Debate: Is an Association Really Necessary [Archive]

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 04:49 PM

The good things chasers do as people (which is really the point here) are like anything else; you don't go round doing good deeds then patting yourself on the back about it for all to see.....IMO, this just taints the whole "good deed" aura by saying "look at me, look what I did, I'm a great person!!!"

We all do little things that are great things out there, all the time. No one ever talks about it because there's nothing to say. We do good things that good people do for one another, it's just a way of life......far beyond chasing. And likewise, so is the practice of focusing first on negative aspects of anything, like our lovely media does. Negative is better TV/radio/ratings. The only way we're ever gonna get the push of good stuff into the spotlight (the way the negative is currently) is if we do it ourselves - and that just takes away from the purity of it in the eyes of people.....even if it's a genuine effort, it will look suspicious for every piece of chaser good to be coming from the chaser community. It'll be like we're making things up after a while....am I the only one who's seeing this Big Picture future?

I think the main thing that most of you aren't remembering is, the target audience of this organization/effort to put chasing into a very favorable public profile will not be the general public....it will be that small %age of lawmakers, the only ones you guys are truly concerned with anyway (cause THOSE people have the power to slap wrists).

I still think the effort is, in the long run, a lot more trouble than the results would be fruitful. I mean, aren't we all going to chase as responsibly and respectfully as possible anyway??? The only difference I see in having some organization is a bunch of labels being handed out, maybe a bumper sticker...oh, and some lucky person actually gets paid for it all.

Mike Peregrine said it best: "This cannot be another SCOA..."

Well, it will be.

Mike Peregrine

06-09-2004, 04:53 PM

As an example of how to inform people without actually tooting your own horn, so to speak ... if you go to http://www.noaa.gov ... you'll notice news links at the top of the page with media information, news, etc. Also, the SPC has provided links to news events such as May 4, 2003 that stayed at the top of its pages. As a way to provide news concerning its services, it is only a by product that people are additionally able to see 'hey, these guys predicted this ahead of time - they are pretty cool.'

It's providing information - but not with a 'hey look at me' slant. Every company in America does it.

Also want to be clear that I'm not interested in any formal position here, other than voluntary support. The reasons ... I don't have the background in operating a non-profit ... and unless it can top my current salary, there's no way I'm interested. And it won't.

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 05:15 PM

The point I'm trying to make here is - it's not the good chasers who are causing problems, it's the dumbass few who do stupid things. We're not controlling the actions of these "chasers" right now, and no association or whatever is going to change that. You're proposing we all band together in an attempt to make America realize "hey, we're good guys" but will any of that make a difference the NEXT time someone pulls a dumbass stunt and the media picks up on it (be it local/state/national level)?

This organization could actually come to pass, things could be done, and everything's great....but the current problem that's the basic cause for all of this isn't going to go away. I think a lot of the people who side with me on this issue will understand what I'm talking about here. Everyone's reaction is to try and paint this pretty chaser picture to counter the few bad apples' moves.....this won't be effective. Instead of taking the high road and being all friendly and rubbing elbows (which I personally don't think is needed at all), what we need to do (if you really think something has to be done) is find the individuals responsible for these infractions......cause there's your problem.

The way it is now, or all of us painted under some banner of chaser do-goodism........either way, one bad apple screwing up will bring it all crashing down to where it is right now. Now, there's two ways to look at this: You either (1) focus your efforts on the problem area and find out who the violators are and deal with them directly, or (2) you realize that "hey, this is a problem that really can't be policed, and therefore there's no point in expelling all the effort for a cause that will no doubt be thwarted by a single negative action" (which will happen).

I just don't see how creating an organization will counter the currrent source of the problem you're campaigning against. This isn't a diplomatic remedy you're facing, it's a bare-bones, in-your-face one.

Or it isn't one at all.

Mike Peregrine

06-09-2004, 05:28 PM

Your points about who is causing the problems are right on - unfortunately for the rest of the world, who isn't involved with chasing, and doesn't know any chasers themselves ... it's the few that finally make the image for the rest. And with no defense, that is how it will stay.

The hundreds of other representative organizations that exist for every other endeavor out there (including thrill sports, rock climbing, needlepoint, whatever) work off of the same premise - that there is merit in taking preventative measures. The one I referred to earlier - NALA - started back in the 70's when no one even knew what a paralegal was ... it was organized as a way to provide information about what legal assistants did. Then, later, talk of legislation started being circulated among several states that wanted professional licensure for paralegals ... we're talking glorified secretaries here ... not people who analyze weather maps and then use their vehicles to chase after violently rotating supercells. NALA has continually worked to promote accuracy and to minimize the effects of misinformation. By providing a voluntary licensure program (one that employers in the industry have actually come to use when hiring paralegals), the organization demonstrates that it requires excellence from its members. As a result, people learn more - they learn better ways of doing their jobs, and there are fewer mistakes.

In this case, the barbaric few out there causing the problems will still cause the problems ... but now we will have a defense for the rest. It's just smart business.

Mike Peregrine

06-09-2004, 05:37 PM

One quick thought on the suggestion of confrontation ... how do you suppose this will help the situation exactly - - - this approach results in constant backfires and only makes the ones going after the offenders to themselves start lacking good judgment. If you can find an example of another agency or anyone who employs an intimidation method that makes them successful or favorable in the eyes of everyone else, please provide such an example.

Mike Hollingshead

06-09-2004, 05:55 PM

And..... say we "fixed"/confronted EVERY bad apple. The worst problem, IMO, will still exist....the appearance that comes with 100 cars on the shoulders of one block, even if they are there handing out do not do drug stickers. If an organization is drawn up I hope first on it's agenda would be ideas to curb this problem we all add to(not that we need an organization to do so). The worst image problem are large numbers of chasers commiting LEGAL acts. You may not think so, but more often then not I bet it is. Any legislation I'm sure has the ability to realize there are bad apples with anything. They can also see bad apples ain't the only problem or the most problematic, and how you going to convince them(if they even wanted to legislate it) our large numbers slowing down emergency vehicles is ok, because a few of us in the convoy "help out with the rescue"? I agree entirely with Shane.

Those that chase the most want little to do with some 'chasing organization', I think...for the most part. For most that chase alot they like the 'oneness' with the hobby even if they do it with friends. They know the sky will always be free, even if they have to watch it while "driving to grandmas". And in the other direction many that don't even chase, often like the 'organization' side of things to be part of something. I myself wouldn't join. I hope this would not cause befriending by those I know who do favor this whole idea. It is true, it can't hurt anything. I guess I'm just an anti-organization freak for whatever reason. Maybe there is a fear that it could cause MORE public interest. I know there is some wise saying for all this. No need for a helmet when it's not hailing? I think we are in virga on the top of a big hill. Some are enjoying the colors the setting sun is creating on the virga. Others are working on a boat so we know we can see the virga down the road. I need to go back to work so bad.

Mike

Mike Peregrine

06-09-2004, 06:01 PM

It's hailing Mike - so far you have been dodging the stones.

Everything starts free ... unfortunately few things stay that way in this world.

Anonymous

06-09-2004, 06:04 PM

Originally posted by Mike Hollingshead

Those that chase the most want little to do with some 'chasing organization', I think...for the most part. For most that chase alot they like the 'oneness' with the hobby even if they do it with friends.

Mike

I have to respectfully disagree here... I am a frequent chaser, and am fully for this program. I believe that there needs to be the public awareness a reputable, balanced non-profit organization can bring. I don't see how there is a seperation between frequent chasers and those who do not chase as much, in my opinion.

Jeff Miller

06-09-2004, 06:05 PM

Apologies, the last post was mine. I did not expect a "guest" format to be allowed here.

Tim Vasquez

06-09-2004, 06:08 PM

No problem; I forgot to enable the "registered user only" permissions when creating the new forum. It's fixed. I left your posts there since they were constructive.

Tim

Mike Peregrine

06-09-2004, 06:10 PM

Wanted to address Mike's point about the sheer numbers out there ... great point ... I've made it myself constantly over the last two weeks.

This is perhaps the single biggest factor in my mind that truly merits consideration. It's going to take some brainstorming to come up with workable solutions to this situation. I'm the first to admit it, since I was one of the first to bring it up in earlier threads.

I have to leave for the evening, but keep posting the thoughts. I'll take a look when I get back in later - - -

Thanks

Jeff Wear

06-09-2004, 06:34 PM

The problem I see with an organization like this is that you may get a lot of people who want to join, but you're not going to get enough people to take an active role in helping run the organization. And if you don't have people who are willing or able to volunteer their time and resources into the organization, it's not going to go anywhere. The fact that Stormtrack has had trouble getting enough dedicated volunteers over the past couple years to help run the site make me wonder where we're going to find enough people with the resources and initiative to help run a national organization for storm chasers.

George Tincher

06-09-2004, 06:53 PM

The purpose of such a group would not be to pat ourselves on the back. If that were the case, it would fail miserably. But what it would be is a unified voice of the chaser community. As of now, there is none.

I'm no expert by any means, but the key thing I see here is that it seperates the responsible chasers from the idiots. When a media report comes out, it may or may not make clear that most chasers are responsible. People outside the weather community probably learned about stormchasing through Twister. So all bad reports may be viewed as the norm. Therefore we must have a voice that's ready to counter such media reports. There's always two sides to every story. I can see it as beneficial to make sure this side is heard. If an article is printed in a paper for example, that unfairly attacks chasing...and may contain faulty or biased info, such a group could have a media relations person write a letter to the editor explaining it from the chaser's point of view...or correct erroneous info. As of now, who is going to do this? I am sure most people would sit around waiting for someone else to do it. But as a united and coordinated group, it would get done.

