Rural Pa. saw more people move in than out

By Eric Scicchitano

ERICS@CNHINEWS.COM

HARRISBURG — Rural Pennsylvania’s population is shrinking but it’s not a result of residents relocating.

More people are moving into rural communities than moving away and that includes working-age adults, a recent study of Census Bureau population data shows.

But, fewer children are being born at a rate lower than deaths — a trend that the Center for Rural Pennsylvania expects to continue. The center is a nonpartisan, bicameral agency of the See RURAL, Page A3

Continued from Page A1 state Legislature.

“The positive net-migration suggests there are other demographic factors causing rural population loss — namely rural Pennsylvania having more deaths than births every year since 2008,” the report states.

A separate examination of state Department of Health data found the birth rate in rural Pennsylvania in 2020 was 9.17 per 1,000 residents, the lowest rate across the previous decade.

The death rate in that same span for rural areas was 13.41 in 2020, spiked by the COVID-19 pandemic, and rates above 11.40 in each of the five years prior.

Between 2010 and 2020, the center’s study found, rural Pennsylvania lost nearly 85,000 residents.

“The bottom line is that the trend of more deaths than births will not change in the near future, and will have implications on school enrollments, workforce participation rates and volunteerism,” according to the report.

An estimated 144,900 people moved into rural Pennsylvania in 2021 while about 123,300 moved out, creating a net gain of 21,600. The gain was slightly greater in 2019: 21,800.

The far majority of those settling in rural communities moved away from urban areas. More than half came from out of state, namely New York, New Jersey and Maryland. Another 41 percent moved from urban areas within the commonwealth, up three points compared to 2019.

Contrasted with those who moved away, the new rural residents are more likely to be married, more likely to be a person of color and more likely to be foreign. They’re also willing to drive farther to get to work, with their average commute clocked at 31 minutes compared to 26 minutes for those who left.

Working is one key demographic. According to the study, in-migration netted Pennsylvania an additional 3,593 working-age adults in 2021 who are active in the labor force. They’re less likely to hold a college degree and their median income is lower: $37,077 compared to $41,197 for those who left.

The migration patterns of working adults varied in rural counties. Crawford, Venango, Northumberland and Montour counties are among those with a net gain of at least 500 new working-age adults. Cambria, Butler, Snyder and Union came in under 500. Mercer, Somerset, Blair and Lycoming are among those with a net loss.

Crawford County had a net gain of more than 500 working adults in 2021, according to the Center for Rural Pennsylvania.

Realtor Christine Brown, one of the owners of RE/ MAX Hometown Realty of Meadville, said she’s noticed a trend of people moving into Crawford County the last two years.

“A lot of buyers are people who are coming in from out of state,” Brown said. “I’ve had quite a few the past two years — more than a dozen. There are others wanting to buy who’ve moved here, but are renting and waiting to buy because they haven’t found a house yet.”

Also, the out-of-state buyers or out-of-staters looking to purchase a home are a mix, according to Brown.

“It’s a combination of those with a physical work location here or are working remotely,” she said.

It’s also a mix of couples with no children and those with children, she added.

“The out-of-state buyers have come from all over — Texas, Hawaii, Virginia, California and Tennessee,” Brown said.

Working-age adults were not the largest group to migrate into rural Pennsylvania. The study found that college students led net-migration, adding 9,236 more than had moved away.

The report found that this could be an indicator that rural employers are competitive in attracting new workers. Telework opportunities could allow for greater flexibility in relocating to rural places.

Young people under the age 18 living in households or group quarters, though not college, were the second-largest. That group accounted for a net gain of 5,149.

Rural areas saw growth in both working-age adults who aren’t in the labor force along with senior citizens: 3,418 and 1,496 gained, respectively, through net-migration. An area of loss was people living in group quarters like a long-term care hospital or prison. That demographic shrunk by 1,321.

Meadville Tribune reporter Keith Gushard contributed to this report.