Storm Chasing: Ethics and Safety

[Jesse Risley]

As a relatively new chaser hoping to learn as much as I can from the immeasurable sum of wisdom accumulated on this forum, I applaud and highly encourage any and all discussion on the topics of safety, ethics, and strategy--none of which should be considered mutually exclusive (e.g., adopting a safer, more conservative chase strategy is ethically considerate toward other chasers, perhaps allowing everyone a wider margin to exercise their escape plans in the event of an uncommon sequence of events). The very dismissive and resigned comments on this particular thread chastising those who want to pursue such thoughtful discussions are entirely counterproductive. Yes, you might not be able to change the reckless behavior of those who choose to put themselves in undue danger deliberately and simultaneously jeopardize the wellbeing of others through their erratic actions behind the wheel, all the time avoiding the buffer provided by becoming better informed in between chases, except perhaps by calling them out and condemning their actions directly in the public square. BUT, you can certainly teach those with a real desire to learn how best to avoid such "whackos" and keep situationally aware on all fronts--weather, traffic, and otherwise.

I have to take issue with that comment, from a strictly respectful point of disagreement. I saw no ill intent by anyone to be "dismissive, resigned" or otherwise "chastising" towards those who share opposing viewpoints, and I don't think anyone was saying it shouldn't be discussed. After all, this is a message board, and that's what it exists for. However, just as you have a strong, well-articulated stance on the matter, so do others, so I would caution confusing disagreement with suggestions that no one can or should discuss the matter, as you might have gotten the wrong idea from some posters, including myself.

If you are newer, as you stated, then a search of the forum archives will reveal that this topic gets brought up at least once or twice per season, and it is always a popular media show after a major tornado or an actual outbreak. Some of us simply feel that the concept (i.e., legal regulation and/or internal ethics enforcement vis-a-vis a professional organization), while perhaps well-intended, is mostly impractical due to the uniqueness of storm chasing as opposed to other hobbies or professions. That doesn't mean we're not willing to debate, discuss, listen or facilitate civil discourse on the topic, and thus far I thought everyone did a fairly decent job of doing so without going ad hominem on others across the aisle. This also doesn't mean that there isn't room to learn from what happened last Friday, or that everyone wouldn't benefit from having a serious internal conversation about safety and storm chasing - just know that human beings are unique and disagreement shouldn't always be taken as a personal affront.

 

[Rob H]

I'm still inclined to say it's a pointless endeavor, *but* - I kind of see his point. We could at least try to establish some standards if we think it would help. If people listened everytime someone said an idea wasn't feasible we'd still be stuck back in the dark ages.

Form an organization, try to confer some sort of benefits to joining (a hat and a discount to Allisonhouse? I have no idea), hold members to standards, get big names on board. Have private webcasts for members where Chuck Doswell talks about some new thing at CIMSS or whatever. It would at least give new chasers an *idea* of where to start the right way, instead of just trial by fire like we do now. Maybe a real effort like this could also prompt the media to distinguish between a "chaser" and a local/whacker/whatever, and the association between chaser and reckless adrenaline junky would start to disappear.

Instead of trying to find reasons why it wouldn't work, maybe we should try to find ways to make it work.

 

[Jake Orosi]

Exactly. It doesn't have to be a matter of licensing; and being a hobby it doesn't even have to rise to the standard of a professional organization.

My other hobby is beekeeping, and there are local, regional, and national-level associations. You never need to join a one of them to keep bees, but there are benefits to doing so - first and foremost educational resources. These associations don't "dictate" a particular style of beekeeping or a set-in-stone standard methodology as a requirement for membership; but when you have those well-known, respected, and ethical personalities that are interacting with younger/newer membership, that ethical standard just tends to osmote because by and large newbies tend to want to emulate those old hands.

Obviously local clubs aren't a viable model; they're usually insular and whackerish and there just aren't that many chasers to begin with, compared to the average population in small area. But large-scale regional or national associations? I think we can do that. And given the subject matter a sort of pledge of ethics wouldn't be inappropriate either.