Nobody is saying this is perfect. But until someone suggests something better, I see no reason not to explore the potential of this idea. If it fails, it fails. But why avoid trying to just because there's a chance it fails? There's a 9 in 10 chance that each chase you take will be a bust. Yet does that stop you? Again, I just can't see why anyone would be opposed to something that can only bring good to the community. It's no risk, other than what little time and effort we'll invest in it.

I guess the reason I am so supportive of this idea is that I've dealt with a similar thing for years in another hobby. I am an active shooter and work to preserve my right to own a firearm. There was a point in our history when the thought that guns might be banned was considered laughable. Now we have several restrictions already in place and more being introduced in congress each year. Think of how the media treats that situation. Remember Columbine? Gun owners were blasted by the media after this tragedy and numerous politicians were ready with new anti-gun legislation almost overnight. Yet the sad fact is, this is identical to the dangers chasers may face to their rights in the near future. Most gun owners are not criminals who are careless or murderers. Yet that doesn't seem to matter in the eyes of some politicians. We all know that most chasers are not crazy people who block roads and drive like maniacs either. Yet watch what happens the first time a chaser is at fault for an accident that results in serious injury or death to someone else. When the media gets hold of it, they will milk it dry. And you can bet political heads will turn. Therefore just as gun owners need the NRA to represent them and stand up for their rights, storm chasers may very well need this same type of representation. Think of the parallels here and you will see I have a valid point.

Again, if there's a better way to go about this, I would be all for it. But I am yet to see any alternatives mentioned. It would be great if there could be some way to deal with the troublemakers directly. But short of mob-like activity in which a muscled Italian guy in a leather jacket beats the crap out of these problem individuals and promises to boil them in oil the next time they pull a hair-brained stunt, I see no way direct action against them can work. LOL. We can report illegal behavior, but that is only one step of many that we all can take. While I agree that those of us who care enough to post to this thread are not the problem, how does the outside world know who is responsible or not? If you have a group of 500 or 1000 people that include many veterans, who have written rules of conduct and work to make this info available to the average person or politician, then that's a tremendous advantage over having nothing. It would also show that the vast majority of chasers are responsible people. You can't just assume people will think that, especially if there is no info available to prove it.

I have basically said my peace here and will just sit back and see what everyone else thinks. But I can see this starting good and getting better and improving with time. There's so many other good things such an organization could do that we haven't even thought of yet. I hope to see it implemented and successful. All that's needed to make that happen is simple participation. I hope people will decide to contribute. Only time will tell I suppose.

-George

Mike Hollingshead

06-09-2004, 06:56 PM

It's so far from hailing. The Cu has faded.

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 06:59 PM

Originally posted by Jeff Wear
The problem I see with an organization like this is that you may get a lot of people who want to join, but you're not going to get enough people to take an active role in helping run the organization. And if you don't have people who are willing or able to volunteer their time and resources into the organization, it's not going to go anywhere. The fact that Stormtrack has had trouble getting enough dedicated volunteers over the past couple years to help run the site make me wonder where we're going to find enough people with the resources and initiative to help run a national organization for storm chasers.

Exactly my point...

I have to bust my balls yearround to get my 8-12 week window of chase time every year, and chasing is what I base EVERYTHING else off of.....so I'm not about to spend my time AWAY from chasing doing anything other than insuring my ability to chase the next year.

I'll keep chasing like I always have, and there will be no mission statement on my website or other object to grab public attention/appeal. Has anyone considered that maybe being invisible is the best way to avoid the public eye? I know I've chased my ass off the past few years and not a damn soul in this world could identify me or look my direction and say "there's a storm chaser!!"

You wanna know the FIRST step in getting rid of the constant spotlight on chasing? Getting chasers to stop whoring video. You wanna blame something for the attention chasers get these days? Blame BNVN. And anything like it.

That's where it starts

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 07:10 PM

Creating this huge effort to construct the illusion of "chaser chivalry" will actually create even MORE interest in the activity than it's already getting....so for every 10 people who "see the light" and realize chasers are overall a good bunch, 3-4 of them will be joining us all on the next big storm in Harper Co, Kansas.

BAD IDEA

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 07:13 PM

Has anyone on this forum seen "J and Silent Bob Strike Back"?

All we can do is, find the people who make us look bad, and beat the **** outta them.

Chris Sokol

06-09-2004, 07:22 PM

I am not quite sure where everybody is getting the idea that this group would be founded with the sole purpose of finding and weeding out the bad apples....or making people chase differently. Thousands of people are members of the NRA, but they still hunt the same way they always have.

Face it people...chasing is not a secret society that is invisible. It will never be invisible again. And besides...those new young chasers that are about to start their 1st season...would you rather send them out with some knowledge of what to look for, where NOT to drive, ect., or continue to let new young chasers go out completely clueless and get themselves hurt? Where the media is concerned, chasers are not getting favorable reviews...the stories are, at best, borderline. It never hurts to have some good PR coming out for you, no matter what you are involved in. Not everybody is expected to go out and get involved with the public. As with any organization, the level of personal involvement will vary from person to person. Some get very involved, some are only members (which always helps...numbers are good). Some of you seem to think that by either having an association, or being a member of one will take something away from you. I just don't see how this is so.

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by Chris Sokol
I am not quite sure where everybody is getting the idea that this group would be founded with the sole purpose of finding and weeding out the bad apples....or making people chase differently. Thousands of people are members of the NRA, but they still hunt the same way they always have. .

Then what's the damn point? You guys are proposing a helluva lot of effort for "not trying to change the way things are."

Originally posted by Chris Sokol+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Chris Sokol)</div>Face it people...chasing is not a secret society that is invisible. It will never be invisible again.[/b]

Nope, especially not with people trying to create national organizations whose sole intent is to cast the chaser image into the forefront, regardless of motive.

Originally posted by Chris Sokol@
And besides...those new young chasers that are about to start their 1st season...would you rather send them out with some knowledge of what to look for, where NOT to drive, ect., or continue to let new young chasers go out completely clueless and get themselves hurt?.

I was one of those...and here I sit 8 years later with 77 tornadoes. This isn't a question of available education going in, it's a question of dedication. Chris - who taught YOU right from wrong in 1985...in ALABAMA?

<!--QuoteBegin-Chris Sokol
Where the media is concerned, chasers are not getting favorable reviews...the stories are, at best, borderline. It never hurts to have some good PR coming out for you, no matter what you are involved in.

Not being involved at all is the answer here.....c'mon folks, any of you who still think the mainstream media can be trusted are NAIVE beyond definition.

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 07:44 PM

Here's another thought.....

Any chaser who's concerned with the level of chasing's "visibility" by the public...that has a website......is a hypocrite.

Eliminate your websites (they're all tops on the internet "storm chaser" keyword search lists anyway, right?) and there's a big part of the "view" killed right there.

You guys think you can expose chasing and then manipulate how it will be perceived....and this is your eternal, fatal flaw........eliminating chasing from public view period is your only chance

Mike Hollingshead

06-09-2004, 07:46 PM

What are we even asking anymore? No one is going to change their views of the NEED and the WANT that exist for it. So those that want/need, start one up. I mean good grief. How many posts have there been on this now? Various versions of the same thing have been going on here for a long time with basically the same few discussing them. Should just have one topic at this point I'd think. Called. Starting up the national storm chasing organization. Have fun, best of luck.

Tim Vasquez

06-09-2004, 07:47 PM

There are some excellent points on both sides. I'd like to see some opinions on this whole concept from the CFDG crowd. If any of you guys are lurking, please sign up for this forum and I'll personally expedite it through so you can participate in this debate.

I myself am not sure where I stand on the issue, but it's a moot point for me anyway since I can't get involved in any other projects at the moment.

Tim

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 07:59 PM

Originally posted by Tim Vasquez
I'd like to see some opinions on this whole concept from the CFDG crowd. If any of you guys are lurking, please sign up for this forum and I'll personally expedite it through so you can participate in this debate.

As much as this HURTS to say....and believe me, having anything nice to say about THIS group of socialties pains me beyond words....

These guys have the right idea for the "chaser organization crusade"....which is to say, INVISIBILITY.

I mean, just look at this group of chameleons....just out there and no one knows a thing about any of it. Maybe these guys had the right idea after all.

At least I know I'M thankful I never fell into the mold of "CFDG Light" chasers....thank you guys for keeping your influence well-away from me during my formative years. We're currently seeing the horrific results of a "chaser" who's sole influence is CFDG-esque mentoring and a surname.

Mike Hollingshead

06-09-2004, 08:02 PM

http://www.chasingstorms.com/memberships.html

Better think of another name not even close to that one...lol. Probably working on the papers for st.org right now as is.

George Tincher

06-09-2004, 08:25 PM

Shane,

You do make one point I strongly agree with. By saying what I am about to say may create a *****storm the likes of which ST has never seen, but I feel it covers a large part of the problem and is worth mentioning. That issue is simply $$$. Taking what was once a hobby and/or scientific research and turning it into a business is a sure fire way to create a ton of problems.

Take this example: I read in one of these threads recently where some people were blocking a road, while they had tripods set up shooting video and refused to move until a cop threatened to arrest them unless they got out of the way. What would necessitate such perfect video as to block a road and refuse to move for authorities? Hmmmm. Most people would be happy with a handheld shot, even if it was a bit shaky. On the other hand, high quality video will bring in more $$$. It seems plausible that people will take extra chances or even do stupid things in order to get a better paycheck from CNN, TWC or Discovery/TLC. Perhaps that's what's causing many of these problems? So Shane, your 'whoring video' concept makes sense. In a world of cut-throat competition, such competition could push people to do some pretty extreme things. I'm not trying to single out any individual in particular, be it chaser or whatever. But perhaps more people should remember this is a hobby, not a livelyhood and act as such. In other words, sell the video you have as the news if need be. Just make sure the video itself isn't the news.

