NWAC facing big cut - write your legislators

The NWAC has made some great improvements on their website. I personally really like the telemetry graphs now available. I would hate to see these details go away...

Just to set the facts straight and give fair credit, regardless of one's views on the funding issue: the telemetry graphs have nothing to do with NWAC or its website, they are just linked from and now displayed on the NWAC website. The graphs are the volunteer work of a private individual, and have been available online at inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~dkantola/weather.html for some time now (years).

I agree that NWAC is a valuable resource for commerce and recreation and that the component required for commerce should be publicly funded, however the recreational component although nice to have, is not a critical funding necessity and in these though times, cuts have to be made and the pain shared.

When public funding for Planned Parenthood is cut( which is just stupid) how can you expect recreational telemetry sites to be funded for the enjoyment of BC skiers???? The reduced public funding should still allow the avalanche forecasting for commerce.

I think you're mistaken about that -- the reduced funding would probably cost at least one staff position (which cost $$$), while having no affect on the telemetry (relatively few $). So it would have a major negative affect on avalanche forecasting for commerce.

With the amount of BC skiers in WA( According to WAC in his snowmobile/wilderness thread) it should be no problem to raise the $79,000 if BC skiers would stop expecting the government to fund the information to assist in their hobby and dip their hand into their pockets and make a donation to FONWAC to make up the funding reduction.

...

There is a $5 billion state budget shortfall in case you haven't heard.
How frivolous and self centered to expect our hobby to be funded when teachers are being cut and social services reduced and people experiencing genuine hardship.

It should be obvious to anyone (including you) that no amount of $79,000 cuts can ever add up to $5 billion. Large programs (with billion dollar budgets, or at least $100 million plus) must be reduced or cut, or revenue must be substantially increased (via taxes).  The NWAC's state funding is already too minuscule to ever have an affect on the overall state budget. This has nothing to do with politics -- it is purely mathematics.

Whether our "hobby" is funded has no bearing on cuts to education and social services. In order to address the shortfall, major cuts have have to be made in major state programs, and any cuts to extremely minor $ programs will have no possible positive budgetary effect. It's mind boggling that politicians don't see this simple mathematical truth when going through the long and painful debates over budget cuts. They should concentrate all the effort and haggling only on the big-ticket programs that could actually affect the bottom line -- worry about the nickels and dimes (like NWAC) at some other time.

The cost isn't in remote data sites.  Its in the analysis of that data.  And without that analysis, all you have is a bunch of automated weather stations that the average citizen won't be able to use.  Analysis is a key piece of NWAC's mission - arguably its core - and that has to be done by a paid staff, in an office, on a computer.

This funding cut isn't going to close a single remote data site.  It threatens to turn off the computer, close the office, and lay off the avalanche forecasters who provide a valuable service for public safety.

Writing your state legislator is one way to address this issue.  Coming to Snowball is another - hope to see you there.

Chris

The NWAC folks do spend a fair amount of their time maintaining the remote data sites, most of that in the late summer and fall.

But, in general, I agree with you Mountain Freak, the gathering of information from ski patrol and hiway reports and translation of real avalanche data and estimation of weather's projected effects on the snowpack stability is not something very many (if any) of us could do.

I mentioned the value of the telemetry in trip planning, but that doesn't mean I don't look at the avalanche forecast as well. Besides using the telemetry to find good skiing, I also use it to help me select safe skiing - really, this latter comes first.

By the way, Scotsman; although I understand your point, the NWAC does have supporting data analysis that statistically demonstrates that it's avalanche forecasts save about one life a year. That analysis may be a few years old, but in any case, showing that forecasts save lives as compared to historical norms (in light of the fact that usage has so dramatically increased) is impressive. Part of government's job, most would argue, is to save lives. I think one would find that courts put a lot higher value on a lost life than $79,000.

From the Friends of NWAC facebook page:
Washington residents...we need your help! The governor's proposed budget calls for a $79,000 cut to NWAC's budget. PLEASE find your legislator with this link and send them an e-mail telling them how important NWAC is...that it SAVES LIVES, facilitates transportation and helps the winter recreation industry generate A LOT of revenue and jobs in WA. Your voice does matter in Olympia. Please make it heard!
Find Your Legislator
apps.leg.wa.gov/

Compared with larger lobbying groups, bc skiers are a fairly small group so legislators need to hear our voices. Write today. Suggest they take a quick look at the NWAC site.
www.nwac.us/
-Jack

I got an email from my legislator yesterday saying that the funding for NWAC was in both the House and Senate budgets.  The next few days will be when the final deals are hammered out on the budget, but I am hopeful that the NWAC funding will survive.

Don't blame me. I voted for I-1098

I agree that NWAC is a valuable resource for commerce and recreation and that the component required for commerce should be publicly funded, however the recreational component although nice to have, is not a critical funding necessity and in these though times, cuts have to be made and the pain shared.

When public funding for Planned Parenthood is cut( which is just stupid) how can you expect recreational telemetry sites to be funded for the enjoyment of BC skiers???? The reduced public funding should still allow the avalanche forecasting for commerce.

With the amount of BC skiers in WA( According to WAC in his snowmobile/wilderness thread) it should be no problem to raise the $79,000 if BC skiers would stop expecting the government to fund the information to assist in their hobby and dip their hand into their pockets and make a donation to FONWAC to make up the funding reduction.
79,000/250 say= 316 avid Bc skiers x $250.
Aren't there 316 skiers on TAY willing to pay $250
or 632 willing  to pay $125??????

There is a $5 billion state budget shortfall in case you haven't heard.
How frivolous and self centered to expect our hobby to be funded when teachers are being cut and social services reduced and people experiencing genuine hardship.
Tax rates are ridiculously low on personal incomes...... tell your legislators to raise taxes not fund recreational hobbies.They won't because they want to be re-elected and there's the rub.

Well said.... Cuts need to be made somewhere and everyone screams when their pet project is on the chopping block. There are plenty of other areas where I would cut first, but the govt seems to like to cut recreational items first (parks, forest, etc) because it is the easiest place for them to cause hurt and ask for increased fees to make up the difference..