Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    23Yankee
    Newest Member
    23Yankee
    Joined

Congress cutting NWS budget?


Recommended Posts

WOW

Wow what? My house is 80 years old. There has never been a tornado at my house, like I said. Can't speak for the Triassic period.

To the point of the thread: I remember previous threats to the Weather Service budget, when Friday was running things. Some judiciously applied publicity stopped the budget cuts. Friday wasn't around much longer after he went on TV about it -- but he got done what needed doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 304
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Lets look at this rolling close down idea from a different perspective. With NWS forecasters being labeled as mission critical, would they still not come to work (no pay) regardless of whether their office is "open"? Now for the support staff, that would be a different story. I don't know...I'm just throwing that out there.

I couldn't imagine doing a winter weather forecast (especially in the transition states) without upper air. The horror!

If I recall correctly (and I could be mistaken, as it was 15 years ago)...the last time there was a furlough in 1995-96...the OPS (meteorologists/HMTs at WSFO's/WSOs) people were considered essential personnel. We reported to work. I don't remember exactly what the pay situation was, other than we eventually got paid for the hours worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow what? My house is 80 years old. There has never been a tornado at my house, like I said. Can't speak for the Triassic period.

To the point of the thread: I remember previous threats to the Weather Service budget, when Friday was running things. Some judiciously applied publicity stopped the budget cuts. Friday wasn't around much longer after he went on TV about it -- but he got done what needed doing.

The NWS needs another martyr. Now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know , its different from the government shutdown which is probably coming again.

From what I was told/understand the whole point of the furlough is because salaries take up such a large portion of the budget, the best way to effectively cut costs would be to not pay the employees for some time period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I recall correctly (and I could be mistaken, as it was 15 years ago)...the last time there was a furlough in 1995-96...the OPS (meteorologists/HMTs at WSFO's/WSOs) people were considered essential personnel. We reported to work. I don't remember exactly what the pay situation was, other than we eventually got paid for the hours worked.

I'm told by those who were around at the time that everyone got back pay... but no one was paid during the shutdown. In other words, there was about a month lapse in pay. So, depending on how long the gov shuts down this time, it might not matter much, or be a really big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I was told/understand the whole point of the furlough is because salaries take up such a large portion of the budget, the best way to effectively cut costs would be to not pay the employees for some time period.

I'm ready for my extended break. I'll fill it with a three week reserve annual training and a week at the beach or mountains depending on the weather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I didn't have pets I'd just head to Jersey for a month.

Take 'em with. They'll enjoy the adventure. Can't get a sitter?

I'm serious...they should furlough us every couple years or so for a month. We'll singlehandedly pay back the debt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As in sarcasm, in the heart of tornado alley, on average, a single point will be struck by a tornado approximately once every 10,000 years.

You very well make my point to isohume, who asked, "why spout worst case scenarios out to the media?" Why indeed? Well, because sometimes people ought to know, that's why. If someone wants to cut NWS funding by 30%, I'd say now is one of those times.

And it's once in 8,800 years.

Simmons, Kevin M. and Daniel Sutter. Economic and Societal Impacts of Tornadoes. Boston: American Meteorological Society. pg. 14.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You very well make my point to isohume, who asked, "why spout worst case scenarios out to the media?" Why indeed? Well, because sometimes people ought to know, that's why. If someone wants to cut NWS funding by 30%, I'd say now is one of those times.

And it's once in 8,800 years.

Simmons, Kevin M. and Daniel Sutter. Economic and Societal Impacts of Tornadoes. Boston: American Meteorological Society. pg. 14.

Yeah, we should also talk about the possibility of instantaneous climate change. Probably wont happen...but folks ought to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take 'em with. They'll enjoy the adventure. Can't get a sitter?

I'm serious...they should furlough us every couple years or so for a month. We'll singlehandedly pay back the debt.

I'd have to drive instead of fly... first road trip with the new car. Hopefully they'd get along with my mom's pets ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm told by those who were around at the time that everyone got back pay... but no one was paid during the shutdown. In other words, there was about a month lapse in pay. So, depending on how long the gov shuts down this time, it might not matter much, or be a really big deal.

Happened to my father in 1995. That is exactly what happened. Although he had to work during the shutdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You very well make my point to isohume, who asked, "why spout worst case scenarios out to the media?" Why indeed? Well, because sometimes people ought to know, that's why. If someone wants to cut NWS funding by 30%, I'd say now is one of those times.

And it's once in 8,800 years.

