County Officials Critical of Storm Chasers

[Mike Smith]

Whoa there, Captain Liberty. He was joining a discussion in which alleged distinctions between "real" chasers and not-"real" chasers were already brought up by others. I'm pretty sure he was speaking hypothetically, not proposing pulling over chasers and demanding ID.

And he brought up a good point - everyone is saying that the people running the red lights and backing up traffic in mile-long caravans aren't "the real chasers"; but how can anyone possibly know that?

It doesn't matter in the least whether they are "real" chasers or not if they are running red lights. They should be ticketed because they are breaking the law. Any chaser, pro or gawker, must obey the law.

If the chasers are not breaking the law it is none of their business. The "TSA mentality" is creeping into too many of our government officials.

If Mr. Douglas believes chasing should be regulated, he is perfectly free to lobby to legislature or Congress to change the law. Until then, as long as they obey the law, people are free to do anything they wish -- including chasing.

 

[Jake Orosi]

I don't see why chasers and spotters wouldn't benefit from having an organization to be a part of, that had requirements maybe like CPR training and membership dues...but not restrictive like designating people as professionals or "certified". Such an organization would be beneficial to people who enjoy chasing whether it's for public awareness or photography, or interest in storms in general.

There are many organizations that represent groups of people, from the NRA to as basic as gold prospecting. Storm chasers and spotters are a group of people who participate in life threating situations for many different reasons, and come under fire for people's lack of responsibility whether it is one of their own or a kid just out to see a tornado one day a year. It would only make sense to me that they would want to have some way for the general public to differentiate, as well as a means to build a true community that would hold their members to established guidelines. Like I said before, it won't stop everyone and their dog from clogging the roads, but it would serve as a way to protect true chasers (and spotters) interest when it gets to a point where someone in an important position decides something needs to be done, whether it's feasible or not. I know if I was a member of such an organization, after the events of the weekend, I would feel better if I had a representative saying "the problems on the road this weekend were directly attributable to the public, not our organization. Our members are clearly identifiable, and are required to uphold a standard that is in line with law enforcement and public safety."

It may not be the case, but I can see where people might want to be included in such a group...especially if they cared enough about their livelyhood/hobby/interest.

See, now you're talking. I belong to a beekeeping association; I don't understand why there can't be a "storm chaser" association. Of course such a group could never keep non-members from chasing storms; nor should they expect any kind of legal deference. But the message sent by the majority of storm chasers banding together and saying "we agree that this is what is acceptable and that is what is not" is powerful and beneficial, and good PR for the hobby.

But it has to be a big thing. There are plenty of local four-member "weather chasing units" with official-sounding trappings and codes-of-conduct, and that's great but practically useless for this purpose.

 

[Simon Brewer]

Friday we pulled over for police (black SUV with blue and red flashing lights) on Highway 9 on eastside of Norman, but after they passed we discovered they were chasers with illegal lights. Will definitely make chasers and other people think twice before pulling over around a storm.

 

[Jake Orosi]

It doesn't matter in the least whether they are "real" chasers or not if they are running red lights. They should be ticketed because they are breaking the law. Any chaser, pro or gawker, must obey the law.

If the chasers are not breaking the law it is none of their business. The "TSA mentality" is creeping into too many of our government officials.

If Mr. Douglas believes chasing should be regulated, he is perfectly free to lobby to legislature or Congress to change the law. Until then, as long as they obey the law, people are free to do anything they wish -- including chasing.

Again, I think you missed his point. I think he was merely illustrating the futility of the "no true storm-chasing Scotsman" line of argument.

 

[Jesse Risley]

See, now you're talking. I belong to a beekeeping association; I don't understand why there can't be a "storm chaser" association. Of course such a group could never keep non-members from chasing storms; nor should they expect any kind of legal deference. But the message sent by the majority of storm chasers banding together and saying "we agree that this is what is acceptable and that is what is not" is powerful and beneficial, and good PR for the hobby.

But it has to be a big thing. There are plenty of local four-member "weather chasing units" with official-sounding trappings and codes-of-conduct, and that's great but practically useless for this purpose.

I think you're talking apples to oranges here, even though your suggestion may have good intentions. There may well be a role for membership in "professional" organizations, especially if you are a mechanic, doctor, lawyer, and such by trade, but what use do they really have where a hobby (e.g., beekeeping, storm chasing, model airplanes, etc.) is concerned? Is there any practicality to paying membership and joining a professional not-for-profit organization for a hobby, at least where the need for "vetting" members is concerned?