Now I'll don my flame suit and prepare for the brimstone and hell fire that's sure to follow. :wink:

Carrie Halliday

06-09-2004, 09:00 PM

Since I do not read any other weather forums (feel I get the best here), I do have one question:

Is this a topic on other weather/chaser sites or just on Stormtrack?

Just curious....

George Tincher

06-09-2004, 09:07 PM

Also, let me add, if you have an individual who goes out solely to shoot video to sell to various media groups....should that person be considered something other than a chaser? I mean many of these folks break off the storm after they capture a tornado just so they can be first to upload and get it on the air. Seems these people would be better defined as freelance photo/videographers. Therefore chasers shouldn't be blamed for the bad this group does, since they really aren't chasers or storm enthusiasts for that matter.

Then you have the locals (aka) "yahoos" who flock out to see storms and get in the way. These people likely aren't what would be a chaser in the traditional sense either. These are probably the same type of people like I encounter at traffic accidents who hear the radio calls on their police scanner and come out to have a close-up look at the carnage. Again, not chasers, just nosy people who like to view carnage.

So I dunno, maybe some of you guys are right afterall. If you factor in those groups, that would probably account for at least 95% to 98% of the complaints generated. So maybe chasers shouldn't worry about actions of people who aren't really chasers/spotters to begin with. Let the media worry about them, since they are responsible for generating both groups in large anyway. :D

-George

Blake W. Naftel

06-09-2004, 09:33 PM

I see absolutely no point in having an organization such as this; other than to further individual egos and create problems down the line. I've prused the previous posts, and agree with Shane's points 99.9%. Personally I have no time to partake in an organization such as this (there's my excuse); with academic and extracurricular work, goals, and other life issues at hand. I could care less whether or not there is a Storm Chasers of America'esque type organization. To me, this is just a modified version of what may become an elitist group; even if the intentions are positive at the moment.

I'll be chasing for the rest of my days; although I'm sure it will slow down once I start a family (which I'd like to someday); but it will always be a part of me. No organization is going to control my actions, be it wise choices or utter stupidity (because like everyone else out there, I'm human and can/will/do make mistakes... this includes while chasing).

Having an association will *not* solve any of the current problems; moreso act like a antidepressant patch. These issues (jackassery while on chase) will exist for as long as chasing is a part of society. Like I've posted on other threads prior to this; adapt, mature, and grow with the changes that chasing is undergoing - don't make more issues to deal with unless your prepared to face negative consequences. I guess this "association" may be part of this adaptation and growth; and while I'll except it's existence if it does indeed come to pass... won't have anything to do with it personally (I'm too busy attempting to graduate from WMU; and get into graduate school at OU to worry about such minor matters).

My opinions only - please take no offense.

..Blake..

John Diel

06-09-2004, 09:51 PM

I suppose one could put me in the spot light for selling a few photos. Am I "whoring video"? No. Am I making a profit? Absolutely not. I'm probably doubly damned as I also report severe weather from the road to a local radio station. What I do, is get a few still photos of various things, print, mat, frame and sell them. I sell them pretty much locally. What does happen though, is someone asks me where I got the photo and "Are you nuts?". This opens a door in which I tell them about storm chasing, storm spotting and gneral thunderstorm 'stuff'. In the process, I manage to work in that I've studied long and hard to learn where to look, where to drive and when to get the heck out of the way. I also manage to put in a few words about NOAA radio and listening to local stations. It's basically a one man campaign, but I get to "rub elbows" with folks and generally put things in a positive light.

I've been asked dozens of times, about chasing as a living as I pull out my bologna sandwich. Of course I give those who ask or are interested, the spiel about how there are very few folks that make a living doing this and how chasing works and recommend this site as a source of information (also the NOAA sites, etc.).

As to turning it into a business? A 501c Non-Profit organization is technically, not a business. There is no profit. After paying the wages and expenses, everything goes back into the company for future growth.

Believe it or not, there are fire departments set up this way. They have a board of elected directors, etc. The only thing missing from Mike Peregrine's formula is a paid administrator.

The only real stumbling block I foresee is getting people to become members. There has to be a benefit for being a member. It's noble to be altruistic and have the higher sense of purpose, but for most folks, that this would appeal to, there needs to be a tangible incentive.

It would be nice to be able to get NOAA behind it similar to the Skywarn programs. I believe there are a great many Skywarn programs that work hand in hand with the various HAM Radio clubs and actually do get out and educate, present safety seminars, etc. Patterning after something like that is possibly something to look at. Many chasers are Skywarn certified, Skywarn certication comes from NOAA. Skywarn is generally geared locally though and not nationally. Ponca City does not have a Skywarn per se. They do have the local HAM Radio club though and they do all the local spotting. Blackwell, on the other hand, DOES have a Skywarn program and it works very closely with the Ham Radio club there. I think on this area, a National Assocaition would be a plus.

There are still, relatively few real Chasers out there. By that, I mean the guys that travel hundreds of miles to see a storm. There are a great many more chasers as myself who will travel a couple hundred miles. I think these are the folks you would want to target. The "Yahoo's"? They're always going to be there. There's no getting rid of them. What we can do, is combat the poor publicity before it gets out of hand. That's what the national organization would be geared to do. Probably very similar to what RACES, Skywarn, and ARRL already are doing on a limited basis.

I know a few years ago, we had the local EM give a speech about spring time safety at our church. I hate to say it, the guy really didn't know what he was talking about. On the technical front, he was abysmal. On the safety front, he shined like a bright star. Why? Because he already had that part layed out for him with the NOAA handouts.

Just some of my thoughts on the subject.

Shane, although some of your comments have recieved my ire in the past (silently, I won't post a flame), and what I percieve to be your general attitude gets my goat. I don't ever want to you to simply shut up. There are a lot of folks out there like you that we don't hear from. When I tell myself, "Shane's FOS", I make myself look from that perspective to try and understand it to counter it. A lot of times I can't counter it. It's simply a different veiwpoint. Sometimes, I want to get on here and tell you off. I don't because your entitled your opinion as anyone else. Keep beating your drum Shane. The opposing view is healthy.

George, the only problem with letting the dog lay, is that we are actively being grouped into the larger lump sum. Where the people that blocked the road "Chasers"? Not by any definition we on Storm Track use. However, because they were on the storm, blocking the emergency traffic and possibly had antenna on their vehicle(s), they were assumed to be Chasers. This in turn was taken by the local media and pronounced as gospel with the backing of the Local EM. Bad news, sensational news, accusatory news, travels much faster than good news. It's generally believed by the majority of the populace that reads it as opposed to a piece of good news about a chaser helping a family out of the bashed in basement. It's hard to counter that. A National Organization with respected members (nationally known members too) would go a long way to help in countering it. Getting the Gary England's and Rick Smith's on board would be a plus as well.

I think one of the examples of media giving the wrong information that really sticks out was the video at the I-35 underpass in Kansas. There was a lot of information put out about how that was the WRONG move to make. I know there was even a lot of real science put into it. Did that get out to the public? No, Why? It was sensational. It was a boring diatribe. It wasn't glamorous.

John

John Diel

Richard Halter

06-09-2004, 10:00 PM

I think that one has to look at what they want the relative complexity and exposure that this organization would give us to be.

to follow with George's analogy, I don't want an NRA. What I want is a body of information put together so that we can provide positives to counter the negative stories published for a local area, and if the issue comes up in a situation where our access to a region is threatened legally, we can supply said info to try to keep our chasing from being limited.

Blake W. Naftel

06-09-2004, 10:13 PM

On the subject of "whoring video"; I currently work (as a career) within the broadcast television industry, and string video on the side (not as a job; but as an extra "helper" to cover rent, school, and life expenditures). I certainly don't see it as "whoring" myself to partake in this. The real issue here is that certain individuals have been/and continue to be rubbed the wrong way by other individuals. My thoughts on the subject; which come from working within the industry for six years and counting (I'm soon to be departing this industry for further academic pursuits); that is the nature of media! Regardless of how it may seem to outsiders, media is a very cut throat business (has been and will always be); and leaves no room for jackassery, bitching, or the nice guy (typically media takes advantage of the "nice guy" by working him/her over for video/or other airable material).

Media, just like "on-chase jackassery" will always be around. I have nothing against organizations such as the noted BNVN; in fact work closely with BNVN (I'm sure several opinions of me just changed with that statement alone); however that particular subject is an entirely different issue at hand (if you choose to discuss it; please contact me off list privately). Individuals without media experience and know-how; or those whom cannot adapt to the business of media will get screwed in the end... it's a fact of life; but it's a business like any other business... and while "whoring" certainly can be applied (I apply that term to others all the time; including myself) ... that's the nature of the beast.

..Blake..

Mike Peregrine

06-09-2004, 10:13 PM

No one is asking any of you to do anything you do not want to do - this is only a friendly discussion of possibilities. So remember if nothing comes to pass, I will take no offense. But I'm sure you would agree that the discussion is worth it.

It does seem interesting that so many folks gladly work within a framework to accomplish things. You go to school, you are willing to perform tasks as your professor requires to graduate. You get a job at Burger King and are willing to flip burgers exactly as they tell you to do it in training. But when someone makes a suggestion that will ultimately help you keep things the way you like them when it comes to chasing - something that can only promote improved relations, suddenly it is a burden beyond anyone's ability to bear - - - when the reality is that nothing is being asked of any of us here except to support what we already spend time supporting. It's amazing that so many are so willing to be extremely vocal about every little thing they feel affects them ... spending hours in here talking about it - but when asked to actually take a stand and do something for something they love, they are running for the exit.

