As President Donald Trump’s administration orders mass layoffs and cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, local meteorologists and influencer storm chasers — including some weather experts who previously claimed to avoid politics or expressed right-leaning views — are speaking out in support of federal employees and the essential information provided by the agency.

Andrea Austria/Media Matters
Research/Study
Storm chasers and meteorologists warn Trump's cuts to NOAA threaten public safety
One storm chaser wrote: “This needs to be stopped because it’s going to end up costing a lot of people’s lives!”
Written by Ilana Berger
Published
-
-
Trump’s funding cuts and layoffs will hobble NOAA and the National Weather Service, potentially restricting access to a vital public good that costs taxpayers very little
-
- NOAA and its subsidiaries, including the National Weather Service, employ thousands of scientists, engineers, and other experts to conduct vital research that is shared with the public. NOAA’s products and services range “from daily weather forecasts, severe storm warnings, and climate monitoring to fisheries management, coastal restoration and supporting marine commerce.” The NWS estimates that the critical information it provides costs just $4 per U.S. resident per year. [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, accessed 3/14/25; The New York Times, 2/8/25]
- Project 2025 — the right-wing plan for a second Trump administration organized by The Heritage Foundation with over 100 conservative partner organizations — called for NOAA to be “broken up and downsized” and urged the National Weather Service to “fully commercialize its forecasting operations.” Weather experts across the country have expressed alarm at Project 2025’s plans to dismantle NOAA under the new administration. Project 2025 architect Russell Vought, who now heads Trump’s Office of Management and Budget, has promised, “We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected.” [Media Matters, 5/31/24, 9/27/24, 2/28/25; ProPublica, 10/28/24]
- Starting on February 27, the Trump administration has laid off more than 800 NOAA employees, plus another 500 who resigned if the agency promised to pay them through September. According to The New York Times, “The two rounds of departures together represent about 10 percent of NOAA’s roughly 13,000 employees.” On March 12, NOAA announced in an email to its staffers that the agency would be laying off another 1,029 employees, or roughly 10% of the agency’s remaining workforce. [The New York Times, 2/27/25, 2/28/25]
- The Associated Press: “After this upcoming round of cuts, NOAA will have eliminated about one out of four jobs since President Donald Trump took office in January.” “This is not government efficiency,” said former NOAA Administrator Rick Spinrad. “It is the first steps toward eradication. There is no way to make these kinds of cuts without removing or strongly compromising mission capabilities.” [The Associated Press, 3/12/25]
- The NWS’ National Hurricane Center has made great strides in tracking dangerous storms, but Trump’s layoffs are threatening that progress. A February preview of a report from the National Hurricane Center concluded that for the first time, the center managed to “explicitly forecast a system that was not yet a tropical cyclone (pre-Helene potential tropical cyclone) to become a 100-kt (115 mph) major hurricane within 72 hours.” However, experts fear that funding cuts and layoffs at NOAA’s Office of Aircraft Operations will impact the ability of the agency’s specialized “Hurricane Hunters” to collect data used for tracking and predicting destructive storms. [National Hurricane Center, 2/24/25; Yale Climate Connections, 3/6/25]
- NOAA and its subsidiaries, including the National Weather Service, employ thousands of scientists, engineers, and other experts to conduct vital research that is shared with the public. NOAA’s products and services range “from daily weather forecasts, severe storm warnings, and climate monitoring to fisheries management, coastal restoration and supporting marine commerce.” The NWS estimates that the critical information it provides costs just $4 per U.S. resident per year. [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, accessed 3/14/25; The New York Times, 2/8/25]
-
Meteorologists and storm chasers are now speaking out against Trump’s cuts to NOAA and the NWS
-
- Writing about the NOAA layoffs for Forbes, meteorologist Marshall Shepherd explained the agency’s importance to everyday Americans. “It is stunning to see posts and comments suggesting that we do not need the National Weather Service because we have Apps, TV stations, your favorite social media influencer and so on,” Shepherd wrote. “To me, that is like saying, ‘Why do we need potato farmers when I can just get fries at my fast food place?’” He added, “NWS offices and centers around the nation provide critical forecasts and warnings that find their way onto your TVs, websites, and phone Apps,” warning that “cuts to NOAA and NWS will likely impact the private sector because they literally work together in offices, labs, and centers.” [Forbes, 3/1/25]
- James Spann, a meteorologist at Birmingham ABC affiliate WBMA, wrote, “If NWS products and services are reduced, we all suffer…especially during times of life-threatening weather.” “Long time followers here know that I don’t do politics, and there’s no political content on this account,” he noted, before calling to support National Weather Service workers. “Their surface and upper air observation networks along with computer models, radars, and satellites are critical for all meteorologists, including those of us in the private sector,” Spann explained, adding, “Their service is absolutely invaluable.” [Twitter/X, 2/25/25]
