The Economic Contributions of Wmas in Georgia 2013

The Economic Contributions of Georgia’s Wildlife Management Areas in 2013: A statewide and county-level analysis

For: Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Resources Division

By: Southwick Associates, Inc. & Responsive Management

August 2014

PO Box 6435 Fernandina Beach, FL 32035 Tel (904) 277-9765

Executive Summary

The economy associated with outdoor recreation can be a powerful economic engine for communities across the nation, generating additional spending, supporting and creating jobs, and building future investments in open spaces and recreational areas. Wildlife Management Areas play an integral part in those outdoor recreational opportunities.

Georgia’s Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Resources Division commissioned a study of the state’s Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) to estimate county-level and statewide activity and to determine the contribution that visitation activity makes to the state’s economy. It is important to note that this analysis is not reflective of total visitation, rather utilization by a target user group of sportsmen in 2013.

Drawing from license sales records of hunters with WMA privileges and Georgia Outdoor Recreation Pass (GORP) holders and survey-based data, this report presents economic contributions based on retail spending in Georgia attributable to outdoor recreation at WMAs in the state. The study also quantifies the total economic contributions for each county.

Findings show that direct retail spending by this targeted group of visitors to Georgia’s WMAs supports more than 3,700 jobs, generating labor income of $118 million dollars. An estimated $206 million is contributed to the state’s GDP and $60 million in tax revenue is generated.

The direct expenditures made by these WMA visitors cycles through the local economy generating additional rounds of spending driven by businesses who provide supporting services and goods to WMA-related recreation. The indirect and induced (aka “multiplier”) effects spurred by the initial spending supports an additional 2,200 jobs, generating $98 million in labor income. These multiplier effects contribute $177 million to the state’s GPD and generate $38 million in tax revenue. And collectively, spending supports more than 5,900 full and part-time jobs, generating labor income of more than $217 million. More than $382 million is contributed to the state’s GDP and $98 million in state, local, and federal tax revenues is generated.

Table E 1. Economic contributions associated with spending by target WMA visitor group Tax Revenues Jobs Labor Income State GDP State & local Federal Direct Effect 3,768 $118,541,809 $205,586,786 $29,435,894 $30,300,556 Multiplier Effect 2,188 $98,190,554 $177,272,053 $14,530,097 $23,473,863 Total Effect 5,955 $216,732,363 $382,858,840 $43,965,991 $53,774,419

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...... ii Introduction ...... 1 Data Collection ...... 1 Methodology ...... 4 Participation ...... 4 Spending ...... 5 Economic contributions ...... 5 Findings ...... 7 Activity ...... 7 Visitor spending...... 11 Economic contributions ...... 16 Public Fishing Area activity ...... 21 WMA importance to outdoor recreation ...... 21 GORP and WMA license awareness and attitudes ...... 24 Summary ...... 26 Appendix ...... 28 Appendix A: Spending profiles by selected activities ...... 29 Appendix B: Average days per participant for each activity ...... 33 Appendix C: Percent of expenditures spent Near Home vs. Near WMA for each item ...... 34 Appendix D: Methodology for estimating economic contributions ...... 35 Appendix E: Explanation of Economic Contribution ...... 36 Appendix F: Economic contributions of WMA lands in Georgia: Phone survey outline ...... 38

iii

List of tables

Table 1. Size of target WMA user population and survey respondent group...... 2 Table 2. Survey respondent sample and WMA utilization rates by age category ...... 3 Table 3. Wildlife Management Area visitation by activity ...... 7 Table 4. Hunting by Species in WMAs ...... 8 Table 5. Estimated WMA visitation ...... 8 Table 6. Estimated spending by selected WMA visitor group: statewide and by county ..... 12 Table 7. Economic contributions associated with Georgia’s WMAs ...... 16 Table 8 . Total economic contributions associated with spending by target visitor group: statewide and by county ...... 17 Table 9. Public Fishing Area and Wildlife Management Area visitation by GORP holders .. 21 Table 10. Declines in participation in the event of complete WMA closure ...... 23 Table 11. Satisfaction with selected characteristics of visitor experience at WMAs ...... 24 Table 12. Summary of WMA visitation related expenditures and economic contributions in Georgia ...... 27 Table 13. Total economic contributions associated with Georgia WMAs...... 27

Table A 1. Boating recreation spending per participant per day ...... 29 Table A 2. Camping recreation spending per participant per day ...... 29 Table A 3. Fishing recreation spending per participant per day ...... 30 Table A 4. Hiking recreation spending per participant per day ...... 30 Table A 5. Hunting recreation spending per participant per day ...... 31 Table A 6. Picnic recreation spending per participant per day ...... 31 Table A 7. Target shooting spending per participant per day ...... 32 Table A 8. Wildlife watching spending per participant per day ...... 32 Table A 9. Average days per participant for each activity ...... 33 Table A 10. Percent of expenditures spent near home vs. near WMA for each item ...... 34

List of Figures

Figure 1. Change in recreational behavior if a particular WMA was no longer available .... 22 Figure 2. Change in recreational behavior if all WMAs were no longer available ...... 22 Figure 3. Change in spending if all WMAs were no longer available ...... 23 Figure 4. Awareness of the GORP to use selected WMAs ...... 25 Figure 5. Opinion about requirement of GORP or WMA license for uses other than hunting on selected WMAs ...... 25 Figure 6. Opinion about expanding GORP program to include additional WMA lands ...... 26

Introduction

This study was undertaken to quantify the total economic contributions of recreational visits to Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) maintained by Georgia’s Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Resources Division (WRD). The user group included in this study includes hunting license holders with WMA privileges or Georgia Outdoor Recreation Pass (GORP) holders. Statewide and county-level contributions associated with numerous activities were estimated for this group.

The goal of the study is to communicate the magnitude of spending by sportsmen and their associated contributions to the state’s economy. And, to inform discussions among Legislators, Agency personnel, and other stakeholders to assist with strategic decision making associated with wildlife resources. It is important to note that these estimates do not reflect total visitation to and economic contributions associated with Georgia’s WMAs, but rather visitation and contributions by license holders with WMA privileges and GORP holders who recreated on WMA lands. Yet, the economic contributions associated with recreational visitation to WMAs by the targeted user group can be a powerful economic engine for communities across Georgia, generating additional spending, supporting and creating jobs, and building future investments in open spaces and wildlife areas.

Data Collection

The GA WRD provided a database of current hunting licensees with a WMA hunting privilege, as well as a database of GORP holders. This database defined the target WMA user group for this analysis. The population of potential WMA users from within this group totals 309,500 (Table 1). From this sample frame, a random sampling was used to ensure that each WMA license or GORP holder had an equal chance of being selected for the study. A target respondent population of 2,400 individuals with WMA license or GORP holders who hunted or otherwise participated in outdoor recreation at least once on a WMA during the 12 months prior to the survey was established prior to initiating a phone survey. (Note: throughout this report, members of this target visitor group are also referred to as participants. Readers can view these two descriptors as identifying the same group as defined above.) The survey sampling plan is designed to ensure a 95% level of confidence and results that accurately reflect both the demographic and geographic composition of WMA license and GORP holders at the statewide level.

To properly measure the annual economic impact of WMAs, a screener question identified WMA license and GORP holders who hunted or otherwise participated in outdoor recreation at least once on a WMA during the 12 months prior to the survey. Respondents who answer yes to the screener question proceeded to the main survey entailing additional follow-up questions; conversely, if the respondent answers no to the screener question, the interviewer informed the respondent that the study is being conducted only with individuals who have hunted or otherwise recreated on a Georgia WMA within the past year. The latter respondents were not included in the number of completed interviews.

