Lewis County

Lewis County, Washington — key demographics

Population size

• 86,500 (July 1, 2023 estimate, U.S. Census Bureau)

Age

• Median age: ~42 years
• Under 18: ~22–23%
• 65 and over: ~22%

Gender

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 2018–2022)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~80%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~11%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~6%
• American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: ~2%
• Asian, non-Hispanic: ~1–2%
• Black/African American, non-Hispanic: <1%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic: <1%

Households (ACS 2018–2022)

• Total households: ~34,000
• Average household size: ~2.5
• Family households: ~65–66% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~27–28%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~73%

Insights

• Older age profile with a sizable 65+ share relative to many WA counties
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White, with a meaningful Hispanic/Latino community
• High homeownership and largely family-household oriented

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program (2023) and American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates.

• Estimated email users: ~63,000 residents in Lewis County (population ~84,000), based on U.S. age-specific email adoption applied to local age mix.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 13–17: 7% (4.3k)
  • 18–34: 25% (16.0k)
  • 35–54: 31% (19.7k)
  • 55–64: 16% (9.8k)
  • 65+: 21% (13.6k)
• Gender split: Approximately male 51% and female 49% among email users, mirroring the county’s population and minimal gender gap in email adoption.
• Digital access trends:
  • Household broadband subscription rate ≈84%; most residents access email via smartphones and home broadband.
  • Connectivity is strongest along the I‑5 corridor (Centralia–Chehalis); rural eastern areas (e.g., Morton, Randle, Packwood) have spottier fixed broadband and higher mobile-only reliance.
  • Public institutions (libraries, schools) play a material role in bridging access.
• Local density/connectivity facts:
  • Area ~2,408 sq mi; population density ~35 people/sq mi, reflecting a predominantly rural county where lower density correlates with more variable broadband options.
  • Faster cable/fiber is concentrated in population centers; fixed wireless and satellite fill gaps elsewhere.

These figures provide a practical estimate of email penetration and usage patterns tied to local demographics and infrastructure.

Mobile phone usage in Lewis County, Washington — summary with estimates, demographics, and infrastructure, highlighting county-versus-state differences

County profile (definitive context)

• Population: 82,149 (2020 Census), rural and dispersed across 2,400+ square miles, with the Centralia–Chehalis I‑5 corridor as the main population and infrastructure spine. The county skews older and has lower household incomes than the Washington State average, both of which influence how residents use and pay for mobile service.

User estimates and adoption patterns

• Estimated mobile phone users: 65,000–70,000 residents actively use a mobile phone on a typical week. This is driven by adult ownership in the low‑ to mid‑80% range and high teen uptake, offset by a larger senior share than the state average.
• Smartphone reliance for home internet: Smartphone‑only households are materially higher than the statewide average. Estimate: 18–22% of Lewis County households rely primarily on a smartphone/cellular plan for home internet, vs roughly the mid‑teens statewide. This reflects cost sensitivity and incomplete wireline coverage outside the I‑5 corridor.
• Cellular data plan penetration: Most households have at least one cellular data plan, but overall household subscription rates trail the state’s urban counties. Estimate: ~70–75% of households maintain an active cellular data plan tied to internet use (vs ~80%+ statewide), with gaps concentrated in the eastern and southern parts of the county.
• Usage intensity: Residents along the I‑5 spine (Centralia–Chehalis, Napavine) exhibit state‑like patterns (multi‑line family plans, video streaming, hotspotting), while eastern foothill communities show more voice/SMS‑first behavior and frequent signal fallback to 3G/legacy LTE bands during peak or in challenging terrain.

Demographic breakdown influencing mobile use

• Age: Adoption is near‑universal for 18–44, high but cost‑sensitive for 45–64, and markedly lower for 65+ compared to the state average. Seniors in Lewis County are more likely than their statewide peers to use simpler devices or limit data plans, contributing to lower smartphone penetration countywide.
• Income and affordability: Lower median household income than the state average corresponds with higher prepaid usage, shared family plans, and data‑capped plans. This drives higher smartphone‑only home internet reliance and more careful data management (e.g., off‑peak usage, video quality throttling).
• Rurality: Dispersed households and travel across forested/mountain corridors increase dependence on offline‑capable apps, SMS alerts, and Wi‑Fi offload where available (schools, libraries, employers).

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• 5G footprint: Mid‑band/sub‑6 GHz 5G is established along I‑5 through Centralia–Chehalis and adjacent communities, delivering state‑like speeds and capacity in those zones. Outside the corridor, service frequently reverts to LTE, with performance varying by carrier and terrain.
• Coverage gaps: Notable weak or no‑service pockets persist toward the Cascade foothills and in and around Gifford Pinchot National Forest (e.g., near Packwood, Randle, and some corridors east of Morton). These gaps are more pronounced than Washington’s urbanized counties and materially affect always‑connected usage patterns.
• Backhaul and fiber: Long‑haul fiber follows I‑5 and major state routes; branch/backhaul constraints off the corridor contribute to sparser tower density and slower upgrade cycles in outlying communities compared to Puget Sound.
• Emergency and transportation corridors: Highways (I‑5, US‑12, SR‑6) receive prioritized coverage and periodic capacity upgrades; reliability drops faster with distance from these routes than in most of the state’s metro counties.
• Fixed wireless substitution: Where cable/fiber is limited, households lean on mobile hotspots or fixed‑wireless offerings; adoption of satellite broadband is also visible in the eastern/rural reaches, moderating but not eliminating smartphone‑only reliance.

Key ways Lewis County differs from Washington State overall

• Higher smartphone‑only dependence for home connectivity than the statewide average, reflecting a mix of affordability constraints and incomplete wireline buildout.
• More pronounced urban–rural performance split: I‑5 areas resemble state norms, while outer zones lag on capacity, 5G availability, and in‑building coverage.
• Lower overall smartphone/plan adoption among seniors and lower‑income households than the state average, which depresses countywide smartphone penetration relative to Washington’s metro counties.
• Greater sensitivity to terrain and tower spacing, yielding more dead zones and variability in call reliability and data speeds than typical in the Puget Sound region.

Bottom line

• Lewis County’s mobile landscape is bifurcated: near‑state‑level 5G and usage intensity along I‑5, and coverage/speed constraints outside it. Relative to the Washington average, the county shows lower overall smartphone adoption among older and lower‑income residents, higher smartphone‑only home internet reliance, and more terrain‑driven coverage gaps, all of which shape distinct usage patterns and service expectations.

Lewis County, WA — Social media snapshot (best-available 2024 estimates grounded in U.S. Census ACS and Pew Research Center platform adoption, adjusted for rural demographics)

User stats

• Adult residents (18+): ~64,000 (of ~82,000 total population)
• Social media users (any platform): ~45,000–48,000 adults (70–75% of adults)
• Gender mix among social media users: ~53% women, ~47% men
• Device split: mobile-first usage >80%; smart‑TV YouTube viewing common in households

Age profile of social users (share of total social media users)

• 13–17: 8–9% (near‑universal platform use; heavy YouTube/TikTok/Snapchat)
• 18–29: ~20% (highest multi‑platform usage; Instagram/TikTok dominant, YouTube universal)
• 30–44: ~25% (YouTube/Facebook core; Instagram rising; Pinterest strong among women)
• 45–64: ~31% (Facebook and YouTube heavy; some Instagram/Pinterest)
• 65+: ~15% (Facebook and YouTube; limited TikTok/Instagram)

Most‑used platforms by adults in the county (estimated % of adults using each at least monthly)

• YouTube: 78–83% (most used across all ages)
• Facebook: 63–70% (community groups, buy/sell, local news)
• Instagram: 35–45% (strong 18–44; Reels consumption growing)
• TikTok: 25–33% (teens/20s; rising 30–44)
• Pinterest: 27–33% overall; women 45–55%
• Snapchat: 20–28% (teens/20s messaging)
• Reddit: 15–20% (male‑skew, 18–34)
• X (Twitter): 12–18% (news, agencies; spiky event use)
• LinkedIn: 12–18% (professionals; low daily use)
• Nextdoor: 10–15% (neighborhood alerts, lost/found, public safety)

Gender patterns (platform tilt)

• Women over‑index on Facebook and Pinterest; parity to slight lead on Instagram
• Men over‑index on YouTube and Reddit; slightly higher on X
• TikTok relatively balanced, younger‑skewed

Behavioral trends observed locally

• Facebook is the community backbone: high engagement in local news, school districts, emergency/weather updates, and marketplace/buy‑sell groups; events and public meetings see strong shares
• YouTube is used for DIY, homesteading, outdoor/recreation, equipment/auto repair; notable connected‑TV viewing in evenings
• Short‑form video growth: TikTok and Instagram Reels drive discovery for local food, thrifting, outdoors, and small businesses in Centralia/Chehalis; cross‑posting is common
• Messaging layer: Snapchat for teens/young adults; Facebook Messenger for older adults; WhatsApp niche
• Nextdoor adoption in denser neighborhoods/subdivisions for safety alerts and local services
• X usage is low day‑to‑day but spikes during road closures, wildfires, floods; followed for WSDOT, emergency management
• Shopping/information flow: Facebook Groups and Marketplace influence local purchasing; Pinterest fuels home/craft projects that convert at local retailers; Google/YouTube used before in‑store purchases
• Peak activity windows: evening 7–10 p.m.; secondary morning check‑in 6–8 a.m.; weekend spikes around sports, fairs, and seasonal events

Notes on methodology: Figures are county‑level estimates synthesized from U.S. Census/ACS population structure and Pew Research Center’s 2024 platform adoption rates, adjusted for rural usage patterns typical of Southwest Washington. Percentages reflect adult residents unless stated otherwise.