Home > Humboldt County > HUMBOLDT COUNTY: Population 134,623

HUMBOLDT COUNTY: Population 134,623

The 2010 census results are out and show Humboldt County added 8,105 residents since 2000, growing by 6.4%.

Here’s the breakdown by city:

Eureka grew 4.1% from 26,128 to 27,191.
Arcata grew 3.5% from 16,651 to 17,231.
Trinidad grew 18.0% from 311 to 367.
Fortuna grew 13.6% from 10,497 to 11,926.
Blue Lake grew 10.4% from 1,135 to 1,253.
Rio Dell grew 6.1% from 3,174 to 3,368.
Ferndale decreased -0.8% from 1,382 to 1,371.

  1. March 10, 2011 at 2:15 am

    Ah, straight up facts and numbers, right up my alley. Hooray!

    Nobody would ever post some inane politically-slated comment on this story.


  2. Mitch
    March 10, 2011 at 6:38 am

    Must…. resist….. temptation.

  3. Ponder z
    March 10, 2011 at 6:39 am

    lots of people left for real jobs outside HUMCO. And dope growers form all over America and Mexico have moved in to take their place. (We dont count the mex). They are the ones hiding in the woods with the ATF lost ak47s.

  4. Decline to State
    March 10, 2011 at 7:00 am

    Trinidad Wins!!! No wait, maybe Ferndale wins.

  5. Norah
    March 10, 2011 at 8:24 am

    What about SoHum?

  6. March 10, 2011 at 8:26 am

    Growth rates were only available for incorporated cities.

  7. March 10, 2011 at 8:36 am

    Thank God Garberville’s not in Humboldt County!

  8. March 10, 2011 at 8:38 am

    That comment is awesome Ernie!

  9. March 10, 2011 at 8:39 am

    I’ve been told that Southern Humboldt pays 80% of the bed tax collected by the county, the rest of the bed tax goes to the incorporated cities.

  10. High Finance
    March 10, 2011 at 8:40 am

    8105 new residents in 10 years.

    That equates to something like 4,000 new housing units or about 400 housing units needed per year.

    And that is just in the incorporated areas of the county.

  11. Eric Kirk
    March 10, 2011 at 8:58 am

    So much for the “growth won’t happen here” argument.

  12. Fence
    March 10, 2011 at 8:59 am

    So, over the next 30 years we will need 12,000 units. Therefore, everyone making a stink about Ridgewood village are greedy homeowners who want to profit from a decreased supply of houses. I get it now Pritchard your selfish and greedy, see times standard article yesterday.

  13. Anonymous
    March 10, 2011 at 9:17 am

    I was at the first Ridgewood Village meeting years ago. I remember the speaker saying something to the effect of, “It’s a fact. These people have to live somewhere,” and the audience nearly lynched him. Near the end of the meeting, the community forest was mentioned and this one hippie chick in a sea of Republicans got this confused look on her face because she’d totally bought into the NIMBY fear mongering.

  14. Squirrel alarmist
    March 10, 2011 at 9:23 am

    134,000 people living in 1,500,000 acres of county land.
    1 person per 100 acres… ze people are over-running ze land…. ve must herd zem into ze cities!

  15. Bed Tax Data
    March 10, 2011 at 9:35 am

    The entire unincorporated area accounts for approximately 24% of the bed tax collected in all of Humboldt County. Eureka accounts for 44%

  16. March 10, 2011 at 9:48 am

    And Boomers are just NOW starting to retire. Expect a larger population increase over the next ten years. As to our economy, it was said in yesterdays TS that had we still been primarily timber dependent, our economy would have taken a bigger hit during this recession, but with the decline of timber our economy has become more diversified. Of course retired Boomers don’t need jobs, since they are retired, but they will contribute to the local economy, more so if the businesses where they spend their money are locally owned.

  17. longwind
    March 10, 2011 at 9:52 am

    I think what Ernie meant is that SoHum provides 80 percent of the bed tax raised from unincorporated Humboldt, about $600,000 a year last I saw a couple years back.

    Eureka’s population grew over the last 10 years, fell the last couple of years.

    Does anyone know how to create figures for the McKinleyville and Garberville Community Services Districts? All we need is a non-existent key to census districts, perhaps on a usable county web site? Does anyone do fed sites?

    March 10, 2011 at 9:57 am

    Urban to rural when fear based emmigration exists due to partly those high societal costs and rip-offs while living in the hustle and bustle areas of metropolises. This is why the concepts by “infillest retoric” that only displaces those who could NEVER CO-EXIST in such higher density locations. Hmmmm, but the Family Court Division of law sure loves the workloads created by nuisances and adverse family generated impacts. More money being swindled over to the system when forcing people to live under constraints.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  19. Anonymous
    March 10, 2011 at 10:04 am

    TOT Fiscal Year Ending 6/30/10
    Arcata 870,708

  20. March 10, 2011 at 10:07 am

    TOT (Bed Tax) Fiscal Year ending 6/30/10
    Arcata, 870,708
    Eureka, 2,032,584
    Ferndale, 75,038
    Fortuna, 443,975
    Rio Dell, 10,414
    Trinidad, 69,758
    County, 1,093,382

  21. longwind
    March 10, 2011 at 10:32 am

    Thanks, Tony. No doubt your county figure of $1.1 million is for unincorporated areas, including G’ville, which could provide 80 percent of the total.

  22. Ecnomics 101
    March 10, 2011 at 10:42 am

    ¨High Finance says:
    March 10, 2011 at 8:40 am
    8105 new residents in 10 years.

    That equates to something like 4,000 new housing units or about 400 housing units needed per year.¨

    Low Class Finance, you have proven over and over again that you don´t understand remedial economics. Perhaps it was the sun stroke you suffered in Palm Springs, I don´t know. I wish you a speedy recovery.

    High Finance says:
    March 8, 2011 at 12:06 pm
    ¨…You could NOT be further from the truth. Our progressive income tax system does NOT “concentrate the wealth at the top”, it does the exact OPPOSITE.¨

  23. High Finance
    March 10, 2011 at 10:45 am

    What a waste of space your post took Ecno.

    Other than an insult do you have anything to say ? Like where my facts are wrong ?

  24. Palmed Springs
    March 10, 2011 at 10:47 am

    trouble is HiFinance when you say 400 housing units you don’t mean 400 studio or 1 bedroom apartments or even 400 one or two bedroom homes you mean 400 mcmansions with 4 or 5 bedrooms on postage stamp lots

    they will be slums within 30 years

  25. Economics 101
    March 10, 2011 at 10:47 am

    High Finance says:
    March 8, 2011 at 12:06 pm
    …You could NOT be further from the truth. Our progressive income tax system does NOT “concentrate the wealth at the top”, it does the exact OPPOSITE.¨

    Any person who thinks wealth is concentrated at the botom (the opposite of the top) needs to shut down their computer, get on the ¨short¨ bus, and first learn the difference between ¨top¨ and ¨bottom¨, ¨40¨ and ¨30¨, and then move on to learning the powers of observation. i.e. ¨Is wealth really concentrated at the opposite of the top of society?¨

  26. Anonymous
    March 10, 2011 at 10:47 am

    Mitch @ 6:38am,
    Hilarious. Thanks.

  27. Random Guy
    March 10, 2011 at 10:56 am

    Why are some of you equating the population growth with a need for more infrastructure???

    Not a rhetorical question…

  28. High Finance
    March 10, 2011 at 11:02 am

    “Economics” should turn in his avatar in shame. I cannot believe that you pay attention to anything posted here.

    I did not say wealth is concentrated at the bottom. I never said that wealth is not concentrated at the top. Your comprehension skills are sorely lacking.

    What I DID say is that our progressive tax system is a wealth distribution system. It does take wealth from the top and it does give it to the bottom. You can argue that it doesn’t go far enough or that it goes too far. But it is pointless to try and assert that it doesn’t.

    To say that it doesn’t redistribute wealth tells us that you haven’t even the foggiest idea of how the tax system works.

    I suggest your new avatar be named “Clueless”.

  29. anadromous
    March 10, 2011 at 11:09 am

    Based on the actual numbers showing that the county is indeed growing in population, the question is how and where do we accommodate current and future growth?

    And given the aging population (and the issue that Richard raised of retiring boomers) coupled with the fact that gas prices will keep rising, we might want to think about building homes that will be closer to stores, schools and public transportation rather than spreading development out like what has happened around Fortuna, Eureka and McKinleyville.

    We can make our urban areas better while preserving farms, forests and opportunities for those living a truly rural lifestyle.

  30. Random Guy
    March 10, 2011 at 11:09 am

    High Finance, if manual labor is the natural resource everybody’s talking about…that is the actual amount of free time an individual has to enjoy their limited existence on this planet…then the wealth is being funneled upward, just like everybody’s been saying since the system was invented.

  31. Random Guy
    March 10, 2011 at 11:12 am

    anadromous, we don’t need to accomodate anything but making what’s already here better for everybody who’s already here. Accomodating the population growth is what did in the forests and the water supply etc. They’re not gonna build anymore shopping malls or apartments in beverly hills…we deserve just as much comfort of living. Humboldt’s geography is prime for making this place a redwood paradise, not just another city on the california coast.

  32. skippy
    March 10, 2011 at 11:28 am

    In related ‘Humboldt County Population’ and Times-Standardnews today Eureka City Councilmember Lance Madsen speaking to the Humboldt County Taxpayer’s League “wants in on Ridgewood Village discussions,” as noted by recent reporter Ahron Sherman’s article
    that can be quickly found here.

    …While 9 year veteran Humboldt County Senior Planner Martha Spencer weighs in with informed opinion correcting the General Plan Update record with the opening salvo:

    As you may recall, I submitted a My Word piece just over a year ago aiming to correct misinformation that was circulated by a local property rights group about the process of updating the county’s General Plan and the nature of the proposed policies.

    Recent public testimony before both the Humboldt County Planning Commission and the Eureka City Council included considerable misinformation about the process that again calls to be corrected publicly…

    The rest of Martha Spencer’s My Word piece, Good Decisions Can Only Be made With Accurate Information can easily be located here.

  33. 69er
    March 10, 2011 at 11:36 am

    1950 Eureka population was 22,962, 1954 estimated population 26,000 as per Polk’s Eureka City Directory. This doesn’t look like too much growth for the city. Of course you need to account for the surrounding growth and the reluctance to actually be a part of the city due to politics I am sure. Come on Eureka give us a reason to be. It would be the best for all concerned if this could be accomplished, think of all the money saved by eliminating duplications of agencies.

  34. Random Guy
    March 10, 2011 at 11:50 am

    69er, I’m with you on cutting back senseless duplications of agencies, but locally there’s enough difference in how surrounding area’s are (should be) governed.

    Asking for incorporation is one of those “be careful what you wish for” things…as far as teh state and federal governments are concerned (and many local developers), the entire coastal plain from rio del to trinidad could “accomodate growth” until it looked like San Jose or Vallejo or Richmond or…pick pretty much any 50 mile stretch of urban coast. Paved to death, three stories tall everywhere, homogenous and no longer capable of being what Humboldt is and could become.

    Again, why are some of you equating population growth with a need for more infrastructure?

  35. High Finance
    March 10, 2011 at 11:56 am

    Random Guy, then according to your post at 11.09am, the richest guy in town is the bum outside the St Vincent Dining Hall at noon !

  36. Random Guy
    March 10, 2011 at 12:00 pm

    Is that really how you translate what I wrote, High Finance?

