2014 National Park Visitor Spending Effects

Transcription

1 National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science 2014 National Park Visitor Spending Effects Economic Contributions to Local Communities, States, and the Nation Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR 2015/947

2 ON THE COVER Visitors marvel at the colors, sounds and smells at Grand Prismatic Spring in Yellowstone National Park. Photograph courtesy of Jon Thomas of Fort Collins, CO.

3 2014 National Park Visitor Spending Effects Economic Contributions to Local Communities, States, and the Nation Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR 2015/947 Catherine Cullinane Thomas 1, Christopher Huber 1, and Lynne Koontz 2 1 U.S. Geological Survey Fort Collins Science Center Fort Collins, Colorado 2 National Park Service Environmental Quality Division Fort Collins, Colorado April 2015 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado ii

4 The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data, and whose background and expertise put them on par technically and scientifically with the authors of the information. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available from the Environmental Quality Division ( and the Natural Resource Publications Management website ( To receive this report in a format optimized for screen readers, please irma@nps.gov. Please cite this publication as: Cullinane Thomas, C., C. Huber, and L. Koontz National Park visitor spending effects: Economic contributions to local communities, states, and the Nation. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR 2015/947. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 999/128377, April 2015 iii

5 Contents Page Figures... v Tables... v Executive Summary... vi Introduction... 1 Overview of Economic Effects Analyses... 2 Types of Economic Effects Measured... 2 Economic Regions... 3 Data Sources and Methods... 4 Recreation Visitation Estimates... 4 Visitor Spending Estimates... 4 Regional Economic Multipliers VSE Model Updates... 6 Results... 7 Recreation Visits... 7 Visitor Spending... 8 National Contribution of Visitor Spending Local, State and Regional Effects Limitations References Appendix iv

6 Figures Figure 1. Distribution of total party days/nights by visitor segment... 7 Figure 2. Distribution of NPS visitor spending by spending category... 9 Page Tables Table 1. NPS visitor spending estimates by visitor segment for Table 2. Economic contributions to the national economy of NPS visitor spending Table 3. Visits, spending and economic contributions to local economies of NPS visitor spending Table 4. Visits, spending and economic impacts to local economies of NPS non-local visitor spending Table 5. Visits, spending and economic contributions to state economies of NPS visitor spending Table 6. Visits, spending and economic contributions to regional economies of NPS visitor spending Table 7. Park unit type abbreviations Table 8. Visit allocation to states for multi-state parks Page v

7 Executive Summary The National Park Service (NPS) manages the Nation s most iconic destinations that attract millions of visitors from across the Nation and around the world. Trip-related spending by NPS visitors generates and supports a considerable amount of economic activity within park gateway communities. This economic effects analysis measures how NPS visitor spending cycles through local economies, generating business sales and supporting jobs and income. In 2014, the National Park System received over 292 million recreation visits. NPS visitors spent $15.7 billion in local gateway regions (defined as communities within 60 miles of a park). The contribution of this spending to the national economy was 277 thousand jobs, $10.3 billion in labor income, $17.1 billion in value added, and $29.7 billion in output. The lodging sector saw the highest direct contributions with 48 thousand jobs and $4.8 billion in output directly contributed to local gateway economies nationally. The sector with the next greatest direct contributions was restaurants and bars, with 60 thousand jobs and $3.2 billion in output directly contributed to local gateway economies nationally. New this year, results from the Visitor Spending Effects report series are available online via an interactive tool. Users can explore current year visitor spending, jobs, labor income, value added, and output effects by sector for national, state, and local economies. This interactive tool is available via the NPS Social Science Program webpage at vi

8 Introduction The National Park System covers more than 84 million acres and is comprised of more than 401 sites across the Nation. These lands managed by the National Park Service (NPS) serve as recreational destinations for visitors from across the Nation and around the world. On vacations or on day trips, NPS visitors spend time and money in the gateway communities surrounding NPS sites. Spending by NPS visitors generates and supports a considerable amount of economic activity within park gateway economies. The NPS has been measuring and reporting visitor spending and economic effects for the past 25 years. The 2012 analysis marked a major revision to the NPS visitor spending effects analyses, with the development of the Visitor Spending Effects model (VSE model) which replaced the previous Money Generation Model (see Cullinane Thomas et al. (2014) for a description of how the VSE model differs from the previous model). This report provides updated VSE estimates associated with 2014 NPS visitation. System-wide visitation estimates in 2014 increased by 7% (or 19.2 million visits) compared to 2013 (Ziesler, 2015). Visitation in 2014 rebounded from a 2013 decline that included a 16-day government shutdown and many park closures for repairs after Superstorm Sandy hit the Northeast in late The re-opening of the Washington Monument, some 21 months after it was rocked by an earthquake and repaired, also added to 2014 visitation numbers. Additionally, several national parks saw record-breaking visitation in 2014, including Joshua Tree, Rocky Mountain, Grand Teton and Glacier national parks. This report begins by presenting an overview of economic effects analyses, followed by details about the data and methods used for this analysis and 2014 model updates. Estimates of NPS visitor spending in 2014 and resulting economic effects at the local, state, regional, and national levels are then presented. The report concludes with a description of current data limitations. Park-level spending and economic effects estimates are included in the appendix. New this year, results from the Visitor Spending Effects report series are available online via an interactive tool. Users can explore current year visitor spending, jobs, labor income, value added, and output effects by sector for national, state, and local economies. This interactive tool is available via the NPS Social Science Program webpage at 1

