the credit river watershed 2008 - 2018

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE THE CREDIT RIVER WATERSHED

2008 - 2018

Virpal Kataure Peel Region 10 Peel Centre Drive Brampton ON L6T 4B9 905-791-7800 x 4358 [email protected]

Socio-Demographic Profile, The Credit River Watershed: 2008 – 2018

ii

November, 2014 NOTE TO READER In support of Credit Valley Conservation’s (CVC) Ecological Goods and Services Project and broader initiatives, the Region of Peel was hired to process the raw census data and produce a report outlining key demographic data across the CVC. As such, the information presented in this report covers only small portion of the available census data and possible analysis. There are over 2500 demographic variables, provided by Environics Analytics for 2008, 2013 and 2018 within various cross tabulations of the Adjusted Census 2011 data, available in raw form for the watershed. The 2018 data are projections based on the 2006 and 2011 census, 2011 National Household Survey data and other complementary data provided by third party sources. If anyone within CVC is interested in demographic data that has not been described within this report please feel free to contact Tatiana Koveshnikova or Mike Puddister in the Restoration and Stewardship Department. The report was coordinated by:

Virpal Kataure Tatiana Koveshnikova Planner, Peel Region Ecological Goods and Services [email protected] Project Coordinator, CVC [email protected] Kamal Paudel Mike Puddister GIS Specialist, CVC Director, Restoration & Stewardship, CVC [email protected] [email protected]


iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY1 The Credit River Watershed and Ontario:

The population in the Credit River watershed in 2008 was 836,422 and increased by 8% to 901,148 in 2013. By 2018, the population is expected to reach slightly under 1 million people (988,506; 18% change). In Ontario, the expected population increase between 2008 and 2018 is 13%.

The median age of the watershed’s population is 37.5 years. This is 2 years younger than in Ontario (39.9). However, the number of individuals under 14 is slightly decreasing, while those over 65 is increasing, indicating an aging population trend.

The average household size and number of couples with children has been on a steady decline since 2008 for both geographies.

Households in the watershed had slightly higher incomes than in Ontario.

The watershed is more ethnically diverse than Ontario as a whole with 44% of the watershed’s population’s mother tongue as non-official languages, coupled by a higher percent of immigrants. The watershed also has a higher proportion of South Asians, reflected in the significant Punjabi and Urdu speaking population.

The Upper, Middle & Lower Watershed Areas:

Majority (90%) of the watershed population resides in the lower watershed area and is expected to grow by over 70,000 people by 2018. This population is also younger than in the other watershed areas.

The lower watershed area has the highest average household size (3.5), while the middle watershed area has the smallest (2.6).

The middle watershed area had 10% of its households earning $200,000+, the most of any other watershed area, while the lower watershed area had the most households earning less than $99,999.

The upper watershed has significant trades, transport, and sales/service occupations, while the lower watershed has the highest percent in the natural and applied science, and business/financing occupations.

1 Please note that all statistics represent 2013 data,

unless otherwise stated.

The lower watershed area has the highest percent of public transit use as the primary mode of transportation for work, as a result of its proximity to urban areas. This area also has the greatest percent of university or higher educated individuals (37%).

The middle watershed has the greatest proportion of single detached dwellings (74%), while the lower watershed has the highest proportion of semi-detached, row and high rise dwellings.

By 2018, 57% of the lower watershed population will be immigrants, compared to only 12% and 11% for the middle and upper watershed areas.

The Subwatershed Areas

Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) subwatershed area has the highest population (171,488) and number of households. Melville to the Forks of the Credit (18) has the smallest population of only 812 people. The greatest percent of population growth from 2008 to 2013 occurred in Springbrook Tributary (8a) (205%), while Norval to Port Credit (9) had the largest increase in total population (18,662 people).

The youngest population resides in Huttonville Creek (7) and the oldest resides in Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham (20). The fastest aging population is in Melville to Forks of the Credit (18).

The highest average household size (4.1) is in Springbrook Tributary (8a), while Glen Williams to Norval (14) has the smallest (2.3).

Melville to Forks of the Credit (18) has the highest income, while Glen Williams to Norval (14) has the lowest. Levi Creek (6) has the greatest percent participation in the labour force. Sawmill Creek (17) has the highest percent of university and above educated individuals.

Shaw’s Creek (17) has the most owned dwellings (94%), while Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributary (22) has the most rented dwellings (38%). This subwatershed area also saw a significant number of new dwelling construction.

Carolyn Creek (2) has the highest non-official languages and highest percent of immigrants, while Orangeville (19) has the highest percent of English as the mother tongue.


iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 METHODOLOGY AND DATA LIMITATIONS ......................................................................................... 3

3.0 POPULATION ......................................................................................................................................... 5

3.1 Population Change .............................................................................................................................. 5

3.2 Age ...................................................................................................................................................... 9

3.3 Gender .............................................................................................................................................. 12

4.0 HOUSEHOLDS ..................................................................................................................................... 13

4.1 Households ....................................................................................................................................... 13

4.2 Family Composition ........................................................................................................................... 15

5.0 HOUSEHOLD INCOME, LABOUR FORCE & TRANSPORTATION TO WORK ................................. 17

5.1 Income............................................................................................................................................... 17

5.2 Labour Force ..................................................................................................................................... 20

5.3 Mode of Transportation to Work ....................................................................................................... 22

6.0 EDUCATION ......................................................................................................................................... 24

7.0 PRIVATE DWELLINGS......................................................................................................................... 27

7.1 Tenure ............................................................................................................................................... 27

7.2 Structure Type ................................................................................................................................... 28

7.3 Period of Construction....................................................................................................................... 31

8.0 ETHNICITY ........................................................................................................................................... 32

8.1 Mother Tongue .................................................................................................................................. 32

8.2 Immigration ....................................................................................................................................... 35

8.3 Ethnicity ............................................................................................................................................. 37

9.0 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................... 39

10.0 APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................................... 41

11.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ..................................................................................................................... 65

12.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 68


v

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Percent Change in Average Current Income, 2008-2018 ............................................................ 17 Table 2: Highest Level of Education Completed by Subwatershed Area, 2013 ......................................... 26 Table 3: Percent of Structure Type by Subwatershed Area, 2013 ............................................................. 30 Table 4: Actual and Percent of Total, Top Languages by Subwatershed Area, 2013 ................................ 34 Table 5: Highest Number of Visible Minority by Year ................................................................................. 38 Table 6: Total Population, 2008-2018 ......................................................................................................... 41 Table 7: Median Age, 2008-2018 ................................................................................................................ 41 Table 8: Age Cohort Population Change in Watershed and ON, 2008-2018 ............................................. 42 Table 9: Population by Age Cohort, 2013 ................................................................................................... 43 Table 10: Total Male and Female Population in Watershed and ON, 2008-2018 ...................................... 43 Table 11: Percent Change in Male and Female Population, 2013-2018 .................................................... 44 Table 12: Households, 2008-2018 .............................................................................................................. 44

Table 13: Total Family Composition in Watershed, 2013 ........................................................................... 45

Table 14: Family Composition, 2013 .......................................................................................................... 46

Table 15: Household Income, 2013 ............................................................................................................ 47

Table 16: Detailed Household Income, 2013 .............................................................................................. 48

Table 17: Household Average Expenditure, 2012 ...................................................................................... 49

Table 18: Labour Force & Occupation, 2013 .............................................................................................. 50

Table 19: Mode of Transportation to Work in Watershed, 2008-2018 ........................................................ 51

Table 20: Mode of Transportation to Work by Subwatershed Area, 2013 .................................................. 51

Table 21: Highest Level of Education Completed, 2013 ............................................................................. 52

Table 22: Highest Level of Education Completed, 2018 ............................................................................. 53

Table 23: Dwellings by Occupancy: Status & Tenure, 2008-2018 ............................................................. 54

Table 24: Dwellings by Period of Construction, 2013 ................................................................................. 55

Table 25: Structure by Watershed Area, 2008-2018 .................................................................................. 56

Table 26: Total Numbers of Dwellings by Structure Types, 2008-2018 ..................................................... 57

Table 27: Population by Mother Tongue, 2013 ........................................................................................... 58

Table 28: Population by Mother Tongue, Non-Official Languages in Watershed, 2008-2018 ................... 59

Table 29: Population by Immigration Status, 2008-2018 ............................................................................ 60

Table 30: Percent Change of Immigrants by Subwatershed Area.............................................................. 61

Table 31: Percent of Visible Minority Status of Total Visible Minority Population in Watershed and ON, 2013 ............................................................................................................................................................ 62

Table 32: Total Languages Spoken by Subwatershed Area, 2013 ............................................................ 63

Table 33: Population by Visible Minority Status, 2008-2018 ...................................................................... 64


vi

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: The Credit River Watershed and its Subwatersheds ..................................................................... 2

Figure 2: Subwatershed Population (Actual and Percent of Total), 2013 ..................................................... 6

Figure 3: Subwatershed Percent Population Change, 2008-2018 ............................................................... 7

Figure 4: Percent Population Change in Top 6 Subwatershed Areas .......................................................... 8

Figure 5: Total Projected 2018 Population by Subwatershed Area .............................................................. 8

Figure 6: Median Age 2008-2018 ................................................................................................................. 9

Figure 7: Percent of Age Cohort Watershed vs. ON, 2008-2018 ................................................................. 9

Figure 8: Percent Change in Detailed Age Cohort, 2013-2018 .................................................................. 10

Figure 9: Growth of Senior Population in Watershed, 2008-2018 .............................................................. 10

Figure 10: Percent of Female vs. Male Population by Median Age Cohort in Watershed 2008-2018 ....... 12

Figure 11: Percent of Female vs. Male Population by Median Age Cohort in Ontario 2008-2018 ............. 12

Figure 12: Average Household Size, 2008-2018 ........................................................................................ 13

Figure 13: Average Household Size by Subwatershed Area 2008-2018 ................................................... 14

Figure 14: Percent of Household Growth in Top 4 Subwatershed Areas ................................................... 14

Figure 15: Family Composition in Watershed, 2013 ................................................................................... 15

Figure 16: Family Structure by Watershed Area, 2013 ............................................................................... 16

Figure 17: Current Income Distribution, 2013 ............................................................................................. 17

Figure 18: Percent of Households by Average Current Household Income, 2013 ..................................... 18

Figure 19: Percent of Total Households Income Earnings, 2013 ............................................................... 19

Figure 20: Occupation Types in Watershed, 2013 ..................................................................................... 20

Figure 21: Top 5 Occupation Types by Watershed Area, 2013.................................................................. 21

Figure 22: Primary Mode of Transportation to Work in Watershed, 2008-2018 ......................................... 22

Figure 23: Primary Mode of Transportation to Work by Watershed Area, 2013 ......................................... 23

Figure 24: Highest Level of Education Completed in Watershed, 2013-2018 ............................................ 24

Figure 25: Highest Level of Education Completed in Watershed Areas, 2013 ........................................... 25

Figure 26: Percent Change in Private Dwellings between in Top 4 Subwatershed Areas, 2008-2018 ..... 27

Figure 27: Dwelling Type by Watershed Area, 2008-2018 ......................................................................... 29

Figure 28: Watershed Area Dwellings by Period of Construction, 2013 ..................................................... 31

Figure 29: Population by Mother Tongue, 2013.......................................................................................... 32

Figure 30: Population by Mother Tongue Non-Official Languages in Watershed, 2013 ............................ 33

Figure 31: Percent of Population by Mother Tongue .................................................................................. 33

Figure 32: Population by Immigration Status, 2008-2018 ........................................................................... 35

Figure 33: Percent of Immigrant Population by Watershed Area, 2008-2018 ............................................ 35

Figure 34: Immigrant Population Distribution by Subwatershed Area, 2013 .............................................. 36

Figure 35: Visible Minority Composition, 2013............................................................................................ 37

Figure 36: Summary of Facts by Watershed Area ...................................................................................... 40


1

1.0 INTRODUCTION The Credit River watershed (CRW or watershed) is an area of land that encompasses 1,500 kilometres of stream and river networks that drain into Lake Ontario. The Credit River watershed is comprised of many diverse landscapes from rapidly urbanizing areas to rural and forested spaces. The watershed covers portions of Peel and Halton Regions, as well as portions of the Wellington and Dufferin Counties. Tributaries of the watershed are present in the municipalities of Mississauga, Brampton, Caledon, Orangeville, Mono, Amaranth, East Garafraxa, Erin, Halton Hills, Milton and Oakville, as shown in Figure 1. The Watershed is comprised of twenty-two subwatersheds (Figure 1). This report is an update to an earlier CVC report (Asfaha & Stiefelmeyer, 2009) that examined the socio-demographic profile of the watershed based on 2006 Census data. This report re-examines the socio-demographic trends in the watershed based on 2008, 2013 and 2018 data extracted from ESRI’s Business Analyst (BA) software. Most of the BA data used in this report originate from the 2006 and 2011 Census data, as well as other complementary data provided by third party vendors.2 The report helps to identify demographic composition and trends in the watershed communities and provide a basis for related program responses. Data were collected and reported based on the subwatershed boundaries3, and some analysis is conducted using the upper, middle and lower watershed areas as described in Figure 1.4

2 For more information on data used in the report see section 2 “Methodology and Data Limitations”.

3 Note that Lake Ontario Shoreline subwatersheds (numbers 21 and 22 shown in Figure 2) are not actual

subwatersheds; they are a collection of distinct watersheds that drain directly into Lake Ontario. For management purposes, CVC has grouped these independent watersheds into two distinct areas. 4 The upper, middle and lower watersheds represent relatively distinct physical regions, characterized by the spatial

distribution of land features. For more information, see the Kennedy & Wilson (2009) report.


2

Figure 1: The Credit River Watershed and its Subwatersheds


3

2.0 METHODOLOGY AND DATA LIMITATIONS

Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) used administrative boundaries to extract the socio-demographic data from ESRI’s Business Analyst (BA) software. BA Canada is an ArcGIS based tool designed to work with the latest data from the most recent Census,5 as well as other complementary data provided by third party vendors. BA Canadian products are based, in whole or in part, on selected Statistics Canada files and a variety of data sources including current economic indicators, post-censal estimates from governments, immigration statistics and economic data, such as building permits. Most of the BA data used in this report is data compiled by Environics Analytics, which includes Census data primarily from 2011, and the data from 2006 if the primary information from 2011 is not available (i.e. National Household Survey). The team at Environics Analytics are responsible for removing the outliers and creating a final improved demographic product for their clients (Environics Analytics, 2014).6 Using ESRI’s BA tool, CVC requested relevant information be extracted at the watershed, subwatershed and Ontario levels. This method differs from the previous methodology used in Asfaha & Stiefelmeyer (2009) report due to a variation in the boundary calculations. Previously, if a Dissemination Area (DA)7 overlapped two or more subwatersheds, Statistics Canada allocated all of the data from one DA to the subwatershed that had more than 50% of DA boundary within the subwatershed area. The current method uses a modified approach to calculate values for an irregular boundary, such as watershed and subwatersheds. There are three major ways to assign values to an irregular boundary:

1. Block apportionment method: Block points are the smallest demographic data available in Business Analyst. In this method, the weighted population values for a particular boundary are applied. If a boundary contained 75% of the block points, then those are taken into account in order to weigh the values of the demographic variables. It is the most accurate method, but takes longer to conduct based on the dataset size.

2. Cascading centroid method: In this method, a centroid from a geographic unit (i.e. census tract8) is created. If the centroid of the unit falls within the boundary of the watershed/subwatershed, then the value of the census tract is applied to calculate the demographic variables (i.e. population). If the centroid falls outside the boundary then the values are not included. On the other hand, if the centroid of a geographic unit falls within the boundary, but the boundary of the geographic unit extends beyond the study area, the total value of the geographic unit is applied. It is one of the fastest methods primarily used for larger datasets, but is less accurate than the block appointment method.

3. Hybrid method: This method merges block apportionment and cascading centroid methods to create a hybrid approach which is more accurate at lower level (block apportionment), and faster for processing at larger geographic levels. The use of this

5 As part of the Census, Statistics Canada collects national, provincial and sub-provincial level data.

6 Note: Environics Analytics acquires and distributes Statistics Canada files in accordance with the Government of

Canada's Open Data Policy. No information on any individual or household was made available to Environics Analytics by Statistics Canada. Copyright: 2014 CVC, 2013 Esri, Environics Analytics & 2012 TomTom 7 Dissemination areas are small areas composed of one or more neighbouring dissemination blocks, with a

population of 400 to 700 persons. All of Canada is divided into dissemination areas. 8 See Glossary for definition.


4

method at a combination of large and small geographic levels returns minimal statistical differences; therefore the overall accuracy is not compromised (ESRI, 2013).

For this report, we used the hybrid method to calculate demographic variables and they were weighted according to the algorithms used by the BA software. Due to the changes in how we approached the data extraction for the current report, the data between this report and the previous report might not be directly comparable. 2008 to 2013 Data Trend:

In order to better reflect the changes in the watershed, the data were modelled and extracted from 2008 to 2013. The data from 2008 builds on to the Census data from 2006 with corrections and future predictions. Once the Census data from 2011 was released, the predicted values for 2008 were adjusted accordingly (if needed), and the demographic variables for 2013 were predicted based on the available historical data using the most current (Census 2011) as a base (ESRI, 2013). The BA predicts and adjusts the historical data based on the most current data available in 5 year intervals, up to 5 years in the past, and 10 years into the future as a base demographic package. In order to reflect the current status of the Credit River watershed and to utilize the resources available, the data from 2008 to 2013 were used instead of reporting based on the Census years such as 2006 and 2011. Because of these differences, the direct comparison between the previous and the latest report might not be practical.

Finally, in 2011 Statistics Canada replaced the mandatory long form Census with a voluntary National Household Survey, reflecting only about 21% of the Canadian population. This change in methodology may not accurately reflect a representative sample of the population, and may be problematic when making comparisons between various years of the survey. When interpreting the data trends in this report, one should keep this limitation in mind. .


5

3.0 POPULATION

3.1 Population Change Total:

From 2008 to 2013, the population of the Credit River watershed (watershed) increased by 8% from 836,422 to 901,148 respectively, while the population of Ontario during the same time increased by 6% (Table 6 in Appendix). The expected population change for the watershed from 2008 to 2018 is 18% for a total projected population of 988,506 by 2018. The population change between this 10 year period is slower than what the watershed experienced between 1996 and 2006, when the population grew by 32% (see Asfaha & Stiefelmeyer, 2009).

Subwatershed Area:

Majority of the population (89%) in the watershed resides in the lower watershed area (798,441 people) as a result of the urbanized areas of Brampton and Mississauga, and is expected to grow by 70,278 people by 2018 (Figure 2 and Table 6 in Appendix).9 The upper watershed area comprises 5% of the total population, while the middle watershed area comprises 5% ( Table 6 in Appendix). The subwatershed area with the greatest total population in 2008, 2013 and 2018 is the Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) with a total of 163,312, 171,488 and 186,262 people respectively ( Table 6 in Appendix). The subwatershed area with the smallest total population in 2008, 2013 and 2018 is Melville to Forks of the Credit (18) with 863, 812 and 785 people respectively. Table 6 in the Appendix shows this negative growth representing a reduction in population, partly attributed to the increase in median age (Table 7 in Appendix) reflected in the reduction in total households, and average household size ( Table 6 in Appendix). Other subwatersheds showing a negative trend over time are Mullet Creek (4) and West Credit River (15).

