Economic Impacts of Arizona Hunters and Anglers

For decades, sportsmen have supported a special excise tax on their hunting and fishing equipment that has generated over $10 billion toward the funding of conservation programs since 1937. This makes ours the most effective wildlife conservation system in the world. Combined, hunters and anglers here generate $124 million in state and local taxes which pay for the majority of the state's wildlife conservation. It is hugely important to note that little to no general fund tax dollars are ever used for these purposes.

Presently, Arizona hunters and anglers contribute $1.3 billion annually to the state's overall economy - which nearly doubles the cash receipts of one the state's top commodity producers! Hunting and angling currently supports over 21,000 jobs in Arizona, and annually it now provides $708 million worth of paychecks for residents.

The supporting data we've provided below will expand upon this in greater detail. Many of the source documents are also provided for you to download and review.

click link to jump to document

The Economic Importance of Fishing and Hunting>>>

Comparison: Economic Impacts of Recreational Activities, Sports Events and State Universities>>>

Report shows waterfowl hunting's contribution to economy>>>

White House Report: Discussion Topics for Implementation of
Executive Order #13443>>>

EXCERPTS FROM:

The Economic Importance of Fishing and Hunting

A 2001 Arizona Game and Fish Department Study Prepared by Jonathan Silberman, PhD., School of Management, Arizona State University.

........

Fishing and hunting recreation activity is an immensely powerful part of the Arizona collective economic fabric, generating nearly $1 billion in retail sales during 2001.

While this spending figure is impressive it becomes even more so through consideration of ‘ripple' or multiplier effects. Each dollar spent by an angler or hunter increases another person's income, enabling that person (or business) to spend more, which in turn increases income for someone else. The process continues to circulate throughout the economy until it is dissipated through ‘leakages' in the form of savings or payments for goods and services from outside the local economy. In the end, the cumulative changes in spending, incomes and employment are a multiple of the initial retail sales spending.

The impact of the nearly $1 billion in spending by anglers and hunters in Arizona during 2001 was shown to have:

........

Two types of measures are included in economic benefits: economic importance and economic values. Economic importance addresses the business and financial activity resulting from the use of a resource, and these measures for fishing and hunting are reported in this study. Economic value is a non-financial measure that estimates the value people receive from an activity like fishing or hunting after subtracting their costs and expenditures. Other economic values from fishing and hunting are the benefits people place on natural resources used for outdoor recreation even if they never use them. A resource has ‘option value' if a person values the option to use it in the future, even if he/she has no present plans to use it and in fact never does so. A resource has ‘bequest value' if a person values the opportunity to preserve it for future generations. A resource has ‘existence value' if a person values the mere knowledge of its existence. Economic values are not reported in this study.

........


click here to enlarge table

........


click here to enlarge table

........

Click here to download a complete copy of this document.


<<<Back to top

COMPARISON:

Economic Impacts of Recreational Activities, Sports Events and State Universities

Click here to download a larger PDF of this document.


<<<Back to top

Report shows waterfowl hunting's contribution to economy

USFWS, The Outdoor Wire-April 13, 2009

Waterfowl hunters spent $900 million on a variety of goods and services from food, transportation, guns and decoys to hunting dogs, clothing and other incidental expenses in 2006, according to a new report issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. These trip and equipment-related expenditures generated more than $2.3 billion in total economic output for 2006, which resulted in $157 million in federal and state tax revenues, supported more than 27,000 jobs, and generated more than $8.5 million in employment income.

"The financial support provided to conservation, and the economy as a whole, is significant," said Rowan Gould, acting Director of the Service. "Waterfowlers, like many other sportsmen, have a proven track record in their contributions to the U.S. economy, and that's certainly something to take comfort in during these tough economic times."

The report, The Economic Impact of Waterfowl Hunting in the United States, is an addendum to the 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. The report shows more than 1.3 million people, 16 years of age and older, hunted waterfowl in 2006. Waterfowl hunters represented 10 percent of all hunters, 7 percent of all hunting trip-related expenditures, and 6 percent of all equipment expenditures.

According to the report, waterfowl hunters tend to be younger, have higher educational achievements, and are more affluent compared to all hunters. The majority (74 percent) of waterfowl hunters live in the South and the Midwest.

"The Service plays a key role providing outdoor recreation opportunities such as hunting," said Gould. "And hunters are critical partners - in part through their purchase of Federal Duck Stamps and a tax a firearms and ammunition that supports habitat conservation - for our efforts to conserve wildlife and wetlands for future generations."

The National Survey, conducted every five years, since 1955, is one of the nation's most definitive sources of information concerning wildlife-dependant recreation. The U.S. Census Bureau conducted the survey in two phases. First, a screening interview identified wildlife-related recreationists. The second phase consisted of multiple interviews to collect detailed information on participation and expenditures for U.S. residents 16 years of age and older.

The waterfowl hunting report in addition to the detailed National Survey report, state reports, and other addenda can be downloaded at www.fws.gov.

<<<Back to top

EXCERPTS FROM:

White House Report: Discussion Topics for Implementation of Executive Order #13443

FACILITATION OF HUNTING HERITAGE AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION

Developed by the Sporting Conservation Council Federal Advisory Committee in Cooperation with a Diverse Coalition of Federal and State Agencies, Conservation and Sportsman's Organizations, and Other Partners Committed to Enhanced and Expanded Hunting and Conservation in the 21st Century.

........

Improving and Enhancing the American System of Wildlife Conservation Funding

Background:

Through the U.S. Constitution, the states possess broad trustee and police powers over fish and wildlife within their borders, including fish and wildlife on Federal lands within a state. Generally, states have delegated this responsibility to the state fish and wildlife agencies. During the early 20th century, the state's management focus was on halting the decline of fish and game and restoring depleted populations through use of harvest regulations, law enforcement, and artificial propagation and stocking. Early on, sportsmen demanded a user pays system where fish and wildlife conservation was funded with dedicated revenue from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses. In 1937, sportsmen's collective actions resulted in the passage of the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (commonly known as the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act).

This historic legislation established a "user pay - user benefit" program that is driven by a "self-imposed" tax on hunting firearms and ammunition (1970 & 1972 amendments extended this tax to pistols, revolvers and most archery equipment). These taxes are levied to the manufacturers of the equipment and collected nationally through the Internal Revenue Service, the Tariff and Taxation Bureau, or Customs depending on the type and origin of the equipment. The collections are deposited into the Wildlife Restoration Account, and allocated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to every state fish and wildlife agency (including U.S. territories) to support the management of the state's wildlife resources.

In 1950, sportsmen expanded this user pay - user benefit funding mechanism to fisheries with the passage of the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (commonly known as the Dingell-Johnson Fishery Restoration Act). This legislation established an excise tax on most equipment used by anglers with the collections deposited into a Sport Fish Restoration Account. The funds deposited into this account are allocated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the states and territories based on the number of fishing licenses sold and the water area within the state. This legislation also assures that all funds collected through the sale of fishing licenses are spent on fishery management activities. Later amendments captured federal fuel taxes attributable to motorboat use to the Sport Fish Restoration Account.

With this dedicated funding stream, states were able to retain adequate staffs of well- trained employees, and in addition to law enforcement and fish stocking, state-level programs for public access and habitat management developed all across the country. Thus began America's system of funding the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation that links the hunter and angler and the industry they support with educated and trained natural resource management professionals. This user pay - user benefit funding system has been a primary engine for implementing the North American Model of fish and wildlife conservation in the United States for the last 75 years.

........

Click here to download a complete copy of this document.


<<<Back to top