When issuing forecasts to the public...

[Ginx snewx]

The problem is, not everyone thinks like you. Most people would be pissed that the forecast busted and say that mets were hyping it as usual.

I agree that it is better to bust when giving warning for what could happen, but the public doesn't think the same way.

Oh I bet they do now, you see I learned the hard way and now so did a million others. Your generation has not had the catastrophic storm, now they have. This is your generations 78, watch how the panic sets in next biggy. Contextually though I am speaking about Historic storms not our normal blizzards etc. When faced with data that says ut oh, it is time to use the strongest terms available and to saturate the entire market with those terms, not just local but regional. The word needs to get out loudly and quickly when a storm of this magnitude threatens, lives depend on it. Face it a lot of people have little common sense and are in denial, sometimes they need to be force fed.

[weatherMA]

Oh I bet they do now, you see I learned the hard way and now so did a million others. Your generation has not had the catastrophic storm, now they have. This is your generations 78, watch how the panic sets in next biggy. Contextually though I am speaking about Historic storms not our normal blizzards etc. When faced with data that says ut oh, it is time to use the strongest terms available and to saturate the entire market with those terms, not just local but regional. The word needs to get out loudly and quickly when a storm of this magnitude threatens, lives depend on it. Face it a lot of people have little common sense and are in denial, sometimes they need to be force fed.

Yeah....I see your point, its a tough call.

On Friday in school no one believed it. Most people said "No way we get a foot", "I bet we get an inch or two", "They are hyping the storm as usual." They were wrong for sure. People only focus on the busts, so I think next storm with a huge forecast they will be just as doubtful that it will pan out.

[weatherwiz]

Yeah....I see your point, its a tough call.

On Friday in school no one believed it. Most people said "No way we get a foot", "I bet we get an inch or two", "They are hyping the storm as usual." They were wrong for sure. People only focus on the busts, so I think next storm with a huge forecast they will be just as doubtful that it will pan out.

That's the other thing to, if people are going to fail to disregard forecasts than that is their own damn fault. This topic is certainly a delegate topic but it poses a great interest. It's generally difficult to convey the weather to the public b/c everyone has such different view points and everyone always wants to "forecast" themselves. For example, with this past storm, like you said people saying no way we get that much snow.

When you see such anomalous setups like we just saw and you have incredible model agreement going on I think you have to play it up than you normally would and really stress the potential impacts to the public. Even a setup like June 1st in the summer I think that should be played up much more than you would for normal summer time convective threats here. Sure tornadoes (especially strong ones) aren't relatively common here and you don't want to scare people but in the end is it really scaring people or is it making them aware? From what I gathered from talking to many people I feel as if most people would prefer to be made aware of the potential, whether it happens or not, then be surprised. This way they can prepare better. Like on June 1st...if people knew there was a threat for tornadoes if they saw storms approaching they would really try and listen to latest weather statements and prepare to go to safety...while if they weren't made aware of the potential they would just think it's a normal summer time storm and could get caught in a bad situation.

For this storm, people would have had the chance to prepare better...stock up on food/water/gas and have a plan already just in case they did lose power.

[MGorse]

A very interesting topic Wiz and one I am sure the pros and their bosses struggle with. When forecasting an historic high impact event at what time should the trigger be pulled? Not discussing a 20 inch snowstorm in January but rather a high impact societal changing storm. These storms are rare and it would seem to me that forecasting an historical storm would require the forecasters to take more chances and go for broke. Even if they bust preparations were made and lessons learned. I know all the forecasters I read were convinced very early on last week that this storm would, because of the time of year, be an immense societal impact storm. Perhaps because of the real worries about busting the message was not delivered hard and quick enough for folks to not blow it off. As with every storm lessons are learned, hopefully with this storm one lesson can be that when given hard science consistently early on forecasters need to go full out and make sure their message is heard and understood loud and clear much earlier than normal. Some forecasters did a fantastic job in our state on Friday stressing the high impact of the storm but I have seen much much wider coverage on lesser storms. Local radio stations for example were saying chance of snow on Sat morning with no real emergent message. I would love to have all TV and Radio stations be forced to announce and read all NWS warnings in their county. Tough decisions sometimes require taking the bull by the horns. It is obvious people are not really prepared so the need to stress the historic storms earlier is probably a good idea.

