Hydrological drought is a pervasive and reoccurring challenge in managing water resources. Reservoirs are critical for lessening the impacts of drought on water available for many uses. We use a novel and generalized approach to identify periods of unusually low reservoir storage—via comparisons to operational rule curves and historical patterns—to investigate how droughts affect storage in 250 reservoirs across the conterminous U.S. (CONUS). We find that the maximum amount of water stored in reservoirs is decreasing, and that periods of unusually low storage are becoming longer, more severe, and more variable in (a) western and central CONUS reservoirs, and (b) reservoirs with primarily over‐year storage. Results suggest that reservoir storage has become less reliable and more vulnerable to larger deviations from desired storage patterns. These changes have coincided with ongoing shifts to the hydroclimate of CONUS, and with sedimentation further reducing available reservoir storage.

Hydrologic models are the primary tools that are used to simulate streamflow drought and assess impacts. However, there is little consensus about how to evaluate the performance of these models, especially as hydrologic modeling moves toward larger spatial domains. This paper presents a comprehensive multi-objective approach to systematically evaluating the critical features in streamflow drought simulations performed by two widely used hydrological models. The evaluation approach captures how well a model classifies observed periods of drought and non-drought, quantifies error components during periods of drought, and assesses the models’ simulations of drought severity, duration, and intensity. We apply this approach at 4662 U.S. Geological Survey streamflow gages covering a wide range of hydrologic conditions across the conterminous U.S. from 1985 to 2016 to evaluate streamflow drought using two national-scale hydrologic models: the National Water Model (NWM) and the National Hydrologic Model (NHM); therefore, a benchmark against which to evaluate additional models is provided. Using this approach, we find that generally the NWM better simulates the timing of flows during drought, while the NHM better simulates the magnitude of flows during drought. Both models performed better in wetter eastern regions than in drier western regions. Finally, each model showed increased error when simulating the most severe drought events.