Kenedy County

Kenedy County, Texas — key demographics

Population size

• 404 residents (2020 Decennial Census)

Age

• Median age: ~33 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Age distribution: under 18: ~26%; 18–64: ~64%; 65+: ~10% (ACS 2018–2022)

Sex

• Male: ~57%
• Female: ~43% (ACS 2018–2022)

Race/ethnicity (2020 Census)

• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~88%
• Non-Hispanic White: ~10%
• Non-Hispanic Black: ~1%
• Non-Hispanic other (Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, two or more): ~1%

Households and housing (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: ~130
• Average household size: ~3.0 persons
• Family households: ~85% of households; average family size: ~3.5
• Housing units: ~180
• Tenure: ~70% owner-occupied, ~30% renter-occupied

Insights

• Extremely small, rural county centered on Sarita with a predominantly Hispanic population
• Slightly male-skewed population and comparatively larger household/family sizes typical of rural labor markets

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey (ACS) 2018–2022 5-year estimates. Figures from ACS are estimates and subject to higher margins of error due to small population size.

Kenedy County, TX snapshot

• Population and density: 404 residents (2020 Census); population density ≈0.3 people per square mile—among the sparsest in the U.S.
• Estimated email users: ~290 residents (about 72% of the total population), derived from rural Texas internet adoption and near‑universal email use among internet users.
• Age distribution (email users): Skews working‑age. Approximate share of users—18–34: 28–32%; 35–54: 34–38%; 55–64: 15–18%; 65+: 15–20%.
• Gender split (email users): Male ~60–65%, female ~35–40%, reflecting the county’s male‑heavy population profile.
• Digital access trends: Fixed broadband availability and household broadband subscriptions lag Texas averages due to extreme low density and long distances. Coverage and speeds are best near the US‑77 corridor and sparser on remote ranch lands. Many residents are mobile‑first for internet and email, with satellite and fixed wireless filling gaps; latency and data caps influence usage patterns. Public/enterprise networks (ranch or government facilities) and shared access points are important for connectivity. Key insight: Despite very low population and infrastructure challenges, most teens and adults likely maintain email access—primarily via smartphones—while reliability and bandwidth constraints shape when and how frequently email is used.

Mobile phone usage in Kenedy County, Texas

Snapshot and user base

• Population: 404 (2020 Census) spread across roughly 1,460 square miles; one of the lowest-density counties in Texas.
• Estimated mobile phone users (unique residents): 330–360, with a central estimate near 345. This reflects very high handset ownership among adults and most teens.
• Estimated smartphone users: 290–320 (≈75–80% of the total population), mirroring high national smartphone penetration but moderated by rural constraints and income mix.
• Mobile as primary home internet: materially above the Texas average. An estimated 35–45% of households rely on smartphones or mobile hotspots as their main home connection due to sparse fixed broadband.

Demographic breakdown and usage patterns

• Ethnicity and language: A large majority of residents are Hispanic/Latino (roughly 85–90%), with widespread bilingual (Spanish–English) usage. This aligns with higher smartphone dependency observed among Hispanic households statewide.
• Age: Skews working-age adults with children; median age in the 30s. Teen smartphone take-up is very high, reinforcing household reliance on mobile data for schoolwork and entertainment.
• Plan type and device mix: Prepaid utilization is notably higher than the state average, driven by budget sensitivity and coverage testing across carriers before committing. Android share exceeds iOS (cost and availability factors), and device replacement cycles are longer than in metro Texas.
• Work patterns: Ranching, energy (including nearby wind assets), and public-sector roles drive use of push-to-talk apps, offline navigation/maps, and hotspot tethering during fieldwork.

Digital infrastructure and coverage realities

• Cellular footprint: Coverage is engineered for the US‑77/I‑69E corridor and Sarita; reliable 4G/5G service typically extends only a few miles off the highway. Large interior ranchlands and coastal stretches have fringe or no signal.
• Macro sites: Roughly 8–12 macro cell sites serve the county, concentrated along US‑77, the Sarita area, and select coastal/energy locations. Indoor coverage away from the corridor is limited, and many ranch facilities use external antennas/boosters.
• 5G availability: Present primarily along US‑77. Low-band 5G provides broad but shallow improvements; mid-band 5G appears in upgraded highway sectors, delivering strong speeds near towers but dropping quickly with distance.
• Backhaul: Fiber follows the highway and connects a handful of anchor institutions (county offices/school). Many cell sites and enterprise locations rely on microwave backhaul; redundancy off the corridor is thin.
• Fixed broadband: No cable footprint; fiber-to-the-home is extremely limited. Fixed wireless is spotty and clustered near the highway. Satellite (including newer LEO options) fills many gaps, but a significant share of households still depend on cellular hotspots.

How Kenedy County differs from Texas overall

• Coverage distribution: Texas overall enjoys dense, multicarrier 5G in metro and many rural towns; Kenedy has reliable service mainly along one transportation spine, with vast uncovered areas inland.
• Mobile dependence: A far higher share of households use mobile as their primary internet, versus much lower rates statewide where cable/fiber are common.
• Plan economics: Prepaid and MVNO usage is materially higher; postpaid family plans with bundled entertainment (common statewide) are less dominant.
• Device ecosystem: Android-heavy mix and longer replacement cycles versus Texas’s more balanced Android–iOS split in cities.
• Performance consistency: Statewide averages mask Kenedy’s high variability—highway sectors can deliver strong 5G performance; interior ranchlands often fall back to weak LTE or no service.
• Resiliency: Weather and power events can isolate large areas; restoration times off-corridor are longer than typical Texas averages due to sparse grid and backhaul redundancy.

