[ARRL-OK] Verbiage

[Jim Glover]

> So you don't like ARES, RACES, MARS being appreciated in a bill to 
> protect amateur radio stations from being penalized

I didn't, and wouldn't, say that!  Although I can't see how it belongs
in a bill destined to become a law, rather than in a resolution, I'd
have no problem with ARES, RACES, and MARS being "appreciated."  What
you asked for went way beyond appreciation.  It called for limiting
the full protection of the law to members of such groups.  That is
what I'd have a problem with.

I certainly meant no disrespect for ARES, RACES, or MARS.

> What does it take to be involved in RACES, ARES, etc.?  In this County, 
> one form and a checkin on a two meter net once in a while.  Of course, 
> you can do more. 

It doesn't take a whole lot to be involved in lots of different
activities.  I'm vice-president of a local repeater club, helping in
that role to keep multiple wide-coverage repeaters on the air and
available for emergencies.  I frequently serve as net control for a
Thursday-evening "Tech Net" where hams have the opportunity to share
their knowledge (usually, everyone learns at least a little something)
and have fun while learning to participate in nets.

Being a member of RACES, ARES, etc. simply isn't the only valid way
to support amateur radio's emergency preparedness role.  Hams who
contribute to the hobby/service in any meaningful way help keep it
strong.  Only a strong hobby/service is of any use to any of us,
including those who wish to focus on emergency preparedness.

> During a disaster, it makes more sense to know that I 
> have a potential resource right next door than to bring resources in 
> from two counties away.  As it stands now, with a ham population of 100 
> locally, I have 10 on the roster.

You know, I do have some concern about this.  Currently, I devote
my Thursday evenings to Tech Net, which takes 1.5 - 2 hours.  The
net used to begin at 8:00 PM, as did the local ARES net, on another
repeater.  We worked out an agreement with them whereby we moved
our start time up to 8:30, and they moved theirs back to 7:30, so
that there would be less conflict between the two nets.  Sometimes
their net lasts a little past when ours begins, but we welcome late
check-ins, so that's no problem for people who want to participate
in both nets.  

I keep telling myself I should get in the habit of checking into
the ARES net.  I haven't gotten around to it yet, though.  When I
do, my family will barely see me at all every Thursday evening.
Since I normally do the cooking around here, they'd really miss
that!  Due to a physical limitation, my wife has historically 
had a difficult time cooking, but she had surgery recently and
should soon be able to take that over for me.  That would be one
less reason not to go ahead and devote more of each Thursday
evening to amateur radio than I do now.

Now, I know I should go ahead and participate in ARES nets, and
that my doing so would help the leadership of ARES know I'd be
available in an emergency, and would help me be more familiar
with the way ARES operates.  However, I reject the notion that
only those who are card-carrying members of ARES can be useful
in emergencies.  Putting aside the fact that everyone who
contributes to the hobby/service helps make us all stronger, it
remains my strong conviction that people who aren't members of
ARES, RACES, or whatnot can still contribute in emergencies.

When the May 3, 1999 tornadoes happened, I was asleep.  I'd
been missing a lot of sleep, and had gone to bed early, without
even checking the weather.  The storm took me by surprise!  But
the next morning, at daybreak, I was on the air, looking for a
way to contribute.  The ARES-sponsored net I offered my services
to told me that they had no use for anyone who'd not been involved
in emergency training, and that I might as well just go away
and think about getting some training before the *next*
disaster hit.  The club I belong to, though, was providing a
net to support communications between the Red Cross sites in
OKC, including their temporary posts out in the stricken areas,
some without adequate means of communication otherwise.  The
guy who'd been net control overnight needed to go to work, so
I took over net control.  I was able to get some time off from
work, so I devoted the next few days to being net control for
that net.  The Red Cross asked for 50 volunteers to provide
ham radio communication in support of their damage assessment
efforts that weekend.  First, I asked that ARES group (the one
who'd turned me down).  Sorry, but, no more trained hams to
devote to even a worthy cause.  The Red Cross would be on
their own, I was told.  So, we put the word out, and by the
end of the week, had 50 volunteers.  I ended up being the
liaison between the Red Cross and the volunteer hams who were
helping out in this effort.  I stayed in that role for the
next two weeks.  The Red Cross continued to ask for our help,
and expressed gratitude for what some of the Red Cross national
volunteers described as one of the best amateur radio support
efforts they'd seen.  Not bad for a bunch of un-trained
volunteers, huh?

I recognize the value of emergency preparedness training
during the calm times between emergencies.  I recognize the
value of a well-coordinated group who have a well-rehearsed
response they're ready to provide at a moment's notice.  I
applaud those who devote themselves to making that sort of
thing a part of the amateur radio hobby/service.  However, I
reject the notion that only those who belong to groups which
focus on emergency preparedness are doing their part to help
keep the amateur radio hobby/service ready to be useful in
emergencies.

> The issue is the bill.  I focused on the public service aspect of 
> amateur radio.  I hope you take the same time it took to reply to my 
> message blasting my choice of words to contact your legislator to 
> support the hams who are not affiliated.  My letter is not intended to 
> disparage anyone.  It is intended to bring to the Legislator an issue 
> that concerns me and hook it to Homeland Security, an issue he will 
> understand, in simple language.

I understand that the issue is the bill.  I responded because I
believe the modifications to the bill which you proposed would
injure amateur radio.  I understand that emphasizing the connection
between amateur radio and emergency preparedness will help those
who write our laws appreciate the value of our hobby/service.
However, the place for that emphasis is in our letters, phone
calls and email to our representatives, not in restrictions on
which hams the bill as ultimately written would actually protect!

> My apologies to anyone I have offended.

You alarmed me, even "shocked and dismayed" me...but certainly
didn't offend me!  :)  Don't worry... I have pretty thick skin.

> Let me know how more I can help.

I'm glad you asked.

I'd imagine it would be helpful if every call for support of a
particular piece of legislation (or calls like this one, to
suggest modifications to proposed legislation) would provide
information about how to identify one's representatives, and
contact them.  That way, those inclined to respond can do so
without having to look elsewhere to research those important
details.

Thanks very much for your support of amateur radio!

73,
Jim  WB5UDE