- Storm chaser Brandon Copic, who joined Fox Weather as an exclusive storm tracker in 2023, shared Spann’s post and wrote, “NOAA/NWS is vital to EVERYTHING people use for their forecasts.” Copic, who has previously written that “I don’t post my political views publicly,” continued: “Data is sourced from the NWS from soundings, model data, etc that is ingested into your app, or analyze by your weather source. It is easily the best bang for your buck. … The NWS is fundamental to your daily life whether you believe it or not.” [Twitter/X, 2/25/25, 11/17/24]
- Tony Pann, a Baltimore-based meteorologist for WBAL, wrote, “Saying we don't need NOAA or the NWS because I can see the weather on my phone, is like saying we don't need farmers because I can just go to the grocery store.” The Nebraska Storm Chasers Facebook page shared Pann’s post, writing, “Couldn’t say this any better,” and later added that the layoffs were a “hatchet job” that is “already proven to disable agencies and already starting to burn out current employees.” [Facebook, 3/7/25, 3/7/25]
- Fox News senior meteorologist Janice Dean wrote: “Most of you who follow me know that I don’t speak out very often unless I feel passionate about something. I have not heard from ONE meteorologist in this industry who thinks the cuts to @NWS @NOAA is a good idea. We are all disturbed and worried.” [Twitter/X, 2/28/25]
- Reed Timmer, who is known for the show Storm Chasers, wrote, “We have multiple chances for super tornado outbreaks through the middle of March! Now is not the time to carve up the National Weather Service!” Timmer, who has previously appeared on Fox News to discuss Hurricane Milton, also encouraged his followers to “contact your representative in support of the NWS. Remember those missed tornado warnings in OK in November due to the office being short staffed? These problems could become more widespread with firings.” He later posted: “I am deeply familiar with how important their role is in the warning process, data collection, and numerical weather prediction as well as research. They all deserve our support.” [Twitter/X, 2/27/25, 2/28/25; Facebook, 2/27/25; Fox News, America’s Newsroom, 10/9/24]
- Journalist and storm chaser Jordan Hall, who has voiced support for Trump in the past, wrote, “Stop the finger pointing of ‘you voted for this/that/ and the other.’ Come together and focus on making it a point to stop the targeting of the NWS and NOAA.” [Twitter/X, 2/27/25, 11/4/20, 11/4/20, 3/7/22]
- Storm chaser Kenny Schenk wrote, “This needs to be stopped because it’s going to end up costing a lot of people’s lives!” He added that NOAA and NWS are “extremely important” and are already “severely understaffed.” [Facebook, 2/27/25]
- Indiana Storm Chasers wrote about the layoffs on its Facebook page, warning, “It’s our greatest fear that an understaffed NOAA and NWS will lead to significant negative impacts across the public sector.” The post continued: “It is not our wish to make this a political statement or to open the door to political commentary, but we will say with great certainty that it is our hope that NOAA and the NWS will be refortified swiftly as the safety of the American public is of paramount priority - especially now as the 2025 severe weather season begins.” [Facebook, 2/27/25]
- Michigan Storm Chasers called the layoffs a “recipe for disaster” and wrote that “by firing and cutting budgets under NOAA, it not only affects those personally, but has serious potential to disrupt public safety and communications when it comes to hazardous weather.” The group’s Facebook page wrote that it typically “avoids engaging in political conversation,” but added, “We are choosing today to make a post on this particular matter because it affects our operations, as well as you as the general public. … NOAA & its branches provide important, essential, life saving data & information to meteorologists & the general public. Without proper staff & funding, public safety is jeopardized as a result.” [Facebook, 2/27/25]
- On Facebook, right-wing climate denier and meteorology student Chris Martz called NWS employees “a critical asset to public safety,” warned that “President Trump would be making a grave mistake … by significantly cutting the staffing at NOAA / NWS,” and said that weather forecasts should not “be privatized and put behind a subscription paywall, especially weather alerts and warnings. Without them, there would be a lot more deaths each year from severe weather.” Martz, who has expressed support for Trump’s picks to head the EPA and Department of Energy, also defended “conservative meteorologists, storm chasers and hobbyists” and wrote, “I do not want to hear the, ‘You voted for this—it's all your fault!’ buIIshit that I have seen for the last 24 hours in every other social media post.” [Facebook, 2/28/25; Twitter/X, 12/31/24, 11/18/24, 11/11/24; Media Matters, 10/4/24]
- Iowa storm chaser John White wrote, “I'm all for cutting gov't waste, but what are we doing touching the NWS/NOAA budget... Cutting money from such a VITAL program that costs ~$3/yr per person in the U.S. is ridiculous and will likely have major repercussions.” White, who has previously written that he hates “infusing politics into weather,” continued in another post: “If you think privatization of the weather field is a good idea, consider how much rural people would have to pay: less people + usually a poorer demographic; thus, VERY little business incentive to protect these people without outrageous prices of over 100s of $'s/yr.” [Twitter/X, 2/27/25, 2/27/25, 11/19/21]
- Writing about the NOAA layoffs for Forbes, meteorologist Marshall Shepherd explained the agency’s importance to everyday Americans. “It is stunning to see posts and comments suggesting that we do not need the National Weather Service because we have Apps, TV stations, your favorite social media influencer and so on,” Shepherd wrote. “To me, that is like saying, ‘Why do we need potato farmers when I can just get fries at my fast food place?’” He added, “NWS offices and centers around the nation provide critical forecasts and warnings that find their way onto your TVs, websites, and phone Apps,” warning that “cuts to NOAA and NWS will likely impact the private sector because they literally work together in offices, labs, and centers.” [Forbes, 3/1/25]