Census 2011 Results:

[vid]

The reason we use Statscan numbers instead of municipal or provincial counts is because Statscan's numbers are derived from a uniform methodology that applies to the entire country.

StatsCan's census numbers count students as residents of their home town.
Alberta municipal censuses count students as residents of the community where they're studying.
Thunder Bay's municipal "census" only counted voting-age people living within city limits for at least 6 months, and I don't think we've even conducted one since 2005.
First Nations censuses count people who are members of the band but not living on the reserve, and do so monthly.

StatsCans census numbers are the only numbers that give us the ability to make a reasonably fair comparison between all communities in the country. No other organization provides as much data with as uniform a method. That is why we prefer it.

StatCan estimates are more accurate in that instead of simply counting people and hoping they all respond, they look at a wide variety of factors, like employment, housing, births, deaths and immigration, on a regular basis, and make very educated guesses. However, they use a baseline based on the previous census. When the 2012 estimates are released, they'll be based on six year old data from the 2006 census. We've only been using the 2006 census as a baseline for estimates since 2010!

Originally Posted by dennis1

They change their Metro Data in the US. The Standards for last years census are not the same as in 1990. Canada can do this. Or is Statistics Canada lazy?

Statistics Canada actually did change the formula for CMAs this year. Their goals of accurate representations of the relationships between municipalities within our economy is a lot different from our personal desire to see the cities we like have higher numbers than the cities we don't like as much.

[eemy]

Wikipedia uses the census counts for a number reasons: it's easier to keep pages up to date, and population estimates aren't provided for all geographic units. The population estimates are provided by Statistics Canada and are official government figures. You can find the latest results at http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo05a-eng.htm.

You seem to be under the impression that these estimates are just random figures that people pull out of the air. The population estimates are just as official as the census counts. I don't see how this is so ambiguous to you. Did you actually read the Statistics Canada note re: estimates vs. census counts?

[dennis1]

SC also has economic regions now.

[Razor]

Okay seen the estimates link..But what figures are "gospel"?..I'm more apt to think that the physical count, followed by the under count adjustement next year are the ones that people should go by..Not the 2010 estimates.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by Razor

Okay seen the estimates link..But what figures are "gospel"?..I'm more apt to think that the physical count, followed by the under count adjustement next year are the ones that people should go by..Not the 2010 estimates.

Statistics Canada says themselves in the link, for the purpose of population counts, the estimates are more accurate. I guess you can go by your own hunch, but I'll stick with the experts.

[vid]

Originally Posted by dennis1

SC also has economic regions now.

Statistics Canada has had economic regions for years. The only difference is that they now appear in search results when you look up community profiles.

Originally Posted by Razor

Okay seen the estimates link..But what figures are "gospel"?..I'm more apt to think that the physical count, followed by the under count adjustement next year are the ones that people should go by..Not the 2010 estimates.

Both figures are "gospel". Estimates are more accurate, but the census numbers have the most coverage. There are no census estimates for Indian Reserves, economic regions or census designated places, etc., so if we want to compare all of these things, which is what Wikipedia, our diagram system and other websites all do both directly and indirectly, we use the census numbers instead of the estimates.

The 2010 estimates are based on the 2006 census and its undercount correction, while also taking into account a wide variety of factors that affect population, and that is what makes them more accurate. It isn't simply a count based on how many respond to a survey. But these estimates are only done for the country, the provinces and territories, and the CMAs. They don't work when you want to compare any other level of data.

Until yesterday when I manually updated every city page, we had population data ranging from 2001 to 2010 from sources as diverse as Statistics Canada, municipal governments and "road signs". You can't compare those numbers as easily as you can when all of the numbers come from the same source, the same methodology.

[dennis1]

Originally Posted by vid

Statistics Canada has had economic regions for years. The only difference is that they now appear in search results when you look up community profiles.

How do you get a break down on what municipalities are in the economic regions.

[SteelTown]

Would it be possible if Haldimand County would ever be included to Hamilton's CMA?

Caledonia and Nanticoke is strongly linked with Hamilton.

[dennis1]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Would it be possible if Haldimand County would ever be included to Hamilton's CMA?

Caledonia and Nanticoke is strongly linked with Hamilton.

CMAs cannot change apparantly.

[SteelTown]

I know once incorporated into a CMA it can't change but I'm sure counties can be included into a CMA. Is Haldimand County already included in another CMA?

[Razor]

Okay then the way I see it.."The world according to me"..Once wikipedia changes then, I'll change. They seem to mirror whatever Stats Can holds as the official figures.

Metropolitan areas in order of Population:

1- Toronto
2- Montreal
3-Vancouver
4-Ottawa/Gatineau
5-Calgary
6-Edmonton
7-Q.C
8-Winnipeg
9- Hamilton
10-KW

[eemy]

Originally Posted by dennis1

How do you get a break down on what municipalities are in the economic regions.

If you use the Geosearch feature on the Statcan website, you can view an overlay of various boundaries, including ERs and CSDs.
GeoSearch

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Would it be possible if Haldimand County would ever be included to Hamilton's CMA?

Caledonia and Nanticoke is strongly linked with Hamilton.

