For a state highly dependent on agriculture, this is a stunning reversal of aquatic events. Not long ago, South Dakota’s newscasts were filled with stories about persistent drought and the need for emergency farm subsidies, importation of livestock feed from other states, and extremely low water levels that threatened irrigation and recreation on the reservoirs, lakes, and rivers. But that has now changed 180 degrees, and South Dakota has gone from drought to surplus.

Lake Oahe on the Missouri River, Spring 2000 (left) and Spring 2005 (right). (NASA)

This spring, the Missouri River (or “Big Muddy”, as it was nicknamed many years ago), which cuts north to south through the center of South Dakota, has risen back to life. Lake Oahe, which had a spring level about 1607 feet above sea level in the Spring of 2000 and had shrunk to a level of 1574 feet in Spring, 2005 – has now grown back to a level of 1612 feet – nine feet above the historical average height of the reservoir. All of the Missouri’s boat ramps are back in operation, a change from recent years in which receding water levels rendered them useless.

There is so much water in eastern South Dakota that the James River remains above flood levels its entire length, from North Dakota to Nebraska – and projections are that flood conditions will continue at least through the end of the month. That is making life difficult along the James right now, but at least it will replenish ground water supplies.

Weather and climate are two different things, and South Dakota’s long term climate suggests it is certainly possible to dry out quickly. But in terms of water, the state’s climate has changed for the better after years of drought.

UPDATE, 4/23/09: Video from Lake Oahe is available at this link from KELO-TV.

Yesterday at the Sustainable Development UK Conference in London, Professor Beddington delivered a Nostradamus-quality forecast of doom.

John Beddington

Besides being struck by yet another rhetorical use of the phrase “perfect storm” (I thought we were already in an economic “perfect storm”?), I was reminded about other well-respected scientists who boldly and confidently predicted catastrophe. There was former presidential science advisor Paul Ehrlich, who wrote a book in 1968 called “The Population Bomb.” It predicted hundreds of millions of people would die of starvation in the 1970s and 1980s as population outgrew food supplies.

A worldwide environmental disaster was predicted by famed astronomer Carl Sagan. He suggested in 1991 that if Kuwaiti oil wells were torched, the resulting fires would pollute the atmosphere and plunge the planet into wintry cold. He erroneously discounted the ability of man to extinguish the fires, and the atmosphere to cleanse itself.

The current US administration has promised to “restore science to its rightful place.” Britain’s Beddington suggests European governments involve independent scientists in policymaking. As something of a scientist myself, I thought I knew what science is and what scientists do. I’m not sure I know anymore.