This article presents the findings of a county-based estimate of the Amish population. The results are from work commissioned by the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies for the recently released 2010 U.S. Religion Census, plus research and updates associated with tracking the growth and geographic spread of Amish settlements in North America. County estimates are restricted to Amish church groups who rely on horse-and-buggy for travel. Using the terminology of the larger ASARB report, we break the Amish population into three groups: communicants (baptized members), non-baptized members (mostly children/young adults still living at home), and adherents (both baptized and non-baptized Amish). We report on population totals, state by state. We include tables showing the 25 largest Amish settlements, the 25 counties with the largest Amish populations, and the 25 counties with the highest percentage of Amish to their total population. Based on current rates of growth, we project the Amish population, decade by decade, to 2050.Keywords: Amish, census, settlement, church districts Erratum (updated November 2013)Pg. 83, Table 1. Estimate for baptized members per church district and young adults / nonbaptized children per church district for settlements three to five years old is reversed. It is now 35 for baptized members and 68 for non-baptized members.

Increasing numbers of Silver Carp Hypophthalmichthys molitrix and Bighead Carp H. nobilis (commonly called "bigheaded carp") in the Illinois River have led to concerns about the impact that their invasion has on native food

The Amish exhibit distinctive demographic patterns, notably high fertility. While scholars have studied Amish population dynamics for more than a half century, recent research in this area is limited. We believe the time is ripe to reverse this trend. This article reviews data collection methods, points to a variety of accessible sources of new data, presents some preliminary results from the analysis of one such source (the McKune dataset for Holmes County, Ohio), introduces the research agenda and work of the newly formed Amish Population Research Group, and reviews past demographic findings to situate our agenda. An invitation is extended to demographers, social scientists, health researchers, and others to enter into collaborations with APRG.

In river systems, high-head dams may increase the distance-decay of fish community similarity by creating nearly impermeable dispersal barriers to certain species from upstream reaches. Substantial evidence suggests that migratory species are impacted by dams, and most previous studies in stream/river networks have focused on small streams and headwaters. Here, we assess whether a high-head dam (Lock and Dam 19; LD 19) on a large river, the Upper Mississippi River (UMR), substantially alters fish community structure relative to variability expected to occur independent of the dam's effect as a fish dispersal barrier. Using fish catch per unit effort data, we modelled the distance-decay function for the UMR fish community and then estimated the similarity that would be expected to occur across LD19 and compared it with measured similarity. Measured similarity in the fish community above and below LD19 was close to the expected value based on the distance-decay function, suggesting LD19 does not create an abrupt transition in the fish community. Although some migratory fish species no longer occur above LD19 (e.g., skipjack herring, Alosa chrysochloris), these species do not occur in high abundance below the dam and so do not drive variation in fish community structure. Instead, much of the variation in species structure is driven by the loss/gain of species across the latitudinal gradient.Lock and Dam 19 does not appear to be a clear transition point in the river's fish community, although it may function as a meaningful barrier for particular species (e.g., invasive species) and warrant future attention from a management perspective.

No abstract