Census 2011 Results: - Page 8

Ayreonaut · #**141** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 5:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkd

Where are you getting 100,000? I'm getting just around 40,000 with those two added. Seems your numbers are way off.

Okotoks - 24,511
Foothills MD - 21, 258
Strathmore - 12,305
High River - 12,920
______
71,000

I don't know what the Foothills MD # is. Does it exclude incorporated towns like Black Diamond and Turner Valley (about 2000 apiece)? Obviously Okotoks and High River aren't included in this number.

The whole MD probably has about 70,000 people now.

Edit: BD is 2400 and TV is 2100 now. Combined, about 1500 more people than when I was in elementary school.

eemy · #**142** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 6:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tibor420

Im shocked that Kitchener is the 4th densest CMA in Canada... i live here... nothings dense except a lot of the people....

I dont get why all of Waterloo Region isnt in its CMA... the CMA is tiny. It would still be tiny if we added the 2 townships left out hahaha

Most of the KWC CMA is urban area, therefore pushing the average density higher. Most other CMAs incorporate large swaths of rural area which has the opposite effect.

Bassic Lab · #**143** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 6:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ayreonaut

Okotoks - 24,511
Foothills MD - 21, 258
Strathmore - 12,305
High River - 12,920
______
71,000

I don't know what the Foothills MD # is. Does it exclude incorporated towns like Black Diamond and Turner Valley (about 2000 apiece)? Obviously Okotoks and High River aren't included in this number.

The whole MD probably has about 70,000 people now.

The Municipal District only includes unincorporated areas.

Foothills MD 21,258
Okotoks 24,511
High River 12,920
Turner Valley 2,167
Black Diamond 2,373
Longview 307
Eden Valley IR 587

Total Foothills population: 64123

It would be more of a stretch to include Wheatland County (ie Strathmore and a couple of other municipalities). To start, Foothills MD ought to have significantly more commuter exchange. It is also much closer to being included by the contiguity rule. The Heritage Pointe-Dewinton area is bound to become a Population Centre (the replacement for Urban Area) quite soon. The requirement is 1000 people at a density of 400 per square kilometre and they are merged when the driving distance is 2km or less (before the metric system it was 1000 people at a density of 1000 per square mile with merging at a distance of 1 mile). Calgary development will get that close relatively soon. The Calgary Population Centre won't encroach on Wheatland County any time soon, if it ever will.

someone123 · #**144** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 6:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by craner

I'm wondering the same thing.

Perhaps it's a Statscan thing.

There's a lot more to the census than total population counts. For example, they have released census tract level data that is not a part of the annual estimates. In the future there will be lots of 2011 data like ethnic origin, modes of transportation to work, etc.

trebor204 · #**145** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 7:20 AM**

Stats Canada renamed Urban Centres as Population Centres

Ethnic Data was part of National Household Survey, data to be released next year.

TallBob · #**146** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 7:31 AM**

A year ago Stats Can showed just under 34 million. What happened? What figures are accurate?

chrisallard5454 · #**147** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 7:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ue

Even though this is preliminary, I was surprised at some of the results...

- Calgary isn't larger than Ottawa
- Montreal isn't even at 3.9 million like everyone was predicting
- Edmonton isn't around 1.2 million
- Neither Kitchener-Waterloo nor London hit 500,000
- Winnipeg is no longer neck and neck with QC, with QC leaving the 'Peg and Hammer in the dust
- Halifax isn't at 400,000 yet
- Regina was predicted at 20K more
- Would have thought Kelowna would've grown a bit more

Nice to see that finally Alberta has another city over 100,000 (Lethbridge). Hopefully soon Red Deer will join that club, maybe even for this census with perhaps CA extensions. How is Oshawa still not apart of the Toronto CMA and Okotoks still not apart of the Calgary CMA?

Remember also that large portions of Winnipeg's Population were displaced due to a 1 in 100 year flood.

Dwils01 · #**148** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 8:00 AM**

Brampton is now bigger than Hamilton.

Dwils01 · #**149** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 8:21 AM**

Canada's 10 biggest cities.

1. Toronto 2,615,060
2. Montreal 1,649,519
3. Calgary 1,096,833
4. Ottawa 883,391
5. Edmonton 812,201
6. Mississauga 713,443
7. Winnipeg 663,617
8. Vancouver 603,502
9. Brampton 523,911
10. Hamilton 519,949

Canadian Mind · #**150** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 9:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TallBob

A year ago Stats Can showed just under 34 million. What happened? What figures are accurate?

