Real-time Verification of CPC Long-Lead Forecasts Using Heidke Skill 
				Scores from Station Data

                	      All Stations    Non-EC Only     % Coverage 

	Season      T		  6.8		 34.8		 19.7 
	SON 05      P		 -3.4		-20.0		 17.1

	Month (LL)  T		 12.8		100.0		 12.8 
	NOV 05      P		  0.0		-----		  0.0

	Updated Mo. T		 36.8		 87.8		 41.0 
	NOV 05      P		  0.0		  0.0		  5.1 

	Change      T		+24.0		-12.2		+28.2 
	(U-LL Mo.)  P		  0.0		-----		 +5.1

		Brief Discussion of Forecasts and Verification
		----------------------------------------------
		
	The temperature forecast for SON 2005 was the fifth consecutive seasonal
	forecast to have positive skill. Heidke skill scores were 6.8 for all
	stations and 34.8 for non-EC only.  Both scores were not as high as those
	for the two previous seasons, as smaller areas were forecast and with
	somewhat less skill as the seasons progress into a time of year with
	lower a priori skill.   Although the area of above normal temperatures
	forecast for the Pacific Northwest coast was all wrong, the other two
	areas of Above normal forecast had positive skill sufficient to give a
	net modestly good score for the CONUS as a whole. In fact, every station
	in the interior Southwest that was predicted to be above normal verified
	as correct.  The tool relied on most strongly was trend, as reflected in
	the OCN tool, which along with CCA gave strong indications for the warmth
	in the Southwest.  The forecast of relative warmth in the Pacific
	Northwest was based primarily on the CAS and SMLR tools that incorporate
	soil moisture. The Pacific Northwest had been in the midst of a serious
	long-term drought for the past several years, but a more active regime
	with typical fall onset of rains developed this year, and cooler air from
	the Gulf of Alaska often came in behind the storms.  Various climate
	models gave mixed forecasts, with some indicating warmth and some cooler
	than normal conditions, so as a whole they were not weighted very heavily
	in the forecast. A new tool that is a consensus of several of the better
	individual temperature tools was also used, but it was not weighted
	heavily due to lack of a track record.

	A prediction of the above normal category that was made for the southern
	coastal areas of Alaska, which was based primarily an extensive areas of
	above normal SST that developed under persistent anomalous ridging that
	had been in place most of the summer, had only modest success, with an
	all-station score of 2.3 and a non-EC score or 4.6 with a coverage of
	50.0%.  Both September and October were well above normal, but at the end
	of October the circulation regime changed and a very cold November
	knocked many stations down into the near normal category even with the
	first two months of the fall being well above normal.
	
	Only one very small area of above median precipitation was forecast over
	Florida and the South Atlantic Coast, on the basis of long-term trends
	and the expectation that the active hurricane season would remain that
	way into the fall. Even though the hurricane season did remain active
	beyond expectations with a record number of named storms by the end of
	November, including two major systems hitting the U.S. mainland in the
	fall, it was dry most of the rest of the time and only one station in
	Florida reported above median precipitation for the fall as a whole.  The
	area predicted to have below median precipitation in the interior Pacific
	Northwest and northern and central Great Basin was based primarily on
	indications from the OCN tool that reflects long-term trends, with some
	support from the CAS tool.  Unfortunately less than a third of the
	stations predicted to be dry in this area  were correct, resulting in a
	negative overall score on the below median and the precipitation forecast
	as a whole.  Model forecasts of precipitation were also in some
	disagreement and were not weighted heavily in the final forecast.  
	Alaska was given a forecast of EC everywhere for precipitation.
	
	The forecast for November 2005 made at approximately 0.5-month lead on
	Oct.20 was calling for above normal temperatures over a medium-sized area
	extending east-northeastward from most of New Mexico and the northern
	half of Texas to Missouri and Arkansas, on the basis of primarily CCA,
	with weak support from OCN and SMLR. The CFS model, which indicated
	widespread warmth centered in the south-central part of the country, was
	also considered and used  Every station forecast to be above normal was
	correct, resulting in skill scores of 12.8 for all stations and a perfect
	100.0 for non-EC only in the CONUS.  The temperature forecast for Alaska
	was however a disaster, with the entire state being predicted above
	normal, but only two stations in the southern part of the Panhandle that
	were still influenced primarily by maritime flow actually being above
	normal.  The forecast was based on a consensus of weak but agreeing
	statistical tools, and unfortunately the CFS model, which indicated below
	normal temperatures for the entire State, was disregarded, perhaps
	because of previous tendencies to have a cold bias.  Heidke still scores
	for the Alaska temperature forecast were -36.4 for both all stations and
	non-EC only, since every stations was forecast to have above normal
	temperatures, giving a coverage of 100%. 

	The 0.5-month lead precipitation outlook for November was given EC
	everywhere in both the CONUS and Alaska, due to weak, conflicting, or
	non-existent indications from both statistical and dynamical tools. 
	Scores were therefore 0.0 for all stations and indeterminate for non-EC
	only.
	
	The revised forecast made on October 31 with input from several dynamical
	models used for medium range forecasting produced what at first might
	seem to be contradictory results, as far as skill is concerned.  The
	all-station temperature skill increased dramatically to 36.8 due to the
	much larger area skillfully forecast, but the non-EC only score decreased
	slightly from a perfect 100 to a still fantastically good 87.8 since it
	would be almost impossible to still have every station correct in a large
	area including 41.0% of the stations in the CONUS.   The area of
	predicted anomalous warmth was correctly extended northward and eastward
	to the Great Lakes Region and the Appalachians, based on very good
	indications from the GFS models used in medium range forecasting that the
	first two weeks of November would be warm over much of the eastern and
	central U.S.  Since these models also indicated below normal temperatures
	in Alaska, in agreement with the CFS model's indications from ten days
	earlier,  the forecaster removed the above normal from Alaska and gave
	the entire State EC., which was a big improvement from the earlier
	long-lead forecast, even though no below normal temperatures were
	forecast due to previous experience that models often overpredicted cold
	regimes in Alaska.

	The revisions to the precipitation forecast, on the other hand, were
	based primarily on the basis of good medium-range forecast guidance for
	the first few two weeks of the month that correctly predicted and active
	trough over the Gulf of Alaska that generated storms hitting both the
	Pacific Northwest and the Alaska Panhandle.  In spite of this being
	basically correct, the precipitation skill scores for the CONUS remained
	at 0.0 for all stations and were also 0.0 for non-EC only, since only two
	of the six stations forecast to be wet in the Pacific Northwest verified
	as correct.  All three of the stations predicted to be wet in the Alaska
	Panhandle were correct however, resulting in scores of 13.1 for all
	stations and 100.0 for non-EC only in Alaska.
	
	--- EOF