Well,since you asked :-) I use the web site http://www.wunderground.com/global/CA_NT.html to get current condition and forecasts for northern Canada. This is a unique site, because you can query an archive of conditions (from the same weather reporting station) backwards for 5 years. As you well know, a fine October 5th off of the coast of North Carolina (for example), is only fine for the day on which you are there. Being able to search the prior five" October 5ths", as reported from the archives of the same weather station, gives a bit more depth. Now...it is also possible to ask local residents: "What is the weather like in the first week of October? " or "What has the weather been like?". My experience has been mixed with this type of "human archive". Sometimes it is reported to be the coldest,warmest,driest,wettest year to date . If you turn around and ask the next person, you may get a "it's pretty typical for this time of year." The chamber of commerce in every town in Montana or Wyoming will always assure you that their area is situated in the "banana belt" of the state Having lived in MT and WY, I can assure you that this is a well-worn, if not "exactly "factual, figure of speech". And to the point: in early July of this year, while driving north from Wyoming to Yellowknife NWT, I used the web to compare the weather conditions as reported by WeatherUnderground and the official CN meteorological reports on http://www1.tor.ec.gc.ca/index_e.cfm . While I was getting "official" reports of 12-22 Centigrade temps ( 54-72F) for Hay River and Yellowknife, (the seasonal "norms" ) the temps reported by wunderground were in the 11-17 centigrade range (52-63F.) While the "official" site mentioned "partly cloudy", wunderground reported "showers". In Yellowknife I was told that it had been a "late and cool Spring", and upon my return I was told "it will be an early winter". A Dene elder, who I met in mid-July [on MacKay Lake] said: " I have never seen a July like this. It is like August's weather." On MacKay Lake (130 miles NE of YK) I was told the same thing by an outfitter who runs a fishing (in July-Aug) camp, and a hunting camp (in Aug-Sept). Now, he is telling booked clients, that the weather has been "warm of late". Your original post (YES... I am still trying to get to the point!) asked about the over-estimation of wind speeds by the Canadian Meteorological Service. I'm unsure. At Dubwant Lake (NWT) the weather station (via wunderground) reported wind speeds of 25 mph/gusts to 48 mph, over a 5 year period for the same date (actually a 5 day bracket around the date) , which gave me a good feel for wind conditions before heading north for our trip. I also used the Back River, Indian River sites for comparison) . I felt somewhat foolish allotting 35 days to paddle 180 miles. And sure, we were rather "slothful" in our progress. We could have comfortably done that distance in 25 days.( We also met 2 very experienced paddlers, who did the same distance in 12 days!, and an absolute novice who had covered 300 miles in 23 days in a 15 foot Penobscot paddled with a an "oar" best used on Sevylor inflatables!) Were the winds ever 25 mph? Yes, often! Gusts above 45 mph? ..yes that, I too can believe. This was our first trip on the "Barrenground"... we are both (relatively) tyros in an Old Town Discovery 17. Does the Canadian weather service "inflate" its windspeed conditions? I doubt it. Having spent the last 5 summers paddling in very northern Canada, I would lean more to a "conspiracy theory" that they "downplay" the winds on the large northern lakes. How else could they prove their over-taxed, socialist welfare state, with its poor currency exchange rate vis-a-vis the almighty US dollar, is truly and honestly the best place on Earth to go paddling!! ( FLAME ALERT!!!) JOKE ALERT! It is now 10 months before we paddle the Hiukitak River on the east shore of Bathurst Inlet. Somehow..we'll manage until then! Rich Dempsey ridem_at_msn.com ******************************************************* I use a small climbers altimeter for a barometer. Please tell us about your experiences with the Canadian weather forecasts. Many of us have had the feeling they exaggerate wind speed forecasts intentionally. Matt Broze http://www.marinerkayaks.com -----Original Message----- From: Rich Dempsey <rdempsey_at_wyoming.com> To: PaddleWise_at_lists.intelenet.net <PaddleWise_at_lists.intelenet.net> Date: Saturday, August 28, 1999 7:23 AM Subject: [Paddlewise] Barometers (for long range weather prediction) >Has anyone had personal experience using a barometer (while on extended >paddling trips) to get a clue as to approaching fronts, changes in weather ?