Chasers Stuck in the mud in SD

[Matthew K. Hartman]

Thank you, Adam! This clarification would have been nice several pages ago. I was under the impression the road ended and you ended up IN the field. So, you turned off the dead-end road and *into* a field.

I have never driven into a wet field on purpose (even in a truck), but it seems to me doing so would get you stuck, in no time. How far did you really think you would get by doing that?

Matthew...130th street WAS THE ROAD THAT SUDDENLY ENDED! You just proved our case that it looks legit. Where the track shows us going south is where we bailed into the field and thats how far we all made it before getting stuck. Our plan was exactly what you suggested. We did not at all plan to go driving through a field.

 

[Joey Ketcham]

How far did you really think you would get by doing that?

All the way to Mississippi.

Doing what they did obviously worked and got them out of the path of the large tornado.

 

[Matthew K. Hartman]

Hah, well, Joey, I have an axe to grind with all chasers that have to be a mile or less from a tornado or pendant hook (on radar) to feel significant. I don't care so much that they put their own lives at risk (that's their decision) but I do when it affects other people's lives or property around them.

It's unsafe and dangerous.

Kind of like Maverick in "Top Gun." He ended up losing his RIO and best friend.

Matthew,

Seems like you have an ax to grind for some reason with the chasers who got stuck. This was just an unfortunate incident and luckily nobody was injured or killed.

 

[Joey Ketcham]

but I do when it affects other people's lives or property around them.

Matthew, is this not your car that is parked on someone else's property during a chase and waiting for storms to fire?

 

[Tim Frieze]

Yet another round of wonderful publicity.

 

[Jennifer Bankier]

As far as the law of trespass is concerned ...

A possessor of land can succeed with a trespass claim against people
on their land without permission, even if no damage is done to the
land, crops growing on it, etc. Even under this situation, the possessor
can recover nominal damages (to protect the right to exclusive
possession of land.

Of course, the possessor can also recover actual damages for
harm actually done to the land, crops, etc.

There is a defense called "necessity" which the chasers here
might try to argue re escapiing the tornadoes ... but it's
not clear if the defense kills the tort entirely (so no damages
have to be paid) or if it only eliminates the nominal damages
discussed above (i.e. where no harm is done) but the
defendants still have to pay for actual damages (e.g.
trampled crops).

Far better to settle things now informally than for anyone
to sue.

 

[Bill Hark]

I was also on that storm. Although I didn't get stuck, there was a point where I was headed north and expected an east option. It was clearly marked on DeLorme and it wasn't there. I had to drive closer to the core than I would have liked to get my east option.

It's not just a problem with GPS maps. Several years ago, I was headed east on a dirt road in Nebraska away from a meso. The road ended in a dirveway at a horsefarm rather than continuing. While decided my next move, a nice lady rushed out and offered me to go into their storm cellar until it passed. I accepted. Luckily, there was no tornado.


Bill Hark

 

[Jeff Snyder]

There sure is a lot of armchair quarterbacking going on! Folks, if you weren't there or part of this chase, it's kind of difficult to comment or judge the situation. I would like to point out that many of the chasers caught up in this are very experienced, safe, and responsible.

If you haven't been burned yet by an error on a map, you will. They are not 100% accurate.

Bryan

I agree. Every chaser makes mistakes, and we all pretty much rely on GPS software and maps to chase successfully, which means that most of us could have gotten into a situation in which the map we were planning our route on stiffs us.

