Tornado Emergencies

[Jim Zandonai]

Well the first time I heard of a Tornado Emergency was last year when DDC issued one during the Greensburg Tornado event if memory serves. The public hears Tornado warnings all the time..some people take them more seriously then others. The problem is most often a Warning is issued when radar indicates rotation for instance and doesnt produce a Tornado so the public thinks 'oh yeah we had tornado warnings out but nothin happened just a storm' . Kind of cry wolf. You know how it goes. But if a Tornado Emergency was issued I personaly would assume a rather large Tornado was on the ground headed for a comminity..no doubt. Now the public probably wouldnt know the difference anyway. Take the case of Springfield MO..we had Tornados reported on the ground and the definitive hooks ! You cant get much for defined then that..so I can see the Emergency wording. In our case up here Radar indicated a Storm 8 Mi. SW of Machesney park with Strong Rotation..Tornado Warning. Well it went on to produce an EF3 Tornado shortly thereafter. My point is Tornado Warnings should be taken as serious as always..but when the weather service knows a long lived Tornado is on the ground from Reports or a well defined hook perhaps a Emergency wording gets the point across better...TAKE COVER NOW. The point is to save lives. Perhaps people would take the wording more seriously then the common Warning ..

 

[Jesse Risley]

In response to the original question, I was also under the assumption that a tornado emergency was issued when a confirmed tornado was on the ground and threatening to impact a well populated area (incorporated city, town, municipality, etc.). I had never heard of a "tornado emergency" prior to the Greensburg, KS event.

I'm going to avoid commenting on the NWS protocalls in specific scenarios, mainly due to the fact that I don't have all of the "insider" information pertaining to why TEs have been issued in past events. However, I do agree that overuse of any term will have the "crying wolf" effect, as always. Tornado warnings are hardly taken seriously by the general public anyhow. I would hate to see the same fate for a TE, if and when people ever figure out what it means.

 

[Jon Person]

I had never heard of a "tornado emergency" prior to the Greensburg, KS event.

This is my understanding as well, but Wikipedia claims that 3/9 was a TE.

 

[Kevin Bowman]

I had never heard of a "tornado emergency" prior to the Greensburg, KS event.

it has been used a few times since 1999 starting with the Moore F5, it was later used with the Moore F4, in the KC metro area on May 4 2003 among a few other times

S

EVERE WEATHER STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE KANSAS CITY/PLEASANT HILL MO
410 PM CDT SUN MAY 4 2003

...TORNADO EMERGENCY FOR THE NORTHERN HALF OF THE KANSAS CITY METRO
AREA...

AT 409 PM CDT...DOPPLER RADAR INDICATED TWO TORNADIC THUNDERSTORMS
ACROSS THE KANSAS CITY AREA. ONE STORM WAS LOCATED NEAR PLATTE
CITY...WITH THE SECOND ALONG INTERSTATE 70 IN LEAVENWORTH COUNTY.
THESE STORMS HAVE A HISTORY OF PRODUCING TORNADOES.

THIS IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND LIFE THREATENING SITUATION.
PEOPLE IN THE PATH OF THESE STORMS SHOULD SEEK SHELTER IMMEDIATELY!

LAT...LON 3953 9464 3909 9462 3901 9491 3899 9516
3937 9512 3943 9495 3951 9494

WWUS34 KOKC 040004
SVSOKC
OKZ025-027>029-040030-

SEVERE WEATHER STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NORMAN OK
657 PM CDT MON MAY 3 1999

...TORNADO EMERGENCY IN SOUTH OKLAHOMA CITY METRO AREA...

AT 657 PM CDT...A LARGE TORNADO WAS MOVING ALONG INTERSTATE 44 WEST
OF NEWCASTLE. ON ITS PRESENT PATH...THIS LARGE DAMAGING TORNADO
WILL ENTER SOUTHWEST SECTIONS OF THE OKLAHOMA CITY METRO AREA
BETWEEN 715 PM AND 730 PM. PERSONS IN MOORE AND SOUTH OKLAHOMA CITY
SHOULD TAKE IMMEDIATE TORNADO PRECAUTIONS!

THIS IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND LIFE THREATENING SITUATION. IF
YOU ARE IN THE PATH OF THIS LARGE AND DESTRUCTIVE TORNADO...TAKE
COVER IMMEDIATELY.

DOPPLER RADAR INDICATED THIS STORM MAY CONTAIN DESTRUCTIVE HAIL TO
THE SIZE OF BASEBALLS...OR LARGER.

