Terrell County

Key demographics — Terrell County, Texas

Population size

• 760 residents (2020 Decennial Census)

Age

• Median age: ~52 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~15%
• 65 and over: ~28%

Gender

• Male: ~53%
• Female: ~47% (ACS 2018–2022)

Racial/ethnic composition (2020 Census)

• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~57%
• White alone, non-Hispanic: ~38%
• Black or African American alone, non-Hispanic: ~1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone, non-Hispanic: ~1%
• Asian alone, non-Hispanic: <1%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~3%

Households and housing

• Households: 348; families: 212 (2020 Census)
• Average household size: ~2.2; average family size: ~2.7 (ACS 2018–2022)
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~72% (ACS 2018–2022)

Insights

• Very small, sparsely populated county with an older age profile
• Majority Hispanic/Latino population
• Small household sizes and high homeownership

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 American Community Survey 5-year estimates)

• Context: Terrell County has 760 residents (2020 Census) across 2,358 sq mi—about 0.32 people per sq mi, among the sparsest in Texas.
• Estimated email users: ≈560 adults. Assumes ~620 adults (18+) and ~90% email adoption (near‑universal among working‑age adults, slightly lower among seniors).
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 18–34: ~110 (≈20%)
  • 35–54: ~200 (≈36%)
  • 55–64: ~90 (≈16%)
  • 65+: ~160 (≈28%)
• Gender split: Population skews male (~56% male, 44% female). Expected email users ≈310 male and ≈250 female.
• Digital access and trends:
  • Household broadband subscription is roughly two‑thirds; remaining households rely on mobile‑only data, fixed wireless, or satellite—especially outside Sanderson.
  • Coverage and speeds are strongest in/near Sanderson and along US‑90; service thins across remote ranch land, reinforcing asynchronous, email‑heavy communication.
  • Smartphone dependence is high among younger and working‑age adults; seniors more often access email via shared or limited connections, moderating usage intensity.
• Local density/connectivity facts: Extreme low density and long loop distances to infrastructure constrain wired options; fixed wireless and satellite have expanded recent access but remain variable by terrain and distance.

Terrell County, TX mobile phone usage summary (as of 2024)

Context

• Population and density: 760 residents (2020 Census) across ~2,358 square miles; roughly 0.3 people per square mile. County seat: Sanderson.
• Rural, mountainous desert terrain with long distances between settlements and extensive ranchland.

Estimated users

• Total mobile phone users (all ages): 642
• Total smartphone users: 577 (≈90% of mobile users; ≈76% of total population)
• By age (estimated users and smartphone users):
  • Ages 0–12: 14 mobile users; 12 smartphone users
  • Ages 13–17: 42 mobile users; 41 smartphone users
  • Ages 18–64: 397 mobile users; 368 smartphone users
  • Ages 65+: 189 mobile users; 156 smartphone users
• Adults who are smartphone-only for home internet (no fixed broadband): ≈150 individuals (about one-quarter of adults), materially higher than the Texas average

Demographic breakdown influencing usage

• Older age profile than Texas overall: higher share of 65+, which lowers smartphone adoption and app intensity relative to the state.
• Hispanic/Latino majority: elevated use of Spanish-language interfaces and OTT messaging (e.g., WhatsApp) compared with statewide norms.
• Lower household incomes than the Texas median: greater reliance on prepaid plans and longer handset replacement cycles; data add-ons and hotspot use are common substitutes for home broadband.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Radio access:
  • 4G LTE is the baseline; service is concentrated in and around Sanderson and along US‑90. Large areas away from the highway corridors have weak or no signal.
  • 5G availability is limited and primarily low‑band; mid‑band 5G coverage that is common in Texas metros is largely absent in Terrell County.
• Site density and backhaul:
  • Very low macro‑tower density with long inter‑site distances (often 15–30 miles), producing sizable dead zones in canyons and on ranch roads.
  • Backhaul is a mix with significant microwave; fiber is limited, constraining peak capacity and making upgrades slower than in urban Texas.
• Border and terrain effects:
  • Spectrum coordination near the Rio Grande and rugged topography reduce practical coverage and capacity along the southern portions of the county.
• Public safety and resiliency:
  • FirstNet (AT&T) coverage focuses on highway corridors and community anchors; power and transport outages take longer to resolve than in cities due to distance and access.

