[CQ-Contest] Reporting Jammers to the FCC

W0MU Mike Fatchett w0mu at w0mu.com
Thu Dec 8 12:16:18 EST 2005

Actually I received a personal response from Riley Hollingsworth about the
situation in question and he was going to contact this individual.  I am not
sure what will happen but if you provide proof they will act.

I would agree that the Amateur spectrum is not at the top of the FCC's
concerns list.

Mike W0MU 

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Charles Morrison
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 10:29 PM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Cc: k0luz at topsusa.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Reporting Jammers to the FCC


Im afraid it would appear that the same goes for the FCC when it comes to
interference.  It would appear as though unless it's a California 2m
repeater they don't seem to give a hoot about operating practices that much
anymore.  They certainly have some serious double standards though.
Shutting down repeaters because of foul language and abuse of Part 97 rules,
but not a peep on incredulous Part 15 violations by BPL programs around the
country.  One answer.. Money.  

The FCC doesn't care about it unless it makes money on it.  The only money
it makes on ham radio is through Vanity call signs and fines and
forfeitures.  One can file all the comments on the NPRM's about code, entry
level licenses, bellyache about BPL, but they're not listening and they
don't care and all the comments in the world will have no affect on the
ultimate outcome.   The fact remains the FCC doesn't give a rats rear about
amateur radio anymore and has no intention of stopping interference to us by
other amateurs or outside sources.  The exception of course is if WE
interfere with a "commercial" licensee.   

There was once a time when I was a kid that I was actually scared to DEATH
that "Charlie" was going to come knocking on the door.  

Heck, they don't even outlaw 11 meter amplifiers or export CB Radios
anymore.  You can buy them online, Ebay, and at truck stops across America.
It would take a SERIOUS and flagrant violation that interferes with a money
paying, public service frequency such as your local police, to draw a fine
that they will actually follow up on these days.  Or of course, you can be


-----Original Message-----
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 15:29:44 -0500
From: <k0luz at topsusa.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Reporting Jammers to the FCC
To: "'AD5VJ  Bob'" <rtnmi at sbcglobal.net>, <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Message-ID: <20051207202950.EB7CF319259 at dayton.akorn.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

Has the OO program improved??  Who is training and certifying OOs??  In a
previous life, (in other words - long long ago),  I was appointed an OO via
the ARRL.  What this meant was I received a stack of cards sent from ARRL
that I could use to fill out and send to "violators". Did I receive any
training to determine what a violation was?  No,  however, I will say that
the people who were OO's, seemed to be knowledgeable from operating and
participating in various activities. However,  we did not have any contact
or affiliation with the FCC.

I also received a nice certificate to hang on the wall.   AND I got to use
the appointment to participate in CD contest parties (now you know how long

Unless things are very different in modern time,  OO appointees will be
ineffective in solving this situation.


CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list