Life-Threatening Confusion With National Weather Service Flash Flood Warnings

What the National Weather Service Intends to Send in 

Flash Flood Warning Situations is Often Not

What the Public Receives!

Apologies may be appropriate by those critical of the decision-making in 

Texas during the pre-dawn hours of July 4 in light of this new information.

News4SanAntonio

"We didn't know this flood was coming." So said the chief executive of Kerr County, Texas, Rob Kelly. He went on to say, "We had no reason to believe that this was going to be anything like what's happened here, none whatsoever."    July 4, 2025

In dozens of media including the New York Times, Washington Post, etc. -- I won't list them all here -- the National Weather Service (NWS) has countered statements like Mr. Kelly's by asserting, correctly, it sent out a flash flood warning at 1:14am that called for "life-threatening flooding." 

Horribly, the "life-threatening" message did not reach segments of the public. 

What follows is the result of research during the past ten days pertaining to critical issues with the NWS's flash flood warning communications -- that exist on a national level. You may find what is written to be a bit complex and confusing. That is fine. I've been doing this 50 years and it is complex and confusing. Storm warnings should be easy to quickly read and phrased so immediate and correct lifesaving decisions can be made. That is hardly the case with current NWS flash flood, tornado and other warnings. 

It turns out that both the National Weather Service itself and the Public Broadcasting System, the latter running the "hub" that sends out WEA smartphone warning messages (details below), change critical wording in NWS flash flood warnings!

The NWS dilutes the wording of a portion of its own warnings to the public. In the July 4 flooding case, that it made the warning less urgent. 

And, PBS changes many flash flood warnings' wording to "cry wolf."

Below is the flash flood warning sent at 1:14am by the National Weather Service office in San Antonio for Kerr County, Texas, which is the location of Camp Mystic and many other similar camps as well as commercial RV and other campsites from which people were swept away.

The Tragic Omission Prior to the Flood

Here is the pertinent text of the 1:14am flash flood warning for Kerr County and the Guadalupe River:

Within the red box, the term "life threatening flash flooding" appears twice. But almost no one among the general public sees the warning in full text form. They receive it via: 

• Weather radio which reads the entire text, which takes forever. Just 3% of the population uses weather radios because they are so cumbersome and they go off in the middle of the night for non-life-threatening issues such as large hail. 
• Commercial radio / television -- which usually do not read / display past the expiration time ("4:15am"). 
• WEA smartphone alerts -- which cause your smartphone to scream a tone and present a condensed version of the warning on the smartphone screen -- in theory go to all phones in a threatened area. However, there are issues with WEA. More about that below. 
• Twitter/X presents every NWS warning. We discuss its shortcomings immediately below:

Because the NWS has control over what it presents on Twitter/X, let's examine what was presented to the public in the pre-dawn darkness of July 4. 

Compare this to the information in the red box, above. Notice something missing? The phrase "life-threatening flash flooding" does not appear in the National Weather Service's own Twitter/X warning -- the very warning the MSM and the NWS have been using to deflect criticism the warning was not sufficiently urgent to convey the catastrophic flooding then developing. More than 1,900 had viewed this warning by mid-morning on the 4th when I did the screen capture. 

Kerr Co. conditions rapidly deteriorated in the next 100 minutes. The NWS was aware of serious flooding by around 3am and Camp Mystic was being flooded soon after. 

In spite of being aware "a very dangerous flash flooding event is ongoing," the information reaching the public on some media channels had nowhere near the corresponding level of urgency. Here is the Twitter/X update from the NWS as of 3:35am. 

The first time a high urgency flash flood warning appears on Twitter/X, and likely elsewhere, was when the NWS finally used the term "flash flood emergency" in a statement (not a warning) that was issued at 4:03am -- about an hour after the flooding had begun at Camp Mystic and other locations on the Guadalupe's South Fork. Keep in mind that statements sometimes do not trigger the urgent distribution (e.g., automatic television "crawl" generators) as warnings:

Once you get through the garbage (the NWS desperately needs to simplify its storm warnings but that is another topic), we learn that as of 4:03am:

• Flooding was already occurring.
• THIS IS A FLASH FLOOD EMERGENCY and it is a PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS SITUATION. 

The Twitter/X message triggered by the above finally reflects the urgency. 

It says, "This is a life-threatening situation. Seek higher ground now" plus it uses the word "emergency." Tragically, this urgent warning was too late for many near the river.

I am confident we would all agree the text warning and the Twitter/X warning at 4:03am on July 4 conveyed the extreme level of threat on the Guadalupe River. But, since this was after the flooding began, it was too late. 

