[EAS] 'improving' EAS

[Richard Rudman]

I want to underscore and emphatically agree with all the points made by one of the most knowledgeable and respected SECC Chairs in the country, namely Adrienne, especially for me as illustrated by the pull quote below.

I have client and non-client EAS Participants asking me what to do when message flooding takes over their airwaves and what to do about, as Adrienne states it so well, "...an ever-growing workload of federal requirements, additional paperwork, new Event Codes and now an almost undecipherable and contrary Order."

Opting out of voluntary relay of non-required EAS events is the path some have already chosen, and I predict more will follow. 

The road to the Common Alerting Protocol and eventually IPAWS was built around a public-private partnership effort called the Partnership for Public Warning. 

At what point did we lose the concept of Partnership in what was and should always be a concerted effort to improve overall public alert and warning to save lives and property for a public at risk?

To again quote Adrienne, "Anyone? Anyone???"

I would only add this: Is it too late to turn this around?

Richard Rudman
CA SECC Vice Chair 

>On Jul 14, 2018, at 2:32 PM, Adrienne Abbott <nevadaeas at charter.net> wrote:

>"At the same time, the stations which only carry the required tests have none of this burden and they're beginning to look like the smart ones."