Butte County

To make sure I give you the most accurate figures, do you want 2020 Decennial Census counts or the latest American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates (2018–2022)?

• 2020 Census gives exact population counts but limited detail.
• ACS 5-year provides the full age/sex/race/household breakdowns for small counties like Butte, but they’re estimates with margins of error.

If you have no preference, I’ll use 2020 Census for total population and ACS 2018–2022 for the demographic and household details.

Butte County, Idaho snapshot (pop ≈2,600; land ≈2,200+ sq mi; density ≈1.1 people/sq mi)

Estimated email users

• 1,900–2,200 users (roughly 70–85% of residents; 85–95% of adults), based on rural Idaho adoption norms.

Age distribution of email users (approx.)

• 13–17: 6–8%
• 18–29: 15–18%
• 30–49: 28–32%
• 50–64: 25–28%
• 65+: 15–20%

Gender split

• ~51% male, 49% female among users; nonbinary share small but present.

Digital access and trends

• Fixed broadband concentrated in and around Arco; speeds and availability drop in outlying ranchlands and public lands.
• Mobile data is the primary connection for many; 4G widely used along US‑20/26/93 corridors, with patchier service off-highway; limited 5G.
• Smartphone‑only households estimated 20–25%; satellite (e.g., Starlink) adoption rising in remote areas.
• Public Wi‑Fi via schools and the county library network supports access for students and lower‑income households.

Local connectivity context

• Extremely low population density and vast federal/INL lands make last‑mile builds costly; fiber/backbone presence near INL corridors improves nearby reliability but doesn’t fully cover rural tracts.

Butte County, Idaho: mobile usage snapshot and how it differs from statewide patterns

Headline estimates (orders of magnitude, not exact counts)

• Population base: ~2,600–2,800 residents; ~75–80% adults.
• Mobile phone users (any mobile, incl. flip phones): ~1,850–2,050 adults.
• Smartphone users: ~1,550–1,750 adults.
• Households primarily relying on mobile data for home internet: roughly 240–320 (about 23–30% of households), notably above the state average.

Why these ranges: Derived from 2020 Census/ACS-sized population, rural age mix, and Pew/U.S. averages adjusted down for older adults and rural adoption, plus observed rural Idaho reliance on cellular in areas with limited wired broadband.

Demographic breakdown and usage nuances

• Older age structure: Median age is several years higher than Idaho overall. Smartphone adoption among 65+ is materially lower than the state average, so total smartphone penetration trails the statewide figure by several points. Basic/feature phones still present among seniors.
• Income and plan mix: Lower median incomes and more seasonal/agricultural work push a higher share of prepaid and budget Android devices than the Idaho average. Family postpaid plans are common where coverage is strong, but single-line prepaid is more prevalent than in metro Idaho.
• Mobile-only households: A larger slice of households use phone hotspots or dedicated LTE/5G hotspots as their primary home internet due to sparse cable/fiber footprints. This creates a polarized data-usage pattern: many light users plus a smaller cohort of very heavy hotspot users.
• Commuter/daytime effects: Traffic associated with the US‑20/26/93 corridor, agriculture, outdoor recreation, and Idaho National Laboratory activity creates time‑ and corridor‑specific load spikes more than in urban counties.

Digital infrastructure and coverage (what matters locally)

• Coverage is corridor-centric: Best along US‑20/26/93 through Arco and in/near towns like Arco and Moore; service thins quickly on ranch roads, in lava fields near Craters of the Moon, and in mountainous terrain. Expect dead zones in canyons and on federal lands where tower siting is constrained.
• Carrier dynamics:
  • Verizon generally provides the most reliable rural coverage and likely has the largest local share.
  • AT&T performs solidly in towns and along highways but with more gaps off‑corridor.
  • T‑Mobile coverage exists on main routes; off‑highway reach is the most limited of the three.
• 5G reality: Low‑band “5G” is present along main corridors and in town centers; mid‑band capacity layers are sparse; mmWave is effectively absent. Practical speeds often resemble good LTE outside town centers.
• Backhaul and tower density: Few macro sites cover large areas; microwave backhaul is still used alongside limited fiber. Power/backhaul outages during winter storms or wildfire events can black out wide areas until crews reach remote sites.
• Fixed broadband context: DSL and fixed wireless are common; fiber exists in limited pockets. This drives above‑average dependence on cellular for home connectivity and amplifies sensitivity to carrier data caps and deprioritization.
• Public safety: VHF land‑mobile radio remains primary for first responders; FirstNet (AT&T Band 14) coverage supports priority users mostly along highways and in towns; coverage off‑corridor is uneven.

How Butte County differs from Idaho overall

• Lower smartphone penetration: Fewer seniors on smartphones and more basic phones than the state average.
• Higher mobile-only internet reliance: A meaningfully larger share of households use cellular as their primary home connection compared with statewide figures.
• Carrier skew: Verizon’s share/usage is higher than in metro Idaho; T‑Mobile’s is lower due to rural reach. Roaming and extended network use are more common.
• Slower 5G transition: 5G availability is broader in Idaho’s metros; in Butte County, 5G mostly means low‑band coverage with limited capacity uplift.
• Plan and device mix: More prepaid lines and longer device replacement cycles than statewide, reflecting income and coverage realities.
• Usage pattern: Data consumption is bifurcated—light users with voice/text focus and a smaller cohort of heavy hotspot users—whereas metro areas show a more even distribution driven by ubiquitous home broadband.

Methodology notes and confidence

• Population and age mix reflect 2020 Census/ACS patterns for small rural Idaho counties; adult smartphone adoption is adjusted using Pew Research’s age‑based adoption rates with a rural penalty.
• Coverage judgments synthesize national carrier maps, rural Idaho performance reports, topography, and highway siting; exact tower counts and 5G bands vary by micro‑location.
• Household mobile-only share extrapolates from rural ACS broadband subscription patterns and Idaho broadband grant focus areas; presented as a range to reflect uncertainty.

Butte County, Idaho — social media snapshot (planning estimates)

• Population context: ~2,600 residents (ACS 2023 est.), older-skewing, very rural.
• Access baseline:
  • Home broadband: ~70–80% of households
  • Smartphone ownership (adults): ~85–90%
• Social media users (any platform):
  • Total users: ~1,600–1,900 residents
  • Adult adoption: ~70–75% of 18+; teens (13–17) ~90%+

Age mix of the local user base (approx.)

• 13–17: 6–9%
• 18–29: 12–15%
• 30–49: 30–35%
• 50–64: 22–27%
• 65+: 20–25% Note: Share of users skews older vs. national, reflecting county demographics.

Gender breakdown among users (approx.)

• Women: 52–56%
• Men: 44–48%

Most-used platforms among local adult social media users (percent of users who use each; ranges reflect rural adjustments to national data)

• YouTube: 75–85%
• Facebook: 70–80%
• Facebook Messenger: 60–70%
• Pinterest: 30–40% (skews female)
• Instagram: 25–35%
• TikTok: 20–30%
• Snapchat: 15–25% (strongest under 30)
• Reddit: 10–15%
• X (Twitter): 8–15%
• LinkedIn: 8–12%
• WhatsApp: 5–10%
• Nextdoor: <5–10% (limited footprint; Facebook Groups fill the niche)

Behavioral trends to expect

• Facebook-first community: Groups and Marketplace are central for school sports, buy/sell/trade, lost-and-found, road/weather updates, volunteer orgs, and church/community events.
• Trust and reach flow through people: Posts from known locals in Groups outperform brand pages; tagging and shares drive distribution.
• Practical video: YouTube for how‑to/DIY, equipment repair, ranching and outdoor content; TikTok adoption rising among under‑40 for short outdoor/ag clips.
• News via Facebook: Regional outlet posts circulate locally; spikes during storms, fires, highway closures, county fair, and hunting seasons.
• Messaging over posting: Messenger is the coordination tool; WhatsApp is niche; SMS fallback remains common.
• Connectivity constraints: Patchy coverage outside towns reduces live streaming/HD uploads; usage peaks early morning, lunch, and evenings.
• Privacy cautious: Many prefer private profiles/closed groups; fewer public check‑ins/geotags; modest influencer presence.
• Small‑biz playbook: Facebook pages + Groups + boosted posts outperform Instagram‑only strategies; local reviews and word‑of‑mouth matter.

Notes on method and sources

• County‑level platform data aren’t directly published. Figures modeled from Pew Research Center Social Media Use (2024) with rural/age/gender adjustments, U.S. Census/ACS age structure for Butte County, and national smartphone/broadband benchmarks (NTIA/FCC). Treat as directional estimates for planning.