Amateur storm chasers cause headaches for emergency spotters

Always two sides to a story and this issue is no different.

Although the vast majority of chasers out there follow the rules of the road and don't endanger others, there are always a few bad apples. I don't think it's a widespread or major issue, but there are many examples of chasers/spotters doing stupid things in the field. It's just a fact.

I've honestly missed getting some footage before because I wasn't in a safe spot to pull off the road/get out the camera.
 
A couple of things stuck out to me in that little whine-fest of an article. First the claim of the "extensive" weather and safety training that spotters go through. I'm sure most people on this site have done the spotter training already and can attest that while being a good basic beginner instruction, it sure as hell doesn't qualify as "extensive" in my book. A lot of this sites users have more knowledge hiding underneath their fingernails than what it takes to qualify as a spotter.
The other thing that caught me eye was that their may be as many as, OMG, get ready for it, as many as (gasp) a hundred chasers in a general area around a storm! Wow! They fail to mention which ones of those hundred chasers shouldn't be allowed there. I must be old fashioned because I've always thought that law abiding citizens were free to move about the country as they wish. I don't hear anybody crying about 1000 people a day visiting Old Faithful, which happens to sit on a huge volcano.
I know everybody likes having a storm to theirselves, but the only way around that is doing what some people do and veer off their main target toward a secondary one that doesn't get as much attention. Maybe the spotter whiners could notice that "their" area is already covered and go back to their mom's basement and let the 100 chasers take care of the reporting.


Sent from my iPad using Stormtrack mobile app
 
Yes, I would say that whoever scolded Daniel Shaw - if that is indeed who they are referring to - owe him a public apology. Daniel puts many of us to shame in the quality, accuracy and professionalism of his reports. That's simply uncalled for to reject that kind of information, much less brag about doing it in a national news article. I think a more appropriate article is to alarm the North Texas public about the dangers of their little spotter net cliques rejecting quality information from experienced individuals. It's been well known that many spotter nets are "closed groups" that are not open to outside information, and if I was a resident, I'd be concerned about that.
 
Last edited:
Ahh the annual "there are too many chasers getting in the way" article. At least we're getting it out of the way early this year.

From what I could tell it was a little busier than normal, but nothing out of the ordinary. I guess Kingfisher years ago will always be what I compare any convergence to, and Sunday was nothing of note that I could see.

Personally, if I were receiving reports I'd much prefer them from a chaser. They are closer to what is going on and because they are actively pursuing they also give a lot more warning time if something indeed touched down rather than someone who is stationary at a designated place a few miles from town.
 
Ethan Lang said:
That Australian "intruder" happens to be Daniel Shaw and he has done some great work with the HAM radio and general storm spotting
Click to expand...
It's literally his first week back in the U.S. (Not even a week yet) and already media are trying to talk crap on him, he happens to be attempting to save lives and if it happened to be the only frequency I could get on to, I would do it too, I was watching his stream last night and the night before, last night he had a funnel but no frequency to report it on. There shouldn't be "closed" storm spotting frequencies, what happens if there is a tornado on the ground heading for a town and he can't get a frequency to report it on or submit a report into SpotterNetwork soon enough?
 
Quincy Vagell said:
Always two sides to a story and this issue is no different.

Although the vast majority of chasers out there follow the rules of the road and don't endanger others, there are always a few bad apples.
Click to expand...

That's exactly the point. Of course there are a few exceptions, of course there are a few bad apples. But this article, like every other one just like it the past decade, continues to broad brush ALL chasers into the same little butthurt target zone. That's what pisses chasers off. Hell, if we're being thorough, why not allow me to pen a nice little ditty of an article about the many myths (and truths) of storm spotting? Like the fact any spotter under the age of 70 probably knows significantly less than any chaser who's been out there a couple years. How about the fact that in situations where people WILL die, they do so while the net controllers are disputing, questioning, or kicking out completely real experienced reports...all because they don't know Bubba, Claude, and didn't go to Mildred's Sunday brunch last weekend...screw saving lives when someone's busting protocol!!!!

