Should Chasers Report, and If So - How?

[Mike Peregrine]

Well - I'm glad that some of you haven't lost faith at this point, but I totally have. The system fails to keep the public's interests at heart.

Here's the deal. That quote was made by a representative of the NWS as an official record. He is officially stating the position of the National Weather Service to the public. Even if he is the only person in ICT that personally feels this way, it doesn't matter. He is merely stating the only official policy we've ever heard given to the public or to spotters at their training. And he is likely just repeating the sentiment of his own superiors.

At this point we have NWS personnel individually who happen to be chasers that can't post reports publically for fear of repercussion by supervisors. They can't call themselves storm chasers. They are merely off-duty NWS personnel who were acting as 'mobile spotters.' None dare to say anything in a thread like this, and I don't blame them one bit. I wouldn't either, because livelihoods are at stake. What a sad, negative situation. There's no possible way to even freely to share information. It should be censored, otherwise people might think it's ok to drive around and observe the weather.

It's been a nice gesture when some have thanked chasers for the efforts they have made at times. But any acknowledgement to chasers really does not matter, because the only thing that the public sees are quotes like the one in Lawrence. What a tough balancing act the ones who are interested in getting information from us must face. I can't even imagine.

But everyone is right ... I need to forget about it and just shut up. Peregrine is back on the board, needlessly overdramatizing the situation as usual. Things are great the way they are and I need to just humbly do my civic duty and then look forward to getting sucker-punched by someone for showing up in the first place.

 

[Mickey Ptak]

"Should Chasers Report"

Depends on the chaser I guess; their personal preferences, experience, and willingness to do so.

"and If So - How?"

1.) Pick up your cell phone.
2.) Dial the number. (use those numbers (0-9) on your phone)
3.) Press the call button (this button is usually green)
4.) When call is answered, make your report.

Simple!

So damn pew pew over nothing... Have a fantastic day!

Mick

 

[Mike Peregrine]

Thanks Mickey ... it's all so clear now.

 

[Jeff Miller]

"Should Chasers Report"

Depends on the chaser I guess; their personal preferences, experience, and willingness to do so.

"and If So - How?"

1.) Pick up your cell phone.
2.) Dial the number. (use those numbers (0-9) on your phone)
3.) Press the call button (this button is usually green)
4.) When call is answered, make your report.

Simple!

So damn pew pew over nothing... Have a fantastic day!

Mick

This certainly answers the questions of how to physically make a report. Unless some of us are disabled for whatever reason, I am highly doubtful that there will be failure of any chaser out there to follow these simple instructions. However as I am certain Mickey has astutely recognized but not mentioned, the situation regards reactions to our "reports".

ALL that we want as chasers is our reports to be recognized, our word to be acknowledged, and to be treated respectfully, not labeled as "road hazards" even when we expend tremendous time and energy on the road to report and try to save some lives. That's not a whole lot to ask.

The only solutions to this problem are as follows:

1. Accept the way it is and shut up.
2. Create a way that our reports will be recognized properly.
3. Don't report.

Two has been thought of over and over again from storm chaser organizations to some sort of licencing. Every idea has always been heartily discussed but never brought into fruition. So scratch Two.

Three is an option that will end this debate once and for all. But morally and ethically, is it appropriate? No, because if we aren't even going to attempt to try to report, then people would say that the only reason we are out there is for "thrill and glory". Oh wait, they say that already now, even when we do try to make a difference.

Then there is one - the answer that everyone hates but does anyway. This topic will exhaust itself, chasers will go out, make reports, get shunned, and go home like why did I even try. And occasionally, a WFO will heartily acknowledge our report and make us go home beaming because yes we made a difference.

Then this whole thing will start up again next year because everyone is unhappy about the way our reports and reputation are treated. Yes, the same old thing year after year. Why not? This is the 4th or 5th yearly run of this same topic Im sure.

I just get tired of discussing the same thing and getting the same responses and the same results and nothing can be done to change it. Oh well, thats the way it is. Now, let's get started on Chase Ethics on the road. Or the Amber Light Bar Thread. Why not LOL.

 

[Mickey Ptak]

Thanks Mickey ... it's all so clear now.

You are most welcome Mike. I am glad I can be of assistance. If there are any more smart ass remarks I can make please let me know, I have plenty to choose from.

BTW: I am not poking fun at anyone in particular, just having fun with a really hot topic. I knew it would come down to spotter vs. chasers and who is the best between the two. Not to mention what the NWS stereotypically thinks of chasers.

A hot topic and I am sure you were well aware of that fact before creating it.

Mick

 

[Mike Peregrine]

yeah ... made sure to mention there was a high risk when it started. But that's the point. We can't work together for all this stupid emotionalism and end up working against each other all the time. There really is no reasonable solution to it but to shut up and accept it.