The area with the greatest percent of population growth occurred in the subwatershed area of Springbrook Tributary (8a) (

9 Please note that all statistics represent 2013 data, unless otherwise stated.


6

Figure 3 and Figure 4).10 Between 2008 and 2013, the population grew by 205% from 3,116 to 9,488 and is expected to grow by 77% from 2013 to 2018 to a total of 16,786 people.

10

The ‘top 4’ subwatershed areas were determined by areas that contained most significant percent change in population when compared to other subwatersheds.


7

Figure 2: Subwatershed Population (Actual and Percent of Total), 2013


8

Figure 3: Subwatershed Percent Population Change, 2008-2018


9

Figure 4: Percent Population Change in Top 6 Subwatershed Areas

The greatest total population increase between 2013 and 2018 is expected to occur in the Norval to Port Credit (9) subwatershed area, with an increase of 18,662 people, for a 2018 total of 185,861 (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Total Projected 2018 Population by Subwatershed Area

Lower Middle Upper

-

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000


10

3.2 Age Total:

The median age in the Credit River watershed increased from 36.1 in 2008 to 37.5, and is expected to increase to 38.4 in 2018 (Table 7 in Appendix). The median age in Ontario was higher than that of the watershed by 2 years (Figure 6). In 2008, the median age in Ontario was 38.9 and in 2013 it was 39.9. It is expected to increase to 40.4 years by 2018 (Table 7 in Appendix). Although the actual median age of those living in the watershed is lower than that of Ontario, the median age in the watershed is increasing by a greater rate than in Ontario between 2013 and 2018 (an expected 0.9 years increase in the watershed compared to 0.5 years increase in Ontario).

Figure 6: Median Age 2008-2018

36.1

37.5

38.438.9

39.9

40.4

2008 2013 2018

Credit River Watershed Ontario

Majority of the population both in Ontario (outer ring) and the watershed (inner ring) is between the ages of 15 and 64 (Figure 7). The total portion of those 14 years of age and under is decreasing in the watershed, while those over 65 years of age are increasing in both Ontario and the watershed (Figure 7).

Figure 7: Percent of Age Cohort Watershed vs. ON, 2008-2018

Detailed age cohorts above 50 are expected to change more significantly than any other age cohorts between 2013 and 2018 (Table 8 in Appendix and Figure 8). Each age cohort is expected to change at a greater rate in the watershed than in Ontario as a whole (Figure 8). The greatest increase is expected to occur in those between 70 and 74


11

years of age for both the watershed (39%) and Ontario (28%) (Figure 8). The greatest decrease in age cohort is expected to occur in those aged 45 to 49 in both the watershed (5%) and Ontario (7%) (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Percent Change in Detailed Age Cohort, 2013-2018

Focusing in on those over 65 years of age, an aging population trend is prevalent (Figure 9). Between 2008 and 2013, and 2013 and 2018, the population over 65 is expected to increase by approximately 28% for a total of 130,020 individuals over the age of 65, representing 13% of the projected 2018 total population (Figure 9).

Figure 9: Growth of Senior Population in Watershed, 2008-2018


12

Subwatershed Area: An interesting trend shows that the lower watershed area has a younger population than the other watershed areas (Table 7 and Table 9 in Appendix). This is likely due to the proximity to major urban centres and improved access to services such as schools for families, access to larger job market for young professionals, etc. The youngest subwatershed area is Huttonville Creek (7) with a median age of 31.4, 32.2 and 33.4 for the three sample years (Table 7 in Appendix). The oldest subwatershed area in 2008 and 2013 was the Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham (20) with a median age of 44.2 and 46.2 respectively (Table 7 in Appendix).

The fastest aging subwatershed area is expected to be Melville to Forks of the Credit (18), with an increase of 3.41 years between 2013 (41.9) and 2018 (47.6), making it the subwatershed area with the highest median age (Table 8 in Appendix).


13

3.3 Gender Total:

There are slightly more females in both the watershed (50.5%) and Ontario (50.7%) than males (49.5% and 49.3% respectively) (Table 10 in Appendix). The population change in watershed is slightly higher than the population change being experienced in Ontario for both time periods (Table 10 in Appendix). Both the male and female median age is expected to continue in an increasing trend for Ontario and the watershed as a whole (Figure 10 and Figure 11). The female population is consistently older than the male population in the subwatershed areas, the watershed as a whole and in Ontario (Table 10 in Appendix). Table 11 in the Appendix details the percent change by subwatershed area from 2013 to 2018.

Figure 10: Percent of Female vs. Male Population by Median Age Cohort in Watershed 2008-2018

5

4

3

2

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 - 4

5 - 9

10 - 1

4

15 - 1

9

20 - 2

4

25 - 2

9

30 - 3

4

35 - 3

9

40 - 4

4

45 - 4

9

50 - 5

4

55 - 5

9

60 - 6

4

65 - 6

9

70 - 7

4

75 - 7

9

80 - 8

4

85+

% o

f to

tal p

op

ula

tio

n Female 2008

Female 2013

Female 2018

Male 2008

Male 2013

Male 2018

Figure 11: Percent of Female vs. Male Population by Median Age Cohort in Ontario 2008-2018

5

4

3

2

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 - 4

5 - 9

10 - 1

4

15 - 1

9

20 - 2

4

25 - 2

9

30 - 3

4

35 - 3

9

40 - 4

4

45 - 4

9

50 - 5

4

55 - 5

9

60 - 6

4

65 - 6

9

70 - 7

4

75 - 7

9

80 - 8

4

85+

% o

f to

tal p

op

ula

tio

n Female 2008

Female 2013

Female 2018

Male 2008

Male 2013

Male 2018


14

4.0 HOUSEHOLDS 4.1 Households Total:

The number of households in the Credit River watershed increased by 10% or 22,277 households (from 266,273) between 2008 and 2013, and is expected to increase by 12% between 2013 and 2018 for an expected total of 329,718 households (Table 12 in Appendix).The average household size has been on a steady decline since 2008 in both the watershed and the Province as a whole (Figure 12).

Figure 12: Average Household Size, 2008-2018

3.14

3.07

3.00

2.65 2.61

2.56

2008 2013 2018

Credit River Watershed Ontario

Subwatershed Area:

The lower watershed area had the highest average household size (3.4), while the middle subwatershed area had the smallest (2.6).11 The Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) subwatershed area continues to have the greatest number of households from 2008 to 2018, for an expected total of 71,919 total households by 2018 (Table 12 in Appendix). The smallest average household size was maintained in Glen Williams to Norval (14) decreasing from 2.3 average people per household in 2008 to 2.1 in 2018. In 2008, Carolyn Creek (2) had the highest average household size with 3.8 people (Figure 13). However, by 2013 the Springbrook Tributary (8a) subwatershed area had the highest household size of 4.4 people expected in 2018.

11

Please note that all statistics represent 2013 data, unless otherwise stated.


15

Figure 13: Average Household Size by Subwatershed Area 2008-2018

In the Melville to Forks of the Credit (18) subwatershed area, which contains the least amount of households, the households have been slightly decreasing from 312 to 292 from 2008 to 2018 (Table 12 in Appendix). Between 2008 and 2013, the Springbrook Tributary (8a) subwatershed area is expected to grow by 155% in total households from 914 to 2331 respectively, and between 2013 and 2018 by 65% to 3,848 households (Figure 14).12

Figure 14: Percent of Household Growth in Top 4 Subwatershed Areas

12

The ‘top 4” subwatershed areas were determined by areas that contained a significant percent change in household growth when compared to other subwatersheds.


16

4.2 Family Composition

Total: The total percent of couples and lone-parent families remains consistent between 2008 and 2018 comprising approximately 84% and 16% of the total census families, respectively (Table 13 in Appendix). The percent of married couples with children (1, 2 or 3+) shows a decreasing trend from 2008 to 2018 (Table 13 in Appendix). Married couples with 2 children are expected to decrease from 46% in 2008 to 30% in 2013 and 28% in 2018 (Table 13 in Appendix). Figure 15 details the family composition of couples and lone parents living in the watershed in 2013:

Figure 15: Family Composition in Watershed, 2013


17

Subwatershed Area: When comparing proportions of various familial structures, the lower watershed area has the greatest percent of married couples (78%) followed by the middle subwatershed area (76%) (Figure 16, Table 14 in Appendix). The upper watershed area has the highest percent of common law (13%) couples, while the lower watershed area has the greatest number of lone parent families (16%) (Table 14 in Appendix).

Figure 16: Family Structure by Watershed Area, 2013


18

5.0 HOUSEHOLD INCOME, LABOUR FORCE & TRANSPORTATION TO WORK

5.1 Income Total:

The median household income for the watershed is $82,567 and the average household income is $105,189 (Table 15 in Appendix).13 The 2013 median and average household income for Ontario is $94,265 (Table 15). Between 2008 and 2018, the average income in the watershed and Ontario changed between 8% to 10% (Table 1). Between 2013 and 2018, the average income is expected to change by almost double than in the last 5 year period, approximately by 21% (Table 1). Over the 10 year period (2008 to 2018), income in the watershed and Ontario changed between 31% and 33% (Table 1).

Table 1: Percent Change in Average Current Income, 2008-2018

2008 2013 2018 2008-2013

2013-2018

2008-2018

CREDIT RIVER WATERSHED $ 97,147 $ 105,190 $ 127,268 8% 21% 31% ONTARIO $ 85,903 $ 94,265 $ 113,901 10% 21% 33%

In 2013, Ontario had a larger portion (35%) of households with an income of less than $50,000 than in the watershed (27%) (Figure 17). The watershed had the greatest percent of households with an income between $50,000 and $99,999 (34%), when compared to other income levels (Figure 17). Those households with an income between $100,000 and $200,000 comprised 31% of the total households in the watershed, versus 26% in Ontario. Households with an income greater than $200,000 were also greater in the watershed (8%) than in Ontario (6%).

Figure 17: Current Income Distribution, 2013

13



19

At a more detailed scale, the percent of households in Ontario with an average income below $60,000 is typically greater than that which is found in the watershed (Figure 18). On the other hand, the percent of households in the watershed with an average income above $60,000 is typically greater than that which is found in Ontario (Figure 18). In both the watershed and Ontario, an income between $100,000 and $124,999 represented the greatest percent of households (12% and 10% respectively) (Figure 18).

Figure 18: Percent of Households by Average Current Household Income, 2013

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%

<$10,000

$10,000 - $19,999

$20,000 - $29,999

$30,000 - $39,999

$40,000 - $49,999

$50,000 - $59,999

$60,000 - $69,999

$70,000 - $79,999

$80,000 - $89,999

$90,000 - $99,999

$100,000-$124,999

$125,000-$149,999

$150,000-$174,999

$175,000-$199,999

$200,000-$249,999

$250,000+

% of Households

ONTARIO CREDIT RIVER WATERSHED

Subwatershed Area:

The following watershed areas had the greatest percent of households with the following incomes (Table 15 and Table 16 in Appendix):

<$50,000 – lower watershed area (28%) $50,000-$99,999 – lower watershed area (34%) $100,000-$199,999 – middle watershed area (36%) $200,000+ – middle watershed area (10%)

The subwatershed area with highest average income is in the upper watershed area, Melville to Forks of the Credit (18) with $158,942 (Figure 19 and Table 16 in Appendix). Glen Williams to Norval (14) had the lowest average household income of $79,150. Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) had the greatest percent of households (36%) with an income of $49,999 or less, whereas Levi Creek (6) had the smallest percent of households (10%) with this income. Huttonville Creek (7) had the greatest percent of households (42%) with an income between $50,000 and $99,999, whereas Melville to the Forks of the Credit (18) had the smallest percent (23%) of households with this income. Levi Creek (6) had the highest percent of households (48%) with an income between $100,000 and $199,999 whereas Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributary (22) had the smallest percent (23%). Finally, Melville to the Forks of the Credit (18) had 20%


20

of its households with an income greater than $200,000, where Glen Williams to Norval (14) had the smallest percent of such households (22%).14

Figure 19: Percent of Total Households Income Earnings, 2013

14

For a detailed breakdown of average household expenditure (2012), see Table 17 in Appendix.


21

5.2 Labour Force Total: In 2008, 72% of the watershed population participated in the labour force (Table 18 in Appendix). This decreased to 71% in 2013, but is expected to increase to 72% by 2018 (Table 18 in Appendix). The largest percentage in the labour force working in the watershed were employed in the business, financing and administration fields (22%), followed by sales and service (21%) and trades, transport/ equipment operators and other related occupations (14%) (

Figure 20). Figure 20: Occupation Types in Watershed, 2013


22

Subwatershed Area:

Based on the top 5 occupation types (as determined by the highest number of people within each occupation), the upper watershed area has the greatest percent of occupations in the trades, transport/equipment operations (17%), and sales and service (24%) (Figure 21). The lower watershed area has the greatest percent of occupations in the natural and applied science (9%) and in business, financing and administration (23%). Lastly, the middle watershed area has the greatest percent of occupations in the management field (14%).

Figure 21: Top 5 Occupation Types by Watershed Area, 2013

For 2008, 2013 and 2018, Levi Creek (6) has the greatest percent of participation in the labour force (82-81%) (Table 18 in Appendix). The East Credit River (13) subwatershed area has the lowest participation in the labour force both in 2008 and 2013 with 66%. In 2018, the lowest labour force participation is expected in Glen Williams to Norval (14) with 66%.


23

5.3 Mode of Transportation to Work Total:

Between 2008 and 2018, the car (including motorcycles) has been the primary mode of transportation in the watershed with almost no fluctuation (84%) ( Figure 22, Table 19). The second most used mode of transportation to work is public transit at approximately 12% ( Figure 22).

Figure 22: Primary Mode of Transportation to Work in Watershed, 2008-2018


24

Subwatershed Area: The lower watershed area has the lowest percent of cars and the highest percent of public transit as the primary mode of transportation to work than any other watershed area (Figure 23). The middle watershed area has the highest percent of individuals walking to work, when compared to the other areas (Figure 23).

Figure 23: Primary Mode of Transportation to Work by Watershed Area, 2013

For 2013, the Norval to Port Credit (9) subwatershed area has the greatest number of individuals using a car as their primary mode of transportation to work (68,597) (Table 20 in Appendix). The East Credit River (13) has the greatest percent of population that uses the car as the primary mode of transportation to work (99%), while Lakeshore Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) has the least (78%). Public transit was used the most in Lakeshore Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) with 18% and the least in Fork of the Credit to Cheltenham (20) with 1%. This is possibly due to the fact that the Town of Caledon, where this subwatershed area is located, has no public transit system in place. Compared to the other subwatershed areas, Glen William to Norval (14) has walking and biking as the second highest primary mode of transportation to work (Table 20 in Appendix).


25

6.0 EDUCATION

Total:

In 2013, approximately 32% of the population in the watershed had a university or higher level of education (Figure 24).15 This is expected to increase by 4% by 2018. The other educational levels are expected to decrease by approximately 1% during the same time period (Figure 24).

Figure 24: Highest Level of Education Completed in Watershed, 2013-2018

Subwatershed Area:

In comparison to the other watershed areas, the upper watershed has the greatest percent of no degree/certificate (20%), high school certificate (32%) and college certificate/diploma (21%) (Figure 25 and Table 21 in the Appendix). The lower watershed area has the greatest percent of university or higher (37%) educated individuals (Figure 25 and Table 21 in the Appendix). This may be attributed in part to the proximity of universities to the lower watershed area.

15



26

U

niv

ers

ity +

C

olle

ge C

ert

ific

ate

/

Hig

h S

ch

oo

l

A

pp

ren

tic

e/T

rad

es

N

o C

ert

ific

ate

Dip

lom

a

Figure 25: Highest Level of Education Completed in Watershed Areas, 2013


27

Examining the same information at a subwatershed level for 2013, Table 2 reports on the highest level of educational attainment reported as a percent of total population in each subwatershed. Sawmill Creek (3) has the highest percent of population with a university and higher education of 41%. The Springbrook Tributary (8a) has the highest percent of population with no certificate (26%). Finally, Orangeville (19) has the highest percent of population with a high school certificate (33%). More detailed information on other educational attainment levels by subwatershed area can be found in Table 21 and Table 22 in the Appendix.

Table 2: Highest Level of Education Completed by Subwatershed Area, 201316

Watershed Area

Subwatershed Area

No Certificate,

etc.

High School Certificate

University and

Higher (Diploma, Degree, etc.)

Lower 1 Loyalist Creek 3,953 19% 5,487 26% 7,373 35% Lower 2 Carolyn Creek 4,527 20% 5,347 24% 8,053 36% Lower 3 Sawmill Creek 8,589 15% 13,094 24% 22,610 41% Lower 4 Mullett Creek 11,179 16% 17,311 25% 25,293 37% Lower 5 Fletcher's Creek 25,027 22% 31,072 27% 30,201 27% Lower 6 Levi Creek 919 13% 1,960 27% 2,373 33%

Lower 7 Huttonville Creek 599 24% 690 28% 607 24%

Lower 8a Springbrook Tributary 1,872 26% 1,960 28% 1,536 22% Lower 8b Churchville Tributary 6,340 25% 7,375 29% 6,190 24% Lower 9 Norval to Port Credit 26,289 19% 34,080 25% 49,590 36%

Lower 21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 7,152 16% 11,264 26% 15,937 36%

Lower 22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 28,297 20% 35,578 25% 49,107 34%

Middle 10 Black Creek 2,548 19% 4,096 30% 2,803 21% Middle 11 Silver Creek 2,912 15% 5,626 30% 5,046 27%

Middle 12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 775 22% 975 28% 848 24%

Middle 13 East Credit River 191 18% 283 27% 312 30%

Middle 14 Glen Williams to Norval 599 25% 819 34% 367 15%

Middle 20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 279 15%

540 29% 550 30%

Upper 15 West Credit River 1,081 19% 1,600 29% 1,267 23%

Upper 16 Caledon Creek 366 18% 571 27% 484 23%

Upper 17 Shaw's Creek 642 17% 1,184 31% 563 15% Upper 18 Melville to Forks of the Credit 138 21% 194 29% 174 26% Upper 19 Orangeville 5,414 22% 8,084 33% 4,027 17%

TOTAL CREDIT RIVER WATERSHED 150,147 18% 205,186 25% 237,054 32%

16

The orange highlights in the table represent the highest value in each category and the corresponding subwatershed area.


28

7.0 PRIVATE DWELLINGS

7.1 Tenure Total:

In 2008, there were 266,273 occupied dwellings in the watershed, and 77% were owned, while 23% were rented (Table 23 in Appendix). The number of occupied dwellings increased by 10% for a total of 293,550 in 2013. The total percent of dwellings owned vs. rented in 2013 slightly decreased to 76%. By 2018, the total number of occupied dwellings is expected to increase by 12% for a total of 329,718. The total increase in dwellings for the watershed as a whole between 2008 and 2018 is 24%. The proportion of owned vs. rented dwellings is also expected to change to 75% and 25% respectively (Table 23 in Appendix).

Subwatershed Area:

In 2008 and 2013, Levi Creek (6) had the greatest percent of owned dwellings with 96% (Table 23 in Appendix). In 2018, Shaw’s Creek (17) had the greatest percent of owned dwellings with 95%. Between 2008 and 2018, Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) is projected to have the highest percent of rented dwellings showing an increasing trend (36% in 2008, 38% in 2013 and 41% in 2018). This is likely due to the large number of apartment buildings in this area. The Springbrook Tributary (8a) subwatershed area saw the greatest percent change in total occupied dwellings (321%) between 2008 and 2018, although the actual number of dwellings was not significant when compared to other subwatershed areas (Figure 26).

Figure 26: Percent Change in Private Dwellings between in Top 4 Subwatershed Areas, 2008-201817

17

The ‘top 4’ subwatershed areas were determined by areas that contained the greatest percent change in private dwellings when compared to other subwatersheds.


29

7.2 Structure Type Total:

The watershed has a total of 293,550 dwellings as of 2013 and is expected to total 329,718 by 2018 (Table 25 in Appendix). In 2013, 46% were single detached, 14% were semi-detached, 13% were row houses and 28% were apartment buildings. The most significant change in total types of dwelling will be apartment buildings, which are expected to increase by 21% between 2013 and 2018 (Table 25 in Appendix).

Subwatershed Area:

Figure 27 describes how each type of dwelling comprises the total structure type in each watershed area. The middle watershed area contains the greatest proportion of single detached dwellings (73%-74%) and the lowest percent of semi-detached dwellings (7%-6%) (Table 25 in Appendix). The lower watershed area contains the greatest proportion of row houses (12%-14%), apartment buildings (28%-32%) and semi-detached dwellings (14%-15%), and the lowest percent of single-detached dwellings (41%-43%).


30

Figure 27: Dwelling Type by Watershed Area, 2008-2018

SINGLE DETACHED SEMI-DETACHED ROW HOUSES APARTMENT


31

Table 3 describes the percent of structure type by subwatershed areas. In Caledon Creek (16), 96% of the dwellings are single-detached. Huttonville Creek (7) contains the largest percent of semi-detached dwellings (26%), while Glen Williams to Norval (14) has the greatest row houses (45%). Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) contains the largest type of apartment buildings when compared to other subwatershed areas (55%). Fletcher’s Creek (5) contains the highest percent of detached duplexes (7%), while the East Credit River (13) contains the highest percent of other single attached structures, albeit only 1%. Finally, the West Credit River (15) contains the highest percent of movable dwellings (2%). Detailed figures on the total number of dwellings by structure type between 2008 and 2018 for subwatershed areas can be found in Table 26 in the Appendix.

Table 3: Percent of Structure Type by Subwatershed Area, 201318

Watershed Area

Subwatershed Area Total

Dwellings Single-

Detached Semi-

Detached Row

Houses

Apartment Buildings (low and high rise)

Detached Duplex

Other Single

Attached

Movable Dwelling

Lower 1 - Loyalist Creek 8,339 55% 2% 12% 28% 4% 0% 0% Lower 2 - Carolyn Creek 7,238 54% 21% 15% 5% 4% 0% 0% Lower 3 - Sawmill Creek 21,640 33% 15% 22% 30% 1% 0% 0% Lower 4 - Mullett Creek 27,704 47% 10% 20% 21% 2% 0% 0% Lower 5 - Fletcher's Creek 41,013 53% 16% 11% 12% 7% 0% 0% Lower 6 - Levi Creek 2,866 66% 11% 22% 0% 1% 0% 0% Lower 7 - Huttonville Creek 886 66% 26% 7% 0% 1% 0% 0%

Lower 8b - Churchville Tributary

2,331 61% 24% 13% 0% 1% 0% 0%

Lower 8a - Springbrook Tributary

8,638 65% 14% 13% 1% 7% 0% 0%

Lower 9 - Norval to Port Credit

53,532 42% 10% 10% 33% 5% 0% 0%

Lower

21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries

18,518 53% 12% 12% 20% 2% 0% 0%

Lower

22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries

63,961 25% 6% 11% 55% 3% 0% 0%

Middle 10 - Black Creek 6,055 77% 4% 7% 10% 2% 0% 0% Middle 11 - Silver Creek 8,468 74% 4% 6% 12% 5% 0% 0%

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams

1,537 85% 2% 3% 8% 2% 0% 0%

Middle 13 - East Credit River 438 94% 0% 0% 1% 4% 1% 1%

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval

1,324 26% 4% 45% 24% 2% 0% 0%

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham

804 95% 1% 1% 1% 2% 0% 0%

Upper 15 - West Credit River 2,368 92% 1% 0% 4% 0% 0% 2% Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 799 96% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% Upper 17 - Shaw's Creek 1,554 91% 3% 3% 2% 0% 0% 0%

Upper 18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit

296 95% 2% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0%

Upper 19 - Orangeville 11,122 63% 11% 9% 15% 1% 0% 0%

18

The orange highlights in the table represent the highest value in each category and the corresponding subwatershed area.


32

7.3 Period of Construction

Total:

The watershed as a whole saw the greatest number of private dwellings built between 2001 and 2011 (73,074 dwellings) followed by 1981 and 1990 with 60,825 dwellings (Table 24 in Appendix).19

Subwatershed Area:

In the upper watershed area, the highest period of dwelling construction (19%) was between 1971 and 1980 and 1991 and 2000, followed by subsequent construction that stayed below this level (Figure 28). On the other hand, 21% of the dwellings in the middle watershed area were built between 2001 and 2011 (Figure 28). The lower watershed area experienced peak periods of construction between 1981 and 1990 (22%) and 2001 and 2011 (25%) (Figure 28). This is likely due to population growth and proximity to urban areas of the lower watershed area.

Figure 28: Watershed Area Dwellings by Period of Construction, 2013

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Before1946

1946 and1960

1961 and1970

1971 and1980

1981 and1990

1991 and2000

2001 and2011

Built After2011

Lower

Middle

Upper

From before 1946 to 1990, Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) saw the greatest number of dwelling unit construction (Table 24 in Appendix). In 1991 to 2000, Norval to Port Credit (9) saw the greatest dwelling construction of 11,621 units, while in 2001 to 2011, Fletcher’s Creek (5) experienced growth of 21,641 dwelling units. Finally, Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) had 3,375 dwelling units constructed after 2011 - the most of any other subwatershed area.

19

Please note that the time periods used to determine construction period are not equal intervals due to the way the data was reported. Any further analysis of this information should recognize this data limitation as direct comparisons cannot be made.


33

8.0 ETHNICITY

8.1 Mother Tongue

Total:

Figure 29 compares the watershed and Ontario population by single response to mother tongue.20 Both English (70%) and French (4%) are more represented as mother tongues in Ontario than in the watershed (55% and 1%) (Table 27 in Appendix). The number of those with non-official languages as their mother tongue in the watershed (44%) is much greater than for all of Ontario (26%). This is likely due to the diversity found in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area as compared to more rural communities of Ontario.

Figure 29: Population by Mother Tongue, 2013

Examining in more detail the non-official mother tongue languages, Punjabi is the most prominent language with 40,550 reporting this as their mother tongue in 2008, followed by Urdu with 29,966 (Figure 30). By 2013, both numbers increased by 18% and 22% respectively (Table 28 in Appendix). By 2018, an expected 56,204 individuals would report Punjabi as their mother tongue while 42,320 would report Urdu as their mother tongue. The greatest increase reported for non-official mother tongue languages between 2008 and 2018 is Russian (72% increase between 2008 and 2018) (Table 28 in Appendix). The greatest decrease (44%) in non-official mother tongue languages between the same time period is Aboriginal languages.

20



34

Figure 30: Population by Mother Tongue Non-Official Languages in Watershed, 2013

Subwatershed Area:

Carolyn Creek (2) has the highest percent of total non-official languages with 60%, while Orangeville (19) has the highest percent of English (92%) as the mother tongue (Figure 31and Table 27 in Appendix). Glen Williams to Norval (14) has the highest percent of French (3%) as the mother tongue in 2013 (Table 27 in Appendix).

Figure 31: Percent of Population by Mother Tongue


35

Table 4 identifies the highest percent of non-official language in each subwatershed area.21 Churchville Tributary (8b) contains the largest percent of a non-official language, with 38% of the population speaking Punjabi (see Appendix Table 32Table 32 for detailed breakdown of total languages by subwatershed area).

Table 4: Actual and Percent of Total, Top Languages by Subwatershed Area, 2013

Italian German Panjabi Spanish Arabic Tagalog Portuguese Polish Urdu Others

1 Loyalist Creek 438 129 548 395 676 551 439 888 1,735 1,145 4% 1% 5% 4% 6% 5% 4% 8% 16% 11%

2 Carolyn Creek 438 49 1,085 409 1,202 1,391 753 840 2,028 1,326 3% 0% 7% 3% 8% 9% 5% 5% 13% 9%

3 Sawmill Creek 710 316 1,165 1,420 3,703 2,067 1,097 2,210 5,643 2,539

2% 1% 4% 4% 12% 7% 3% 7% 18% 8%

4 Mullett Creek 1,173 487 999 2,160 2,586 1,580 1,496 2,341 3,611 2,541

4% 2% 3% 7% 8% 5% 5% 7% 11% 8%

5 Fletcher's Creek 1,438 247 22,527 2,392 1,091 3,129 4,296 1,466 5,673 5,424

2% 0% 35% 4% 2% 5% 7% 2% 9% 8% 6

Levi Creek 144 51 181 269 122 119 211 198 134 191

6% 2% 7% 11% 5% 5% 9% 8% 6% 8%

7 Huttonville Creek 23 4 543 35 20 109 83 44 150 135

2% 0% 37% 2% 1% 7% 6% 3% 10% 9%

8a Springbrook Tributary 68 17 1,411 114 101 346 227 221 552 442

1% 0% 31% 2% 2% 8% 5% 5% 12% 10%

8b Churchville Tributary 341 60 5,579 503 190 812 1,058 503 1,118 1,195

2% 0% 38% 3% 1% 6% 7% 3% 8% 8%

9 Norval to Port Credit 2,665 651 9,804 3,353 6,025 5,522 4,709 6,083 8,103 6,987

3% 1% 12% 4% 7% 7% 6% 7% 10% 8%

10 Black Creek 137 167 22 52 8 53 157 212 1 141 9% 11% 1% 3% 1% 3% 10% 14% 0% 9%

11 Silver Creek 200 233 29 115 12 90 286 269 8 265 8% 10% 1% 5% 0% 4% 12% 11% 0% 11%

12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 55 66 9 51 2 16 42 51 3 41

11% 13% 2% 10% 0% 3% 8% 10% 1% 8%

13 East Credit River 30 17 54 5 3 1 21 19 0 6

15% 9% 27% 3% 1% 0% 10% 10% 0% 3%

14 Glen Williams to Norval 18 32 0 28 0 5 36 32 0 19

7% 13% 0% 11% 0% 2% 14% 13% 0% 8%

15 West Credit River 30 68 3 22 0 14 63 51 0 50 7% 15% 1% 5% 0% 3% 14% 11% 0% 11%

16 Caledon Creek 51 68 6 14 2 2 40 8 1 26

18% 24% 2% 5% 1% 1% 14% 3% 0% 9%

17 Shaw's Creek 48 46 24 21 4 14 53 50 1 18

14% 13% 7% 6% 1% 4% 15% 14% 0% 5%

18 Melville to Forks of the

Credit 13 24 11 1 0 1 16 8 1 7

13% 25% 11% 1% 0% 1% 16% 8% 1% 7%

19 Orangeville 195 249 60 142 51 101 212 156 29 178

10% 13% 3% 7% 3% 5% 11% 8% 1% 9%

20 Forks of the Credit to

Cheltenham 52 52 38 9 7 2 26 33 2 13

16% 16% 12% 3% 2% 1% 8% 10% 1% 4%

21 Lake Ontario Shoreline

West Tributaries 861 472 236 868 730 823 821 2,462 646 1,492 6% 3% 2% 6% 5% 5% 5% 16% 4% 10%

22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East

Tributaries 3,721 787 2,931 5,288 7,260 6,267 4,938 8,530 7,004 8,540

4% 1% 3% 6% 8% 7% 6% 10% 8% 10%

CREDIT RIVER WATERSHED

12,927 4,272 47,769 17,746 23,764 23,114 21,267 26,872 36,571 32,999 3% 1% 13% 5% 6% 6% 6% 7% 10% 9%

21

For some subwatersheds the top 2 non-official languages were highlighted due to similarity of values.


36

8.2 Immigration Total:

The watershed consistently has a much smaller non-immigrant population (52%-46%) than in the Province (70%-98%) between 2008 and 2018 (Figure 32 and Table 29 in Appendix). On the other hand, the immigrant population in the watershed (47%-53%) is greater than that in Ontario (29%-31%), and is also increasing at a greater rate from 2008 to 2018 (Figure 32 and Table 29 in Appendix).

Figure 32: Population by Immigration Status, 2008-2018

52%49%

46%

70% 69% 68%

47%50%

53%

29% 30% 31%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2008 2013 2018

CRW Non-Immigrant Population

ONT Non-Immigrant Population

CRW Immigrant Population

ONT Immigrant Population

Subwatershed Area:

The following figure indicates that the immigrant population in the lower watershed area is increasing, and by 2018 57% of the immigrant population is projected to reside in the lower watershed (Figure 33). This is contrary to the trend seen in the middle and upper watershed area, where the immigrant population is expected to slightly decline.

Figure 33: Percent of Immigrant Population by Watershed Area, 2008-2018

51%54% 57%

14% 14% 12%

13% 13% 11%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

2008 2013 2018

Lower SubwatershedArea

Middle SubwatershedArea

Upper SubwatershedArea


37

The difference between the percent of immigrants to non-immigrants is much greater in the upper and middle watershed areas than in the lower watershed area (Figure 34). The subwatershed area with the greatest immigrant population is Carolyn Creek (2) with 65% in 2013 (Table 29 in Appendix). The area with the greatest non-immigrant population is Shaw’s Creek (17) with 89% in 2013. Table 30 outlines the percent change of total immigrant population by subwatershed area, with Springbrook Tributary (8a) with the greatest percent change of 462% from 2008 to 2018.

Figure 34: Immigrant Population Distribution by Subwatershed Area, 2013


38

8.3 Ethnicity Total:

The visible minority composition in the Watershed shows higher representation of the South Asian community (45%) in comparison to Ontario (31%) (Figure 35 and Table 31 in Appendix). On the other hand, Ontario has a higher percentage of Black (16%) and Chinese (20%) visible minorities compared to the watershed (13% and 11%).

Figure 35: Visible Minority Composition, 2013

Subwatershed Area:

For detailed figures on visible minority status by subwatershed area, see Table 33 in Appendix. Fletcher’s Creek (5), Norval to Port Credit (9) and Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries (22) subwatershed areas contained the largest number of the following visible minority populations (Table 5):


39

Table 5: Highest Number of Visible Minority by Year Subwatershed Area

Visible Minority Population

2008 2013 Projected 2018

Fletcher’s Creek

South Asian 44,033 55,418 65,275 Black 20,743 23,921 25,773 All Other Visible Minorities

2,653 2,868 2,768

Multiple Visible Minorities 2,192

Norval to Port

Credit

Chinese 13,890 15,476 17,134 Filipino 10,911 Japanese 775 Multiple Visible Minorities 2,287

Lake Ontario

Shoreline East Tributaries

Filipino 8,911 9,760 Latin American 4,294 4,860 5,697 Southeast Asian 5,169 6,285 7,617 Arab 5,481 7,005 8,503 West Asian 1,729 1,930 2,351 Korean 1,935 2,105 2,233 Japanese 580 647 675 Multiple Visible Minorities 1,971 2,061 2,265


40

9.0 CONCLUSION

The Credit River watershed’s diverse physical landscape of stream and river networks and rural vs. urban environments is as diverse as its socio-demographic profile. The watershed continues to grow at a faster rate than in Ontario as a whole, with majority of the growth occurring in the lower watershed area. Although the population and the number of households are expected to continue growing, the average household size has been on decline since 2008. Furthermore, the watershed is also experiencing aging of its population. Nonetheless, the average age of residents in the watershed is still younger than that of Ontario as a whole, and the total percent of families remains consistent. The average household income in the watershed is slightly higher than in Ontario, but both have been increasing between 2008 and 2018. The labour force in the watershed has experienced some impacts demonstrated by a decline in participation in the labour force as a result of the recession, but this is expected to increase by 2018. The car remains the primary mode of transportation to work for the residents in the watershed, with almost no change between 2008 and 2018. Public transit only comprises 12% of the total modes of transportation used for travel to work, although public transit use is greater in some subwatershed areas than others as a result of the established transit network. The population in the watershed is showing trends of increasing educational attainment levels, with university and higher educational levels projected to increase by 2018. The total number of dwellings is growing, with rented dwellings showing an increase. The dwelling structures in the watershed continue to be comprised of single detached dwellings, but higher density housing such as apartment buildings are expected to increase by 2018. However, the proportion of various structure types, expected growth and construction period varies significantly from upper to lower watershed areas. Finally, the watershed represents a more ethnically diverse community when compared to Ontario. The numbers of individuals with non-official languages as their mother tongue is almost double that of Ontario, with Punjabi and Urdu being the most dominant of the non-official languages. This is also reflected in the more significant immigrant population of the watershed, particularly those from the South Asian and Black communities.


41

Figure 36 summarises some more interesting facts by watershed area.


42

Figure 36: Summary of Facts by Watershed Area


43

10.0 APPENDIX22,23

Table 6: Total Population, 2008-2018

22

The orange highlights in the table represent the highest value in each category and the corresponding subwatershed area. The green highlights in the table represent the lowest value in each category and the corresponding subwatershed area. 23

The sum of the subwatershed totals and the Credit River Watershed total in some tables do not match because of the independent demographic data calculations with the best possible boundary calculation method applied to the individual boundary. For more details please read section 2.0 Methodology and Data Limitations.

Watershed Area Subwatershed 2008 2013 2018

% change '08-'13

% change '13-'18

% change '08-'18

Lower 1- Loyalist Creek 26,777 26,317 27,189 -1.7% 3.3% 1.5%

Lower 2- Carolyn Creek 26,395 27,247 26,849 3.2% -1.5% 1.7%

Lower 3- Sawmill Creek 59,710 68,710 76,480 15.1% 11.3% 28.1%

Lower 4- Mullett Creek 83,709 82,598 81,820 -1.3% -0.9% -2.3%

Lower 5 - Fletcher's Creek 131,930 147,382 152,632 11.7% 3.6% 15.7%

Lower 6 - Levi Creek 8,078 9,476 12,298 17.3% 29.8% 52.2%

Lower 7 - Huttonville Creek 1,923 3,341 5,197 73.7% 55.6% 170.2%

Lower 8a - Springbrook Tributary 3,116 9,488 16,786 204.5% 76.9% 438.7%

Lower 8b - Churchville Tributary 25,839 33,162 41,384 28.3% 24.8% 60.2%

Lower 9 - Norval to Port Credit 155,883 167,199 185,861 7.3% 11.2% 19.2%

Lower 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 52,342 52,033 55,962 -0.6% 7.6% 6.9%

Lower 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 163,312 171,488 186,262 5.0% 8.6% 14.1%

Sub-total 739,016 798,441 868,719 8.0% 8.8% 17.6%

Middle 10 - Black Creek 17,006 17,578 19,032 3.4% 8.3% 11.9%

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 22913 23477 24818 2.5% 5.7% 8.3%

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 4,064 4,400 5,040 8.3% 14.5% 24.0%

Middle 13 - East Credit River 1,255 1,226 1,502 -2.3% 22.5% 19.7%

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval 2,876 2,979 3,255 3.6% 9.3% 13.2%

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 2,127 2,173 2,562 2.2% 17.9% 20.5%

Sub-total 50,241 51,834 56,210 3.2% 8.4% 11.9%

Upper 15 - West Credit River 7,121 6,741 6,973 -5.3% 3.5% -2.1%

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 2,565 2,527 3,090 -1.5% 22.3% 20.5%

Upper 17 - Shaw's Creek 4,333 4,887 5,898 12.8% 20.7% 36.1%

Upper 18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit 863 812 785 -5.9% -3.4% -9.1%

Upper 19 - Orangeville 29,270 30,220 31,643 3.2% 4.7% 8.1%

Sub-total 44,152 45,186 48,389 2.3% 7.1% 9.6%

Credit River Watershed 836,422 901,148 988,506 7.7% 9.7% 18.2%

Ontario 12,930,908 13,693,517 14,564,394 5.9% 6.4% 12.6%


44

Table 7: Median Age, 2008-2018

Watershed

Area Subwatershed 2008 2013 2018

Median

Male

Median

Female

Low er 1 - Loyalist Creek 36.42 38.01 38.67 36.09 39.57

Low er 2 - Carolyn Creek 34.46 36.42 37.95 34.69 37.75

Low er 3 - Saw mill Creek 35.85 36.77 37.73 35.27 38.03

Low er 4 - Mullett Creek 37.13 39.23 40.69 37.64 40.48

Low er 5 - Fletcher's Creek 32.46 32.92 33.38 32.92 34.75

Low er 6 - Levi Creek 34.70 35.33 35.84 34.55 35.91

Low er 7 - Huttonville Creek 31.37 32.18 33.36 31.42 32.82

Low er 8a - Springbrook Tributary 31.94 32.33 33.62 32.07 32.54

Low er 8b - Churchville Tributary 32.35 33.44 34.45 32.85 33.99

Low er 9 - Norval to Port Credit 36.49 38.01 38.92 36.97 38.93

Low er 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 40.51 42.22 42.31 39.63 40.85

Low er 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 37.26 38.82 40.03 40.89 41.95

35.08 36.31 37.25 35.42 37.30

Middle 10 - Black Creek 38.26 40.31 41.01 43.84 44.73

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 39.66 41.44 41.84 45.13 47.05

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 42.69 44.30 44.27 38.72 42.85

Middle 13 - East Credit River 43.80 46.09 46.17 43.30 43.57

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval 39.06 40.91 41.78 44.35 46.56

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 44.20 46.23 47.02 38.21 37.01

41.28 43.21 43.68 42.26 43.63

Upper 15 - West Credit River 41.16 43.44 44.59 44.26 44.14

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 42.02 45.59 46.45 36.28 39.17

Upper 17 - Shaw 's Creek 36.11 37.56 37.58 46.65 45.79

Upper 18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit 41.86 44.20 47.61 40.71 43.58

Upper 19 - Orangeville 35.98 37.75 37.76 37.95 39.61

39.43 41.71 42.80 41.17 42.46

36.09 37.50 38.38 36.44 38.44

38.91 39.93 40.44 38.84 40.93

Median Age

Ontario

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal

Credit River Watershed

Table 8: Age Cohort Population Change in Watershed and ON, 2008-2018

Age 2008 2013 2018 '08-'13 13-'18 '08-'18 2008 2013 2018 08-'13 13-'18 08-'18

0-4 51,561 49,413 51,853 -4.2% 4.9% 0.6% 703,949 732,395 771,466 4.0% 5.3% 9.6%

5-9 52,887 54,846 54,815 3.7% -0.1% 3.6% 718,165 744,301 780,596 3.6% 4.9% 8.7%

10-14 59,177 57,609 60,513 -2.6% 5.0% 2.3% 801,978 757,746 782,869 -5.5% 3.3% -2.4%

15-19 62,307 65,143 63,593 4.6% -2.4% 2.1% 887,208 864,364 805,201 -2.6% -6.8% -9.2%

20-24 59,747 68,349 72,214 14.4% 5.7% 20.9% 895,742 979,489 951,487 9.3% -2.9% 6.2%

25-29 58,607 62,903 76,405 7.3% 21.5% 30.4% 867,926 962,207 1,075,112 10.9% 11.7% 23.9%

30-34 59,850 60,784 69,915 1.6% 15.0% 16.8% 862,849 921,777 1,058,761 6.8% 14.9% 22.7%

35-39 64,297 63,065 66,516 -1.9% 5.5% 3.5% 929,663 896,450 975,613 -3.6% 8.8% 4.9%

40-44 73,300 67,254 67,375 -8.2% 0.2% -8.1% 1,032,148 952,493 928,734 -7.7% -2.5% -10.0%

45-49 71,611 75,569 71,916 5.5% -4.8% 0.4% 1,073,287 1,045,150 972,429 -2.6% -7.0% -9.4%

50-54 59,037 70,833 76,326 20.0% 7.8% 29.3% 944,777 1,072,927 1,053,650 13.6% -1.8% 11.5%

55-59 47,428 57,990 70,480 22.3% 21.5% 48.6% 800,048 931,696 1,070,519 16.5% 14.9% 33.8%

60-64 37,455 45,573 56,565 21.7% 24.1% 51.0% 673,271 784,820 918,299 16.6% 17.0% 36.4%

65-69 25,788 35,760 44,148 38.7% 23.5% 71.2% 504,423 650,238 759,397 28.9% 16.8% 50.5%

70-74 19,404 24,393 33,918 25.7% 39.0% 74.8% 406,969 474,854 609,721 16.7% 28.4% 49.8%

75-79 14,853 18,171 23,023 22.3% 26.7% 55.0% 348,029 365,558 422,439 5.0% 15.6% 21.4%

80-84 10,668 12,414 15,217 16.4% 22.6% 42.6% 260,842 282,900 297,207 8.5% 5.1% 13.9%

85+ 8,445 11,079 13,714 31.2% 23.8% 62.4% 219,634 274,152 330,894 24.8% 20.7% 50.7%

CRW Total Population ONT Total Population

% Change % ChangeYear Year


45

Table 9: Population by Age Cohort, 2013

Watershed

Area Subwatershed 0-14 15-34 25-44 25-54 35-54 75+ Total

Low er 1 - Loyalist Creek 4,514 7,739 6,498 10,710 7,298 1,379 38,137

Low er 2 - Carolyn Creek 4,881 8,278 7,197 12,229 8,818 927 42,330

Low er 3 - Saw mill Creek 12,719 19,964 19,066 30,266 21,102 2,998 106,115

Low er 4 - Mullett Creek 13,247 23,913 21,295 36,290 25,855 3,349 123,950

Low er 5 - Fletcher's Creek 32,688 43,515 45,947 67,007 45,185 5,068 239,409

Low er 6 - Levi Creek 2,169 2,521 2,705 4,462 3,380 202 15,439

Low er 7 - Huttonville Creek 838 1,004 1,143 1,568 1,034 72 5,659

Low er 8a - Springbrook Tributary 2,355 2,894 3,395 4,574 2,880 217 16,316

Low er 8b - Churchville Tributary 7,165 10,275 10,559 15,333 9,982 866 54,180

Low er 9 - Norval to Port Credit 27,663 49,138 46,811 74,215 50,789 7,860 256,476

Low er 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 7,851 13,846 12,167 21,354 15,402 3,423 74,044

Low er 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 27,428 48,743 51,075 78,451 52,486 9,435 267,619

Middle 10 - Black Creek 3,369 4,112 4,565 7,603 5,773 940 26,362

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 4,295 5,406 5,683 9,956 7,745 1,437 34,522

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 739 936 953 1,776 1,395 262 6,061

Middle 13 - East Credit River 179 274 246 478 369 70 1,616

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval 497 726 842 1,324 945 245 4,580

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 310 473 422 856 687 103 2,851

Upper 15 - West Credit River 1,152 1,455 1,415 2,789 2,307 271 9,389

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 375 598 462 974 774 123 3,305

Upper 17 - Shaw 's Creek 1,027 1,233 1,269 2,155 1,636 168 7,487

Upper 18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit 133 176 175 321 252 41 1,098

Upper 19 - Orangeville 5,500 8,427 8,163 13,145 9,200 1,679 46,115

161,868 257,179 254,006 400,408 276,721 41,664 1,391,846

2,234,442 3,727,837 3,732,927 5,851,004 3,967,020 922,610 20,435,840

Subtotal

Credit River Watershed

Ontario

Table 10: Total Male and Female Population in Watershed and ON, 2008-2018

2008% Change

'08-'132013

% Change

'13-'182018

Male 414,540 7.6% 446,023 9.6% 489,048

% of Total Population 49.6% 49.5% 49.5%

Female 421,882 7.9% 455,125 9.7% 499,458


Male 6,375,014 5.9% 6,750,542 6.4% 7,182,170


Female 6,555,894 5.9% 6,942,975 6.3% 7,382,224


CRW

ONT


46

Table 11: Percent Change in Male and Female Population, 2013-2018

Watershed

Area2013 2018 % Change 2013 2018 % Change

Low er 1 Loyalist Creek 12,879 13,296 3% 13,439 13,893 3%

Low er 2 Carolyn Creek 13,511 13,259 -2% 13,735 13,589 -1%

Low er 3 Saw mill Creek 33,849 37,858 12% 34,861 38,622 11%

Low er 4 Mullett Creek 40,829 40,394 -1% 41,769 41,426 -1%

Low er 5 Fletcher's Creek 73,347 75,663 3% 74,034 76,969 4%

Low er 6 Levi Creek 4,754 6,243 31% 4,722 6,055 28%

Low er 7 Huttonville Creek 1,672 2,630 57% 1,669 2,566 54%

Low er 8a Springbrook Tributary 4,685 8,426 80% 4,803 8,360 74%

Low er 8b Churchville Tributary 16,536 20,667 25% 16,626 20,717 25%

Low er 9 Norval to Port Credit 83,236 92,787 11% 83,963 93,074 11%

Low er 21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 25,791 27,729 8% 26,243 28,234 8%

Low er 22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 84,187 91,285 8% 87,301 94,977 9%

Middle 10 Black Creek 8,927 9,600 8% 8,651 9,432 9%

Middle 11 Silver Creek 11,599 12,274 6% 11,878 12,544 6%

Middle 12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 2,223 2,533 14% 2,177 2,507 15%

Middle 13 East Credit River 643 791 23% 583 711 22%

Middle 14 Glen Williams to Norval 1,432 1,544 8% 1,547 1,711 11%

Middle 20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 1,088 1,290 19% 1,085 1,273 17%

Upper 15 West Credit River 3,381 3,485 3% 3,360 3,489 4%

Upper 16 Caledon Creek 1,299 1,577 21% 1,228 1,513 23%

Upper 17 Shaw 's Creek 2,406 2,880 20% 2,482 3,018 22%

Upper 18 Melville to Forks of the Credit 409 392 -4% 403 393 -3%

Upper 19 Orangeville 14,675 15,099 3% 15,545 16,545 6%

446,023 489,048 10% 455,125 499,458 10%

6,750,542 7,182,170 6% 6,942,975 7,382,224 6%

Male Female

Subwatershed Area


ONTARIO


47

Table 12: Households, 2008-2018

Watershed

Area Subwatershed 2008 2013 2018

% Change

08-13

% Change

13-18

% Change

08-182008 2013 2018

Low er 1 - Loyalist Creek 8,074 8,339 8,964 3.3% 7.5% 11.0% 3.32 3.16 3.03

Low er 2 - Carolyn Creek 6,869 7,238 7,279 5.4% 0.6% 6.0% 3.84 3.76 3.69

Low er 3 - Saw mill Creek 18,409 21,640 24,202 17.6% 11.8% 31.5% 3.24 3.18 3.16

Low er 4 - Mullett Creek 26,877 27,704 28,378 3.1% 2.4% 5.6% 3.11 2.98 2.88

Low er 5 - Fletcher's Creek 36,780 41,013 43,750 11.5% 6.7% 18.9% 3.59 3.59 3.49

Low er 6 - Levi Creek 2,384 2,866 3,823 20.2% 33.4% 60.4% 3.39 3.31 3.22

Low er 7 - Huttonville Creek 545 886 1,355 62.5% 52.9% 148.6% 3.53 3.77 3.84

Low er 8b - Churchville Tributary 6,850 8,638 10,633 26.1% 23.1% 55.2% 3.77 3.84 3.89

Low er 8a - Springbrook Tributary 914 2,331 3,848 154.9% 65.1% 320.8% 3.41 4.07 4.36

Low er 9 - Norval to Port Credit 48,086 53,532 61,863 11.3% 15.6% 28.7% 3.24 3.12 3.00

Low er 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 17,828 18,518 20,530 3.9% 10.9% 15.2% 2.94 2.81 2.73

Low er 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 58,212 63,961 71,919 9.9% 12.4% 23.5% 2.81 2.68 2.59

231,828 256,665 286,544 10.7% 11.6% 23.6% 3.35 3.36 3.32

Middle 10 - Black Creek 5,820 6,055 6,634 4.0% 9.6% 14.0% 2.92 2.90 2.87

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 8,246 8,468 9,052 2.7% 6.9% 9.8% 2.78 2.77 2.74

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 1,382 1,537 1,849 11.3% 20.3% 33.8% 2.94 2.86 2.73

Middle 13 - East Credit River 435 438 557 0.6% 27.2% 27.9% 2.88 2.80 2.70

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval 1,257 1,324 1,518 5.3% 14.7% 20.7% 2.29 2.25 2.14

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 756 804 994 6.3% 23.7% 31.5% 2.81 2.70 2.58

17,897 18,626 20,604 4.1% 10.6% 15.1% 2.77 2.72 2.63

Upper 15 - West Credit River 2,453 2,368 2,482 -3.5% 4.8% 1.2% 2.90 2.85 2.81

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 787 799 1,005 1.5% 25.8% 27.7% 3.26 3.16 3.07

Upper 17 - Shaw 's Creek 1,391 1,554 1,927 11.8% 24.0% 38.6% 3.12 3.14 3.06

Upper 18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit 312 296 292 -5.0% -1.6% -6.5% 2.77 2.74 2.69

Upper 19 - Orangeville 10,288 11,122 12,282 8.1% 10.4% 19.4% 2.84 2.72 2.58

15,231 16,139 17,987 6.0% 11.5% 18.1% 2.98 2.92 2.84

Total Credit River Watershed 266,273 293,550 329,718 10.2% 12.3% 23.8% 3.14 3.07 3.00

Total Ontario 4,883,040 5,243,879 5,694,107 7.4% 8.6% 16.6% 2.65 2.61 2.56

Subtotal

Total Household Percent Change Average Household Size

Subtotal

Subtotal

Table 13: Total Family Composition in Watershed, 2013

2008 % 2013 % 2018 %

Total number of census families in private

households by family size 230,638 248,956 272,542

Total couple families by family structure 194,193 84.2% 210,218 84.4% 230,605 84.6%

Total families of now-married couples 178,767 92.1% 193,394 92.0% 211,308 91.6%

Without Children 57,593 32.2% 66,304 34.3% 80,252 38.0%

With Children 121,174 67.8% 127,090 65.7% 131,056 62.0%

1 child 41,339 34.1% 43,088 22.3% 44,383 21.0%

2 children 55,807 46.1% 58,642 30.3% 59,835 28.3%

3+ children 24,028 19.8% 25,360 13.1% 26,838 12.7%

Total families of common-law couples 15,426 7.9% 16,824 8.0% 19,297 8.4%

Without Children 8,272 53.6% 9,409 55.9% 11,155 57.8%

With Children 7,154 46.4% 7,415 44.1% 8,142 42.2%

1 child 3,415 47.7% 3,564 48.1% 3,908 48.0%

2 children 2,607 36.4% 2,690 36.3% 2,968 36.5%

3+ children 1,132 15.8% 1,161 15.7% 1,266 15.5%

Total lone-parent families by sex of parent 36,445 15.8% 38,738 15.6% 41,937 15.4%

Male parent 6,730 18.47% 7,152 18.46% 7,892 18.8%

1 child 4,217 62.7% 4,506 63.0% 5,039 63.8%

2 children 1,884 28.0% 1,993 27.9% 2,185 27.7%

3+ children 629 9.3% 653 9.1% 668 8.5%

Female parent 29,715 81.53% 31,586 81.54% 34,045 81.2%

1 child 16,430 55.3% 17,443 55.2% 18,748 55.1%

2 children 9,345 31.4% 9,929 31.4% 10,734 31.5%

3+ children 3,940 13.3% 4,214 13.3% 4,563 13.4%


48

Table 14: Family Composition, 2013

Total number of

census families in

private households by

family size

Total couple

families by

family

structure

Total families

of now-

married

couples

Total families

of common-

law couples

Total lone-

parent

families

Lower 1 - Loyalist Creek 7,193 6,092 5,620 472 1,330

Lower 2 - Carolyn Creek 7,316 6,364 6,098 267 952

Lower 3 - Sawmill Creek 18,749 16,137 15,071 1,066 2,613

Lower 4 - Mullett Creek 23,214 19,641 18,045 1,596 3,573

Lower 5 - Fletcher's Creek 39,959 33,262 31,112 2,151 6,697

Lower 6 - Levi Creek 2,639 2,333 2,118 215 305

Lower 7 - Huttonville Creek 969 830 783 47 138

Lower 8a - Springbrook Tributary 2,538 2,217 2,079 138 321

Lower 8b - Churchville Tributary 8,939 7,632 7,157 476 1,307

Lower 9 - Norval to Port Credit 45,664 39,318 36,885 2,433 6,346

Lower 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 14,815 12,622 11,467 1,155 2,193

Lower 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 47,785 38,945 35,401 3,544 8,840

219,780 185,393 171,835 13,558 34,615

78.2% 6.2% 15.7%

Middle 10 - Black Creek 4,891 4,272 3,710 562 619

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 6,779 5,810 5,150 660 969

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 1,280 1,141 1,022 119 138

Middle 13 - East Credit River 372 333 299 35 38

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval 852 624 505 118 229

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 656 591 516 74 65

14,830 12,771 11,202 1,569 2,059

75.5% 10.6% 13.9%

Upper 15 - West Credit River 2,000 1,799 1,528 271 202

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 701 634 570 64 67

Upper 17 - Shaw's Creek 1,389 1,221 1,089 133 167

Upper 18 - Credit River - Melville to Forks of the Credit 246 224 189 35 21

Upper 19 - Orangeville 8,484 6,959 5,854 1,104 1,525

12,819 10,837 9,230 1,608 1,982

72.0% 12.5% 15.5%

2013

Family Composition by Subwatershed, 2013

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal

%

%

%


49

Table 15: Household Income, 2013

Average

Household

Income

Median

Household

Income

<$49,999

% of Total

$50,000 -

99,999

% of Total

$100,000 -

199,999

% of Total

$200,000+

% of Total

Total

Households

(Household

Income

Base)

Low er 1 - Loyalist Creek 118,553.15$ 82,930.62$ 2,591 31.1% 2,250 27.0% 2,397 28.7% 1,101 13.2% 8,339

Low er 2 - Carolyn Creek 102,687.87$ 88,756.76$ 1,595 22.0% 2,615 36.1% 2,604 36.0% 424 5.9% 7,238

Low er 3 - Saw mill Creek 113,691.79$ 91,274.65$ 4,986 23.0% 7,027 32.5% 7,638 35.3% 1,989 9.2% 21,640

Low er 4 - Mullett Creek 111,122.18$ 88,129.67$ 6,670 24.1% 9,192 33.2% 9,208 33.2% 2,634 9.5% 27,704

Low er 5 - Fletcher's Creek 93,963.33$ 80,910.20$ 10,262 25.0% 16,057 39.2% 13,141 32.0% 1,552 3.8% 41,013

Low er 6 - Levi Creek 147,731.26$ 100,001.00$ 291 10.1% 713 24.9% 1,385 48.3% 477 16.6% 2,866

Low er 7 - Huttonville Creek 108,536.36$ 91,776.32$ 131 14.8% 374 42.2% 329 37.1% 53 5.9% 886

Low er 8a - Springbrook Tributary 124,507.13$ 100,001.00$ 299 12.8% 859 36.8% 937 40.2% 236 10.1% 2,331

Low er 8b - Churchville Tributary 108,048.74$ 90,430.77$ 1,573 18.2% 3,369 39.0% 3,181 36.8% 515 6.0% 8,638

Low er 9 - Norval to Port Credit 109,937.39$ 84,866.10$ 14,603 27.3% 16,951 31.7% 17,016 31.8% 4,962 9.3% 53,532

Low er 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 138,070.88$ 92,178.85$ 4,378 23.6% 5,672 30.6% 5,586 30.2% 2,881 15.6% 18,518

Low er 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 84,289.05$ 66,194.67$ 23,174 36.2% 23,170 36.2% 14,730 23.0% 2,888 4.5% 63,961

113,428.26$ 88,120.88$ 70,552 27.5% 88,248 34.4% 78,153 30.4% 19,712 7.7% 256,665

Middle 10 - Black Creek 116,578.39$ 92,271.60$ 1,306 21.6% 2,036 33.6% 2,218 36.6% 496 8.2% 6,055

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 120,263.31$ 97,919.19$ 1,685 19.9% 2,652 31.3% 3,184 37.6% 947 11.2% 8,468

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 126,757.46$ 97,107.84$ 338 22.0% 461 30.0% 527 34.2% 212 13.8% 1,537

Middle 13 - East Credit River 136,028.20$ 96,363.64$ 102 23.4% 124 28.3% 151 34.4% 61 13.9% 438

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval 79,149.63$ 69,174.31$ 434 32.8% 530 40.1% 337 25.5% 22 1.7% 1,324

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 154,947.53$ 95,000.00$ 211 26.2% 215 26.8% 229 28.5% 148 18.5% 804

122,287.42$ 91,306.10$ 4075 21.9% 6019 32.3% 6,645 35.7% 1,886 10.1% 18,626

Upper 15 - West Credit River 124,795.71$ 100,001.00$ 456 19.3% 702 29.7% 897 37.9% 312 13.2% 2,368

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 135,318.14$ 100,001.00$ 151 18.9% 216 27.0% 360 45.1% 72 9.1% 799

Upper 17 - Shaw 's Creek 114,517.63$ 98,660.71$ 312 20.1% 480 30.9% 618 39.7% 144 9.3% 1,554

Upper 18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit 158,941.87$ 100,001.00$ 54 18.1% 68 23.1% 115 38.8% 59 20.0% 296

Upper 19 - Orangeville 92,302.00$ 81,375.66$ 2,982 26.8% 3,983 35.8% 3,678 33.1% 479 4.3% 11,122

125,175.07$ 96,007.88$ 3,955 24.5% 5,450 33.8% 5,668 35.1% 1,066 6.6% 16,139

Total CREDIT RIVER WATERSHED

Total ONTARIO33.2% 1,355,091

105,189.15$ 82,567.20$ 78,764 26.8% 100,405 34.2%

94,264.63$ 94,264.63$ 1,817,911 34.7% 1,741,188

2013 Household Income

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal

2013

25.8% 329,689

7.8%

6.3%

293,550

5,243,879

91,363 31.1% 23,018


50

Table 16: Detailed Household Income, 2013

<$10,000 $10,000 -

$19,999

$20,000 -

$29,999

$30,000 -

$39,999

$40,000 -

$49,999

$50,000 -

$59,999

$60,000 -

$69,999

$70,000 -

$79,999

$80,000 -

$89,999

$90,000 -

$99,999

$100,000-

$124,999

$125,000-

$149,999

$150,000-

$174,999

$175,000-

$199,999

$200,000-

$249,999

$250,000+

$100,000+

Low er 1 - Loyalist Creek 329 456 567 628 611 541 472 443 418 376 876 696 458 366 468 633 3498

Low er 2 - Carolyn Creek 173 234 314 409 465 485 514 539 555 522 1067 757 489 290 210 214 3028

Low er 3 - Saw mill Creek 487 740 990 1303 1467 1471 1441 1358 1389 1369 2995 2202 1460 980 866 1123 9626

Low er 4 - Mullett Creek 912 1124 1352 1568 1713 1808 1924 1927 1874 1659 3517 2672 1842 1177 1233 1401 11842

Low er 5 - Fletcher's Creek 1144 1690 1985 2509 2934 3176 3381 3388 3285 2827 5620 3929 2311 1282 781 771 14693

Low er 6 - Levi Creek 35 68 57 57 73 85 93 136 197 201 427 374 355 230 227 250 1862

Low er 7 - Huttonville Creek 4 13 27 39 49 61 74 78 85 76 138 94 63 33 25 27 381

Low er 8a - Springbrook Tributary 0 24 64 94 118 145 169 164 193 187 347 249 216 124 118 118 1173

Low er 8b - Churchville Tributary 115 202 291 426 538 621 689 690 719 650 1322 922 606 332 238 277 3697

Low er 9 - Norval to Port Credit 1948 2486 2978 3476 3715 3664 3544 3356 3286 3101 6601 4803 3284 2328 2155 2807 21978

Low er 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 124 261 280 302 338 370 397 426 437 405 2060 1544 1165 817 1004 1877 2714

Low er 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 148 312 350 397 477 538 537 537 546 495 6419 4472 2351 1488 1196 1692 4131

Middle 10 - Black Creek 44 66 68 76 83 82 80 91 106 102 895 671 398 254 197 299 739

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 13 17 21 24 27 27 27 25 24 22 1120 938 685 441 411 536 211

Middle 12 - Credit River - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 34 65 91 114 129 128 109 96 105 92 197 154 100 75 84 128 359

Middle 13 - East Credit River 57 75 79 108 138 162 170 122 129 120 44 48 38 21 24 37 1209

Middle 14 - Credit River - Glen Williams to Norval 17 26 28 35 45 48 48 36 35 48 169 107 25 37 6 16 432

Middle 20 - Credit River - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 26 57 60 81 89 85 89 90 103 112 72 70 51 36 52 96 762

Upper 15 - West Credit River 7 8 12 15 12 8 8 10 17 25 318 271 146 163 115 196 174

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 267 570 622 742 781 768 852 855 756 752 95 102 105 57 19 54 4157

Upper 17 - Shaw 's Creek 27 37 47 51 49 42 41 39 44 49 214 181 160 62 73 71 377

Upper 18 - Credit River - Melville to Forks of the Credit 532 711 882 1077 1176 1181 1203 1182 1094 1012 45 32 22 16 24 35 8467

Upper 19 - Orangeville 3162 4011 4746 5485 5770 5573 5219 4742 4276 3358 1592 1071 583 431 289 189 17618

9606 13250 15935 19085 20888 21190 21237 20503 19792 17683 36478 26584 11130 11130 9975 13043 114381

3% 5% 5% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 6% 12% 9% 4% 4% 3% 4% 39%

207144 368561 397100 420873 424233 400471 375920 352827 324235 287735 546174 395485 158952 158952 137199 192490 1684780

4% 7% 8% 8% 8% 8% 7% 7% 6% 5% 10% 8% 3% 3% 3% 4% 32%

Total CREDIT RIVER WATERSHED

Total ONTARIO

2013 Household Income by Detailed Income

2013

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal


51

Table 17: Household Average Expenditure, 2012

Watershed

Area Expenditure

Total Current

Consumption Food Shelter Transportation Education

Low er 1 Loyalist Creek $74,969.68 $9,935.79 $22,888.38 $4,940.96 $2,325.47 $1,737.32

Low er 2 Carolyn Creek $69,579.90 $9,149.92 $20,940.46 $4,315.22 $1,976.11 $1,411.82

Low er 3 Saw mill Creek $75,313.62 $9,600.16 $22,707.45 $4,925.95 $2,124.04 $1,711.32

Low er 4 Mullett Creek $71,241.76 $9,457.08 $21,829.00 $4,760.23 $2,166.95 $1,661.14

Low er 5 Fletcher's Creek $64,536.42 $8,386.52 $19,370.75 $4,011.65 $1,872.81 $1,393.68

Low er 6 Levi Creek $95,157.34 $11,991.61 $29,049.68 $6,390.59 $2,777.88 $1,931.26

Low er 7 Huttonville Creek $72,421.71 $8,994.39 $21,622.93 $4,611.36 $2,123.48 $1,575.88

Low er 8a Springbrook Tributary $80,619.70 $10,238.94 $23,625.95 $5,150.37 $2,517.53 $1,848.29

Low er 8b Churchville Tributary $72,224.50 $9,461.99 $21,453.69 $4,438.12 $2,127.37 $1,488.19

Low er 9 Norval to Port Credit $71,993.10 $9,749.58 $21,913.77 $4,634.96 $2,154.05 $1,631.09

Low er 21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries $80,335.80 $10,354.72 $24,274.54 $5,547.57 $2,476.31 $2,003.41

Low er 22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries $59,544.53 $8,589.53 $18,495.73 $3,824.94 $1,783.63 $1,445.81

$73,994.84 $9,659.19 $22,347.69 $4,795.99 $2,202.14 $1,653.27

Middle 10 Black Creek $75,197.52 $9,829.53 $22,852.14 $5,031.46 $2,363.28 $1,919.00

Middle 11 Silver Creek $79,209.33 $10,404.41 $23,981.87 $5,207.47 $2,520.48 $1,938.99

Middle 12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams $83,759.73 $10,927.46 $25,168.61 $5,433.41 $2,617.70 $2,018.46

Middle 13 East Credit River $79,590.49 $10,355.89 $24,378.07 $5,555.55 $2,473.53 $1,857.05

Middle 14 Glen Williams to Norval $56,476.81 $7,979.07 $16,408.81 $3,738.69 $1,814.17 $1,704.66

Middle 20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham $89,274.74 $11,346.88 $26,901.25 $6,130.34 $2,804.10 $2,052.12

$77,251.44 $10,140.54 $23,281.79 $5,182.82 $2,432.21 $1,915.05

Upper 15 West Credit River $85,546.51 $11,435.00 $25,473.32 $5,552.39 $2,661.41 $2,224.63

Upper 16 Caledon Creek $86,595.22 $11,152.17 $26,136.32 $5,679.17 $2,727.87 $1,968.20

Upper 17 Shaw 's Creek $77,795.08 $9,821.74 $23,340.08 $4,954.75 $2,289.50 $1,775.68

Upper 18 Melville to Forks of the Credit $100,525.93 $12,879.48 $29,149.77 $6,487.16 $3,195.18 $2,309.68

Upper 19 Orangeville $62,855.61 $8,519.40 $18,836.44 $4,207.54 $2,011.29 $1,698.35

$82,663.67 $10,761.56 $24,587.19 $5,376.20 $2,577.05 $1,995.31

$69,602.31 $9,331.25 $21,156.35 $4,518.54 $2,088.34 $1,622.25

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal


Subwatershed Area


52

Table 18: Labour Force & Occupation, 2013

Watershed

Area

2008 2013 2018Management

occupations

Business,

finance and

administration

Natural and

applied

science and

other related

Health

Social science,

education,

government

service and

religion

Art,

culture,

recreation

and sport

Sales

and

service

Trades,

transport/

equipment

operators and

other related

Primary

industry

Processing,

manufacturing

and utilities

Occupation

not

applicable

Total

Low er 1 Loyalist Creek 69.5% 68.2% 69.9% 1850 3182 1168 614 952 362 3564 1502 105 1037 221

Low er 2 Carolyn Creek 72.0% 70.8% 72.7% 1503 3677 1487 724 854 223 3379 1965 43 1518 305

Low er 3 Saw mill Creek 72.7% 71.9% 73.7% 4813 9315 4153 2090 2698 920 8849 4016 204 2071 814

Low er 4 Mullett Creek 73.7% 72.4% 74.1% 6434 12385 4803 2126 3829 1130 10479 5364 336 2240 862

Low er 5 Fletcher's Creek 73.8% 73.3% 75.2% 7186 18847 5836 3210 4562 1242 15188 15057 596 9829 1632

Low er 6 Levi Creek 81.9% 80.6% 81.2% 1216 1281 540 151 497 134 980 751 68 200 62

Low er 7 Huttonville Creek 72.7% 69.5% 70.8% 193 444 80 73 74 10 282 396 51 102 32

Low er 8a Springbrook Tributary 68.1% 66.4% 67.9% 740 1113 116 172 190 27 799 1136 193 124 121

Low er 8b Churchville Tributary 72.8% 71.0% 72.2% 1966 4060 941 654 821 240 3215 3781 367 1861 428

Low er 9 Norval to Port Credit 70.9% 69.9% 71.8% 10486 21510 9255 4067 5892 2072 19997 12691 716 7807 1916

Low er 21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 70.1% 68.7% 70.2% 4626 6997 2119 1501 2537 1021 6199 3221 298 1205 389

Low er 22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 69.1% 68.0% 69.7% 8987 21738 8817 3755 5526 2467 21698 13002 665 8566 2114

50,000 104,549 39,315 19,138 28,431 9,849 94,629 62,882 3,643 36,560 8,896

10.9% 22.8% 8.6% 4.2% 6.2% 2.2% 20.7% 13.7% 0.8% 8.0% 1.9%

Middle 10 Black Creek 75.0% 73.2% 75.1% 1305 1938 610 417 639 162 2030 1811 248 710 90

Middle 11 Silver Creek 72.5% 71.0% 72.9% 1993 2631 870 532 1152 366 2827 1768 353 846 166

Middle 12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 71.5% 69.7% 71.7% 334 491 150 85 124 106 572 323 141 105 31

Middle 13 East Credit River 66.4% 65.7% 68.6% 112 132 53 44 54 30 99 90 46 19 4

Middle 14 Glen Williams to Norval 70.4% 67.0% 65.5% 182 300 103 55 132 25 379 249 63 128 1

Middle 20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 70.8% 69.6% 71.9% 211 227 78 83 139 37 236 158 77 47 3

4,137 5,718 1,864 1,216 2,241 727 6,144 4,399 926 1,855 295

14.0% 19.4% 6.3% 4.1% 7.6% 2.5% 20.8% 14.9% 3.1% 6.3% 1.0%

Upper 15 West Credit River 74.6% 73.9% 76.4% 620 714 232 155 286 113 835 702 165 248 43

Upper 16 Caledon Creek 73.0% 72.0% 73.9% 255 310 98 104 150 27 244 190 73 52 3

Upper 17 Shaw 's Creek 76.1% 75.6% 78.0% 445 600 164 78 186 68 623 441 79 187 36

Upper 18 Melville to Forks of the Credit 73.2% 72.1% 74.0% 71 71 42 21 50 43 88 62 15 19 1

Upper 19 Orangeville 73.4% 72.2% 74.0% 1804 2806 781 755 1337 312 4654 2994 314 1630 101

3194 4501 1317 1113 2009 562 6444 4389 646 2136 184

12.1% 17.0% 5.0% 4.2% 7.6% 2.1% 24.3% 16.6% 2.4% 8.1% 0.7%

TOTAL 71.7% 70.6% 72.3% 58,085 115,350 42,714 21,541 32,875 11,234 107,810 71,912 5,218 40,773 9,380 516,892

Labour Force & Occupation, 2013 in the Watershed


Subtotal

% of all occupations

457,892

29,520

26,496

Rate of Participation in the Labour

Force

Subtotal


Subtotal


Subw atershed Area

Occupation Type 2013


53

Table 19: Mode of Transportation to Work in Watershed, 2008-2018

Year

Car/ Motorcycle

Public Transit

Walking Bicycle Other Total

2008 347,236 53,227 10,616 1,532 2,987 415,598

% 83.6% 12.8% 2.6% 0.4% 0.7% 100%

2013 375,629 56,880 11,175 1,549 3,474 448,707

% 83.7% 12.7% 2.5% 0.3% 0.8% 100%

2018 424,327 63,862 12,839 1,757 4,188 506,973

% 83.7% 12.6% 2.5% 0.3% 0.8% 100%

Table 20: Mode of Transportation to Work by Subwatershed Area, 2013

Watershed

Area

Car/

Motorcycle%

Public

Transit% Walking % Bicycle % Other % Total

Low er 1 Loyalist Creek 10,122 81.0% 1,824 14.6% 502 4.0% 3 0.0% 40 0.3% 12,490

Low er 2 Carolyn Creek 11,708 84.6% 1,856 13.4% 159 1.1% 31 0.2% 89 0.6% 13,843

Low er 3 Sawmill Creek 25,753 82.3% 4,453 14.2% 711 2.3% 123 0.4% 263 0.8% 31,303

Low er 4 Mullett Creek 36,816 84.0% 5,491 12.5% 1,128 2.6% 84 0.2% 295 0.7% 43,814

Low er 5 Fletcher's Creek 65,178 87.9% 7,455 10.1% 901 1.2% 71 0.1% 549 0.7% 74,155

Low er 6 Levi Creek 4,830 93.6% 244 4.7% 33 0.6% 5 0.1% 51 1.0% 5,163

Low er 7 Huttonville Creek 1,340 87.7% 112 7.3% 35 2.3% 5 0.3% 36 2.4% 1,527

Low er 8a Springbrook Tributary 3,476 88.4% 169 4.3% 119 3.0% 0 0.0% 168 4.3% 3,932

Low er 8b Churchville Tributary 14,222 88.5% 1,313 8.2% 276 1.7% 2 0.0% 260 1.6% 16,074

Low er 9 Norval to Port Credit 68,597 81.7% 12,608 15.0% 1,902 2.3% 258 0.3% 561 0.7% 83,926

Low er 21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributar 20,454 79.6% 4,057 15.8% 805 3.1% 241 0.9% 152 0.6% 25,708

Low er 22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributari 66,490 77.8% 15,765 18.4% 2,361 2.8% 250 0.3% 609 0.7% 85,474

84.8% 11.5% 2.3% 0.2% 1.2%

Middle 10 Black Creek 8,154 92.4% 270 3.1% 260 2.9% 77 0.9% 62 0.7% 8,821

Middle 11 Silver Creek 10,895 91.1% 402 3.4% 525 4.4% 78 0.7% 65 0.5% 11,964

Middle 12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 1,747 86.3% 87 4.3% 109 5.4% 48 2.3% 34 1.7% 2,025

Middle 13 East Credit River 565 98.5% 4 0.7% 2 0.3% 0 0.0% 3 0.5% 574

Middle 14 Glen Williams to Norval 1,283 87.8% 35 2.4% 96 6.6% 38 2.6% 9 0.6% 1,461

Middle 20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 1,037 94.4% 8 0.7% 22 2.0% 8 0.7% 24 2.2% 1,098

91.8% 2.4% 3.6% 1.2% 1.0%

Upper 15 West Credit River 3,210 92.6% 28 0.8% 172 5.0% 40 1.2% 15 0.4% 3,466

Upper 16 Caledon Creek 1,225 96.2% 35 2.8% 10 0.8% 0 0.0% 3 0.2% 1,272

Upper 17 Shaw's Creek 2,429 94.5% 22 0.9% 76 3.0% 41 1.6% 2 0.1% 2,570

Upper 18 Melville to Forks of the Credit 382 96.8% 7 1.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6 1.5% 394

Upper 19 Orangeville 14,359 91.8% 163 1.0% 883 5.7% 135 0.9% 94 0.6% 15,635

94.4% 1.4% 2.9% 0.7% 0.6%Subtotal

Subwatershed Area

Mode of Transportation to Work, 2013

Subtotal

Subtotal


54

Table 21: Highest Level of Education Completed, 2013

Watershed

Area

Household

Population

15+

No

Certif icate,

Diploma/

Degree

% No

Certificate,

etc.

School

Certif icate

(Grade 9-

13)

% High

School

Certificate

Apprentice,

Trades,

Certif icate/

Diploma

% Apprentice,

Trades, etc.

Diploma

College, w ith

Certif icate/

Diploma

% College

Certificate/

Diploma

University

Certif icate,

Diploma (no

Bachelors)

University

Bachelors

Degree/ Higher

% University

and Higher

(Diploma,

Degree, etc.)

Low er 1 Loyalist Creek 21,331 3,953 18.5% 5,487 25.7% 1,391 6.5% 3,127 14.7% 1,222 6,151 34.6%

Low er 2 Carolyn Creek 22,134 4,527 20.5% 5,347 24.2% 1,350 6.1% 2,856 12.9% 1,759 6,294 36.4%

Low er 3 Saw mill Creek 55,515 8,589 15.5% 13,094 23.6% 2,709 4.9% 8,514 15.3% 3,945 18,666 40.7%

Low er 4 Mullett Creek 69,087 11,179 16.2% 17,311 25.1% 4,154 6.0% 11,151 16.1% 4,436 20,857 36.6%

Low er 5 Fletcher's Creek 113,536 25,027 22.0% 31,072 27.4% 8,403 7.4% 18,832 16.6% 7,437 22,765 26.6%

Low er 6 Levi Creek 7,294 919 12.6% 1,960 26.9% 438 6.0% 1,604 22.0% 284 2,089 32.5%

Low er 7 Huttonville Creek 2,501 599 24.0% 690 27.6% 193 7.7% 412 16.5% 173 434 24.3%

Low er 8a Springbrook Tributary 7,128 1,872 26.3% 1,960 27.5% 640 9.0% 1,120 15.7% 460 1,076 21.5%

Low er 8b Churchville Tributary 25,817 6,340 24.6% 7,375 28.6% 1,968 7.6% 3,945 15.3% 1,638 4,551 24.0%

Low er 9 Norval to Port Credit 138,020 26,289 19.0% 34,080 24.7% 8,404 6.1% 19,657 14.2% 9,468 40,122 35.9%

Low er 21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 43,829 7,152 16.3% 11,264 25.7% 2,549 5.8% 6,926 15.8% 2,649 13,288 36.4%

Low er 22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 143,092 28,297 19.8% 35,578 24.9% 10,055 7.0% 20,054 14.0% 9,754 39,353 34.3%

649,284 124,744 19.2% 165,217 25.4% 42,254 6.5% 98,197 15.1% 43,226 175,645 33.7%

Middle 10 Black Creek 13,601 2,548 18.7% 4,096 30.1% 1,115 8.2% 3,038 22.3% 349 2,455 20.6%

Middle 11 Silver Creek 19,018 2,912 15.3% 5,626 29.6% 1,521 8.0% 3,913 20.6% 695 4,352 26.5%

Middle 12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 3,531 775 22.0% 975 27.6% 244 6.9% 688 19.5% 124 724 24.0%

Middle 13 East Credit River 1,036 191 18.5% 283 27.3% 91 8.8% 159 15.4% 36 276 30.1%

Middle 14 Glen Williams to Norval 2,416 599 24.8% 819 33.9% 203 8.4% 428 17.7% 58 309 15.2%

Middle 20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 1,859 279 15.0% 540 29.0% 176 9.5% 315 16.9% 68 482 29.6%

41,461 7,304 17.6% 12,338 29.8% 3,350 8.1% 8,542 20.6% 1,330 8,597 23.9%

Upper 15 West Credit River 5,564 1,081 19.4% 1,600 28.8% 442 7.9% 1,174 21.1% 204 1,063 22.8%

Upper 16 Caledon Creek 2,091 366 17.5% 571 27.3% 152 7.3% 517 24.7% 62 422 23.2%

Upper 17 Shaw 's Creek 3,844 642 16.7% 1,184 30.8% 352 9.2% 1,104 28.7% 99 463 14.6%

Upper 18 Melville to Forks of the Credit 670 138 20.6% 194 29.0% 41 6.1% 122 18.3% 34 140 26.0%

Upper 19 Orangeville 24237 5414 22.3% 8084 33.4% 1778 7.3% 4934 20.4% 539 3488 16.6%

36,406 7,641 21.0% 11,633 32.0% 2,765 7.6% 7,851 21.6% 939 5,576 17.9%

TOTAL 732,018 140,684 19.2% 189,930 25.9% 48,517 6.6% 115,833 15.8% 45,781 191,273 32.4%CREDIT RIVER WATERSHED

2013

Subw atershed Area

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal


55

Table 22: Highest Level of Education Completed, 2018

Watershed

AreaHousehold

Population

15+

No

Certif icate,

Diploma/

Degree

% No

Certificate,

etc.

High

School

Certif icate

(Grade 9-

13)

% High

School

Certificate

Apprentice,

Trades,

Certif icate/

Diploma

% Apprentice,

Trades, etc.

Diploma

College, w ith

Certif icate/

Diploma

% College

Certificate/

Diploma

University

Certif icate,

Diploma (no

Bachelors)

University

Bachelors

Degree/ Higher

% University

and Higher

(Diploma,

Degree, etc.)

Low er 1 Loyalist Creek 22,401 4,002 17.9% 5,590 25.0% 1,399 6.2% 2,988 13.3% 1,365 7,057 37.6%

Low er 2 Carolyn Creek 22,580 4,407 19.5% 5,285 23.4% 1,296 5.7% 2,642 11.7% 1,927 7,023 39.6%

Low er 3 Saw mill Creek 62,789 9,121 14.5% 14,096 22.5% 2,865 4.6% 8,620 13.7% 4,800 23,287 44.7%

Low er 4 Mullett Creek 70,070 10,811 15.4% 17,055 24.3% 3,971 5.7% 10,251 14.6% 4,827 23,155 39.9%

Low er 5 Fletcher's Creek 120,405 25,820 21.4% 32,585 27.1% 8,472 7.0% 18,550 15.4% 8,373 26,604 29.0%

Low er 6 Levi Creek 9,710 1,353 13.9% 2,691 27.7% 587 6.0% 1,826 18.8% 360 2,893 33.5%

Low er 7 Huttonville Creek 4,018 1,020 25.4% 1,113 27.7% 299 7.4% 601 15.0% 286 700 24.5%

Low er 8a Springbrook Tributary 12,958 3,362 25.9% 3,547 27.4% 1,122 8.7% 1,902 14.7% 907 2,118 23.3%

Low er 8b Churchville Tributary 32,847 8,030 24.4% 9,156 27.9% 2,506 7.6% 4,696 14.3% 2,239 6,221 25.8%

Low er 9 Norval to Port Credit 155,124 28,237 18.2% 37,440 24.1% 8,875 5.7% 20,063 12.9% 11,191 49,318 39.0%

Low er 21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 47,642 7,295 15.3% 11,724 24.6% 2,586 5.4% 6,799 14.3% 3,068 16,170 40.4%

Low er 22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 155,758 29,322 18.8% 37,481 24.1% 10,220 6.6% 19,866 12.8% 11,366 47,502 37.8%

716,302 132,779 18.5% 177,764 24.8% 44,199 6.2% 98,803 13.8% 50,709 212,048 36.7%

Middle 10 Black Creek 14,892 2,456 16.5% 4,399 29.5% 1,153 7.7% 3,250 21.8% 399 3,236 24.4%

Middle 11 Silver Creek 20,266 2,686 13.3% 5,749 28.4% 1,507 7.4% 4,018 19.8% 768 5,538 31.1%

Middle 12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 4,069 809 19.9% 1,112 27.3% 273 6.7% 779 19.1% 151 947 27.0%

Middle 13 East Credit River 1,263 238 18.8% 343 27.1% 107 8.5% 193 15.3% 44 339 30.3%

Middle 14 Glen Williams to Norval 2,618 632 24.1% 890 34.0% 215 8.2% 436 16.7% 61 385 17.0%

Middle 20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 2,194 362 16.5% 631 28.8% 197 9.0% 352 16.0% 81 572 29.8%

45,302 7,182 15.9% 13,123 29.0% 3,451 7.6% 9,026 19.9% 1,503 11,016 27.6%

Upper 15 West Credit River 5,780 1,019 17.6% 1,584 27.4% 428 7.4% 1,183 20.5% 239 1,328 27.1%

Upper 16 Caledon Creek 2,588 460 17.8% 705 27.2% 196 7.6% 598 23.1% 71 559 24.3%

Upper 17 Shaw 's Creek 4,735 783 16.5% 1,447 30.6% 402 8.5% 1,362 28.8% 126 615 15.6%

Upper 18 Melville to Forks of the Credit 671 141 21.0% 191 28.5% 42 6.2% 116 17.3% 33 147 26.9%

Upper 19 Orangeville 25,756 5,554 21.6% 8,531 33.1% 1,848 7.2% 4,981 19.3% 563 4,279 18.8%

39,529 7,957 20.1% 12,458 31.5% 2,915 7.4% 8,240 20.8% 1,032 6,927 20.1%

TOTAL 813359 150,147 18.5% 205,186 25.2% 51,154 6.3% 118,439 14.6% 54,216 234,217 35.5%CREDIT RIVER WATERSHED

2018

Subw atershed Area

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal


56

Table 23: Dwellings by Occupancy: Status & Tenure, 2008-2018

Watershed

Area

Total

Occupied

Total

Occupied

Total

Occupied2008-2013 2013-2018 2008-2018

Low er 8,074 5,714 70.8% 2,360 29.2% 8,339 5,861 70.3% 2,478 29.7% 8,964 6,082 67.9% 2,881 32.1% 3% 7% 11%

Low er 6,869 5,938 86.5% 930 13.5% 7,238 6,273 86.7% 965 13.3% 7,279 6,310 86.7% 969 13.3% 5% 1% 6%Low er 18,409 14,536 79.0% 3,873 21.0% 21,640 16,285 75.3% 5,355 24.7% 24,202 18,137 74.9% 6,065 25.1% 18% 12% 31%

Low er 26,877 21,585 80.3% 5,291 19.7% 27,704 22,080 79.7% 5,624 20.3% 28,378 22,434 79.1% 5,944 20.9% 3% 2% 6%

Low er 36,780 30,851 83.9% 5,929 16.1% 41,013 34,291 83.6% 6,722 16.4% 43,750 35,801 81.8% 7,949 18.2% 12% 7% 19%

Low er 2,384 2,286 95.9% 98 4.1% 2,866 2,741 95.6% 125 4.4% 3,823 3,517 92.0% 306 8.0% 20% 33% 60%

Low er 545 493 90.5% 52 9.5% 886 762 86.0% 124 14.0% 1,355 1,129 83.4% 225 16.6% 63% 53% 149%

Low er 914 765 83.6% 150 16.4% 2,331 1,924 82.6% 407 17.4% 3,848 3,175 82.5% 673 17.5% 155% 65% 321%

Low er 6,850 6,178 90.2% 672 9.8% 8,638 7,693 89.1% 945 10.9% 10,633 9,411 88.5% 1,222 11.5% 26% 23% 55%

Low er 48,086 36,712 76.3% 11,374 23.7% 53,532 39,958 74.6% 13,574 25.4% 61,863 44,916 72.6% 16,947 27.4% 11% 16% 29%

Low er 17,828 14,688 82.4% 3,141 17.6% 18,518 15,161 81.9% 3,356 18.1% 20,530 16,759 81.6% 3,770 18.4% 4% 11% 15%

Low er 58,212 37,365 64.2% 20,847 35.8% 63,961 39,693 62.1% 24,268 37.9% 71,919 42,568 59.2% 29,351 40.8% 10% 12% 24%

231,828 177,110 76.4% 54,717 23.6% 256,665 192,722 75.1% 63,943 24.9% 286,544 210,240 73.4% 76,304 26.6%

Middle 5,820 4,970 85.4% 851 14.6% 6,055 5,196 85.8% 860 14.2% 6,634 5,714 86.1% 920 13.9% 4% 10% 14%

Middle 8,246 6,868 83.3% 1,378 16.7% 8,468 7,137 84.3% 1,331 15.7% 9,052 7,692 85.0% 1,360 15.0% 3% 7% 10%

Middle 1,382 1,265 91.6% 116 8.4% 1,537 1,382 89.9% 155 10.1% 1,849 1,650 89.2% 199 10.8% 11% 20% 34%

Middle 435 373 85.7% 62 14.3% 438 376 85.9% 62 14.1% 557 481 86.4% 76 13.6% 1% 27% 28%

Middle 1,257 985 78.4% 272 21.6% 1,324 1,021 77.2% 302 22.8% 1,518 1,094 72.1% 424 27.9% 5% 15% 21%

Middle 756 672 88.9% 84 11.1% 804 712 88.6% 91 11.4% 994 871 87.6% 123 12.4% 6% 24% 31%

17,897 15,133 84.6% 2,764 15.4% 18,626 15,824 85.0% 2,802 15.0% 20,604 17,502 84.9% 3,102 15.1%

Upper 2,453 2,167 88.4% 286 11.6% 2,368 2,102 88.8% 266 11.2% 2,482 2,211 89.1% 271 10.9% -3% 5% 1%

Upper 787 729 92.7% 57 7.3% 799 741 92.8% 58 7.2% 1,005 932 92.8% 73 7.2% 2% 26% 28%

Upper 1,391 1,303 93.7% 88 6.3% 1,554 1,462 94.1% 92 5.9% 1,927 1,819 94.4% 108 5.6% 12% 24% 39%

Upper 312 284 91.1% 28 8.9% 296 270 91.0% 27 9.0% 292 265 91.0% 26 9.0% -5% -2% -7%

Upper 10,288 8,310 80.8% 1,978 19.2% 11,122 9,059 81.5% 2,063 18.5% 12,282 9,962 81.1% 2,320 18.9% 8% 10% 19%

15,231 12,794 84.0% 2,437 16.0% 16,139 13,634 84.5% 2,505 15.5% 17,987 15,190 84.4% 2,797 15.6%

TOTAL 266,273 206,124 77.4% 60,149 22.6% 293,550 223,898 76.3% 69,652 23.7% 329,718 247,039 74.9% 82,679 25.1% 10% 12% 24%

19 - Orangeville

RentedOwnedOwned RentedRentedOwned

14 - Glen Williams to Norval

20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham

15 - West Credit River

16 - Caledon Creek

17 - Shaw 's Creek

22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries

10 - Black Creek

11 - Silver Creek

12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams

13 - East Credit River


1 - Loyalist Creek

2 - Carolyn Creek

3 - Saw mill Creek

4 - Mullett Creek

5 - Fletcher's Creek

6 - Levi Creek

7 - Huttonville Creek

8a - Springbrook Tributary

8b - Churchville Tributary

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal

9 - Norval to Port Credit

18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit

21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries

2008 2013 2018 % Change

Subwatershed Area


57

Table 24: Dwellings by Period of Construction, 2013

Watershed

Area

Total

number of

occupied

private

dwellings

Before

1946

1946 and

1960

1961 and

1970

1971 and

1980

1981 and

1990

1991 and

2000

2001 and

2011

Built After

2011

Low er 1 Loyalist Creek 8,339 10 224 1,119 1,727 3,563 1,027 462 206

Low er 2 Carolyn Creek 7,238 12 11 17 23 850 4,304 1,938 82

Low er 3 Saw mill Creek 21,640 45 161 536 4,549 4,489 2,430 8,179 1,251

Low er 4 Mullett Creek 27,704 140 613 729 6,751 8,691 7,384 2,954 442

Low er 5 Fletcher's Creek 41,013 66 950 1,143 1,659 6,510 7,495 21,641 1,549

Low er 6 Levi Creek 2,866 52 31 30 19 215 1,533 798 189

Low er 7 Huttonville Creek 886 6 9 13 9 4 26 712 106

Low er 8a Springbrook Tributary 2,331 9 28 30 21 13 33 1,757 440

Low er 8b Churchville Tributary 8,638 31 105 102 62 1,610 2,407 3,711 610

Low er 9 Norval to Port Credit 53,532 729 2,769 4,160 7,457 12,065 11,621 12,133 2,598

Low er 21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 18,518 316 2,598 4,380 5,042 3,199 1,190 1,123 670

Low er 22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 63,961 1,062 5,151 6,486 12,818 15,177 9,961 9,931 3,375

256,665 2,478 12,650 18,745 40,138 56,385 49,411 65,338 11,519

1% 5% 7% 16% 22% 19% 25% 4%

Middle 10 Black Creek 6,055 768 671 705 1,018 493 649 1,609 142

Middle 11 Silver Creek 8,468 766 1,741 1,606 905 655 996 1,573 226

Middle 12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 1,537 206 159 217 266 180 106 350 54

Middle 13 East Credit River 438 91 45 91 67 58 37 35 12

Middle 14 Glen Williams to Norval 1,324 82 44 97 200 280 404 164 54

Middle 20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 804 174 76 94 152 107 58 123 19