9 Overview of Economic Effects Analyses Visitors to NPS lands spend money in local gateway regions, and these expenditures generate and support economic activity within these local economies. Economies are complex webs of interacting consumers and producers in which goods produced by one sector of an economy become inputs to another, and the goods produced by that sector can become inputs to yet other sectors. Thus, a change in the final demand for a good or service can generate a ripple effect throughout an economy as businesses purchase inputs from one another. For example, when visitors come to an area to visit a park or historic site these visitors spend money to purchase various goods and services. The sales, income and employment resulting from these direct purchases from local businesses represent the direct effects of visitor spending within the economy. In order to provide supplies to local businesses for the production of their goods and services, input suppliers must purchase inputs from other industries, thus creating additional indirect effects of visitor spending within the economy. Additionally, employees of directly affected businesses and input suppliers use their income to purchase goods and services in the local economy, generating further induced effects of visitor spending. The sums of the indirect and induced effects give the secondary effects of visitor spending; and the sums of the direct and secondary effects give the total economic effect of visitor spending in a local economy. Economic input-output models capture these complex interactions between producers and consumers in an economy and describe the secondary effects of visitor spending through regional economic multipliers. Types of Economic Effects Measured The economic effects of visitor spending to local economies are estimated by multiplying visitor spending by regional economic multipliers. Two regional economic metrics, economic contributions and economic impacts, are described in this report: Economic contributions describe the gross economic activity associated with National Park visitor spending within a regional economy. Economic contributions can be interpreted as the relative magnitude and importance to regional economies of the economic activity generated through National Park visitor spending. Economic contributions are estimated by multiplying total visitor spending by regional economic multipliers. visitor spending includes spending by both visitors who live within the local gateway regions (local visitors) and visitors who travel to the parks from outside of the local gateway regions (non-local visitors). Economic impacts describe the net changes to the economic base of a regional economy that can be attributed to the inflow of new money to the economy from non-local visitors. Economic impact estimates only include spending by non-local visitors. Spending by local visitors is excluded because if local visitors choose not to visit the park, they will still likely spend a similar amount of money within the local economy participating in other local 2

10 recreation activities. Economic impacts can be interpreted as the economic activity that would likely be lost from the local economy if the National Park were not there. For both of these metrics, four types of regional economic effects are described: Jobs are measured as annualized full and part time jobs that are supported by NPS visitor spending. Labor Income includes employee wages, salaries and payroll benefits, as well as the incomes of sole proprietors that are supported by NPS visitor spending. Value Added measures the contribution of NPS visitor spending to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of a regional economy. Value added is equal to the difference between the amount an industry sells a product for and the production cost of the product. Economic Output is a measure of the total estimated value of the production of goods and services supported by NPS visitor spending. Output is the sum of all intermediate sales (business to business) and final demand (sales to consumers and exports). Economic Regions In order to assess the economic effects of NPS visitor spending, appropriate local regions need to be defined around each park unit. For the purposes of this analysis, the local gateway region for each park unit is defined as all counties contained within or intersecting a 60-mile radius around each park boundary 1. Geographic information systems (GIS) data were used to determine the local gateway region for each park unit by spatially identifying all counties partially or completely contained within a 60-mile radius around each park boundary 2. Only spending that took place within these regional areas is included as supporting economic activity. 1 The economic region for parks in Alaska and Hawaii are defined as the State of Alaska and the State of Hawaii, respectively. Due to data limitations, the island economy of the State of Hawaii is used as a surrogate economic region for the U.S. territories of America Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. 2 This method results in some relatively large local gateway regions, especially in some western states where counties are large. Because of this, there is the potential for including some areas that are not intrinsically linked to the local economies surrounding each park. 3

11 Data Sources and Methods Three key pieces of information are required to estimate the economic effects of NPS visitor spending: the number of visitors who visit each park, visitor spending patterns in local gateway regions, and regional economic multipliers that describe the economic effects of visitor spending in local economies. Visitation source data are derived from a variety of efforts by the NPS Social Science Program. The data sources and methods used to estimate these inputs and the resultant economic effects are described below. Recreation Visitation Estimates The NPS Visitor Use Statistics Office ( provides detailed park-level visitation data for 370 National Park units. The annual NPS recreation visitation estimates published in the 2014 Statistical Abstract (Ziesler, 2015) are used for this analysis. The abstract reports the number of overnight camping and lodging stays within the parks. For each park, visitation is measured as visits 3. Visitation estimates must be adjusted based on trip characteristic data in order to develop an estimate of visitation that is useful for estimating total visitor spending. Adjustments to visitation estimates are described in the visitor spending estimates section below. Visitor Spending Estimates The NPS has conducted Visitor Services Project (VSP) surveys since These surveys measure visitor characteristics, evaluations of importance and quality for services and facilities, and a subset of the VSP surveys include questions on visitor spending. Fifty-six VSP surveys conducted between 2003 and 2012 have the requisite data necessary to estimate park-level visitor spending profiles for this analysis. Spending data for the 56 surveyed parks were adjusted to 2014 dollars, and were used to represent spending patterns at the surveyed parks. Non-surveyed parks were classified into four park types: parks that have both camping and lodging available within the park, parks that have only camping available within the park, parks with no overnight stays, and parks with high day use (including National Recreation Areas, National Seashores and National Lakeshores). Generic spending profiles for each of these park types were developed using data from the 56 surveyed parks. A number of parks are not well represented by the four park types constructed using the VSP survey data. For these parks, profiles were constructed using the best available data. These units include parks in Alaska, parks in the Washington D.C. area, parkways, and parks in highly urban areas. Profiles were also constructed for a number of unique parks. 3 Parks count visits as the number of individuals who enter the park each day. For example, a family of four taking a week-long vacation to Yellowstone National Park and staying at a lodge outside of the park would be counted as 28 visits (4 individuals who enter the park on 7 different days). A different family of four, also taking a week-long vacation to Yellowstone National Park but lodging within the park, would be counted as 4 visits (4 individuals who enter the park on a single day and then stay within the park for the remainder of their trip). These differences are a result of the realities of the limitations in the methods available to count park visits. 4

