Pipestone County

Pipestone County, Minnesota — key demographics

Population size

• Total population: 9,424 (2020 Census)
• Recent estimate: ~9.2k (U.S. Census Bureau 2023 estimate)

Age

• Median age: 42.6 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~24%
• 65 and over: ~20%

Gender

• Female: ~49.5%
• Male: ~50.5%

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 2018–2022; Hispanic spans races)

• White alone: ~91%
• Black or African American alone: ~1–2%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~1%
• Asian alone: ~1%
• Two or more races: ~5%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~6–7%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~86–87%

Household data (ACS 2018–2022 unless noted)

• Number of households: ~3,800–3,900
• Average household size: ~2.34 persons
• Homeownership rate: ~74%
• Family vs. nonfamily households: roughly two-thirds family households
• Households with children under 18: ~28%
• One-person households: ~30%

Insights

• Small, aging population with a high share of older adults and high homeownership.
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White with a modest but growing Hispanic/Latino presence.

Pipestone County, MN snapshot

• Population and density: ~9,424 residents (2020 Census) across ~465 sq mi ≈ 20 people per sq mi.
• Digital access: ~82% of households have a broadband subscription and ~90–92% have a computer (ACS 2018–2022). About 15% lack fixed home internet; 8–10% are smartphone‑only.
• Estimated email users: ~6,600 residents use email regularly (≈92% of adults plus most teens), concentrated in and around Pipestone, Edgerton, and Jasper where fixed broadband is strongest.

Email user profile (share of users)

• By age: 18–34 ≈21%; 35–54 ≈28%; 55–64 ≈16%; 65+ ≈27%; under 18 ≈8%.
• By gender: roughly even (≈50% female, 50% male), mirroring the county’s population split.

Trends and insights

• Coverage and adoption have risen with recent fiber and fixed‑wireless builds; most populated areas meet or exceed 100/20 Mbps, while some farmsteads remain on DSL or fixed wireless.
• Lower rural density raises last‑mile costs, contributing to the fixed‑broadband gap and slightly higher reliance on smartphone‑only access among lower‑income and older households.
• Email penetration is effectively universal among working‑age adults; the main non‑user pockets are very old, lower‑income, or no‑subscription households.

Mobile phone usage in Pipestone County, Minnesota — 2025 snapshot

Population context

• Population: 9,424 (2020 Census), land area 465 square miles; sparsely populated (20 people/sq mi) with one small urban center (City of Pipestone) and largely rural townships
• Household count (est.): ~4,100 (assuming 2.3 persons/household)

Estimated mobile user base

• Total smartphone users: ~6,600 residents (about 70% of the population)
  • Method: age-structured adoption using national rural adoption rates applied to local age mix (higher older-adult share depresses the overall rate)
• Smartphone-only (mobile-only) home internet households: ~800–900 (about 20% of households), materially above the Minnesota average
• Cellular-connected tablets/hotspots in use: several hundred subscriptions countywide (primarily in mobile-only households and farm operations)

Demographic breakdown driving usage

• Age
  • Under 18: ~23% of population; among teens (12–17), ~90% smartphone adoption; ~640 teen users
  • 18–29: ~12% of population; ~95% adoption; ~1,070 users
  • 30–49: ~24% of population; ~93% adoption; ~2,100 users
  • 50–64: ~18% of population; ~80% adoption; ~1,360 users
  • 65+: ~23% of population; ~65% adoption; ~1,410 users
  • Net effect: larger 65+ share than the state reduces overall adoption and increases basic-phone retention relative to Minnesota’s urban counties
• Income and rurality
  • Lower median household income than the Minnesota average and dispersed settlement patterns correlate with:
    • Higher reliance on smartphones as primary internet access (tethering/hotspots)
    • Greater use of fixed wireless and satellite at home where fiber/cable is absent
• Race/ethnicity
  • County is predominantly non-Hispanic White with small Hispanic and other minority communities; mobile-centric access is notably common among lower-income and renter households across groups

Digital infrastructure highlights

• Mobile networks
  • T-Mobile: broad low-band 5G coverage across most of the county; mid-band 2.5 GHz present mainly around the City of Pipestone and along primary corridors
  • Verizon: strong LTE; selective C-band 5G around the county seat/major road junctions; extended LTE in outlying areas
  • AT&T/FirstNet: 5G/LTE along US-75, MN-23, and MN-30; Band 14 (FirstNet) coverage on priority sites for public safety
  • Coverage is highway-centric with wider site spacing in farm/range areas; indoor coverage can be inconsistent in metal-clad buildings and in low-lying areas away from highways
• Wireline/backhaul
  • Cable broadband (Mediacom) in the City of Pipestone and immediate surroundings
  • Local telcos/co-ops provide DSL-to-fiber transitions in several exchanges (e.g., Woodstock and surrounding townships), with ongoing rural fiber buildouts
  • Fixed wireless (including CBRS/LTE) used by local providers to reach dispersed farms and acreages; common as primary or backup connectivity
• Cross-border dynamics
  • Proximity to South Dakota and Iowa means edge-of-market coverage and roaming conditions influence user experience on western/southern fringes; Sioux Falls–oriented networks can be the nearest high-capacity nodes

