive stewardship of the land or any sort of warning that public access was in jeopardy; I didn’t even know it was private property at the top of the butte until this conflict surfaced. I’ll take it up with the Jackson Hole Land Trust when I have a chance.

  8. skip May 13, 2013 11:58 pm

    I’m glad to hear that you weren’t aware that it was private property, because I didn’t know it, either. I am certain that there could’ve been some change in community behavior had we known the potential consequences. I think most believed it to be public land.

  9. Karen May 14, 2013 10:11 am

    This issue looks like a case for a prescriptive easement:
    A prescriptive easement arises if someone uses part of your property without your permission. A prescriptive easement involves only the loss of use of part of a property, for example a pathway or driveway. Payment of property taxes is not required, as it is to obtain title by adverse possession. Adverse possession of a prescriptive easement involves the loss of an entire property by open, notorious, hostile adverse and continuous use.

    The legal test to acquire a prescriptive easement of another owner is that the use must be (a) open, not secret, (b) notorious, clearly observable, (c) hostile, without the landowner’s consent and (c) continuous, without interruption for the number of years required by state law. For example, the minimum hostile use varies from 5 years in California to 30 years in Texas.

    The most common prescriptive easement arises when a fence is erected several feet on the wrong side of a boundary line. If the hostile user meets all the requirements, after the required number of years, a permanent prescriptive easement results for the strip of land. Prescriptive easements can be shared, that is, the hostile use need not be exclusive. Use can be shared with the legal owner and/or other hostile prescriptive claimants.

    To perfect a legal prescriptive easement, the hostile user must bring a quiet title lawsuit against the property owner and prove all the open, notorious, hostile and continuous use requirements.

  10. What Underground? May 17, 2013 6:50 am

    Yelp, Skip, we need a new place to go for news. Jim is too busy and has too many conflicts with his new job.

    Gossip, news, entertainment. Not here.

  11. Brad May 17, 2013 9:01 am

    Wow, Dolph. Just…wow. The Butte is closed because the Olivers are racist. Right.

  12. joe May 17, 2013 11:55 am

    if only we’d known, we wouldn’t have trashed it, but now that we know, lets take it? the arrogance is mind boggling.

  13. Jim Stanford May 17, 2013 4:17 pm

    @What?: Perhaps you’re right. I’ve missed a lot of big news lately, like this. And this.

  14. skip May 17, 2013 8:43 pm

    Yeah, I didn’t get why N&G thought an accident at a day care was newsworthy of front page attention.

  15. Peter May 18, 2013 8:03 am

    A prescriptive easement is the typical LIBERAL solution to the issue. The taking of private property rights is NOT the solution.

    The family was generous enough to allow access for decades and should be able to close access at any time especially if the property is being damaged.

    It may be that they want to close access in order to sell the property, protect the property, or simply get rid of intruders at this point in time. It doesn’t matter what their excuse is. They own the property.

    As for all the ‘trespassers’ who didn’t know they were on private property, shame on you. It’s your responsibility to know before you go. A quick look at the TC map server would have given you a clue – or a careful reading of the JHNG over the years.

    Josie’s Ridge will get more play. It’s a short bike ride to the trailhead from the butte.

  16. Peter May 18, 2013 8:07 am

    Accident at daycare….IS BIG NEWS if it’s your kid.

    It’s an ongoing problem that’s unreported in the news. This wasn’t the only injury this year.

  17. Levi May 18, 2013 8:02 pm

    Karen, it does not meet the hostile requirement. Up until now, access has been with the landowners permission. Not to mention I think its pretty dumb that your proposing that the town essentially try to steal land through adverse possession. Adverse possession laws were intended for farmers who had been plowing their neighbors field for years, and neither side realized the error. As far as prescriptive easement, I doubt you could prove you “needed” to get to the top the butte. Its not ment for worthless human beings who cant make it to the top of snowking.

Leave a Comment

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Comments

More Blog Posts

Next Post: