TJKLECKNER
EF4
You won't need to hire anyone, but if a group is having an outing or say softball tournament, an official, scorekeeper or chaperone could keep a radio tuned nearby.
Cities removing tornado sirens in favor of texts, media and Internet warnings
- Thread starter Warren Faidley
- Start date
You won't need to hire anyone, but if a group is having an outing or say softball tournament, an official, scorekeeper or chaperone could keep a radio tuned nearby.
TJKLECKNER
EF4
its obvious that nobody is going to make rdale happy today 
rdale
EF5
its obvious that nobody is going to make rdale happy today
Not if you're seriously proposing a law that requires the umpire to carry around a NWR with him when he's on the ballfield
Some of the proposals here make me wonder...Mike Johnston
EF5
Just for Joplin, or the whole Springfield CWA?
rdale
EF5
I thought you meant siren policy... If you're talking about the SGF WFO - they are getting worse. False alarm rate was 68% in 2012 (not bad), 75% in 2013 (national norm), and 89% this year (horrid.) They've issued 28 warnings, verified 3 of them, and missed 12 tornadoes.
Mike Johnston
EF5
My original comment was about the SGF WFO, but I realized your comment was about local warning policy. I'm glad there is such a thing as a best practices model out there. I wonder if the Baxter Springs tornado was counted as a "miss." And the Quapaw, OK tornado - but not exactly sure if that is in SGF's area or Tulsa's. Those were two recent events that kind of shook up my mom. Of course, the Joplin disaster really shook her up. There were some very questionable communications that came from SGF during Joplin. I think my mom wishes she got her warnings from Wichita.
Last edited by a moderator:
Joey Ketcham
EF4
Quapaw is Tulsa, Baxter is SGF.
Mike Smith
I wish I could state otherwise, but I am not sanguine about siren policy in Joplin. As best I can tell, they have gone through two changes in policy after the May 22, 2011, tornado. First, keep in mind they have the technical capability to sound the sirens only in (or in and near) the polygons. Their policy change after the tornado was to sound them for TOR and SVR for any part of Jasper and Newton counties in MO and if a TOR was issued in Cherokee Co., Kansas. This was, along with some bullying by local officials, documented here: http://meteorologicalmusings.blogspot.com/2012/09/joplins-curious-post-storm-behavior.html
Then, they changed the policy to what is described below (cut-and-pasted from their web site):
The City of Joplin will activate outdoor warning sirens when any of the following severe weather conditions exists:
Storm Siren Activation Policy
Storm Sirens shall be activated when:
While I am not sold on "75mph" (especially given SGF's ridiculous over-warning, but that is not JLN's fault), this is a good policy. The concern I have is they have had so many policies over the last five years I'm not convinced "John Q" knows what the current policy is. I know two people in JLN who thought "hail" was still a criterion so there is at least some anecdotal evidence that is the case.
Then, they changed the policy to what is described below (cut-and-pasted from their web site):
The City of Joplin will activate outdoor warning sirens when any of the following severe weather conditions exists:
Storm Siren Activation Policy
Storm Sirens shall be activated when:
- The National Weather Service issues a TORNADO WARNING, OR a trained spotter reports a tornado:
- In Jasper County, Missouri; Newton County, Missouri; or Cherokee County, Kansas
- AND the tornado path includes the City of Joplin
- Or the National Weather Service reports a storm system producing wind speeds of 75 MPH or greater, AND the storm path includes the City of Joplin
While I am not sold on "75mph" (especially given SGF's ridiculous over-warning, but that is not JLN's fault), this is a good policy. The concern I have is they have had so many policies over the last five years I'm not convinced "John Q" knows what the current policy is. I know two people in JLN who thought "hail" was still a criterion so there is at least some anecdotal evidence that is the case.
rdale
EF5
That policy is verbatim to the best practices...
Just came late to the thread. Opposed to eliminating sirens - strongly.
