Botetourt County

Here are concise, recent Census Bureau statistics for Botetourt County, Virginia.

Population size

• Total population: 33,596 (2020 Decennial Census)

Age

• Median age: ~47.8 years
• Under 18: ~20%
• 18–64: ~58%
• 65 and over: ~22% (Source: ACS 2018–2022, S0101)

Sex (Census “sex”)

• Female: ~50.6%
• Male: ~49.4% (Source: ACS 2018–2022, DP05)

Race/ethnicity (mutually exclusive)

• Non-Hispanic White: ~92%
• Non-Hispanic Black: ~2–3%
• Non-Hispanic Asian: ~1%
• Non-Hispanic Other/Two+ races: ~2–3%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~2–3% (Source: ACS 2018–2022, DP05)

Households

• Total households: ~13.3k
• Average household size: ~2.45
• Family households: ~72% of households
• Owner-occupied housing: ~84% (Source: ACS 2018–2022, S1101, DP04)

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates (tables DP05, S0101, S1101, DP04).

Botetourt County, VA snapshot (estimates)

• Population: 33.6k; low density (60 people/sq. mile) across a rural–suburban mix.
• Email users: ~25k–29k residents (roughly 75–85% of all residents; about 90–95% of adults).
• Age distribution and email use:
  • Under 18 (~20%): lower regular use; school-driven accounts common.
  • 18–34 (~16–18%): 95%+ use email → ~5–6k users.
  • 35–64 (~45–48%): 93–97% use → ~14–15k users.
  • 65+ (~22–24%): 80–90% use → ~6–7k users.
• Gender split: County is roughly 51% female/49% male; email use is nearly even by gender, mirroring population.
• Digital access trends:
  • Household broadband subscription is broadly in the mid-to-high 80% range (ACS-style measures); 6–10% are smartphone-only; a small minority lack home internet.
  • Connectivity is strongest along the I-81/US-220 corridor; mountainous, low-density areas have more gaps, raising last‑mile costs.
  • Ongoing fiber expansions supported by Virginia and federal programs (e.g., VATI, BEAD) are improving speeds/availability.
  • Remote work, telehealth, and school platforms since 2020 have reinforced heavy email reliance for adults and families.

Notes: Figures are derived from county population profiles, ACS broadband adoption patterns for similar Virginia counties, and national email-usage rates by age.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Botetourt County, VA (distinctives vs statewide)

Context

• Population: roughly 33–37k residents across a large, mountainous county north of Roanoke; ~13–15k households. Settlement is concentrated along the I-81/US-220 corridor with sparsely populated ridges and river valleys elsewhere. Terrain strongly shapes mobile coverage and usage.

User estimates (best-available estimates synthesizing ACS, FCC and regional trends through 2024)

• Mobile phone users: 25–27k adults (≈95% of adults). Virginia overall is a touch higher, ~96–97%.
• Smartphone users: 22–26k adults (≈85–90% of adults), a few points below Virginia (~90–92%), driven by an older age profile.
• Wireless-only (no landline) households: ~55–60% in Botetourt vs ~65–70% statewide. Many older households keep a landline or VoIP.
• Mobile-only internet households (no fixed home broadband, rely on cellular hotspots/plans): ~8–12% vs ~6–8% statewide—higher in pockets lacking cable/fiber.
• Work and commuting use: Daytime demand clusters along I-81/US-220, schools, and industrial sites; off-corridor valleys see intermittent service and heavier reliance on Wi‑Fi calling.

Demographic breakdown (how usage differs from Virginia averages)

• Age: Botetourt skews older (median age notably above Virginia’s). Smartphone adoption among 65+ is estimated ~70–80% locally vs ~80–85% statewide; more basic/older devices remain in use. Younger households mirror statewide habits (high smartphone and unlimited-plan uptake).
• Income/education: Middle-to-upper income for a rural county. Postpaid family plans and newer iOS/Android devices are common along the southern corridor; prepaid use is somewhat higher than in urban Virginia in more rural parts.
• Race/ethnicity: The county is less diverse than the state; adoption differences by race are overshadowed by age and infrastructure factors.
• Affordability: With the wind-down of the federal ACP in 2024, some lower-income and outlying households appear to have shifted more usage to mobile data, widening the local gap vs state in mobile-only internet reliance.

