Should Chasers Report, and If So - How?

[Rick Smith]

I've been lurking for a while as this discussion has evolved, but I've seen a couple of mentions about WFO OUN and wanted to chime in with my perspective.

Like most NWS offices, OUN is NOT overflowing with reports during svr wx. Quite the contrary - we are often looking for information from whatever source we can find, whether it is a spotter, an observer, law enforcement, the media or even a gas station attendant in a remote area.

We will accept a report from any chaser, at any time, either by telephone, amateur radio, e-mail, etc. We rely on chase images, videos and accounts to assist us in piecing together svr wx events, and several of the chasers on this list have assisted us in the past.

If there is a perception otherwise, I'd be glad to discuss it..

Rick

 

[matt patterson]

Rick, i was making reference to when a severe event is impacting the metro area.

 

[al pietrycha]

Skywarn spotter - access to the 'spotter net' + report directly to net controller = local warning issued.

Storm chaser - no access to spotter nets + must rely on cell service (if available) to contact local NWS office + talk to the call center + get transferred to radar + radar consults WCM + WCM contacts local authorities = local authorities sound the siren (if the storm hasn't moved on by now). And this only works IF the local NWS knows and trusts the chaser's judgment in most cases. Plus, you've put the chaser on hold for ten minutes while all this gets worked out ... grrr. How many chasers are actually going to go through all this when all they really want to do is chase the friggin storm? Of course that's what we want to do ... we're storm chasers.

Perhaps the Spotter Network would be a good option here, as a quick and easy method to send real-time reports to the NWS, and without any hassles.

www.spotternetwork.org

As an aside for the chasers, we wrote a paper a few years back in the NWA Digest highlighting the importance of chasers to the warning decision process for locations where spotters are few and far between. The event took place in the TX Panhandle, 15 May 2003. Chasers verified 65% (17 of 26) of the tornadoes that occurred within the AMA WFO CWA. See here for the paper.

http://stormeyes.org/pietrycha/tmp/NWAversion2a2.pdf

--Al Pietrycha
Tube chaser going on 20+ yrs

 

[Jeff Snyder]

I wanted to clear up that I didn't intend my comments to be "anti-OUN". With OUN, it's not really any "bad" experiences I've had, but just not as good as with SGF, ICT, and TSA (I mention those offices because I've had correspondences with personnel in those NWSFOs). It's worth noting that, IMO, the linked spotter net(s) set up in the OUN CWA are some of the best I've run across. From the very rapid radar updates and "insider-info" to the breadth of coverage (both highly important when in-field data / internet is unreliable or absent), I think the system set up in OUNs CWA is one of the best around, even if reports seem to be discouraged on one of the linked freqs (e.g 147.045). I understand the need for traffic control and organization, but I've heard people discouraged from reporting, being told that they should report to one of the local stations (with the local operator relaying that information "up the chain"). In most instances, this is understandable given the potential for massive activity during some events. For chasers unfamiliar to the area or the local nets, however, it may not always be feasible to spend a few minutes scanning the freq band to find a local Skywarn/spotter station/repeater on which to submit the report. I don't think much can necessarily be done about this, since it's the nature of the beast (an organized, efficient system is not likely to be the most open system). It's still many times better than some of the "locked-down" RACES / ARES nets I've heard (with some ops making it very clear that reports from non-members are strongly discouraged). Regardless, I wanted to clear up any confusion.

 

[Mike Peregrine]

Perhaps the Spotter Network would be a good option here, as a quick and easy method to send real-time reports to the NWS, and without any hassles.

www.spotternetwork.org

This thread was worth all the struggle just to get this link. It's the first I've heard of this (even though I'd seen the link in Allison House, but just never investigated), and it sounds like a great idea to me. Something like this just might turn out to be the solution we're looking for. Sign me up -

 

[Willie Dines]

This link is perfect, in fact on Jeff Miller's youtube video rant, I had stated that maybe it would be a solution if all chares, spotters, etc, were all signed up with the various networks, like Skaywarn, etc, after all, we're all here because we want to help save lives by chaseing and/or researching severe wx, and so, I feel that it's our responsibility to do whatever is necessary to help all warnings get out that little bit sooner, and the only way that we can do that, is if we all have the co-operation of all networks and NWS offices, and so on

To answer the initial question - Yes, I would report and I would do it every single time that there is any possible life threatening weather occuring, reguardless of it being a tornado, flash flood or large hail, if it's a risk to life and limb, then it should be reported no matter what, no if's or but's about it, because the more information there is from various reports, the more accurately detailed the warning will be, when given out to the public

I wish you all a safe and successful chase season, as I realise that you all do something that carries more significance, than many people realize, I just wish that many more people could see that too

Willie

 

[Bryce Stone]

I'm not going to get into this one (call or don't call) because I think it has been exhaustively covered, but I did want to make one observation on the off-topic line of the thread. At the last spotter meeting I went to, I was reading the picture credits on the pics/videos that the NWS showed during the presentation. Almost without exception, I recognized the names on the slides/video as either Stormtrack members (saw some of Tony Laubach's stuff) or legend chasers (Samaras, Moore, Moller, etc.). I felt that the NWS displays an incredible arrogance in bashing the chasing community while using the materials it produces.

