Montmorency County

Montmorency County, Michigan — key demographics

Population size

• 9,153 (2020 Decennial Census)

Age (ACS 2018–2022)

• Median age: about 57 years
• Under 18: ~18%
• 18 to 64: ~52%
• 65 and over: ~30%

Gender (ACS 2018–2022)

• Female: ~49%
• Male: ~51%

Racial/ethnic composition (2020 Census; Hispanic is an ethnicity)

• White: ~95%
• American Indian and Alaska Native: ~1–2%
• Black or African American: ~0–1%
• Asian: ~0–1%
• Two or more races: ~3%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~2%

Household data (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: ~4,200
• Persons per household: ~2.2
• Family households: ~64%
• Married-couple households: ~53%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~88%

Insights

• Very small, aging population with nearly one in three residents 65+
• Predominantly White, with limited racial/ethnic diversity
• Small household size and high owner-occupancy typical of rural, retiree-heavy counties

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 American Community Survey 5-year estimates)

Montmorency County, MI snapshot

• Population/density: 9,153 residents (2020 Census); ~547 sq mi land; ~16.7 people/sq mi.
• Estimated email users: 7,100 residents (≈78% of population), reflecting high adult internet adoption and email’s near-universal use among internet users (90%).
• Email users by age: • 13–24: 12% • 25–44: 22% • 45–64: 36% • 65+: 30%
• Gender split among email users: ~51% men, 49% women, mirroring county demographics.

Digital access and trends

• ~75% of households subscribe to broadband; ~86% have a computer; ~13% are smartphone‑only internet users.
• Fixed broadband (≥25/3 Mbps) is available to roughly 85% of locations; fiber remains limited, while fixed wireless coverage is expanding.
• Connectivity is strongest around Atlanta, Lewiston, and Hillman; speeds and reliability fall off in outlying forested/seasonal‑home areas, raising last‑mile costs.
• Public libraries and schools serve as key Wi‑Fi access points.
• Trend: gradual growth in broadband subscriptions and mobile data use since 2020; email remains the default digital identity across ages, with seniors favoring webmail on desktops and younger users primarily accessing email via smartphones.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Montmorency County, Michigan (2024)

Context and scale

• Population: 9,153 (2020 Census); very rural at roughly 16 people per sq. mile.
• Age profile: among the oldest in Michigan; median age about 57, with roughly one-third of residents age 65+.
• Housing mix: a high share of seasonal/recreational homes compared with the state average, which creates pronounced weekend/summer peaks in mobile traffic.

User estimates (modeled from the county’s age mix and current U.S./Michigan adoption rates)

• Adults using any mobile phone: 93% of adults, or about 6,900 residents.
• Adults using smartphones: 80% of adults, or about 5,900 residents.
• Wireless-only (no landline) adults: 59%.
• Households relying on mobile broadband as their primary home internet (cellular-only): 18%.

Demographic breakdown (smartphone adoption; adults)

• By age
  • 18–29: 96%
  • 30–49: 94%
  • 50–64: 82%
  • 65+: 64%
• By income (household)
  • Under $35k: 72%
  • $35k–$75k: 81%
  • $75k+: 89%
• By education (highest in household)
  • High school or less: 74%
  • Some college/associate: 80%
  • Bachelor’s or higher: 88%

Digital infrastructure touchpoints

• Cellular coverage: 4G LTE is the baseline across populated corridors; coverage gaps persist in forested areas, around lakes, and on secondary roads. 5G is present but largely low-band; mid-band 5G capacity is localized and does not yet blanket the county.
• Backhaul and capacity: Sparse macro-site density and long backhaul routes mean sites can congest during summer/weekend surges tied to seasonal housing.
• Fiber and fixed access: Ongoing rural fiber builds by local electric/broadband cooperatives and incumbents are steadily increasing FTTH availability; where fiber has arrived, cellular-only home internet dependence is dropping.
• Public access: Libraries and schools in Atlanta, Hillman, and Lewiston remain important Wi‑Fi anchors; outside these, public Wi‑Fi options are limited compared with state averages.