It's easy for us to blame everyone else when things go wrong. It's much harder to take responsibility and protect the things we love. It's work. There is no question. Fortunately there will always likely be enough of those who do take a personal responsibility to at least genuinely reach out to others in an effort to help the situation at times.

If we continue with things as they are, then one thing that is certain is that the issues before us cannot improve ... there is no chance of them doing so. We will continue to do the exact same things, and get the same results.

And in all of the effort to not appear elitest, the end result is exactly that. We worry that people outside the plains need some type of organization like this while the ones who live here do not. What is the basis for supporting this conclusion? ... I won't judge motives, but by actions alone it does indeed sound like an elitest position. Would you use the same reasoning when you interview for a new employer? - - "I'm willing to belong to your company, but just so you know, I'll be doing everything my way around here."

None of us truly want an organization like this ... that's not the point. I don't want it when it comes down to it ... I never have. But more and more I am seeing the need for it. There may never come a time when you need someone in your corner to speak for you when you need it or help you out when you need it most ... then again, there may. That's the risk we take, isn't it. Again - no one is asking anyone to take time out of their schedules to do anything ... nothing ... you are not being asked to reach out to the schools in your area - you are not being asked to travel a thousand miles and attend a mandatory convention somewhere ... I don't recall those stipulations being made at any point. What we are doing is talking about the ways we can improve the situation somehow - represent ourselves with the strongest of our lot who are looking out for our best interests. None of us currently debating this fall into that category, so I'm not sure what you think is being asked of you here.

It may indeed be true that finding competent and willing leadership will be a difficulty - those on the board basically would be willing to meet online, via telephone, etc. at least every three months to discuss the direction the organization is taking. Everything else can be delegated. It's really not that hard - people do this every day - in much bigger ways than the proposal here.

Just a few thoughts - I certainly don't want to lose any friendships over this, though I may indeed consider the quick conclusions to be an unwise course of action.

Jeff Miller

06-09-2004, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by Mike Peregrine
the reality is that nothing is being asked of any of us here except to support what we already spend time supporting. It's amazing that so many are so willing to be extremely vocal about every little thing they feel affects them ... spending hours in here talking about it - but when asked to actually take a stand and do something for something they love, they are running for the exit.

It's easy for us to blame everyone else when things go wrong. It's much harder to take responsibility and protect the things we love. It's work. There is no question. Fortunately there will always likely be enough of those who do take a personal responsibility to at least genuinely reach out to others in an effort to help the situation at times.

If we continue with things as they are, then one thing that is certain is that the issues before us cannot improve ... there is no chance of them doing so. We will continue to do the exact same things, and get the same results.

This is my main cup of soup here, folks. Everyone is always so vocal about everything on this subject which of course is fine. An opportunity comes up to take a stand and so many diametrically oppose it, which is also fine... but I fail to understand the reasoning of why not give something new a try, except that it's a change...and the natural human tendancy is to resist change.

This is an opportunity to make a difference, no matter how minute. I would much rather take a risk and see what could happen then sit back and never know what could have been.

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 10:46 PM

Originally posted by John Diel
Shane, although some of your comments have recieved my ire in the past (silently, I won't post a flame), and what I percieve to be your general attitude gets my goat. I don't ever want to you to simply shut up. There are a lot of folks out there like you that we don't hear from. When I tell myself, \"Shane's FOS\", I make myself look from that perspective to try and understand it to counter it. A lot of times I can't counter it. It's simply a different veiwpoint. Sometimes, I want to get on here and tell you off. I don't because your entitled your opinion as anyone else. Keep beating your drum Shane. The opposing view is healthy.

Ah, but isn't keeping silent (for the pevention of a 'flame war') basically doing the same thing you just told me not to do? Don't be bashful about calling me out on this forum; I only get better when people debate me. Debate inspires thought. I'd love to hear your opinions (that are apparently the complete opposite of mine) so I can see exactly where you're coming from. Will I fire away at anything I disgaree with? Probably, but you're invited to do the same :wink:

Brian Brubaker

06-09-2004, 11:19 PM

I'm relatively new to this hobby and this forum, so I don't have the advantage of being "plugged in" or the years of reading debates on this, but here's my $.02 anyway.

Shane, I admire your passion and I agree with you that the ultimate goal is invisibility. But, unfortunately I don't think that is going to happen in the near future.

For example, after we broke off of the May 29 storms in SCKS, we went back home. The CBS affiliate in Wichita (KWCH) was in constant storm coverage (as was every other affiliate, but I chose to watch KWCH). They had live audio from at least four "chasers" on multiple occassions. They even cut, live, to a video of the huge, rotating wall cloud (being filmed by a paid "chaser") and we watched the formation of several tornados including the one that developed into the large wedge.

Why did they have all this field coverage? Sure, it helps report where the dangerous portion of the storm is, but I think the primary reason is because viewers want to see the spectacular and the TV stations know this.

We could just keep doing what we're doing and hope this fascination with severe weather goes away. And it just might, but not until the general population becomes bored with it and who knows how long that will take? Maybe all this live audio and video on TV will satisfy the "yahoos" and they'll stay home instead. No, probably not.

I think there are problems with having a publically visible organization.

1) When the public/LE/media have a negative encounter with a chaser/photog/yahoo/whatever, the org will be a magnet (in the public's and media's eyes) for the negative publicity and become a scapegoat.

2) If gov't ever does attempt to regulate chasing, a reputable, public org could very well be pointed to as an entity to administrate the regulations. (I do believe, though, if regulation is forced upon us, something like this would be preferable to a gov't beauracracy.)

3, 4, 5 . . .) All the aforementioned reasons given by others.

What is the solution? I don't know. There are others smarter than I who might answer that. But I think ignoring this and quietly going about our hobby isn't going to help things.

Regardless of the outcome, this is great dialogue.

Sheila_Ward

06-09-2004, 11:24 PM

I have not decided if I'm in favor of an organized group or not. But I certainly think having this open debate is a step in the right direction.

Here's a couple things that concern be about an organized group:

1. It will start with gangbusters, then interest will be lost. What will be left is people that just send in an annual fee, get a bumper sticker and say "Look at me, I'm an official storm chaser".

2. Those that belong vs. those that don't. I fear there will be some "I'm an official chaser and you're not because you don't belong" from those who feel superior. It will come from those that are in it for the "image" of being a storm chaser muckity muck more than they actually chase storms.

Having an organization is NOT going to stop some of the issues discussed in other threads (reckless driving, blocking emergency vehicles, etc). Anytime you have more that 1 person in an area for ANY reason you have the potential for one of them to be a dumbass. I see it everyday just commuting to work. I think this problem can only be addressed by confronting the offender, post a pic online if necessary, whatever it takes. Unfortunately there is no cure for stupidity.

Shane Adams

06-09-2004, 11:26 PM

Actually, being invisible out there is quite easy. I see a lot of you many times, but you never see me. It's all in how you conduct yourself out there. It's very easy to blend :wink:

Jeff Miller

06-09-2004, 11:29 PM

Originally posted by Sheila_Ward
I have not decided if I'm in favor of an organized group or not. But I certainly think having this open debate is a step in the right direction.

Here's a couple things that concern be about an organized group:

1. It will start with gangbusters, then interest will be lost. What will be left is people that just send in an annual fee, get a bumper sticker and say \"Look at me, I'm an official storm chaser\".

2. Those that belong vs. those that don't. I fear there will be some \"I'm an official chaser and you're not because you don't belong\" from those who feel superior. It will come from those that are in it for the \"image\" of being a storm chaser muckity muck more than they actually chase storms.

Having an organization is NOT going to stop some of the issues discussed in other threads (reckless driving, blocking emergency vehicles, etc). Anytime you have more that 1 person in an area for ANY reason you have the potential for one of them to be a dumbass. I see it everyday just commuting to work. I think this problem can only be addressed by confronting the offender, post a pic online if necessary, whatever it takes. Unfortunately there is no cure for stupidity.

The best thing that can happen is just what we are doing. Getting the negatives on print so we can look at them and figure out how to avoid that from happening. The biggest threat of interest being lost will be in the winter months, in non chase downtime. We would need to use that time for education/school visits/etc in my opinion. The second concern was the "elitest" concern of "Im better than you". Promoting a positive image is important, not promoting an elitest image. Another point to work on... and yes, organization will not stop the idiots. It may however stop some from becoming idiots, and that to me is worth it, with proper promotion of safety and ethics, the number one reason in my book.

Brian Brubaker

06-09-2004, 11:33 PM

From several posts it seems some are looking at an association as a means to put an end to problems with "chasers". But wasn't the idea to just put a face out there that could help counter the negative publicity?

Shane, know that I think about it, you're right! I've never seen you out there! Of course, I wouldn't know it was you if I did! :wink:

But seriously, I thing Mike P is on the right track about needing to deal with the issue of public visibility and setting the right perception. We don't want to become victims of "perception is reality". Not saying we will, though.

Chris Sokol

06-10-2004, 12:30 AM

Actually, being invisible out there is quite easy. I see a lot of you many times, but you never see me. It's all in how you conduct yourself out there. It's very easy to blend

When one or two people are on a storm...sure. But 150 inconspicious vehicles are...well...conspicious!

The subject of chasers being "visible" is not that of the individual chasers, but storm chasing in general. It will never be invisible again.

As for the comparison of the concept of the type of association that we are discussing with groups like SCOA....thats just absurd.

Shane Adams

06-10-2004, 02:59 AM

Originally posted by Chris Sokol
The subject of chasers being \"visible\" is not that of the individual chasers, but storm chasing in general. It will never be invisible again.

I understand that, my point was each person can be whatever he/she wants to be regarding the overall "chase visibility." The more people choose to make themselves invisible, naturally, the more invisible chasing itself becomes. This theory isn't anymore a pipedream than the proposed association that's currently sitting on the table

Originally posted by Chris Sokol
As for the comparison of the concept of the type of association that we are discussing with groups like SCOA....thats just absurd.

Not really. As much as it's human nature to resist change (this organization), it's also human nature to lose interest. Everyone's saying it will take much involvment from a core group of trusted, veteran chasers to get this thing off the ground. Who's going to worry about running the shop when those chasers are out....well, chasing?

Sure, this is a great idea right now because many (most?) of us are staring the end of our Spring chase season right in the face. But when it's time to actively chase again next Spring and the Spring after that (and so on), who's going to run things (during the time of year when it matters most)?

Because chasers will be busy chasing.

Melissa Moon

06-10-2004, 03:16 AM

I think everyone probably has a good idea of what I think about all of this. Enjoy your debate!

mikegeukes

06-10-2004, 04:40 AM

If this organization ever got off the ground and become popular, and attract hundreds of new chasers each year. Some folks are already complaining there are too many chasers out there. The roads will more crowded yet, with a steady influx of new chasers. Would this be good for the hobby?

Educating the public on storm chasing, average joe public at times have trouble watching the meteorologist on tv, and knowing the difference between a watch and warning. How would you go about educating the public, web site, pamphlets, public appearances, etc. Takes money to do that, and does the public really care, about storm chasers.

Certification of chasers, once again, how would you go about in doing it , at some meeting in the Plains. or regional meetings, if people could not attend would you do this by video, on-line, reading materials, etc. After you are certified, then what have a decal or a sign on your vehicle, saying I am a certified storm chaser and keep a certificate in your glove compartment or wear a name badge like some Skywarn groups have. This could lead to elitism. Look at me I am certified and you are pond scum attitude.

What about training videos, the rights and wrong of storm chasing. Using vehicles and chasers on a mock chase. Do not do this, but do this. The code of ethics and safety video you could call it. In the heat of the chase, most chasers will not be telling themselves, what did that video tell me do or not to do. Training videos,, on-line stuff, books on a whole array of stuff from interpretating the sky to forecasting. Once again, it takes money. If someone did a forecasting training video, the person should at least have a degree in meteorology.

Some one should come up with a definition of a veteran storm chasers. Just because your a veteran chaser, does not necessarly meanyour a safer chaser and you follow the golden rule in life either. I imagine there are a few bad apple veterans chasers and some with overflated egos. I would think having a variety of chasers from new ones to vets involved in the organization would be more productive.

What about publications, will the same people write the articles, and make a boring chase into sounding like the most thrilling chass ever. Or someone promoting how great they, etc.

Board of Directors, I see for some becoming power hungry, or a country club type of attitude and only a few people will be recognize within the association.

Bottom line, is people chase for a variety of reasons, you have different personalities in this hobby, more somewhat ego driven then other hobbies. People should chase, forgot about what this chaser is doing, and concentrate on their next chase.

Only organizations, I belong too is the National Weather Association and I been a full member of the American Meteorological Society for years, I joined those organizations, because I enjoy reading the journals and conference preprints.

Would I join a chase organization, all depends how it was run and who are the people running it. If it comes across as a bunch of overflated egos country club snobs, you can take the organization and flush it down the toilet.

In the meanwhile, chasers should just think about chasing and forget about this chaser and what that chaser is doing.

Mike

Francesco

06-10-2004, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by mikegeukes
Certification of chasers, once again, how would you go about in doing it , at some meeting in the Plains. or regional meetings, if people could not attend would you do this by video, on-line, reading materials, etc. After you are certified, then what have a decal or a sign on your vehicle, saying I am a certified storm chaser and keep a certificate in your glove compartment or wear a name badge like some Skywarn groups have.

The problem I see with this is how will you police it? I am sure that "un-liscenced" chasers would manage to sneak through because there will be no preventative way to make sure that "un-liscenced" chasers do not chase. And if something were to be created, I do not think many chasers will be kean to the idea of being pulled over in the middle of a chase and being asked for their chasing liscence.

Aint this a fickle matter.

Shane Adams

06-10-2004, 11:49 AM

Originally posted by Francesco

The problem I see with this is how will you police it? I am sure that \"un-liscenced\" chasers would manage to sneak through because there will be no preventative way to make sure that \"un-liscenced\" chasers do not chase. And if something were to be created, I do not think many chasers will be kean to the idea of being pulled over in the middle of a chase and being asked for their chasing liscence.

Aint this a fickle matter.

This Chaser Association would (if it ever sees the light of day) have absolutely ZERO influence on chasers who aren't a part of it. Besides attending a bunch of functions that will have nothing to do with the actual, physical practice of chasing severe weather, I don't see what the difference would be between a chaser who's a member and one who isn't.

Amos Magliocco

06-10-2004, 02:05 PM

This is the problem with trying to organize something via committee--everybody has ideas which is great--and lots of people have ideas about why it can never work and shouldn't be done. For a hobby that requires a healthy degree of optomism, there are a suprising number of naysayers around.

I'm not able to follow the thread step by step here, just the last several posts. I think certification is a terrible idea. There are no "policing" capabilities. An organization like this would have no real 'teeth,' and it shouldn't. Not like we need a military force here, just a group focused on promoting the positive aspects of chasing, and exposing new chasers to various ideas about how to do so safely and responsibly.

What can possibly be bad about that??

Mike Peregrine

06-10-2004, 02:32 PM

I'm leaning the same way, Amos - - - we've obviously tried the self-policing thing - it doesn't work, and would likely breed resentment.

This thread is the reason I had intended to hold off on discussing the idea until we could acquire some input of those with the appropriate experience. Over the years of flaming and tossing things around, we've entered into some sort of disfunctional group dynamic. We're disorganized and we love it.

It is noteworthy, however, that there has so far been no substantial argument that is sufficient to cause a reasonable person to believe that positive representation could possibly do any harm - other than 'we just don't want it, we don't need it, and what good is it going to do.' (What enterprise have we not heard those words spoken about in its proposal phase?) There are many who fail to see the benefit, but the arguments reflect the same relunctance toward progress, or hitting things from a new angle, that we have seen for years.

The risk is simply part of it - nothing ventured, nothing gained. The business plan remains in progress, and will be compiled over the next few weeks. There may yet be angles worth exploring that we have not yet begun to consider, and its doubtful that any big picture has truly started to emerge yet.

I do appreciate the flow of ideas, however - Mike G. has some very interesting ones - and several others also put some nice thought into theirs. Your input is very much appreciated - everyone's is, to be quite honest.

Amos Magliocco

06-10-2004, 02:49 PM

Originally posted by Mike Peregrine
It is noteworthy, however, that there has so far been no substantial argument that is sufficient to cause a reasonable person to believe that positive representation could possibly do any harm - other than 'we just don't want it, we don't need it, and what good is it going to do.' (What enterprise have we not heard those words spoken about in its proposal phase?) There are many who fail to see the benefit, but the arguments reflect the same relunctance toward progress, or hitting things from a new angle, that we have seen for years..

I agree. As I said in one of the very first posts about this, I recognize people feel that this is unnecessary. What I don't understand is why they feel compelled to convert the rest of us to their idea.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain the harm in promoting positive chasing stories. Here's a way for US to manipulate the media. Like I said before, well-written press releases OFTEN end up nearly VERBATIM in stories and magazines. Politicians learned this a long time ago--if you do all the work, get the quotes, shape the story, then often the media will take the page and say, "thanks, now I can take a long lunch." But left to their own devices, they'll write things about how insane we are and how we impede emergency vehicles.

As for the second point about exposing new chasers to various ideas about chasing, I'm intentionally using non-coercive language there. I DON"T believe in certification or blacklists or Halls of Shame or anything other than presenting various ideas. I don't think we should present ideas that encourage people to get within 30 yards of an F4, of course, but chasers are fiercely independent, so there's no point in trying to MAKE anybody do anything. Similarly, there's no harm in suggesting that a very good way to chase is safely and responsibly. Right??

Amos Magliocco

06-10-2004, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by Shane Adams
This Chaser Association would (if it ever sees the light of day) have absolutely ZERO influence on chasers who aren't a part of it. Besides attending a bunch of functions that will have nothing to do with the actual, physical practice of chasing severe weather, I don't see what the difference would be between a chaser who's a member and one who isn't.

I agree totally. And plenty of chasers won't join, and they'll still chase safely and responsibly and have a great time and I can't imagine ANYBODY will hold their decision against them. All I really care about in this is centralizing positive info about chasing, then targetting it to various media outlets. Instead of waiting for media to compose the new 'angles' on chasing feature stories, we should do it FOR them.

That's my primary motivation for mentioning the idea.

Mike Peregrine

06-10-2004, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by Amos Magliocco
All I really care about in this is centralizing positive info about chasing, then targetting it to various media outlets. Instead of waiting for media to compose the new 'angles' on chasing feature stories, we should do it FOR them.

That's my primary motivation for mentioning the idea.

I sincerely believe this was the motivation for everyone involved. I can understand how - after getting burned by people with ulterior motives time after time - that we've developed an environment that breeds suspicion. But like everything, we have to let our choices and actions ultimately speak for us ... it's what we do that counts.

Shane Adams

06-10-2004, 03:11 PM

Originally posted by Amos Magliocco

I agree. As I said in one of the very first posts about this, I recognize people feel that this is unnecessary. What I don't understand is why they feel compelled to convert the rest of us to their idea.

