This Looks Suspiciously Like a ‘Forecast of Least Regret’

Note that this forecast puts a major metropolitan area in the northeast quadrant with an uptick in intensity just off the coast. Remember that.

Back in 2007, I did an e-mail Q&A style interview with Chuck Watson, Director of Research and Development for Kinetic Analysis Corporation. In the five-year history of this blog’s goofy musings and absurd ramblings on the New Orleans experience, this interview probably contained the most important thing this blog has ever done- a qualified hurricane forecaster stating emergency mangers in areas prone to be in Hurricane paths imply or even demand exaggerated predictions from forecasters and, the forecasters indeed comply…

The Chicory: You said in your comment that emergency managers “always want people scared” and the media doesn’t always publish below average predictions. Does this mean authorities pressure you to deliver sensational numbers? Does it effect the manner in which researchers study and predict storms?

Chuck Watson: Huge question. I don’t think pressure from emergency managers and other sources directly impacts the research itself (although it does impact who gets funding to an extent), but it has a big, big, impact on forecasts and the way they are reported, both seasonally and operationally.

Emergency managers have a tough job. They are always pushing hurricane awareness, especially at the beginning of the season. Calling for a quiet season means less press coverage, and less scary coverage, at exactly the same time they are trying to get people to start thinking about evacuation plans and preparedness. So they get touchy when we say a below normal season for their jurisdiction because they perceive it as making their job harder. They prefer that we, in the words of one irate caller from a couple years ago, “either tell people they might get hit by a storm this year or shut the f*** up, ’cause people won’t prepare otherwise”. I (obviously) disagree with that attitude – if you treat people like idiots, generally they don’t disappoint you. I think if you explain the risks and the benefits of mitigation and preparedness, without the scare tactics, most people will react accordingly.

I always tell people that it only takes one storm to ruin your day, and even if our odds for a hurricane in your county are half of normal, say 1 in 100, that’s still pretty big odds you will lose your roof. Sometimes that message gets lost in the technical discussions about the forecasts, but it’s not because I’m not saying it.

Operationally, the hype from the media and pressure from emergency managers is intense. NHC sometimes uses what they call the “forecast of least regret” (their words). For example, if the storm is forecast to brush the coast, they tend to show it making landfall, making a direct hit on a major city rather than an adjacent lower populated area, or call for the winds to be higher than either the models or unbiased forecasting would indicate. NHC has reportedly changed tracks at the behest of emergency managers to make them “scarier” and encourage people to evacuate, especially for high risk areas like the Florida Keys. I think this is a bad idea. The forecast should be the best possible rendition of where the storm is going and how strong it will be when it gets there. Fudging the tracks and, more typically, the intensities, tends to decrease the credibility of the forecasts and over time is counterproductive.

Reading that I almost immediately recall this “Hell on Earth” forecast before Katrina from the National Weather Service. While the NWS was patting itself on the back for scaring the shit out of people and inciting them to leave, consider that the many details in the release didn’t happen. All gabled roofs didn’t fail. All apartments didn’t collapse. It mentions throughout the damage from wind but the majority of Katrina damage in Louisiana and Mississippi was from levee failures and storm surge flooding. Nothing about flooding was mentioned in the release. So while the bulletin was heralded by the NWS as saving lives, it was mostly bogus and off the mark. Perhaps if it urged people to seek higher ground it would have saved even more lives?

The chickens came home to roost three years later when Hurricane Ike approached the Texas Gulf Coast…

Why Hurricane Ike’s “Certain Death” Warning Failed

So if my dreamed-of “absolute database of everything” actually existed, I would love to find out just how useful scaring the shit out of people to motivate them is. It appears to be one-shot pony as many residents quickly figure out the tactics. Nudge that intensity up a little bit, nudge that path over a little bit.

Next thing you know you have a Cat 3 Irene hitting the 300 year-old port city of Charleston and effecting 700,000 people in the metro area. And it’s already working…

Forecasters say SC could see effects of Irene

There are larger issues here as well, stuff like the role government should play in our lives, “nanny state” shit. I think this type of thing creates a dependence on government for thought and direction when an average person is perfectly capable of thinking for them self despite what a lot of others think. Chuck agreed above when he said, “if you treat people like idiots, generally they don’t disappoint you.” People aren’t as stupid as they are thought to be. There are labels telling folks not to eat the rat poison or think an inflatable Sponge Bob is a good lif life preserver* (helmet, seat belt and open container laws fit in here too).

But hey, at least people will actually get sick or die from eating the rat poison. These hurricane forecasters have escalated / devolved into “we know what’s good for you more than you do” with a heaping helping of “fear is better than truth.”

* Consider the possibility of a drowning person with no life preserver whose friends don’t toss him the huge inflatable Sponge Bob because it specifically says not to on it. Oh fortuna, if I’m ever drowning throw my ass anything that floats and I’ll take my chances.