Also, I was a spotter for three years before I ever started chasing. Looking back at my years of being a spotter, I can see that I didn't know jack. It took real-world experience to make me comfortable with observing severe weather and knowing what I was seeing. Spotters are necessary (I still am one), but your average chaser knows 100x more than your average spotter.

Therefore, in an ideal world, chaser reports would be taken much more seriously and relayed much more quickly. So the question becomes this: will chaser reports ever be taken as seriously as spotter reports and relayed as quickly? Probably not, and I certainly don't know how to change that fact.

 

[scott r currens]

Like most NWS offices, OUN is NOT overflowing with reports during svr wx. Quite the contrary - we are often looking for information from whatever source we can find, whether it is a spotter, an observer, law enforcement, the media or even a gas station attendant in a remote area.
Rick

Rant on>

If that is the case then why do NWS offices hide their 24/7 phone numbers? Severe Weather sometimes happens outside of office hours. Shouldn’t an updated list that is freely available to all spotters and chasers be published by the NWS? Heck if you really need reports the phone numbers should be available to the public, in every phone book. You could have them in big bold print at the top of your webpage’s during severe weather events.

WE NEED YOUR SEVERE WEATHER REPORTS! CALL US 24/7 at 1 800 BAD WTHR

Rant off>

I am not trying to attack any particular NWS office. I do however think it is ridiculous that the only way to get the phone numbers is from a semi-secret list that was compiled by Storm Chasers. If the NWS wants reports why do they hide phone numbers like they are PIN numbers to their Bank Card?

 

[Jeff Snyder]

I am not trying to attack any particular NWS office. I do however think it is ridiculous that the only way to get the phone numbers is from a semi-secret list that was compiled by Storm Chasers. If the NWS wants reports why do they hide phone numbers like they are PIN numbers to their Bank Card?

FWIW, some (many?) offices do include a 1-800 number on the bottom of their warnings. I won't speak for OUN, but I would think that the biggest reason WFOs do not publically provide a reporting number is because they are bound to get tens/hundreds of calls from people who don't have anything to report. During a severe weather event, things can be busy enough without having to field calls of "I'm in podunkville, is a tornado going to hit here?"-type or "I'm Joe John, and I see hail the size of olives falling and the winds are strong"-type of calls. That's partly why the NWS tries to train spotters, and many in the general public are not trained to properly estimate winds (estimating wind is difficult enough for those who have been around high winds) or other events. This is where ham radio becomes an important piece of equipment. Providing the phone list to chaser- or spotter-only types helps ensure that (hopefully) only reports from people who can be trusted are called in. Well, "trusted" isn't the best word -- perhaps trained and motivated are better. I don't have a problem with relatively restricted phone lists for this reason, but I do think it's important to provide a phone list to begin with. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Jesse Risley]

I'm not going to get into this one (call or don't call) because I think it has been exhaustively covered, but I did want to make one observation on the off-topic line of the thread. At the last spotter meeting I went to, I was reading the picture credits on the pics/videos that the NWS showed during the presentation. Almost without exception, I recognized the names on the slides/video as either Stormtrack members (saw some of Tony Laubach's stuff) or legend chasers (Samaras, Moore, Moller, etc.). I felt that the NWS displays an incredible arrogance in bashing the chasing community while using the materials it produces.

While I don't disagree with anything you've written, I do think the NWS is taking an unfair hit on this thread. Having a background in education, I can tell you that the public sector (which includes the NWS as well as law enforcement and education) has taken an exteme beating in recent years as we slowly become a more litiguous society. Now, more than ever before, the public demands greater accountabilty from people whose salaries are paid by their tax dollars. There is nothing wrong with this, since taxpayers deserve a "bang for their buck" so to speak, but like everything else we're overcompensating and allowing armchair quarterbacks to run the court system.

The bottom line: 1. The NWS needs to cover their ***es and I can understand why they hesistate to publicly endorse storm chasing. 2. The people reading and responding to this thread have a greater appreciation for the destructive power of mother nature than 90+% of the general population. It's simply inexcusable not to report potentially life threatening weather conditions; it's a civic duty. Let the NWS live with themselves if they blow off your report - at least you can look at yourself in the mirror when the day is over!

 

[Dan Robinson]

I agree that there shoud be some sort of standard or certification for chasers so that the NWS can be confident in the information received by them. Any TV meteorologist can tell you about the things that people call in about. Back when I was strictly a 'lightning' chaser, I wouldn't have been qualified enough to reliably identify supercell features even though I was still technically a 'chaser'.

I wonder if it would be possible that a Skywarn-type certification could be offered to chasers. I could see it being something of a more rigorous standard, since the average chaser is more likely to encounter a warning-worthy situation (and be faced with the responsibility of calling in a report) than the average spotter.

 

[Amos Magliocco]

This thread reminds me of ESPN's coverage of Terrell Owens. It circles back on itself and gets more dramatic with every lap. Now we're talking about some kind of a rift between NWS and chasers? Well, there isn't one. It doesn't exist. Every office and every storm system, they take our reports and issue warnings on the basis of those reports. Look through the LSRs and count the "chaser reported" entries.

