Caledonia County

Caledonia County, Vermont — key demographics (latest available)

Population

• Total: ~30,600 (2023 population estimate)

Age

• Median age: ~45 years
• Under 18: ~20%
• 18–64: ~58–60%
• 65 and over: ~21–22%

Gender

• Female: ~50–51%
• Male: ~49–50%

Race and ethnicity (2020 Census; Hispanic can be of any race)

• White: ~94%
• Black or African American: ~1–1.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.5–1%
• Asian: ~0.5–1%
• Two or more races: ~3%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~2%

Households (ACS 2019–2023 5-year)

• Total households: ~12,500–12,700
• Family households: ~7,600–7,800
• Average household size: ~2.25
• Average family size: ~2.8–2.9
• Married-couple families: ~5,000
• Households with children under 18: ~28–30%
• Nonfamily households: ~38–40%
• Households with someone 65+ living alone: ~12–14%
• Tenure: ~73% owner-occupied; ~27% renter-occupied

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5-year estimates; 2023 Population Estimates). Figures rounded for clarity.

Caledonia County, VT snapshot (estimates)

• Users: 23,000–26,000 residents use email regularly. That’s roughly 90% of adults and 75–85% of the total population (applying U.S./VT adoption rates to local demographics).
• Age mix of email users: 18–29: ~15%; 30–49: ~35%; 50–64: ~30%; 65+: ~20%. Usage is near‑universal among working‑age adults; seniors participate at somewhat lower rates but rising.
• Gender: Approximately 50% female / 50% male; no meaningful usage gap by gender.
• Digital access trends: Household broadband subscription is around 80–85%, with strong growth in fiber builds led by NEK Broadband across the Northeast Kingdom. Smartphone access is widespread, but mobile coverage can be spotty in hillier, remote areas; public Wi‑Fi (libraries, town offices) remains an important access point.
• Local density/connectivity facts: Population ~30K, density ~46 people per square mile (rural). Terrain and low density create last‑mile gaps, but ongoing state and federal investments (ARPA/BEAD) are expanding 100/20 Mbps+ service and gig‑fiber in more towns.

Notes: Figures synthesized from ACS population/broadband indicators and Pew Research email/internet adoption benchmarks applied to Caledonia County’s age structure.

Mobile phone usage in Caledonia County, VT — key points and how it differs from statewide patterns

User estimates

• Size of the user base: With ~30–31k residents and ~24–25k adults, an estimated 19–21k adults use smartphones (assumes roughly 80–85% smartphone ownership in rural New England) and ~22–23k use some kind of mobile phone. This is a few points lower than typical Vermont statewide adoption, reflecting Caledonia’s more rural/older profile.
• Mobile as primary internet: A noticeably higher share of households rely on a cellular data plan as their only internet connection than Vermont as a whole. County-level ACS patterns for rural VT suggest roughly 9–14% “cellular-only” in Caledonia versus ~6–8% statewide. This aligns with lower fixed-broadband availability in remote towns.
• Carrier mix: Users are more unevenly distributed across carriers than statewide. Choice of carrier (Verizon, AT&T, T‑Mobile) matters more for day-to-day usability, leading to higher churn toward whichever provider has the most reliable signal in a user’s specific valley or hill town.

Demographic breakdown (and how usage differs from the Vermont average)

• Age: Caledonia has a slightly older age structure than the state average. Smartphone ownership and heavy app usage are lower among residents 65+, widening the age gap seen statewide. Voice/text and Wi‑Fi calling are relied upon more by older residents in fringe coverage areas.
• Income: Median household income is below the state average; cost sensitivity translates to higher prepaid/MVNO use, longer device replacement cycles, and a larger installed base of LTE-only phones. This makes 5G adoption lag the state.
• Students and commuters: Student populations around Lyndon/St. Johnsbury drive high seasonal mobile data use. Commuters along I‑91/US‑2 behave more like statewide users (consistent 4G/5G use), while residents of upland towns adapt with offline-first apps, text-first communication, or home Wi‑Fi calling.
• Location within the county:
  • Town centers and corridors (St. Johnsbury, Lyndonville, I‑91, US‑2): usage patterns resemble statewide norms—multiple carriers usable, more 5G-capable devices, higher streaming/telehealth uptake.
  • Hill and valley towns (Burke/Sutton/Walden/Wheelock/Peacham/Barnet uplands/Waterford/Ryegate hills): lower smartphone upgrade rates, more carrier-specific pockets, and greater reliance on texting/downloads over streaming due to capacity/coverage.

Digital infrastructure (what’s different from the state level)

• Coverage variability:
  • LTE is broadly available along primary corridors and in larger villages, but dead zones persist on secondary roads and in valleys. This gap is wider than Vermont’s average.
  • 5G is present primarily as low-band (especially along I‑91 and in/near St. Johnsbury–Lyndon). Mid-band 5G is sparse; mmWave is effectively absent. Relative to the state, Caledonia has less 5G footprint and lower median 5G speeds.
• Capacity and congestion:
  • Cells near Burke Mountain and event venues see pronounced seasonal congestion (ski/bike seasons, fairs), causing peak-time slowdowns more than the statewide norm.
• Backhaul and fiber:
  • A higher share of rural sites historically depended on microwave backhaul. Ongoing fiber builds by NEK Broadband and other providers are improving tower backhaul and laying groundwork for denser 5G, but these upgrades are trailing more populated VT counties.
• Carrier disparity:
  • Inter-carrier performance differences are larger than average. T‑Mobile’s low‑band 600 MHz has improved reach in some pockets; Verizon often retains better deep‑rural voice/LTE reliability; AT&T’s FirstNet presence along main corridors is meaningful for public safety. Off-corridor, any given carrier may drop to unusable—more so than statewide.
• Emergency services:
  • E‑911 voice works reliably on corridors; text-to-911 depends on having a working carrier signal and falls off in fringe areas. Public safety radio is strong, but cellular for responders still has off-network zones away from highways—again, more pronounced than the statewide picture.

Trends that diverge from Vermont statewide

• Adoption and devices: Slightly lower smartphone penetration and slower device refresh cycle; larger LTE-only base; 5G adoption lag.
• Internet substitution: Higher share of cellular-only households; mobile hotspots used as a primary connection more often than statewide.
• Performance: Lower typical 5G availability and speeds; more frequent drops to 4G or no service outside corridors; wider performance spread between carriers.
• Usage patterns: More reliance on text/voice, offline-first apps, and Wi‑Fi calling at home; heavier seasonal swings around tourism hubs than the state overall.
• Equity: Bigger rural affordability and access gaps—cost-sensitive plans and MVNOs are more common, and digital inclusion relies more on public Wi‑Fi (libraries, schools) than in metro Vermont.

Notes on sources/methods

• Estimates synthesize: U.S. Census/ACS S2801 (Types of Computers and Internet Subscriptions) for county vs state patterns; FCC mobile coverage maps; Vermont Dept. of Public Service drive-testing and map challenges; and Pew Research on smartphone adoption by age/rurality (2023–2024). Exact carrier footprints change frequently; on-the-ground experience in specific towns can differ from maps.

Social media usage in Caledonia County, VT (short, estimated snapshot)

Overall reach

• Population ~31,000; adults ~24–25k.
• Adults using at least one social platform: 68–72% (≈16.5–18k adults). Teen use (13–17) is very high (90%+).

Most-used platforms among adults (share of adult residents; estimates informed by Pew US rural patterns and Vermont’s older age mix)

• YouTube: 65–70%
• Facebook: 63–68%
• Instagram: 35–40%
• Pinterest: 30–35% (skews female)
• TikTok: 25–30%
• Snapchat: 20–25% overall; 70–80% among teens/early 20s
• LinkedIn: 18–22%
• WhatsApp: 15–18%
• X/Twitter: 14–18%
• Reddit: 12–15%
• Front Porch Forum (local network): 30–45% of adults subscribed; 15–25% monthly active
• Nextdoor: 5–8%

Age patterns (approximate usage within each group)

• Teens (13–17): Any platform ~95%; YouTube ~90%; Snapchat ~75–80%; TikTok ~70–75%; Instagram ~70%; Facebook ~20–30%.
• 18–29: Any ~95%; YouTube ~95%; Instagram ~75%; Snapchat ~60%; TikTok ~60%; Facebook ~45–55%.
• 30–49: Any ~85–90%; YouTube ~90%; Facebook ~70%; Instagram ~50%; TikTok ~30–40%.
• 50–64: Any ~75–80%; Facebook ~70–75%; YouTube ~80%; Instagram ~25–35%; TikTok ~15–25%.
• 65+: Any ~60–65%; Facebook ~55–65%; YouTube ~55–65%; Instagram ~15–25%; TikTok ~10–15%.

Gender notes (directional)

• Women: higher on Facebook (+5 pp vs men), Instagram (+3 pp), TikTok (+~3 pp), Pinterest (≈3–4x men).
• Men: higher on Reddit (≈2x women), X/Twitter (+~2–3 pp), slightly higher on YouTube; LinkedIn leans male in this area.

Behavioral trends

• Community and local info: Heavy reliance on Facebook Groups and Front Porch Forum for town updates, school closings, storm/road conditions, lost & found, and civic issues.
• Marketplace and classifieds: Strong Facebook Marketplace activity (tools, farm/outdoor gear, furniture), porch pickups common.
• Local events and tourism: Regional events (e.g., St. Johnsbury, Burke Mountain) promoted via Facebook and Instagram; seasonal spikes (foliage, winter sports).
• News consumption: Local news largely via Facebook shares/groups; X/Twitter use is niche.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger for families/community; Snapchat for younger users; WhatsApp used by some service and newcomer communities.
• Content style: DIY, homesteading, outdoor rec, pets, local business promos; short-form video (Reels/TikTok) growing but constrained by patchy connectivity in some hollows.
• Engagement rhythms: Peaks early morning and evenings; storm days and winter months show elevated engagement; many older users are “read-only” lurkers.

Notes and methods

• Exact county-level platform stats aren’t published. Figures are estimates based on Pew Research Center social media adoption (2023–2024), rural vs. urban splits, Vermont’s older age profile, ACS demographics, and known Vermont-specific behavior (notably Front Porch Forum). Ranges reflect uncertainty and local variance.