[DX-CHAT] Permission to go

2006-06-30 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Folks,
Just a few comments more on this dead horse. To address the comments to the effect that if there is permission to go, I can operate.
Put yourself in the place of the FWS person who is in charge of signing the permit, or giving verbal permission. Now suppose as the person in charge you give permission. Now, during the landing the conditions are too bad, but the participants try it anyway. The zodiac flips over and someone drowns. Or while trying to rescue one of the people in the water the larger boat gets too close, hits the rocks and sinks. Or, the group gets on the island, and a Haitian serial killer who has escaped to Desecheo, and has been living off poached goats, comes down to the camp at night and cuts someones throat with his goat-skinning knife. Or while refueling a generator there is an explosion and the Coast Guard must be dispatched with a helicopter to transport the victim to a burn unit hospital. Or, someone simply slips and breaks his leg while carrying a generator.
How would you like to be the guy who signed the permit when your boss wants to know what on earth these guys were doing there, and who told them they could. And who was going to pay the bill for the helicopter. Don't think these things are so far-fetched. Only last year a DXpeditioner had to be rescued by Canadian Coast Guard helicopter after a tower he was erecting on a DXpedition fell. How much do you think that little mission cost? I can tell you it wasn't cheap, and I'm sure there were some heated conversations in Dartmouth. But, that is why they require a $2 Million insurance policy if you want to go there.
So, just because someone is given permission to go to an inhabited, ecologically sensitive place, to install a secret laser scanner to count boat traffic in the channel {any resemblance to the true mission on Desecheo is purely coincidental} to enhance homeland security, doesn't mean the person who gave permission signed off on hauling out generators, setting up antennas, etc. Then again, maybe permission was given to do that. But, my point is that when property does not belong to someone, just because they are given permission to GO there means any activity they choose to engage in is approved.
I could rent the pavilion at my local park, and say I was having a little get-together. But, what do you think would happen when they found out I held ATV races across the grass? Yes, I had permission to go there, but not to do that.
Many people have operated from sensitive areas while stationed there for whatever reason, but most likely had the operation approved. Believe me, authorities are not real keen on people hauling in generators and gas or diesel, which could cause a spill. FWS has a job to do to protect their assets. To us, Ham Radio is a very important activity which should be allowed. To them, it is just some body's hobby, which they could care less about, but if they allow it could bring them major headaches. There are probably other people who have been told no as well. maybe the guy who has seen every lizard in the world except the two on Desecheo, and wanted to camp there and look for them. Who knows. Ham Radio is not singled out for persecution. They do not want anyone there. It is too much liability, and if something is done to harm the environment they are charged to protect then there will be you know what to pay by someone.
The best thing to do is keep trying to negotiate access to the island, proving that any ham operation would take place according to any rules set out, with their personnel present if needed, with liability coverage, etc. They can still say no. Going to Congress may work, maybe not. Likely FWS could build a pretty good case why having anyone on the island doing that sort of thing would be damaging. Saying- look at the illegal guys, probably won;t help either. Because someone else is doing something illegally doesn't give someone else a right to doit too.
Just more of my thoughts- No I don't have anything better to do right at Tye moment, thanks.
73, Duane, WV2B

"Therewardofathingwelldoneistohavedoneit."-RalphWaldoEmerson


Re: [DX-CHAT] Permission to go

2006-06-30 Thread john

At 08:28 AM 6/30/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 But, my point is that when property does not belong to someone, just 
because they are given permission to GO there means any activity they 
choose to engage in is approved


In this case, the property belongs to all US citizens.




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.7/379 - Release Date: 6/29/2006

Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat


To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org