On Friday morning, heavy rains led to catastrophic flooding along the Guadalupe River in central Texas.
Tragically, it appears that at least fifty people lost their lives.
But what is particularly disturbing is that the National Weather Service (NWS) provided excellent warnings and forecasts before the event that clearly predicted a substantial threat.
And yet, no attempt at evacuation was made.
Furthermore, weather model forecasts indicated the potential for a major precipitation event over this historically flood-prone region during the prior days.
The EventThe flooding occurred around 4 AM on July 4.
A heavy precipitation event was forecast for the region during the previous days. For example, the NOAA/NWS HRRR forecast from 8 PM July 3 (the evening before) predicted a band of heavy rain over central Texas.
THE DAY BEFORE, the NWS Forecast Office in San Antonia put out a flood watch for central Texas Hill Country, which included the site of the tragedy. During the subsequent hours, the National Weather Service communicated increasingly strong warnings, including flash flood warnings. A children's camp on a floodplain should have been evacuated.
Here is the warning by the local NWS office several hours before the flood.
Also consider the warning by the National Weather Service Weather Prediction Center (WPC) before the event:
As the event got closer, with National Weather Service radar showing the event unfolding, the San Antonia office made the threat explicit, noting a very dangerous flash event.
Any media or other organization suggesting that the National Weather Service was not on top of this event is not only not telling the truth, but doing a deep disservice to the highly professional and skillful folks in that organization.
Some folks are making such suggestions for patently political reasons. Extraordinarily unethical and wrong.
Areas along the Guadalupe River have flooded catastrophically many times in the past, and not evacuating low-lying areas with such warnings verges on criminal neglect. The local county (Kerr) does not even have a flood warning system in place.
The Texas flooding is another example of large numbers of deaths, even when weather forecasts are excellent, with all too many other examples, including the Maui wildfires, the LA wildfires, and flooding from Hurricane Helene.
But if you really want to experience media and advocacy group loss of moral compass, consider those claiming this event is the result of global warming.
For example, this connection was suggested by the New York Times:
There is NO EVIDENCE that the central Texas floods are the result of climate change.
For example, the Environmental Protection Agency has noted that flooding is DECLINING over time in that region (see below)
I examined this issue myself. Below is a plot of the extreme daily precipitation in July for nearby San Antonio from the 1940s to today.
There is NO upward trend, which suggests that climate change is not a factor in this event.
If climate change was significant, there WOULD be an upward trend.
In summary, society needs to learn how to effectively use the greatly improved prediction and observational capabilities that now exist.
Most weather-related deaths can be prevented if society makes use of this valuable information.
Those using disasters to support their political and social change agendas are not only hurting those they wish to help, but acting in a morally and ethically indefensible way.
.jpeg)
.png)
There should be some political repercussions locally, right? Life threatening flooding was forecast and authorities didn’t call for evacuation or similar, things they do in Florida, for example, before a hurricane.
ReplyDeleteIt sounds as if you’re suggesting the culpability in this case lies with the state and/or local governments as well as private legally responsible parties which should have reacted appropriately to the accurate and timely information provided to them by NOAA/NWS but for some reason failed to do so. To be clear, I take no issue with your analysis but just want to make sure I’m understanding your conclusions.
ReplyDeleteyou will see that while significant precipitation was forecast the previous day, the flood warnings were issued at 1:30 in the morning..... when everyone is sound asleep. The flooding occurred at 4:00 a.m. Really its just some unfortunate timing.
DeleteIts still remarkably shameful that county officials started pointing fingers of blame at NWS for "poor forecasting" when clearly it was near gold standard. Being a bit off on precipitation amounts is no reason for blame either. They issued a flood warning when they knew it was warranted. Just a shame that convective showers can occur so fast and that happened when everyone was asleep
Awww. Everyone was sound asleep!
DeleteNOT. There are people whose JOB it is to pay attention to this and take appropriate ACTIONS.
Heads should roll. But they won't, will they. Because we live in the era of "Blame someone else."
Your comments are spot on!...The bone-headed Texas authorities are responsible for not communicating the coming portent of disaster.
