2008 County/City Census Estimates

[jimrtex]

Biggest losers:

1. Loving, TX: -22.2%

12 people weren't loving Loving County.  So they left the other 42 souls behind.

Have you ever had the pleasure of reading up on Loving County?  There needs to be a television miniseries before it's too late.  So much potential.

'Lonesome Dove', by Larry McMurtry which was the basis for a miniseries of the same name was based loosely on the life of Oliver Loving (and Charles Goodnight).  Oliver Loving is the namesake of Loving County.

[jimrtex]

9. McCullen, TX: -4.0%

Is this McMullen, McCulloch, or McLennan?

[jimrtex]

9. McCullen, TX: -4.0%

Is this McMullen, McCulloch, or McLennan?

McCulloch.  This is how you know that you have too many counties

It's McMullen after all.  So the the three big losers in Texas (King, McMullen, and Loving) are all sparsely populated.  King in the NW part of the state is surrounded by lots of other losing counties (no water, no oil => no people).  McMullen is in south Texas.  All ranches.  Tilden has a cemetery in the town square named Boot Hill.

Boot Hill

Ironically, Loving is surrounded by 3 fast growing counties (17th, 29th, and 30th).  The top 10 in Texas are all suburban, but then you start getting into some counties with oil booms, including Ward, Winkler, and Pecos.

[jimrtex]

Biggest losers:

6. Crowley, CO: -4.4%

Lots of prisons.  Maybe another unit was opened elsewhere and some prisoners/guards were moved.

[jimrtex]

6. Sublette, WY: +6.4%

Hilarious name. Presumably same factors as Tits.

William Sublette

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Just next to Bexar, so is presumably being submerged by the suburban mushroom.
[/quote]
On I-10 NW of city into the Hill Country, so semi-exurban rather than sprawl.  Increase in part due to small population base.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

wtf[/quote]
Tri-Cities, but not in the immediate area of Hanford, so sort of suburban growth.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
Probably tied to Fort Polk.