Leelanau County

Leelanau County, Michigan — key demographics (U.S. Census Bureau: 2020 Census; 2019–2023 ACS 5‑year)

• Population

  • 2020 Census: ~23,100
  • 2019–2023 ACS estimate: ~23,600 (modest growth since 2010)

• Age

  • Median age: ~52
  • Under 18: ~18–19%
  • 18–64: ~54–56%
  • 65 and older: ~27–28% (among Michigan’s older counties by age structure)

• Gender

  • Female: ~50–51%
  • Male: ~49–50%

• Race and ethnicity

  • White (non-Hispanic): ~89–91%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native: ~3–4%
  • Two or more races: ~2–3%
  • Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~4–5%
  • Black: ~0.3–0.6%
  • Asian: ~0.4–0.6%

• Households and housing

  • Total households: ~9,800–10,000
  • Average household size: ~2.3
  • Family households: ~62–64%; nonfamily: ~36–38%
  • Owner-occupied rate: ~85–87%; renter-occupied: ~13–15%
  • Median household income: roughly $80–90k (above Michigan statewide median)
  • Poverty rate: ~6–8%
  • Housing units: 15,000, with a high share of seasonal/recreational units (25–30%)

Insights: Leelanau County is small and slowly growing, older than the state overall, predominantly non-Hispanic White with a notable Native American presence, highly owner-occupied with many seasonal homes, and relatively high median household income with comparatively low poverty.

• Scope and density: Leelanau County, MI has 22,301 residents (2020 Census) over ~347 sq mi, ≈64 people/sq mi.
• Estimated email users: ≈17,650 adults use email (≈79% of total population; ≈93% of adults), derived from Pew U.S. email adoption rates applied to local age structure.
• Age distribution of email users (estimated):
  • 18–34: ~3,060 users (≈98% of ~3,120 in this group)
  • 35–54: ~5,140 (≈96% of ~5,350)
  • 55–64: ~3,560 (≈94% of ~3,790)
  • 65+: ~5,890 (≈88% of ~6,690)
• Gender split: Near parity; ≈8,900 women and ≈8,700 men use email (reflecting the county’s slight female majority and minimal gender gap in email adoption).
• Digital access and trends:
  • ACS Computer/Internet (2022): ~96% of households have a computer; ~88% subscribe to broadband; ~6% have no home internet; ~7% are smartphone‑only.
  • Connectivity: FCC mapping indicates >95% of locations have at least 25/3 Mbps availability; fiber and fixed‑wireless expansions are improving speeds in population centers and along major corridors, while some sparsely populated peninsulas and shoreline areas remain last‑mile challenged.
• Insight: High device ownership and ongoing network upgrades support robust email usage even in a low‑density, aging county, with adoption strongest among under‑65 adults and only modestly lower among seniors.

Mobile phone usage in Leelanau County, MI — summary and how it differs from Michigan overall

Headline estimates and usage

• Population base: ~22,700 residents and ~10,200 households (2023 estimates).
• Mobile phone users: approximately 19,000–20,000 unique users (about 84–88% of residents), slightly below the statewide share due to the county’s older age structure and rural pockets with weaker coverage.
• Smartphone users: approximately 16,500–18,500 people (roughly 75–82% of residents; ~86–88% of adults), a few percentage points below the statewide adult average.

Demographic patterns that shape usage

• Older population: Leelanau has one of Michigan’s oldest age profiles (roughly 29–32% aged 65+, vs ~18–20% statewide). This lowers overall smartphone penetration and increases reliance on voice/SMS and Wi‑Fi calling compared with the state.
• Age-specific smartphone adoption (adults, directional benchmarks):
  • 18–34: mid‑ to high‑90s percent
  • 35–64: upper‑80s to low‑90s percent
  • 65+: low‑ to mid‑70s percent
• Seasonal population: A high share of seasonal/recreational homes (around one‑third to two‑fifths of housing units) produces pronounced summer spikes in visitor devices and data traffic, especially along M‑22, lakeshore towns, and the National Lakeshore. This seasonal surge is far more pronounced than the state average.
• Income/education: Above‑average household income and education support high smartphone quality (newer devices, 5G‑capable) even among older users, blunting but not erasing the age‑related adoption gap.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Carriers and 5G status:
  • All three national operators (AT&T, T‑Mobile, Verizon) provide broad 4G LTE. 5G is present in and between population centers (Suttons Bay, Lake Leelanau, Leland, Glen Arbor/Empire corridor, Northport), but mid‑band 5G density is lower than statewide norms, and coverage drops rapidly in interior valleys, forested areas, and dune topography.
  • T‑Mobile’s 600 MHz low‑band 5G helps with reach; Verizon and AT&T low‑band 5G is widespread but mid‑band capacity (n41/n77) is more limited than in urban Michigan.
• Notable coverage gaps:
  • Interior of the Leelanau Peninsula away from highways, parts of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Glen Lake area, segments between Cedar–Maple City, and pockets north of Omena toward the tip. These gaps drive higher use of Wi‑Fi calling and in‑home signal boosters than the Michigan average.
• Backhaul and middle‑mile:
  • Regional fiber backbones (e.g., Merit/REACH‑3MC and Peninsula Fiber Network) ring the Grand Traverse area and feed macro sites, but last‑mile fiber and dense small‑cell builds are sparser than state urban centers.
• Fixed broadband context that interacts with mobile usage:
  • Cable/fiber availability in town centers (e.g., Spectrum/Charter in villages) is solid, but rural stretches still lean on DSL sunset, fixed wireless, or Starlink. As a result, mobile hotspots are used more often as a primary or backup broadband path than in most Michigan suburbs and cities.
  • Public safety and FirstNet: AT&T Band 14 deployments have improved corridor coverage, yet in‑building performance still lags in some lake-adjacent and wooded areas.

