The Economic Contribution of Marine Angler Expenditures in the ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ABSTRACT Marine recreational fishing is a popular outdoor leisure activity nationwide when measured by number of participants. The National Marine Fisheries Service estimates that 24.7 million saltwater anglers fished 127.2 million days in the coastal states of the U.S. in 2006. In this report, we quantify the level of fishing expenditures for these anglers within each coastal state and the U.S. as a whole. At the U.S. level, we estimate that saltwater anglers spent an estimated $5.8 billion on trip-based expenditures (e.g., ice, bait, and fuel) and another $25.6 billion on fishing equipment and durable goods (e.g., fishing rods, fishing tackle, and boats) in 2006. In the second exercise carried out for this study we conduct a regional input-output assessment to examine how those expenditures circulated through each state’s economy as well as the economy of the entire U.S. We show that as angler expenditures filtered through the U.S. economy, they contributed an estimated $82.3 billion in total sales, $39.1 billion in value-added (i.e., contribution to gross domestic product), $24.0 billion in income, and supported nearly 534 thousand jobs in the U.S. INTRODUCTION The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has been collecting marine recreational catch, effort, and participation data since 1979 in an effort to assess the influence of recreational fishing on fish stocks. With the passing of the Magnuson-Stevenson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) in 1996, Congress additionally mandated the analysis of the economic impacts on fishing participants and coastal communities of management policies. In response, NMFS began to conduct a series of marine angler expenditure surveys in the coastal regions of the U.S. in 1998. The first surveys were administered in the Northeast Region in 1998, in the Southeast Region in 1999, and in the Pacific Region in 2000. The purpose of the survey efforts was to provide data to quantify recreational fishing expenditures and the economic impacts (i.e., effects) of the expenditures in each region and the U.S. as a whole. A separate publication for each region (Steinback and Gentner, 2001; Gentner, Price, and Steinback, 2001a; Gentner, Price, and Steinback, 2001b) summarized the survey results and provided state-level estimates of expenditures by marine recreational fishermen. In a fourth publication (Steinback, Gentner, and Castle, 2004), the data from the first three reports were used to assess the total economic impacts of anglers’ saltwater expenditures within each of the regions and the U.S. overall. The angler expenditure and impact estimates shown in those four reports provides policy analysts with information to assess the economic effects of recreational fishing activities to communities and fishery dependent and independent businesses. Angler expenditures and the economic impacts generated from the expenditures changes over time, however. As recreational fishing becomes increasingly regulated in the U.S. it essential that state and federal regulators have access to the most recent expenditure data available. In this report we show the results of the second endeavor by NMFS to collect and quantify marine recreational fishing expenditures and the economic impacts generated from angler expenditures. For this second round of marine angler expenditure surveys, data were collected from anglers fishing in all of the coastal states in the Nation in 2006. The results shown here provide updated estimates of angler expenditures and economic impacts for every coastal state in the Nation and the U.S. overall. At the U.S. level, we 1
estimate that saltwater anglers spent an estimated $5.8 billion on trip-based expenditures (e.g., ice, bait, and fuel) and another $25.6 billion on fishing equipment and durable goods (e.g., fishing rods, fishing tackle, and boats) in 2006. We also show that as these angler expenditures filtered through the U.S. economy, they generated an estimated $82.3 billion in total sales, $39.1 billion in value-added (i.e., contribution to gross domestic product), $24.0 billion in income, and supported nearly 534 thousand jobs. The report begins with a description of the survey sampling design and the completion statistics. The methods used to estimate mean angler expenditures, total angler expenditures, and economic impacts are shown next and then the expenditure and impact results are presented in four separate regional sections: the Northeast, Southeast, Pacific Coast, and Hawaii. Results for the entire U.S. are shown in a separate section. A number of statistical tests were conducted to examine the potential effects of non-response bias and survey mode differences and these findings are also discussed. The last section places the study results in context relative to the expenditure and impact estimates previously collected by NMFS and to angler expenditure estimates produced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2006. The last section also