That said, this is another reminder that there is ALWAYS a risk when you place yourself in the path of a tornado (or even close to the predicted path of a tornado). Saying that you'd be okay if the road were actually there (or, in the case of 5/10/10, if chaser convergence hadn't been as bad) may be correct, but everyone still made the decision to put themselves in the path downstream of the tornado and rely on correct GPS maps. There is ALWAYS a risk of potential catastrophe when a chaser opts to take a road that places them in the tornado's path. Again, I think nearly all of us have done this from time to time, and it's unfortunate it happened to happen to those involved. I think I'm stating the obvious, and I don't think I've heard much from those involved that sounds like they are making excuses for what happened (well, blaming the maps is fine, but at least most don't seem to be shunting any personal responsibility). I'm stating this, rather, as a lesson that new and/or non-experienced chasers can learn. We can all be happy (and I'm sure those involved certainly are!) that nobody was seriously injured, and it's a good reminder (for me included) that maintaining a significant distance from a low-level meso is often the only way to really minimize your chances of being in a similar situation. Of course, we may fall behind a storm if road options are limited (e.g. the only way to stay with the storm is to get to a road that is very near the tornado and/or its path), but that's still a calculated risk we take.

 

[Matthew K. Hartman]

Thanks Jay...! Tongue in cheek, comment, sorry. I have a weird sense of humor, I know.

Dang straight! And I know I'll never have to when chasing. I'll never be so close that I won't have time to get out of the way and will always have escape routes. I don't know, I guess that's just the way I've always chased...

OK great shot Matthew..lol Still proves our point and you werent trying to save your @ss from a tornado.

 

[Derek Weston]

If the farmer actually loses any money because of crop damage, anyone who participated in causing that damage is a complete irresponsible arrogant ass if he doesn't offer to reimburse the man; and mean it. I have a feeling a couple of them will offer and will pay, most of the rest will not; and a few will say they will until they are out of legal reach, then forgot about their debt. This is a case of an unexpected expense of a storm chase; just like having to pay $150 a night for a room in the only hotel left in the area. Or having to spend an extra $50 for gas because you had to backtrack due to a closed bridge over a river.

If you actually saved your life by driving over his crops, you should be happy to pay for the little bit of wheat crop you trampled. There could have been a thick forest or swamp at road's end, and just being lucky enough to find a somewhat drivable terrain was simply fortuitous.

Why should a hard working man minding his own business have to pay for hobbyists' "unintended consequences."

From his point of view, here are a bunch of thrill seekers from out of town (no, you are not doing this for "science", no matter how many times you say it in the mirror) chasing tornadoes, of all things, and all of a sudden they find themselves in "unforeseen" danger. From a normal person's point of view, that's like someone diving in shark infested waters viewing sharks, then "finding" themselves in unforeseen danger of an approaching shark.

These "wild kids" decide they "have" to mow down some of his crops (that take investment in money and hard work) to save their sorry asses; and then get all uppity with him because he simply wants them to pay for the damage they caused.

Someone mentioned they had not foreseen anything like this every happening. Cute.

I have to admit, this thread is pretty darn funny.

It is what it is. Map failure. I don't think the Chasers are bad people, I don't think they did anything unreasonable. I don't think the farmer is wrong for being upset that some of his property may have been damaged. I would also think he ought to be understanding of the situation -- I'm sure he understands the concept of personal preservation. He wouldn't done the same thing.

The chasers ought to make sure he is reimbursed for any damages and perhaps a little something extra for the mess. Simply cleaning up your mess.

Nobody is evil in this, just an unfortunate situation.

 

[Danny Neal]

,$400 a person. 12 people involved. If all pay, no legal action, no insurance company, its all settled so without naming names please all that were there come up with the four so we can put this behind us.

 

[Derek Weston]

Hah, well, Joey, I have an axe to grind with all chasers that have to be a mile or less from a tornado or pendant hook (on radar) to feel significant. I don't care so much that they put their own lives at risk (that's their decision) but I do when it affects other people's lives or property around them.

It's unsafe and dangerous.

Kind of like Maverick in "Top Gun." He ended up losing his RIO and best friend.

So you don't feel chasers ought to be playing it that close. (and your feel that we wouldn't have had this situation if chasers were not so close)

That said... given that they were that close... and given the situation at hand... you cannot fault them for driving into the field for purposes of self preservation, correct?

 

[Derek Weston]

I agree. Every chaser makes mistakes, and we all pretty much rely on GPS software and maps to chase successfully, which means that most of us could have gotten into a situation in which the map we were planning our route on stiffs us.