Right now, it is 36% to Hamilton under the forward-commuting rule, and 9% from Hamilton under the reverse-commuting rule. It would need either 50% or 25% respectively. Interestingly, Haldimand looks like it is quite literally right on the cusp of being a CA in its own right - the population for Caledonia is 9999, 1 short of the requirement for the core of a CA. If it were to become a CA, it would seem to qualify for being a part of Hamilton based on the 35% combined rule for merging a CMA and CA. That would add almost an additional 50000 to Hamilton.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by Razor

Okay then the way I see it.."The world according to me"..Once wikipedia changes then, I'll change. They seem to mirror whatever Stats Can holds as the official figures.

Metropolitan areas in order of Population:

1- Toronto
2- Montreal
3-Vancouver
4-Ottawa/Gatineau
5-Calgary
6-Edmonton
7-Q.C
8-Winnipeg
9- Hamilton
10-KW

This is funny, because I'm the one who edited that page.

There are three primary reasons wikipedia uses the figures they do.

• to have consistent data across all geographic units (municipalities, provinces, CMAs etc)
• other figures such as ethnicity, income etc. are only comparable with the census figures
• it would be challenging to keep wikipedia current with estimates which are updated as frequently as every quarter

Finally, wikipedia is hardly a better authority than Statistics Canada.

[haljackey]

Census numbers are hard figures.

Estimates are soft figures.

Simple as that.

[vid]

Originally Posted by dennis1

CMAs cannot change apparantly.

Municipalities can be added, but not taken away, and CMAs cannot merge, but CAs can merge with each other or be added to CMAs.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by haljackey

Census numbers are hard figures.

Estimates are soft figures.

Simple as that.

I think the language is maybe a bit misleading. The fact is that the census numbers are an estimate as well, because we know that we don't count every person.

[Razor]

All this circular talking..Without being wishy washy,Jeremy please list here what the ten metro areas in Canada are in order of ranking by population.

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

Right now, it is 36% to Hamilton under the forward-commuting rule, and 9% from Hamilton under the reverse-commuting rule. It would need either 50% or 25% respectively. Interestingly, Haldimand looks like it is quite literally right on the cusp of being a CA in its own right - the population for Caledonia is 9999, 1 short of the requirement for the core of a CA. If it were to become a CA, it would seem to qualify for being a part of Hamilton based on the 35% combined rule for merging a CMA and CA. That would add almost an additional 50000 to Hamilton.

Thank you for the explanation. So I guess next time Haldimand will be included in Hamilton's CMA. If Caledonia was 10000 than Hamilton would be above both Quebec City and Winnipeg.

[vid]

Yes, that's just how subjective the whole comparison thing can be. If a little town had one more person on May 16th, 2011, Hamilton would be 50,000 people larger than it is now! Likewise, if the area north of Thunder Bay was a municipality, we'd have more people without actually having more people.

Originally Posted by Razor

All this circular talking..Without being wishy washy,Jeremy please list here what the ten metro areas in Canada are in order of ranking by population.

There is no absolute ranking. Where the lines are drawn, what counts and doesn't count, the currency of the data and how comprehensive it is are all subjective things.

Ten largest CMAs according to the 2011 census:

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recen...205&S=3&RPP=50

Toronto
Montreal
Vancouver
Ottawa-Gatineau
Calgary
Edmonton
Québec
Winnipeg
Hamilton
Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo



Ten largest CMAs according to the most recent estimate (June 2010, based on 2006 census data and other factors)

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91-214-...0/t021-eng.htm

Toronto
Montreal
Vancouver
Calgary
Ottawa-Gatineau
Edmonton
Quebec
Winnipeg
Hamilton
Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo

[lake of the nations]

I think the list I did in the other thread could be appreciated here.

01. Toronto: 5,583,064 (+469,915)
02. Montréal: 3,824,221 (+188,665)
03. Vancouver: 2,313,328 (+196,747)
04. Ottawa: 1,236,324 (+102,691)
05. Calgary: 1,214,839 (+135,529)
06. Edmonton: 1,159,869 (+124,924)
07. Ville de Québec: 765,706 (+46,553)
08. Winnipeg: 730,018 (+30,655)
09. Hamilton: 721,053 (+28,142)
10. Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo: 477,160 (+25,925)
11. London: 474,786 (+17,066)
12. St. Catharines–Niagara: 392,184 (+1,867)
13. Halifax: 390,328 (+17,470)
14. Oshawa: 356,177 (+25,583)
15. Victoria: 344,615 (+14,527)
16. Windsor: 319,246 (-4,096)
17. Saskatoon: 260,600 (+26,677)
18. Regina: 210,556 (+15,585)
19. Sherbrooke: 201,890 (+10,480)
20. St. John's: 196,966 (+15,853)
21. Barrie: 187,013 (+9,952)
22. Kelowna: 179,839 (+17,563)
23. Abbotsford-Mission: 170,191 (+11,171)
24. Greater Sudbury: 160,770 (+2,512)
25. Kingston: 159,561 (+7,203)
26. Saguenay: 157,790 (+1,485)
27. Trois-Rivières: 151,773 (+7,060)
28. Guelph: 141,097 (+7,399)
29. Moncton: 138,644 (+12,220)
30. Brantford: 135,501 (+10,894)
31. Saint John: 127,761 (+5372)
32. Thunder Bay: 121,596 (-1,311)
33. Peterborough: 118,975 (+2,405)
34. Lethbridge*: 105,999 (+10,803)
35. Chatham-Kent*: 104,075 (-4,514)

*CA