I received an email last week that made an interesting and quite accurate point about how we see the size of Yankton.

It seems that when government officials and reporters refer to Yankton’s population, we usually put it terms of about 15,000 people. (The official 2010 census of the town is 14,454.) However, as the email pointed out, such references ignore the inhabitants of the lake area, which pushes the greater Yankton area population closer to the 20,000 neighborhood.

(3) comments

nokoolaidforme

This is a highlight of what is wrong with Yankton. What he sums up in his editorial should have been a focus 20 years ago. Now the corridor is lined with camp sites and storage buildings. Is there no one in city/county government that can look ahead, designate areas, and work on developing them before it's too late?

lilnemo

Yankton's estimated 2013 population within its incorporated boundaries was 14,591. The city's incorporated boundaries stop at West City Limits Road and therefore none of the population of river and lake area west of there is included in the city's official population count. Watertown (2013 est. pop. 21,995) and Mitchell (2013 est. pop. 15,539) both include within their incorporated boundaries areas surrounding their recreational lakes, Lake Kampeska and Lake Mitchell, respectively.

Pundit1

Getting the lake dredged should be a priority or someday there will be no lake. it will look like the Springfield and Niobrara areas

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.