Amateur storm chasers cause headaches for emergency spotters

Dan Robinson said:
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.
Click to expand...

Not if it is a RACES net. They can close the channel, just like the Dallas area group does. However it does remain open for emergency transmissions.
 
Wow, it's only mid-April during a crappy season and the poop is already hitting the fan!

I know some newer chasers on this list might not remember the golden days when ham radio was king. It was also a "sin" in most areas to jump onto "controlled" spotter networks without being registered. I have to agree with this rule. You would not believe the morons I've heard on closed frequencies during emergency situations. There has to be some control, even if most experienced chasers know more than your average Joe spotter. They have no idea of your experience. My advise is to get registered on the frequency, or better yet, just call in reports on a cell phone. During 99% of severe weather situations near major cities, the events are well reported by the media and local spotters.

As for traffic issues, once more, it's the locals that authorities should be focusing on. They cause over 90% of problems. This was the problem during El Reno. If the media would spend more time teaching people to avoid storms than promoting reckless (too close) chasing via station competition it might help. (e.g, TWC until their party ended).
 
Drue Bernardi said:
Sounds like a bunch of "trained spotters" are getting their feelings hurt and are looking down at chasers as "amateurs" and assuming they don't have any training. Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it sounds like they think everyone who isn't a "trained spotter" is there to do nothing but take pictures and block the road. Get over yourselves.
Click to expand...

Don't be quick to blame this on "trained spotters". I'm a member of the Skywarn community and I take a lot of pride in the organization. However, I do chase as well, locally and respect storm chasers even if they are not out there to 'report' conditions. I think the blame can be put on the uninformed here. The editor of the article seems to be hell-bent on chasing in general without really understanding what it is. I've heard of storm chasing long before the movie Twister came out. Sure, there are bad chasers. There are bad spotters, too. And there are even bad cops and bad firefighters... There is bad in all groups but the whole group shouldn't be blamed for the actions of a few bad eggs.
 
Shawn Gossman said:
Don't be quick to blame this on "trained spotters". I'm a member of the Skywarn community and I take a lot of pride in the organization. However, I do chase as well, locally and respect storm chasers even if they are not out there to 'report' conditions. I think the blame can be put on the uninformed here. The editor of the article seems to be hell-bent on chasing in general without really understanding what it is. I've heard of storm chasing long before the movie Twister came out. Sure, there are bad chasers. There are bad spotters, too. And there are even bad cops and bad firefighters... There is bad in all groups but the whole group shouldn't be blamed for the actions of a few bad eggs.
Click to expand...

I'm not blaming all spotters. However, there are a large number of spotters that go through a SkyWarn class and then get a big ego and take their role as spotters way too seriously. This particular group seems to have taken that road. There are some spotters out there who are perfectly fine and do their thing without interfering in chasing and some even welcome input from chasers. Others however seem to have a personal vendetta against chasers and look down on them.
 
Drue Bernardi said:
I'm not blaming all spotters. However, there are a large number of spotters that go through a SkyWarn class and then get a big ego and take their role as spotters way too seriously. This particular group seems to have taken that road. There are some spotters out there who are perfectly fine and do their thing without interfering in chasing and some even welcome input from chasers. Others however seem to have a personal vendetta against chasers and look down on them.
Click to expand...

I won't argue that.

What bothers me most about the article though is that it was posted on a professional emergency management publication site.

I'm in emergency management myself. Emergency management often supports public safety agencies, right? Like the police... If we get a few national news reports about a few bad cops abusing their power, emergency management professionals would know it is wrong to blame all the cops, right? To me, this article is like that... it is hypocritical and poorly written.

They mentioned the deaths of the chasers in the sub-head of the article but then don't really talk about it anywhere else. The author seems to just be baiting an audience to read the article. It looked like it was researched and written by a jr high school student, LOL.

I do understand that about some spotters who get the ego thing. That is one thing I am always trying to do with my forum, mitigate that sort of activity. Focus on real issues like safely observing severe weather and reporting it to help the local community. The drama of it all is something we all need to get away from.
 