In the United States, the use of cellular telephones as the only telecommunications device has increased dramatically. For this reason, the telephone survey was conducted using landline and cellular telephone numbers. By doing so, it is possible to reach elusive populations, including young adults, singles, and mobile-only households, further ensuring the representativeness of the sample population.

Phone interviews were conducted Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., and Sunday 3:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., local time. A five- callback design was used to maintain the representativeness of the sample, avoid bias toward people easy-to-reach by telephone, and provide an equal opportunity for all to participate. The five-callback system uses a total of at least four subsequent calls, often as many as eight, to each unanswered number selected in the original sample. Subsequent calls will be placed at different times of the day and different days of the week. In addition, respondents who decline to participate because of inconvenience will be called again to encourage their participation or to set an appointment for their participation. The objective was to convert refusals into completed interviews to help minimize nonresponse.

Table 1. Size of target WMA user population and survey respondent group Customer Population Survey Respondents Demographic count percent count percent Age Group: 17 to 25 27,752 9.0% 412 8.9% 26 to 35 41,275 13.3% 778 16.7% 36 to 45 45,019 14.5% 798 17.2% 46 to 55 45,153 14.6% 771 16.6% 56 to 65 31,172 10.1% 589 12.7% 66 and above 119,179 38.5% 1,299 28.0% Subtotal 309,550 100.0% 4,647 100.0% Residency: Nonresidents 40,581 13.2% 521 11.3% Residents 267,435 86.8% 4,103 88.7% Subtotal 308,016 100.0% 4,624 100.0% Total Count 309,550 4,647

The resulting sample was analyzed for correspondence with the total population of Georgia sportsmen within the target visitor group (license holders with WMA privileges or GORP holders). The sampling frame of respondents matches the total population of customers quite closely in terms of geographic distribution, but they are somewhat more likely to be residents (Table 1). The survey respondents were more likely than the population to be somewhat younger. A weighting procedure was used to account for this difference. With the calculated weights applied to the analysis, the final respondent sample more closely matches the population of sportsmen.

Potential for bias

The sample frame included all license holders who had either WMA or GORP privileges, including those individuals who hold a lifetime license. Hunters who do not hold a lifetime license must purchase a WMA license in addition to their basic hunting license to hunt on a WMA. WMA privileges are included along with other benefits as part of the lifetime license package and hunters over the age of 65 years can obtain a lifetime license at no cost. The impact of this bundled privilege is seen in the distribution of the population of potential users within the target group (Table 1).

Thirty-eight percent (38%) of the target audience of potential WMA users is over the age of 65 years old. This is more than twice the size of any other age category grouping. Individuals within this oldest age category tended to have a lower response rate to the survey and, as previously mentioned, the weight procedure was applied to adjust for that response bias.

Results also show that the proportion of the population within the oldest age category who utilize WMAs is smaller, relative to the other age categories (Table 2). There are a number of factors which might drive the distinct differences in utilization. First, those who must purchase the privilege to use WMAs signal the intent to visit a WMA in the future by their purchase; otherwise they would not have rationally made the purchase. There is no corresponding signal of intent for those lifetime license holders. And, second, age and mobility greatly impacts an individual’s ability to make use of wilderness areas for hunting and other forms of recreation.

Table 2. Survey respondent sample and WMA utilization rates by age category Survey Utilization of WMAs among Respondents survey respondents Demographic Percent Percent Age Group: 17 to 25 8.9% 60.2% 26 to 35 16.7% 62.1% 36 to 45 17.2% 61.8% 46 to 55 16.6% 61.0% 56 to 65 12.7% 57.4% 66 and above 28.0% 27.6% Total 100.0% 51.5%

We raise this point to reiterate that these findings reflect the population of WMA visitors from within a targeted visitor group, namely hunting license holders who have WMA privileges and GORP holders who recreated on a WMA. This group shows a disproportionate number of individuals who are 66 years or older and who are less likely to utilize WMAs to recreate, relative to other age categories.

