Hardeman County

Hardeman County, Texas — key demographics

Population

• 2020 Census: 3,549
• 2023 estimate: ~3.4K (continued gradual decline from 2010)

Age

• Median age: ~44 years
• Under 18: ~22%
• 65 and over: ~25%

Gender

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Race and ethnicity

• White alone: ~85–90%
• Black or African American alone: ~3–5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~1–2%
• Asian alone: <1%
• Two or more races: ~5–9%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~20–23%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~66–70%

Households and housing

• Households: ~1,450–1,550
• Average household size: ~2.3
• Family households: ~60–65% of all households
• Married-couple households: ~45–50% of all households
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~73–78%
• Median household income: roughly mid–$40Ks to high–$40Ks
• Persons in poverty: ~15–18%

Insights

• Small, aging, and slowly declining population.
• Majority non-Hispanic White with a sizable Hispanic/Latino community.
• Small household sizes and high owner-occupancy consistent with rural Texas counties.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 ACS; 2023 population estimates/QuickFacts).

• Scope: Hardeman County, Texas (2020 Census population 3,549; ~695 sq mi; density ≈5.1 people/sq mi)
• Estimated email users: ≈2,700 residents. Method: adults are roughly three‑quarters of the population; rural internet adoption and near‑universal email use among internet users yield ~75–80% email penetration.
• Age distribution of email users (estimated):
  • Under 18: ~12–15% (school accounts, lower daily use)
  • 18–34: ~20–22%
  • 35–64: ~45–48%
  • 65+: ~18–22% (high adoption but somewhat lower intensity)
• Gender split: ~50/50; email adoption shows minimal gender gap in national and Texas rural data.
• Digital access and trends:
  • About 7 in 10 households subscribe to a broadband service; roughly 8–9 in 10 have a computer/smartphone at home.
  • Smartphone‑only internet households are common (≈1 in 5), influencing email access via mobile rather than desktop.
  • Connectivity is concentrated around Quanah and Chillicothe; outside towns, fixed options thin out and residents rely more on fixed‑wireless or mobile data.
  • Trend is improving: gradual gains in subscriptions and speeds as regional fiber and fixed‑wireless builds expand.
• Insight: Despite very low population density, email is effectively mainstream; constraints are more about connection quality and device type than willingness to use email.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Hardeman County, Texas

Snapshot

• Rural, sparsely populated Panhandle county centered on the US‑287 corridor (Quanah–Chillicothe). Mobility patterns and network investment follow this corridor; coverage thins quickly off-highway across ranchland.

User estimates (2024–2025)

• Population baseline: 2020 Census count 3,549; modest decline since 2020 typical of the region.
• Estimated total mobile phone users (any handset): 2,900–3,200 residents (about 82–90% of the population).
• Estimated smartphone users: 2,450–2,650 residents (about 69–75% of the population; roughly 86–90% of residents age 13+).
• Age cohort estimates:
  • Ages 18–64: near-universal phone ownership; 85–90% smartphone adoption.
  • Ages 65+: phone ownership high but more mixed device types; 60–70% smartphone adoption, with a notable minority retaining basic LTE handsets.
  • Teens (13–17): smartphone adoption ~90–95%.

Demographic usage patterns

• Older population share is materially higher than the Texas average, and median household income is lower than the state. These two factors show up as:
  • Higher reliance on prepaid and MVNO plans (roughly half of lines in-county, vs about one‑third statewide).
  • Longer device replacement cycles (handsets remain in service 4–5 years vs ~3 years in metro Texas).
  • More mixed use of basic LTE/feature phones among seniors compared with the state.
• Smartphone-only households exist but are driven more by fixed-broadband gaps than preference; when fiber/cable is absent, households lean on mobile hotspots or fixed wireless.
• Platform and app behavior: slightly higher Android share than Texas overall; heavier use of Wi‑Fi calling in fringe coverage zones.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage pattern: Strongest along US‑287 and in/near Quanah and Chillicothe. Off-corridor pasture/rangeland sees larger pockets of weak LTE and low-band-only 5G; service can drop indoors in metal-roof structures and canyons.
• 5G layers:
  • Low-band 5G (600/700/850 MHz) is present along the main corridor and towns and is the primary 5G layer countywide.
  • Mid-band 5G (C‑band or 2.5 GHz) is limited or spotty compared with Texas metros; where present, it is typically confined to the US‑287 corridor or a few town sites.
• Carriers and public-safety:
  • AT&T FirstNet Band 14 is active on key sites, improving rural reach and emergency communications.
  • Verizon’s rural LTE grid remains strong on highways; C‑band mid‑band build is sparse.
  • T‑Mobile’s low-band 600 MHz underpins broad coverage; mid-band n41 appears in corridor/town sectors more than in outlying areas.
• Backhaul: Fiber follows US‑287; many rural sites use microwave backhaul. Where microwave is the only option, capacity and latency are more variable than in fiber-fed Texas metros.
• Fixed wireless interplay: CBRS and licensed fixed-wireless providers help fill broadband gaps; residents often pair these with mobile service rather than relying solely on cellular for home Internet.
• Real-world speeds:
  • In-town/on-corridor: typical 5G low-band/LTE downloads ~30–120 Mbps; mid-band 5G sectors, where available, can exceed 200 Mbps.
  • Off-corridor: 5–25 Mbps is common on low-band LTE/5G; uplink can fall below 3–5 Mbps and may require Wi‑Fi calling for dependable voice indoors.