The answer is literally on the first page, and the second, third, fourth, etc. Try giving the thread a read before asking a question that has been answered 5 times already.

Spoolmak · #**151** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 1:42 PM**

Holy, Kamloops and Nanaimo tied at 98,000, while Chilliwack is slowly but surely coming up the rear at 92,000! Chilliwack could surpass Kamloops and Nanaimo in the next couple decades to become BC's 5th largest city!

flar · #**152** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 1:56 PM**

Here's what I'm interested in. Urban area populations (now called Population Centres) and densities:



Geographic name       2011 Pop	Land area	Density (/km2)

Toronto                    5,132,794	1751.5	2930.5

Montréal                   3,407,963	1545.3	2205.4

Vancouver                   2,135,201	1150.4	1856.0

Calgary                     1,095,404	704.5	1554.8

Edmonton                    960,015	855.3	1122.4

Ottawa-Gatineau             933,596	501.9	1860.1

Québec                        696,946	669.39	1041.2

Winnipeg                     671,551	449.8	1492.9

Hamilton                      670,580	370.3	1811.1

Kitchener                     444,681	313.8	1417.0

London                        366,191	221.5	1653.1

Victoria                      316,327	277.1	1141.6

St. Cath-Niagara              309,319	378.7	816.8

Halifax                      297,943	269.3	1106.5

Oshawa                        290,937	164.3	1770.9

Windsor                       276,165	175.8	1571.2

Saskatoon                    222,035	150.1	1479.0

Regina                         192,756	118.9	1620.9

freeweed · #**153** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 3:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

I wonder what the demographic trends are going to look like. I don't know about elsewhere in Canada, but where I am at right now (Petawawa) and where I am originally from (Comox), there is a huge number of 20-somethings producing offspring, if they haven't already got 1 or 2.

It seems as though the "Echo" generation is repeating what their Boomer parents did. I definitely notice more people in their 20s having kids than when I was that age - both in terms of the sheer number of people doing it, but also they seem to be having more children per couple. Us GenXers never were going to be a large demographic bubble, nor did we ever see half the wealth these kids seem to have come into thanks to their parents.

What I'm not sure is if this is a real trend, or if I'm just seeing it through the myopic view of Calgary. This city is absolutely stuffed with affluent 20-somethings right now, all of whom are starting families as a result.

Doug · #**154** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 3:42 PM**

^I think the difference is most Gen Xers in Canada at least lived through two almost back to back recessions in the 80s and 90s while the Ys have never really known hard times. I didn't even think of marriage in my 20s as I was too concerned with keeping a crappy job and paying bills.

Acajack · #**155** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 4:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by freeweed

It seems as though the "Echo" generation is repeating what their Boomer parents did. I definitely notice more people in their 20s having kids than when I was that age - both in terms of the sheer number of people doing it, but also they seem to be having more children per couple. Us GenXers never were going to be a large demographic bubble, nor did we ever see half the wealth these kids seem to have come into thanks to their parents.

What I'm not sure is if this is a real trend, or if I'm just seeing it through the myopic view of Calgary. This city is absolutely stuffed with affluent 20-somethings right now, all of whom are starting families as a result.

It may be due to factors completely different to those in Alberta, but I also notice here in Quebec that people in their 20s and 30s are having more kids than people aged 40-55 did.

People 40-55 seem to mostly have one or two kids, and sometimes none. Whereas with people in their 30s at least, families with three kids are ubiquitous, and sometimes seem close to being a plurality even. They certainly are in my entourage - families with three kids are pretty much the norm and are more numerous than two-child families.

I read an article that said that for women born in the 60s and 70s in Quebec, one in four had no kids, but that staring in the late 70s and up until today the proportion of women without children has been dropping and is now approaching the 15% range.

chrisallard5454 · #**156** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 4:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by freeweed

It seems as though the "Echo" generation is repeating what their Boomer parents did. I definitely notice more people in their 20s having kids than when I was that age - both in terms of the sheer number of people doing it, but also they seem to be having more children per couple. Us GenXers never were going to be a large demographic bubble, nor did we ever see half the wealth these kids seem to have come into thanks to their parents.

What I'm not sure is if this is a real trend, or if I'm just seeing it through the myopic view of Calgary. This city is absolutely stuffed with affluent 20-somethings right now, all of whom are starting families as a result.

