Amateur storm chasers cause headaches for emergency spotters

[Jim Duyck]

And by "here", I meant Wichita Falls where I live.


Sent from my iPhone using Stormtrack mobile app

 

[Devin Pitts]

Well, I am sure many of you have already seen this, but in case you hadn't, this is a quote from Daniel Shaw's storm chasing Facebook page.

"
The past few days have seen a vast amount of comments and controversy regarding my storm spotting activity in the Wichita Falls area in Texas.

This area runs a closed net, and in good faith, I believed due to the storm conditions my reporting to their coordinator prior to submitting any reports justified my transmitting on their net due to public safety concerns.

This action has created such a backlash with many people expressing strong reaction on both sides of the argument.

The Wichita County ARES volunteers are highly regarded for their dedication to public safety, and in this case, there has been a misunderstanding of acceptable procedure on my part, and I wish to offer my deep apology.

Australians have long considered American citizens as distant relatives rather than foreigners, and although we are descendants from the same stock, there are cultural differences than can be easily overlooked.

Whilst I have proudly contributed over the years to the reporting of life threatening storm activity across much of the country, this recent incident and stress associated with the ongoing dispute of opinions has caused me to make a very hard decision.

I have made the decision to cease spotting and reporting operations, and instead concentrate on my passion for sharing my adventures in a more relaxed and less stressful way.

Nevertheless, when I am faced with tornadic activity, if approached by the National Weather Service, Emergency Management, or Local Authorities, I will always prioritise their needs to protect the communities I hold dear to my heart.

Daniel Shaw

"

Good for him. Bad for towns in tornado alley, and honestly all over the country. Obviously there are other skilled spotters/chasers out there who can help tell the ground truth, but it doesn't help to lose one of them due to this silliness...

Well crap. I'm glad he's going to continue streaming as I really enjoy watching his spotting ops, but that's one hell of a spotter that was just lost over a superiority complex.

 

[John Moore]

@Nick Copeland

As Phil Frost posts out in a well written post at http://ham.stackexchange.com/questions/4878/, not following “good amateur practice” is itself a violation of § 97.101 (a).

.

Thanks for pointing this out.

I find it troubling - if the FCC wants to prohibit the practice, it should go through a rule making process and issue an amendment to the rules. The use of this clause reminds me of the "catch 22" clause of the UCMJ (at least when I was in the Navy) which essentially said "if we don't like you, we can do bad things to you" with no more specificity than that. A rule making process allows outside input, which can clarify the issue.

All that being said, I read the stackexchange thread to mean that repeated violations of repeater operator intent are the problem - which is a common way the FCC operates. I didn't see stated, but I could take the 797.101(a) to also apply to repeatedly and intentionally disobeying the directives of a net control operator. They sure didn't do that when I was net control of the Hurricane Watch Net, but that's been over 10 years ago.

John NJ7E

 

[James Wilson]

I rarely see chasers blocking roads it almost always locals that just grabbed there kids and drive around looking at the sky. Law Enforcement and what have you labels these people "chasers" too because they are out around a storm ... they do not see the difference in a real chaser with gear training and knowledge over a person on a joy ride that is in danger and they do not even know it.

Frustrating but also why I try to avoid the crowds as best I can on a chase ... my truck allows me to go places others cannot so I can dodge and weave.

 

[hazelmaryjackson]

Following Daniel Shaw's announcement on his facebook chasing page that he was the "intruder" referred to in Lyn Walkers article, I emailed Mr Walker to complain about his article. I pointed out that Daniel Shaw is a highly experienced and safety conscious chaser who is a registered Skywarn Certified spotter and has been chasing in the US Spring for 12 years. I said that if Mr Walker had bothered to check on Daniel's website he would have found this out. I also pointed out that many of the irresponsible chasers out there are local young men who see a storm is forecast and get in their *unequipped* cars to go and watch it for a thrill, with no concern for their own safety or anyone else's. And that nothing could be further from the truth where Daniel is concerned.

Mr Walker emailed back to say "I have no idea who Mr. Shaw is or whether he was the man referred to in the story. No names were ever mentioned to me.. " So basically his friend Charlie Byars, the ARES co-ordinator for the area had a rant to him and he wrote it up while neither man knew anything about the person they were criticising. If you read the original story you will see it has a number of quotes from Charlie Byars. One is: "Byars said some amateur chasers will drive hundreds of miles from their homes for a chance to photograph a tornado. The phenomenon seems to have special appeal to foreigners who do not have tornadoes in their own countries, he said. One intruder on the spotter radio network Sunday was an Australian, who continued arguing against his exclusion from the frequency into Monday afternoon."

Clearly Mr Byers complained about Daniel Shaw to Mr Walker on the unwarranted assumption, from Daniel's accent, that he was just some uninformed pesky tourist from overseas and this is reflected in the article. So both men were prepared to make assumptions about Daniel with no knowledge to back these up. Mr Walker at least should know better. I would guess Daniel Shaw is more experienced and better qualified to report in severe weather incidents than many of their local spotters. As I said in my email to Mr. Walker, his article has done nothing to discourage irresponsible and in experienced chasers, all it has done is lost to the emergency services a valued and conscientious spotter with many years experiencing chasing in the mid West.

But the incident also raised another issue which puzzles me. I assume that the Wichita Falls ARES relies totally on their selected band of approved spotters. I have chased in Kansas. it is a big place and, despite what the cell phone providers might have you believe, has large areas without cell phone coverage. Chasers on the road, who like Daniel who are trained spotters, and can phone in warnings over the short wave radio bands, must be a very useful resource for local emergency services when a bout of severe weather springs up and there are signs a tornado is imminent. Particularly in areas where the cell phone coverage is patchy or even non existent. How can Witchita Falls ARES know that their spotters have it all covered and they don't need any further information? Maybe they know where the tornadoes are going to form. Maybe they could share their secret with the rest of us.

 

[Dan Robinson]

I posted this in my blog's comments, but I'm crossposting it here since the media is likely monitoring both locations:

One of the main issues I see is a widespread unfamiliarity in much of the spotter community of what storm chasers do and how much knowledge we have about severe weather. In order to be a successful chaser, we really have to put in the time to learn meteorology on a fairly detailed level. Chasing SPC outlooks, watches and NWS tornado warnings will only get you so far as a chaser. Most of us have learned to do our own forecasting, and have paid our dues with many failed forecasts and busted chases. It's expensive to chase, so we have incentive to learn. We all spend our own money, any revenue we make from video sales goes toward possibly covering SOME of our gas money. Most chasers really do have extensive knowledge and can offer something of value to any spotter net.

Again, we all agree on the bad apples that exist out there that ruin it for everyone. The problem with this current controversy is the lumping of all chasers into the same category as the bad apples, and then publishing a rather poorly written/researched and journalistically unethical national news article. This is giving a bad rap to people who don't deserve it. You can find Daniel Shaw's Youtube channel and watch/listen to all of his chases in their entirety, including the audio of all of his spotting interactions. He's not a threat to any spotter group, he's an asset, and other net ops can testify to this. From what I understand, he's made the effort in the past to introduce himself to the Wichita County group for this very purpose, and his only mistake may have been misunderstanding the implications of trying to check into such a rigidly closed net. While I don't agree with closed nets (if OKC/OUN nets can operate just fine open, no reason SPS ones couldn't also), I respect the decision of any one to do so. I don't however respect the perpetuation of the yahoo chaser stereotype and the broadbrushing of it to apply to all of us as the article does.

Furthermore, from what I've seen across the internet in the past few days, the "all chasers are yahoos" stereotype is widepread across the spotter community (forums, Reddit, Facebook, etc). We'd simply appreciate a better understanding of what we do and an acknowledgement that we have something to offer the spotter community. You will rarely, if ever, find chasers disparaging spotters - on the contrary, we are always highly supportive of what they bring to the table. It's unfortunate that the feeling is rarely mutual, and I think this is due to a long-standing stereotype that the news pieces only further perpetuate. The best I can do is provide video evidence of what chasers actually do and what our chases are really like. Again, I've provided links to over 20 full-day videos from me and other chasers to help show this.

Ideally, both chasers and spotters can work together for a common goal. Chasers are willing, we just need spotters to do the same. For the most part they do, aside from the islands of holdouts like Wichita County. What can be done to change the false perceptions?

 

[Warren Faidley]

In the link Dan posted, a poster talks about the chasers killed at El Reno, he says "they were supposedly "researchers" "...

Doesn't even know who Tim Samaras is AND attempts to put into question his significance... and/or justification for being out there....

I really need to stop reading into this topic or I may become homocidal

Yea, thanks for nothing that. It also upsets me. Tim and I discussed the genuine researcher vs. fakes issue at length in private emails before his death. He was the real deal. What this does is support my (and others) rantings on the subject of "fake" researchers and clearly illustrates how their misleading antics reflect negatively on legitimate research / researchers. This is a prime example. It's going to take years for the damage to be fixed so people once more believe independent, severe weather research is genuine and not a deceptive method to generate income and ego stroking.

 

[rdale]

So Wichita County cannot close a radio frequency if a person is licensed.

The trustee can restrict users of that repeater.

 

[M Morris]

Hello all,

My name is Matthew Morris. I'm the Section Emergency Coordinator (SEC) for the North Texas ARRL Section (http://www.arrl.org/Groups/view/north-texas), which includes the Wichita Falls area. For those of you who may not be familiar with the ARRL field organization, the SEC is responsible for ARES within the section. The SEC answers to the Section Manager.

I want to apologize to the chaser community and to Mr. Shaw for what he experienced when attempting to check into the ARES net in Wichita County. The North Texas Section Manager and I are addressing the issue. This type of event should not be a problem in the North Texas Section in the future. All ARES nets should be open to any amateur who in good faith wishes to participate.

I would like to reiterate, as some have mentioned, that not all weather nets are operated under the ARES umbrella. I have no control over weather nets operated outside the purview of ARES.

Please feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions or concerns or experience problems with an ARES net in North Texas in the future. My email address is [email protected] and my Google Voice phone number is 940-441-7220 (texts preferred over voice calls).

Sincerely,
Matthew Morris (K5ICR)
North Texas Section Emergency Coordinator

 

[Randy Jennings]

@M Morris - The leadership you and Nancy have shown on this issue makes me very proud to say I am an active ARES member in the North Texas Section. Both spotters and chasers are important parts of the Integrated Warning Team. I hope this action is the beginning of a great partnership in North Texas.

For my fellow chasers, Matt and Nancy are people of their word. My inbox this morning had a new policy for the North Texas Section that says:

Section 1.02 Closed Nets Prohibited

1. All ARES nets shall be open for participation by any licensed amateur. No net control station or ARES leadership acting in an official capacity shall prohibit the good faith participation of any licensed amateur.
   
   
2. Nothing in this section shall be constructed to prevent the establishment of minimum reporting criteria by a net control station or ARES leadership as appropriate to the situation at hand, as long as these criteria are not established intentionally or knowingly to prevent the participation of an amateur or group of amateurs.

This policy applies only to the North Texas Section which includes the counties of Anderson, Archer, Baylor, Bell, Bosque, Bowie, Brown, Camp, Cass, Cherokee, Clay, Collin, Comanche, Cooke, Coryell, Dallas, Delta, Denton, Eastland, Ellis, Erath, Falls, Fannin, Franklin, Freestone, Grayson, Gregg, Hamilton, Harrison, Henderson, Hill, Hood, Hopkins, Hunt, Jack, Johnson, Kaufman, Lamar, Lampasas, Limestone, McLennan, Marion, Mills, Montague, Morris, Nacogdoches, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Panola, Parker, Rains, Red River, Rockwall, Rusk, Shelby, Smith, Somervell, Stephens, Tarrant, Throckmorton, Titus, Upshur, Van Zandt, Wichita, Wilbarger, Wise, Wood, and Young. As Matt noted in his post, some counties operate Skywarn nets under RACES (Dallas county and sometimes Tarrant county are examples) and this policy does not apply to them.

As chasers we need to make sure we don’t mess up this opportunity. As ARES Training AECs often say, we need to “listen, listen, listen” before we transmit. We need to make sure we understand how the net operates and what minimum reporting criteria are. When we have something to report we need to give our call sign, wait to be recognized by net control, and then make a brief but accurate report (much like we would on SpotterNetwork). We should think twice before checking into a net. Checking into a net means you are committing to work as a resource at the direction of the net control. That could mean staying in a spot where nothing is happening or being moved to another spot. If you are not willing to do that, then don’t checkin. You can always report a significant event even if you haven’t checked in yet. When I’m out of my home county I don’t check in or report unless the net controller is asking for resources in a certain area and not getting them or unless I see something significant that isn’t getting reported. I suggest other chasers do the same. I also suggest that we follow Matt’s example and extend the olive branch to spotters. We should introduce ourselves when we see them as long as it isn’t interfering with their duties. Perhaps we should invite them to pair up on chase with us in the future.

 

[John Moore]

This is a very welcome.

Does anyone know of a list of Skywarn nets for chase country?

 

[Dan Robinson]

Mr. Morris, a tremendous thank-you for your response.

I am happy to see something positive come from the discussion. And as a gesture of appreciation, I am pledging to finally get my HAM license and begin participating in storm reporting on that medium across the USA. I think I can speak for all chasers in that we look forward to working together on this for the common goal.

 

[Dan Robinson]

This new piece in the Times Record News reveals why the articles were written in the first place:

http://www.timesrecordnews.com/colu...e6-3284-2135-e053-0100007f1173-375897481.html

I think it's time attention be turned away from the Wichita County ARES and onto Lynn Walker and the Times Record News, the true villains behind this story. A new blog post from me is coming soon.

 

[Justin Reed]

This new piece in the Times Record News reveals why the articles were written in the first place:

http://www.timesrecordnews.com/colu...e6-3284-2135-e053-0100007f1173-375897481.html

I think it's time attention be turned away from the Wichita County ARES and onto Lynn Walker and the Times Record News, the true villains behind this story. A new blog post from me is coming soon.

Well, yes and no. As of today the Wichita County ARES group has renamed themselves to Wichita County Skywarn in order to get around the "open net" requirement. So nothing has really changed here.

We need the NWS to step in on a nationwide level and require spotter nets to be open just like ARES.

Justin
NV8Q

 

[Bill Hark]

Wow, Dan that article you referenced about storm chasers is nasty. Probably the worst I've seen. That reporter is certainly double downing on his bias and hatred. My blood is boiling but I'll wait until I can provide a calmer and more insightful response.

Bill Hark