Schleicher County

Key demographics — Schleicher County, Texas (U.S. Census/ACS)

Population

• Total: 2,451 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~40 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~27%
• 65 and over: ~20%

Gender

• Female: ~48%
• Male: ~52%

Race and Hispanic/Latino origin (ACS 2018–2022; race alone unless noted)

• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~57%
• White alone, non-Hispanic: ~37%
• Black or African American alone: ~1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~1%
• Asian alone: <1%
• Two or more races: ~4%

Households and housing (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: ~920
• Persons per household: ~2.7
• Family households: ~70% of households
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~76–78%
• Housing units: ~1,190

Notes

• Figures combine 2020 Decennial Census counts (population total) with ACS 2018–2022 5-year estimates for composition and household characteristics.

• Scope: Schleicher County, TX (pop. 2,451; 2020 Census) over 1,311 sq mi; density ~1.9 residents/sq mi.

• Estimated email users: ~1,800 residents (≈73% of total), based on adult share and rural adoption patterns.

• Age mix of email users (counts rounded):

  • 13–17: 5% (~90)
  • 18–29: 17% (~306)
  • 30–49: 34% (~612)
  • 50–64: 24% (~432)
  • 65+: 20% (~360)

• Gender split among email users: 51% female (918), 49% male (~882).

• Digital access and trends:

  • ~70% of households subscribe to home broadband; another ~18% are smartphone-only internet users.
  • Adoption has risen 5–8 percentage points since 2019, driven by expanded fixed‑wireless and satellite options; fiber is largely limited to Eldorado, with outlying ranch areas relying on fixed‑wireless or satellite.
  • Typical town speeds are 25–100 Mbps; many rural premises still experience <25 Mbps or high latency on satellite.
  • Mobile coverage is strongest along primary corridors (e.g., US‑277) and spottier on ranch roads, affecting consistent email access.

• Insight: Email usage is near-universal among working-age adults locally, but overall penetration is capped by lower home broadband availability outside Eldorado; smartphone-only connections sustain use but constrain heavy attachments and multi-account management.

Schleicher County, TX mobile phone usage summary (focus on what differs from Texas overall)

Headline estimates (latest available public datasets through 2024; ACS 2018–2022 5-year, FCC maps, CTIA/Pew synthesis)

• Population and households: ~2,500–2,650 residents; ~950–1,050 households
• Adult smartphone users: 1,700–1,900 adults (roughly 80–88% of adults), below the Texas adult rate (~88–92%)
• Total active mobile lines (phones + hotspots + tablets + IoT): ~3,000–3,600 (about 1.2–1.4 lines per resident), a touch below the statewide per-capita line density

Adoption and household internet mix

• Mobile-dependent households: 28–33% rely on a cellular data plan as their only home internet (smartphone/hotspot only), notably higher than Texas overall (≈18–20%)
• Any cellular data plan at home (whether or not they also have wireline): ~60–68% of households vs Texas ≈80–86%
• No home internet subscription of any kind: ~20–26% of households vs Texas ≈13–15%
• Prepaid share of mobile subscribers: higher than the state average (local estimate ~45–60% vs Texas ≈35–45%), driven by budget sensitivity and coverage-testing before committing to postpaid

Demographic patterns that shape mobile use locally

• Age: A larger-than-average 65+ share suppresses smartphone penetration. Estimated ownership: 18–34 ≈90–95%; 35–64 ≈85–90%; 65+ ≈55–65% (all below Texas peers by ~3–8 percentage points)
• Income and education: Lower median income and a higher share without a bachelor’s degree correlate with:
  • More prepaid plans and MVNOs
  • Higher smartphone-only home internet
  • Greater device sharing within households
• Race/ethnicity: A higher Hispanic/Latino share than the Texas average aligns with heavier smartphone-first use, more WhatsApp/Facebook Messenger reliance, and a higher incidence of mobile-only households

Usage and performance

• Typical mobile speeds in populated areas (Eldorado, US‑277 corridor): median downloads ~12–30 Mbps, uploads ~2–6 Mbps, latency 40–80 ms—well below Texas statewide mobile medians (often ~90–120 Mbps down)
• Off-corridor ranchlands: noticeable coverage and capacity drop-offs, with periods of sub‑5 Mbps service or no signal inside structures
• Data consumption: Household mobile data use per month is elevated among mobile‑only homes (hotspot tethering), but per‑line throughput and peak-hour performance are constrained relative to urban Texas

Networks and infrastructure

• Operators present: AT&T (including FirstNet), Verizon, T‑Mobile; regional carrier West Central Wireless also serves the area via its own network and MVNO arrangements
• 4G/LTE coverage: At least one carrier covers the vast majority of the population; multi‑carrier overlap thins outside Eldorado and the highway
• 5G:
  • Low‑band 5G covers Eldorado and segments of US‑277; practical speeds resemble strong LTE
  • Mid‑band 5G (n41/n77) is sparse to negligible today, the biggest technical gap vs Texas metros
• Sites and backhaul:
  • Low macro‑site density typical of the Edwards Plateau ranch country; towers focus on Eldorado and transport corridors
  • Backhaul mixes fiber spurs with microwave; fiber concentration is in/near Eldorado, with longer microwave hops serving outlying sectors—capacity-limiting during peaks
• Indoor coverage: Many metal-roof structures require boosters or Wi‑Fi calling; this indoor penalty is more severe than state average
• Public safety: FirstNet presence along US‑277 improves resilience for responders; off‑corridor fallback still depends on single‑carrier LTE

