Happy Eclipse Day! A History of Eclipses in Columbus

In honor of today’s historic “Great American Eclipse”, I thought it might be interesting to take a look at both eclipses that have affected the area in years past, as well as those that will come long into the future.

Solar eclipses are not as unusual as people think, but to have the sun mostly or completely covered in any particular area IS relatively rare. In Columbus, that is no exception. Looking back in time to 1900, here are Columbus’ greatest solar eclipses. Only those solar eclipses with at least 75% coverage will be detailed. For maps, animated recreations, etc., follow the links.

1900-1909
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 4
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 1
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 15
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 5
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 4

May 28, 1900 Solar Eclipse: 7:43AM-10:07AM
This eclipse was the most significant of the 1900-1909 decade for Columbus. The path of totality entered the United States around Brownsville, Texas, crossed New Orleans, went just south of Atlanta and left the country at Virginia Beach, Virginia. In Columbus, maximum coverage reached 82.58%.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19000528

1910-1919
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 6
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 0
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 15
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 7
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 5

June 8, 1918 Solar Eclipse: 6:28PM-8:22PM
This eclipse’s path of totality is somewhat similar to August 21, 2017, only a few hundred miles to further south. Path of totality entered the US in southern Washington state, moved across Denver, just north of Oklahoma City to central Mississippi and northern Florida. In Columbus, maximum coverage reached 72.58%, making this the most significant solar eclipse of the 1910s.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19180608

1920-1929
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 3
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 1
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 16
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 5
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 4

January 24, 1925 Solar Eclipse: 7:52AM-10:12AM
Path of totality for this eclipse began in northern Minnesota, crossed northern Michigan, Buffalo and then over Long Island, New York. In Columbus, coverage reached 92.79%, the highest of any solar eclipse in the 20th Century.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19250124

1930-1939
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 4
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 1
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 13
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 4
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 3

August 31, 1932 Solar Eclipse: 3:15PM-5:36PM
The path of totality on this eclipse was somewhat unusual, moving south out of northern Canada over Montreal and then just east of Boston. In Columbus, coverage reached 79.31%, the highest during the 1930s.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19320831

1940-1949
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 4
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 0
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 14
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 6
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 5

April 7, 1940 Solar Eclipse: 3:39PM-6:12PM
While there were no solar eclipses during the 1940s that reached at least 75% coverage in Columbus, the most significant during the decade did reach 61.86% coverage. The path of totality for this eclipse was in the Deep South, crossing into the US in central Texas and then riding along the Gulf Coast until it exited around Jacksonville, Florida.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19400407

1950-1959
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 3
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 2
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 15
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 4
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 4

September 1, 1951 Solar Eclipse: 6:01AM-8:05AM
Because this eclipse began in the morning, the first half was not visible, and the maximum coverage in Columbus, at 81.58% and the greatest during the decade, occurred just as the sun was rising on the horizon, so it was poor viewing overall. Path of totality began in far eastern Tennessee and moved out of the US at Virginia Beach, Virginia.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19510901

June 30, 1954 Solar Eclipse: 6:06AM-7:56AM
As with the eclipse in 1951, this one began early in the morning, so the first half was not visible. Viewing was slightly better than in 1951, as maximum occurred while the sun was over the horizon, but because it was still low, one needed a clear eastern view to really see it. In Columbus, maximum reached 76.59%, second best of the decade. Path of totality for this eclipse began in north-central Nebraska and moved northeast over Minneapolis and then into Canada and off northern Newfoundland.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19540630

1960-1969
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 4
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 0
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 16
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 9
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 8

July 20, 1963 Solar Eclipse: 4:34PM-6:49PM
This eclipse’s totality path was almost entirely in Canada, only entering the US briefly in Maine. In Columbus, coverage reached 72.41%, the maximum of any solar eclipse during the 1960s.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19630720

1970-1979
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 6
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 1
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 13
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 5
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 5

March 7, 1970 Solar Eclipse: 12:12PM-2:43PM
Path of totality moved north through the panhandle of Florid and then along the East Coast before exiting the US at Virginia Beach, Virginia (they seem to be in a lot of eclipse paths). In Columbus, maximum reached 79.10%, the most in the 1970s.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19700307

1980-1989
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 2
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 1
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 13
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 3
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 3

May 30, 1984 Solar Eclipse: 11:09AM-2:08PM
The 1980s had very few solar eclipses, but it did have one of the 20th Century’s best for Columbus. Path of totality was unusually narrow for this eclipse, but the 90%+ coverage was very wide. Totality went from just north of New Orleans over Atlanta and off the coast of Maryland. In Columbus, coverage reached 82.44%, a top 5 of the century.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19840530

1990-1999
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 3
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 1
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 16
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 5
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 4

May 10, 1994 Solar Eclipse: 11:28AM-3:00PM
For me, this is the only eclipse I can remember experiencing. Path of totality went northeast from southern New Mexico through northern Ohio and off of Maine and Nova Scotia. In Columbus, coverage reached 87.48% and was the 2nd highest of the 20th Century. This was also the only solar eclipse of the century where the path of totality entered Ohio.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=19940510

2000-2009
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 4
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 0
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 14
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 7
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 7

No significant eclipses occurred in Columbus during the 2000s. The most significant was December 25, 2000, when coverage reached just 42.42%

2010-2019
Total Solar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 3
Total Solar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 1
Total Solar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 0
Total Lunar Eclipses that affected Columbus: 15
Total Lunar Eclipses with at least 75% coverage: 6
Total Lunar Eclipses with 100% coverage: 5

August 21, 2017 Solar Eclipse: 1:04PM-3:52PM
The most significant eclipse so far this century, the “Great American Eclipse” is the first one to transit across the US west to east since 1898. Path of totality enters the US in Oregon and crosses Kansas City, St. Louis and Nashville before exiting the country over Charleston, South Carolina. In Columbus, it will be the most significant solar eclipse since 1994 and the 3rd best since 1900, with 86.55% coverage.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=20170821

Significant Future Solar Eclipses

April 8, 2024 Solar Eclipse: 1:55PM-4:26PM
This eclipse will be Columbus’ greatest at any time in the next 200 years. In the city itself, coverage will reach 99.88%, and one wouldn’t have to go very far northwest to see 100%.
https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/in/usa/columbus?iso=20240408

After 2024, there are no eclipses that reach even 75% coverage until June 11, 2048, and none 80% or higher until May 11, 2078, and none over 90% until July 23, 2093. So enjoy today’s and the one 7 years from now, because after that, you’ll be waiting a very long time for another.

In Franklin County, Young Adults Prefer Density

I’ve seen several articles across the internet lately questioning the idea that young professionals and Millennials really prefer urban areas or not. I decided to see how this played out in Franklin County overall. I first looked at the total population aged 20-34 in the year 2000 and the year 2015 by Census Tract.
Here were the maps for those years.

After looking at the numbers for both years, I came up with this map for how that age group had changed in the 2000-2015 period.

Unfortunately, some tracts, particularly in the eastern suburban areas, did not exist in 2000, and so I was not able to figure out the change for them during the period. The rest of the map, however, shows that the strongest growth in this age group was not only inside 270, but closest to Downtown and central corridors along Broad and High Streets.
These maps don’t tell us about the relationship between those changes and the population density of the census tracts. So I went further and broke the tracts into increments of density to see where the strongest growth was occurring.

With a few exceptions, there appears to be a correlation between average 20-34 aged population growth and the density of the census tracts it occurs in. This suggests that this age group, at least in Franklin County, prefers areas with moderate to high density, which typically translates to urban living.

Before and After April 2017

I haven’t done a Before and After installment for a while. This time around, I chose to not focus on any single neighborhood.

First up is a photo of the construction of the Columbus Interurban Terminal, looking northwest from 3rd. The photo was taken on October 5, 1911, about 3 months before the building opened. The interurban system was relatively short-lived in the city, and the terminal closed after only 26 years in 1938. The building survived as a grocery store through the mid-1960s before the building was demolished in 1967 as part of the construction of the Greyhound Bus Terminal across the street. The actual location of the building was not on the Greyhound site, but was used as an overflow parking lot. It remained a parking lot until the mid-1980s, when it became part of the City Centre Mall site. Today, plans are for the site to become the location for the 12-story, Two25 mixed-use project.

Here is the same place in September 2016.

And the near future.