<SNIP> I'm not interested in pursuing the weather-radio route, though I imagine it to >be at least as reliable as the Canadian Government weather forecasts >(another topic!!) >Rich Dempsey >ridem_at_msn.com *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Ah, marine weather forecasts. There are days when I think the prognostications of Environment Canada are done with chicken bones, or something like that. At least, when I'm on a trip with friends and suggest we pay attention to the forecasted gale, I get called a little chicken sh#_at_%. This yellow streak is do to the fact that I spend a lot of time on the water kayaking, and have actually experienced correct forecasts, once in a while, believe it or not. However, as my preeminent friends have found out, most of the time the local conditions are no where near as severe as was stated. This presents a bit of a problem during in-situ trip planning. Matt and I have had a bit of a discussion on this subject concerning that rescue I had off the Storm Islands last April with my other two buds. We had incorrect forecasts every day for ten days coming down from Bella Bella to Port Hardy. There were days when we would be told to expect NW winds. Half way into a long crossing, we would get SE winds (in our faces, of course), a full 180 degrees to predicted directions. So not only are wind strengths out, so are directions at times. We also heard sunny skys, and got nailed by snow squalls. Eventually we just gave up, and on the day of the ill fated crossing ignored the forecast (Matt will tell the whole story, hopefully about Feb 2000 in Sea Kayaker Magazine). After 25 years of canoe and kayak paddling, I'm finally learning that a forecast is just that, a forecast - not a "fact-cast". I also know from talking to fishermen, storm bound in places like Winter Harbor, that while it may appear relatively calm along coastal waters, offshore, it may be a very different matter.(This was mentioned in a recent post by someone). Forecasters are dedicated to providing information to the men and women who ply these offshore waters for a living, not pleasure boaters who don't have to be on the water closer to land. I also find that waters more inland, where more pleasure boaters frequent, do get a detailed, through forecast. Unfortunately, these waterways, such as the the Georgia Basin and Puget Sound area, are subject to local variations that defy complete, accurate forecasting. I've come to learn that forecasts are like a large net, catching most of the "fish" as it sweeps along, but, lots of little "fish" get through the small "holes" in the net. After my return to civilization after thr Storm Island rescue, I phoned Environment Canada on the 1-900 line for some "personal service". Specifically, I went over my log book day by day, including the day of the final crossing, comparing Environment Canada's forecasts with what we actually experienced. The French canadian fellow answering the phone was non-pulsed, and suggested I heard the forecasts wrong, or misunderstood them. He said there are six forecasters who do the central/north coast, and that they take pride in the accuracy of their work. To be fair, the cold fronts moving through were rapid, and Fitz Hugh Sound subject to variation with mountain ranges so close. The day we left Port Hardy, where we filled out a float plan with the Coast Guard at the strart of the trip, we had asked them for a three day forecast. They said they were lucky if EC got the next 6 hours right. That was straight from the horse's mouth (guess I was the horse's ars). Anyway, I've also experience the opposite of predicting to great a wind strength, as I'm sure many of you have too. Just today, they said winds in Juan De Fuca to 20 knots. The Coast Guard finally over-broadcasted the regular EC recording, indicating 35 knot winds were occurring. On a larger scale, we have had a few marine "bombs" drop on us, where hurricane force winds rapidly developed from a small craft warning. I've been caught in a few of those situations over the year's (the more time you spend on the water, the greater the chance of "ship happening"), and it is worse than being a victim of over-predicting, where you sat on the beach unnecessarily. So, I guess I'd rather go with the trend of EC over-predicting. It does make trip planning a bit of a challenge, and, after my Storm Island experience, I'll just have to stay yellow -- at least I match the color of my kayak's gelcoat :) For further reading for those interested in Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands and adjacent areas, I suggest "Marine Weather Hazards Manual - a guide to local forecasts and conditions" by EC, and the newly published "The Wind Came All Ways - A quest to understand the winds, waves and weather in the Georgia Basin" by Owen S. Lange and EC. BC'in Ya Doug Lloyd >Please tell us about your experiences with the Canadian weather forecasts. >Many of us have had the feeling they exaggerate wind speed forecasts >intentionally. >Matt Broze *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Original message: >>Please tell us about your experiences with the Canadian weather forecasts. >>Many of us have had the feeling they exaggerate wind speed forecasts >>intentionally. >>Matt Broze Matt and fellow POW's (Prisoners of Weather), [LONG POST WARNING] I took the liberty to phone Environment Canada on Friday. They charge 2 bucks a minute for personal service. (Call came to $10.00. Now, divided by, say, 500 paddlewisers, equals...2 cents: so, I hope you all get your two cents worth!) I said I was calling on behalf of an internet listserver group dedicated to paddling knowledge and safety, and would like to talk to someone