Boundary County

Here are the latest high-level demographics for Boundary County, Idaho.

• Population

  • ~12.6k (ACS 2018–2022 5-year estimate); 12,056 (2020 Decennial Census)

• Age

  • Median age: ~43
  • Under 18: ~23–24%
  • 65 and over: ~21–22%

• Gender

  • Male ~51%, Female ~49%

• Race/ethnicity (share of total population)

  • White (non-Hispanic): ~89%
  • Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~5%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native (non-Hispanic): ~3%
  • Two or more races (non-Hispanic): ~3%
  • Black, Asian, NH/PI: each <1%

• Households

  • ~4.9k households
  • Average household size: ~2.5–2.6
  • Family households: ~70–72%
  • Owner-occupied housing: ~75–80%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS) 2018–2022 5-year estimates; 2020 Decennial Census. Figures are rounded; small-area ACS estimates carry margins of error.

Boundary County, ID snapshot

• Population 12,400; very rural (9–10 people per sq mi). Most residents live in/around Bonners Ferry; outlying valleys and mountains are sparsely connected.
• Estimated email users: 7,500–9,000 residents. Basis: ~9,300–9,800 adults; ~80–85% have internet access; 90–95% of online adults use email (Pew-like rates adjusted for rural Idaho).
• Age pattern (share using email): 13–17: ~80–90%; 18–29: ~95–98%; 30–49: ~95–97%; 50–64: ~88–93%; 65+: ~75–85%.
• Gender split: essentially even (men and women each ~49–51% of users).
• Digital access and trends: Roughly mid‑70s to low‑80s of households have a home internet subscription. Fiber exists in parts of Bonners Ferry; many rural areas rely on fixed wireless or legacy DSL, with satellite filling gaps. Mobile‑only internet likely serves ~10–15% of households. Connectivity is strongest along the US‑95 corridor and weaker in remote basins and forested terrain. Ongoing fiber and fixed‑wireless upgrades are expanding coverage, but affordability pressures after the ACP wind‑down and long last‑mile distances keep some households offline.

Note: Figures are estimates derived from ACS-style household internet rates and national email adoption patterns, tuned to rural northern Idaho.

Mobile phone usage in Boundary County, Idaho — 2025 snapshot

Topline estimates

• Population and households: About 12–13k residents and roughly 4.8–5.1k households.
• Smartphone users: 7.8–8.6k residents use smartphones (about 80–85% of adults; teen uptake is high but the youth population is small).
• Total personal mobile lines (voice+data): 9–11k, plus 600–1,200 data-only devices (hotspots/tablets; farm/forestry/IoT units).
• Mobile-primary internet households: 12–18% likely rely on cellular as their main home internet (vs a lower share statewide), driven by patchy fixed broadband outside Bonners Ferry.

Demographic patterns shaping usage

• Older age profile: Median age is several years higher than Idaho overall. Seniors’ smartphone adoption is meaningfully lower, so basic/flip-phone use is more common (roughly 8–12% of users vs about 5–7% statewide).
• Income and device cycles: Lower median incomes and more seasonal/remote work correlate with:
  • Higher prepaid/MVNO use and shared family plans.
  • Longer handset replacement cycles (often 3.5–4 years vs ~3 years statewide).
• Education and occupations: Agriculture, forestry, and outdoor trades raise the premium on coverage, battery life, and rugged devices; SMS/voice remains critical when data is weak.
• Tribal community: The Kootenai Tribe’s small population concentrates near Bonners Ferry; tribal broadband improvements help, but mobile remains a common fallback for off-reservation travel.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Terrain-limited radio environment: Service is strongest along the US‑95 corridor and in/near Bonners Ferry. Mountainous terrain (Selkirk and Purcell ranges) and river valleys create shadowing and dead zones east/west of the corridor.
• 5G footprint:
  • Low‑band 5G from national carriers covers town and the highway, with frequent LTE fallback in outlying areas.
  • Mid‑band 5G (Verizon C‑band, T‑Mobile 2.5 GHz) is limited or absent outside the core, so median 5G speeds are lower than Idaho’s metro counties.
• Carrier mix: The market skews toward Verizon and AT&T for rural coverage; T‑Mobile presence is improving along the corridor but is still thinner than in southern and urban Idaho.
• Backhaul: Fiber follows US‑95; many hilltop/timber sites use microwave backhaul. Capacity constraints can produce evening and incident-driven (wildfire/event) congestion.
• Sites and boosters: Fewer macro sites cover larger areas; many remote households and ranches use in‑home signal boosters. Public Wi‑Fi is concentrated at the library, schools, and civic buildings; hotspot‑lending programs help bridge homework gaps.
• Border effects: Proximity to Canada produces occasional inadvertent roaming; residents often disable data roaming near the line.
• Public safety: FirstNet coverage follows major corridors; off‑corridor reliability varies with the same terrain constraints.

How Boundary County differs from Idaho statewide

• Coverage and speeds: Significantly less mid‑band 5G and more LTE fallback, yielding lower median speeds and higher variability than the state average (which is buoyed by Boise/Nampa/Idaho Falls).
• Adoption mix: Slightly lower overall smartphone penetration due to older demographics; higher persistence of basic phones.
• Plan types and costs: Higher share of prepaid/MVNO and shared plans; lower ARPU. Device upgrade cycles are slower.
• Network experience: More dead zones, greater reliance on boosters, and more frequent cross‑border roaming issues than typical for Idaho residents.
• Internet substitution: A larger slice of households use cellular as primary home internet due to limited fixed broadband off the main corridor.
• Carrier share: Heavier tilt toward Verizon/AT&T for coverage; T‑Mobile has less relative share here than statewide.
• Investment pace: New 5G mid‑band overlays and small cells roll out more slowly than in Idaho’s urban counties, often gated by backhaul upgrades and federal/state funding cycles.

Near‑term outlook (12–24 months)

• Expect incremental 5G improvements on existing macro sites along US‑95 as backhaul is upgraded; mid‑band additions will be spotty outside town.
• State/federal broadband funds (e.g., BEAD) should expand fiber to more anchors and neighborhoods around Bonners Ferry, reducing cellular hotspot dependence in town, with slower spillover to remote valleys.
• Continued uptake of LEO satellite (e.g., for homesteads and ranches) may relieve mobile networks in the most remote pockets but won’t eliminate coverage gaps for on‑the‑go use.

Notes on method and uncertainty

• Figures are synthesized from recent population estimates, rural adoption benchmarks (Pew/FCC), carrier coverage patterns in North Idaho, and typical rural device/plan behavior. Local validation (county GIS, carrier RF maps, and provider build plans) will refine these ranges.

Below is a concise, data‑informed snapshot of social media use in Boundary County, Idaho. Exact county-level platform stats aren’t published, so figures are estimates extrapolated from Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform adoption, adjusted for rural patterns and the county’s older age profile per Census ACS. Treat ranges as directional.

Quick context

• Population: about 12,000 residents; roughly 9,000–10,000 adults (18+).
• Roughly 75–85% of adults use at least one social platform, implying around 6,700–8,500 adult users.

Most‑used platforms among adults (estimated share of adult residents)

• YouTube: 75–85%
• Facebook: 60–70%
• Instagram: 30–40%
• TikTok: 25–35%
• Pinterest: 30–35% (skews female)
• Snapchat: 20–30% (usage concentrated under 35)
• WhatsApp: 10–20% (lower than national average)
• X (Twitter): 15–20%
• Reddit: 12–18%
• Nextdoor: 5–10% (limited local coverage in many rural areas)

Age‑group patterns (directional)

• Teens (13–17): YouTube near‑universal; Snapchat and TikTok dominant for daily messaging/short video; Instagram moderate; Facebook mainly for groups/school/community via parents.
• 18–34: Mix of Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat; heavy YouTube; Facebook for Marketplace, events, and jobs.
• 35–54: Facebook is the hub (groups, Marketplace, school/sports); YouTube strong; Pinterest and Instagram for DIY, recipes, home/homestead; TikTok rising but secondary.
• 55+: Facebook and YouTube dominate; lower Instagram/TikTok/Snapchat adoption; Messenger heavily used for family comms and group chats.

Gender breakdown (relative tendencies)

• Women: More likely on Facebook (+a few points), Pinterest (+20–30 points vs men), and slightly more on Instagram.
• Men: More likely on YouTube (+a few points), Reddit (+10–15 points), and X (+5–10 points).
• Overall user base split is roughly even by gender; platform choice shows the bigger differences.

Behavioral trends observed in similar rural/older counties (applicable to Boundary County)

• Facebook is the community backbone: buy/sell/trade and yard‑sale groups, school/sports updates, church and civic groups, event coordination, road/weather/sheriff updates, and Marketplace transactions.
• YouTube is the go‑to for practical content: small‑engine repair, hunting/fishing, gardening, homesteading, DIY, and family entertainment.
• Instagram is used by local businesses (food, retail, tourism/outdoors) for visual promotion; cross‑posting to Facebook is common.
• TikTok is creator‑light but growing for short local scenery, outdoor life, and small‑business promos; younger residents consume more than they post.
• Messaging behavior: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat are primary; group chats organize teams, clubs, and family.
• Trust and discovery: Local pages/groups and word‑of‑mouth outrank national sources; share/reshare behavior around emergencies, closures, and weather is high.
• Engagement timing: Evenings and weekends see the most activity; event‑driven spikes (storms, road closures, school announcements).

Notes on method and sources

• Estimates derive from Pew Research Center (Social Media Use in 2024) platform adoption, with rural adjustments and Boundary County’s older demographic profile (U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5‑year). Nextdoor presence is inferred from platform coverage in small rural markets.
• Because no official county‑level platform census exists, treat percentages as reasonable planning ranges rather than exact measurements.