Powder River County

Powder River County, Montana — key demographics

Population size

• 1,694 (2020 Census)

Age (ACS 2018–2022)

• Median age: about 48
• Under 18: ~22%
• 18–64: ~50%
• 65 and over: ~28%

Gender (ACS 2018–2022)

• Male: ~52%
• Female: ~48%

Racial/ethnic composition

• White alone: ~95% (ACS 2018–2022)
• American Indian and Alaska Native alone: ~1–2% (ACS 2018–2022)
• Two or more races: ~2–3% (ACS 2018–2022)
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~3% (ACS 2018–2022)
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~93% (ACS 2018–2022)
• Other groups (Black, Asian, NHPI): each ~0–1% (ACS 2018–2022)

Households (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: roughly 770–800
• Persons per household: ~2.2
• Family households: ~60–65% of households
• Married-couple households: ~50–55% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~20–25%
• Nonfamily households: ~35–40%
• Householder living alone: ~30–35% (about half of these age 65+)

Insights

• Very small, sparsely populated county with an older age profile (nearly three in ten residents are 65+)
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White with very small representation from other groups
• Small household sizes and a high share of married-couple and nonfamily households

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

Powder River County, MT snapshot

• Population and density: ~1,694 residents across ~3,297 sq mi (≈0.5 people/sq mi; among Montana’s most sparsely populated counties).
• Estimated email users: ≈1,200 residents use email regularly (roughly 70% of those age 12+), reflecting rural/older demographics and limited broadband.
• Age distribution of email users (share of users): 12–17: 8%; 18–34: 20%; 35–54: 32%; 55–64: 18%; 65+: 22%. Usage is near-universal among working-age adults and students, lower in the oldest cohorts.
• Gender split among users: ≈51% male, 49% female, mirroring the county’s population balance.
• Digital access and trends:
  • Households with a computer: ~85–88%.
  • Households with a broadband subscription (ACS 2018–2022): ~72–75% (below Montana’s ~85%).
  • Smartphone-only internet: ~10–12% of households.
  • No home internet subscription: ~22–25%.
  • Connectivity relies on a mix of DSL, fixed wireless, and satellite; fiber is limited outside town centers. Mobile coverage is strongest along highways/near Broadus and sparse across ranchland.
• Insight: Ultra-low density and long last-mile runs increase deployment costs, keeping broadband adoption and, consequently, email usage below state and national averages, though steady gains in fixed wireless and mobile broadband are narrowing the gap.

Mobile phone usage in Powder River County, Montana — summary with estimates, demographics, and infrastructure, emphasizing how it differs from state-level patterns.

Core context

• Population: 1,694 (2020 Census). One of Montana’s most sparsely populated counties, with very low settlement density and no urbanized areas (functionally 100% rural).
• County seat and main service hub: Broadus, on US‑212; MT‑59 runs north–south.

User estimates (modeled from 2020 Census age structure for very rural Montana counties and national/rural mobile adoption rates adjusted downward for older age mix)

• Estimated adult mobile phone users: 1,150–1,250 (roughly 68–74% of total population, 85–90% of adults).
• Estimated adult smartphone users: 1,050–1,150 (about 60–68% of total population, 78–85% of adults).
• Teen users (13–17): about 90–100 smartphone users, reflecting very high adoption in that cohort.
• Device mix: compared with Montana overall, a higher share of basic/feature phones among seniors and more dual‑device households (smartphone plus landline or radio) among ranching operations.

Demographic breakdown of use (estimates; highlights are differences from statewide patterns)

• Age
  • 18–34: near‑universal smartphone ownership (≈95–98%). Smaller cohort share than state average, so this contributes less to total users than in urban counties.
  • 35–64: high ownership (≈90–94% smartphone), heavy work use for logistics and safety; more reliance on LTE voice/SMS than app‑based services during field work due to coverage variability.
  • 65+: noticeably lower smartphone adoption than Montana overall (≈68–75% vs ≈80%+ statewide), with a meaningful minority using basic phones or keeping a landline as primary voice.
• Income/household type
  • Modest median household incomes relative to the state correlate with higher use of prepaid plans and conservative data buckets; hotspot tethering is used selectively to avoid separate fixed broadband where fiber or DSL is unavailable.
  • A higher share of “cellular‑only internet” households outside Broadus than the state average, but also a higher share of “no home internet” among the oldest households than statewide.
• Occupation
  • Agriculture/ranching drives daytime usage in low‑signal areas; two‑way radios remain important complements. Text and photo messaging for herd, fencing, and weather coordination are common; streaming and high‑bandwidth apps are used mostly when back at home on Wi‑Fi.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Radio access technologies
  • LTE (4G) is the primary mobile layer. 5G availability is limited and mostly corridor‑based; outside main highways, 5G is sparse or absent. This contrasts with Montana’s urban counties (e.g., Yellowstone, Gallatin, Missoula) where 5G population coverage is widespread.
• Geographic coverage pattern
  • Strongest signals cluster around Broadus and along US‑212 and MT‑59. Large ranchland areas away from these corridors experience weak signal, one‑bar LTE, or dead zones, especially in draws and breaks.
  • Site density is low, with macro towers spaced far apart; many valleys depend on single‑sector azimuths, leading to variable indoor coverage.
• Carriers
  • All national carriers operate in the region, but practical usability differs: Verizon and AT&T generally provide the most reliable rural LTE; T‑Mobile’s footprint is improving but remains thinner off the main roads compared with the state’s population centers.
  • FirstNet (AT&T) coverage improvements benefit first responders and spill over to general users near upgraded sites, but coverage is still corridor‑centric.
• Backhaul and local internet interplay
  • Fiber backhaul reaches key community anchor institutions in Broadus; outside town, microwave backhaul and long fiber laterals constrain capacity at some sites.
  • Fixed broadband is a patchwork: fiber in/near Broadus and select routes; DSL and fixed wireless in many outlying areas; satellite (including Starlink) adoption is visibly higher than in urban counties. Wi‑Fi calling is a critical workaround for indoor voice reliability.
• Emergency and resilience
  • E911 is county‑based; during severe weather or wildfire, traffic spikes and single‑link backhaul can produce localized congestion or temporary outages. Residents often maintain a landline or radio as backup.

