Bannock County

Here are concise, recent demographics for Bannock County, Idaho.

Population

• ~90,000 (2023 estimate); 87,018 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~32
• Under 18: ~24%
• 65 and over: ~16%

Sex

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Race and ethnicity (share of total population)

• White alone, non-Hispanic: ~80%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~10–12%
• American Indian and Alaska Native: ~4–5%
• Two or more races: ~5–6%
• Black or African American: ~1%
• Asian: ~1%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: <1%

Households

• Total households: ~33,000
• Average household size: ~2.6
• Family households: ~64% of households
• Married-couple families: ~47% of households
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~66–68%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5-year estimates; 2023 Population Estimates Program). Figures rounded.

Here’s a practical, data-informed snapshot for Bannock County, ID:

• Estimated email users: 65,000–75,000 residents (about 75–85% of ~90k population). Driven by >90% adult email adoption and high teen uptake.
• Age distribution of email users (approx.):
  • 13–17: 6–8%
  • 18–34: 30–36% (boosted by Idaho State University students in Pocatello)
  • 35–54: 30–34%
  • 55+: 22–28%
• Gender split among users: ~49% male, 51% female (email usage is near-parity by gender).
• Digital access trends:
  • Household internet subscription: ~82–88%; smartphone‑only internet: ~15–20%.
  • Fixed broadband ≥25/3 Mbps: >90% coverage along the I‑15 corridor (Pocatello, Chubbuck); fiber present in core city areas; rural pockets (e.g., Lava Hot Springs, Arimo, Downey) face slower or less reliable service.
  • Mobile access is critical for lower‑income and student households; high mobile email usage.
• Local density/connectivity facts: ~1,100 sq mi county area with roughly ~80 people per sq mi; density and terrain drive access disparities, with urban nodes far better connected than outlying communities.

Figures are estimates blending national email adoption with local demographics and typical broadband availability patterns.

Below is a practical, decision-ready snapshot of mobile usage in Bannock County (home to Pocatello/Chubbuck and Idaho State University), with rough-order estimates and what’s notably different from Idaho as a whole.

How the estimates were derived

• Baselines: 2020 Census puts Bannock County near 87k residents; recent ACS growth suggests “about 90k” today. Adult share roughly 75%. National smartphone ownership (Pew) ~85–90% of adults; 18–29 is ~95%+. U.S. subscriptions per capita are typically ~1.2–1.3 (CTIA-style market norms). Teen smartphone ownership is very high (>90%).
• Local context that skews Bannock: a large university population, a more urbanized core than many Idaho counties, and some tribal/rural areas at the edges.

User estimates (order-of-magnitude)

• Population basis: ~90,000 residents; ~67,000 adults.
• Smartphone users:
  • Adults: 89–91% adoption is plausible in a college county => ~60–61k adult smartphone users.
  • Teens (13–17): ~6–7k teens, with ~90–95% adoption => ~5.5–6.5k teen users.
  • Estimated total smartphone users: ~66–68k countywide.
• Total mobile subscriptions (phones, tablets, hotspots, IoT): ~1.2–1.3 lines per resident => roughly 108k–117k active lines.
• Home internet via cellular (FWA or hotspot-only households): Likely above the Idaho average in Pocatello/Chubbuck due to apartment living and student budgets; rural fringes may also lean on FWA where cable/DSL is weak.

Demographic usage patterns (local skews)

• Younger skew from ISU:
  • Higher share of 18–29 users, near-saturation smartphone ownership, heavier app-based communications, and a higher churn toward prepaid/MVNO plans than Idaho overall.
  • More device diversity (secondary lines for wearables/tablets, campus/study devices).
• Income/affordability:
  • More price-sensitive users (students, service workers) than the Idaho median, boosting prepaid and ACP/Lifeline historical uptake. With ACP funds exhausted in 2024, expect some plan downgrades, line consolidation, or shifts to MVNOs—likely more visible here than statewide.
• Tribal and rural households:
  • Parts of the Fort Hall Reservation extend into the county; these areas tend to show lower signal quality and lower median speeds than the county’s urban core, mirroring statewide rural/tribal gaps but concentrated in specific southern/eastern corridors.

