The NWS Forecasts for Katrina

[Dan Robinson]

I heard either all or parts of the NWS statement being read and discussed by numerous local and national TV and radio anchors across the country. Nearly every non-weather message board I read on a regular basis had people posting about it. I think as far as NWS statements go, this may have been the most widely distributed, read, heard and talked about statement in NWS history. I'd think this would have been especially true in the areas in the path of the storm.

 

[Morgan Palmer]

But was it talked about in the media ahead of time? Or was the strong wording dismissed? I know Geraldo read it on Fox news after the fact.

 

[Jay McCoy]

" It very well may be required, forceful evacuations?"

I don't think that would work very well. Would you break into everyone's home to see if they left? Would you arrest tens of thousands of people. Would they be evacuated to a shelter or out of city? Im more for education, emphasis on the dangers, providing transport to the shelters, etc.

No you couldnt make them leave if they really want to stay but it would be made very clear that they do so at their own peril and will NOT be rescued or supplied by the government during or after the storm. You stay..you pay!! dont call 911 and ask for the FD to come save ya. Dont get on your roof afterward and wave down a coast guard chopper. you wanted to stay so you take care of yourself. There are consequences to your choices so choose wisely!!

 

[Scott Olson]

" It very well may be required, forceful evacuations?"

I don't think that would work very well. Would you break into everyone's home to see if they left? Would you arrest tens of thousands of people. Would they be evacuated to a shelter or out of city? Im more for education, emphasis on the dangers, providing transport to the shelters, etc.

No you couldnt make them leave if they really want to stay but it would be made very clear that they do so at their own peril and will NOT be rescued or supplied by the government during or after the storm. You stay..you pay!! dont call 911 and ask for the FD to come save ya. Dont get on your roof afterward and wave down a coast guard chopper. you wanted to stay so you take care of yourself. There are consequences to your choices so choose wisely!!

Im not sure I'd agree with that either, perhaps in a perfect world where everyone understood the impact of Hurricanes and money was not an issue. If this was the case then you'd get to watch tens of thousands of people die on the news in NO instead of making an effort to rescue them.

It's not like people didn't 'pay' as many nearly lost their lives and perhaps thousands did.

 

[Glen Romine]

You stay..you pay!! ...you wanted to stay so you take care of yourself.

This is all pretty easy to say from an outside perspective - but reality is that no amount of stubborn resolve on the part of the victims should be held against them in terms of at least offering some level of compassion for human life. This has the same logic of refusing to help someone in a car accident because when you found them afterwards they were not wearing a seatbelt.

Regardless, there are going to be some folks who will refuse to evacuate. The real question to ask is what, if anything, would have made some of them change their mind to leave sooner. I suspect either the individual threat was not known or the probability of the scenario as it played out was poorly known. Clearly, lots of folks are wanting to leave now, so I suspect they would have been more likely to do so earlier had they known then what they now know. Of course, if you thought the Supedome / Convention Center situation was bad, imagine if 2-3 times that many people had shown up. The government at all levels appeared to be poorly prepared to handle that scenario - perhaps because some statistician calculated the odds and came up with an 'acceptable' risk score.

Glen

 

[rdale]

Interesting article from Drudge:

The TIMES-PICAYUNE published a story on July 24, 2005 stating: City, state and federal emergency officials are preparing to give a historically blunt message: "In the event of a major hurricane, you're on your own."

Staff writer Bruce Nolan reported some 7 weeks before Katrina: "In scripted appearances being recorded now, officials such as Mayor Ray Nagin, local Red Cross Executive Director Kay Wilkins and City Council President Oliver Thomas drive home the word that the city does not have the resources to move out of harm's way an estimated 134,000 people without transportation."

"In the video, made by the anti-poverty agency Total Community Action, they urge those people to make arrangements now by finding their own ways to leave the city in the event of an evacuation.

"You're responsible for your safety, and you should be responsible for the person next to you," Wilkins said in an interview. "If you have some room to get that person out of town, the Red Cross will have a space for that person outside the area. We can help you."

 

[David Wolfson]

NOAA also did a magnificent job modeling storm surges and water levels, both for the many prescient studies on the consequences of a NO hit, near-real time while the storm was on the way, and rolling out satellite imagery while K's trailing cloud field was still obscured some of the landscape. I hope to heaven the Prez and Congress find it in their hearts and pocketbooks to throw a tiny fraction of the $50B NOAA's way.

On the off-topic discussion... I agree with what Glen said. TTI I saw a lot of cowardice and precious little can-do from the higher levels of government. I believe the agencies who could and should have gone in early and in force were worried about their own butts more than saving desperate fellow-americans. A sad picture that I hope we find the wisdom and will to never repeat.

 

[Chris Geelhart]

Originally posted by Dan Robinson
I heard either all or parts of the NWS statement being read and discussed by numerous local and national TV and radio anchors across the country.

Here is an article that was published today in the Syracuse (NY) Post-Standard, regarding this message. Specific link:
http://www.syracuse.com/kirst/index.ssf?/b...2690.xml&coll=1
(Sorry for any word wrap issues with the link.)

Chris G.

 

[Warren Eckels]

More props for the Weather Services

http://www.esa.org/pao/PolicyNewsUpdate/pn...04/07162004.php
http://www.ucar.edu/oga/html/budget/fy05_noaa.html

The NWS budget approved for FY '05 was $710.7 million, down from $722 billion. Its parent organization, NOAA, got $3.89 billion, which is supposed to be a 1.3% cut.

I think that the NHC is part of NOAA, so its budget would come from the appropriation for NOAA in general.

The Federal Government's weather agencies further distinguished themselves in the art of running bureaucracies the last three weeks. There has been much criticism of jurisdictional snafus between FEMA and Homeland Security, to say nothing of confusion between state and local governments and NGOs. No such bureaucratic bickering was apparent from the NWS and the NHC, who worked together so seamlessly that casual observers cannot tell where one's responsibility ends and the other's begins. And the "10 am Advisory of Doom", controversial even on a board with many NOAA fans, was both surprisingly forthright and uncannily accurate.

 

[B Ozanne]

The NWS budget approved for FY '05 was $710.7 million, down from $722 billion.

Better check your illions. No way was the NWS budget .722 trillion dollars. I'm sure you meant $722 million.

 

[jladue]

Re: More props for the Weather Services

Here's where the NHC is located:

NOAA/NWS/NCEP/NHC where NCEP is the National Center for Environmental Prediction
They're a sister group to the SPC, HPC, The Marine Prediction Center (MPC), Space Environment Center (SEC), and more.

The culture of working together is because it's all one organization.

regards,

Jim

Originally posted by Warren Eckels
http://www.esa.org/pao/PolicyNewsUpdate/pn2004/07162004.php
http://www.ucar.edu/oga/html/budget/fy05_noaa.html

The NWS budget approved for FY '05 was $710.7 million, down from $722 billion. Its parent organization, NOAA, got $3.89 billion, which is supposed to be a 1.3% cut.

I think that the NHC is part of NOAA, so its budget would come from the appropriation for NOAA in general.

The Federal Government's weather agencies further distinguished themselves in the art of running bureaucracies the last three weeks. There has been much criticism of jurisdictional snafus between FEMA and Homeland Security, to say nothing of confusion between state and local governments and NGOs. No such bureaucratic bickering was apparent from the NWS and the NHC, who worked together so seamlessly that casual observers cannot tell where one's responsibility ends and the other's begins. And the \"10 am Advisory of Doom\", controversial even on a board with many NOAA fans, was both surprisingly forthright and uncannily accurate.