Survey Instrument

A survey instrument measuring WMA participation levels (including both hunting and non- consumptive use), attitudes toward various WMA features, and associated expenditures was developed. The survey is included in Appendix F.

Methodology

Three measures (participation, spending, and estimated economic contribution) across the target recreational activities structure the methodological approach. Total participation and average spending per person, per activity are combined to estimate total expenditures across the state and in each county. An economic model for Georgia was then used to determine the economic contributions associated with the total expenditures by WMA visitors. Separate analyses were conducted for residents and non-residents. Participation

The WMA license and GORP database of resident and non-resident holders provided the overall population size of potential WMA visitors within the target group. The survey data provided an estimate of the share of participants that pursued numerous activities in each WMA.1

Respondents were asked about the number of days they visited each WMA in the past year and the types of recreational activities in which they engaged, including hunting and/or non-consumptive activities (see list below). These results provide data on the avidity levels for hunting and other activities per WMA (Table A9), and allowed us to estimate total participant days by activity for each WMA.

Outdoor activities under study2 . Hunting . Fishing . Hiking . Cycling . Canoeing/kayaking . Horseback riding . Caving . Picnicking . Wildlife watching . Target shooting at range . Other

In the event that an activity took place in more than one WMA over the course of one day, respondents were asked to allocate their days of participation based on the location where most of the time was spent. Participation information was collected separately for each activity.

1 The sum of the number of participants across all WMAs exceeds the total number of participants because many visitors choose to pursue outdoor activities in more than one WMA. 2 Caving, cycling, and horseback riding were excluded from the expenditure estimates and economic contributions due to low sample sizes in survey responses. This exclusion has a minimal effect on the results since these activities make up a small part of participation. 4

Spending

Statewide average expenditure profiles for activities were constructed based upon responses to detailed spending questions. To minimize survey burden, each respondent was asked to provide comprehensive spending information only for one activity in a specified WMA. Respondents were prompted to provide information about a typical trip, including the length in days and the amount of money spent for specific goods and services. These responses were used to build spending profiles for the average participant of each activity (Appendix A). Separate expenditure profiles were constructed for resident and nonresident sportsmen. These spending profiles were multiplied by the estimated days in each WMA to estimate spending in each activity category. In this way the spending attributable to each WMA was estimated for each expenditure item.

Some spending typically takes place closer to the sportsmen’s place of residence (e.g., snacks for the trip, recreation related equipment, and fuel). Some spending occurs closer to WMAs (e.g., food & drink at restaurants, lodging, and souvenirs). To distinguish these types of spending, respondents were asked about where their typical expenditures occur for each expenditure item. Respondents were prompted to allocate the percentages spent near home, the amount spent in counties between home and the county of the WMA, and the amount spent in the area immediately surrounding the WMA (Table A10).3 These separations allow for the collection of expenditure data specific to each county. In other words, a portion of spending was allocated as “Near WMA” and a portion was allocated as “Near home”.4

The survey asked respondents specifically to report only spending that took place in Georgia in 2013. Expenditures were allocated to the 159 counties based on WMA location and participant residency. When a WMA is geographically located in more than one county, estimates are proportionally allocated to each county based upon the percentage of retail sales occurring in each of the counties where the WMA is located.

Economic contributions

The direct spending made by WMA visitors cycles through the state and local county economies generating additional rounds of spending by businesses that provide supporting services and goods to WMA visitors. This is known as the multiplier effect and includes indirect contributions arising from additional spending within businesses supporting those businesses frequented by sportsmen as well as induced contributions which result from household spending by employees of affected businesses. The total economic contributions reflect the collective effect of the direct retail spending as well as the indirect

3 The survey results suggest that most spending (95%) occurs either near a participant’s home or near the destination WMA. For simplicity, spending occurring elsewhere was assumed to be zero. 4 For nonresidents, the estimated “near home” expenditures were excluded from the final spending estimates and economic contributions. 5 and the induced effect. Separate IMPLAN input-output models of the Georgia economy and of each of the 159 counties were created for this analysis.

Four types of economic activity are measured and reported for each activity and target species:

Employment: The number of full- and part-time jobs created or supported as a result of the economic activity. Labor income: Total payroll, including salaries, wages and benefits paid to employees and business proprietors State GDP: This represents the total “value added” contribution of economic output made by the industries impacted by WMA visitation. Tax Revenue: All local, state, and federal taxes paid by individuals and businesses.

Additional discussion about economic contribution concepts can be found in Appendix E. Details of the economic contribution methodology are presented in Appendix D.

Additional survey questions were explored including residence zip code, demographic information, and preferred types of hunting (e.g., deer, upland game, waterfowl) and other activities (e.g., sport shooting, wildlife viewing, fishing in public fishing areas where WMA licenses are required). The survey inquired whether the respondent’s number of annual trips and expenditures per county would decrease if the WMA were not open to the public. This data is needed to address counterarguments that hunters and other recreationist would have participated anyway even if the WMA were not publicly available. It also covered topics including, respondents’ satisfaction with WMAs, species hunted, opinions on WMA-specific regulations and requirements, ratings of hunting and other recreational opportunities provided by WMAs, and future needs and expectations regarding WMAs in Georgia.

Findings

Activity

The analysis quantifies the economic contributions of outdoor recreation associated with visitation to Wildlife Management Areas in Georgia at the statewide level and for each county. Two of the key factors influencing those estimates are the number of people and the number of days people spend visiting WMAs across the state.

The activity most frequently participated in at WMAs by both residents and nonresidents is hunting. This is a function of the population on which this analysis focused, including license holders with WMA privileges and GORP holders. It is also important to note that participation reported in Table 2 does not estimate total participation at WMAs but rather participation by the target group of WMA users.

Respondents were asked to share all of the activities they participated in on WMAs over the course of the year. And, many take part in multiple activities. In addition to hunting, fishing and hiking are the second and third most popular activity among both residents and nonresidents.

Table 3. Wildlife Management Area visitation by activity Residents Nonresidents Activity Participants Days Participants Days Cycling* 4,512 41,891 281 2,040 Canoeing/kayaking (not 16,367 117,472 1,019 5,719 fishing) Camping 9,095 69,215 566 3,370 Caving* 2,026 19,116 126 931 Fishing 75,259 884,850 4,686 43,080 Hiking (not hunting) 43,065 344,784 2,682 16,786 Hunting 105,462 1,569,578 6,567 76,417 Picnicking 28,575 199,695 1,779 9,722 Horseback riding* 3,935 43,308 245 2,108 Target Shooting 31,638 180,825 1,970 8,804 Bird/wildlife Watching 23,607 211,074 1,470 10,276 * Cycling, caving, and horseback riding were excluded from the economic analysis due to low sample sizes.

There are an estimated 105,000 residents within the target visitor group who hunt on WMAs an average of 14.9 days per year for a total of 1.6 million days annually (Table 3 & 4). There are also an estimated 6,600 nonresidents within the target visitor group who hunt on WMAs an average of 11.6 days per year for a total of 76,000 days annually. Deer and turkey are the most commonly hunted species for both residents and nonresidents (Table 4).

Table 4. Hunting by Species in WMAs Residents Nonresidents Hunting Species Participants Days Participants Days Deer 80,616 878,698 4,966 35,505 Bear 7,908 64,144 239 1,273 Turkey 31,119 265,123 1,743 9,738 Upland game birds 8,875 49,320 975 3,553 Waterfowl 14,453 146,542 573 3,810 All Species 105,462 1,569,578 6,567 76,417

Within the population of hunting license holders with WMA privileges or GORP holders, there are an estimated 137,500 residents and 8,500 nonresidents who recreate on WMAs across the state (Table 5). Residents are estimated to spend a total of 3.7 million days at WMAs each year, which equates to 27 days per WMA license or GORP holder. Chattachoochee, Cedar Creek, and Blue Ridge WMAs are the three most frequently visited by resident participants. Nonresidents are estimated to spend a total of 179,000 days at WMAs each year, which equates to 21 days per participant. Estimates of participation and days of recreation are not estimated for individual WMAs due to the fact that sample sizes would be too small to report reliably.

Table 5. Estimated WMA visitation Residents Nonresidents Participants Days Participants Days Georgia 137,523 3,681,807 8,563 179,253 WMAs Albany Nursery 754 7,449 * * Alexander 628 6,595 * * Allatoona 8,241 99,181 * * Allen Creek 466 7,825 * * Altamaha 5,941 71,826 * * Arrowhead 343 5,114 * * B. F. Grant 3,065 25,569 * * Bartram Forest 334 4,450 * * Beaverdam 3,035 32,942 * * Berry College 4,781 47,560 * * Big Dukes Pond 500 3,605 * * Big Hammock 4,043 54,001 * * Big Lazer Creek 6,202 91,198 * * Blanton Creek 1,819 23,641 * * Blue Ridge 10,927 139,599 * * Broad River 1,857 20,161 * *

Table 5 (cont). Estimated WMA visitation Residents Nonresidents Participants Days Participants Days Bullard Creek 2,642 32,854 * * Cedar Creek 11,408 115,403 * * Chattahoochee 14,133 180,078 * * Chattahoochee River Park 2,365 35,045 * * Chestatee 4,582 52,602 * * Chickasawhatchee 6,041 67,020 * * Clarks Hill 5,443 62,353 * * Clayhole Swamp 868 7,919 * * Clybel 9,946 136,485 * * Cohutta 9,949 135,401 * * Cooper's Creek 7,258 94,772 * * Coosawatee 2,081 19,652 * * Coosawatee – Carter’s Lake 1,271 17,817 * * Crockford-Pigeon Mountain 5,305 57,748 * * Dawson Forest 9,737 122,351 * * Di-Lane 4,140 36,292 * * Dixon Bay 147 1,875 * * Dixon Memorial 2,222 18,946 * * Doerun Pitcherplant Bog 490 4,631 * * Dukes Creek / Smithgall Woods 2,779 30,370 * * Dyal Pasture 147 1,061 * * Echeconnee Creek 775 6,036 * * Elbert County 475 3,429 * * Elmodel 1,570 13,426 * * Fishing Creek 891 11,458 * * Flat Tub 1,251 10,101 * * Flint River 1,683 18,397 * * Germany Creek 147 2,100 * * Grand Bay 1,854 18,604 * * Griffin Ridge 1,824 21,567 * * Hannahatchee 3,310 36,753 * * Hart County 1,024 8,010 * * Hiltonia 791 5,679 * * Horse Creek 2,664 25,584 * * Indian Ford Farm Dove Fields 310 2,213 * * J.L. Lester 711 8,772 * * Joe Kurz 4,180 37,412 * * John's Mountain 8,615 102,835 * * Keg Creek 1,398 14,083 * * King Tract 401 7,951 * * 9

Table 5 (cont). Estimated WMA visitation Residents Nonresidents Participants Days Participants Days Lake Russell 7,056 106,312 * * Lake Seminole 2,229 29,673 * * Lake Walter F. George 411 2,312 * * Little Satilla 3,263 39,107 * * Lower Broad River 862 6,215 * * Lula Bridge Tract 481 6,515 * * Mayhaw 960 12,450 * * McGraw Ford 1,377 14,092 * * Mead Farm 637 4,577 * * Montezuma Bluffs 304 2,172 * * Moody Forest 187 3,144 * * Morgan Lake 490 4,476 * * Oaky Woods 6,531 59,866 * * Ocmulgee 9,160 101,818 * * Oconee 6,025 71,329 * * Ogeechee 294 5,255 * * Ohoopee Dunes 310 1,813 * * Oliver Bridge 1,235 11,017 * * Ossabaw Island 952 10,462 * * Otting Tract 162 1,924 * * Paulding Forest 6,679 69,452 * * Paulks Pasture 2,470 20,698 * * Penholoway Swamp 530 4,933 * * Phinizy Swamp 775 8,946 * * Pine Log 8,543 94,190 * * Redlands 8,880 94,387 * * Rich Mountain 3,261 36,768 * * Rich Mountain - Cartecay Tract 629 6,937 * * Richmond Hill 3,209 27,237 * * River Bend 1,753 23,603 * * River Creek 1,205 12,243 * * Rocky Mountain 3,777 42,517 * * Rogers 304 2,190 * * Rum Creek 3,880 40,801 * * Sansavilla 3,660 43,112 * * Sapelo Island 1,628 17,802 * * Sheffield 3,718 31,690 * * Silver Lake 2,260 22,857 * * Soap Creek 402 6,189 * * Sprewell Bluff 1,815 16,757 * * 10

Table 5 (cont). Estimated WMA visitation Residents Nonresidents Participants Days Participants Days Standing Boy Creek 901 9,763 * * Swallow Creek 2,336 31,544 * * Tallulah Gorge State Park 2,908 36,457 * * Townsend 2,072 25,085 * * Tuckahoe 3,405 35,719 * * Walton Public Dove Field 579 5,402 * * Warwoman 4,669 55,084 * * West Point 7,430 77,728 * * Wilson Shoals 4,394 35,227 * * Yuchi 1,986 20,322 * * Zahnd 613 5,837 * * * Sample sizes are too low to report reliably.

Visitor spending

WMA visitors make expenditures on a number of items such as lodging, food, fuel, and recreation related accessories. Statewide and county-level spending estimates are based on the “average” profile of a target visitor to Georgia’s WMAs (See Appendix A for detailed spending profiles). Table 6 shows total direct retail spending at both the state and county level.

Spending near home by resident WMA visitors is estimated at $277.5 million, while $113.9 million of spending occurs in the areas near the WMAs. Collectively spending is estimated at $391.4 million. This equates to $2,846 per year per resident visitor or $106 per resident visitor per day.

On average, 71% of spending occurs near home in the county of residence and 29% occurs in the county where the WMA is located (See Appendix C for additional detail). Note that there are a number of counties where the “near WMA” spending value is $0. This is because there are no WMAs located within that particular county. Nevertheless, WMA visitation does positively impact the economy in those counties due to the “near home” spending that is driven by outdoor recreation at WMAs located in other areas of the state. Counties where a WMA is located benefit from both the “near home” and “near WMA” spending.

For nonresident targeted visitors, “near home spending” occurs within their state of residency and is outside the scope of this analysis. “Near WMA” spending is estimated to be $11.5 million. This equates to $1,343 per year per nonresident visitor or $64 per nonresident visitor per day.

