Golden Valley County

Key demographics for Golden Valley County, Montana

• Population: 823 (2020 Census)
• Age (ACS 2019–2023): median age ~52; under 18 ≈20%; 18–64 ≈57%; 65+ ≈23%
• Sex (ACS 2019–2023): male ≈52%; female ≈48%
• Race/ethnicity (ACS 2019–2023):
  • White (non-Hispanic) ≈94%
  • Hispanic/Latino (any race) ≈3%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native ≈1%
  • Two or more races ≈2%
  • Other categories each <1%
• Households (ACS 2019–2023): ≈365 households; average household size ≈2.2; family households ≈58% (nonfamily ≈42%)

Notes: ACS figures are multi-year estimates and subject to larger margins of error in small-population counties.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates.

Golden Valley County, MT email usage (estimates)

• Population context: 1,000–1,100 residents spread over ~1,175 sq mi (0.9 people/sq mi), among Montana’s least-dense counties. Towns: Ryegate, Lavina.
• Estimated email users: ~600 residents (±100). Basis: adult share ~80% of population; internet adoption ~70–80% of adults; email use ~90% of internet users.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 18–34: ~18–22%
  • 35–64: ~48–55%
  • 65+: ~25–32%
• Gender split among users: ~51% male, ~49% female (reflecting slight male tilt in rural demographics).
• Digital access trends:
  • Home broadband subscriptions ~60–70% of households; additional ~10–15% are smartphone-only.
  • Mobile coverage strongest along US‑12 and in town centers; patchy in outlying ranchland.
  • Public access via school/library Wi‑Fi in Ryegate and other civic sites; rising use of satellite (e.g., Starlink) to fill gaps.
  • Gradual improvements from co‑op/fiber projects and state/federal rural broadband grants; speeds of 100/20 Mbps remain uneven outside town cores.

Notes: Figures synthesized from ACS/FCC rural benchmarks and Pew email adoption norms, scaled to local population. Actual values can vary by neighborhood and provider footprint.

Mobile phone usage in Golden Valley County, Montana — 2025 snapshot

Quick profile

• Very small, rural county in central Montana (population roughly 800–900; low density; towns clustered along US‑12 such as Ryegate and Lavina).
• Older age structure and lower median income than the Montana average, with a high share of agricultural and outdoor occupations.

User estimates (order‑of‑magnitude, based on ACS demographics, rural adoption differentials, and Pew mobile adoption rates)

• Total mobile phone users (any mobile): about 700–800 residents.
• Smartphone users: roughly 500–600 (about 70–78% of mobile users; below the statewide share).
• Feature/flip‑phone users: about 120–200 (notably higher share than statewide).
• Households maintaining a secondary mobile line or hotspot for home internet or field work: roughly 10–20% of households.
• Teen users (13–17): small in absolute number but high adoption among those with service; overall county share of teens is low, which reduces the total smartphone base versus the state.

Demographic patterns shaping usage

• Age: Larger 65+ share (approximately 30% or higher) than Montana overall, contributing to more flip‑phone retention and lower app usage.
• Income and work: Lower median household income than the state average and more outdoor/agricultural work lead to:
  • Greater emphasis on voice/SMS and coverage reliability over high‑end data plans.
  • Practical app mix (weather, ag markets, offline maps, messaging) rather than data‑heavy entertainment.
• Education and devices: Fewer multi‑device households than in metro Montana; shared family plans are common; BYOD for small businesses and ranch operations.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Cellular coverage
  • Stronger signal clustered along US‑12 and in/near towns; rapid drop‑off in coulees, breaks, and away from highways.
  • Carrier patterns typical of rural Montana: Verizon generally most reliable; AT&T workable in pockets; T‑Mobile coverage limited. Residents often keep a second SIM or rely on Wi‑Fi calling for dead zones.
  • 5G: Little to no practical 5G; service is predominantly LTE on low‑band spectrum. Expect modest speeds near towns and very weak data service in remote areas.
  • Performance: Near towns, LTE downlink often in the 5–25 Mbps range; elsewhere sub‑5 Mbps is common, with occasional periods of no service. Latency typically 50–80 ms when signal is strong.
  • Resilience: Weather, wildfires, and power events can degrade service; backup power at sites is limited in duration.
• Home and backhaul
  • Fixed broadband relies on legacy DSL and fixed wireless; fiber to the home is sparse. Many households use mobile hotspots or Starlink to fill gaps.
  • Wi‑Fi calling is widely used indoors due to weak in‑home cellular signal.
  • Public access: County library, school facilities, and a few businesses provide important public Wi‑Fi nodes.

