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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

RESULTS Anglers’ expenditures and the economic impacts of those expenditures on each coastal state’s economy are discussed in five separate regional sections: the Northeast, Southeast, Pacific Coast, North Pacific, and Hawaii. A sixth section shows the expenditure and impact results for the entire U.S. In each regional section, expenditures and impacts are shown by state and aggregate impacts across regions are provided in the U.S. section. Nine tables of results are shown for each state. The first table shows mean expenditures and standard errors by mode and resident status. The second table shows total expenditures by mode and resident status, as well as 95% confidence intervals for the expenditure estimates. The third table summarizes the total economic impacts attributable to recreational fishing by resident status displaying the direct, indirect, and induced impacts on sales, value-added, income, and employment for resident and non-resident anglers. Tables four through seven in each state separately detail the impacts on sales, value-added, income, and employment respectively by individual expenditure category. The eighth table displays the total economic impacts generated from saltwater fishing trip expenditures by fishing mode and resident status. This table excludes the impacts of fishing equipment purchases and other durable items that could be used for multiple trips since these could not be linked to a particular mode of fishing. The final table for each state shows the estimated revenue received by federal and state/local governments from angler purchases. The tax revenue estimates are based on data available in IMPLAN’s social accounting matrix, which tracks monetary flows between industries and institutions such as households, government, investment, and trade. The rows of the table depict the types of tax payments and the institutions that receive them, while the columns represent the different institutions making each type of tax payment. Employee compensation, enterprise, and indirect business taxes are paid by businesses, while taxes on proprietary income and household expenditures are paid by individuals. Northeast Region Expenditures Daily mean trip expenditures were generally higher for non-residents than residents in all of the coastal states in the Northeast (1 st Table for each state). Non-resident anglers tended to travel further and were more inclined to take overnight fishing trips, requiring the use of lodging facilities. Resident anglers in New Hampshire fishing aboard for-hire boats and resident anglers in Connecticut, New Hampshire, and New York fishing from private or rental boats were the only groups of resident anglers to incur higher mean trip expenditures than their non-resident counterparts. The highest single mean trip expense for resident anglers in all of the Northeast coastal states was charter fees. The highest mean trip expense for non-residents was also charter fees in every state except in Maryland and Massachusetts where mean lodging fees exceeded all other trip expenditures. 13
In contrast to daily trip expenditures, resident anglers in every state but one (Maine) spent considerably more on fishing equipment and durable items in 2006, per angler, than out-of-state anglers. The largest difference in durable expenditures across the two groups of anglers was for boat related purchases. Residents tended to spend significantly more, per angler, on boat purchases, boat accessories, and boat storage in all of the Northeast states except in Maine. Nonresident anglers fishing in Maine were estimated to spend more for boats and boating related items in Maine, on average, than residents of Maine. Total resident expenditures on trip-related items exceeded the amount spent by non-residents in 6 of the 10 Northeast coastal states (CT, MD, NH, NJ, NY, and VA), even though mean daily expenses in those states were generally higher for non-residents (2 nd Table for each state). This occurred because residents of those six states fished many more days than non-residents in 2006. Resident anglers in the remaining four Northeast states (DE, ME, MA, and RI) also fished more days than non-residents, but mean daily resident expenditures were considerably lower so total non-resident trip expenditures exceeded resident expenditures in those states. In terms of total expenditures on fishing equipment and durable goods in 2006, resident anglers spent more than non-residents in 8 of the 10 Northeast coastal states. Non-residents fishing in Maine and Rhode Island spent more, in total, than their resident counterparts due mainly to higher boating and fishing vehicle expenditures in those states. Across all of the Northeast coastal states, anglers fishing in New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, Massachusetts, and New York exhibited the highest total expenditures in 2006 (i.e., the sum of trip, fishing equipment, and durable good purchases). Anglers fishing in these states spent between $769 million and $1.4 billion on marine recreational fishing in 2006. Total resident expenditures exceeded the amount spent by non-residents in all of the Northeast states except in Maine and Rhode Island. Economic Impacts Overall, the highest sales, value-added, income, and employment impacts were generated by angler expenditures in New Jersey (Table 63). The $1.4 billion spent on retail good and services by anglers in New Jersey in 2006 generated $1.6 billion in total sales within the state, $830 million in value-added, $523 million in income, and supported 9,814 jobs. New Jersey was followed by Maryland, New York, Massachusetts, and Virginia in generating sales, value-added, income, and employment. A substantial portion of the items purchased by anglers, however, was imported into each state. As a result, many of the angler dollars spent in each coastal state impacted the economies of other states and countries. The amount lost to other regions can be calculated from the difference between the total expenditures and the direct sales impacts in the third and fourth table for each state. For instance, of the $1.4 billion spent by anglers on all goods and services in New Jersey, only $951 million (68%) directly affected the New Jersey economy (Table 63); $441.5 million in goods and services were imported into the state in response to angler demands. Thus, on average, about 32 cents of every dollar spent by anglers in New Jersey leaves the state. This is the lowest 14
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 20 and 21: ABSTRACT Marine recreational fishin
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 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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?