 

[STexan]

But LE does not distinguish between "trained chaser" and "local adrenaline junky". I think before the conversation is to continue further we need to distinguish if that additional training and "class time" is going to mean anything in the heat of the storm to anybody. Is the training going to get anyone the benefit of the doubt in a given situation. If not, then it would seem to be a doomed for failure as reality rears it's ugly head as it does with some unusual storms with unusual circumstances and events, especially in the prime locations near OKC, Wichita, Tulsa, etc where the dynamics of storm chasing change considerably.

You think the Tamaras team and others there didn't have significant training and "continuing education credits" and technology? And we see how that turned out. I think the need for "safety and ethics standards" speaks for itself and those that don't understand or embrace this are going to be a problem regardless what the responsible chasers do. Maybe when all is said and done, there would be some sort of visible distinction between trained chaser and not, but I'm unsure what that could ultimately mean come storm time.

 

[Sean Ramsey]

I think some sort of organization like the the NRA is a great idea, experienced leaders would need to step up but I think it's feasible. Posted this a year ago....


http://www.stormtrack.org/forum/showthread.php?28934-County-Officials-Critical-of-Storm-Chasers&p=322279#post322279

 

[Jake Orosi]

But LE does not distinguish between "trained chaser" and "local adrenaline junky". I think before the conversation is to continue further we need to distinguish if that additional training and "class time" is going to mean anything in the heat of the storm to anybody. Is the training going to get anyone the benefit of the doubt in a given situation. If not, then it would seem to be a doomed for failure as reality rears it's ugly head as it does with some unusual storms with unusual circumstances and events, especially in the prime locations near OKC, Wichita, Tulsa, etc where the dynamics of storm chasing change considerably.

You think the Tamaras team and others there didn't have significant training and "continuing education credits" and technology? And we see how that turned out. I think the need for "safety and ethics standards" speaks for itself and those that don't understand or embrace this are going to be a problem regardless what the responsible chasers do. Maybe when all is said and done, there would be some sort of visible distinction between trained chaser and not, but I'm unsure what that could ultimately mean come storm time.

Well there's really only one way to find out! The bonus is that training and class time certainly won't hurt anybody if it's presented the right way, whether or not it leads to a sea change in chasing. The people who aren't interested simply won't attend the classes or training rides; the people who are interested will extract great value from them. Will it keep them from ever winding up in danger? No, as we have sadly seen. But even that tragedy has teaching value - do you think Tim Samaras would've objected?

And still or not, even if chasers aren't necessarily made safer by the training, their hobby experience is made richer. There's people who can't extract anything useful from a radar image outside of "classic supercell shape" and "that little notch is where the tornado would be, right?". I bet there's any number of chasers who see velocity mode as unintelligible gibberish and never use it. What the heck is a skew-T and why should we care what it says anyway? Mesoscale discussions - they might pick out an occasional word they recognize, like "east" or "the", but the rest of it may as well be Cyrillic. I even suspect that most dot-chasers deep down inside don't want to be dot-chasers, but they're intimidated by all the lines and numbers it looks like they'd have to learn in order to evolve. All those people can be helped.

 

[rdale]

...and nothing has happened in that year. No laws. No bans. No regulations.

Instead of throwing out ideas to see if any stick, convince us naysayers with an actual plan for raising money, obtaining buyin, and providing benefits.

 

[Paul Schmit]

Jesse,

Thanks for your very thoughtful response. I hope my comments didn't come off as hypercritical. Chastise might not have been entirely appropriate (except perhaps those who initially thought the thread itself was disrespectful toward our fallen comrades), but I do think the individualistic "chase and let chase" mantra falls a little bit within this dismissive line of thought. As an experienced chaser, I'm sure you probably leap at the opportunity to pass on your wisdom to others, especially those who truly seek to learn with enthusiasm and an open mind. So perhaps that's why it strikes a chord with me when the dialogue incorporates absolute statements akin to, "no matter what we do or say, or how we try to standardize, we will never be able to fix the problem created by the less knowledgeable and more reckless 'chasers' out there." But I realize that this sort of statement isn't advocating a total abandonment of constructive discussion on boards like these. I apologize if I made it seem that way.

Maybe complimentary to Warren's allusion to Darwinism sorting things out, perhaps a more unified organization of serious chasers, perhaps even with designated spokespeople, will serve to drown out the "extreme" and reckless elements who currently get the lion's share of media coverage. If the most responsible among us are also the most inclined to respectfully bow out of the public conversation, then it will be that much harder to make a dent in the trajectory of the decline of storm chasing's public image.