How Terrell County differs from Texas statewide

• Adoption and dependence:
  • Similar overall adult mobile ownership rates, but a higher share of residents rely on smartphones as their primary or only internet connection because fixed broadband is scarce or costly.
  • Seniors make up a larger slice of the population than statewide, dragging down overall smartphone penetration and app usage per capita.
• Network quality and availability:
  • Far more LTE‑only areas and substantially less mid‑band 5G than the Texas average; users experience greater variability in signal strength and speeds, especially off US‑90.
  • Wi‑Fi calling and signal boosters are used more frequently indoors than in most Texas counties.
• Market behavior:
  • Higher prepaid and budget‑plan penetration, lower average data consumption per line, and longer device replacement intervals than in Texas metros.

Method note

• User figures are modeled from the 2020 Census population, rural ownership/adoption benchmarks from recent national surveys, and age‑specific adoption patterns (higher teen and working‑age smartphone ownership; lower among 65+). Infrastructure points reflect the county’s geography, settlement pattern, and widely reported rural West Texas network characteristics.

Terrell County, TX — Social media usage (2025 modeled snapshot)

Overview

• Population: ~760 (2020 Census). Adults (18+): ~620.
• Adults using at least one social platform: 60–65% (≈370–400 adults).
• Daily use: ~70% of users check at least one platform daily.
• Multi‑platform: average 2–3 platforms per user.

Most-used platforms (share of county’s adult social media users, monthly)

• YouTube: 70–72%
• Facebook: 62–66%
• Instagram: 25–30%
• TikTok: 20–25%
• Snapchat: 14–18%
• X (Twitter): 9–12%
• WhatsApp: 8–10%
• Reddit: 6–9%

Age-group penetration (share of residents in each group who use social)

• 13–17: 85–90% (small cohort; heavy on TikTok/Snapchat/Instagram)
• 18–29: 85–90% (YouTube, Instagram, TikTok; Facebook ~50–55%)
• 30–49: 70–75% (YouTube, Facebook dominant; Instagram ~30–40%)
• 50–64: 55–60% (Facebook, YouTube; limited Instagram/TikTok)
• 65+: 40–45% (Facebook and YouTube primarily)

Gender breakdown (of adult social media users)

• Women: ~54%
• Men: ~46%
• Skews: women over-index on Facebook/Instagram; men over-index on YouTube/X/Reddit.

Behavioral trends

• Community coordination is Facebook-centric: local groups for schools, county notices, road/weather, volunteer fire, church events; Facebook Marketplace is the default for buy/sell/trade.
• Information diet is practical and local: high engagement with public-safety and service updates; regional news shared via Facebook posts more than via native news apps.
• Messaging norms: Facebook Messenger and group SMS dominate; WhatsApp is niche but used in some bilingual households and for family ties outside the county.
• Content style: consumption > creation; most residents are “browsers.” YouTube used for DIY/ranch/repair/outdoors; short-form video (Reels/TikTok) concentrated among teens/20s.
• Access patterns: mobile-first; evening peaks (7–10 pm) and weekends; patchy coverage and data constraints reduce live streaming and favor short clips/downloaded content.
• Civic reach: posts from county offices, schools, and volunteer organizations achieve outsized reach on Facebook relative to total population; events and fundraisers convert well when boosted by local group admins.

Notes on method

• Figures are 2025 estimates derived by applying Pew Research Center 2023–2024 platform adoption rates by age/sex to Terrell County’s age structure (Census/ACS), with rural adjustments for connectivity and older median age. Percentages are rounded and represent share of adult users unless otherwise stated.