How Much Does Your Surf Report Rely on NOAA?
NOAA is nothing short of our lifeline on the water, but per last week's email directives, reportedly obtained by WIRED, from the Commander in Chief's cabinet for NOAA employees to 'PAUSE ALL INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENTS,' including correspondence with foreign nationals and participation in international commissions, you might wonder whether the Administration is on shaky ground. And that's to say nothing of infamous 'Sharpiegate' culprit Neil Jacobs' nomination to head the potentially soon-to-be-defunct NOAA.
Meanwhile, NOAA employees were also ordered by Acting Commerce Secretary Jeremy Pelter to give an engineer with no oceanic or scientific background to speak of—21-year-old former Twitter employee Nikhil Rajpal—from Elon Musk's unofficial Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) access to edit the Administration. Whether that's to scrub DEI or climate change language, which seems to be the M.O. of the initiative per the President and what appears so far to be his cabinet's playbook, Project 2025, is almost immaterial: It seems that a 21-year-old has been sent to target and gut weather and climate resources.There's probably not a whole lot you or I can do about any of this. With many of Project 2025's authors now holding senior administrative positions in the White House, it's hard to imagine that things aren't going about as proposed, in which case plans to privatize the weather are on the horizon.
Speculations around this increasingly real possibility abound, with NPR calling it 'a meteorological arms race.' Hyperbole aside, the federal government has been in the business of weather since 1870, and NOAA was drawn into existence by none other than President Richard Nixon a century later at a time when he was in direct contention with SURFER's founder John Severson, and, writ large, the surfing community itself.
Now, President Nixon couldn't have considered that NOAA might directly benefit surfers at the time of NOAA's inception, but there he was, throwing us all a bone. Of course, NOAA does far more than offer meteorological data and enable surf reports: From fisheries regulation and tsunami warning systems to marine rescues and plastic pollution and oil spill mitigation, the Administration has many arms. 'Everyone relies on NOAA, whether you realize it or not,' Ocean Conservancy VP of External Affairs Jeff Watters told Fast Company, putting forth the question, 'Is a [private] company going to invest in multimillion pieces of infrastructure to monitor and understand weather…?'
As for the here and now, it is merely my duty to ask: What for the sake of our collective yet selfish pursuit, dear reader and vested member of the surf community, are we to preempt? What kind of entity (or person) could replace NOAA, and what would our surf forecasts look like going forward? Could it produce the models and analysis therein with the same attention, diligence, detail, technology, and, dare we ask, science? Could you, or I, a lowly scribe, even manage to afford it? Time may tell.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Commentary: It's a bad time to rely on the social safety net
Whether Americans want it or not, President Trump and his fellow Republicans are making historic cuts to the nation's safety net programs. It's the biggest test in decades of whether the 'nanny state' really is bloated, as critics insist, or is too essential to get rid of. The experiment will inflict pain on millions. The huge tax bill Trump recently signed contains numerous provisions that will remake the economy by favoring certain industries and classes of workers over others, stimulating spending for a while — and adding at least $4 trillion to the national debt. The two political parties and their supporters will dicker for months over whether the tax cuts help ordinary workers or favor the wealthy too much. Read more: What is the US debt ceiling, and how does it impact you? There's been less focus on various ways the tax law and other actions by the Trump administration will dismantle social welfare, yet those changes could end up more consequential than the tax cuts. Federally funded healthcare and food aid are both set to undergo the biggest cuts in the history of those programs. The changes will come in spurts, and it won't always be apparent that federal policy is to blame. The end result, however, will be a sharp reversal of modern trends, with the nation's social safety net shrinking rather than expanding. The number of Americans lacking health insurance is set to rise by 16 million through 2034. Cuts to food aid will hit another 16 million or so. Some Americans, susceptible to both, will endure an unfortunate double whammy. While these are deliberate policy options chosen by Trump and his fellow Republicans, they'll hit Democratic, Republican, and Independent voters more or less the same. The biggest changes come from the tax law. To offset trillions in lost revenue from keeping tax rates low and enacting new tax cuts, Congress made major changes to Medicaid, the health program for the poor, that will ultimately result in lower coverage rates. The law makes it harder for adults to qualify