-----------------------------------------------
ARRL's intruder watch program is run from ARRL HQ.
By ARRL's own admission, reports received are only sent to FCC:
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/intruder.html
FCC is the telecom authority for USA territory, but is perfectly
capable of raising matters of intruders or harmful interference from
outside its patch. The mechanism is in the ITU Radio Regulations.
Is a bit too much work this early in the morning to dig them up for
you, but after over a decade as our national society's president &
dealing with our telecom authority, I'm rather familiar with them
(familiar enough that when pushed, our TA has been told by the ITU
that how they tried to interpret them was wrong & what we said they
meant was right).
For the past three years, I have compiled the IARU Region 3
Monitoring System report with VU2UR. During that time, ARRL has
not shared any reports on intruders & appears to have not taken up
with the FCC anything we've found with a connection to USA. I've
been to two Regional conventions as a delegate, ARRL raised no
intruder matters at them. In the decade that I was president of our
IARU member-society, I can't recall anything being brought up or
the sort of post-problem-solved PR that would be expected if ARRL
had actually brought a case to the attention of anyone on the other
side. And definitely nothing during the past three years that I've
been very much involved with IARU R3 MS.
Closer to home, for such a large country with so many hams who
one might expect to be inclined to complain about intruders &
harmful interference, there's no sign of ARRL involvement in
published IARU Region 2 Monitoring System reports & very little
involvement from amateurs in USA:
http://www.iaru-r2.org/counter/getfile.php?id=21#pdf
http://www.iaru-r2.org/counter/getfile.php?id=22#pdf
http://www.iaru-r2.org/counter/getfile.php?id=23#pdf
http://www.iaru-r2.org/counter/getfile.php?id=26#pdf
And USA makes no contribution to the ITU Monitoring System,
which does have the ability to pursue reported cases, which would
be where something reported by ARRL would be pursued before
would be raised directly state-to-state:
http://www.itu.int/ITU-R/terrestrial/monitoring/
Ineffective is being polite. I reckon ARRL isn't doing squat. Heck,
on that IW page they don't even correctly list which allocations
are exclusive amateur & which are not. They talk the talk, but don't
walk the walk.
What they do seem to be good at is making folks think they're
doing something. I know better. And we deserve better.
73, Brett/p.