Folks,
I have been holding off commenting on the reflector. I have offered this idea
to my CAC rep. There are other things they could be spending time on, but here
is my opinion FWIW. (Traffic is low enough with Dayton in full swing)
Why not make it a function of urban population density per the most recent
census with a maximum radius of 50 miles (or so). The smallest urban
population densities would have the maximum allowed radius. The largest
densities would need the smallest radius to maintain equity.
The point is to help the rural populace form legitimate clubs, while not
affecting current allocations. Maybe the right answer is to keep the lower
limit at 20 miles while increasing the radius for the less densely populated
states. Increasing the opportunity to form clubs willing or capable of
competing surely would be a good thing in the overall. The propagational
situation of each locale will not be affected by this change, just the
opportunity for some clubs to actually field 10 members!
With the values I chose the mean radius is 27 miles. There are 9 states that
would potentially see a reduction in radius. Their average is 15.2 miles...not
that bad really. Given the number of amateurs per sq mile I would be willing
to bet the effect would be negligible. There is no reason to change the
minimum from 20 miles.
On a related topic I think it would be a good thing to allow a station to
count their score in more than on club category as well.
=====================
Table 1. Land Area, Population, and Density for Stat 1990
Source: US Census Bureau
Released: March 12, 1996
Rural Urban
Pop per pop per pop per Proposed
% urban % rural sq mile sq mile sq mile radius
Alaska 67.5% 32.5% 1.0 0.3 0.7 50
Montana 52.5% 47.5% 5.5 2.6 2.9 42
Wyoming 65.0% 35.0% 4.7 1.6 3.1 42
South Dakota 50.0% 50.0% 9.2 4.6 4.6 40
North Dakota 53.3% 46.7% 9.3 4.3 5.0 39
Idaho 57.4% 42.6% 12.2 5.2 7.0 37
New Mexico 73.0% 27.0% 12.5 3.4 9.1 36
Nevada 88.3% 11.7% 10.9 1.3 9.6 36
Nebraska 66.1% 33.9% 20.5 6.9 13.6 34
Maine 44.6% 55.4% 39.8 22.0 17.8 32
Utah 87.0% 13.0% 21.0 2.7 18.3 32
Vermont 32.2% 67.8% 60.8 41.2 19.6 32
Oregon 70.5% 29.5% 29.6 8.7 20.9 31
Kansas 69.1% 30.9% 30.3 9.4 20.9 31
Arkansas 53.5% 46.5% 45.1 21.0 24.1 31
Mississippi 47.1% 52.9% 54.9 29.0 25.9 30
Colorado 82.4% 17.6% 31.8 5.6 26.2 30
West Virginia 36.1% 63.9% 74.5 47.6 26.9 30
Arizona 87.5% 12.5% 32.3 4.0 28.3 30
Iowa 60.6% 39.4% 49.7 19.6 30.1 29
Oklahoma 67.7% 32.3% 45.8 14.8 31.0 29
Minnesota 69.9% 30.1% 55.0 16.6 38.4 28
Kentucky 51.8% 48.2% 92.8 44.7 48.1 27
Alabama 60.4% 39.6% 79.6 31.5 48.1 27
Missouri 68.7% 31.3% 74.3 23.3 51.0 27
Texas 80.3% 19.7% 64.9 12.8 52.1 26
Washington 76.4% 23.6% 73.1 17.3 55.8 26
Wisconsin 65.7% 34.3% 90.1 30.9 59.2 26
New Hampshire 51.0% 49.0% 123.7 60.6 63.1 25
South Carolina 54.6% 45.4% 115.8 52.6 63.2 25
Louisiana 68.1% 31.9% 96.9 30.9 66.0 25
North Carolina 50.4% 49.6% 136.1 67.5 68.6 25
Georgia 63.2% 36.8% 111.9 41.2 70.7 25
Tennessee 60.9% 39.1% 118.3 46.3 72.0 25
Indiana 64.9% 35.1% 154.6 54.3 100.3 23
Virginia 69.4% 30.6% 156.3 47.8 108.5 22
Michigan 70.5% 29.5% 163.6 48.3 115.3 22
Hawaii 89.0% 11.0% 172.5 19.0 153.5 21
Illinois 84.6% 15.4% 205.6 31.7 173.9 20
California 92.6% 7.4% 190.8 14.1 176.7 20
Pennsylvania 68.9% 31.1% 265.1 82.4 182.7 20
Ohio 74.1% 25.9% 264.9 68.6 196.3 19 (20)
Florida 84.8% 15.2% 239.6 36.4 203.2 19 (20)
Delaware 73.0% 27.0% 340.8 92.0 248.8 18 (20)
New York 84.3% 15.7% 381.0 59.8 321.2 17 (20)
Maryland 81.3% 18.7% 489.2 91.5 397.7 15 (20)
Connecticut 79.1% 20.9% 678.4 141.8 536.6 14 (20)
Massachusetts 84.3% 15.7% 767.6 120.5 647.1 13 (20)
Rhode Island 86.0% 14.0% 960.3 134.4 825.9 11 (20)
New Jersey 89.4% 10.6% 1042.0 110.5 931.5 11 (20)
68.2% 31.8% 166.1 37.7 128.4 26.9 Avg
14.5% 14.5% 232.8 35.7 202.1 8.3 SDev
--
73 de KK1L...ron (rrossi@btv.ibm.com) <><
QTH: Swanton, Vermont
My page: http://www.together.net/~larossi/kk1l.html
My wife's page: http://www.together.net/~larossi
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|