Sherman County

Sherman County, Texas – key demographics

Population size

• Total population: 3,186 (2020 Decennial Census)

Age

• Median age: 32.5 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Age distribution: 0–17: 30.5%; 18–64: 57.1%; 65+: 12.4% (ACS 2018–2022)

Gender

• Male: 52.0%
• Female: 48.0% (ACS 2018–2022)

Racial/ethnic composition

• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): 56%
• White alone, non-Hispanic: 39%
• Black or African American alone: 1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: 1%
• Asian alone: 0.3%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: 2.7% (ACS 2018–2022)

Households and housing

• Total households: 1,050
• Average household size: 3.00
• Family households: 76% of households; married-couple families: 58% of all households
• Nonfamily households: 24%
• Housing units: 1,260; owner-occupied: 68%; renter-occupied: 32% (ACS 2018–2022)

Insights

• Small, rural county with a majority Hispanic population, relatively young median age, larger household sizes, and a slight male majority consistent with agricultural labor patterns.

Sherman County, TX email usage snapshot

• Population and density: ≈3,400 residents spread across ≈923 sq mi (≈3.7 people/sq mi). Population is concentrated in Stratford, with extensive low‑density ranchland elsewhere.
• Estimated email users: ≈2,650 residents (≈78% of the population).
• Gender split of users: ≈50% male, ≈50% female (mirrors overall population).
• Age distribution of email users (share of users):
  • 13–17: ~9%
  • 18–34: ~28%
  • 35–54: ~34%
  • 55–64: ~13%
  • 65+: ~16%
• Digital access and usage trends:
  • Household broadband subscription ≈77%; smartphone‑only internet access ≈13%.
  • Adult email adoption is near‑universal; heaviest daily use among 18–54, with steady growth among 65+ as smartphone use rises.
  • Outside Stratford, residents commonly rely on fixed wireless, mobile data, or satellite for primary access; email usage often occurs on smartphones rather than desktop.
• Connectivity context:
  • Low population density increases last‑mile costs, limiting cable/fiber buildouts; legacy DSL, fixed wireless, and satellite are prevalent beyond the town center.
  • Coverage is strongest along US‑287; service becomes patchier on section roads and remote ranches, though expanding 5G fixed‑wireless and LEO satellite options are improving availability.

Mobile phone usage in Sherman County, Texas — estimates and key differences from statewide patterns

Headline numbers (2023–2024 estimates)

• Population and households: ~3,400 residents; ~1,200 households; adult (18+) population ~2,420.
• Mobile phone users (any mobile): ~2,300 adults (≈95% of adults, in line with rural Texas).
• Smartphone users: ~2,050 adults (≈85% of adults; a few points below the Texas statewide ~90%).
• Smartphone-only internet households: 24% of households (≈285), notably higher than Texas overall (14–16%).
• Households with no fixed home broadband: ~20% (Texas ~12–13%), most of whom rely on smartphones for internet access.

Demographic and usage breakdown

• Age
  • 18–34: ~95–97% smartphone adoption; heavy app/social/video use, hotspotting when fixed broadband is unavailable.
  • 35–64: ~88–92% smartphone adoption; high work-related mobile use, especially in agriculture, trades, oil and gas services.
  • 65+: ~68–75% smartphone adoption; overall mobile (any phone) ~90%; more voice/SMS-reliant, growing telehealth and messaging.
• Race/ethnicity
  • The population is predominantly White and Hispanic; bilingual (English/Spanish) device settings and app usage are common.
  • Hispanic adults show slightly higher smartphone dependence (≈87–90% adoption) and higher rates of smartphone-only home internet than non-Hispanic White adults, driven by cost and availability of fixed broadband.
• Income and plan mix
  • Median household income ≈$60k–$70k; cost sensitivity is evident in plan choices.
  • Prepaid share is elevated (≈25–30% of lines vs ≈18–22% statewide), reflecting seasonal and budget-driven usage.
  • Data usage averages roughly 18–22 GB per line per month, with peaks during planting/harvest and school months; hotspot use is common in smartphone-only homes.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage geometry
  • Fewer than a dozen macro cell sites countywide; coverage concentrated around Stratford and along US‑54 and US‑287. Off-corridor ranchland sees larger gaps and edge coverage.
  • 4G LTE is the baseline across most populated areas; indoor coverage off the main corridors is inconsistent.
• 5G availability
  • Practical population coverage ~65–75% (primarily low‑band 5G). Mid‑band 5G (capacity/speed) is limited to town cores and highway segments.
  • Texas statewide 5G population coverage exceeds 90%; Sherman County lags on mid‑band capacity specifically.
• Speeds and reliability
  • Typical LTE: 5–35 Mbps down, 1–10 Mbps up; can fall below 5 Mbps at cell edges.
  • Low‑band 5G around towns/highways: 30–120 Mbps down in favorable conditions; mid‑band bursts higher where present but with small footprints.
  • Congestion spikes occur during school commute times and agricultural peaks; weather can affect microwave backhaul on fringe sites.
• Backhaul and middle‑mile
  • Fiber backhaul follows major road corridors; several rural sites still lean on microwave. This constrains peak capacity compared with urban Texas.
• Carriers and programs
  • AT&T, Verizon, and T‑Mobile all serve the county; AT&T FirstNet and Verizon Frontline cover primary corridors and Stratford for public safety.
  • Fixed alternatives: limited DSL/legacy cable, scattered fiber builds, regional fixed‑wireless, and satellite (including Starlink) widely used beyond town limits.

How Sherman County differs from Texas overall

• Higher smartphone-only dependence: ~24% of households vs ~14–16% statewide, reflecting both gaps in fixed infrastructure and the practicality of mobile as the primary connection.
• Slightly lower smartphone adoption rate among adults (mid‑80s vs ~90% statewide), but higher reliance on mobile for core internet tasks.
• Sparser tower grid and more pronounced off‑highway coverage gaps; 5G mid‑band capacity is notably thinner than in Texas metros and large towns.
• Higher prepaid share and greater month‑to‑month plan churn, tied to seasonal work and budget management.
• Mobile is a primary on‑ramp for services (banking, school portals, messaging, telehealth), but sustained high‑bandwidth use (HD streaming, multi-user telework) is less feasible outside town cores due to capacity and signal constraints.

Method notes

• Figures are derived from the latest available ACS population/household structure for Sherman County combined with rural‑Texas and national mobile adoption benchmarks (Pew/industry), FCC coverage data patterns for the Panhandle, and observed rural performance ranges. Estimates are rounded for clarity and reflect 2023–2024 conditions.

Social media usage in Sherman County, Texas (short breakdown, 2024)

Scope and method: Figures are county-level estimates built from the 2020 Census (Sherman County population 3,186) and the latest Pew Research Center U.S. platform-adoption rates, adjusted for rural Texas age mix.

User stats

• Adults using any social media: ~72% of 18+ residents
• Daily social media users (of adults who use): ~70%
• Teen adoption (13–17): ~95% use at least one platform

Age groups (share of people in each age band who use any social platform)

• 13–17: ~95%
• 18–29: ~90%
• 30–49: ~82%
• 50–64: ~73%
• 65+: ~50%

Gender breakdown (among social media users)

• Male: ~51%
• Female: ~49% Notes: Women skew higher on Facebook and Pinterest; men skew higher on YouTube, X, and Reddit.

Most-used platforms (share of adult social media users who use each platform)

• YouTube: ~82%
• Facebook: ~70%
• Instagram: ~38%
• TikTok: ~31%
• Snapchat: ~28%
• Pinterest: ~30%
• X (Twitter): ~19%
• LinkedIn: ~18%
• WhatsApp: ~16%
• Nextdoor: ~4%

Behavioral trends

• Facebook-first for local life: County offices, schools/athletics, churches, civic clubs, and buy/sell/trade groups dominate engagement.
• Video-forward habits: YouTube for how-to, farming/ranch equipment, weather; short-form (Reels/TikTok) growing fastest among under-35.
• Messaging patterns: Facebook Messenger is default for adults; Snapchat prevalent among teens/college-age; WhatsApp niche (family ties/immigrants).
• Peak activity windows: Evenings (7–10 pm) and weekend mornings; sharp spikes during severe weather, school sports, road closures.
• Participation mix: Majority are “lurkers” who react/share more than they post; comment activity clusters around local news and sports.
• Local business use: Restaurants, contractors, and ag suppliers rely on Facebook Pages/Groups and Events; paid reach most efficient for ages 25–64.
• Trust and verification: High trust in known local institutions/pages; users cross-check rumors with county/school pages and local TV weather.
• Platform gaps: Nextdoor usage is minimal due to sparse neighborhood density; LinkedIn is used for professional visibility rather than local networking.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census); Pew Research Center (U.S. social media adoption, 2022–2023). Figures are county-scaled estimates consistent with rural Texas patterns.