12 Visitor spending data from the VSP surveys are reported as spending per party per night for overnight trips, and spending per party per day for day trips. A party is defined as a group that is traveling together and sharing expenses (e.g., a family). Party days/nights are defined as the number of days (for day trips) and the number of nights (for overnight trips) that parties spend visiting a park. To estimate total party days/nights, park visit data from the NPS Statistical Abstract are combined with trip characteristic information derived from the VSP surveys. Trip characteristic data includes average party sizes, re-entry rates, and lengths of stay. Visitation data are converted to total party days/nights using the following conversion: party days/nights = Visits Party Size 1 Length of Stay ReEntry Rate The VSP data is also used to segment visitors by type of trip. NPS recreation visitors are split into the following seven distinct visitor segments in order to help explain differences in spending across user groups: Local day trip: local visitors who visit the park for a single day and leave the area or return home, Non-local day trip: non-local visitors who visit the park for a single day and leave the area or return home, NPS Lodge: non-local visitors who stay at a lodge or motel within the park, NPS Campground: non-local visitors who stay at campgrounds or at back country camping sites within the park, Motel Outside Park: non-local visitors who stay at motels, hotels, or bed and breakfasts located outside of the park, Camp Outside Park: non-local visitors who camp outside of the park, and Other: non-local visitors who stay overnight in the local region but do not have any lodging expenses. This segment includes visitors staying in private homes, with friends or relatives, or in other unpaid lodging. Spending is further broken into the following eight spending categories derived from the VSP survey data: Hotels, motels and bed and breakfasts, Camping fees, Restaurants and bars, Groceries and takeout food, Gas and oil, Local transportation, Admission and fees, and Souvenirs and other expenses. 5

13 Regional Economic Multipliers The multipliers used in this analysis are derived from the IMPLAN software and data system (IMPLAN Group LLC). IMPLAN is a widely used input-output modeling system. The underlying data drawn upon by the IMPLAN system are collected by the IMPLAN Group LLC from multiple Federal and state sources including the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the U.S. Census Bureau. This analysis uses IMPLAN version 3.0 software with 2013 county, state, and national-level data. Economic effects are reported on an annual basis in 2014 dollars (. Where necessary, dollar values have been adjusted to $2014 using Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) deflators. This analysis reports economic impacts and contributions at the local-level, and economic contributions at the state, NPS region, and national levels. Local economic impacts and contributions use county-level IMPLAN models comprised of all counties contained within the local gateway regions; state-level contributions use state-level IMPLAN models; regional-level contributions use regional IMPLAN models; and the national-level contributions use a national IMPLAN model. The size of the region included in an IMPLAN model influences the magnitude of the economic multiplier effects. As the economic region expands, the amount of secondary spending that stays within that region increases, which results in larger economic multipliers. Thus, contributions at the national level are larger than those at the regional, state, and local levels VSE Model Updates The 2014 VSE analysis uses 2013 IMPLAN data. The 2013 IMPLAN dataset features increased industry detail compared to previous years, expanding the number of industry sectors from 440 to 536 sectors. To estimate how visitor spending ripples through economies, visitor expenditure categories are matched to IMPLAN industry sectors (a process called bridging). The new expanded IMPLAN sector scheme required visitor spending categories to be re-bridged to the new sectors. Most of the spending categories were matched one-to-one from the 440 industry scheme to the 536 industry scheme, with the exception of expenditures made at restaurants and bars, and retail and souvenir expenditures. Restaurant expenditures were split between the new full-service restaurants and limited-service restaurants sectors. This change had very little effect on impact and contribution results. Retail and souvenir expenditures were moved from the general merchandise stores sector to the miscellaneous store retailers sector, to better represent the types of retail stores most likely frequented by NPS visitors. The previously used general merchandise stores sector describes department stores and warehouse clubs, whereas the newly used miscellaneous store retailers sector describes florists, gift stores, art dealers, and thrift stores, among others. For retail purchases, only retail margins are modeled as stimulating economic activity in the local economy. The general merchandise stores sectors has a relatively low retail margin of around 27 percent, whereas the miscellaneous store retailers sector has a higher margin of about 45 percent. As a result of this higher applied margin for retail and 6

14 souvenir expenditures, estimated secondary effects of visitor spending are relatively higher in 2014 as compared to Results Recreation Visits A total of million NPS recreation visits are reported in the 2014 NPS Statistical Abstract (Ziesler, 2015). This is up 19.2 million visits from 2013 visitation. party days/nights are estimated for each park unit and for each visitor segment based on visitor segments splits (as described in the visitor spending estimates section). In 2014, visitor groups accounted for million party days/nights. Figure 1 provides the distribution of total party days/nights by visitor segment. Figure 1. Distribution of total party days/nights by visitor segment. party days/nights measures the number of days (for day trips) and nights (for overnight trips) that visitor groups spend in gateway regions while visiting NPS lands. 7

15 Visitor Spending In 2014, park visitors spent an estimated $15.7 billion in local gateway regions while visiting NPS lands. Visitor spending was estimated for each park unit and for each visitor segment based on park and segment specific expenditure profiles (as described in the visitor spending estimates section). visitor spending is equal to total party days/nights multiplied by spending per party per day/night. Table 1 gives total spending estimates and average spending per party per day/night by visitor segment. Figure 2 presents the distribution of visitor spending by spending category. Lodging expenses account for the largest share of visitor spending. In 2014, park visitors spent $4.8 billion on lodging in hotels, motels and bed and breakfasts, and an additional $386.7 million on camping fees. Food expenses account for the next largest share of expenditures. In 2014, park visitors spent $3.2 billion dining at restaurants and bars and an additional $1.1 billion purchasing food at grocery and convenience stores. Table 1. NPS visitor spending estimates by visitor segment for Visitor Segment Spending ($ Millions, Percent of Spending Average Spending per Party per Day/Night ( Local Day Trip $ % $40.72 Non-Local Day Trip $2, % $88.23 NPS Lodge $ % $ NPS Camp Ground $ % $ Motel Outside Park $9, % $ Camp Outside Park $ % $ Other $ % $41.34 $15, % $