I'm not trying to influence anyone into my line of thinking, I'm just wondering why anyone thinks it will work. I don't see any harm in the idea (as pointed out by Amos - NO PAY), but I also don't see the point. Who says who becomes the first wave of electees, and why? In the case of safety, a 20-year veteran has no more authority than a 2-year newbie....because the particular safety issue this entire thing is addressing is of a behavioral aspect, namely driving. Any 20-something person should be well-versed in safe and responsible driving, chase experience has nothing to do with that.

My point is - all this organization's mission seems to be saying is "we're going to try and teach the obvious to those who should already know." Inexperience chasing storms is a risk that's just a part of the game, you have to chase to learn. No amount of classroom lecturing will ever replace that (look at spotters). Sure, you can preach safety and share experiences, but none of that really applies to real-time decision making....that's something only real-world experience can hone.

Finally, the image issue. I don't think either of the subjects I addressed above are the problem. It's experienced chasers who do stupid things....not much of a cure for that besides maybe a shotgun and a bar ditch in the middle of BFE :wink: .......kidding aside, seems fruitless to put all the effort into making us look better when there's still the root of the problem out there strong as ever. You guys get your organization together, you have a breakthrough meeting, and everyone leaves happy and enlightened.....then the next day another Harper Co happens and it's all gone - that quick.

I think the idea is a noble one, but also, unfortunately, an impossible one.

[/i]

Melissa Moon

06-10-2004, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Amos Magliocco

As I said in one of the very first posts about this, I recognize people feel that this is unnecessary. What I don't understand is why they feel compelled to convert the rest of us to their idea.

Isn't that the purpose of a debate? To argue to get what you want and to convince people that you are right, more importantly making sure that all sides of an issue get brought to the table before a decision is made? Besides, I think that those who are lobbying for this are the ones more guilty of being "compelled to convert the rest of us to their idea", especially by getting touchy when someone disagrees.

I think that this idea is silly; it's just going to add to the pre-existing cliquiness, politics, and hypocrisy already present in the chase community, and I don't think that the organization will get the respect and support from the community as a whole to be successful simply because too many people, including myself, think it is a waste of time, money, and all sorts of resources (and I don't think it will fix anything on top of that).

I know that what I have to say (along with anyone else who is not all gung-ho about this) will not sway you guys in forming your organization, but you should listen to all sides of this debate because it will help you make wiser, less-biased decisions that may help you in the long run. I am not going to make post after post arguing my position on this (because, to me, it is a waste of my time), but I felt need to respond to what Amos said earlier.

Mike Peregrine

06-10-2004, 04:21 PM

Certainly if no one was willing to listen, the proposal would not have been submitted for your review and discussion. As was said, the ideas are quite helpful, as is the debate. Thank you for participating in it -

Chris Sokol

06-10-2004, 04:26 PM

Besides, I think that those who are lobbying for this are the ones more guilty of being \"compelled to convert the rest of us to their idea\", especially by getting touchy when someone disagrees.

This is incorrect. As with any organization for any hobby or profession, you have the freedom of choice to either join and participate, or not to. Noboby has once said that you will have to join....just as nobody has said that an association would be responsible for policing chasers. That is best left for the police.

I think that this idea is silly; it's just going to add to the pre-existing cliquiness, politics, and hypocrisy already present in the chase community, and I don't think that the organization will get the respect and support from the community as a whole to be successful simply because too many people, including myself, think it is a waste of time, money, and all sorts of resources (and I don't think it will fix anything on top of that).

My opinion only: This is mainly because of ego..."I don't think that you are a better chaser than I am, so I will have no part of anything that you start."

Also...one quick response to one of your comments Shane. Nobody would be either asked or expected to go out and "meet the public". Lord knows Shane that I not only respect the hell out of you as a chaser, but I also think the world of you as a person, but you are the last person I would ever want to put up in front of a civic group! :lol:

Amos Magliocco

06-10-2004, 04:29 PM

Originally posted by Melissa Moon
I think that this idea is silly; it's just going to add to the pre-existing cliquiness, politics, and hypocrisy already present in the chase community, and I don't think that the organization will get the respect and support from the community as a whole to be successful simply because too many people, including myself, think it is a waste of time, money, and all sorts of resources (and I don't think it will fix anything on top of that)

Wow. With all due respect, I think your lack of specific detail here takes some steam from your argument. But I agree that there are many ways something like this could go wrong; there are uncountable chances for failure. It's wise to think of them, and much easier than trying to compose ways for success, no doubt. But it's hardly a reason to give up right out of the box.

I don't see how something like this is doomed to fail if the objectives are simple and within capabilities. For arguments sake, lets say there were only two or three. Something like issuing occasional press releases and centralizing information about chasing safely and responsibly. How hard would that be? Wouldn't those be objectives relatively easy to achieve? Specific, simple, and do-able? I honestly don't think these ideas are threatening.

Two or three simple, benign objectives that are within reach and within reason should make it relatively easy if a few people are willing to volunteer to help. As for being an "association," chasers willing to lend their name would probably be asked for little more than that.

I'm definitely listening to all sides and keeping an open mind, but I'm as yet unconvinced that something like this will hurt chasing. However, I'm VERY willing to listen to other viewpoints here. The last thing on earth any of us want is to make things worse, I'm sure.

Tim Vasquez

06-10-2004, 04:48 PM

One thought is that this organization may find its best niche among novice and intermediate chasers, who are always looking for some sense of belonging and purpose. Such an organization might help put them on the right track -- for example maybe the organization can provide beginner info kits with safety and ethics info, as well as perhaps key tornado research papers that have been cleared for non-profit reproduction by the AMS and NWA. And of course bumper stickers that might turn their novice friends on to good safety/ethics resources. As each member gains more experience, they can of course drop out and go independently if they feel they're getting nothing out of the organization. In that regard I can see some purpose for the organization. For many of us who are very experienced, an organization is certainly redundant, but it might provide important function for beginners.

Canned news releases are a definite PR idea, as I've noticed the media these days, even television, is being solidly built on syndicated content, even including what amounts to free PR for business interests. However I am skeptical on this because it would probably require a PR firm or someone with considerable experience to be effective, and may have little influence except in the smallest media circles.

However I'm not sure how much of this is viable or needed, especially in the Internet age and with this online forum. I still find myself flatly neutral on the idea and am continuing to watch the debate with interest.

At last check nobody from CFDG has signed on, so either they've written off this idea or are still lurking.

Tim

Shane Adams

06-10-2004, 05:22 PM

About Tim's last line above.....I'm guessing the former. I understand that it's natural to want the imput of the "fathers" or whatever of the current chasing world, but history is littered with examples of how this CFDG group has no desire to mesh with today's genre of chasers....hence the inception of that list in the first place.

Though I'm not for it, I'd suggest the organizers of the proposed association not hold their breath for CFDG imput and instead focus their interests where it really matters - the current group of rooks and newbies, as well as any relatively-new established chasers.

Amos Magliocco

06-10-2004, 05:38 PM

Maybe we can all agree that, at this point, we don't even know what we're arguing about. There are no specifics on the table, no details or formal plans to accept, reject, or debate. All we're debating now are theoretical ideas of what something like this might look like, and those who in general don't like the idea come up with the worst case scenario, and people like me come up with the best case scenario, but neither is particularly grounded in reality.

Would it make more sense to get a few specific ideas on the table first, then decide if they're good or bad? A few people are working on this, myself included, not because we want to be 'in charge' but because we want to get opinions on specific ideas. It's very difficult for opponents to assail ambiguity, then have supporters respond with more ambiguity--all of it pulled out of the air.

Are people willing at least to look at some specifics in a few days and keep an open mind until then?

Shane Adams

06-10-2004, 07:00 PM

Sure, I'm willing to look at list of actual proposals. I'll be as fair and objective as I possibly can.

Amos Magliocco

06-10-2004, 07:12 PM

Well, I'm working on trying to outline my two ideas in some detail. But I have only those two, so...that's not very many--lol. Several people mentioned other specific ideas in various threads.

Since TimV has opened an entire forum for this, we have some real space to spread out. Pulling some words from politics, we could make each 'plank' of a 'platform' its own seperate topic within this forum, and use that method to accept, reject, modify, and debate every specific idea.

If all the ideas are shouted down, then we'll know that the whole plan is a bust. I won't shed any tears, I promise. This is already sounding like a lot of work. But then we can say that we tried.

I'll try to get my two ideas posted as seperate topics by Saturday afternoon. Everybody knows what they are by now since I've put them in every post all day--LOL--but I'd like to add a little detail and anticipate potential objections.

Others could do the same--lets take advantage of a cool and powerful database forum here.

Mike Peregrine

06-10-2004, 07:49 PM

Sounds reasonable and objective to me. I'll try to have mine outlined over the weekend as well.

Richard Halter

06-11-2004, 05:17 PM

My idea is to have it first and foremost be some form of PAC - Publicity Action Committee.

For every Emergency Manager who has a bad story, there must be many who have been helped by chaser information, for example. We are a valuable asset to public safety as a part of our hobby/avocation, and need to get that out.

We could use a sympathetic national reporter.

Mike Peregrine

06-12-2004, 09:36 AM

May take me a few more days to put anything more formal together, as this weekend has shaped up considerably for chasing (and I think we all know given the choice, which I will choose) :)

So anyway - I'll probably run into some of you somewhere under a storm in the next day or two, and you can feel free to pick up the nearest big rock to throw at me if you'd like ... ;)

Later,
MP

Kevin Scharfenberg

06-12-2004, 01:58 PM

I think one reason most of the CFDGers aren't responding are that 2/3 of them have been chasing since this idea came up! :)

I sense a major lack of consensus on what such a group is meant to accomplish -- or at least I can't figure it out! I suggest one of the proponents write out some bullet-points about the purpose for such an organization-- a first hash at a "charter" if you will. That might give us some things to debate.

