Hanson County

Hanson County, South Dakota — key demographics

Population size

• 3,461 (2020 Census)
• ~3,5xx (2023 Census Bureau estimate; small year-to-year changes typical for the county)

Age

• Median age: ~38 years
• Under 18: ~27%
• 18 to 64: ~57%
• 65 and over: ~16%

Gender

• Male: ~51%
• Female: ~49%

Racial/ethnic composition

• White, non-Hispanic: ~96%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~2%
• Two or more races: ~1–2%
• American Indian and Alaska Native: ~0.5–1%
• Black or African American: ~0.2%
• Asian: ~0.2%

Household data

• Households: ~1,300
• Average household size: ~2.6–2.7
• Family households: ~70% (majority married-couple)
• Households with children under 18: ~1/3
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~80%+

Notes: Figures are from the U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census and latest ACS 5-year estimates), rounded for clarity due to small population size.

Hanson County, SD snapshot

• Population: 3,461 (2020 Census); density ~8 people per sq. mile.
• Estimated email users: ~2,300 adults. Method: ~2,630 adults (≈76% of population) × ~88% email adoption typical for rural U.S. = ≈2.3k users.

Age distribution of email users (estimated, rounded)

• 18–29: 23% (530 users)
• 30–49: 33% (760 users)
• 50–64: 27% (620 users)
• 65+: 17% (390 users)

Gender split

• Roughly even; ≈1,150 women and ≈1,150 men use email, reflecting near 50/50 county demographics and similar adoption by gender.

Digital access and connectivity

• Broadband subscription: ~84% of households; computer access: ~92% of households (ACS-style measures for rural SD counties).
• Connectivity context: Sparse population increases last‑mile costs, but regional telephone/fiber cooperatives serve towns and farms; 4G/5G mobile coverage is strong along major corridors, supporting email on smartphones.
• Trend: Household broadband and smartphone ownership continue to rise, lifting email use among older residents; usage is already near‑universal among working‑age adults.

Insights

• Email penetration is mature and stable; growth comes mainly from improved rural broadband and smartphone access rather than new adopters in younger cohorts.

Mobile phone usage in Hanson County, South Dakota — county snapshot (focus: what differs from statewide patterns)

By the numbers (best-available estimates, 2023–2024)

• Population and households: 3,461 residents (2020 Census) in roughly 1,280 households.
• Mobile phone users: about 2,750–2,850 residents use a mobile phone (≈80–82% of the total population).
• Smartphone users: roughly 2,450–2,600 residents (≈70–75% of the total population; ≈88–92% of mobile users).
• Mobile-only internet households: approximately 10–12% of households rely primarily on cellular data/hotspots for home internet, higher than the statewide share (≈7–9%).
• Households with no internet subscription: roughly 8–10% (above the statewide average of ≈5–7%).

Demographic breakdown (usage patterns)

• Age
  • 13–17: smartphone adoption around 88–92% (near state levels).
  • 18–34: very high smartphone adoption (≈93–96%), similar to the state.
  • 35–64: high adoption (≈85–90%), slightly below urban/state averages.
  • 65+: any mobile phone usage ≈80–85%, smartphone usage ≈65–72% (lower than statewide seniors, reflecting rural device-retention and cost sensitivity).
• Income and plan type
  • Greater use of value plans and MVNOs than the state average, aligning with rural price sensitivity.
  • Unlimited data plan take‑up is somewhat lower than in Sioux Falls–area households; hotspot add‑ons are more common in mobile‑only homes.
• Race/ethnicity
  • The county is overwhelmingly White and has a much smaller share of Native American residents than the state average. As a result, the statewide digital‑divide pattern by race is less pronounced locally; age and income are the primary drivers of differences in mobile adoption.
• Device mix
  • Android share is higher than in the state’s urban counties; iPhone share correspondingly lower. Feature phones persist among older residents more than the state average.