ReplyDeleteDHS Secretary Kristi Noem said that the rainfall was "unprecedented". That descriptor seems pretty consistent with climate change. Climate science tell us that events like this will become more frequent, and possibly more intense. It seems to me that weather forecasters and emergency planners who overlook this reality will fail at their jobs.
ReplyDeleteJerry..... Noem was wrong. The rainfall was not unprecedented. The situation had no implications regarding climate change, particularly since there is no upward trend in heavy precipitation in the region. ..cliff
DeleteCliff, I don't make a habit of saying that Kristi Noem got things right, but maybe she did in this case. Records were set, which is not consistent with a climate-business-as-usual view of this event.
Deletehttps://www.newsweek.com/devastating-texas-floods-shatter-guadalupe-river-record-2095684
There should be a weather alert warning issued to cell phones (like an Amber alert) so people in specific locations can evacuate.
ReplyDeleteWe have weather warnings to cell phones for flash flood, tornado and other warnings. Unfortunately, cell coverage in that area is poor and the warnings were not as good as they might have been. Please see: https://www.mikesmithenterprisesblog.com/2025/07/we-didnt-know-this-flood-was-coming.html
DeleteThis is a really helpful analysis. Remember the famous snowstorm a few years ago that left a lot of TX frozen and without power for several days, partly because TX never made basic weatherizing upgrades to their power infrastructure and refuses to be part of the national power interchange.
ReplyDeleteIf kids died because of local incompetence, local authorities should definitely pay a political price.
Unfortunatley, Texas politicans didn't seem to pay much of a political price for the infamous snow and ice storm a few years ago. Nor did they pay much of a price for the Uvalde tragedy the following year, which was an election year. Many of the politicans who were in charge then are still in power today, and we are more than a year away from the next elections down there. You would think that a tragedy of this magnitude would cause voters who reconsider who is running their state, but history has shown otherwise.
DeleteWeatherization was not the problem. The problem was too much reliance on wind energy and then the ~36 hours of nearly calm winds and the resulting power outages. Most of Texas uses electricity to heat their homes.
DeleteIt sounds like Texas might need to diversify its energy grid to allow people to use sources other than electricity to heat their homes.
DeleteLocal authorities wanted to put in an audio warning system like we have for tsunamies, but voters didn't want to pay for it.
ReplyDeleteIf thats the case, then the local authorities need to find other sources of funding for an audio warning system. I know that is going to be a major challenge with many federal sources of funding being cut off under the current administration, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't try.
DeleteIt's one thing to have this sort of weather alert in text form go out to subscribers. But who among the general public receives those directly? Who is listening to TV or the radio while camping on a holiday weekend? Who takes a weather alert radio with them on vacation? Would they have even had their phones on to have received some sort of alert through them, assuming the area they were in had cell coverage? I'm sincerely wondering, Cliff -- what sorry of alert system would have worked in these circumstances? Assuming city or county emergency managers received the alert, should they have headed out in trucks with loudspeakers to all the low-lying areas and told people to hop in their cars and leave at once? Should they have had maps of the flood prone areas showing all the places that might be occupied so they would have planned on advance where they would need to drive and make the announcement? Could they have reached all the impacted areas in time if they had started promptly? Is this standard practice in areas with similar history and vulnerability? Should there be laws in place to require that sort of planning and preparation if there isn't any now? And thinking about home, does Washington State have such a law in place? Do the feds?
ReplyDeleteCould the weather alerts come through on people's phones even if the phones were off? Given that the extreme weather conditions that necessitate the issuing of weather alerts can be life threatening, it seems like these alerts should be programmed to come through on people's phones, regardless of whether the phones are on or off.
DeleteToby, I have family in Texas and they are telling me that there is a warning system in Texas and it fires off on your cell phone. He received several of these on Thursday, causing him and his friends to change their plans. He said it is a loud warning and very hard to ignore. He also said he didn't sign up for or download an app for it. Problem with Camp Mystic and likely others.... No cell phones.
DeleteA quality explanation. Would that the Seattle Times, New York Times, and Washington Post would post facts rather than their political biases when examining and posting supp. osed factual information on extreme events. An extreme event unrelated to climate change is the biased perceptions these papers bring instead of reporting facts. The day this stops will be a real extreme event.
ReplyDeleteSo much has been invested in the Climate Change fraud that the progressives will never admit it has always been a feeble attempt to salvage a tie from the jaws of defeat in the Cold War.
DeleteGo here: 30.009398, -99.370441 ~ ~ ~ See Camp Mystic
ReplyDeleteNote the name “Edmunson Creek”, a small drainage that flows through the property. Cypress Creek, in a larger valley, enters from the southwest. Panther Creek is another (name taken from a road). The large stream is the Guadalupe River.
Examine the siting of this camp. What is it built on? What could go wrong?
Immediate prior flood was 1987. 1959 & 1978 had large volumes in the Guadalupe.
Cliff,
ReplyDeleteYou say that there is no upward trend in flooding for this area and seem to equate flooding as a climate change indicator. However, the idea of change to me allows for increase or decrease. Why is a decrease in floods not a change indicator in terms of climate in this case?
It's a small decrease... not statistically significant.. so you cannot say yhe decrease was caused by climate change.
DeleteWhat a horrible tragedy. And I hope meteorologists aren't taking it personally when they are berated. Federal government agencies can only do so much to put emergency information into ears of individuals. You know the old saying, "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink." Individuals have to be listening in order to hear the messages. This ultimately requires preparedness on the part of individuals in the danger area, as well as the those responsible for linking emergency alerts to endangered people. Letting locals off the hook because the flood happened at night makes no sense. Nature doesn't sleep at night. Blaming climate change, the NWS, or defunding of NWS skirts a lot of territory in the blame game. I'm baffled by passivity and complacence of otherwise responsible people toward well known hazards of nature in their very own communities. But it's cruel to point fingers at local agencies and individuals who are deep in mourning. The investigations and lawsuits will unearth facts which are too painful to visit this early.
ReplyDeleteAlmost immediately after this news broke, I started seeing wild-eyed political posts accusing the T administration of causing (!) this disaster due to "cuts to the NWS". I figured that was unhinged, and obviously it is. The NWS was aware, they did issue alerts. I have family in Oklahoma and Florida, living in climates notorious for rapidly-evolving and extreme weather events, and if there's any lesson at all to be learned from this it's: "People - PAY ATTENTION, take these warnings seriously." I agree with what "Dee Aura" and others have written along these lines. This horrible tragedy shouldn't be used for a political blame game. And, frankly I don't see the event as all that rare. My husband and I experienced a sudden flash-flood when we were on a golf course in bone-dry Nevada once that I'll never forget (the suddenness).
ReplyDeleteAre prediction and coordination separate responsibilities? Is it possible that departures left traditional avenues of communication lacking? From nytimes: “ The National Weather Service’s San Angelo office, which is responsible for some of the areas hit hardest by Friday’s flooding, was missing a senior hydrologist, staff forecaster and meteorologist in charge, according to Tom Fahy, the legislative director for the National Weather Service Employees Organization, the union that represents Weather Service workers.
ReplyDeleteThe Weather Service’s nearby San Antonio office, which covers other areas hit by the floods, also had significant vacancies, including a warning coordination meteorologist and science officer, Mr. Fahy said. Staff members in those positions are meant to work with local emergency managers to plan for floods, including when and how to warn local residents and help them evacuate.
That office’s warning coordination meteorologist left on April 30, after taking the early retirement package the Trump administration used to reduce the number of federal employees, according to a person with knowledge of his departure.”
There is a big problem with your comment: the NY Times had the wrong office! San Antonio is responsible for the disaster area, NOT San Angelo. Turns out that the San Antonio office had enhanced staffing that night. More than normal, not less than normal.
DeleteCliff, I am seeing chatter this morning about weather modification projects in Texas and that may have aggravated the situation. Is that a valid concern here?
ReplyDeleteWeather modification was not a factor. Those projects were shut down at the time.
DeleteThanks Mike
DeleteHi Cliff, great report. I agree with every word of it.
ReplyDeleteI've written a report about what occurred in Kerr County (the location of the camps, camp sites, etc.) and it can be found here: https://www.mikesmithenterprisesblog.com/2025/07/we-didnt-know-this-flood-was-coming.html
Would you consider publicly advocating for a National Disaster Review Board? It would help save lives in the future.
