Cell tower not necessary to get rid of dead spots

G’day: I was reading the letter about a cell tower in the Fisher Road area to get rid of dead spots.

G’day: I was reading the letter about a cell tower in the Fisher Road area to get rid of dead spots.

A “tower” is not needed to accomplish that type of thing, if one is trying to get rid of ONE important dead spot (if any really are actually). Simply, an antenna on a high spot near that area that, can crossband repeat using a good path to a larger/higher tower, ** away from places children frequent ** will do the job.

Sometimes one thinks that the money is the thing with people who want a tower. It’s part of it obviously but not all of it. I myself have had it, long ago, with being irradiated for the sake of someone wanting to send text messages, or surfing the net. It’s ridiculous; the new toys people have are not the norm and in a pinch (quake, or fire etc.) will not be useful.

I am neither for or against, but I don’t need to have my children’s cellular growth diminished, or their cells exploded or deformed as they grow up because of stupidity. Another topic is anything wireless in the home, which I absolutely have disdain for.

But the directors’ conclusion is, if not an informed one, still correct. (A licensed amateur radio operator.)

 

 

David Richards

Shawnigan Lake