As for STexan's question whether formal training will amount to any better decision-making in the field, in the heat of the moment, I'll just offer up a personal anecdote from my time as a skydiver. In skydiving, to obtain an entry-level license and be allowed to jump with another individual (who is not an instructor), you have to go through a roughly 6 hour ground school (which mostly teaches emergency procedures for the myriad issues you can run into up there), as well as ~25 training jumps with a progressive ascension in difficulty. However, after ~10 jumps you are already cleared to jump by yourself. With no one there to help you and very little time to react, the training is *everything*, and it is the only thing that can save your butt in a crisis. I had one particular jump where I passed my deployment altitude and couldn't find the handle to my pilot chute. Within a second or two I recalled the classroom instruction I received that told us to run our hands down the line of the container from mid-back to butt, and sure enough, the handle was wedged between my body and the container. I managed to deploy at a marginally safe altitude and the crisis was averted. I bring this up only to suggest that if formal instruction provided me key insight in a situation where I had only seconds to react, surely a large percentage of chasers would be able to utilize protocol for safety and strategy in an environment where the time to react is more likely >1 minute, several minutes if one has left oneself a better margin for contingencies. But you're right that the proof is in the pudding. I, for one, would love to see things formalized a bit more, if only to allow the best practices to rise to the top through some form of democratic consensus among those who know best.

 

[Jeff Duda]

I was just kind of hoping this tragedy would cause individuals to change their chasing strategies when it comes to mesocyclones and tornadoes, especially on days where the atmosphere is particularly volatile (i.e., high CAPE/high shear/high risk).

I understand the basic ethics and safety of a storm chaser. Basically they're the same ethics and safety rules that apply to driving on public roads in the US and to rock concerts - play hard and play smart, but follow the rules and pick up your fellow man when he goes down.

Everyone has a survival instinct - that little voice in their head that talks them out of doing something that is likely to kill them. I think my survival instinct kicks in at a lower threshold of danger than it does for other chasers. I tend to get nervous and worried once hail larger than an inch or two begins bombarding my car (especially when I can't see where the meso/tornado may be) or when the wind begins to increase and turn in towards where the meso/tornado is likely to be. Then I simply stop, take a few deep breaths, and go back the way I came in. I did this exact thing in NW Texas on May 23. I was chasing alone in unfamiliar territory in King County, which is about as rural as it gets since there are only two highways that go through the county. I was no longer getting radar updates (I was data-dead) and the CGs were getting uncomfortably close. I saw a base pop out of the rain well to my SW, but I also saw a base directly in front of me. Then the moderate rain turned into hailstones which got progressively larger. By the time they were going over 1" in size I had had enough. I was not 100% sure what was going on (the storm was moving in an atypical direction at an atypical orientation and was shape-shifting), and rather than be brash and possibly get my car bashed to s--t just to get in front of it, I stopped and turned back and tried to find another way around the storm.

It is my hope that the number of close calls and deaths from this event will cause everyone's survival instinct to kick in at a lower threshold. I do not support any legislation that would ban chasing given the complexities and difficulties with enforcing it, especially as it relates to the freedom of driving on public roads. But I hope people pick up on this message, which is usually what goes through my mind the instant my survival instinct kicks in:

Before you decide to punch that core or drive into that bear's cage: literally take a minute to stop and think about the consequences of your actions. Realize that what you're doing could kill you. You are not invincible, and you don't know the future. One misstep or one miscalculation and you're dead. Is your life really worth getting the shot that no one else got or getting closer than anyone else?

 

[Sean Ramsey]

...and nothing has happened in that year. No laws. No bans. No regulations.

Instead of throwing out ideas to see if any stick, convince us naysayers with an actual plan for raising money, obtaining buyin, and providing benefits.

Benefits: Centralized organization, public representation, opportunity for endorsement from law enforcement, government officials, metorology community (?) a voice against any legislation (if any is proposed), a clear distinction from public yahoo's, an acutal community that could bond chasers even tighter. Centralized voice to the media, clear distinction from non-members who don't follow safe practices (as determined by leadership?)

Buyin: Official endorsements from the organizations above recognizing safe practices, experienced chasers and meteorology members, pre-coordination with local officials...which would really be beneficial on PDS days like Friday.

