Bill Tabor
EF5
Watching this week's 'The Debris Show', and reading about the tornado warning delay from last Monday's cold core event in Oklahoma along with observations / experience over the years made me realize there are issues / problems which chasers face when it comes to making severe weather reports. These problems may in turn affect public safety.
1) The chaser / spotter may not be believed. (This is likely because NWS doesn't know who the person reporting is, and what level of training they have had).
2) The NWS office may not take the report because a chaser or mobile spotter may not have a Spotter Id. (When I contacted NWS in DEN the other day about the direct reporting phone number the Warning Coordinator had a problem with me for awhile because I didn't have a Spotter Id. Though perhaps one was given some years back at a local Skywarn meeting I don't believe I have one that would be relevant to their office / location. I had to explain who I was, why I was calling from Texas, etc.)
3) Spotternetwork (often used by chasers) is not used by all NWS offices.
4) Not all NWS office direct phone numbers are available through Spotternetwork. (However, recently I provided an update, which should improve that situation)
5) Many of the Skywarn groups in the US are Ham radio based and may be ARES or RACES networks. (Problem here is, (as I understand it) often the NWS only takes reports through their network. These are often closed networks though. Only members of the local ARES or RACES net may provide reports.
6) Lack of standardization between NWS offices. I've noticed that many of the offices welcome any reports, some prefer (or perhaps require) a valid local spotter id, some use eSpotter some don't. Some make their 800 numbers somewhat available if you ask; whereas others won't give it to you unless you are part of their direct network. Some may monitor Spotternetwork reports; others apparently don't or don't weight those reports much. Some prefer phone calls. Streaming video.. - not sure?
7) Chasers may stream video providing direct ground truth to verify radar and warnings issuance criteria but often those feeds are not monitored by NWS. Perhaps sometimes they are.
8) NWSchat? How well is it utilized / integrated? How effective?
9) Media reporting integration / issues?
10) Warning Coordinator overwhelmed from too many sources to check?
11) Some say chasers are often looked down upon by local law enforcement, or viewed suspiciously compared to Spotter groups. I suppose this idea is based on the concept that chasers are out for the photography, adrenaline rush, or to make a buck on some video as opposed to Spotters who are just there and part of the community to help warn the public. Of course in truth many chasers provide warnings to the public when spotters aren't around. In this case Spotters are seen as part of the inside group, and chasers are seen as outsiders and often considered reckless troublemakers causing congestion on the roads, etc.
12) Chasers / Mobile spotters may not have a good NWS WFO phone number - quick and direct. In addition many non-direct numbers are voicemail mazes only staffed 8-3:30 with no option to report severe weather or it is the very last option stated.
Rising up above all these issues and looking down on the bigger picture a few thoughts come to mind.
1) A lot of technology and environment has changed since the advent of the original Spotter groups, and NWS procedures.
2) The NWS warning offices seem to each be in a different spectrum mix with regards to their policies, procedures, and warning infrastructure. Many still rely primarily or only on conventional Amateur radio Skywarn networks.
3) Millions are spent on radar, equipment, research, training, education in order to understand the science of storms, but I believe only a fractional part is spent on the infrastructure related to actually warning the public and the marketing / education program for the public in order to help keep them safe from the storms. (For instance...if a tornado warning is issued many / most will go outside and look rather than take shelter).
4) NWS offices likely are not fully utilizing all the new technology sources to help them make quicker / better warnings for the public.
5) It may not be clear to each office which mix of infrastructure technology provide the most effective tools for helping to warn the public.
Based on the above I propose a few ideas for improvement:
1) More coordination and standardization should be made for consistency between NWS warning offices in regards to warning decision sources, usage’s, and methodologies.
2) It might be a good idea to commission a study to determine the best way to utilize / integrate chasers, mobile spotters, streaming video, Spotternetwork, NWSchat, the media, eSpotter, etc. There is a lot of information out there but the key is finding the best, most accurate information and in the quickest, most convenient form.
3) Find ways to help utilize chasers in a positive way and improve their image amongst the local public, law enforcement and Skywarn nets.
4) Create National Spotter Id’s for submitting reports. (I don't believe these exist - no?) A National Spotter Id would provide a mechanism for chasers and mobile spotters to validate themselves as a worthy source of information for reporting when out of their local area. This would also ensure that they have met a certain standard in regards to training in order to receive the Id. Actually Spotternetwork and NSR (National Storms Research & Training Institute) already have an online certification program. This program could receive NOAA / NWS approval (if it hasn't already) and be one avenue for receiving the National Spotter Id. This Id would be registered at all NWS WFO's enabling chasers / mobile spotters to make reports utilizing direct lines, Spotternetwork, or through the local Amateur Radio network. Note this is not the same as a National Chaser Id or License. This is only optional for reporting purposes.
5) I believe more attention / money should be spent on the back end of the severe weather warning infrastructure to integrate all the sources (mentioned above) and to help educate the public.
6) Provide a complete direct list of NWS WFO numbers to valid Spotters with a National Spotter Id.
7) Eliminate NWS WFO voice mail maze. Make sure if there is voicemail that severe reports are the first option stated.
In closing, let me say this is not a comprehensive list. I don’t have perfect knowledge of all this stuff, and it is a big topic / issue. I probably left out some things or misrepresented the extent of an issue. For instance, I know there is standardization at NWS offices, but I believe it is incomplete, or at least inconsistent. None of this is meant as condemnation against any party or group, but friendly ideas for improvement and should only be taken as such.
Let me know if these issues, problems and solutions / proposals are accurate and how effective you think they will be. Generally I just see it as a new age with many new options and we just need to refine the system for the most effectiveness.
