If Dick Hallgren were alive today…what would be his message?

Meteorologists are hardly celebrities. They’re not visible on the world stage in the same way as entertainers or political figures or the wealthy. Fact is, their work is often most successful when their accomplishments are least noticeable: a forecast of adverse flight conditions enabling the FAA to redirect air traffic; a forecast of coming severe weather that prompts the farmer to harvest a crop a day earlier; a prediction that a hurricane will intensify overnight that puts coastal emergency services on heightened alert; and so on.

For that reason, attempting to identify and rank meteorologists whose immediate past work has most influenced the weather services of today would be a challenge, even for those in the field.

But the name Richard Hallgren should be on a lot of top-ten lists. Repeating a bit of background: Dick’s career began in the 1950’s and spanned more than a half-century, including stints with the Air Force, IBM, NOAA, and the American Meteorological Society, and a continuing role at the World Meteorological Organization; he was actively mentoring service meteorologists and researchers worldwide through regular phone calls until a few weeks before his passing in late 2023. During his nine-year tenure as Director of the National Weather Service (1979-1988) he formulated and led substantial Agency modernization. He reinvented NWS outreach to and partnership with what is today’s vibrant meteorological private-sector. He increased America’s contributions and stature in provision and coordination of weather services globally. His work led to greater safety for all Americans – from farmers to the flying public to those facing immediate threats from floods and drought, winter storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, and more.

Our world today is weathering a season of another kind of tempest and hazard. Weather extremes are hitting once-resilient populations rendered vulnerable by recent years of pandemic, disease, poverty, war, terrorism, political turmoil, and civic polarization. Too many of these wounds and their accompanying weather vulnerabilities are self-inflicted. Armed conflicts rage across Europe, the Middle East, Asia, and Africa. Much of the fighting and global unrest is driven by a handful of leaders (not the majority) who care more for a peculiar, unfathomable idea of personal gain than the true needs of their people.

It’s common in time like this when recalling great figures from the past (or our parents or loved ones, for that matter) to think or say something along the lines of “it’s a good thing he or she didn’t live to see this day.”

That’s not the case with Dick. He was made of stern stuff; he wouldn’t be happy with present events or trends, but he wouldn’t cringe. He’d have wanted to be here, and in the action. He’d be vigorously articulating and promoting a raft of good ideas to make for a more peaceful, fair, prosperous, and safer world.

He’d be thinking broadly, but he’d also have strong views on matters closer to home: in particular, the forced retirements, indiscriminant firings, and hollowed-out staff levels of the National Weather Service today, and the implications for the American public.

How would he see things? What would be his message today? Well, here’s a guess – with a little presumption (but not much, because he was so clear and outspoken on a range of similar challenges throughout his life and career).

He would begin with thanks. He would offer praise and encouragement to every NWS employee, from Ken Graham and the leadership at the top to the shift forecasters and other staff at the local forecast offices. This praise would cover present employees but also those of the recent past. It would include those retired, those let go, not just those remaining. He’d salute their acumen and their energy and commitment to public service. He’d commend the service improvements they’d accomplished in recent years and the truly heroic effort they’re making in the face of budget cuts, organizational downsizing, etc. to maintain those high standards.

He would stress mission. He’d emphasize now, as he did in life, that the mission of NOAA and NWS is not simply to make forecasts. The mission is to protect life and public safety in the face of hazardous weather. And in the next breath he’d remind us all that Americans face the world’s greatest weather hazards: the same number of winter storms as Canada and Russia. The same number of hurricanes as tropical Pacific and Atlantic nations. Much more dangerous summer convective weather – including a virtual monopoly on the world’s tornadoes. He’d explain that it would always be tempting to save a bit here and there on the costs of any level of mere forecasting skill, but it would never be acceptable for any responsible administration to make budget-, personnel-, and facility cuts that would put American lives, incomes and property at risk.

