1. ARRL-Awards
  2. Topics

Moderated Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status?

Mike Groom
 

This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.

Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))
W3UR Bernie McClenny
 

DXCC Entities are not deleted because of lack of activity. They are deleted when they no longer meet the criteria that got them on the list to begin with.

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

On Oct 27, 2019, at 6:52 PM, Mike Groom <ve3vhb@...> wrote:

This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures. With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time. The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.

Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all :))
Dick
 

If indeed the "Rocks" are submerged at High Tide, then they
no longer meet the DXCC Criteria and should be deleted.

The only problem is verifying that they are submerged at High
Tide.

73, Dick, W1KSZ

ps: I do have it confirmed.


Sent from Outlook

From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> on behalf of Bernie McClenny via Groups.Arrl.Org <bernie=dailydx.com@...>
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 5:59 AM
To: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...>
Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status?
 
DXCC Entities are not deleted because of lack of activity. They are deleted when they no longer meet the criteria that got them on the list to begin with.

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
           The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
           How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/  
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

> On Oct 27, 2019, at 6:52 PM, Mike Groom <ve3vhb@...> wrote:
>
> This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.
>
> Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))
>




Ria, N2RJ
 

It would require a vote of the Board. I can’t speak for anyone else but I wouldn’t support it unless the rocks become totally submerged, never to return. 


73
Ria, N2RJ
Ria, N2RJ
 

To clarify - it would require a Board vote if it still met the rules. If it didn’t meet the rules it could be deleted because it no longer met the rules (like KH5K was).

Ria
N2RJ
Jim Miller, AB3CV <jtmiller47@...>
 

Hi Bernie

Any idea where I could find the submission criteria that put a pile of rocks on the list?

Thanks

Jim ab3cv
W3UR Bernie McClenny
 

I don’t have a copy of the rules at the time BS7H was added. Perhaps someone in Newington?

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

On Oct 28, 2019, at 9:26 AM, Jim Miller, AB3CV <jtmiller47@...> wrote:

Hi Bernie

Any idea where I could find the submission criteria that put a pile of rocks on the list?

Thanks

Jim ab3cv
Skip
 

I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft.  The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland.  I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed.  I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement.  T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future.  I do have the BS7H card however.

73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:

This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.

Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))
Zack Widup
 

When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.

73, Zack W9SZ

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:
I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft.  The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland.  I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed.  I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement.  T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future.  I do have the BS7H card however.

73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:
This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.

Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))


Virus-free. www.avast.com

W3UR Bernie McClenny
 

China was not taken off the list. It was 40 years. Albania was not taken off the list it was about 21 years.
Both also were elevated to the top of the most wanted list. They are rare for a reason. Start taking things off the list because no one has figured out how to operate from there and the next thing you know we’ll have more requests to take others off the list for some other reason. The only reason to take a country off the list is if it no longer meets the criteria that got it on there in the first place.

Bernie

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

On Nov 7, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@...> wrote:

When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.

73, Zack W9SZ

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:
I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft. The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland. I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed. I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement. T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future. I do have the BS7H card however.

73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:
This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures. With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time. The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.

Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all :))



Virus-free. www.avast.com
Kermit Lehman
 


Why was Wrangel Island taken off the list?  It was on the DXCC list in 1958 and later removed but isn't on the Deleted list.  There must be a story there.

73,
Ken, AB1J


-----Original Message-----
From: Bernie McClenny via Groups.Arrl.Org <bernie=dailydx.com@...>
To: ARRL-Awards <ARRL-Awards@...>
Sent: Thu, Nov 7, 2019 2:24 pm
Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status?

China was not taken off the list. It was 40 years. Albania was not taken off the list it was about 21 years.
Both also were elevated to the top of the most wanted list. They are rare for a reason. Start taking things off the list because no one has figured out how to operate from there and the next thing you know we’ll have more requests to take others off the list for some other reason. The only reason to take a country off the list is if it no longer meets the criteria that got it on there in the first place.

