On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 03:30:43 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:


"Leo" wrote in message
.. .
On 11 Feb 2004 00:00:18 GMT, (N2EY) wrote:

In article , Leo

writes:

Except for Japanese 4th class licensees, how many hams are there in the
rest of
the planet?

Well, my trusty EuroCall 2003 CD lists 276,446 callsigns in Europe
alone - even if a couple of guys died, there's probably more than that
now. I don't have figures for Asia, Africa, Oceania or the rest of
the Americas (except that there's around 56,000 or so up here...).

Quite a few, anyway! DX wouldn't be the same without 'em.....


Excluding Japan, the last time I checked the Radio Amateur Call book listed
about 600,000+ for the combined rest of the world. Roughly equal to the
number of US Amateurs.

Sounds about right. (Japan has 1,000,000 hams? That explains the
number of Japanese amateur products out there - they built their own
user base for 'em!).

However, voting rights in the ITU, CCITT or other global entities
aren't weighted entirely upon the number of licensees or service users
that each country has. If they were, the US could control the ITU like
a corporation - claim a 51% user share and set global amateur policy
on their own votes alone. Fortunately, it doesn't work that way

Agreed that the US is obviously a major player - but I'm sure that
even if they had gone their own way, the rest of the world would not
necessarily follow. The role of agencies like the ITU is to
coordinate global resources so as to prevent chaos on the bands - not
to act as an agent of US policy.


Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

73, Leo

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 03:25:54 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:


"Leo" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:32:40 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:


"Leo" wrote in message
.. .
On 10 Feb 2004 09:52:50 -0800, (N2EY) wrote:

snip

Without the ARRL, do you think we'd still have amateur radio? I don't.

Um, the rest of the planet does not have the ARRL, and amateur radio
is still going strong there.....


snip

73 de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo


Without the ARRL, US amateur radio would have remained permanently closed
after World War I. The other countries did not have enough amateurs to
justify keeping the frequencies and it is highly probably that they would
have all gone to commercial interests. Everyone wanted the shortwave
frequencies at that time and without the US, the foreign amateurs would
not
have had enough leverage to have held on to the spectrum.

Dee,

Perhaps, but I'm not comfortable that it is fact. In 1917 (or 1916,
depending on the source), there were some 6,000 amateurs operating in
the US - not sure how many there were when amateur radio was turned
back on in 1919, but it was probably less than that, due to losses in
the war. Even at 6,000, though, would that constitute a sufficient
number of amateurs to influence policy on a global scale? Keeping in
mind that the US, as a member of the ITU, has voting privileges but
not an overwhelming influence. Foreign stations still boom over here
today on part of our 40 meter band - because the ITU agreements say
they can. The Americas can request, and debate, and vote upon, but not
control ITU policy. I doubt very much that they could back then,
either.


Although records in the early 1900s are sketchy, if you pick periods in time
that are documented, the number of US amateurs was roughly equal to the rest
of the world combined. This is still true today if one excludes Japan, which
has over 1 million licensed users but with an abysmally low activity rate
(Japanese licenses are for life, many children are licensed in school
programs and never use the licenses, and no renewal is required).

As of our last restructuring,Canadian licences (actually,
"Certificates of Proficiency") are also valid for life - no renewal
required.

While theUS would not have been an "overwhelming" influence, it still would have been
a major player. How long could amateurs in other countries have been
effective against government and commercial interests in the ITU if the US
had remained in an "amateur radio black hole?" It is difficult to say of
course but there would have been much less strength available to resist the
encroachment. Yes one cannot say with absolute certainty which way it would
have gone but I do believe that amateur radio would be a lot less common now
if the US had not been involved. Also keep in mind that due to our form of
government, our civilian population (in this case hams) do have more
influence in shaping our governments approach to items like amateur radio
than is and was prevalent in a lot of countries.

I wonder if that is true - the FCC does not appear to have a history
of implementing what the ARRL requests, for example - and they
represent many thousands of amateurs. Sure, comments and suggestions
are encouraged - but it is not a true democratic process - the FCC is
under no obligation whatsoever to implement the will of the majority.
Plus, the comment and review procedure is massive - thousands of
individual public comments and proposals to go through, another round
of proposals and responses, then review, and on and on - a juggernaut
of a process that may well take years to run its course.

Here, Industry Canada asked our national radio association (RAC) to
gather data on what Canadian amateurs wanted to do with licensing
requirements if the Morse requirement was dropped at WRC-03. The RAC
set up a web page with a questionnaire on it, and opened it up to all
licenced Canadian amateurs (not just RAC members). The results were
collected and tabulated, recommendations prepared, and forwarded to IC
for their consideration. As licensing changes within the Amateur
service do not have an impact on either the general public or
commercial interests, this approach makes sense.

Now there is a system that amateurs have direct influence over!

