Valley County

Valley County, Montana — key demographics (latest U.S. Census Bureau data; 2020 Census and 2019–2023 ACS 5-year estimates, values rounded)

Population size

• Total population: 7,578 (2020 Census)
• Population estimate: ~7.6K (2023, Census Population Estimates Program)

Age

• Median age: ~42 years
• Under 18: ~23%
• 65 and over: ~21%

Gender

• Male: ~51%
• Female: ~49%

Racial/ethnic composition

• White alone: ~85%
• American Indian and Alaska Native alone: ~10–12%
• Black or African American alone: <1%
• Asian alone: <1%
• Two or more races: ~3–4%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~3–4% Note: Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity and can overlap with race categories.

Households and families

• Households: ~3,200
• Average household size: ~2.2
• Family households: ~60–63% of households; average family size ~2.8–2.9
• Married-couple households: ~50%
• Households with children under 18: ~25–28%
• Nonfamily households: ~37–40%
• Householders living alone: ~33%; living alone age 65+: ~14–15%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~67–69%; renter-occupied: ~31–33%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates; Population Estimates Program (2023). Percentages rounded.

Valley County, MT snapshot

• Population/density: ≈7,700 residents over ~4,900 sq mi (≈1.6 people/sq mi); population centers along US‑2 around Glasgow.
• Estimated adult email users: ≈5,400 (about 91% of adults), derived from local age mix and national email adoption benchmarks.
• Age distribution among email users (share ≈ count):
  • 18–34: ~24% (≈1,300)
  • 35–54: ~33% (≈1,760)
  • 55–64: ~16% (≈870)
  • 65+: ~27% (≈1,460)
• Gender split among email users: mirrors population, ~51% male (≈2,750) and ~49% female (≈2,650); usage rates are effectively equal by gender.
• Digital access and connectivity:
  • Fiber is available in and near Glasgow (notably via Nemont, a regional cooperative); connectivity declines outside towns, where many households rely on fixed wireless or satellite.
  • Sparse settlement and long last‑mile distances constrain wired buildouts; service is strongest along main corridors, with ranchlands experiencing speed/latency variability.
  • Public Wi‑Fi and devices at libraries/schools in Glasgow and nearby towns help bridge access for lower‑income and remote residents. Overall, email is near‑universal among working‑age adults; seniors participate substantially but at slightly lower rates, reflecting broader rural broadband constraints rather than lack of interest.

Mobile phone usage in Valley County, Montana (2025)

User estimates

• Population: ≈7,700 residents; ≈6,200 adults (18+)
• Residents using any mobile phone: ≈6,250 (≈81% of the population; ≈93% of adults)
• Smartphone users (all ages): ≈5,800
  • Adults with smartphones: ≈5,300 (≈86% of adults)
  • Teens (12–17) with smartphones: ≈470
• Households: ≈3,300
  • Households with at least one smartphone: ≈2,900 (≈88%)
  • Households with a cellular data plan for internet: ≈2,300 (≈70%)
  • Households primarily relying on cellular data for home internet: ≈720 (≈22%)

Demographic breakdown (smartphone adoption, 2025 estimates)

• Ages 18–34: ≈96% (≈1,330 users)
• Ages 35–64: ≈90% (≈2,700 users)
• Ages 65+: ≈72% (≈1,275 users)
• Geography within the county:
  • Glasgow/Nashua/Fort Peck townsites: highest adoption, strong device turnover and 5G-capable handsets
  • Outlying ranchlands and Missouri/Milk River breaks: noticeably lower smartphone usage and more basic handsets due to patchier coverage and power/charging constraints
• Native residents: Valley County’s Native share is meaningfully higher than the state average; coverage along the Fort Peck Reservation fringes is more uneven, yielding slightly lower smartphone adoption than the county average and higher reliance on prepaid and mobile-only internet in those areas

Digital infrastructure

• Coverage pattern: Service is concentrated along the U.S. Highway 2 corridor (Glasgow, Nashua) and around Fort Peck Dam; large areas away from these corridors have weak or no signal
• 5G availability: Low‑band 5G from Verizon and AT&T is present in and immediately around Glasgow and along US‑2; T‑Mobile 600 MHz 5G appears along the corridor. Mid‑band 5G is limited to town centers. No mmWave deployments
• LTE bands commonly in use:
  • Verizon: B13, B2, B66 (with DSS 5G)
  • AT&T/FirstNet: B12, B2, B66, B14 (FirstNet)
  • T‑Mobile: B71, B2, B66 (mid‑band where available near town)
• Carriers and roaming: Verizon and AT&T have the most reliable rural footprint; T‑Mobile is present primarily along US‑2 and in towns. Nemont/Sagebrush (the regional cooperative) provides fiber backhaul, fixed wireless, and roaming partnerships that bolster coverage in pockets where national carriers lean on local infrastructure
• Backhaul: Fiber follows the Hi‑Line/rail and state trunk routes (notably through Glasgow), with microwave hops feeding remote towers. This routing means single fiber cuts or power events can create wide‑area cellular disruptions
• Home internet interplay: Because wireline broadband thins quickly outside towns, fixed‑wireless and mobile hotspots are common. T‑Mobile and Verizon 5G/LTE home internet services are available in and around Glasgow/Nashua; elsewhere, subscribers lean on mobile data plans or satellite

How Valley County differs from Montana overall

• Slightly lower smartphone adoption overall, driven by an older age profile and wider areas of marginal coverage
• Meaningfully higher reliance on cellular data as the primary home internet, especially outside town centers
• 5G footprint is narrower and mostly limited to towns and a single highway corridor, while the state’s populated areas see broader 5G coverage
• T‑Mobile’s footprint and performance are more constrained than the state average; Verizon and AT&T dominate practical rural coverage
• Greater dependence on regional cooperative infrastructure (Nemont/Sagebrush) for both backhaul and roaming, which is less pronounced in more urban Montana counties
• Coverage variability (topography, distance to towers, weather) is more pronounced than the state average, contributing to higher use of basic handsets and offline-first workflows in remote areas

Method note: Figures are 2025 estimates synthesized from recent American Community Survey patterns (household device and cellular data adoption), national smartphone ownership by age, and observed rural coverage/deployment patterns for Montana. Estimates are rounded for clarity and intended to reflect current, local conditions in Valley County.

Valley County, MT social media snapshot (localized estimates with cited baselines)

Headline user stats

• Population and connectivity: ~7.6k residents (2020 Census); households with a broadband subscription ≈ 75–80% (ACS 2018–2022). Adult (18+) share ≈ 79%.
• Adult social media users: ≈ 4,300 (about 72% of ~6,000 adults, aligning with Pew’s rural-adult adoption rate).

Most-used platforms among adult social media users (estimated local share)

• YouTube: ~80%
• Facebook: ~70%
• Instagram: ~35%
• Pinterest: ~32%
• TikTok: ~28%
• Snapchat: ~22%
• X (Twitter): ~18%
• LinkedIn: ~15%
• Reddit: ~12%
• WhatsApp: ~12%
• Nextdoor: ~5%

Age-group breakdown (share of the Valley County adult social media audience)

• 18–29: ~19% of users (near-universal use in this cohort)
• 30–49: ~37% of users (high multi-platform use)
• 50–64: ~26% of users (Facebook/YouTube dominant; growing YouTube adoption)
• 65+: ~18% of users (Facebook first; YouTube for news/how-to; lighter on TikTok/Instagram)

Gender breakdown

• Overall user base: ~51% male, ~49% female (mirrors county demographics).
• Platform skews: Pinterest skews female; Reddit and X skew male; Instagram/TikTok skew slightly female but mixed overall; Facebook and YouTube broadly even.

Behavioral trends observed in similar rural counties and consistent with Valley County’s profile

• Reliance on Facebook for local life: High engagement with community groups (buy/sell/trade, school sports, road and weather updates, hunting/fishing, county services). Events and fundraisers organize primarily via Facebook Events/Groups.
• Video-first problem solving: YouTube used for DIY, ranching/farm equipment repair, outdoor recreation, and product research; short-form video consumption (Reels/Shorts/TikTok) growing but skews younger.
• News and alerts: Local sources (county pages, schools, EMS, weather) drive spikes on Facebook; YouTube for longer explainer content; X used by a smaller, news-oriented niche.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is the default; WhatsApp adoption is modest; SMS remains common for coordination.
• Time-of-day usage: Peaks before work (7–9 a.m.) and evenings (7–10 p.m.); weekday mid-afternoons softer; weekend late mornings/early afternoons stronger for events and group posts.
• Commerce: Facebook Marketplace is the primary local channel for person-to-person sales; Instagram shopping used by younger adults; Pinterest influences home/outdoor purchase inspiration.
• Creator/influencer footprint: Limited local creator base; pragmatic content (weather, wildlife, agriculture, how‑to) outperforms lifestyle content; trust is highest for familiar local pages and individuals.

Notes on methodology

• Local estimates are derived by applying Pew Research Center’s latest U.S. platform usage rates and rural-versus-urban adoption differences to Valley County’s age and sex structure from the U.S. Census Bureau’s ACS. This yields defensible, county‑level approximations where direct county platform data are unavailable.

Sources

• U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS) 2018–2022: population structure and broadband subscription.
• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2024; and prior Pew findings on rural/urban adoption gaps.