18,626 2,087 2,737 2,809 2,608 1,772 2,251 3,853 507

11% 15% 15% 14% 10% 12% 21% 3%

Upper 15 West Credit River 2,368 378 234 238 571 392 314 227 14

Upper 16 Caledon Creek 799 71 35 84 211 235 107 35 20

Upper 17 Shaw 's Creek 1,554 127 46 50 166 265 315 490 94

Upper 18 Melville to Forks of the Credit 296 77 35 30 44 67 24 18 3

Upper 19 Orangeville 11,122 804 619 1,264 2,076 1,861 2,278 1,745 474

16,139 1,457 968 1,666 3,068 2,821 3,039 2,515 605

9% 6% 10% 19% 17% 19% 16% 4%

TOTAL 293,550 6,041 16,721 23,426 45,905 60,825 54,522 73,074 13,036

Subtotal

%


Subwatershed Area

Subtotal

%

Subtotal

%


58

Table 25: Structure by Watershed Area, 2008-2018

2008 % 2013 % 2018 % 08-13 13-18


Single Detached 125,302 47% 134,520 46% 148,473 45% 7% 10%

Semi-Detached (inc. duplex, other single attached) 37,720 14% 40,812 14% 43,789 13% 8% 7%

Row House 34,495 13% 36,747 13% 38,883 12% 7% 6%

Apartment Buildings 68,552 26% 81,310 28% 98,406 30% 19% 21%

Other 204 161 167 -21% 4%

Total (excluding other) 266,069 293,389 329,551

LOWER

Single Detached 100,673 43% 108,164 42% 117,821 41% 7% 9%

Semi-Detached (inc duplex, other single attached) 34,939 15% 38,093 15% 40,500 14% 9% 6%

Row House 31,984 14% 33,864 13% 35,370 12% 6% 4%


Other (movable) 84 57 59 -32% 4%


MIDDLE

Single Detached 13,129 73% 13,732 74% 15,230 74% 5% 11%

Semi-Detached (inc duplex, other single attached) 1,306 7% 1,251 7% 1,324 6% -4% 6%

Row House 1,485 8% 1,538 8% 1,638 8% 4% 6%


Other 13 8 11 -38% 32%


UPPER

Single Detached 10,847 72% 11,672 73% 13,016 73% 8% 12%

Semi-Detached (inc duplex, other single attached) 1,533 10% 1,541 10% 1,711 10% 1% 11%

Row House 987 7% 1,034 6% 1,154 6% 5% 12%


Other 69 60 62 -12% 2%


Area, Type of Dwelling % ChangeDwelling and % of Total


59

Table 26: Total Numbers of Dwellings by Structure Types, 2008-2018

Watershed

AreaSubwatershed Area

Total

Dwellings

Single-

Detached

Semi-

Detached

Row

Houses

Apartment

Buildings (low

and high rise)

Detached

Duplex

Other

Single

Attached

Movable

Dw elling

Total

Dwellings

Single-

Detached

Semi-

Detached

Row

Houses

Apartment

Buildings (low

and high rise)

Detache

d Duplex

Other

Single

Attached

Movable

Dw elling

Total

Dwellings

Single-

Detached

Semi-

Detached

Row

Houses

Apartment

Buildings (low

and high rise)

Detached

Duplex

Other Single

Attached

Movable

Dw elling

Low er 1 - Loyalist Creek 8,074 4,512 179 939 2,149 296 0 0 8,339 4,570 170 962 2,343 295 0 0 8,964 4,587 172 971 2,936 298 0 0

Low er 2 - Carolyn Creek 6,869 3,646 1,440 1,113 393 275 1 0 7,238 3,912 1,519 1,119 375 313 0 0 7,279 3,932 1,526 1,125 383 313 0 0

Low er 3 - Saw mill Creek 18,409 6,673 2,870 4,274 4,431 161 0 0 21,640 7,081 3,207 4,734 6,447 168 1 2 24,202 7,946 3,691 5,124 7,251 186 1 2

Low er 4 - Mullett Creek 26,877 12,814 2,707 5,598 5,219 519 8 12 27,704 13,015 2,757 5,607 5,760 551 10 4 28,378 13,169 2,792 5,634 6,206 565 10 4

Low er 5 - Fletcher's Creek 36,780 19,513 5,889 4,417 4,275 2,673 9 5 41,013 21,739 6,753 4,598 4,965 2,934 13 11 43,750 22,396 6,807 4,721 6,839 2,962 13 11

Low er 6 - Levi Creek 2,384 1,583 304 470 4 20 1 0 2,866 1,904 302 628 8 24 0 0 3,823 2,743 336 673 25 47 0 0

Low er 7 - Huttonville Creek 545 386 132 22 1 4 0 0 886 582 227 64 3 10 0 0 1,355 890 326 107 12 21 0 0

Low er 8b - Churchville Tributary 914 610 191 104 0 9 1 0 2,331 1,427 570 311 0 22 2 0 3,848 2,337 948 523 0 37 3 0

Low er 8a - Springbrook Tributary 6,850 4,475 940 795 52 584 2 1 8,638 5,650 1,244 1,086 49 607 3 0 10,633 6,882 1,629 1,422 49 646 5 0

Low er 9 - Norval to Port Credit 48,086 21,430 4,934 4,949 14,079 2,624 19 51 53,532 22,691 5,266 5,223 17,553 2,761 17 21 61,863 26,033 5,678 5,298 21,937 2,873 21 23

Low er 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 17,828 9,605 2,246 2,227 3,391 312 45 1 18,518 9,887 2,265 2,224 3,776 329 31 6 20,530 10,994 2,467 2,232 4,451 347 32 6

Low er 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 58,212 15,426 3,482 7,075 30,154 2,042 20 14 63,961 15,706 3,610 7,308 35,209 2,097 17 13 71,919 15,912 3,626 7,539 42,706 2,106 17 13

231,828 100,673 25,314 31,984 64,148 9,519 106 84 256,665 108,164 27,888 33,864 76,487 10,111 94 57 286,544 117,821 29,998 35,370 92,794 10,401 101 59

Middle 10 - Black Creek 5,820 4,509 272 360 578 77 20 4 6,055 4,671 269 396 604 94 20 2 6,634 5,092 287 450 683 99 21 2

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 8,246 5,978 314 487 1,011 420 35 1 8,468 6,240 298 498 1,039 390 2 0 9,052 6,748 313 544 1,046 399 2 0

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 1,382 1,204 23 27 94 28 2 5 1,537 1,309 24 41 128 30 3 2 1,849 1,579 31 41 159 32 3 3

Middle 13 - East Credit River 435 412 2 1 2 14 2 2 438 413 0 0 3 17 3 2 557 525 0 0 3 21 5 3

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval 1,257 307 53 607 269 20 1 0 1,324 338 52 597 313 21 1 1 1,518 350 52 596 496 21 2 1

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 756 720 6 3 7 12 6 1 804 761 7 6 9 18 2 1 994 936 12 6 14 23 2 2

17,897 13,129 668 1,485 1,962 572 66 13 18,626 13,732 650 1,538 2,096 569 32 8 20,604 15,230 694 1,638 2,400 596 35 11

Upper 15 - West Credit River 2,453 2,204 30 4 106 38 12 60 2,368 2,175 20 7 94 7 10 55 2,482 2,288 20 7 94 8 10 55

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 787 747 3 0 28 5 2 1 799 763 1 1 26 3 4 1 1,005 964 2 1 26 4 6 2

Upper 17 - Shaw 's Creek 1,391 1,226 51 49 56 8 1 0 1,554 1,408 52 53 36 5 0 0 1,927 1,715 92 76 37 7 0 0

Upper 18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit 312 298 3 4 2 1 3 1 296 282 7 5 0 2 0 0 292 277 7 5 0 2 0 0

Upper 19 - Orangeville 10,288 6,371 1,206 930 1,604 155 15 7 11,122 7,044 1,256 968 1,675 164 10 5 12,282 7,772 1,366 1,065 1,887 175 11 5

15,231 10,847 1,294 987 1,796 207 33 69 16,139 11,672 1,335 1,034 1,831 182 24 60 17,987 13,016 1,487 1,154 2,045 197 27 62

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal

2013 20182008


60

Table 27: Population by Mother Tongue, 2013

Total Single

ResponseEnglish French

Total Non-

Official

%

English% French

% Total Non-

Official

1 Loyalist Creek 24,832 13,880 278 10,674 55.9% 1.1% 43.0%

2 Carolyn Creek 25,687 10,019 225 15,442 39.0% 0.9% 60.1%

3 Saw mill Creek 64,972 32,548 773 31,650 50.1% 1.2% 48.7%

4 Mullett Creek 79,493 46,389 1,190 31,913 58.4% 1.5% 40.1%

5 Fletcher's Creek 139,081 73,433 1,365 64,284 52.8% 1.0% 46.2%

6 Levi Creek 9,202 6,588 205 2,409 71.6% 2.2% 26.2%

7 Huttonville Creek 3,170 1,665 22 1,483 52.5% 0.7% 46.8%

8a Springbrook Tributary 9,006 4,332 87 4,587 48.1% 1.0% 50.9%

8b Churchville Tributary 31,434 16,451 320 14,662 52.3% 1.0% 46.6%

9 Norval to Port Credit 157,903 71,908 1,511 84,484 45.5% 1.0% 53.5%

10 Black Creek 16,810 14,919 368 1,524 88.7% 2.2% 9.1%

11 Silver Creek 23,075 20,123 591 2,361 87.2% 2.6% 10.2%

12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 4,238 3,668 65 504 86.6% 1.5% 11.9%

13 East Credit River 1,188 970 21 197 81.6% 1.8% 16.6%

14 Glen Williams to Norval 2,881 2,539 91 251 88.1% 3.2% 8.7%

15 West Credit River 6,663 6,113 103 446 91.8% 1.6% 6.7%

16 Caledon Creek 2,445 2,111 48 286 86.3% 2.0% 11.7%

17 Shaw 's Creek 4,849 4,452 52 346 91.8% 1.1% 7.1%

18 Melville to Forks of the Credit 791 684 9 98 86.4% 1.2% 12.4%

19 Orangeville 29,529 27,234 327 1,968 92.2% 1.1% 6.7%

20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 2,148 1,795 36 318 83.5% 1.7% 14.8%

21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 50,447 34,596 820 15,031 68.6% 1.6% 29.8%

22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 162,167 73,709 1,724 86,734 45.5% 1.1% 53.5%

857,437 472,981 10,340 374,116 55.2% 1.2% 43.6%

13,182,359 9,160,099 541,990 3,480,270 69.5% 4.1% 26.4%


ONTARIO

2013

Population by Mother Tongue by Subwatershed Area, 2013


61

Table 28: Population by Mother Tongue, Non-Official Languages in Watershed, 2008-2018

Non-Official Languages2008

%

Change 2013

%

Change 2018

%

Change

Panjabi 40,550 18% 47,769 18% 56,204 39%

Urdu 29,966 22% 36,571 16% 42,320 41%

Others 28,395 16% 32,999 15% 37,800 33%

Polish 27,260 -1% 26,872 -3% 26,190 -4%

Arabic 18,203 31% 23,764 25% 29,743 63%

Tagalog 18,693 24% 23,114 26% 29,152 56%

Portuguese 22,942 -7% 21,267 -3% 20,615 -10%

Spanish 16,006 11% 17,746 16% 20,520 28%

Chinese n.o.s. 14,098 10% 15,560 3% 15,976 13%

Italian 14,909 -13% 12,927 -9% 11,744 -21%

Tamil 10,739 11% 11,890 11% 13,189 23%

Hindi 9,897 20% 11,835 15% 13,608 37%

Mandarin 9,279 24% 11,522 18% 13,595 47%

Cantonese 12,455 -12% 11,007 -7% 10,265 -18%

Gujarati 7,856 25% 9,781 17% 11,406 45%

Vietnamese 10,039 -3% 9,697 -1% 9,647 -4%

Persian 4,967 14% 5,669 19% 6,774 36%

Croatian 5,957 -10% 5,356 -12% 4,726 -21%

Korean 5,145 -5% 4,913 -3% 4,779 -7%

Russian 3,284 34% 4,397 29% 5,658 72%

Ukrainian 4,584 -6% 4,325 -4% 4,162 -9%

German 5,244 -19% 4,272 -13% 3,705 -29%

Bengali 3,116 13% 3,531 22% 4,306 38%

Serbian 2,809 11% 3,117 17% 3,648 30%

Romanian 2,460 26% 3,096 23% 3,822 55%

Greek 2,817 -6% 2,650 -8% 2,441 -13%

Dutch 2,331 -9% 2,119 -18% 1,733 -26%

Hungarian 1,960 2% 1,992 -3% 1,924 -2%

Turkish 983 20% 1,176 14% 1,335 36%

Japanese 1,062 -14% 912 -11% 813 -23%

Creoles 945 -18% 771 3% 794 -16%

Somali 680 10% 747 17% 872 28%

Czech 819 -11% 733 2% 745 -9%

Aboriginal Languages 25 -24% 19 -26% 14 -44%

Total 340,475 374,116 414,225


62

Table 29: Population by Immigration Status, 2008-2018

Watershed

AreaSubwatershed Area

Non-

immigrant

population

Total

immigrants by

place of birth

Non-

permanent

residents

% Non-

immigrant

population

% Total

immigrants by

place of birth

% Non-

permanent

residents

Non-

immigrant

population

Total

immigrants by

place of birth

Non-

permanent

residents

% Non-

immigrant

population

% Total

immigrants by

place of birth

% Non-

permanent

residents

Non-

immigrant

population

Total

immigrants by

place of birth

Non-

permanent

residents

% Non-

immigrant

population

% Total

immigrants by

place of birth

% Non-

permanent

residents

Low er 1 - Loyalist Creek 13,618 12,423 302 52% 47% 1% 12,614 12,938 290 49% 50% 1% 11,860 14,560 291 44% 55% 1%

Low er 2 - Carolyn Creek 9,907 16,076 194 38% 61% 1% 9,385 17,435 196 35% 65% 1% 7,950 18,495 173 30% 69% 1%

Low er 3 - Saw mill Creek 26,696 32,168 408 45% 54% 1% 24,322 43,479 418 36% 64% 1% 23,612 51,888 449 31% 68% 1%

Low er 4 - Mullett Creek 46,191 36,345 908 55% 44% 1% 41,898 39,545 882 51% 48% 1% 38,213 42,513 820 47% 52% 1%

Low er 5 - Fletcher's Creek 62,044 67,828 914 47% 52% 1% 62,999 82,272 934 43% 56% 1% 60,703 89,710 901 40% 59% 1%

Low er 6 - Levi Creek 5,876 2,141 49 73% 27% 1% 7,056 2,361 44 75% 25% 0% 9,432 2,794 44 77% 23% 0%

Low er 7 - Huttonville Creek 1,000 916 6 52% 48% 0% 1,823 1,509 7 55% 45% 0% 3,111 2,074 7 60% 40% 0%

Low er 8a - Springbrook Tributary 1,950 1,159 4 63% 37% 0% 5,989 3,488 6 63% 37% 0% 10,255 6,513 7 61% 39% 0%

Low er 8b - Churchville Tributary 13,121 12,306 160 51% 48% 1% 17,153 15,667 162 52% 48% 0% 21,069 19,984 147 51% 49% 0%

Low er 9 - Norval to Port Credit 68,577 84,317 1,668 44% 55% 1% 68,956 94,893 1,811 42% 57% 1% 74,297 107,915 1,967 40% 59% 1%

Low er 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 34,398 17,256 360 66% 33% 1% 33,124 18,217 331 64% 35% 1% 34,685 20,544 360 62% 37% 1%

Low er 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 69,384 90,484 2,395 43% 56% 1% 68,208 100,033 2,235 40% 59% 1% 65,725 117,002 2,255 36% 63% 1%

Subtotal 352,761 373,420 7,368 48% 51% 1% 353,528 431,837 7,318 45% 54% 1% 360,913 493,994 7,422 42% 57% 1%

Middle 10 - Black Creek 14,515 1,951 39 88% 12% 0% 14,996 1,928 36 88% 11% 0% 16,459 1,928 36 89% 10% 0%

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 19,090 3,548 90 84% 16% 0% 19,842 3,384 81 85% 15% 0% 21,333 3,239 72 87% 13% 0%

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 3,291 604 47 83% 15% 1% 3,609 608 47 85% 14% 1% 4,263 585 52 87% 12% 1%

Middle 13 - East Credit River 1,013 222 5 82% 18% 0% 1,006 200 6 83% 16% 0% 1,277 193 8 86% 13% 1%

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval 2,447 347 23 87% 12% 1% 2,552 332 25 88% 11% 1% 2,824 328 29 89% 10% 1%

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 1,651 453 18 78% 21% 1% 1,717 434 17 79% 20% 1% 2,163 376 13 85% 15% 1%

Subtotal 42,007 7,126 221 85% 14% 0% 43,723 6,885 213 86% 14% 0% 48,320 6,650 210 88% 12% 0%

Upper 15 - West Credit River 6,230 862 0 88% 12% 0% 5,945 768 0 89% 11% 0% 6,256 689 0 90.1% 10% 0%

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 2,049 446 5 82% 18% 0% 2,030 426 5 82% 17% 0% 2,611 385 6 87% 13% 0%

Upper 17 - Shaw 's Creek 3,773 541 2 87% 13% 0% 4,329 539 2 89% 11% 0% 5,309 567 3 90.3% 10% 0%

Upper 18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit 711 140 0 83% 17% 0% 676 124 0 85% 15% 0% 679 94 0 88% 12% 0%

Upper 19 - Orangeville 24,963 3,792 70 87% 13% 0% 25,800 3,858 70 87% 13% 0% 27,349 3,715 66 88% 12% 0%

Subtotal 37,727 5,781 78 87% 13% 0% 38,780 5,715 78 87% 13% 0% 42,203 5,450 76 88% 11% 0%

433,956 387,731 7,783 52% 47% 1% 438,177 447,847 7,699 49% 50% 1% 455,455 517,000 7,900 46% 53% 1%

8,958,494 3,662,980 117,601 70% 29% 1% 9,296,958 4,072,927 116,856 69% 30% 1% 9,762,367 4,462,186 115,842 68% 31% 1%

Population by Immigration Status by Subwatershed Area, 2008-2018

2008 2013 2018


ONTARIO


63

Table 30: Percent Change of Immigrants by Subwatershed Area

Watershed

AreaSubwatershed Area 2008 2013 2018

% Change

'08-'13

% Change '13-

'18

% Change

'08-'18

Low er 1 - Loyalist Creek 12,423 12,938 14,560 4% 13% 17%

Low er 2 - Carolyn Creek 16,076 17,435 18,495 8% 6% 15%

Low er 3 - Saw mill Creek 32,168 43,479 51,888 35% 19% 61%

Low er 4 - Mullett Creek 36,345 39,545 42,513 9% 8% 17%

Low er 5 - Fletcher's Creek 67,828 82,272 89,710 21% 9% 32%

Low er 6 - Levi Creek 2,141 2,361 2,794 10% 18% 31%

Low er 7 - Huttonville Creek 916 1,509 2,074 65% 37% 126%

Low er 8a - Springbrook Tributary 1,159 3,488 6,513 201% 87% 462%

Low er 8b - Churchville Tributary 12,306 15,667 19,984 27% 28% 62%

Low er 9 - Norval to Port Credit 84,317 94,893 107,915 13% 14% 28%

Low er 21 - Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 17,256 18,217 20,544 6% 13% 19%

Low er 22 - Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 90,484 100,033 117,002 11% 17% 29%