Bernie

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
      The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
      How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/  
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

> On Nov 7, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@...> wrote:
>
> When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:
> I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft.  The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland.  I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed.  I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement.  T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future.  I do have the BS7H card however.
>
> 73,
> Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
> Sparks NV DM09dn
> Washoe County
>
> On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:
>> This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.
>>
>> Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))
>
>
>
>
>     Virus-free. www.avast.com
>



Chuck, WS1L
 

I agree that lack of activity shouldn't be enough to take an entity off the list.  

Now, being underwater... that seems to make sense.  If it isn't above water 24x7 then I wouldn't consider it to be an entity. 

73 de Chuck, WS1L

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 8:24 AM Bernie McClenny via Groups.Arrl.Org <bernie=dailydx.com@...> wrote:
China was not taken off the list. It was 40 years. Albania was not taken off the list it was about 21 years.
Both also were elevated to the top of the most wanted list. They are rare for a reason. Start taking things off the list because no one has figured out how to operate from there and the next thing you know we’ll have more requests to take others off the list for some other reason. The only reason to take a country off the list is if it no longer meets the criteria that got it on there in the first place.

Bernie

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
           The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
           How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/   
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

> On Nov 7, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@...> wrote:
>
> When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:
> I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft.  The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland.  I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed.  I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement.  T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future.  I do have the BS7H card however.
>
> 73,
> Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
> Sparks NV DM09dn
> Washoe County
>
> On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:
>> This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.
>>
>> Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))
>
>
>
>
>       Virus-free. www.avast.com
>






--


===================
Chuck Chandler
===================
Ria, N2RJ
 

I agree with this.

What is DXCC? It’s a personal challenge but also a measure of your DX success compared against your peers (only if you wish to see it that way). As such, some entities will be hard to activate and will be on rarely and some would have a rare one in their logs. That’s OK because if everything was easy and readily available there would be much less of a challenge. 

There have been ideas for separate awards under the DXCC program that have different criteria that take into account activation levels but the consensus has been that core of the DXCC program should remain unchanged.

73
Ria, N2RJ

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 9:24 AM Bernie McClenny via Groups.Arrl.Org <bernie=dailydx.com@...> wrote:
China was not taken off the list. It was 40 years. Albania was not taken off the list it was about 21 years.
Both also were elevated to the top of the most wanted list. They are rare for a reason. Start taking things off the list because no one has figured out how to operate from there and the next thing you know we’ll have more requests to take others off the list for some other reason. The only reason to take a country off the list is if it no longer meets the criteria that got it on there in the first place.

Bernie

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
           The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
           How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/   
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

> On Nov 7, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@...> wrote:
>
> When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:
> I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft.  The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland.  I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed.  I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement.  T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future.  I do have the BS7H card however.
>
> 73,
> Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
> Sparks NV DM09dn
> Washoe County
>
> On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:
>> This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.
>>
>> Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))
>
>
>
>
>       Virus-free. www.avast.com
>




Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.

+ There is no "must be activated at least every X years to remain on the list" criterion, nor should there be. China and Albania were inactive for decades.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ
Skip
 

DXCC entities are real places, either sovereign or owned/administered by another entity.  Just because there is no amateur activity does not seem like it should mean removal from the DXCC list if it otherwise qualifies under the rules.  While I was happy to work BS7H early one morning, and I have their card, I do question whether it should be on the DXCC list, given that it is claimed by at least China and the Philippines, and possibly also Vietnam.  The administration of Ducie Island is clear and unambiguous and it meets the distance and above high tide requirements. 

There are as many reefs, atolls, and rocks in the S. China Sea as there are dialects of Tagalog, or so it seems.  If Scarborough is an entity, why not many of the others?

The DXCC rule for Scarborough is: "Island: A naturally formed area of land surrounded by water, the surface of which is above water at high tide. For the purposes of this award, it must consist of connected land, of which at least two surface points must be separated from each other by not less than 100 meters measured in a straight line from point to point. All of the connected land must be above the high tide mark, as demonstrated on a chart of sufficient scale. For the purposes of this award, any island, reef, or rocks of less than this size shall not be considered in the application of the water separation criteria described in Part 2 of the criteria."


I really don't see how the ring of "rocks" called Scarborough Reef meets this test but deletion for non-activity does not seem like a valid or desirable reason.