How Golden Valley differs from Montana overall

• Lower smartphone penetration and higher flip‑phone share because of older age structure and coverage constraints.
• Heavier reliance on voice/SMS, Wi‑Fi calling, and offline‑capable apps; lower average mobile data consumption than state urban centers (Billings, Bozeman, Missoula).
• Far less 5G availability and fewer carrier options; practical coverage is dictated by a small number of LTE sites along major corridors rather than broad area 5G.
• More multi‑carrier contingency and device/workarounds (hotspots, Starlink, satellite messengers for backcountry work) than the state average.
• Slower uptake of app‑based payments and streaming; higher relative use of phones for utility functions (weather, markets, logistics, safety) versus entertainment.

Notes on methodology and uncertainty

• Figures reflect county size from Census/ACS 5‑year patterns, rural adoption adjustments from Pew Research on mobile ownership, and typical rural‑Montana carrier footprints and FCC coverage/broadband maps; exact counts vary by neighborhood, terrain, and ongoing network upgrades.
• For planning or grant purposes, validate with current FCC National Broadband Map, carrier coverage tools, and the latest ACS tables (population by age, income) for Golden Valley County.

Below is a concise, best-available snapshot. Because Golden Valley County’s population is under 1,000 and public platform data isn’t published at the county level, figures are modeled from rural Montana and U.S. rural patterns (Pew Research Center 2023–2024; ACS demographics). Treat percentages as ranges, not absolutes.

Quick context

• Small, older-leaning population; each 1% ≈ 7–10 people.
• Internet access is uneven; expect 70–80% of households with reliable broadband, lower in outlying areas.
• Among adults, roughly 55–65% are monthly active on at least one social platform; 40–50% weekly.

Most‑used platforms (estimated share of adult residents using monthly)

• YouTube: 60–70%
• Facebook: 50–60%
• Facebook Messenger: 45–55%
• Instagram: 20–30%
• TikTok: 15–25% (skews younger)
• Snapchat: 15–25% (mostly teens/young adults)
• Reddit: 8–12% (younger males)
• X/Twitter: 5–10%
• LinkedIn: 5–10%
• WhatsApp/Telegram: 5–10% (niche; family/work groups)
• Nextdoor: <5% (limited presence)

Age patterns

• Teens (13–17): Heavy Snapchat and TikTok; near‑universal YouTube. Low public posting; high private messaging and Stories.
• 18–34: YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat/TikTok common; Facebook used for groups/Marketplace more than personal posting.
• 35–54: Facebook is primary (groups, school/activities, Marketplace); YouTube for how‑to, weather, hunting/outdoors.
• 55+: Facebook dominant (community updates, obituaries, events); YouTube for tutorials and local/weather content. Limited Instagram/TikTok uptake.

Gender tendencies (directional)

• Women: Slightly higher Facebook/Instagram and local group participation; more Marketplace buying/selling.
• Men: Higher YouTube and Reddit; outdoors, equipment, ag/mechanics content. TikTok/Instagram usage growing among younger men.

Behavioral trends

• Community-first usage: Facebook Groups for local news, school sports, church and fair events, road/wildfire/weather updates; Marketplace is a key utility.
• Lurker majority: A small minority creates most posts. Many prefer sharing/DMs over public posting.
• Visual, practical content: Farm/ranch life, 4‑H/FFA, hunting/fishing, equipment repair, DIY, local businesses. YouTube for “how‑to” (equipment, fencing, small‑engine repair) and longer weather outlooks.
• Messaging over feeds: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat are primary for coordination; group chats for family, teams, and committees.
• Seasonality and dayparts: Peaks early morning (6–8 a.m.) and evenings (7–10 p.m.). Activity can dip during planting/harvest and spike around storms, wildfires, and school sports.
• Trust and privacy: Preference for known, local sources and closed groups; cautious with outsiders and ads that feel generic or urban-centric.

Practical notes

• Audience sizes are tiny; widen targeting to adjacent counties or a radius around population centers to reach critical mass.
• Local pages/groups (school, county gov, fair/rodeo, buy/sell/trade) often outperform generic interest targeting.
• Each percent change represents only a handful of people—use ranges and qualitative signals (group membership counts, event turnout) to ground decisions.