Iron County

Iron County, Wisconsin — key demographics

Population size

• Total population: 6,137 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~55 years (ACS 2019–2023)
• Under 18: ~17%
• 18 to 64: ~55%
• 65 and over: ~28–29%

Gender

• Male: ~50–51%
• Female: ~49–50%

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 2019–2023)

• White (alone): ~95–96%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1–2%
• Black or African American: <1%
• Asian: <1%
• Two or more races: ~2%
• Hispanic/Latino (of any race): ~2%

Household data (ACS 2019–2023)

• Households: ~2,900
• Average household size: ~2.0 persons
• Family households: ~58% of households; married-couple families ~50%
• Nonfamily households: ~42%; one-person households ~35–40%
• Owner-occupied housing: ~80% of occupied units

Insights

• Very small, aging population with one of the highest median ages in Wisconsin.
• Predominantly White population with small racial/ethnic minority shares.
• Small household sizes and a high share of single-person and owner-occupied households.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates.

Iron County, WI snapshot (estimates based on 2023 Census population, Pew email adoption, and rural broadband data):

• Population and density: ≈5,700 residents; ≈7–8 people per square mile (≈760 sq mi land area).
• Email users: ≈4,500 residents (about 79%) use email at least monthly.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 18–34: ~20% (≈900 users)
  • 35–64: ~47% (≈2,100 users)
  • 65+: ~33% (≈1,500 users)
• Gender split among users: ≈49% male, 51% female, mirroring the county’s slightly older, female-leaning population.
• Digital access trends:
  • Household home internet/broadband subscription: roughly 70–75%; smartphone‑only access: ~10–15%.
  • Adoption and reliability are highest in and around Hurley and Mercer and along US‑2/US‑51; coverage drops in dispersed lake/forest areas where long driveways and terrain raise last‑mile costs.
  • Public Wi‑Fi via libraries, schools, and municipal buildings remains an important access channel for lower‑income and seasonal residents.
  • Ongoing state/federal investments (e.g., Wisconsin PSC grants and BEAD‑funded builds) are expanding fiber and fixed‑wireless, gradually lifting speeds and availability.

Bottom line: Email usage is widespread but moderated by the county’s older age profile and rural connectivity gaps; improvements are accelerating where new fiber reaches outlying homes.

Iron County, Wisconsin: mobile phone usage snapshot (2024)

Context and scale

• Population: roughly 6,000 residents, with one of Wisconsin’s oldest age profiles (about 30% 65+ vs ~18% statewide). Housing is skewed toward small, seasonal, and single-person households.
• Sources underpinning the estimates below include U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2019–2023 5-year tables on device and internet subscriptions, FCC Broadband Map 2023–2024, and Pew Research Center’s 2023 smartphone adoption by age/rurality, applied to county demographics.

User estimates

• Adult smartphone users: approximately 4,000–4,400 residents (about 82–88% of adults), lower than Wisconsin’s statewide adult benchmark near 90%.
• Basic/feature phone users: approximately 8–12% of adults, notably higher than the state average (which is in the mid–single digits).
• Adults without a mobile phone: approximately 4–7%, higher than the state average, driven by the larger 65+ share.
• Households with any mobile phone line: roughly 95% of occupied households.
• Households with at least one smartphone: about 2,300–2,500 (roughly 82–88% of occupied households), several points below the state rate.
• Mobile-only internet households (no fixed broadband, using cellular data/hotspots as primary internet): approximately 8–10% of occupied households, a larger share than the state average, reflecting patchy wireline options.

Demographic breakdown (share using smartphones; modeled from Pew age-by-adoption applied to local age mix)

• Ages 18–34: ~93–96% (near state/U.S. levels).
• Ages 35–64: ~85–90% (a few points below state).
• Ages 65+: ~55–65% (well below state average; the 65+ cohort is large locally, pulling down the overall rate).
• Income and housing: lower-income and seasonal/second-home households are more likely to be mobile-only for home internet. Single-person and renter households show the highest mobile-only rates.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage pattern: dependable 4G LTE along primary corridors and in population centers (Hurley/Ironwood area, Mercer, key stretches of US-2 and US-51; WI-77 corridor). Outside these, coverage transitions to weaker LTE and spot dead zones in heavily forested and lake-dense areas, especially away from highways and town centers.
• 5G footprint: present, but mainly in and around towns and along the major highways; off-corridor 5G remains inconsistent. 4G remains the primary service layer for much of the county.
• Capacity and seasonality: traffic spikes during tourism peaks (summer lakes, snow season) produce noticeable congestion relative to baseline; this effect is more pronounced than at the state level because local capacity is sized for a small resident base.
• Wireline interplay: limited fiber-to-the-home and uneven cable/DSL outside town centers push some households toward cellular as primary or backup internet, a pattern stronger than statewide.
• Public safety and reliability: modern E911/FirstNet coverage reaches town centers and main roads; backcountry reliability remains variable, with location accuracy and uplink performance degrading in low-signal terrain.

How Iron County differs from the Wisconsin statewide pattern

• Lower overall smartphone penetration: driven by a much older population structure and more rural geography.
• Higher reliance on basic/feature phones and voice/text-first usage: older residents and spotty data performance sustain a larger non-smartphone segment.
• More mobile-only households: cellular data is a primary home internet solution for a noticeably larger slice of households due to limited fixed-broadband availability outside towns.
• Slower 5G uptake and smaller 5G footprint: fewer 5G devices per capita and more limited mid-band coverage compared with metro and many non-metro state counties.
• Stronger seasonal swings: tourism-related load variations impact network performance more sharply than the state average.

Implications and actionable insights

• Demand is durable for robust LTE coverage and voice reliability in off-corridor areas; incremental tower infill or sector upgrades will meaningfully improve user experience.
• Mid-band 5G buildouts concentrated on town centers and key corridors will capture most traffic benefits; off-grid or lake-country gaps remain the chief source of user pain.
• Programs targeting older adults (device training, accessibility features, telehealth readiness) can move the 65+ smartphone adoption needle.
• Given the above-average share of mobile-only households, plans with generous hotspot allowances and network management tuned for fixed-wireless use will see higher-than-typical uptake locally.

Note on figures: County-level mobile usage is not directly censused; the numeric values above are best-available, methodologically grounded estimates derived from ACS device/subscription data, FCC coverage inventories, and age-specific adoption rates from Pew, adjusted to Iron County’s age and rural profile. They reliably capture the direction and magnitude of Iron County’s differences from statewide norms.

Iron County, Wisconsin social media snapshot (population ≈6,000; 2023 ACS estimate), modeled from county age mix and 2023–2024 Pew U.S. platform adoption patterns.

Topline user stats

• Estimated total social media users: ~4,100 (≈70% of residents)
• Adults (18+): ~3,900 users; Teens (13–17): ~285 users
• Device mix: Predominantly mobile-first use; desktop use concentrated among 50+ for Facebook and YouTube

Age mix of users (share of all local users; approximate)

• 13–17: ~7%
• 18–29: ~15%
• 30–49: ~26%
• 50–64: ~29%
• 65+: ~23%

Gender breakdown (overall users; platform skews in parentheses)

• Women: ~52% overall (higher on Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, TikTok)
• Men: ~48% overall (higher on YouTube, Reddit, X/Twitter)

Most-used platforms among adults in Iron County (estimated % of adults who use)

• YouTube: 75–80%
• Facebook: 60–66%
• Instagram: 28–34%
• Pinterest: 26–32% (heavily female)
• TikTok: 20–26% (younger adults; some 50+ adoption via short-form how‑tos)
• Snapchat: 20–24% (teens/younger adults)
• LinkedIn: 15–20% (low density; limited local recruiting utility)
• X/Twitter: 14–18% (news/sports followers; low posting)
• Reddit: 10–15% (tech/outdoors niches)
• WhatsApp: 10–14% (family/group comms; small)
• Nextdoor: <5% (coverage sparse; Facebook Groups fill the “neighborhood” role)

Behavioral trends to know

• Facebook is the community hub: high engagement in local Groups (events, buy/sell, school sports, road/weather updates, hunting/fishing clubs). Marketplace drives meaningful local commerce.
• Seasonal attention swings: spikes around hunting season, snowmobile/ATV seasons, summer tourism weeks, and major weather events. Content tied to these cycles outperforms.
• Video preference: Short, mobile-native video performs best. YouTube for how‑to, equipment repair, outdoor skills; Facebook Reels and TikTok for quick local stories and event recaps.
• Trust pathways: Residents often rely on posts from local gov/EMS, school districts, and established community pages; shares in Groups materially expand reach.
• Under‑30 split: Snapchat and TikTok dominate daily messaging/entertainment; Instagram for visuals and creators; Facebook used mainly for Groups/events.
• 50+ cohort: Heavy Facebook usage; YouTube for tutorials and news clips; Pinterest for DIY/home/crafts (female‑skewed).
• Posting windows: Highest interaction typically early morning and evening; midday weekday engagement is weaker outside urgent updates.
• Cross‑community following: Residents commonly track neighboring Northwoods/U.P. pages, widening effective reach for regional businesses and tourism messaging.

Notes on method

• Population and age structure reflect recent ACS/Census estimates for Iron County’s small, older-leaning population.
• Platform percentages are county-level estimates derived by applying 2023–2024 Pew U.S. adoption rates by age/gender to Iron County’s demographic mix.