Thursday afternoon I sent this out to all of our staff and to our emergency management team.

Never in our weather history has our region been threatened with such an early intense snowstorm. With the time of year and the warm waters that surround us, usually we are impacted by strong rain storms. Unfortunately this year of crazy weather has again raised its head for our neck of the woods. Starting Saturday we are under the gun for a very strong winter type storm. Those who live close to the water will see less snow but much more wind. The potential for extended power outages is real. Talking with multiple Professional meteorologists over the last few days it is readily apparent that this storm has the potential to be a high impact storm. The further inland and the higher in elevation you are the more likely significant snow accumulation will occur. Right now these are the best guesses from the folks I talk with. Prudence is advised to all. Perhaps some end up with a windy rainstorm while others are in near blizzard conditions. Because this has never happened before Meteorologists are skeptical and conservative in their public forecasts, behind the scenes however there are real concerns. Just wanted to give all a heads up.

Interesting thread/discussion. I have wondered about the bolded sentence above. While the NWS cannot force the TV and radio stations to announce and read all NWS warnings, we look to them to help get the word out regarding hazardous weather. This is an example (no finger pointing intended), but AccuWeather had a general policy (and from what I gather still does) of not including many NWS headlines in their radio broadcasts (such as winter storm warnings). I wonder if they carried say an NWS winter storm warning to lead off their radio forecast, if that would hit home more to the listeners. Not really sure, but I would imagine it would grab the listeners attention at least some more.

[Ginx snewx]

Interesting thread/discussion. I have wondered about the bolded sentence above. While the NWS cannot force the TV and radio stations to announce and read all NWS warnings, we look to them to help get the word out regarding hazardous weather. This is an example (no finger pointing intended), but AccuWeather had a general policy (and from what I gather still does) of not including many NWS headlines in their radio broadcasts (such as winter storm warnings). I wonder if they carried say an NWS winter storm warning to lead off their radio forecast, if that would hit home more to the listeners. Not really sure, but I would imagine it would grab the listeners attention at least some more.

Thanks for adding to the discussion. I would love to see this implemented. One thing I am sure of is, lots of folks listening to their favorite FM station never heard your warnings. Your warnings were concise and dramatic. Scrolls too are largely ignored, every station now crawls something. Dissemation of warnings needs to be heard by everyone not just us news aware folks. there is an increasingly large segment of our society that is out of tune with the mainstream.

[CT Rain]

Thanks for adding to the discussion. I would love to see this implemented. One thing I am sure of is, lots of folks listening to their favorite FM station never heard your warnings. Your warnings were concise and dramatic. Scrolls too are largely ignored, every station now crawls something. Dissemation of warnings needs to be heard by everyone not just us news aware folks. ther is an increasingly large segment of our society that is out of tune with the mainstream.

I only include NWS warnings when they agree with the story/forecast I'm going to convey.

9 times out of 10 in the winter I'll exclude them because they take more time to explain than is worth it to the general public.

Severe wx warnings are different.

[CT Rain]

When would you use words like "historic" or "catastrophic" when issuing forecasts or talking to the general public? Or at what point would you use those words, or something similar?

I ask this b/c I feel this is an extremely important situation to touch base on. After talking with some people the past few days the generalization I got is nobody really believed any of the forecasts. My boss at work today said he didn't think it would be bad until he saw limbs falling in his yard. I told him on Friday I think 8-12'' for northern CT and he didn't believe it.

Anyways I understand for this system given the time of year it was hard to buy this type of solution but the fact is by the time many people (mainly us) realized what was going to transpire it was really too late for the public to really prepare.

Friday morning I was using words like "historic", "extraordinary", and "record-shattering"... I've never even come close to doing that 24-36 hours before a storm but it fit for this one.

[MGorse]

Thanks for adding to the discussion. I would love to see this implemented. One thing I am sure of is, lots of folks listening to their favorite FM station never heard your warnings. Your warnings were concise and dramatic. Scrolls too are largely ignored, every station now crawls something. Dissemation of warnings needs to be heard by everyone not just us news aware folks. ther is an increasingly large segment of our society that is out of tune with the mainstream.

I agree that improvements are needed, but to what extent is probably open for debate. Also, I noticed that some TV stations when they scroll the NWS convective warnings they are generic which is that it states the entire county/counties (probably an automated process that reads the county codes), instead of stating what portions of the counties (i.e. storm-based polygon warnings) are in the warning. Then again, perhaps a lot of people do not know exactly what section of the their county they live in (not real sure). Perhaps some TV Mets can shed some more light on the whole warning crawls thing for convective weather.

[weatherwiz]

Friday morning I was using words like "historic", "extraordinary", and "record-shattering"... I've never even come close to doing that 24-36 hours before a storm but it fit for this one.

Yeah you did a tremendous job as usual. I seriously try to tell everyone to watch channel 30 b/c they are the best when it comes to getting the weather accurate, Channel 3 would be a fairly close second depending on how is doing the forecasts.

The one major issue for this event is nobody wanted to believe it...so in a sense that is their own fault for not taking this situation serious enough. However, on the other hand just to play both sides of the court here in a way you have to ask could there have been more done to better prepare the public or persuade them of the oncoming disaster (not saying this applies to you).

It can be a little tough I guess for the public when you have different stations saying something completely different...I know I hear this alot, this is when I definitely try and tell people just watch Channel 30, don't even worry about what anyone else has to say.

[Ginx snewx]

One thing for sure we all knew what was about to happen, anybody sign up under the name Jeff Butler this week? If I was him I would.

[MGorse]

I only include NWS warnings when they agree with the story/forecast I'm going to convey.

9 times out of 10 in the winter I'll exclude them because they take more time to explain than is worth it to the general public.

Interesting approach, but I am sure you are not alone doing it this way. As an NWS Met, I am disappointed to read this but on the other hand I can understand as typically you are not given much time on the air to explain things.

Severe wx warnings are different.

That is good!

[Ginx snewx]

Yeah you did a tremendous job as usual.

The one major issue for this event is nobody wanted to believe it...so in a sense that is their own fault for not taking this situation serious enough..

Yes he did, part of the problem was the lack of understanding of what exactly would happen to trees. People hear snow, say ah snow NBD. The power issue problem probably was not understood, many were unsure up until that afternoon what the effect really would be.

[weatherwiz]

Interesting approach, but I am sure you are not alone doing it this way. As an NWS Met, I am disappointed to read this but on the other hand I can understand as typically you are not given much time on the air to explain things.

That is good!

Yeah that's what sucks...for tV mets they only get a few minutes of air time and that make sit quite difficult to fully explain things.

[CT Rain]

Interesting approach, but I am sure you are not alone doing it this way. As an NWS Met, I am disappointed to read this but on the other hand I can understand as typically you are not given much time on the air to explain things.

That is good!

Given the fact our market is made up of 3 NWS offices it can be difficult to get things to make sense for a fewer. For example I'll use a winter storm warning/winter weather advisory configuration if it makes sense based on what I'm forecasting but too often we're left with odd "donut holes" or watches and warnings in effect for our viewing area simultaneously for different offices.

I've always thought my viewers care most about impact... and timing. Spending :30 or :45 seconds explaining the difference between the different advisories/warnings can take away from spending time discussing specific impacts and time tables.

The most important thing the NWS can do with us is coordinate about impacts and not whether or not they're going advisory or warning before our main shows. Unfortunately we still have a lot to work to do on that end and it's a 2 way street.

[Ginx snewx]

Ryan how many people is 175,000 CLP customers. I keep hearing the media say 175,000 people without power, not true.

[weatherwiz]

Yes he did, part of the problem was the lack of understanding of what exactly would happen to trees. People hear snow, say ah snow NBD. The power issue problem probably was not understood, many were unsure up until that afternoon what the effect really would be.

I think I mentioned this last night but I was talking to my boss at work yesterday and he didn't believe when I told him I think we see 8-12'' of snow and there could be major issues. He said it was around 2 PM or so when he was watching limbs fall in his yard that he realized it was going to be bad.

He asked me though, did I think it would be this bad...as bad as it was. I really had to think about that and I said well I knew it would be bad but this bad...I can't say I knew b/c nobody has ever seen anything like this and there really wasn't anything to compare this to unless you looked at what happened in other parts of the country. Then I said you know, if you're expecting even 3-4'' of wet snow on fully leaved trees common sense should ring in and say MAJOR TROUBLE. He agreed.