for coverage, for instance, and to keep coverage once they qualify. The Congressional Budget Office estimates all these changes combined will reduce the number of people covered by Medicaid by 7.8 million by 2034. Other changes in the law will make it harder to qualify for coverage under the Affordable Care Act, at the same time the Trump administration is making its own administrative changes to the ACA and dialing back coverage even more. The Republican-controlled Congress is also likely to let a set of temporary healthcare subsidies expire this year, making ACA policies more expensive for some 4 million people, in some cases prohibitively so. All these changes combined would lower ACA coverage by 8.2 million, according to the CBO. That would add 16 million Americans to the uninsured rolls, raising the uninsured rate from a near-record low of 7.9% now to 9.2% in 2028. KFF forecasts that the uninsured rate would jump the most in Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas — which all have Republican governors. In Florida, as one example, nearly 1 million people are likely to lose coverage. Healthcare cuts in the tax-cut law will reduce government spending by about $1 trillion during the next 10 years. The reduction in food aid will be small by comparison, trimming $114 billion over a decade. But that will still have widespread effects. The Urban Institute estimates that around 5.3 million families will lose food assistance worth at least $25 per month. At about three people per family, that's 16 million mouths getting a little less. There's never been a cutback of that magnitude in food conservatives argue that welfare programs have gotten out of hand, making some cutbacks necessary. They've long lobbied for work requirements, tighter eligibility standards, and other measures to ensure that aid programs are not abused and are limited to those who need them most. Yet even some Republicans balked at the cuts Trump was pushing for in the tax bill. Two Republican senators voted against the bill because of Medicaid cuts. Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski voted for the bill, but only after negotiating special exemptions on some Medicaid cuts for her own state. One particular concern for some Republican legislators is the fate of rural hospitals reliant on Medicaid funds to keep their doors open. More rural hospitals have closed than opened during the last 10 years, and many remain unprofitable. The final tax bill included a $50 billion rural hospital fund to offset losses from Medicaid cutbacks. But that probably isn't enough, which means Congress may have to provide more money for these care centers or face voter wrath. Ordinary Americans will notice these changes piecemeal. Some will face higher premiums when they try to renew a policy under the ACA this year or next. In some cases, the cost could jump so much that coverage will become unaffordable. Medicaid enrollees will notice new paperwork requirements to prove they have a job or otherwise qualify. There will be more frequent check-ins and people who can't keep up with the red tape will lose coverage. Some rural hospitals will inevitably close, while others will cut back or eliminate services such as mental health or disability care. There will be more paperwork and tougher cutoff points to qualify for food aid, as well. Voters will have their say. In 2018, they revolted against a new Republican tax cut law by giving Democrats control of the House of Representatives in a 'blue wave' election. And that law included no major benefit cuts, just tax breaks voters thought favored the wealthy over everybody else. Are Americans more prepared for austerity now? There's no reason to think so. High inflation of the past few years has hammered purchasing power and affordability remains a top voter concern. If Republicans cutting the safety net know something the rest of us don't, maybe they should start explaining. Rick Newman is a senior columnist for Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Bluesky and X: @rickjnewman. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices.
Bloomberg
2 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Supreme Court Lets Trump Continue Education Department Purge
The US Supreme Court let President Donald Trump resume dismantling the Department of Education, lifting a lower court order that required the reinstatement of as many as 1,400 workers. Granting an emergency request from the administration over three dissents, the justices put on hold a federal district court ruling that said the Trump purge would leave the department unable to perform duties required under US law. The Supreme Court order will apply while the case continues on appeal.
Washington Post
3 hours ago
- Washington Post
Trump announces new Ukraine weapons plan, threatens tariffs on Russia
The Trump administration will send advanced weaponry to Ukraine, paid for by European countries, President Donald Trump said Monday as he also threatened 'secondary tariffs' against Russia. The announcements represented Trump's most significant moves to support Kyiv and came after he repeatedly expressed frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin's continued bombardment of Ukraine.
