Iowa County

Iowa County, Wisconsin — key demographics (latest U.S. Census Bureau data)

Population size

• Total population: 23,709 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~43.7 years (ACS 2019–2023)
• Under 18: ~21.5%
• 65 and over: ~21.6%

Gender

• Female: ~49.6%
• Male: ~50.4%

Racial/ethnic composition (2020 Census)

• White alone: ~95%
• Black or African American alone: ~0.5%
• American Indian and Alaska Native alone: ~0.5%
• Asian alone: ~0.6%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: ~0.0%
• Two or more races: ~2–3%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~2–3%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~94%

Household data (ACS 2019–2023 unless noted)

• Households: ~9,900
• Average household size: ~2.35–2.40
• Family households: ~62% (average family size ~2.9)
• Married-couple households: ~50%
• Households with children under 18: ~27%
• One-person households: ~28% (about half of these are 65+ living alone)
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~77%

Insights

• Small, stable population with an older age profile than the Wisconsin average.
• Predominantly White, with small but growing Hispanic and multiracial populations.
• Household sizes are modest; majority are owner-occupied and married-couple families.

• Scope: Iowa County, WI has about 24,000 residents and a roughly 31 people/sq‑mile density centered on Dodgeville and Mineral Point, with many dispersed rural households.
• Estimated email users: ~19,000 residents use email (≈80% of the 13+ population), in line with national adoption among internet users.
• Age distribution (email penetration): 18–34: ~97%; 35–54: ~96%; 55–64: ~93%; 65+: ~88%. Use skews slightly older than urban areas because the county’s population is older-than-average.
• Gender split: Near-even among users (≈51% female, 49% male), mirroring the county’s population; no meaningful gender gap in email adoption.
• Digital access and trends:
  • Access: Roughly 90% of households have a computer; about 82–85% subscribe to home broadband (ACS 5‑year patterns for rural Wisconsin counties).
  • Mobile-only internet reliance remains a minority but material segment of households, concentrated in lower-density townships.
  • Connectivity is strongest along the US‑151/WI‑23 corridors and in municipal centers; fixed wireless and DSL remain common in outlying areas, with fiber availability expanding via recent state-supported builds.
  • Public Wi‑Fi/computer access through libraries and schools supplements gaps, supporting older adults and lower‑income residents.

Bottom line: Email is a near-universal tool among connected adults; overall adoption is constrained mainly by rural broadband access rather than willingness to use email.

Mobile phone usage in Iowa County, Wisconsin—key findings (latest available county data are from the Census Bureau’s 2019–2023 American Community Survey [ACS 5-year] and 2024 federal/state broadband reporting)

Overall user estimates

• Population and households: Approximately 24,000 residents and roughly 9,500–10,000 households.
• Residents using smartphones: About 18,000–19,000 people, based on ACS household smartphone prevalence and age-adjusted adoption rates.
• Smartphone-only home internet households: Roughly 700–900 households rely on cellular data as their only home internet connection.
• Landline-only is rare; the vast majority of households use wireless, with many having both wireless and some form of broadband.

County statistics (ACS 2019–2023, household-level)

• Households with a smartphone: about 88–90% (Wisconsin statewide is a bit higher, ~91–92%).
• Households with a cellular data plan: around two-thirds (county is several points higher than the state, which is closer to ~60%).
• Smartphone-only home internet (cellular data but no cable/fiber/DSL): roughly 7–9% (above the statewide share of ~5–6%).
• No home internet subscription: about 12–14% (higher than the Wisconsin average of ~8–9%).

Demographic breakdown and implications

• Older population share: Iowa County’s 65+ share is a few points higher than the state average. This correlates with slightly lower smartphone adoption among seniors and a higher likelihood of voice/text–centric usage. It also contributes to the county’s higher “no home internet” rate.
• Rural household mix: A larger rural share than Wisconsin overall increases dependence on cellular data plans (including smartphone tethering and 5G fixed wireless) and leaves a minority of households with limited or no wired broadband options.
• Income and device mix: As in the rest of the state, lower-income households are more likely to be smartphone-only for home internet. In Iowa County, that pattern is amplified by patchier wired availability outside town centers.

Digital infrastructure and market characteristics

• Coverage baseline: 4G LTE from multiple national/regional carriers blankets primary roads and towns; coverage can break in low-lying or wooded areas typical of the Driftless topography.
• 5G footprint: 5G is present in and around the main population centers and along the US-18/151 corridor (e.g., Dodgeville–Mineral Point–Barneveld), with spottier service across sparsely populated areas. This contrasts with the more continuous 5G footprints seen in Wisconsin’s metros.
• Fixed Wireless Access (FWA): 5G/LTE home internet from major carriers is widely marketed in towns and along corridors and is growing as a primary broadband option where cable/fiber is limited—meaning a higher share of cellular-reliant households than the state overall.
• Wired alternatives: Cable and fiber are primarily town-centered; many rural addresses remain on legacy DSL or shift to FWA. Recent state and federal grants (ARPA/BEAD) are driving new fiber builds, but buildout is still in progress.
• Performance variability: Median mobile speeds are competitive near towns and highways but drop off faster than in urban Wisconsin as you move into valleys and ridge country; indoor performance in older or metal-clad buildings is a recurring constraint.

Trends that differ from statewide patterns

• Higher reliance on cellular: A distinctly larger slice of households use cellular data (either smartphone-only or FWA) for home internet compared with the state average.
• Slightly lower smartphone saturation: Household smartphone presence trails the statewide rate by a couple of points, consistent with an older and more rural population.
• Larger connectivity gap: A higher share of households lack any home internet subscription than Wisconsin overall, reflecting both affordability and availability issues.
• More variable 5G experience: Iowa County’s terrain and tower spacing produce greater performance variance than in metro counties, making network experience less uniform.

What these findings mean in practice

• SMS and voice remain highly reliable channels countywide; app-centric strategies should assume a portion of users face limited bandwidth or inconsistent 5G.
• FWA is an important growth vector for closing rural gaps, but wired buildouts will be needed to reduce the county’s above-average “no internet” rate.
• Senior-focused digital inclusion efforts (device training, affordability programs) will yield outsized gains relative to statewide averages.

Primary data sources

• U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS) 2019–2023 5-year, Table S2801 (Computer and Internet Use) for county and state comparisons.
• FCC Broadband Data Collection (2024) and Wisconsin PSC broadband reporting for 4G/5G and FWA availability patterns.
• National adoption context from Pew Research Center (2023–2024) applied to the county’s age mix to derive user counts.

Iowa County, WI social media snapshot (modeled from best-available data)

• Population baseline: ~24,000 total; ~19,000 adults 18+ (U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2022–2023).
• Adult social media users: ~83% of adults use at least one platform → about 15,800 users (Pew Research Center, 2024, U.S. adult adoption rate applied locally).

Most-used platforms among adults (share of adults; Pew 2024 U.S. adoption rates; local counts are modeled)

• YouTube: 83% → ~15,800 adults
• Facebook: 68% → ~12,900
• Instagram: 47% → ~8,900
• Pinterest: 35% → ~6,700
• TikTok: 33% → ~6,300
• Snapchat: 30% → ~5,700
• LinkedIn: 30% → ~5,700
• X (Twitter): 27% → ~5,100
• Reddit: 22% → ~4,200
• WhatsApp: 21% → ~4,000
• Nextdoor: 20% → ~3,800

Age-group patterns

• County skews older than the U.S. average, boosting Facebook and YouTube reach relative to TikTok/Snapchat.
• Under 35: Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat dominate for daily engagement and peer messaging; short-form video and Stories/Reels formats perform best.
• 35–64: Facebook and YouTube are primary; Instagram is secondary for local lifestyle, youth sports, and family content.
• 65+: Facebook (Groups, community pages) and YouTube (how‑to, news clips) lead; lower use of TikTok/Snapchat.

Gender breakdown

• Overall user base is roughly half women and half men (reflecting county population).
• Women over-index on Facebook and Pinterest; strong engagement with local groups, events, school updates, recipes, crafts, and resale.
• Men over-index on YouTube, Reddit, and X; strong engagement with how‑to, machinery/outdoors, sports, markets, and local governance updates.

Behavioral trends (observed in rural Midwestern counties and consistent with Iowa County’s profile)

• Facebook is the community backbone: high participation in Groups (local news, schools, youth sports, county fair, volunteer fire/EMS), Marketplace, and event RSVPs. Boosted posts and short native videos drive outsized reach.
• YouTube is the go-to for tutorials, equipment repairs, DIY/home projects, and hunting/outdoors; long-tail search continues to deliver views weeks to months after upload.
• Instagram is visual storytelling for local businesses, boutiques, tourism, parks/trails, and food; Reels expand reach beyond followers.
• TikTok grows among teens/young adults; local event highlights, festivals, and nature/outdoor clips perform well, but total county reach remains smaller than Facebook/YouTube due to age mix.
• Messaging is split: Facebook Messenger (broad, cross‑age) and Snapchat (youth). WhatsApp remains niche.
• Local commerce: strong reliance on Facebook Marketplace and buy/sell/trade groups; Pinterest referral traffic supports seasonal/home projects among women 25–54.
• Timing: evening and weekend engagement peaks; weather-driven spikes around storms, school closings, and road conditions increase Facebook Group activity.

Notes on method

• County adult counts come from ACS; platform percentages come from Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. adult adoption rates and are applied to Iowa County’s adult population to produce modeled local estimates. Actual platform ad reach can vary with account ownership, multi-accounting, and platform-specific eligibility.