Lets remember that this means "some measureable precipitation". That means it could have, say, drizzled for five minutes at 3am and been clear and sunny for the rest of the day, and that still counts as a "rain day" in the tally. It's not some sort of "...and it rained for 23 days and 23 nights" biblical deluge. I have to keep reminding my friends of this when they talk about the "90 straight days of rain" we had a few years back.

BTW, what's up with that 90-day figure everyone keeps quoting? Is the actual record a mere month?

"A mere month"?

90 days = a month and a half

don't you mean 3 months?

oh burn!

Oh total burn.

Yes, I meant 3 months. D'oh. Was thinking about time (hour and a half) rather than days...

The 90 days figure comes from the 90 rainy days in a 4 month period that happened Nov 1, 98 thru Feb 28, 99 (which is around 120 days, or 3 out of 4 days were rainy then). That was one rainy, dreary winter. It broke some previous record of 87 rainy days over the same date range.

Wow, 23 straight days. You'd swear we live in Seattle or something-

... oh, right.

i think what paulus was asking was if the record is really a mere 33 days (as mentioned in the post). 33 days being approximately one month...

Does anyone know why it rarely ever snows in Seattle? I've never gotten a satisfactory explanation on that.

Thanks for backing me up, Caitlin. As far as the lack of Seattle snow, it seems like we get less every year. I grew up here and remember winters from my youth that had lots of snow. Enough snow to build forts and tunnels (granted, I was young and small, but I know we had a couple times with at least a foot on the ground). The older I got, the lighter the snowfall, so that some years we get none at all. It does seem to dump pretty hard every few years still. I can remember heavy falls in '91, '94, and '97. Seems like we're about due for a dumping.

Hmm, maybe because IT'S NOT COLD ENOUGH?

I think we get about as much snow as we always have; in other words, not much; usually a noticeable amount every other year or so. I can't remember having "at least a foot" on the ground here, in the city proper at least, and I'm older than God. Three inches has always been a rare thing here, especially three inches that lasts for more than a day or two. We had a really big load just two years ago, but it's always gon shortly after.

The thing is, you remember snow a lot more readily than you remember not-snow, if you know what I mean. And humans are pattern-seeking animals.

Okay, why doesn't it get cold enough in the city of Seattle for snow? I find it strange that a city as far north as this gets so little snow.

SB: A very large ocean to our west regulates the temperature. To anyone interested in weather in this area I'd recommend Steve Pool's newish book "Somewhere, I Was Right". But don't worry, SP didn't really write it (his producer did.)

Motown is right. Big ocean, big mountains, more medium-sized water, then even bigger mountains makes for a perfect slot of temperate weather. Seattle is far to the north of every big East Coast city, for instance (even Montreal), yet gets much less snow and much less rain (though more frequent) than any of them. London's more northerly than us, but they don't get much snow either.