Simmons, Kevin M. and Daniel Sutter. Economic and Societal Impacts of Tornadoes. Boston: American Meteorological Society. pg. 14.

Yes, hence the qualifier "approximately." I was pretty close for off the top of my head :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for doing what has to be done but I'm sure not looking forward to anything of that nature.

Its not a pleasant prospect in the grand scheme of things. But if it happens, I'll take advantage of the time off as much as possible. As they say: If life gives you lemons, make lemonade ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why would you say that NWS would cut offices? The budget of NWS is largely made up of labor costs...not facilities. The cuts have to come from reducing staff...not closing offices. Closing offices and consolidating staff

won't solve the problems. Staffing will need to be reduced, and ,politically, closing offices has been a real problem in the past. I believe the offices will remain but the staffing will fall in each office through the years if

the budget picture does not improve.

Just got back and am reading through these posts. We can argue on and on about the current fiscal situation and whether cutting the NWS makes sense but the long term outlook is not good for the NWS and mets in general. I see a future where there is maybe just a couple dozen WFOs coming within the next 10-20 years. I think its safe to say that anyone currently in school for meteorology or younger should accept the fact that they will most likely NOT be working for the NWS and will probably be making about 20-40 k in the private sector. If this is ok for someone great, then go for it. Most, however, have higher expectations that will very likely not be realized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why would you say that NWS would cut offices? The budget of NWS is largely made up of labor costs...not facilities. The cuts have to come from reducing staff...not closing offices. Closing offices and consolidating staff

won't solve the problems. Staffing will need to be reduced, and ,politically, closing offices has been a real problem in the past. I believe the offices will remain but the staffing will fall in each office through the years if

the budget picture does not improve.

I have a hard time buying even that argument considering that NWS offices are at bare bones staff as it is. Plus, the NWS contributes to a whopping 0.03% of the federal budget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a hard time buying even that argument considering that NWS offices are at bare bones staff as it is. Plus, the NWS contributes to a whopping 0.03% of the federal budget.

Maybe bare bones staffing for the way duties are assigned at present. However rumors have been circulating for years (ever since GFE came into play) about HPC taking over the extended forecast. They already produce grids for the extended and ship these out to all offices once a day. How long until they issue these grids in-house? All grids would be collaborated with no CWA boundaries evident. Take away long term grids from each office and you can easily cut one position from each office. 122 forecasters down... If this works well, why not produce two sets of extended grids from HPC? Possibly another body lost as that gets absorbed into HPC? Another 122 forecasters gone.

With new technology emerging all the time and the model guidance improving in the short term (for the most part - not always but probably enough) who's to say plug and chug of model guidance for the near term would not be on the table? High res near term models may be good enough for most purposes. Most members of Congress likely do not understand the incredible variability of meteorological details and how a 1-2 hour difference in timing of convection, fog, wind shifts, etc. may impact search and rescue operations, aviation traffic, flight planning, etc. All they want to see are numbers, as that is right in front of them. If the numbers show that models are just as good as humans, why pay the salaries of all these forecasters when no real value is being added?

Not to say that this is where the NWS/NOAA is going. However I think it is irresponsible to assume this would not be the case and things will remain as is over the coming years. It is the job of the Union to get the word out to the public and local media, which in turn gets back to members of Congress. I have a sneaking suspicion that the NWS of today is not what we will see in 5-10 years time if budget woes continue. I hope I'm wrong...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe bare bones staffing for the way duties are assigned at present. However rumors have been circulating for years (ever since GFE came into play) about HPC taking over the extended forecast. They already produce grids for the extended and ship these out to all offices once a day. How long until they issue these grids in-house? All grids would be collaborated with no CWA boundaries evident. Take away long term grids from each office and you can easily cut one position from each office. 122 forecasters down... If this works well, why not produce two sets of extended grids from HPC? Possibly another body lost as that gets absorbed into HPC? Another 122 forecasters gone.

With new technology emerging all the time and the model guidance improving in the short term (for the most part - not always but probably enough) who's to say plug and chug of model guidance for the near term would not be on the table? High res near term models may be good enough for most purposes. Most members of Congress likely do not understand the incredible variability of meteorological details and how a 1-2 hour difference in timing of convection, fog, wind shifts, etc. may impact search and rescue operations, aviation traffic, flight planning, etc. All they want to see are numbers, as that is right in front of them. If the numbers show that models are just as good as humans, why pay the salaries of all these forecasters when no real value is being added?