Membership in a national association will probably make little difference if there is an issue with traffic impediments or nefarious driving practices. In much the same manner, membership in the NRA doesn't mean much of anything if one commits a legal infraction with a firearm, nor does it much matter whether or not you have a valid driver's license if you cause an accident on a public right-of-way. In either case, licensure, certification, etc., or possession of proof thereof, seems to be of little consequence to the overall issues at hand here.

 

[Brian Davidson]

Friday we pulled over for police (black SUV with blue and red flashing lights) on Highway 9 on eastside of Norman, but after they passed we discovered they were chasers with illegal lights. Will definitely make chasers and other people think twice before pulling over around a storm.

Do you have video and or did you get a plate ID on the vehicle?

 

[Jake Orosi]

Friday we pulled over for police (black SUV with blue and red flashing lights) on Highway 9 on eastside of Norman, but after they passed we discovered they were chasers with illegal lights. Will definitely make chasers and other people think twice before pulling over around a storm.

Do not! Nobody should ever let those dweebs make you have to think about pulling over for blue-and-red lights. If you pull over for the next set of such lights and it turns out to be a chaser, the worst that happens is that another chaser got past you - big deal. Get his plate and report him for those lights. But if you don't pull over for the next set of lights and it turns out to be Smokey, your chase day will end in a rather different kind of "bust"...

 

[Andrew Stoller]

Whoa there, Captain Liberty. He was joining a discussion in which alleged distinctions between "real" chasers and not-"real" chasers were already brought up by others. I'm pretty sure he was speaking hypothetically, not proposing pulling over chasers and demanding ID.

And he brought up a good point - everyone is saying that the people running the red lights and backing up traffic in mile-long caravans aren't "the real chasers"; but how can anyone possibly know that? How does one tell? It seems to me the only thing that separates the "legit" from the "yahoo", technique-wise, is what they do before the chase - how they decide where exactly they'll start chasing. Because after that point, everyone's exactly the same - following the radar echoes. And they all naturally will end up in the same places because they're all following the same storms.

Not to mention that all those "yahoos" think they're legit chasers. Any attempt to try and standardize will likely be met with resistance from those folks. Heck, even attempts to unilaterally condemn bad driving practices meet with resistance - there's already at least one "legit" chaser here who says an adrenaline rush justifies breaking traffic laws and he doesn't care what anyone else thinks about it.

Lets just cut out all the politically correct bull and the categorizing of people who go out and look at clouds, because that is the essence of what EVERYONE who storm chases, does. Whether you operate a tour company, are a Skywarn spotter, a media spotter, or a local that heard about severe weather in THE MEDIA and who's a die hard fan of Discoveries Stormchasers, we're all out there for one reason: to witness storms and document them. Any other effort to de-legitimize ANYONE for driving on a public road to look at a thunderstorm or to divide people up into categories is stupid. I've witnessed many well known storm chaser break traffic laws. Rest assured, they're "real storm chasers".

It is what it is as I like to say. Everyone who buys fuel for their vehicle (and therefor pays taxes) and registers their vehicle has every damn right to be out there storm chasing and that is the bottom line. Whether they break traffic laws is a compltely seperate matter, as someone who's likely to break traffic laws and drive like an ass while storm chasing likely drives that way on a regular basis.

 

[Andrew Stoller]

The "TSA mentality" is creeping into too many of our government officials.

Here here! Thank god some people are awake to this. Yea, it wouldn't surprise me ion the least if we end up with a new TSA in the future: The "Thunderstorm Safety Administration". They could conduct road side gropes on high risk days. Just so we stay safe...

 

[Andrew Stoller]

See, now you're talking. I belong to a beekeeping association; I don't understand why there can't be a "storm chaser" association. Of course such a group could never keep non-members from chasing storms; nor should they expect any kind of legal deference. But the message sent by the majority of storm chasers banding together and saying "we agree that this is what is acceptable and that is what is not" is powerful and beneficial, and good PR for the hobby.

But it has to be a big thing. There are plenty of local four-member "weather chasing units" with official-sounding trappings and codes-of-conduct, and that's great but practically useless for this purpose.

