Perth Water Corporation too incompetent to measure various 2017 monthly rain totals

Could anybody make this up? – the $Bn’s WA Govt organization at the heart of the +decade long slogan “our drying climate” is too careless to measure natures rainfall falling free from the sky. Starting from their Rainfall at Individual Dams www page.
Churchmans Brook Dam recorded 0 rain for June – simply not credible nearby BoM Araluen 9000 recorded 70.8 over 4 days.

Mundaring Dam recorded 0 rain for January – simply not credible – note BoM Mundaring 9030 just to north recorded 57.6 for Jan 2017 and to the south BoM Bickley 9240 recorded 48.4.

South Dandalup Dam recorded 0 rain for June – simply not credible – note the BoM Huntly 9936 to the north recorded 124.8 for Jun 2017 and to the south BoM Dwellingup 9538 recorded 103.8.

Victoria Dam recorded 0 rain for June – simply not credible – just to the west the BoM Gosnells City 9106 recorded 54.8 on the 22nd.
Victoria Dam recorded 0.6 rain for October – simply not credible – the BoM Gosnells City 9106 recorded 33.7 over at least 9 days.

I think highly unreliable and not to be trusted would be the only way to describe the rain measuring efforts of the Western Australian Govt. Water Corporation. In recent years I have been checking their rain data too. Noticed shortcomings 2Aug16 – Called for an audit 28Aug16 – Got unhelpful reply from Minister 14Oct16 – Commented on their famous 2 rain gauges 27Oct16 – Did a wrap of 2016 rain 8Jan17

8 thoughts on “Perth Water Corporation too incompetent to measure various 2017 monthly rain totals”

  1. So what’s the agenda of the Government and the Water Corporation, do they want to fool the punters into believing that all the money that’s been wasted on desal is justified? Fool them into believing that the rain, like the music, has died!
    Could it be that their rain gauges are kept inside near the jar by the door that holds Eleanor Rigby’s face, or maybe the bureaucrats just don’t want to wear the rain gauges out, like Mrs Richards with her cunning scheme to save her hearing aid batteries.

  2. I can’t believe the audacity of you respondents with your replies, which are cruel heartless and manifestly WRONG.
    Too even suggest incompetence by this august body is an
    incorrect statement which must be addressed as a matter of urgency.

    The Department within the Water Corporation that maintains
    and accurately records all the weather and rainfall data, which
    is essential to provide the critical information to enable all
    water users to be confident , knowing that their water supply is plentifull and safe.

    Besides the error in your incompetence suggestion is manifestly wrong, given their are 144 people in that Department which suggests to me you adjust incompetence
    to gross incompetence.


  3. Waterguru, you might support the Water Corporation staff in that department, by first addressing the post above. Warwick’s questions about data collecting are very relevant, and have gone unanswered. I too fully support the activities of Water Corporation staff, especially in my district, but the public has a right to know if and when politics and agendas infiltrate this support.
    Please advise why there records of no rain in places where there was rain.

  4. Tom Harley, you seem to be seriously missing the point.
    The multitude of errors or lack of information by the Water Corporation that Warwick has pointed out, is precisely his and
    my complaint and it is obvious to me that you haven’t dealt with
    the Water Corporation when pointing out errors in their
    publications or suggestions.

    My long running complaint has to do with grossly inaccurate
    information pooring out of the Water Corporation, especially
    since 2002 at the advent our so called water crisis.

    You may remember at the time they were suggesting the
    crisis was “an Act of God” in that high CO2 emmissions were
    restricting rainfall, not their mismanagement, then went on
    to put us all on strict water rationing (still in place) and ordered us to reduce our carbon footprint.

    Their contradictory response was to install two of the biggest
    power guzzling, polluting monstrocities known to man and all
    shortly after the then CEO Jim Gill published statements that the Water Corporation would not be getting involved in seawater desalination plants because they did’nt want to get involved in this new “cutting edge” technology.

    There was no need to spend $2.5 billion dollars and create another 200,000 tonnes of CO2 pollution at the water using taxpayers expense, when all they had to do was recommence
    the tried and proven and far cheaper and environmentally friendly way of improving our water collection and storeage
    our carbon footprint.

    I would also point out the continuing gross neglect of Wellington Dam and the fact they were and still are
    continuing to discharge 45 GL pa of slightly saline water
    to the sea.

    Correcting this iconic dam would have saved taxpayers over
    $1 billion and 200,000 tonnes of CO2 annually.

    I would like Tom to provide an answer as to why there
    has’nt been a rainfall guage on Mundaring Weir for two years
    and why the Water Corporation is providing rainfall data when
    the Bureau of Meteorology is better staffed, qualified and resourced than the Water Corporation to find a $10 guage
    from Bunnings.


  5. Waterguru you raise some relevant points, but also miss some glaring misfits between PC doctrine based on what politically motivated, contrived and much adjusted historical data might suggest as distinct from what centuries of real world, untampered raw data should be screaming at us.
    You identify CO2 emission as "pollution" when without that essential trace gas, which geological history confirms to be at low levels, no carbon based plant or animal life (including humans) could survive.
    But then, we shouldn't take life too seriously, should we!

  6. Bob in C you are right to point out the emission of CO2 is not pollution.
    Everyone who mentions the suppose dangerous effects of CO2 should be reminded, that if it was so, that they are disgusting polluters who breath out CO2, fart methane and produce sh*t which bacteria can turn into more CO2 and methane, Then if they want to save the world they should stop eating (plants which need CO2 and animals which eat plants).
    BTW look at my blog and see that methane is less of a greenhouse gas than CO2 which in turn is insignificant in comparison to H2O vapour.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *