![]() |
![]() |
|||
|
||||
|
Aug. 01, 2008
Town population is down againPVT
The population of Pahrump declined for the second straight quarter, according to estimates by the Nye County Planning Department. Pahrump experienced its first quarterly drop in population since Nye County planners began their calculations during the first quarter of 2008. They estimated the Pahrump population dropped from a high of 38,859 to 38,817 people, a loss of 42 people, or 0.1 percent. For the second quarter, Nye County planners estimate Pahrump's population dropped to 38,798, for the loss of another 19 residents. For Nye County as a whole, planners estimate the county population dropped by a similar amount, from 46,773 residents to 46,755, a loss of 18 residents. That follows a drop in county population from 46,850 in the first quarter of 2008. Pahrump forms 83 percent of the Nye County population. Tonopah continued to decline, with a 0.6 percent drop in population, losing 16 residents during the second quarter, from 2,903 residents to 2,887. At the end of 2007, planners estimated Tonopah had 2,911 residents. Beatty had 1,050 residents as of June 30, two fewer than at the end of the first quarter. One of the only places to gain population was Amargosa Valley. Planners estimate 14 more people lived there after the second quarter, raising the population from 1,393 to 1,407. Gabbs picked up six more residents, with a population of 392 people. The population of Smoky Valley stayed the same at 1,765 people, planners estimate. Reese River Valley in far Northern Nye County lost three people, dropping to 114 residents. The Nye County Planning Department uses the number of residential accounts by electrical utilities multiplied by the average number of residents per household as determined in the 2000 census. People living in group quarters, like nursing homes and detention facilities, are estimated using a trending factor that is checked annually through telephone interviews. Nye County uses the population figures to monitor baseline conditions for the Yucca Mountain project, to compare with other estimates, as well as for public and private agency planning and management. |
|