Signature · 13.8% SNAP (36th pct in OK)
Love County, OK
Love County's food-access picture is close to the national norm, with pockets that qualify as low-access. This profile breaks down who qualifies as a food desert and the income, SNAP, and vehicle-access context behind it.
- 19.4%
- low-access pop.
- 0
- food-desert tracts
- 13.8%
- on SNAP
- 10K
- residents (ACS 2024)
USDA FARA access plate
County Love County, OK
LA-MODERATE · BELOW-NATIONAL · LILA-NONE · SNAP-HEAVY · VEH-OK · DENSITY-CLEAR
- LA-MODERATE 19.4% low-access
- BELOW-NATIONAL -2.7 pts vs US
- LILA-NONE 0 food-desert tracts
- SNAP-HEAVY 13.8% SNAP
- VEH-OK 3.2% no vehicle
- DENSITY-CLEAR 0% tracts LILA
Nearest low-access peer: Latimer County (+ 0.1 pts)
The food-access picture
According to the USDA Food Access Research Atlas, Love County ranks #1,732 of 3,079 U.S. counties by low-access share and #57 of 77 counties in OK (19.4% low-access).
- #1,732
- national by low-access %
- #57
- in OK
- 1
- low-access tracts
- 549
- food-desert residents
Low access = living more than 1 mile (urban) or 10 miles (rural) from the nearest supermarket. Food deserts add a low-income condition (USDA LILA).
Signature read: 13.8% SNAP (36th pct in OK) (+1.7 pts vs U.S. SNAP) .
How Love County compares nationally
Love County lands in the middle of the national distribution: a 19.4% low-access share that beats 45% of the 3,133 U.S. counties with USDA data (rank #1,732).
Love County: USDA Food-Access Tier Breakdown
3 census tracts grouped by USDA classification .
All 3 of Love 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.
Love County low-access neighbourhood
Poles + nearest peers in Oklahoma, not a full county-board reprint
- Grant
Grant 65.3%
65.3 % low-access
- Latimer 19.5
Latimer 19.5%
19.5 % low-access
- Love 19.4
Love 19.4%
19.4 % low-access
- Garfield 19.1
Garfield 19.1%
19.1 % low-access
- Kingfisher 18.9
Kingfisher 18.9%
18.9 % low-access
- Hughes 18.8
Hughes 18.8%
18.8 % low-access
- Pawnee 5.6
Pawnee 5.6%
5.6 % low-access
Food Access (USDA FARA 2019)
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Census Tracts | 3 |
| Atlas Population (2010 basis) | 9,423 |
| Low-Access Tracts | 1 |
| Food-Desert Tracts (low-income & low-access) | 0 |
| Low-Access Population | 1,825 |
| Low-Access Share | 19.4%below the national average |
| Low-Income & Low-Access Population | 549 |
Demographics & Assistance (Census ACS 2024)
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Population | 10,261 |
| Median Household Income | $66,580 |
| Poverty Rate | 15.0%near the national average |
| SNAP Households | 537 |
| SNAP Participation Rate | 13.8%above the national average |
| Households Without a Vehicle | 3.2%well below the national average |
| Group-Quarters Population | 0.9% |
SNAP retailers in Love County
Love County has 11 stores currently authorized to accept SNAP (EBT) benefits, across 3 store categories. Convenience Store lead with 6 locations (55% of the total), followed by combination grocery/other.
Where the store book sits, by town
3 towns share the 11 authorized stores; Marietta holds 64% of them. 2 of the 3 towns have no grocery-grade outlet, only convenience or dollar/combination stores: Thackerville, Burneyville.
| Town | SNAP stores | Grocery-grade |
|---|---|---|
| Marietta | 7 | 1 |
| Thackerville | 3 | none |
| Burneyville | 1 | none |
Convenience Store · 6
- allsup's 102468, thackerville
- brody's roadies, marietta
- e-z mart 4221, marietta
- falcon head one stop, marietta
- oswalt mart 1, marietta
- quick stop one 12 01, thackerville
Combination Grocery/Other · 4
- dollar general 20249, burneyville
- dollar general 21773, thackerville
- dollar general 31526, marietta
- family dollar store 1276, marietta
Supermarket · 1
- homeland 123, marietta
Source: USDA SNAP Retailer Locator (currently authorized stores, a live third population, not the 2019 Atlas or ACS 2024 snapshot above).
Other Counties in Oklahoma
One of 76 counties in Oklahoma, 6 are shown here.
Compare Love County vs Adair County → · All Oklahoma counties →
Nationwide peers for Love County's low-access or SNAP share
SNAP-led peer set first for Love County (13.8%), with low-access neighbours deduped against it, both outside Oklahoma.
Similar low-access share
Nearest low-access rates outside OK (19.4% here).
- Bernalillo County, NM · 19.4% low-access
- Weakley County, TN · 19.4% low-access
- Midland County, MI · 19.4% low-access
- Wayne County, KY · 19.4% low-access
Similar SNAP participation
Nearest household SNAP rates outside OK (13.8% here).
- Crawford County, OH · 13.8% SNAP
- Allen County, OH · 13.8% SNAP
- Beaver County, PA · 13.8% SNAP
- Yancey County, NC · 13.8% 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.
Oklahoma among West South Central states
Oklahoma ranks 2nd of 4 West South Central states by population-weighted low-access (25.2%). Love County, at 19.4%, runs 5.8 pts below the Oklahoma rate.
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 Love County, OK are computed from the joined Atlas and ACS records for FIPS 40085. 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.