Davis County

Do you want 2020 Census counts or the latest estimates (ACS 2019–2023 / 2023 population estimate)? I can provide a concise, sourced snapshot either way.

Modeled snapshot (estimates, using ACS population and rural-adjusted Pew/FCC adoption rates)

• Population and density: 9,100 residents spread over ~505 sq mi (18 people/sq mi). Connectivity is strongest in/near Bloomfield; outlying farms rely more on fixed‑wireless or mobile data.
• Estimated email users: ~6,000 residents (range 5,600–6,300).
• Gender split among email users: ~51% female, ~49% male (roughly mirrors population).
• Age distribution of email users (share of users):
  • 13–17: ~7% (most check via school accounts/mobile)
  • 18–34: ~26% (near‑universal adoption)
  • 35–54: ~32% (work and family communication)
  • 55–64: ~15%
  • 65+: ~20% (lower, but rising with smartphones)
• Digital access trends:
  • Home broadband subscription estimated at ~75–80% of households, below Iowa’s urban areas; fixed‑wireless is common outside town limits.
  • Smartphone ownership high (~80–85% of adults); 10–15% of households are likely smartphone‑only for internet, making mobile email primary.
  • Ongoing fiber buildouts around population centers; libraries/schools provide key public Wi‑Fi access.
• Local connectivity context: Low population density and long last‑mile runs increase infrastructure costs, so email and other low‑bandwidth tools remain reliable for residents with variable speeds.

Note: Figures are modeled estimates, not a local survey.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Davis County, Iowa

Context

• Small, rural county centered on Bloomfield; population a little over 9,000. The county includes a sizable Old Order/Conservative Anabaptist (Amish/Mennonite) community, extensive farmland, and low-density settlement. These factors measurably shift mobile adoption and usage away from Iowa’s statewide profile.

User estimates (orders of magnitude; based on rural/U.S. adoption norms adjusted for local demographics)

• Total mobile phone users: roughly 6,200–7,000 residents (about 68–77% of total population), lower than Iowa overall (typically 82–86% when counting all cell phones).
• Smartphone users: about 4,800–5,400 adults, implying adult smartphone penetration around 70–78% vs Iowa’s ~86–90%.
• Device mix: noticeably higher share of basic/feature phones and older LTE-only smartphones than statewide. 5G-capable handset share is growing but lags the state by several years.
• Plan mix: higher use of budget/prepaid and MVNO plans (cost sensitivity and coverage testing), plus family-share plans among non-Amish households; some communal or business-only phones in Amish-owned enterprises.

Demographic patterns that differ from state-level

• Religious community effect: The Amish/Conservative Anabaptist population (materially larger share than in Iowa overall) lowers both smartphone ownership and on-the-go data use. Where phones are used, basic/flip phones or shared/business devices are more common; many households avoid always-on mobile internet.
• Age:
  • Teens: high adoption among public-school teens; markedly lower among youth in Amish parochial schools. Overall teen smartphone penetration is below the state average.
  • Seniors: smartphone ownership and app use are below statewide senior averages; more voice/SMS-first behavior and simpler devices.
• Income and jobs: Median income trails the state, nudging users toward lower-cost carriers, refurbished devices, and conservative data plans. Farm and trades workers prioritize coverage and battery life over premium data speeds.
• Use cases: Lower rates of mobile banking, telehealth video, and heavy streaming relative to state averages; higher reliance on voice/SMS and occasional data. Wi‑Fi offload is common where home or workplace broadband exists; otherwise some households rely on public Wi‑Fi at schools/library.

Digital infrastructure highlights (and how they diverge from Iowa overall)

• Carrier coverage profile:
  • UScellular and Verizon tend to offer the most consistent rural LTE coverage across the county. AT&T is solid in and around Bloomfield and along main corridors (IA‑2/IA‑63). T‑Mobile’s low‑band 5G blanket often exists but can be patchy indoors and off-corridor compared with metro Iowa.
  • Cross-border effects with Missouri can produce edge-of-county roaming or weaker in-home signal in southern townships.
• 5G availability and speeds:
  • Low-band (coverage-layer) 5G is present near Bloomfield and along primary roads; mid-band 5G (e.g., C-band/2.5 GHz) is limited compared to urban Iowa, so average 5G speeds are lower and reversion to LTE is common outside town.
  • Typical observed performance: LTE in rural areas ~5–30 Mbps; low-band 5G ~25–150 Mbps where signal is strong. State metro areas routinely exceed this due to denser mid-band deployments.
• Tower density and terrain:
  • Fewer macro sites per square mile than Iowa’s average; rolling timber and low valleys create dead zones, particularly west/south of Bloomfield. Capacity constraints appear during county events (e.g., fairgrounds) more than in cities elsewhere in Iowa.
• Backhaul and fiber:
  • Fiber backbones follow main highways and utility routes; in-town Bloomfield has better fiber availability from local/independent providers. Outside town, legacy DSL and fixed wireless internet persist; this limits carrier backhaul options and can cap mobile capacity compared with fiber-rich urban corridors statewide.
• Alternatives and anchors:
  • Higher-than-average reliance on fixed wireless and satellite (including Starlink) for home connectivity, which shapes mobile use (e.g., Wi‑Fi calling at home rather than strong macro coverage).
  • Schools and the public library remain important Wi‑Fi/access points; hotspot programs that expanded during the pandemic still matter for households without robust broadband.