  37. Hern Shadenfreude
    March 10, 2011 at 1:11 pm

    Squirrel alarmist says:
    March 10, 2011 at 9:23 am

    “134,000 people living in 1,500,000 acres of county land.
    1 person per 100 acres… ze people are over-running ze land…. ve must herd zem into ze cities”!


    Ve have already built ze cities beyond capacity vith additional moratoriums comink deeshpite ze silly protests.

    Ve vill tell you ven ve are vinished harvesting your infrastructure!

    Only zin Ve Vill leave! Ve made verk-kamps for our poor, And you vant us to build them affordable housing?

    Ache De Liber!


  38. Migh Finances
    March 10, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    If the worthless bums outside St. Vincent’s worked hard enough, they too could fill their trash bags full of loot from the U.S. Treasury!

    With my bigoted blinders, leisure and homelessness are identical.

  39. longwind
    March 10, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    skippy, thanks for the reference info. I’m sorry to say Martha Spenser isn’t correcting anything, but repeating misleading information. When Martha says “They seem to believe the public input on the GPU from the 185 community meetings and 72 Planning Commission meetings held over the past 12 years should be ignored,” what *she* ignores is that only views in accord with those of Humboldt’s permanent government were invited, accepted or acted upon from any of those many pointless meetings.

    As I and others have described here and elsewhere, predeterminations were made about policy options before the public heard a word, more than 185 meetings ago. At the Samoa Cook House Forestry session where most of us had our first General Plan Update experience in 2000, the vast majority of more than 100 people present were quite vocally upset to learn that the county didn’t care what we wanted, because it was different from what they had already decided on (Plan A, without a name yet).

    On a related wrong track, Martha also asserts that it was legal for the county to throw out the entire public participation component of our current General Plan, which was done without public process, though that was specifically illegal.

    Yes, the Planning Department did get the Board of Supervisors to illegally erase pages of language that mandated working with the public. That didn’t make it legal for county staff to violate our county Constitution, it simply made the Board of Supervisors complicit in violating it.

    With this in mind we can follow discussion of public participation in the weeks ahead. As usual, there’s a whole different story that what we read, and more and more people know it.

    If anyone really wants the backstory without BS, the good citizens who actually wrote the book on public participation, and have been on this issue for 30+ years, are Dan Taranto and Peter Childs. They’re in the phone book.

  40. Taxpayer
    March 10, 2011 at 1:38 pm

    Thanks for the link Skippy, I was at that Humb. Taxpayer’s League meeting, as usual, the TS will not connect any dots.

    A woman asked why the GP process was taking so long…Madsen said NOTHING about having voted to delay it further, JUST LAST WEEK!

    A man asked why city representatives don’t bother attending ANY of the GP hearings or element workshops, Madsen replied that it’s of no use, since “they tend to conduct business throughout these events and you can’t be heard”. (Spoken by someone NEVER in attendance!!!).

    Another question concerned the Eureka Community Plan that the Ridgewood developers are following TO THE LETTER.
    Madsen said NOTHING about his involvement with this document as a city councilman 1990-1998, except that they “REALLY NEED A PLAN NOW”. No comment on any details of that plan.

    So far, the good old boys interests were being served, to hell with infrastructure limitations!

    Some outside whippersnappers are mistaken to think they’re gonna come in here and do the same!

  41. TimH
    March 10, 2011 at 1:50 pm

    what are the birth and death rates for the county? it would be interesting to know how much of the growth is the birth – death rate.

  42. the hat
    March 10, 2011 at 2:07 pm

    Why didn’t any local news source have anything to say about this? Are they awake?

  43. Taxpayer
    March 10, 2011 at 2:32 pm

    The local news sources are wary to publish ANYTHING that might reveal “business as usual” by the local development community, and one of the largest ad-revenue sources remaining.

  44. Not A Native
    March 10, 2011 at 3:17 pm

    HumCo death rate is about 950 per 100,000 So around 1200 a year die here.

    The birth records show about 1500 a year.

    So, my estimate is that annually 300 more people are being born here than die here. But why does that number matter unless you’re xenophobic?

    It doesn’t mean those births/deaths are among some more worthy “local people” in the sense that TimH is likely interested in. A tourist in a car crash is a death and a birthing woman who came to be near her family is a birth. A more interesting statistic IMO is the numbers of people who move into and move out of HumCo, people who are ‘voting’ with their feet.

  45. taxed
    March 10, 2011 at 3:41 pm

    While the population has remained pretty much the same in Eureka the people that inhabit the city have changed. For instance more working people have left and more dependent people have moved in.

  46. kale estanoche
    March 10, 2011 at 4:08 pm

    I disagree with your “statistics”. From my observation, it has been the opposite. Seems that there is an increase in younger working folks moving to Eureka due to housing prices that are more affordable than elsewhere.

    As for “dependent people”… dependency is a result of a failed economic system that ships jobs overseas for the sake of a measly buck.

    This is the same system that gives handouts to oil executives and industrial ag, while people’s pensions are robbed and collective bargaining rights are taken away.

    This is the same system that operates on the notion of infinite growth without immediate regard for the fact that we live on a finite world with limited resources.

  47. taxed
    March 10, 2011 at 4:14 pm

    Part of it is that we have made welfare a growth industry. I do agree with your last two paragraphs, kale.

  48. eurekite
    March 10, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    Can anyone find a reliable statistic on the population of the Eureka AREA? Obviously most of the outlying areas around the very tight city boundaries are part of the city in all but name. Myrtletown/Cutten/Humboldt Hill and thereabouts being the natural areas to include of course.

  49. kale estanoche
    March 10, 2011 at 4:47 pm

    A question on the census numbers: Does the 6.4% growth rate relate only to the incorporated areas? If so, are there figures for the County as a whole?

  50. TimH
    March 10, 2011 at 5:05 pm

    Not a Native, I am not a xenophobe. Your comment is odd. How could you possibly know why I would find a particular piece of data interesting?

    I was just curious about the same thing you are, how many people moved here vs. moved out? Is that a number that is tracked or do we use your estimate of around a net of 5100 people moved here than moved away in that 10 year period?

  51. March 10, 2011 at 5:22 pm

    The 6.4% figure is for the whole county.

  52. Anonymous
    March 10, 2011 at 5:25 pm

    My neighbor moved here and bought a house, then sold her house and moved. She got tired of the huge percentage of white trash criminals and drug dealers. That was a few years ago. Unfortunate because the town lost a great family. If they had just hung there a little longer things changed for the better. It improved in the neighborhood when the new Police Chief got here. He is cleaning house on the low life human trash. Our neighborhood is peaceful and quiet now.

  53. Sam Spade a.k.a. Economics 101
    March 10, 2011 at 5:48 pm

    High Finance says:
    March 10, 2011 at 11:02 am

    I never said that wealth is not concentrated at the top.

    High Finance says:
    March 8, 2011 at 12:06 pm
    …You could NOT be further from the truth. Our progressive income tax system does NOT “concentrate the wealth at the top”, it does the exact OPPOSITE.¨

    Okay ¨Hi Finance¨, all half jokes aside. I attended private conservative schools K-12, then I acquired a college degree. Then I worked in the finance industry for nearly ten years. In December 2005 I composed an analysis regarding the coming RE bubble based on something I learned in Banking 101, that is ¨Rate = Risk¨. Hard working people with good credit, two years stable income documentation, and a down payment were receiving about a fixed rate six percent home loan then. People with lousy credit, less than stable income history (or undocumented history), and little or no down payment were obtaining ARM loans with introductory teaser rates which would be adjusting upward in three to five years. The nut of my analysis was ¨rate does not equal the risk here, we are flooding the market with money, prices will temporarily skyrocket, then the bubble will burst, foreclosures will ensue, and prices will fall.¨ Period. I called it. And I am only a smart fifth grader. But the chain upward from me was a bunch of greedy bastards who cared more about immediate profits than America´s economy. You, my friend, remind me exactly of those greedy bastards. Worse, you try to present yourself on this blog as some sort of Professor of economics. But I know that you and lots of those scumbags on Wall Street care much more about your personal profits than the American economy. You shamelessly boast of buying repos and benefiting from the near bankruptcy of America AND from the misfortune of you fellow Americans who bought into the greatest scam since snake oil. So I half tease you because you are low hanging fruit and I half chastise you because you are a part of the park of wolves whose so called ¨economics¨ have nearly bankrupted America.

    So let me be clear. You, Sir, are a charlatan and I think setting America up for misfortune thorough sub-moronic lending policies and THEN profiting from said misfortune is absolutely despicable. I only wish I could meet you and I could look you in the eyes and tell you what a miserable scoundrel you are. You and your ilk did to America what external enemies could not do, nearly bankrupt America.

  54. skippy
    March 10, 2011 at 6:13 pm

    Thank you for your insight at 1:18, Longwind, and relating the rest of the corrected story, in addition to Taxpayer’s 1:38 comments of attending the recent League meeting noting the lack of Eureka City’s involvement with the General Plan Update, Housing Element, and the Ridgewood Village plans. The firsthand information you both imparted is rarely, if ever, covered in the news and is important.

    A reminder note for a few reading the stats of population growth (or loss, as in Ferndale’s case; Ernie also wryly noted Garberville falling off the face of our chart seemingly into a puff of smoke): the population rates and overall County growth of 6.4%, as Heraldo noted, is over a 10 year Census period, from 2000-2010, and not annually.

    Yours truly also appreciated Anonymous’ @5:25, not usually hearing positive remarks regarding law enforcement or Police Chiefs when crime is prevalent. Thank you. What neighborhood or city would that be, Anonymous?

  55. March 10, 2011 at 6:13 pm

    We could all probably agree that those numbers are only going to increase more dramatically with each new Census.

    Hi Finance…I don’t agree (of course) that you can equate leisure with homelessness. I see leisure as a time to contemplate one’s work, and it’s usually something to be enjoyed. Here’s another idea from wikipedia….

    “A distinction may also be drawn between free time and leisure. For example, criticism of consumer capitalism by ‘Situationist International’ maintains that free time is illusory and rarely free; economic and social forces appropriate free time from the individual and sell it back to them as the commodity known as ‘leisure’.”

    See High? Even with free time the homeless can’t afford “leisure.”

  56. Not A Native
    March 10, 2011 at 6:15 pm

    TimH, Sorry, the reason I guessed you’re xenophobic is I thought you wanted to know WHERE the people living here now were born, as if it matters. Well, it doesn’t and why should it?

    As far as the number of people moving in and out, that isn’t tracked because its unfettered. The number I calculated isn’t any good for that purpose. People in the US have freedom to move without needing any kind of official permission and the census counts only where they are right now.

    I expect a much much larger number of people are circulating through here than the net gains/losses. But I have no numbers. I think a lot could be learned about what this place is and what makes it that way by knowing their motivations for coming and going.

  57. retired guy
    March 10, 2011 at 8:52 pm

    5:48 post. You are so right on re: HF, but maybe a tad too generous. The guy has had his head up his ass for a very long time.I sometimes can’t believe some of the prattle that he writes. It’s almost like he writes this stuff just to get progressives to respond. If that is his intention, he is truly successful. If he really believes this shit, he is a very sad case indeed.

  58. Random Guy
    March 10, 2011 at 8:54 pm

    The census numbers aren’t really important when it comes to county planning right now. Knowing Humboldt today vs. ten years ago (and even ten years before that), there’s no evidence of any need to explode with new infrastructure. If anything, slow down growth (that is an option, ya know). Fix up what we’ve got…less is more. Resource use/distribution improves, space is maintained, everybody’s value goes up. Seems like a no-brainer, if the idea is to build a strong community, figuratively as well as literally. Gas prices just shot up, the wake of that hasn’t even started to hit everybody’s cost of living.

    Only real estate interests would push a need to “accomodate growth” in a place like Humboldt…it’s socially and politically ridiculous to consider dumping everybody’s time and money into right now.

  59. 69er
    March 10, 2011 at 9:45 pm

    eurekite says:
    March 10, 2011 at 4:33 pm
    Can anyone find a reliable statistic on the population of the Eureka AREA? Obviously most of the outlying areas around the very tight city boundaries are part of the city in all but name. Myrtletown/Cutten/Humboldt Hill and thereabouts being the natural areas to include of course.

    The Humboldt Fire Protection District #1 surrounds Eureka from Indianola on the north to Freshwater to Fields Landing on the south. Approximately 40 sq. miles and 25,000 plus residents. This might give some idea.

  60. Plain Jane
    March 10, 2011 at 10:17 pm

    Spot on, Sam and Retired Guy. The current attacks on the wages of what is left of the middle class makes their goal of sucking up the small amount of wealth they don’t already own crystal clear. They just have to bankrupt the pesky public employee sector with the added benefit of eliminating the competition for the best employees – and at bargain basement prices. They profited while deliberately wrecking the economy and now are profiting from the fire sales. Great patriots, no?

  61. Been There
    March 10, 2011 at 11:17 pm

    It’s a joy to read so many intelligent posts that banish HiFi…like garlic to a vampire. As usual, expect his conceit to force his trademark childish insult as a losing volley.

    Ask anyone who served in the Census administrative office in Eureka, and you’ll soon learn how the Census numbers are about as accurate as the ridiculous unemployment figures.

    Our hills are awash in buildings visible from space, not listed as official addresses. With the second highest “NARFU” rates in the U.S., (non-respondents) second to Alaska, there are thousands uncounted.

    They’re living near their water-sources, pulling out every drop for man made lakes, trout farms, Olympic pools, orchards, misc. agriculture, and pot.

    An unbroken legacy of human behavior continuing unabated, forever.

    The pot farmers were the friendlies…it was the wacky red necks on ATV’s that rushed out with their guns.

  62. High Finance
    March 11, 2011 at 7:34 am

    Silly “Been There”. Any excuse to attack me ?

    If you stopped smoking your pot long enough you would have noticed that there are several others posting here whose POV is opposite of yours.

  63. Sam Spade
    March 11, 2011 at 7:42 am

    No Class Finance, ¨You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?¨

  64. March 11, 2011 at 7:54 am

    Evacuating Old Arcata Road.

  65. Been There
    March 11, 2011 at 9:11 pm

    HiFi’s more fun after he’s had his morning Hi-Ball.

    The homeless are “rich in leisure.”


  66. High Finance
    March 12, 2011 at 8:34 am

    I didn’t say that Mr Been There. Go back and read it again.

    Random Guy said it.

  67. Been There
    March 12, 2011 at 11:00 pm

    And where exactly did Random Guy write that the homeless are rich in leisure???

    Go have another Hi-Ball and come back and lie better.

  68. Been There
    March 14, 2011 at 10:50 pm

    The curmudgeon banished once again….

  69. High Finance
    March 16, 2011 at 8:32 am

    No sense arguing with a troll.

  70. Not A Native
    March 26, 2011 at 3:15 pm

    TimH Finally I found HumCo numbers for births/deaths/net migration by race/ethnicity. The California Dept. of Finance compiles those statistics. I’m going to post some more on the new thread.

    The bottom line for 2000-2008 is:

    Numbers of White people was flat, but tmay now be increasing. There were more deaths than births. White population increased strongly due to in-migration until 2004. White population peaked in 2004 and fell back to flat by 2008.

    Black population is flat, on a tiny base of only 1,000 people.

    Asian population is declining.

    Native American population is increasing strongly.

    Hispanic population increased strongly until 2005 and became flat.


  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s