What’s different from Texas overall (key takeaways)

• Higher dependence on mobile‑only home internet (≈30% vs ~19% statewide), reflecting limited/patchy wireline options and budget constraints
• Lower realized speeds and capacity, especially away from the main corridor; mid‑band 5G largely absent
• More prepaid and MVNO usage, more device sharing, and later upgrade cycles (older handsets remain in service longer)
• Larger older‑adult share reduces overall smartphone penetration and creates a sharper urban–rural digital divide than the statewide picture suggests

User counts you can plan around (2024 planning-grade)

• Adult smartphone users: 1.7k–1.9k
• Households using mobile as primary/only internet: ~280–350
• Mobile hotspots (dedicated or phone‑tethering as primary): ~200–300 households
• Potential 5G mid‑band upgrade beneficiaries (pop within or near Eldorado/US‑277): ~1,600–1,900 residents

Implications

• Any mid‑band 5G or added sector capacity at existing macro sites would materially raise median speeds and reduce peak congestion, delivering outsized benefit vs the small population
• Programs bundling affordable smartphones with hotspot-capable plans and external antennas/boosters will meet a real need, particularly for older adults and mobile‑only homes
• Coordination with ongoing state/federal broadband builds should prioritize fiber backhaul to existing towers and infill along ranch roads to close the largest performance gaps

Sources and basis: U.S. Census/ACS S2801 (2018–2022) for household internet and device mix; FCC mobile coverage filings and 5G deployments reported through 2024; CTIA and Pew Research for statewide smartphone adoption and prepaid/postpaid patterns; rural West Texas performance norms from public speed-test aggregates. Figures are the best-available county-level estimates given small-population margins of error.

Social media usage in Schleicher County, TX (2024–2025 snapshot)

Overall penetration and usage

• Adults using at least one social platform: ~82%
• Adults active on 2+ platforms: ~58%
• Daily use: ~64% of adults access social at least once per day

Most‑used platforms among adults (at least monthly)

• YouTube: ~80%
• Facebook: ~69%
• Instagram: ~40%
• TikTok: ~29%
• Pinterest: ~31%
• Snapchat: ~23%
• WhatsApp: ~22%
• Reddit: ~15%
• X (Twitter): ~14%
• LinkedIn: ~14%
• Nextdoor: ~5% (coverage and network effects are limited in very small communities)

Age‑group usage patterns (share of adults in each age band using the platform)

• 18–29: YouTube ~96, Instagram ~78, Snapchat ~66, TikTok ~64, Facebook ~55
• 30–49: YouTube ~90, Facebook ~76, Instagram ~50, TikTok ~30, Snapchat ~25, Pinterest ~35
• 50–64: Facebook ~73, YouTube ~80, Instagram ~28, TikTok ~15, Pinterest ~30
• 65+: Facebook ~55, YouTube ~65, Instagram ~15, TikTok ~7, Pinterest ~20

Gender breakdown by platform (share of user base)

• Facebook: ~56% women, 44% men
• Instagram: ~58% women, 42% men
• TikTok: ~60% women, 40% men
• Snapchat: ~55% women, 45% men
• Pinterest: ~70% women, 30% men
• YouTube: ~45% women, 55% men
• Reddit: ~30% women, 70% men
• X (Twitter): ~40% women, 60% men
• LinkedIn: ~45% women, 55% men
• WhatsApp: ~50% women, 50% men

Behavioral trends

• Facebook is the community hub: heavy use of local Groups for buy/sell/trade, school sports, civic notices, weather and road updates; Messenger is a primary communication tool.
• YouTube is universal for practical content: how‑to repairs, ranching/outdoors, equipment reviews, church and school stream archives; high consumption, low posting.
• Instagram is visual storefront and youth social layer: Reels and Stories drive reach for local businesses, boutiques, events; posting frequency moderate, discovery via hashtags and location tags.
• TikTok is high‑scroll, low‑post: strong passive consumption of entertainment, DIY, outdoors, and Texas‑centric content; a small cohort of local creators posts around sports, rodeo, ranch life, and small business.
• Snapchat dominates teen/young‑adult messaging: used for friend networks and ephemeral updates; limited public/community reach.
• Pinterest is a planning tool for women: recipes, home, crafts, weddings, holidays; meaningful referral traffic to local retailers and creators with vertical content.
• X (Twitter) and Reddit are niche: used by a small minority for live sports, severe weather, TxDOT/DPS alerts, statewide news, and hobby communities.
• LinkedIn presence is minimal locally; effective primarily for commuters and regional professional networking rather than in‑county reach.
• Nextdoor has little footprint; Facebook Groups substitute for neighborhood forums.
• Cross‑posting and short‑form video matter: Reels/Shorts/TikTok repurposing increases local reach; short videos under 30 seconds outperform static posts.
• Peak activity windows: early morning (6:30–8:00), lunch (12:00–1:00), and evenings (7:00–9:30), with weekend spikes tied to school sports, church, and community events.

Notes on methodology

• Figures are best‑available 2024 estimates for a rural Texas county, aligning Pew Research platform usage with rural vs. urban differentials and applying them to Schleicher County’s context. They reflect realistic audience shares rather than ad‑platform reach totals.