senior regarding forecast policy and their derivation of forecasted wind speeds. Disscussion, for those interested, was as follows (to my best recollection): Q. Does the Pacific Weather Center, through some directive from either Atmospheric Environment Services or Environment Canada (EC) in general, have an internal, tacit policy with respect to public marine forecasts whereby the highest "possible" wind speeds are broadcast in order to avoid liability? A. Well, uh, no. No we don't. Q. I guess you would have to say that, even if you did have this policy in effect. I know, because I work for the Government too. A. Not really. Individual forecasters, like myself, usually are wrong the other way. If mistakes are made, it is usually that winds are higher. Q. Are you senior there? A. Yes. I have been here 10 years. There are 5 regulars, and one other who often assists. We are responsible for the entire west coast. Q. The reason I'm phoning is because myself, numerous coastal users, kayak guides and everyone I know says EC always predicts stronger winds, on a consistent basis year after year, than what is actually experienced for the forecast region and period. As you are fairly senior forecaster, perhaps you could help me out here to understand the discrepancy. A. Well, up until a few years ago, we had a certain rate of staff turnover. Due to variables with the jet stream, topography impingement, etc, there is a real learning curve getting to the point whereby accurate forecasting is consistent. The last couple of years, we have a lot more staff stability, so you don't get new people making the same mistakes over and over again as each successive employee reinvents the wheel, as it were. Q. But, pardon me for saying, I think its getting worse, not better. Perhaps you don't understand what its like to be sitting on a beach in your little pup tent, living by every little word and detail that comes over the radio, especially if you are a guide or responsible for other people. Don't you have more accurate computer models these days, and a greater networking or pooling of resources, to help folks like us who are so dependent being so prone to the wind and the seas it produces? A. We have many user groups to consider, and we try our best to please everyone with the resources we have at our disposal. Our models bring up, usually, good broad-brush information, but when you superimpose what is generated over the vast area we deal with, there are many holes, shadows, whatever you want to call it, where details just are not available to input into the forecast. Perhaps you can give me some examples of problems you and your friends are encountering...I'm more than willing to help. Q. I phoned in April after a rather unfortunate occurence in Queen Charlotte Sound. Three of us were coming down from Bella Bella, via Fitz Hugh Sound. I asked previously why 9 out of 10 days you had it wrong, all wrong, including wind speed, direction, precipitation. The last guy said the predictions matched what eventually transpired. He would not say much else, other than the 6 of you took pride in your work. A. Did you give specifics? Do you have something more common place. Fits Hugh Sound has too many variances, and I didn't take the call. Q. Okay, when we are out on the West Coast in summer, with a strong NW regime, EC will call for gale force winds in the afternoon to 40 knots. So, we sit it out, expecting the worst, and it only hits 30, if that. A. We forecast out to 60 nautical miles offshore. Where we can, we include information from coastal reporting stations as it happens, along with the usual observations. If we say 40 knots, it will be 40 knots offshore...though with me, "I'll have usually forecasted 35 (forecaster laughs into phone). This would explain your situation in Fits Hugh Sound. Q. I kind of thought maybe that was the problems so many of us are experiencing, but what about places like Estavan Point or Brooks Peninsula. You often give very specific forecasts for these points, with detailed forecasts that turn out to be wrong. These are very dangerous points of land for small craft. A. Like I said, I'm very senior here, and I still can't get it totally right. The more stable the air mass, the better I do, and actually the stronger the wind, the easier it is as the entire coast tends to experience similar wind speed and direction. Its when the wind backs off a bit that the picture falls apart. Also, a SE flow is much easier to predict consequences for than a NW flow. Let me just bring up something on my screen here (forecaster takes a minute -- with my money -- while he interprets the info). Okay, the forecast for the East Morsby (Queen Charlotte Islands) is NW 15 to 20 knots. Its blowing just over 15 knots, but, at Cumshewa (a headland of sorts) it is blowing SW 10 knots. So you can see the difficulties. How much can we get into a broadcast is another question. Our user groups want forecasts for places like Solander off Brooks, so we do our best -- given that similar situations exist there as with Cumshewa, it makes it difficult. Q. I thank you for the information. I should really go now. A. (Forecaster continues almost unbroken from previous