Best wishes, Mike
A national disaster review board should be implemented to properly study and review these types of events so that we can learn what was done right, what was done wrong, what needs to be improved, and any new information that an event like this unearth that can be used to help prepare for future events.
DeleteStrike one was locating a summer camp in a valley prone to catastrophic river flooding, with campers not allowed to have smartphones, smart watches, or any other devices with screens. It's good to deprive children of these devices, but at the same time they would have likely saved lives in this event.
ReplyDeleteStrike two was a failure to invest in tornado sirens that could have been activated for floods, and would have at least awoken camp officials who could have then ascertained the situation. Sirens save lives. They have to be built, maintained, and tested to be effective.
Strike three was the river rising over 25 feet in the middle of the night. Without eyes on the river, nobody was able to say, "hey, maybe we should load up the buses and go climb that hill over there just to be sure."
This isn't anyone's fault. It isn't the result of climate change. It's the result of several factors in a river valley where training thunderstorms overhead are far from unknown.
This is why I've never been fully on board with the banning phones in schools idea. I agree that children should not be constantly glued to their devices. However, should a major emergency like this occur, they should be able to have their devices handy to get alerts and respond accordingly, under the supervision and guidance of trusted adults if at all possible.
DeleteI'm sure you are right on NWS competency and will give you the benefit of the doubt on climate change, but it's also true that the state of Texas has spend $11B on border security (personnel and wall building ) and only $700M on flood control projects.
ReplyDeleteTypical flawed logic. Your statement suggests there is a correlation between the two, but there isn't one. Imagine an electorate that thinks like this.
DeleteYes, if only the US had more stringent immigration laws, Texas would not have to spend $11B on boarder security! In fact, if we ended birthright citizenship (14th Amendment does not require it), amnesty, enforced hiring laws etc Texas might not have to spend anything on boarder security and could reallocate much of those funds to benefit its own citizens. Thanks for pointing that out Jay!
DeleteTexas needs to signifanctly increase spending on flood control projects to help prevent future disasters like this one. $700 million in a state as large as Texas simply doesn't cut it. The number needs to be well into the tens of billions. This isn't the only part of Texas that needs help with flood control. Houston alone needs billions of dollars worth of flood control improvements.
DeleteThey spend whatever they deem necessary for flood control. Who are we to say how much is the "correct" amount? We don't even live there.
DeleteRegardless, it has nothing whatsoever to do with border security spending. That's an issue fallacy and classic flawed reasoning.
"As heavy rain triggered flash flood warnings along the Guadalupe River in Texas Hill Country early Friday, the small unincorporated town of Comfort had something its neighbors upriver in Kerr County didn’t: wailing sirens urging residents to flee before the water could swallow them.....
ReplyDeleteno one died in Comfort, a town of about 2,300 people in Kendall County. " NBC
Another opportunity for Cliff to address bias and stupidity!!!
ReplyDeleteSwing And A Miss: Activists Blame Home Run Spike On Climate Change,
Activists say climate change is causing increased home runs in major league baseball games, but the so-called science ignores the the actual mechanics of how baseball works.
Climate Central published a report saying 26 of the 27 MLB cities have experienced increased temperatures during baseball season from 1970 to 2024. The result, it says, is a 1% increase in home runs between 2010 and 2019.
Hot temperatures can indeed impact how baseballs fly. Warm air is less dense and reduces drag on the ball, making it fly farther. But a change in the number of home runs has far more to do with the ball than with the climate.
In the 2010s, MLB experienced a 46% increase in home runs, higher than the 44% spike from the steroid era in the 1990s, Sports Illustrated reported. That included a record-breaking spike in 2019, breaking a previous record set in 2017.
An independent study, commissioned by the MLB, found that the increase was the result of changes to the ball. The 2019 ball had lower stitches that led to reduced drag, making the ball travel farther than previous years. That change accounted for 60% of the increase in home runs, with the other 40% coming from changes in hitting strategies.
