Increasingly, rural America’s new neighbors are Hispanic/Latino. While only a small percentage of Americans living in rural and mixed-rural counties are Hispanic – 12% – they make up a large number of new families moving and being born in rural places. One-in-two of America’s new rural neighbors are Hispanic. Put differently, that is 1.5 million new Hispanic residents over a two year period.
Below is a table of the estimated net new rural/mixed-rural county residents summed by state broken out by ethnicity. Figures were calculated by comparing the 2011 and 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Population Estimates. Margins of error were excluded so figures should be taken as rough approximations.
State | All Ethnicities | Hispanic/Latino | % Hispanic | ||
Alabama | 98,349 | 32,669 | 33% | ||
Alaska | 17,417 | -579 | < 0% | ||
Arizona | 69,655 | 46,080 | 66% | ||
Arkansas | 53,322 | 19,227 | 36% | ||
California | 378,886 | 383,331 | > 100% | ||
Colorado | 92,830 | 50,376 | 54% | ||
Connecticut | 2,700 | 2,759 | > 100% | ||
Delaware | 18,320 | 6,214 | 34% | ||
D. of Columbia | NA** | NA** | NA** | ||
Florida | 169,089 | 78,890 | 47% | ||
Georgia | 143,808 | 42,576 | 30% | ||
Hawaii | 24,590 | 2,952 | 12% | ||
Idaho | 57,414 | 18,970 | 33% | ||
Illinois | 64,330 | 21,983 | 34% | ||
Indiana | 65,360 | 16,902 | 26% | ||
Iowa | 43,080 | 16,652 | 39% | ||
Kansas | 21,020 | 18,391 | 87% | ||
Kentucky | 25,320 | 11,894 | 47% | ||
Louisiana | 64,930 | 18,598 | 29% | ||
Maine | 12,163 | 663 | 5% | ||
Maryland | 35,115 | 12,594 | 36% | ||
Massachusetts | 2,992 | 2,026 | 68% | ||
Michigan | 362 | 9,000 | > 100% | ||
Minnesota | 53,104 | 13,214 | 25% | ||
Mississippi | 30,241 | 11,815 | 39% | ||
Missouri | 79,033 | 12,146 | 15% | ||
Montana | 26,597 | 1,515 | 6% | ||
Nebraska | 17,603 | 11,619 | 66% | ||
Nevada | 127,517 | 56,472 | 44% | ||
New Hampshire | 4,343 | 1,632 | 38% | ||
New Jersey | -2,672 | 7,453 | NA*** | ||
New Mexico | 43,792 | 30,928 | 71% | ||
New York | 51,951 | 18,596 | 36% | ||
North Carolina | 218,062 | 64,479 | 30% | ||
North Dakota | 27,058 | 639 | 2% | ||
Ohio | 61,873 | 11,446 | 18% | ||
Oklahoma | 64,958 | 19,244 | 30% | ||
Oregon | 42,107 | 32,040 | 76% | ||
Pennsylvania | 42,054 | 14,085 | 33% | ||
Rhode Island | NA** | NA** | NA** | ||
South Carolina | 122,572 | 31,211 | 25% | ||
South Dakota | 11,184 | 1,469 | 13% | ||
Tennessee | 117,024 | 22,302 | 19% | ||
Texas | 365,331 | 230,265 | 63% | ||
Utah | 27,567 | 15,792 | 57% | ||
Vermont | 4,544 | 1,017 | 22% | ||
Virginia | 54,666 | 13,366 | 24% | ||
Washington | 107,072 | 57,737 | 54% | ||
West Virginia | 33,047 | 2,086 | 6% | ||
Wisconsin | 52,835 | 19,742 | 37% | ||
Wyoming | 30,748 | 6,608 | 21% | ||
All States | 3,275,263 | 1,521,086 | 46% |
* Figures calculated by comparing the 2011 and 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Population Estimates. Margins of error were excluded so figures should be taken as rough approximations.
** Rhode Island and the District of Columbia have no counties that are classified as “rural” or “mixed-rural” according to the measures of Andrew Isserman.
*** New Jersey had a declining rural/mixed-rural population. As a result, it is impossible to say that Hispanics accounted for any of the “increase” in the state’s rural/mixed-rural population. However, the rural/mixed-rural decline was smaller because of a large increase in the Hispanic population in these areas.
Leave a Comment