Canoeing, Kayaking and Whitewater Rafting This fact sheet looks at the impact of tourism on the economy of the
region. Using an input-output model, the impact of canoeists on the economy
was looked at specifically. From a survey that was conducted in 1993,
canoeists spent an estimated $655,607 in the Valley. The total direct and
indirect impact of this expenditure accounts for about $700,000 in sales,
about $240,000 in wages and about $463,000 in all types of income. In
addition, about 18 jobs are created. This analysis shows the significance of
one recreational activity to the Valley's economy and why tourism as a
development strategy can yield beneficial results. Norman, W. C., K. Larkin and S. Hamilton. 1994. A Profile of Canoers on
the Kickapoo River Summer 1993. Madison, WI: Tourism Research and Resources
Center, University of Wisconsin-Extension. The Kickapoo River has been popular to canoers, but to this date little was
known about who the canoers were, why they canoed, and how much they spent on
their trips. This study aimed to answer some of these questions so that better
promotion, planning and development of tourism could occur. The study produced
a visitor profile of canoers, a description of a canoeing trip, and an
analysis of canoeing expenditures and its related economic impact. Canoer
expenditures totaled over $700,000 in total sales and the creation of over 18
jobs in the area. Boyle, K. J. and R. C. Bishop. 1984. Lower Wisconsin River Recreation:
Economic Impacts and Scenic Values. No 216. Madison, WI: Department of
Agricultural Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison. This study of summer canoeists and boaters along the Lower Wisconsin River
found that there are substantial economic impacts and benefits from this type
of recreation. Interviews were conducted of river users. Through this method,
it was found that summer use by boaters added $860,000 per year to business
activity and $439,000 to household incomes. In addition, the study used a
contingent valuation method to estimate the value of the scenic aspects of the
river. The study recommended several management policies that could help to
maintain the scenic beauty of the area, including stricter zoning ordinances
and purchases of scenic easements. Sumathi, N. R., W. Fischer and T. Kane. 1983. An Economic Profile of
Kayak/ Canoe Users. Superior, WI: The Center for Community Economic
Development, University of Wisconsin-Extension. Kayak/Canoe users were surveyed to obtain information about them, their
activities, their economic impact on the local economy, and their interest in
supporting the proposed "Lake Superior Water Trail." Respondents generally
were male and close to 40 years old. Over half were employed in
professional/technical occupations and average household income exceeded
$45,000 per year. In the report, activities were broken into silent and
non-silent activities, with most respondents participating in both types of
activities. The average party spent close to $350 per trip. Blank, U. and S. Stipe. 1971. Economic Impact of the Crow Wing Canoe
Trail, Wadena County, Minn. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Recreation Resources Center, University of Wisconsin-Extension. This study measured the economic impact of developing a canoe trail along
two rivers in Minnesota. Surveys of outfitters and users was used to estimate
economic and employment impacts. Although the impact was small, the study was
optimistic in seeing canoeing as a core to a future of recreational
development. Johnson, R. L. 1993. "Tourism Impact Estimation." Annals of
Tourism Research 20:279-288.
Lake State Examples -
Other Examples
Back to Table of Contents
Lake States
Examples:
Leatherman, J. C. 1995. At Work in The
Kickapoo Valley: Tourism. Madison, WI: The Center for Community Economic
Development, University of Wisconsin-Extension.
This paper tackles the challenge of estimating regional economic impacts by whitewater rafting on the Upper Klamath River in Oregon. In particular, the study looks to provide accurate estimates by 1) accounting for expenditures only in the specified region, 2) determining the percentage of multiple destination trips to the tourism resource, and 3) including only those local expenditures that represent import substitution. Using the IMPLAN input-output model output, income and employment impacts are estimated. A model that accounted for both import substitution by local users and non-local users who were on a multiple destination trip and would likely have recreated in the region anyway provided lower impact estimates than a model that disregarded both local substitution and the affect of multiple destination trips.