In order to move forward will likely require formal proposal / agreement between NOAA/NWS and alignment with the Spotternetwork Association, National Storms Research and Training Institute and Skywarn groups.
1) The chaser / spotter may not be believed. (This is likely because NWS doesn't know who the person reporting is, and what level of training they have had).
2) The NWS office may not take the report because a chaser or mobile spotter may not have a Spotter Id. (When I contacted NWS in DEN the other day about the direct reporting phone number the Warning Coordinator had a problem with me for awhile because I didn't have a Spotter Id. Though perhaps one was given some years back at a local Skywarn meeting I don't believe I have one that would be relevant to their office / location. I had to explain who I was, why I was calling from Texas, etc.)
3) Spotternetwork (often used by chasers) is not used by all NWS offices.
4) Not all NWS office direct phone numbers are available through Spotternetwork. (However, recently I provided an update, which should improve that situation)
5) Many of the Skywarn groups in the US are Ham radio based and may be ARES or RACES networks. (Problem here is, (as I understand it) often the NWS only takes reports through their network. These are often closed networks though. Only members of the local ARES or RACES net may provide reports.
6) Lack of standardization between NWS offices. I've noticed that many of the offices welcome any reports, some prefer (or perhaps require) a valid local spotter id, some use eSpotter some don't. Some make their 800 numbers somewhat available if you ask; whereas others won't give it to you unless you are part of their direct network. Some may monitor Spotternetwork reports; others apparently don't or don't weight those reports much. Some prefer phone calls. Streaming video.. - not sure?
7) Chasers may stream video providing direct ground truth to verify radar and warnings issuance criteria but often those feeds are not monitored by NWS. Perhaps sometimes they are.
8) NWSchat? How well is it utilized / integrated? How effective?
9) Media reporting integration / issues?
10) Warning Coordinator overwhelmed from too many sources to check?
11) Some say chasers are often looked down upon by local law enforcement, or viewed suspiciously compared to Spotter groups. I suppose this idea is based on the concept that chasers are out for the photography, adrenaline rush, or to make a buck on some video as opposed to Spotters who are just there and part of the community to help warn the public. Of course in truth many chasers provide warnings to the public when spotters aren't around. In this case Spotters are seen as part of the inside group, and chasers are seen as outsiders and often considered reckless troublemakers causing congestion on the roads, etc.
12) Chasers / Mobile spotters may not have a good NWS WFO phone number - quick and direct. In addition many non-direct numbers are voicemail mazes only staffed 8-3:30 with no option to report severe weather or it is the very last option stated.
Rising up above all these issues and looking down on the bigger picture a few thoughts come to mind.
1) A lot of technology and environment has changed since the advent of the original Spotter groups, and NWS procedures.
2) The NWS warning offices seem to each be in a different spectrum mix with regards to their policies, procedures, and warning infrastructure. Many still rely primarily or only on conventional Amateur radio Skywarn networks.
3) Millions are spent on radar, equipment, research, training, education in order to understand the science of storms, but I believe only a fractional part is spent on the infrastructure related to actually warning the public and the marketing / education program for the public in order to help keep them safe from the storms. (For instance...if a tornado warning is issued many / most will go outside and look rather than take shelter).
4) NWS offices likely are not fully utilizing all the new technology sources to help them make quicker / better warnings for the public.
5) It may not be clear to each office which mix of infrastructure technology provide the most effective tools for helping to warn the public.
Based on the above I propose a few ideas for improvement:
1) More coordination and standardization should be made for consistency between NWS warning offices in regards to warning decision sources, usage’s, and methodologies.
2) It might be a good idea to commission a study to determine the best way to utilize / integrate chasers, mobile spotters, streaming video, Spotternetwork, NWSchat, the media, eSpotter, etc. There is a lot of information out there but the key is finding the best, most accurate information and in the quickest, most convenient form.
3) Find ways to help utilize chasers in a positive way and improve their image amongst the local public, law enforcement and Skywarn nets.
4) Create National Spotter Id’s for submitting reports. (I don't believe these exist - no?) A National Spotter Id would provide a mechanism for chasers and mobile spotters to validate themselves as a worthy source of information for reporting when out of their local area. This would also ensure that they have met a certain standard in regards to training in order to receive the Id. Actually Spotternetwork and NSR (National Storms Research & Training Institute) already have an online certification program. This program could receive NOAA / NWS approval (if it hasn't already) and be one avenue for receiving the National Spotter Id. This Id would be registered at all NWS WFO's enabling chasers / mobile spotters to make reports utilizing direct lines, Spotternetwork, or through the local Amateur Radio network. Note this is not the same as a National Chaser Id or License. This is only optional for reporting purposes.
5) I believe more attention / money should be spent on the back end of the severe weather warning infrastructure to integrate all the sources (mentioned above) and to help educate the public.
6) Provide a complete direct list of NWS WFO numbers to valid Spotters with a National Spotter Id.
7) Eliminate NWS WFO voice mail maze. Make sure if there is voicemail that severe reports are the first option stated.
In closing, let me say this is not a comprehensive list. I don’t have perfect knowledge of all this stuff, and it is a big topic / issue. I probably left out some things or misrepresented the extent of an issue. For instance, I know there is standardization at NWS offices, but I believe it is incomplete, or at least inconsistent. None of this is meant as condemnation against any party or group, but friendly ideas for improvement and should only be taken as such.
Let me know if these issues, problems and solutions / proposals are accurate and how effective you think they will be. Generally I just see it as a new age with many new options and we just need to refine the system for the most effectiveness.
In order to move forward will likely require formal proposal / agreement between NOAA/NWS and alignment with the Spotternetwork Association, National Storms Research and Training Institute and Skywarn groups.
Last edited by a moderator: