Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Utah Thefts

Expand Messages
  • Blake Bowers
    Actually, on some of the sites, AT&T actually retained the building and the land, selling only the tower to ATC. Most of course were sold lock stock and
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 30, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Actually, on some of the sites, AT&T actually retained the
      building and the land, selling only the tower to ATC. Most
      of course were sold lock stock and barrel, but there were a
      number of the sites that are still active, or have been shut
      down in the past 2 years that AT&T retained the building
      and land. Some ATC got rights to part of the building, which
      were sectioned off by chain link fencing inside the building.


      >
      > I imagine they did. It's important to realize that:
      >
      > 1. The towers are not owned by AT&T, despite what the Millard County
      > Sheriff's department thinks. They are owned by American Tower, and
      > space on the the towers and in the facility is leased to AT&T. Although
      > these towers were once Long Lines facilities, they haven't been owned
      > by AT&T for a number of years. ATC probably has a different view of
      > security than the old Long Lines group did -- doing something like this
      > back then would most likely get a technician carrying a shotgun.
      >



      > 2. The alarms on the facilities, as I understand them, are in the
      > building itself, not on the tower. I could be wrong, but I doubt there
      > is a perimeter alarm. There is a significant amount of fencing to try
      > and keep people off the tower.
      >

      Correct. And up till last week, a entry alarm was a rather low key
      affair. Some of the larger sites have been updated in the past couple
      of years with remote cameras however.


      > 3. At least when the facilities were owned by AT&T, I have heard the
      > alarm system was somewhat more laid back than we might think they
      > should be. I'm told if you penetrated the facility, they would
      > initially assume you were a friend, and would try to contact you before
      > calling the cops.
      > I doubt ATC bothered to upgrade the alarm system.
      >

      Exactly.

      > 4. ATC took down the "nasty note" signs threatening federal prosecution
      > when they acquired the towers. In Meadow's case, they threw it away. I
      > know this because I happen to have it..of course, I asked ATC's local
      > representative (at the time) before taking it, even though it had been
      > discarded.
      >
      ROFL... The direction of an ATC VP who thought those signs made
      the sites look "unfriendly".


      > I think 2.5 hours isn't a bad response time, considering they probably
      > initially considered it an equipment failure. I imagine when the
      > vandals hit Levan (which I would consider the next one they would hit)
      > they will get a different response, since the company will be looking
      > for it. If I were the thieves, I'd be a little worried. The law
      > enforcement people in central Utah don't really have a lot of patience
      > with thieves.
      >

      Actually, it took three times here to get a fire lit. Two different sites,
      one site twice.

      And it has happend before, Gutherie OK was stripped twice while
      active. (that is also the site surrounded now by a survivalist group...)
    • Daryl R. Gibson
      True, but both Meadow and Scipio were sold entirely to ATC. AT&T retained SLC Jct, SLC Main (shared with Qwest), Provo Main (not part of this circuit), and
      Message 2 of 2 , Sep 30, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        True, but both Meadow and Scipio were sold entirely to ATC. AT&T
        retained SLC Jct, SLC Main (shared with Qwest), Provo Main (not part of
        this circuit), and Lund (the location of their Cedar City POP). All the
        rest of the towers were sold to ATC, or sold previously when the other
        parts of the circuit were turned down.

        Daryl


        --- Blake Bowers <bbowers@...> wrote:

        > Actually, on some of the sites, AT&T actually retained the
        > building and the land, selling only the tower to ATC. Most
        > of course were sold lock stock and barrel, but there were a
        > number of the sites that are still active, or have been shut
        > down in the past 2 years that AT&T retained the building
        > and land. Some ATC got rights to part of the building, which
        > were sectioned off by chain link fencing inside the building.
        >
        >
        > >
        > > I imagine they did. It's important to realize that:
        > >
        > > 1. The towers are not owned by AT&T, despite what the Millard
        > County
        > > Sheriff's department thinks. They are owned by American Tower, and
        > > space on the the towers and in the facility is leased to AT&T.
        > Although
        > > these towers were once Long Lines facilities, they haven't been
        > owned
        > > by AT&T for a number of years. ATC probably has a different view of
        > > security than the old Long Lines group did -- doing something like
        > this
        > > back then would most likely get a technician carrying a shotgun.
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > > 2. The alarms on the facilities, as I understand them, are in the
        > > building itself, not on the tower. I could be wrong, but I doubt
        > there
        > > is a perimeter alarm. There is a significant amount of fencing to
        > try
        > > and keep people off the tower.
        > >
        >
        > Correct. And up till last week, a entry alarm was a rather low key
        > affair. Some of the larger sites have been updated in the past
        > couple
        > of years with remote cameras however.
        >
        >
        > > 3. At least when the facilities were owned by AT&T, I have heard
        > the
        > > alarm system was somewhat more laid back than we might think they
        > > should be. I'm told if you penetrated the facility, they would
        > > initially assume you were a friend, and would try to contact you
        > before
        > > calling the cops.
        > > I doubt ATC bothered to upgrade the alarm system.
        > >
        >
        > Exactly.
        >
        > > 4. ATC took down the "nasty note" signs threatening federal
        > prosecution
        > > when they acquired the towers. In Meadow's case, they threw it
        > away. I
        > > know this because I happen to have it..of course, I asked ATC's
        > local
        > > representative (at the time) before taking it, even though it had
        > been
        > > discarded.
        > >
        > ROFL... The direction of an ATC VP who thought those signs made
        > the sites look "unfriendly".
        >
        >
        > > I think 2.5 hours isn't a bad response time, considering they
        > probably
        > > initially considered it an equipment failure. I imagine when the
        > > vandals hit Levan (which I would consider the next one they would
        > hit)
        > > they will get a different response, since the company will be
        > looking
        > > for it. If I were the thieves, I'd be a little worried. The law
        > > enforcement people in central Utah don't really have a lot of
        > patience
        > > with thieves.
        > >
        >
        > Actually, it took three times here to get a fire lit. Two different
        > sites,
        > one site twice.
        >
        > And it has happend before, Gutherie OK was stripped twice while
        > active. (that is also the site surrounded now by a survivalist
        > group...)
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >


        ----------------------------------------------------------------
        "As you ramble through life, brother, no matter what your goal,
        keep your eye upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole"
        --Dr. Murray Banks, quoting a menu
        ----------------------------------------------------------------
        Daryl R. Gibson, MCSE
        Office: (801)422-2950 Cell: (801)367-4341
        Home: (702)734-6153, Utah Residence: (801)802-6348
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.