Also, look at how quickly amateurs in Great Britain, Australia,
Germany and many others were able to have the Morse requirement
dropped following WRC-03. No red tape, no seemingly endless
discussion - just done. Many did this in direct response to the
request of their own national radio clubs to do so if permitted
post-WRC-03. Now there is real democracy in action!



According to The Wayback Machine, it wasn't commercial interests that
wanted control of these bands post-WWI (all radio bands, actually!) in
the US - it was the US Military. The ARRL did a fine job of lobbying
the US government to have the frequencies reopened to US amateurs -
but I don't think that the rest of the world would have walked away
from amateur radio forever if the ARRL had been unsuccessful. And, in
the absence of the ARRL, other alliances may have been formed to lobby
for this right - just like they did in the rest of the world.


I did indeed mean to include military. Sorry about that. In the context of
lobbying the US government for keeping amateur frequencies and re-opening
them after WWI, I do believe that in the absence of the ARRL another body
could have formed (and probably would have) and done the same as the ARRL.
But you know what, we would then be having this same discussion of "ZZZZ"
organization and the people who today slam the ARRL would be slamming the
"ZZZZ." The rest of us would then be defending "ZZZZ". Same game,
different names.

But Dee, other governments re-opened the amateur bands after WW1
without the assistance of the ARRL - in many foreign countries. I'm
neither praising nor slamming the ARRL - just stating that their
achievement was a local, not a global, one. Canadian hams were back
on the air months before the ARRL's victory in the US - I'm sure that
others were as well in various places around the world. Seems natural
enough - activities were suspended due to the conflict, and reinstated
after the hostilities ended. Not everyone's military tried to keep
the bands indefinitely for their own private use!


In fact, your happy ham neighbours to the North were legally
transmitting again as of May 1, 1919 - a full 5 months before the US
amateurs were allowed back on the air on October 1st of that year.

As I recall from history class, the US military hasn't attemped to
enforce US policy up here since 1814 - and never successfully prior to
that


But would they have had enough clout in subsequent ITU conferences to stave
off the commercial and military seekers of the bands. In any disagreement,
you don't want the strongest player sitting on the sidelines or playing on
the other side.

I don't see why not - the ITU voting structure isn't that heavily
weighted based on the size of the US - otherwise, they would be in
business strictly to globalize US policy. Or, countries like China
could assert that as they have 4 times the population of the US, they
should control 4 times as many votes. Countries like Japan could claim
that they have 3 times the number of licenced Amateurs, and monopolize
the process. If that were the case, how many countries would have
remained members of the ITU? None, I'd say.


Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


73, Leo

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:29:01 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

Leo wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:44:04 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Leo wrote:

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:15:37 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Doggone it Dee! Your factual post is going to ruin another anti-US rant!


No rant intended, Mike. Just looking for facts!

You wouldn't happen to have any on you, would you?

Facts? I have the history I've read.


I'll have to take that as a 'no' then....


Do you always take history as fact?

Not always, Mike. Depends on whether the source of the historical
information quotes verifiable references or not. Otherwise, it's just
the opinion of the writer.

I never take hearsay as fact, however.

The fact is, other countries were back on the air well before the ARRL
was successful in restoring amateur privileges in the US. Neither the
US nor the ARRL was responsible for the restoration of amateur
privileges in other sovereign nations.

Perhaps the ARRL overstated its importance in the lobbying for the
return of Amateur privileges as well - in recent history, the FCC does
not always follow their suggestions (incentive licensing comes to
mind, for one). Maybe the Government would have told the military to
back off and get out of the radio monopolization business? If the
military had been successful, there would have been no commercial
radio either - just military.

But hey, if you're lobbying for something and it ends up going your
way, then you get to claim that you made it happen, right! Even if it
would have happened anyway - who's to disagree?


FWIW, I have read that the US amateurs and their representatives were
pretty much the driving force in Amateur radio post WW1. The numbers of
Amateurs in the US was roughly equal to the Amateurs in the rest of the
world. These numbers coupled with a few organizations that represented
them from one country instead of spread out over the globe, would
naturally have a major influence on the hobby/avocation.

If the international unions were structured like corporations, that
would be true. The US would have a majority share, and could
implement anything that they wanted based upon the number of
'shareholders' (amateurs, in this case) that they represented.

In reality, it's not structured like that at all. Otherwise, how would
comparitively small countries like Albania or Turkey have any chance
of having their national interests recognized?


Now I don't know that for sure, since I wasn't around then, but it seems
sensible and logical enough, so I assign it a good probability.

Perhaps they were a driving force - but if they hadn't been (i.e. if
the US military had successfully locked them out after WW1), why on
Earth would the rest of the planet have abandoned amateur radio? It
might have been different, and ther might have been contention between
US military traffic and the rest of the world - but I really don't
believe for a second that the US influence over the amateur policies
of the rest of the world was ever that strong. Not then - and not
today.

Historically speaking.