Digital infrastructure highlights

• Coverage/technology:
  • Strong macro coverage along I-15/I-86 and across Pocatello/Chubbuck, with widely available LTE and mid-band 5G from national carriers. 5G penetration and user uptake are above Idaho’s rural average due to urban density and student demand.
  • Terrain-limited pockets in foothills/valleys can still see weaker indoor service; rural south/east of the metro is more variable.
• Fixed Wireless Access (FWA):
  • T-Mobile and Verizon 5G Home/FWA are commonly offered in the Pocatello/Chubbuck footprint; adoption is buoyed by renters and students. This makes Bannock a stronger FWA market than many Idaho counties without a university center.
• Backhaul and fiber:
  • Presence of university-grade fiber (Idaho State University), regional carriers (e.g., Lumen/CenturyLink, Syringa), and cable operators supports 5G backhaul density in the urban core better than the Idaho rural norm.
• Public safety and campus networks:
  • FirstNet (AT&T) public-safety LTE covers the metro and corridors. ISU campus Wi‑Fi reduces cellular load indoors and supports offload patterns atypical of many Idaho counties without a major campus.

What’s different from Idaho overall (key trends)

• Higher smartphone penetration and 5G use driven by the university and a denser urban core than most Idaho counties.
• More prepaid/MVNO mix and plan-churn sensitivity (students), especially after the ACP funding lapse—expect a bigger affordability effect here than statewide.
• Above-average FWA uptake (apartments/renters, student housing), whereas many Idaho counties rely more on DSL/cable or have sparser 5G capacity.
• Better median speeds and indoor coverage in the urbanized core than rural Idaho norms, but sharper urban–rural and tribal edges within the same county.
• More secondary/ancillary lines (tablets, wearables, hotspots) per capita tied to campus needs, nudging total SIMs per resident toward the higher end of the statewide range.

Notes and data confidence

• Numbers are estimates using national adoption rates adjusted for a college-centered county profile and typical U.S. line-per-capita ranges. For precise local counts (coverage, site density, speeds, and FWA eligibility), validate against: FCC Broadband Map, carrier 5G/FWA availability tools, ACS table on “cellular data plan” households, and independent speed-test panels (Ookla, M‑Lab).

Here’s a concise, localized snapshot for Bannock County, Idaho. Figures are estimates modeled from Pew Research (2024), U.S. Census/ACS demographics, and typical platform reach patterns for similar counties with a university presence (Idaho State University).

Overall user stats

• Population: ~88,000; age 13+ roughly ~74,000
• Estimated social media users: 60,000–68,000 (about 70–80% of residents; 80–90% of 13–29s, ~70% of 30–64s, ~50–60% of 65+)
• Device: >90% mobile-first; video is the dominant format

Age mix among social media users (share of local social users)

• 13–17: 10–12%
• 18–24: 16–18% (boosted by ISU)
• 25–34: 18–20%
• 35–44: 16–18%
• 45–54: 14–16%
• 55–64: 10–12%
• 65+: 10–12%

Gender breakdown (among social media users)

• Women: ~52–55%
• Men: ~45–48%
• Notes: Pinterest, Instagram, and Facebook Groups skew female; Reddit skews male; others fairly balanced.

Most-used platforms (share of local social users; multi-platform use is common)

• YouTube: 80–85%
• Facebook: 60–65%
• Instagram: 45–50%
• TikTok: 38–45%
• Snapchat: 35–40% (strong 13–29)
• Pinterest: 28–35% (strong women 25–54)
• Reddit: 18–22% (men 18–34)
• X (Twitter): 15–20%
• LinkedIn: 15–18% (professional/educational audiences)

Behavioral trends to know

• Community-first on Facebook: Heavy use of local Groups (yard sales, parenting, sports), Marketplace, and event posts. Word-of-mouth and recommendations drive action.
• Short-form video wins: Reels/TikTok/Snapchat for local food, outdoor spots, campus life, and quick updates. Authentic, lightly edited clips outperform polished ads.
• Campus effect: Peaks in 18–24 activity during semesters; Snapchat and Instagram Stories see strong day-to-day engagement near ISU.
• Utility content on YouTube: DIY/home, vehicle maintenance, hunting/fishing, and outdoor recreation perform well; searchable, how-to formats have long tail.
• Messaging > comments: High reliance on Messenger and Instagram DMs for questions, appointments, and customer service.
• Timing: Evenings 7–10 pm strongest; weekday lunch (11:30 am–1 pm) is a secondary window; weekend mornings are good for community and events.
• Local deals convert: Clear offers, limited-time promos, and geotargeted ads near retail corridors see above-average CTR. User-generated content and local creators add trust.
• Seasonality: Back-to-school and fall sports spike student-driven platforms; summer emphasizes family/outdoor content; holidays drive Facebook Groups and Marketplace activity.

Note: These are best-available local estimates derived from national surveys and platform patterns, adjusted for Bannock County’s age mix and university presence. For campaign planning, validate with platform ad tools (location-targeted potential reach) and a quick local survey.