Tornado TracksThis feature layer, utilizing data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), displays tornadoes in the United States, Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands between 1950 and 2024. A tornado track shows the route of a tornado. Per NOAA, "A tornado is a narrow, violently rotating column of air that extends from a thunderstorm to the ground. Because wind is invisible, it is hard to see a tornado unless it forms a condensation funnel made up of water droplets, dust and debris. Tornadoes can be among the most violent phenomena of all atmospheric storms we experience. The most destructive tornadoes occur from supercells, which are rotating thunderstorms with a well-defined radar circulation called a mesocyclone. (Supercells can also produce damaging hail, severe non-tornadic winds, frequent lightning, and flash floods.)"EF-5 Tornado Track (May 3, 1999) near Oklahoma City, OklahomaData currency: December 30, 2024Data source: Storm Prediction CenterData modifications: Added field "Date_Calc"For more information: Severe Weather 101 - Tornadoes; NSSL Research: TornadoesSupport documentation: SPC Tornado, Hail, and Wind Database Format SpecificationFor feedback, please contact: ArcGIScomNationalMaps@esri.comNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationPer NOAA, its mission is "To understand and predict changes in climate, weather, ocean, and coasts, to share that knowledge and information with others, and to conserve and manage coastal and marine ecosystems and resources."

U.S. Storm Events Database

An In-depth Look at Historical Weather Events 1950-Present

By US Open Data Portal, data.gov [source]

About this dataset

The National Weather Service (NWS) provides Storm Data, detailing the statistics of personal injuries and damage estimates resulting from numerous types of severe weather events that have occurred in the United States. Compiling records as early as 1950 to the present, Storm Data allows users to select storms by county or other custom criteria, listing hurricanes, tornadoes, thunderstorms, hail, floods, drought conditions, lightning strikes, blustering winds and snowfall accumulations among many other natural phenomena of varying intensities. All this raw material is organized chronologically by state and used selectively to gain a better understanding of our nation's diverse weather experiences. A maximum 120 day delay may exist in providing up-to-date Storm Data due to periodic updates released by NWS so users are afforded greater accuracy with their research efforts regardless for what purpose it’s being sought – whether for analysis or education. Making an informed decision about safety measures or studying historic trends related to climate change demands reliable data from trusted sources such as NCDC Storm Events Database; empowering us all with unimpeded access towards achieving a higher understanding of our environment

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset contains detailed information about various types of storms that have occured in the United States since 1950, including hurricanes, tornadoes, hail storms, and floods. The data is organized by county and can be used to analyze weather patterns or conduct research on severe weather events in particular regions of the country. Here are some steps to help you get started using this dataset:

• Select a geographic area: You can start by selecting a specific state or county from where you would like to explore data on storm events. This will narrow down your search results so you can easily find more relevant data points.

• Filter for desired storm type(s): Next step is to filter for the particular type of storm event that interests you—such as hurricanes, snowstorms, lightning strikes —to further refine your search results based on specific criteria such as date range and damage estimates etc..

• Analyze the resulting data set: Lastly you’ll need to analyze any additional fields available post filtering process like fatalities numbers , damage estimates , cities affected . Run analyses that could result in trends on severity of storms over time or location-based distribution etc.. Alternatively create charts / graphs which could help visualize any insights drawn from your findings better

Research Ideas

• Looking into the correlation between severe weather events and climate change by tracking historical data points from 1950 onwards with the NCDC Storm Events Database.
• Identifying trends in storm damages, such as those caused by hail, high winds, and other weather phenomena that could lead to better preparedness strategies for businesses or individuals who are vulnerable to certain risks in their area.
• Analyzing which states or counties have experienced the most severe weather events over the years and use this information to inform better mitigation planning ahead of potential disasters in those areas

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

Unknown License - Please check the dataset description for more information.

Columns

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. If you use this dataset in your research, please credit US Open Data Portal, data.gov.

Storm Data is provided by the National Weather Service (NWS) and contain statistics on personal injuries and damage estimates. Storm Data covers the United States of America. The data began as early as 1950 through to the present, updated monthly with up to a 120 day delay possible. NCDC Storm Event database allows users to find various types of storms recorded by county, or use other selection criteria as desired. The data contain a chronological listing, by state, of hurricanes, tornadoes, thunderstorms, hail, floods, drought conditions, lightning, high winds, snow, temperature extremes and other weather phenomena.

