Idaho County

Idaho County, Idaho – Key Demographics

Population size

• 16,541 (2020 Census; U.S. Census Bureau)

Age

• Median age: ~50.0 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~21%
• 18–64: ~52%
• 65 and over: ~27%

Gender

• Male: ~51%
• Female: ~49%

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 2018–2022)

• White alone: ~92%
• American Indian and Alaska Native alone: ~4–5%
• Two or more races: ~3–4%
• Asian, Black, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: each <1%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~4%

Households (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: ~7,100
• Average household size: ~2.33
• Family households: ~63% (married-couple ~53%)
• With children under 18: ~23%
• Nonfamily households: ~37% (living alone ~31%; 65+ living alone ~14%)
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~77%

Insights

• Older age structure: seniors (27%) and median age (50) exceed national averages.
• Predominantly White with a notably higher American Indian share than the U.S. average.
• Small households and high owner-occupancy reflect a rural housing profile.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census (P.L. 94-171) and American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates.

• Population and density: Idaho County has 16,541 residents in 6,905 households (2020 Census) across 8,503 sq mi, yielding very low density (~1.9 people/mi²).
• Estimated email users: ≈12,000–13,000 residents (about 75–80% of the population), reflecting rural internet and email adoption rates.
• Age distribution of email use (share of each age group using email): 13–17 ≈85%; 18–34 ≈97%; 35–54 ≈93%; 55–64 ≈88%; 65+ ≈75%. With a median age around 49, a larger-than-average share of local email users are 55+.
• Gender split: Population ≈51% male and 49% female; email usage is essentially equal by gender (difference within 1–2 percentage points).
• Digital access and trends: About 70% of households subscribe to home broadband (~4,900–5,100 homes), and 15–20% of adults are smartphone‑only for internet. Fixed broadband coverage is uneven outside towns due to mountainous terrain and long last‑mile distances; many rural addresses rely on DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite. Fiber/cable is concentrated in and around population centers such as Grangeville and Cottonwood, delivering 100–1000 Mbps, while outlying areas often see 10–50 Mbps. Extremely low settlement density continues to be the key constraint on connectivity expansion.

Idaho County, ID mobile phone usage summary (with county-specific estimates and how it differs from Idaho overall)

County snapshot relevant to mobile use

• Area and settlement: Idaho’s largest county by land area with very low population density and rugged terrain (Salmon, Clearwater, and Selway river canyons). Population is concentrated in and around Grangeville, Cottonwood, Kamiah/Kooskia, and along U.S. 95 and U.S. 12.
• Demographics: Older than the state overall, with a substantially larger 65+ share and smaller 18–34 share. This materially affects device adoption, upgrade cycles, and reliance on voice/SMS vs data-heavy apps.

User estimates (2024–2025 best-available, county-scale)

• Adult smartphone users: Approximately 11,300 (range 11,000–11,800), implying about 83–87% smartphone adoption among adults in the county. This is several points lower than Idaho’s statewide adult adoption.
• Households with at least one smartphone: About 6,200–6,400 out of roughly 7,000 households (≈88–91%).
• Mobile-only internet households (no wired home broadband, rely on cellular data plans/hotspots): Approximately 1,200–1,600 households (≈17–23%). This is meaningfully higher than the statewide share, reflecting limited wired options in outlying communities.
• Basic/feature-phone users: Roughly 6–9% of adults retain non‑smartphones, above the state average.
• Dual-SIM or multi‑carrier workarounds: Noticeably higher than statewide in remote areas, used to manage coverage gaps along travel and work corridors.

Demographic breakdown of smartphone adoption (county-specific estimates)

• 18–34: ~3,200 smartphone users, near-saturation (≈93–97%). Slightly below statewide among younger adults due to coverage and affordability constraints.
• 35–54: ~3,700–3,900 users (≈90–94%). Close to statewide, with strong BYOD usage among trades, forestry, and services.
• 55–64: ~1,200–1,300 users (≈78–83%). A few points below statewide.
• 65+: ~3,000–3,200 users (≈65–70%). This cohort is larger in the county than statewide, pulling down the county’s overall adoption rate and increasing the share who keep voice/text-centric plans.

Digital infrastructure and coverage characteristics

• 4G LTE: Reliable along U.S. 95 (Riggins–Grangeville–Cottonwood) and U.S. 12 (Kooskia–Kamiah) and within town centers; significant dead zones persist in canyons and on forest roads (Selway‑Bitterroot, Gospel Hump, remote Salmon River segments).
• 5G: Present in and around Grangeville/Cottonwood and parts of Kamiah/Kooskia and along primary corridors; large portions of the county remain LTE‑only. Population-weighted 5G availability is well below Idaho’s statewide level.
• Carrier landscape: Verizon typically provides the broadest rural footprint; AT&T covers primary corridors and FirstNet routes; T‑Mobile’s 600 MHz “extended range” fills in some areas but capacity can be limited. Local/regional providers and roaming agreements help along the Clearwater/Salmon corridors.
• Backhaul and capacity: Fiber backhaul exists on main corridors and in town centers; elsewhere, microwave backhaul and long spans between sites constrain capacity and resiliency during outages or fire seasons.
• Emergency operations: Seasonal wildfire activity drives temporary deployables (COWs/COLTs) near incidents; many residents and backcountry workers supplement cellular with satellite messengers for off‑grid areas.
• Indoor service: Metal construction and canyon topography mean above-average reliance on Wi‑Fi calling and external antennas/repeaters in homes, ranches, and small businesses.