The second historic photo is of the #57 streetcar on Kelton Avenue just south of the Oak Street intersection. The photo, which looks north, was taken on June 30, 1915 and includes 3 separate visible buildings as well. The house on the left actually survived until 1977, when it and the rest of the east half of the block was demolished. The building visible on the right is the surviving streetcar barn. Today, it is in bad shape, and while many would like to see it renovated and saved, time seems to be running out. The other surviving building, barely visible in the 1915 photo, is the tenement building on the northwest corner of Oak and Kelton.

And in November 2015.

Third in this list is a photo of the demolition of the old Franklin County Jail, once located at 36 E. Fulton Street in Downtown. Built in 1889, the structure survived until the fall of 1971, when the building, which by then had become outdated for its intended purpose, was torn down to make way for- what else- a parking garage. The parking garage remains to the present day. Columbus leaders at the time should’ve been flogged for such short-sighted thinking, something that was repeated over and over and over again during that era. Today, such a very cool, gothic building would’ve made an excellent candidate for mixed-use conversion.

And in August 2016.

Finally, this next photo isn’t really historic. It was taken a mere 15 years ago in February, 2002, looking northwest from the corner of N. High Street and 10th Avenue. At the time, this area had been made up of low-rise historic buildings that had long held bars for OSU students. All these buildings in the photo, and many more, were demolished not long after the photo was taken in order to make room for the South Campus Gateway, now more or less just called the Gateway. Similar large-scale demolitions are taking place to the north and south as the entirety of the High Street corridor around Campus is transformed. Whether that is good or bad depends on who you ask. What can be agreed upon, however, is that the corridor will be almost unrecognizable in the end.

And in October, 2016.

Franklin County Gentrification Trends 1990-2015




**Note: This was originally posted on March 8, 2016. However, the data went to 2014 rather than 2015 and I actually posted it without adding all the maps and other information intended.

I saw this post (http://www.citylab.com/housing/2016/03/mapping-the-resegregation-of-diverse-neighborhoods-in-4-us-cities/472086/) the other day about changing neighborhood demographics in certain cities, particularly when it comes to racial segregation and gentrification. Surprisingly, of all the maps and posts I’ve done on demographics, I hadn’t thought to do one like this. Well, now I have.

A bit of an explanation is needed for the color coding:
-For those categories marked “Steady”, the demographic listed has been the majority throughout the period, with little to no change of other demographics.
-For those mixed categories of one decline and one rise, it means that the majority demographic has declined at least 5 percentage points, while a secondary demographic has risen at least 5 percentage points.
-For the category of recent or steady integration, there are at least 2 demographics at 10% or more of the total population, as well as a 3rd demographic reaching at least 5% of the population.

A few things that stand out to me: The eastern half of the county is in much greater flux than the western half, and integration is respectable county-wide. These neighborhoods of demographic equilibrium are largely the result of increasing Hispanic and Asian populations, particularly on the Northeast and West Sides, as well as the Whitehall area. In the center core, almost all of the High Street corridor has remained Steady White, suggesting that other demographics have, so far, been unable to tap into the building boom along and adjacent to this corridor. One other thing I notice is that there are FAR more tracts with a growing black population than there are with a growing White population, suggesting that perhaps the idea of Whites moving into neighborhoods and displacing residents is not quite as big of an issue as some might believe.

Here are the integrated tracts by year, based the above criteria, and their racial breakdown.

Top 10 Tracts with the Highest White Population

1990
1. 7205: 99.6%
2. 98: 99.1%
3. 7207: 98.9%
4. 120, 9240: 98.8%
5. 7201, 7203, 80: 98.7%
6. 7922, 9440, 9752: 98.6%
7. 9751, 10601: 98.5%
8. 110, 8141, 8821, 9711, 9740: 98.4%
9. 9450, 9800: 98.3%
10. 6230, 7210: 98.2%
2015
1. 65: 98.7%
2. 6810: 97.4%
3. 6822, 9712: 97.0%
4. 98: 96.0%
5. 6721, 6950: 95.9%
6. 220: 95.8%
7. 9497: 95.6%
8. 66: 95.5%
9. 6330: 94.8%
10. 7394: 94.7%