16 Figure 2. Distribution of NPS visitor spending by spending category. In 2014, visitors to NPS lands spent an estimated $15.7 billion in local gateway regions. 9

17 National Contribution of Visitor Spending This section reports the economic contributions of visitor spending to the national economy. These contributions are estimated by multiplying total visitor spending by national economic multipliers. Contributions at the national-level are larger than those at the park-level because, as the economic region expands, the amount of secondary spending that stays within that region increases which results in larger economic multipliers. Table 2 gives the economic contributions to the national economy of NPS visitor spending. In 2014, NPS visitors spent a total of $15.7 billion in local gateway regions while visiting NPS lands. These expenditures directly supported nearly 174 thousand jobs, $5.0 billion in labor income, $7.6 billion in value added, and $12.4 billion in output in the national economy. The secondary effects of visitor spending supported an additional 103 thousand jobs, $5.4 billion in labor income, $9.4 billion in value added, and $17.3 billion in output in the national economy. Combined, NPS visitor spending supported a total of 277 thousand jobs, $10.3 billion in labor income, $17.1 billion in value added, and $29.7 billion in output in the national economy. Table 2. Economic contributions to the national economy of NPS visitor spending Sector Direct Effects Jobs Labor Income ($ Millions, Value Added ($ Millions, Output ($ Millions, Hotels, motels, and B&Bs 48,359 $1,783.0 $3,080.1 $4,805.7 Camping and other accommodations 5,558 $159.2 $248.6 $386.7 Restaurants and bars 60,614 $1,372.2 $1,847.3 $3,183.3 Grocery and convenience stores 4,644 $143.0 $205.9 $313.0 Gas stations 2,674 $98.2 $129.5 $202.5 Transit and ground transportation services 7,760 $364.5 $767.8 $1,153.6 Other amusement and recreation industries 26,279 $626.9 $901.8 $1,603.4 Retail establishments 17,850 $405.7 $453.1 $708.1 Direct Effects 173,738 $4,952.7 $7,634.1 $12,356.3 Secondary Effects 103,222 $5,350.1 $9,418.5 $17,339.3 Effects 276,960 $10,303.0 $17,053.0 $29,

18 Local, State and Regional Effects Contributions and impacts to local gateway economies are provided in the appendix in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. Economic contributions are estimated by multiplying total (local and nonlocal) visitor spending by park-level economic multipliers. Economic impacts are estimated by multiplying non-local visitor spending by park-level economic multipliers. Park unit type abbreviations are included in Table 7 in the appendix. Contributions to state and regional economies are provided in the appendix in Tables 5 and 6, respectively. State-level contributions use state-level multipliers and regional-level contributions use regional multipliers. For parks that fall within multiple states, park spending is proportionally allocated to each state based on the share of park visits that occur within each state. Visit shares for multi-state parks are listed in Table 8 in the appendix. The size of the region included in an IMPLAN model influences the magnitude of the economic multiplier effects. As the economic region expands, the amount of secondary spending that stays within that region increases, which results in larger economic multipliers. Thus, contributions at the national level are larger than those at the regional, state, and local levels. 11

19 Limitations The accuracy of spending and impact estimates rests largely on the input data, namely (1) public use recreation visit and overnight stay data; (2) party size, length of stay, and park re-entry conversion factors; (3) visitor segment shares; (4) spending averages; and (5) local area multipliers. Public use data provide estimates of visitor entries for most parks. Various counting instructions consider travel mode context at park units to derive recreation and non-recreation visitation at both a monthly and annual resolution. Re-entry factors, vehicle occupancy rates and other corrections are collected using travel surveys that increase the accuracy of these estimates. While these methods are well established in the visitor use estimation literature, these are still estimates. Visitor spending estimates are calculated by multiplying total party days/nights for each visitor segment by average spending profiles for each visitor segment. Accurate estimates of visitor segment splits and trip characteristic data, including park re-entry rates, party sizes, and lengths of stay in the area, are needed to convert park visits to the number of party days/nights by visitor segment. Data used in the VSE model are derived from Visitor Services Project (VSP) surveys. For each park, visitors are split into seven visitor segments (local day trip, non-local day trip, NPS lodge, NPS campground, motel outside park, camp outside park, and other). Visitor segment splits for each park determine how many visits are attributed to each visitor segment, and can have a substantial effect on visitor spending estimates. As with trip characteristic data, visitor segment splits are derived from VSP data. These data seem to overestimate the percent of visits that fall into the other segment. Other visitors are defined as non-local visitors who stay overnight in the local region but do not have any lodging expenses. This segment includes visitors staying in private homes, with friends or relatives, or in other unpaid lodging. Although the percent of visits assigned to this segment is likely overestimated, average spending for the other segment is low; thus, an overestimate in the percent of visits that are classified as other should have a downward effect on spending and economic effect estimates. Many visitors come to local gateway regions primarily to visit NPS lands. However, some visitors are primarily in the area for business, visiting friends and relatives, or for some other reason, and their visit to a NPS unit is not their primary purpose for their trip. For these visitors, it may not be appropriate to attribute all of their trip expenditures to the NPS. The VSE model only counts expenditures for the number of days that these visitors visit the park, but it does not adjust daily expenditures to omit spending such as motel and rental car expenses. This likely results in an over-attribution of visitor spending in sectors such as lodging and local transportation. Plans are underway to improve this methodology as better data on trip purpose and visitor spending become available. Similarly, it is difficult to allocate trip expenses for visitors who visit a park as part of a multidestination trip, a tour package, or a longer vacation. This is especially applicable for visitors to 12