“Just to give you an idea, the change in seam height of a fraction of the thickness of a sheet of paper like this would give you a measurable effect in the change in the drag,” said Alan Nathan, professor emeritus of physics at the University of Illinois and one of the researchers of the study.
The original climate change study admitted the ball stitching had a greater impact on ball performance than increased temperatures.
“Other factors such as changes in the height of the stitches on the baseball appear to have been more important in driving recent home run trends,” the study said.
But Climate Central dismissed the MLB’s study as “ongoing research” that was simply “testing various explanations” for the increase in home runs.
This year could be the second-hottest on record behind 2024, according to climate scientist Zeke Hausfather. If the climate change home run theory is accurate, the MLB should be seeing an increase of about 58 home runs this year.
But “home runs as a percentage of fly balls hit in March, April and May are at an eight-year low” across 28 of 30 MLB stadiums, The Athletic found.
Instead of seeing less drag due to hot temperatures, the 2025 season has seen more drag on the ball. Baseballs are coming up about four feet short compared to the previous nine seasons, according to a review by The Athletic of public MLB data.
The league has identified a possible, tiny change to the ball’s seam width or height but has not made any conclusions, The Athletic said.The increase in drag comes after MLB has altered the ball to reduce year-to-year swings in drag, the outlet reported.
“MLB bought the ball manufacturer, changed the bounciness of the inner core and installed humidors in every park,” the outlet said.
Drag became less varied in the four seasons after those changes, and the league has yet to identify the causes of this year’s increased drag.
Nathan told The Athletic that, correcting for air density, game-time temperature, and elevation, the ball traveled more than three feet farther in 2024. Still, he said there is more research to do.
“I would not take this to be the definitive word on the subject, as there is much more analysis one might do,” Nathan said.
Roger Pielke Jr. has a similar take on this tragedy posted on his substack blog [https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/the-texas-flash-floods] and in an article in The Free Press [https://www.thefp.com/p/the-texas-floods-were-an-avoidable-tragedy].
ReplyDeleteThe Wall Street Journal had a story about a family where the dad did get a warning about flash floods, but the message gave different areas than where they were cabin camping. (They were in an area where cell coverage was good. That's not the case evidently in much of the hill country). His daughter and parents were in a cabin closer to the river, and were swept away. He was in a cabin higher up the hill, and survived. It sounds as though there have been many warnings over the years that have not preceded major floods, so people tend to downplay any warnings.
ReplyDeleteI also read the camp director, a third generation owner of the camp, and his wife, perished while trying to save campers.
I think a huge question is what type of warning system can help: it needs to be hyper localized, needs to have gradations so people know when something is super serious vs something less serious, and needs to be able to work without cell phone service and work when power sources may already be disrupted.
You’ve given us a lot to think about here, Cliff. I accept that the local NWS did the best they possibly could have, with the most state-of-the-art science and technology that currently exists. My question is whether the current state of the art is acceptable to us. Should we settle for it, despite the occasional mass casualty event? Has the science progressed as far as it possibly can? If we don’t accept that, and if the local river valleys are as dangerous as everyone says they are, then the Texas congressional delegation should be lobbying for MORE meteorology and climate research. Instead, they’re lobbying for less. That’s the complaint that I have. Maybe you too.
ReplyDeleteJerry...you are missing the forest through the trees. You are missing the essential facts here. The forecasts were not the problem. It is the lack of response that was the problem. Meteorology and climate research will not fix this situation...cliff
DeleteThanks for responding, Cliff, and no hard feelings if you don't want to continue the discussion. For me I think it's more a matter of envisioning a bigger, better forest. In Texas, "flash flood emergency" notices were issued by NWS in timely fashion. However there are 30 to 90 such notices issued around the country every year. They are especially commonplace in flood- and hurricane-prone regions. Many people who saw the notices in Kerr County might have said: OK, we've seen this before, the water didn't reach our house last time, so let's lay low and see what happens. Perhaps with better science and better modeling methods, there can be better spatial and temporal precision, and fewer false alarms. And as the climate warms, perhaps people can be told with better precision when a particular storm will be different from anything they've seen before.
DeleteAgain, I'm not saying this is the only need, or even the most important one, but I think it can help. Especially with all your graduating students on the job! ;)