Not to say that this is where the NWS/NOAA is going. However I think it is irresponsible to assume this would not be the case and things will remain as is over the coming years. It is the job of the Union to get the word out to the public and local media, which in turn gets back to members of Congress. I have a sneaking suspicion that the NWS of today is not what we will see in 5-10 years time if budget woes continue. I hope I'm wrong...

Interesting post. I have also heard about HPC possibly taking over the long term portion of the forecast. I have not heard any updates on that though in awhile. As for the bolded part, I think in the future the NWS will not be exactly what it is now however to the theme you mentioned I also hope you are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree with your points. For these reasons, I think anyone wanting to major in meteorology, especially those hoping to work for the NWS, should think about majoring in something else instead. Our skills are needed elsewhere. That's what the market is essentially telling us with the low salaries in the private sector.

Maybe bare bones staffing for the way duties are assigned at present. However rumors have been circulating for years (ever since GFE came into play) about HPC taking over the extended forecast. They already produce grids for the extended and ship these out to all offices once a day. How long until they issue these grids in-house? All grids would be collaborated with no CWA boundaries evident. Take away long term grids from each office and you can easily cut one position from each office. 122 forecasters down... If this works well, why not produce two sets of extended grids from HPC? Possibly another body lost as that gets absorbed into HPC? Another 122 forecasters gone.

With new technology emerging all the time and the model guidance improving in the short term (for the most part - not always but probably enough) who's to say plug and chug of model guidance for the near term would not be on the table? High res near term models may be good enough for most purposes. Most members of Congress likely do not understand the incredible variability of meteorological details and how a 1-2 hour difference in timing of convection, fog, wind shifts, etc. may impact search and rescue operations, aviation traffic, flight planning, etc. All they want to see are numbers, as that is right in front of them. If the numbers show that models are just as good as humans, why pay the salaries of all these forecasters when no real value is being added?

Not to say that this is where the NWS/NOAA is going. However I think it is irresponsible to assume this would not be the case and things will remain as is over the coming years. It is the job of the Union to get the word out to the public and local media, which in turn gets back to members of Congress. I have a sneaking suspicion that the NWS of today is not what we will see in 5-10 years time if budget woes continue. I hope I'm wrong...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe bare bones staffing for the way duties are assigned at present. However rumors have been circulating for years (ever since GFE came into play) about HPC taking over the extended forecast. They already produce grids for the extended and ship these out to all offices once a day. How long until they issue these grids in-house? All grids would be collaborated with no CWA boundaries evident. Take away long term grids from each office and you can easily cut one position from each office. 122 forecasters down... If this works well, why not produce two sets of extended grids from HPC? Possibly another body lost as that gets absorbed into HPC? Another 122 forecasters gone.

With new technology emerging all the time and the model guidance improving in the short term (for the most part - not always but probably enough) who's to say plug and chug of model guidance for the near term would not be on the table? High res near term models may be good enough for most purposes. Most members of Congress likely do not understand the incredible variability of meteorological details and how a 1-2 hour difference in timing of convection, fog, wind shifts, etc. may impact search and rescue operations, aviation traffic, flight planning, etc. All they want to see are numbers, as that is right in front of them. If the numbers show that models are just as good as humans, why pay the salaries of all these forecasters when no real value is being added?

Not to say that this is where the NWS/NOAA is going. However I think it is irresponsible to assume this would not be the case and things will remain as is over the coming years. It is the job of the Union to get the word out to the public and local media, which in turn gets back to members of Congress. I have a sneaking suspicion that the NWS of today is not what we will see in 5-10 years time if budget woes continue. I hope I'm wrong...

I believe what we will find that the increase in aviation grids and the aviation program in general in both temporal and geographical extent would more than take up the slack if hpc took over day 4 to day 7 grids. I wouldn't be surprised if deterministic forecasts are extended beyond day 7 soon anyway. When we first went to day 7 years ago I internally proved there was forecast skill at our office at day 7 way back when. Since then I'm estimating models have improved in their skill by 1 to 3 days.

It all comes down to safety and there is office safety also. Most offices are staffed with bare bones on the operational side. One person operational staffing will not legally fly. Would anyone want one pilot flying the plane? Change is inevitable but there is hardly any staffing left on the operational end to cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree with your points. For these reasons, I think anyone wanting to major in meteorology, especially those hoping to work for the NWS, should think about majoring in something else instead. Our skills are needed elsewhere. That's what the market is essentially telling us with the low salaries in the private sector.

OMG we heard you the first 10 times you've posted this in various threads. We get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...