Shasta County

Shasta County, California — key demographics

Population size

• Total population: 182,139 (2020 Census); roughly 182,000–183,000 in 2023 Census estimates, essentially flat since 2020

Age

• Median age: about 43 years
• Under 18: ~21%
• 18–24: ~9%
• 25–44: ~24%
• 45–64: ~24%
• 65 and over: ~22%

Sex

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Racial/ethnic composition (Hispanic is any race)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~75%
• Hispanic/Latino: ~14%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~5–6%
• American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: ~2–3%
• Asian, non-Hispanic: ~2–3%
• Black/African American, non-Hispanic: ~1–2%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic: <1%

Households

• Total households: ~74,000–75,000
• Average household size: ~2.4
• Family households: ~62% of households
• Married-couple families: ~47% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~26%
• Single-person households: ~28–29%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~68%; renter-occupied: ~32%

Insights

• Older age profile than the state overall, with a notably large 65+ share
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White with modest Hispanic and Native American presence relative to California averages
• Smaller average household size and higher owner-occupancy than the California norm

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2023 Population Estimates Program; American Community Survey 1-year/5-year estimates). Figures are rounded.

Shasta County, CA email usage snapshot

• Population and users: ~182,000 residents; ~146,000 adults (18+). Applying Pew Research’s ~92% U.S. adult email adoption, adjusted slightly downward for Shasta’s older age profile, yields ~130,000 adult email users.
• Age distribution of email users (approximate): 18–29: 20% (26k); 30–49: 33% (43k); 50–64: 27% (35k); 65+: 20% (26k). Adoption is near-universal under 65 and somewhat lower among 65+.
• Gender split: Approximately even—about 50% female and 50% male among email users, reflecting the county’s near 50/50 sex composition and minimal gender gaps in email use nationally.
• Digital access and trends:
  • Households with a computer: ~93%.
  • Households with a broadband subscription (any type): ~89%. (U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2018–2022, Table S2801/DP02)
  • Adoption and device access have risen modestly since 2016, with increased reliance on smartphone-only internet among lower-income and rural households; older and rural residents lag slightly in subscription rates.
• Local density/connectivity facts: Land area ~3,775 sq mi; population density ~48 people/sq mi. About half of residents live in Redding, where connectivity is strongest along the I‑5 corridor; service quality and choice taper in outlying rural communities, contributing to slightly lower broadband adoption than California’s urban counties.

Shasta County, CA mobile phone usage: a concise county-level profile (distinct from California overall)

User estimates

• Population baseline: ~181,000 residents; ~73,000–75,000 households; ~141,000 adults (18+).
• Mobile phone users (any cellphone): ~135,000–145,000 adult users, midpoint ~140,000.
• Smartphone users: ~120,000–130,000 adults, midpoint ~125,000.
• Active mobile connections (SIMs, including data devices and IoT): roughly 200,000–230,000, reflecting 1.1–1.3 lines per resident typical of rural/suburban markets.

Demographic breakdown and usage patterns

• Age-driven adoption gap: Shasta County’s older age structure (about 22% age 65+ vs ~16% statewide) pulls down overall smartphone penetration. Adult smartphone ownership is roughly mid‑ to high‑80% locally, several points below California’s low‑90s.
• Income and plan type: Lower median household income than California increases price sensitivity. Prepaid share is materially higher than the state average, around one‑third of lines locally versus roughly one‑quarter statewide.
• Smartphone‑only households: Approximately 17% of households rely on a cellular data plan as their only home internet (no cable/DSL/fiber), compared with ~11% statewide. This is concentrated among lower‑income and rural households.
• Households without any internet subscription: ~12% in Shasta vs ~7% statewide, reflecting coverage gaps and affordability constraints.
• Urban–rural split: In Redding/Anderson/Shasta Lake, adoption and speeds resemble state averages; outside these cores, a higher share of residents use mobile hotspots or phone tethering as primary home internet.

Digital infrastructure highlights

• Coverage and technology mix:
  • 4G LTE is effectively ubiquitous in and around Redding and along I‑5/US‑299 corridors, with persistent gaps in mountainous and forested areas and at the county’s edges.
  • 5G is available from all three national carriers in population centers and along primary corridors; coverage thins in sparsely populated tracts, with low‑band 5G more common than mid‑band outside Redding.
• Network performance:
  • In‑city (Redding) median mobile download speeds commonly reach high double‑digits to low triple‑digits Mbps on mid‑band 5G.
  • Outside the core, speeds fall to the 20–60 Mbps range with higher variability and more frequent drops to 4G or 3G fallback in remote pockets.
• Carrier positioning:
  • Verizon and AT&T retain a coverage advantage in remote terrain and remain the default choices for many rural subscribers; T‑Mobile has improved materially along I‑5 and in Redding with mid‑band spectrum but still lags on depth of rural coverage.
  • FirstNet (AT&T Band 14) is present on key sites, improving priority access for public safety.
• Resilience and dependencies:
  • Wildfire and Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) risk elevate the importance of backup power at cell sites; extended outages still occur in the most remote areas when backhaul or site power is disrupted.
  • Reliance on mobile hotspots for home connectivity increases peak‑time sector loading in exurban/rural sectors relative to urban California.

How Shasta County differs most from the state

• Higher reliance on mobile as primary home internet: Smartphone‑only/home‑cellular‑only households are notably more common than statewide, especially in outlying communities.
• Slightly lower overall smartphone penetration: Driven by older age mix and lower incomes than the California average.
• Greater prepaid usage and price sensitivity: A larger share of cost‑conscious and credit‑adverse subscribers.
• Coverage and speed variability: Strong performance in Redding and along major highways; more pronounced coverage gaps and lower, less consistent speeds in mountainous and sparsely populated tracts than typical for California metros.
• Carrier market skew: Preference toward carriers with deeper rural footprints (Verizon/AT&T) is more pronounced than in California’s large urban counties, where T‑Mobile share is higher and mid‑band 5G is more uniformly available.

Key stats reference points

• Households with a smartphone/cellular data plan: mid‑80s percent in Shasta vs low‑90s in California (ACS S2801, 2018–2022).
• Smartphone‑only home internet: ~17% Shasta vs ~11% California (ACS S2801, 2018–2022).
• No internet subscription: ~12% Shasta vs ~7% California (ACS S2801, 2018–2022).
• Age 65+ share: ~22% Shasta vs ~16% California (ACS, 2022 5‑year).
• Mobile data growth trend since 2020: Faster in Shasta than the state average because of higher mobile‑only reliance, with sustained double‑digit annual growth and peak‑hour congestion in rural sectors.

Bottom line Shasta County is a mobile‑reliant market with strong corridor coverage but greater rural variability than California’s urban counties. Mobile phones and hotspots substitute for home broadband at higher rates than the state average, prepaid adoption is higher, and carrier choice tilts toward networks with deeper rural coverage. Improvements in mid‑band 5G have lifted speeds in Redding and along I‑5, but the county’s terrain and dispersed settlement pattern continue to shape a mobile experience that is more uneven—and more essential for home connectivity—than the statewide norm.

Shasta County, CA social media snapshot (2024)

Population context

• Population: ~182,000; median age ~43 (older than the US median)
• 13–17: 6% (11,000); 18+: 78% (142,000)
• Gender: ~50% female, ~50% male (slight female majority)

Most-used platforms (share of residents 13+; modeled from Pew Research Center 2024 adult data and 2023 teen data applied to local demographics)

• YouTube: 84% (128k users)
• Facebook: 66% (100k)
• Instagram: 48% (73k)
• TikTok: 35% (54k)
• Pinterest: 33% (50k)
• Snapchat: 31% (48k)
• LinkedIn: 28% (43k)
• X (Twitter): 22% (33k)
• Reddit: 22% (33k)
• WhatsApp: 21% (32k) Note: Nextdoor has strong neighborhood adoption locally, especially for public safety and community updates, though consistent county-level percentages aren’t published.

Age-group usage patterns (local age mix skews usage older)

• Teens 13–17 (11k): Very high on YouTube (93%), TikTok (63%), Snapchat (60%), Instagram (62%); low on Facebook (33%) and X (~20%).
• 18–29: YouTube and Instagram dominate; Snapchat and TikTok remain high; Facebook is used but secondary.
• 30–49: Heavy on YouTube and Facebook; Instagram moderate; TikTok/Pinterest growing; strong activity in local groups and parenting/school communities.
• 50–64: Facebook and YouTube lead; Pinterest useful for hobbies; Instagram/TikTok lighter but rising.
• 65+: Facebook for family/community and YouTube for how‑tos/news; Nextdoor use is common for neighborhood info.

Gender breakdown

• Women slightly over-index on Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, and TikTok; men over-index on YouTube, Reddit, and X.
• Practical implication: community, family, shopping, and lifestyle content engages more women; news, sports, DIY, and tech content engages more men.

Behavioral trends to know

• Public safety and wildfire updates: Facebook Pages/Groups (e.g., Sheriff, CAL FIRE) and Nextdoor are primary channels for incident updates, evacuations, weather, and road status.
• Community commerce: Facebook Marketplace and buy/sell/trade groups are highly active (vehicles, tools, outdoor gear, housing).
• Local life: High engagement for school districts, youth sports, events, fairs, and church/community-service content; Instagram used for teams and events.
• Outdoor lifestyle: Fishing (Sacramento River), boating (Shasta Lake), hiking, off‑road—strong photo/video sharing on Instagram and YouTube; “how‑to” and gear reviews perform well on YouTube.
• Politics and civic discourse: Active local issue discussions (land use, schools, taxes) primarily on Facebook; X used by a smaller but vocal subset.
• Small business marketing: Facebook and Instagram drive reach and foot traffic; YouTube pre‑roll helps local awareness; LinkedIn mainly for healthcare, public sector, and professional hiring.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is default for coordinating; WhatsApp used by multilingual households and cross‑region families.
• Usage rhythm: Mobile‑first, with evening peaks; daytime posting sees strong engagement among retirees and shift workers.

Method notes and sources

• Counts and percentages are modeled by applying Pew Research Center’s 2024 US adult platform adoption and 2023 teen social media data to Shasta County’s population and age structure (US Census/ACS). Use as planning-grade estimates; actual platform ad-reach can vary by ±5–10 percentage points depending on campaign settings and data freshness.