Repeater requests, but no reply

[Templeton]

I am in the Midwest and have put in a few repeater usage requests. With all except 2 of them, I got approval, which is all good.

But on 2 of them, I didn't get any reply at all. And this was over 4 months ago. I can't send a 2nd request via myGMRS, so what is the best way forward to get a reply, approval or denial?

Thanks.

[OffRoaderX]

You can try sending a direct message to the listed owner of the repeater, but if he doesn't respond to his repeater-requests, he probably wont respond to his direct-messages either.

[Templeton]

Ok, I might try that. Thanks for the reply.

[Templeton]

1 hour ago, OffRoaderX said:

You can try sending a direct message to the listed owner of the repeater, but if he doesn't respond to his repeater-requests, he probably wont respond to his direct-messages either.

Well, I just tried that. One message went through, but, with other person, I got an error message, Boz cannot receive messages.

Did he block his ability to get direct messages? Does that mean that repeater will be essentially unavailable?

[OffRoaderX]

There may be other ways to get the repeater information such as the local ham/GMRS group or by scanning the input frequency with a radio that can scan for the tone, then connecting to the repeater and calling out/asking for permission, or just using it until someone tells you to not use it.

[Sshannon]

32 minutes ago, Templeton said:

Well, I just tried that. One message went through, but, with other person, I got an error message, Boz cannot receive messages.

Did he block his ability to get direct messages? Does that mean that repeater will be essentially unavailable?

My admittedly poor attitude is that if a repeater owner doesn’t respond in a timely manner to access requests they probably won’t notice that you’re accessing their repeater unless you do something wrong. Do as Randy says and scan for the input tone. If they object to you accessing their repeater they can always say so. 

[WRXH357]

I'm in the same boat.  I've made a few requests with no response.  I have gotten quite a few approvals as well.  I've made contacts on those repeaters so I'm happy knowing I setup the radio correctly.  

[JB007Rules]

Which repeaters?

[lougasp61]

Silly question but have you checked if these repeaters are listed as Stale or Offline? Also, I agree with Randy about scanning for tones.

 

 

[drk1970nj]

Some owners have there repeaters listed but you may also take in considering that the repeater owner may not check mygmrs much either or even so the repeater may be a old listing also .....I am also sitting on two that never responded 

[gortex2]

That's been an issue since the site started. Some folks are on the forum daily but rarely get on the actual website. Also some at one point thought to add every repeater under the sun regardless if its even there. Others listed a repeater was online for a while then left and don't reply nor care. Lots of reasons. 

I actually removed my repeaters from the listing as I didn't want folks asking about them. 

[WRQL370]

On 6/23/2023 at 2:20 PM, OffRoaderX said:

There may be other ways to get the repeater information such as the local ham/GMRS group or by scanning the input frequency with a radio that can scan for the tone, then connecting to the repeater and calling out/asking for permission, or just using it until someone tells you to not use it.

This is poor advice. You don’t jump on someone’s repeater unless you have permission to do so and you certainly don’t just use it until told otherwise. 
 

Some repeaters may still be leftovers from when businesses were licensed on those frequencies, and regardless,  at the end of the day, the repeaters are private property of the owners.  While the airwaves are not, the repeater or this method of using them is, and by using a repeater without permission is basically  unauthorized use of private property.  
 

This is the same as coming across someone’s yard or land, and just using it until you are told otherwise or thrown off.
 

Until you identify who’s repeater it is and make contact with the owner or responsible party, treat it as a closed repeater and stay off it.  

 

 

 

 

[Sshannon]

2 hours ago, WRQL370 said:

This is poor advice. You don’t jump on someone’s repeater unless you have permission to do so and you certainly don’t just use it until told otherwise. 
 

Some repeaters may still be leftovers from when businesses were licensed on those frequencies, and regardless,  at the end of the day, the repeaters are private property of the owners.  While the airwaves are not, the repeater or this method of using them is, and by using a repeater without permission is basically  unauthorized use of private property.  
 

This is the same as coming across someone’s yard or land, and just using it until you are told otherwise or thrown off.
 

Until you identify who’s repeater it is and make contact with the owner or responsible party, treat it as a closed repeater and stay off it.  

 

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, WRXE944 said:

I agree: This IS poor advice!

That is why the: POSTED: NO TRESSPASSING sign exists!

If a repeater owner fails in their obligation to respond to a request for permission to use, the reasonable conclusion is that it is an open repeater, until instructed otherwise. 

Except that by putting the repeaters on MyGMRS for everyone to see, these repeater owners are advertising their repeaters for use.  If they truly wanted you to stay off they never should have advertised them.  To advertise them and then fail to respond to requests in a timely manner blocks others from using those repeater frequencies. 

[pcradio]

22 minutes ago, Sshannon said:

Except that by putting the repeaters on MyGMRS for everyone to see, these repeater owners are advertising their repeaters for use.  If they truly wanted you to stay off they never should have advertised them.  To advertise them and then fail to respond to requests in a timely manner blocks others from using those repeater frequencies. 

