A bunch of French parks removed overnight

Hadn't seen this posted yet.

https://q5hamradio.substack.com/p/parks-on-the-air-board-statement

 

When you post something like this, please add a few lines of text summary so that readers can tell what it is about.

I'm not going to watch the video, and many other QRZers won't either.

 

To be honest, I didn't watch it either. So I took the transcript and ran it through copilot and asked it to summarize it. Here you go.


Summary: POTA France Park Removals Controversy
Overview
The speakers discuss a major controversy within Parks on the Air (POTA) after approximately 85% of French POTA parks were removed from the program.

Their focus is not on the specific dispute itself, but on what they see as larger concerns about governance, communication, and the future of POTA as an international program.

What Happened?

• Around 85% of French POTA-designated parks were removed.
• The removals appear to be based on a disagreement over:
  • What qualifies as a "park" under POTA rules.
  • Whether many French parks meet those requirements.
• The speakers note there was ongoing communication between French representatives and POTA leadership, but they believe communication was largely one-sided.
• Larry (France's POTA mapping representative) resigned following the removals.

Impact on France
Larry's Role

• Served as the POTA mapping representative for France.
• Spent roughly three years building and maintaining French park data.
• Manually entered many park records into the POTA system.
• Attempted to justify why the French parks should qualify.
• Allegedly received little or no response before the parks were removed.

Why He Resigned
The speakers say:

• Most of the work he had invested in was effectively erased.
• He lost much of the territory he managed.
• They sympathize with his decision to step down.

Concerns About POTA Governance
The speakers question whether POTA is truly operating as an international organization.

Main Criticism

• POTA's board consists entirely of Americans.
• The program originated in the United States.
• Rules were originally designed around U.S. government structures:
  • Federal lands
  • State parks
  • Counties
  • Municipalities

The Problem They See

• Other countries have very different administrative systems.
• Applying U.S.-centric rules globally can be difficult.
• Country representatives often have to "make the system fit" local realities.

The speakers repeatedly use the analogy of:

Trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Fear That Other Countries Could Be Next
The speakers believe this issue may extend beyond France.

Questions They Raise

• Could other countries lose parks as well?
• Will other national park systems be re-evaluated?
• Are additional park removals coming?

They acknowledge:

• This may be a France-only issue.
• Or it could signal broader changes.

Their concern is uncertainty and lack of communication.

The Importance of Trust
A recurring theme throughout the video is trust.

The speakers argue that POTA depends on several groups:

1. Activators
People who go to parks and operate radios.

• Viewed as the foundation of the program.
• Without activators, there is no POTA activity.

2. Hunters / Chasers
People who contact activators.

• A large part of the community.
• Provide motivation and engagement.

3. Country Mapping Representatives

• Build and maintain park databases.
• Interpret local laws and park structures.
• Enable international expansion.

4. POTA Administration
The speakers view administration as important, but less valuable than the user community itself.

Their argument:

The organization should support the community, not alienate it.

Communication Issues
One of the strongest criticisms is the way the situation was handled.

The speakers state:

• The international organization has not publicly explained its actions.
• A formal statement is needed.
• Even if POTA leadership has valid reasons, communication has been inadequate.

They argue:

• The decision may have damaged trust.
• Major changes should involve discussion and transparency.
• Removing parks first and discussing later was a mistake.

Concerns About the Future of POTA
The speakers fear a potential split in the amateur radio parks community.

Their Predictions
If the issue is not resolved:

• POTA could become more U.S.-centric again.
• International participation may decline.
• A competing worldwide program could emerge.

They mention:

• World Wide Flora & Fauna (WWFF) already exists.
• Another alternative program could potentially gain traction.

They believe:

If enough international operators lose confidence in POTA, another system could replace it outside the United States.

Personal Perspective
The speakers emphasize:

• They are not POTA administrators.
• They are simply active POTA participants.
• They care deeply about the program and the community.

Their frustration comes from feeling that:

• A community they enjoy is being damaged.
• Trust between operators and administrators is weakening.

Call to Action
The speakers encourage viewers to:

Continue Participating

• Keep activating parks.
• Keep operating radio outdoors.
• Continue enjoying the hobby.

Express Concerns Respectfully

• Criticize policies and decisions.
• Do not attack volunteers personally.
• Remember that individuals involved are volunteers.

Consider Delaying Log Uploads
One speaker proposes:

• Continue operating POTA.
• Temporarily hold back uploading activation logs.
• Use this as a peaceful way to signal dissatisfaction.

This is presented as a form of protest that does not stop people from enjoying the hobby.

Key Takeaways

• Roughly 85% of French POTA parks were reportedly removed.
• France's mapping representative resigned afterward.
• The speakers believe POTA's rules are heavily U.S.-centric.
• They are concerned the same issue could affect other countries.
• Lack of communication from leadership is their biggest complaint.
• They believe trust from activators, hunters, and mapping representatives is essential to POTA's success.
• They fear long-term damage to POTA's international presence if the dispute is not resolved.
• They urge operators to remain respectful while making their concerns known.

 

wd4dan did a video about it

 

This is a huge NOTHING BURGER!

The POTA mapping rep in France has done a fantastic job of mapping national and regional level parks, but then started to include department level administrative (similar to county in the US) protected areas. This would be like me including the greenbelt 'protected area' behind my home. It was all 3rd tier parks that were removed. Sometimes mapping reps get over-zealous and list parks that don't qualify. When those parks are identified they are deleted or deactivated from the database. It's that simple.

Each mapping rep should do due diligence to ensure the parks they list are 1st or 2nd level administrative governed parks. This is not a hard concept to understand for foreign mapping reps. I am the mapping rep for most of the island nations in the Pacific, Viet Nam, Cambodia, and St. Kitts & Nevis. Larry requested more than once that I add parks on islands because the park was listed on "Protected Planet" and Wikipedia. Without a reference to a gov't source, I don't add parks based on some 3rd party website. He escalated the issue to the head mapping dude who ultimately sided with me, and those fake parks were not added.

For the past 2 years I've gone to France and activated 5 parks. 4 of them were first time activations. There are literally hundreds of parks around France that have not yet been activated, so this action by the POTA BoD in no way harms French (or visiting foreign) POTA players, and I suspect that less than 0.5% of POTA players in the US had any idea what was going on until some whiny crybaby decided this was a major issue and the BoD had to explain in great detail to the sheeple herd who don't take the time to read the rules, but react irrationally with wild speculation to some parks being scrubbed from the list as if it were a major catastrophic event in the POTA world.

WRT to speaker comments...

1. The speakers are not mapping reps and very likely ignorant that the guidelines are clear in that only 1st and 2nd tier administrative levels of gov't parks qualify. (In France that is national and regional.)
2. The suggestion that 85% of parks were removed is simply ludicrous. Anyone simply has to look at the map of France on the POTA App to realize this is an insane claim.
3. All mapping reps invest a lot of personal time to map the areas they have volunteered to support
4. Yes, all BoD members of POTA are US. Just like ALL BoD members of WWFF are European! So what?
5. Yes, some other countries could be and should be reviewed. Some references in other countries including the US could be deactivated if they were not appropriately researched. This is exactly what WWFF does!
6. The speakers are talking out their posterior opening. There is good reason why POTA reenergized the ham radio world, and WWFF did not.
7. If some activators want to hold back their activation logs, they are only hurting themselves. Logs don't always get uploaded in a timely manner, but if some activators are holding back logs it's not hard to identify who they are, and hunters can blacklist them.
8. There is no "dispute" to resolve. Larry decided to quit, and someone will eventually volunteer to be the new French mapping rep.

 

I'm not sure it's quite the ZNIEFF locations are really quite the same as a county level park. "A ZNIEFF is not a measure of regulatory protection, but an inventory. It corresponds to the census of outstanding natural land areas in the twenty-two metropolitan areas as well as the overseas departments of France. The designation of a ZNIEFF based primarily on the presence of species or groups of species with strong heritage interest".

