Discussion About Changing the Start of the Atlantic Hurricane Season to May (15th)

[CyclonicFury]

It is interesting how, despite the early activity in weaker short lived storms, the prevalence of early-season hurricanes seems to have not changed. No May hurricanes have formed since 1970, and only 3 June hurricanes have formed since 1995.

This is often used as an argument in opposition to naming these short-lived, pre-season (sub-)tropical storms, given that doing so skews the historical database.

I personally think every tropical cyclone should be classified. If it meets the criteria it meets the criteria...regardless of time of year or whether it is a threat to land.

[CrazyC83]

Or maybe January 1 as the start of hurricane season?

[CyclonicFury]

Or maybe January 1 as the start of hurricane season?

I don't think this would make sense. A year round season would likely mean people take less time to prepare for the season without an official start date. Also, TCG in January-April is extremely rare, and the few storms that do form in these months usually do not affect areas with major populations. The Atlantic isn't like the WPAC which occasionally can produce a monster storm in February-April. I think a May 15 start makes the most sense, no earlier.

[cycloneye]

World Meteorological Organization Hurricane Committee Meeting is 25-28 APR April 2022.

[HurricaneEnzo]

It is interesting how, despite the early activity in weaker short lived storms, the prevalence of early-season hurricanes seems to have not changed. No May hurricanes have formed since 1970, and only 3 June hurricanes have formed since 1995.

This is often used as an argument in opposition to naming these short-lived, pre-season (sub-)tropical storms, given that doing so skews the historical database.

I personally think every tropical cyclone should be classified. If it meets the criteria it meets the criteria...regardless of time of year or whether it is a threat to land.

This. It skews the data if you DON'T name them. If you have a set of criterion for such a thing and don't use it what is the point? Longevity and impact aren't part of the criteria.

[ncforecaster89]

I agree that if a system meets the clearly defined criterion for TC formation, it should be designated as such. That said, the NHC has definitively been more liberal in such classification during the new millennium than they were in the preceding century.

Personally, I see no need to amend the current June 1 start date for the NATL hurricane season. There has been, and will continue to be, TC development outside of the “official” six month hurricane season (and during every single month of the year)...so it’s perfectly fine as it is.

As far as hurricanes are concerned, there has been absolutely no discernible difference in the average date of the first TC to achieve hurricane intensity...during the past five decades.

The median date of the first hurricane of the season:

1971-1980: 7/29
1981-1990: 8/04
1991-2000: 8/03
2001-2010: 8/04
2011-2020: 7/31

[HurricaneEnzo]

I agree that if a system meets the clearly defined criterion for TC formation, it should be designated as such. That said, the NHC has definitively been more liberal in such classification during the new millennium than they were in the preceding century.

Personally, I see no need to amend the current June 1 start date for the NATL hurricane season. There has been, and will continue to be, TC development outside of the “official” six month hurricane season (and during every single month of the year)...so it’s perfectly fine as it is.

As far as hurricanes are concerned, there has been absolutely no discernible difference in the average date of the first TC to achieve hurricane intensity...during the past five decades.

The median date of the first hurricane of the season:

1971-1980: 7/29
1981-1990: 8/04
1991-2000: 8/03
2001-2010: 8/04
2011-2020: 7/31

I agree there can be development any month of the year but it has become commonplace in May. It is a much more rare event in any other 'off-season' month. I feel like it should be May personally but in the grand scheme of things probably doesn't make much of a difference either way.

[wxman57]

The season typically starts earlier now because of different naming criteria and better detection of short-lived storms without recon. The average date of the first hurricane has slipped a little later since 1950 and now lies near the end of July. There have been only 3 hurricanes that formed prior to June 1st since 1950, and one of those was that ET storm that formed in January of 2016 by the Azores that was then briefly classified as a hurricane. Changing the "official" start date of the season would only mean that the NHC would begin issuing tropical outlooks on that date, so that they wouldn't have to issue special outlooks for a pre-season subtropical storm (that was their main goal). Hurricanes, though, are not forming earlier than 70 years ago. Here's a graphic:

[captainbarbossa19]

I agree that if a system meets the clearly defined criterion for TC formation, it should be designated as such. That said, the NHC has definitively been more liberal in such classification during the new millennium than they were in the preceding century.

Personally, I see no need to amend the current June 1 start date for the NATL hurricane season. There has been, and will continue to be, TC development outside of the “official” six month hurricane season (and during every single month of the year)...so it’s perfectly fine as it is.

