Search

Search Results

• 11. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Douglas 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. Douglas ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Douglas 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. Douglas County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates 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. Sutherlin, the second most populous UGB, and Canyonville posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.7 and 3.0 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Douglas County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct 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 fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population growth nearly to a halt by 2010. In more recent years (2010 to 2014) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population growth Total population in Douglas County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2015 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration Even so, Douglas County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 20,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 43,000 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 Douglas 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. Douglas County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates 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. Sutherlin, the second most populous UGB, and Canyonville posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.7 and 3.0 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Douglas County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct 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 fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population growth nearly to a halt by 2010. In more recent years (2010 to 2014) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population growth Total population in Douglas County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2015 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration Even so, Douglas County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 20,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 43,000 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

• 12. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson 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. Jackson ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson 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. Jackson County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of above one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Eagle Point and Central Point UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates at 5.6 and 2.9 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Jackson County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net in-migration and natural increase. 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 slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline to almost nothing by 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—slowing population growth by 2010. Since 2010 net in-migration has driven rising population growth rates, while natural increase continues to shrink. Total population in Jackson 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, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Jackson County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 44,600 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 95,600 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). 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 Jackson 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. Jackson County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of above one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Eagle Point and Central Point UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates at 5.6 and 2.9 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Jackson County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net in-migration and natural increase. 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 slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline to almost nothing by 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—slowing population growth by 2010. Since 2010 net in-migration has driven rising population growth rates, while natural increase continues to shrink. Total population in Jackson 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, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Jackson County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 44,600 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 95,600 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 13. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Jefferson 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. Jefferson ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Jefferson 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. Jefferson County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates of a little more than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Culver posted the highest average annual growth rate 5.4 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Jefferson County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of steady natural increase— the difference between births and deaths—and substantial net in-migration from 2006 to 2008. 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 and a consequent decline in births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to declining natural increase. While net inmigration and steady natural increase contributed to population growth during the early and middle years of the last decade, both of these numbers shrank during more recent years—slowing population growth from 2010 to 2013. Total population in Jefferson 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 declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Jefferson County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 5,100 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 11,000 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). The Madras UGB will likely show slightly stronger population growth—relative to the 2000s—in the initial 20 year forecast period, but population growth is expected to slow during the last 30 years. Population within the Culver UGB is expected to grow at a much slower rate—relative to the 2000s—in the initial 20-year forecast period. Population growth in Culver is also expected to taper throughout the last 30 years of the forecast period. The area outside UGBs is forecast to grow at a steadier, although lower rate than the UGBs throughout the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Jefferson 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. Jefferson County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates of a little more than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Culver posted the highest average annual growth rate 5.4 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Jefferson County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of steady natural increase— the difference between births and deaths—and substantial net in-migration from 2006 to 2008. 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 and a consequent decline in births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led to declining natural increase. While net inmigration and steady natural increase contributed to population growth during the early and middle years of the last decade, both of these numbers shrank during more recent years—slowing population growth from 2010 to 2013. Total population in Jefferson 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 declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Jefferson County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 5,100 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 11,000 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). The Madras UGB will likely show slightly stronger population growth—relative to the 2000s—in the initial 20 year forecast period, but population growth is expected to slow during the last 30 years. Population within the Culver UGB is expected to grow at a much slower rate—relative to the 2000s—in the initial 20-year forecast period. Population growth in Culver is also expected to taper throughout the last 30 years of the forecast period. The area outside UGBs is forecast to grow at a steadier, although lower rate than the UGBs throughout the forecast period. Close

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

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

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Klamath 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 the local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Klamath County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000 with average annual growth rates 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. Malin and the area outside UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.4 and 0.7 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Klamath County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was due to the combination of net inmigration and natural increase (births minus deaths). At the same time an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years and a consequent decline in births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration and natural increase both contributed to population growth from 2000 to 2010, in recent years (i.e., 2011-2014) these two numbers shrank—slowing population growth. Total population in Klamath 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), and more slowly in 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 declining natural increase. As natural increase declines and becomes natural decrease, population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Klamath County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 5,100 over the next 20 years (2015-2035), but the county as whole is expected to see population decline over the last 30 years of the forecast period. With the exception of the area outside UGBs most sub-areas that saw population growth in the 2000s are forecast to have growth throughout the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population increase throughout the forecast period, but these gains will likely be small. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Klamath 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 the local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Klamath County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000 with average annual growth rates 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. Malin and the area outside UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.4 and 0.7 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Klamath County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was due to the combination of net inmigration and natural increase (births minus deaths). At the same time an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years and a consequent decline in births. The growing number of deaths and shrinking number of births led natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration and natural increase both contributed to population growth from 2000 to 2010, in recent years (i.e., 2011-2014) these two numbers shrank—slowing population growth. Total population in Klamath 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), and more slowly in 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 declining natural increase. As natural increase declines and becomes natural decrease, population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Klamath County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 5,100 over the next 20 years (2015-2035), but the county as whole is expected to see population decline over the last 30 years of the forecast period. With the exception of the area outside UGBs most sub-areas that saw population growth in the 2000s are forecast to have growth throughout the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population increase throughout the forecast period, but these gains will likely be small. Close

• 15. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Lane 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. Lane ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Lane 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. Lane County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of just under one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Veneta and Creswell posted the highest average annual growth rates at 5.2 and 3.1 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Lane County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration and in the early years, natural increase. 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 slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to shrink between 2007 and 2012. Since 2012, net in-migration has outpaced natural increase, driving rising population growth rates. Total population in Lane County as a whole as well as within many of its sub-areas is forecast to 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 declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines and eventually becomes natural decrease, population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Lane County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 67,300 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 152,400 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). 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 Lane 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. Lane County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of just under one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Veneta and Creswell posted the highest average annual growth rates at 5.2 and 3.1 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Lane County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration and in the early years, natural increase. 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 slower growth in births. The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to shrink between 2007 and 2012. Since 2012, net in-migration has outpaced natural increase, driving rising population growth rates. Total population in Lane County as a whole as well as within many of its sub-areas is forecast to 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 declining natural increase (births minus deaths). As natural increase declines and eventually becomes natural decrease, population growth is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Lane County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 67,300 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by nearly 152,400 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 16. [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

• 17. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney 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. Harney ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney 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. Harney County’s total population has slowly declined since 2000, with an average annual rate of negative 0.2 percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). Burns is accountable for the county’s overall declining population. All other sub-areas experienced very slight population growths during the 2000 to 2010 period, increasing by a total of 32 persons. Harney County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of frequent net out-migration. The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, however, a larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase for 8 out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015 (Figure 12). Even so, net out-migration outweighed these slight natural increases, causing a slow decrease in the Harney County’s population since 2000. Total population in Harney County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas are forecast to all decrease at a slightly faster rate in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Harney County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 500 persons over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066), a loss in population mostly happening in areas outside the UGBs. Sub-areas are expected to generally follow historical patterns of population decrease over the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney 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. Harney County’s total population has slowly declined since 2000, with an average annual rate of negative 0.2 percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). Burns is accountable for the county’s overall declining population. All other sub-areas experienced very slight population growths during the 2000 to 2010 period, increasing by a total of 32 persons. Harney County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of frequent net out-migration. The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, however, a larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase for 8 out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015 (Figure 12). Even so, net out-migration outweighed these slight natural increases, causing a slow decrease in the Harney County’s population since 2000. Total population in Harney County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas are forecast to all decrease at a slightly faster rate in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Harney County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 500 persons over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066), a loss in population mostly happening in areas outside the UGBs. Sub-areas are expected to generally follow historical patterns of population decrease over the forecast period. Close

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

  Wasco County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). The Dalles UGB and the area outside UGBs posted ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wasco 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 Wasco County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). The Dalles UGB and the area outside UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates, both at about 0.6 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Wasco County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a substantial net in-migration and periods of small natural increases and decreases (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been more stable during second half of the decade and the recent years, contributing to a population increase. Total population in Wasco County as a whole as well as within some of 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 an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births)—as well as a decline in net in-migration toward the end of the forecast. Even so, Wasco County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 4,400 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by more than 10,500 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). The Dalles, Mosier, and the area outside UGBs are expected to grow the most of all of Wasco County’s sub-areas. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Wasco 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 Wasco County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). The Dalles UGB and the area outside UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates, both at about 0.6 percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Wasco County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a substantial net in-migration and periods of small natural increases and decreases (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been more stable during second half of the decade and the recent years, contributing to a population increase. Total population in Wasco County as a whole as well as within some of 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 an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births)—as well as a decline in net in-migration toward the end of the forecast. Even so, Wasco County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 4,400 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by more than 10,500 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). The Dalles, Mosier, and the area outside UGBs are expected to grow the most of all of Wasco County’s sub-areas. Close

• 19. [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

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

  Union County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). However, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Union 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 Union County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). However, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Summerville posted the highest average annual growth rate of 1.4 percent, and Imbler and Union were close behind with average annual growth rates of about 1.2 percent each. Union County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the combined result of a consistent natural increase and a net in-migration. 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 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, accounting for the majority of Union County’s population increase. Total population in Union County as a whole as well as within some of its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the nearer-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the longer-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Steady increase in net in-migration is expected to offset the growing natural decrease, leading to relatively steady population growth over the forecast period. However, 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 stabilization in the number of births. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Union 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 Union County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with an average annual growth rate of half percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). However, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Summerville posted the highest average annual growth rate of 1.4 percent, and Imbler and Union were close behind with average annual growth rates of about 1.2 percent each. Union County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the combined result of a consistent natural increase and a net in-migration. 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 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, accounting for the majority of Union County’s population increase. Total population in Union County as a whole as well as within some of its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the nearer-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the longer-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Steady increase in net in-migration is expected to offset the growing natural decrease, leading to relatively steady population growth over the forecast period. However, 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 stabilization in the number of births. Close