Breakdown of # of Tracts by % of White Population
1990
95% or Higher: 80
90%-94.9%: 73
80%-89.9%: 64
70%-79.9%: 10
60%-69.9%: 11
50%-59.9%: 6
Total Majority White Tracts: 244
40%-49.9%: 7
30%-39.9%: 9
20%-29.9%: 5
10%-19.9%: 9
0.1%-9.9%: 9
0%: 0
Total Minority White Tracts: 39
2015
95% or Higher: 11
90%-94.9%: 35
80%-89.9%: 62
70%-79.9%: 52
60%-69.9%: 30
50%-59.9%: 19
Total Majority White Tracts: 209
40%-49.9%: 11
30%-39.9%: 17
20%-29.9%: 25
10%-19.9%: 15
0.1%-9.9%: 6
0%: 0
Total Minority White Tracts: 74

Top 10 Tracts with the Highest Black Population
1990
1. 730: 94.2%
2. 5420: 93.4%
3. 15, 28: 92.3%
4. 36: 91.8%
5. 5410: 91.4%
6. 7551: 91.1%
7. 7512: 90.9%
8. 23: 89.0%
9. 2520: 87.4%
10. 29: 87.2%
2015
1. 7512: 88.1%
2. 9337: 87.7%
3. 730: 84.9%
4. 7511: 83.6%
5. 23: 82.2%
6. 15: 81.9%
7. 55: 81.4%
8. 5420, 9332: 81.0%
9. 29: 80.9%
10. 8813: 79.1%

Breakdown of # of Tracts by % of Black Population
1990
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 7
80%-89.9%: 10
70%-79.9%: 4
60%-69.9%: 8
50%-59.9%: 6
Total Majority Black Tracts: 35
40%-49.9%: 7
30%-39.9%: 10
20%-29.9%: 9
10%-19.9%: 32
0.1%-9.9%: 190
0%: 0
Total Minority Black Tracts: 248
2015
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 9
70%-79.9%: 8
60%-69.9%: 28
50%-59.9%: 9
Total Majority Black Tracts: 52
40%-49.9%: 20
30%-39.9%: 17
20%-29.9%: 24
10%-19.9%: 44
0.1%-9.9%: 126
0%: 0
Total Minority Black Tracts: 231

Top 10 Tracts with the Highest Asian Population
1990
1. 7820: 23.3%
2. 1122: 11.2%
3. 1110: 10.8%
4. 105: 9.0%
5. 1810: 8.2%
6. 6372: 7.6%
7. 6384: 7.3%
8. 1121: 7.2%
9. 6386: 6.9%
10. 6395: 6.8%
2015
1. 7820: 34.1%
2. 7721: 26.8%
3. 6230: 26.7%
4. 1122: 21.9%
5. 7830: 17.0%
6. 1110: 16.6%
7. 105: 16.2%
8. 6395: 15.5%
9. 6372: 15.3%
10. 6386: 14.9%

Breakdown of # of Tracts by % of Asian Population
1990
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 0
70%-79.9%: 0
60%-69.9%: 0
50%-59.9%: 0
Total Majority Asian Tracts: 0
40%-49.9%: 0
30%-39.9%: 0
20%-29.9%: 1
10%-19.9%: 2
0.1%-9.9%: 273
0%: 7
Total Minority Asian Tracts: 283
2015
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 0
70%-79.9%: 0
60%-69.9%: 0
50%-59.9%: 0
Total Majority Asian Tracts: 0
40%-49.9%: 0
30%-39.9%: 1
20%-29.9%: 4
10%-19.9%: 17
0.1%-9.9%: 215
0%: 46
Total Minority Asian Tracts: 283

Top 10 Tracts with the Highest Hispanic Population
1990
1. 7820: 2.9%
2. 1122, 7209: 2.5%
3. 1810, 30: 2.3%
4. 8163, 9323, 9336: 2.1%
5. 6352, 7830: 2.0%
6. 1110, 1121, 2750: 1.9%
7. 10, 32, 40, 42, 7533: 1.8%
8. 12, 17, 1901, 6353, 7041, 7199: 1.7%
9. 6, 1820, 6945, 7531, 7551, 7721, 9326, 99: 1.6%
10. 13, 2710, 6933, 7120, 7532, 8164, 8230, 8730, 103: 1.5%
2015
1. 8230: 39.3%
2. 8164: 28.7%
3. 8163: 26.4%
4. 26: 24.2%
5. 9321: 22.7%
6. 8210: 22.6%
7. 99: 21.4%
8. 9230: 21.0%
9. 7043: 19.8%
10. 6945: 18.9%