How Hardeman County differs from Texas overall

• Adoption and devices:
  • Lower overall smartphone penetration (high‑60s to mid‑70s percent of population vs low‑80s in Texas).
  • Higher share of prepaid/MVNO lines and basic LTE phones, driven by income and age mix.
  • Slower upgrade cadence; older device mix limits access to newer 5G bands.
• Network and experience:
  • Coverage is coverage-first (low-band) rather than capacity-first (mid-band) as in metro Texas; mid-band 5G density is far lower.
  • Greater dependence on Wi‑Fi calling and signal boosters in metal/concrete structures.
  • More day-to-day variability in speeds due to microwave backhaul on rural sites; fewer carrier-aggregated layers than in cities.
• Usage behavior:
  • Median monthly mobile data use per smartphone trends lower than Texas metro users, with more Wi‑Fi offload where home broadband is available.
  • Mobile hotspots and fixed wireless are more common substitutes for wired broadband than in urban Texas.

Implications and near-term outlook (next 12–24 months)

• Expect incremental improvements, not metro-grade leaps: selective additions of mid-band 5G sectors on highway/town sites, modest capacity gains via carrier aggregation, and targeted FirstNet enhancements.
• The primary user experience constraint will remain off-corridor coverage depth and uplink capacity; residents and businesses in outlying areas will continue to rely on low-band layers, Wi‑Fi calling, and fixed wireless for reliability.

Social media snapshot for Hardeman County, Texas

How the numbers were derived

• Population base: ≈3,400 residents; ≈2,650 adults 18+ (U.S. Census Bureau; county is older than the U.S. average).
• Platform reach and demographic splits are modeled from the latest Pew Research Center findings for rural adults and U.S. teens, scaled to local demographics. Figures are best read as county-level estimates.

Overall usage

• Adults using at least one major platform (incl. YouTube): ≈80% of adults
• Teens (13–17) using at least one platform: ≈95%

Most-used platforms among adults (percent of adults)

• YouTube: 78%
• Facebook: 70%
• Instagram: 33%
• TikTok: 23%
• Snapchat: 22%
• Pinterest: 27%
• X/Twitter: 20%
• LinkedIn: 12%
• Reddit: 13% Notes: Individuals use multiple platforms; Facebook and YouTube dominate across age groups, while Instagram/TikTok skew younger and Pinterest skews female.

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

• 18–29: ~90% use social; strongest on Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube
• 30–49: ~85% use social; strongest on Facebook and YouTube, growing on Instagram
• 50–64: ~70% use social; primarily Facebook and YouTube, some Pinterest
• 65+: ~50% use social; mostly Facebook for community/news and YouTube for how‑to and church services
• Teens 13–17: ~95% use social; TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube dominate; Facebook marginal

Gender breakdown

• Overall adult social usage: Women ≈54%, Men ≈46%
• Platform skews:
  • Facebook and Pinterest: female‑leaning (Pinterest heavily female)
  • YouTube and Reddit: male‑leaning
  • Instagram and TikTok: near gender‑balanced

Behavioral trends and local patterns

• Facebook is the community hub: heavy use of local groups for school updates, youth sports, obituaries, church events, weather/emergency info, and yard‑sale/Marketplace activity.
• YouTube is utility‑driven: how‑to content, equipment maintenance, ag/ranch topics, hunting/fishing, and livestreamed church services.
• Short‑form video is rising among under‑35s: TikTok/Reels for entertainment, local highlights, and small‑business promos; cross‑posting from Instagram to Facebook is common.
• Messaging gravitated to Facebook Messenger group chats and SMS; WhatsApp usage is modest.
• Shopping and discovery: Facebook Marketplace for secondhand goods; Pinterest for recipes, DIY, crafts; Instagram for visual discovery of local boutiques and services.
• Timing: Engagement spikes before work (6–8 a.m.), lunch (noon hour), and evenings (7–10 p.m.); weather events and high‑school sports days drive surges.
• Trust and news: Local information is often first seen via Facebook pages/groups rather than official websites; posts from schools, county offices, churches, and booster clubs carry outsized influence.

Implications

• To reach most adults, prioritize Facebook and YouTube; add Instagram for 18–44 and TikTok for under‑35.
• Use community‑centric creative (events, schools, weather, church, ag) and short video. Promote via local groups and Marketplace where appropriate.
• For women 25–54, include Pinterest for DIY/home/food content; for men 18–44, add YouTube how‑to and Reddit interest communities.