I normally consider myself proud to be both a chaser and a spotter, but articles like this make me reluctant to say that. I started out as an ARES spotter in the county I live, latter got a RACES appointment in the county I work in, and then decided I wasn’t going to be a very effective spotter unless I got outside of my home counties to see and learn about weather – so I became a chaser.

Dan Robinson said:
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.
Click to expand...

So the short answer to your question Dan is yes, they can close the frequency used in a spotter net. There are 2 primary types of spotter nets. One is a Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES) net that operates under Part 97 Subpart E of the FCC rules. These rules could reasonably be read several ways, but the way the FCC enforces it is the way Dallas TX RACES puts it in their Cloud Cowboy Reference Manual: “By FCC regulations only certified appointees may participate in RACES operations...Amateur radio operators that are not RACES appointees may report events that are an eminent threat to life or property as per Part 97 of the Rules and Regulations.” What is an “eminent treat” is up to interruption. I’ve heard net controllers with a narrow and wide definition of that, even within the same RACES group. If you are making a report in good faith under that exception, you are not likely to face FCC action even if the net controller doesn’t agree.

The second type is Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES). This is what Wichita County operates under. ARES is run under the American Radio Relay League (ARRL). ARRL says “every licensed amateur, regardless of membership in ARRL or any other local or national organization is eligible to apply for membership in ARES. Training may be required or desired to participate fully in ARES.” Some ARES groups run open nets where any ham can make reports even if not registered. Others are more restrictive. While no single ham owns a given frequency (even repeater inputs), Part 97.205 e) says “limiting the use of a repeater to only certain user stations is permissible.” This is where the concept of a closed repeater comes from. The FCC fines people all the time for being on a repeater they have been warned to stay off of. As a repeater operator/trustee myself, I am strongly opposed to the concept of a closed repeater, but it is allowable under FCC rules.

My recommendations for us as chasers:

  1. Don’t give up on amateur radio to make reports. There are places your reports will be not be welcome, but there are many other where they will be. I remember a time chasing the Rio Vista and Grandview area in Wise county TX last year, and that ARES net controller very much appreciated my report. In some WFO areas, ham radio is still the best way to report.

  2. When out of my home counties, I normally only report very significant events that they are not already getting reports on, unless they are asking for conformation on something. The last thing a net controller needs is another pea sized hail report from someone they don’t know.

  3. I always try to listen to how the net operates, match their style, and make the best report I can possibly give. The quality and style of the report makes a difference in how it is received. Maybe adding “trained spotter from another county” after your call might add to your creditability (assuming you are).

  4. When you encounter a net controller who doesn’t welcome your report, move on. There is nothing we can say to convince them otherwise. Call NWS or report on Spotter Network.
I hate to see this spotter vs chaser thing every year. There are good and knowledgeable folks on both sides, and there are folks that don’t know a wall cloud from a shelf cloud on both sides.
 
This is another example of crap journalism. The audio archive of this repeater is available and I listened to it. There was only one "chaser" that attempted to work with this sorry ass net controller, and the audio of that exchange is here:

http://ks0lnk.net/audio/ares_net.mp3

(Source: http://www.broadcastify.com/archives/feed/4682)

Daniel, and practically all chasers, are welcome to give honest, accurate reports on our weather net - as long as they are concise and intelligible.

Justin Reed
NV8Q
K-Link Repeater Network
http://ks0lnk.net
 
Last edited:
Justin - thanks for posting that.
No question - net controller didn't handle it well. It sounds like there is some history here. I don't have a premium Brodcastify account so I can't hear the period before this. Did Daniel give his call sign and wait to be recognized by the net controller before this exchange? Was there a minimum reporting criteria at the time? Was the net controller taking check-ins (like it appears Daniel was trying to do), or just reports at the time? I'm not trying in away to defend the net controller - I'm just trying to do some self examination as a chaser to see if we handle the situation differently if perhaps the outcome would have been different.
 
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