It is ironic the NWS talks about "the last mile" (getting the warning from the NWS to the user) when on Twitter/X and on some other channels, it was in control of the last mile. From the BBC:

Above is a screen capture from BBC News.
Agree that what the San Antonio NWS office intended to convey was good.
What reached the public was far less good. And, there was clearly 
confusion with social media messages that did not convey the seriousness
of the flooding that was to come. 

Clearly a reason for "not understanding the seriousness" was because the urgency wording was not included in the messages seen by residents of the area on Twitter/X and, perhaps, other sources between 1:14 until 4:03am in the Texas Hill County. 

Public Broadcasting System Changes the NWS's Words

This section has been updated as of 2:30pm Monday. 

Hypothetically: what if every flash flood warning -- even those for borderline situations -- said it was a "dangerous" and "life-threatening" situation? Every single one? And after, if the resulting flooding experienced by the user was minor or non-existent? Users might become numbed to flood warnings. If the "real thing" eventually presented itself, users might not be inclined to take it seriously. Social science research indicates false alarms matter. 

The above is not entirely hypothetical. While it is not one for "minor" flash flood situations, it is the case with the type of flood warnings we receive on our smartphones, PBS adds wording to every flash flood warning. Sometimes the word is "dangerous." Or, the phrase, "This is a dangerous and life-threatening situation." 

Received on my smartphone in a low-risk flood situation 
Thursday morning in Kansas City.

Brief summary of the WEA flood warning problem:

1. In 2003, the National Weather Service (NWS) significantly complicated its flash flood warning messaging. In addition to four types of flood "advisories," they went from one to three types of flash flood warnings. Almost none of the ordinary residents of the USA understand it.
2. In April 2012, the NWS plus the FCC, NOAA and DHS began WEA to provide storm warning services to smartphones. WEA is Wireless Emergency Alerts on smartphones.Tragically, the system is poorly designed and doesn't work as well as the private sector services that WEA was intended to supplant. Why exactly, the government felt it was necessary to "solve" a problem that was already solved by the private sector's free services was never explained (and I attended the meeting in Norman, OK where WEA was initially announced). 
3. For reasons unclear to me, the agencies above chose the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) to be the "hub" for WEA messages. The NWS sends them to PBS, which sometimes alters the messages, then sends them to the wireless cell services, which then transmits them to their customers. This sometimes results in unacceptable delays for flood and tornado warnings. 
4. Yes, PBS changes the wording of NWS flash flood warnings!*
5. The NWS has apparently not caught on to #4. 
6. The issues with #4 might have made a difference in the decision making in Texas during the pre-dawn hours of July 4. Because no one agency (like a National Disaster Review Board) is conducting a comprehensive study, we may never know. 
7. This is the type of issue that would be caught and quickly repaired by a National Disaster Review Board. It is only coincidence that I discovered it -- and I have no influence with any of the parties in #2.

*Please note: AccuWeather, MSN, and others, provide the correct full text of all NWS warnings via their app. 

For the record, the NWS flash flood warning that triggered the Kansas City "Emergency Alert" shown on my smartphone (displayed above) does not contain the word "dangerous" or the phrase "life-threatening."

In addition to the NWS's correct "softer" wording (no one died or was significantly injured in this situation), please note the four-minute lag from when the original warning was sent to when it was displayed on my smartphone. These delays, at times, are even longer. This is unacceptable for a service that bills itself "life saving."

I went to the PBS archive and I found the WEA smartphone 6:14am Kansas City flash flood warning. PBS added the "dangerous and life-threatening situation" wording (look under the blue line).  

The words "dangerous and life-threatening situation" were
 added by PBS. They did not come from the NWS. It appears
that they are added to every WEA flash flood warning.

So, PBS is inflating the urgency of flash flood warnings beyond what the National Weather Service intends.

The Bottom Line: Immediate Repair 

The bottom line is that the NWS undermines its own warnings of serious flooding on Twitter/X and that PBS exaggerates the threat of ordinary flash flood warnings. These are a major issues which are completely unacceptable and that demand immediate repair. 

It is now clear there was validity to Texas' officials complaints of inadequate warning. The rush to judgment in the hours after the flood, at least in some cases, was unfair and incorrect. 

It is difficult for me to write this because I am a meteorologist but it is important: Meteorologists' culture -- much like that of engineers and other scientists -- makes it difficult to see these issues from the point of view of a non-specialist. That is why a National Disaster Review Board with a broad range of expertise is absolutely essential!

If we hadn't coincidentally had the flash flooding in the Kansas City area last week, this issue would not have been uncovered.  A National Disaster Review Board likely would have uncovered it nearly immediately. 

The issues with the United States weather warning programs are widespread and increasing. I urge Congress to seriously look at these issues and create a National Disaster Review Board as described here. 

© 2025 Mike Smith Enterprises, LLC