20 the large western national parks and parks in vacation destinations like Hawaii. Plans are underway to develop improved expenditure profiles for visitors on these types of trips. The generic profiles constructed from the available VSP data should be reasonably accurate for many park units. However, a number of parks are not well represented by the generic visitor spending and trip characteristic profiles developed from the VSP data. For these parks, profiles were constructed using the best available data. These units include parks in Alaska, parks in the Washington D.C. area, parkways, and parks in highly urban areas. There is a great need for increased sampling rigor across park types and geographic regions in order to increase the accuracy of these data and thus improve the accuracy of future visitor spending effects analyses. Efforts are underway to diversify the number of park units that these profiles represent. It is expected that these inputs to the model will continue to improve, and park unit specific data will be more prevalent through socioeconomic monitoring. Parks in Alaska- Visit characteristics and spending at Alaska parks are unique. Spending opportunities near Alaska parks are limited and for many visitors a park visit is part of a cruise or guided tour, frequently purchased as a package. Most visitors are on extended trips to Alaska, making it difficult to allocate expenses to a particular park visit. Lodging, vehicle rentals, and air expenses frequently occur in Anchorage, many miles from the park. Also, many Alaska parks are only accessible by air or boat, so spending profiles estimated from visitor surveys at parks in the lower 48 states do not apply well. For this analysis, Alaska statewide multipliers are used to estimate impacts for parks in Alaska. Visitor trip characteristics and spending profiles are adopted from two reports on visitor spending and impacts in Alaska: a 2010 report on visitor spending and economic significance of visitation to Katmai National Park and Preserve (Fay and Christensen, 2010), and a 2010 report on the economic impacts of visitors to southeast Alaska (McDowell Group, 2010). Parks in the Washington D.C. area- The many monuments and parks in the Washington, D.C. area each count visitors separately. To avoid double counting of spending across many national capital parks, we must know how many times a visitor has been counted at park units during a trip to the Washington, D.C. area. For parks in the Washington, D.C. area, we assume an average of 1.7 park visits are counted for day trips by local visitors, 3.4 visits for day trips by non-local visitors, and 5.1 park visits on overnight trips (Stynes, 2011). Better data on visitor trip patterns in the Washington D.C. area would improve the accuracy of spending and economic effects for these parks. Parkways and urban parks- Parkways and urban parks present special difficulties for economic impact analyses. These units have some of the highest number of visits while posing the most difficult problems for estimating visits, spending, and impacts. The majority of visits to these types of units were assumed to be day trips by local or non-local visitors. Due to the high numbers of visits at these units, small changes in assumed spending averages or segment mixes 13

21 can swing the spending estimates by substantial amounts. Better data on parkway and urban park spending patterns and trip characteristics are needed. The economic effects of visitor spending are estimated by multiplying visitor spending estimates by local area multipliers. Local area multipliers are developed using county-level IMPLAN models comprised of all counties contained within the local gateway regions. For this analysis, the local gateway region for each park unit is defined as all counties contained within or intersecting a 60-mile radius around each park boundary. This method results in some relatively large local gateway regions, especially in some western states where counties are large. Because of this, there is the potential for including some areas that are not intrinsically linked to the local economies surrounding each park. Efforts are underway to improve local gateway region definitions. 14

22 References Cullinane Thomas, C., C. Huber, and L. Koontz National Park visitor spending effects: Economic contributions to local communities, states, and the nation. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR 2014/765. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. Fay, G. and Christensen, J Katmai National Park and Preserve Economic Significance Analysis and Model Documentation. Prepared for: National Park Conservation Association and National Park Service, Katmai National Park and Preserve, 60 pp. IMPLAN Group LLC, IMPLAN System (data and software), Birkdale Commons Parkway Suite 206, Huntersville, NC McDowell Group Economic Impact of Visitors to Southeast Alaska, Prepared for: Alaska Wilderness League, 33 pp. Ziesler, P Statistical abstract: Natural Resource Data Series NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRDS 2015/775. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. Stynes, D. J Economic Benefits to Local Communities from National Park Visitation and Payroll, Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR 2011/481. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. 15

23 Appendix Table 3. Visits, spending and economic contributions to local economies of NPS visitor spending Park Unit Recreation Visits Visitor Spending 16 Jobs Contribution of all Visitor Spending Labor Income Value Added Output Abraham Lincoln Birthplace NHP 241,264 $13, $6,428.5 $10,306.8 $18,129.5 Acadia NP 2,563,128 $221, ,486 $91,220.0 $154,139.8 $270,924.7 Adams NHP 178,468 $10, $5,619.6 $8,846.5 $14,096.5 African Burial Ground NM 54,861 $3, $1,815.7 $2,817.8 $4,230.7 Agate Fossil Beds NM* 12,441 $ $272.5 $490.2 $913.0 Alibates Flint Quarries NM 4,513 $ $101.0 $176.3 $314.9 Allegheny Portage Railroad NHS 172,883 $9, $4,802.2 $7,546.2 $13,090.2 Amistad NRA 1,130,095 $47, $14,492.1 $26,196.2 $47,269.3 Andersonville NHS 127,189 $7, $2,745.4 $4,676.0 $8,688.1 Andrew Johnson NHS 42,863 $2, $1,077.8 $1,799.1 $3,114.5 Aniakchak NM&PRES 134 $ $48.8 $115.5 $172.2 Antietam NB 337,080 $18, $10,301.5 $16,167.6 $25,738.1 Apostle Islands NL* 290,060 $44, $16,907.0 $29,651.1 $53,777.3 Appomattox Court House NHP 278,776 $15, $6,761.5 $11,315.2 $19,941.7 Arches NP* 1,284,768 $146, ,455 $61,114.3 $110,401.2 $193,737.4 Arkansas Post NMEM 30,861 $1, $760.2 $1,195.2 $2,075.9 Arlington House, The Robert E. Lee Memorial NMEM 671,638 $37, $20,582.8 $32,310.5 $51,081.3 Assateague Island NS 2,170,681 $90, ,241 $35,689.0 $62,774.0 $102,346.9 Aztec Ruins NM 44,720 $2, $929.8 $1,615.5 $2,865.9 Badlands NP 868,094 $53, $20,883.5 $34,407.7 $66,184.9 Bandelier NM 130,107 $7, $3,377.7 $5,458.4 $9,790.7 Bent's Old Fort NHS 24,555 $1, $545.6 $973.4 $1,685.5 Bering Land Bridge NPRES 2,636 $3, $1,895.1 $3,480.3 $5,658.7 Big Bend NP 314,102 $27, $9,245.8 $16,842.7 $30,170.2 Big Cypress NPRES 1,192,856 $91, ,323 $50,613.1 $80,400.7 $129,699.8 Big Hole NB 36,987 $2, $864.8 $1,300.6 $2,408.1 Big South Fork NRRA* 599,906 $17, $6,304.6 $10,713.2 $18,638.3 Big Thicket NPRES 109,957 $6, $3,220.3 $5,201.5 $8,632.9 Bighorn Canyon NRA 224,082 $9, $3,764.3 $6,008.5 $11,111.4 Biscayne NP 525,745 $32, $17,859.9 $27,890.1 $44,794.0 Black Canyon Of The Gunnison NP 183,046 $10, $5,093.4 $8,314.0 $13,469.7 Blue Ridge PKWY 13,941,750 $863, ,020 $408,847.2 $678,557.0 $1,175,763.3 Bluestone NSR 38,450 $1, $633.5 $1,019.4 $1,792.4 Booker T Washington NM 26,128 $1, $649.6 $1,060.2 $1,889.9 Boston NHP 2,476,078 $138, ,071 $78,093.7 $122,993.7 $195,610.8 Boston African American NHS 408,640 $22, $12,883.1 $20,295.8 $32,286.1

