On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 11:23:13 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...
I know that aspects of this have been posted previously, but I thought
I would provide an update I saw in today's newspapers and a release by
the Associated Press.

According to several articles in the news, "Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa.,
the U.S. Senate's third-ranking Republican, stirred up a growing storm
with a bill introduced on April 14 that would restrict the availability
of weather information provided now by the National Weather Service for
free to the general public. Among the products removed from public
access would be weather data and radar through the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's Web sites. Though Santorum claims the NWS
would compete unfairly with such commercial sites as AccuWeather and
the Weather Channel, both for-profit services use basic data provided
by the NWS as well as other information from other sources and
repackage it for target markets."

According to a release by the Associated Press, "Two days before Sen.
Rick Santorum introduced a bill that critics say would restrict the
National Weather Service, his political action committee received a
$2,000 donation from the chief executive of AccuWeather Inc., a leading
provider of weather data."

If you use NOAA weather information to plan sailing events, you might
want to contact the senators from your state.

If you use NOAA weather information to plan *any* day out on the water, then
you know what it's like to be frustrated by inaccurate forecasting. NOAA
sucks.

Just a tad of hyperbole there me thinks. Up around here, they are
pretty good. And if you are used to an area, you know damn well when
the wind is from the SW 10-15 you'd best stay the hell out of Fisher's
Island Sound. :)

But that wasn't the point of the discussion - the use of publicly paid
for data to be used exclusively by private interests and all the
attendant complications and implications for the future was the
discussion.

Later,

Tom