Why California’s tsunami warning turned into chaos for some

The tsunami warning that came blaring through my cell phone at 10:51 am was blunt: “You’re in danger.”

The warning applies to 5.3 million people in California, according to the Associated Press, although not all have received it – and many who have received it are shocked in disbelief.

A tsunami here? It’s impossibleI thought, at first. I live east of San Francisco, over a mile inland from the beach, about two hundred feet above sea level.

Then I thought: I need to get to my children.

I wasn’t sure how a 7.0 magnitude earthquake hundreds of miles to my north could bring a warning like the one I got from the National Weather Service.

But I also know enough about the science of earthquakes and the earthquakes of the west coast, the volcanic “ring of fire”, to understand that my situation is in the path of tectonic plates, both underground and in the deep ocean. And that the tension in those plates can translate into unimaginable power.

One day, those underwater plates may cause a catastrophic explosion, leading to a deadly tsunami. Was it this day?

I needed to find out more about our risk, but doing so proved more difficult and confusing than I expected. Finally I came across a scary map showing that my family was indeed in the warning zone, but I had no guidance as to what to do about it.

Why did so many people receive a tsunami warning?

I didn’t know it at the time, but that warning map was wrong for my location and “not the best decision tool for warning,” according to David Snider, tsunami warning coordinator for the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration.

In the interview, Snider also explained that the federal agency’s tools for warning the public about tsunamis are less accurate than we might expect, because of the way geographic boundaries are drawn.

If I had been enjoying a day at the beach, I would have appreciated a life-saving text message. But based on my location at the time, I probably shouldn’t have gotten a loud warning. Snider said the message is sent automatically by the Wireless Situation Alert system following a tsunami warning.

Meanwhile, some people in the Bay Area didn’t get that alert on their phones, but got news via text from their states that it had been canceled. Others found nothing.

“A key need in our next phase of service is connecting people in the right places,” Snider said, “and helping people know who doesn’t need to move, that they don’t need to move.”

Snider added that the tsunami warning center’s website is making major improvements to improve the way warning maps are displayed, which should clarify future hazard levels.

But he also noted that those boundaries reflect NWS weather and warning areas, among other factors. Here’s what it might mean: people who live near the coast or coastal waterways may be clustered in the same population center not far from the ocean but near higher elevations, such as Oakland and the Berkeley Hills.

The result: an ominous warning map where the entire San Francisco Bay area is covered in red.

The problem is in faith

As a journalist with experience reporting on science, I have little tolerance and caution in times of crisis. I understand that precautions are necessary to prevent death and tragedy, even if the worst outcome is unlikely.

But being caught in limbo, with a critical warning and not much else, is a different kind of fear. It’s the kind of fear, echoed by thousands of people, that can create widespread mistrust of experts and government authorities. Over time, that distrust can lead to resentment.

For example, see responses to the National Weather Service’s announcement in X that the tsunami warning has been canceled. Another user accused the federal agency of lying to protect “fat wages/pension/benefits.” Another DOGE with pages, X chronicles Elon Musk’s new government hacking program known as the Department of Good Government.

Tsunami warnings are rare, compared to other natural disasters such as hurricanes and wildfires. And as Snider pointed out, people who were in potential danger along the coast seemed to have heeded the alarm, followed directions, and started to get out. In that sense, the plan worked.

But if there was ever a time for disaster and emergency authorities to be more in touch with the public, it was now.

Was I in danger?

Personally, I couldn’t wait to confirm whether I was in danger or not. My family’s emergency fund, which I would need to be ready if the tsunami waves hit San Francisco at 12:10 pm, as predicted, was not complete.

It was while I was busy packing my first aid kit, still looking for information, that I found a map of the NWS tsunami warning system.

The San Francisco Bay Area was blanketed in ominous red, indicating that everything in its vicinity — including my home and my children’s school — was under alert.

This was hard to compare to the phone warning I received, which said I needed to get to higher ground, or inland, immediately. But what if I was already there and still being threatened?

Again, this is where a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. I saw a separate government map of the local tsunami hazard, made a few years ago. That map showed coastal waterways as the only dangerous areas.

So which map was right?

An urgent warning received by the author.
Credit: Rebecca Ruiz / Mashable

Later, Snider told me that the map of the tsunami warning system did not show the exact dangers of the tsunami at the community level, so it is not “a complete story that helps all end users have a complete response at that time.”

But at that moment, my mind raced for answers.

I thought that a massive tsunami-level explosion in the Bay, covering 1,600 square kilometers, would send water and debris rushing inland. The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, which killed 230,000 people, led to flooding three miles inland in some areas. The images of that tragedy still linger in my memory.

However, I couldn’t find any reliable explanations for why this warning covers much of the Bay Area, or what I should do next.

Should I just drive east, away from the Bay and the beach? That would take me through the hills of Berkeley and Oakland, a lot high ground, the kind you’d think would be safe – but the hills are also covered in warning. The text alert did not point recipients to a website or resource for real-time updates or instructions.

I did not hear from the government official after the warning was issued. When I look at the account X of Gov. Gavin Newsom from California later, I found out that he didn’t post about the tsunami warning until it was canceled.

My children’s school district sent a message about an hour after the initial warning. “We are advised to keep everyone safe,” said the statement.

While the National Weather Service is my go-to resource during nature- and weather-related events and disasters, the agency’s tsunami alert account on X had only sent a warning.

The NWS Bay Area X account posted one update between when the alert was issued and when it was canceled. “We are still waiting for the water to increase,” it reads. “We’ll let you know as we learn more”.

The Tweet may have been deleted

Friends reported that they tried to find the same information I had, but they said that the reliable websites were out of date for them. Then, shortly before noon, the warning was lifted.

“Based on all available information… the tsunami threat of this earthquake has passed,” the statement said. It took about 15 minutes for county officials to text and email me the news.

What happens next?

I don’t know of a more effective way to warn millions of people about a potential tsunami. The most important thing is that people living on the coast get the warning as soon as possible. But I am concerned that what happened could undermine confidence in the warning system.

Snider said future updates to Tsunami.gov could better reflect tsunami danger zones, which are already well-known and currently available in map form at the state and local level.

He understands that the public wants and needs information specific to their location that is organized and easily accessible. Snider indicated that some of this work was already underway, in addition to the development of the tsunami warning system’s website.

The response to the earthquake and possible tsunami will be evaluated, Snider promised, focusing on how information reached the public.

The forecasting and warning services provided by the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration are important, but some members of the public may think the worst of what has happened. Maybe they will think that sometimes the government tries to scare us for its own evil reasons. Maybe they’ll think that the hard-working scientists behind the models that warn of potential disaster don’t know what they’re doing, and they’ll turn to cranks or grifters making false announcements by clicking on social media instead.

None of these are good results in a situation that destroys trust in officials. And it is unlikely that people will broadcast future tsunami warnings if they feel that this one is unnecessary. Just because the tsunami threat ended as quickly as it started doesn’t mean people won’t remember how they were warned – for all the wrong reasons.