24 Park Unit Recreation Visits Visitor Spending Jobs Contribution of all Visitor Spending Labor Income Value Added Output Brown V Board Of Education NHS 26,868 $1, $789.3 $1,255.6 $2,197.9 Bryce Canyon NP 1,435,741 $117, ,810 $46,455.8 $82,083.0 $142,767.3 Buck Island Reef NM 34,400 $2, $929.5 $1,574.1 $2,425.2 Buffalo NR 1,357,057 $56, $22,278.5 $36,471.3 $65,160.8 Cabrillo NM 893,434 $50, $27,025.6 $41,453.1 $66,724.4 Canaveral NS 1,451,225 $89, ,348 $43,032.6 $71,969.5 $119,444.4 Cane River Creole NHP 28,981 $1, $653.7 $1,119.0 $1,967.3 Canyon De Chelly NM 827,761 $51, $18,407.3 $32,261.1 $57,807.4 Canyonlands NP 542,431 $31, $11,839.6 $21,210.0 $37,337.0 Cape Cod NS 4,426,750 $185, ,421 $97,292.1 $149,273.6 $232,951.3 Cape Hatteras NS 2,153,349 $131, ,047 $55,699.3 $92,629.8 $162,760.5 Cape Krusenstern NM Cape Lookout NS 430,928 $20, $7,597.2 $12,582.0 $23,366.8 Capitol Reef NP* 786,515 $54, $20,214.6 $35,511.6 $61,895.3 Capulin Volcano NM* 50,891 $1, $455.6 $785.0 $1,466.3 Carl Sandburg Home NHS 82,377 $4, $2,010.0 $3,383.4 $5,852.9 Carlsbad Caverns NP 397,309 $24, $8,915.9 $14,950.4 $27,397.2 Casa Grande Ruins NM 63,699 $3, $1,906.8 $3,079.7 $5,055.9 Castillo De San Marcos NM 760,707 $42, $19,865.4 $33,634.5 $57,455.9 Castle Clinton NM 4,727,109 $112, ,321 $56,256.8 $85,684.8 $130,218.9 Catoctin Mountain P 188,170 $10, $5,787.6 $9,179.0 $14,592.2 Cedar Breaks NM 762,907 $47, $17,427.4 $30,990.7 $54,258.1 Cesar E. Chavez NM 8,855 $ $270.0 $417.3 $685.2 Chaco Culture NHP 38,385 $2, $854.7 $1,419.6 $2,566.4 Chamizal NMEM 108,400 $6, $2,355.3 $4,097.1 $7,534.7 Channel Islands NP 342,161 $20, $11,401.3 $17,553.9 $28,631.0 Charles Pinckney NHS 53,486 $2, $1,327.1 $2,255.5 $3,748.7 Chattahoochee River NRA 3,119,162 $128, ,014 $67,136.8 $104,240.3 $177,414.6 Chesapeake & Ohio Canal NHP 5,066,219 $91, ,381 $51,031.8 $81,261.6 $130,497.5 Chickamauga & Chattanooga NMP 996,694 $61, $24,342.3 $42,404.4 $75,337.4 Chickasaw NRA* 1,152,083 $17, $4,665.6 $7,476.4 $13,482.4 Chiricahua NM 45,125 $2, $884.6 $1,536.3 $2,689.6 Christiansted NHS 109,160 $6, $2,898.1 $4,800.6 $7,452.5 City Of Rocks NRES 94,825 $5, $2,142.4 $3,447.7 $6,149.4 Clara Barton NHS 20,028 $1, $614.7 $965.2 $1,528.1 Colonial NHP 3,335,061 $187, ,123 $88,515.5 $145,600.8 $254,353.0 Colorado NM 416,862 $25, $9,972.1 $17,993.9 $31,142.2 Congaree NP* 120,123 $5, $2,294.3 $4,041.7 $6,901.6 Coronado NMEM 118,838 $6, $2,681.2 $4,691.0 $7,

