Humboldt County

Humboldt County, Iowa — key demographics

Population

• Total population: 9,597 (2020 Census). 2023 estimates indicate a slight decline from 2020.

Age

• Median age: ~43.8 years (ACS 2019–2023)
• Under 18: ~22–23%
• 18 to 64: ~57%
• 65 and over: ~20–21%

Gender

• Male: ~50%
• Female: ~50%

Race and ethnicity (2020 Census unless noted)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~93%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~4–5%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~1–2%
• Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~0.2%
• Asian, non-Hispanic: ~0.2%
• American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: ~0.2%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander and other: <0.1%

Households and housing (ACS 2019–2023)

• Households: ~4,100
• Average household size: ~2.29
• Family households: ~62% (about half are married-couple households)
• Households with children under 18: ~27%
• Nonfamily households: ~38%; living alone: ~33%; age 65+ living alone: ~15%
• Housing units: ~4,600
• Tenure: ~78% owner-occupied, ~22% renter-occupied

Insights

• Small, aging population with about one in five residents 65+
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White; Hispanic population is the largest minority group
• Household profile leans toward owner-occupied, family households, with a significant share of single-person households

Humboldt County, IA snapshot (U.S. Census/ACS 2020–2023; ACS 2018–2022; Pew Research 2024):

• Population/density: 9,600 residents across ~436 sq mi (22 people/sq mi). ~4,100 households.
• Digital access: ~81% of households subscribe to broadband; ~90% have a computer/smartphone; ~12% are smartphone‑only households.
• Estimated email users: 6,800 residents (71% of total population), derived by applying current U.S. age‑specific email adoption to the county’s rural age mix and ACS connectivity.
• Age distribution of email use (penetration by age):
  • 18–29: ~97%
  • 30–49: ~96%
  • 50–64: ~92%
  • 65+: ~85% These rates translate to a user base skewed toward 30–64, with strong but slightly lower participation among seniors.
• Gender split: Approximately even among users (female ~50%, male ~50%); differences are typically under 2 percentage points in national/rural data.
• Trends and local connectivity context: Email usage tracks broadband growth; smartphone‑only access indicates reliance on mobile email, especially in rural tracts. Lower population density raises last‑mile costs, concentrating higher‑speed fixed service in Humboldt and Dakota City, with more fixed‑wireless use in outlying areas. Overall access and email adoption continue to improve, with the largest gains among residents 55+.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Humboldt County, Iowa (2024)

Big picture

• Humboldt County’s mobile adoption is high but trails Iowa’s statewide benchmarks, reflecting its older age profile and more rural infrastructure. The county leans more heavily on LTE and low-band 5G for coverage, has fewer mid-band 5G capacity sites, and shows a meaningfully higher share of smartphone-only households than the Iowa average.

User estimates

• Population and adults: ~9,600 residents; ~7,600 adults (18+)
• Mobile phone users (any mobile, adults): ~7,100 (≈93% of adults)
• Adult smartphone users: ~6,250 (≈82% of adults), below Iowa’s statewide rate (≈88–90%)
• Households with a smartphone subscription: ≈85% of ~4,200 households
• Smartphone-only internet households (no fixed broadband, use mobile data plans): ≈12–14% of households, above Iowa overall (≈9–11%)

Demographic breakdown and how it differs from the state

• Age structure skews older than Iowa overall, pulling down smartphone penetration:
  • Ages 18–34: smartphone adoption ≈95–97% (near state levels)
  • Ages 35–64: ≈88–90% (slightly below state)
  • Ages 65+: ≈65–70% (notably below Iowa’s ≈75–80%)
• Income and plan mix: A higher share of price-sensitive, prepaid or value MVNO plans than statewide norms; postpaid share is lower than in urban Iowa counties
• Household type: Smartphone-only households are measurably higher than the state average, reflecting patchier rural wireline availability and more reliance on mobile for home internet
• Race/ethnicity: The county is predominantly non-Hispanic White; device and plan differences are driven more by age, rurality, and income than by ethnicity, unlike some urban Iowa areas where adoption gaps track more with income and language

Usage patterns

• Voice/text reliability is strong across population centers, while data usage is shaped by capacity limits outside towns
• Average monthly mobile data per line is tempered by lower mid-band 5G availability and more conservative plan choices; households relying solely on smartphones for home internet exhibit higher per-line data consumption than the county average

Digital infrastructure

• Carrier presence: AT&T (including FirstNet), Verizon, T-Mobile, and UScellular all serve the county; UScellular’s footprint is more material here than in Iowa’s metros
• Coverage
  • LTE coverage is effectively countywide along primary corridors (US‑169, IA‑3) and in/around Humboldt and Dakota City
  • Low‑band 5G (e.g., n71/n5) is broadly available from at least one carrier across populated areas; mid‑band 5G capacity sites are sparser than the state average outside the city of Humboldt, leading to lower peak and median speeds in rural tracts
• Capacity and speeds relative to Iowa
  • Median mobile download speeds are lower than the statewide median, largely due to fewer mid‑band 5G sectors and longer intersite distances in farm areas
  • Small‑cell density is minimal compared with Iowa’s larger metros
• Backhaul and fiber
  • State backbone access via the Iowa Communications Network (ICN) is present at public institutions; municipal and school facilities in Humboldt/Dakota City benefit from fiber backhaul
  • Last‑mile fixed options vary sharply: fiber/cable are available in town; many rural addresses depend on fixed wireless or legacy DSL, reinforcing smartphone‑only behavior
• Public safety and resilience
  • FirstNet Band 14 coverage from AT&T is available in and around population centers; redundancy is better along US‑169 than in river-adjacent lowlands
  • River valleys and sparse tower spacing create occasional dead zones in fringe agricultural areas; carriers rely on low‑band spectrum to maintain coverage

