The future of Amateur Radio?

By James Wades, WB8SIW

The recent decision by the ARRL Board of Directors to withdraw its support of the International radiotelegraphy requirement once again offers evidence that far too many in the Amateur Radio community lack any valid insight into the potential problems limiting the future growth of this valuable radio service.

If we are to make appropriate choices as to those steps necessary to institute growth and continue the evolution of Amateur Radio, we must understand the "real" reasons for a lack of growth in the Amateur Service. The time has come to challenge many of the assumptions made by both the leadership, as well as the "rank and file" of the Amateur Radio Service. Some of this may be considered harsh, but the time has come for some "plain speaking."

Assumption 1: "CW is keeping young people out of the hobby. If we don't eliminate it, the phone won't ring, numbers will dwindle, and our portion of the RF spectrum will be re-allocated."

Repeat a lie often enough, and soon it will be accepted as "gospel" truth. There is no doubt that CW keeps some young people (and adults) out of the Amateur Service. Of course, so do technical exams and radio theory.

Despite the fact that this worn-out assumption is repeated again, and again, particularly by those that have never learned the code, no one has yet proven this assumption! Where are the nonbiased studies and statistical analysis performed by an independent organization? Where are the demographics? Where is the empirical evidence? There isn't any!

During the past year, I have had the opportunity to witness a large number of Amateur Radio demonstrations, which involved phone, digital, and radiotelegraph stations. I have watched as literally hundreds of children have walked past a SSB or digital station paying little, if any, attention to it. Yet, the very same youths have walked right up to a CW operator, fascinated by the "dots and dashes."

The simple fact is, talking into a microphone, a hand-held radio, or typing on a computer keyboard is no longer a unique experience for today's generation of youth. As more children grow up with digital technology now as commonplace in the home as the telephone, digital communications may do even less to attract young people.

Our own experience shows that eliminating the code will not have a significant impact on growth!

For many years now, we have had a no-code license offering full access to the VHF, UHF, and microwave Amateur Radio bands. Yet, few young people are entering the hobby. Those that do are rarely interested in technical innovation or public service. The demographics of Technician (no-code) licensees track closely with those of the remainder of the Amateur Radio community. The simple fact is that the no-code license has failed to attract great numbers of radio amateurs. It has also failed to spur technical innovation.

Here are some facts:

The VHF, UHF, and microwave spectrum offers perhaps the greatest opportunity for technical innovation. This portion of the spectrum is ideal for high-speed data networks, Internet connectivity, and a variety of high-tech communications media. Yet, few are utilizing this valuable resource in an innovative manner.

Many Amateur Radio Emergency Service organizations utilize the VHF and UHF spectrum extensively for public service communications. Most radio amateurs do not participate in any of these programs. Only a fraction of those licensed are registered with an ARRL Emergency Coordinator. Even fewer participate on a regular basis!

Even basic packet radio communications attracts few proponents. Such useful modes as APRS attract even fewer, despite extensive promotion and coverage in the Amateur Radio press.

We are attracting few young people, technical innovators, or public service oriented individuals, despite an extremely useful "no-code" license. You can't blame this one on CW!

Assumption 2: "Greater numbers will preserve our frequencies. We need as many radio amateurs as we can to insure access to valuable RF spectrum." Bunl!

Our public service record has, and will, continue to justify our access to RF spectrum. There have always been demands for amateur spectrum. In the 1910s, the U.S. Navy and commercial point-to-point services wanted our amateur spectrum; and they almost got it! In the 1920s and Ô30s, broadcasters wanted it for a wide variety of applications, from remote pick-up services to international broadcasting. From the post war years, through the present, numerous proposals have been put forth to grab the VHF and UHF amateur allocations.

Yes, we do need to bring youth into the hobby. However, it is equally important that we bring in quality individuals who wish to invest their time and effort in technical innovation and public service. Simply attracting more individuals interested in a high-class alternative to Family Radio Service won't pay the rent; and rightfully so! If we provide no service to the community, then why should we tie up radio spectrum with the potential to create billions of dollars in economic growth and job production?