25 Park Unit Recreation Visits Visitor Spending Jobs Contribution of all Visitor Spending Labor Income Value Added Output Cowpens NB 200,836 $12, $6,059.0 $9,779.1 $16,768.5 Crater Lake NP 535,508 $44, $21,613.0 $34,055.9 $61,038.2 Craters Of The Moon NM&PRES* 214,993 $7, $2,626.2 $4,285.6 $8,111.8 Cumberland Gap NHP 879,934 $54, $22,558.6 $39,131.2 $67,642.9 Cumberland Island NS 61,402 $2, $1,078.9 $1,761.5 $3,013.4 Curecanti NRA 931,368 $38, $16,390.9 $27,031.4 $44,334.2 Cuyahoga Valley NP 2,189,849 $135, ,284 $67,095.4 $107,710.5 $189,924.7 Dayton Aviation Heritage NHP* 57,565 $3, $1,854.8 $2,896.6 $5,096.3 De Soto NMEM 342,039 $19, $9,847.1 $16,054.9 $26,733.9 Death Valley NP 1,101,312 $89, ,264 $44,343.6 $71,914.5 $116,463.3 Delaware Water Gap NRA* 4,041,672 $132, ,013 $80,891.8 $124,328.2 $194,684.5 Denali NP&PRES 531,315 $524, ,806 $249,433.1 $462,498.1 $748,443.4 Devils Postpile NM 114,414 $6, $2,891.5 $4,875.8 $8,302.0 Devils Tower NM 440,875 $26, $10,778.9 $17,924.9 $33,693.9 Dinosaur NM 250,624 $14, $5,736.4 $9,469.8 $16,059.1 Dry Tortugas NP 64,865 $3, $1,582.4 $2,583.3 $4,160.9 Edgar Allan Poe NHS 13,700 $ $451.5 $701.4 $1,133.6 Effigy Mounds NM* 77,811 $4, $1,853.5 $3,144.7 $5,747.2 Eisenhower NHS 58,239 $3, $1,773.2 $2,769.9 $4,409.8 El Malpais NM 164,063 $9, $3,922.4 $6,451.0 $11,737.1 El Morro NM 46,256 $2, $798.9 $1,503.9 $2,849.9 Eleanor Roosevelt NHS 60,455 $3, $1,801.7 $2,916.6 $4,499.2 Eugene O'Neill NHS 3,202 $ $104.0 $154.7 $247.3 Everglades NP 1,110,900 $104, ,552 $60,917.8 $96,751.9 $155,544.7 Federal Hall NMEM 137,538 $7, $4,565.2 $7,066.0 $10,598.6 Fire Island NS 384,343 $15, $8,639.7 $13,376.9 $19,989.9 First Ladies NHS 15,326 $ $455.4 $708.5 $1,231.1 Flight 93 NMEM 284,226 $15, $7,952.8 $12,471.8 $21,617.5 Florissant Fossil Beds NM 63,298 $3, $1,945.7 $3,124.5 $5,132.0 Ford's Theatre NHS 655,441 $11, $6,739.4 $10,645.8 $16,795.9 Fort Bowie NHS 6,964 $ $154.6 $270.4 $462.5 Fort Caroline NMEM 187,844 $10, $5,091.3 $8,457.1 $14,428.8 Fort Davis NHS 49,843 $2, $902.4 $1,620.5 $2,947.7 Fort Donelson NB 262,317 $16, $7,561.4 $12,485.1 $20,826.3 Fort Frederica NM 228,102 $12, $5,913.3 $9,723.6 $16,700.4 Fort Laramie NHS 49,038 $2, $1,073.6 $1,845.4 $3,212.7 Fort Larned NHS* 24,607 $1, $470.6 $841.6 $1,571.8 Fort Matanzas NM 568,530 $31, $14,909.6 $25,243.0 $43,022.9 Fort McHenry NM&SHRINE 769,300 $43, $23,381.1 $37,286.7 $58,

26 Park Unit Recreation Visits Visitor Spending Jobs Contribution of all Visitor Spending Labor Income Value Added Output Fort Necessity NB 219,546 $13, $6,850.6 $10,878.3 $18,752.7 Fort Point NHS 1,677,456 $94, ,325 $54,436.5 $80,996.3 $129,525.0 Fort Pulaski NM 387,010 $23, $10,187.6 $17,242.9 $28,990.3 Fort Raleigh NHS 264,987 $14, $6,514.7 $10,638.2 $18,741.6 Fort Scott NHS* 25,966 $ $141.5 $228.8 $428.9 Fort Smith NHS 88,790 $4, $2,037.9 $3,388.5 $6,165.7 Fort Stanwix NM* 60,819 $3, $1,234.7 $2,442.4 $3,910.0 Fort Sumter NM 828,521 $46, $20,559.0 $34,974.8 $58,198.5 Fort Union NM* 10,934 $ $300.1 $459.6 $793.2 Fort Union Trading Post NHS* 11,520 $ $313.9 $465.0 $801.2 Fort Vancouver NHS 803,739 $45, $24,326.7 $37,421.2 $64,753.8 Fort Washington P 466,078 $26, $14,285.6 $22,364.9 $35,176.2 Fossil Butte NM* 16,623 $ $302.6 $488.0 $847.9 Franklin Delano Roosevelt MEM 2,938,238 $53, $30,211.9 $47,723.6 $75,293.3 Frederick Douglass NHS 45,492 $ $467.8 $738.6 $1,163.8 Frederick Law Olmsted NHS 8,668 $ $272.8 $430.0 $686.1 Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania NMP 873,328 $48, $26,115.2 $40,790.5 $64,610.8 Friendship Hill NHS 34,317 $1, $984.1 $1,544.7 $2,671.2 Gates Of The Arctic NP&PRES 12,669 $19, $9,108.4 $16,727.5 $27,197.9 Gateway NRA 6,021,713 $143, ,709 $72,086.3 $109,267.6 $167,385.9 Gauley River NRA 117,355 $4, $1,929.6 $3,040.0 $5,320.5 General Grant NMEM 100,623 $5, $3,328.8 $5,170.3 $7,767.2 George Rogers Clark NHP 125,218 $7, $2,741.3 $4,651.0 $8,548.5 George Washington MEM PKWY 7,472,150 $46, $27,495.8 $40,683.9 $66,695.2 George Washington Birthplace NM* 131,984 $5, $2,996.2 $4,682.2 $7,358.2 George Washington Carver NM* 41,535 $ $291.9 $461.7 $826.0 Gettysburg NMP 1,020,702 $62, $33,259.2 $52,739.5 $83,823.0 Gila Cliff Dwellings NM 31,136 $1, $538.6 $955.1 $1,765.3 Glacier NP 2,338,528 $193, ,405 $91,058.6 $139,669.0 $260,526.3 Glacier Bay NP&PRES 500,727 $111, ,979 $60,041.9 $94,726.5 $159,895.2 Glen Canyon NRA 2,368,452 $151, ,166 $56,617.4 $100,036.3 $171,761.9 Golden Gate NRA 15,004,419 $357, ,416 $173,611.2 $255,554.0 $409,790.4 Golden Spike NHS* 44,125 $2, $1,186.9 $1,866.6 $3,330.7 Governors Island NM 698,228 $39, $23,175.7 $35,871.0 $53,804.9 Grand Canyon NP* 4,756,771 $509, ,846 $265,037.7 $441,309.6 $711,041.9 Grand Portage NM 88,877 $5, $1,595.9 $2,927.3 $5,393.0 Grand Teton NP* 2,791,393 $489, ,822 $226,450.9 $362,187.4 $636,692.6 Grant-Kohrs Ranch NHS 20,564 $1, $556.4 $817.7 $1,

