Search

Search Results

• 11. [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

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

  Grant County’s total population has declined since 2000, losing an average of about 50 persons per year between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). With the exception of minimal population increase among three small ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Grant 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 Grant County’s total population has declined since 2000, losing an average of about 50 persons per year between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). With the exception of minimal population increase among three small UGBs, every sub-area recorded population loss during the 2000s. Prairie City and the area outside UGBs posted the largest losses, losing on average about 17 and 19 persons per year, respectively. Grant County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a consistent natural decrease as well as relatively steady net out-migration (Figure 12). The smaller number of births relative to deaths led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in nearly every year from 2000 to 2015. While net out-migration was common during the last decade (2000-2010), in recent years (2010-2015) net in-migration has occurred. Even so, natural decrease has persisted and generally exceeded net in-migration, leading to continued population decline. Grant County is expected to experience population decline over the 50-year forecast period. This population loss will likely occur at a relatively uniform rate among the county’s sub-areas, with losses occurring at an increasing rate as time progresses. For Grant County as a whole, increasing natural decrease and relatively steady net in-migration are expected to lead to population decline. 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 in-migration is expected to persist throughout the entire forecast period, but will not fully offset the natural decrease, leading to population decline. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Grant 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 Grant County’s total population has declined since 2000, losing an average of about 50 persons per year between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). With the exception of minimal population increase among three small UGBs, every sub-area recorded population loss during the 2000s. Prairie City and the area outside UGBs posted the largest losses, losing on average about 17 and 19 persons per year, respectively. Grant County’s population decline in the 2000s was the result of a consistent natural decrease as well as relatively steady net out-migration (Figure 12). The smaller number of births relative to deaths led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in nearly every year from 2000 to 2015. While net out-migration was common during the last decade (2000-2010), in recent years (2010-2015) net in-migration has occurred. Even so, natural decrease has persisted and generally exceeded net in-migration, leading to continued population decline. Grant County is expected to experience population decline over the 50-year forecast period. This population loss will likely occur at a relatively uniform rate among the county’s sub-areas, with losses occurring at an increasing rate as time progresses. For Grant County as a whole, increasing natural decrease and relatively steady net in-migration are expected to lead to population decline. 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 in-migration is expected to persist throughout the entire forecast period, but will not fully offset the natural decrease, leading to population decline. Close

• 13. [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

• 14. [Article] 2007 Oregon Population Report

  This report contains the annual population estimates for Oregon, and its counties, incorporated cities and towns, and unincorporated areas for July 1, 2007. Included are estimates that are summarized by ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: 2007 Oregon Population Report Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa, Hough, George C., Jr. Year: 2008 This report contains the annual population estimates for Oregon, and its counties, incorporated cities and towns, and unincorporated areas for July 1, 2007. Included are estimates that are summarized by unincorporated and incorporated areas at the State level, as well as by metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. At the end of this report there are 6 maps showing county-level population estimates for 2007 or population change from 2000 to 2007. There is also a county reference map that shows locations of cities throughout Oregon. Title: 2007 Oregon Population Report Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Proehl, Risa, Hough, George C., Jr. Year: 2008 This report contains the annual population estimates for Oregon, and its counties, incorporated cities and towns, and unincorporated areas for July 1, 2007. Included are estimates that are summarized by unincorporated and incorporated areas at the State level, as well as by metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. At the end of this report there are 6 maps showing county-level population estimates for 2007 or population change from 2000 to 2007. There is also a county reference map that shows locations of cities throughout Oregon. Close

• 15. [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

• 16. [Article] North Santiam School District Population and Enrollment Forecasts, 2017-18 to 2031-32

  This report presents a series of three scenarios of district-wide enrollment forecasts by grade level for the North Santiam School District (NSSD) for the 15-year period between 2017-18 and 2031-32. Each ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: North Santiam School District Population and Enrollment Forecasts, 2017-18 to 2031-32 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Rynerson, Charles, Stewart, Scott, Chun, Nicholas Year: 2016 This report presents a series of three scenarios of district-wide enrollment forecasts by grade level for the North Santiam School District (NSSD) for the 15-year period between 2017-18 and 2031-32. Each enrollment forecast scenario is related to population forecasts that incorporate different assumptions about growth within the District, with the primary differences being the contribution of net migration to the District’s population and age distribution. Individual school forecasts consistent with the middle series scenario are also presented for the 15-year period. Title: North Santiam School District Population and Enrollment Forecasts, 2017-18 to 2031-32 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Rynerson, Charles, Stewart, Scott, Chun, Nicholas Year: 2016 This report presents a series of three scenarios of district-wide enrollment forecasts by grade level for the North Santiam School District (NSSD) for the 15-year period between 2017-18 and 2031-32. Each enrollment forecast scenario is related to population forecasts that incorporate different assumptions about growth within the District, with the primary differences being the contribution of net migration to the District’s population and age distribution. Individual school forecasts consistent with the middle series scenario are also presented for the 15-year period. Close

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

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Coos 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. Coos County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with average annual growth rates of nearly zero between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more population growth during the 2000s. Lakeside and Bandon, for example, posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.2 and 0.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Coos County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. 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 periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2013. Total population in Coos 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, 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 already yielding natural decrease (births minus deaths). As natural decrease persists and becomes more pronounced over time, population growth in Coos County is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Coos County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 1,200 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 2,500 over the entire 50 year forecast period. Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s will likely experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population gains throughout the forecast period, although these gains will likely be small. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Coos 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. Coos County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with average annual growth rates of nearly zero between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more population growth during the 2000s. Lakeside and Bandon, for example, posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.2 and 0.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Coos County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. 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 periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2013. Total population in Coos 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, 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 already yielding natural decrease (births minus deaths). As natural decrease persists and becomes more pronounced over time, population growth in Coos County is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Coos County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 1,200 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 2,500 over the entire 50 year forecast period. Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s will likely experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population gains throughout the forecast period, although these gains will likely be small. Close

• 18. [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

• 19. [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

• 20. [Article] Population Estimates of Counties and Incorporated Cities of Oregon

  This report contains estimates for each of the thirty-six counties and the 239 incorporated cities of Oregon. The populations of 10 cities in the state were enumerated under the supervision of the Center ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Population Estimates of Counties and Incorporated Cities of Oregon Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center Year: 1963 This report contains estimates for each of the thirty-six counties and the 239 incorporated cities of Oregon. The populations of 10 cities in the state were enumerated under the supervision of the Center for Population Research and Census, between 1963-1974. Title: Population Estimates of Counties and Incorporated Cities of Oregon Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center Year: 1963 This report contains estimates for each of the thirty-six counties and the 239 incorporated cities of Oregon. The populations of 10 cities in the state were enumerated under the supervision of the Center for Population Research and Census, between 1963-1974. Close