We provide a dataset of tornadoes and waterspouts in Chile from 1554 to present based in chronicles, newspaper articles, social media, scientific literature and books. The database includes only those events that have been qualified as more than likely a tornado or waterspout based on a subjective qualification by the researchers. For each tornado we provide at least one geographical location point, the local and UTC hour (if known) and for most cases an estimation of the intensity based on the Enhanced Fujita damage scale.The following are the parameters contained in the database:N°: This is the entry number or identifier for each record in the file.Location: The name of the place where the weather event occurred.Latitude: The geographical latitude coordinate of the event's location.Longitude: The geographical longitude coordinate of the event's location.Date (Gregorian Calendar): The date when the event occurred, according to the Gregorian calendar.Hour (local): The local time when the event occurred.Hour (UTC): The time of the event in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).Sound: A binary indicator (usually 1 for 'Yes' and 0 for 'No') showing whether there was a notable sound associated with the event.Hail: A binary indicator showing whether hail was a feature of the weather event.Electric Storm: A binary indicator showing whether the event involved an electric storm.Damage: A binary indicator showing whether there was any damage resulting from the event.Tornado: A binary indicator showing whether a tornado was a part of the event.Waterspout: A binary indicator showing whether a waterspout was observed during the event.Register: This column refers to the existence of some witness account or visual material of a rotating column.Max. EF Rating: The maximum Enhanced Fujita Scale rating assigned to the tornado, indicating its intensity.Analyst: The name or initials of the person who analyzed or reported the event.Fatalities: The number of fatalities (deaths) caused by the event.Injured: The number of injuries reported due to the event.Link to Documents: References or links to documents where the event is described or recorded.Sources: The sources or references from where the information about the event is derived.Comments: Additional remarks or notes about the event, providing context or extra details.

The core breeding range of Swainson's warbler (Limnothlypis swainsonii) overlaps a zone of exceptionally high tornado frequency in southeastern North America. The importance of tornadoes in creating breeding habitat for this globally rare warbler and other disturbance-dependent species has been largely overlooked. This paper estimates tornado frequency (1950–2021) and forest disturbance in the 240 counties and parishes in which breeding was documented from 1988 to 2014. The frequency of destructive tornadoes (EF1-EF5) varied 6-fold across the breeding range with a peak in the Gulf Coast states. Counties from east Texas to Alabama experienced the lowest median return interval of 5.4 years per 1000 km2, resulting in approximately 2477 ha of forest damage per 1000 km2 per century, based on current forestland cover. Tornadoes were significantly less frequent north and east of the core breeding range, with return intervals increasing to 9.1 years per 1000 km2 for breeding counties on the Atlantic coastal plain, 10.2 years per 1000 km2 in the Ozark Mountains, and 32.3 years per 1000 km2 in the Appalachian Mountains. Breeding counties within 150 km of the coastline from east Texas to North Carolina are also subjected to the highest frequency of hurricanes in the Western Hemisphere. Hurricanes often cause massive forest damage but archived meteorological and forestry data are insufficient to estimate the aggregate extent of forest disturbance in breeding counties. Nevertheless, the combined impact of tornadoes and hurricanes in the pre-Anthropogenic era was likely sufficient to produce a dynamic mosaic of early-successional forest crucial for the breeding ecology of Swainson's warbler. To ensure the long-term survival of this rare warbler, it is advisable to develop habitat management plans that incorporate remote sensing data on early-successional forest generated by catastrophic storms as well as anthropogenic activities. This dataset comprises a catalog of 1717 song recordings of male Swainson's warblers (Limnothlypis swainsonii) on breeding territories in the southeastern United States. Songs were recorded from 1988 to 2014. The spreadsheet includes song recording field number (GRG), state, county or parish, date, latitude, and longitude. Breeding territories were located in 240 counties and parishes, which served as the geographic template for storm data analysis. Geographic coordinates were plotted in Fig 1 of "Catastrophic storms, forest disturbance, and the natural history of Swainson's warbler" (doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11099). Questions or inquiries regarding the dataset can be directed to the author.
Methods Geolocation of territorial Swainson's warblers. From 1988 to 2014, I surveyed breeding populations in 15 states as part of a comprehensive study of the warbler’s natural history. These surveys targeted Swainson’s warbler and were not incidental components of broader community censuses. Territorial males were documented in 240 counties and parishes documented by song recordings. Surveys were conducted during the breeding period, which began on 22 April in the Gulf Coast states and ended on 30 June in the Appalachian Mountains. I surveyed a wide spectrum of forestland and shrubland habitats, broadly classified as “forest land” by the USDA on public and private land and along waterways. Most breeding territories of this monogamous species were located using playback of songs, utilizing a protocol that was field-tested and fine-tuned in the late 1980s on the breeding and wintering ranges. Territorial males respond to playback by approaching the song source and delivering agitated “chip” notes, but usually refrain from singing until the playback source retreats or playback ends. Response to playback, mate-guarding, persistence during “playback-and-follow” trials, and counter-singing with other males were regarded as evidence of territoriality. Mist-netting or other handling was not required to document territoriality. The geographic coordinates of territories were recorded on site with Garmin™ GPS receivers (post-1998) or with Google Earth Pro from field notes and maps. All fieldwork was performed by the author.

