These are the number of current,
unexpired FCC-issued amateur
radio licenses held by individuals
on the stated dates, and the
percentage of the total number
of active licenses that class contains.

Percentages may not add up to exactly
100.0% due to rounding.

These totals do not include licenses
that have expired but are in the grace
period, nor do they include club, military
and other station-only licenses.

Effective April 15, 2000, FCC no longer issued
new Novice, Technician Plus and Advanced
class licenses, so the numbers of those license
classes have declined steadily since then.

Also since April 15, 2000, FCC has renewed all
existing Technician Plus licenses as Technician.
It is therefore informative to consider the totals of
the two classes, since the Technician class
includes a significant number of Technician Plus
licenses renewed as Technician.

Due the renewing of Technician Pluses as Technicians, the number of
Novices now exceeds the number of Technician Pluses.


On February 23, 2007, the last Morse Code
test element, the 5 wpm receiving test, was
eliminated as a requirement.

The ARS License Numbers:

As of May 14, 2000:

Novice- 49,329 (7.3%)
Technician - 205,394 (30.4%)
Technician Plus - 128,860 (19.1%)
General - 112,677 (16.7%)
Advanced - 99,782 (14.8%)
Extra - 78,750 (11.7%)

Total Tech/TechPlus - 334,254 (49.5%)

Total all classes - 674,792


As of February 22, 2007:

Novice - 22,896 (3.5%)
Technician - 293,508 (44.8%)
Technician Plus - 30,818 (4.7%)
General - 130,138 (19.9%)
Advanced - 69,050 (10.5%)
Extra - 108,270 (16.5%)

Total Tech/TechPlus - 324,326 (49.5%)

Total all classes - 654,680


As of February 23, 2008:

Novice - 20,119 (3.1%)
Technician - 297,709 (45.3%)
Technician Plus - 18,973 (2.9%)
General - 142,812 (21.7%)
Advanced - 64,883 (9.9%)
Extra - 112,411 (17.1%)

Total Tech/TechPlus - 316,682 (48.2%)

Total all classes - 656,857


Changes:

From May 14, 2000, to February 22, 2007:

Novice - decrease of 26,433
Technician - increase of 88,114
Technician Plus - decrease of 98,042
General - increase of 17,461
Advanced - decrease of 30,732
Extra - increase of 29,520

Total Tech/TechPlus - decrease of 9,928

Total all classes - decrease of 20,112


From May 14, 2000, to February 23, 2008:

Novice - decrease of 29,210
Technician - increase of 92,315
Technician Plus - decrease of 109,887
General - increase of 30,135
Advanced - decrease of 34,949
Extra - increase of 33,661

Total Tech/TechPlus - decrease of 17,572

Total all classes - decrease of 17,935


From February 22, 2007, to February 23, 2008:

Novice - decrease of 2,777
Technician - increase of 4,201
Technician Plus - decrease of 11,845
General - increase of 12,674
Advanced - decrease of 4,217
Extra - increase of 4,141

Total Tech/TechPlus - decrease of 7,644

Total all classes - increase of 2,177


73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote in message
...

[snip]
As of February 22, 2007:
Total all classes - 654,680

As of February 23, 2008:
Total all classes - 656,857


Therefore the change from Feb 22, 2007 to Feb 23, 2008 was 0.33% increase.

Here are the guesses that were on the list.
N8UZE: 1% less to 1% more -- Average = 0% change --- "winner"
of guessing game
N2EY: 1% more to 2% more -- Average = 1.5% growth --- "3rd
place" in guessing game
KH6HZ: 1% less to 0% change -- Average = 0.5% decline --- "2nd
place" in guessing game
N3KIP: 2% more to 6% more -- Average = 4.0% growth
KH6O: 6% more to 10% more -- Average = 8.0% growth
KK6J: 12% more to 14% more -- Average = 13.0% growth
KC2HMZ: 5% more -- Average = 5% growth
K8BSG: 2% to 3% more -- Average = 2.5% growth


Perhaps the next year will bring more growth or perhaps it won't.