Weather warnings are one place we need all the help we can get. As has been pointed out - not everyone will have their electronics on in the middle of the night, and face it many of those same folks don't have weather radios. Or maybe they leave their cell phone in the car. No matter what you think of, text and internet still isn't patched into a foolproof broadcast method any more than TV or radio. It has to be on and nearby to work (or able to turn itself on and nearby).
Although tornado sirens were never meant to be indoor warnings, they fill the gap nicely and can be heard in many buildings. Used properly, they induce a kind of attention and even fear in some so as to induce action. They usually imply something dire is about to happen (unless over used). Text messages can be misread, misinterpreted, and don't always have that same feeling of urgency. Too many words leaves people interpreting and thinking, when some of them should be thinking "danger - get to cover now!"
As Mike mentions in his book (When the Sirens were Silent, but Warnings is excellent as well) both NWS warnings and sirens can fall short of the goal if used improperly. So again, I say the more warning methods to get the message to people, the better - in case one is flawed or missing you have the other hopefully as backup.
Weather warnings are one place we need all the help we can get. As has been pointed out - not everyone will have their electronics on in the middle of the night, and face it many of those same folks don't have weather radios. Or maybe they leave their cell phone in the car. No matter what you think of, text and internet still isn't patched into a foolproof broadcast method any more than TV or radio. It has to be on and nearby to work (or able to turn itself on and nearby).
Although tornado sirens were never meant to be indoor warnings, they fill the gap nicely and can be heard in many buildings. Used properly, they induce a kind of attention and even fear in some so as to induce action. They usually imply something dire is about to happen (unless over used). Text messages can be misread, misinterpreted, and don't always have that same feeling of urgency. Too many words leaves people interpreting and thinking, when some of them should be thinking "danger - get to cover now!"
As Mike mentions in his book (When the Sirens were Silent, but Warnings is excellent as well) both NWS warnings and sirens can fall short of the goal if used improperly. So again, I say the more warning methods to get the message to people, the better - in case one is flawed or missing you have the other hopefully as backup.
rdale
EF5
The text message says "Tornado Warning this area until 6pm" - hard to say that's prone to misinterpretation
John Olexa
EF5
The text message says "Tornado Warning this area until 6pm" - hard to say that's prone to misinterpretation
I don't know. I'm still suprised at how many people still don't know the difference between watches & warnings or just gets them mixed up.
Last edited by a moderator:
rdale
EF5
Really? I know that can happen in a generic survey, but when the TV guy says "There is a Tornado Warning - here is live video of the tornado approaching Yourtown, Yourstate" I find it hard to believe anyone in their right mind says "Oh, it's just a warning, that could mean we get nothing for hours."
John Olexa
EF5
With TV I agree but I was talking about receiving a text message (post # 56.) Heck people now treat Doppler indicated warnings like a watch.
Thats exactly what I mean by interpretation. I think people can literally read the words in a text, but still misunderstand / misinterpret what it means to them or what action they should take, how much time they think they have, etc. In my opinion, a siren properly used means 'take shelter, right now' to most people, or at the least, 'pay attention something dangerous is happening now', regardless of their understanding of the differences in warning types.
Its just a shame that so many cities sound them for every little thing that happens, allegedly to protect people AND property - but desensitizing the populace. I really disagree with sounding sirens for anything that does not have the potential to cause bodily harm or death. Property can be replaced and anyone who needs warning to protect property from hail or severe winds can be responsible for keeping up with situations themselves without a siren. Where some emergency managers got the idea to protect property with siren warnings is beyond me. Once the threat level reaches injury or death though, sirens can and should be used.
Locally, here in Colorado the city of Aurora will literally sound their siren for any SVR with a dark cloud. I've heard Aurora sound their siren three days in a row just this year form my workplace in nearby Centennial - never with a credible threat to property OR life. Its truly abysmal management. Just across town, in Lakewood, if you hear the siren you know there is a funnel or imminent real threat. In 3 years of working there, I only heard the sirens once, and a funnel was spinning overhead.
Similar threads
- Drew.Gardonia
- Advanced weather & chasing