As far as hurricanes are concerned, there has been absolutely no discernible difference in the average date of the first TC to achieve hurricane intensity...during the past five decades.

The median date of the first hurricane of the season:

1971-1980: 7/29
1981-1990: 8/04
1991-2000: 8/03
2001-2010: 8/04
2011-2020: 7/31

I agree there can be development any month of the year but it has become commonplace in May. It is a much more rare event in any other 'off-season' month. I feel like it should be May personally but in the grand scheme of things probably doesn't make much of a difference either way.

A large reason why it is commonplace is because the NHC started to name subtropical systems in 2002. Think about how many storms named in May since then were subtropical.

[Audrey2Katrina]

Isn't it called "Hurricane" season? Not TC season.... "Hurricane" season. We do need to consider that had they used these same criteria, including naming subtropicals and with much better data, there may have been a far greater number of pre-June 1st systems in decades past. Since Hurricanes have NOT shown any strong inclination to start before Jun 1, I see no reason to move "Hurricane" season to include a month that has seen, how many? 3 in the past 50 years?

[HurricaneEnzo]

Isn't it called "Hurricane" season? Not TC season.... "Hurricane" season. We do need to consider that had they used these same criteria, including naming subtropicals and with much better data, there may have been a far greater number of pre-June 1st systems in decades past. Since Hurricanes have NOT shown any strong inclination to start before Jun 1, I see no reason to move "Hurricane" season to include a month that has seen, how many? 3 in the past 50 years?

I mean yeah if you want to play semantics. It's called Hurricane season but is clearly used to delineate the time of the year where tropical cyclone activity (not limited to Hurricanes) is most prevalent.
"The National Hurricane Center selected the June 1 to Nov. 30 period for the Atlantic hurricane season because it encompasses more than 97% of tropical cyclones."

[Audrey2Katrina]

Isn't it called "Hurricane" season? Not TC season.... "Hurricane" season. We do need to consider that had they used these same criteria, including naming subtropicals and with much better data, there may have been a far greater number of pre-June 1st systems in decades past. Since Hurricanes have NOT shown any strong inclination to start before Jun 1, I see no reason to move "Hurricane" season to include a month that has seen, how many? 3 in the past 50 years?

I mean yeah if you want to play semantics. It's called Hurricane season but is clearly used to delineate the time of the year where tropical cyclone activity (not limited to Hurricanes) is most prevalent.
"The National Hurricane Center selected the June 1 to Nov. 30 period for the Atlantic hurricane season because it encompasses more than 97% of tropical cyclones."

Fine, and in 2002 they started including things that were NOT included in years prior to that. if 97% of all cyclonic activity still occurs from June 1 to Nov. 30 (Using say from 1980 to present) then it would seem the current season of June 1 to Nov 30 is quite adequate.

A2K

[CrazyC83]

Or maybe January 1 as the start of hurricane season?

I don't think this would make sense. A year round season would likely mean people take less time to prepare for the season without an official start date. Also, TCG in January-April is extremely rare, and the few storms that do form in these months usually do not affect areas with major populations. The Atlantic isn't like the WPAC which occasionally can produce a monster storm in February-April. I think a May 15 start makes the most sense, no earlier.

You're right. Most of the "off-season" storms were in May or December (usually the first half of that month). May 15 to November 30 is most logical, with May 1 to December 15 perhaps the furthest ranging option.

[captainbarbossa19]

Wow. This topic seems to be about as controversial in meteorology as the time change among the general public.

[AnnularCane]

This thread is older than I thought! I was thinking it was pretty recent, but apparently it was started two years ago.

I think I've also mellowed somewhat since my original post in this thread. I suppose if they feel it's a good idea, go ahead. Just as long as they make the decision well ahead of when they plan to implement it. I mean, I might need a little time to get used to the idea.

[AlphaToOmega]

I would keep the hurricane season from June 1 to November 30. No major hurricane in the Atlantic has formed outside that window, and major hurricanes are usually the storms with the greatest impacts. If a major hurricane formed outside that window, I would be open to a date change.

[Yellow Evan]

I would keep the hurricane season from June 1 to November 30. No major hurricane in the Atlantic has formed outside that window, and major hurricanes are usually the storms with the greatest impacts. If a major hurricane formed outside that window, I would be open to a date change.

Considering the greatest threat from tropical cyclones is inland flooding, I’d be careful with that attitude.