What’s most different from the state profile

• Lower overall mobile and smartphone penetration, largely due to the Amish/Conservative Anabaptist share and lower density.
• Heavier mix of basic phones and older LTE devices; slower transition to 5G handsets and plans.
• Coverage-first carrier choices (UScellular/Verizon) over speed-first; more prepaid/MVNO usage.
• Patchier mid-band 5G and backhaul constraints leading to lower average speeds and more LTE fallback than urban/suburban Iowa.
• Greater dependence on public Wi‑Fi, fixed wireless, and satellite; lighter use of data-heavy mobile apps and services.

Notes on uncertainty and method

• Figures are estimates synthesized from rural U.S. and Iowa adoption norms, adjusted for Davis County’s population size, rurality, and known cultural composition. Exact counts vary by carrier buildouts and year-to-year device upgrades.

Below is a concise, directional snapshot modeled from 2023–2024 Pew Research Center platform usage, rural U.S./Midwest patterns, and Davis County’s small, rural profile. County-level social media stats aren’t directly published, so use these as planning estimates.

Overall user stats

• Adult social-media penetration: ~78–85% of adults
• Estimated adult users: roughly 5,500–6,200 (directional)
• Devices: overwhelmingly smartphone-first; home broadband is spottier than urban Iowa, so short-form video and lightweight posts perform better than long streams.

Most‑used platforms (share of Davis County adults; monthly use)

• YouTube: ~70–75%
• Facebook: ~60–65%
• Instagram: ~28–34%
• TikTok: ~22–28%
• Snapchat: ~20–25% (concentrated under 30)
• Pinterest: ~24–30% (female‑skewed)
• LinkedIn: ~14–18% (professional niche)
• X/Twitter: ~14–18%
• Reddit: ~12–16% (younger male skew)
• Nextdoor: ~8–12% (adoption limited in low‑density areas)

Age patterns (estimated share within each age group using the platform monthly)

• Teens (13–17): YouTube 90%+, Snapchat 75–85%, TikTok 70–80%, Instagram 60–70%, Facebook <30%
• 18–29: YouTube 88–92%, Instagram 70–75%, TikTok 60–65%, Snapchat 60–65%, Facebook 60–65%
• 30–49: YouTube 80–85%, Facebook 70–75%, Instagram 45–50%, TikTok 30–35%, Snapchat 25–30%
• 50–64: YouTube 70–75%, Facebook 65–70%, Instagram 25–30%, TikTok 15–20%
• 65+: YouTube 55–60%, Facebook 55–60%, Instagram 15–20%, TikTok 8–12%

Gender breakdown (directional)

• Overall: near even, with women slightly more likely to use social media than men by a few points.
• Platform skews: Pinterest ~70–75% female; Facebook ~55–60% female; Instagram ~55% female; TikTok slightly female‑leaning; YouTube ~55–60% male; Reddit ~65–70% male; X/Twitter ~60% male.

Behavioral trends (local/rural Midwest)

• Facebook is the community hub: heavy use of Groups (buy/sell/trade, school, church, civic updates), Marketplace, event promotion (county fair, high‑school sports).
• Video is growing: YouTube for DIY, equipment reviews, ag and outdoors content; TikTok rising under 35 for entertainment and local happenings.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger for most adults; Snapchat for teens/young adults.
• Content that travels: local faces/stories, high‑school sports, hunting/fishing, farm/land, weather alerts, church/community events, practical “how‑to” tips.
• Posting cadence and timing: best engagement typically around 6–8 am, lunch (12–1 pm), and 7–9 pm; short, native video and photo carousels outperform links.
• Advertising: Facebook/Instagram geotargeting can efficiently reach a large share of county adults; TikTok and Snapchat are efficient for under‑35; LinkedIn is niche (healthcare, education, public sector).

Notes

• Figures are modeled estimates; for precise local numbers, pull platform ad‑reach figures with a Davis County geofence or run a quick resident survey.