Search

Search Results

• 1. [Article] Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2013

  The dataset also includes: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2012 (prepared January 2013) Estimates of Population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2013 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2014 The dataset also includes: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2012 (prepared January 2013) Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2011 (prepared January 2011) Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2013 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2014 The dataset also includes: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2012 (prepared January 2013) Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2011 (prepared January 2011) Close

• 2. [Article] Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2015

  Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2015. Prepared by Population Research Center, Portland State University, January ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2015 Author: Proehl, Risa, Portland State University. Population Research Center Year: 2016 Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2015. Prepared by Population Research Center, Portland State University, January 2016. Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2015 Author: Proehl, Risa, Portland State University. Population Research Center Year: 2016 Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2015. Prepared by Population Research Center, Portland State University, January 2016. Close

• 3. [Article] Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2014

  Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties.

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2014 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2015 Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties. Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2014 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2015 Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties. Close

• 4. [Article] Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2011

  Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties.

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2011 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2012 Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties. Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2011 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2012 Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties. Close

• 5. [Article] Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2010

  Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties.

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2010 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2010 Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties. Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2010 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2010 Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties. Close

• 6. [Article] Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2012

  Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties.

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2012 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2013 Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties. Title: Estimates of Population Age Groups (ages under 18 yrs., 18-64 yrs., and 65 yrs. and over) for Oregon and Its Counties, July 1, 2012 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2013 Estimates of population age groups for Oregon and its counties. Close

• 7. [Article] Estimates for Population Ages 4-20 Years for Oregon and Its Counties

  Estimates for population ages 4-20 years for Oregon and its counties.

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Estimates for Population Ages 4-20 Years for Oregon and Its Counties Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2010 Estimates for population ages 4-20 years for Oregon and its counties. Title: Estimates for Population Ages 4-20 Years for Oregon and Its Counties Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa Year: 2010 Estimates for population ages 4-20 years for Oregon and its counties. Close

• 8. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Wheeler 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. Wheeler ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wheeler 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. Wheeler County’s total population has declined slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of just above negative one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced some population growth during the 2000s. Fossil, the most populous UGB, experienced small growth and Spray posted the highest average annual growth rate at 0.1 and 1.1 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Wheeler County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of an aging population. The 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 deaths relative to births caused a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration and natural decrease compounded to create a substantial population decrease during the early and middle years of the last decade, migration into the county increased in the later part of the decade and helped to offset the natural decrease. Net out-migration was still substantial for populations between the ages of 20 and 29 years from 2000 to 2010, but there has been net in-migration for a slightly older population from 30 to 39 years of age. In more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it some slight population growth. Total population in Wheeler County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely decline at a slightly slower pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The declining of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a steady natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Wheeler County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 90 over the next 19 years (2016- 2035) and by more than 300 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). All sub-areas are expected to experience similar rates of population decline during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wheeler 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. Wheeler County’s total population has declined slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of just above negative one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced some population growth during the 2000s. Fossil, the most populous UGB, experienced small growth and Spray posted the highest average annual growth rate at 0.1 and 1.1 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Wheeler County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of an aging population. The 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 deaths relative to births caused a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration and natural decrease compounded to create a substantial population decrease during the early and middle years of the last decade, migration into the county increased in the later part of the decade and helped to offset the natural decrease. Net out-migration was still substantial for populations between the ages of 20 and 29 years from 2000 to 2010, but there has been net in-migration for a slightly older population from 30 to 39 years of age. In more recent years (2010 to 2015) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it some slight population growth. Total population in Wheeler County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely decline at a slightly slower pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The declining of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a steady natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Wheeler County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 90 over the next 19 years (2016- 2035) and by more than 300 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). All sub-areas are expected to experience similar rates of population decline during the forecast period. Close

• 9. [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

• 10. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Josephine County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  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. Josephine ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Josephine County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 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. Josephine County’s total population as a whole has grown slowly since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Grants Pass and Cave Junction posted average annual growth rates at 2.1 and 1.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Josephine County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net inmigration. 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 slow growth in the number of births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to natural decrease—more deaths than births—in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years— bringing population decline in 2012. Since 2012 net in-migration has increased, driving population increase for 2013 and 2014. Total population in Josephine County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035) relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs over time population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Josephine County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 16,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 38,000 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Subareas 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 Josephine County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 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. Josephine County’s total population as a whole has grown slowly since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Grants Pass and Cave Junction posted average annual growth rates at 2.1 and 1.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Josephine County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net inmigration. 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 slow growth in the number of births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to natural decrease—more deaths than births—in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years— bringing population decline in 2012. Since 2012 net in-migration has increased, driving population increase for 2013 and 2014. Total population in Josephine County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035) relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs over time population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Josephine County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 16,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 38,000 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Subareas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close