Search

Search Results

• 31. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Gilliam County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Gilliam County’s total population declined during the 2000s, with average annual growth rate of negative two-tenths of one percent (Figure 1); however, since 2010 the county has seen a slight increase ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Gilliam County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Gilliam County’s total population declined during the 2000s, with average annual growth rate of negative two-tenths of one percent (Figure 1); however, since 2010 the county has seen a slight increase in population, growing by more than 100 persons between 2010 and 2015 (Figure 2). Gilliam County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural decrease and periods of net out-migration (Figure 12). The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease in nearly every year from 2000 to 2010. While net in-migration fluctuated during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been increased stably during recent years, contributing to population increase since 2009. Total population in Gilliam County as a whole is expected to increase over the forecast period, with the majority of this growth occurring within Arlington UGB (Figure 1). Increasing net in-migration is expected to offset the growth in the natural decrease throughout the entire 50-year forecast period. An aging population in the near-term is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a steady number of births. During the final 31 years of the forecast period, the population is expected to shift toward younger ages leading to more births and a steady number of deaths. This combined with steady net in-migration is expected to lead to continued steady population growth. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Gilliam County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Gilliam County’s total population declined during the 2000s, with average annual growth rate of negative two-tenths of one percent (Figure 1); however, since 2010 the county has seen a slight increase in population, growing by more than 100 persons between 2010 and 2015 (Figure 2). Gilliam County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural decrease and periods of net out-migration (Figure 12). The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease in nearly every year from 2000 to 2010. While net in-migration fluctuated during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been increased stably during recent years, contributing to population increase since 2009. Total population in Gilliam County as a whole is expected to increase over the forecast period, with the majority of this growth occurring within Arlington UGB (Figure 1). Increasing net in-migration is expected to offset the growth in the natural decrease throughout the entire 50-year forecast period. An aging population in the near-term is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a steady number of births. During the final 31 years of the forecast period, the population is expected to shift toward younger ages leading to more births and a steady number of deaths. This combined with steady net in-migration is expected to lead to continued steady population growth. Close

• 32. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Baker County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Baker County’s population declined between 2000 and 2010, losing on average of just over 60 people per year (Figure 1); however in recent years this pattern has changed and population increase has occurred. ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Baker County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Baker County’s population declined between 2000 and 2010, losing on average of just over 60 people per year (Figure 1); however in recent years this pattern has changed and population increase has occurred. Between 2010 and 2015 the county added on average about 20 persons per year (Figure 2). Baker County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of natural decrease and periods of substantial net out-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years (2010-2015), contributing to population increase. Total population in Baker County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the three sub-areas of Baker City, Richland, and Sumpter (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the last 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of growing natural decrease, which is expected to surpass net in-migration between 2030 and 2035. Overall the county is forecast to see nearly no net change in population over the entire 50-year period, beginning the forecast at around 16,400 in 2016 and ending at about 16,400 in 2066. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Baker County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Baker County’s population declined between 2000 and 2010, losing on average of just over 60 people per year (Figure 1); however in recent years this pattern has changed and population increase has occurred. Between 2010 and 2015 the county added on average about 20 persons per year (Figure 2). Baker County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of natural decrease and periods of substantial net out-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years (2010-2015), contributing to population increase. Total population in Baker County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the three sub-areas of Baker City, Richland, and Sumpter (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the last 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of growing natural decrease, which is expected to surpass net in-migration between 2030 and 2035. Overall the county is forecast to see nearly no net change in population over the entire 50-year period, beginning the forecast at around 16,400 in 2016 and ending at about 16,400 in 2066. Close

• 33. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Wallowa County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Wallowa County’s total population has declined since 2000 at an average annual rate of about threetenths of one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Enterprise and Joseph experienced population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wallowa County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Wallowa County’s total population has declined since 2000 at an average annual rate of about threetenths of one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Enterprise and Joseph experienced population growth during the 2000s. In spite of population increases in the two most populous UGBs, the area outside UGBs declined by nearly one percent per year between 2000 and 2010, losing nearly 200 persons and effectively driving countywide population decline. Even so, Wallowa County’s population has slightly increased in recent years, growing by roughly 100 people between 2010 and 2015 (Figure 2). Wallowa County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a natural decrease and periods of net out-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net migration fluctuated dramatically during the last decade, net in-migration has been consistent during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Total population in Wallowa County as a whole will likely increase in the near-term (2015 to 2035), driven by population growth in Enterprise, Joseph, and the area outside UGBs (Figure 1). However, in the remaining 31-year period, the county is forecast to see population decline. A rise in the magnitude of natural decrease and slow growth of net in-migration are expected to cause population growth to reach its peak in 2025, turning to population decline through the remainder of the forecast period. An aging population is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a long-term decline in births. Net migration is expected to remain relatively steady throughout the forecast period, but will not offset natural decrease after 2025. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wallowa County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Wallowa County’s total population has declined since 2000 at an average annual rate of about threetenths of one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Enterprise and Joseph experienced population growth during the 2000s. In spite of population increases in the two most populous UGBs, the area outside UGBs declined by nearly one percent per year between 2000 and 2010, losing nearly 200 persons and effectively driving countywide population decline. Even so, Wallowa County’s population has slightly increased in recent years, growing by roughly 100 people between 2010 and 2015 (Figure 2). Wallowa County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a natural decrease and periods of net out-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net migration fluctuated dramatically during the last decade, net in-migration has been consistent during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Total population in Wallowa County as a whole will likely increase in the near-term (2015 to 2035), driven by population growth in Enterprise, Joseph, and the area outside UGBs (Figure 1). However, in the remaining 31-year period, the county is forecast to see population decline. A rise in the magnitude of natural decrease and slow growth of net in-migration are expected to cause population growth to reach its peak in 2025, turning to population decline through the remainder of the forecast period. An aging population is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years will likely result in a long-term decline in births. Net migration is expected to remain relatively steady throughout the forecast period, but will not offset natural decrease after 2025. Close

• 34. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Sherman County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Sherman County’s total population has declined since 2000, at an average annual rate of nearly one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Wasco UGB, one of its sub-areas, experienced population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Sherman County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Sherman County’s total population has declined since 2000, at an average annual rate of nearly one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Wasco UGB, one of its sub-areas, experienced population growth during the 2000s. Wasco, the most populous UGB, posted an average annual growth rate of a little less than one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. This translated into a population increase of about 30 persons. Sherman County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of consistent net out-migration and periods of natural decreases (more deaths than births, Figure 12). The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, which combined with a relatively steady number of births has resulted in a natural decrease for nine out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015. While net out-migration and natural decrease were common during the last decade, in more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has occurred, bringing with it some population growth. Total population in Sherman County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the two sub-areas of Rufus and Wasco (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the remaining 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of a growing natural decrease, which is expected to exceed net in-migration around 2030. Sherman County’s total population is forecast to increase by about 50 persons over the next 19 years (2016-2035), but will likely see population decline of more than 80 persons during the last 31 years of the forecast period (2035-2066). Sub-areas are expected to generally follow their historical patterns of population increase or decrease over the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Sherman County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Sherman County’s total population has declined since 2000, at an average annual rate of nearly one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, Wasco UGB, one of its sub-areas, experienced population growth during the 2000s. Wasco, the most populous UGB, posted an average annual growth rate of a little less than one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. This translated into a population increase of about 30 persons. Sherman County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of consistent net out-migration and periods of natural decreases (more deaths than births, Figure 12). The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, which combined with a relatively steady number of births has resulted in a natural decrease for nine out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015. While net out-migration and natural decrease were common during the last decade, in more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has occurred, bringing with it some population growth. Total population in Sherman County is forecast to increase in the near-term (2016 to 2035), a trend that is driven by growth in the two sub-areas of Rufus and Wasco (Figure 1); however population decline is expected for the county over the remaining 31 years of the forecast period. This population decrease is the result of a growing natural decrease, which is expected to exceed net in-migration around 2030. Sherman County’s total population is forecast to increase by about 50 persons over the next 19 years (2016-2035), but will likely see population decline of more than 80 persons during the last 31 years of the forecast period (2035-2066). Sub-areas are expected to generally follow their historical patterns of population increase or decrease over the forecast period. Close

• 35. [Article] Is Portland Really the Place Where Young People Go To Retire? Migration Patterns of Portland’s Young and College-Educated, 1980-2010