Assumption 3: "CW is obsolete and of little value"

This is a comment usually heard from those with little or no proficiency. Nonetheless, the value of radiotelegraphy should be obvious to those with an open mind.

• At the risk of repeating the obvious, here are just a few of the advantages of CW:
• Radiotelegraphy overcomes language barriers, allowing those with different languages to communicate basic information.
• Radiotelegraphy is spectrum efficient. The narrow bandwidth of a CW signal also allows one to communicate more reliably for a given amount of power.
• CW equipment is simple and inexpensive, making it ideal for radio amateurs in developing countries.
• Only a few advantages have been listed in the interest of space. However, let's not forget that CW is the only mode of communications that has the ability to attract and hold the interest of many simply because it is an art form. Perhaps if we explained the value of the mode and presented it as an opportunity rather than a barrier, more people would want to take advantage of it.

The reality:

Apparently, the FCC and the ARRL are too myopic to identify the real factors leading to a potential decline in the Amateur Radio Service. Therefore, to be of assistance, let's point out a few of the features on the distant horizon:

Amateur Radio is invisible.

Ask the average person on the street to explain what Amateur Radio is, based on their personal insights or knowledge of the hobby (an interesting question for a pollster; perhaps one hired by the League). You will be shocked at the answers you receive. The average person is unable to provide a realistic summary or description of the Amateur Radio Service. Why is this so? WE ARE INVISIBLE.

Other than a short mention in an occasional news story covering a major disaster, we are rarely discussed in mass media or popular culture. When we are, the coverage is brief and superficial. Has the amateur community taken any effective steps to correct this problem? No! They are apparently busy blaming the license structure and radiotelegraphy. Admittedly, such organizations as the ARRL haven't the funds or the contacts to correct this problem. However, no erstwhile attempt has been made by any national Amateur Radio organization to raise the funds necessary to create an effective media and outreach campaign.

Most Amateur Radio clubs and organizations have no organized approach to community outreach. There are no guidelines or programs designed to encourage involvement in educational programs. There are no effective national programs designed to promote cooperation with such programs as the scouting movement. Few if any Amateur Radio clubs make a speaker available to community groups to promote Amateur Radio. Few Amateur Radio clubs even know how to put together a press release!

By the way, as a corollary to the above exercise, ask the same person to explain what the Boy Scouts do, or the Girl Scouts, or the National Rifle Association, or Trout Unlimited, or Ducks Unlimited, or ??

A bunch of grumpy old men?

I once asked a young lady, recently licensed and 18 years of age, whether the CW requirement was a barrier or discouragement on her path to becoming licensed. Her response was straightforward. "It wasn't the code that almost frightened me off, it was all the grumpy old men," she said.

Take a look in the mirror folks. Next time you attend a swap or an Amateur Radio event, observe the dress, behavior, and social skills of the vast majority of your brethren. Many of us can't even get along with each other - we're too busy complaining about the code requirement.

Next time you see a radio amateur portrayed in the media, take note. Ask yourself these questions:

• Is he dressed well?
• Is his shack neat and well organized?
• Is he using a unique mode of communications, or is he simply talking on "2 Meters."
• How old is he?

My guess is that he (note the pronoun) will typically be:

• About 50 to 70 years old.
• He will be talking on a hand-held or a simple VHF-FM radio
• He won't be particular about appearance or hygiene.
• His "shack" will be located in the corner of a dark, musty, basement.

The truth is simple, but seldom heard. We have spent so much time arguing about CW over the past ten years, we have lost a decade in the race to preserve our wonderful hobby.

We lack diversity:

For example, women make up roughly half of the population, yet few are radio amateurs. Many of the reasons for this are far beyond our control, being based in long held cultural norms. Nonetheless, it seems likely that we are missing a large number of individuals who would have a genuine interest in Amateur Radio. Of course, no one is suggesting that we What are the odds of a young woman feeling at home at your Amateur Radio club? The sad fact is that we have little, if any, contact with whole segments of the American population.

We don't cooperate - with anyone!

