Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Hi All, Seeing as how there's finally something worthwhile to chime in on here (a refreshing break before getting back to the mindless flame wars that have characterized this NG for the last year or two), I'll de-lurk and contribute my $0.02 on this subject, in the hope that it might turn out to be worth at least $0.02. In the comments that follow, I've quoted comments from several other posters as well as from Hans' original post, so as to get all my comments into one place rather than having them fragmented in several replies throughout the thread. As a result, this post is rather on the lengthy side, but...well, like i said, hopefully it's at least worth the $0.02. Here goes: On Tue, 03 May 2005 14:21:48 GMT, "KØHB" got us started with his now well-known (to regulars anyway) PBI: The growth in numbers of Amateurs over the past decade has been overwhelmingly via the Technician license. This segment of the Amateur population does not seem highly attracted to ARRL membership, nor affiliative with the "national association" nature of ARRL. Interestingly, however, these new Amateurs are "local joiners". They attach some importance to public service communications events such as disaster drills, SkyWarn, flood relief, marathons, parade communications, and similar functions of a local nature. Interestingly, even though their on-the-air participation is limited, they represent a significant portion of the crew at Field Day, hamfest staffs, and similar "local" events. They are also well represented on the rosters of many local clubs. I think it's worth noting here, the old adage about birds of a feather flocking together. It's been my experience that people join the local ham radio clubs for a variety of reasons, just as they get involved with amateur radio to begin with for a wide variety of reasons. When you bottom-line it, though, a local club remains a sure-fire way for a newcomer to meet others who share at least some of their interests in amateur radio. For many it's a way of introducing themselves to the other hams in their area, sort of like, "I've got my license and I'm here now, so when you hear me on the local repeaters you don't have to worry that I might be a bootlegger." When they get to the local clubs and hook up with other newcomers (and the observation that the vast majority of newcomers to the ARS enter via the Technician route is dead on...that's why it's called the "entry-level license class"), they find the other Techs basically doing the only things they're permitted to do, absent any meaningful HF privileges unless they pass a code test - they're doing Skywarn; tactical comms for parades, bike races, marathons; Field Day, etc. Another old adage: When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Thus, it's no surprise that many new Techs join in these activities. This is the same route I myself took when I entered into the ARS back in '99 and I'm still active in these pursuits now, except it's in a leadership role rather than as one who is learning the ropes, so to speak. Following is a PBI (Partially Baked Idea) to favorably position ARRL (and Amateur Radio in general) with these newcomers to our hobby. I propose that the ARRL BoD consider an initiative to attract these newcomers to an interest in ARRL by establishment of a new "Department of Community Support". The mission of this department of ARRL would be to organize, train, support, and nurture a system of tactical communications teams on the LOCAL level. I use the term "tactical" as opposed to "emergency" intentionally to broaden the scope of the mission to include a wide variety of community-level communications needs. Mike Coslo contributed on this that many of the people he can count on for such activites are Techs, and added: "That is a good idea. Tactical communications would serve as a good training ground." For what it's worth, I concur. In fact, I think tactical communications is a skill that is too often ignored as many public service and emergency communications groups opt for developing proficiency in formal traffic handling - which is a valuable skill in the right circumstances, but unless a group is located somewhere that circumstances warrant the frequent use of formal traffic handling (like being somewhere that often gets smacked by earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and other major disasters that result in relatively long relief efforts and a lot of health & Welfare traffic)...well, many groups will only rarely need formal traffic handling skills. Tactical communications skills, on the other hand, are something I think any such group is going to always need, especially if they are doing parades, races, etc. Incidentally, I personally use the term "public service communications" to distinguish this type of work from the more commonly thought of "emergency" communications that is used during and in the aftermath of some sort of disaster. At any rate, to continue... This "department" would be outside the current Field Organization, and given VISIBLE and COMMITTED volunteer leadership at Director or Vice President rank. Did I hear someone muttering "Isn't that what ARES is all about?" or "Our current field organization already provides for this." Good points -- ARRL already has some of the pieces in place, and it looks good on paper. Unfortunately these "pieces" tend to be scattered around the ARRL organization and are not linked into a cohesive program. Support and leadership responsibility, from Newington all the way down to the local level, is often a collateral duty and the attention level is spotty and often diluted by competing responsibilities and personal interests. Leadership attention at the SM level is widely variable, and SM's have a diminished mindshare of the general membership by the unfortunate H.Q. decision to remove "Section News" from the national journal of our Association. On this passage, Steve, K4YZ, commented as follows: First of all, there's already flexibility written into the ARES program to allow for it's implementation based upon local needs or concerns. The needs of emergency planners in Plymouth, MN or Winchester, TN are going to be different than those of New York City or Miami, FL. As I see it, Steve, the problem with this is that in many (most?) areas, the local ARES group wears two hats, serving also as the local RACES group, and because FEMA guidelines for RACES call for its implementation at the County level, there's often a lack of ARES/RACES groups having established relationships with local governments (city, town, village, etc.). That is something that, as a result, often falls to the local clubs - but ARRL sees it as an ARES function and local clubs looking for support for their efforts in this area end up getting referred to the local ARES leadership...which is often hesitant to help because they see the clubs' efforts as undermining their own. Steve continued: I don't see how a nationally directed program could possibly do anything more than appear to be micromanaging. Again, admitting that their is a niche for local groups to be involved at a local level and offering some support to them independent of the ARES (or ARES/RACES) mechanism would not be micromanaging. Often there are entirely different missions involved, and even when the missions overlap, again it does not hurt ARES all that much for the local clubs to have a relationship with a city government's disaster preparedness officials in a county where the ARES group has a relationship with the county's disaster prearedness office. In other words, this would eliminate the "turf war" mentality that often crops up when the local clubs, or other groups independent of ARES, start to actually succeed at what they're doing. Steve went on... Secondly, the ARRL Special Services Club's program already offers assistance for helping to manage some aspects of club activities, offers of sponsorship, etc. What they (the ARRL) COULD do, without creating a whole new "branch" and field directorship with it, would be to start spending some more money to get more recruiting materials, including TV/Radio "commercials" into the field. They could "regionalize" the materials with pictures of local clubs, landmarks, etc in them to help "identify" them to the target audience. To this I say, "Bingo!" As one of two co-coordinators of the public service communications team sponsored by a local SSC, I know from personal experience that one of our biggest challenges is just letting people know we are here. This is exactly the kind of support I had in mind above. OK, back to Hans' original PBI: Without dwelling overlong on the shortcomings of the current situation, I think we can all agree on four points: I'd settle for seeing everyone agree on ONE point. Four is really asking a lot. But... grin 1) A focused national program with Director (or higher) level leadership would have more impact than the current fragmented attention to "local" Amateur Radio. I'd say that depends on whether the program deals directly with amateurs operating at the local level (in which case I tend to agree), or attempts to use the existing field organization to accomplish its goals (in which case I have serious doubts, mainly because I'm convinced that in many areas the existing field organization is so completely out of touch with "local" amateur radio as to render any meaningful progress in a project of this nature highly unlikely). 2) Such a program, if successful, would give Amateur Radio valuable credibility in the regulatory and legislative arenas, and with national organizations like Homeland Security, FEMA, and the Red Cross. I'm not so sure about this. As far as FEMA is concerned, and FEMA is part of the DHS, they're primarily looking at RACES, and their guidelines call for implmentation at the county level. To me, "local" means this city, this town, this village. In some areas, county-level might work. In my own area, I'm quite sure it would not. As for the Red Cross, in my area the two Red Cross chapters are served agencies of two different county ARES groups. As for the group I co-coordinate, we have a relationship with a city that is served by the Red Cross chapter that is based in a county whose ARES/RACES group has them as a served agency, but it is not the same county our city is in! 3) Such a program, if successful, would serve to elevate the perceived value of Amateur Radio with local civil authorities, perhaps softening the effects of issues like tower ordinances, etc. I'm in complete agreement. 4) Such a program, strongly identified with the League, would provide a membership "attractor" to those classes of Amateurs that are now only locally "affiliative". Gaining some traction into this huge reservoir of potential members would be a godsend to the health and growth of ARRL. Again, I'm in complete agreement. What would need to be done to implement such a plan. Here are some "off the top of my head" thoughts. -- Define the mission and organizational structure. You've already defined the mission quite well. The organizational structure definitely needs to be defined. -- Many of the people (SEC/EC's, etc) are already in place. The organization structure would need to include a short chain-of-command headed by a focused leader at Newington. If you're going through the SEC/EC's, you're going through ARES. In my opinion, this is not going to work in many areas, including my own. This needs to be totally separated from the existing field organization, in my opinion. -- Move Field Day and SET into this organization as "their" events. This is throwing the new dog a bone...however, I think the local amateur radio clubs that sponsor public service communications groups are probably already active in Field Day and already consider FD to be one of "their" events - I know we do. Much less so with SET, which is the "other" annual ARRL-sponsored EmComm event, and (in this area at least) gets far less attention than Field Day. My feeling is that Field Day and SET are fine the way they are, and let both the ARES groups and the new local public service communications groups participate. -- Devise a recognition vehicle to give visibility to noteworthy work by individuals and teams in this Department. This visibility (QST?) should extend outside the organization to the "general population" of hams as a recruiting tool. You've already noted the boneheaded mistake the league made in removing the section news from QST - undoing that mistake would be a good start. The user here who goes by Billy Beeper has commented: The ARRL has made an effort to get web pages up for each division and section. That is the method they use of distributing regional and local information. It's easy to forget that not everyone has Internet access. As far as the section news on the net is concerned, I'm subscribed to the section news summary and am supposed to receive it monthly via e-mail, but have received nothing since December. If they are going to call QST "The Official Journal Of The ARRL" then the section news should be in each month's issue, period. That's the only way of insuring that it reaches each and every member. ARRL membership is about ham radio, not about the Internet. When they have a magazine that is sent to each and every member on a monthly basis, relying on the Internet to distribute regional and local information is just plain bull****, IMO. -- Establish a new periodical (like NCJ for contesters and QEX for experimenters) to help build a "sense of community" among the participants. I can see another magazine like QST, full of advertising, with a little note at the bottom of a page somewhere inviting you to visit the ARRL website if you want anything really useful. In which case, thanks, but I'm going to pass. There's also the problem of how to get the word out about this new periodical to its target audience. Since the audience you want to reach isn't ARRL members, talking about it in QST isn't going to cut it, because your target audience isn't receiving QST and isn't reading it. -- Educate local civil authorities about this organization, their capabilities, and how to best interface with them to take advantage of their capabilities. Definitely. This is exactly the kind of support that is lacking now, in terms of what the local clubs are able to do in this regard. In order to build some critical mass and gain traction, the outreach effort to build these teams should not initially stress ARRL membership for "grassroots" level players, but rather depend on a strong ARRL identity to build esprit de corps and lead to an attitude of support and affiliation with the parent organization. Perhaps appointment to team leadership positions would be conditioned on ARRL membership. Well, first of all, I think you produce a more effective team if you base appointment to leadership positions on ability rather than on what cards one does or doesn't have stuffed into one's wallet. Beyond that, though, if you start to tie in ARRL membership, at that point, with many Techs you crash head-on into the other issue that a couple of guys here have already raised, namely, the perception held by many people about the ARRL and the Morse code issue. Based on what many people have said to me in eye-to-eye discussions, this issue is one of the major reasons why a lot of people choose not to join ARRL. Len Anderson commented with respect to the ARRL position on code testing over the years as follows: The ARRL could have taken a position of MODERN LEADER- SHIP a decade ago. Actually, the ARRL could have taken a position of modern leadership THREE decades ago when the mid-1970's Communicator Class proposal was out there. Instead, the League chose to register strong opposition to the idea of any no-code license class, delaying the introduction of a codeless license class for another twenty years - something that many have never forgotten, myself included. In fact, personally, I never will forget it. Oh, yes, I've gotten over it - I'm now an ARRL member, I'm a duly appointed (by the SM) PIO in this section, and have a leadership role in an ARRL SSC here - but a lot of guys my age would have been involved in amateur radio twenty years earlier, and many retain that *perception* of the League today despite the current ARRL proposal for retaining the code test only for the Extra class license. Whether the perception is accurate or not, it is the *perception* in the minds of Tech licensees that matters, especially NCTs. If someone sees ARRL as acting in opposition to their best interests, they're probably not going to join ARRL...and this is how many hams have felt about ARRL for years. In this respect, Len and Billy are quite correct - the ARRL has shot itself in the foot more than once on this issue, at least with respect to the hams who would otherwise have benefitted from reduced emphasis on code proficiency in the testing procedures. How they go about fixing that now, I don't know. For one thing, they should push hard for and hope for the FCC to get off its collective duff and allow Techs some meaningful HF privileges without a code test. Then, they need to take advantage of the opportunity this will present by providing some support for the newcomers once they start to exercise their new privileges. Sponsoring a new contest aimed at the new operators might help. Incorporating a new award perhaps - or maybe bring back RCC and...what was it called, the Friendship Award (where you tried to get a contact with callsigns ending in all the letters from A to Z)? But they've got to do something to offset the perception many people have of the League having crapped on no-coders for thirty years if they want to ever see those hams joining ARRL in any significant numbers. Obviously a lot of this proposal needs a great deal of "fleshing out" and refinement, but I present it in the spirit of a "topic for discussion". I'm sure that the minds gathered here will not be bashful about improving my PBI. Hans, anything would be better than the endless flame wars in here, but you've actually come up with something constructive that just might be a good start toward doing something positive for the ARRL and for the ARS. Here's hoping it works out! 73 de John, KC2HMZ |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|