Oklahoma Weather Tracking Licensure Legislation

[JamesCaruso]

A fellow chaser sent this to me. I downloaded the PDF and read the bill. I think it’s just proposed at this point, not passed. And if it is passed, I don’t think it takes effect until July 1. From what I can tell, the licensure is not required to “chase,” and it says nothing about people “chasing” without a license. Its only purpose seems to be to pass roadblocks or gain access to restricted areas. Appears to have no impact as a practical matter - chasers generally couldn’t get past roadblocks before, and we still won’t be able to. The only risk is that this law encourages more roadblocks. But I don’t see that happening. That would imply that LEOs were only keeping roads open in the past just in case there happened to be a media or research chaser that wanted to get through.

Curious about others’ thoughts on this, especially those in OK that may have local intel.

Oklahoma SB158 | 2025 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2025-02-03) Weather tracking licensure; creating the Oklahoma Emergency Weather Response and Tracking Regulatory Act. Effective date. Emergency. [Coauthored by Representative Fetgatter (principal House author)]

legiscan.com

https://legiscan.com/OK/text/SB158/id/3080906/Oklahoma-2025-SB158-Introduced.pdf

 

[Warren Faidley]

lol.... was just going to post this myself, thanks.

What a load of poop. This is the ultimate Gestapo attempt to stop storm chasing. First of all, I do not believe you can "license" or limit access to news events under the First Amendment. What are they going to do? Block roads and check for your chasing license? Arrest you and haul your ass to prison if you don't have a chasing license?

This topic is obviously going to ignite a fire storm.

View attachment badges.mov

 

[JamesCaruso]

For those who don’t want to read the whole proposed bill, here is a synopsis generated by ChatGPT:

Oklahoma Senate Bill 158 (SB 158) proposes the creation of the Oklahoma Emergency Weather Response and Tracking Regulatory Act of 2025. The bill aims to establish a professional severe weather tracker license, which would be managed by Service Oklahoma.


Under the proposed law, any severe weather tracker employed by a qualified media outlet must


• Maintain a valid license on file with their employer.


• Display their license and the media outlet’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) number on their vehicle.


• Pass a criminal background check.


• Provide a letter from the chief meteorologist of their media organization.


• Show proof of ongoing insurance coverage.


The bill sets licensing fees at $500 for the initial application and $250 annually for renewal. Service Oklahoma would have the authority to suspend or revoke licenses. Additionally, it establishes the Severe Weather Tracker Licensure Fund, and allows designated tracker vehicles to be classified as emergency vehicles during significant weather events (legiscan.com).



For the full text of the bill, you can refer to LegiScan(legiscan.com).

 

[JamesCaruso]

I gave ChatGPT this prompt:

What effect, as a practical matter, will this law have on recreational storm chasers? Recreational chasers could not get through roadblocks before either. So they just still can’t. I doubt this bill will prompt LEOs to close roads more often. It’s not as if they were keeping them open only for professional storm chasers before!

The response:

As a practical matter, SB 158 is unlikely to significantly change how recreational storm chasers operate in Oklahoma. Here’s why:





1. Roadblocks Were Already a Barrier


Recreational chasers have never had guaranteed access to roadblocks or restricted areas during severe weather. Law enforcement officers (LEOs) primarily close roads for public safety, and their decision-making is based on storm severity, debris, and traffic, not the presence of professional chasers. This bill doesn’t expand law enforcement powers regarding road closures—it simply formalizes an existing distinction between credentialed media chasers and everyone else.


2. No Apparent Increase in Road Closures


There’s no indication that SB 158 would prompt LEOs to close roads more often. If anything, emergency declarations and law enforcement protocols already dictate when roads are shut down, primarily to protect the general public and emergency responders. This bill does not change those protocols.


3. Formal Recognition for Media Chasers


What the bill does is establish a licensing framework for storm chasers affiliated with “qualified media outlets.” This allows them to:


• Legally identify themselves as emergency weather trackers.


• Have their vehicles classified as emergency vehicles during severe weather events.


• Provide proof of professional status via licensing and insurance requirements.


For LEOs managing roadblocks, this could make it easier to distinguish between media-affiliated chasers and independent or recreational chasers. However, since recreational chasers were already being turned away at roadblocks, their situation remains unchanged.


4. No Direct Criminalization of Recreational Chasing


The bill does not prohibit storm chasing by individuals who are not licensed. Recreational chasers can still operate as they did before, but they will not have the benefits of licensure, such as emergency vehicle designation or guaranteed road access.


