Kiowa County

Kiowa County, Colorado — key demographics

Population size

• 1,446 residents (2020 Decennial Census)

Age

• Under 18: ~22%
• 18–64: ~56%
• 65 and over: ~22%
• Median age: ~46 years (Source: ACS 2018–2022 5-year estimates)

Gender

• Male: ~52%
• Female: ~48% (Source: ACS 2018–2022)

Race and ethnicity

• White alone: ~92–93%
• Black or African American alone: ~0–1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~1%
• Asian alone: ~0–1%
• Two or more races: ~4–5%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~10–12%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~83–86% (Note: Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity and overlaps with race categories) (Source: ACS 2018–2022)

Households and housing

• Households: ~630–660
• Average household size: ~2.2 persons
• Family households: ~60–62% of households
• Married-couple households: ~50–55%
• Households with children under 18: ~23–27%
• Nonfamily households: ~38–40%; living alone: ~33–36%; age 65+ living alone: ~15–17%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~72–76% (Source: ACS 2018–2022, tables S1101, DP04)

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates (DP05, S0101, S1101, DP04). Figures are official Census estimates and may include sampling error for small populations.

• Population and density: Kiowa County, CO had 1,446 residents in 2020 across about 1,786 sq mi—roughly 0.8 people per sq mi. Population is concentrated in Eads, with smaller clusters in Haswell and Sheridan Lake along the US‑287/US‑385 corridor.

• Estimated email users: ~1,090 residents (about 75% of the total population), derived from the county’s age structure and standard U.S. email adoption rates by age.

• Age distribution of email users:

  • Ages 13–17: ~6%
  • Ages 18–64: ~70%
  • Ages 65+: ~24%

• Gender split among email users: Approximately 50% female, 50% male (email adoption is near‑parity by gender).

• Digital access and usage trends:

  • Home broadband and fiber are concentrated in town centers; outside towns, fixed wireless and satellite are common due to long distances and sparse backhaul.
  • Mobile access is important; cellular coverage is strongest in and near Eads and along US‑287/US‑385, weaker in outlying ranchlands, influencing email check‑in patterns.
  • Public Wi‑Fi (libraries/schools) supplements access for residents without reliable home service.
  • Low population density and long last‑mile runs raise per‑household deployment costs, slowing fiber expansion but making fixed wireless and satellite practical stopgaps.

Mobile phone usage in Kiowa County, CO (2024 snapshot)

Population baseline

• Residents: 1,446 (2020 Census). One of Colorado’s least-populated counties, with a distinctly older age profile and highly rural settlement pattern centered on Eads, Haswell, and Sheridan Lake.
• Households: about 660 (ACS 2018–2022 5-year).

Modeled user estimates (derived from ACS age structure for small rural counties and Pew Research smartphone adoption by age/rural status)

• Adult unique mobile phone users (any cellphone): approximately 1,130.
• Adult smartphone users: approximately 900.
• Teen smartphone users (ages 13–17): approximately 90.
• Total unique smartphone users: approximately 1,000 (about 69% of the total population, but roughly 90% of teens and 80% of adults).
• Mobile-only internet households (use a cellular data plan as the primary/only home internet): approximately 100–110 households (about 16% of households), notably higher than the statewide share.

Demographic breakdown of smartphone adoption (users and rates)

• Ages 18–34: ~250 residents; ~92% smartphone adoption; ~225 users.
• Ages 35–64: ~580 residents; ~85% smartphone adoption; ~490 users.
• Ages 65+: ~290 residents; ~62% smartphone adoption; ~180 users.
• Teens 13–17: ~95 residents; ~95% smartphone adoption; ~90 users. Key takeaways:
• Adoption among older adults is markedly lower than the state average, pulling down overall county adoption despite very high uptake among younger cohorts.
• Mobile phone (any cellphone) ownership remains high across adults (mid-90% for under 65; mid-80s for 65+), but a larger share of older residents still use basic phones compared with the Colorado average.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Network footprint: Service is anchored by a small number of macro towers clustered in Eads and along US‑287/CO‑96, with highway-oriented coverage and sparser service on ranchlands away from major roads.
• Technology mix:
  • 4G LTE is the primary layer countywide.
  • 5G is present mainly as low-band (extended-range) on T‑Mobile and AT&T near towns and along US‑287; Verizon remains largely LTE with selective 5G. Mid-band 5G (2.5 GHz/C‑band) is limited, so capacity gains are modest compared with the Front Range.
• Spectrum in use (typical rural layers): 600 MHz Band 71 (T‑Mobile), 700 MHz Bands 12/14 (AT&T/FirstNet) and 13 (Verizon), plus PCS/AWS overlays where available. Low-band spectrum underpins broad outdoor reach but constrains capacity.
• Backhaul: Long‑haul fiber follows US‑287 with microwave spurs to remote sites; town centers rely on copper or fixed wireless where fiber to the premises is limited. This scarcity of robust wired options contributes directly to the higher share of mobile‑only households.
• Public safety: FirstNet (Band 14) coverage via AT&T sites supports county EMS and law enforcement; this often improves reliability but does not by itself raise consumer capacity.

Usage patterns and performance

• Typical outdoor LTE/low‑band 5G speeds are serviceable for messaging, maps, and standard-definition video, but peak and median speeds are materially lower than Colorado’s metro areas due to reliance on low-band spectrum and fewer sectors per site.
• Indoor coverage depends heavily on proximity to a highway‑side macro site; Wi‑Fi calling is commonly used in homes and metal‑roof buildings to offset weak indoor signal.
• Daytime load spikes track highway traffic on US‑287 and seasonal ag activity; this can depress speeds near Eads during peak hours.

How Kiowa County differs from Colorado statewide

• Adoption levels: Adult smartphone adoption is roughly 6–10 percentage points lower than the statewide norm, driven by a larger 65+ share and higher prevalence of basic phones among seniors.
• Primary internet via mobile: Mobile‑only household reliance is about 1.5× the state rate, reflecting limited cable/fiber availability locally.
• 5G availability and capacity: Coverage is overwhelmingly low‑band 5G/LTE, with sparse mid‑band. In contrast, Colorado’s Front Range enjoys dense mid‑band 5G with much higher median speeds.
• Carrier parity: Verizon and AT&T highway coverage is comparatively stronger; T‑Mobile’s extended‑range 5G helps fill gaps. In Front Range metros, all three carriers offer dense, high‑capacity layers; in Kiowa, coverage is adequate but capacity-limited.
• Network growth trajectory: Local improvements since 2022 have focused on coverage consistency (low‑band 5G overlays and backhaul upgrades) rather than large capacity jumps. Statewide growth has emphasized mid‑band 5G densification and multi‑gig fiber backhaul.

Implications

• For residents and small businesses, mobile phones are a practical default for both voice and home connectivity, but heavy data use (HD streaming, multi‑user telework) can strain limited mid‑band capacity.
• Emergency and agricultural operations benefit from FirstNet and broad low‑band coverage, though redundancy (e.g., dual‑SIM or satellite messaging) remains prudent off the main corridors.
• Closing the gap with state performance would require additional mid‑band 5G sectors and expanded fiber backhaul to existing towers, alongside more in‑building coverage solutions in Eads and Sheridan Lake.

Sources and methods

• Population and household counts: U.S. Census 2020 and ACS 2018–2022 5‑year tables.
• Adoption rates by age/rural status: Pew Research Center (2019–2023) device ownership and broadband reports.
• Infrastructure and coverage characterization: FCC mobile coverage maps (2023–2024), carrier public coverage maps, FirstNet buildout disclosures, and standard spectrum band deployments in rural Colorado.
• Estimates are modeled by applying age‑specific adoption rates to Kiowa’s age structure and aligning household connectivity shares with FCC/ACS indicators for rural Colorado counties.

Social media usage in Kiowa County, Colorado (2025 snapshot)

Baseline

• Population: ~1,400–1,500 residents; residents age 13+ ≈ 1,150–1,250.
• Internet access: Predominantly smartphone-based; household broadband is lower than Colorado’s metro average, typical of rural counties. This shapes platform mix toward mobile-first services and Facebook-centered communities.

Estimated user stats (residents 13+)

• Use at least one social platform: ~70–75% (≈ 800–950 people).
• Daily social users: ~60% of residents 13+.
• Multi-platform use (3+ platforms): ~35–40% of social users.

Most-used platforms (share of residents 13+; rounded, modeled from rural U.S. patterns and local demographics)

• YouTube: 58%
• Facebook: 53%
• Instagram: 23%
• Snapchat: 20%
• TikTok: 20%
• Pinterest: 19%
• LinkedIn: 13%
• WhatsApp: 14%
• X (Twitter): 11%
• Reddit: 10%
• Nextdoor: 9% Notes: Facebook Groups/Marketplace usage is notably higher than in urban counties; Nextdoor adoption is modest given dispersed neighborhoods.

Age-group usage patterns (share who use at least one platform within each age group; and most-used platforms within the group)

• Teens (13–17): 90–95%; YouTube, Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram lead. Facebook used mainly for school/sports updates.
• Young adults (18–29): ~90%; YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok; Facebook for community ties and Marketplace.
• Adults (30–49): ~80%; Facebook and YouTube dominate; Instagram/Pinterest secondary; TikTok growing but still minority.
• Adults (50–64): ~70%; Facebook first, YouTube second; Pinterest/Instagram niche.
• Seniors (65+): ~45–55%; Facebook for family/community, YouTube for how‑to/news; low presence elsewhere.

Gender breakdown among adult social users (platform propensity within each gender)

• Women: Higher on Facebook (75–80% of female users), Pinterest (45–50%), Instagram (~35–45%). Strong engagement with local groups, school/sports pages, buy/sell.
• Men: Higher on YouTube (80–85% of male users), Reddit/X (15–20%), and farm/ranch, outdoors, and local sports content. Facebook still widely used (~70–75%).

Behavioral trends

• Facebook is the community hub: county and town pages, school sports, churches, ag/co-op updates, emergency/weather alerts, and buy/sell/Marketplace. Closed and private groups are central.
• YouTube is utilitarian: how‑to repairs (farm/ranch equipment, DIY, home/auto), hunting/outdoors, local history, and regional news recaps.
• Messaging > public posting: Facebook Messenger is the default; SMS remains heavy; WhatsApp has pockets of use in multi-county work crews and extended families.
• Posting cadence: Consumption outweighs creation. Most residents post infrequently; engagement spikes around school athletics, fairs, rodeos, severe weather, road closures, and community events.
• Commerce: Marketplace is a primary channel for local resale and farm/ranch equipment; small businesses rely on Facebook Pages over standalone websites; boosted posts perform better than broad ads.
• Timing: Morning (6–8 a.m.) and evening (7–10 p.m.) engagement peaks; mid-day dips during fieldwork/school hours. Weekend spikes around games and events.
• Trust: High trust in known local sources (county offices, schools, extension office, churches) and recognizable neighbors; lower tolerance for anonymous or out-of-area promotions.
• Platform fit: Nextdoor under-indexes due to low neighborhood density; Instagram/TikTok skew to teens/20s; LinkedIn minimal except for educators, healthcare, and public-sector roles.

Method notes and sources

• Figures are modeled for Kiowa County using its rural, older-leaning profile combined with recent U.S. rural social media adoption patterns (e.g., Pew Research Center 2023–2024 platform use) and ACS/Census demographics. They reflect likely local levels rather than a direct county survey.