How Idaho County differs from Idaho statewide (key trends)

• Adoption level: Adult smartphone adoption runs several percentage points lower than the state average, driven by an older age mix and more persistent coverage gaps.
• Primary reliance on mobile: A higher share of households rely on mobile data as their only at‑home internet, reflecting fewer cable/fiber options outside town limits.
• 5G availability: Materially lower 5G footprint and capacity; most day‑to‑day service outside towns is LTE, with a higher incidence of signal transitions on drives.
• Device/plan mix: Higher prevalence of budget and legacy devices, hotspot‑based home internet, and multi‑carrier strategies to stitch together coverage across work and travel routes.
• Usage patterns: Voice/SMS and lightweight apps (banking, messaging, navigation, ag/forestry tools) are relatively more prominent than high‑bitrate streaming while on the move; heavier data use shifts to in‑home Wi‑Fi where available.

Implications for stakeholders

• Carriers: Additional low‑band spectrum utilization, more macro infill on corridors, and fiberized backhaul to existing sites will yield outsized reliability gains; selective 5G expansion in town perimeters should focus on capacity and indoor penetration.
• Public agencies: Continue leveraging FirstNet buildouts on evacuation and fire routes, expand public Wi‑Fi and cellular boosters at community hubs, and prioritize redundant power/backhaul for E‑911 continuity.
• Residents and businesses: Wi‑Fi calling, external antennas/boosters, and dual‑carrier hotspots materially improve reliability; satellite messaging remains prudent for backcountry travel and operations.

These estimates synthesize county demographics from recent Census/ACS releases and observed FCC coverage and carrier rollouts through 2024–2025, emphasizing deviations from Idaho’s statewide profile.

Social media usage in Idaho County, Idaho (2025 snapshot)

Overall user stats

• Estimated active social media users (age 13+): ~11,400 residents
• Overall penetration (age 13+): ~80%
• Household internet context: rural usage patterns apply; adoption and platform mix closely mirror U.S. rural averages

Most-used platforms (share of adults who use each, local estimate)

• YouTube: 80%
• Facebook: 70%
• Instagram: 40%
• TikTok: 30%
• Pinterest: 33%
• Snapchat: 28%
• LinkedIn: 22%
• X (Twitter): 20%
• Reddit: 18%
• WhatsApp: 19%

Age-group usage and platform mix (share of each group using the platform; local estimates aligned to rural U.S. patterns)

• Teens 13–17: 95% use at least one platform; YouTube ~95%, Instagram ~70%, TikTok ~60%, Snapchat ~60%, Facebook ~40%
• Adults 18–29: 96%+ any; YouTube ~93%, Instagram ~78%, Snapchat ~65%, TikTok ~62%, Facebook ~67%
• Adults 30–49: ~90% any; YouTube ~92%, Facebook ~73%, Instagram ~49%, TikTok ~39%, Snapchat ~25%
• Adults 50–64: ~80% any; Facebook ~69%, YouTube ~83%, Instagram ~29%, TikTok ~24%
• Adults 65+: ~62% any; Facebook ~58%, YouTube ~65%, Instagram ~15%, TikTok ~10%

Gender breakdown (share of adults using each; local estimates)

• Women: Facebook ~73%, Pinterest ~50%, Instagram ~49%, YouTube ~81%
• Men: YouTube ~86%, Facebook ~66%, Reddit ~25%, X ~23%, Instagram ~44%
• Interpreted locally: women skew to Facebook and Pinterest; men skew to YouTube, Reddit, and X

Behavioral trends in Idaho County

• Facebook is the community hub: heavy use of Groups and Marketplace for local events, schools, churches, buy/sell/trade, and service referrals; older adults rely on it for news and county updates
• YouTube is the how-to channel: strong interest in DIY, homesteading, ranching/agriculture, small-engine/equipment repair, hunting/fishing, and local outdoor content
• Visual short-form is youth-driven: Snapchat and TikTok dominate daily messaging and short video among teens and 18–29; Instagram for aspiration, creators, and local businesses
• Discovery and commerce: local businesses lean on Facebook Pages, Marketplace, and Instagram; word-of-mouth amplified via groups and shares more than paid ads
• Messaging patterns: Facebook Messenger for cross-age communication; Snapchat as primary for teens/young adults; WhatsApp niche (family ties, international)
• Participation style: majority are “browsers” and group participants; posting is concentrated among a smaller set of community organizers, churches, schools, and small businesses
• Civic content: local government, school districts, and emergency updates see high engagement on Facebook; event and volunteer mobilization occurs via Groups

Notes on methodology and sources

• Figures are small-area estimates for Idaho County derived from Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform usage (with rural adjustments) and U.S. Census population structure for the county; platform percentages are shares of adults who use each platform. Estimates are calibrated to rural usage patterns and the county’s older age profile. Sources include Pew Research Center (Social Media Use, 2024) and U.S. Census Bureau (Idaho County population structure).