Dolores County

Dolores County, Colorado — key demographics

• Population: 2,326 (2020 Decennial Census)
• Age (ACS 2019–2023):
  • Median age: ~50
  • Under 18: ~19%
  • 18–64: ~57%
  • 65+: ~24%
• Sex (ACS 2019–2023): ~52% male, ~48% female
• Race/ethnicity (ACS 2019–2023; Hispanic is any race):
  • Non-Hispanic White: ~86%
  • Hispanic/Latino: ~9%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native: ~2%
  • Two or more races: ~3%
  • Black, Asian, NHPI: each <1%
• Households (ACS 2019–2023):
  • Total households: ~1,030
  • Average household size: ~2.2
  • Family households: ~62% of households
  • Average family size: ~2.8

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census (P.L. 94-171) and 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5-year estimates (tables DP05, S0101, S1101). Note: Small-county ACS estimates carry larger margins of error.

Dolores County, CO snapshot (population ~2,300; ~2.2 residents per sq. mile)

Estimated email users: 1,600–1,800 residents, driven by high adult adoption (roughly 90–95% of adults use email, based on national/rural patterns).

Age distribution (share using email):

• 18–29: ~97–99% (near-universal)
• 30–49: ~95–97%
• 50–64: ~90–93%
• 65+: ~75–85% (lower but rising)

Gender split: Essentially even; men and women use email at similar rates.

Digital access trends:

• Most households have a computer; roughly 70–75% likely maintain a home internet subscription, with quality varying by location.
• Outside Dove Creek and other populated areas, residents often rely on DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite; mobile-only internet likely around 10–15% of households.
• Public access points (library/schools) remain important for remote or lower-income users.
• Sparse settlement and rugged terrain constrain last‑mile infrastructure, but ongoing fiber and fixed‑wireless expansions in southwest Colorado are gradually improving speeds and reliability.

Notes: Figures are estimates derived from 2020 Census scale, Pew/ACS patterns, and rural Colorado connectivity norms; exact county-level email metrics are not directly published.

Below is a practical, county-level picture built from recent rural adoption research (Pew, FCC availability maps), Colorado broadband planning materials, and typical carrier footprints in southwest Colorado. Exact, current survey data for Dolores County are scarce, so figures are expressed as ranges and deltas versus state averages.

Snapshot and user estimates (2025)

• Population: ~2,100; adults ~1,650.
• Any mobile phone (voice/text): 88–92% of adults (about 1,450 ±80 users). Lower than Colorado overall (typically ~93–96%).
• Smartphones: 76–82% of adults (about 1,250 ±90 users). Colorado statewide skews higher (~85–90%).
• Mobile-only home internet (smartphone or hotspot as primary connection): 20–28% of households, notably higher than Colorado overall (roughly low–teens). This rose after the wind‑down of the Affordable Connectivity Program in 2024 as some households shifted from wired plans to prepaid mobile or hotspots.

Demographic and usage patterns

• Age:
  • 18–34: Near‑universal smartphone adoption (≈95%+), heavy messaging/social use; hotspotting common for renters/seasonal workers.
  • 35–64: High adoption (≈85–90%); frequent hotspot use for homework and remote work where DSL/cable is weak.
  • 65+: Lower smartphone adoption (≈55–70%); above‑average reliance on voice/SMS or basic phones. More “Wi‑Fi first” behavior when fiber/DSL is available at home, otherwise voice/text priority.
• Income and education:
  • Lower median income than state average correlates with more prepaid plans, older devices, and shared/family data plans.
  • Mobile-only internet use is concentrated among lower‑income households and renters.
• Work patterns:
  • Agriculture, trades, and energy workers rely on coverage along highways and fields; push‑to‑talk apps and simple location/messaging tools matter more than high‑bandwidth apps.
• Digital inclusion:
  • Libraries and schools serve as key Wi‑Fi anchors. With ACP funding ended, demand for public Wi‑Fi and device lending has increased.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Coverage footprint:
  • Service clusters along US‑491 (Dove Creek–Cahone corridor) and other main roads; mesa breaks and canyons create dead zones off‑corridor.
  • Verizon typically provides the most consistent rural footprint; AT&T is competitive in‑town and along highways; T‑Mobile coverage is improving but remains spottier off main corridors. MVNOs mirror those networks.
• 5G vs LTE:
  • Expect mostly LTE and low‑band 5G; mid‑band 5G capacity is limited and highly corridor‑dependent. This contrasts with Colorado’s Front Range, where mid‑band 5G is widespread.
• Capacity/backhaul:
  • Several rural sites rely on microwave backhaul, which constrains peak speeds and uplink during busy hours. Fiber backhaul is limited outside anchor institutions.
• Home internet interplay:
  • Wired options (legacy DSL; limited cable) underperform or are absent in many areas; fixed wireless and satellite (notably Starlink) see above‑average uptake. Many households pair satellite or fixed wireless with a mobile hotspot for redundancy.
• Public safety:
  • FirstNet (AT&T) generally tracks AT&T’s macro footprint; off‑highway coverage gaps persist. Wi‑Fi calling is important inside metal‑roof homes and public buildings.

How Dolores County differs from the Colorado state picture

• Adoption: Lower smartphone penetration and slightly lower overall mobile phone ownership than the state average.
• Substitution: Significantly higher share of mobile‑only internet households.
• Network quality: Smaller mid‑band 5G footprint; more LTE/low‑band 5G; greater dependence on microwave backhaul; more variability by micro‑location.
• Choice: Fewer viable carrier options off highways; residents are more likely to pick a carrier based on a single workable tower rather than price/features.
• Plans and devices: Higher prepaid share, older/entry‑level devices, and more hotspot usage to substitute for wired broadband.

Implications and near‑term outlook (2025–2028)

• Expect incremental coverage and capacity upgrades along US‑491 and town centers before deep off‑grid buildouts.
• State BEAD and other rural grants are slated to expand fiber to un/underserved pockets; when fiber reaches homes, mobile‑only rates should decline and indoor cellular experience should improve via Wi‑Fi calling.
• For residents today: test SIMs from multiple carriers, enable Wi‑Fi calling, and consider satellite or fixed wireless for primary home internet with mobile as backup.

Dolores County, CO: Social media snapshot (estimates)

Context

• Small, rural county (~2.2k residents; older age profile; agriculture/outdoors economy). Broadband access is patchier than urban Colorado, so usage is mobile-first and platform choices skew practical/community-oriented.

Estimated user base

• Likely social media users (age 13+): ~1,400–1,700 people
  • Basis: Apply national rural usage rates to county population; adults ~75–80% on at least one platform; teens ~90%+.

Age mix among users (share of local social users)

• 13–17: ~8–10% (small cohort, very high intensity)
• 18–29: ~18–22%
• 30–49: ~32–36% (largest slice; parents, working-age)
• 50–64: ~20–24%
• 65+: ~14–18% (growing; mostly on Facebook/YouTube)

Gender

• Overall user split roughly even (county population is near 50/50), with platform skews:
  • More women on Facebook and especially Pinterest
  • More men on YouTube, Reddit, X
  • Messaging (Messenger/Snapchat) used by both; Snapchat heavier among teens/20s

Most-used platforms in the county (share of local social users; estimated)

• YouTube: ~80–85%
• Facebook: ~65–75%
• Instagram: ~35–45%
• TikTok: ~30–40%
• Snapchat: ~25–35% (concentrated among <30)
• Pinterest: ~25–35% (skews female, 25–54)
• WhatsApp: ~15–25% (family/long-distance ties)
• X (Twitter): ~15–20%
• Reddit: ~12–18%
• LinkedIn: ~10–15% (lower in rural areas)
• Nextdoor: ~5–10% (less common in very low-density places)

Behavioral trends

• Community-first usage: Facebook Groups/Pages dominate for local news, obituaries, school closings, events, wildfire/road/weather updates, 4-H and high-school sports, buy/sell/trade, and Marketplace.
• Practical content: YouTube for how‑to (farm/ranch repairs, DIY, hunting/fishing), weather, and gear reviews.
• Small business marketing: Local shops, artisans, ag services favor Facebook + Instagram; cross-post to regional groups (e.g., Cortez/Montezuma, San Miguel).
• Messaging-centric for youth: Teens/20s lean on Snapchat (streaks, group chats) and Instagram DMs; TikTok for entertainment and creators, including ag/outdoors niches.
• Timing: Peaks early morning and after work; seasonal spikes during planting/harvest and hunting seasons; fast engagement during storms/wildfires.
• Access patterns: Mobile-only users are common; live-streaming and high‑bandwidth activities are less frequent in fringe-coverage areas.
• Information quality: Heavy reliance on Facebook can amplify rumor circulation; trusted local admins and official county/school pages play outsized roles in verification.

Notes on method and sources

• No official, county-level platform counts are published. Figures above are derived by applying rural and statewide benchmarks to local demographics.
• Benchmarks: Pew Research Center “Social Media Use in 2024” (adult platform reach) and “Teens, Social Media and Technology 2023/2024” (teen patterns), plus known rural-urban usage gaps. Demographic context from recent ACS/Census profiles of Dolores County.
• Treat percentages as directional ranges suitable for planning, not precise measurements.