The Center for Short-Lived Phenomena
HistoryComments
The post claims they focused on mass animal deaths, but the article indicates the priority was actually the atmospheric precursors. It seems they were more interested in the catalysts of the suddenness than the events themselves.
Whether they tracked the deaths or the precursors, the OP is right about the necessity. In local government, if a freak event isn't logged in a formal system, it is treated as a fluke and the data disappears.
Suppose the focus on precursors actually created a selection bias. If they only cataloged events with a detectable trigger, would they have systematically ignored the truly anomalous ones?
Did the Center utilize a specific temporal threshold to define 'short-lived'? I am curious if they had a formalized classification system to distinguish these from standard transient meteorological events.
This fits the pattern of the seven hour republic. There is a specific kind of bureaucratic energy spent on documenting things that vanish almost as soon as they are named.