LAT...LON 3524 9784 3511 9769 3536 9735 3552 9754

ANDRA

 

[Mike Smith]

Here is an amazing 9-1-1 recording during Monday's Kenosha, WI tornado, which caused a fair amount of damage. I am amazed at the number of people who call in, including a local emergency manager!

www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=705677

 

[Bob Hartig]

Mike, that truly is an amazing and revealing recording. Thanks for sharing it!

It also appears on another thread, and you posted there as a sort of continuation of the warning/emergency debate. I'm responding on this thread in order to keep the two threads separate. I'm quoting here a part of what you had to say:

" The TE thread was interesting and useful to me, thanks to everyone who commented. In that thread, I made the point that, from my point of view, all tornado warnings are emergencies. If we really believe "Tornado Emergency" phrasing is what is needed to get people into shelter, maybe we should change the terminology from Tornado Warning to Tornado Emergency. Just a thought."

I honestly don't think that's the solution. The more I've thought about this, the clearer it becomes to me that we're dealing with two different scenarios.

Remember, your point of view is not necessarily the public's point of view, and therein lies the rub. Tornado warnings are perceived in different ways and with varying urgency, and my guess is, they will continue to be because they cover a spectrum of risk, not a highly specific crisis situation. I'm not sure there's a way around that, and I don't know that there needs to be. I think that spectrum of risk is realistic, and warnings do a good job of addressing it.

In any event, I don't see that simply changing the terminology is going to solve anything. The virtue in the term "tornado emergency" lies in three things: its specificity, its much higher degree of certainty, and its rarity. Start treating that term like a standard warning--start weakening it with language like "Doppler-detected tornado"--and you simply recreate the very problem the term is intended to solve.

I think a three-tiered approach, from watch to warning to--in exceptional cases--emergency, is more realistic in terms of what will most effectively protect a sometimes shockingly lackadaisical public.

As for the tape, I don't know that it argues one way or the other. I think it simply illustrates that even sirens don't cut it by themselves, and there will always be a need for a multi-pronged approach to disseminating warnings.

 

[John Robinson]

In case anyone was wondering, there are no NWS national guidelines or protocols for issuing Tornado Emergencies. Local offices could have their own guidelines, but they have been issued so rarely that I doubt many offices would have any written rules. Basically, the Tornado Emergencies are examples of "enhanced wording" that offices are encouraged to use during unusually threatening events.

 

[Patrick Marsh]

While there are some on this thread who seem to be anti-NWR, here is at least one opinion that differs...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJ55bgwT7M4

This is also the first step toward "automated" warnings.

 

[Darrin Rasberry]

Bump.

We've apparently had more this year than all the years since 1999 combined. The question is starting to swirl in my head: if a TE is going to be a mainstay for even conjectured significant tornadoes, some going through rural portions of counties even, could the possibility be that, at some point, the lives saved from the "emergency" tag will be balanced out and overtaken by the public's disregard for a "tornado warning" label? Many TOR will be of the "capable of producing" variety, and when the public gets to know this "emergency" system and associates it with a destructive tornado - and disregards the fact that a TOR is actually itself already pretty bad, with the potential to change to significant stature at the drop of a hat - people might indeed be more inclined to feel safer during a plain old tornado warning.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

Bump.

We've apparently had more this year than all the years since 1999 combined. The question is starting to swirl in my head: if a TE is going to be a mainstay for even conjectured significant tornadoes, some going through rural portions of counties even, could the possibility be that, at some point, the lives saved from the "emergency" tag will be balanced out and overtaken by the public's disregard for a "tornado warning" label? Many TOR will be of the "capable of producing" variety, and when the public gets to know this "emergency" system and associates it with a destructive tornado - and disregards the fact that a TOR is actually itself already pretty bad, with the potential to change to significant stature at the drop of a hat - people might indeed be more inclined to feel safer during a plain old tornado warning.

Perhaps. However, how often does each NWSFO experience a confirmed significant tornado heading towards or already in a population center? If we look at climo, I think it's safe to assume that it'd be less than once a year for most NWSFOs across the country (perhaps a couple of times in the climo-favored areas of OK/TX). If TEs stay this "rare" (which they should, unless we see a large increase in towns getting hit by siggy tors), then I don't think it'll be of much consequence to the regular Tornado Warnings.

I'd also like to see the Tornado Emergency stay "unofficial". As it is now, the TE is packed with the Tornado Warning and Severe Weather Statement. I fear that if the TE ever becomes an "official" product, it'll fall victim to political pressures whereby the "ultimate sin" will be a missed event, so we'd likely see a marked increase in FAR as mets try to bring PoD to 1.