A database of verified tornado occurrences across Canada has been created covering the 30-year period from 1980 to 2009. The tornado data have undergone a number of quality control checks and represent the most current knowledge of past tornado events over the period. However, updates may be made to the database as new or more accurate information becomes available. The data have been converted to a geo-referenced mapping file that can be viewed and manipulated using GIS software.

This dataset consists of Level III weather radar products collected from Next-Generation Radar (NEXRAD) stations located in the contiguous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, U.S. territories and at military base sites. NEXRAD is a network of 160 high-resolution Doppler weather radars operated by the NOAA National Weather Service (NWS), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the U.S. Air Force (USAF). Doppler radars detect atmospheric precipitation and winds, which allow scientists to track and anticipate weather events, such as rain, ice pellets, snow, hail, and tornadoes, as well as some non-weather objects like birds and insects. NEXRAD stations use the Weather Surveillance Radar - 1988, Doppler (WSR-88D) system. This is a 10 cm wavelength (S-Band) radar that operates at a frequency between 2,700 and 3,000 MHz. The radar system operates in two basic modes: a slow-scanning Clear Air Mode (Mode B) for analyzing air movements when there is little or no precipitation activity in the area, and a Precipitation Mode (Mode A) with a faster scan for tracking active weather. The two modes employ nine Volume Coverage Patterns (VCPs) to adequately sample the atmosphere based on weather conditions. A VCP is a series of 360 degree sweeps of the antenna at pre-determined elevation angles and pulse repetition frequencies completed in a specified period of time. The radar scan times 4.5, 5, 6 or 10 minutes depending on the selected VCP. During 2008, the WSR-88D radars were upgraded to produce increased spatial resolution data, called Super Resolution. The earlier Legacy Resolution data provides radar reflectivity at 1.0 degree azimuthal by 1 km range gate resolution to a range of 460 km, and Doppler velocity and spectrum width at 1.0 degree azimuthal by 250 m range gate resolution to a range of 230 km. The upgraded Super Resolution data provides radar reflectivity at 0.5 degree azimuthal by 250 m range gate resolution to a range of 460 km, and Doppler velocity and spectrum width at 0.5 degree azimuthal by 250 m range gate resolution to a range of 300 km. Super resolution makes a compromise of slightly decreased noise reduction for a large gain in resolution. In 2010, the deployment of the Dual Polarization (Dual Pol) capability to NEXRAD sites began with the first operational Dual Pol radar in May 2011. Dual Pol radar capability adds vertical polarization to the previous horizontal radar waves, in order to more accurately discern the return signal. This allows the radar to better distinguish between types of precipitation (e.g., rain, hail and snow), improves rainfall estimates, improves data retrieval in mountainous terrain, and aids in removal of non-weather artifacts. The NEXRAD products are divided in two data processing levels. The lower Level II data are base products at original resolution. Level II data are recorded at all NWS and most USAF and FAA WSR-88D sites. From the Level II quantities, computer processing generates numerous meteorological analysis Level III products. The Level III data consists of reduced resolution, low-bandwidth, base products as well as many derived, post-processed products. Level III products are recorded at most U.S. sites, though non-US sites do not have Level III products. There are over 40 Level III products available from the NCDC. General products for Level III include the base and composite reflectivity, storm relative velocity, vertical integrated liquid, echo tops and VAD wind profile. Precipitation products for Level III include estimated ground accumulated rainfall amounts for one and three hour periods, storm totals, and digital arrays. Estimates are based on reflectivity to rainfall rate (Z-R) relationships. Overlay products for Level III are alphanumeric data that give detailed information on certain parameters for an identified storm cell. These include storm structure, hail index, mesocyclone identification, tornadic vortex signature, and storm tracking information. Radar messages for Level III are sent by the radar site to users in order to know more about the radar status and special product data. NEXRAD data are provided to the NOAA National Climatic Data Center for archiving and dissemination to users. Data coverage varies by station and ranges from May 1992 to 1 day from present. Most stations began observing in the mid-1990s, and most period of records are continuous.