Digital infrastructure and coverage (key points and local deviations)

• Coverage pattern: 4G LTE is strong along I‑81/US‑220 and population centers (Daleville/Troutville/Blue Ridge, Fincastle, Buchanan). Terrain creates dead zones in ridge/valley areas and far northern/western parts. Compared to Virginia overall, Botetourt has more spotty coverage off major corridors.
• 5G availability: Low-band 5G covers much of the I‑81/US‑220 spine and southern half of the county; mid-band 5G is limited outside the Roanoke fringe. Population coverage likely ~60–75% for low-band vs ~85–90% statewide; mid-band materially lower than the state average.
• Carrier differences: Verizon and AT&T generally provide the broadest rural footprint; T‑Mobile coverage is best along main corridors and more variable elsewhere. Users in hollows often depend on Wi‑Fi calling or signal boosters.
• Backhaul and fiber: Recent county partnerships and state VATI-funded builds have added towers and expanded fiber backhaul along corridors, improving capacity. Nevertheless, several census blocks remain cable/fiber-poor compared to statewide norms, sustaining higher dependence on mobile hotspots.
• Speeds and reliability: Median speeds are acceptable on corridors but drop in fringe areas; call reliability and text/IoT coverage can be inconsistent in valleys. This gap is wider than Virginia’s urban/suburban averages.
• Public safety and enterprise: Stronger presence of FirstNet/LMR interop for volunteer fire/EMS and industrial sites than in urban Virginia; push-to-talk and backup satellite/microwave solutions are more common where cellular is unreliable.

Trends that diverge from state-level

• Adoption is rising but lags among seniors; wireless-only household share is lower than the state due to age profile and landline retention.
• Mobile-only internet use is higher than the state in un- and under-served fixed-broadband pockets.
• 5G (especially mid-band) footprint and performance trail state averages outside the main corridor; terrain-driven coverage gaps persist despite new towers.
• Usage is corridor-centric (I‑81/US‑220 commuting and schools) rather than dense, city-center-driven patterns typical of statewide statistics.

Notes on methodology and uncertainty

• Figures are estimates based on county demographics, ACS device and subscription indicators, FCC coverage data, and Virginia rural adoption patterns through 2024. Localized conditions (new tower activations or fiber builds) can shift these numbers by a few points. For planning, validate at the census-tract level with the latest provider maps and ACS 5‑year tables.

Social media in Botetourt County, VA — short breakdown

Snapshot

• Population context: ~33–34k residents; older-leaning age mix vs U.S. average.
• Estimated adult social media penetration: 78–82% of adults (≈20k–23k people). Daily users ≈65–70% of adults.
• Device pattern: smartphone-first; Facebook logins dominate among 40+.

Most-used platforms (adults, estimated share of residents)

• YouTube: 78–82%
• Facebook: 62–70% (Groups/Marketplace especially strong)
• Facebook Messenger: 55–60%
• Instagram: 32–38% (skews <40)
• Pinterest: 28–34% overall; among women: 45–55%
• TikTok: 20–27% (heavy <30)
• Snapchat: 18–24% (teens/young adults)
• LinkedIn: 18–25% (professionals, Roanoke commuters)
• X/Twitter: 12–18% (news, sports, emergencies)
• Nextdoor: 12–18% of adults/households (highest in suburban neighborhoods)
• Reddit: 10–14%
• WhatsApp: 8–12% (niche; family/international ties)

Age-group usage patterns

• Teens (13–17): near-universal YouTube; Snapchat ≈70–80%, TikTok ≈65–75%, Instagram ≈60–70%; Facebook minimal except for school/teams.
• 18–29: YouTube, Instagram, TikTok core; Snapchat strong; Facebook used for events/Marketplace.
• 30–49: Facebook is the hub (Groups, Marketplace, school/activities); YouTube high; Instagram moderate; Pinterest notable among women; TikTok growing.
• 50–64: Facebook and YouTube dominate; Pinterest moderate; Instagram light; TikTok limited but rising for entertainment.
• 65+: Facebook primary (news, community); YouTube for how‑to and church content; minimal TikTok/Instagram.

Gender breakdown (tendencies)

• Overall usage: women slightly higher than men.
• Women: higher Facebook engagement (Groups), strong Pinterest, active local shopping/referrals.
• Men: strong YouTube (sports, DIY), slightly higher Reddit/LinkedIn; Facebook for news/Marketplace.

Behavioral trends

• Community-first: Facebook Groups are the county’s digital town square (local news, churches, youth sports, HOA, volunteer fire/EMS). Marketplace and yard‑sale groups see heavy activity.
• Events and alerts: Facebook Events for festivals and school activities; county/school closings and VDOT/utility updates followed on Facebook and X.
• Video habits: YouTube for DIY, equipment/auto, hunting/fishing, and how‑to; short‑form video (Reels/TikTok) used by local businesses for promos.
• Lurkers > posters: a minority creates most content; broad participation via comments/reactions and sharing.
• Shopping/influence: Word‑of‑mouth lives in Groups; local service recommendations drive decisions; peak engagement on weather, school/sports, road conditions, and openings/closings.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is default; WhatsApp niche; SMS still common.
• Timing: Engagement peaks early morning (6–8am), lunchtime, and evenings (7–10pm); weekends for events/Marketplace.

Notes on methodology

• Estimates blend Pew Research Center 2024 U.S. platform adoption with Botetourt’s older age profile and suburban/rural behavior patterns; figures are directional ranges, not a county census.