Signature · 14.9% low-access (32nd pct)
Carbon County, MT
Carbon County lands in the lower national band on low-access (14.9%); supermarket distance is less binding than in the upper band, though local tracts can still diverge.
- 14.9%
- low-access pop.
- 0
- food-desert tracts
- 6.1%
- on SNAP
- 11K
- residents (ACS 2024)
USDA FARA access plate
County Carbon County, MT
LA-MODERATE · BELOW-NATIONAL · LILA-NONE · SNAP-LIGHT · VEH-OK · DENSITY-CLEAR
- LA-MODERATE 14.9% low-access
- BELOW-NATIONAL -7.2 pts vs US
- LILA-NONE 0 food-desert tracts
- SNAP-LIGHT 6.1% SNAP
- VEH-OK 3.4% no vehicle
- DENSITY-CLEAR 0% tracts LILA
Nearest low-access peer: Stillwater County (+ 0.4 pts)
Lower-band low-access
Carbon County lands in the lower national band (14.9%, #2,123 of 3,079); local tracts can still diverge from the county mean.
- #2,123
- national by low-access %
- #50
- in MT
- 1
- low-access tracts
- 337
- food-desert residents
Lower-band county means still leave tract outliers on the table below.
Signature read: 14.9% low-access (32nd pct) (-7.2 pts vs U.S. low-access).
How Carbon County compares nationally
Carbon County lands in the middle of the national distribution: a 14.9% low-access share that beats 32% of the 3,133 U.S. counties with USDA data (rank #2,123).
Carbon County's lower-band USDA tier split
5 census tracts grouped by USDA classification .
All 5 of Carbon County's tracts are rural in the USDA classification, so every one is judged on the 10-mile test: a resident counts as low-access only when the nearest supermarket is more than 10 miles away.
Carbon County vs nearby low low-access peers
Poles + nearest peers in Montana, not a full county-board reprint
- Wibaux
Wibaux 100%
100 % low-access
- Gallatin 16.6
Gallatin 16.6%
16.6 % low-access
- Broadwater 15.4
Broadwater 15.4%
15.4 % low-access
- Stillwater 15.3
Stillwater 15.3%
15.3 % low-access
- Carbon 14.9
Carbon 14.9%
14.9 % low-access
- Flathead 12.9
Flathead 12.9%
12.9 % low-access
- Ravalli 2.7
Ravalli 2.7%
2.7 % low-access
FARA 2019 · lower low-access
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Census Tracts | 5 |
| Atlas Population (2010 basis) | 10,078 |
| Low-Access Tracts | 1 |
| Food-Desert Tracts (low-income & low-access) | 0 |
| Low-Access Population | 1,505 |
| Low-Access Share | 14.9%below the national average |
| Low-Income & Low-Access Population | 337 |
Demographics & Assistance (Census ACS 2024)
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Population | 11,116 |
| Median Household Income | $80,261 |
| Poverty Rate | 7.8%well below the national average |
| SNAP Households | 286 |
| SNAP Participation Rate | 6.1%well below the national average |
| Households Without a Vehicle | 3.4%well below the national average |
| Group-Quarters Population | 0.9% |
SNAP retailers in Carbon County
Carbon County has 8 stores currently authorized to accept SNAP (EBT) benefits, across 6 store categories. Combination Grocery/Other lead with 2 locations (25% of the total), followed by convenience store.
Where the store book sits, by town
3 towns share the 8 authorized stores; Red Lodge holds 63% of them. Every one of these towns has at least one grocery-grade outlet (3 across the county).
| Town | SNAP stores | Grocery-grade |
|---|---|---|
| Red Lodge | 5 | 1 |
| Bridger | 2 | 1 |
| Joliet | 1 | 1 |
Combination Grocery/Other · 2
- family dollar 10666, red lodge
- family dollar store 10877, bridger
Convenience Store · 2
- cenex zip trip 74, red lodge
- town pump of red lodge 1 1720, red lodge
Farmers' Market · 1
- red lodge farmers' market, red lodge
Large Grocery Store · 1
- valley foods bridger, bridger
Medium Grocery Store · 1
- joliet country market, joliet
Super Store · 1
- beartooth market, red lodge
Source: USDA SNAP Retailer Locator (currently authorized stores, a live third population, not the 2019 Atlas or ACS 2024 snapshot above).
Other Counties in Montana
One of 55 counties in Montana, 6 are shown here.
Compare Carbon County vs Beaverhead County → · All Montana counties →
Counties near Carbon County's lower low-access or SNAP band
Two USDA/ACS-derived peer sets for Carbon County, both outside Montana so the neighborhoods are not the same-state county list above.
Similar low-access share
Nearest low-access rates outside MT (14.9% here).
- Morgan County, OH · 14.9% low-access
- Clay County, IA · 14.9% low-access
- Marshall County, IN · 14.9% low-access
- Yakima County, WA · 14.9% low-access
Similar SNAP participation
Nearest household SNAP rates outside MT (6.1% here).
- Dodge County, MN · 6.1% SNAP
- Henry County, OH · 6.1% SNAP
- Marion County, KS · 6.1% SNAP
- Warren County, IA · 6.1% SNAP
Source: USDA Food Access Research Atlas (2019) + Census ACS 2024 SNAP. Peers floor at 10,000 residents so stub counties cannot own the match.
Montana among Mountain states
Montana ranks 7th of 8 Mountain states by population-weighted low-access (22.3%). Carbon County, at 14.9%, runs 7.4 pts below the Montana rate.
- New Mexico 31.7%
- Wyoming 29.7%
- Arizona 26.8%
- Idaho 25.8%
- Utah 23.9%
- Nevada 23.0%
- Montana 22.3%
- Colorado 21.5%
Source: USDA Economic Research Service, Food Access Research Atlas (2019), population-weighted by state; divisions per the U.S. Census Bureau. National state map
Read with this county
Sources: USDA Economic Research Service, Food Access Research Atlas (2019) · U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2024 5-Year Estimates · methodology · compiled .
PlainFoodAccess renders this county profile directly from the USDA Food Access Research Atlas (2019) and U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (2024 5-year estimates), no number is typed in by an editor. Figures for Carbon County, MT are computed from the joined Atlas and ACS records for FIPS 30009. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of 2026-06-23. Primary sources: USDA Food Access Research Atlas and Census ACS 5-year estimates.
Note: This page presents public USDA and Census data for informational purposes and is not professional advice. Figures reflect the cited dataset vintages and may differ from the most recent local conditions. How this data is sourced & verified.