Subtotal 373,420 431,837 493,994 16% 14% 32%

Middle 10 - Black Creek 1,951 1,928 1,928 -1% 0% -1%

Middle 11 - Silver Creek 3,548 3,384 3,239 -5% -4% -9%

Middle 12 - Cheltenham to Glen Williams 604 608 585 1% -4% -3%

Middle 13 - East Credit River 222 200 193 -10% -3% -13%

Middle 14 - Glen Williams to Norval 347 332 328 -4% -1% -5%

Middle 20 - Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 453 434 376 -4% -13% -17%

Subtotal 7,126 6,885 6,650 -3% -3% -7%

Upper 15 - West Credit River 862 768 689 -11% -10% -20%

Upper 16 - Caledon Creek 446 426 385 -4% -9% -13%

Upper 17 - Shaw 's Creek 541 539 567 0% 5% 5%

Upper 18 - Melville to Forks of the Credit 140 124 94 -12% -24% -33%

Upper 19 - Orangeville 3,792 3,858 3,715 2% -4% -2%

Subtotal 5,781 5,715 5,450 -1% -5% -6%

387,731 447,847 517,000 16% 15% 33%

3,662,980 4,072,927 4,462,186 11% 10% 22%


ONTARIO


64

Table 31: Percent of Visible Minority Status of Total Visible Minority Population in Watershed and

ON, 2013

2013 Credit River Watershed

% of Total Visible

Minority Population

Ontario % of Total

Visible Minority Population

South Asian 208,336 45% 1,142,712 31% Black 62,636 13% 593,845 16% Chinese 53,302 11% 737,047 20% Filipino 42,193 9% 286,939 8% Arab 23,261 5% 163,135 4% Southeast Asian 20,252 4% 161,600 4% Latin American 17,909 4% 206,529 6% Multiple Visible Minorities 11,408 2% 97,504 3% West Asian 8,188 2% 145,243 4% Korean 7,994 2% 98,673 3% All Other Visible Minorities 6,939 1% 71,630 2% Japanese 2,927 1% 33,883 1%

Total 465,345 3,738,740


65

Table 32: Total Languages Spoken by Subwatershed Area, 2013

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8a 8b 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 TOTAL

Loyalist

Creek

Carolyn

Creek

Sawmill

Creek

Mullett

Creek

Fletcher's

Creek

Levi

Creek

Huttonville

Creek

Springbr

ook

Tributary

Churchville

Tributary

Norval

to Port

Credit

Black

Creek

Silver

Creek

Cheltenham

to Glen

Williams

East

Credit

River

Glen

Williams

to Norval

West

Credit

River

Caledon

Creek

Shaw's

Creek

Melville to

Forks of

the Credit

Orange-

ville

Forks of the

Credit to

Cheltenham

Lake Ontario

Shoreline West

Tributaries

Lake Ontario

Shoreline East

Tributaries

CREDIT

RIVER

WATERSHED

Italian 438 438 710 1,173 1,438 144 23 68 341 2,665 137 200 55 30 18 30 51 48 13 195 52 861 3,721 12,927

German 129 49 316 487 247 51 4 17 60 651 167 233 66 17 32 68 46 24 11 249 52 472 787 4,272

Panjabi 548 1,085 1,165 999 22,527 181 543 1,411 5,579 9,804 22 29 9 54 0 3 6 24 11 60 38 236 2,931 47,769

Cantonese 323 824 1,063 1,192 854 42 11 41 108 3,615 23 12 4 0 4 0 5 0 1 28 2 314 2,526 11,007

Spanish 395 409 1,420 2,160 2,392 269 35 114 503 3,353 52 115 51 5 28 22 14 21 1 142 9 868 5,288 17,746

Arabic 676 1,202 3,703 2,586 1,091 122 20 101 190 6,025 8 12 2 3 0 0 2 4 0 51 7 730 7,260 23,764

Tagalog 551 1,391 2,067 1,580 3,129 119 109 346 812 5,522 53 90 16 1 5 14 2 14 1 101 2 823 6,267 23,114

Portuguese 439 753 1,097 1,496 4,296 211 83 227 1,058 4,709 157 286 42 21 36 63 40 53 16 212 26 821 4,938 21,267

Polish 888 840 2,210 2,341 1,466 198 44 221 503 6,083 212 269 51 19 32 51 8 50 8 156 33 2,462 8,530 26,872

Mandarin 376 469 1,479 1,948 423 25 8 21 46 3,668 5 21 2 0 0 7 2 2 7 16 1 510 2,479 11,522

Chinese n.o.s. 482 842 1,831 2,268 768 71 13 52 150 4,727 24 35 0 3 0 8 11 9 0 14 8 651 3,526 15,560

Urdu 1,735 2,028 5,643 3,611 5,673 134 150 552 1,118 8,103 1 8 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 29 2 646 7,004 36,571

Vietnamese 165 760 547 496 1,570 31 18 64 272 2,443 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 9 0 149 3,001 9,697

Ukrainian 140 91 238 250 134 30 2 15 28 944 41 45 43 4 19 20 1 5 1 24 18 390 1,818 4,325

Persian 398 209 563 631 499 34 21 29 92 1,079 3 26 2 0 0 0 1 3 0 16 0 369 1,685 5,669

Russian 106 79 369 578 195 73 4 7 24 857 37 71 20 0 5 8 0 10 0 13 1 570 1,350 4,397

Dutch 34 1 73 143 667 18 4 5 40 200 121 142 40 5 23 28 23 19 5 188 18 176 167 2,119

Korean 211 127 674 711 130 38 2 9 17 1,133 33 32 1 1 4 1 3 4 0 41 1 406 1,338 4,913

Greek 85 64 193 263 281 35 3 8 62 595 32 73 3 4 3 8 8 3 0 27 12 205 674 2,650

Tamil 192 938 606 526 3,107 63 65 205 487 2,372 14 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 3 108 2,976 11,890

Gujarati 180 410 568 685 2,586 47 70 246 655 1,890 18 13 1 1 1 17 0 4 0 4 1 242 2,002 9,781

Romanian 105 68 307 555 237 24 5 12 63 527 12 36 6 0 8 0 0 3 0 37 1 251 819 3,096

Hindi 219 539 721 862 3,193 61 66 245 766 2,571 7 21 3 8 0 6 0 0 0 28 0 285 2,108 11,835

Hungarian 75 14 184 228 132 10 0 1 35 396 47 61 3 3 3 8 8 10 2 41 1 175 532 1,992

Croatian 172 177 396 591 442 114 12 37 125 1,227 127 204 26 9 1 20 22 4 5 54 7 249 1,327 5,356

Creoles 24 25 62 63 167 11 2 7 42 147 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 29 180 771

Serbian 95 55 251 226 198 24 6 12 31 735 8 9 2 0 6 2 0 1 0 16 0 231 1,204 3,117

Bengali 150 158 275 337 656 22 18 58 186 710 3 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 75 854 3,531

Japanese 42 19 115 130 46 6 1 2 22 184 6 13 3 0 2 1 4 3 4 4 2 74 226 912

Turkish 53 30 112 113 158 5 2 4 21 272 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 54 348 1,176

Czech 15 15 71 92 32 6 0 3 18 149 7 23 10 1 2 10 1 5 3 27 7 93 160 733

Somali 90 64 78 49 127 0 5 6 14 133 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 11 162 747

Aboriginal 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 6 19

Others 1,145 1,326 2,539 2,541 5,424 191 135 442 1,195 6,987 141 265 41 6 19 50 26 18 7 178 13 1,492 8,540 32,999

TOTAL 10,674 15,498 31,650 31,913 64,284 2,409 1,483 4,587 14,662 84,484 1,524 2,361 504 197 251 446 286 346 98 1,968 318 15,031 86,734 374,116


66

Table 33: Population by Visible Minority Status, 2008-2018

2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018 2008 2013 2018

1 Loyalist Creek 1,264 1,266 1,318 6,444 7,204 8,518 2,138 2,118 2,226 964 1,018 1,144 601 668 809 322 369 436 583 640 718 382 375 400 271 297 319 243 256 272 107 84 79 247 247 266

2 Carolyn Creek 2,818 2,832 2,719 8,004 9,392 10,104 1,894 1,781 1,618 2,130 2,132 2,078 348 368 372 1,226 1,533 1,797 742 815 813 391 446 473 316 313 272 25 25 25 283 233 236 694 725 712

3 Saw mill Creek 4,853 5,897 6,791 11,893 16,990 21,243 3,375 3,574 3,921 3,488 4,691 5,799 1,090 1,238 1,305 958 1,526 1,855 2,205 3,313 4,308 1,154 1,610 1,866 752 956 1,166 241 247 249 344 307 347 1,095 1,332 1,577

4 Mullett Creek 6,956 7,553 8,064 13,302 15,521 17,504 4,433 4,413 4,462 2,509 2,763 3,163 1,549 1,789 2,043 846 990 1,136 2,112 2,400 2,600 586 609 631 1,386 1,523 1,551 390 421 422 347 290 324 1,310 1,430 1,551

5 Fletcher's Creek 2,965 3,122 2,841 44,033 55,418 65,275 20,743 23,921 25,773 6,150 7,441 8,347 2,632 3,067 3,266 2,886 3,929 4,609 1,200 1,580 1,768 829 999 1,127 377 432 416 170 185 175 2,653 2,868 2,768 1,854 2,192 2,272

6 Levi Creek 265 292 342 763 870 1,022 190 208 400 127 131 157 93 119 151 54 62 87 116 144 199 29 42 62 23 25 31 10 11 14 33 33 48 185 219 254

7 Huttonville Creek 32 52 69 506 744 989 330 457 574 118 212 332 29 34 36 21 25 27 8 12 20 6 6 6 5 11 17 2 3 4 35 43 46 24 24 20

8a Springbrook Tributary 95 270 519 358 1,017 1,884 183 543 1,152 128 466 994 7 13 16 14 31 45 23 84 197 0 1 1 13 44 73 3 10 20 17 46 96 18 31 36

8b Churchville Tributary 484 673 957 7,706 9,621 11,889 3,891 4,423 5,266 950 1,353 1,881 513 645 758 337 402 460 91 181 341 28 31 36 17 51 84 30 39 54 293 342 412 365 393 404

9 Norval to Port Credit 13,890 15,476 17,134 38,328 46,109 52,578 8,234 8,244 8,652 8,718 9,625 10,911 2,983 3,564 4,174 3,788 4,686 5,588 5,115 6,285 7,593 1,426 1,724 1,970 1,371 1,572 1,739 505 616 775 1,189 1,036 1,078 1,956 2,121 2,287

10 Black Creek 58 56 64 192 217 261 106 124 149 70 100 134 86 119 163 3 4 4 2 2 2 8 12 11 2 3 3 44 41 35 17 15 16 21 26 35

11 Silver Creek 174 160 161 199 211 237 97 131 151 135 205 292 178 253 327 56 67 82 2 2 3 22 18 20 10 9 9 35 34 36 17 13 14 56 78 98

12 Cheltenham to Glen Williams 7 7 6 6 6 7 27 34 39 1 2 3 36 57 82 3 4 8 2 2 2 1 1 1 6 5 6 12 12 16 3 7 9 1 1 2

13 East Credit River 1 1 2 32 37 43 1 1 1 8 12 24 2 2 4 1 1 2 11 15 18 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 1 2

14 Glen Williams to Norval 3 2 1 29 34 33 72 77 80 1 1 2 23 37 52 12 24 41 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 0 0 0

15 West Credit River 8 6 6 20 21 22 24 15 14 7 4 4 3 2 2 3 2 2 9 11 16 0 0 0 6 8 10 4 3 3 0 0 0 10 8 10

16 Caledon Creek 23 27 36 19 24 35 32 38 45 2 2 5 1 1 6 0 0 2 5 6 14 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 10 12 19

17 Shaw 's Creek 86 134 176 99 164 252 55 63 83 39 57 79 5 13 37 17 20 23 1 1 3 2 12 45 16 19 22 34 45 42 2 12 20 4 4 4

18 Melville to Forks of the Credit 17 23 31 13 19 24 21 21 19 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1

19 Orangeville 114 114 123 509 660 820 492 493 503 71 84 99 160 234 299 5 18 36 40 49 75 94 151 186 2 3 4 39 25 23 54 77 95 17 18 23

20 Forks of the Credit to Cheltenham 63 75 83 77 96 108 14 14 17 30 69 100 2 2 3 11 23 63 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 3 1 1 2 11 12 15

21 Lake Ontario Shoreline West Tributaries 1,977 2,281 2,714 3,590 4,386 5,696 2,042 2,051 2,209 1,535 1,708 2,030 619 650 712 233 307 452 517 624 836 229 270 308 366 426 489 235 270 330 241 257 305 395 449 542

22 Lake Ontario Shoreline East Tributaries 10,853 12,132 13,613 32,791 39,987 49,567 9,204 9,290 9,912 8,911 9,760 10,829 4,294 4,860 5,697 5,169 6,285 7,617 5,481 7,005 8,503 1,729 1,930 2,351 1,935 2,105 2,233 580 647 675 931 864 1,091 1,971 2,061 2,265

47,515 53,302 59,473 168,237 208,336 251,031 57,841 62,636 68,935 36,280 42,193 49,507 15,363 17,909 20,790 15,843 20,252 24,809 18,263 23,261 28,446 6,864 8,188 9,556 7,004 7,994 8,760 2,617 2,927 3,239 6,815 6,939 7,846 10,228 11,408 12,520

639,118 737,047 834,735 914,127 1,142,712 1,379,770 521,576 593,845 670,619 233,188 286,939 346,153 167,391 206,529 250,053 126,906 161,600 199,513 129,428 163,135 198,067 112,915 145,243 178,792 81,105 98,673 113,245 30,781 33,883 36,396 62,078 71,630 82,008 84,497 97,504 111,616

Multiple Visible


ONTARIO

Subwatershed Area

Population by Visible Minority Status by Subwatershed Area, 2008-2018

Southeast Asian Arab West Asian Korean Japanese All Other Visible Chinese South Asian Black Filipino Latin American


67

11.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS Apartments

Includes dwelling units found in a wide range of structures such as: Duplexes Triplexes Row-duplexes Apartments proper

Dwelling units over or at the rear of a store or other non-residential structure. Please note that the above is the structural definition of apartments. The ownership type (owned vs. rented), therefore, may vary.

Census family persons

Refers to household members who belong to a census family. Census family persons

can be further classified into one of the following four categories: married spouses,

common-law partners, lone parents or children.

Census Tract Area that is small and relatively stable. Census tracts usually have a population between 2,500 and 8,000 persons. They are located in census metropolitan areas and in census agglomerations that have a core population of 50,000 or more.

Children Blood, step or adopted sons and daughters (regardless of age or marital status) who are living in the same dwelling as their parent(s), as well as grandchildren in households where there are no parents present. Sons and daughters who are living with their married spouse or common-law partner, or with one or more of their own children, are not considered to be members of the census family of their parent(s), even if they are living in the same dwelling. In addition, those sons and daughters who do not live in the same dwelling as their parent(s) are not considered members of the census family of their parent(s).

Cohort A group of values that share a similar characteristics or factors within a time span.

Common-law partners Two persons of opposite sex or of the same sex who are not legally married to each other, but live together as a couple in the same dwelling.

Credit River Watershed An area of land that encompasses 1,500 kilometres of stream and river networks that drain into Lake Ontario. The watershed covers portions of Peel and Halton Regions. Tributaries of the watershed are present in the municipalities of Mississauga, Brampton, Caledon, Orangeville, Mono, Amaranth, East Garafraxa, Erin, Halton Hills, Milton and Oakville.

Dissemination Area (DA) Dissemination areas are home to about 500 people and are based on the distance that a census enumerator can easily walk. Dissemination areas fit into census tracts.


68

Double or Semi-Detached Dwelling Each of two dwellings separated by a common wall or by a garage - but not attached to any other building - and surrounded on all other sides by open space.

Dwelling Refers to a set of living quarters in which a person or a group of persons reside or could reside.

Expenditure 2012 Household Spending Potential shows the amount spent on a variety of goods and services by households that reside in the market area. Expenditures are shown by broad budget categories that are not mutually exclusive.

GTA

The Greater Toronto Area, which includes the City of Toronto and the Regions of Halton, Peel, York and Durham.

GTAH The Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton.

Household

Refers to a person or a group of persons (other than foreign residents) who occupy the same dwelling and do not have a usual place of residence elsewhere in Canada. It may consist of a family group (census family) with or without other persons, of two or more families sharing a dwelling, of a group of unrelated persons, or of one person living alone.

Household Maintainer Status

Refers to whether or not a person residing in the household is responsible for paying the rent, or the mortgage, or the taxes, or the electricity or other services or utilities. Where a number of people may contribute to the payments, more than one person in the household may be identified as a household maintainer. If no person in the household is identified as making such payments, the reference person may be so identified by default.

Household size The number of persons occupying a private dwelling

Immigrant A person who has been granted permission to live in Canada indefinitely by the Immigration Authorities

Knowledge of official languages Refers to the ability to conduct a conversation in English only, in French only, in both English and French, or in neither English nor French.

Lone parents Mothers or fathers, with no married spouse or common-law partner present, living in a dwelling with one or more children.


69

Married spouses Two persons of opposite sex or of the same sex who are legally married to each other and living in the same dwelling.

Median The middle in a numerical order of numbers.

Mother Tongue The first language learned in childhood and still understood by the respondent.

Non-immigrant

This refers to a person who is a Canadian citizen by birth.

Non-permanent resident This refers to a person from another country who has a work or study permit or who is a refugee claimant, and any non-Canadian-born family member living in Canada with them.

Persons not in census families Refers to household members who do not belong to a census family.

Private dwelling

A separate set of living quarters designed for or converted for human habitation in which a person or group of persons reside or could reside.

Subwatershed

Known as smaller surrounding drainage areas, within a watershed.

Visible Minority A person is considered a visible minority if he or she is non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour. This definition is based on the Employment Equity Act. (This information is collected for the entire population except for institutional residents and aboriginal persons.)


70

12.0 REFERENCES 2014 CVC, 2013 Esri, Environics Analytics & 2012 TomTom Asfaha, Tesfa & Stiefelmeyer, Kate. (2009). Demographic Profile of the Credit River Watershed. George Morris Centre. 225-150 Research Lane, Guelph, ON, N1G 4T2. Kennedy, Mike & Wilson, Jeff. (2009). Estimating the Value of Natural Capital in the Credit River Watershed. The Pembina Institute. ESRI. (2013). Working with Business Analyst. Retrieved from http://resources.arcgis.com/en/help/main/10.1/index.html#//000z000000v7000000

Environics Analytics. (2014). ESRI Business Analyst. Retrieved from http://www.environicsanalytics.ca/software/esri-business-analyst

Statistics Canada. (2009). Definitions. Statistics Canada. Ottawa. Version updated May 6, 2014. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/concepts/definitions/index-eng.htm (October 9, 2014)

Statistics Canada. (2009). Complete A to Z index. Statistics Canada. Ottawa. Version updated February 1, 2013. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/azindex-eng.cfm (October 1, 2014)

http://resources.arcgis.com/en/help/main/10.1/index.html#//000z000000v7000000

http://www.environicsanalytics.ca/software/esri-business-analyst

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/concepts/definitions/index-eng.htm

http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/azindex-eng.cfm

http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/azindex-eng.cfm

the credit river watershed 2008 - 2018

Documents