OverviewThe multiple hazard index for the United States Counties was designed to map natural hazard relating to exposure to multiple natural disasters. The index was created to provide communities and public health officials with an overview of the risks that are prominent in their county, and to facilitate the comparison of hazard level between counties. Most existing hazard maps focus on a single disaster type. By creating a measure that aggregates the hazard from individual disasters, the increased hazard that results from exposure to multiple natural disasters can be better understood. The multiple hazard index represents the aggregate of hazard from eleven individual disasters. Layers displaying the hazard from each individual disaster are also included.

The hazard index is displayed visually as a choropleth map, with the color blue representing areas with less hazard and red representing areas with higher hazard. Users can click on each county to view its hazard index value, and the level of hazard for each individual disaster. Layers describing the relative level of hazard from each individual disaster are also available as choropleth maps with red areas representing high, orange representing medium, and yellow representing low levels of hazard.Methodology and Data CitationsMultiple Hazard Index

The multiple hazard index was created by coding the individual hazard classifications and summing the coded values for each United States County. Each individual hazard is weighted equally in the multiple hazard index. Alaska and Hawaii were excluded from analysis because one third of individual hazard datasets only describe the coterminous United States.

Avalanche Hazard

University of South Carolina Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute. “Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database”. United States Counties. “Avalanches United States 2001-2009”. < http://hvri.geog.sc.edu/SHELDUS/

Downloaded 06/2016.

Classification

Avalanche hazard was classified by dividing counties based upon the number of avalanches they experienced over the nine year period in the dataset. Avalanche hazard was not normalized by total county area because it caused an over-emphasis on small counties, and because avalanches are a highly local hazard.

None = 0 AvalanchesLow = 1 AvalancheMedium = 2-5 AvalanchesHigh = 6-10 Avalanches

Earthquake Hazard

United States Geological Survey. “Earthquake Hazard Maps”. 1:2,000,000. “Peak Ground Acceleration 2% in 50 Years”. < http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/products/conterminous/

. Downloaded 07/2016.

Classification

Peak ground acceleration (% gravity) with a 2% likelihood in 50 years was averaged by United States County, and the earthquake hazard of counties was classified based upon this average.

Low = 0 - 14.25 % gravity peak ground accelerationMedium = 14.26 - 47.5 % gravity peak ground accelerationHigh = 47.5+ % gravity peak ground acceleration

Flood Hazard

United States Federal Emergency Management Administration. “National Flood Hazard Layer”. 1:10,000. “0.2 Percent Annual Flood Area”. < https://data.femadata.com/FIMA/Risk_MAP/NFHL/

. Downloaded 07/2016.

Classification

The National Flood Hazard Layer 0.2 Percent Annual Flood Area was spatially intersected with the United States Counties layer, splitting flood areas by county and adding county information to flood areas. Flood area was aggregated by county, expressed as a fraction of the total county land area, and flood hazard was classified based upon percentage of land that is susceptible to flooding. National Flood Hazard Layer does not cover the entire United States; coverage is focused on populated areas. Areas not included in National Flood Hazard Layer were assigned flood risk of Low in order to include these areas in further analysis.

Low = 0-.001% area susceptibleMedium = .00101 % - .005 % area susceptibleHigh = .00501+ % area susceptible

Heat Wave Hazard

United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention. “National Climate Assessment”. Contiguous United States Counties. “Extreme Heat Events: Heat Wave Days in May - September for years 1981-2010”. Downloaded 06/2016.

Classification

Heat wave was classified by dividing counties based upon the number of heat wave days they experienced over the 30 year time period described in the dataset.

Low = 126 - 171 Heat wave DaysMedium = 172 – 187 Heat wave DaysHigh = 188 – 255 Heat wave Days

Hurricane Hazard

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Coastal Services Center. “Historical North Atlantic Tropical Cyclone Tracks, 1851-2004”. 1: 2,000,000. < https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/historical-north-atlantic-tropical-cyclone-tracks-1851-2004-direct-download

. Downloaded 06/2016.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Coastal Services Center. “Historical North Pacific Tropical Cyclone Tracks, 1851-2004”. 1: 2,000,000. < https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/historical-north-atlantic-tropical-cyclone-tracks-1851-2004-direct-download

. Downloaded 06/2016.