I'll throw out a few of my own, if I were starting a storm chasing organization:

1. Public relations - There's no way to avoid this aspect, so might as well confront it. There is intense public interest in the hobby. Such an organization should have a few people willing to work with the media during and after major events, appear on talk shows, etc.

2. Charity/public service - This would be an important aspect to me if I'm going to take time out of my personal life for this, though I think there should be no obligation for any member to participate. Possible activities include working with disaster relief agencies, holding blood drives, speaking at civic clubs and schools, etc.

3. Archival/library services - There has been some talk "elsewhere" about the fact a lot of slides/film/video are now being lost as the hobby comes of age. Such an organization could become a central library for people who either want to donate some of their film/video/etc. for an archive, or for someone who doesn't want to see their 25 year old tornado film disintigrate. This is true for individuals as well as the government (e.g., NSSL). Also, some people will want their old slides/film digitized.

4. Spotter training - The NWS does a great job at this, but they have limited resources for holding classes and developing materials. A lot of NWS trainers still only have slides and filmstrips from the 1980s to show! A lot of great videos from chasers that could be very useful in spotter training never is seen.

5. Scientific/real-time data collection/warning coordination - Pretty soon we will all be able to transmit our videos/images in real-time to the web from the field. A lot of people adorn their vehicles with weather instruments. A lot of this info could be extremely useful to real-time warning forecasters, and to scientists studying events afterwards. Unfortunately, the government has limited resources to accomplish bringing all of this technology together into the scientific and warning processes. This could be a great project for a lot of the technologically-inclined folks among us.

Above all, there should be no stigma for people who choose not to join. I agree with the posters who have said that trying to solve the "problem" of yahoo chasers in this manner is foolhardy -- such people will not want to join anyway, and safe/sensible chasers who do not want to join will tend to be unfairly lumped with the yahoos if that is the overall goal of such an organization.

So...is an organization necessary? Probably not. Is it a good idea anyway? Perhaps!

Comments?

Jeff Miller

06-12-2004, 04:11 PM

I personally would be very involved in the aspect of charity relations. That would not only be an extremely important aspect of the chase community, I would feel like I am accomplishing something for myself and said group. Imagine the poistive aspects of organizing food, clothing, etc... even possibly our own salvation army type disaster assistance program! This not only excites me, I personally cannot wait to see that develop.

Bobby Lang

06-13-2004, 02:32 AM

I know I am new to Storm Track, but I am going to throw in my 2 cents...

For those that say it will fail & we should not even try...
First, I'll start with a quote from Beverly Sills...
You may be disappointed if you fail, but you are doomed if you don't try.
Just wanted to throw out a stat I read in a book last year that 4 out of 5 small businesses will fail in their first 5 years. How many small businesses each year are started to be the "lone" survivor.

Second, I will just say KISS (keep it simple stupid). If this association was started it needs to be as small as it can so that it does not have an overwhelming workload. Over time when word gets around then one by one it can be expanded to handle more and/or bigger issues. Right now, I think we need to only focus on good PR. So in my book, we need to break that down further which I think Amos & Mike are doing. For a board of directors type thing, I purpose one made up of 12 people who are diversified from police officers or emergency management to chasers etc. These people would debate PR issues and most important, what to do or what action to take.

That's all I'm going to post for now since it's late & I'm going to bed. Plus, I want to wait until Amos & Mike give us detailed data. Feel free to disagree or agree & finally, a good book I'm in process of reading is "Good to Great" by Jim Collins. Although it's about business companies it can be applied to organizations.

Patrick Ware

06-13-2004, 10:51 AM

I just wanted to point out the obvious.
There are already organizations in place for charity and the general welfare of people in a disaster. Documentation of storms can be found all over the INTERNET and in any public library, and traffic laws, local laws and codes have been present for years. Like so many other issues, non-enforcement is the problem.
Education and command and control is provided by the NWS and local RACES groups in many areas.
People who do not follow and obey these laws and rules, much less have the common courtesy to yield to emergency traffic or respect another human being who has just suffered the trauma of a devastating storm with the loss property or life, will not acquiesce to the charter and rules of any association or club which will be rooted in politics and personal agenda.
The science of severe storms is necessary while the pursuit of these same storms for art and enjoyment is a fundamental need for those of us who are left brained.

What is needed is a simple refresher course in courtesy and human compassion from those who chase toward those who become casualties of natures selective process. Our pursuits, no matter what the reason, should not contribute to the evening news and need for more emergency response.

The formation of an association should be for instruction and sharing of experience. To form one which will generate any further legislation will be self defeating.
A healthy balance of maturity and adreneline with a thorough understanding of why one chases sever weather and the dangers involved can go far in achieving a positive appearance to the public. Ego and supercells do not mix well.

Just some food for thought.

Brian Barnes

06-14-2004, 05:03 AM

I come from a trade association background. In my own humble opinion, I think it would be extremely tough to put together anything solid for storm chasing.

Most associations offer some kind of benefits to it's members. I have seen some ideas on this list in the form of things like "spotter training", and I can't speak for the rest of the country but in the Tulsa area the WCM of the Tulsa WFO takes care of this with a loose association to Skywarn. He puts together a little 1 hour training seminar and travels around to a lot of the smaller communities to train their law enforcement, and emergency management people...so I think "spotter training" is best kept to these type of programs.

When I think of association, I think of "TRADE" associations. Such entities provide things such as bonding for companies. That is the biggest reason that I believe companies join an association. They have to meet a minimum standard set forth by the association and in return they are bonded with a level of protection. Thus, the customers of that company know that the company is reputable. I can't think of any reason a storm chaser would need to be "bonded", unless there was a deeper tie such as an independent or freelance journalist.

Another thing that an association does is hold seminars to convince the target audience they need to do business with members of their association because..... Thinking along these terms, I'm just going to use "video" as a storm chasers 'target' so if an association was established that convinced buyers to only purchase video from association members then I can see that as being beneficial. However, we all know that there is bound to be someone who walks out their front door and films their neighbor's home being relocated to the next town and that video would then be sold and bought whether or not that person was a member of the "storm chaser's association", so I can't see that happening.

The next thing that I would think of is member discounts. I'd join a storm chasing association if I could get a nice discount on a rental van. That said, rental companies might not like the idea of so many storm chasers renting their vehicles for such things (even though I do it all the time). Or, maybe a hotel discount for association members.

But to even put "spotter training" and "storm chasers" in the same sentence???? In my view spotting and chasing are two different animals. There are plenty of sources for spotters to receive the training they need and with so many new chasers appearing year after year, sooner than later EVERY tornado will be witnessed by "chasers" who will call in the report and make the need for a spotter none existant. I can just about hear an emergency manager in Harper County go "why even deploy our spotter network, there are 150 chasers out there under that cell - if it hoses we'll know about it!" I'm getting off topic a little bit, but I think it's a decent point.

My main point is that a "storm chasing association" would most likely fail if there were no money saving or money making benefits. However, if an association existed specifically for "weather journalist" (people who earn at least 50% of the income from storm chasing in the name of journalism) and there were benefits that would allow them to obtain equipment insurance or great discounts, as well as establish a name with purchasers who respected the 'association' for it's high standards in quality and professionalism....then I can maybe see that happening. Just an example, who would you hire to take a family portrait? The guy down the street with a nice SLR or a PPA member? I would choose the PPA member because I know that he has the PROFESSIONAL training to do it right and if he doesn't then he better hope that he's bonded with some level of protection!

-Brian Barnes

===========
Will chase for food!

Chris Sokol

06-14-2004, 12:12 PM

But to even put \"spotter training\" and \"storm chasers\" in the same sentence???? In my view spotting and chasing are two different animals.

Geez....give me a break. You know what though? You are right in a way. A larger percentage of chasers know their storm features alot better than spotters. No offense intended to ANY NWS Office...but I think that most people agree that, while the basic spotter course is a good introduction, there is definately a need for more advanced training. Budget and time will probably never allow for the NWS to develope and teach advanced spotting topics. Yes...there IS an advanced spotter course, but how often is it offered?

I get so tired of hearing spotters say that chasers have nothing to offer. I especially love to hear spotters that down chasers, but call in scud features as "rotating funnels". I have been parked right next to a spotter before and witnessed this.

Emergency managers that continue to ignore reports from chasers because "They are not spotters" will eventually allow a major disaster in terms of human life to occur. I can promise you this...if I ever have a tornado headed for a populated area and call it in, only to have my report dismissed, thereby allowing no warning of any type to be given and loss of life to occur, I promise you that what I have to say after the event will stop no lower than that states capital...and possibly even further.

I can just about hear an emergency manager in Harper County go \"why even deploy our spotter network, there are 150 chasers out there under that cell - if it hoses we'll know about it!\" I'm getting off topic a little bit, but I think it's a decent point.

And this type of information stream would be bad? One has to wonder what your priorities are. For the public? Are you that afraid that chasers will replace spotter groups? That will never happen. But what is wrong with chasers ENHANCING spotter groups? From what I hear from the Skywarn community, chasers must really be perceived as a threat. Now...couldn't additional training from people that log hundreds, if not thousands of hours a year observing severe weather be of some type of help to those that may get to see 5-10 hours of severe weather in the same time frame? And would this not also not only give spotters and emergency managers a better understanding of chasers, but also give chasers the same of spotters? I would say the answer is a definate yes...as long as people are willing to set their prejudices aside.