[CT Rain]

Ryan how many people is 175,000 CLP customers. I keep hearing the media say 175,000 people without power, not true.

Yeah 175k customers. In general it's about a 2:1 customers to people ratio.

[CT Rain]

I think I mentioned this last night but I was talking to my boss at work yesterday and he didn't believe when I told him I think we see 8-12'' of snow and there could be major issues. He said it was around 2 PM or so when he was watching limbs fall in his yard that he realized it was going to be bad.

He asked me though, did I think it would be this bad...as bad as it was. I really had to think about that and I said well I knew it would be bad but this bad...I can't say I knew b/c nobody has ever seen anything like this and there really wasn't anything to compare this to unless you looked at what happened in other parts of the country. Then I said you know, if you're expecting even 3-4'' of wet snow on fully leaved trees common sense should ring in and say MAJOR TROUBLE. He agreed.

I knew we were in for it when I sent an email to my bosses at noon on Saturday saying this was going to be even worse than I thought... and I already thought it was going to be really bad. I also packed a bag to bring to work and sleep over which I've never done before lol.

[Ginx snewx]

I think I mentioned this last night but I was talking to my boss at work yesterday and he didn't believe when I told him I think we see 8-12'' of snow and there could be major issues. He said it was around 2 PM or so when he was watching limbs fall in his yard that he realized it was going to be bad.

He asked me though, did I think it would be this bad...as bad as it was. I really had to think about that and I said well I knew it would be bad but this bad...I can't say I knew b/c nobody has ever seen anything like this and there really wasn't anything to compare this to unless you looked at what happened in other parts of the country. Then I said you know, if you're expecting even 3-4'' of wet snow on fully leaved trees common sense should ring in and say MAJOR TROUBLE. He agreed.

Denver and PA this year showed what 4 inches could do. It was obvious that we were in deep crap, I actually thought the problem would be worse in Eastern areas but that sneaky warm layer and psuedo dry slot modified that. Still trying to figure out how Cold Miser and I had 5-6 and did not lose power or many limbs. We did get 4 on the last cold band so thats what probably saved us.

[Ginx snewx]

Yeah 175k customers. In general it's about a 2:1 customers to people ratio.

Thanks

[weatherwiz]

I knew we were in for it when I sent an email to my bosses at noon on Saturday saying this was going to be even worse than I thought... and I already thought it was going to be really bad. I also packed a bag to bring to work and sleep over which I've never done before lol.

I remember when I got to NH that morning around 12:30 or so I looked at the models briefly and saw they continued to spit out 2'' of QPF over a widespread area and temperature profiles inland were going to support virtually all snow...this is when I completely knew we were screwed. When I had made my snowfall maps and such and went 10-16'' for a large part of MA/NW CT and southern NH I was worried about those totals verifying, especially in CT where I put 8-12'' for much of the northern half of the state b/c I was worried that we would end up warmer so this made me hesitate early on going balls out with widespread devastation/destruction.

[weatherwiz]

Denver and PA this year showed what 4 inches could do. It was obvious that we were in deep crap, I actually thought the problem would be worse in Eastern areas but that sneaky warm layer and psuedo dry slot modified that. Still trying to figure out how Cold Miser and I had 5-6 and did not lose power or many limbs. We did get 4 on the last cold band so thats what probably saved us.

Yeah I brought that up to my boss and said more should have been conveyed about what happened in those areas...could have really put a full perspective on this for many. Regardless Channel 30 did what they could in CT and all of us on here did what we could...people didn't listen. Maybe next time they will.

[CT Rain]

Denver and PA this year showed what 4 inches could do. It was obvious that we were in deep crap, I actually thought the problem would be worse in Eastern areas but that sneaky warm layer and psuedo dry slot modified that. Still trying to figure out how Cold Miser and I had 5-6 and did not lose power or many limbs. We did get 4 on the last cold band so thats what probably saved us.

There was a certain time where the snow flipped to enough fluff to avert disaster in eastern areas.

[CT Rain]

Either way this was probably not as bad as the '73 ice storm in terms of damage and societal impact.

[Ginx snewx]

Either way this was probably not as bad as the '73 ice storm in terms of damage and societal impact.

How long were the power outages then. How many lost power?

[weatherwiz]

Either way this was probably not as bad as the '73 ice storm in terms of damage and societal impact.

