Union County

Union County, Oregon — key demographics

Population size

• 26,196 (2020 Decennial Census)
• 26,5xx (2023 Census Population Estimate; modest growth since 2020)

Age (ACS 2019–2023, 5‑year)

• Median age: ~38–39 years
• Under 18: ~22%
• 18–24: ~13%
• 25–44: ~24%
• 45–64: ~23%
• 65 and over: ~18%

Gender (ACS 2019–2023)

• Male: ~50%
• Female: ~50%

Race and ethnicity (ACS 2019–2023)

• White alone: ~90–91%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~8–9%
• Two or more races: ~5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1–2%
• Asian: ~1%
• Black or African American: <1%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: <1%
• Note: Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity; Non‑Hispanic White is roughly mid‑80s percent.

Households (ACS 2019–2023)

• Total households: ~10.4k–10.6k
• Average household size: ~2.4–2.5
• Family households: ~60–62% of households
• Married‑couple families: ~47–49% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~27–30%
• Nonfamily households: ~38–40%
• Living alone: ~30–32%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5‑year estimates; 2023 Population Estimates Program).

Union County, OR email usage snapshot (2025)

• Population ≈26,500; density ≈13 residents per square mile (largely rural, centered on La Grande and the I‑84 corridor).
• Estimated email users: ≈21,000 (≈79% of residents; ≈92% of adults).
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 13–17: ≈1,300 (6%)
  • 18–34: ≈5,200 (25%)
  • 35–64: ≈9,700 (46%)
  • 65+: ≈4,800 (23%)
• Gender split: ≈50.5% female, 49.5% male; email adoption is effectively equal across genders (gap <2 percentage points).
• Digital access and trends:
  • Strongest fixed broadband (cable/fiber/5G) in and around La Grande and along I‑84; outlying valleys and mountain communities rely more on DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite with lower speeds and higher latency.
  • Smartphone access is widespread; a notable minority of households are smartphone‑only for internet.
  • State/federal rural broadband programs are expanding fiber across Eastern Oregon through 2028, reducing unserved pockets and improving reliability.

Insights: Email reach is highest among working‑age adults, with growing adoption among seniors as access improves. Optimize campaigns for mobile reading and include low‑bandwidth fallbacks to ensure coverage in lower‑speed areas.

Union County, Oregon mobile phone usage — 2024 snapshot

Topline

• Union County’s mobile uptake is high but a bit below Oregon’s metro-driven averages. Coverage and 5G capacity cluster along the I‑84 corridor (La Grande/Island City), with LTE still dominant in outlying valleys and foothills. A sizable student population and a larger‑than‑average senior cohort create a barbell in device sophistication and usage patterns. Prepaid and budget plans are more common than statewide, and device replacement cycles are longer.

User estimates (people and lines)

• Population base: ~26.5K residents
• Mobile phone users (any mobile, unique): ~24.6K (≈93% of residents), 2–4 percentage points below Oregon’s statewide rate
• Smartphone users: ~22.3K (≈84% of residents; ≈88–89% of adults), 2–5 points below statewide
• 5G‑capable handsets among smartphone users: ~70% (statewide ≈75–80%)
• Active lines per adult: ≈1.1–1.2 (wearables, tablets, hot‑spots push line counts above headcount more in La Grande than in rural tracts)
• Prepaid share of active mobile lines: ≈33–38% (higher than Oregon’s ≈25–30%), driven by price sensitivity and seasonal work patterns

Demographic patterns (how usage differs from Oregon overall)

• Age
  • 18–29 (boosted by Eastern Oregon University): near‑universal smartphone adoption (≈97–99%); heavier app and hotspot use; above‑average MVNO/prepaid adoption
  • 30–64: high adoption (≈90–93%); moderate multi‑line ownership (work + personal)
  • 65+: smartphone adoption ≈68–72% (below Oregon seniors by ~6–10 points); more basic/voice‑first devices and LTE‑only handsets persist
• Income and plan type
  • Households under ~$50K show notably higher prepaid and family‑plan usage; device upgrade cycles ~6–12 months longer than in Portland metro
  • Mobile‑only internet households are common among students and renters in La Grande and among remote households lacking competitive wired broadband; share is modestly above the state average
• Urban vs. rural within the county
  • La Grande/Island City: highest 5G penetration, most mid‑band capacity, and strongest indoor coverage; app‑heavy, video‑centric usage profiles
  • Union, Elgin, Cove, Imbler, North Powder, Summerville, and unincorporated areas: LTE‑reliant, more signal variability; greater use of voice/SMS and Wi‑Fi offload; higher external antenna/hot‑spot use for home connectivity

Usage and behavior

• Average cellular data per smartphone: ≈16–19 GB/month (Oregon statewide skews higher, ≈20–25 GB), reflecting LTE reliance and cautious data habits where mid‑band 5G is sparse
• Text/SMS remains comparatively strong among older users; OTT messaging dominates among students
• Workflows: agriculture, logistics, and public sector users lean on LTE push‑to‑talk and coverage predictability over peak speeds

