[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFI] ARRL to FCC...

To: rfi@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RFI] ARRL to FCC...
From: David Cole <dave@nk7z.net>
Reply-to: dave@nk7z.net
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 16:21:05 -0700
List-post: <rfi@contesting.com">mailto:rfi@contesting.com>
Hi Don,

You are correct, you in the non-legal states do have an advantage, and
for exactly your stated reasons...  

We in the "legal" states, don't enjoy the additional enforcement that
comes with illegal activities, and hence the fear that a grower has of
being located, that makes the growers really careful.  In Oregon, it is
legal, so they are less careful, and hence more RFI results.  

I thought I was clear we are handing out information to the sales
outlets, and I am visiting them as well...  The entire exchange is
always friendly...  

I stop short of suggesting ways to suppress RFI, but point them at the
ARRL's web site for RFI, which does have links to suppressors.  I am not
enough of a lawyer to know what the line is for how much I can help a
grower quiet down an operation, it is after all still not legal
federally, so I don't suggest ways to make it stop, as much as I would
like too...  

There are other things the lawyer advised not to suggest, such as
telling light selling outlet that a certain type of light is RF quiet,
even if we can't see any RFI, and even if it is RFI quiet-- if we are
wrong, then we could be sued for telling them it was clean when it was
not, All sorts of legal mumbo-jumbo, so we never tell anyone what they
should do, we just tell them what we will do if we find RFI.  We are
always friendly, and kind, we hand out this sheet to anyone involved in
RFI generation.  This is the hand out:


It took five people, one lawyer, and a club that is actually enlightened
to get this right...  

It would be good if the ARRL would create a page for light vendors that
all clubs could point to!  With test ratings...  Maybe have "able to
locate" stars, the more stars, the harder the source would be to locate,
based on output levels of RFI... :)

As Pot is becoming legal in states surrounding Oregon, it is a shoe-in
that Oregon will be next, or a close third...  I want to get it written
into the laws of the state, that lights must meet FCC spec are the only
type that can be used...  

Like yourself, I could care less what someone is growing, as long as it
is RFI quiet...

It is a real mess to get things fixed once it starts... I am happy to
see the ARRL getting involved in this!  It really helps us out here to
be able to point people at the ARRL pages.

Thanks and 73's,
For equipment, and software setups and reviews see:
for MixW support see;
for Dopplergram information see:
for MM-SSTV see:

On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 19:42 +0000, Donald Chester wrote:
> > We in the "legal grow" states thank you, and the ARRL for testing and
> > reporting those offending lights! Here is an example as to why your
> > tests will help...
> >
> > It is a real mess in my local area right now-- as soon as one grow
> > operation gets quiet, another starts making RFI...
> >
> > Until the FCC bans the import of all RFI generating lights, and enforce
> > that ban, our only real hope is what you and the ARRL are doing to get
> > the items banned as far upstream as possible...
> Those of us in "illegal grow" states might actually be at a substantial 
> advantage.
> I personally couldn't care less what kind of plants a neighbour is growing on 
> his own property, especially for his own use; that's his business and I'm 
> certainly not going to call the cops over what I "suspect" might be something 
> illegal, unless he is making an obnoxious nuisance of himself or posing a 
> clear threat to the safety of those who have to live around him.
> If his grow lights are spewing RFI all over the neighbourhood, he would 
> likely want to be the first to know, and take immediate steps to correct the 
> problem, since that's like having a flashing beacon on top of your house, and 
> usually attracting attention is the last thing those guys want to do.
> If the offender appears approachable, a little explanation of the phenomenon 
> and friendly reminder, presented in a non-threatening way, should be all it 
> would take. Be sure to provide information on non-interfering alternatives if 
> you know of anything. If the people appear non-approachable or you are 
> fearful that they may be Mob types and you are afraid to let them know you 
> are aware of their operation, try to communicate the facts anonymously. Maybe 
> write up a short letter and drop it in their letterbox or mailbox, or send it 
> by mail. I would include multiple copies that they could share with cohorts, 
> with plenty of documentation. If word gets around within the "growing" 
> community, you can be sure they will be more interested in cleaning up their 
> RFI act than any ham who lives next door. 
> These folks communicate with each other as does any other special interest 
> group. If we could somehow instil factual information on their websites and 
> speciality publications, demand for RFI-prone lights would disappear 
> overnight, and "RF invisibility" would become a sought-after feature, 
> especially if they thought law-enforcement people might be aware of this 
> phenomenon. If the amateur community can instil a demand for clean grow 
> lights, this would inevitably carry over to the legal use as well.
> Fight fire with fire; you and the offenders have a strong common interest in 
> cleaning up the RFI. This will likely work much more quickly than complaining 
> to the FCC, which should be a last resort, and which could possibly put you 
> in greater danger than by trying to work with them and get them to willing 
> co-operate.
> Let's take advantage of this window of opportunity.
> Don, k4kyv
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi

RFI mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>