[HamWAN PSDR] Cell Sites on DNR Towers

Mon Nov 15 09:23:47 PST 2021

There is already a WA state law,  RCW 79.13.500 ( <https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=79.13.500#:~:text=RCW%2079.13.500%20Amateur%20radio%20repeater%20stations%20%E2%80%94%20Legislative,in%20disaster%20relief%20and%20search%20and%20rescue%20support> https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=79.13.500#:~:text=RCW%2079.13.500%20Amateur%20radio%20repeater%20stations%20%E2%80%94%20Legislative,in%20disaster%20relief%20and%20search%20and%20rescue%20support), requiring reduced lease costs for ham equipment installed at DNR sites…ie hams do NOT pay commercial rates and DNR’s hands are currently tied on changing that to charge hams commercial rates (not a good idea since that alone would drive hams off nearly all DNR sites).  The issue is that DNR is supposed to be reimbursed with the difference between what ham and commercial rates by the WA legislature in their budget, and it’s a bit unclear as to whether DNR has been taking that money for other purposes and demanding more from the legislature or whether the legislature has not earmarked any line item for that reimbursement.  Therefore, DNR is currently taking the position of reducing the number of hams at any one site to some number (my bet is one ham) to both comply with the RCW and create more “space” for commercial clients that they hope to gain.  Some commercial industry pros who install and maintain radios believe the market for thatstead is declining, so DNR may be experiencing a pipedream, but that is an irrelevant aside for now.

Yes, lobbying your elected head of DNR, Hillary Franz, governor Inslee, and of course state representative/senator for your district is important IMO.  Having the backing of your local emcomm ham team, city/county EOC, in addition to electric/water/gas utilities, is a factor as it has an more severe impact on them as compared to the ragchewers.

Stephen W9SK

From: PSDR <psdr-bounces at hamwan.org> On Behalf Of Dana Hanford
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 8:43 AM
To: Puget Sound Data Ring <psdr at hamwan.org>
Subject: Re: [HamWAN PSDR] Cell Sites on DNR Towers

I may have missed it, but I don’t recall seeing an answer to John Hays’ question about lobbying efforts to change the DNR policy regarding charging commercial rates to hams for DNR site use.  I am disturbed about losing these sites for HamWAN and other amateur uses that have a greater public value in support of public safety/disaster communications.  It may be the 11th hour but perhaps it is not too late to start lobbying.

73 de,

Dana

Dana Hanford, Jr., CPMR, KC7SDD

Vice President / Partner

The Sales Group, inc. 
MANUFACTURERS REPRESENTATIVES
7641 NE North Street
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110-1057
O: (206) 842-9076
C: (206) 660-7147
 <http://www.thesalesgroup.com/> www.thesalesgroup.com

Proud Member of:

 <https://www.apcointl.org/>  <https://www.nena.org/>  <https://radioclubofamerica.org/> 

From: PSDR <psdr-bounces at hamwan.org <mailto:psdr-bounces at hamwan.org> > On Behalf Of John D. Hays
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 8:35 AM
To: Puget Sound Data Ring <psdr at hamwan.org <mailto:psdr at hamwan.org> >
Subject: Re: [HamWAN PSDR] Cell Sites on DNR Towers

About 10 years ago, DNR was going to start charging amateur repeaters commercial rates to use DNR sites.  I recall there was an active information campaign to the legislature and the legislature instructed DNR to maintain the amateur radio rates.  I recall ARRL was involved as well.  What has been done with your legislators and the Governor's office to see what they are willing to do?

On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:05 PM Jamie Owens <jlowens76 at gmail.com <mailto:jlowens76 at gmail.com> > wrote:

Maybe also throw in HamWAN Cam's helped catch a wildfire early on. http://www.arrl.org/news/ham-radio-wireless-network-camera-detects-washington-wildfire

Sad things like this go un-noticed/recognized

On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 10:19 PM Dale Skyllingstad <dskyllingstad at harbornet.com <mailto:dskyllingstad at harbornet.com> > wrote:

This is very unfortunate news.  Perhaps we can draft a letter to our state legislators explaining our situation with the DNR, and detailing our network's contribution toward state emergency communications.  Maybe even including an example of our wildfire report last year?

Dale
AH6ET

On 10/18/2021 10:07 PM, Nigel Vander Houwen wrote:

Hello HamWAN volunteers/users/interested parties, 

As has been previously discussed on the list, there has been a lot of happenings in the background over roughly the last year with regards to DNR sites. We’ve had several sites in limbo for some time as lease holders worked with DNR to sort things out, and we had some hopeful indications that it would end up working out in the end.

Unfortunately indications have greatly soured. As discussed in recent weeks, Rattlesnake and Larch Mountain were decommissioned recently, and we’ve now received official word that we’ll need to decommission Gold Mountain in the coming weeks. As much as I’d like it to end there, we are not holding our breath for Capitol Peak or Blyn.

Unfortunately new rules DNR has placed on amateur leases effectively exclude use cases like HamWAN, if they were offering them at all due to DNR budget issues, and commercial rates are simply not feasible. I’m sure folks will think/suggest about additional donations to cover it, but commercial rates would require many-fold our current donation levels EVERY YEAR to make work. It’s simply not something we can reasonably consider.

I’m very sorry to have to deliver this news to the many folks this will impact. This is obviously a major blow for the network. I’m thankful for the team who has put so much effort into building out these sites and maintaining the infrastructure, and I’m saddened to see that work torn down. Likewise I know there are quite a number of combined users, repeaters, and emergency groups who are going to be impacted by this. I hope that we can work with you to get you connected to another site where the pathing works.

We’re not done. There’s a lot of the core network, and a lot of coverage that doesn’t rely on these DNR sites, and will remain operational. We’ll likely need to do some work to reconsider/rework redundant pathing after this loss. Going forward I’m hopeful for finding new non-DNR sites where we can rebuild and expand once more.

If anyone has any specific notes or suggestions, please send us an email at netops at hamwan.org <mailto:netops at hamwan.org> 

Nigel

HamWAN

_______________________________________________
PSDR mailing list
PSDR at hamwan.org <mailto:PSDR at hamwan.org> 
http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr

_______________________________________________
PSDR mailing list
PSDR at hamwan.org <mailto:PSDR at hamwan.org> 
http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr

-- 

Thanks,

Jamie Owens

_______________________________________________
PSDR mailing list
PSDR at hamwan.org <mailto:PSDR at hamwan.org> 
http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr

-- 

John D. Hays
Kingston, WA

K7VE / WRJT-215

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20211115/e9656db1/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 19685 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20211115/e9656db1/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8868 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20211115/e9656db1/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 10895 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20211115/e9656db1/attachment-0002.jpg>