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Coverage geography
  • Strongest along I‑84 (La Grande/Island City, Ladd Canyon), US‑30, and OR‑82 to Elgin; shadowing increases along canyon walls, forested slopes, and some valley fringes (e.g., Catherine Creek area and foothill roads)
• 5G footprint (as reflected by carrier maps and field reports through 2024)
  • T‑Mobile: mid‑band 5G (n41) in and around La Grande/Island City; rapid fall‑off to LTE outside town centers
  • Verizon: low‑band 5G (DSS “Nationwide”) in La Grande; LTE is primary outside; limited/no Ultra‑Wideband
  • AT&T: low‑band 5G in La Grande core; LTE across smaller towns and rural stretches
• Capacity and backhaul
  • Mid‑band 5G capacity nodes concentrated near population centers, schools, and the I‑84 corridor; rural sectors are bandwidth‑constrained at peak
  • Fiber backhaul present along I‑84 and into La Grande via regional carriers; rural tower backhaul mixes fiber, microwave, and leased transport, which can bottleneck upgrades
• Resilience
  • Sites along primary corridors generally have better backup power and restoration priority; single‑route backhaul to some rural sectors raises outage risk during wildfire or winter storms

How Union County diverges from state trends

• Coverage/capacity: Lower mid‑band 5G availability outside the county seat; Oregon’s urban counties enjoy denser 5G and higher median speeds
• Adoption: Slightly lower smartphone adoption overall, with a wider senior adoption gap; higher prevalence of LTE‑only devices
• Plans and price: Higher prepaid/MVNO share and longer device replacement cycles than the statewide mix
• Data intensity: Lower average cellular data per smartphone than state urban averages, but higher reliance on mobile hot‑spots where wired broadband options are limited
• Concentration: Usage and capacity are more centralized (La Grande/I‑84) than in most Oregon counties, making performance more variable across short distances

Practical takeaways

• Investments that extend mid‑band 5G and fiber backhaul from La Grande toward Union, Elgin, and Cove would close the largest performance gaps
• Senior‑focused device support and affordable 5G handset programs will move the adoption needle faster here than in metro Oregon
• Prepaid and family‑plan promotions, campus partnerships, and improved rural in‑building solutions (repeaters, CPE with external antennas) align well with local demand patterns

Social media usage in Union County, Oregon (2025 snapshot)

Scope and method

• Best-available county-level estimates derived from 2024–2025 national/state surveys (e.g., Pew) and platform audience patterns; figures represent adults (18+) unless noted.

Core user stats

• Population: ~26,000; adults 18+: ~21,000
• Social media users (any platform): ~17,500 adults (≈84% of adults)

Age groups (share who use any social platform)

• 18–29: 95–98%
• 30–49: 90–92%
• 50–64: 78–83%
• 65+: 45–55%

Gender breakdown

• Overall users: roughly 50% women, 50% men
• Notable platform skews: Pinterest skews female; Reddit and X (Twitter) skew male; Facebook is near parity; Snapchat skews younger and slightly female; LinkedIn skews male in this market.

Most-used platforms (estimated reach among adults)

• YouTube: 82–85%
• Facebook: 65–72% (highest daily use among 30+)
• Instagram: 40–48%
• TikTok: 30–36%
• Snapchat: 25–30% (strong 18–29, including EOU students)
• Pinterest: 30–35% (women 25–54)
• X (Twitter): 20–24%
• LinkedIn: 22–28%
• Reddit: 18–22%
• Nextdoor: 8–12% (primarily La Grande neighborhoods)

Behavioral trends

• Community-first usage: Facebook Groups power local life (school and sports updates, wildfire/road conditions, garage sales, buy–sell–trade, lost pets). Facebook Events is the default for event discovery.
• Video-forward consumption: YouTube for how-to, repairs, outdoors, and local news recaps; Instagram Reels and TikTok for short local clips. Few local creators, but sharing and commenting are high.
• Messaging over posting: Facebook Messenger is universal across ages; Snapchat dominates coordination among teens/young adults. WhatsApp remains niche.
• Mobile-first with bandwidth constraints: Brief captioned videos and image carousels perform best. Engagement peaks early morning, lunch, and 8–10 pm.
• Trust hierarchy: Highest responsiveness to posts from county/city agencies, ODOT, schools, hospitals, and established local media; lower trust in anonymous pages.
• Local commerce: Facebook Marketplace/Groups are primary for services and resale; Instagram Shops help boutiques; classifieds have shifted off Craigslist.

Targeting guidance by cohort

• 18–29: YouTube (~95%), Instagram (70%+ of cohort), Snapchat (60%+), TikTok (60%+)
• 30–49: Facebook (80%+), YouTube (90%), Instagram (50%)
• 50–64: Facebook (70%+), YouTube (~80%)
• 65+: Facebook (45–55%), YouTube (45–55%)