  For many metro areas, including Portland, being economically competitive in today’s knowledge and information economy depends on attracting and retaining young, college-­‐educated (YCE) migrants. On this ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Is Portland Really the Place Where Young People Go To Retire? Migration Patterns of Portland’s Young and College-Educated, 1980-2010 Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Schrock, Greg Year: 2012 For many metro areas, including Portland, being economically competitive in today’s knowledge and information economy depends on attracting and retaining young, college-­‐educated (YCE) migrants. On this indicator, Portland has been most successful: since 1980, the Portland metropolitan region has attracted college-­‐educated individuals under the age of 40 at some of the country’s highest net migration rates in good economic times and bad. Though not unique to Portland, the resiliency of Portland’s migration streams, even in periods of economic uncertainty, calls attention to an increasingly selective group of YCE migrants who appear to place greater relative value on non-­‐economic factors—from political milieu to access to quality public transportation—compared to employment opportunities. This trend directly challenges a long-­‐established cornerstone of traditional migration theory suggesting that the decision to move is predicated on benefits exceeding costs, and linked to the importance of jobs and economic opportunity as attractive forces for working-­‐age households. Reading between the lines of recent media accounts, and in particular the television show Portlandia, the shift from economic to non-­‐economic factors has been portrayed in a most interesting way: because young migrants to Portland place relatively low value on work and traditional careers, their desire to exchange employment opportunities for quality of life (amenity) factors indeed makes Portland the city “where young people go to retire.” The question is: in the short and long-­‐term, how sustainable is Portland’s trend of attracting and retaining YCE migrants if labor market outcomes continue to remain worse compared to other metro areas? What are the facts? In this paper we draw upon U.S. Census Bureau data from the 2000 Census and more recent American Community Surveys from 2005-­‐2007 and 2008-­‐2010, to compare migration patterns in Portland to the other 50 largest U.S. metros. Title: Is Portland Really the Place Where Young People Go To Retire? Migration Patterns of Portland’s Young and College-Educated, 1980-2010 Author: Jurjevich, Jason R., Schrock, Greg Year: 2012 For many metro areas, including Portland, being economically competitive in today’s knowledge and information economy depends on attracting and retaining young, college-­‐educated (YCE) migrants. On this indicator, Portland has been most successful: since 1980, the Portland metropolitan region has attracted college-­‐educated individuals under the age of 40 at some of the country’s highest net migration rates in good economic times and bad. Though not unique to Portland, the resiliency of Portland’s migration streams, even in periods of economic uncertainty, calls attention to an increasingly selective group of YCE migrants who appear to place greater relative value on non-­‐economic factors—from political milieu to access to quality public transportation—compared to employment opportunities. This trend directly challenges a long-­‐established cornerstone of traditional migration theory suggesting that the decision to move is predicated on benefits exceeding costs, and linked to the importance of jobs and economic opportunity as attractive forces for working-­‐age households. Reading between the lines of recent media accounts, and in particular the television show Portlandia, the shift from economic to non-­‐economic factors has been portrayed in a most interesting way: because young migrants to Portland place relatively low value on work and traditional careers, their desire to exchange employment opportunities for quality of life (amenity) factors indeed makes Portland the city “where young people go to retire.” The question is: in the short and long-­‐term, how sustainable is Portland’s trend of attracting and retaining YCE migrants if labor market outcomes continue to remain worse compared to other metro areas? What are the facts? In this paper we draw upon U.S. Census Bureau data from the 2000 Census and more recent American Community Surveys from 2005-­‐2007 and 2008-­‐2010, to compare migration patterns in Portland to the other 50 largest U.S. metros. Close

• 36. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Morrow County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Morrow ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Morrow County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Morrow County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Boardman, the most populous UGB, and Irrigon posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.0 and 0.5 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Morrow County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of a substantial natural increase (Figure 12). Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase in every year from 2000 to 2014. In more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population more growth. Total population in Morrow County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by a larger base population—the denominator to calculate growth rates. As baby boomers age into the mid-term of the future, natural increase will reach its low point around 2045 and then rebound. Even so, Morrow County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 1,900 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by almost 4,900 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Morrow County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Morrow County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Boardman, the most populous UGB, and Irrigon posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.0 and 0.5 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Morrow County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of a substantial natural increase (Figure 12). Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase in every year from 2000 to 2014. In more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population more growth. Total population in Morrow County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by a larger base population—the denominator to calculate growth rates. As baby boomers age into the mid-term of the future, natural increase will reach its low point around 2045 and then rebound. Even so, Morrow County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 1,900 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by almost 4,900 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 37. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Hood River County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Hood River County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of about one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). The Hood River UGB experienced more rapid population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Hood River County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Hood River County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of about one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). The Hood River UGB experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s, averaging more than one percent per year during the 2000 to 2010 period. Hood River County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural increase and periods of substantial net in-migration (Figure 12). The larger number of births relative to deaths has led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015. While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has increased stably during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Overall, Hood River County’s population growth is becoming more reliant on net in-migration. Total population in Hood River County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is driven by a growing natural decrease, as well as a larger population base. As natural decrease occurs over the final 31-year period, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Hood River County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 6,000 during the initial 19-year period (2016-2035) and by more than 14,000 over the entire 50-year forecast (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Hood River County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Hood River County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of about one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). The Hood River UGB experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s, averaging more than one percent per year during the 2000 to 2010 period. Hood River County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural increase and periods of substantial net in-migration (Figure 12). The larger number of births relative to deaths has led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015. While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has increased stably during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Overall, Hood River County’s population growth is becoming more reliant on net in-migration. Total population in Hood River County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is driven by a growing natural decrease, as well as a larger population base. As natural decrease occurs over the final 31-year period, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Hood River County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 6,000 during the initial 19-year period (2016-2035) and by more than 14,000 over the entire 50-year forecast (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close