How Leelanau differs from state-level trends

• Older age structure dampens countywide smartphone penetration and shifts some usage toward basic voice/SMS, while Michigan overall skews younger and slightly more smartphone‑saturated.
• Far greater seasonal variability: summer traffic surges and congestion on lakeshore corridors materially exceed statewide seasonality impacts.
• Coverage variability is sharper: outdoor LTE is broad, but terrain and lake effects produce more indoor dead zones than typical in Michigan’s metro counties, raising reliance on Wi‑Fi calling and signal boosters.
• 5G capacity layers are thinner: fewer mid‑band 5G sectors per capita than state urban averages, creating wider speed swings between town centers and rural roads.
• Higher hotspot and fixed‑wireless reliance in rural pockets than Michigan’s urban/suburban norm, but also a higher share of high‑end devices among residents and visitors, which partially offsets capacity constraints where mid‑band 5G is available.

Practical implications

• Network planning should prioritize mid‑band 5G infill along M‑22, M‑72, and in interior valleys to handle summer peaks and reduce coverage holes.
• Public venues and lodging benefit from robust Wi‑Fi offload, especially in National Lakeshore gateway communities.
• Emergency communications and telehealth for older residents are sensitive to indoor coverage; small‑cell or dedicated in‑building solutions in clinics, civic buildings, and senior housing deliver outsized benefits.

Bottom line: Leelanau’s mobile landscape is defined by an older resident base, heavy seasonality, and rugged terrain. These factors produce slightly lower smartphone penetration, more pronounced coverage gaps, and sharper peak‑season loads than Michigan as a whole, even as affluent users and visitors keep device quality and overall usage high.

Leelanau County, MI social media snapshot (2025)

User base

• Population: ~23,300 (2023 ACS). Estimated social media users: ~15,000 total
  • Adults (18+): ~13,800 users (about 72% of adults)
  • Teens (13–17): ~1,200 users (about 95% of teens)
• Gender (users): ~52% women, ~48% men (reflects local demographics and national usage skews)

Age mix of users (share of all users)

• 13–17: ~7%
• 18–29: ~14%
• 30–44: ~25%
• 45–64: ~33%
• 65+: ~21% Note: County’s older age profile pushes a larger share of users into 45+ compared with U.S. averages.

Most‑used platforms (adults in Leelanau; percent of adult social users)

• YouTube: ~80%
• Facebook: ~70%
• Instagram: ~40%
• Pinterest: ~30%
• TikTok: ~24%
• Snapchat: ~18%
• LinkedIn: ~20%
• X (Twitter): ~17%
• WhatsApp: ~17%
• Nextdoor: ~11%
• Reddit: ~11%

Teens (13–17) platform usage pattern (nationally benchmarked; Leelanau similar)

• YouTube ~95%, TikTok ~65–70%, Instagram ~60–65%, Snapchat ~55–60%, Facebook ~30–35%

Behavioral trends (what people do and how to reach them)

• Facebook is the community hub: local news, township/county updates, school notices, buy/sell/trade, lost‑and‑found, event discovery, and Messenger for quick business inquiries.
• Strong seasonality: engagement rises late spring through fall (tourism, wineries, farm markets, festivals, lake/park activity). Visual content about scenery, food/drink, and itineraries performs best.
• Video, but keep it light: short Reels/Shorts with captions outperform longer clips; rural broadband constraints favor concise, mobile‑first formats.
• Older residents skew to Facebook and YouTube; younger adults and visitors add Instagram and TikTok. Pinterest over‑indexes with women (shopping, home, recipes, weddings/events).
• Timing: evening scroll (7–9 pm) and early morning (7–8 am) are reliable; weekend spikes align with events and harvest season.
• Local credibility matters: posts featuring recognizable locations, nonprofits, schools, first responders, and local creators earn higher sharing and comment rates.
• Practical searches: users look for hours, menus, reservation/ordering links, trail and weather updates; clear CTAs and map pins improve outcomes.

Method and sources

• Figures are modeled for Leelanau County using U.S. Census Bureau (ACS 2023) population and age structure with Pew Research Center’s 2022–2024 social media adoption rates applied to the county’s older-skewing demographics. Percentages are rounded estimates intended for planning-level decisions.