First, we don't cooperate with each other. Ten radio clubs may exist in a metropolitan area, each with a limited membership. Half of these clubs may offer an introductory licensing class. These same clubs will do a poor job of instruction and follow-through. Why? Because they have a limited pool of talent.

How would one describe a typical Amateur Radio class?

• It will likely have poor learning facilities. An elementary school classroom or high school cafeteria is a typical location for a licensing class. The acoustics are likely to be poor, the seats uncomfortable, and the lighting terrible.
• The audio-visual aids will likely be poor. A home projector screen, a chalkboard, or a small TV set for the occasional video are the best one can hope for.
• The instructors are uninspiring. Let's face it; a radio club consisting of 50 members is not likely to have access to a variety of inspiring, effective instructors.
• Personal prejudices will abound, particularly with respect to learning CW. How often will an Amateur Radio "bigot" tell a classroom of potential radio amateurs that CW is of no value except as a hazing ritual to "keep the CBers out?"

Wouldn't it be great if a number of clubs pooled their resources to present the best possible licensing class. For example:

• Instructors would be chosen based on talent and knowledge, not politics.
• Members would find the funds necessary to rent a proper instructional facility, preferably one suitable for a professional gathering.
• A national Amateur Radio organization would develop a set of standards and guidelines for licensing classes. They might also develop effective teaching aids, such as "Power-Point" presentations, instructional videos, and similar tools. A programmed learning course would be available via the Internet. Students in rural areas wouldn't even have to leave home to learn how to become a radio amateur!
• A National Amateur Radio organization would provide a web page advertising the locations, dates, and times of licensing classes and VEC session throughout the U.S.

Best of all, radio clubs would utilize it.

Of course, we not only don't choose to cooperate with each other, we don't cooperate with anyone. A major metropolitan ARES group recently told me they don't care about NTS activities. They also have "no use" for the American Red Cross. If I recall, they also have no use for a wide variety of agencies because their "boss" (the Emergency Management Director) has no use for anyone but his particular law enforcement agency.

• Is this situation unique? Absolutely not. It has been witnessed repeatedly. Such behavior seems more evident today, at a time when we can least afford it.
• Ask your fellow radio club members the following questions:
• Do we have a relationship with a local scouting organization?
• Do we have a public information officer?
• When was the last time we issued an effective press release (other than field day)?
• When was the last time we invited the ARRL Emergency Coordinator to speak to our club?
• When was the last time we offered a service to the community?
• Have we created a partnership with a number of other radio clubs to promote Amateur Radio in some fashion (e.g. cable access show, licensing classes, etc).

Many clubs can't answer any of these questions in the affirmative. Perhaps they're too busy griping about the "horrible code requirement."

Our problems are not unique to Amateur Radio.

It has been said "for every complex social problem there is a simple solution that's wrong." Many "anti-code" proponents have honorable intentions, yet, one can't help but suspect they are misguided in their efforts to insure the survival of Amateur Radio. Many factors are keeping people of all ages out of the hobby. A few such factors include:

• Lack of time: The average U.S. citizen is now working the greatest number of hours in history. A total of 55 to 70 hours a week are common in many industries. Downsizing in the business sector has placed significant stress on the time available to the very type of individual likely to have an interest in Amateur Radio.
• Changing Cultural Norms: Fifty years ago, when the World War II generation was starting its families, the man's role was limited to "bread winning." Once work was over, few responsibilities confronted the male head of household with the exception of yard care and vehicle maintenance. The woman stayed at home, raised the children, and kept the house. The typical man (and most Hams are male) had a reasonable amount of time available in the evening for hobbies. Not any more! Today, women work and therefore they expect the man to contribute his share of time to child rearing, house-cleaning, and similar activities. Guess what! No time for Amateur Radio (but that's OK. Let's blame it on CW anyway).
• Urban Sprawl: Men and women no longer live in small, close-knit communities and neighborhoods. School children used to walk to a neighborhood school for extracurricular activities, today they must be driven by the parents, many of whom act as "chauffer" five nights a week. Individuals used to drive a short distance to work and to shop, today they must often drive 30 or more miles. All of this takes time; time that used to be spent on hobbies like Amateur Radio.
• Competing Media: Several generations have grown-up with nearly continuous exposure to entertainment media that engenders passive participation. Most individuals under the age of 50 have been "trained" to seek passive forms of entertainment. The idea of developing a skill or passing a theory test in order to engage in a hobby activity is nearly beyond their comprehension.

