RE: 7
MHz
It has
never been our intention to seek an expansion of the 300 kHz that amateurs in
Region 2 presently have on 40 meters. Our objective has been to clear the upper
200 kHz of the broadcasting stations in Regions 1 and 3 that reduce the utility
of the allocation here in Region 2. That's what's in it for us; amateurs in the
rest of the world obviously have more to gain because they're starting out with
less. Conversely, as Joel says, we have more to lose. For everyone but the
amateurs of Region 2, realignment of the allocations around 7 MHz would
most easily be done by making the ham band 100 kHz
worldwide.
As for
how we're doing, I reported in ARRL-ODV:7758 on September 3 that we face
heavy going in Region 3. There's a CEPT meeting going on right now in Mainz,
Germany where we'll find out if the problems we have
there are undermining the support we'd built up in Europe. (IARU
Region 1 is covering this meeting; we are neither staffing nor paying for
it.)
Canada
has just floated a proposal in CITEL that would meet our objective of 300 kHz
worldwide but would not meet the broadcasters' objective for 250 kHz worldwide.
Next month there will be a CITEL meeting in Quito where Canada will try to build
support for its proposal. At this point the US is not supporting or opposing the
Canadian proposal or any other proposal for 7 MHz. At least for now there's a
deadlock between the FCC, which represents the non-government spectrum users and
supports the proposal (our proposal) that has been endorsed by its WRC
Advisory Committee, and the government side which since last September 11 has
decided it prefers the status quo in order to maintain its options in teh event
of a national communications disruption. We're trying to change the government
view. It's worth noting that the broadcasters aren't getting any encouragement
from the government side, either.
One of
the most strident supporters of the status quo in this frequency range is
Australia, which normally is a solid supporter of amateur radio. They cite
defense and other national requirements for maintaining the fixed service HF
allocations. Ironically, one reason the Australian amateurs have not been able
to get support from their administration for a 300-kHz worldwide amateur
allocation is that Australia already allows its amateurs to use the full 300
kHz, the top 200 kHz on a non-interference basis. So the Australian
administration's response is, "You already have it."
Dave
K1ZZ
The
money we have spent on 40 meters (very well spent in my opinion) will
hopefully keep us from LOSING spectrum there, not necessarily gaining any
since we already have 300 KHz. If the rest of the world gains some...we
win.
Joel
In a
message dated 10/24/2002 11:04:27 AM Central Daylight Time,
frenaye@pcnet.com writes:
How are we really doing on 40m for WRC-2003? How about
the VLF and 5 MHz
Well, Tom there are two answers
to the 40 meter question.
I had rather address the VLF and 5 MHz in
that my feeling is we have much more of a chance to get something there than
40 meters. We have spent a lot of money on 40 and I don't see anything
happening (that has been available to me) that will benefit us. Oh, regions
1 and 3 might get an additional 100 KHz, and that in itself will help the
amateur community to work DX easier. Moving the BC stations out of 40? Not
going to happen.
Jim H.