A friend of mine last night was telling me just about everyone he talked to who went through the Ice Storm said it was either worse or just as bad...damage wise.

[MGorse]

Given the fact our market is made up of 3 NWS offices it can be difficult to get things to make sense for a fewer. For example I'll use a winter storm warning/winter weather advisory configuration if it makes sense based on what I'm forecasting but too often we're left with odd "donut holes" or watches and warnings in effect for our viewing area simultaneously for different offices.

I've always thought my viewers care most about impact... and timing. Spending :30 or :45 seconds explaining the difference between the different advisories/warnings can take away from spending time discussing specific impacts and time tables.

The most important thing the NWS can do with us is coordinate about impacts and not whether or not they're going advisory or warning before our main shows. Unfortunately we still have a lot to work to do on that end and it's a 2 way street.

I understand the difficulty (I once worked in TV and the private sector), but have you and others in the TV market talked about this difference in headlines with

the 3 NWS offices that cover your area? There has to be collaboration when going with an advisory or warning as this process is supposed to make for more seamless headlines from office to office (this does take time especially with the more offices that have to be brought into the collaboration process). I know this is not always the case. Passing this feedback onto the offices would be helpful (imo). The impacts are supposed to be put into the headline products and can also be mentioned in the AFD. This was one of the reasons for the long fused headline products going to a bulleted format.

[powderfreak]

Thanks for adding to the discussion. I would love to see this implemented. One thing I am sure of is, lots of folks listening to their favorite FM station never heard your warnings. Your warnings were concise and dramatic. Scrolls too are largely ignored, every station now crawls something. Dissemation of warnings needs to be heard by everyone not just us news aware folks. there is an increasingly large segment of our society that is out of tune with the mainstream.

Again though we are educated in a lot of the terminality of these warnings...the general public does not. Even Ryan says he doesn't put NWS warnings on his casts because it confuses people. Honestly if I didn't know any better the terminology used in most winter storm warnings is fairly generic and the same if it's 4-8" or 12-24".

Ginx there's only so much you can do to people to get them to listen...if they won't read scrolling info on the TV you can't shove it down their throats. I dunno I just think there's only so much you can do for people.

[Skivt2]

As a non-met lurked here I was aware of the potential. I am certain that as of Friday afternoon the general public did not have a clear picture of what historic actually meant. Getting 10 inches of snow in October is historic in and of itself and would have societal impacts. The chance for wiespread tree damage and power outages was in some forecasts. But most people I talked to Friday had heard 4-5 inches and thought after last winter that they could deal with a small 4-5 inch snowstorm.

I really think that even here earlier in the week last week there was some uncertainty and disbelief that this would happen.

I think the issue with even the strongly worded forecasts was that historic and societal impact was not linked strongly enough to the words tree damage and power outages. I think people focused too on the "o my gosh it's going to snow" and not enough on why this would be different that a normal snowstorm.

I'm not writing to point blame at the messenger or the public but I do think there was a disconnect. You cant control the public response so all you can influence is the message. The words "historical widespread lengthy power outages across an enormous area" could have been said earlier, louder and more frequently.

I was reading here. I warned people I work with. I did not warn them strongly enough. It's hard I know. Tough to look backwards.

[Ginx snewx]

As a non-met lurked here I was aware of the potential. I am certain that as of Friday afternoon the general public did not have a clear picture of what historic actually meant. Getting 10 inches of snow in October is historic in and of itself and would have societal impacts. The chance for wiespread tree damage and power outages was in some forecasts. But most people I talked to Friday had heard 4-5 inches and thought after last winter that they could deal with a small 4-5 inch snowstorm.

I really think that even here earlier in the week last week there was some uncertainty and disbelief that this would happen.

I think the issue with even the strongly worded forecasts was that historic and societal impact was not linked strongly enough to the words tree damage and power outages. I think people focused too on the "o my gosh it's going to snow" and not enough on why this would be different that a normal snowstorm.

I'm not writing to point blame at the messenger or the public but I do think there was a disconnect. You cant control the public response so all you can influence is the message. The words "historical widespread lengthy power outages across an enormous area" could have been said earlier, louder and more frequently.

I was reading here. I warned people I work with. I did not warn them strongly enough. It's hard I know. Tough to look backwards.

Fantastic post and exactly what I was trying to convey.