Ron,
> That being said, I would seriously doubt that the under the
> upcoming political change, the existing two N.A. entities
> would be consolidated into one.
It would not be consolidating the two existing Netherlands Antilles
entries into one ... it would be deleting the two current entities
and replacing them with three new ones (Curacao, St. Maarten, and
the BES Islands) assuming that the Department of State adds
Curacao and St Maarten to the "Dependencies" list as they did with
Aruba.
In theory, both Netherlands Antilles entities cease to exist and
become "Deleted Countries" at midnight local time on 10/10/10 when
Netherlands Antilles officially disappears. Since the distance
between islands is less than 800 km, the entire group should become
a single "Island Group" until the various islands are added to the
Department of State list. However, I suspect DXCC will keep the
current Netherlands Antilles entities on the list until there is
some action by Department of State or the UN.
Personally, I would prefer DXAC and the DXCC desk avoid any new
"deleted countries" by making Bonaire the "successor entity" to
PJ2/4 and Saba/St. Eustatius the "successor entity" to PJ5/6/7.
Given the extremely long reintegration period and the open-ended
period for the BES Islands to continue using local currency/US
Dollars, one can argue the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles
does not create a significant change in status for the BES Islands
while the situation vis a vis Curacao and St. Maarten is the same
as Aruba.
> Those who are spending a lot of money in anticipation of being
> "the first" to activate their hopeful new entities are taking a
> gamble. They know, or should know, the risks. But that's their
> chance to take; why throw cold water on it?
I don't know that I'm "throwing cold water on it" - just pointing
out that it took the Department of State nine months to add St.
Barts to the "dependencies" list and absent that action, any new
entities can't be added to the DXCC list under the current rules.
Now the Department of State might surprise me but I doubt updating
an insignificant document has any priority for that bureaucracy.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 9/10/2010 12:17 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
> Joe,
>
> Well, I agree with you that assuming that Bonaire will be a new DXCC entity
> after 10 October is jumping the gun.
>
> But at worst, the entity status for all of the islands in the Leeward&
> Windward Islands -- that is to say, the North America& South America
> entities that comprise the Netherlands Antilles -- will remain unchanged.
>
> Considering that this political change in the islands has been in the works
> for years, and that the political entity known as the Netherlands Antilles
> WILL be dissolved on or about 10 October, it is not unreasonable to
> anticipate and assume that Bonaire will become a new entity. Granted,
> though, that there are no guarantees.
>
> There are a multitude of possibilities at work here. And I'm sure that the
> DXCC desk has already done its due diligence, considering the lead time
> involved.
>
> That being said, I would seriously doubt that the under the upcoming
> political change, the existing two N.A. entities would be consolidated into
> one. The precedent of the separation of Aruba would imply otherwise...
> again, granted, under older DXCC criteria and not the current rules.
>
> Those who are spending a lot of money in anticipation of being "the first"
> to activate their hopeful new entities are taking a gamble. They know, or
> should know, the risks. But that's their chance to take; why throw cold
> water on it?
>
> We will know the status changes soon enough.
>
> In short: WFWL!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
> Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 10:53 AM
> To: [Contest]
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Now Official: The Netherlands Antilles Will Be
> Dissolved on 10-10-10
>
>
> > CU in CQWW DX CW as PJ4A from the new country of Bonaire. It's
> > going to be fun. J
>
> Don't jump the gun.
>
> None of the former Netherlands Antilles automatically gain "new
> country" status. To become a "Political Entity" the territory
> must: be a member of the UN General Assembly, have a separate
> ITU callsign block, or be listed on either the US Department of
> State or UN list of "non self-governing territories."
>
> Since all of the former PJ islands will continued to be represented
> by The Netherlands for external/international affairs, neither of
> the first two criteria are likely to come into play (even Aruba
> does not have its own ITU block - P4 is assigned to The Netherlands).
>
> As to inclusion on the UN or US DOS lists, there is no assurance
> that will happen on 10/10/10 or even quickly after 10/10/10. In
> the case of St Barts (FJ) it took some nine months from the date
> on which the French Ministry made FJ an Overseas Collective (a
> separately administered entity) and the date on which FJ first
> appeared on the US DOS listing. (Contacts with FJ were not valid
> for DXCC purposes until the addition of St. Barts to the DOS
> list on December 14, 2007).
>
> Further, there is no guarantee that Bonaire, St. Eustatius, and
> Saba (the BES Islands) will appear on the DOS list - they are
> to be "municipalities" within The Netherlands and not autonomous
> entities. Unless the BES Islands are listed individually on the
> DOS or UN lists, they should be a single "Island Group" under
> the DXCC rules since the separation between the Port of Saba and
> the northeast corner of Bonaire (near Spoelunk Light) is less
> than 800 km according to Google Earth and at least one of the
> accepted distance calculation methods of the US FCC.
>
> It is a shame that the multiplier status of PJ2/4 and PJ5/6/7 are
> likely to be in a state of flux throughout the entire fall and
> winter contest season. It is also a shame that there are groups
> spending big bucks to activate countries on "independence day"
> when those contact may not count for anything other than PJ2/4
> or PJ5/6/7 if ARRL follow their published rules.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|