Dee, N8UZE

So perhaps the code issue wasn't all that important, anyway.


--
Alan
WA4SCA

"Dee Flint" wrote in
:


wrote in message
.
..

[snip]
As of February 22, 2007:
Total all classes - 654,680

As of February 23, 2008:
Total all classes - 656,857


Therefore the change from Feb 22, 2007 to Feb 23, 2008 was 0.33%
increase.

Here are the guesses that were on the list.
N8UZE: 1% less to 1% more -- Average = 0% change ---
"winner" of guessing game
N2EY: 1% more to 2% more -- Average = 1.5% growth --- "3rd
place" in guessing game
KH6HZ: 1% less to 0% change -- Average = 0.5% decline ---
"2nd place" in guessing game
N3KIP: 2% more to 6% more -- Average = 4.0% growth
KH6O: 6% more to 10% more -- Average = 8.0% growth
KK6J: 12% more to 14% more -- Average = 13.0% growth
KC2HMZ: 5% more -- Average = 5% growth
K8BSG: 2% to 3% more -- Average = 2.5% growth


What I think is important is that new Hams are coming on board to
replace those that were lost after the big drop-off happened. That drop
is very likely to have been caused by the so called "honeydo" Hams who
became inactive with the ascendency of cell phones.

It will take a lot of new Hams testing to replace that dropoff. It looks
like we are doing it, slow and steady. Just as it should be.

The focus of of this poll is to judge the impact of the elimination
of element 1 on the numbers of Hams. Is it possible that given the other
issue of drop offs, that it is very difficult to draw a reliable
conclusion from it?


Perhaps the next year will bring more growth or perhaps it won't.

Hard to disagree with that! 8^)

- 73 d eMike N3LI -

Alan WA4SCA wrote in
:

So perhaps the code issue wasn't all that important, anyway.

Hi Alan

It is so hard to determine. It is possible that no one cared, or that it
just takes time for news to get out - Hams are not a noisy publicity
seeking bunch.

Or it could be that New hams are coming along nicely. We are testing and
granting licenses at a pretty good clip. I don't have the numbers handy,
Anyone out there have them? We did have that big drop off of Hams who have
since moved on to cell phones - those who used the first non element 1
tested group to use repeaters for local family comms, which is probably
continuing, and it will take several years and a lot of new hams just to
tread water.

I think we won't really know until around 7 to 10 years have passed.


- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Feb 25, 12:09 am, Mike Coslo wrote:

We are testing and
granting licenses at a pretty good clip. I don't have the numbers handy,
Anyone out there have them?

Easy - just go to

http://www.hamdata.com/fccinfo.html

For example, in the last 365 days FCC has licensed 27,211 new
amateurs.

I think we won't really know until around 7 to 10 years have passed.

Complicated by the fact that the rules are rarely left alone for
anywhere near that long.

Consider the past 25 years or so:

~1983: VE system created; question pools become public, license terms
doubled to 10 years
1987: Old General/Tech Element 3 split into 3A and 3B, making it
easier to get a Tech
~1990: Morse Code test waivers make any class license available with 5
wpm and a doctor's note.
1991: Technician loses its code test.
~1994:Vanity call program
2000: Restructuring reduces number of available-to-new-issue license
classes from 6 to 3 and reduces both code and written testing for all
classes
2006: HF 'phone bands widened, particularly 75 meters.
2007: Morse Code test eliminated.

On top of all that is the "anticipation effect". It takes FCC a long
time to make up its mind, and that delay can have effects of its own.
(If you were thinking of buying something and heard there would be a
big sale next month, wouldn't you tend to put off the sale until
then? Or if you heard the price was going to rise significantly,
wouldn't you tend to buy right now?) The treaty requirement for Morse
Code testing changed in July 2003 but it took FCC more than 3-1/2
years to get around to changing the rules. Could it be that there were
some folks waiting for the change to take place?

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
On Feb 25, 12:09 am, Mike Coslo wrote:
We are testing and
granting licenses at a pretty good clip. I don't have the numbers handy,
Anyone out there have them?

Easy - just go to

http://www.hamdata.com/fccinfo.html

For example, in the last 365 days FCC has licensed 27,211 new
amateurs.

And that isn't too bad. It also illustrates the extent of the falloff
that those 27K only makes for a small increase in the total. Just
something we have to live with for a few years.


I think we won't really know until around 7 to 10 years have passed.

Complicated by the fact that the rules are rarely left alone for
anywhere near that long.

Consider the past 25 years or so:

~1983: VE system created; question pools become public, license terms
doubled to 10 years

That 10 year thing is the direct precursor to the present dropoff. Of
course it just delayed the start by 5 years 8^)




On top of all that is the "anticipation effect". .......
.......... Could it be that there were
some folks waiting for the change to take place?

Absolutely! I know several myself, and as a VE, I expect to hear from
more in the future. I had hoped that once the requirement was dropped,
that they would not have waited so long to implement it.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Alan WA4SCA wrote:

So perhaps the code issue wasn't all that important, anyway.


Perhaps it is just ONE factor among many. Other factors may include:


* the almost complete lack of any reporting of this change to the world
outside ham radio. I would like to see a poll that asks people what they
know about this. My guess is that if you take one step outside of ham
radio circles, you will find that no one knows anything about it.

* the aging (and death) of the ham population. The ten year license
term means that, on average, it will be five years before a dead ham is
dropped from the rolls, assuming that his heirs do not notify the FCC.

* We have no way of knowing whether a licensed ham is active, so there
again, it will take years for inactive hams to be dropped from the
license database, assuming that they take no action to renew their
licenses.

In sum, I believe that the small change in licensing numbers does not
rise to the level of statistical significance. Given the magnitude of
the unknowable quantities described above, we probably cannot tell
whether the population of live, active hams has grown or shrunken. Is
there a statistician in the house? I would like to see an estimate of
the margin of uncertainty of those numbers (plus or minus x percent),
given the various unknown factors.

--
Klystron

Klystron wrote:

In sum, I believe that the small change in licensing numbers does not
rise to the level of statistical significance. Given the magnitude of
the unknowable quantities described above, we probably cannot tell
whether the population of live, active hams has grown or shrunken. Is
there a statistician in the house? I would like to see an estimate of
the margin of uncertainty of those numbers (plus or minus x percent),
given the various unknown factors.

I don't claim to be a statistician but it is an easy bet that there are
sufficient variables to place the current result within the error of the
measurement technique. This is especially true when you add that magic
word "active" to your requirement.

The most reliable statistic is the number of new hams being licensed.
Even for those, it's not possible to say if they're "active" (no matter
what your definition might be for that term). But if 27,000 people
invested the effort to obtain a license during the last year, at least
we know that about 1 in 10,000 people cared enough to study for and pass
the exam.

73, Steve KB9X

"Klystron" wrote in message
...
Alan WA4SCA wrote:
[snip]
* the almost complete lack of any reporting of this change to the world
outside ham radio. I would like to see a poll that asks people what they
know about this. My guess is that if you take one step outside of ham
radio circles, you will find that no one knows anything about it.


Since most of the "outside world" doesn't and didn't have a clue about the
requirements to get a ham license, publicizing the elimination of the Morse
code testing would have had little to no impact. The only way it might have
helped was in letting people know that ham radio exists.

* the aging (and death) of the ham population. The ten year license
term means that, on average, it will be five years before a dead ham is
dropped from the rolls, assuming that his heirs do not notify the FCC.


Try more like 6 years since there is a two year grace period after the
expiration date that also needs to be factored in.


Dee, N8UZE