"Things You Wouldn't Know If We Didn't Blog Intermittently."
Sorry, I can't accept that Amarillo, TX got more blizzard warnings than Barre, VT. Receiving a warning clearly has more to do with the area's capacity to respond to snow coverage than the actual amounts of snow it receives.
There's no doubt that Vermont has more snow, but remember that the NWS definition of a blizzard includes wind: "a storm with "considerable falling or blowing snow" and winds in excess of 35 mph and visibilities of less than 1/4 mile for at least 3 hours."I would believe the NWS data, because I've been to Amarillo. Not many trees to block the wind out there...
I've been present when the Tulsa airport was shut down by an inch and a half of snow, and when the Burlington airport was running normally just 12 hours after a 30-inch dump. There's quite a lot of room to interpret "considerable" in that definition!
I thought it was cute that Hawaii was even included at all
Something is wrong with the data. The entire "lake effect" area of Northern Ohio only had a few warnings in a decade? And warnings magically increase near large cities?
Well, as above, it's a combination of snow plus wind; most cities are in places where there is ample water to make snow, on the edge of land where warmer air would become colder, and would create such. And the last decade has been fairly light aside the last couple of years for lake effect snows. And lake effect snows don't require over 35mph winds.Most of the warnings are nowhere near cities, anyhow.