sentence). Yeah, we often get calls, even from land based citizen observations, telling us we have it all wrong. Places like Holberg Inlet get winds that are sudden and severe, and the coastal and inlet inhabitants get mighty upset. Q. Yes I've experienced those confined waterway winds. Quatsino Sound (a large inlet mouth on the northwest coast of Vancouver Island) is another bad one. Especially in the morning. Just as the sun is rising, outflow winds can build to 25 knots -- just as you are in the middle of your "calm morning crossing". As the sun proceeds to rise, winds will abruptly turn and inflow winds will start to develop. A. We often try to include outflow winds where we can in the forecast. Places like Howe Sound (inside waters, north of Vancouver) are given particular attention because of the high number of pleasure boaters frequenting the area, for example. Q. I see EC has a new book out, "The Wind Came All Ways" and a revised edition of the Marine Weather Manual. A. Both the Strait of Georgia and Juan de Fuca strait are particularly difficult areas in general, to forecast, let alone small localities within those two areas. We hope the new book will help educate boaters about local effects. Was there another question? Q. Here's a specific. Last Monday you called for Westerlies to 20 knots late afternoon. By dinner time, it was at least 35 to 40. Finally, the Coast Guard broadcast right over the EC recording to say it was a full gale. This is the opposite problem from why I originally called, but is does illustrate why some days I feel like chucking the radio. A. Hhmmm. This is a problem. Juan de Fuca can be a bugger. Part of the problem however is that in this case, I saw the trend coming, but the forecast at four pm was for the immediate. The winds did pick up suddenly just prior to the revised forecast, so there are times when what is happening is not what you heard on the forecast. I thanked the forecaster and told him I appreciated their continued commitment to the boating public. I had wanted to push more on the above Race Rocks - Juan de Fuca fowl-up, but I was phoning from work and was getting the evil-eye from my boss, so said goodbye. I do know that the American forecasts I listen to are often much more accurate if you follow up 4 hours later and listen to the observations -- they usually align with the earlier predictions. Often, I use the American broadcast to predict what will happen in my local, if the flow is our way. American reports, I also notice, give details regarding rogue wave heights, etc. A very detailed bunch of guys you got down there. I got a note from a fellow PW'er who just came back from a one or two week trip in the Blackfish Sound area of NE Vancouver Island -- what a nightmare of misinformation he got from EC off the radio. So, the beef goes on. Bottom line, keep a sharp weather eye out on the water. Sorry for long post, but as we are all analy retentive... BC'in Ya Doug lloyd *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Doug Lloyd wrote: > Matt and fellow POW's (Prisoners of Weather), > > I took the liberty to phone Environment Canada on Friday. [big snip] > > and would like to talk to someone senior regarding forecast policy and > their derivation of forecasted wind speeds. Disscussion, for those > interested, was as follows [mongo snip] > I thanked the forecaster and told him I appreciated their continued > commitment to the boating public. [snip] I do know that the > American forecasts I listen to are often much more accurate if you follow > up 4 hours later and listen to the observations -- they usually align with > the earlier predictions. [snip] > Bottom line, keep a sharp weather eye out on the water. Sorry for long > post, but as we are all anally retentive... Thanks for pursuing this, Doug. I would not have had the patience and stick-to-it-iveness. I suspect that it is tough for anybody, be it EC or NOAA/NWS, to get wind predictions as reliable as we would like. And, I agree EC has a tough forecast job on the BC coast, and in the Strait of Juan de Fuca area. Of necessity, I'm pretty self-reliant when it comes to wind/weather, on my "home" waters, though I have been nailed a few times, particularly in winter, by outflow winds. FWIW, the NWS misses its share down here, also -- and for similar reasons, I suspect -- not much actual data coming in from the west. Not as happy a situation as forecasting air mass behavior in the center of the continent, where there is a huge body of information from ground observations in all directions. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Doug Lloyd wrote: --snip-- > > Perhaps you don't understand what its like to be sitting on a beach in your > little pup tent, living by every little word and detail that comes over the > radio, especially if you are a guide or responsible for other people. > ... some days I feel like chucking the radio. This raises interesting questions as to why one paddles, how much tech one might want to haul along, and to what degree one is willing to be dependent upon such tech. Cheers, Richard Culpeper culpeper_at_tbaytel.net www.tbaytel.net/culpeper *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:02 PDT