Presidio County

Presidio County, Texas – key demographics

Population size

• Total population: 6,131 (2020 Census)
• 2023 estimate: ~6,100 (U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates)

Age

• Median age: ~40 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Age 0–17: ~24%
• Age 18–64: ~60%
• Age 65+: ~16%

Gender

• Male: ~51%
• Female: ~49%

Racial/ethnic composition

• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~85%
• White alone, non-Hispanic: ~13%
• Black or African American: ~0.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.6%
• Asian: ~0.4%
• Two or more races/other: ~1%

Households and housing

• Households: ~2,300
• Average household size: ~2.6 persons
• Family households: ~65–70% of households
• Owner-occupied housing: ~70% of occupied units; renter-occupied: ~30%
• Median household income: ~$36–38K; poverty rate: ~25–27% (ACS 2018–2022)

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates; Population Estimates Program (2023). Figures rounded for clarity.

• Scale: Presidio County has about 6,100 residents spread across roughly 3,856 sq mi (≈1.6 people per sq mi), with most connectivity clustered in Marfa and Presidio.
• Estimated email users: ≈4,000 residents (about 65% of the population) use email regularly.
• Age distribution of email users (share of users): 13–17: ~6%; 18–34: ~30%; 35–64: ~52%; 65+: ~12%. Usage is highest among prime‑working ages and lowest among teens and seniors due to access and adoption gaps.
• Gender split among email users: roughly even, ~51% male and ~49% female, mirroring the county’s population.
• Digital access and trends:
  • Households: ≈2,260.
  • With home broadband: 58% (1,310 households).
  • Mobile‑only internet: 20% (450 households).
  • No home internet: 22% (500 households).
  • Modest uptick in broadband subscriptions since 2019, with faster growth in smartphone‑only access.
• Connectivity facts: Fixed fiber/cable is concentrated along the US‑67/US‑90 corridor in Marfa and Presidio; vast rural areas rely on LTE/5G. Low density and long loop distances constrain fiber builds and keep average fixed speeds below urban Texas norms, reinforcing reliance on public Wi‑Fi (schools, libraries) and mobile hotspots for email access.

Mobile phone usage in Presidio County, Texas — user estimates, who’s using what, and how the network differs from the rest of the state

Context and population

• Population and settlement: About 6,100 residents across 3,800+ square miles, with the vast majority living in the two towns of Presidio and Marfa. Population density is among the lowest in Texas.
• Demographics: Predominantly Hispanic/Latino (roughly mid-80s percent share), with a relatively high share of lower-income and Spanish-speaking households compared with Texas overall.

User estimates and adoption

• Smartphone users: Approximately 4,200 residents use smartphones on a regular basis. This estimate aligns rural smartphone adoption (around low-80s percent of adults) to the county’s adult population and includes most teens.
• Wireless-only voice households: Roughly 1,700–1,900 of the county’s households are mobile-only for voice (no landline), a higher share than the Texas average. Wireless-only is the norm across the county, reinforced by sparse landline alternatives outside town centers.
• Smartphone-only internet at home: An estimated 25–30% of households rely on a smartphone/data plan as their primary or only home internet, materially higher than the Texas average. This is driven by cost sensitivity and limited fixed-broadband options in rural areas.

Demographic breakdown and usage patterns

• Language and apps: High usage of WhatsApp, Facebook, and other data-light, Spanish-friendly apps; cross‑border communication is common given proximity to Ojinaga, MX.
• Age: Younger residents (teens and working-age adults) show near-universal smartphone adoption; older adults (65+) adopt smartphones at lower rates, contributing to a notable age-based digital gap within the county.
• Income: Prepaid and value plans are more prevalent than in Texas overall, reflecting price sensitivity; hotspot use to serve whole-household connectivity is common where fixed broadband is poor or unaffordable.

Digital infrastructure and coverage characteristics

• Coverage footprint:
  • 4G LTE: Reliable in and around Marfa and Presidio and along major corridors (US‑90, US‑67). Large dead or weak‑signal areas persist in ranchlands and low-density tracts off the highways.
  • 5G: Present primarily in/near town centers and select highway stretches; coverage is far less continuous than in urban Texas. Mid‑band 5G is limited; low‑band 5G provides reach but modest capacity.
• Carriers: AT&T, T‑Mobile, and Verizon operate in the county; AT&T’s FirstNet covers key public‑safety areas in and near towns. Competitive performance varies by corridor, terrain, and distance to macro sites.
• Tower density and backhaul: Sparse macro‑tower grid with long intersite distances; capacity is constrained by both spectrum depth and backhaul in remote areas. Local fiber from regional providers supports town sites and anchor institutions, but off‑corridor backhaul options are limited.
• Border effects: Devices near the Rio Grande may attach to Mexican networks if roaming protections are not set, creating unexpected charges and intermittent coverage at the river and low-lying areas.
• Seasonal load: Events and tourism (e.g., Marfa cultural weekends) produce short bursts of congestion; capacity augments are periodic rather than permanent.

