Hoonah Angoon County

Hoonah–Angoon Census Area, Alaska (county-equivalent)

Population

• 2020 Census: 2,365
• 2023 estimate: ~2,30s (small, stable rural population)

Age

• Median age: ~47–48 years
• Under 18: ~22%
• 65 and over: ~22%

Sex

• Male: ~52%
• Female: ~48%

Race and ethnicity (ACS 2018–2022, shares may not sum to 100% due to rounding)

• American Indian and Alaska Native alone: ~44–46%
• White alone: ~41–43%
• Two or more races: ~10–12%
• Asian: ~1–2%
• Black or African American: <1%
• Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander: <1%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~5–7%

Households and housing

• Households: ~1,000
• Average household size: ~2.2–2.3
• Family households: ~60–65%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~75–78%
• Median household income (2022 dollars): roughly upper-$60k to low-$70k
• Poverty rate: ~10–12%

Key takeaways

• Very small, sparsely populated area with a relatively older age profile.
• Large Alaska Native population alongside White residents; minimal representation from other groups.
• High homeownership and small household sizes typical of rural Alaska.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates; Census Bureau Population Estimates Program.

Hoonah-Angoon Census Area, AK (pop. ~2,400) is extremely rural, with population density under 1 person per square mile and communities largely reachable only by boat or plane—factors that shape connectivity and email use.

Estimated email users: ~1,700 residents (≈70–75% of the population). Basis: roughly three-quarters of households maintain an internet subscription (ACS 5‑year patterns for rural AK) and ≈90–95% of connected adults use email (Pew).

Age profile of email users (est. share of users):

• 18–29: 12–15%
• 30–49: 28–32%
• 50–64: 30–34%
• 65+: 22–26% Skews older than national averages due to the area’s older age structure.

Gender split among email users: ~52% male, ~48% female, reflecting the local population.

Digital access trends:

• Connectivity improving via low‑Earth‑orbit satellite uptake and ongoing state/tribal broadband investments; service quality remains location dependent.
• Fixed broadband is concentrated in town centers; many residents rely on mobile or satellite for primary access.
• Device access is high among connected households; smartphone‑centric use is common where fixed service is limited.

Implication: Email penetration is solid among connected residents, but overall usage is capped by infrastructure constraints and low settlement density.

Mobile phone usage in Hoonah–Angoon Census Area, Alaska (Hoonah Angoon “County”) shows high adoption despite sparse population and challenging geography, with usage patterns shaped by limited terrestrial networks, seasonal tourism, and a large Alaska Native population.

User estimates

• Population baseline: 2,365 residents (2020 Census); approximately 2,300 in recent estimates.
• Adult base: roughly 1,700–1,900 adults.
• Mobile users: approximately 1,800–2,200 total mobile lines in service across residents, seasonal workers, and business/government, equating to roughly 80–95 lines per 100 residents year-round and peaking higher during summer.
• Smartphone users: about 1,400–1,800 resident smartphone users; smartphone penetration among adults is slightly below Alaska’s urban centers but still the dominant device class.
• Mobile-only internet households: meaningfully higher than Alaska’s urban average; many homes rely on mobile data or satellite in lieu of cable/fiber, with Wi‑Fi calling used to compensate for weak indoor cellular signals.

Demographic breakdown and usage patterns

• Alaska Native population share is markedly higher than the state average, and community services (schools, clinics, tribal offices) play outsized roles in connectivity and device access.
• Age structure skews older than the state average; seniors are a larger share of residents than in Anchorage/Fairbanks/Mat‑Su. As a result, smartphone uptake among 55+ is lower than state urban norms, but basic mobile phone ownership remains high for safety and coordination in remote travel.
• Youth and working-age adults show high smartphone and messaging app use, with heavy reliance on OTT messaging (e.g., Messenger, WhatsApp) because it performs better than voice during congestion or weak signal.
• Seasonal labor and tourism create a sizable transient user base, with sharp summer spikes in device density around Hoonah (Icy Strait Point) and Gustavus/Glacier Bay access points. Networks see short-run demand increases several-fold on cruise-call days.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Radio access: 4G LTE is available in the principal communities; coverage between communities and into outlying settlements and passages is limited or absent. 5G is minimal to unavailable across most of the census area.
• Carriers: GCI and AT&T provide the primary on-island LTE footprints; Verizon service is largely via roaming/partner coverage. T‑Mobile presence is minimal.
• Backhaul: Community cell sites are primarily microwave-fed from regional hubs; outlying areas and marine corridors lack terrestrial backhaul. This constrains capacity and peak throughput during seasonal surges.
• Satellite uptake: Rapid growth in consumer satellite broadband (notably Starlink since late 2022) materially improves home and small-business connectivity, enabling Wi‑Fi calling and reducing reliance on marginal LTE indoors.
• Public safety and community access: Clinics, schools, libraries, tribal facilities, and city halls often host the most reliable public Wi‑Fi. E911 is supported via regional dispatch, but dead zones persist beyond community footprints and along marine routes; residents commonly carry SPOT/InReach/PLBs for redundancy.

Key trends that differ from Alaska’s state-level picture

• Coverage, not adoption, is the binding constraint: Resident willingness to use mobile is high, but usable signal is highly localized to towns; Alaska’s urban corridors report broad 5G and denser LTE, which Hoonah–Angoon largely lacks.
• Higher dependence on Wi‑Fi calling and satellite: Households routinely pair LTE for mobility with satellite at home for voice reliability and higher-speed data; this hybrid model is far more prevalent here than statewide.
• More pronounced seasonal volatility: Tourism (cruise and independent travel) drives extreme, short-duration traffic spikes uncommon in most of Alaska, stressing backhaul-limited LTE sectors.
• Lower device and plan diversity: With fewer carriers and retail options, residents consolidate on a small set of plans (GCI/AT&T and prepaid), and roaming is more common; statewide markets show broader carrier choice and more 5G device uptake.
• Slower 5G transition: While Alaska’s population centers now have expanding 5G, Hoonah–Angoon remains predominantly LTE, so handset upgrades yield fewer performance gains than in Anchorage/Juneau/Fairbanks.
• Community-anchored connectivity: Tribal and municipal institutions are central to digital access and digital skills support, shaping usage patterns (e.g., daytime clustering around anchor facilities) more than in statewide urban areas.

Actionable implications

• Network investment that targets backhaul (microwave capacity upgrades or new middle‑mile links) will relieve peak congestion more effectively than adding radios alone.
• Support for Wi‑Fi calling, in-home signal boosters, and satellite–cellular bundling aligns with how residents already solve coverage gaps.
• Public and tribal facilities remain critical touchpoints for digital inclusion; device programs and digital literacy training routed through these institutions will reach a larger share of underserved residents than state-level channels.

Hoonah-Angoon, AK social media snapshot (modeled to 2025)

• Geography baseline: Hoonah-Angoon Census Area, Alaska. Population 2,282 (2020 U.S. Census).

Estimated user base and penetration

• Social media users: 1,550–1,700 residents, equating to 68–74% of the total population using at least one platform monthly.
• Basis: 2020 local population profile combined with Pew Research Center 2023–2024 U.S. adoption by age (adults and teens) and rural Alaska connectivity benchmarks.

Age mix of local users (share of the user base)

• 13–17: 6–8%
• 18–29: 18–22%
• 30–49: 32–36%
• 50–64: 23–27%
• 65+: 14–18%

Gender breakdown of users

• Men: 52–55%
• Women: 45–48%
• Note: Reflects the area’s slightly male-skewed population; usage rates by gender are similar nationwide, with women modestly higher on Facebook/Instagram and men modestly higher on Reddit/X.

Most-used platforms locally (share of social media users)

• YouTube: 78–84%
• Facebook: 65–72%
• Instagram: 35–45%
• TikTok: 28–36%
• Snapchat: 22–30%
• X (Twitter): 14–20%
• Reddit: 16–22%
• LinkedIn: 14–22% Interpretation: YouTube and Facebook are the reach leaders. Facebook’s role is outsized for local news, groups, buy/sell/trade, public notices, and event coordination; YouTube usage is high but more for entertainment/how‑to than local coordination.

Behavioral trends observed in similar rural Alaska communities and consistent with local public pages

• Community coordination is Facebook-centric: city/tribal notices, school updates, ferry/flight/weather disruptions, subsistence and safety information, and hyperlocal buy/sell/trade groups.
• Seasonal spikes: Summer tourism (e.g., Hoonah/Icy Strait Point) drives more business promotion, photo/video sharing, and service updates; off-season usage centers on community info and events.
• Messaging over posting: Facebook Messenger is widely used for person-to-person and small-group coordination; SMS remains common. WhatsApp use is limited compared with national immigrant hubs.
• Bandwidth-aware behavior: Fewer long live streams; preference for photos/short clips, batch uploads when on Wi‑Fi, and reposting of statewide news rather than heavy original video.
• Peak activity: Evenings and weekends (local time) see the most posting, with morning check-ins for service and travel updates.
• Multi-platform use: Younger residents stack Instagram/Snapchat/TikTok on top of Facebook; 50+ users lean heavily on Facebook, with modest YouTube and limited TikTok/Instagram.

Notes on method and sources

• County-specific social media surveys are not published. Figures above are modeled from: U.S. Census Bureau 2020 population structure for Hoonah‑Angoon; Pew Research Center 2023–2024 U.S. social media adoption by age and platform; national teen social media usage; and rural/Alaska connectivity benchmarks (NTIA/ACS). Estimates represent best-available, locality-adjusted projections for 2025.