Exactly. If a repeater is advertising itself, its obviously available. Its like a water fountain, its public use. If you don't want anyone using your repeater, then don't put it out there, make the tones non-standard, etc.

[Sshannon]

3 minutes ago, WRXE944 said:

@Sshannon @pcradio: “Except…” “Exactly…”

How “exactly”, are you disagreeing with my criticism of @WRQL370 post?

Why assume I am disagreeing with you?

I included your post for context only.  

[Sshannon]

3 minutes ago, WRXE944 said:

Many readers, including myself, would feel your comments were specifically in response to the prior quoted text. 

But, OK then!

My original comments apply to a repeater not listed here as well; if not more so!

Honestly, I couldn’t understand what you were saying.  First you agreed with the previous poster by echoing his statement about poor advice and then you said something about no trespassing signs and finally you said to treat it as an open repeater. You seemed to be all over the place, so I included your post for context. Seeing how you react I’m sorry I did.

[OffRoaderX]

Jeezus....

[marcspaz]

15 minutes ago, OffRoaderX said:

Jeezus....

 

Come on man... you make it sound like if I knock on the door of your house for 20 minutes and you don't answer, I can't just walk in, assuming it's okay because you didn't say "don't come in".

[marcspaz]

@WRXE944 that is not how Property Rights in the US work.  The repeater owners have zero obligation to anyone (beyond FCC rules and state/federal laws, of course).  My house is on a public street.  It doesn't mean everyone who has the privilege of accessing that street has any business being in my house and I certainly don't have an obligation to make it known that my house is private, not public or they can just come right in.  By law, it is assumed private and you can't come in.  Those personal Property Rights don't change depending on the property. 

You have the exact same 'privilege' to use the frequencies as anyone else.  Unless you ask the owner of the radio (which is what a repeater is) if you can use their radio, you can't just assume the privilege of using that person's radio is yours.  It is their Right to grant or deny access to their personal property.

The problem with you sharing your opinion is, while you don't care if you open yourself to criminal trespass charges and FCC fines, not everyone feels the same way.  You are giving out bad advice.

[marcspaz]

2 minutes ago, WRXE944 said:

Again real property analogies just don’t hold up. 

are you really suggesting that if a repeater owner ignores my request for access, that my subsequent use of that repeater (until specifically told otherwise) is subject to criminal trespass laws and FCC fines?!?

 

As someone who has spent near a decade studying Constitutional Law, federal law and working at the state level to help draft and propose Bills into law... yes... yes I am.

[marcspaz]

8 minutes ago, WRXE944 said:

Ok then; thank you for your advice.  I will give my more detailed response more thought. 

In which jurisdiction are you licensed to practice law?

 

I'm not.  Never said I was.  When was that a requirement to study Law or to help write Bills and ask Congress for consideration? Or a requirement for having a qualified opinion?  I mean, I have represented myself in dozens of cases and have never lost.  So, obviously being a lawyer doesn't mean they are more qualified to practice law or have an opinion about the legality of any particular issue than someone who has not passed the Bar.

[marcspaz]

@WRXE944 now you're just messing with me.  LOL

[marcspaz]

17 minutes ago, WRXE944 said:

While I consider a more detailed response, I do take particular exception to this sentence!

Since you like bad analogies so much, how about messing with this one:

”So, obviously being a doctor doesn’t mean they are more qualified to practice medicine or have an opinion about a particular medical procedure than someone who is not a licensed doctor.” 

 

I have no issue with that whatsoever.  Depends on the person in question.  Just like in my case.  I mean, shoot, the guy who invented fentanyl was a European drug dealer pretending to be a doctor, trying to make better designer synthetic opioids.  Yet most First World nations have approved it for use in legit medical practice.  Including the USPHS.  Same type of results with x-rays, antibiotics and a bunch of other stuff.

Not to mention all the other people licensed to practice medicine who are not medical doctors, like LPN's, chiropractors and many others.

[nokones]

Depending on how the Trespass Statute is written for the jurisdiction of where the act was committed, it may be possible that an act of using a person's private repeater without permission could be considered trespassing "if" the statute has language to include a "chattel". A trespass to chattels is an intentional interference with another person's lawful possession of a personal property. A "chattel" refers to any personal property, moving or non-moving.

However, in order for a violation of a Trespass be enforced, an order must be given to the violator and that Trespass order must be documented/recorded by law enforcement in order to enforce it at a future date.

No, I do not consider myself an expert. I'm just a lowly ol' internet user that happens to be in the know and retired playing with my gazillion Part 90 and two Part 95 radios for giggles on both Part 90 & 95 freqs. 

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, nokones said:

[...] However, in order for a violation of a Trespass be enforced, an order must be given to the violator and that Trespass order must be documented/recorded by law enforcement in order to enforce it at a future date. [...]

BUT - would not an acknowledgement of such order by "the government" constitute the grant of an exclusive right to use a certain channel / tone combination in a given area?

As channels and tones are shared and not coordinated, an owner would have a hard time arguing exclusivity and damages ... ?!?

  just [another] lowly ol' internet user