27 Park Unit Recreation Visits Visitor Spending Jobs Contribution of all Visitor Spending Labor Income Value Added Output Great Basin NP 107,525 $5, $1,896.9 $3,382.8 $6,108.6 Great Sand Dunes NP&PRES 271,774 $15, $6,103.9 $10,923.9 $19,040.4 Great Smoky Mountains NP 10,099,276 $806, ,759 $366,278.5 $639,907.0 $1,087,764.5 Greenbelt P 132,688 $7, $4,185.1 $6,668.3 $10,496.1 Guadalupe Mountains NP 166,868 $9, $3,749.4 $6,553.5 $11,900.3 Guilford Courthouse NMP 173,261 $10, $5,172.8 $8,110.5 $14,212.2 Gulf Islands NS 4,455,240 $185, ,731 $80,812.4 $131,010.4 $224,462.4 Hagerman Fossil Beds NM 22,483 $1, $602.1 $934.4 $1,674.2 Haleakala NP 1,142,040 $70, $32,210.8 $54,581.0 $84,066.3 Hamilton Grange NMEM 20,944 $1, $691.8 $1,074.1 $1,610.3 Hampton NHS 32,499 $1, $1,004.6 $1,587.3 $2,515.8 Harpers Ferry NHP* 261,203 $12, $7,222.3 $11,270.9 $17,919.0 Harry S Truman NHS 29,364 $1, $874.9 $1,389.0 $2,429.5 Hawaii Volcanoes NP 1,693,005 $136, ,672 $64,076.4 $111,326.3 $170,878.0 Herbert Hoover NHS 139,086 $7, $3,233.9 $5,627.1 $9,928.9 Home Of Franklin D Roosevelt NHS 179,339 $10, $5,395.7 $8,680.3 $13,401.7 Homestead NM* 69,156 $2, $766.9 $1,283.1 $2,366.6 Hopewell Culture NHP 36,432 $2, $1,060.5 $1,642.3 $2,889.9 Hopewell Furnace NHS 48,105 $2, $1,529.4 $2,392.1 $3,936.2 Horseshoe Bend NMP 64,360 $3, $1,651.7 $2,653.6 $4,788.1 Hot Springs NP 1,424,485 $87, ,422 $36,484.5 $61,917.8 $111,375.4 Hovenweep NM 26,808 $1, $622.4 $1,093.0 $1,871.7 Hubbell Trading Post NHS 81,476 $4, $1,643.5 $2,838.9 $5,137.2 Independence NHP 3,648,051 $204, ,217 $120,228.8 $186,764.9 $301,845.7 Indiana Dunes NL 1,553,372 $64, $34,631.3 $54,588.4 $88,057.2 Isle Royale NP 14,560 $3, $1,210.8 $2,168.3 $3,990.6 James A Garfield NHS* 17,956 $ $321.2 $503.7 $894.4 Jean Lafitte NP&PRES 445,524 $24, $11,798.8 $18,963.4 $32,470.8 Jefferson NEM* 1,817,091 $173, ,195 $96,597.8 $152,540.4 $270,001.1 Jewel Cave NM 104,348 $5, $2,385.7 $3,889.6 $7,417.8 Jimmy Carter NHS 62,056 $3, $1,332.3 $2,270.0 $4,221.2 John D Rockefeller Jr MEM PKWY 1,264,842 $42, $23,408.2 $38,171.0 $67,593.6 John Day Fossil Beds NM* 183,420 $8, $3,509.4 $5,473.7 $9,812.5 John F Kennedy NHS 26,272 $1, $826.6 $1,303.1 $2,079.8 John Muir NHS 41,536 $2, $1,347.8 $2,006.3 $3,209.6 Johnstown Flood NMEM* 141,353 $8, $4,365.4 $6,818.6 $11,879.3 Joshua Tree NP* 1,589,904 $73, ,030 $37,957.5 $59,989.2 $97,156.4 Kalaupapa NHP 67,211 $3, $1,784.4 $2,955.8 $4,588.6 Kaloko-Honokohau NHP 154,206 $8, $4,094.0 $6,781.7 $10,