Johnston] NAVAHO POPULATION 125 



western parts of the reservation (map 4). This suggests that the 

 Human Dependency Survey, like many of the earlier surveys, was in- 

 adequate in its coverage of the less populated and less accessible regions 

 of the reservation. It must be stressed, however, that the major dis- 

 crepancies between the 1936 and the 1940 figures shown in table 26 are 

 due to the omission, in the 1936 data, of the off-reservation population 

 in districts 15 and 19, and to the enlargement, in 1940, of the boundaries 

 of districts 11, 15, and 16.^^ 



The operational reliability of the consumption group as a unit for 

 purposes of recording socioeconomic data in large-scale censuses and 

 surveys cannot be determined on the basis of the findings shown in 

 table 26, because the 1940 census enumerators recorded their informa- 

 tion in terms of conventional household and family units/^ However, 

 the 1936 data do suggest that the average size of the consumption 

 group tends to equal that of the biological family among off-reservation 

 Navahos, while it remains somewhat larger in the more isolated parts 

 of the reservation. This suggests, in turn, that the consumption group 

 and the biological family tend to converge toward identity among the 

 off-reservation Navahos.'^^ 



To conclude, the chief value of the Human Dependency Survey was 

 its delineation of more significant geographic areas and its recognition 

 of functional socioeconomic groupings among the inhabitants of these 

 areas. It should be noted, further, that this survey was a pioneering 

 effort in the execution of an integrated, cooperative research project 

 whereby the skills of experts from a variety of fields were focused upon 

 a common problem. Despite seeming deficiencies in the coverage of 

 the survey, the establishment of the land management districts as units 

 for the recording of data on the socioeconomic characteristics of the 

 Navaho population has permitted the accumulation of valuable infor- 

 mation on both the distribution and the socioeconomic status of this 

 population. As an enumeration of the total population, however, this 

 survey falls short of the basic requirements, both in regard to the com- 

 pleteness of coverage and in regard to the length of time required for 

 its completion. 



7* These changes are detailed in table 26, footnote 4. The staff members of the Human 

 Dependency Survey estimated the total Navaho population as of December 31, 1935, at 

 over 43,000, including the residents of the extension area not included in the 1936 figures 

 shown in table 26. This estimate is given in Soil Conservation Service, 1936, table 1. 



''^ The number of consumption groups in each land management district in 1940 was 

 estimated by dividing the 1940 population of each district by the average size of consump- 

 tion groups reported for that district in 1936. 



'<■ The average (arithmetic mean) size of a group of 101 Navaho families studied in 1944 

 was 7.3 persons (Tomlinson, 1944). These families were located in land management 

 districts 15 and 19, on the eastern fringes of the Navajo Reservation. The average size 

 of the consumption groups in district 15 was 6.9 persons. However, the above study may 

 have been selective of families of above-average size. At the time of the Human Depend- 

 ency Survey, the average size of all Navaho families was reported to be 5.7 persons. 

 (Kimball. MS.) 



780-568—66 10 



