In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

(Vipul wrote
what does it matter about ARS license numbers?

Numbers = use of our spectrum = justification for keeping what we have
(and maybe getting a bit more in the future)

Not necessarily! What really matters is how many ACTIVE hams we have, and how
active they are.

There are more US hams now than ever before. More modes, more activities,
smaller and much less expensive equipment, etc. We have about the same amount
of spectrum below 500 MHz as we had 45 years ago, when there were fewer than
half as many US hams. (WARC-79 added 250 kHz of HF in 3 bands, and we lost
220-222 MHz about a dozen years after that).

But are the bands full-to-busting with activity 24/7? Yes, it's hard to
coordinate a new repeater in some metro areas - but are all the existing ones
tied up around the clock so that we need more?

Numbers = political influence (also necessary to protect our spectrum)

Only those who are active will have influence. Back in the '60s, with about
250,000 hams and no internet or email, FCC got over 6000 comments in response
to its restructuring proposal. A few years ago, with about 675,000 hams, and
the ECFS system, FCC's restructuring proposal got less than 2300 comments. (It
is left to the reader to figure out the percentages).

Numbers (of younger hams) = hams that will survive longer into the
future ...

Only matters if they are active. I know several hams who got licenses back in
the '80s and '90s for "honeydew" purposes. Now they have cellphones. Will they
renew when the license runs out? Don't count on it.

with today's demographic,

What IS today's demographic? Do you have a reliable source?

the sad reality is that a large
percentage of current hams will be SK in the next 10-20 years, resulting
in a major drop in our numbers unless we make ham radio more attractive
and interesting to the younger generation.

Actually, the younger generation first has to know ham radio even exists.

To do that, we can't force the
PC/internet generation to cling to/embrace some "traditions" (such as Morse)
in which the "older generation" iks so deeply invested (in an emotional
sense).

How do you know, Carl?

From 1996 to 2001, I did Field Day with a local group of clubs at a local park.
Location was chosen for visibility to the non-ham public. Lots of young people
came through, asked lots of questions, took lots of literature. The computers
and voice operation got a passing glance from most of 'em. But they were almost
universally fascinated by the CW tent, where I and a few others held forth,
with one ham operating while another explained and translated.

This was not an isolated occurrence - it happened again and again. The fact
that we were making CW contacts faster and with less effort than the 'phone
folks was not lost on the visitors, either.

eliminating Morse testing will help

No, it won't. The entry-level license is already code free. Eliminating
Morse testing will not cause more people to want to join.

Yup. The real problem is things like lack of publicity.

omigawd, I'm agreeing with Vipul!

Many folks are interested in HF access as part of their "portfolio" of
capabilities ... the entry level license currently precludes them from
HF use ... that is a major disincentive to many.

I disagree 100%, but let's put that aside for a moment.

Suppose tomorrow morning, next week or next month, by some method or another,
FCC just dumps Element 1 and merges the Tech and Tech Plus licenses. The
entry-level license will then have some HF access, consisting of little CW-only
slivers of 80, 40 and 15 meters, plus a slightly bigger chunk of 10 meters with
SSB and CW. All with a power limitation. Above 30 MHz, though, the entry level
license has all privileges. Is that really the best arrangement? Will the
removal of Element 1 fix that alleged disincentive problem?

Or are other changes needed?

73 de Jim, N2EY