next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects --part1_bc01.714d475c.3dbefbd0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think it is probably easy to get confused with the multitude of offerings on weather. I find the Canadian weather office the best, where you can compare the US hurricane forecast alongside the Canadian version. I find that they are mostly comparable with perhaps a bit more detail on the US side. Click on _www.weatheroffice.gc.ca_ (http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca) , go to "marine info" and then "hurricane" and you can make your choice of Canadian or Noaa offerings.. Peter Stow Hubbards. In a message dated 28/10/2012 4:44:22 P.M. Atlantic Daylight Time, e.mills@dal.ca writes: Hi Larry, I agree that the site one uses depends on what information is required. For example, if I were in the eastern Great Lakes area through to Central Ontario, I'd be following the EC site with rapt attention, both for the forecast of adverse weather and for bird prediction. We got surprisingly little out of Irene (last fall), so Sandy may be similar, though it may be larger and thus more effective in bringing us some pelagics from that way-far-out-at-sea eastern sector of the cyclone. Prediction is a mug's game, to quote someone. I'm not sure where you are unpacking. Are you back in NS? All the best, Eric On 28 Oct 2012 at 9:55, Larry Neily wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > We are still unpacking so I'll be brief. But I feel I shouldrespond > to your question,"The NOAA site > is good, but why not use one oriented to our area, originating > withEnvironment Canada"? > > While I was certain that anyone wanting local coverage would check > the Environment Canada > (EC)site - as you say, discussion of the local conditions is bound > to be more in depth - I did not > propose the National Hurricane Center (NHC) site for that reason > alone. I believe that the > mapping and graphical coverage of storms is much superior on the NHC > site, especially for > comparitive overviews such as I was proposing (in response toa > question someone asked last > week what could be expected to show up after the storm). As a quick > example, historical storm > data from EC seems to consist of aseries of single day snippets, > while NHC has graphics of the > entire storm track. > > It was proposed as a fun exercise, but perhaps could be interesting, > who knows. > > Hope to get out birding soon. Cheers, Larry > > > On 27 Oct 2012 at 14:51, Larry Neily wrote: > > > > > > > > Seeing Don's post made me wonder if this listservs members had > heard of the NOAA > National > > > Hurricane Center website. Probably superfluous, but maybe some > folks out there haven't > heard > > > of it: > > > http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/. It is great fun to check out all the > possibilities, but it also allows > close > > > following of the projected and pasttrack - always of interest to > birders. > > > > > > The link > > > >http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at3+shtml/120153.shtml?50w > ind120#contentsis to > > > Hurricane Sandy,and at other spots on the main siteyou can watch > all previous storms or > those > > > just beginning. If youfound previous storms that followed > Sandy's track at the same time of > year, > > > you might look for birds similiar to those th > > Eric L. Mills 286 Kingsburg Road RR#1, Rose Bay, NS B0J 2X0 Canada e.mills@dal.ca --part1_bc01.714d475c.3dbefbd0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII" http-equiv=3DContent-Type> <META name=3DGENERATOR content=3D"MSHTML 9.00.8112.16450"></HEAD> <BODY style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 14pt" id=3Dro= le_body=20 bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Dro= le_document=20 color=3D#000000 size=3D4 face=3DArial> <DIV><FONT size=3D4>I think it is probably easy to get confused with the mu= ltitude=20 of offerings on weather. I find the Canadian weather office the best, where= you=20 can compare the US hurricane forecast alongside the Canadian version. I fin= d=20 that they are mostly comparable with perhaps a bit more detail on the US=20 side.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D4>Click on <A=20 href=3D"http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca">www.weatheroffice.gc.ca</A>, go to = "marine=20 info" and then "hurricane" and you can make your choice of Canadian or= Noaa=20 offerings..</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D4>Peter Stow Hubbards.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D4></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV>In a message dated 28/10/2012 4:44:22 P.M. Atlantic Daylight Time,=20 e.mills@dal.ca writes:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE=20 style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px">= <FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=3D#000000 size=3D2 face=3DA= rial>Hi=20 Larry, <BR><BR>I agree that the site one uses depends on what information= is=20 required. For example, if I were <BR>in the eastern Great Lakes area thro= ugh=20 to Central Ontario, I'd be following the EC site with <BR>rapt attention,= both=20 for the forecast of adverse weather and for bird prediction. <BR><BR>We g= ot=20 surprisingly little out of Irene (last fall), so Sandy may be similar, th= ough=20 it may be <BR>larger and thus more effective in bringing us some pelagics= from=20 that way-far-out-at-sea <BR>eastern sector of the cyclone. Prediction is = a=20 mug's game, to quote someone. <BR><BR>I'm not sure where you are unpackin= g.=20 Are you back in NS?<BR><BR>All the best,<BR><BR>Eric<BR><BR><BR><BR>On 28= Oct=20 2012 at 9:55, Larry Neily wrote:<BR><BR>> <BR>> Hi Eric,<BR>>=20 <BR>> We are still unpacking so I'll be brief. But I feel I=20 shouldrespond<BR>> to your question,"The NOAA site <BR>> is good, b= ut=20 why not use one oriented to our area, originating<BR>> withEnvironment= =20 Canada"?<BR>> <BR>> While I was certain that anyone wanting local= =20 coverage would check<BR>> the Environment Canada <BR>> (EC)site - a= s you=20 say, discussion of the local conditions is bound<BR>> to be more in de= pth -=20 I did not <BR>> propose the National Hurricane Center (NHC) site for t= hat=20 reason<BR>> alone. I believe that the <BR>> mapping and graphical= =20 coverage