Breakdown of # of Tracts by % of Hispanic Population
1990
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 0
70%-79.9%: 0
60%-69.9%: 0
50%-59.9%: 0
Total Majority Hispanic Tracts: 0
40%-49.9%: 0
30%-39.9%: 0
20%-29.9%: 0
10%-19.9%: 0
0.1%-9.9%: 278
0%: 5
2015
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 0
70%-79.9%: 0
60%-69.9%: 0
50%-59.9%: 0
Total Majority Hispanic Tracts: 0
40%-49.9%: 0
30%-39.9%: 1
20%-29.9%: 7
10%-19.9%: 33
0.1%-9.9%: 241
0%: 9

Integrated Tracts By Year
1990: 2
2015: 98

Most Integrated Tract by Year
1990
1122: White: 76.6% Black: 9.6% Asian: 11.2% Hispanic: 2.5%
2015
7721: White: 33.9% Black: 31.2% Asian: 26.8% Hispanic: 10.1%

All in all, the data shows that the county is much less racially stratified/segregated now than it was in 1990, and that it doesn’t appear that gentrification is really affecting many areas in terms of forcing out one racial group for another.

The Origins of the Columbus Metro’s Domestic Migration

Top 30 Largest Net Domestic In-Migration Origins (Ohio Counties and States)

2006-2010————————2009-2013—————————-2010-2014
1. Cuyahoga: 1602———-1. Cuyahoga: 1905————–1. Cuyahoga: 1702
2. Montgomery: 1020——-2. Michigan: 1425—————-2. Michigan: 1473
3. Michigan: 893————-3. Montgomery: 1123————3. Montgomery: 1098
4. Maryland: 745————-4. Summit: 744——————–4. Washington (state): 740
5. Lorain: 740—————–5. Lorain: 715———————-5. Summit: 689
6. Virginia: 636—————6. Indiana: 694———————6. Lucas: 635
7. Mahoning: 603————7. Lucas: 569———————–7. Stark: 632
8. Stark: 584——————8. Maryland: 512——————-8. New Jersey: 579
9. Lucas: 554—————–9. Hamilton: 504——————–9. Indiana: 536
10. Summit: 531————-10. Clermont: 466—————–10. Medina: 465
11. Highland: 499———–11. Stark: 466———————–11. Richland: 465
12. New Jersey: 497——-12. Arizona: 463——————–12. Fayette: 436
13. Hamilton: 483———–13. Alabama: 431——————-13. Trumbull: 404
14. New York: 419———-14. Trumbull: 401——————-14. Wayne: 383
15. Allen: 384—————-15. Mahoning: 387——————15. Erie: 368
16. Tennessee: 375——–16. Fayette: 354———————16. Clermont: 355
17. Logan: 328—————17. Washington (state): 353—–17. Illinois: 355
18. Trumbull: 325————18. Coshocton: 346—————-18. Massachusetts: 325
19. Coshocton: 310———19. Medina: 322——————–19. Allen: 320
20. Jefferson: 290———–20. Allen: 302————————20. Maryland: 294
21. Scioto: 259—————21. Erie: 290————————-21. Butler: 275
22. Belmont: 254————22. Highland: 270——————-22. Puerto Rico: 268
23. Huron: 245—————23. Puerto Rico: 265—————23. Lake: 267
24. Darke: 217—————24. Adams: 260———————24. West Virginia: 257
25. Lake: 212—————-25. Warren: 260———————25. Highland: 256
26. Tuscarawas: 202——-26. Massachusetts: 259———-26. Lorain: 249
27. Iowa: 200—————–27. Wayne: 259———————27. Mahoning: 244
28. Shelby: 199————–28. Morgan: 255——————–28. Adams: 226
29. Medina: 196————-29. Tuscarawas: 253————–29. Columbiana: 225
30. Massachusetts: 192—30. Ashtabula: 244—————–30. Arizona: 221

Top 30 Largest Net Domestic Out-Migration Destinations (Ohio counties and States)