A service organization recently retained a respected polling firm to ask young men, between the ages of 30 and 40, how many hours they had available per month for a club or service organization. The answer: three hours per month. Undoubtedly, this too must be the fault of CW!

Some conclusions:

• For too long now, the ignorant have been shouting "get rid of CW." They justify their argument by suggesting that CW is harming Amateur Radio. There is great danger in this patently false assumption. If we continue to debate the CW requirement, we run the risk of failing to seek genuine solutions for those problems facing Amateur Radio. We also run the risk of eliminating one of the very aspects of Amateur Radio that may make it unique and appealing for a future group of licensees.
• It seems that our leadership lacks the ability to articulate a common vision and a set of goals necessary to move Amateur Radio into the future. Perhaps the task is too daunting. Unfortunately, the alternative to a proper course of action is the demise of Amateur Radio.
• I challenge the ARRL (and others) to make the difficult choices necessary to preserve Amateur Radio. This does not mean giving-in to mass hysteria and the self-serving mindset of those that do not like CW or have never developed enough proficiency with the mode of communications to see its usefulness. This does not mean attempting to judge the proper course of action for the amateur service based on those choices made by the Department of Defense or the International Maritime Community, Kenwood Corporation, or a variety of publishing company owners. We are a unique group of individuals with unique requirements.

The time has come for us to demand true leadership from our ARRL, Affiliate Radio Clubs, and ourselves. It is my opinion that we should demand the following:

• Research that will identify the target demographic likely to have an interest in Amateur Radio.
• A viable and effective outreach and media campaign
• Standards and guidelines for properly conducted Licensing classes
• The development of useful teaching tools
• The development of a program designed to integrate Amateur Radio into scouting organizations, schools, and similar youth-centered organizations.
• Cooperative partnerships between independent radio clubs in the area of licensing, community outreach, and public service.
• We should also demand an unbiased look at the value of CW. This mode still has much to offer.
• Finally, let's elect ARRL leadership that is willing to tell the truth, even if it isn't what people want to hear.

Am I going to stay with the League?

The lack of vision and reasoned debate on the part of the ARRL has had me quite concerned. At times, I have even considered withdrawing my membership. After considerable thought, I arrived at one question: Where else is there to go? There are no other viable national Amateur Radio organizations. Furthermore, the ARRL still has much to offer. The ongoing support of ARES, RACES, Skywarn, and NTS are enough to justify continued membership. However, the time has come to draw a line in the sand.

We should place our ARRL leadership on notice as follows:

• Let's demand that there will be absolutely no more evisceration of the CW requirements. We should demand that the ARRL fight "tooth and nail" to maintain the 5 wpm telegraphy requirement.
• Let's further demand that the phone bands not be expanded at the expense of the CW/digital spectrum. CW and digital operators need a place to operate where they are not bothered by 3 to 5 kHz wide SSB signals. If the
• League is sincere about technical innovation and modernization, they should recognize that CW and digital modes are quite compatible. Decreasing the size of the CW sub-bands will hinder the development of new, narrow-band, digital technologies. The existing Novice Bands should be allocated to narrow band modes. The voluntary band-plan should assign them primarily to digital communications.
• Let's demand that the truth be told about CW. CW nets handle more traffic, more reliably than phone nets. CW overcomes language barriers, making it an ideal mode for DX communications. CW equipment is simple, fun, and easy to build. Such equipment makes CW operation an ideal first step into experimentation with radio communications technology.

The time has come to illuminate the dark corners that breed illogical, narrow-minded and shortsighted opinions. Let's point out patently false and overly simplistic solutions presented to solve complex and difficult problems.

Back to top