15,000 Attend Juan de Fuca Festival
About 4,000 people bought tickets to the Festival, and roughly 11,000 additional people attended the street fair.
The Festival's Executive Director, Anna Manildi, said: "We had about the same amount of people come in the doors [as in 2009] but we had less people at the street fair," because of the "wet weather."
And this is where we come to the PDN's somewhat — without putting too fine a point on it — schizophrenic approach when it comes to reporting the local weather.
Port Angeles residents who constantly talk about all the rain we're getting — and then happen to glimpse at the weather section at the back page of Section C of the PDN — must be wondering when Rip Van Winkle is going to wake up, look out the window and go "Huh??? Oh! Uhh..."
The most blatant display of the PDN's schizophrenic weather reporting was 2 or 3 weeks ago. They had a front page photo of a sailboat in Port Angeles Harbor, and the caption said something like "after the rain finally stopped, so-and-so was finally able to sail his boat in the harbor yesterday afternoon."
Then, in case anyone happened to glimpse at that day's weather page after reading that caption, the report was "yesterday's rainfall for Port Angeles, 0.0 inches."
Hello?!?!?!?!? Dingdingdingdingdingding!!! Anybody home???
This ineptitude has been going on all year. And it isn't just the PDN's weather "service," AccuWeather. The Weather Channel (linked at the upper right corner of this blog) is just as "mysterious." They show Port Angeles' rainfall from the previous day, going back for up to two months. Except —not trying to insult anyone's intelligence here, but if the shoe fits — they keep revising the earlier rainfall counts. Revising??? How do you revise that? Maybe I'm missing something, but if a certain area got, say, .80 inches of rain on a given day, how does that measurement get "revised" downward to .07 inches a day or two later?
Does the Weather Channel (or AccuWeather) hire handicapped/cerebrally-challenged people to measure rainfall? Maybe this disadvantaged person goes back to the same rain gauge 2 or 3 days later and thinks "Huh? Oh, I wrote .8 inches, but now that I look closer, it's actually only .01 inches."
I mean, I'm not making accusations — I'm just wondering. Does anyone else think it's a little odd that Sequim has almost as much rain as Port Angeles this year (according to the PDN), and Port Townsend has more? Or just, well, every time it rains, like it's been doing a lot lately, the next day's PDN weather page will say Port Angeles got a "trace" of rain, or maybe .01 inches.
Is this just a case of incredible incompetence (reading a rain gauge is sooo complicated), or are the Port Angeles Powers That Be trying to attract new residents by horning in on Sequim's "rain shadow" reputation?
I'm not accusing anyone of anything; just asking. Anyone have answers or theories?
The Festival's Executive Director, Anna Manildi, said: "We had about the same amount of people come in the doors [as in 2009] but we had less people at the street fair," because of the "wet weather."
And this is where we come to the PDN's somewhat — without putting too fine a point on it — schizophrenic approach when it comes to reporting the local weather.
Port Angeles residents who constantly talk about all the rain we're getting — and then happen to glimpse at the weather section at the back page of Section C of the PDN — must be wondering when Rip Van Winkle is going to wake up, look out the window and go "Huh??? Oh! Uhh..."
The most blatant display of the PDN's schizophrenic weather reporting was 2 or 3 weeks ago. They had a front page photo of a sailboat in Port Angeles Harbor, and the caption said something like "after the rain finally stopped, so-and-so was finally able to sail his boat in the harbor yesterday afternoon."
Then, in case anyone happened to glimpse at that day's weather page after reading that caption, the report was "yesterday's rainfall for Port Angeles, 0.0 inches."
Hello?!?!?!?!? Dingdingdingdingdingding!!! Anybody home???
This ineptitude has been going on all year. And it isn't just the PDN's weather "service," AccuWeather. The Weather Channel (linked at the upper right corner of this blog) is just as "mysterious." They show Port Angeles' rainfall from the previous day, going back for up to two months. Except —not trying to insult anyone's intelligence here, but if the shoe fits — they keep revising the earlier rainfall counts. Revising??? How do you revise that? Maybe I'm missing something, but if a certain area got, say, .80 inches of rain on a given day, how does that measurement get "revised" downward to .07 inches a day or two later?
Does the Weather Channel (or AccuWeather) hire handicapped/cerebrally-challenged people to measure rainfall? Maybe this disadvantaged person goes back to the same rain gauge 2 or 3 days later and thinks "Huh? Oh, I wrote .8 inches, but now that I look closer, it's actually only .01 inches."
I mean, I'm not making accusations — I'm just wondering. Does anyone else think it's a little odd that Sequim has almost as much rain as Port Angeles this year (according to the PDN), and Port Townsend has more? Or just, well, every time it rains, like it's been doing a lot lately, the next day's PDN weather page will say Port Angeles got a "trace" of rain, or maybe .01 inches.
Is this just a case of incredible incompetence (reading a rain gauge is sooo complicated), or are the Port Angeles Powers That Be trying to attract new residents by horning in on Sequim's "rain shadow" reputation?
I'm not accusing anyone of anything; just asking. Anyone have answers or theories?
posted by Tom Harper at 1:25 AM
20 comments
