These census figures would indicate that over the 5 year period, talking into account the number of births and deaths, that in fact we have a negative growth in population.

Just the birth rate alone should have increased our population over 5 years by approx 2000 people. Seems we still have people leaving the City.

I bet alot of roomate and basement renters are not included in the census. Had this happen when I was renting a basement suit.

You do not see anything strange about those figures?

Whoever does not see anything strage about those figures, does not have a working knowledge about the population of the City of Prince Geroge.

Here are the real figures.

Census has three different areas listed for the Prince George area:

1. Population Centre
2. The City of Prince George
3. The Prince George CA

———————–

The 2011 figures are

1. 65,503 area = 99.93 km2 0.7% growth
2. 71,974 area = 318.26 km2 1.4% growth
3. 84,232 area = 17,686.4km2 1.2% growth

The CA goes about 45 km west, 110 km east, 30 km north and 35 km south.

In other words, not Hixon, not Cluculz, likely the lake district northeast of here.

You do not see anything strange about those figures?

Yes…. the sign at the corner of highway 16 & 97 says there are 75,000 people and city hall is not known for bending the truth;)

I wonder who is the author of the news article here???

You are right lonesome sparrow, based on that sign, the City also has no working knowledge of the populattion of PG. :-)

Of course, there is another way to look at this.

71,974 live in the city and pay city taxes. Another 12,258 live just on the outside of the city, pay taxes to the regional district which are less than for the city, yet take advantage of the services that city tax payers provide.

That is a significant 14.5% of the total metro population of Prince George.

For the same three categgories in the same order, Kamloops looks like this.

1. 73,472 4.1% growth
2. 85,678 6.6% growth
3. 98,754 6.4% growth

Why? Weather? Proximity to the GVRD? On major rail linkages? Sun Peaks? Tobiano? Lack of birth control?

;-)

As DPJ says how many people in illegal suits in town. Renters use the services but pay no taxes and making neighborhoods busier than they should be. Hey catch taxes from these renters and there might be enough money to make payments on the PAC.

“I bet alot of roomate and basement renters are not included in the census.”

This is the type of error which would be consistent across the province.

It is not a very large error because with seasonal residents – treeplanters, students, etc – they may be counted in their “hometown”.

Tax the illegal suites! Brilliant idea.

Maybe city hall could issue City Of PG ID cards to everyone that lives in the city limits. That way when you go to the pool or the game they can charge you 2.00 more for being a non resident.

So, going back to the City not having a good working knowledge of the population, here is what it says on the City web site:

“Known as BC’s northern capital, Prince George is a bustling city located on the traditional territory of the Lheidli T’enneh with a population of approximately 76,000 situated at the crossroads of Highway 97 (north-south) and Highway 16 (east-west), and at the confluence of the Fraser and Nechako Rivers. As a major city of the Pacific Rim, Prince George is firmly tied to the global market.”

Wonder if they will change this now, or whether they will carry on with the same head in the sand tactic Kinsley used?

I realize that the figure is from provincial and even City projections, but maybe someone is smart enough to realize the need to improve the source data used to make those projections.

It is time we accepted the facts and moved on to bigger and more important battles.

PG -> 1.4%
Kamloops -> 6.6%
Kelowna -> 9.6%
Nanaimo ->6.5%
Chilliwack -> 12.6%

Nice to see the trend continue. Well actually it isn’t but that’s a whole other discussion.

Fort St. John -> 6.9%
Dawson Creek -> 5.4%
Fort Nelson -> -13.6%

Why haven’t these areas done better given that the time period measured was during the Oil and Gas boom? Could it possibly be true that resource based towns just AREN’T the places that people want to live, despite the fact that jobs may be available?

Wonder what Pat Bell’s official take on these findings are? I thought this was supposed to be a time of prosperity for the North and yet it is still lagging behind other areas of the Province. Perhaps it’s time to abandon the “if you don’t like it move” mentality in PG and start looking at ways to keep and attract people. Dead horse I know, LOL.

