NWS budget cuts

[Andrew Stoller]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46430601

This seems to be a very stupid decision, and might actually end up costing the federal government more in the long run. They're getting rid of some IT positions at local NWS offices, and having them done remotely? Not to mention, this literally is a needle in a hay stack when you look at the total federal budget.

This comment was good:

"My name is Buddy Whorrall and I represent the National Weather Service Employees Organization. I am also what is referred to as an IT efficiency, I am an Information Technology Officer.

I want to comment on some of the above remarks, I would compare them to taking your car to a repair shop where the person at the front desk tells you that they have let the mechanics go because they have invested in new technologies that allow them to have someone from their remote headquarters talk the desk clerk through the diagnostics and repair of the vehicle.

The National Weather Service does an outstanding job ensuring public safety. The only reason they are able to provide accurate advanced watches and warnings is because they have all of the correct pieces of the puzzle. IT support is on location for a reason. They are resident experts of the complex weather systems and applications, without them on site during a rapidly changing severe weather event you could run the risk of a forecaster trying to troubleshoot a problem rather than concentrating on issuing a warning."

 

[rdale]

The first budget presented by the President never becomes the final budget. That being said, it's still good to make your voice known to Congress on this issue...

 

[Andrew Stoller]

I noticed last year during the big outbreaks that many NWS web pages, especially local forecast office pages which have local warning information, were very slow and sometimes weren't functioning. If any local responders get information that way, it could be a problem.

 

[Andrew Stoller]

That being said, it's still good to make your voice known to Congress on this issue...

Was that supposed to be a joke, cause I'm laughing! Congress is so bought and paid for by special interest money that I'm sure any letter I'd write would be filed into the trash can by a staffer.

 

[rdale]

ITOs would still be at the region and that's where the web pages are hosted, so no impact there.

 

[Kelly Sugden]

Yeah, impacts would start locally where information could not be disseminated.

 

[rdale]

That should be no big deal - at the start of every AWIPS 2 update I hear "This is the last time we will have to announce a delay, we'll have all the bugs out of it by the next call"

 

[Jake Orosi]

Was that supposed to be a joke, cause I'm laughing! Congress is so bought and paid for by special interest money that I'm sure any letter I'd write would be filed into the trash can by a staffer.

A significant public response from scientists and its biggest fans and led to the immensely over-budget James Webb Space Telescope being saved from a congressional axe earlier last year, and in the president's proposed budget this year despite otherwise brutal cuts to the rest of NASA's budget. It can definitely be done; as far as I know, there's no active anti-NWS lobby to fight against on this, it was probably included just because it seemed to some suit like something they could cut without too many complaints.

 

[Joshua Nall]

I still feel the same way I did last year this topic came up. If they want to cut everything by about 30 percent, then we might be getting somewhere. All of these proposed cuts are really just a show to make the general public feel government is thinking about doing something. Even if they do cut a few percent, it's just a drop in the bucket considering the immensity of the problem. They pick programs and agencies they feel will upset the fewest people.

 

[Jeff Duda]

I would think there would be bigger fish to fry than to suck out 4% of the NWS's budget. Perhaps the new budget is also taking as much or more out of other agencies as well, but I'm sure it's pretty arbitrary.

 

[Andy Jackson]

NWS cuts are really just the tip of the ice burg. I would have assumed with the disasters last year that the NWS would be safe but not quite. I could open a whole can of worms here concerning the national debt but that is a pretty dim picture. All I suggest is to choose your presidential choice wisely.

 

[rdale]

Not to be political - but President Obama did not set out to kill IT positions in the NWS. His office gave them a number and HQ made the decisions. It's also impacting Skywarn training, and I hear the profiler network soon too... I have yet to hear any other candidate run on the platform of increasing the Federal spending in order to keep NWS funding at existing levels, so I can't imagine anything will change unless Congress hears from us.

 

[Tim Shriver]

One big impact will be in the spotter training. We have seen drastic cuts in our area leaving the spotter groups to pick up the slack. training wise.

Tim

 

[rdale]

Tim, check with your local TV meteorologists. Many would be willing to do it, and they can even use the NWS slides if you want. Even consider having your EMA use their training funds to help support his travel / etc. and you should be set.

 

[Scott A. Kampas]

Some NWSFOs are using webinars in lieu of in person training this year due to cuts.

FWIW, someone started a petition at the WH system to save NWS funding: https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitio...budget-cuts-national-weather-service/nQVPd4l2