 

[Tony Laubach]

The biggest problem is my report being blown off. Amos and I share a similar view; let the blame be on someone else's hands. I've done my job. I make every effort to report what I see in a timely manner. I've called into NWS offices on several occasions, including my own here in Denver, and have been blown off for my report. Fortunately, no tornado I have ever seen as resulted in the death of anyone. I certainly don't take that as owed to me, I've just been lucky. Tornadoes always have, and likely will continue to take the lives of people. All the warning in the world will not save everyone. None-the-less, I will feel a lot better about what I am doing as long as I have relayed the information to the proper place. If they choose not to believe my report or blow it off, that's their choice. Not mine.

Kiesling also makes a good point, and this is where I'll happily take some credit. I am avid about calling in flood and wind damage reports. NWS Denver hears from me all the time in the summer when we get slow moving thunderstorms. Jon V and I enjoy the hell out of urban flood type storms. Living in Denver as long as I have, I know the hotspots. I know where to be, when to be there, and am usually the first one to get such reports to NWS. Countless Urban and Small Stream Flood Advisories as well as a couple flash flood warnings have been issued on storms in which I have reported, many probably due to my reports. Yes, I take pride in that. In fact, I'm on the scene of these situations before the emergency crews most times. I've never had to call those crews cause of a life threatening situation, but more times than not, I'm already on the phone with a video camera tripoded before other authorities show up. But yes, even outside of Denver, I am reporting these situations.

I think Doug is also true in saying tornadoes are usually called in 10 times by 10 different witnesses (chasers, emergency crews, police, media, etc), but few times do you see flood reports or wind damage come in. Even if it is after the fact, I still make the report. I feel its my duty as a chaser to relay any information I can related to severe weather. Some may not feel that's way and that is fine. We're all out for different reasons. I will not say reporting is my number 1 priority, but its very high on that list.

A quick point to the chaser vs. spotter thing, I consider myself both. End of story. I believe there is a difference between the two, and this is noted quite well in my chasing logs AND by how I conduct my "professionalism" between the two. As a chaser, I consider myself doing more than just chasing a storm; I'm taking a road trip, enjoying being out with friends in hopes to see severe weather. As a spotter, mainly locally, I'm out to document and report what's going on to either NWS, media, or both. So yes, there is a difference, but it doesn't make one better than the other.

 

[Mickey Ptak]

However as I am certain Mickey has astutely recognized but not mentioned, the situation regards reactions to our "reports".

ALL that we want as chasers is our reports to be recognized, our word to be acknowledged, and to be treated respectfully, not labeled as "road hazards" even when we expend tremendous time and energy on the road to report and try to save some lives. That's not a whole lot to ask.

Good luck with that. This will never change unless 90% of us quit chasing. As long as we are cluttering the roads, we will always be considered a “hazard” and “thrill seekers”. I personally will not be one of those 90%.

The only solutions to this problem are as follows:

1. Accept the way it is and shut up.
2. Create a way that our reports will be recognized properly.
3. Don't report.

Then there is one - the answer that everyone hates but does anyway. This topic will exhaust itself, chasers will go out, make reports, get shunned, and go home like why did I even try. And occasionally, a WFO will heartily acknowledge our report and make us go home beaming because yes we made a difference.

Here’s the dill pickles.

IMO Option 1 and 2 are your only options. If you decide you want to call in, and do just that, and in response the NWS official chooses to ignore or down play your report then that is their call. You did your part as a chaser.

If the official is a prick to you while receiving your report, then blow it off. There is no need to cry. Again, you did your part.

I am not sure what the fuss is about. If you want personal recognition for your report than you just may have to understand and except where we are as chasers these days. Some people think of chasers as “hazards” and others think of chasers as “life savers”.

Mick

 

[Jeff Snyder]

Why so many generalizations? One meteorologists says something about chasers, and now the entire NWS organizations, and all employees of the NWS, ignore chasers? A few spotter nets are exlusive and only want reports from their own spotters, and now all Skywarn nets are rude and ignore chasers? Some spotters don't know much beyond what they are told in a (sometimes questionable) 2-hr annual Skywarn training session and now all spotters are idiots?

There's hyperbole dripping from this thread. Clearly, I feel there is a lot of "grey" area; this is certainly not a black - and - white issue. I know it's not desirable for an NWS employee to say something something negative about chasers (a gross generalization in itself), and such comments from employees acting as representatives of an organization should, in the ideal world, represent the official position of that organization. But, I strongly feel that, in the real world, this is not the case. Some NWS mets (or offices, for that matter) may disregard chaser reports, but there are some that certainly do not. I've seen numerous LSRs credit reports to storm chasers. I've emailed several offices after-the-event, and most have seemed very interested in my reports, video, and/or pictures. In particular, my experience with the WCMs and/or MICs at SGF, TSA, and ICT have been very positive. So, I think this is, very much, a YMMV procedure. Regardless, I think I can understand why SOME may be suspicious of "chaser reports", since I've heard some reports from "chasers" that seem dubious and inaccurate. If a met gets 10 reports from different Johhny Does, and they're all dubious and questionable, I can understand how that met would take a more cautious view of further reports. I'm not a warning met, so I don't know exactly what goes through the minds of mets as they deal with significant severe weather events. I would imagine that they'd be just like most of us -- if we hear a bunch of dubious reports, I think we'd be cautious of further reports ourselves (and I think that's a human response). But, I don't think it can hurt to submit your accurate reports (I trust that most of us on this board are knowledgeable and responsible enough to be accurate in our reports, if reports are made). Sure, it may be dismissed, but it may also make-or-break a warning extension, etc.

