|
To
all the members of the amateur radio community in the SLVRC
Region who are involved with repeaters and other systems on
fixed frequencies, as owners, sponsors or users:
We
are all aware that coordination of frequency selection is not
required by the regulations under which we as amateurs operate.
The objective of frequency coordination is to provide a
service to the amateur radio community.
The Saint Lawrence Valley
Repeater Council appears to have arrived at a low point in its
long history of serving the amateurs in this area.
As you know, the Council attempts to provide a
service through 'coordination' of the frequencies employed by
systems in our area. In
essence, at the most simple definition of the Council's role,
this means that we try to recommend frequencies for systems that
will, to the greatest extent possible, avoid interference to
other systems or in turn be interfered with by others.
The purpose obviously is to assist in the effective use
of the VHF and UHF bands - to everyone's benefit.
This activity is not rocket science, but is based on
reasonable judgment, which in turn must rely on having current
and complete information on frequencies already in use. You all know this. The
question is, though, how many of you care enough to do your part
in the process?
From November
2010 to January 2012, the Council received only 14
Technical Information Reports for systems within our region –
information that is required and needed each year.
This indicates to me that most repeater owners and
sponsors apparently do not see a need to spend the little time
it takes to file a technical information report with the
Council. Is this
apathy, or something else?
I must emphasize that there
are a number of you who regularly communicate and with the
Council in providing your information, needed to make the work
of the Council more effective.
You let us know what is going on with your installations.
And you file your technical reports without being begged
for them numerous times. You have our sincere thanks for your
efforts and cooperation.
Unfortunately, there is the
much larger group with frequencies coordinated that does not
manage to report their information at least annually, as
required to maintain 'coordinated' status for their systems –
a number complaining about the time it takes to fill out the
report form. Some
reports contain information we know to be guesswork or even
erroneous. Another group goes ahead with changes or new systems
and does not inform the Council of the details.
A further group – thankfully small in number – seems
to oppose the work of the Council, and does not provide
technical information even when it is requested.
In addition to lack of current
technical information, another issue is the level of
participation with the Council especially at general meetings.
Council meetings are held to discuss with and inform the
amateur community about current repeater and related issues and
to let the attendees know from each other about changes
and improvements in their systems.
So, what is the point of holding a meeting when time
after time only about 6 people come?
Even when meetings are held following a flea market, most
system representatives who could be participating with others at
the Council meeting instead just go home.
How about meetings where perhaps one person or nobody
from Ottawa turns up - with many Ottawa repeaters on the books?
On the other side of the
coin, I know I personally have not served well enough some of
you who have asked for frequency recommendations, by not
responding as promptly as I should have, for a variety of
reasons. I admit
that after about thirty years of my participation on the Council
and with other issues on my mind as well, I am running out of
steam and getting somewhat tired.
It is evident to me that the SLVRC needs new leadership.
The Saint Lawrence Valley
Repeater Council, if it is to continue in operation,
1)
needs those with frequencies coordinated to file their
required information reports, and on time, without being begged
to do their part.
2)
needs active participation - by users, system
owners and sponsors - with the Council and others, particularly
at general meetings. Given
the quite large number of systems in the SLVRC region, only a
few people coming out to a meeting just does not cut it.
3)
needs some new volunteers as officers to help with the
Council. The work
is being done by a very few people.
Mike and Pierre are doing a great job.
Several of us however need a break, for personal reasons.
We all have many pressures on our time, and of course you
all do as well. However,
perhaps some of you knowledgeable and experienced people will
feel the Council work is worthy of some priority.
It is interesting that other councils (e.g. UNYRC,
WNYSORC, BCARCC) each have enough interest and participation to
have large active groups of council officers to share their
work.
So, what is it to be? Will there be changes, or not?
Will the SLVRC continue or not? To what extent are these
issues of interest to you?
There are some alternatives that can be considered if
most of you think the SLVRC is not worth continuing in its
current form, or if there is not enough support for
'coordination' of system frequencies in this region.
Please let me have your
reflections and suggestions on these SLVRC issues as soon as
possible. Your
opinions are important, particularly at this time. mailto:graham@ve3byt.com
73,
Graham Ide
VE3BYT
Chairman, SLVRC
Return
to the SLVRC Front Page |