[ARRL-OK] SB-389

Tue, 28 Oct 2003 20:44:26 -0600

Jim hits the nail right on the head here.  It is not appropriate to judge=20
which hams are Worthy and which are Unworthy based upon their=20
activities.  The rationale for the Amateur Radio Service is quite clearly=20
elucidated within the FCC regulations.  If you have perhaps lost sight of=20
this, I'll remind you:

=A797.1 Basis and purpose.

The rules and regulations in this Part are designed to provide an amateur=20
radio service having a fundamental purpose as expressed in the following=20
principles:

(a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the=
=20
public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly=20
with respect to providing emergency communications.

(b) Continuation and extension of the amateur's proven ability to=20
contribute to the advancement of the radio art.

(c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur service through rules=20
which provide for advancing skills in both the communications and technical=
=20
phases of the art.

(d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of=
=20
trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts.

(e) Continuation and extension of the amateur's unique ability to enhance=20
international goodwill.

I hope this sounds familiar. Limiting protection to the "right" amateurs=20
who participate in "worthy" activities is wrongheaded in the=20
extreme.  *ANY* amateur licensee must be subject to to the same protections.

While the proposed wording was almost certainly well-intentioned, it's=20
simply wrong-headed. Amateur radio is a marvelously diverse service and=20
this diversity is key to our survival; everything we do must keep in mind=20
preserving and encouraging this diversity.

Kim Elmore, N5OP

                           Kim Elmore, Ph.D.
                        University of Oklahoma
         Cooperative Institute for Mesoscale Meteorological Studies
"All of weather is divided into three parts: Yes, No, and Maybe. The
greatest of these is Maybe" The original Latin appears to be garbled.

At 06:19 PM 10/28/2003 -0800, you wrote:
> >   For example,
> >
> > C.    No provision in this bill shall prohibit licensed amateur radio
> > operators from installing towers on their own property so far as the
> > structures are permitted by current zoning ordinances.  Communities are
> > required to accomodate, in the greatest possible manner, amateur radio
> > operators registered and participating with their local emergency
> > management agency and/or the Amateur Radio Emergency Service.
> >
>
>Whoa!!!!
>
>I am absolutely floored to see the suggestion that exemption from
>antenna-hindering legislation be afforded only hams who are affiliated
>with EM or ARES.  I am both shocked and dismayed to see that someone
>has that sort of narrow view concerning which sorts of hams are worth
>protecting from legal impediments to operating an amateur radio station.
>Legislation of the sort proposed here would make second-class hams out
>of non ARES/EM members, in that they would not have the same right to
>put up good antennas that ARES/EM members might have.
>
>Please consider these scenarios (using fictional names, but describing
>situations which could easily apply to many hams' lives):
>
>Joe Ham is a new ham.  He's busy learning things, like how to get a
>basic station on the air, how to participate in routine QSO's, in
>nets, in repeater round-tables, how to make antennas, and theory and
>maybe Morse code for an upgrade.  Joe's finding the nets the most
>fun, followed closely by ragchew, but really has no idea what will
>interest him in the future.  If we had the necessary crystal ball,
>we could see that in 5-10 years, Joe, now more experienced, and
>feeling confident about his ability to operate properly under even
>the most stressful conditions, will decide it's time to look seriously
>at getting involved in public service.  For now, though, he's busy
>just getting to know the hobby.
>
>Mary has been a ham for years, and has held a general class license
>for almost that long.  A busy wife, mother, and career woman, Mary
>has very little time to get on the air, and spends what little time
>she has chasing DX.  She's not involved in any sort of emergency
>preparedness, but she buys a new radio every few years, and pays dues
>to her local club and the ARRL.  Good fortune willing, we will never
>have to find out, but it just so happens that in the event of the
>sort of catastrophe that might wipe out communications over much
>of the North American continent, her knowledge of propagation could
>quite possibly prove invaluable.  (Of course, she'd have a hard time
>developing that skill in the first place without a decent antenna
>and support system for it.)  Without her and thousands like her,
>amateur radio would have fewer manufacturers making ham gear, less
>influence to support things like spectrum protection legislation, and
>a smaller, weaker, national organization.
>
>Bob has held an extra class for even longer than Mary, but gets on
>the air very little.  He's too busy reading technical journals and
>tinkering with computers and circuitry.  When he decides to try to
>get on the air and do some experimenting, he discovers that he
>doesn't belong to one of the qualifying groups which would lend him
>the credibility necessary in the eyes of the law to qualify for
>having an antenna up.  Discouraged, he decides to sell his ham
>equipment, and let his license lapse.  He continues to work on his
>research, and eventually develops an ingenious method of filtering
>that virtually makes BPL interference disappear.  Rather than write
>his article for QST, providing amateur radio a bright glimmer of
>hope in the midst of its downward spiral after the onslaught of the
>BPL disaster, he instead submits his idea to the US military, who
>quietly sits on it.
>
>Jerry is 75 years old, and has been a ham for over 50 years.  For
>over three decades of that 50 years, he was involved in some sort
>of public service.  On 11 different occasions, he responded to
>tornadoes, floods, and other natural disasters by leaving his job
>and family behind to assist with emergency communications in the
>stricken areas.  His health no longer permits that level of
>involvement, but his greatest joy in retirement is getting on 40M
>CW at night, and 20M CW during the day, to keep in touch with
>friends and make new ones.  Some of the guys at the local club
>have been helping Jerry maintain his tower and antennas, but they're
>not sure they should go on doing so since, technically, Jerry is no
>longer qualified to have a tower up.
>
>Do you really want to exclude Joe, Mary, Bob and Jerry from fully
>participating in amateur radio, just because they don't happen to
>belong to ARES, or whatever?  Do you really believe that hams who
>are members of emergency preparedness organizations are the only
>ones who deserve accommodation?  Do you think that hams who'd rather
>devote their time to building equipment, modeling antennas, studying
>propagation, working contests, maintaining repeaters, working EME,
>working meteor scatter, writing articles, or educating the next
>generation of hams, don't deserve the right to erect antennas and
>support structures, unless they devote some of their time to some
>emergency preparedness organization instead?
>
>Do you really believe that's what's best for ham radio?
>
>Everyone, please do support accommodations for amateur radio in any
>legislation which aims to restrict the building of antennas or
>their support structures.  However, please do not even *think* of
>limiting this support to hams who belong to any particular type of
>additional organization, such as RACES.  Let's support the right
>for *all* hams to build and maintain effective amateur radio
>stations.
>
>73,
>Jim  WB5UDE
>______________________________________________________
>___________________ Information __________________________
>ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT [email protected]
>Oklahoma Section Web page http://www.qsl.net/wb5syt/index.html
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>
>ARRL-OK mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/faq.htm
>Post: mailto:[email protected]