73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 11/7/2019 9:05 AM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:

+ AA6YQ comments below

When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.

+ There is no "must be activated at least every X years to remain on the list" criterion, nor should there be. China and Albania were inactive for decades.

        73,

                Dave, AA6YQ

David Hallidy
 

I MIGHT agree, but have a question.  Why were such entities as Blenheim and Geyser reefs, Farquhar, Des Roches (and probably a few others) deleted?  I worked them all, and sometime after their deletion was told it was because at various times they (at least Blenheim and Geyser) were underwater.  If true, then it would make sense for a place like Scarborough to also be deleted.  If that wasn't the reason, I'd like to know what was so I could possibly change my opinion of Scarborough's status.
Just asking...
Thanks.

Dave K2DH 



Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: "Ria, N2RJ" <rjairam@...>
Date: 11/7/19 11:08 (GMT-05:00)
To: ARRL-Awards@...
Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status?

I agree with this.

What is DXCC? It’s a personal challenge but also a measure of your DX success compared against your peers (only if you wish to see it that way). As such, some entities will be hard to activate and will be on rarely and some would have a rare one in their logs. That’s OK because if everything was easy and readily available there would be much less of a challenge. 

There have been ideas for separate awards under the DXCC program that have different criteria that take into account activation levels but the consensus has been that core of the DXCC program should remain unchanged.

73
Ria, N2RJ

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 9:24 AM Bernie McClenny via Groups.Arrl.Org <bernie=dailydx.com@...> wrote:
China was not taken off the list. It was 40 years. Albania was not taken off the list it was about 21 years.
Both also were elevated to the top of the most wanted list. They are rare for a reason. Start taking things off the list because no one has figured out how to operate from there and the next thing you know we’ll have more requests to take others off the list for some other reason. The only reason to take a country off the list is if it no longer meets the criteria that got it on there in the first place.

Bernie

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
           The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
           How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/   
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

> On Nov 7, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@...> wrote:
>
> When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:
> I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft.  The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland.  I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed.  I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement.  T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future.  I do have the BS7H card however.
>
> 73,
> Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
> Sparks NV DM09dn
> Washoe County
>
> On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:
>> This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.
>>
>> Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))
>
>
>
>
>       Virus-free. www.avast.com
>




Gilbert Baron
 

I and many others will never have to worry about this sort of thing. I probably do not have the operating skill, time, or equipment to approach honor role. Happy to have DXCC and I bet many others are too.

 

Seems like a useless argument going on here for 99.999% of operators.

 

Outlook Laptop Gil W0MN

Hierro Candente Batir de Repente

44.08226N 92.51265 W en34rb

 

 

From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of David Hallidy
Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2019 10:25
To: ARRL-Awards@...
Cc: k2dh1@...
Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status?

 

I MIGHT agree, but have a question.  Why were such entities as Blenheim and Geyser reefs, Farquhar, Des Roches (and probably a few others) deleted?  I worked them all, and sometime after their deletion was told it was because at various times they (at least Blenheim and Geyser) were underwater.  If true, then it would make sense for a place like Scarborough to also be deleted.  If that wasn't the reason, I'd like to know what was so I could possibly change my opinion of Scarborough's status.

Just asking...

Thanks.

 

Dave K2DH 

 

 

 

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

 

-------- Original message --------

From: "Ria, N2RJ" <rjairam@...>

Date: 11/7/19 11:08 (GMT-05:00)

Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status?

 

I agree with this.

 

What is DXCC? It’s a personal challenge but also a measure of your DX success compared against your peers (only if you wish to see it that way). As such, some entities will be hard to activate and will be on rarely and some would have a rare one in their logs. That’s OK because if everything was easy and readily available there would be much less of a challenge. 

 

There have been ideas for separate awards under the DXCC program that have different criteria that take into account activation levels but the consensus has been that core of the DXCC program should remain unchanged.