Guys, the storm chasing "community" is as fractured as it ever has been. Creating some official storm chasing organization is fantasy land. There are already a few well established institutions for storm chasing; Stormtrack, Facebook, Skywarn (to a degree), and Chasercon.

maybe fractured is the wrong word. Storm chasing for the most part is an individual activity is what I meant. If people want to join organizations, they already exist.

 

[Jake Orosi]

There may well be a role for membership in "professional" organizations, especially if you are a mechanic, doctor, lawyer, and such by trade, but what use do they really have where a hobby (e.g., beekeeping, storm chasing, model airplanes, etc.) is concerned? Is there any practicality to paying membership and joining a professional not-for-profit organization for a hobby, at least where the need for "vetting" members is concerned?

Well, I'm not so sure the idea is "vetting". It's merely everyone agreeing to follow certain standards of behavior, along with the benefits that naturally come with having a large group.

Take the AOPA; it's not a professional organization, and you don't need to be a member to be licensed pilot or fly anywhere you want. But joining gives you access to all kinds of educational resources otherwise unavailable; discounts for commonly-used services, and a lobby watching your back when it comes to legislation. And the AOPA does more to promote aviation's image than any individual could.

 

[Jacob Ferden]

The problem with any organization idea is you will never get many of the veteran chasers to join. Most of the chasers I know tend to view themselves and act as free spirits and, as such, are not going to be terribly receptive to any sort of organization or standardization.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

Sean -- such an idea has been batted around for at least a few years. The primary issue, in my opinion, is that those who are driving and parking recklessly aren't likely to be the ones who would take an active role in such an organization. I suspect, though with little evidence other than scattered anecdotes, that most active Stormtrack members aren't the ones who are causing problems on the roads. Storm chasing can be a very expensive hobby, not just in monetary terms (equipment, gas expenses, etc.) but also in terms of time. For me, I spent hours and hours and hours looking at models, trying to create forecasts, making early-morning adjustments, dealing with chase logistics (vehicles, chase partners, etc.), taking the entire day to chase and driving to the target. All of this is *before* the actual storm is in view and the chase is "on". When storms move quickly, there may be a relatively small window during which I'm in the best position to view a tornado, and making split-second decisions (changing target storms, picking the best road / route, etc.) can be stressful and can make or break a chase. With so much invested (time, money, and effort), I suspect that all of us want to maximize our opportunity of having a successful chase (for many, "success" means seeing a tornado -- sometimes it can be a relaxing structure chase, etc.). This makes people do crazy things.

In theory, the idea of a formal storm chasing organization is good, in my opinion. However, in practice, I'm not sure it'd be any good. Law enforcement aren't going to start asking for organization ID cards to let those who are "certified" pass a road block. Those who drive most recklessly probably don't care enough about the issue to spend any money joining such an organization. That's not to say there aren't positives to such an idea, however! There just aren't enough of us, I suspect, to make any meaningful impact on the situation.

An organization could try to open a dialogue with local leaders and law enforcement, but all it takes a group of irresponsible chasers or yahoos (or "chasers") to make all of that moot. The problem may not even be the "yahoo" chasers or irresponsible driving / parking habits -- the sheer number of vehicles around a particular storm can be a problem (see pic from 5/19/10) even if everyone is driving legally. I'm part of the problem, as are most Stormtrack members, since we're just one more vehicle added to the mix. Cheap internet makes it easy to go out and watch a storm, at least locally and at least on the high impact days. High gas prices may encourage carpooling (it has for me), but the locals won't care that gas is $4/ga instead of $2/ga if they only need to drive 30 miles to watch a storm or tornado. Pile everyone in the truck, take your iPhone to get video and pics to post to Instagram, and you're good to go.

 

[Jacob Ferden]

One other factor that has been mentioned briefly a couple of times: if you really go in and look at it, Saturday was not just forecast in advance...it was arguably the MOST WELL-FORECAST outbreak ever in terms of days before the event. If you've seen that SPC progression thing on Facebook, you'll know what I'm talking about. A Day 7 over the area...then a Day 2 High Risk? On a Saturday??? I'm almost amazed the convergence wasn't worse than it was, frankly.

 

[Andrew Stoller]

It's merely everyone agreeing to follow certain standards of behavior, along with the benefits that naturally come with having a large group.

No offense, but the Catholic church can't get it's members to follow certain standards of behavior; what makes you think a storm chasing organization will make all members obey traffic laws? isn't that the issue at hand in this thread? Chasers obeying traffic laws?