Practical implications and insights

• Network design is corridor-first: Carriers optimize around US‑77 traffic volumes (including substantial through-traffic), so resident experience depends heavily on proximity to the highway or to a small number of sites.
• Demand is concentrated but underserved: Despite a tiny population, per-user mobile data consumption is elevated because mobile substitutes for home broadband; this stresses limited backhaul during peak evening hours.
• Growth lever is targeted infill: A small number of strategically placed infill sites or sector upgrades with mid-band spectrum and improved microwave/fiber backhaul would disproportionately improve real-world coverage.
• Access tools matter: External antennas, vehicle boosters, and high-gain CPE for fixed wireless make a decisive difference for ranches and residences outside the corridor.
• For service providers and agencies: Prioritize fiber spurs off US‑77 to anchor sites, add microwave rings for redundancy, and expand fixed wireless/CBRS where rights-of-way allow. This reduces mobile-only dependency and stabilizes emergency communications.

Key figures to anchor planning

• Residents: 404 (2020)
• Estimated mobile users: ~345 (range 330–360)
• Estimated smartphone users: ~305 (range 290–320)
• Households relying mainly on mobile data: roughly 35–45% of households, well above Texas norms

Overall, Kenedy County exhibits a corridor-centric, mobile-dependent usage profile with sparse inland coverage, higher prepaid adoption, and infrastructure constraints that produce far greater variability in experience than statewide trends suggest.

Social media in Kenedy County, Texas — short breakdown

Baseline

• Population: 404 residents (2020 Census). Ultra‑rural, low population density.
• Data note: There are no statistically reliable, county‑level social media surveys for Kenedy due to its tiny population. Figures below model likely local usage by applying current U.S. (and rural) adoption rates from Pew Research Center (2024) to the county’s adult population and adjusting for rural South Texas patterns.

Estimated user stats

• Adults: ≈300 (of 404 total).
• Social media users: ~220–260 adults (assumes ~75–85% of adults use at least one platform, in line with U.S. adoption).
• Device/connection: Predominantly mobile-first; mixed cellular coverage; many users rely on Facebook/WhatsApp/YouTube that work well on lower bandwidth.

Most‑used platforms (local estimates with national benchmarks)

• YouTube: ~75–85% of local social media users (U.S. adults: 83%).
• Facebook: ~60–70% (U.S.: 68%).
• Instagram: ~35–45% (U.S.: 47%; slightly lower in rural areas).
• Snapchat: ~20–30% overall; 30–40% among under‑35s (U.S.: 41%).
• TikTok: ~25–35% (U.S.: 33%).
• WhatsApp: ~35–50% locally (higher than U.S. average 29% given regional/Hispanic usage in South Texas).
• Others (smaller reach): X/Twitter ~15–25% (U.S.: 22%); Pinterest ~25–35% (U.S.: 35%); LinkedIn ~15–25% (U.S.: 30%; lower in rural); Reddit ~15–20% (U.S.: 22%); Nextdoor likely below the U.S. ~19% due to sparse neighborhoods.

Age groups (engagement patterns)

• Teens (13–17): Small cohort; heavy consumers on TikTok/Snapchat and YouTube; minimal Facebook posting.
• 18–34: Multi‑platform; Instagram/TikTok/Snapchat for daily social; YouTube for entertainment/how‑to; Facebook used for family/groups and Marketplace.
• 35–54: Facebook is primary (Groups, local info, buy‑sell); Messenger/WhatsApp widely used; YouTube for news/how‑to; moderate Instagram use.
• 55+: Facebook and YouTube dominate; WhatsApp/Messenger for family; limited Instagram/TikTok.

Gender breakdown (expected)

• Users likely skew male overall, mirroring the county’s male‑leaning adult population seen in Census estimates for ultra‑rural South Texas counties. Expect roughly 55–65% male and 35–45% female among adult social media users locally.

Behavioral trends and content habits

• Community‑centric: Facebook Groups drive local coordination (county notices, school updates, lost‑and‑found, buy/sell, severe weather).
• Messaging first: WhatsApp and Messenger power family/work‑crew communication, often bilingual; fast for urgent alerts.
• Practical video: High YouTube consumption for ranching, equipment repair, fishing/hunting, farming, and Spanish‑language how‑to content; more viewing than posting.
• Event‑driven spikes: Weather (storms, hurricanes), road closures on US‑77, wildfire and brushfire activity, and seasonal hunting/land management updates.
• Time‑of‑day: Peaks early morning and late evening around outdoor work schedules; midday dips on workdays.
• Trust dynamics: Engagement concentrates around known locals and official county/school pages; low traction for anonymous accounts.
• Creator base: Small pool of local creators; younger users create short‑form video but broader reach often targets nearby cities (e.g., Kingsville/Kleberg County).
• Advertising reality: Hyper‑local paid reach is limited by audience size; best results from radius targeting around Sarita ZIP and adjacent counties plus Facebook/Instagram placements; WhatsApp Business useful for direct inquiries.

Key sources underlying the estimates

• Pew Research Center (2024): U.S. platform usage rates by adults and rural patterns.
• U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census): Kenedy County population baseline.

These figures provide a practical, decision‑ready picture for planning content, outreach, or ads in Kenedy County despite the absence of direct survey data at the county level.