[TowerTalk] anti-climb, litigation, attractive

[Jim Thomson]

Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 18:36:41 -0500
From: Hans Hammarquist <hanslg at aol.com>
To: towertalk at contesting.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] Fwd:  Fwd:  anti-climb, litigation, attractive
nuisance

I do believe that if you put up the anti-climb planks or a reasonable high fence around the tower and add signs warning about the danger you should be relatively safe. Regarding high RF levels I suggest that you keep this under control so you can interrupt transmission if somebody enter that area. A better alternative would be to avoid high RF levels at ground altogether.


73 de, Hans - N2JFS -----

##  and if you post signs, they had better be in several languages. They should also be illuminated at night, like  perhaps a motion detector led..and perhaps powered from a UPS supply. 
And if you mark the signs...danger.  Danger from what, falling yagis, or falling ice, or your shunt fed 160m Tower.
And if marked ..danger.   That implies the tower is a dangerous hazard. You just implicated yourself, good luck with that.    One of the local hams  used  three 4 x 8 sheets  of plywood on the base of his trylon tower.
Painted em white.   Easily removed when required.  At the telco I worked at, we used 4 sided  steel fencing, non climbable, and barbed wire facing outwards at the top, at a 45 deg angle... for both towers, and also
guy anchors.   Teen aged kids and guy anchors are a bad mix.   Base of tower + equipment buildings were also fenced off with an 8 ft tall fence + more barbed wire. 

Jim   VE7RF