- Mike KB3EIA

73, Leo

Hello, Dee and the group,

at the ITU, each country has only ONE vote, see the post about albania and
san marino etc.

And about the strength of the national radio clubs like your ARRL, or the
RAC, DARC: ARRL is holding abt 25% of the hams, in Europe the average member
number of the club is over 60% of all hams in this country. But I agree,
lobbying the government is a game they know how to play in the US.

73 & 88 de
OE8SOQ
Helmut

(Len Over 21) wrote in
:

In article , "Dee D.
Flint" writes:

As I indicated in another post, early on in amateur radio, it would
have been easy for the ITU to have allocated all the frequencies to
commericial and government interests. The size of the US amateur
community was, in those early days, very probably a key element in
keeping an allocation for amateurs.

There was NO "ITU" before WW2. There was the CCITT.

The size of the US amateur community was, in those early days,
miniscule compared to the broadcasters getting started. Ham radio's
oinks weren't near "numerous" until AFTER WW2.

But, to hear the spin from the league, they and Stl Hiram
practically invented ham radio and saved it from perdition.

Selective editing of the REAL history of all radio doesn't make it
"truth." Except to the devout Believers...

LHA / WMD

They even claim they were responsible for the no-code licence, when the
truth is the FCC would have introduced one 20 years earlier but for the
league's opposition!

Mike Coslo wrote in :

Alun wrote:

Ah well, Leo, they still think that the United states is the centre of
the universe (or even the center of the universe, HI!). We used to
think the same thing about the British Empire, and we were wrong too!

Trolling, eh?

- Mike KB3EIA -



Not atall. I'm serious. We did think we were the centre of everything, but
that is an illusion that passes. Trust me. All things pass. The Roman
empire, the British empire ... you get the idea.

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in
.com:


"Leo" wrote in message
...
On 10 Feb 2004 09:52:50 -0800, (N2EY) wrote:

snip

Without the ARRL, do you think we'd still have amateur radio? I
don't.

Um, the rest of the planet does not have the ARRL, and amateur radio
is still going strong there.....


snip

73 de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo


Without the ARRL, US amateur radio would have remained permanently
closed after World War I. The other countries did not have enough
amateurs to justify keeping the frequencies and it is highly probably
that they would have all gone to commercial interests. Everyone wanted
the shortwave frequencies at that time and without the US, the foreign
amateurs would not have had enough leverage to have held on to the
spectrum.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



If you beleive that, you'll beleive almost anything.

Mike Coslo wrote in
:

Dee D. Flint wrote:
"Leo" wrote in message
...

On 10 Feb 2004 09:52:50 -0800, (N2EY) wrote:


snip

Without the ARRL, do you think we'd still have amateur radio? I
don't.

Um, the rest of the planet does not have the ARRL, and amateur radio
is still going strong there.....


snip

73 de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo



Without the ARRL, US amateur radio would have remained permanently
closed after World War I. The other countries did not have enough
amateurs to justify keeping the frequencies and it is highly probably
that they would have all gone to commercial interests. Everyone
wanted the shortwave frequencies at that time and without the US, the
foreign amateurs would not have had enough leverage to have held on to
the spectrum.

Doggone it Dee! Your factual post is going to ruin another anti-US
rant!

8^)

FWIW, I'm really disapointed in thoes two. 8^(


- Mike KB3EIA -



Mike, how is it anti-US to point that the world doesn't revolve around
America? Of course, if you think it does, then you're probably beyond help.

Alun wrote:

Mike, how is it anti-US to point that the world doesn't revolve around
America? Of course, if you think it does, then you're probably beyond help.


It's a troll, Alun. Go post the same message anywhere on netnews and
watch the reaction.

If you don't believe it, then you're probably beyond help.

Of course the world doesn't revolve around the US. The world revolves
around it's axis.

How is the ARRL proposal going to affect the rest of the world's
amateurs anyway?

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:43:25 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

Alun wrote:

Mike, how is it anti-US to point that the world doesn't revolve around
America? Of course, if you think it does, then you're probably beyond help.


It's a troll, Alun. Go post the same message anywhere on netnews and
watch the reaction.

Mike, I didn't take Alun's message as a troll - just a response in
context to the thread to a rather lofty assertion that without the
ARRL (and by definition, the US Amateur Radio Service, since that is
all the ARRL influences), the world would never have known the joys of
Amateur Radio.

Which is just a tad jingoistic, I'd say - and nigh-on impossible to
substantiate without resorting to theory, opinion and conjecture.


If you don't believe it, then you're probably beyond help.

Of course the world doesn't revolve around the US. The world revolves
around it's axis.

How is the ARRL proposal going to affect the rest of the world's
amateurs anyway?

It won't.

Yet, according to the comments earlier in the thread, historically,
without the ARRL there would be no amateur radio anywhere in the
world.

Really? I don't think so.


- Mike KB3EIA -

73, Leo