Bottom Line


Recreational storm chasers are not losing a privilege they previously had—they are simply not gaining the privileges granted to licensed trackers under this bill. Unless law enforcement agencies interpret the law in an unexpected way (such as closing roads more aggressively or penalizing unlicensed chasers), most independent chasers will continue operating as they always have: navigating roadblocks when possible and relying on public road access where permitted.

 

[JamesCaruso]

Based on the above, on its face the bill doesn’t seem like it changes much. Doesn’t this already happen with hurricanes, where only the media can get onto evacuated barrier islands? I could see there being a concern about “slippery slope,” making LEOs maybe generally more aggressive, etc., but doesn’t seem like it’s too much to worry about. Having said that, definitely hoping OK chasers fight it tooth and nail!

 

[Warren Faidley]

A fellow chaser sent this to me. I downloaded the PDF and read the bill. I think it’s just proposed at this point, not passed. And if it is passed, I don’t think it takes effect until July 1. From what I can tell, the licensure is not required to “chase,” and it says nothing about people “chasing” without a license. Its only purpose seems to be to pass roadblocks or gain access to restricted areas. Appears to have no impact as a practical matter - chasers generally couldn’t get past roadblocks before, and we still won’t be able to. The only risk is that this law encourages more roadblocks. But I don’t see that happening. That would imply that LEOs were only keeping roads open in the past just in case there happened to be a media or research chaser that wanted to get through.

Curious about others’ thoughts on this, especially those in OK that may have local intel.

Oklahoma SB158 | 2025 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2025-02-03) Weather tracking licensure; creating the Oklahoma Emergency Weather Response and Tracking Regulatory Act. Effective date. Emergency. [Coauthored by Representative Fetgatter (principal House author)]

legiscan.com

https://legiscan.com/OK/text/SB158/id/3080906/Oklahoma-2025-SB158-Introduced.pdf

Like the majority of new laws, the interpretations will take years and unfortunately be challenged in court by charges and arrests. I can guaranteed you 100% that LEO will use this law to inhibit chasing. What about chasers parked on the side of the road? One could easily argue they are "unauthorized" and subject to arrest under the current wording. What about "spotters." There are no exemptions for spotters. What defines a "research" or "media" chaser. Are YouTube chasers qualified? You can only imagine what kind of nuclear argument will occur over this issue.

 

[Jonathan Scrogham]

I don’t see this having the huge impact some are saying it might have, at least for now. Even if it was targeting recreational chasing, how would they enforce it? On high risk days, are they going to pull over every chaser in the horde and arrest them if they don’t have a license? I do hope this proposal doesn’t snowball into other restrictions, and I could definitely see law enforcement less tolerant of chasers as a result.

 

[Dan Robinson]

I read the bill, and agree with James' synopsis. This bill is simply allowing for the elevation of certain chasers to the status of an emergency responder, with the privilege of having lights/sirens, right-of-way over other vehicles and access to blocked roads and other emergency scenes where the public (including the rest of chasers) is restricted from entering.

The most controversial thing about the proposed law, in my view, is that it grants that status to those who just have a media affiliation. That means that TV chasers can 'run code' and will have right-of-way over everyone else just like a fire truck, police car or ambulance does. Meaning you'll be required to pull over to let them pass if they're behind you. A lot of us regularly have video on national TV, so presumably we would also qualify - we'd just need some form of credentials issued to us. I wouldn't be comfortable doing that, even if I could.

 

[Drew Terril]

I tend to agree with James on this. I read the bill (probably the shortest bill I've ever read tbh), and I don't see how this would impact recreational chasers. It seems to allow a means to crack down on some of the reckless crap from certain news station chasers too. If they're licensed and continue to run people off the road (which I've had close calls with that on more than one occasion), then the state would have a means to restrict their access to notable events.

Note in the bill that it also applies to other weather related events like winter storms, wildfires, etc.

I think any, shall we say, overeager LEOs on the enforcement end would get reeled back pretty quick. Entire towns in Oklahoma have had their local PDs stripped of their power to write tickets on state maintained roadways before.

 

[Sean Ramsey]

Just wondering what the motive is behind the bill. Elevating a certain segment of chasers and holding them to a professional standard recognized by law would create a clear boundary between what would be called "Professionals" and recreational chasers, both local and out of state.

Did the bill writer decide to try, albeit indirectly begin addressing the convergence problems we see in Oklahoma each spring? Are they trying to rein in media and academia chasers by holding them to a higher standard given their visibility? Is the bill writer a weather enthusiast and a fan of chasing and this is a way to give chasers a boost in status?

Edit: Just had a thought that maybe there was some lobbying done by local media, given their chasers get impeded by convergence and this would provide them an avenue to stay up with the storms instead of getting stuck like the rest of us. They regularly complain about this on the air.