2006-2010——————————-2009-2013—————————-2010-2014
1. Texas: -1371———————-1. Georgia: -1024—————-1. Florida: -1243
2. Knox: -942————————-2. Florida: -1013——————2. Georgia: -984
3. North Carolina: -782————3. Greene: -524——————-3. Knox: -608
4. Georgia: -718———————4. Missouri: -516——————4. Colorado: -456
5. Athens: -679———————-5. Colorado: -448—————–5. Minnesota: -405
6. Kentucky: -516——————-6. California: -436—————–6. California: -396
7. South Carolina: -499———–7. South Carolina: -431———-7. Greene: -382
8. California: -364——————-8. Knox: -418———————-8. Athens: -375
9. Florida: -360———————-9. North Carolina: -417———-9. Missouri: -348
10. Wood: -351———————10. Wisconsin: -395————–10. Utah: -325
11. Richland: -344——————11. Athens: -336——————11. Tennessee: -264
12. Greene: -239——————–12. Minnesota: -308————-12. Logan: -242
13. West Virginia: -236————13. Utah: -290———————13. Mississippi: -214
14. Missouri: -219——————-14. Richland: -266—————14. Wisconsin: -197
15. Crawford: -209——————15. Portage: -265—————–15. Oregon: -161
16. Hardin: -179———————16. Kentucky: -257—————16. Texas: -156
17. Noble: -177———————-17. Logan: -242——————-17. South Carolina: -144
18. Muskingum: -175—————18. Pennsylvania: -242———18. Seneca: -141
19. Butler: -173———————-19. Tennessee: -200————19. Louisiana: -140
20. Holmes: -163——————–20. Oregon: -187—————-20. Sandusky: -134
21. Marion: -138———————21. Wood: -166——————21. Wood: -134
22. Portage: -134——————-22. Sandusky: -157————–22. Darke: -109
23. Ottawa: -131——————–23. Mississippi: -151————-23. Jefferson: -103
24. Sandusky: -124—————-24. Jefferson: -127—————24. Noble: -98
25. Oregon: -120——————-25. Kansas: -98——————-25. Hardin: -96
26. Indiana: -116——————-26. Delaware (state): -88——-26. Idaho: -89
27. Idaho: -115———————27. Idaho: -74———————-27. Kansas: -81
28. Utah: -103———————- 28. Crawford: -73—————–28. Marion: -78
29. Fayette: -93———————29. Hardin: -68——————–29. Meigs: -70
30. Kansas: -90———————30. Seneca: -66——————-30. Ottawa: -67

Top 25 Largest Positive Swings Between 2006-2010 and 2010-2014
1. Texas: +1215
2. North Carolina: +808
3. Washington: +807
4. Kentucky: +675
5. Indiana: +652
6. Michigan: +580
7. West Virginia: +493
8. Athens: +369
9. Knox: +358
10. South Carolina: +355
11. Arizona: +288
12. Alaska: +283
13. Puerto Rico: +268
14. Illinois: +236
15. Hardin: +198
16. Marion: +187
17. Maine: +160
18. Alabama: +153
19. Logan: +149
20. Darke: +139
21. Massachusetts: +133
22. Rhode Island: +131
23. Wyoming: +127
24. Greene: +104
25. Champaign: +101

Top 25 Largest Negative Swings Between 2006-2010 and 2010-2014
1. Florida: -883
2. Tennessee: -639
3. Colorado: -619
4. Virginia: -595
5. Minnesota: -529
6. Maryland: -451
7. Lucas: -392
8. Montgomery: -384
9. New York: -308
10. Cuyahoga: -288
11. Muskingum: -276
12. Georgia: -266
13. Stark: -246
14. Utah: -222
15. Wisconsin: -215
16. Hamilton: -193
17. Scioto: -170
18. Miami: -154
19. Mississippi: -150
20. Clermont: -142
21. New Mexico: -140
22. Louisiana: -137
23. Mahoning: -131
24. Missouri: -129
25. Pennsylvania: -116

Total Counts By Period
Positive Ohio Counties
2006-2010: 53
2009-2013: 57
2010-2014: 53

Positive States, including DC and Puerto Rico
2006-2010: 21
2009-2013: 24
2010-2014: 29

Total Net In-Migration
Ohio
2006-2010: +8,008
2009-2013: +11,366
2010-2014: +10,101

Outside Ohio
2006-2010: -1,158
2009-2013: -466
2010-2014: +1,007

Ohio and Outside Ohio
2006-2010: +6,850
2009-2013: +10,900
2010-2014: +11,108

All these figures show that the Columbus metro has net positive domestic migration. While the majority of that comes from within the state, Columbus’ previously negative net total from outside the state has more recently become positive as well. Combined, the net total has been climbing. For a long time, Columbus’ relative success was not well-known outside of the state, but perhaps word is finally getting out.