Clark County

Do you want figures from:

• 2020 Decennial Census (exact counts), or
• The most recent ACS 5-year estimates (2019–2023; best for detail but are estimates with margins of error)?

I can provide both if you prefer.

Summary for Clark County, Idaho (estimates)

• Estimated email users: 500–650 residents. Basis: ~900 total population, ~65–70% adults, rural internet use 75–85%, and email use among internet users ~90%+.
• Age patterns (usage rates among adults; share of local email users in parentheses):
  • 18–29: 85–95% (≈15–20%)
  • 30–49: 90–95% (≈30–35%)
  • 50–64: 85–90% (≈25–30%)
  • 65+: 70–85% (≈15–20%)
• Gender split: Roughly even (≈49–51%/49–51%); minimal difference in email adoption by gender.
• Digital access trends:
  • Home broadband below state average; 20–30% of households likely rely on mobile data or lack fixed service.
  • Smartphone-only internet users estimated at 15–25%.
  • Public access points (library/schools in Dubois) important for those without home service.
  • Increasing use of fixed wireless and satellite (e.g., for ranches and remote homes).
• Local density/connectivity facts:
  • Among Idaho’s least-populated counties; density under 1 person per square mile across ~1,700+ sq mi.
  • Best connectivity in/near Dubois and along I‑15; coverage and speeds drop in outlying areas.
  • Seasonal agricultural work can boost mobile network load and email access via smartphones.

Notes: Figures extrapolated from ACS demographics and national/rural email and internet adoption studies.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Clark County, Idaho

Quick context

• Population: very small and dispersed; roughly 900–1,100 residents centered on Dubois/Spencer, with large ranchland and public land.
• Economy: agriculture, ranching, quarrying, and highway services; notable seasonal/itinerant workforce along I‑15.

Estimated users and adoption (order‑of‑magnitude, 2024–2025)

• Residents carrying a mobile phone: about 600–800 people on an average (non‑seasonal) week.
• Smartphone users: roughly 520–720 (most active users are on smartphones).
• Teens (13–17): high smartphone access (≈90%); adds ~60–90 users depending on the year.
• Seasonal lift: late‑spring to fall brings 100–300 additional workers with phones, causing noticeable load spikes near work sites and along I‑15.
• Mobile‑only internet households: meaningfully higher share than Idaho statewide, driven by limited fixed broadband outside town centers.

Demographic and usage patterns

• Ethnicity/language: a much larger Hispanic/Latino share than the Idaho average; Spanish is widely used. Messaging/calling via WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, and international add‑ons see above‑average adoption.
• Age: a bimodal pattern—older long‑time residents plus younger families and seasonal workers. This yields:
  • Strong daytime usage around farms, logistics yards, and the I‑15 corridor.
  • Higher reliance on prepaid and budget plans than statewide averages.
• Device and plan behavior:
  • Prepaid share higher than statewide; family multi‑line discounts less common outside town limits.
  • Longer device replacement cycles; more LTE‑only and budget 5G handsets in use.
  • Wi‑Fi calling is important indoors due to weak signal in metal buildings and valleys.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Macro coverage concentrated along I‑15; service drops quickly on ranch roads and in basins away from the corridor.
• 5G availability: primarily low‑band 5G on highway sites; mid‑band capacity is sparse compared with Idaho’s metro corridors. LTE remains the workhorse technology countywide.
• Backhaul: fiber follows I‑15; many off‑corridor sites rely on microwave backhaul. Outages or weather can affect remote sectors more visibly than in urban Idaho.
• Fixed broadband: small town cores may have DSL or limited fiber; most outlying homes use fixed wireless or satellite. Starlink adoption is notably higher than the state average.
• Community anchor connectivity: schools, the library, and county facilities provide critical public Wi‑Fi; residents frequently offload mobile data there.
• Public safety: land‑mobile radio remains primary in the backcountry; broadband data usage by responders works best along I‑15. First responder LTE coverage off‑corridor is less predictable than in Idaho’s population centers.

How Clark County differs from Idaho overall

• Coverage pattern: highly corridor‑centric (I‑15), with steep drop‑offs off‑highway; state averages are moderated by metro build‑outs in Boise, Idaho Falls, Pocatello, and Coeur d’Alene.
• Network tech mix: heavier reliance on LTE and low‑band 5G; less mid‑band 5G capacity than statewide.
• Access behavior: more mobile‑only households and higher use of Wi‑Fi calling/boosters due to weak indoor signal; state averages see more fixed broadband substitution.
• Plans and spend: higher prepaid share and slower device upgrade cycles than the state average.
• Demographics: a substantially larger Spanish‑speaking population drives above‑average use of OTT messaging and international calling features.
• Seasonality: usage surges with agricultural and highway seasonal workers—this seasonal swing is much more pronounced than in urban Idaho counties.

Planning notes and watch‑outs (next 1–3 years)

• Any new macro site or sector aimed off I‑15 can materially change user experience for ranches and work camps.
• Mid‑band 5G additions on existing highway sites would relieve peak‑season congestion.
• Fixed wireless (CBRS, licensed microwave) and continued satellite uptake will keep mobile data offload patterns atypical compared with state averages.
• Community anchors (schools/library) remain key places for dependable connectivity and should be included in outreach and capacity planning.

Method note: Figures are estimates derived from county population ranges, rural U.S./Idaho smartphone adoption benchmarks, and typical rural usage patterns; they are intended for planning rather than compliance reporting. For validation, compare against the latest Census county estimates, FCC Broadband Data Collection maps, carrier coverage disclosures, and school/library network reports.

Below is a concise, data‑informed snapshot for Clark County, Idaho. Because county‑level platform stats aren’t directly published, figures are modeled from Pew Research (rural U.S.), Idaho/rural usage patterns, and current population estimates for a ~1,000‑person county. Treat percentages as directional ranges.

Quick user stats

• Population: ~1,000 residents; ~750–800 adults
• Active social media users: ~600 (roughly 55–65% of residents; 65–70% of adults). Teens (13–17) are highly active, so total users include a notable youth share.

Age mix of local users (share of user base)

• 13–17: 12–15% (near‑universal usage; heavy on Snapchat/TikTok/YouTube)
• 18–29: 18–22%
• 30–49: 35–40% (largest slice; parents, working adults)
• 50–64: 18–22%
• 65+: 10–15% (more Facebook/YouTube; lower daily activity)

Gender breakdown

• Roughly balanced: ~49–51% male/female among users. Platform preferences vary (women skew higher on Facebook/Pinterest; men on YouTube; teens split to Snapchat/TikTok).

Most‑used platforms locally (share of adult social media users)

• YouTube: 70–80%
• Facebook: 60–70% (Groups and Messenger are central)
• Instagram: 25–35% (younger adults, local businesses)
• TikTok: 20–30% (teens/20s; ag/outdoors content)
• Snapchat: 20–30% (teens/young adults; messaging)
• Pinterest: 20–30% (women, DIY, recipes)
• X (Twitter): 8–12% (news/sports followers)
• LinkedIn: 8–12% (small professional niche)
• Nextdoor: <5% (limited footprint in very small/rural communities)

Behavioral trends to know

• Community first: Facebook Groups/pages drive local news, school sports, county fair, weather/road conditions, emergency notices, lost & found, and buy/sell/trade.
• Practical video: YouTube for how‑to (equipment repair, ranching, DIY), church services, and outdoor/hunting content.
• Local commerce: Small businesses lean on Facebook + Instagram for awareness; boosted posts with tight geo‑targeting work better than broad ads. Word‑of‑mouth in Groups is powerful.
• Messaging > public posting: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat are primary for quick coordination; group chats are common.
• Content that wins: Photos of local kids/teams, event reminders, service announcements, and seasonal ranch/ag content; simple, authentic visuals over polished creative.
• Timing: Peaks before work (6–8 a.m.), lunch hour, and evenings (8–10 p.m.). Weekends show strong engagement around events and sports.
• Trust: Posts from known local institutions (schools, county, EMS, churches) and familiar community members carry outsized credibility and reach.

Notes on methodology and uncertainty

• Figures are modeled from rural U.S./Idaho patterns (Pew Research Center, ACS/Census). Small population means year‑to‑year swings and sampling error are high.
• For precision, cross‑check with platform ad tools (location‑based audience sizes), local school enrollment for teen counts, and engagement metrics from key Facebook Groups/pages.