Most meteorologists are acquainted with the notion of a "weather hole", that is, a location that storms often barely miss or near which approaching storms often dissipate. Put more plainly, a weather hole is a location that receives less interesting weather than the surrounding area. In the authors' experience, most meteorologists and interested civilians think that they actually live in weather holes. The authors have generally believed that such people simply enjoy experiencing interesting weather, are memorably disappointed whenever it misses their vicinity, and eventually conclude that their location is subject to some kind of meteorological disfavor. The recent availability of multiple years' worth of nationally composited radar data makes it feasible to address objectively whether the concept of a weather hole is reasonable, and to evaluate the degree to which selected sites may be weather holes (or even weather "hot spots").

Preliminary work using 18 "target" sites (with large meteorological communities, such as at universities and research laboratories) shows that there are mesoscale patterns of spatial variability in a 5 year radar dataset. The frequency of echoes > 20 dBZ is not significantly higher at any of the 18 points than in their surroundings. However, it appears that there may indeed be local holes and hot spots when focusing on echoes > 40 dBZ (i.e. convective precipitation), much as many weather enthusiasts suspect. The authors' poster and extended abstract will document these variations in the radar data, discuss their implications, and reveal the studied sites that have a statistical basis for being called weather holes.