Classification

Atlantic and Pacific datasets were merged. Tropical storm and disturbance tracks were filtered out leaving hurricane tracks. Each hurricane track was assigned the value of the category number that describes that event. Weighting each event by intensity ensures that areas with higher intensity events are characterized as being more hazardous. Values describing each hurricane event were aggregated by United States County, normalized by total county area, and the hurricane hazard of counties was classified based upon the normalized value.

Landslide Hazard

United States Geological Survey. “Landslide Overview Map of the United States”. 1:4,000,000. “Landslide Incidence and Susceptibility in the Conterminous United States”. < https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/landslide-incidence-and-susceptibility-in-the-conterminous-united-states-direct-download

. Downloaded 07/2016.

Classification

The classifications of High, Moderate, and Low landslide susceptibility and incidence from the study were numerically coded, the average value was computed for each county, and the landslide hazard was classified based upon the average value.

Long-Term Drought Hazard

United States Drought Monitor, Drought Mitigation Center, United States Department of Agriculture, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “Drought Monitor Summary Map”. “Long-Term Drought Impact”. < http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/MapsAndData/GISData.aspx >. Downloaded 06/2016.

Classification

Short-term drought areas were filtered from the data; leaving only long-term drought areas. United States Counties were assigned the average U.S. Drought Monitor Classification Scheme Drought Severity Classification value that characterizes the county area. County long-term drought hazard was classified based upon average Drought Severity Classification value.

Low = 1 – 1.75 average Drought Severity Classification valueMedium = 1.76 -3.0 average Drought Severity Classification valueHigh = 3.0+ average Drought Severity Classification value

Snowfall Hazard

United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “1981-2010 U.S. Climate Normals”. 1: 2,000,000. “Annual Snow Normal”. < http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/normals/1981-2010/products/precipitation/

. Downloaded 08/2016.

Classification

Average yearly snowfall was joined with point location of weather measurement stations, and stations without valid snowfall measurements were filtered out (leaving 6233 stations). Snowfall was interpolated using least squared distance interpolation to create a .05 degree raster describing an estimate of yearly snowfall for the United States. The average yearly snowfall raster was aggregated by county to yield the average yearly snowfall per United States County. The snowfall risk of counties was classified by average snowfall.

None = 0 inchesLow = .01- 10 inchesMedium = 10.01- 50 inchesHigh = 50.01+ inches

Tornado Hazard

United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Storm Prediction Center. “Severe Thunderstorm Database and Storm Data Publication”. 1: 2,000,000. “United States Tornado Touchdown Points 1950-2004”. < https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/united-states-tornado-touchdown-points-1950-2004-direct-download

. Downloaded 07/2016.

Classification

Each tornado touchdown point was assigned the value of the Fujita Scale that describes that event. Weighting each event by intensity ensures that areas with higher intensity events are characterized as more hazardous. Values describing each tornado event were aggregated by United States County, normalized by total county area, and the tornado hazard of counties was classified based upon the normalized value.

Volcano Hazard

Smithsonian Institution National Volcanism Program. “Volcanoes of the World”. “Holocene Volcanoes”. < http://volcano.si.edu/search_volcano.cfm

. Downloaded 07/2016.

Classification

Volcano coordinate locations from spreadsheet were mapped and aggregated by United States County. Volcano count was normalized by county area, and the volcano hazard of counties was classified based upon the number of volcanoes present per unit area.

None = 0 volcanoes/100 kilometersLow = 0.000915 - 0.007611 volcanoes / 100 kilometersMedium = 0.007612 - 0.018376 volcanoes / 100 kilometersHigh = 0.018377- 0.150538 volcanoes / 100 kilometers

Wildfire Hazard

United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Fire, Fuel, and Smoke Science Program. “Classified 2014 Wildfire Hazard Potential”. 270 meters. < http://www.firelab.org/document/classified-2014-whp-gis-data-and-maps

. Downloaded 06/2016.

Classification

The classifications of Very High, High, Moderate, Low, Very Low, and Non-Burnable/Water wildfire hazard from the study were numerically coded, the average value was computed for each county, and the wildfire hazard was classified based upon the average value.