Tower talk worries Ham operators

MAT-SU — With a vote scheduled for tonight that could end the years-long process of rewriting Mat-Su Borough codes for tall structures, a group of hobbyists say they are worried that the new rules might spell the end for their pastime.

“The chilling effect would mostly be to discourage this kind of activity, which is already at a very low ebb,” said Ham radio operator Ken Slauson.

Slauson, who spends a lot of time working on boards overseeing emergency services, said the way he reads the ordinance, any structure taller than 85 feet built on private land will need something on the order of $3,500 worth of permits. That’s not taking into account various engineering requirements written in for tall structures.

For Ham radio operators, that would significantly curtail their hobby, Slauson said. The type of radio frequency that can bounce signals off of the ionosphere and communicate with people around the world generally requires a relatively tall antenna, he said.

Slauson noted that Ham radio enthusiasts often provide crucial communication links during an emergency. It’s usually the last form of communication to go down, he said. When everything else is broken, usually there’s still a Ham operator who can summon help.

Most of those kinds of communication don’t require the tall towers. Slauson’s got one in his car, for instance, that can get a decent signal.

“Will we still try to communicate? Sure,” he said.

But they won’t get a signal that’s as reliable or that can go as far, say to connect with other Hams internationally, which would make the hobby a lot less fun.

“The reason it does work when the world breaks is because they’ve used it recently,” he said. “The reason they’ve used it recently is it’s fun.”

Killing that fun will likely push a lot of people out of the Ham community, a group that is already made up mostly of people “who are getting fewer and fewer and older and older,” Slauson said.

He said that previous versions of the tower ordinance have included exemptions for towers used for noncommercial purposes like Ham radios. Writing those exemptions out of the code, he said, is foolish, especially in a state like Alaska, which is short on backups where infrastructure is concerned.

“We’re talking about getting rid of one of the few backup that we have,” he said.

He said he also doesn’t see a much of a reason for the ordinance. Slauson said he doesn’t buy borough safety concerns.

“I know of two towers that have fallen over in the last 20 years. Both of them are because airplanes ran into them,” he said.

The safety issue is just one of many concerns the borough has raised. The borough has gone through a number of tower fights in recent years. Officials say the ordinance is an attempt to thread the needle between having enough telecommunications in the borough while also minimizing the impact towers have on neighbors’ views and property values.

Co-location has been a goal — putting multiple antennas on a single tower. Another goal has been to encourage tower construction on borough land.

Contact Andrew Wellner at andrew.wellner@frontiersman.com or 352-2270.