Outdoors A Big Business In Texas
KNIGHT
If outdoor recreation in Texas was a corporation, it would rank 166th, ahead of businesses like Oracle, Eastman Kodak, Sun Microsystems and Pepsi, on the 2007 Fortune 500 ranking.
Having been tagged with a $14.4 billion economic value, hunting, fishing and wildlife watching in the state would qualify as a top 20 business in Texas.
That is the findings of a study commissioned by Texas Parks and Wildlife Department based on the 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-associated recreation. The study, conducted by Southwick Associates, showed not how important outdoor activities are to those engaged in them, but to the economy of the state of Texas.
"These new findings demonstrate the significant roles hunting and fishing play in Texas' economy," said Gene McCarty, TPWD deputy executive director. "They also put into perspective our challenge as the state agency charged with managing the natural resources these industries rely upon."
The dollars spent by fishermen, hunters and even bird watchers go to multiple places. Some cash is spent at the local gas station for fuel for the boat or truck. It helps employ people at the local ice plant and soft drink bottler. Money is spent at sporting goods stores, paying the salaries of store employees, wholesalers who sell the products and those who make them. Some goes to the farmers who grow the deer corn or feed used in bird feeders, and of course to the ranchers who lease their land.
In some portions of the state the revenue from deer hunters to landowners is second only to what they earn from livestock, and those numbers could soon flip-flop as deer leases are shooting up to between $20 and $25 per acre a year.
In Texas, fishing is the economic big dog. According to the study freshwater fishing had an annual economic impact in 2006 of $2.93 billion while saltwater fishing's value was set at $1.79 billion. Combined, the two dumped about $4.73 billion into the state's economy.
There were 1.7 million resident freshwater anglers and about 143,000 nonresident fishermen, many of whom came to the East Texas area to fish Lake Fork, Sam Rayburn or Toledo Bend. In all, freshwater fishermen spent almost 27 million days a year on the water. And while bass garner the most publicity, catfish are the most sought-after species in Texas' lakes, the study found.
The study identified about 1.1 million saltwater anglers, most of whom were in-state fishermen. Saltwater anglers spent 15.1 million days on the water, with redfish the most popular target.
In 2006 hunting had an economic impact of $4.63 billion, an average of $4,200 per year for each of the 1.1 million hunters. According to the study about 978,000 of the hunters are Texans and 122,000 came from out of state. Hunters spent 14 million days a year in the field, a number that seems low. Deer hunting was the most popular activity and drew more than twice the participation of migratory bird hunting, the No. 2 most-popular choice.
Wildlife watching was valued at $5.12 billion. More than 955,000 people fall into the category that requires a person to travel at least a mile from their home to qualify. About three-quarters of the participants are Texas residents, and in all those involved in wildlife watching spend 13.1 million days involved in the activity.
The primary watchable wildlife activity, measured in terms of number of participants, was observing wildlife, primarily birds. Wildlife photography was second on the list.
The wildlife watching value seems suspect when compared to hunting. It is hard to see how wildlife watchers could possibly spend more than hunters, who to start with have to buy a license and then just continue to add costs for equipment, leases, lodging and food. However, the study does note that each activity is not exclusive of another, meaning a hunter could also be considered a wildlife watcher.
The average hunter in Texas is a male in his 40s, married and with an average household income of $66,316. Almost 60 percent have some college experience. The non-resident hunters have both a higher income and more education.
Freshwater fishermen fit the same profile mold as hunters. Saltwater anglers, however, appear to be slightly older and more affluent.
On the other hand, wildlife watchers skewed older than hunters and anglers, and are split evenly between men and women. They are also more likely to be married.
While fishing is predominately on public waters, it is not surprising that hunting and wildlife watching requires a combination of public and private lands. It also shows that the demand for public lands will grow in the future.
Unfortunately, TPWD is not adding acreage to its list of wildlife management areas. Some believe the department has the opportunity through its migratory and upland game bird stamps, but it isn't being directed that way at this time.
In contrast, wildlife watchers are even more dependent on public lands, though, there isn't a mechanism for them to help underwrite the cost of new WMAs unless they are willing to buy a hunting license or invest in the state stamps. Wildlife watchers do pay to enter state parks, but most parks are geared more toward camping and other recreation than watching wildlife in a true wild setting.
Steve Knight is the outdoor writer for the Tyler Morning Telegraph. He can be reached by calling 903-596-6277 or by e-mail at outdoor@tylerpaper.com.
FAQ
Search Forums
Log in
Register
