Eve Gruntfest ecguccs.edu

1
Lessons from the Warning Project

• Eve Gruntfest ecg_at_uccs.edu
• Kansas City January 22, 2009

2
The Big Thompson Flood in Colorado July 31, 1976

• 140 lives lost 35 miles from Boulder
• Studied the behaviors that night
• Who lived?
• Who died?
• Led to detection response systems

Focus on flash floods warning systems
3
Our 2003-2008 National Science Foundation project
aimed to

• Evaluate impacts of
• Demographic change
• New different
• sources of information
• Test conventional wisdom about
• False alarms/ close calls

Evaluate previous trauma experience warning
perceptions
4
What we know about warnings Public response
components

• Hear/receive
• Understand
• Believe
• Personalize
• Decide to act
• Respond

Reinforcing what Havidan said this morning The
warning process is complex
5
Why Austin Denver

• Similarities
• Large
• Growing cities
• Diverse
• populations
• Vulnerable to
• flash flooding

6
Warning project methodology

• Survey Development
• 1 year
• Input from officials hazards researchers
• Survey format
• Likert scale true/false
• Demographic questions
• Experience with flash floods trauma
• Surveys in English Spanish to selected
  respondents
• Survey is available for follow up studies

7

• Mail survey
• 6000 surveys sent to residents in or near the
  floodplain
• 1017 surveys returned

8

• Where do people get their weather information?
• Best way for officials to warn you about a flash
  flood?

9
All sources of weather information used
n935
10
Most important source of weather information
N945
11
A flash flood warning indicates a more serious
threat than a flash flood watch
92
8
n1031
12
I take flash flood warnings seriously
92
8
n1017
13
The best way for officials to warn you about a
flash flood?
N1020
14
Is overwarning a problem False alarm issues
--cry wolf may not be a major problem

• People prefer more warnings even if there are
  more false alarms
• No measurement of close calls near misses
• Events occur but not exactly in the warning areas
  or with exactly the predicted intensity
• How about new categories? New metrics?

15
Officials are too sensitive to the possibility of
flash flooding
N 1031
16
Realizing its difficult to predict flash floods,
I prefer more warnings even if there are more
false alarms or close calls
N 1047
17
Austin by GenderRealizing its difficult to
predict flash floods, I prefer more warnings even
if there are more false alarms or close calls
X² 4.150, p 18
New ways of representing what we know include
hydrology - Isabelle Ruin new time/space analysis

19
Challenging our assumptions - For flash floods
shorter lead time may be better than longer lead
time

• Smaller area under warning

• Is there a best leadtime?
• Concerns with too much leadtime?
• Are these warranted?

20
We need new metrics Socially relevant
verification Forecast verification is difficult
in rural areas
21
Prairie dogs dont answer the phone
22
Since not all meteorological hazards are created
equally

• ---What are acceptable
• levels of risk? Infrastructure is aging!
  (levees for category 2,3,4,5?)
• --- How do we measure warning success? If 20
  people die in Greensburg, KS warnings can still
  have saved hundreds

23
I would drive through an intersection with six
inches of water running across it
63 say they would NOT DRIVE through it
Is this good or bad news?
24
Tailor message for local hazards --Maricopa
County (Phoenix, AZ)

• Floodwaters can conceal a damaged roadway
• Flash Floods rarely last more than an hour
• Dont trade an hour for a lifetime

25
Challenge of confronting ads from car companies
Ad says Warning use the cup holders at your
own risk
How to convince people they are better Wet than
Dead?
26
Behavioral survey project
Observe drivers behavior at low water crossings
in Texas
http//70.253.207.10/view/index.shtml

• Quantitative survey
• Use of video
• car counting
• Qualitative survey
• Use Youtube video, travels log in-depth
  interviews

27
WHAT WERE THEY THINKING? USING TO
OBSERVE DRIVER BEHAVIOR CROSSING FLOODED ROADS

• 2009 Geography Masters thesis by Cedar League

28
INTENTIONAL/SITUATIONAL

• Intentional drivers purpose was to film the
  flood water, or to drive in the flood water (for
  fun). 59 (n31)
• Situational drivers purpose of trip was based
  upon their current situation, like driving to or
  returning from work. 41 (n21)

29
Purpose of Trip
30
SOURCES OF WEATHER INFORMATION
31
Are warnings always possible? Do they always
make THE difference?
Sirens Technical capability for smaller than
county warning But whole county hears sirens?
32
West Nile Virus study epidemiology-
awareness example

• Folks 50 years old most vulnerable to severe
  manifestations
• Campaign for elderly

Nobody identifies themselves as elderly
33
How do we address nuisance events vs
catastrophic events? Height of the 1997 Fort
Collins flash flood
34

• Warning project findings
• Weather information requirements of each user
  community are highly specialized
• The weather research community has not focused on
  the individual needs of specific user communities
• Existing social science studies barely scratch
  the surface more comprehensive studies must be
  done to have more confidence in policy change
  based on findings

35
In 2018 yet another decade from nowWhen we
meet we must see
Easy natural collaborations between physical
scientists, planners, engineers, broadcasters,
emergency managers, social scientists
others Fewer deaths reduced losses from
weather events a better understanding of how
people use weather information
36
Las Vegas Billboards
37
Warning project publications Environmental
Hazards 2007 -- Vol 7

• C. Benight, E. Gruntfest, M. Hayden, L. Barnes
  Trauma and short-fuse weather warning perceptions
• S. Drobot C. Benight, E. Gruntfest Risk factors
  for driving into flooded roads
• M. Hayden, S. Drobot, S. Radil, C. Benight, E.
  Gruntfest, L. Barnes Information sources for
  flash flood warnings in Denver, CO and Austin, TX
• I.Ruin, J-C. Gaillard, C. Lutoff How to get
  there? Assessing motorists flash flood risk
  perception on daily itineraries