How Pipestone County differs from Minnesota overall

• Higher mobile-only internet reliance: ~20% of households vs a clearly lower share statewide, driven by fiber/cable gaps and lower incomes
• Lower mid-band 5G density: more dependence on low-band 5G/LTE, yielding broader coverage but lower median speeds than Minnesota’s metro counties where mid-band is widespread
• Older population tilt: significantly higher 65+ share than the state average, translating to lower overall smartphone adoption and more basic-phone users
• More fixed wireless substitution: greater use of LTE/CBRS fixed wireless for home access compared with fiber/cable-dense metro/suburban areas
• Investment pacing: slower upgrade cadence (smaller cell grid, fewer 5G mid-band sectors) than Twin Cities and regional centers; capacity additions focus on the City of Pipestone and highway sites
• Seasonal/agricultural load: noticeable traffic peaks during planting/harvest and at wind energy sites on Buffalo Ridge, a pattern less pronounced in urban Minnesota

Actionable implications

• Carrier choice matters by location: T-Mobile often leads on broad coverage; Verizon on rural LTE robustness; AT&T offers FirstNet advantages for public safety and some farm operations
• External antennas/boosters can materially improve performance in metal buildings and on farmsteads off the main corridors
• For mobile-only households, pairing an unlimited phone plan with a dedicated 5G home internet or fixed-wireless plan can stabilize speeds versus ad hoc tethering

Notes on figures

• Population and household counts are from the 2020 Census with standard household-size assumptions
• User counts are derived from the county age mix and widely cited national/rural smartphone adoption rates applied to local demographics
• Mobile-only household share reflects rural U.S./Minnesota patterns and local infrastructure availability; the point estimate is calibrated to Pipestone’s older, lower-density profile

Social media usage in Pipestone County, MN — 2025 snapshot

How this is derived

• Figures are county-level estimates modeled from Pipestone County’s age/sex structure (U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2018–2022) combined with latest U.S. platform adoption rates and rural-urban deltas (Pew Research Center, 2023–2024). Percentages below reflect the share of residents in each group who use each platform at least occasionally.

Overall user stats (residents 13+)

• Use at least one social platform: 81%
• Adults 18+: 72%
• Teens 13–17: 95%
• Daily users (any platform): ~66% of 13+

Most-used platforms (adults, 18+)

• YouTube: ~80%
• Facebook: ~70%
• Instagram: ~40%
• Pinterest: ~33%
• TikTok: ~30%
• Snapchat: ~25%
• WhatsApp: ~20%
• X (Twitter): ~20%
• LinkedIn: ~16%
• Reddit: ~14% Top teen platforms (13–17)
• YouTube ~93–95%, TikTok ~65–70%, Snapchat ~60–65%, Instagram ~60–65%, Facebook ~30–35%

Age-group usage highlights (share using any social media)

• 13–17: 95% (heavy on YouTube, TikTok, Snapchat; light on Facebook)
• 18–29: ~88% (YouTube, Instagram, TikTok; Snapchat significant; Facebook moderate)
• 30–49: ~80% (YouTube and Facebook dominant; Instagram secondary; TikTok growing)
• 50–64: ~72% (Facebook and YouTube; Pinterest notable)
• 65+: ~58% (Facebook and YouTube; limited use of others)

Gender breakdown (adults)

• Overall social media use: women ~75%, men ~67%
• Platform skews:
  • Women higher on Facebook (+5–8 pts vs men), Instagram (+4–6), Pinterest (women ~3× men)
  • Men higher on YouTube (+4–6), Reddit (+8–10), X/Twitter (+2–4)

Behavioral trends observed in rural Minnesota counties of similar size

• Facebook as the community hub: school sports, local government updates, church and community events, buy/sell/auction and farm/yard equipment groups drive consistent engagement.
• Video-first consumption: short-form video (Reels/Shorts) gains across all ages; long-form YouTube for ag/DIY, local sports highlights, sermons, and how-to content.
• Messaging > public posting for younger users: Snapchat and Instagram DMs for day-to-day communication; Facebook Messenger common across ages.
• Local trust signals matter: content from recognizable local people/organizations outperforms polished brand creative; event reminders and weather/ag updates see high saves/shares.
• Prime engagement windows: early morning (6–8 a.m.), lunch (11:30 a.m.–1 p.m.), and evenings (7–9 p.m.); weekend activity spikes around local events and sports.
• Cross-posting works when tailored: the same short video performs best when captioned for Facebook community context, hashtagged for Instagram, and clipped for YouTube Shorts.

Notes and sources

• Sources: Pew Research Center Social Media Use (2023 teens; 2024 adults), U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2018–2022 (Pipestone County age/sex composition).
• Method: Applied Pew platform-by-age adoption to the county’s age mix, with rural adjustments observed by Pew (rural slightly higher Facebook, slightly lower TikTok/Instagram/Snapchat than urban). Figures are rounded estimates appropriate for planning and benchmarking.