A Letter from the President of the ARRL

de W6ROD

A number of members have asked why the ARRL Board of Directors, at its July 1998 meeting, decided to propose changes to the amateur radio licensing structure. Let me see if I can shed some light on some of the reasons for the proposed changes.

I am certain that some hams will find change itself to be very disconcerting. It is our nature to like things the way they are and the way they were. We're generally comfortable with that and not comfortable with change. In many instances, we would like to return to "the good old days" of ham radio. However, there are some very real reasons why amateur radio has to make some changes if it is to be around in the 21st century.

As amateur radio operators, we're slipping farther and farther behind on the technology power curve, and people take note of that. Take a look at the primary modes of communication we use: SSB, FM, CW, etc. Each of those modes of operation have been around 50, 60, 70 years or more. I was traveling by airplane not long ago and the person sitting next to me was a retired electrical engineer. As we chatted I told him about my involvement with amateur radio. He had a ham license about 45 years ago. He was amazed hams still use SSB, let alone CW. He wondered why the hams didn't use some of the more "modern" modes of communications. This is a typical reaction. We have to change people's perception of ham radio being a pursuit involving 70 year old communication techniques. One of the ways to help change that perception is to modernize our approach to CW. We're not eliminating it, we're simply trying to put in its proper perspective as we move into a new century. CW will be around for a very long time as one of the modes of communication for amateurs. There are still many people who use CW to communicate. However, as an examination element, it carries much more weight than it should at the present time. I believe the League proposal will put CW into a more proper perspective in the examination context as we try to bring amateur radio into the current technological environment.

I don't think there are many people who see CW as the future of amateur radio. If they do, in my opinion, they are looking backwards and not to the future of ham radio. And, as I mentioned, we're not eliminating CW. There will be plenty of people operating CW just as they have for years. Most non-hams think of ham radio as a hobby. And as a matter of fact, most hams think of amateur radio as a hobby. Sure, the League tries to stress the emergency communications and the public service aspects of amateur radio to those that are unaware of that role and people outside of ham radio do have some understanding of that role of amateur radio. It is certainly one of the first things I tell people about amateur radio if they have no acquaintance with the amateur service. However, the bottom line is we're viewed as a hobby.

The point is, we have some very valuable spectrum that is available to us for hobby purposes, and yes, even for our public service activities. It has become more and more difficult in recent years to justify retaining and defending our spectrum from commercial interests who make some very good arguments as to why they should be allowed to use our spectrum for endeavors that will generate jobs, used advanced telecommunications techniques and put the spectrum to use for commercial purposes, not just for hobby purposes.

Even considering the perception that what we do is a "hobby," we can counter some of that perception that we're "a dying breed" clinging to old technologies when we can show that amateur radio is a vital, growing activity. One only has to look at the statistics in the last few years to find that to be untrue. In recent years the average age of an active ham has crept up to nearly 60 years old. The growth rate of new hams coming into the service is at a very low rate of less than two percent. That doesn't even keep up with the "loss rate" of people who die or simply leave amateur radio for various reasons. The argument that we need to retain spectrum for the growth of amateur radio in the face of such dwindling numbers is an unconvincing one to anyone, such as the FCC and commercial interests, who take a moment to look at the numbers.

Taking these factors into consideration, the perception of ham radio is one of an aging group of hobbyists who use "less than state-of-the-art" communication techniques. We may not like that perception but that is what it is in many circles of the communications industry. And of course the communications industry is where we have to compete for our spectrum. The changes proposed by the League are not the total solution to the problem. We still have to make an effort to move into more advanced communication techniques in the near future. We need to take advantage of some of the more cutting edge modes of digital communication to allow for more efficient use of the spectrum. The Board of Directors is aware that merely restructuring license classes and modernizing the CW testing requirements is not the whole answer.

The League is going to have to take the lead in promoting technological advances within amateur radio even if it is just stressing the idea that amateurs put to use in amateur radio some of the techniques used by the commercial services. Hopefully, we'll be able to rise to that challenge. And it's not just the League that needs a different mindset to get us into the next century with a vital amateur radio. For example, we might persuade repeater coordinators to give priority to sanctioning repeaters that are going to be using advanced digital modes rather than the 50 year old narrow band FM mode.

We might even persuade radio manufacturers to market HF radios that use other modes than CW and SSB as the primary modes of communication below 30 MHz. There are digital techniques that can be applied to the amateur service that would make more efficient use of the spectrum and minimize the interference potential between stations.

I suppose the bottom line is we in amateur radio have to start thinking about the future and where we want amateur radio to be in the future. Changes within ham radio have been suggested for quite a number of years. The pressure for change has been building. The FCC has had a continuing stream of proposals from individual amateurs to make significant changes over the last ten years or so. The League, for various reasons, has resisted such change, myself included. However, I think the proposal the League recently adopted will move us as amateurs in the direction we need to be going.

I have resisted engaging in any debate about the pros and cons of CW and how it is or is not a filter for "quality" amateurs getting on the HF bands. There are plenty of people who will spend hours and hours debating that subject. I don't. Not only that, it misses the whole point of why the Board suggested the changes it did. If you have an urge to do that, I can suggest some internet newsgroups where that debate has been raging for years and with no satisfactory conclusion I might add.

Any comments you have regarding the specific provisions of the proposal can be addressed by filing comments with the FCC now that the matter is released for public comment.

I also have to make a comment about the "motives" of the members of the Board in making such a proposal. Some hams who are not in favor of the changes have said the Board made the move to make sure more radios were sold. Some have said it was to attract more members to the League. I can state without any hesitation that the Board acted in the best interests of amateur radio and for no other reason. Most all of the members of the Board have been amateurs for 35 years or so and some even much longer. These are not people who want to see amateur radio be hurt in any way. They don't spend 30 or 40 hours a week working on amateur radio matters for anything other than the benefit of amateur radio.

I don't think there is anyone on the Board who cares how many radios Yaesu, Icom or Kenwood sell. Those companies are involved in other commercial activities and the amateur radio segment of their business is not large in the context of their entire commercial enterprise. If one or more of those companies should leave the amateur radio market, some other company will fill the void and market amateur radios. Of course, that assumes there is an amateur radio service.

The League would obviously like to have more of the amateurs as members. I certainly don't dispute that. But that doesn't mean it will benefit any person on the Board if the League has additional members because we are volunteers to begin with. We don't get paid and we certainly don't get any bonuses if additional members join the organization. It actually means the League can provide more in the way of services to the members more than anything else.

I would hope that you would consider these factors in assessing the need for and the effect of the League's proposal. There's no reason the changes are being suggested other than they are needed. Other changes along the lines that I mentioned are also needed for the amateur service to continue to be a growing, valuable service.

73, Rod Stafford, W6ROD President, ARRL