Johnston] 



NAVAHO POPULATION 



153 



Table 30. — Average annual rates of natural increase (r) for selected Navaho 

 populations and, periods — 18^9-1962 ^ " 



Period 



Midpoint 



Pn 



P„ 



inr) 



(percent) 



1849 to 1869 3 

 1869 to 1890- . 

 1869 to 1900 «. 



1869 to 1910 « 



1890 to 1900.. 

 1869 to 1930- . 

 1890 to 1910- . 



1900 to 1910 -. 

 1890 to 1930.. 

 1900 to 1920.. 

 1910 to 1920.. 

 1900 to 1930.. 

 1890 to 1950.. 

 1900 to 1940. 

 1910 to 1930 « 



1900 to 1950.. 

 1910 to 1940.. 

 1910 to 1950.. 

 1920 to 1940.. 

 1920 to 1950- . 

 1930 to 1950 « 



1930 to 1957.. 

 1930 to 1962.. 

 1940 to 1950.. 

 1940 to 1957.. 

 1950 to 1957 ' 



1953 to 1957 8 

 1950 to 1962 9 



1859 



1879 to 1880 

 1884 to 1885. 

 1884 to 1885. 

 1889 to 1890 

 1889 to 1890 



1895 



1899 to 1900. 

 1900 



1905 



1910 



1910 



1915 



1915 



1920 



1920 



1920 



1920 



1925 



1925 



1930 



1930 



1935 



1940 



1940 



1943 to 1944. 

 Feb. 1946... 



1945 



1948 to 1949. 

 1953 to 1954- 

 1953 to 1954. 



1955 



Feb. 1956... 



10, 000 

 17, 204 

 21,826 

 21, 826 

 25, 000 

 22, 455 

 21, 826 

 39, 064 

 22, 455 



22, 455 

 39, 064 

 30, 473 

 30, 473 

 39, 064 

 64, 274 

 48, 722 

 39, 064 

 39, 064 



64,274 

 48, 722 

 64, 274 

 48, 722 

 64, 274 

 64, 274 

 69, 167 

 81, 700 

 93, 377 

 64, 274 

 81, 700 

 81, 700 

 81, 700 

 81, 700 

 93, 377 



9,000 

 10, 000 

 12, 000 

 10, 000 

 12, 000 

 10, 000 

 17, 204 

 10, 000 

 17, 204 



21, 826 

 17, 204 

 21, 826 

 22, 455 

 21, 826 

 17, 204 

 21, 826 

 25, 000 

 22, 455 



21,826 

 22, 455 

 22, 455 

 30, 473 

 30, 473 

 39, 064 

 40, 858 

 39, 064 

 40, 858 

 48, 722 

 48, 722 

 64,274 

 69, 167 

 73, 400 

 69, 167 



0. 10536 

 . 54256 

 . 59819 

 . 78052 

 . 73397 

 . 80893 

 . 23796 



1. 36262 

 . 26638 



. 02841 

 . 82006 

 . 33374 

 . 30533 

 . 58210 

 1. 31801 

 . 80303 

 . 44633 

 . 55369 



1. 08005 

 . 77462 



1.05164 

 . 46929 

 . 74631 

 . 49795 

 . 52642 

 . 73785 

 . 82654 

 . 27702 

 . 51692 

 . 23990 

 . 16653 

 . 10713 

 . 30010 



20 



21 



31 



31 



41 



41 



10 



60.75 



20 



10 



39.75 



20 



10 



29.75 



59.75 



40 



19.75 



19.75 



49.76 



30 



39.75 



20 



29.75 



20 



20 



27.25 



31.7 



9.75 

 17 



7.25 



7 



4 

 11.7 



0.53 

 2.58 

 1.93 

 2.52 

 1.79 

 1.97 

 2.38 

 2.24 

 1.33 



.28 

 2.06 

 1.67 

 3.05 

 1.96 

 2.20 

 2.01 

 2.26 

 2.80 



2.17 

 2.58 

 2.64 

 2.35 

 2.51 

 2.49 

 2.63 

 2.71 

 2.61 

 2.84 

 3.04 

 3.31 

 2.38 

 2.68 

 2.56 



1 Tlie population totals used in this table were selected from those listed in table 27, p. 136. The source of 

 each total is presented in the footnotes to that table. All of the totals are assumed to pertain to the midpoint 

 of the specified years, excepting the totals reported in the censuses of 1930, 1940, 1950, and 1960; which were 

 assumed to pertain to April 1 of the respective year. 



2 See appendix for means of obtaining average annual rate of natural increase. 



' The population totals selected for this period represent an approximate average of the widely differing 

 estimates reported for the years 1849 and 1869. 



< In this calculation, a higher estimate of 12,000 is used for the population in 1869. A glance at the totals 

 given in table 27 indicates that this higher figure still falls well within the range of reported estimates for that 

 year. This higher figure for 1869 also produces more plausible rates of natural increase for the decades im- 

 mediately following. By the same tolcen, however, it suggests that the 1849 figure of 9,000 is too low. 



s In this calculation, the reported total for 1910 was arbitrarily raised to 25,000. This adjustment is in line 

 with the general opinion expressed to the effect that the 1910 census seriously underenumerated the Navaho 

 population. In Bureau of the Census, 1915, p. 78, Roland Dixon expressed the view that the actual number 

 of Navahos in 1910 was "somewhere between" the Bureau of Indian Affairs figure of 28,000 and the Bureau 

 of the Census figure of 22,455. The higher figure for 1910, like its counterpart for 1869, produces more plausible 

 rates of natural increase during the following two decades. 



« The first set of totals for the period 1930-50 are those reported by the respective censuses. The second set 

 of totals for this period are those reported by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 



' The total given for 1957 is from an estimate prepared by the Albuquerque Office of the Division of Indian 

 Health, U.S. Public Health Service. 



8 The totals used for this period are estimates prepared by the Albuquerque Office of the Division of Indian 

 Health, U.S. Public Health Service. 



« The 1961-62 estimate is from Young, 1961, p. 331. The 1930 and 1950 estimates are those of the Navajo 

 Agency, derived from the official census counts of April, but adjusted to include persons presumably missed 

 in those enumerations. 



Navaho fertility has not increased in recent years, the postulated minimum rate appears 

 to be sensible. Tlie postulated maximum crude birth rate of 50 per 1,000 does not enjoy 

 the same degree of empirical support. However, it should be noted that the crude birth 

 rates observed among Navahos in the Chinle-Many Farms area from 1955 to 1959 averaged 

 49.5 per 1,000. These data were supplied through the courtesy of Bernice W. Loughlin, 

 Public Health Service, Navajo-Cornell Field Health Project, Chinle, Ariz. The postulated 

 crude death rates are derived from the limits imposed by the given rates of fertility and 

 natural increase in each case. 



