|
Where the Ganns Are Written by Joy Gann Brown Those of you who saw the write-up in the Lufkin, Texas, newspaper about the 2001 Gann Gathering which was held in that fair city in late June (2001) will perhaps remember that I was quoted - correctly, I might add - as saying that there are more Ganns living in Texas today than any other state. When I made that remark, I believed it to be true and I think it was true a couple of decades ago. In 1982, for instance, one source listed the following number of Gann residences in each of the United States:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1982 2001 |
|
|
Whoa! How could this be? What happened to Texas?
I prevaricated to the reporter in Lufkin, albeit it unintentionally. In
almost two decades, the Texas Gann population increased only 21 percent
whereas during the same period the family in Tennessee grew by 162
percent. Clearly it is the latter state, Tennessee, which can today
claim the prize for having the largest population of Ganns in the United
States.
Other states experienced significant increases in the number of Gann
residences within their borders during the years from 1982 to 2001.
Missouri, for instance, where the Gann residences jumped nom 299 to 826
had a nice percentage increase of 176 percent. Then there is Arkansas's
with a 198 percent increase, which is impressive, but not so much as
Georgia where the total Gann telephones took a 244 percent leap. Of
course, when it comes to percentage increase, none of the states with
the relatively large number of Ganns can come close to matching the
smaller states like Alaska where the number went from 1 to 17 for an
increase of 1600 percent. During the period between 1982 and 2001, South
Dakota lost its one Gann Family. Today that state, along with its sister
state, North Dakota, has no Gann living within its borders (at least not
one with a telephone). The District of Columbia shares a similar fate.
Since DC was not included in the first listing, we don't know what the
situation was there in 1982. Massachusetts wasn't listed in 1982 either
probably just a typographical error. Other states saw a decrease in
their Gann population. Connecticut, for instance had 14 Gann families in
1982 but only 13 in 2001 while New York's number went from 27 to 26.
Delaware was the one state with no change at all. Weren't you surprised
to learn that the California Ganns grew only from 315 to 337 families
during the period? I would have expected the number to have at least
doubled.
|