[Category5Kaiju]

I would keep the hurricane season from June 1 to November 30. No major hurricane in the Atlantic has formed outside that window, and major hurricanes are usually the storms with the greatest impacts. If a major hurricane formed outside that window, I would be open to a date change.

Actually, I would like to throw a caveat into that (no offense of course ). You can still have impactful and deadly TSs, examples being Allision, Erika, Alberto 2018, Imelda 2019, and Claudette 2021. Now of course major hurricanes do carry an exponentially higher magnitude of energy and are capable of more severe destruction more readily, but the idea that you can still get land-impacting TSs in May that can cause hazardous conditions for lives and property may need to be considered. Also, I know there's this argument that hurricanes are very rare in May and therefore the May 15 start date would make no sense, but then again, if it was only hurricanes that mattered, then why do we name TSs in a given "(insert year) Atlantic Hurricane Season"? Hurricanes and TSs are both tropical entities that can very well threaten lives and property, that's why.

[Hammy]

I think it's two things. First, the naming of Sub-Tropical Cyclones and second, more up to the minute satellite and data analysis then we had even 15-20 years ago.

If we never named Sub-Tropical storms, there is also a chance they would have not "turned tropical" and if they had, it would have been unnamed and after the fact. 20 years ago, Hurricane "Florence" last year would have likely been "Hurricane Chris" and Michael would have likely been "Helene" or "Isaac". No way we would have had as many storms named. Alberto, Debby, Ernesto, and Joyce all began as sub-tropical storms, and I'm skeptical if any would have been named even after turning tropical with the old naming procedures. Perhaps only Leslie and Oscar.

If so, we would have had the following in 2018:

Hurricane Alberto (Beryl)
Hurricane Beryl (Chris)
Hurricane Chris (Florence)
Tropical Storm Debby (Gordon)
Hurricane Ernesto (Helene)
Hurricane Florence (Isaac)
Tropical Storm Gordon (Kirk)
Hurricane Helene (Leslie)
Hurricane Isaac (Michael)
Tropical Storm Joyce (Nadine)
Hurricane Kirk (Oscar)

We would have had a season of 11 storms, 8 hurricanes, 2 major hurricanes. Hurricanes Chris and Isaac would have been what Florence and Michael were. This could also explain why we used to have many "retired storms" that were earlier in the name lists. Instead of Allen, Alicia and Andrew, we end up with Matthew, Maria and Michael.

Also, for a season like 2016, I'm skeptical if any storm would have been named until Hurricane Earl in late July prior to the 2000s. Hurricane Alex was a sub-tropical system that became a hurricane in January. Even as recently as the 90s, this would likely have never attained a name. "Bonnie" was so poorly organized I'm skeptical if it would have gone beyond depression status back in the day. Same for Colin and Danielle. That would have made Hurricane Earl christened Hurricane "Alex". Hermine would have been Hurricane "Danielle", and Matthew, Nicole and Otto would have been "Ian, Julia and Karl."

I think much of all of this has to do with naming procedures and better analysis and tools for tracking.

There does seem to be a tangible increase in May storms in general, rather than a change in classification--I've been compiling an archive of storms I feel were missed even counting those (and I'm more liberal with what I feel qualifies for the subtropical definition), May storms were few and far between even during that time.

I don't feel that a lot of storms would've gone unclassified had we not named subtropical storms, but rather, they would've simply been designated tropical and gone straight to tropical storm. Alberto in 2018 is a very good example of this, there were so many June tropical storms as late as the 2000s that were arguably subtropical but were designated as tropical. It seems they are simply less hesitant to use the term now that there's more widely available information which I think leads to less public confusion, especially when you consider there were a fair number of storms in the 90s and even early 2000s that had subtropical portions added to the BT post-season, but were treated as non-tropical systems (and not carried operationally) during that portion.

However, I do feel this assessment is entirely accurate in a more general sense (applying it outside of May) prior to the middle to late 80s, as 1982-83 alone had multiple storms that appear they would be designated tropical or subtropical storms today

[wwizard]

I don’t see the need to change anything, then again, I really don’t see the need to call it a hurricane season. We have the technology that if anything pops up it will get reported on. Whether it’s in a “season” or not really doesn’t make a difference.

In the summer months, the tropical activity is increased. Everybody knows that. And those storms get reported on just the same as those in May, December, or any other month.

The dates of the “season” are basically for public consumption. I think changing it would just add confusion. Leave it as is and report what’s out there whenever something spins up.