California hates (spins wheel) uh..ham radio.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • rvb

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 14, 2009
    6,396
    63
    IN (a refugee from MD)
    wow so much hyperbole.

    "people are going to die because of this decision"
    "It costs the State of California nothing to allow these repeaters on public land"
    "California is now targeting hard-working Ham operators who provide critical and vital Disaster Emergency Communications"
    "Ham Radio is a threat to the government"

    If CA doesn't see a real likely use for this service, which is usually a back-up to a back-up to a back-up, then it's not "going after" ham radio to say they have to pay just like everyone else to use the same tower space. CA is loosing $ if some other user will pay for the space on the tower, and CA is paying the utilities. Not to mention liability if some amateur falls climbing the tower to repair an antenna (or someone from the state has to be paid to do the work).

    Space on towers is more and more competitive everywhere; it's harder and harder for repeater owners to get access to towers for all the same reasons.

    I'm a ham operator, and not one to quickly defend CA policies, but the article seemed a little desperate to make ham radio appear critical...

    -rvb
     

    lonehoosier

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    May 3, 2011
    8,012
    63
    NWI
    wow so much hyperbole.

    "people are going to die because of this decision"
    "It costs the State of California nothing to allow these repeaters on public land"
    "California is now targeting hard-working Ham operators who provide critical and vital Disaster Emergency Communications"
    "Ham Radio is a threat to the government"

    If CA doesn't see a real likely use for this service, which is usually a back-up to a back-up to a back-up, then it's not "going after" ham radio to say they have to pay just like everyone else to use the same tower space. CA is loosing $ if some other user will pay for the space on the tower, and CA is paying the utilities. Not to mention liability if some amateur falls climbing the tower to repair an antenna (or someone from the state has to be paid to do the work).

    Space on towers is more and more competitive everywhere; it's harder and harder for repeater owners to get access to towers for all the same reasons.

    I'm a ham operator, and not one to quickly defend CA policies, but the article seemed a little desperate to make ham radio appear critical...

    -rvb
    Rep inbound.

    How dare you take my welfare away from me. This so called prepares sure are relying on the government.
     

    Cameramonkey

    www.thechosen.tv
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    May 12, 2013
    31,688
    77
    Camby area
    Rep inbound.

    How dare you take my welfare away from me. This so called prepares sure are relying on the government.

    In the past it has been a symbiotic relationship. They provide free tower space in exchange for free comms labor when the SHTF.

    Now it sounds like they have installed comms gear that they think will replace the need for hams, and now they have no use for them now. And if they dont have a necessary relationship, hams now become just another peon to collect revenue from.


    And I cant find the story now, but one of the rumors also floating around is this isnt as widespread as it is being made out to be and stems from somebody hanging stuff on a state tower without permission and they got their hand slapped for it. You know, like how if somebody wanted the scrap wood on your property and had just asked, they could have had it for free, but since they didnt now you want to press theft charges.
     

    fullmetaljesus

    Probably smoking a cigar.
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    5,851
    149
    Indy
    I'm a ham operator, and not one to quickly defend CA policies, but the article seemed a little desperate to make ham radio appear critical...

    -rvb

    Maybe I'm drinking the kool-aid but I have to disagree. Ham radio is critical.

    For decades ham radio was there to help emergency services due by natural disasters and terrorist attacks.

    When (not if) phones fail, or when dispatch is over loaded. Ham operators are there to put on their silly high vis vests and help emergency services get to where they need to be.
     

    russc2542

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Oct 24, 2015
    2,111
    83
    Columbus
    In the past it has been a symbiotic relationship. They provide free tower space in exchange for free comms labor when the SHTF.

    Now it sounds like they have installed comms gear that they think will replace the need for hams, and now they have no use for them now. And if they dont have a necessary relationship, hams now become just another peon to collect revenue from.


    And I cant find the story now, but one of the rumors also floating around is this isnt as widespread as it is being made out to be and stems from somebody hanging stuff on a state tower without permission and they got their hand slapped for it. You know, like how if somebody wanted the scrap wood on your property and had just asked, they could have had it for free, but since they didnt now you want to press theft charges.

    Seems plausible. Someone doing something stupid they should have known better about is how a lot of legislation gets going. One person ruining it for everyone else and all that.
     

    rvb

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 14, 2009
    6,396
    63
    IN (a refugee from MD)
    https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?th...ands-ham-radio-repeater-infrastructur.676338/

    The bottom line explanation from the video:


    -Cal Fire does routine audit of radio vault.
    -Finds unrecognized amateur repeater
    -Repeater owner has no Memorandum of Understanding with any Cal agency; No documented lease; Repeater is not recognized supporting any Cal agency.
    -Cal property manager advises repeater own of situation, advises owner to either provide documentation or else submit commercial lease and fees.


    Lessons:
    -Repeater owner failed to establish formal documentation and reasoning for repeater hosting
    -Failed to maintain visible support and benefit to any Cal agency
    -Failed to maintain working relationships with any Cal agency officials
    -It is not the job of Cal property manager to find a reason to support an amateur repeater at no charge.
    -It is repeater owners' responsibility to meet Cal regulations and maintain documentation.
     

    Site Supporter

    INGO Supporter

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    524,489
    Messages
    9,794,213
    Members
    53,638
    Latest member
    Dhlawson
    Top Bottom