It really is an unfortunate reality that these small town folk just don't like anyone who's not from their neck of the woods. They feel the need to be responsible for everything, including making inaccurate reports (they believe save lives) while disallowing any other report not because it's bad information but because their accent is funny, or they're from out of town, or they have a weird callsign. I've said it before and I'll continue screaming it until the day I stop breathing: it is not against ANY law to be PRESENT around severe weather. Until this changes (and it won't keep me away even if it does), these people (and all like them) can collectively F off.
 
I've been doing some digging and I have a feeling this story may become bigger - soon.

Please put the word out. If any chasers had video running on Sunday and captured the exchange on the Wichita Falls spotter net, we need that ASAP! Thanks in advance!
 
Purely anecdotal. But take this for what it's worth. Reasons I've encountered chaser "convergence"

1.) Emergency vehicles blocked or narrowed road options. In several cases, actually trapping traffic into hail cores, or retrograding rope tornadoes.

2.) Locals stopping in the middle of road next to me to ask what that dark cloud is. And then I need to hear a 20 minute story about that one time their brother's girlfriend's dad's uncle saw a tornado once.

3.) Exciting long duration storm in the middle of nowhere with limited road network and the tallest object on the horizon was a prairie dog.

4.) I once saw what looked like 200 red dots on radarscope on a road I was parked next to. Didn't see a soul near me.

Even if there's just one storm on a moderate risk day, I might see the same 40 chasers go by over and over. I think the popularity of this hobby is way overblown and we actually get lumped into local traffic, local interest, local response, and local law enforcement. And yet being "the face" of a weather related hobby, storm chasers will always be the scapegoat no matter who is causing problems. They can do no wrong.


Maybe we should do a high risk stand down. Nobody "chases" just let the locals do their thing all on their own. Then let all of the footage of clogged roads, bad etiquette and clogged channels speak for themselves.
 
Update: The Wichita Falls spotter net and their associates are the main driving force behind this latest news piece. Have any other chasers had dealings with them?

Also, it's been discovered that there are FCC regulations requiring spotter net frequencies to remain open for reports from all who check in. Can anyone clarify? I'm contacting the FCC to get their take.
 
Last edited:
funny , I never saw anyone breaking traffic laws ! Just another ham net with a big ego , 100% the reason I quit ham radio ! I did hear channels 7s chasers saying a chaser ( think it was Danial Shaw ) was get the net mad .
 
Well said Michael G. When I come upon a jam-packed location, I usually just veer off onto another storm site realizing that this event is over-saturated already, or move miles ahead of it to set up for a spotter report or video footage. I never want to be one of the reasons that articles like these get written. Apparently the Wichita County ARES doesn't want Okies like me crossing the Red River.....
 
Last edited:
Jason Young said:
funny , I never saw anyone breaking traffic laws ! Just another ham net with a big ego , 100% the reason I quit ham radio ! I did hear channels 7s chasers saying a chaser ( think it was Danial Shaw ) was get the net mad .
Click to expand...

Jason, do you know the names of the Channel 7 guys who heard the exchange? I'm trying to track down a video of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

John Farley
Val and Amy Castor hydroplane and overturn - they are okay
Replies
14
Views
1K
Jeff Duda
Jeff Duda
Nathan Parker
Notebook Recommendation for Storm Shelter Area
Replies
5
Views
478
Nathan Parker
Nathan Parker
John Robinson
Bogus storm report in SW Missouri Sunday night
Replies
2
Views
724
John Robinson
John Robinson
Randy Jennings
2024 TESSA Conference Notes
Replies
1
Views
476
Warren Faidley
Warren Faidley
50th Anniversary of Scientific Tornado Coverage on Television
2
Replies
23
Views
864
Mike Smith
Back
Top