 

73

Ria, N2RJ

 

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 9:24 AM Bernie McClenny via Groups.Arrl.Org <bernie=dailydx.com@...> wrote:

China was not taken off the list. It was 40 years. Albania was not taken off the list it was about 21 years.
Both also were elevated to the top of the most wanted list. They are rare for a reason. Start taking things off the list because no one has figured out how to operate from there and the next thing you know we’ll have more requests to take others off the list for some other reason. The only reason to take a country off the list is if it no longer meets the criteria that got it on there in the first place.

Bernie

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
           The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
           How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/   
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

> On Nov 7, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@...> wrote:
>
> When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:
> I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft.  The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland.  I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed.  I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement.  T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future.  I do have the BS7H card however.
>
> 73,
> Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
> Sparks NV DM09dn
> Washoe County
>
> On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:
>> This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.
>>
>> Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))
>
>
>
>
>       Virus-free. www.avast.com
>



Gary Hinson <Gary@...>
 

For the basic DXCC, 240 entities are effectively ‘not on the list’ already … and yet basic DXCC is a genuine challenge.  Do you not remember the excitement of receiving your first DXCC?  Just this morning, I heard from a guy thrilled to have worked and confirmed 107 countries using FT8, running 5-20 watts to an attic antenna.  Whether Scarborough Reef is on the list is immaterial to him, at this point.

 

Like virtually any ‘collect the set’ challenge, DXCC gets progressively harder the nearer we get to completing the set.  For those of us nearing or on Honor Roll, the last few are immensely hard, verging on impossible … and that’s precisely where the challenge and the fun lies.  De-listing entitites (permanently or temporarily) simply because they have not been activated lately would reduce the challenge and hence the fun factor in completing the set.  It might also discourage intrepid hams from even trying to activate them: who would invest a small fortune and put themselves at risk to activate Scarborough Reef, Bouvet Island, DPRK, Turkmenistan or whatever if they weren’t in such high demand? 

 

Don’t lower the hurdles.  Practice harder and jump higher.

 

73

Gary  ZL2iFB

 

From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Zack Widup
Sent: 08 November 2019 02:28
To: ARRL-Awards@...
Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status?

 

When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.

 

73, Zack W9SZ

 

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:

I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft.  The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland.  I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed.  I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement.  T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future.  I do have the BS7H card however.

73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:

This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.

Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))

 

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

Andreas Junge
 

I think the creation of the BS7H entity was an exercise of how far one can go by stretching the rules of the day. I am not kidding.

This should never have been an entity to begin with.

Looking at the pictures of operation in 2007, there do not seem to be 100 meters between the points above high tide level. That’s why scaffolds on tiny rocks were needed to have any point above the water level where one could operate. 

Now, If a team can go there today and operate then leave it on the list. If not, maybe it needs to go the way Kingman Reef did. 

It needs to be a technical reason and not the time between operations the knocks it off the list. 

Just my $0.02 

Yes, I do have BS7H in the log and confirmed - work first worry later.

Andreas, N6NU



On Nov 7, 2019, at 11:38 AM, Gilbert Baron <w0mn00@...> wrote:

I and many others will never have to worry about this sort of thing. I probably do not have the operating skill, time, or equipment to approach honor role. Happy to have DXCC and I bet many others are too. 
 
Seems like a useless argument going on here for 99.999% of operators.
 
Outlook Laptop Gil W0MN
Hierro Candente Batir de Repente
44.08226N 92.51265 W en34rb
 
 
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of David Hallidy
Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2019 10:25
To: ARRL-Awards@...
Cc: k2dh1@...
Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status?
 
I MIGHT agree, but have a question.  Why were such entities as Blenheim and Geyser reefs, Farquhar, Des Roches (and probably a few others) deleted?  I worked them all, and sometime after their deletion was told it was because at various times they (at least Blenheim and Geyser) were underwater.  If true, then it would make sense for a place like Scarborough to also be deleted.  If that wasn't the reason, I'd like to know what was so I could possibly change my opinion of Scarborough's status.
Just asking...
Thanks.
 
Dave K2DH 
 
 
 
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
 
-------- Original message --------
From: "Ria, N2RJ" <rjairam@...> 
Date: 11/7/19 11:08 (GMT-05:00) 
Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status? 
 
I agree with this.
 