How Montmorency County differs from Michigan overall

• Lower smartphone penetration: Countywide adult smartphone use (about 80%) trails the Michigan average by roughly 6–8 percentage points, primarily due to the larger 65+ population and lower median income.
• Fewer wireless-only adults: At about 59%, wireless-only is lower than the statewide rate, reflecting the older age structure and lingering landline use.
• More cellular-only home internet: At approximately 18% of households, reliance on mobile broadband for primary home internet is higher than the state average, driven by gaps in cable/DSL and uneven fiber maturity outside town centers.
• Greater seasonal load variability: A much higher seasonal/recreational housing share than the state average produces sharper, predictable spikes in mobile traffic, stressing sites near lakes, campgrounds, and along M‑32/M‑33.
• Slower 5G capacity rollout: While low-band 5G is present, mid-band 5G coverage is sparser than the Michigan norm, keeping average attainable mobile speeds lower and more variable, especially indoors and in wooded terrain.

Key implications

• The county’s older, lower-density profile depresses smartphone adoption and wireless-only rates relative to Michigan, but coverage gaps and seasonal population swings increase dependence on cellular in specific pockets.
• Continued fiber buildouts are the main structural change likely to reduce cellular-only home internet use over the next 12–24 months while improving overall digital inclusion; until then, LTE remains the practical floor for reliability countywide.

Montmorency County, MI — Social media usage snapshot (2024 estimates modeled from Pew Research Center U.S. rural trends and the county’s older age profile)

Overall usage

• Share of adults (18+) using at least one social platform: 72–76% (est.)
• Daily users among adult social users: ~70% (est.)

Most‑used platforms among adults (share of all adults)

• YouTube: ~78%
• Facebook: ~65%
• Pinterest: ~31%
• Instagram: ~28%
• TikTok: ~22%
• Snapchat: ~18%
• X (Twitter): ~14%
• Reddit: ~13%
• LinkedIn: ~12%
• WhatsApp/Telegram: ~10%
• Nextdoor: ~15% (usage varies; Facebook Groups often substitute for neighborhood apps)

Age breakdown (share of each age group using any social platform)

• 13–17: ~90%+
• 18–29: ~94%
• 30–49: ~88%
• 50–64: ~74%
• 65+: ~58% Notes: The county skews older; overall penetration is pulled down by the 65+ segment. Younger cohorts are heavy multi‑platform users; 65+ users concentrate on Facebook and YouTube.

Gender breakdown (adult users)

• Overall mix: ~52% women, ~48% men (reflects slightly older population)
• Platform skews:
  • Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest: higher female share
  • YouTube, Reddit, X: higher male share
  • TikTok, Snapchat: slight female tilt; strongest among under‑35

Behavioral trends

• Community coordination lives on Facebook: high engagement in local Groups for weather/roads, school sports, county fair, lost & found pets, volunteer fire, and township alerts. Marketplace is a primary channel for local buying/selling (ATVs, boats, tools, firewood).
• Information diet: Sheriff/EMS pages and regional media pages drive spikes during storms, outages, and road closures; rumor control and admin moderation matter for trust.
• Video consumption over creation: YouTube is used heavily for DIY, small‑engine repair, hunting/fishing, cabin and property maintenance; short‑form (Reels/TikTok) viewed more than posted.
• Youth patterns: Snapchat for messaging; TikTok and Instagram for entertainment and trends. Cross‑posting from creators in the broader Northern Michigan region is common; local original creator base is small.
• Business use: Seasonal and tourism‑adjacent outfits (guides, cabins, bait/tackle, power‑sports dealers, contractors) rely on Facebook pages/Groups and Instagram for promos; boosted posts outperform always‑on ads due to limited audience size.
• Access realities: Mobile‑first usage is prevalent; pockets of limited broadband reduce live streaming and high‑bitrate video uploads, concentrate engagement in evenings/weekends, and favor lightweight formats.
• Civic engagement: Event‑driven surges around elections, millages, road commissions, and school board issues; older users more active in comments and shares than in posting original content.

Method note: Percentages are county‑level estimates derived by applying 2023–2024 Pew Research Center social media adoption rates for rural U.S. adults and teens to Montmorency County’s older age structure; platform shares reflect adults unless stated otherwise.