House Fiscal '11 Budget Proposal

[somethingfunny]

NOAA and its' divisions protect the citizens of the United States against a danger which attacks us much more frequently than foreign enemies do. Nobody in government seems to realize that the NWS has just as much to do with our national defense as the Armed Forces do.

[CrazyC83]

One thing I have always wondered about the Hurricane Hunter program: it is a US-based program, but every country in the Atlantic basin gets the data and importance from it. Would it make more sense for a private company (or consortium) to operate it?

[psyclone]

the nws is one government agency that actually does a helluva job. a nearly 30% cut seems a disproportionate share of the burden. that said, when outlays exceed receipts by over $1 trillion, there are no sacred cows. hopefully the nws folks can lobby for a fairer portion of the burden. unless their budget has increased nearly 30% since 2008, it seems like they're being picked on.

[wxman57]

The fact is, there just isn't the money to pay for it. Government agencies are going to have to do the same (or more) with less, just as we are in the private industry. UAVs may actually be the way to go for recon (vs. manned flights). They have the capability of remaining on-site longer and/or reaching even the far eastern Atlantic. Cost would probably be less, too. But they're still working on the instrument packages for the UAVs. And the government has placed too many restrictions on their use near/over populated areas.

[CrazyC83]

Agreed with UAV's being a cost-saver since no flight staff is necessary. I think a cost-sharing agreement with other countries (and private industry?) should be reached as well if possible since it affects everyone in the Atlantic basin, not just the US.

[Florida1118]

From Dr.Masters at weather underground-
"Last month, the U.S. House of Representatives proposed a new budget (HR 1) for the remainder of the fiscal year that would slash funding of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) by $454 million. This would mean a draconian 28% cut for the National Weather Service, the agency entrusted to protect us from natural hazards such as hurricanes, tornadoes, and floods. Monday, the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee released a proposed alternative to HR 1 that would make a $110 million reduction to NOAA operations for the remainder of the fiscal year. Of the $110 million cut, $104 million was from earmarks that are no longer funded. This effectively only cuts the NOAA budget by $6 million, and would allow NOAA to continue its efforts through the coming tornado, flood, and hurricane seasons to help protect lives and property without suffering from crippling budget cuts.

Now is the time to mobilize to ensure adequate funding for NOAA, and the National Weather Service Employees Organization issued these recommendations in a letter posted on their website today:

----------------

Assuming the Senate adopts this proposal, the effort goes to convincing House Leadership of the important work of the NWS and fully funding NOAA. At this important stage, we ask you to contact Congressmen John Boehner and Eric Cantor and respectfully request that they support the Senate's proposal for NOAA's budget. These congressmen hold the key to the future of the NWS.

To email or call Speaker John Boehner
http://www.speaker.gov/Contact/

To email or call Representative Eric Cantor
http://cantor.house.gov/contact/

You can also join the Protect the National Weather Service Facebook group, which was created for this cause. Our fan count is growing rapidly but we need more. We want Congress to take notice of how much support our fans have shown. Please share this message with your friends and ask them to click "like" directly on our page. We will have more information, some cool photos and interesting tidbits to share in the coming days."

[TreasureIslandFLGal]

I can understand the rolling blackouts for times of the year when severe weather is unlikely to threaten an area and simple forecasts can easily be done by nearby stations. It makes sense. Just like we don't really need hurricane support/warning from Jan through April....its just not necessary and hard to justify.

However, for those fearing that Hurricane Forecasting will drop off and not be so good, I think you are mistaken. It is even more important now than ever for the Oil Rigs to know as far in advance as possible when a storm could threaten their operation. There are rigs off the eastern seaboard too, not just in the GOM. So don't fret, Big Oil will ensure that someone is getting the best equipment and funding to ensure they can secure their investments. We may simply find ourselves getting info from nontraditional means.

Personally, I would love to see Big Oil simply donate some of their Big Profits to NHC to keep things running and even advance their current forecasting abilities.

[CrazyC83]

Here is my thought:

* All AF flights should be maintained, as that is outside NOAA's budget. However, they cannot be operated beyond reasonable distance from US bases.

* NOAA flights should only be fully funded for storms within 72 hours of a US impact (including Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands).

* NOAA flights outside the 72 hour window should be co-ordinated with other countries, in which they agree to fund the flights and have base support.

Boundaries of control:

Atlantic Ocean

East of 45W and north of 25N - Portugal (Azores)
East of 45W and south of 25N - Cape Verde
From 45W to 65W, south of 15N - Barbados
From 45W to 65W, 15N to 25N - Antigua and Barbuda, when not threatening PR or USVI
From 55W to 70W, 25N to 38N - Bermuda
From 45W to 70W, north of 38N - Canada, when not threatening the US
West of 70W and south of 30N - Bahamas, when not threatening the US

Caribbean Sea

East of 65W - Barbados, when not threatening PR or USVI
65W to 85W - Jamaica, when not threatening PR or USVI
West of 85W - Mexico

Gulf of Mexico

South of 22.5N - Mexico, when not threatening the US

Eastern Pacific

All storms - Mexico, when not threatening the US