“Lack of birth control”

LMAO!!!!!

That might help explain why the taxes go up ad infinitum…they actually believe what they post on the website and spend accordingly.

Quesnel

City – 10,007 an increase of 7.3%

We need to get their census enumerators up here so that they can catch all those illegal suite dwellers … ;-)

Williams Lake, just a hop skip and jump away is down in population by a fraction of a percent.

Clinton is a hub of activity also …. 6.4% increase from 598 to 636 …..

There was a wedding in the log restaurant there on census day and they got the guests to fill out the census when they stayed at the motel.

The wedding party was from PG, so they did not get counted here ….. ;-)

Fort St. James 25.3% growth
Tumbler Ridge 10.4%
Surrey 18.6% Squamish 14.6%
West Kelowna 13.5%
Pemberton 8.1%
Castlegar 7.7% … WOW!!!
Nelson 10.5% … WOW!!!!
Vanderhoof 4.4%
Smithers 3.3%
Wells 3.8% .. 9 more people than 2006
West Vancouver 1.3%
Prince Rupert -2.5%
FFGRD 0.4%

So Gus, as a person that lives outside the city and pays taxes to the Regional District. What services am I getting from PG that I’m not paying for? I take my own garbage to the dump, my water comes from a well, and the roads I drive on are paid in part by gas taxes that I pay. The city of PG doesn’t plow my roads, or fill my potholes, or pay for my fire protection.

The sign at the junction of Highway 16 and 97 actually shows the population as being 81000. This has never changed for the past 10 or more years.

There have been numerous shots at the City over the years to do something about the sign.

If it now says 75000 it has finally been changed. I will check it next time I go bye.

It likely still does say 81k, I just knew it had no basis in reality.

Funny Ruperts’ population is decreasing when there has been nothing but talk the last year about all the activity that is going on and will be going on north west of here. Does that mean a lot of the work is being done by transient workers who don’t live in the area?

I am not sure what the “lot of work” you are referring to is.

Just because there is a port improvement does not mean that there is a significant, if any, increase in employment.

“Just because there is a port improvement does not mean that there is a significant, if any, increase in employment”

Bingo! Investments like that could just slow down the decline instead of seeing the population drop off a cliff. Same thing will likely happen to PG in a decade, although I’d say the chances are greater that it will be the latter scenario.

The problem we are facing big time in this region is that we hear the positive news only with respect to employment. We never hear the negative.

In addition, we hear no detailed information on economic indicators such as changes in retail sales. When coupled with more detailed information of the type of goods and services purchased they can also be indicator of social well being.

Malls, individual stores, etc. keep relatively detailed data that can be shared with organizations such as University groups interested in regional economic development and, of course, local and regional economic development offices such as IPG.

Instead, we get an announcement of a new venture, either a construction project with mega jobs for one or two years and no details of how many of those are actually local jobs. But, we do hear about multipliers, which are often multipliers on a provincial scale rather than a local scale because there is no regional impact information for BC at all. The same happens for the occasional new business, where most of the multipliers have local impact.

However, no one is keeping track of how many of those multipliers actually end up in new jobs, or simply businesses, such as retail, which have a skeleton staff on and where the additional business is not going to add jobs, but make existing jobs more productive from an economic point of view.

We also have no idea of whether the jobs pay more or less than the average wage in PG, and most certainly not on which jobs the multiplier money will be spent, on average.

We do not hear of small layoffs or business closures. We do hear of major layoffs, such as manufacturing plant and other business closures. But, you know, I do not ever recall someone reporting that business AB is closing and putting 150 FTE people out of work and that the multiplier of that means that 80 FTE jobs will be impacted which will cause additional reductions in staff in other many other businesses or additional reductions in work hours per person employed (from full to part time as a for instance, or a calling in on 2 occasions per week instead of 5).

We really do not know what is up. I think we are owed better information. Whose community is this anyway?