Key trends that diverge from Montana statewide

• Lower overall smartphone penetration due to an older age profile and coverage constraints; higher persistence of basic phones and landlines among seniors.
• Heavier reliance on LTE voice/SMS and Wi‑Fi calling; lower everyday use of bandwidth‑intensive apps when away from home compared with users in urban Montana.
• 5G remains limited and largely confined to the two highway corridors; statewide, 5G population coverage is much broader in and around metro areas.
• Greater share of households either cellular‑only for internet or without any home internet among the oldest households than statewide averages.
• Device and plan choices skew toward durability and cost control (prepaid, ruggedized phones, conservative data plans), reflecting ranching workflows and income mix.

Implications

• For service providers: incremental gains will come from adding low‑band coverage and small fill‑in sites along ranch roads, enabling carrier aggregation on existing LTE, and extending fiber backhaul to reduce peak congestion.
• For residents and businesses: Wi‑Fi calling, external antennas, and satellite or fixed‑wireless backups materially improve reliability; text-first communication remains the most dependable in fringe areas.

Powder River County, MT social media snapshot (2025)

Population baseline

• Total population: 1,694 (2020 Census)
• Adults (18+): ~1,350 (estimate; rural MT counties skew older)

Overall social media reach

• Adult social media users: ~880–970 (≈65–72% of adults), consistent with rural U.S. adoption rates

Most-used platforms among adults (share of adults; modeled from Pew Research 2024 platform reach, adjusted for a rural, older age profile)

• YouTube: 70–80% (≈945–1,080 adults)
• Facebook: 60–70% (≈810–945)
• Instagram: 25–35% (≈340–475)
• TikTok: 20–30% (≈270–405)
• Pinterest: 25–35% (≈340–475; over-indexes among women)
• Snapchat: 15–20% (≈200–270; concentrated among teens/20s)
• X (Twitter): 10–15% (≈135–200)
• Reddit: 8–12% (≈110–160)
• LinkedIn: 8–12% (≈110–160)
• WhatsApp: 10–15% (≈135–200)
• Nextdoor: 5–10% (≈70–135; neighborhood-level use where available)

Age profile of local social media users (share of all users; modeled)

• 13–17: ~8–10% (very high usage; platforms: Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube)
• 18–29: ~15–18% (heavy on Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat; YouTube universal)
• 30–49: ~30–35% (Facebook, YouTube dominant; Instagram moderate; Messenger/WhatsApp for family)
• 50–64: ~25–28% (Facebook and YouTube; growing TikTok viewing, limited posting)
• 65+: ~12–15% (primarily Facebook for community info and YouTube for news/how‑to)

Gender breakdown (modeled)

• Overall users: roughly even male/female
• Platform skews: Pinterest female-heavy; Reddit and X male‑skewed; Facebook and YouTube broadly balanced

Behavioral trends observed in rural/low‑density MT contexts that fit Powder River County’s profile

• Community hub effect: Facebook Groups and Pages function as bulletin boards for school sports, county fair, road/weather/wildfire updates, church/community events, and buy/sell (Marketplace)
• Video viewing over creation: YouTube and TikTok are used heavily for consumption; creation rates are lower due to bandwidth, privacy, and small‑community visibility
• Messaging-first: Facebook Messenger (and SMS) are primary; WhatsApp used among families with out‑of‑area ties
• Timing: Engagement spikes evenings (6–9 p.m.) and weekends; real‑time surges during severe weather, emergencies, and local events
• Content that performs: Local faces, straight-to-the-point posts, event notices, livestock/ag tips, school activities; shorter videos or image posts outperform long, high‑bitrate video
• Seasonality: Noticeable lifts around calving/branding, back‑to‑school, county fair, hunting season, and holiday events

Notes on method and sources

• County population: 2020 U.S. Census (1,694)
• Adoption rates derived from Pew Research Center’s Social Media Use reports (2021–2024), with rural and age reweighting to reflect an older, lower‑density county profile. Figures are modeled estimates due to the absence of platform‑level reporting at the county scale.