provides some concluding remarks regarding model assumptions and limitations. DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS Across the U.S. there currently is no complete and consistent frame of saltwater anglers as some coastal states do not require a saltwater license. Therefore, this survey effort utilized a number of sampling frames. The Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) conducts an intercept creel survey in the state of Hawaii and in all of the states on the East and Gulf Coasts, excluding Texas. The MRIP survey platform represents the best, most consistent sample frame for saltwater anglers in states covered by the MRIP. Within the MRIP coverage area, an add-on to the intercept survey was used to collect expenditures resulting from the intercepted trip and to gather a frame for mailing a follow-up survey regarding annual durable expenditures. However, there are coverage gaps in the MRIP for collecting national level data as the entire West Coast, Texas, and Alaska are not covered. In those states, license frames were utilized to contact anglers via a mail survey regarding both trip and durable good purchases. The MRIP The MRIP consists of two independent and complementary surveys. These two surveys are stratified to provide independent estimates of catch, effort, and participation across states, fishing modes, and two month waves through each year. The fishing modes used for this stratification are: shore mode, private or rental boat mode, and party or charter boat mode. This method of stratification has proven useful for developing estimates annually or seasonally and it allows individual regions to easily add sample within strata to increase the precision of the estimates. The first survey is an intercept survey of marine anglers at fishing access sites. This survey attempts to obtain a random sample of all marine recreational fishing trips. The MRIP maintains a list of over 6,000 sites in a master site list, which is continuously updated. Each of these sites is 2
Page 1: The Economic Contribution of Marine
Page 4 and 5: Suggested citation: Gentner, Brad,
Page 6 and 7: LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Intercept a
Page 8 and 9: Table 39. Total Income Generated in
Page 10 and 11: Table 75. Total Income Generated in
Page 12 and 13: Table 111. Total Income Generated i
Page 14 and 15: Table 147. Total Employment Generat
Page 22 and 23: anked by an index of relative fishi
Page 24 and 25: Mail survey questions in Hawaii wer
Page 26 and 27: (i.e., fishing tackle or gear), all
Page 28 and 29: at the stratum level so it was nece
Page 30 and 31: For the remainder of this report, U
Page 32 and 33: RESULTS Anglers’ expenditures and
Page 34 and 35: level of import requirements for an
Page 36 and 37: followed by Texas, North Carolina,
Page 38 and 39: Across all of the Pacific and North
Page 40 and 41: The $755.9 million spent on retail
Page 42 and 43: ethnicity (under both the Rao-Scott
Page 44 and 45: storage, and registration with a to
Page 46 and 47: Keynesian multipliers can also be u
Page 48 and 49: REFERENCES Archer, H.B. 1984. Econo
Page 50: APPENDIX I MRIP ECONOMIC INTERCEPT
Page 65: APPENDIX III LICENSE FRAME MAIL SUR
Page 79 and 80:
Table 2. Angler Effort in Thousands
Page 81 and 82:
Table 4. Recreational Expenditure S
Page 83 and 84:
Table 6. Results of Survey Mode Tes
Page 85 and 86:
Table 7. Mean Expenditures by Mode
Page 87 and 88:
Table 9. Total Economic Impacts Gen
Page 89 and 90:
Table 11. Total Value-Added Generat
Page 91 and 92:
Table 13. Total Employment Generate
Page 93 and 94:
Table 15. Federal and State Tax Imp
Page 95 and 96:
Table 17. Total Marine Recreational
Page 97 and 98:
Table 19. Total Sales/Output Genera
Page 99 and 100:
Table 21. Total Income Generated in
Page 101 and 102:
Table 23. Total Economic Impacts Ge
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
SOUTHEAST REGION TABLES Alabama Eas
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Table 100. Total Sales/Output Gener
Page 181 and 182:
Table 102. Total Income Generated i
Page 183 and 184:
Table 104. Total Economic Impacts G
Page 185 and 186:
Table 106. Mean Expenditures by Mod
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Table 110. Total Value-Added Genera
Page 191 and 192:
Table 112. Total Employment Generat
Page 193 and 194:
Table 114. Federal and State Tax Im
Page 195 and 196:
Table 116. Total Marine Recreationa
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Table 1034. Total Economic Impacts
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Table 176. Federal and Sate Tax Imp
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
PACIFIC REGION TABLES California Or
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
NORTH PACIFIC REGION TABLES Alaska
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
HAWAII TABLES 284
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
UNITED STATES TABLES 294
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321:
show all

The Economic Contribution of Marine Angler Expenditures in the ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?