Plumas County

Plumas County, California — key demographics (latest available, primarily U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2018–2022 5-year estimates; housing unit counts cross-checked with decennial data)

Population

• Total population: ~19,500

Age

• Median age: ~51.8 years
• Under 18: ~17–18%
• 18–24: ~6%
• 25–44: ~19%
• 45–64: ~31%
• 65 and over: ~26%

Sex

• Male: ~52%
• Female: ~48%

Race and ethnicity (mutually exclusive; Hispanic can be any race)

• Non-Hispanic White: ~80%
• Hispanic or Latino: ~11–12%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~3–4%
• Two or more races: ~4–5%
• Asian: ~1%
• Black or African American: ~1% or less
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: ~0–0.5%

Households and housing

• Households (occupied housing units): ~8,300–8,400
• Average household size: ~2.1–2.2 persons
• Family households: ~55–57% of households
• Married-couple families: ~45–47% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~19–20%
• Living alone: ~36–38% of households; 65+ living alone: ~15–16%
• Housing units (total): ~16,000–17,000
• Occupied vs. vacant: roughly half of units are vacant overall, largely due to seasonal/recreational use
• Tenure: owner-occupied ~74–76%; renter-occupied ~24–26%

Insights

• Older age structure (median age ~52; about one-quarter 65+).
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White with a modest Hispanic population.
• Small households, high owner-occupancy, and an unusually high share of vacant/seasonal homes consistent with recreation/second-home dynamics.

Plumas County snapshot (pop. ~19,800; ~2,613 sq mi; ~7.6 people/sq mi):

• Estimated email users: 14,000–15,000 adults (≈88–92% of adults), reflecting high U.S. email adoption with a modest rural discount.
• Gender split among users: ≈50% women, 50% men.
• Age distribution of email users (estimated): 18–34: 20–22%; 35–54: 32–35%; 55–64: 20–22%; 65+: 24–28%. Older skew mirrors the county’s higher median age, yet seniors remain active email users.
• Digital access and trends:
  • Households with a broadband subscription: roughly 78–82%; about 1 in 5 households lacks wired broadband, with reliance on fixed wireless or satellite in outlying areas.
  • Mobile coverage is uneven in canyons/forested terrain; smartphone-only internet users likely 6–8%.
  • Ongoing fiber buildouts (e.g., Plumas‑Sierra Telecommunications) and California’s middle‑mile efforts are improving backhaul; adoption is trending upward from 2022–2025.
  • Wildfire history (e.g., 2021 Dixie Fire) underscores dependence on email for alerts/recovery communications and the need for redundant links.

Insights: Email is a near‑universal, cross‑age channel in Plumas, especially for government, healthcare, and school communications; bandwidth variability encourages concise, low‑attachment messaging and offline-friendly campaigns.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Plumas County, California

Context

• Population: approximately 19,000 residents (2023 Census estimate); older age profile with a markedly higher share of adults 65+ than the California average.
• Settlement pattern: small towns (Quincy, Portola, Greenville/Indian Valley, Chester/Lake Almanor) and extensive mountainous terrain; this materially shapes coverage and usage.

User estimates and adoption

• Mobile users: approximately 15,000–16,000 residents use a mobile phone of some kind on a regular basis, reflecting high overall mobile adoption but tempered by age and coverage gaps.
• Smartphone users: approximately 13,000–14,500 residents use smartphones; basic/feature-phone-only users are a noticeably larger share than the state average due to the older population and coverage dead zones.
• Households with smartphones: roughly low-to-mid 80s percent of households in Plumas have at least one smartphone, versus low-90s percent statewide (ACS 2019–2023, S2801).
• Households with a cellular data plan: roughly upper-60s to low-70s percent in Plumas, versus low-80s percent statewide (ACS 2019–2023, S2801). This indicates fewer mobile-data-reliant households than the California average.

Demographic breakdown (how usage differs from state trends)

• Age:
  • Under 50: smartphone adoption is near universal and broadly in line with the state.
  • 50–64: adoption lags the state by several percentage points; more users keep legacy devices or maintain mobile for voice/SMS only.
  • 65+: materially lower smartphone adoption than the state; higher prevalence of basic phones and shared household devices.
• Income and housing:
  • Lower-income and remote households are less likely to maintain an active cellular data subscription than comparable groups statewide, reflecting both affordability and coverage limitations.
  • Seasonal/second-home dynamics (Almanor Basin, recreation areas) lead to variable device counts per dwelling and intermittent usage spikes that are less common in most California counties.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage pattern:
  • 4G LTE is the de facto baseline; 5G is present primarily as low-band along major corridors (e.g., US‑70, CA‑89, CA‑36) and in towns. Large forested valleys and canyons remain 4G-only or unserved.
  • Mid-band 5G (capacity layers) is limited to a few population centers; statewide, mid-band 5G coverage is broad in metro areas. This gap contributes to lower median speeds in the county than the California median.
• Reliability constraints unique to the county:
  • Terrain shadowing and long backhaul spans create persistent dead zones (Feather River Canyon, Bucks Lake, Lakes Basin, parts of Indian Valley).
  • Wildfire impacts (notably the 2021 Dixie Fire) and Public Safety Power Shutoffs stress sites; while many macro sites have batteries/generators, shorter backup runtimes lead to service degradation during extended events more often than in urban California.
• Public-safety and roaming:
  • FirstNet (AT&T Band 14) build-outs have improved coverage for agencies along primary corridors and in towns, with incidental consumer benefits.
  • Consumers are more likely than the state average to rely on multi-carrier strategies (e.g., work vs personal lines on different networks) due to localized dead zones.
• Typical performance envelope:
  • Population centers commonly see 20–50 Mbps downlink on LTE/low-band 5G, with wider swings by carrier and site load; statewide medians in urban counties are materially higher (often 80–150+ Mbps where mid-band 5G is prevalent).
  • Off-corridor areas experience frequent drops to sub‑10 Mbps or complete loss of service, a contrast to the much denser in-fill present in California’s metro counties.

Trends that differ most from state-level

• Adoption gap: Plumas trails California by roughly 6–10 percentage points on household smartphone presence and cellular-data-plan subscriptions, driven by older age structure and variable coverage rather than demand alone.
• Device mix: A higher share of basic/feature phones persists, particularly among seniors, while the state skews more uniformly toward smartphones.
• Mobile-only internet reliance: Lower than the statewide average; when fixed broadband is unavailable, households often turn to satellite or fixed wireless rather than mobile-only solutions because of signal variability.
• Speed and 5G capacity: The county’s limited mid-band 5G footprint and terrain-constrained site grid keep typical speeds below state medians and widen the urban–rural performance gap.
• Network resilience: Power and wildfire disruptions affect mobile availability more frequently and for longer durations than in most California counties, shaping user behavior (redundant carriers, offline-capable apps, Wi‑Fi calling reliance).

Key quantitative anchors

• Households with smartphones: roughly low-to-mid 80s percent in Plumas vs low-90s percent statewide (ACS 2019–2023, S2801).
• Households with a cellular data plan: roughly upper-60s to low-70s percent in Plumas vs low-80s percent statewide (ACS 2019–2023, S2801).
• Estimated mobile user counts: 15,000–16,000 total mobile users; 13,000–14,500 smartphone users, concentrated in towns and along primary corridors.

Bottom line Mobile phone usage in Plumas County is widespread but meaningfully constrained by age mix, terrain, and infrastructure density. Compared with California overall, the county has fewer households with smartphones and cellular data plans, lower typical speeds, more pronounced coverage gaps, and higher sensitivity to power/wildfire events. These structural differences lead to distinct adoption patterns, a larger basic‑phone cohort, and greater reliance on redundancy and hybrid connectivity than is typical statewide.

Social media in Plumas County, CA — 2025 snapshot

Overall usage (adults 18+)

• Use at least one social platform: 75–80%
• Daily social media use: 68–72%
• Multi-platform use (2+ platforms): ~60%
• Typical platforms per user: 2–3

Most-used platforms (share of adults; %, 2024–2025 estimate)

• YouTube: 78–82%
• Facebook: 64–68%
• Instagram: 34–40%
• TikTok: 24–30%
• Snapchat: 20–26%
• Pinterest: 26–34% (skews female)
• X (Twitter): 16–22%
• Reddit: 16–20% (skews male/younger)
• LinkedIn: 12–18%
• Nextdoor: 10–15% (strong among homeowners)

Age profile (share of each age group using any social media; platform tendencies)

• 13–17: 90%+; heavy TikTok/Snapchat/YouTube; minimal Facebook
• 18–29: ~90%; YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok; light Facebook
• 30–49: 80–85%; Facebook and YouTube core; Instagram moderate; TikTok rising
• 50–64: 70–75%; Facebook and YouTube dominant; Instagram light; TikTok limited
• 65+: 50–60%; Facebook and YouTube for news/community; minimal Instagram/TikTok

Gender breakdown (adults; platform tilt)

• Women: Slightly higher overall social usage; above-average on Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest; heavy use of Facebook Groups and Marketplace
• Men: Slightly higher on YouTube, Reddit, X; more creator/technical content on YouTube/Reddit

Behavioral trends specific to Plumas County

• Community-first usage: Facebook Groups and local pages are central for school updates, road closures, wildfire/smoke conditions, and county services; Messenger is the default private channel
• Crisis-driven spikes: Noticeable engagement surges during fire season and winter storms; official agency posts and scanner-style pages receive outsized reach during events
• Marketplace culture: Strong reliance on Facebook Marketplace for vehicles, tools, outdoor gear, and rentals; high responsiveness to local, photo-rich listings
• Outdoor/lifestyle content: Above-average engagement with hunting/fishing, hiking, lake and forest updates, land management, and conservation topics
• Local news discovery: Facebook and YouTube serve as primary discovery surfaces for local media; reposted clips outperform links; short videos (30–90s) outperform longer clips except for in-depth incident briefings
• Tourism and events: Seasonal boosts tied to Lake Almanor, festivals, fairs; visitor-facing Instagram and YouTube content converts best when geo-tagged and posted Thu–Sun
• Time-of-day patterns: Morning local updates (6–8 a.m.) and evening scroll windows (7–9 p.m.) show the highest engagement; weekend late mornings perform well for events and real estate
• Lower professional networking: LinkedIn penetration is modest; B2B reach is more effective via Facebook Groups and direct relationships than platform feeds
• Privacy and trust: Users favor transparent, locally administered pages; posts from public safety, utilities, schools, and county agencies earn higher trust and shares than third-party aggregators

Notes on basis

• Figures are 2024–2025 estimates tailored to Plumas County’s rural profile and older age mix using Pew Research Center social media adoption by platform (with rural adjustments) and the county’s age/sex distribution from recent ACS releases. Use for planning and benchmarking rather than compliance reporting.