What is DXCC? It’s a personal challenge but also a measure of your DX success compared against your peers (only if you wish to see it that way). As such, some entities will be hard to activate and will be on rarely and some would have a rare one in their logs. That’s OK because if everything was easy and readily available there would be much less of a challenge. 
 
There have been ideas for separate awards under the DXCC program that have different criteria that take into account activation levels but the consensus has been that core of the DXCC program should remain unchanged.
 
73
Ria, N2RJ
 
On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 9:24 AM Bernie McClenny via Groups.Arrl.Org<bernie=dailydx.com@...> wrote:

China was not taken off the list. It was 40 years. Albania was not taken off the list it was about 21 years.
Both also were elevated to the top of the most wanted list. They are rare for a reason. Start taking things off the list because no one has figured out how to operate from there and the next thing you know we’ll have more requests to take others off the list for some other reason. The only reason to take a country off the list is if it no longer meets the criteria that got it on there in the first place.

Bernie

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
           The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
           How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial - 
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/   
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518 

> On Nov 7, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@...> wrote:
> 
> When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.
> 
> 73, Zack W9SZ
> 
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:
> I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft.  The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland.  I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed.  I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement.  T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future.  I do have the BS7H card however.
> 
> 73,
> Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
> Sparks NV DM09dn
> Washoe County 
> 
> On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:
>> This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures.  With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time.  The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.
>> 
>> Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all  :))
> 
> 
> 
> 
>       Virus-free. www.avast.com
> 
W3UR Bernie McClenny
 

"Wrangel Island: This deletion is made in view of the fact Wrangel Island meets none of the published criteria for separate status. Since no one has ever received DXCC credit for Wrangel Island, its deletion will affect no one's total. This deletion is effective immediately.”

The above per QST Magazine - September 1960 page 90.



Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

On Nov 7, 2019, at 9:47 AM, Kermit Lehman via Groups.Arrl.Org <ktfrog007=aol.com@...> wrote:


Why was Wrangel Island taken off the list? It was on the DXCC list in 1958 and later removed but isn't on the Deleted list. There must be a story there.

73,
Ken, AB1J


-----Original Message-----
From: Bernie McClenny via Groups.Arrl.Org <bernie=dailydx.com@...>
To: ARRL-Awards <ARRL-Awards@...>
Sent: Thu, Nov 7, 2019 2:24 pm
Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Time to delete Scarborough Reef from DXCC status?

China was not taken off the list. It was 40 years. Albania was not taken off the list it was about 21 years.
Both also were elevated to the top of the most wanted list. They are rare for a reason. Start taking things off the list because no one has figured out how to operate from there and the next thing you know we’ll have more requests to take others off the list for some other reason. The only reason to take a country off the list is if it no longer meets the criteria that got it on there in the first place.

Bernie

Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
The Weekly DX (2001-2019)
How's DX? (1999-2019)

Two week trial -
http://www.dailydx.com/free-trial-request/
https://twitter.com/dailydx
410-489-6518

On Nov 7, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@...> wrote:

When was the last operation from there? I feel that if an entity has not been activated in a long time and is not likely to, it should be taken off the list until it is activated again.

73, Zack W9SZ

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:24 AM Skip <k6dgw@...> wrote:
I've been to Scarborough Reef ... well, over it at 10,000 ft. The S. China Sea is dotted with atoll-like reefs all the way from the Philippines to the mainland. I suspect that at some tide conditions, the "rocks" are underwater, even if only an inch or so and at other times are exposed. I would think that exposed 24/7 should be a requirement. T2 and others may fail that requirement in the foreseeable future. I do have the BS7H card however.

73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 10/27/2019 3:52 PM, Mike Groom wrote:
This "entity" would never be even considered today, the use of scaffolds to support platforms above the few protruding rocks is surely beyond acceptable procedures. With rising sea levels - and there's no question that this is happening - even the rocks may well be submerged by this time. The "entity" was created to satisfy certain folks who desperately wanted a "new one", but the chances of it ever being activated again appear to be minimal considering also the continuing political situation in the area.

Of course, it's the one entity I've needed for many years to have them all :))



Virus-free. www.avast.com

1 - 20 of 21