Clear Creek County

Population

• Total population: ~9,4oo (2023 estimate, U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program)
• 2020 Census count: 9,397

Age

• Median age: ~47–48 years (ACS 2019–2023 5-year)
• Under 18: ~16–18%
• 65 and over: ~21–23%

Gender

• Female: ~48%
• Male: ~52% (ACS 2019–2023 5-year)

Race/ethnicity (shares sum ~100%; ACS 2019–2023 5-year)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~85–87%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~7–9%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~3–4%
• Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~0.5–1%
• Asian, non-Hispanic: ~0.5–1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: ~0.5–1%

Households (ACS 2019–2023 5-year)

• Total households: ~4,100–4,300
• Persons per household (avg): ~2.2
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~74–78%
• Renter-occupied: ~22–26%
• Family households: ~55–60% of households

Notes: Figures reflect the latest available U.S. Census Bureau estimates for small counties (ACS 5-year and 2023 population estimate).

Clear Creek County, CO snapshot (estimates):

• Population and density: ~9.5K residents; ~24 people per sq. mile. Population clusters along I‑70 (Idaho Springs, Georgetown); mountainous terrain creates off‑corridor coverage gaps.
• Email users: ~6.6K–6.9K adult users, applying Pew U.S. adoption rates to local age mix. Adults ≈7.9K; email adoption ≈85–90% overall.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 18–29: ~0.9K
  • 30–49: ~2.3K
  • 50–64: ~2.0K
  • 65+: ~1.4–1.5K (lower adoption than younger groups)
• Gender split: County skew is roughly 54% male / 46% female; email usage mirrors this (no major gender gap in adoption).
• Digital access trends:
  • Strong fixed broadband and mobile service along the I‑70 corridor; patchy service in canyons and higher‑elevation areas.
  • Home broadband subscription is high in town centers; smartphone‑only access is more common in remote areas.
  • Public Wi‑Fi at libraries and civic buildings supplements access.
  • Daytime demand spikes from commuters and remote workers traveling or living near the corridor.

Basis: ACS/Census population structure and Pew Research internet/email adoption applied to local demographics.

Clear Creek County, CO: mobile usage overview (with county–vs–state differences)

Resident user estimates

• Population base: roughly 9,500–10,000 residents.
• Mobile phone users (any mobile handset): about 8,500–9,000 residents (≈88–92% penetration). This is a few points lower than Colorado’s overall penetration, largely due to an older age mix and terrain‑driven coverage gaps.
• Resident smartphone users: about 7,000–7,500 (≈72–78% of total population; ≈82–86% of adults), versus closer to ~90% of adults statewide.
• Weekend/seasonal peaks: Connected devices in the county can more than double along the I‑70 corridor during ski/hiking seasons and holiday weekends as travelers pass through Idaho Springs, Georgetown, and the Eisenhower/Johnson Tunnel area. Networks see transient loads far above the resident base.

Demographic usage patterns (how the mix differs from Colorado overall)

• Older age structure: A larger 65+ share than the state average depresses smartphone adoption modestly; voice/text and Wi‑Fi calling remain comparatively important. Colorado overall skews younger with higher smartphone and app adoption.
• Family/teens: Teen penetration is still very high (>90%), but the teen share of population is smaller than in many Front Range counties; youth‑driven social/video usage is a smaller slice of total county traffic than statewide.
• Language/ethnicity: A smaller Hispanic/Spanish‑speaking share than the state average reduces demand for Spanish‑first plans and content bundles common in metro areas.
• Work patterns: Many residents commute or work in the outdoor/recreation economy. Tethering and hotspot use for remote work is disproportionately common where fixed broadband is limited; statewide, more households have robust cable/fiber and lean less on mobile for home connectivity.

Carrier mix and coverage (county patterns vs state)

• Carrier preference: Verizon and AT&T tend to dominate due to broader low‑band coverage in mountains and FirstNet build‑outs; T‑Mobile has improved but remains spottier off the I‑70 spine. Statewide, T‑Mobile is more competitive, especially in metros.
• 5G availability: Reliable 5G (including C‑band/mid‑band) is concentrated in towns and along I‑70 (Idaho Springs, Georgetown, Silver Plume, and the tunnel approaches). Outside those nodes, service often drops to LTE/low‑band or to no signal in canyons. Colorado overall has much broader pop‑coverage of mid‑band 5G in urban/suburban areas.
• Speeds/reliability: Median speeds in-town and on I‑70 can be strong, but performance is volatile at trailheads and during weekend surges. Off‑corridor, speeds fall back due to terrain, fewer sectors, and limited backhaul. Statewide medians are steadier because they’re dominated by Front Range results.

Digital infrastructure highlights

• Macro sites: Dozens of macro cells cluster along I‑70 and in population centers; far fewer sites cover mountain valleys and forest service roads. Many shadow zones remain on CO‑103 (toward Echo Lake/Mt. Blue Sky), Guanella Pass Rd, and in canyons.
• Tunnels and public safety: Distributed antenna systems provide in‑tunnel coverage at the Eisenhower/Johnson tunnels, and Band 14/FirstNet presence along the corridor improves first‑responder reliability. This public‑safety overlay is more critical here than in most flatland counties.
• Backhaul: CDOT fiber along I‑70 and microwave links to ridge sites underpin capacity; away from the corridor, limited backhaul constrains upgrades. In metro Colorado, dense fiber lowers this constraint.
• 5G bands: Mid‑band 5G is mainly an I‑70/town feature; low‑band extends farther but with limited capacity. Millimeter wave is effectively a non‑factor here, unlike targeted hot spots in Denver/Boulder.
• Power/permits/topography: Federal/forest lands and steep terrain lengthen timelines for new sites and hardening; infill is slower than statewide norms.
• Workarounds: Wi‑Fi calling, signal boosters, and satellite messaging (and Starlink for home) are adopted at higher rates than the state average because of coverage gaps.

Usage behaviors that diverge from state trends

• Heavier dependence on offline maps, caching, and Wi‑Fi calling for residents who recreate off‑grid; greater carriage of satellite messengers among hikers/climbers.
• More conservative data plans among older residents; conversely, some remote workers push high mobile hotspot usage where cable/fiber isn’t available.
• Weekend congestion patterns strongly tied to tourism and I‑70 incidents; Colorado’s urban counties see more weekday‑commute and venue‑centric spikes instead.

What this means for planning and service

• Coverage, not just capacity, is the binding constraint away from I‑70; low‑band infill and carefully placed small macros or repeaters would add outsized value relative to raw spectrum additions.
• Backhaul expansion off‑corridor and power resiliency (backup generation) will materially improve reliability, especially for emergency communications.
• For residents, plans that bundle Wi‑Fi calling support, roaming on FirstNet-capable networks (for eligible users), and allowances for hotspot use are more practical than pure “unlimited speed” marketing common in metro Colorado.

Method notes and uncertainty

• Figures above are estimates derived from county population size, national/state smartphone adoption by age, the county’s older age profile, and typical rural mountain coverage patterns. Local carrier reports, drive tests, and ACS updates will refine these numbers.

Below is a concise, evidence‑based snapshot of social media use in Clear Creek County, CO. Because county‑level platform data aren’t publicly reported, percentages are modeled from Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. social media use benchmarks and adjusted for Clear Creek’s older‑than‑average age profile and commuter/tourism mix. Treat figures as reasonable planning estimates, not exact counts.

County context

• Population: roughly 9–10k; median age mid‑40s; mix of mountain‑town residents, Front Range commuters, and tourism (I‑70 corridor: Idaho Springs, Georgetown, Empire, Silver Plume).
• Adults (18+): about 7–8k.

Overall usage (modeled)

• Adults using at least one social platform: ~70–80% of adults (≈5.3k–6.0k people).
• Daily users: most active platforms see majority daily use; expect ~60–70% of adult users checking at least one platform daily.

Most‑used platforms (share of local adults; modeled ranges)

• YouTube: 75–82%
• Facebook: 68–76%
• Instagram: 35–45%
• TikTok: 25–33%
• Pinterest: 30–38% (skews female)
• LinkedIn: 28–35% (commuter/professional tilt)
• Snapchat: 20–28% (concentrated under 30)
• Reddit: 15–22% (skews male/tech/outdoors)
• X (Twitter): 15–22% (news/alerts)
• Nextdoor: 18–25% (more in Idaho Springs/Georgetown neighborhoods)

Age profile of local social users (approximate share)

• 13–24: 15–18% (heavy TikTok/Snap/YouTube; IG primary, FB minimal)
• 25–44: 35–40% (FB + IG core; Marketplace, groups; YouTube universal; some LinkedIn)
• 45–64: 30–35% (FB dominant; YouTube; Pinterest/Nextdoor)
• 65+: 12–15% (FB + YouTube for news/community; limited on TikTok/IG)

Gender patterns (directional)

• Women: higher likelihood to use Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, Nextdoor; strong participation in community groups, school/event pages, Marketplace.
• Men: higher likelihood to use YouTube, Reddit, X; follow avalanche/skiing, hunting/angling, 4x4, tech/finance content.

Behavioral trends specific to Clear Creek

• Real‑time utility: High engagement with road, weather, wildfire, avalanche, and closure updates (CDOT, Sheriff/EMS pages). Spikes during storms, I‑70 incidents, and fire season.
• Facebook Groups as the “town square”: Local chatter, county meetings/land‑use issues, short‑term rental debates; buy/sell/trade and lost‑and‑found are very active.
• Tourism seasonality: Weekends/holidays drive peaks; local businesses use FB/IG for service hours, wait times, and specials; user posts/reviews rise around Georgetown Christmas Market, summer festivals, St. Mary’s Glacier traffic, and hot springs visits.
• Visual outdoor content performs: Hikes, skiing, off‑road trails, leaf‑peeping; safety tips from CAIC/CSAR share well.
• Commuter spillover: Many residents follow Denver media and statewide agencies; LinkedIn use elevated vs. rural norms; Nextdoor adoption strongest in denser neighborhoods.

Planning notes

• Paid reach: Targeting the county alone typically yields “mid‑ to high‑thousands” monthly reach on Meta; broader 10–15‑mile geofences around Idaho Springs/Georgetown expand audiences materially.
• Content cadence: Timely utility posts (closures, weather, safety) and event‑driven content outperform generic promos. Use FB Groups, IG Reels, and short YouTube for widest local impact; TikTok/IG for younger locals and visitors.

Sources/method

• Modeled from Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2024 (U.S. adult platform adoption and age splits), applied to Clear Creek’s age mix (U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2018–2022 5‑year profiles) and local context (tourism/commuting). Nextdoor, Reddit, and X usage reflect Pew’s 2024 estimates, adjusted directionally for community size and interests.