Number 30, October 2001

Correspondence

We encourage your correspondence, and although we cannot print all that we receive, we will include at least one short, perhaps edited, letter per issue.

Dear WeatherZine,

As an avid reader of WeatherZine I noted the link posted to the Weather Channel/Project Safeside (and other links) site about lightning safety. The Project Safeside site includes a section "A Warning is Issued." WRONG!! In spite of the national lightning network, which has been in place for years, and the availability of real time data in WFOs, there are NO criteria or current planning for lightning warnings. Today in Washington we had very "hot" cells throughout the area with 4,000 cloud-ground stokes per hour within 75 miles of DC. There was a severe storm warning issued for one cell, when the 88D algorithim tripped for 3/4'' hail . . .unfortunately 2 people were killed tonight by lightning, not 3/4'' hail.

We have criteria for warnings and advisories for everything from cold to heat, floods, ice, wind, snow, frost, freeze, visibility, probably even sunshine. . . every weather event but the one storm- related weather that kills more people than floods--lightning. How about allowing line forecasters the discretion of issuing severe thunderstorm warnings for high cloud-ground flash rates for storms in populated areas? We break into programming and run crawls regularly for weather events that don't mean much to most people. What is our false alarm rate for 3/4'' hail anyway? How about getting around to coming up with criteria for warnings we have the skill to provide. . .and the lives to possibly save.

Bob Ryan
bob.ryan@nbc.com

ed.: The Project Safeside site discusses what to do if a severe thunderstorm warning is issued.

Dear WeatherZine,

Your editorial "Ka-ching!! Dealing with Financial Conflicts of Interest" was right on the mark and dealt with a current and still unfolding issue. The examples you presented are real. When I hear of these new public-private partnerships, I have the same discomfort as, I am sure, many of us on the public side feel.

I agree that policy guidance is needed. The American Meteorological Society (AMS) is a logical choice to develop such guidance. I might also suggest the National Research Council and its Board on Atmospheric Science and Climate (BASC) as another choice. In fact, I suggest a possibly unprecedented joint effort between BASC and the AMS policy group to develop a guidance document. Applying their combined impact and expertise to this important issue would be significant.

John Gaynor
NOAA and USWRP
John.Gaynor@noaa.gov