Merely speculation of course, but so many ways to slice this one up.

 

[Jesse Risley]

After reading the bill it appears to be a way to increase revenue for the state whilst allowing a select group of institutional research chasers and mass media chasers (e.g., university research teams, NOAA, NCAR, TV stations, etc.) to be classified as de facto emergency responders so that they can have immediate access to or use of public right-of-ways that are inaccessible to the plebians due to closures or roadblocks enforced by the state. It may also be an attempt by the state to categorically legitimize allowing a select group of said chasers to engage in risker chasing when the rest of the general public isn't allowed closer access to a storm due to something like an ongoing tornado, blizzard, wildfire, or flood emergency. In other words Vortex, KFOR and NCAR, for example, can zero meter on I-44 but everyone else will have to wait behind OHP's roadblock.

 

[Warren Faidley]

I have to kindly disagree with the potential effect of this bill. As my attorney wife pointed out, it's important to discover who is sponsoring the bill. Someone is promoting the bill. It's either law enforcement, the media or a research entity. Allowing the media to run "code-3" is insane. No state I'm aware of does this. Emergency service response requires special training. Can you imagine not being able to pass a media truck on the side of the road with red lights?

What happens to out of state research groups or media interests? Do they all need to get special code-3 training? What chaser will want to assist at disaster scenes only to discover they are going to get arrested for not being authorized to be there as they are leaving.

Again, it's foolish to theorize such a law would be benign. Who ever is sponsoring it wants special treatment and hobbyist chasers need to fight it.

 

[gdlewen]

Just wondering what the motive is behind the bill. Elevating a certain segment of chasers and holding them to a professional standard recognized by law would create a clear boundary between what would be called "Professionals" and recreational chasers, both local and out of state.

Did the bill writer decide to try, albeit indirectly begin addressing the convergence problems we see in Oklahoma each spring? Are they trying to rein in media and academia chasers by holding them to a higher standard given their visibility? Is the bill writer a weather enthusiast and a fan of chasing and this is a way to give chasers a boost in status?

So many ways to slice this one up lol.

I don't think this will go anywhere. Oklahoma legislators file far more bills each session than can possibly be heard. Many good bills don't get heard because of this. This bill may not even get a committee hearing.

I don't think this is addressing chaser convergence because it specifies Service Oklahoma, which handles various licensing such as driver's licenses, hunting and fishing, etc. Chaser convergence could be handled, for example, by attempting to control the parking/stopped vehicle density along roadways.

This could be just another attempt at regulation by a minority in the Legislature that never met a regulation it didn't like. But it looks like it was written by or for a large news outlet or by or for one of the OK universities. Maybe both. The word "institution" keeps appearing without any qualifier to include media outlets, which suggests OU or OSU originated the bill.

Question for the Gallery: Is anyone aware of particular university animus towards the chasing public that would elicit a bill like this?

One thing's for sure: once this is in place and "licensed weather trackers" are established, it will not be hard for local jurisdictions to create ordinances restricting who can park on shoulders during "significant weather events" to licensed weather trackers. (That's just one example.) A lot of verbage is spent on "significant weather events" so to me that's "down the road" aimed at chasers.

Parenthetically: There is a bill filed for the upcoming session (which also probably will not be heard) that would require state agencies that request legislation to make their request public and state the reasons why they request it. That would be nice, right about now.

 

[Dan Robinson]

Unfortunately I think the public will overwhelmingly support this bill. Most already view TV chasers as deserving of responder status and the "rest of us" as being in the way. Granting responder status to the media, though, doesn't seem practical for the reasons Warren covered, I'd think that part of the bill might be removed. The part requiring credentials to get past roadblocks is more realistic, but won't affect us much unless the DOT and/or LEOs start mass-closing roads on chase days. We've rehashed the dangers and impracticalities of that many times though.

 

[Warren Faidley]

After reading the bill it appears to be a way to increase revenue for the state whilst allowing a select group of institutional research chasers and mass media chasers (e.g., university research teams, NOAA, NCAR, TV stations, etc.) to be classified as de facto emergency responders so that they can have immediate access to or use of public right-of-ways that are inaccessible to the plebians due to closures or roadblocks enforced by the state. It may also be an attempt by the state to categorically legitimize allowing a select group of said chasers to engage in risker chasing when the rest of the general public isn't allowed closer access to a storm due to something like an ongoing tornado, blizzard, wildfire, or flood emergency. In other words Vortex, KFOR and NCAR, for example, can zero meter on I-44 but everyone else will have to wait behind OHP's roadblock.

And who decides what is "media" or "research?"