Grant County

Grant County, South Dakota — key demographics

• Population size:

  • 7,300 (approx., 2023 Population Estimates Program)
  • 7,556 (2020 Decennial Census count)

• Age:

  • Median age: ~45 years
  • Under 18: ~23%
  • 65 and over: ~22%

• Gender:

  • Male: ~50%
  • Female: ~50%

• Racial/ethnic composition:

  • White, non-Hispanic: ~93%
  • Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~3%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1%
  • Two or more races: ~2%
  • Black/African American: ~0.3%
  • Asian: ~0.3%

• Household data:

  • Households: ~3,050
  • Average household size: ~2.3
  • Family households: ~64% of households
  • Married-couple households: ~53%
  • Owner-occupied housing rate: ~79%
  • Median household income: ~$65,000
  • Persons in poverty: ~9%

Insights:

• Small, aging population with a high share of older adults and modest share of children.
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White with limited racial/ethnic diversity.
• High owner-occupancy and smaller household sizes typical of rural Great Plains counties.
• Slight population decline since 2020.

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

Grant County, SD overview (2020 Census): ≈7,500 residents across ≈681 sq mi; density ≈11 people/sq mi. Milbank is the population center.

Estimated email users: ≈5,700 residents (≈75% of total population), reflecting ≈92% adoption among adults 18+ and lower uptake among teens.

Age distribution of email users (share of user base):

• 13–17: 3%
• 18–29: 14%
• 30–49: 36%
• 50–64: 29%
• 65+: 18%

Gender split among email users: ≈51% female, ≈49% male (mirrors the county’s near-even sex ratio; women’s slightly higher longevity raises the 65+ female share).

Digital access and connectivity:

• Households with a broadband subscription: ≈79% (ACS-style measure of home internet via cable/DSL/fiber/fixed wireless/cellular).
• Device access: ≈90% of households have a computer and/or smartphone; smartphone-only internet households ≈10–15%.
• Fixed broadband is strongest in and around Milbank (multiple 100+ Mbps options); rural areas rely more on fixed wireless and satellite. 4G LTE and sub‑6 GHz 5G cover primary corridors, improving email access on mobile.

Insights: Email use is effectively universal among working-age adults, with slightly lower usage among 65+ and teens. Adoption tracks home broadband and smartphone availability; denser areas show higher speeds and more consistent email engagement.

Grant County, South Dakota: mobile phone usage snapshot

Population base and user estimates

• Population baseline: 7,556 (2020 Decennial Census).
• Adults (18+): about 5,900; youth 13–17: about 450 (using standard Census age structure for rural SD).
• Adult mobile phone ownership (any cellphone): ~95% → ≈5,600 adult users.
• Adult smartphone users: ≈5,150 (about 88% of adults), derived by weighting higher adoption among 18–64 (92%) and lower among 65+ (77%) using Pew Research 2023 rates and the county’s older age profile.
• Teen (13–17) smartphone users: ≈430 (ownership ~95%).
• Total unique mobile users (13+): ≈6,030, or roughly 80% of the total population.

Demographic breakdown and behavior

• Age-driven differences
  • Seniors (65+) make up a larger share locally than statewide, which depresses smartphone adoption a few points versus the South Dakota average. Expect smartphone adoption among seniors in Grant County in the mid-to-high 70% range vs low-80s statewide.
  • Among 18–64, smartphone penetration is near urban levels (low 90s%), narrowing the gap with the state for working-age adults.
• Urban–rural split
  • Milbank and Big Stone City see more consistent 5G use and higher rates of unlimited data plans; town-based users are more likely to use mobile hotspots or 5G Home as a secondary connection.
  • Outlying townships have higher reliance on Wi‑Fi calling and signal boosters; feature-phone use is modestly higher among older farm and retiree households.
• Income and plan mix
  • Prepaid share is slightly above the statewide mix due to price sensitivity and single-carrier coverage pockets; family postpaid plans are common in town.
  • Mobile-only voice households (no landline): ≈70% of households locally vs roughly three-quarters statewide, reflecting a somewhat higher persistence of landlines among seniors.
• Mobile-only internet reliance
  • Households relying primarily on a smartphone data plan for home internet: ≈10% in Grant County versus roughly 13% statewide. The county’s cooperative fiber footprint reduces smartphone-only internet reliance despite its rural character.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage and radio access
  • 4G LTE: countywide outdoor coverage on major corridors (US‑12, SD‑15, SD‑20) from all three nationals (Verizon, AT&T/FirstNet, T‑Mobile).
  • 5G: low-band 5G blankets towns and highways; mid-band 5G (T‑Mobile n41, Verizon C‑band) is concentrated in and near Milbank and along US‑12, with limited reach into low-density townships.
  • Indoor coverage is generally solid in Milbank; fringe and lake-adjacent areas see variable indoor signal without boosters.
• Backhaul and middle mile
  • Strong fiber presence from regional providers and cooperatives (e.g., ITC and Midco) along US‑12 and into Milbank supports robust backhaul; this underpins better peak-hour performance in town than in many rural SD counties.
• Fixed wireless/home 5G
  • 5G/LTE fixed wireless (Verizon, T‑Mobile) is available in and around Milbank and some rural sections; take-up is meaningful where fiber/cable is absent but lower than statewide where co‑op fiber reaches farms and acreages.
• Cross‑border dynamics
  • Along Big Stone Lake, devices may preferentially camp on Minnesota‑side sectors, improving lakeshore performance but leaving some inland pockets with lower mid‑band signal quality.

How Grant County differs from South Dakota overall

• Slightly lower overall smartphone penetration driven by an older age structure, even while working‑age adoption matches the state.
• Lower smartphone‑only home internet dependence than the state average due to unusually strong rural fiber/co‑op coverage for a small, fully rural county.
• Mid‑band 5G availability is more localized (Milbank/US‑12) than the state’s metro corridors (Sioux Falls/Rapid City), so the share of users experiencing 5G “premium” speeds is smaller on a typical day.
• Voice cutting is a bit less advanced: more households retain a landline than statewide averages, consistent with the county’s age mix.
• Seasonal and cross‑border effects matter more here than in most SD counties: summer congestion around Big Stone Lake and network selection along the MN border produce more variable experience than inland state averages.

Numbers at a glance (estimates, current conditions)

• Adult mobile users: ≈5,600
• Adult smartphone users: ≈5,150 (≈88% of adults)
• Teen (13–17) smartphone users: ≈430
• Total mobile users (13+): ≈6,030
• Mobile-only voice households: ≈70% of ~3,100 households → ≈2,170 households
• Smartphone‑only home internet households: ≈10% → ≈310 households

Insights for planning

• Investments that extend mid‑band 5G sectors outward from Milbank (especially along SD‑15/SD‑20 and toward Revillo/Stockholm) will disproportionately raise real‑world speeds and reduce booster dependence.
• Maintaining and expanding co‑op fiber keeps mobile networks from bearing primary home‑internet loads, which is one reason Grant County’s smartphone‑only reliance is lower than the state’s.
• Targeted outreach and simplified device plans for seniors would close most of the remaining smartphone adoption gap with the rest of South Dakota.

Grant County, SD social media snapshot (2025, estimated from ACS demographics and Pew Research platform adoption for rural U.S. adults)

Overall user base

• Adult population (18+): ~5,600
• Adults using at least one major social or video platform monthly: ~4,400 (≈78% of adults)
• Household broadband adoption: ~80% of households

Most‑used platforms among adults (monthly reach, share of adults)

• YouTube: 80%
• Facebook: 70%
• Instagram: 40%
• Pinterest: 34%
• TikTok: 26%
• Snapchat: 20%
• LinkedIn: 18%
• X (Twitter): 16%
• Nextdoor: 10%

Age‑group usage patterns (share of each age group using the platform monthly; local mix adjusted for rural)

• Ages 18–29: YouTube 95%, Instagram 78%, Snapchat 72%, TikTok 69%, Facebook 60%, X 25%, LinkedIn 22%
• Ages 30–49: YouTube 90%, Facebook 80%, Instagram 52%, Pinterest 40%, TikTok 33%, LinkedIn 28%, X 20%
• Ages 50–64: YouTube 77%, Facebook 72%, Pinterest 38%, Instagram 30%, TikTok 15%, LinkedIn 16%, X 14%
• Ages 65+: YouTube 61%, Facebook 58%, Pinterest 28%, Instagram 17%, TikTok 8%, LinkedIn 9%, X 8%

Gender breakdown (share of each platform’s local user base)

• Facebook: ~56% women, 44% men
• Instagram: ~54% women, 46% men
• Pinterest: ~72% women, 28% men
• TikTok: ~57% women, 43% men
• Snapchat: ~58% women, 42% men
• YouTube: ~47% women, 53% men
• X (Twitter): ~39% women, 61% men
• LinkedIn: ~46% women, 54% men

Behavioral trends observed in rural Upper Midwest counties like Grant

• Facebook as the community hub: Heavy use of Groups (schools, churches, youth sports, city/county updates) and Marketplace; event‑driven spikes around school sports, fairs, weather incidents, and local elections.
• Video‑first consumption: Strong growth in short‑form video (YouTube Shorts, Instagram Reels, TikTok). How‑to, ag/land management, hunting/fishing, DIY, and local highlights perform best.
• Messaging habits: Facebook Messenger prevalent across ages; Snapchat is the default for teens/young adults. WhatsApp remains niche.
• Shopping and recommendations: Facebook Marketplace is routinely checked; Pinterest drives planning/inspiration for home, crafts, weddings, and seasonal buying among women 25–54.
• News and trust: Local pages, known personalities, and county/city agencies are more trusted than national sources; weather and road conditions drive high engagement.
• Time‑of‑day activity: Morning (6–8 a.m.), lunch (noon–1), and evening (7–10 p.m.) peaks; weekend mid‑mornings are strong for family/community content.

Notes on method

• Figures are county‑level estimates derived from Grant County’s ACS demographic profile (2019–2023), statewide broadband adoption, and Pew Research Center’s 2023–2024 platform‑use benchmarks with rural adjustments. Totals are rounded; expect ±3–5 percentage‑point variance.