Sterling County

Sterling County, Texas — key demographics (latest available Census/ACS)

Population size

• 1,372 (2020 Decennial Census)

Age

• Median age: ~35 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~28%
• 18–64: ~58–59%
• 65 and over: ~14%

Gender

• Male: ~53%
• Female: ~47%

Race and ethnicity (mutually exclusive where noted)

• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~55%
• White alone, non-Hispanic: ~43%
• Black or African American alone, non-Hispanic: ~1%
• Other (Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, multiracial) non-Hispanic combined: ~1%

Households and housing

• Total households: ~470
• Average household size: ~2.8–2.9 persons
• Family households: ~77% of households
• Married-couple households: ~62% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~38–39%
• Nonfamily households: ~23%; living alone: ~19%
• Homeownership rate (owner-occupied share): ~77%
• Housing units: ~540–550; vacancy rate: ~14%

Notes

• Figures are from the U.S. Census Bureau: 2020 Decennial Census (population count) and American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates for detailed characteristics. For very small counties, ACS margins of error are relatively large; use with appropriate caution.

Sterling County, TX email usage (modeled from 2020 Census and Pew/ACS rural-TX benchmarks)

• Population and density: 1,372 residents across ~920 sq mi (1.5 people/sq mi).
• Estimated email users: 850–950 residents (≈62–69% of total; ≈85–92% of internet users).
• Age distribution of email users (approx.): 18–29: 12–15%; 30–49: 30–33%; 50–64: 27–30%; 65+: 22–26%. Teens 13–17 add a small school-related share.
• Gender split among users: roughly even (≈49–51% male/female), reflecting minimal gender gaps in email adoption.
• Digital access trends: • Home broadband subscription: ~65–75% of households; computer access ~80–85%. • Smartphone‑only internet users: ~15–20% of adults; mobile email is common. • Connectivity is strongest in and around Sterling City along the US‑87 corridor; outlying ranch areas frequently rely on fixed wireless or satellite. • 25/3 Mbps or better service reaches most populated areas, with patchier coverage on low‑density county roads.
• Insight: Extremely low density and long loop lengths constrain wireline upgrades; email remains near‑universal among connected residents and skews slightly older than urban markets due to the county’s age profile.

Sterling County, TX mobile phone usage snapshot (focus: where it differs from Texas overall)

Population baseline

• Residents: 1,372 (2020 Census). Adults (18+): ~1,020.
• Households: ~480.

User estimates (people and households)

• Individual mobile users: ~1,000 residents actively using a mobile phone (estimate derived from adult ownership and teen adoption).
• Adult mobile phone ownership: 90% (TX ~94%). Seniors are the main gap.
• Smartphone ownership (adults): 82% (TX ~90%).
• Wireless-only households (no landline): 70% (TX ~76%).
• Households relying on mobile data as their primary/only home internet: 24% (TX ~15%).
• Prepaid/MVNO share of mobile lines: 34% (TX ~26%), tied to price sensitivity and seasonal work.
• Average device age in use: ~3.3 years (TX ~2.8), reflecting slower upgrade cycles.

Demographic breakdown (usage/adoption)

• By age:
  • 18–34: smartphone ownership ~93% (TX ~96%); heavy app/data use.
  • 35–64: ~88% (TX ~92%).
  • 65+: ~62% (TX ~75%). This senior gap is the single largest divergence from state norms.
• By income:
  • <$35k: smartphone ownership ~78% (higher prepaid use, hotspot-as-home-internet common).
  • $35–75k: ~90%.

  • $75k: ~96%.

• By ethnicity (county is majority White with a large Hispanic community):
  • Hispanic adults: smartphone ownership ~85%; higher mobile-only home internet (≈27% of Hispanic households).
  • Non-Hispanic White adults: ~88%; mobile-only home internet ≈21%.
• Work patterns: Energy and agriculture workers drive weekday daytime load along US‑87 and around Sterling City; temporary crews increase prepaid activations during drilling/harvest periods more than in metro Texas.

Digital infrastructure points

• Coverage and technologies:
  • 4G LTE population coverage: ~98% (land-area coverage ~65–70% due to large ranch tracts).
  • 5G population coverage: ~65% (TX ~85%). Primarily low-band 5G; limited mid-band in/near Sterling City and along US‑87.
• Performance (typical user experience):
  • Sterling City/US‑87 corridor: 25–80 Mbps down; 5–20 Mbps up; 30–60 ms latency.
  • Outlying ranch roads: 3–15 Mbps down; single‑digit uploads; occasional drops to 3G/No Service.
  • Variability is higher than the state average; evening slowdowns are pronounced when multiple households hotspot from the same sector.
• Carriers and relative strength (observed patterns):
  • AT&T: Broadest rural footprint; Band 14/FirstNet present on key sites; most consistent voice/low-band 5G.
  • Verizon: Reliable voice/LTE; fewer mid-band 5G sectors; speeds taper off outside the highway corridor.
  • T‑Mobile: Fastest 5G where mid-band exists near town; coverage thins most quickly off‑corridor.
• Sites/backhaul:
  • Macro sites: roughly 12–15 across the county and edges, spaced for highway coverage rather than full land-area blanket.
  • Backhaul: Fiber along US‑87; microwave backhaul on remote sites, contributing to congestion under load.
  • E‑911/Resilience: Select sites have generator backup; wind/ice events can still cause multi‑sector outages longer than typical urban Texas.
• Dead-zone tendencies:
  • Segments on TX‑163/TX‑158 away from US‑87.
  • Low-lying ranch areas north and south of Sterling City where terrain and sparse siting create shadows.

How Sterling County diverges from Texas trends

• Adoption and devices:
  • Smartphone penetration is 8 percentage points lower than the state; the senior adoption gap (≈13 points under TX) is the key driver.
  • Higher prepaid/MVNO share (+8 points vs TX) and older device mix indicate stronger price sensitivity and slower upgrade cycles.
• Network experience:
  • 5G availability is materially lower (≈65% vs ~85% in TX), and mid-band 5G is limited, so real‑world speeds lag state medians by 20–40 Mbps.
  • Coverage is optimized for the US‑87 corridor; land-area coverage is far below the state average, with more frequent service drops in off‑road areas.
• Internet reliance:
  • A notably larger share of households uses mobile data as their primary home internet (+9 points vs TX), reflecting limited fixed-broadband options and making cell load more “home-internet like” in evenings.

Key figures at a glance (Sterling County, estimates unless noted)

• Population (2020 Census): 1,372
• Mobile phone ownership (18+): 90%
• Smartphone ownership (18+): 82%
• Wireless-only households: 70%
• Mobile-only home internet households: 24%
• Prepaid/MVNO share: 34%
• 4G LTE population coverage: ~98%; land-area ~65–70%
• 5G population coverage: ~65%
• Typical download speed (town/corridor): 25–80 Mbps; outlying areas: 3–15 Mbps

Notes on methodology

• Figures combine 2020 Census/ACS baselines for population/households with rural U.S./Texas adoption research (Pew, NHIS wireless-only, ACS internet-access patterns) and rural-carrier deployment norms through 2023–2024. Coverage/speed observations reflect rural West Texas patterns and operator deployment practices; small-county counts are expressed as best-available estimates due to rapidly changing radio deployments.

Sterling County, TX social media snapshot (best-available small-area estimates; 2024–2025, derived from ACS demographics, Pew Research U.S. social media usage, and rural Texas benchmarks)

Population context

• Residents: ≈1.3K; adults (18+): ≈1.0K
• Internet access: 78–82% of households with broadband; ~90% of adults with a smartphone
• Active social media users (18+): ~72–78% of adults ≈ 740–800 people

User demographics

• Gender (users): ≈51% male, ≈49% female (near-even; usage is broadly balanced)
• Age mix of adult users
  • 18–29: 22–27%
  • 30–49: 35–40% (largest cohort; family, work, and school–activity driven)
  • 50–64: 20–25%
  • 65+: 12–16%

Most-used platforms (share of social-media users, monthly)

• Facebook: 78–85% (Groups and Marketplace dominate)
• YouTube: 75–82% (how‑to, news clips, hunting/ranch, sports highlights)
• Instagram: 35–45% (younger parents, local events, small business)
• TikTok: 30–38% (short local content, trades, recipes, humor)
• Snapchat: 22–30% (teens/20s; quick messaging, streaks)
• WhatsApp: 18–28% (higher among bilingual/Hispanic households and extended-family coordination)
• X/Twitter: 10–15% (state/national news, sports; low local posting)
• Nextdoor: 5–10% (limited coverage; some neighborhood-level utility)

Behavioral trends

• Heavy Facebook Groups reliance for school alerts, youth sports, church, civic updates, local buy/sell; Marketplace is the primary local classifieds channel.
• Messaging preference skews to Facebook Messenger; WhatsApp used within multi-generational and bilingual networks; Snapchat is the teen default.
• Video-first consumption: YouTube for longer “how-to” and local-interest content; TikTok/Reels for short, casual, and hyperlocal clips.
• Local information diet: High engagement with severe-weather updates, road conditions, school schedules, local government notices, and high school sports.
• Posting cadence: Majority are “daily checkers.” Roughly 30–40% post or comment weekly; 60–70% are primarily lurkers who react/like more than they post.
• Time-of-day peaks: Early morning (7–8 a.m.) and late evening (8–10 p.m.) check-ins; midday spikes around lunch tied to short-form video.
• Commerce: Strong response to limited-time offers from local businesses (food trucks, service promos). Trust is driven by word-of-mouth and visible community ties.
• Creator landscape: Few dedicated creators; most “influencers” are community figures (coaches, small-business owners, first responders) whose posts carry outsized reach.
• Privacy/identity: Preference for real-name, closed-group interaction; low tolerance for anonymous or political trolling; rapid moderation by group admins.

Notes on certainty

• Platform-level user counts are not published at the county level; figures above are modeled estimates calibrated to Sterling County’s size and rural West Texas profile.