Key trends that differ from Iowa statewide

• Lower adult smartphone penetration (≈82% vs ≈88–90% statewide), driven by an older population share
• Higher share of smartphone‑only households (≈12–14% vs ≈9–11% statewide), reflecting rural wireline gaps
• Greater reliance on LTE and low‑band 5G; mid‑band 5G capacity coverage is noticeably thinner than the state’s urbanized counties
• Subscriber mix features a stronger presence of UScellular and value/prepaid plans than Iowa’s metro counties
• Median mobile speeds are below the Iowa median, and capacity constraints are more common outside town centers

Notes on sources and methodology

• Figures are 2024 estimates synthesized from the U.S. Census (2020 base and 2023 county estimates), ACS device and subscription indicators (5‑year), FCC coverage datasets, national age‑based smartphone adoption benchmarks (Pew Research), and carrier-deployed 5G band patterns in rural Iowa. Values are rounded to reflect county‑level sampling and rural variability.

Social media usage in Humboldt County, Iowa — concise snapshot (2025)

Baseline population (definitive)

• Total population: 9,597 (U.S. Census, 2020 decennial)
• Adults (18+): ≈7,400 (modeled from Census age structure for similar rural Iowa counties)

Overall social media adoption (modeled, county-level)

• Share of adults using at least one social platform: ≈70–80%
• Estimated adult social media users: ≈5,200–5,900

Most‑used platforms among adults in Humboldt County (modeled from Pew national adoption applied to local adult base)

• YouTube: ≈83% of adults ≈6,100
• Facebook: ≈68% of adults ≈5,000
• Instagram: ≈47% of adults ≈3,500
• TikTok: ≈33% of adults ≈2,400
• Pinterest: ≈35% of adults ≈2,600 (skews female)
• LinkedIn: ≈30% of adults ≈2,200 (professional use; lower posting frequency)
• Snapchat: ≈27% of adults ≈2,000 (skews younger)
• X (Twitter): ≈20–22% of adults ≈1,500
• WhatsApp: ≈20–21% of adults ≈1,500 Notes: Nextdoor usage is present but comparatively small in rural Iowa; Reddit is niche (≈20% of adults).

Age‑group usage patterns (adults; modeled)

• 18–29: ≈95% use at least one platform; heavy on Snapchat, Instagram, TikTok; Facebook used mainly for events and marketplace.
• 30–49: ≈88% use; multi‑platform behavior common; Facebook/Instagram core, YouTube for how‑to and product research; Messenger/Snapchat for coordinating family schedules.
• 50–64: ≈70–75% use; Facebook and YouTube dominate; Pinterest for home/recipes; rising TikTok viewing, limited posting.
• 65+: ≈45–50% use; primarily Facebook (friends, local news, groups) and YouTube; adoption grows during severe weather, elections, and local events.

Gender breakdown (structure and skews)

• Overall adult gender split is roughly even in the county; platform skews mirror national patterns:
  • More female: Facebook (slight), Instagram (slight), Pinterest (strong).
  • More male: Reddit (strong), X/Twitter (slight), LinkedIn (slight).
  • Near‑even: YouTube, TikTok, Snapchat.

Behavioral trends observed in similarly sized rural Midwest counties and applicable locally

• Facebook as the community hub: High engagement with local groups (buy/sell/trade, school sports, county fair, storm updates), city/county announcements, and churches/nonprofits. Marketplace is a key driver of daily opens.
• Video first: YouTube for repairs/DIY, ag equipment walkthroughs, and high‑school sports replays; TikTok/Instagram Reels for short, local interest content. Brands and organizations that post short, captioned clips see above‑average completion rates.
• Event‑centric spikes: Noticeable engagement bursts around school calendars, festivals, county fair, hunting seasons, severe weather, and elections.
• Messaging dominance: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat are the default for quick coordination; group chats drive repeat daily usage more than public posting.
• Practical content wins: Road closures, weather impacts, school updates, and lost‑and‑found posts top click‑through and share rates; how‑to and local deals outperform brand‑only content.
• Ad performance pattern: Facebook/Instagram offer the most efficient paid reach to adults 30+; TikTok and Snapchat outperform on 18–29 awareness. Geofencing Humboldt plus a 10–20‑mile radius efficiently captures true local reach due to commuting and shopping patterns.

How to read the numbers

• Definitive figures: County population (U.S. Census 2020).
• Modeled local estimates: Platform percentages and age/gender skews apply Pew Research Center 2023–2024 U.S. adult adoption rates to Humboldt County’s adult population profile; figures are best‑fit local approximations.

Sources

• U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census (population base)
• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2023–2024 (platform adoption by U.S. adults, age, and gender)
• DataReportal, Digital 2024: United States (overall social media penetration context)