How Hanson County differs from South Dakota overall

• Higher reliance on mobile as primary home internet: Mobile-only households are several points above the state average due to pockets without affordable fixed broadband and farm/outlying locations.
• More pronounced senior gap: Seniors are more likely to carry basic/feature phones and less likely to use smartphones than seniors statewide.
• Plan economics: Prepaid/MVNO and shared data plans are more prevalent than the statewide mix, reflecting cost control and multi‑line family plans common in farm and small‑business households.
• Performance variability: Network experience is more uneven than statewide averages—fast 5G along the Interstate corridor and around towns, more modest LTE/low‑band 5G performance in interior sections.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Macro coverage
  • All three national carriers (Verizon, AT&T, T‑Mobile) provide countywide voice/LTE coverage.
  • Low‑band 5G is broadly available from the national carriers across most of the county.
  • Mid‑band 5G (capacity/speed layers) is concentrated along I‑90 and near the towns (e.g., Alexandria/Emery), tapering in lower‑density areas. Typical user experience: 200–500 Mbps on mid‑band 5G near the corridor; 30–120 Mbps on low‑band 5G/LTE away from it.
• Sites and backhaul
  • A small rural footprint of roughly a dozen macro tower sites in or immediately around the county, with additional off‑county sites covering fringe areas.
  • Backhaul is a mix of fiber and microwave; highway‑adjacent sites typically have fiber, supporting higher 5G capacity.
• Fixed broadband context (relevant to mobile usage)
  • Local telecom cooperatives have extended fiber to towns and many farmsteads, but unserved/underserved pockets remain. Where fiber is present, households offload to Wi‑Fi; where it is absent or costly, residents lean on mobile hotspots, raising the mobile‑only share versus the state.
• Reliability and emergency coverage
  • Highway corridors and town centers have strong redundancy; interior sections can see reduced indoor coverage in metal‑roof structures, a more common issue here than in statewide urban areas.

Key takeaways

• Hanson County’s overall mobile adoption is high, but smartphone use—especially among seniors—trails state averages.
• The county shows a distinctly higher dependence on cellular for primary home connectivity than South Dakota overall.
• Network performance is bifurcated: excellent along I‑90 and towns; adequate but slower in interior rural blocks.
• Price sensitivity drives greater use of prepaid/MVNO options and longer device replacement cycles compared with the state average.

Sources and basis

• 2020 Census population for Hanson County; ACS “Computer and Internet Use” (S2801) patterns for rural counties; Pew Research Center smartphone adoption trends; FCC mobile coverage/service maps (2023–2024); statewide benchmarks from South Dakota ACS and carrier public coverage data. Figures shown are county‑specific estimates derived from these sources and rural adoption patterns.

Hanson County, South Dakota — social media snapshot (2024 modeled estimates)

What this is

• Figures are modeled for Hanson County using U.S. Census/ACS population structure and Pew Research Center 2023–2024 social media adoption benchmarks for rural/small‑town America. County‑level platform releases are not published; numbers below are the best-available local estimates.

User stats

• Population: ~3,500 residents; ~2,980 are age 13+
• Social media users: ~2,450 (≈71% of total population; ≈82% of residents age 13+)
• Daily active social users: ~1,700 (≈70% of social users)
• Devices: overwhelmingly mobile-first; growing connected‑TV use for YouTube/short‑form video

Age mix of local social users

• 13–17: ~8%
• 18–24: ~10%
• 25–34: ~15%
• 35–44: ~17%
• 45–54: ~16%
• 55–64: ~16%
• 65+: ~18%

Gender breakdown (share of social users)

• Women: ~51%
• Men: ~49%

Most‑used platforms among Hanson County residents age 13+ (share of social users; rounded)

• YouTube: ~80% (≈1,960 users)
• Facebook: ~70% (≈1,715)
• Facebook Messenger: ~65% (≈1,590)
• Instagram: ~40% (≈980)
• Snapchat: ~38% (≈930)
• TikTok: ~34% (≈830)
• Pinterest: ~30% (≈735)
• X (Twitter): ~20% (≈490)
• LinkedIn: ~16% (≈390)
• Reddit: ~15% (≈365)
• Nextdoor: ~8% (≈195) Notes: Facebook and Messenger are effectively paired for many users; Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok skew heavily to under‑35s; Pinterest skews female 25–54.

Behavioral trends

• Community and commerce: Facebook is the default hub for local news, school/athletics, churches, civic groups, and Marketplace. Engagement peaks evenings (roughly 6–9 p.m.) and weekends.
• Youth communication: Snapchat is the primary daily messaging app for teens/young adults; “streaks” and Stories drive multiple check‑ins per day. TikTok continues steady growth for entertainment and local creator content.
• Video habits: YouTube is used for how‑to, agriculture/outdoor, product research, and cord‑cutting TV on smart TVs; Shorts are an important discovery surface.
• Shopping and discovery: Facebook Marketplace is widely used; Instagram and TikTok influence consideration for apparel, home goods, and events. Pinterest is strong for recipes, DIY, crafts, and seasonal projects.
• Messaging patterns: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat dominate interpersonal messaging; WhatsApp usage remains low.
• News and alerts: Many residents rely on Facebook posts from regional outlets, schools, and public safety; weather and road‑condition events trigger short‑term spikes in usage.
• Demographic skews: Women over‑index on Facebook, Instagram, and Pinterest; men over‑index on YouTube and Reddit. Older users cluster on Facebook; under‑35s split time across Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram.

Sources and method

• U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2022 5‑year tables (population/age structure)
• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2023–2024 (national and rural breakouts)
• Percentages applied to Hanson County’s age mix to produce county‑level modeled estimates