[LeArc] UNFOUNDED RUMORS: Region 2 IARU Band Plan & AM Operation

[Jesse Risley]

From: "ARRL CL Division" <memberlist at www.arrl.org>
Date: Wed,  7 Nov 2007 22:11:21 -0500 (EST)

7 NOV 2007 - 2050 CST

Fellow Central Division ARRL Members:

For those who follow FCC proceedings and already understand what the
IARU is and how it operates, a lot of what I'm about to say may be old
news to you.  However, we still appear to have individuals, who do not
understand the IARU (and sometimes even the FCC), get very excited when
somebody tells them their cherished mode of amateur radio operation is
in danger of being eliminated.  What follows is for the benefit of
these people.

The recently approved IARU Region 2 Band Plan is only an advisory band
plan for use, as desired, primarily by those amateur radio societies in
Region 2 that have little in the way of a band plan.  This is the
second IARU Region to adopt a new or revised band plan.  Region 3 still
has yet to act on this item.
 
> The International Amateur Radio Union (IARU) is only an advisory
> organization made up of the amateur radio societies in each respective
> region.  Region 2 is North and South America.  The geographic regions
> mirror the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Regions.  The
> ITU is the body that develops the rules at World Radio Conferences that
> then have to be adopted by each country.  The IARU has no such power.
> 
> The current mini-uproar is the result of a very few ignorant people
> with issues making postings to various un-moderated Internet email
> reflectors.
> 
> There is no plot to shut down amateur radio AM operation in the U.S. or
> it's territories.  The existing AM footnotes to our current band plan
> still apply and will continue to do so until the FCC changes or erases
> them from its Part 97 Regulations.  I repeat, there is no ARRL plan to
> get rid of HF amateur radio AM operation in the U.S.  I also point out
> that the AM footnotes (that enable AM operation) in the current FCC
> Amateur Radio Service band plan would have still applied to our
> regulation by bandwidth proposal, if it had become an FCC Regulation. 
> Only the portions of the HF band plan that would have been changed were
> listed in the ARRL petition to the FCC.  This is standard procedure in
> an FCC filing.  Many people still do not "get it".
> 
> I find it absolutely amazing that many people jump to conclusions
> before they do their own homework.  This is true in many activities,
> including amateur radio.  There have been, and apparently always will
> be, individuals who are gullible, biased, have an axe to grind, or are
> some combination of the three when it comes to discussing and
> considering amateur radio regulations.  They are few in number, but
> there are a lot of others who are taken in by these people simply
> because they don't understand the situation and don't want to spend the
> effort to get the facts directly from the source.
> 
> I don't have a good answer to this situation other than to keep working
> to spread the truth.  I apologize for my exasperation that shows
> through in this message.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> ARRL Central Division
> Director: George Isely, W9GIG
> w9gig at arrl.org


"There is only one difference between a long life and a good dinner: that, in the dinner, the sweets come last."

Robert Louis Stevenson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com