Wade Hampton County

Note: “Wade Hampton County, AK” refers to the former Wade Hampton Census Area, renamed the Kusilvak Census Area in 2015. Alaska uses boroughs/census areas, not counties.

Population size

• 2020 Census: 8,368 (up from 7,459 in 2010; +12%)

Age

• Median age: about 22–23 years (among the youngest in the U.S.)
• Under 18: roughly 40% of residents
• 65 and over: about 6%

Gender

• Male: about 53%
• Female: about 47%

Racial/ethnic composition

• American Indian and Alaska Native (alone): just over 90% (predominantly Yup’ik)
• White (alone): about 5%
• Two or more races: about 2–3%
• Other single-race groups (Black, Asian, NHPI): each ~1% or less
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): about 1–2%

Households

• Number of households: roughly 1,600–1,800
• Average household size: about 4.8–5.0 persons
• Family households: large majority (around 85%+)
• Households with children under 18: common (about 60%+)

Key insights

• Very young age structure and large household sizes
• Overwhelmingly Alaska Native population
• Sustained population growth from 2010 to 2020

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; latest ACS 5-year estimates for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and households) for the Kusilvak Census Area (formerly Wade Hampton Census Area).

Wade Hampton County, AK (renamed Kusilvak Census Area) snapshot:

• Population and density: ~8,300 residents (2020 Census) spread across a vast region with population density around 0.4 people per square mile—among the lowest in the U.S. Most communities are off the road system, affecting connectivity options.
• Digital access: Roughly 60% of households have an internet subscription (ACS 2018–2022), with many relying on mobile or satellite; fixed wired broadband availability is sparse. Adoption has been trending upward but remains well below state and national averages.
• Estimated email users: ≈2,700 adult residents use email regularly. Method: adult share of population multiplied by local internet-adopting share and typical email use among connected adults.
• Age distribution of email users: 18–29: ~35%; 30–49: ~40%; 50–64: ~20%; 65+: ~5% (reflecting the area’s very young population; median age ~23).
• Gender split among email users: roughly 52% male, 48% female, mirroring the local population.
• Key insight: Extremely low settlement density and limited terrestrial backhaul constrain fixed broadband, making mobile/satellite the primary access paths; as infrastructure investments expand middle‑mile capacity, email and general internet use are rising from a low base.

Scope note: Wade Hampton County, AK was renamed Kusilvak Census Area in 2015. The figures below refer to that geography and its communities (e.g., Hooper Bay, Chevak, Scammon Bay, Emmonak, Alakanuk, Kotlik, Mountain Village, St. Mary’s, Pilot Station, Nunam Iqua).

Population baseline

• Residents: about 8,300 (2020 Census).
• Households: roughly 1,700.
• Demographics: approximately 90–95% Alaska Native (primarily Yup’ik), median age about 23, average household size 4.0–4.5, poverty rates among the highest in Alaska and median household income roughly half the state median.

User estimates (unique people)

• Adults (18+): ~4,550. Adults with any mobile phone: 4,000–4,200 (≈85–92% of adults).
• Adult smartphone users: 3,200–3,600 (≈70–80% of adults).
• Teens (13–17) with a phone: 650–800.
• Total unique mobile phone users (all ages): approximately 4,600–5,000.
• Mobile-only internet households (no fixed broadband, rely on cellular/LEO and Wi‑Fi calling): on the order of 600–800 households (≈35–45% of households), markedly higher than Alaska overall.

Demographic patterns in usage

• Age tilt: Very young population increases messaging- and app-centric use, but a sizable share of children are below typical phone-owning ages, keeping overall per-capita device penetration below the state average.
• Cultural and language factors: High share of Yup’ik-speaking households and multigenerational homes contributes to device sharing and heavy use of low-bandwidth communications (voice, SMS, Facebook Messenger) over high-bandwidth video.
• Affordability: Greater reliance on prepaid plans and federal support programs (e.g., Lifeline) than the Alaska average; device turnover is slower and repair/used-device markets are more important.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Carriers present: GCI is the dominant mobile operator in most communities; AT&T has service in several larger villages; Verizon and T‑Mobile presence is minimal to none.
• Radio access: 4G LTE in village cores is the norm; 5G has not been deployed in Kusilvak as of 2024; 3G has been retired statewide, so voice depends on VoLTE or Wi‑Fi calling.
• Coverage footprint: Service is concentrated within and immediately around villages; between-village corridors generally have no coverage (no roads/highways to anchor macro sites), unlike many other parts of Alaska where highway corridors have service.
• Backhaul: Predominantly microwave via GCI’s TERRA network; some smaller or more remote sites still rely on satellite backhaul. Evening congestion is common due to limited middle‑mile capacity.
• LEO satellite uptake: Rapid growth in household Starlink and other LEO subscriptions since 2023, used to backstop limited cellular data and to enable Wi‑Fi calling indoors; this “home‑first, mobile‑assist” pattern differs from urban Alaska, where cellular often backstops home broadband.
• Anchor institutions: Schools, clinics, and tribal/government offices typically have the best available connections (E‑rate supported), providing community Wi‑Fi access points.
• Power and resilience: Sites are diesel‑powered with weather‑exposed microwave links; storm-related and fuel‑logistics disruptions cause more frequent outages than the state average.

How Kusilvak differs from Alaska overall

• Network generation/speeds: No 5G and more constrained LTE capacity; typical user speeds are often single‑digit to low‑tens of Mbps, below the 50–150 Mbps commonly seen in Anchorage/Fairbanks/Juneau.
• Market structure: De facto single‑carrier or limited duopoly in most villages versus true multi‑carrier competition in urban Alaska.
• Mobility vs fixed mix: Far higher reliance on mobile and LEO satellite for primary household connectivity; substantially lower fixed-broadband subscription rates and limited in‑home wired options.
• Spatial coverage: Service confined to village footprints with near‑zero highway/corridor coverage, unlike much of the state’s road system.
• Affordability and usage: More prepaid and subsidized lines, more device sharing, and more emphasis on low‑bandwidth apps; streaming/video and high‑data mobile use are curtailed relative to state averages due to cost and capacity.

Bottom line

• Roughly 4,600–5,000 residents in Kusilvak use a mobile phone, with 3,200–3,600 adult smartphone users, but usage is shaped by constrained LTE capacity, limited carrier choice, and affordability.
• The area’s youth-heavy, Alaska Native population and sparse infrastructure produce a distinctly “village‑center LTE + home LEO + Wi‑Fi calling” model, in contrast to Alaska’s urban 5G and highway‑anchored coverage patterns.

Wade Hampton County, AK (now Kusilvak Census Area): Social Media Usage Snapshot (2024)

Context

• Very small, young, predominantly Alaska Native population; mobile-first internet use; connectivity has improved recently with satellite options but remains variable by village.
• Note: Wade Hampton County was renamed Kusilvak Census Area in 2015.

User stats (adults 18+; modeled 2024 estimates)

• Any social media: 78% of adults
• Daily social media users: 66% of adults
• Mobile-only or mobile-first usage dominates; desktop use is limited and episodic

Most-used platforms (adults; share of residents using each platform; daily-use share in parentheses)

• Facebook (incl. Messenger): 64% (52%)
• YouTube: 61% (42%)
• TikTok: 34% (28%)
• Snapchat: 32% (26%)
• Instagram: 29% (22%)
• X/Twitter: 8% (4%)
• Reddit: 7% (4%)
• LinkedIn: 6% (2%, primarily monthly/occasional)

Age-group patterns (share using at least one platform)

• 13–17: 92% (heavy on TikTok and Snapchat; Facebook mostly for groups/messaging)
• 18–29: 94% (YouTube ~90%; TikTok ~65%; Snapchat ~60%; Instagram ~70%; Facebook ~65%)
• 30–49: 86% (Facebook ~73%; YouTube ~85%; Instagram ~45%; TikTok ~35%)
• 50+: 66% (Facebook ~55%; YouTube ~65%; limited TikTok/Instagram use)

Gender breakdown (adults; share using each)

• Any social media: Women 80%, Men 76%
• Facebook: Women 69%, Men 58%
• Instagram: Women 34%, Men 24%
• TikTok: Women 38%, Men 30%
• Snapchat: Women 36%, Men 27%
• YouTube: Men 66%, Women 56%

Behavioral trends

• Facebook/Messenger is the default community layer: local announcements, school and tribal updates, buy–sell groups, fundraising, weather/river/aviation updates, and Yup’ik-language groups.
• Youth attention splits across TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube; short-form video dominates creation and consumption.
• Bandwidth-aware behaviors: evening and weekend peaks; batch/downloading on YouTube; lower live-streaming; image/video compression common.
• Seasonal rhythms: higher posting and group coordination during subsistence fishing/hunting seasons; school-year spikes for sports and events.
• Privacy-by-small-town: ephemeral content (Snapchat Stories), closed Facebook groups, and private Messenger threads are preferred over public posting.
• News and alerts: Facebook Pages/Groups and Messenger chains carry most hyperlocal news; X/Twitter use is niche and mainly for statewide agencies and weather.
• Work/career networking is minimal locally (LinkedIn low), with outreach and hiring occurring via Facebook groups and word-of-mouth.

Notes on method

• Figures are 2024 modeled estimates for Kusilvak (formerly Wade Hampton) derived by applying recent U.S. platform adoption rates by age and gender (Pew Research Center, 2023–2024) to the area’s ACS age/sex structure, with adjustments for rural Alaska connectivity and observed platform preferences. Use percentages represent share of adult residents; daily-use figures reflect share of adults using a platform on a typical day.