I have received recent inquires about the number of Latter-day Saints in each state in the United States. See below for a list of all states in the United States (plus the District of Columbia) ranked by church-reported membership for year-end 2017. Locations listed in
bold do not have an LDS temple announced or in operation.
- Utah - 2,090,401
- California - 767,252
- Idaho - 450,347
- Arizona - 428,069
- Texas - 353,317
- Washington - 288,515
- Nevada - 183,638
- Florida - 156,724
- Oregon - 153,955
- Colorado - 151,433
- Virginia - 95,379
- North Carolina - 86,132
- Georgia - 85,363
- New York - 82,361
- Hawaii - 74,278
- Missouri - 71,212
- New Mexico - 69,627
- Wyoming - 67,275
- Ohio - 61,966
- Illinois - 57,111
- Pennsylvania - 51,765
- Tennessee - 51,050
- Montana - 50,420
- Oklahoma - 47,852
- Indiana - 44,876
- Michigan - 44,849
- Maryland - 43,721
- South Carolina - 40,608
- Kansas - 37,780
- Alabama - 37,487
- Kentucky - 35,125
- New Jersey - 33,726
- Alaska - 33,492
- Minnesota - 33,012
- Arkansas - 31,254
- Louisiana - 29,787
- Iowa - 28,160
- Massachusetts - 27,576
- Wisconsin - 26,753
- Nebraska - 24,945
- Mississippi - 21,725
- West Virginia - 16,933
- Connecticut - 15,870
- North Dakota - 11,244
- Maine - 10,947
- South Dakota - 10,626
- New Hampshire - 8,771
- Delaware - 5,527
- Vermont - 4,625
- Rhode Island - 4,177
- District of Columbia - 2,848
See below for a list of states and the District of Columbia ranked in order by membership growth rate for the year 2017. The 10 states with the most members in this list are indicated in
italics:
- District of Columbia +3.26%
- Rhode Island +2.63%
- Delaware +2.35%
- Tennessee +2.04%
- Arkansas +1.82%
- Vermont +1.69%
- South Dakota +1.68%
- Texas +1.49%
- North Carolina +1.45%
- Wisconsin +1.37%
- Massachusetts +1.37%
- Idaho +1.29%
- Utah +1.19%
- New Hampshire +1.19%
- Arizona +1.18%
- Missouri +1.17%
- Florida +1.16%
- Georgia +1.12%
- Oklahoma +1.06%
- South Carolina +0.97%
- Minnesota +0.90%
- Ohio +0.77%
- New York +0.76%
- New Jersey +0.74%
- Nebraska +0.73%
- Alabama +0.67%
- Nevada +0.56%
- Montana +0.55%
- Kentucky +0.49%
- Hawaii +0.47%
- Indiana +0.46%
- Maryland +0.43%
- Michigan +0.42%
- Kansas +0.39%
- Washington +0.38%
- Connecticut +0.23%
- Pennsylvania +0.19%
- Virginia +0.19%
- New Mexico +0.01%
- Oregon +0.01%
- Iowa +0.01%
- Illinois +0.00%
- North Dakota -0.11%
- Maine -0.28%
- West Virginia -0.28%
- Colorado -0.30%
- Wyoming -0.34%
- Louisiana -0.49%
- California -0.55%
- Mississippi -0.57%
- Alaska -0.94%
I know California loses a lot of members constantly to other states. It seems Alaska and Wyoming, and probably Colorado and North Dakota, have had enough overall population growth to reduce the numbers of Church growth. Then again, it appears that is not the measure shared in the list of percentage growth, but it is interesting to see those 4 western sites losing growth in 2017.
ReplyDeleteAlaska is a very expensive place to live, and we also have a significant crime problem. Our legislators decided that "non-violent" crimes aren't worth prosecuting, so anyone arrested for crimes, like theft, are almost always immediately released. People just don't want to live in these conditions, where the police actually cannot do their jobs. People leave Anchorage to go live in Eagle River or Wasilla, but crime is growing in those places at a rapid pace.
ReplyDeleteNorth Dakota's booming oil industry that attracted so many people a few years ago has probably has slowed down a bit.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised to see any growth in eastern states and especially New York. I wonder how many of those members are staying active. I grew up in upstate New York, we had approximately two baptisms a year who more often than not would be inactive within weeks. Even this one girl who attended church for months before she got baptized went inactive immediately after. Weird. Our membership roll was full of names of people nobody in the branch had ever met. And as the deacons' and then teachers' quorum president I was supposed to "reactivate" boys who had never set foot in our chapel in their lives. Of course, we also had active members moving in from California. I can see why they left California but I'm not sure why they wanted to trade the weather for New York's winters.
New York probably attracts people with jobs.
ReplyDeleteWould love to see church growth benchmarked against Census data. Does someone have 2010 membership by state to compare to this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population_growth_rate
ReplyDeleteAlthough Wyoming's membership showed a minor decline, the state actually lost population in the same period. At the same time, the LDS percentage has crept up slightly.
ReplyDeleteNorth Dakota's membership jumped up in recent years but has also experienced a slowdown due to its reliance on the oil industry.
Still, North Dakota at 1.49% LDS has the highest LDS percentage of state population in any state outside the Mormon corridor. Kansas and Nebraska are close, and Texas at 1.25% is moving up very fast, probably due to its business-friendly stance which has attracted so many job seekers.
Ryan, you can access that information on this blog by going to Cumorah.com, Countries, States, and then ask for Statistical Profiles. It will show the Census figures as well as the Church-reported membership figures and percentage of population that are LDS. This information is available for for every year since the information became available.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to see membership growth relative to population growth.
ReplyDeleteI used to be ministering brother to a family that had lived in North Dakota, moved to Michigan, and when the husband got a job in North Dakota again decided to stay in Michigan and have him work a schedule where he would be gone for weeks straight at a time. So the loneliness and other conditions on the oil patch may not be good for long-time Church development.
ReplyDeleteIn urban areas like New York City and Detroit the Church has seen quite a bit of growth. This is also playing out a bit in DC, although there it is probably more the rising tide of gentrification on the north-west side and its attracting young professionals than Church growth in Anacostia.
California's figure gives us a loss of about 3,500 members. My guess is that this is most heavily a net outmigration to other parts of the US.
ReplyDeleteTo "Unknown" Re: California,
ReplyDeleteSince 2013 membership has decreased from 780,200 to 767,252. In the same time, overall population has risen from 38,388,473 to 39,536,653. Outmigration doesn't account for why California is still growing. So there must be other reasons. Convert baptisms have dropped the last few years. It's likely there are more older members dying than are being replaced by new children of record, as inactivity rates rise. People are having their names removed from church records at a higher clip than in the past. Quitmormon.org says they have processed about 11,000 resignations in the 5 or so years they have existed. And that's just one lawyer offering a service. There are many people leaving the church through other methods. California is a more liberal state (63% voted for Hillary). Mormonism is generally favored by a more conservative crowd. It's likely the more liberal minded members are leaving at a higher rate than the conservatives.
Just a thought.
Eric, you're missing the principal reason for the drop off in California membership, and that is the outrageous cost of living and high taxes. Add to that the prevailing state politics, which are not family-friendly. This is why there is a huge out-migration of LDS members to localities which have low or non-existent state taxes, good job prospects, less expensive housing, and suitable public schools.
ReplyDeleteI'll give myself as an example. I left California with a small family for the reasons mentioned above. Our family has been fortunate to grow at a fast pace, and now, with grandchildren, number almost 20. We miss a lot about California, but it was simply too expensive to stay there. We are just one of countless families who left for better quality of life.
I agree Ray. Here in Arizona we have seen a lot of members relocate here from California. It seems every other week a new family moves in from California (typically southern cal). I also have come across numerous people through work who left California due to the jobs, cost of living as well as social and political climate. I love California,but I will admit the residents are trashing it fast.
ReplyDeleteIf it would not be out of line for me to comment, while I have no firsthand knowledge about the factors relating to living in California, I know that Utah has recently seen an influx of Californians coming into the state, particularly here in northern Utah County. I also know that a venture capitalist who lives in California has submitted several proposals to potentially split the state for the reasons outlined here that make leaving California as one of the largest (if not the very largest) states in the union somewhat impractical.
ReplyDeleteThe latest such initiative was scheduled to be on the California ballot this year, but apparently the Supreme Court of that state raised some judicial concerns about the wording of the measure as it now stands, so it may have been struck from the ballot for this year.
I also know that any proposal to split California has mixed reactions from those retaining their residence there. Some have clearly indicated they are in favor of splitting the state to make the government and economical situation more manageable, while others have expressed concerns that the measure in any form misses the mark in many ways.
More information about that is available. For myself, as an outside observer of matters in the United States which do not directly relate to Utah, I can see more to the merits of the ideas to split some of the larger states that are more of a political and economical force.
At the same time, since I don't live in those other states, I don't quite understand the reservations some residents in states such as California have expressed regarding measures like these that would split the state into smaller, more manageable governments with more equivalent economics. These are just some additional thoughts I had, for what they may be worth to any of you.