How Presidio County differs from Texas overall

• Higher reliance on mobile for primary internet: Smartphone-only households are significantly more common than the state average due to affordability constraints and fewer fixed-broadband options.
• Lower and more fragmented 5G availability: 5G is patchy and largely confined to towns and major roads, unlike the broader, denser statewide 5G footprint in metro areas.
• More prepaid and single-line plans: Cost-sensitive adoption skews toward prepaid and basic plans, with fewer multi-line, premium, or fixed–mobile convergence bundles than the state norm.
• Greater exposure to coverage gaps: Terrain, distance between sites, and very low density produce more dead zones than typical in Texas; residents are more likely to use offline maps, external antennas, or Wi‑Fi calling at home.
• Language and cross‑border usage patterns: Spanish-first communication, cross‑border calling/messaging, and awareness of roaming settings are more salient than in most Texas counties.

Implications for service and policy

• Network investments that matter most locally: Additional mid‑band 5G sectors on existing towers, selective new macro/mini‑macro sites along secondary roads, and expanded fiber backhaul to rural nodes would directly improve experience.
• Affordability and device programs: Subsidies and ACP-replacement initiatives maintain mobile connectivity levels and address the smartphone-only reliance of many households.
• Public-safety and resilience: Hardening town‑center sites and adding off‑grid power and microwave/fiber diversity on highway sites reduce the impact of power or fiber cuts common in remote terrain.

Sources and basis

• Population and demographics from the U.S. Census; adoption and household telephone status informed by national rural adoption data (Pew Research, CDC/NHIS) and ACS “Types of Computers and Internet Subscriptions.” Coverage and infrastructure synthesized from FCC mobile/broadband mapping and carrier public footprints for West Texas. Figures above are county-specific estimates grounded in those datasets and known rural/border-county patterns as of 2024.

Social media snapshot: Presidio County, Texas

At-a-glance user base

• Population context: Small, rural, majority-Hispanic border county (≈80–85% Hispanic/Latino; seat: Marfa).
• Adults (18+): ≈4,300–4,500
• Adults using at least one social platform: ≈3,000–3,300 (about 69–72% of adults; rural U.S. adult benchmark applied)

Most-used platforms among adults (modeled to the county’s rural and majority-Hispanic profile; rounded)

• YouTube: ~85–90%
• Facebook: ~70–75%
• Instagram: ~45–50%
• WhatsApp: ~40–45% (notably high due to Hispanic adoption)
• TikTok: ~30–35%
• Snapchat: ~25–35%
• Pinterest: ~30–35% overall (majority female)
• X (Twitter): ~18–22%
• LinkedIn: ~15–20% (lower in rural, non–white-collar areas)
• Reddit: ~12–18%
• Nextdoor: ~8–12%

Age pattern highlights

• 18–29: Very high YouTube; Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat are core daily apps; Facebook is secondary.
• 30–49: Facebook and YouTube dominate; Instagram meaningful; growing WhatsApp and TikTok use.
• 50–64: Facebook and YouTube lead; Instagram and WhatsApp moderate; TikTok emerging.
• 65+: Facebook for community/news and YouTube for tutorials/entertainment; limited use of newer apps.

Gender breakdown (among social media users; modeled)

• Female: ~52–54%
• Male: ~46–48%
• Platform skews: Pinterest and Facebook skew female; Reddit and X skew male; Instagram/TikTok slightly female-leaning; WhatsApp balanced to slightly female-leaning in Hispanic communities.

Behavioral trends observed/likely in Presidio County

• Facebook Groups and Pages function as the community hub (city updates, school info, local events, buy/sell via Marketplace).
• WhatsApp is a primary communication layer for families, cross-border ties, and small-business/customer messaging; bilingual (Spanish/English) content is common.
• YouTube is the default video platform across ages; how-to, music, and local culture content perform well.
• Short-form video (Reels/TikTok/Shorts) gets outsized engagement versus link posts; creators and businesses that localize content (bilingual captions, local landmarks/events) see better reach.
• Instagram is strongest with younger adults and the arts/tourism scene (Marfa/Chinati); Stories and Reels outperform static posts.
• Event-driven spikes: festivals, school athletics, city and weather alerts drive surges on Facebook and WhatsApp.
• Messaging-first behavior: Many transactions and confirmations happen in Messenger/WhatsApp rather than email; quick-response expectations are high.
• Platform utility: LinkedIn use is limited; X is niche (news/politics). Pinterest uptake is notable among women for food, décor, and DIY; Snapchat persists with teens/young adults for close-friend communication.

Notes on method and sources

• Adult penetration and platform rates are derived from Pew Research Center’s 2024 social media adoption figures, adjusted for rural residency and the county’s majority-Hispanic profile (which meaningfully lifts WhatsApp, and modestly lifts Instagram/TikTok). Adult counts reflect U.S. Census Bureau decennial/ACS population structure for Presidio County. Figures are modeled estimates, rounded to reflect uncertainty while providing practical planning guidance.