Chasers can not only enhance a spotter groups ability to identify potentially dangerous situations, but they can also help to further a spotter groups education level. Several NWS Offices have come to understand this, and welcome chaser reports. Isn't it about time for everybody else to come on board?

David Sallee

06-14-2004, 05:20 PM

Hey all,

i'm just going to add a little something here... What about your local CERT (Community Emergancy Response Team) training?? We start ours tonight and earlier I brought up that I was a Storm Chaser to the Fire Chief and he thought it would be GREAT to include some extensive spotter/chasing classes with this... this will give the "spotters" a possibly different view of storms and a different view of us (chasers) to the public... Also, nothing against the great job of the NWS training but they are mostly "per certain county" trained... The CERT classes are per "city" trained meaning every city has the own CERT team which is trained and managed locally (per city). But can be and will be called out for any county or neighboring county disaster...

what does everyone think?

BTW, I'm all for the Storm Chase Association...

Dave

Bridget Beddow

06-30-2004, 03:49 PM

Hello, everyone, I'm a little new to this so I'm trying to get caught up on the topics. I want to say that I am all for an association that provides the
community of science assistance in helping to support the public when it comes to the weather. I live in a likely spot for Category 3 hurricanes, and while North Carolina is definitely not Tornado Alley, I've been through my share. In 1984 I was ten in my backyard Prattville,Al when my mother came out and asked me to come inside due to a tornado watch. Right then a tornado dropped and probably kicked up less dust than me and my mother hauling butt back to the house. In July,1996, I was driving cross-country through Arkansas and ran into (what I know now) was a supercell. Was there a tornado? I don't know, but me being stupid seeing people parked underneath a bridge, I decided to step on through it and after I got into the hail and severe lightning, I thought boy, did I drag my 12 year old brother into something I couldn't handle. In April,2000 I decided to take a week off from work to spend with my fiancee who lived 3 hours away from me and the first day a tornado passed through 1 mile away and completely twisted one of the farm pivots. I've had many many other close encounters, and 9 times out of 10 people will (out of fear or pure stupidity) make decisions that will cost them their lives. I haven't chased tornado's, but they sure seem to like me, and I would much rather be on the informative side than have one drop on me not knowing that I could have prevented the situation I got myself into. I'm going to learn as much as I can about the weather now as a hobby, but I wish they would have had things like this forum back in the day for me to learn from. I've read alot of opinions on the idea of the association and while they are all good points, I really do think that public safety and awareness is a big key to prevention. While having an association that promotes the "good side" of storm chasers may induce dislike from those who are not involved, isn't it reasonable to say that at least there is somebody "for" storm chasers instead of so many people against it? If there is not enough support for an association (ex: lack of funds, promotion, lack of attendance) why doesn't the the NSSL or meteorologists promote what storm chasers do in assistance for the public while others are bashing it. Ex: I don't care if someone wants to drive home from the bar drunk, that's their choice. When they knock over a family member or a good friend, then we're going to have a problem. (I hope nobody takes offense to that, I drink but I certainly don't want to see ANYBODY hurt over a drinking and driving incident) I recently made a comment about storm chasing to someone I don't know that well, their comment was "Those people are so stupid". Why did she think that they're stupid, so far from what I've seen from reading from THIS forum is that they're are a heck of alot of people doing it that are much more educated than she is. Problems are usually only problems if you let them be, but this is a free country and some people do LIKE to cause problems just because they can, as is their freedom. Having somebody who is willing to speak out in defense(in a respectable and professional manner) is definitely a good thing to have going for you.

Jane ONeill

07-10-2004, 07:17 PM

I'd like to share my perspectives from the inside looking out of the sort of association that you are now considering.

The Australian Severe Weather Association (ASWA) was incorporated in May 1999 for the following publicly noted purposes (taken straight from the website):
"ASWA was created for several reasons. Firstly, it enables people interested in any type of severe weather (thunderstorms, tropical cyclones to droughts and blizzards) to meet other people with similar interests. This often occurs at the monthly or bi-monthly state meetings - many members enjoy the opportunity to meet others with similar interests, especially when it comes to exchanging stories, photos and video footage. Meetings vary in their content, but often contain feature presentations (sometimes by guest speakers), comments and descriptions of previous recent significant weather setups and events and the opportunity to share video footage and photos of weather events.

The second reason ASWA was created was a community benefit - that is to assist in severe weather reporting. Currently ASWA focuses on severe thunderstorms (a prevalent threat in Australia), but there is no limit set for the scope that ASWA can cover. ASWA encourages its members to report severe thunderstorms and conduct local damage surveys so that this information can be forwarded onto the Bureau of Meteorology for the issuing of vital warnings and important database information that can lead to further research of severe weather related phenomena in Australia. In the future, ASWA hopes to continue this and report more information - many thunderstorms go unreported, and many areas have very little thunderstorm preparation. ASWA aims to assist in improving the thunderstorm reporting network and give information on how people can prepare for the thunderstorm season. ASWA also aims to extend this to all aspects of severe weather in the future.

Since ASWA's founding, ASWA has conducted several successful activities - these include a Bureau of Meteorology and ASWA combined storm spotter seminar, and the increasingly popular ASWA AGM weekend, which is an annual weekend with a variety of events that attracts many people from interstate to attend!"

We have aims and objectives, and also a disclaimer required for the rather tough insurance requirements in this country (although they are now being relaxed somewhat).

We have found that being a member of the association has given people some credibility when it comes to being in 'odd places at odd times doing odd things' - people stop worrying that you might be going to rob them if you produce a membership card and tell them a little of what we do.

ASWA is also strong on the education side and we are working atm to put together comprehensive information for distribution to schools. Members give public talks and the association has provided a foundation for a group of people who have now developed close and long lasting friendships.

The downsides of an association are the same as those in any formal group:-
- a relatively small number of members run it and do the lion's share of the work
- there are formalities that are required to be followed as per the Constitution, which can take away from those very limited hours of the day that we all have
- money for memberships needs to be handled correctly and banked and then consensus gained from the Exective and committee as to how these funds are to be spent for the good of the group
- the stated desires of the groups are wide ranging dependant upon age, experience, knowledge of the atmosphere and meteorology or lack thereof making some decisions rather difficult when trying to satisfy most of the people most of the time
- as with all groups, if a member does something that brings disrepute upon the group as a whole, it can take a lot of hard work to put things to right

I wouldn't change the fact that we have ASWA having been involved formally in the incporporation of it and the running of it since its inception as joint Victorian State Rep for a number of years and now as National Secretary. It has ben a very useful engine for collecting together individuals with a common interest, after 5 years, the association is now perceived as being a reliable and relevant group by the Bureau of Meteorology, but we have had to prove ourselves.....

for more information re the Code of Ethics and the Aims and Objectives, please feel free to explore:

http://www.severeweather.asn.au/public/about.php

Hoefully this gives just a brief insight as to our experience.

Cheers,

Jane

Jimmy Deguara

07-11-2004, 01:04 AM

Hi all,

A large group of storm chasers here in Australia decided last year to try another meeting concept specifically focusing on storm chasing from an Australian perspective.

It is based in Sydney, Australia and simply is a group of Australian storm chasers with a common interest. When we meet, people can submit edited video, slides, photographs, presentations on Australian storm chases and events as well as those from other parts of the world. People come and go as they please. There are guidelines but no rules and nobody is charge I guess similar to a chaser picnic with an educational focus. It is amazing how people have come to enjoy the relaxed atmosphere!! Our focus is on learning and reporting accuracy. Theories and terminologies are discussed as well as chaser methodologies and safety.

We meet once a month in our region and put out a bi-monthly newsletter.

http://www.stormchasing.com.au/modules.php...wdownload&cid=1 (http://www.stormchasing.com.au/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=1)

All this is done voluntarily as we have found it much easier to operate without the need of handling money, voting, etc. Again, nobody is in charge. We simply meet and enjoy and if anyone feels like running a particular meeting, presenting etc we allow it. We put limitations on our meetings such as time that edited video can be shown and the number of presentations. It has been working well with increasing interest and attendance.

We simply deal with the art of storm chasing not having to worry about anything else. Just my 2 cents worth.

The Australian storm chasers website is lcoated at:

www.stormchasing.com.au (http://www.stormchasing.com.au)

Regards,

Jimmy Deguara

Bill Tabor

07-16-2004, 04:04 AM

You know I think it just comes down to a few action minded people (chasers) deciding if they want to create an organization or not. Someone has to come forward. I mean I could create an association (for instance) and then it's success would just depend on whether others joined it or not, and if they participate, etc.

Who or what entity provided for SkyWarn's creation and mandate? Was it just a bunch of public or government?

I see one of the main potential benefits of a national chaser org would be that it would eventually be a recognized and documented entity that people and government officials (read law enforcement) as well as local spotters would recognize. Being a member of this recognized org might allow chasers to call in reports of weather with less doubt than currently given to Skywarn members, and local law might consider us part of the 'has business being here' crowd. That distinction could then separate many of the more involved chasers from just locals that come out and cause traffic jams and problems for instance.

Obviously the association would have a charter and a mission. What would they be? Here's a few thoughts:

1) Establishment of a National Chaser Association
2) Guidelines and accepted rules of behavior that members are required to swear and adhere to.

Generally the guidelines would be that we conduct chases in a sane fashion with not endangering the public and not breaking the law. We wouldn't be required to call stuff in, but the association would facilitate identification of trained chaser reports possibly by a member number. This would be explained to NWS, and they would provide buy in.

There might be recommendations about helping those in need, etc but not necessarily requirements. In other words I want it to be a vehicle for credibility and public recognition for media exposure but not a millstone around the neck of chasers as a set of required rules.