That said, this is another reminder that there is ALWAYS a risk when you place yourself in the path of a tornado (or even close to the predicted path of a tornado). Saying that you'd be okay if the road were actually there (or, in the case of 5/10/10, if chaser convergence hadn't been as bad) may be correct, but everyone still made the decision to put themselves in the path downstream of the tornado and rely on correct GPS maps. There is ALWAYS a risk of potential catastrophe when a chaser opts to take a road that places them in the tornado's path. Again, I think nearly all of us have done this from time to time, and it's unfortunate it happened to happen to those involved. I think I'm stating the obvious, and I don't think I've heard much from those involved that sounds like they are making excuses for what happened (well, blaming the maps is fine, but at least most don't seem to be shunting any personal responsibility). I'm stating this, rather, as a lesson that new and/or non-experienced chasers can learn. We can all be happy (and I'm sure those involved certainly are!) that nobody was seriously injured, and it's a good reminder (for me included) that maintaining a significant distance from a low-level meso is often the only way to really minimize your chances of being in a similar situation. Of course, we may fall behind a storm if road options are limited (e.g. the only way to stay with the storm is to get to a road that is very near the tornado and/or its path), but that's still a calculated risk we take.

Right. Played the scenario out in my head a number of times and I am not a fan at all of putting myself in the path of a potentially violent tornado. Too many odd things could happen. Error margin is razor thin.

I would've been rather torn with that situation... from what I understand.... heading north closer to the core to get my east option, or bailing east on a country road in the path of the storm. (I really try avoid cores, though, if it was safer, probably what I'd do)

 

[Ryan Moats]

,$400 a person. 12 people involved. If all pay, no legal action, no insurance company, its all settled so without naming names please all that were there come up with the four so we can put this behind us.

Seems fair. The farmer, i wouldn't be surprised to take some sort of action.

Now looking at the picture, Street Atlas, and Deloreme, clearly a call was made to go down that road.

Now chasers, think of pilots. Many planes have crashed because there gauges said something else and they simply forgot to fly the plane.

When chasing, GPS, radar data, etc are just a simple extra thing to help you, but in the end, you got to go with your gut which i personally think most of you guys did not and relied on something that barely existed only a few years ago. Mapping data is provided by 3 different corporations. All but one being owned by Microsoft is some way.

Notice how on Google Maps, the road ends but on every other street map available on the web, and software (Street Atlas, Deloreme) the road 130th street continues east. On my Garmin 496, it shows that it ends right in the middle.

So my conclusion matter whatever way you put it..... LIFE trumps over any farmers field, road whatever and i will do whatever i need to do to avoid getting hurt or killed if a tornado is bearing down on me.
Next thing is to accept responsibility since going after a tornado in the first place and take roads normally never takes by anyone except farmers, that you will run into dead ends etc. Its one thing to see a torndao a 100 feet away and another to see it many miles away. What you all did, veteran or not, was reckless to take roads not know or taken and to have tornados drop matter of feet if front of you, you did put yourself there while others found other ways to avoid it.

Paper maps i still use since i find them to be the most accurate and easiest to use believe it or not.

Pay the farmer as it's part of the many hazard pays that come with storm chasing.

 

[Joshua Nall]

Like Mr. Snyder said....when you place yourself in the path of a storm capable of dropping tornadoes... there are risks, excuses such as "the road ended" don't really mean anything. It can explain the situation, but it's not an excuse. Deal with what ever comes, and make it right. Sounds like they have. Do things different in the future so it doesn't happen again. I'm talking to myself here, as I have run off the road before and gone through a barbed wire fence, then I offered to pay for it, but the owner wouldn't let me. I was so thankful to him. I have to say "baloney" on self preservation bit though....I'm sure the farmer thought they were a boat load of crazies for even being in that position. I don't think the "but we had to" argument would mean much to me if I were the farmer with 20 vehicles in my field. There are lots of old roads that show up on digital maps around here that are nothing more than old field roads, some of them have been plowed over.