He would put people first. As clear from the mission, that would start with the interests and needs of the American public in harm’s way. But it would extend to all people worldwide. Dick would note that weather knows no boundaries; therefore, to know what the weather will do next requires continuous observations and inputs from all corners of the globe. Because the work and costs are distributed worldwide, the benefits should be shared universally as well. Because the important weather impacts are human, he’d know that artificial intelligence and other technologies notwithstanding, it will always be vital to keep human beings in the weather services loop. And because that very human work matters, nations should do their best to maintain stable and functional meteorological work environments.

Accordingly, he would see weather warnings in the face of hazard as a public good. He would note that rich or poor, all live on a planet that does much of its business through extremes of heat and cold, flood and drought, storms and calm (the latter equally hazardous because of its implications for air quality). He would remind all parties that access to life-saving weather information is a basic human right.

He would stress public-private partnership. Just over one percent of American workers are civilian federal employees (a similar fraction are in the uniformed services). This figure is dwarfed by public-sector employees at the state and local level – perhaps 12% of the total workforce. The figures are similar to the worldwide demographics. The vast majority of people live and work in the private sector. That’s where particular weather-related vulnerabilities and opportunities lie. Partnerships are necessary to get weather information to the global public. But that dissemination is not itself the end. That accomplished, other partnerships are vital to then realize weather’s economic and recreational opportunities and to protect against weather risks.  And partnership is not accomplished by savaging or doing away with either the public- or private partners.

He would call for continuous innovation. That would extend beyond merely “doing things right,” to also “doing the right things.” He was always aware that weather is natural, but weather vulnerabilities are a human construct and therefore are constantly changing in response to social change and technological advance. He was always careful to describe the NWS modernization carried out during his tenure as “the Tenth Modernization.” Because he saw the vital importance of people (there’s that idea again!) he used the full title “NWS Modernization and Associated Restructuring,” before launching into a short speech about enabling and empowering the NWS workforce in the execution of its mission. The Modernization reduced the number of offices from some 300 to about 120, while at the same time better equipping the staff, and keeping them close to the local publics and partners they served.

He would stand for identifying and exploring options. Dick was not a member of the ready-fire-aim school. He would decry any break-things-and-see-what-happens approaches to weather services. He’d want to see options before settling on any particular plan or course of action. And he’d want to see multiple options, not just a coin toss to choose among two. He frequently said that the worst human mistake was the invention of coins that only had two sides.

He would be unable to resist telling us “I told you so.” An example, especially poignant in light of recent U.S. events: For decades, Dick railed against each of a multi-year series of small agency steps and actions that have separated NOAA’s weather and climate services, and using those two labels. He understood how different natural processes come into play at longer time scales. But he argued that nature made no sharp distinction or strict boundary line separating “weather” vs. “climate.” Instead, the atmosphere was resolutely variable from minute-to-minute to days to seasons to centuries, and across local and regional and global geographies. He thought we should respect that unity in the corresponding services and their delivery. He also was mildly offended whenever (and this was on a daily basis) different governmental forecasts and private-sector forecasts contradicted each other with regard to forecasts of temperatures, precipitation, and timing and location of events, outside their claimed error bars. He thought this led to public skepticism. He wanted more care in forecast uncertainties.

And being Dick, he’d look at this LOTRW blogpost and spend a half hour listing its omissions, misrepresentations, and other shortcomings, relieving the pain only slightly with an occasional grin. Where’s something on connection of research to services (and the need to fence and protect their budgets)? What about the dangers of content-free leadership? What about…? Such debriefs would usually be terminated only by a smartphone interruption from Australia or the like.

We miss you, Dick.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to If Dick Hallgren were alive today…what would be his message?

  1. Alexander MacDonald says:

    Amen, Bill. Well said.

  2. Julie Campbell says:

    Superb, as always.

  3. Helen Wood says:

    On point!!!

  4. Allan Eustis says:

    All true. Nice remembrance.
    Bill.

  5. Laura Furgione says:

    Both of you are GOATs! ❤️

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *