I Think Les Has a good idea going here, but I also think if we give the
'mob' any bit of the spectrum they will continually fight harder for even
more of our precious frequency allocation.
Another approach that could benefit all; provided the 'mob' interests were
only low power, is to share the frequencies such as is with the 70 cm band
but with the change of having amateur radio licensees remain as primary to
all other users or licensees.
Just my 2 cents worth....
James Hayes, N2YEV
FN34fo
Peru, NY
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Les Rayburn" <les@highnoonfilm.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 1:55 PM
To: <vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu>; "VHF Contesting Reflector"
<vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] [VHF] Use It or Lose It
> It seems clear that another assault on our frequencies is coming. I'd be
> willing to bet my next paycheck that the ARRL will cease this opportunity
> to
> drum up contributions to the Spectrum Defense Fund, and fight any such
> move
> tooth and nail. This "tried and true" approach may succeed, but if so,
> what
> will really be gained?
>
> Instead, I propose another course of action.
>
> Instead of entering into bitter legal combat with corporate giants, why
> not
> negotiate with both corporate interests and Congress instead? I'd submit
> that there is so little activity above 1.2ghz as to make the impact of
> the
> loss of these bands unnoticeable to the amateur population outside the
> members of these mailing lists. Even the majority of VHF Men wouldn't
> directly mourn the loss.
>
> If instead of fighting to retain these highly underutilized bands, let's
> look at what negotiating a settlement might offer:
>
> In exchange for all amateur allocations above 1.2ghz (with perhaps a small
> allocation at 10ghz) we could ask for:
>
> 1.) Swift passage of legislation similar to PRB-1 that would allow
> reasonable accommodation of amateur radio antennas, even those who live in
> HOA situations.
>
> 2.) Legislative protection from any future encroachment on current amateur
> radio allocations.
>
> 3.) An increased commitment towards resolving interference issues that
> affect amateur radio.
>
> 4.) Allocation of spectrum on LF and MF ranges that are not nearly as
> attractive to industry, and of greater interest to the majority of
> amateurs.
>
> Some would argue that such an approach to "spectrum defense" would make
> more
> sense in the long term, and that the gains to amateur radio would be far
> greater. Alas, it won't serve the professional fundraisers who seem to
> have
> the loudest voice in Newington these days, nor will it please those who
> always prefer mortal combat to reasonable solutions, but the essence of
> true
> leadership is in plotting the wisest course, not bending to the rule of
> the
> mob--or the voices of a well-heeled few.
>
> 73,
>
> Les Rayburn, N1LF
> EM63nf
> 121 Mayfair Park
> Maylene, AL 35114
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|