I just don't think this needs to be such a polarized issue. If you can report, and you want to report, then do it. If you have some reason why you don't want to report (e.g. nasty experiences in the past), then don't report. Personally, I favor Amos's stance -- if you make the report, then the blood is off your hands, and you've done what you can do to participate in the warning process. I don't think it's required, though, since people should be able to do what they want and what they are comfortable with (assuming they aren't increasing the risk). I'd certainly hope that most feel compelled to submit a report, however.

Obviously, different circumstances call for different levels of concern over reports. Big days in Oklahoma in May are often accompanied by the armada of TV helicopters, chasers, and spotters, so I'm not AS concerned about making sure I report everything.

 

[Dan Robinson]

I don't think anyone is lumping everyone into one category. That's exactly what we are trying to avoid, but the problem is that the veiwpoint that makes it into the paper or onto the news is almost always the negative generalization. That is what the public is reading and hearing. If the pro-chaser mets would get the soundbites and quotes once in a while, it would be a different story.

 

[matt patterson]

Very true Jeff, NWS TSA takes a large number of their reports from the chasers who work for the TV stations, or the TV station relays the report to the NWS. TSA is very happy to have these reports and has a great relationship with nearly all the chasers in these parts. I would venture to say that E OK/NW AR skywarn is actually composed of more chasers than most other skywarns in the country. OUN is a totally different story. The area covered vs the amount of chasers and spotters and law enforcement creates a HUGE amount of reporting traffic. I dont think that Oklahoma is the place that this thread should be focused on because of how severe weather is covered by the vast and agressive local media.

 

[Brian Stertz]

I agree with you Matt...when I lived and chased in the Tulsa CWA (1998-2005) ...a report sent hit the severe wx statements, local storm reports, tv live coverage very quickly and completely. I was very impressed by Steve Pilz and the others at the NWS Tulsa (including George Matthews when he was there). It did not matter if it was spotter or chaser...or whatever. If the report checked out on radar and had merit, they reacted quickly. My hats off to the Tulsa NWS for a job well done. They've got a tough job dealing with those E. Oklahoma/W.Arkansas HP's that plague the area normally. I had many frustrations with those rain-wrapped beasts and getting in position without getting hammered by baseballs.

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

My solution is to call 911 if I see a tornado. It's quick, it's simple, and it relays the info to emergency management folks. If the sheriff wants to pass that on to the NWS, more power to him. A town's EMS guy will usually crank the sirens with a chaser call-in report of a tornado on a severe warned storm whether or not they've got an official tornado warning or not. This also avoids politics, since you're dealing with local law enforcement, not the NWS. Yeah, the public reports often get less weight than spotter reports or (sometimes) chaser reports, but it keeps me from having to memorize numbers and which WXOs welcome chaser reports and which are too busy or otherwise disinclined to take them. And often if you can explain to them that you're a chaser (you can toss in the phrase "professional chaser" if you do it a lot and know what you're doing), they'll give your words more weight. If not, well, that's the guy the town elected to protect them.

I'll often file storm reports after the fact if I see anything interesting, though the NWS website makes this a bit of a chore to do.

One thing that should be pointed out is that there ARE a significant number of jackasses out there chasing storms. I'm sure most of us have driven by them lots of times and maybe even personally know a few of them. Yes, for the most part they're just locals who hear a warning on the radio and drive towards it. But it doesn't matter. The things they do affect the public perception of what we do. And for the most part, many "real" chasers generally speed and sometimes either intentionally or unintentionally drive recklessly when near supercells. These kinds of things get noticed by law enforcement; they're just usually too busy trying to protect lives to deal with it. Not that they don't want to pull us over and taze us; they probably do.

IIRC, wasn't it in Kansas a couple years back where a speeding chaser got off of a ticket by telling the Sheriff he was working for the NWS? And then the Sheriff called the NWS later and found out the truth?

 

[Mark Manchester]

I happened to be at a meeting with a NWS representative today and I brought this subject up. He couldn't understand why any office would discount a chaser report, especially when so many chasers use the NWS radar and products for their information while chasing.

 

[Jeff Miller]

I made a short video blog concerning this subject, nothing really I haven't said here, but felt it would be a great expression. I think that's the end of what I will say on this subject... it's just honest.

I really appreciate the honest candor on this forum, it is refreshing to see constructive dialog take place without flame wars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUzAJNBpIgg