Amador County

Here are recent, high-level demographics for Amador County, California.

Population

• Total: ~40–41k (2020 Census count 40,474; recent ACS 5-year estimate ≈40k)

Age

• Median age: ~50 years
• Under 18: ~18%
• 65 and over: ~27%

Sex

• Male: ~54%
• Female: ~46% (Note: the county’s prison population skews the sex balance toward male.)

Race and ethnicity (mutually exclusive; shares may not sum to 100% due to rounding)

• Non-Hispanic White: ~80%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~12%
• Two or more races (non-Hispanic): ~4–5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native (non-Hispanic): ~2%
• Black/African American (non-Hispanic): ~1–2%
• Asian (non-Hispanic): ~1–2%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (non-Hispanic): <1%

Households and housing

• Households: ~16.5–17k
• Average household size: ~2.3 persons
• Family households: ~60–65% of households
• Owner-occupied: ~75–78%; renter-occupied: ~22–25%
• Median household income: roughly low-to-mid $70,000s
• Poverty rate: ~11%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census DP tables; American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates).

Amador County snapshot (estimates)

• Population: ~41,000 residents across ~606 sq mi (≈67 people/sq mi).
• Email users: ~30,000–33,000 residents use email at least monthly (driven by high adult adoption but tempered by rural/older demographics).
• Age mix of email users:
  • 18–29: ~10–13%
  • 30–49: ~25–30%
  • 50–64: ~28–32%
  • 65+: ~25–30%
• Gender split: roughly even among civilian residents (≈51% female, 49% male). Note: a local state prison skews the overall census male, but incarcerated residents are not typical consumer email users.

Digital access and trends

• Broadband at home: ~80–85% of households subscribe (in line with rural CA benchmarks); highest along Jackson–Sutter Creek–Ione corridors, lower in outlying foothill and “upcountry” areas.
• Mobile access: smartphone ownership ~85–90%; ~10–15% of adults are smartphone‑only for internet.
• Connectivity: Cable/DSL and some fiber in town centers; fixed wireless and satellite fill rural gaps. Terrain and low-density roads off SR‑49 and SR‑88 contribute to dead zones and variable speeds.
• Public access: libraries, schools, and civic buildings provide Wi‑Fi that supplements home connectivity.

Notes: Figures are modeled from U.S./rural‑California usage patterns and Amador’s older age profile; treat as directional estimates.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Amador County, California (focus on how it differs from statewide patterns)

Context snapshot

• Rural, low-density Sierra foothill county of roughly 40–41k residents, older than the state average, with population clustered around Jackson, Sutter Creek, Ione, and Plymouth and long stretches of mountainous/forested terrain (Hwy 88/49).
• These characteristics drive different adoption, carrier mix, coverage, and reliability outcomes than California’s urban/coastal counties.

User estimates (planning ranges, not a census)

• People who personally use a mobile phone: roughly 31k–34k residents.
  • Method: ~32k–34k adults plus teens; apply slightly lower-than-California adoption due to older age profile and rural coverage gaps (about 2–6 percentage points lower than state averages).
• Active mobile lines/SIMs: roughly 35k–45k.
  • Method: 1.1–1.3 active lines per user (fewer tablets/wearables than urban counties; some multi-line use for work, IoT, farm/ranch telemetry).
• Wireless-only households: likely below the California average.
  • Statewide, wireless-only has grown steadily; in Amador, a larger senior share and pockets of poor reception keep some landlines, VoIP, or satellite voice in use.

Demographic usage patterns (how Amador differs from statewide)

• Older age structure
  • Median age is much higher than California’s; share 65+ is notably larger. This typically correlates with:
    • Slightly lower smartphone adoption and less frequent device upgrades.
    • Heavier reliance on voice/SMS and simpler plans; lower uptake of premium 5G features.
    • Higher need for hearing-aid compatibility and clear emergency calling.
• Income and affordability
  • Household incomes trail the state average; budget sensitivity is higher.
  • Greater reliance on prepaid/MVNO plans and shared family plans; price shocks from the sunset of the federal ACP program have outsized effects (downgrades, churn, occasional service gaps).
• Race/ethnicity and language
  • Higher share of non-Hispanic White; smaller shares of Asian and foreign-language households than statewide averages.
  • Fewer language-access barriers than in many CA metros, but local tribal communities (e.g., Jackson Rancheria) may face coverage and affordability gaps concentrated on or near tribal lands.
• Work, school, and travel patterns
  • Commuting toward the Sacramento metro and seasonal recreation traffic on Hwy 88 create directional, time-of-day spikes in load.
  • School districts and libraries continue to backstop coverage with loaner hotspots where fixed broadband is weak; mobile hotspots are used as primary internet in more households than the state average.

Carrier mix and service quality

• AT&T and Verizon generally provide the most consistent coverage across town centers and along primary corridors; T-Mobile is present and improving but remains patchier in backcountry and higher elevations than in California’s metros.
• 5G footprint is present but thinner than statewide norms:
  • Low-band 5G covers the main towns and corridors; mid-band 5G (C-band/n41) is limited to a smaller set of sites near population centers; mmWave is effectively absent.
  • Typical outcome: 4G LTE remains the practical baseline outside towns; 5G throughput gains are localized.
• Congestion is episodic rather than constant:
  • Peaks during commute windows, weekend events, wildfire incidents, and winter travel surges toward the Sierra.

Digital infrastructure and constraints (local realities vs state)

• Terrain and tower density
  • Steep canyons, forested ridges, and snow-prone passes reduce line-of-sight and complicate siting; fewer macro sites per square mile than California’s urban counties.
  • Coverage holes persist off-corridor (especially east of Pine Grove toward Carson Pass) and in river canyons; this is a sharper contrast with urban California.
• Backhaul
  • Outside the town cores, more cell sites rely on microwave backhaul; fiber laterals are limited. This caps capacity and slows 5G densification compared to the state’s metro areas.
  • Local provider Volcano Communications Group operates key last-mile and some middle-mile assets (DSL and growing fiber in parts of the county); their footprint matters for carrier backhaul options.
• Power resiliency and outages
  • Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS), winter storms, and wildfire seasons cause more frequent and longer interruptions than the statewide average.
  • Backup power requirements (e.g., CPUC 72-hour rules at critical sites) have improved resilience, but compliance and refuel/logistics are harder in remote sites; residents see more site-specific outages than urban Californians.
• Alternative broadband and substitution
  • Fixed wireless (e.g., regional WISPs) and Starlink have higher penetration than in California’s cities; some households rely on phone-based tethering/hotspots as a primary connection.
  • Where fixed choices are limited or expensive, mobile-only internet use is higher—even as overall wireless-only voice adoption remains lower due to the older population.
• Public safety and coverage obligations
  • FirstNet (AT&T) adoption among public-safety agencies is meaningful; coverage is good along main corridors but has rural gaps. Mutual-aid events highlight backcountry dead zones more often than in urban California.

Notable local factors that skew metrics

• The presence of Mule Creek State Prison (Ione) and other institutional populations can depress per-capita “lines per resident” measures if not excluded.
• Seasonal tourism and weather-driven closures concentrate usage onto a few sites, creating short-term congestion that statewide averages don’t reveal.

What to watch in the next 12–24 months

• Select infill sites and additional mid-band 5G sectors around Jackson/Ione/Sutter Creek could lift median speeds, but broad rural 5G parity with metros is unlikely without more fiber backhaul.
• Post-ACP affordability pressures may sustain or increase prepaid/MVNO share and hotspot reliance.
• State middle-mile build-outs near the Sierra foothills, if/when they intersect Amador, could lower backhaul costs and enable more robust rural coverage than today.

How to use these estimates

• Treat the user and line counts as planning ranges anchored in the county’s population size, rural density, and age structure; refine with carrier RF data, CPUC/FCC maps, local permitting records, and school/library hotspot program counts.

Amador County social media snapshot (est.)

• Population: ≈41,000 residents; ≈33,000 adults
• Internet/smartphone: ~90% of adults online; ~85–90% own a smartphone
• Any social media: ~78–82% of adults ⇒ ≈26,000 users

Most-used platforms among adults (share of adults; ≈user count)

• YouTube: 75–80% (≈25–27K)
• Facebook: 68–72% (≈22–24K)
• Instagram: 35–40% (≈12–13K)
• TikTok: 25–30% (≈8–10K)
• Pinterest: 25–30% (≈8–10K)
• Snapchat: 20–25% (≈7–8K)
• X/Twitter: 15–20% (≈5–7K)
• WhatsApp: 12–18% (≈4–6K)
• LinkedIn: 12–18% (≈4–6K)
• Reddit: 10–15% (≈3–5K)
• Nextdoor: 10–15% (≈3–5K)

Age patterns (usage = share using at least one platform)

• Teens 13–17: 90–95%; heavy on YouTube (~95%), TikTok (70%+), Snapchat (60%+); light on Facebook
• 18–29: 90–95%; YouTube (95%), Instagram (70%+), TikTok (60%+), Snapchat (60%); Facebook (40%)
• 30–49: 85–90%; Facebook (70–75%), YouTube (~90%), Instagram (45–55%), TikTok (30–40%)
• 50–64: 70–75%; Facebook (70%), YouTube (80–85%), Instagram (25–35%), Pinterest (35%)
• 65+: 55–60%; Facebook (~60%) and YouTube (60–65%) dominate; some Nextdoor (12–18%)

Gender breakdown (adults; est.)

• Women: 80–82% use social; higher on Facebook (72–78%), Instagram (40–45%), Pinterest (35–40%), TikTok (25–30%)
• Men: 76–78% use social; higher on YouTube (80–85%), Facebook (62–68%), Instagram (30–38%), X/Twitter (18–22%), Reddit (12–18%)

Behavioral trends to know

• Facebook-centric community: Local groups, events, Marketplace, wildfire/road/outage updates get the most comments and shares
• Video-first consumption: YouTube and short-form (FB Reels/IG Reels/TikTok); DIY, home/auto, outdoor, and local-interest clips perform well
• Local commerce: Wineries, restaurants, trades, and events rely on Facebook/Instagram posts and boosted, ZIP-targeted ads; photo carousels and short videos outperform text-only
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is the default; WhatsApp used within specific communities; DMs drive a meaningful share of inquiries
• Timing: Peaks evenings 6–9 pm; solid weekend morning/early afternoon activity
• Content cues: Faces, recognizable locations, community causes, timely info (weather, closures, school sports) outperform; giveaways and “comment to vote” prompts spur engagement
• Platform split: Older adults cluster on Facebook/YouTube; under-30s split time across YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok; cross-posting Reels to IG+FB is common
• Neighborhood chatter: Nextdoor and Facebook groups used for lost/found, neighborhood watch, and service recommendations

Notes on method

• Figures are estimates derived from recent Pew Research U.S. platform adoption, rural/older-user adjustments, and Census ACS population; localized platform telemetry is limited for small counties. Use ranges as planning guides rather than exact counts.