Mike talked about a rift between chasers and spotters in his opening post, but he didn't give an example. I'm not saying he's necessarily wrong, some spotters think poorly of us I'm sure, but how does their vague disrespect translate into a battle of wills between NWS and chasers? I cited an example of not having a report immediately create a warning, but the guy wasn't rude to me. And frankly, whether or not he issued a warning was his business, not mine. I didn't take it personally.

So one met in ICT said something negative about us to the paper. Good for him. Got his name in print. I don't think it's fair or logical to project that opinion or attitude onto all WFO's and every staff member. That's just not the way they think. When you consider the tens of thousands of perfectly pleasant interactions between chasers and NWS in the last twenty years, isn't this thread going overboard a little?

Worse, with people taking to their blogs and YouTube to blast the weather service, aren't we widening a "rift" that wasn't really there? I'm sure the NWS guys don't like hearing what assholes they are. I'm sure it will be on their minds the next time we light up the phone lines.

It's hard to remember this, but once upon a time, Stormtrack Magazine (definitely NOT the website we frequent today) had the stated mission of bringing together chasers and scientists. Now it seems like we're looking for reasons to drive the groups apart again. It's too bad. I don't know what purpose it serves.

 

[Mike Peregrine]

Amos - I did state a relevant example later in the thread, but feel it's actually immaterial to the real issue. I agree that making sweeping generalizations on any front would be exercising poor judgment and it's unnecessary, but don't feel like that's the point the thread is struggling to make. The NWS as a group is not bad and it works for the public good ... spotters as a group aren't bad either and we should all feel thankful for them as well. I guess I feel like we owe it to ourselves to take a look at any weaknesses that may exist and do exactly as you say, work to bring the groups together.

The point is that a chaser cannot pick up a transeiver wherever they are chasing and call in a report as easily as a spotter. Why is this? Maybe personally you haven't experienced this, and I'm doubtful that many of the vets out there have as well ... but several do reference cases of their reports being shut out from the system. Plenty of these nets are in rural areas where we have no cell phone coverage as well. How would you place a call in this case to report a wall cloud that is tightening up just before it gets to the next town? You wouldn't and couldn't.

That's the point. If reports are shut out of the system (actually, I'm going to say if ANY report is shut out for whatever reason - we shouldn't be so quick to discount the public either, IMO), then there may be something we can take a closer look at and start working toward improvement.

I'm actually pretty hopeful for something like the Spotter Network. I've been looking at it all week since Mr. Pietrycha posted the link. It's true that it relies on cell/data signal as well. But what I love about the idea is that it provides a record of reports. If you have ten chasers placing reports in the Spotter Network and then people on an individual level decide not to act, then the ball is certainly in their court.

 

[Rick Smith]

Just wanted to touch on a couple of quick things...

1. Some NWS offices publish their 800 number, others don't. We have a phone line that is answered 24 hours a day, every day of the year that ANYONE can call. That number for the OUN CWA is 405-325-3816. That number is NOT hidden, and can be found in the newspaper, phone books, etc. We do not publish our 800 number because we have only one line, and its primary purpose is to allow us to communicate quickly with our partners in emergency management in the 56 counties we cover.

2. We rely very heavily on video and images from storm chasers, and always provide proper credit in each spotter training presentation we do. I have referred quite a few interested people who wanted to purchase videos we included. We do not "bash" storm chasers in our presentations.

Rick

 

[Amos Magliocco]

Mike,

It seems to me that closed Skywarn nets are a different subject than the relationship between the NWS and chasers. I don't know how much direct influence any WFO has in the way a given county organizes a weather net, but they don't have direct control in all cases or perhaps in any. In North Texas, the local ARES or RACES groups organize and operate the spotters. I think some Skywarns have good reason for operating controlled, closed networks (I have heard "spammers" interrupt Skywarn nets for kicks many times) and it's presumptuous of us to think they'd put aside their rules and procedures for somebody they didn't know just because he called himself a "chaser." Reporting an imminent threat to life and property should be an exception, of course, always. Are there networks where reports of imminent threats to life and property are not allowed on the air?

Again, NWS doesn't organize or operate local Skywarn nets. The local hams do that. But even in that case, I think the relationship between freelance chasers and spotter groups are pretty good. I've checked in and out of more nets than I can count and have never been mistreated. However, I know that I can't pop into the Dallas net during an event and join in the fun. I accept that they operate a more controlled net because they have a lot of ground to cover and a tremendous amount at stake. If I see a tornado about to plow into a children's hospital, however, I bet they'd tolerate my report.

My main point was that this thread had morphed into a rant about how badly the NWS treats chasers. This just isn't so. It's hyperbole created on the internet, but unlike most of what happens on the never-never land of Stormtrack, it could actually have an effect on the real world. It could cause hard feelings where there's no reason for them or make newer chasers more reluctant to call the weather service.

In my experience, the NWS offices have been uniformly professsional, courteous, and have always always welcomed my reports. They want our reports. I think it's a disservice to suggest otherwise.