So they're not quite parks, but an inventory of places. A list, basically.

 

Aaron, you are correct. I couldn't think of the closest comparison that most Americans could relate to this morning before my second cup of coffee.

I think most mapping reps are pretty thorough in their research, but sometimes mistakes will be made.

 

Thanks for the AI summary. It took me two minutes to read vs. having to suffer through a rambling, 18-minute video. France exemplifies a built-in problem that was destined to metastasize with POTA at some point, because the classification rules for POTA are indeed US-centric. I could be incorrect, but my understanding is that POTA was originally intended to be mainly a USA thing and grew on a worldwide scale as its popularity exploded, perhaps thus creating the current dilemma. Whether that's 100-percent accurate or not, I can tell you that members of my local radio club have had park designation requests turned down on multiple occasions by POTA because the areas in question did not meet the same criteria that ultimately dickbombed France's locations. An example would be that parks owned by a municipality do not qualify.

For some perspective, I'll point out that France is about 75-percent the size of Texas with only 11 national parks and a certain number of prefecture-esque parks that would clearly qualify for POTA status under the current rules. We all know there were many more than that, some of which may've been be owned or administrated by municipalities or similar non-qualifying entities. By way of comparison, Texas has only two national parks, but about 90 state parks that do qualify for designation as a matter of rule; a classification system that probably does not make make much, if any, sense for France. In short, it's a basically a mess, and trying to apply US jurisdiction models to places like the EU is seemingly and largely nonsensical.

If the POTA board ultimately decides to continue handling this issue in the same manner, we could end up with a lot fewer parks worldwide. On the other hand, if they relax the rules, we could end up with a lot more, including in the USA. It begs the question of which scenario is better for POTA in the long run. Anyhow, it'll be interesting to see how it all shakes out.

 

France has 11 national parks, 45 regional nature parks, 153 National Reserves, 161 Regional Reserves, plus a multitude of additional POTA references. It was the list of ZNIEFF areas that were removed from the list of "park" references. As I wrote above, the claim that 85% of France parks are gone is simply ludicrous.

LET'S REALLY PUT THIS INTO PERSPECTIVE.

• You're right France is a little larger than 75% the size of Texas but has listed 14,411 POTA references. That is 1,203 more than the entire continental US.
• Of those 14,411 referenced parks only about 5500 have had activations or attempted activations. (5 by me ). That means about 2/3 of the parks in France have never even had an attempted activation.
• The over-zealousness of some mapping reps also included non-qualifying parks. For example, let's take a look at Square Alex Biscarre Recreation Park (FR-14246). This is clearly a city own park. It took me 3 minutes of research to learn this is the former garden of the Hôtel Dosne-Thiers, later to the Institut de France, which ceded it to the City of Paris. The garden is opened as part of an agreement between the Institute and the municipality. This park and thousands of others in France are NOT tier 1 or 2 administrative level parks and this one specifically is a city park.

In short, you don't know what you are talking about. As an international mapping rep, we were given very CLEAR direction. POTA qualifying "parks" must be managed by the 1st and 2nd tier administrative levels of government. In the US that is national and state, in France it is national and region, in Canada it is national and province. This really isn't difficult to understand. If you don't know the 1st and 2nd tier levels of gov't in your country you probably need a refresher course in civics.

It is shaken out. The French mapping rep didn't like being told no, so he took his marbles and went home.

He will be replaced with another volunteer in France, and POTA will continue to rock on!

 

As we say in CW, 4Q.

 

Le Miserable, lol.

 

Excuse me for being cretin but why is this here under Video, Podcast and Blogs and not under SOTA/POTA Enthusiast? Maybe my mistake but I always thought and commented on this section for the promotion and comments regarding things like Ham Related Videos and there content and production value.
Within that context do have to say at least they did use two cameras and live people as compared to many of the videos that have been presented here that are simply AI generated essays with semi related images.

 

I do not get it.

They started out at Walmart's, Got ran off from there also.

To much like a real Zoo.