Memberships - Dues, conferences, whatever to raise money. Pay some salaries (part time? full time?) to elected officials with enough money raised...if there's as many chasers as was stated this shouldn't be an issue.

These are just ideas and details would need to be worked out, but a group of well respected organized chasers could plant the seed and the timing couldn't be better for something like this. I'd join.

 

[David Wolfson]

I don't think it's pointing out the obvious too much to reiterate that the Twistex team was just about the best trained, most experienced, appropriately cautious, professional, courteous, and connected chasers you will ever find. If there's a lesson to be learned from this particular tragedy and the other near-tragedies, perhaps its that training, or certification, or licensing, or experience might tend to give a chaser some false sense of security or immunity when it comes to the power and unpredictability of storms.

My observation as a traffic planner is that the issue isn't so much the number of chasers on a particular road. A two-lane road can physically handle the traffic if it's moving. But when the road is blocked for whatever reason it doesn't much matter if there are thirty trained and licensed spotters or three hundred yahoos on that road. That's too many if trouble comes their way without a ready escape route.

The larger issue which still really bugs me -- both with respect to the Newcastle-Moore tornado and these -- is the lack of shelter requirements for commercial and public buildings. Simply put, I think requiring them to have sufficient, inspected, adequately engineered shelter space to handle their employees plus some extra depending on the business will save lives. A few towns in Oklahoma do have municipal shelters and they have worked. With these, residents and travelers have some nearby places to go in an emergency and don't clog the roads and potentially put themselves into harm's way.

 

[Warren Faidley]

Two things would improve highway safety and save lives.

1: Add additional electronic highway information signs, especially along 1-40 and 1-35. A notice could tell motorists to exit well in advance of a weather threat.

2: The Highway Patrol in Oklahoma should hire a very experienced chaser or meteorologist to assist with real-time road closure decisions during severe weather. I'm not sure how the current chain of commands works, but it's obviously flawed. I doubt they have someone looking at high resolution radar who understands storm behavior. I suspect the decisions are made by someone watching television. This would also help to protect their own officers.

W.

 

[Greg Campbell]

Two things would improve highway safety and save lives.

1: Add additional electronic highway information signs, especially along 1-40 and 1-35. A notice could tell motorists to exit well in advance of a weather threat.

2: The Highway Patrol in Oklahoma should hire a very experienced chaser or meteorologist to assist with real-time road closure decisions during severe weather. I'm not sure how the current chain of commands works, but it's obviously flawed. I doubt they have someone looking at high resolution radar who understands storm behavior. I suspect the decisions are made by someone watching television. This would also help to protect their own officers.

W.

1. Adding freeway information to the already existing Wireless Emergency Alerts most cell phones receive probably wouldn't hurt either.

2. They need a bright red telephone that's wired directly to Tim Vasquez's secret underground lair.

 

[STexan]

I'm not sure ANY "road closure" is a good idea except in a handful of rare events occurring in locations where a closure is prudent. And trying to "re-direct" traffic is not really practical or possible.

 

[Hannah.Taylor]

I'm gonna throw a few things in about pre-chase ethics. This is for you younger, high energy, over excited types.

If you're chasing with someone, who invites another person that you haven't met or chased with before...don't message that person out of the blue and suddenly change the meet time of the upcoming chase with, just because initiation looks to be later than expected. Especially if you haven't discussed it with your primary chase partner first (YES, this just happened today. I was seriously pissed about it, but it's been handled and addressed, so I won't embarrass the chaser publicly that did this, although I really should).

If you make plans to chase with someone, make sure you have money BEFORE you commit to making plans. Making chase plans and then breaking them the day of because you didn't get paid, or couldn't meet up with someone to get paid is piss poor consideration for your chase partner. (Yes, this happened yesterday.) My chase partner was waiting to get paid for a service he provided, and couldn't meet up with the person. Which ruined the plans I could have made doing something else.

Don't cancel a chase on a day that you've already committed to with someone in favor of a day with a better set up. Your chase partner might already have other things going on or planned.

I can't even believe I have to say these things, but apparently some people just don't get it and think it's all about them. When you chase with others, be considerate, have some manners, and most of all know your place. Especially when someone else provides their vehicle and finds other chasers to help keep costs down.

Rant over.