Seeing it in Winnipeg, and Southwestern Ontario as well. Anywhere from late 20's to mid 30's are popping out children like candy.

chrisallard5454 · #**157** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 4:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acajack

It may be due to factors completely different to those in Alberta, but I also notice here in Quebec that people in their 20s and 30s are having more kids than people aged 40-55 did.

People 40-55 seem to mostly have one or two kids, and sometimes none. Whereas with people in their 30s at least, families with three kids are ubiquitous, and sometimes seem close to being a plurality even. They certainly are in my entourage - families with three kids are pretty much the norm and are more numerous than two-child families.

I read an article that said that for women born in the 60s and 70s in Quebec, one in four had no kids, but that staring in the late 70s and up until today the proportion of women without children has been dropping and is now approaching the 15% range.

This is a good thing though right? Isn't everyone concerned about a lack of population being able to support the country once the boomers retire... If they ever do?

MonkeyRonin · #**158** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 4:31 PM**

Interesting, I know of almost no 20-somethings that have actually planned to have a baby. A few that have had "accidents", but thats it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by flar

Here's what I'm interested in. Urban area populations (now called Population Centres) and densities:

Its good to see that density is increasing in every metro area.

Acajack · #**159** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 4:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

This is a good thing though right? Isn't everyone concerned about a lack of population being able to support the country once the boomers retire... If they ever do?

For a country like Canada, this is an excellent trend. If we were Bangladesh or Nigeria, not so much...

eemy · #**160** Posted **Feb 9, 2012, 4:46 PM**

I thought I would expand on flar's post by showing all of the population centres within each of the six largest CMAs and then the total population and density when they are all combined. It gives a slightly more regional perspective and compensates for some peculiarities when just looking at the population centre data (Kanata being a separate centre from Ottawa, for examples).



Geographic name			2011 Pop	Area	Density



Toronto				5,132,794	1751.5	2930.5

  Milton			   75,573	  32.1	2356.5

  Georgetown			   40,150	  23.1	1736.6

  Orangeville			   30,729	  31.2	 986.2

  Bolton			   25,954	  11.2	2327.7

  Keswick - Elmhurst Beach	   25,527	  20.0	1274.4

  Stouffville			   24,886	  14.9	1673.6

  Bradford			   22,378	  12.2	1841.8

  Alliston			   15,379	  16.9	 910.0

  Uxbridge			   11,531	  19.4	 594.7

  Other (10)			   39,154	  63.9	 612.6

  Total				5,444,055	1996.2	2727.2



Montréal			3,407,963	1545.3	2205.4

  Chateauguay			   70,812	  94.4	 774.4

  Saint-Jerome			   65,825	  55.5	1185.6

  Beloeil			   50,796	  47.6	1067.6

  Salaberry-de-Valleyfield	   39,391	  10.1	3892.4

  Hudson			   21,091	  37.0	 569.4

  Varennes			   19,458	   6.7	2886.9

  Les Coteaux			   15,847	  21.2	 747.5

  L'Assomption			   14,113	   6.0	2356.1

  Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines	   10,890	   3.8	2850.8

  Lavaltrie			   10,436	   7.1	1467.8

  Other (8)			   30,932	  42.0	 736.7

  Total				3,757,554	1873.9	2005.3



Vancouver			2,135,201	1150.4	1856.0

  White Rock			   82,368	  46.0	1790.6

  Walnut Grove			   27,969	  17.8	1567.8

  Aldergrove			   12,778	  15.4	 829.7

  Other (2)			    2,431	   4.1	 592.9

  Total				2,260,747	1233.8	1832.4



Calgary				1,095,404	 704.5	1554.8

  Airdrie			   42,564	  33.1	1285.9

  Cochrane			   16,841	  19.6	 861.4

  Chestermere			   14,363	   8.9	1612.0

  Other (3)			    7,418	  17.0	 436.6

  Total				1,176,590	 783.1	1502.6



Edmonton			  960,015	 855.3	1122.4

  Spruce Grove			   27,947	  22.4	1247.1

  Leduc				   24,279	  37.0	 656.7

  Stony Plain			   13,882	  17.6	 787.9

  Beaumont			   13,284	  10.5	1265.1

  Other (6)			   24,742	  55.8	 443.8

  Total				1,064,149	 998.6	1065.7



Ottawa-Gatineau			  933,596	 501.9	1860.1

  Kanata			  101,760	  49.6	2052.0

  Buckingham			   23,589	  31.7	 743.2

  Rockland			   11,099	   8.1  1375.3

  Other (8)			   23,390	  30.8   760.4

  Total				1,093,434	 622.1	1757.8