| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
November 10th 04, 06:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Leo wrote in message . ..
On 09 Nov 2004 12:26:50 GMT, PAMNO (N2EY) wrote: In article , Leo writes: On 5 Nov 2004 17:31:32 -0800, (Brian Kelly) wrote: snip Here, from the FCC R&O, is what that money bought us: "We similarly do not find that Amateur Radio frequencies warrant the special protection afforded frequencies reserved for international aeronautical and maritime safety operations. While we recognize that amateurs may on occasion assist in providing emergency communications," it described typical amateur operations as "routine communications and hobby activities." Oh oh. We've been caught. The FCC said the dreaded "hobby" word. Then we should grab that ball and run with it! Run with what? With a revised definition of what ham radio is all about, and its importance in today's world. To paraphrase Orwell, the FCC sees all license holders as equal, but some are more equal than others.....amateur radio apparently being on the 'less than equal' side of the equation......non-essential, per se. I don't know about the Orwellian part ("Animal Farm" reference well-done and duly noted) but it's hard to argue that all of amateur radio is more important or even equal with, say, maritime or aeronautical safety communications. What I see FCC saying is just that those safety communications deserve the most protection. Of course the idea that *any* licensed service does not have absolute protection from interference caused by an unlicensed, incidental radiator is the real problem. And it's not a "science" problem but a "political" problem. Most of what goes over the internet is "routine communications and hobby activities" isn't it? ...which has what relevance to the topic of amateur radio and BPL? BPL is being touted as something we *need*, for some reason or other. Why do we *need* high speed internet via BPL at all? Why is such access so needed that licensed radio services must tolerate interference from BPL systems? IOW, what will BPL do that is so much more important - more "vital" - than ham radio and other licensed radio services? Jim, it looks like your "it's an avocation, not a hobby" arguement didn't work - they seem to have seen right through it and figured out what Amateur Radio is anyway! Nice try, though. I say we go forward on all fronts - hobby, avocation, public service, education, emergency comms, tinkering, advancing SOTA, etc. If they're gonna call us hobbyists, then make it a badge of honor, same as was done with the title "ham operator". Nice flag waving, Jim, but is there a strategy behind that lofty statement? I'm following K0HB's "PBI" concept. Come up with ideas and see where they lead. Go forward how, with what, to whom, and to what goals and objectives? Publicity, for one. How we present ourselves to Congress, the FCC, and our BPL opponents, for another. I've seen plenty of "Sportsmen for Bush" and "Sportsmen for Kerry" bumperstickers. By folks who hunt and fish for "a hobby". Or was that just a "one for the Gipper" thing that you thought sounded real cool? Nope. The regulatory folks have made it pretty clear - do you have a plan to have them overruled somehow? By whom? - the decision on BPL is entirely within their sphere of control. Congress is one avenue. Another is simply to make amateur radio more visible and better understood. And this goes beyond the BPL battle. Take CC&R struggles - would they try to ban other "hobbies"? CC&Rs are outside the jurisdiction of the FCC, I believe..... Exactly! I like the term "antenna-hugger" myself. Great! Just wait until the FCC helps the ARRL complete the sequel to their most popular book (entitled "2 Meters And Down - Amateur Radio In The 21st Century"). The little antennas for our only remaining bands will be much easier to hug! Actually, I see the VHF/UHF allocations as being much more threatened by reallocation than HF. --- The phrase I object to is "*just* a hobby" - which denies the components of public service, education, etc. Which, unfortunately, is what the FCC R&O quoted above boils down to - no special protection warranted, it's just a hobby activity. *Most* amateur communications aren't emergency communications. Never have been. The emergency communications aspect was dismissed pretty neatly in their statement.....the condescending "while we recognize..." line. My point is simply that the FCC isn't buying the argument that we hams need complete protection from BPL because we *sometimes* do emergency communications. Neither do the CC&R folks. So we need a new tactic. Like the "Sportsmen for X" folks. Part of which is a revised definition that shows how unique and valuable a resource amateur radio is - just like the park system. Even though I'll probably never visit most of the nation's parks, they are of value to me. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#3
November 10th 04, 10:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(N2EY) writes: Leo wrote in message ... On 09 Nov 2004 12:26:50 GMT, PAMNO (N2EY) wrote: In article , Leo writes: On 5 Nov 2004 17:31:32 -0800, (Brian Kelly) wrote: snip Here, from the FCC R&O, is what that money bought us: "We similarly do not find that Amateur Radio frequencies warrant the special protection afforded frequencies reserved for international aeronautical and maritime safety operations. While we recognize that amateurs may on occasion assist in providing emergency communications," it described typical amateur operations as "routine communications and hobby activities." Oh oh. We've been caught. The FCC said the dreaded "hobby" word. Then we should grab that ball and run with it! Run with what? With a revised definition of what ham radio is all about, and its importance in today's world. Then YOU should start the redefinition off instead of passing the buck over to anyone else. To paraphrase Orwell, the FCC sees all license holders as equal, but some are more equal than others.....amateur radio apparently being on the 'less than equal' side of the equation......non-essential, per se. I don't know about the Orwellian part ("Animal Farm" reference well-done and duly noted) but it's hard to argue that all of amateur radio is more important or even equal with, say, maritime or aeronautical safety communications. What I see FCC saying is just that those safety communications deserve the most protection. Isn't that impossible in the self-righteous glorification of amateur radio? You surely must have noted the insistence by so many hams that the government-commercial infrastructure always fails in a disaster or emergency yet hams and ham gear are always there to take over and save the day. Of course the idea that *any* licensed service does not have absolute protection from interference caused by an unlicensed, incidental radiator is the real problem. And it's not a "science" problem but a "political" problem. It is ALL a "political problem." Politics DEFINES which radio services are "licensed" or not. "Licensed" radio services did not come about by Divine Intervention. Most of what goes over the internet is "routine communications and hobby activities" isn't it? ...which has what relevance to the topic of amateur radio and BPL? BPL is being touted as something we *need*, for some reason or other. Why do we *need* high speed internet via BPL at all? Why is such access so needed that licensed radio services must tolerate interference from BPL systems? Quit asking all those questions and start giving some answers. IOW, what will BPL do that is so much more important - more "vital" - than ham radio and other licensed radio services? For one thing, it would open the doors to having more Chat Rooms where hobbyist hams could sit around all day and high-five each other that They were of vital need to the nation (because they are officially licensed) because the ARRL told them they were. Jim, it looks like your "it's an avocation, not a hobby" arguement didn't work - they seem to have seen right through it and figured out what Amateur Radio is anyway! Nice try, though. I say we go forward on all fronts - hobby, avocation, public service, education, emergency comms, tinkering, advancing SOTA, etc. If they're gonna call us hobbyists, then make it a badge of honor, same as was done with the title "ham operator". Nice flag waving, Jim, but is there a strategy behind that lofty statement? I'm following K0HB's "PBI" concept. Come up with ideas and see where they lead. You have to check in with Kellie to see if he approves of your "brainfarts." Go forward how, with what, to whom, and to what goals and objectives? Publicity, for one. How we present ourselves to Congress, the FCC, and our BPL opponents, for another. So far, that job has been quite POOR in the USA. I've seen plenty of "Sportsmen for Bush" and "Sportsmen for Kerry" bumperstickers. By folks who hunt and fish for "a hobby". Ham radio is not a sport. Ice hockey is a sport. Hunting and fishing are loosely defined as "sport." Ham radio is a hobby. Or was that just a "one for the Gipper" thing that you thought sounded real cool? Nope. Tsk. Sure sounded that way... The regulatory folks have made it pretty clear - do you have a plan to have them overruled somehow? By whom? - the decision on BPL is entirely within their sphere of control. Congress is one avenue. Another is simply to make amateur radio more visible and better understood. ...which means getting BEYOND the pages of ARRL publications and into the mass media. Very puny efforts by the ARRL to make any sort of mass media entry in the last half century or so. Example: The mass media journalists duly reported many, many groups out hunting for shuttle debris, lots of photographs shown of people engaged (and some identified) in that plus shots of debris itself in various places of the US of A. Where was it identified that amateur radio groups were the "leaders" or even participants of such activity? Answer: On the league website and in QST. Not exactly mass media outlets. More examples: Many disasters and emergencies have been chronicled by the news media in the last half century, much film and video footage, many many photos, hundreds of column-inches of type composed about all that. Hardly any mention at all of ham radio involvement and, if it were, confined to what has been termed "health and welfare" messaging. Where has it been glowingly reported as of vital interest? On the league website and in pages of QST. Again, NOT mass media. Amateur radio publicity MUST go beyond the puny efforts of the league in getting out the message. The league has been ineffective using its old approach. Cable TV has hundreds of channels covering an amazing assortment of activities. There are at least three programs on Arts and Crafts on the schedules (would have been a fourth but Aleene's went off). There are none about amateur radio. Has "Dateline" or "60 Minutes" done any reporting of amateur radio in their existance on network TV? Any of the news broadcasts? [answer: Hardly any if at all.] Yet the league glowling reports (in remarkable vague implications) all the wonderful work done by amateurs and they Believe it all, hook line and sinker. You should realize that league self-glorification is what they do for a living...to convince all that they should be members and that they tell members and non-members what they psychologically want to hear. It ain't necessarily detailed truth, but mostly implied doing of good works. Actually, I see the VHF/UHF allocations as being much more threatened by reallocation than HF. If you've been following all the agencies and organizations going after "bands" you should have said all that spectral territory ABOVE 1 GHz if where the activity is...UHF is essentially fixed as to occupiers now (except some rare instances of government frequencies being freed to allow allocation by the FCC). The radio world is concerned with HF primarily to keep what it has...few are trying to get any part of it. Which, unfortunately, is what the FCC R&O quoted above boils down to - no special protection warranted, it's just a hobby activity. *Most* amateur communications aren't emergency communications. Never have been. "Never have been" what? Finish the sentence. The emergency communications aspect was dismissed pretty neatly in their statement.....the condescending "while we recognize..." line. My point is simply that the FCC isn't buying the argument that we hams need complete protection from BPL because we *sometimes* do emergency communications. Neither do the CC&R folks. So we need a new tactic. Realization! Amazing! A new dawning! :-) Like the "Sportsmen for X" folks. Part of which is a revised definition that shows how unique and valuable a resource amateur radio is - just like the park system. Amateur radio is NOT "just like the park system." Never was. USE of an analogue in POLITICAL divvying-up of resources does NOT mean "just like it." It is just politics. You have to go after it in a political manner...and NOT confine all efforts within the limits of a single membership organization that hasn't gotten much mass media exposure in the last half century. Even though I'll probably never visit most of the nation's parks, they are of value to me. You should get out more. :-) [try a "Lifetime Membership Pass" from the National Park Service] But...none of the Parks I know about have anyone extoling the "unique and valuable resources" of ham radio or morse code, so I doubt you will ever bother with one of those. :-) |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
