Lake County

Lake County, Colorado — key demographics (most recent U.S. Census Bureau data; primarily 2018–2022 ACS 5-year estimates, with 2020 Decennial count for context)

Population size

• Total population: ~7,700 (ACS 2018–2022 ≈ 7,700); 2020 Census count: ~7,400
• Modest growth since 2010; small, rural county centered on Leadville

Age

• Median age: ~35 years
• Age distribution: ~24% under 18; ~66% 18–64; ~10% 65+

Sex

• Male: ~54%
• Female: ~46%

Race and ethnicity (mutually exclusive where noted)

• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~38–40%
• Non-Hispanic White: ~55–58%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1%
• Asian: ~1%
• Black/African American: <1%
• Two or more races/other: ~3–4%

Households and housing

• Households: ~2,800
• Average household size: ~2.7–2.8
• Family households: ~60–65% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~30–35%
• Tenure: ~60–65% owner-occupied; ~35–40% renter-occupied

Insights

• Young, working-age profile with a sizable Hispanic/Latino community
• Slight male majority, consistent with outdoor, construction, and resource-sector employment
• Housing skewed toward ownership but with a substantial renter presence, reflecting seasonal/amenity-driven labor markets

Lake County, CO snapshot (2020 Census): population 7,410 across ~384 sq mi (≈19 people/sq mi).

Estimated email users

• ~5,300–5,700 residents use email (≈72–77% of total population; ≈88–92% of adults), derived from Pew U.S. adoption rates applied to local demographics.

Age distribution of email users (estimate)

• 13–17: 5–7%
• 18–34: 30–33%
• 35–49: 27–29%
• 50–64: 21–23%
• 65+: 11–13% Usage is near‑universal among working‑age adults and lower but substantial among seniors.

Gender split (estimate)

• Roughly even: ≈49–51% female, ≈49–51% male; email adoption rates show minimal gender gap.

Digital access and connectivity trends

• Household broadband adoption is likely ~80–85% (in line with rural Colorado ACS patterns), with about 15–20% of households primarily smartphone‑only.
• Coverage is strongest in and around Leadville and along US‑24; mountainous terrain creates pockets of weaker fixed and mobile service in outlying areas, affecting speeds and reliability.
• Expanded 4G/5G and incremental fiber/fixed‑wireless buildouts are improving access; libraries and schools provide key public Wi‑Fi. Insights: Email is a staple for work, school, and services; access gaps are geographic rather than demographic, concentrating in remote, high‑alpine zones.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Lake County, Colorado (2024–2025)

Overall user estimates

• Resident mobile users: approximately 6,000–7,000 unique adult residents carry an active mobile phone. This is based on population size, age structure, and rural smartphone penetration typical for central-mountain Colorado.
• Mobile connections: 7,500–9,500 active SIMs (resident devices only), reflecting multi‑device ownership and work phones.
• Households using mobile as primary internet: 450–600 households rely on a cellular data plan with no fixed broadband. This is meaningfully higher than the statewide share.

How Lake County differs from Colorado overall

• Mobile-only internet reliance is higher than the state average by roughly 1.5x, driven by limited fixed broadband options outside Leadville and cost sensitivity among renters and seasonal workers.
• 5G availability is primarily low‑band for coverage; mid‑band 5G capacity is sparse compared with Front Range metros, so median 5G speeds are lower and more variable.
• Coverage gaps are more common due to terrain; dead zones persist around high-elevation passes and recreation areas that do not exist at the same rate in urban Colorado.
• Prepaid and budget plans represent a larger share of lines than statewide, reflecting lower median household income and a higher share of younger, seasonal, and Hispanic/Latino users.
• Daytime and weekend traffic variability is higher due to recreation and work travel to/from Summit and Eagle counties, producing localized congestion not typical of the state average.

Demographic breakdown and usage patterns

• Age
  • 18–34: near‑universal smartphone adoption; heavy app‑centric usage (social/video/messaging) and hotspotting for secondary devices.
  • 35–64: very high adoption; common use of multi‑line family plans and work phones; frequent hotspot use where home broadband is weak.
  • 65+: adoption lags younger cohorts but remains high; larger share on plans with lower data caps and more voice/SMS use.
• Income and housing
  • Median household income is below the Colorado median; as a result, prepaid/MVNO lines and mobile-only home internet are more prevalent than statewide.
  • Renters and workforce housing residents show notably higher reliance on mobile data for home internet than owner-occupied households.
• Language and ethnicity
  • Hispanic/Latino residents constitute a substantially larger share of the population than the Colorado average. Spanish‑speaking households are more likely to choose prepaid plans, rely on WhatsApp and similar OTT messaging, and exhibit higher mobile‑only internet rates.
• Workforce and seasonality
  • Construction, outdoor recreation, and service-sector employment contribute to strong daytime usage along US‑24/CO‑91 corridors and in Leadville, with weekend peaks tied to tourism.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Radio access
  • AT&T, T‑Mobile, and Verizon provide 4G LTE coverage in and around Leadville and along US‑24; low‑band 5G (AT&T Band 14/FirstNet and T‑Mobile n71) is present in town and on main corridors.
  • Mid‑band 5G capacity (e.g., T‑Mobile n41, AT&T/Verizon C‑band) is limited or corridor‑constrained, leading to lower median 5G throughput than along the Front Range.
  • mmWave 5G is effectively absent.
• Terrain and gaps
  • Signal shadowing and dead zones persist around Turquoise Lake, Tennessee Pass, Fremont Pass, and forested canyons; in‑vehicle and external‑antenna boosters materially improve reliability for work crews and backcountry users.
• Backhaul and resiliency
  • Fiber backhaul is concentrated in Leadville; many macro sites outside town rely on microwave backhaul, which increases latency and reduces peak capacity versus fiber‑fed sites.
  • Redundant fiber paths are limited; single‑cut risks can degrade mobile capacity across multiple sectors during outages.
• Home and small‑business internet interplay
  • Fixed broadband is solid in Leadville proper (cable/fiber), but pockets outside town rely on fixed wireless, LTE/5G home internet, or satellite. This drives higher cellular data consumption at home than the statewide norm.
  • Starlink has meaningful rural uptake; it offloads some mobile demand but is cost‑sensitive for lower‑income households.
• Public safety and critical comms
  • FirstNet coverage has improved AT&T low‑band reach along primary corridors and for emergency services, but backcountry reliability still requires radios and satellite messengers.

Quantitative indicators (best-available local estimates aligned to ACS device data, carrier footprints, and rural Colorado norms)

• Household smartphone access: roughly 90–94% of households have at least one smartphone, slightly below metro Colorado but in line with other central-mountain counties.
• Mobile-only households (cellular data plan with no fixed broadband): approximately 15–20% of households in Lake County versus roughly 9–12% statewide.
• Typical performance
  • In-town 5G: 50–200 Mbps down on low‑/mid‑band where available; uploads 5–25 Mbps.
  • Outlying LTE: 5–20 Mbps down; uploads often under 5 Mbps; latency elevated on microwave‑backhauled sectors.
• Plan mix: prepaid/MVNO lines represent a larger share than the state average, with notably higher adoption among younger and Hispanic/Latino users.

Implications

• Carriers that add mid‑band 5G sectors or upgrade backhaul on existing sites in Leadville and along US‑24/CO‑91 will see outsized improvements in user experience versus equivalent investments in already‑dense Front Range markets.
• Community broadband projects and fiber extensions beyond town limits would directly reduce the county’s high mobile‑only reliance and improve network resiliency during fiber cuts or wildfire events.
• Bilingual plan support, affordable device financing, and hotspot‑capable plans are particularly impactful given the county’s demographic mix and higher share of mobile‑dependent households.

Lake County, CO social media snapshot (2025)

What’s definitive locally

• Population: roughly 8–9K residents; households are predominantly connected via broadband (majority of households subscribe; ACS).
• Age structure: young-leaning for a mountain/rural county (under-18 roughly one-quarter; 65+ roughly one-eighth; ACS).
• Gender: slightly more men than women (female share in the mid‑40s percent; ACS).
• Ethnicity: sizable Hispanic/Latino community (about one‑third to two‑fifths of residents; ACS).

Modeled user stats (county-level platform data aren’t officially published; figures below apply current U.S. usage by age to Lake County’s age mix and broadband access)

• Social media users (13+): 6,000–6,800 people, about 75–85% of residents 13+
• Adult social media users (18+): 5,300–5,900 people, about 80–88% of adults
• Daily users (any platform): ~60–70% of adults

Most‑used platforms (share of adults; county-modeled from 2024 Pew Research and similar sources)

• YouTube: 80–85% (highest across all ages)
• Facebook: 60–65% overall; 70–80% among ages 30–64
• Instagram: 40–45% overall; 60–70% among 18–34
• TikTok: 25–30% overall; 50–60% among 18–29
• Snapchat: 25–30% overall; 65–75% among 13–24
• Pinterest: 30–35% overall; 45–55% of women
• WhatsApp: 20–25% overall; 30–40% among Hispanic/Latino households
• X (Twitter): 20–25% overall
• LinkedIn: 20–25% overall (concentrated among commuting professionals)
• Nextdoor: 15–20% (neighborhood and civic updates)

Age groups (share of the local social audience; modeled from ACS age mix)

• 13–17: ~6–8% (heavy Snapchat/TikTok; light Facebook)
• 18–24: ~9–11% (YouTube/Instagram/Snapchat first; TikTok rising)
• 25–34: ~16–20% (Instagram/YouTube; strong Facebook Groups for parenting/housing)
• 35–44: ~18–22% (Facebook/YouTube dominant; Instagram secondary)
• 45–54: ~14–18% (Facebook/YouTube; Pinterest and Nextdoor for planning/local info)
• 55–64: ~14–18% (Facebook/YouTube; lower Instagram/TikTok)
• 65+: ~10–13% (Facebook and YouTube primarily)

Gender breakdown (of social media users; aligned to county demographics and U.S. usage patterns)

• Men: ~52–55% of users; skew to YouTube, Reddit, X, and outdoor/sports communities
• Women: ~45–48% of users; higher propensity for Facebook Groups, Instagram, Pinterest, and WhatsApp

Behavioral trends and local nuances

• Facebook Groups are the hub for community: school updates, weather/road closures, city/county alerts, gear swaps, and event coordination.
• Mobile‑first, low‑bandwidth content wins: short video and vertical formats perform best; large downloads underperform during storm periods.
• Event‑driven spikes: Leadville Race Series and seasonal tourism (ski/ride/hike) trigger surges on Instagram, YouTube, and Strava‑adjacent communities; trail and conditions content over-indexes.
• Bilingual engagement: Spanish‑language posts and WhatsApp cross‑posting meaningfully increase reach among Hispanic households.
• Time‑of‑day patterns: morning (6–8 a.m.) and evening (7–10 p.m.) peaks; midday dips outside of weather/emergency updates.
• Trust sources: local government, schools, and well‑known community admins drive higher click‑through and share rates than brand pages.
• Commerce: marketplace and “buy/sell/trade” groups on Facebook, plus Instagram for local artisans and seasonal rentals; Pinterest influences project and home improvement planning.

Notes on method

• Demographics and household connectivity from U.S. Census Bureau (ACS/QuickFacts for Lake County, CO).
• Platform penetration from 2023–2024 Pew Research Center U.S. social media use; applied to Lake County’s age/ethnic mix and broadband adoption to produce county‑level estimates.