Stronger NWS wording needed for freezing rain

[Dan Robinson]

Major headlines on every local media website read... "Freezing Rain Advisory makes travel Hazardous.' The advisory was disemminated on radio, local media, and both local and nws websites. Every local TV station had the little raindrop logo with bold text 'Freezing Rain Advisory' in the top right corner and a bar of cancellations on closures scrolled across the bottom of the screen. Overhead road signs on I-80 say 'Ice Possible- Slow Down.' Police sat on some major roads with their lights on to warn drivers to slow down... what else could've been done besides shutting everything down?

But most of that was after the fact - not beforehand. All of that happens with every icing event - the accidents start happening and only then do all the information sources, news reports and police reponses start jumping on the bandwagon. By then, the worst of the crashes have already happened. I've personally seen this happen again and again.

The public is simply not 'trained' to recognize freezing rain as a significant weather-related threat on par with a tornado. And weakly-worded advisories don't help that. A little icon on a web page doesn't trigger the proper response. That's what I'm getting at - for instance, make that little raindrop something bigger - something that matches the threat level.

That, and changing NWS wording, is not going to be a huge thing to implement. If it, in tandem with awareness compaigns, saves a few dozen lives a year, why not?

Tornadoes kill an average of 62 people per year in the US. The icy road toll for this season could end up being eight times that! Why should we not consider ways to make improvements to that number, or are icy road deaths just meaningless and/or an acceptable status quo compared to tornado deaths?

 

[Chris Allington]

That, and changing NWS wording, is not going to be a huge thing to implement. If it, in tandem with awareness compaigns, saves a few dozen lives a year, why not?

What are you going to do to change the wording and make people not think... just another warning?

 

[Dan Robinson]

What are you going to do to change the wording and make people not think... just another warning?

The same thing that is done for blizzard warnings, tornado warnings, hurricane warnings and flood warnings. All of those include wording stressing the life-threatening aspect of each hazard. Freezing rain is certainly deserving of that. Even a severe thunderstorm warning mentions 'deadly lightning'.

For any given area (outside of the northern states), there are only a handful of these events every season. I believe communities would benefit from not only the enhanced NWS wording, but the trickle-down effect that would have in the media and public perception of the hazard. I think people need to develop the same respect for this as they do for tornadoes.

It's ironic how people think we're crazy for chasing tornadoes, yet they subject themselves to an even greater weather risk several times every winter. It's that I'd like to see change.

 

[Chris Allington]

The same thing that is done for blizzard warnings, tornado warnings, hurricane warnings and flood warnings. All of those include wording stressing the life-threatening aspect of each hazard. Freezing rain is certainly deserving of that. Even a severe thunderstorm warning mentions 'deadly lightning'.

The same thing is already done unless I'm mistaken. My weather radio goes off for a freezing rain advisory. The local media tells me about the threat for freezing rain and reiterates the ongoing conditions. A little icon displays on my local media channels including a flashing map of the included counties. The only thing that doesn't happen that happens with tornado or severe thunderstorm warnings here is interuption of live programming. I don't think its a necessity. Like rdale pointed out earlier. I go outside and slide down my driveway to get the mail, or have to chip the ice off my car. Freezing rain doesnt really happen on an instantaneous basis like the other phenomenon. Most people already know you can die from being in a car accident... so a freezing rain advisory lets us know that roads might be slick, which by all reasonable accounts can lead to an accident. It explains itself... its sad to me if weve reached a time where people are really that oblivious and unable to reason.

It's ironic how people think we're crazy for chasing tornadoes, yet they subject themselves to an even greater weather risk several times every winter. It's that I'd like to see change.

Exactly, they subject themselves. Its not different than the local yo-hoos that try to film a tornado from there front porch even though the wall to wall coverage on their tv is telling them to get in their basement. Or the people who go to check out the creek in the flood warning and get up to their windshield in water.

 

[mikegeukes]

Here is an example of an freezing rain advisory that was cancelled, but the NWS in Omaha mentions untreated roads and streets likely remain extremely slick and hazardous though...so if you still need to travel tonight...be prepared for icy conditions in many areas.
http://weather.cod.edu/kamala/offs/KOAX/0901040204.wwus43.html

Short Term Forecasts are useful in mentioning about freezing rain.
Examples:
http://kamala.cod.edu/offs/KMKX/0901040345.fpus73.html
http://kamala.cod.edu/offs/KGRR/0901040513.fpus73.html

Some offices are probably better than others, when it comes to issuing products concerning winter weather.

 

[Bob Hartig]

But COULD it have been made better if a "black ice road travel warning" was issued, and TV stations went wall-to-wall, and sirens sounded? I've yet to see the evidence... That's all I'm saying.

The kind of evidence you're asking for can't possibly be produced because "black ice road travel warnings" don't exist, and so can't be tested. Until such testing occurs, no evidence can be furnished either for or against.

What I find myself wondering is, what kind of thought went into developing the existing terminology? I'm guessing (though I don't know) that it was somewhat arbitrary--not that thought didn't go into it, but I wonder if the thinking behind it was as meticulous as this thread has been. Once it becomes entrenched, the status quo has a lot of staying power, but where did it come from in the first place? We tend to not give these matters much thought, if any, until someone raises an issue that calls them into question, as Dan has done here. Consider the points made in this discussion and ask yourself this: if no winter weather advisory language existed today and we had to develop terminology from scratch, what would we wind up with? Would it be identical to what's currently in use, or would it be different--and if it were different, how and why?

I agree with Dan that geography plays a big role in winter driving awareness. I do think the media do their utmost to get the word out and warn the public, and ultimately, all the media squawk in the world can't cure a bad case of The Stupids. But again, I don't think it could hurt to revisit the terminology.

 

[mikegeukes]

I remember in Norman Oklahoma, the forecast was for a ice storm, which did happen, did not get the accumulated amount that was forecasted. The public was well aware of the storm. In fact the Walmart store on the east side of Norman, was almost wiped out of food and supplies. There was hardly a vehicle on the roads in Norman, during the ice storm, but some did go out anyways driving. No matter, what the wording, is people will still drive somewhere if its in ice storm, freezing rain, snow, blizzard, etc.

Mike
Lansing, MI

 

[Paul Hadfield]

Right now we have a 'freezing rain advisory' with 0.05" of ice expected overnight. I'm not mentioning the advisory, but I am leading the show because of the potential. Should we call in manpower to be here overnight when the icing starts? Should we keep a crawl up continuously? How would you handle a case like this?

Keep watch on ground level conditions via spotter, coop, EMA, police, fire, etc. from their respective locations and the moment ice is being reported on non-elevated surfaces, immediately upgrade to warning. Announce conditions via the Emergency Broadcast System advising people to stay off roadways till conditions improve etc. Perhaps even place a "W" on the upper right of the tv screen as is for severe tstorm warnings. Ice affects more square mileage than any single thunderstorm so how is taking extra precaution on such a far reaching phenomena a nuisance?

 

[Chris Allington]

I agree with Dan that geography plays a big role in winter driving awareness. I do think the media do their utmost to get the word out and warn the public, and ultimately, all the media squawk in the world can't cure a bad case of The Stupids. But again, I don't think it could hurt to revisit the terminology.

This has been a good discussion and I agree. But, what can you do to change the wording. Saying roads will be icy, means I should drive accordingly or I might get in a accident, accidents cause injury or death. It seems like a no-brainer to me. I just don't know what you could change it too and it not be one extreme or the other. It sounds like you want to warn of the potential for injury or death... but you can't really say, 'road surfaces will become deadly and dangerous.' Then if no one gets hurt or killed, people just go back to ignoring the wording and it just seems a little harsh. The wording now says it could be slick, dont travel unless you need to. I just think eventually one would have to put 2 and 2 together and realize ice ='s drive safely or you might crash. Plus, my confidence in my driving and yours could be completely different.

 

[mikegeukes]

On the other hand, how many people really pay attention to Flash Flood Watches, Flood Watches, Flash Flood Warnings, Flood Warnings, etc.
People will still drive around barricades and drive through flooded areas.

 

[Dan Robinson]

Most people don't go out in freezing rain thinking 'this could kill me'. Who better to help change that than the NWS and media - the very sources people already get their weather information from? I'm thinking of the mom with kids in car seats. I know most people like that would take a warning that mentioned a life-threatening situation more seriously.

And it often does happen very fast - I've watched (and videotaped) bridges get icy in a matter of minutes.

 

[Chris Allington]

Most people don't go out in freezing rain thinking 'this could kill me'.

Most people shouldn't because if they drive according to the conditions and use common sense it won't affect a vast vast majority. By the same token how many people drive smart and never have an accident in adverse weather conditions?

 

[Joel Wright]

Around here people seem to freak out everytime the words freezing rain are mentioned. I think people who have had to deal with it (which is everyone around here) are well aware of how much fun it is to try to commute in icy conditions.

During the winter months there almost seems to be an overload of advisories/watches/warnings etc. For the most part the NWS does a great job at issuing what's needed for a given event. I hear people say the wrong watch/advisory all the time for what's actually been issued. I've heard a lot of people say there's a warning out for something when in reality all that's been issued was a watch or advisory.

Freezing rain advisories seem to cause a lot of fear whenever they're issued. At least around here. Ice storm warnings really make everyone go nuts. News media really pounds the story too. So I'd have to think at least when it comes to freezing rain the public seems to take it pretty seriously from what I've seen. Other winter type advisories maybe not so much.

The way I look at it is there are lots of traffic accidents everyday even in good driving conditions. Unfortunate but true. Adverse winter precip just amplifies the risk that's always there everytime you leave your driveway.

 

[Dan Robinson]

Most people shouldn't because if they drive according to the conditions and use common sense it won't affect a vast vast majority. By the same token how many people drive smart and never have an accident in adverse weather conditions?

That's part of the goal. Awareness of the hazard that results in a change in behavior, IE, slow down.

Freezing rain's biggest threat is its element of surprise - it produces ice that is not visually apparent. Therefore most accidents don't involve people who are aware of the conditions and choose to carelessly drive normally anyway. Most involve people who encounter ice unexpectedly - they never had a chance to evaluate the conditions and slow down accordingly. You have to know the conditions are there before you can know to adjust your driving behavior.

 

[Dan Robinson]

Around here people seem to freak out everytime the words freezing rain are mentioned. I think people who have had to deal with it (which is everyone around here) are well aware of how much fun it is to try to commute in icy conditions.

Exactly That's the way it should be everywhere, and what the primary goal of my suggestion is. Incidentally, there have been very few fatalities in northern Illinois compared to the rest of the state. Unfortunately, people in say, Indianapolis, Cincinnati and St. Louis don't have that same respect for the hazard.