Fremont County

Fremont County, Idaho — key demographics

Population size

• 13,388 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~34
• Under 18: ~32%
• 65 and over: ~15%

Gender

• Male: ~51%
• Female: ~49%

Race and ethnicity (shares of total population)

• Non-Hispanic White: ~78%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~19%
• Non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1–2%
• Non-Hispanic Two or more races: ~2%
• Non-Hispanic Black: <1%
• Non-Hispanic Asian: <1%
• Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: <1%

Households

• Number of households: ~4,200
• Average household size: ~3.1
• Family households: ~75–80% of all households
• Homeownership rate: ~75–80%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census (population); American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates (age, gender, race/ethnicity, and household measures). Estimates; margins of error omitted for brevity.

Summary for Fremont County, Idaho (estimates based on county population and rural U.S. usage patterns)

• Estimated email users: 8,500–10,000 residents. Assumes ~13.5–14k population, with 80–90% of adults and 60–80% of teens using email.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • Under 18: ~15–20% of email users (teens 13–17 most likely within this group).
  • 18–34: ~25–30%.
  • 35–64: ~35–40% (largest share).
  • 65+: ~10–15% (growing but lower adoption than younger cohorts).
• Gender split: Roughly even, ~49–51% male vs female among users; minimal difference in email adoption by gender.
• Digital access trends:
  • Home broadband subscription likely ~70–80% of households; smartphone-only internet ~10–15%, higher in remote areas.
  • Wired broadband concentrated in town centers (e.g., St. Anthony, Ashton); fixed wireless and satellite more common in rural/fringe areas.
  • Mobile LTE coverage is widespread along main corridors; signal quality drops in forested and mountainous zones.
  • Public internet access via libraries/schools helps bridge gaps; affordability and terrain remain key barriers.
• Local density/connectivity facts:
  • Low population density (~7–8 people per square mile) increases last‑mile costs and slows fiber buildout.
  • Connectivity strongest along US‑20 corridor; more limited in backcountry/Island Park areas.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Fremont County, Idaho (focus on what differs from Idaho overall)

Topline estimates

• Population base: roughly 14,000 residents (2023 estimate).
• Mobile users: approximately 10,000–12,000 residents actively use a mobile phone. This range is derived from adult smartphone ownership rates typical for rural areas (about 80–88%), very high teen adoption, and partial adoption among children.
• Households with smartphones: about 4,000–4,200 of an estimated 4,400–4,700 households have at least one smartphone.
• Wireless-only for phone service: a large majority of households rely on mobile phones rather than landlines, broadly in line with national rural patterns and likely comparable to or slightly above the Idaho average.

Demographic breakdown (and how it diverges from state patterns)

• Age
  • Teens (13–17): very high smartphone adoption (near-universal), and a larger everyday dependency on mobile data when traveling to school and work along the US‑20 corridor. Youth-driven data usage spikes around school and commute times are more pronounced than in many Idaho urban counties because wired alternatives are thinner outside town centers.
  • Older adults (65+): adoption is lower than younger adults but rising. Limited wired options in outlying areas nudges some seniors toward basic smartphones and voice/text over LTE rather than maintaining a landline—so the 65+ cohort’s mobile reliance is catching up faster than in Idaho’s metro areas.
• Hispanic/Latino residents (roughly mid‑teens share of county population): mirroring national trends, they are more likely to rely on smartphones as a primary internet access point and to use prepaid/MVNO plans. Because Fremont has a meaningful Hispanic population but fewer low‑cost wired options outside towns, smartphone‑centric access is more prevalent here than the statewide average.
• Seasonal/part‑time residents and tourism workers: Island Park and gateway traffic to Yellowstone create a sizeable seasonal user base. Summer brings a distinct surge of temporary mobile users and hotspot use in cabins and short‑term rentals—this seasonal swing is much larger than the Idaho average.

Digital infrastructure and coverage (local specifics)

• Networks present: All three national carriers operate in the county. Coverage is strongest along US‑20 and in/around St. Anthony and Ashton. 5G is predominantly low‑band; mid‑band 5G is spotty and clustered near towns. Millimeter‑wave is unlikely.
• Terrain and dead zones: Forested and mountainous northern areas (Island Park, Targhee National Forest, Henrys Lake vicinity) have persistent weak/no‑signal pockets and variable in‑building coverage. These terrain‑driven gaps are more frequent than the statewide norm.
• Backhaul and fiber builds: Local fiber expansion by regional providers (e.g., Blackfoot Communications in legacy Fremont Telcom exchanges and Fall River Electric’s fiber initiatives) is improving tower backhaul and selective neighborhood broadband. But outside town centers and newer fiber footprints, many homes still lack robust wired service, keeping mobile usage (and mobile hotspot dependence) comparatively high.
• Capacity and performance: Summer tourism peaks strain sector capacity along US‑20, boat ramps, trailheads, and Island Park commercial nodes. Congestion-based slowdowns are more noticeable than in most Idaho counties that do not experience large seasonal influxes.
• Cross‑border and roaming dynamics: Proximity to Montana and Wyoming and long stretches of federal land mean more “edge‑of‑network” driving. Device/carrier switching, roaming, and coverage handoffs are day‑to‑day issues for rural commuters and recreationists—again, more pronounced than the Idaho average.

How Fremont County differs most from Idaho overall

• Stronger seasonal variability: Visitor traffic drives sharp summer surges in active devices and data use—far above the state norm.
• More hotspot and smartphone‑only internet use: Sparse wired options outside towns push households to rely on mobile data for home connectivity more than in Idaho’s cities and larger towns.
• More terrain‑related gaps: Coverage holes in forests and at elevation changes are more common than in southern and urban Idaho counties; indoor coverage away from highways is less reliable.
• Faster mobile uptake among seniors than you’d expect: Because landlines and wired broadband are limited in many rural pockets, older residents are adopting basic smartphones and cellular voice at a quicker clip than in Boise‑area suburbs.
• Price sensitivity and plan mix: A higher share of prepaid/MVNO plans and data‑capped hotspots shows up in billing data anecdotally through local retailers and aligns with rural income patterns; this mix differs from postpaid‑heavy suburban Idaho.

Method notes and confidence

• User counts are estimated by applying current rural smartphone adoption benchmarks (Pew and ACS device‑availability trends) to local population/household sizes and then adjusting for Fremont’s seasonal influx and limited wired alternatives.
• Infrastructure points reflect carrier coverage patterns common to eastern Idaho, FCC map tendencies, and known local fiber/backhaul initiatives; exact tower counts and measured speeds vary by micro‑location.

Fremont County, Idaho — Social media snapshot (2025, estimates)

How these numbers were built

• Based on Pew Research Center 2023–2024 U.S. usage rates, adjusted for rural patterns, and applied to Fremont County’s population. Small-county estimates carry ±5–10 percentage points of uncertainty.

Population baseline

• Total residents: ~14,000
• Adults (18+): ~10.5–11.5k
• Teens (13–17): ~0.8–1.1k
• Mobile-first usage is common; broadband is uneven in outlying areas (e.g., Island Park).

Most-used platforms (adults 18+; share of adults; rough user counts)

• YouTube: 80–85% (≈8.4–9.8k)
• Facebook: 70–75% (≈7.4–8.6k)
• Instagram: 40–45% (≈4.2–5.2k)
• Pinterest: 35–40% (≈3.7–4.6k)
• TikTok: 28–35% (≈3.0–4.0k)
• Snapchat: 25–30% (≈2.6–3.3k)
• LinkedIn: 18–22% (≈1.9–2.4k)
• X (Twitter): 15–20% (≈1.6–2.2k)
• Nextdoor: 8–12% (≈0.8–1.3k)

Teens (13–17) platform usage (share of teens)

• YouTube: 90–95%
• TikTok: 65–75%
• Snapchat: 60–70%
• Instagram: 60–70%
• Facebook: 20–30%

Age-group patterns (tendencies)

• 18–24: Heavy Instagram (60–70%), Snapchat (60–70%), TikTok (55–65%); YouTube ~90%+; Facebook ~50%.
• 25–34: YouTube ~90%; Facebook 65–70%; Instagram ~60%; TikTok 45–50%; Snapchat 40–50%.
• 35–54: Facebook 75–80%, YouTube 85–90%; Instagram 40–45%; TikTok 25–35%; Pinterest 40–50%.
• 55+: Facebook 70–75%, YouTube 70–80%; Instagram 25–30%; TikTok 10–20%; Pinterest 30–40%.

Gender breakdown (directional, among platform users)

• Facebook: slight female tilt (≈53–57% female)
• Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat: female-leaning (≈55–60% female)
• Pinterest: strongly female (≈70–80% female)
• YouTube: male-leaning (≈55–60% male)
• X (Twitter): male-leaning (≈60–65% male)
• LinkedIn: slight male tilt (≈55–60% male)

Behavioral trends to know

• Community-first: Facebook Groups, school/booster pages, buy–sell–trade, and Marketplace drive high engagement; local news and alerts spread via community pages.
• Utility content performs: Weather and road closures (US‑20, Ashton Hill), wildfire/smoke, water/irrigation, and school sports get outsized reactions.
• Outdoor/seasonal cycles: Strong interest in snowmobiling, hunting, fishing, trail/river conditions; engagement peaks in winter and fall hunting seasons.
• Tourism spillover: Locals discuss Yellowstone/Island Park traffic and recommend businesses; resident audiences respond best to familiar local faces/testimonials.
• Video wins: Short vertical video (Reels/TikTok) and simple phone-shot clips outperform static posts; live streams for games and community events work well.
• Messaging expectations: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat are common for quick Q&A; fast replies (<1–2 hours in business hours) influence conversions.
• Timing: Engagement often clusters around 6–8am, noon, and 8–10pm; winter weekends see more online activity.
• Tone and trust: Family-friendly, practical, and service-oriented content resonates; transparent pricing and community involvement help.
• Ads/playbook: Small budgets go far due to limited reach; use tight geo (5–15 miles around St. Anthony/Ashton/Island Park), event/weather triggers, and lookalikes; optimize for mobile and slower connections, include clear calls and hours.

Note: Figures are indicative, not census counts; for campaigns, validate with platform audience tools filtered to Fremont County before finalizing budgets.