The Boston Globe can't be bothered with reality...

The problem with mud season is not just that it exists, but that there is more of it.

New England winters have warmed on average more than 4 degrees Fahrenheit over the last 40 years, allowing spring melt to begin earlier and the ground to freeze later in the fall. Add to that an increase in winter thaws, mini-mud seasons that are a preview for the main spring event. It all adds up to more muddy days per year.

The trend presents bigger problems than buying rubber boots. New England's logging industry depends on winter for work. Most roads into the North Woods are unpaved and need to be frozen or very dry to support the weight of logging trucks. Timber companies also need frozen ground to get to low-lying trees.

Got that? The Winters in New England are warmer, so there is more mud in the Spring. I'm admittedly not the sharpest pencil in the box, but I would think that winter thaws allow quicker evaporation. I would, also, think that it wouldn't matter when the first ground freeze occurred or when the first spring thaw occurred. I would think that the mud would be the same whenever each of these items occurred. I would, also, think that the amount of precipitation over the period would play a roll. I believe the calling card of the zealots is that global warming causes drought...right? Then again, I'm not the one trying to justify this global warming garbage.

Incidentally, New England's Winter was not warmer this year:



As you can see, the temperatures in New England down through the Northeast were not above average. Keep in mind that the entity that sets the temperatures also likes to play fast and loose with the figures if they don't support their position. I'm not sure the NOAA is a good source for determining much of anything that isn't politically motivated.