Red might have crested; forecast calls for continued gradual decline

Pat N. Chanhassen, MN     03/29/2009 4:41 PM

Sheldon: [9:15 PM] I use more than the library and Internet in making my river forecasts. I have a laptop and Microsoft Office software. I began my career in river forecasting at the KCRFC when they were in the process of converting their hand calculation runoff and routing procedures to computer calculations. I can input the rating table numbers, runoff and routing coefficients and use Excel in modeling the flows and stages in the Red River basin on my home computer. It's not just a black box procedure for me as it is for some of the meterorologists and hydrologists at NWS.


Report a Violation

Pat N. Chanhassen, MN     03/29/2009 1:33 PM

I think some comments show some people would like to know why I came here so I'll explain. In an earlier post, Bill S. wrote ... "The man appeared several weeks ago with a transparent agenda,".

I had three objectives for posting my perspectives on Spring Flood 2009 to Areavoices and the Inforum. 1st: I wanted to continue with my career goal which I had from 1976 - 2005 at NWS to offer my expertise from what I learned in hydrology in my career and personal study. 2nd: I wanted to tell
people in the Red River basin what I learned regarding what took place at NWS during and after the 1997 flood. 3rd: I wanted to tell people how NWS used poor flood predictions on the Red in '97 to implement a methodology for issuing hydrologic outlooks that I believe is inappropriate for dealing with climate change underway in the basin.

Excerpts from a NWS NCRFC Memorandum on January 3, 2001, below, are related to my 2nd and 3rd objectives.

Memorandum For: Senior Hydrologist, NCRFC, Chanhassen, MN
From: Hydrologist in Charge, NWS NCRFC, Chanhassen, MN

Excerpts dealing with global warming, climate change in the Red River
basin (ND, MN) and climate change in the Devils Lake basin (ND).... On September 19, 2000, you sent e-mail from your office computer which
contained assertions about the impact of global warming related to the
mission of the North Central River Forecast Center. The message contained
the following statements:

o "With global warming, it is now evident that: ... "the underlying assumption
that historical time series (typically over a 40-year period) of both temperature
and precipitation are possible representations of future occurrences is is (sic) invalid."

o "that several NWS personnel, in NCRFC, the NWS Central Region office, and possibly higher up in the organization, are not acting in good conscience, or do not understand the growing and now overwhelming evidence that global warming is fact and very serious, and is of the highest importance for providing the best possible public service for today and for the year ahead".

o On January 25, 2000, I personally spoke to you and stated "that the mission of the NCRFC was operational in nature, and that Global Warming was beyond the time window of your hydrologic forecast mission."

o On March 30, 2000, in my memorandum to you I stated "[y]our position in the River Forecast Center is that of Senior Hydrologist. Researching Global Warming is not a significant part of your Job and at best has only incidental value as it may relate to your Job as a Senior Hydrologist."

o On April 24, 2000, in a memorandum from John A. May, Acting Director, National Weather Service, Central Region, he stated "you are not an expert nor are you tasked with such work in the application of climate change theory to the river forecast and water resources services of the North Central River Forecast Center (NCRFC). Although the NCRFC is responsible for issuing long-range forecasts in the form of Winter and Spring Flood Outlooks, the experts that issue long-range products you should use for this purpose are located at the Climate Prediction Center located in Maryland". ...

o On August 15, 2000, in a memorandum from Mr. John E. Jones, Deputy Director of the National Weather Service, Mr. Jones repeated Mr. May's comments to you. In addition Mr. Jones pointed out to you your "[f]ailure to follow instructions, willful disregard of supervisor's instructions, misrepresentation, inappropriate use of government time and unauthorized use of government equipment are each serious offenses."

On Tuesday, September 26, 2000, at 12:17pm, you sent an e-mail message, subject: Methodology for spring flood outlooks, from your office computer ...

This transmission forwarded a message which you had apparently sent from your private e-mail account ... subject: Has the hydrologic cycle changed? ...

The September 25, 2000 message included your personal belief that "the hydrologic cycle on the Red River has changed, ...

You have been repeatedly told not to send e-mails addressing global warming in your capacity as a Senior Hydrologist at the NCRFC. ...

On October 18, 2000, ... you sent an e-mail message subject: DEM meeting in Devils Lake, ... In the message you stated: ...

"Climate change is now a significant component influencing Devils Lake levels." ... "more frequent high intensity local flash flood events and more frequent and severe drought conditions are likely in the years ahead. For Devils Lake, that means increasing uncertainty and variability in lake levels."

... Your role as a Senior Hydrologist at the North Central River Forecast Center is clear. ... You have neither the authority nor credentials to deviate from CPC predictions, nor advocate to others that they deviate from CPC predictions nor extrapolate these predictions beyond their time period. The integrity and reputation of the NWS is dependent on your adhering to the direction you have been provided."
...

That's a start at trying to explain why I came here. I don't know if I'll hang around for awhile yet or just go away.



Report a Violation

Sheldon B. Wahpeton, ND     03/29/2009 11:49 AM

Pat shut the hell up nobody cares!

Report a Violation