Table 6. Estimated spending by selected WMA visitor group: statewide and by county Residents Nonresidents Near home Near WMA Near Home1 Near WMA Georgia $277,511,066 $113,947,690 N/A $11,497,728 Counties Appling $1,073,923 $603,815 N/A * Atkinson $122,960 $0 N/A * Bacon $122,960 $0 N/A * Baker $141,426 $428,744 N/A * Baldwin $635,375 $173,861 N/A * Banks $872,148 $1,835,465 N/A * Barrow $2,313,365 $0 N/A * Bartow $4,315,379 $2,309,481 N/A * Ben Hill $496,646 $0 N/A * Berrien $1,575,650 $0 N/A * Bibb $2,987,667 $125,183 N/A * Bleckley $1,614,563 $1,283,163 N/A * Brantley $1,491,603 $369,825 N/A * Brooks * * N/A * Bryan $3,429,699 $555,038 N/A * Bulloch $1,510,340 $343,777 N/A * Burke $345,194 $1,940,615 N/A * Butts $1,554,759 $0 N/A * Calhoun * $147,276 N/A * Camden $1,106,767 $0 N/A * Candler $122,960 $0 N/A * Carroll $3,410,131 $0 N/A * Catoosa $2,391,624 $0 N/A * Charlton $345,465 $0 N/A * Chatham $4,140,418 $361,118 N/A * Chattahoochee $600,553 $0 N/A * Chattooga $682,336 $218,368 N/A * Cherokee $10,388,427 $4,309,463 N/A * Clarke $3,134,442 $0 N/A * Clay $192,629 $64,777 N/A * Clayton $1,654,074 $0 N/A * Clinch $141,426 $0 N/A * Cobb $11,028,375 $0 N/A * Coffee $1,552,495 $207,362 N/A * Colquitt $1,380,325 $160,778 N/A * Columbia $5,381,068 $451,072 N/A * Cook $686,146 $0 N/A * Coweta $5,483,643 $0 N/A * 12

Table 6 (cont). Estimated spending by selected WMA visitor group: statewide and by county Residents Nonresidents Near home Near WMA Near Home1 Near WMA Crawford $118,447 $0 N/A * Crisp $494,220 $0 N/A * Dade $693,476 $0 N/A * Dawson $2,364,256 $2,441,628 N/A * Decatur $1,389,189 $1,548,308 N/A * DeKalb $5,025,028 $0 N/A * Dodge $352,795 $0 N/A * Dooly $359,854 $554,992 N/A * Dougherty $2,865,576 $2,016,122 N/A * Douglas $1,729,043 $0 N/A * Early $303,746 $0 N/A * Echols * * N/A * Effingham $1,811,924 $0 N/A * Elbert $501,279 $189,488 N/A * Emanuel $229,835 $55,346 N/A * Evans $363,931 $0 N/A * Fannin $2,365,180 $5,858,040 N/A * Fayette $1,298,854 $0 N/A * Floyd $2,656,145 $3,816,489 N/A * Forsyth $5,496,485 $0 N/A * Franklin $1,035,131 $0 N/A * Fulton $8,529,943 $0 N/A * Gilmer $1,983,781 $2,429,625 N/A * Glascock $111,388 $0 N/A * Glynn $3,374,065 $820,252 N/A * Gordon $2,809,970 $527,085 N/A * Grady $345,465 $0 N/A * Greene $1,016,391 $2,016,879 N/A * Gwinnett $8,938,145 $0 N/A * Habersham $3,459,657 $2,256,793 N/A * Hall $6,653,715 $1,495,056 N/A * Hancock * $275,297 N/A * Haralson $812,465 $0 N/A * Harris $1,375,420 $717,580 N/A * Hart $668,383 $272,836 N/A * Heard $512,415 $506,391 N/A * Henry $6,215,358 $0 N/A * Houston $9,422,404 $1,713,700 N/A * Irwin $118,447 $0 N/A * 13

Table 6 (cont). Estimated spending by selected WMA visitor group: statewide and by county Residents Nonresidents Near home Near WMA Near Home1 Near WMA Jackson $3,234,042 $60,979 N/A * Jasper $1,459,456 $1,249,096 N/A * Jeff Davis $697,985 $435,225 N/A * Jefferson * * N/A * Jenkins $236,894 $101,132 N/A * Johnson $229,835 $0 N/A * Jones $1,451,536 $1,188,286 N/A * Lamar $537,823 $0 N/A * Lanier $505,356 $15,758 N/A * Laurens $3,558,484 $1,579,552 N/A * Lee $2,319,988 $0 N/A * Liberty $1,573,180 $0 N/A * Lincoln $809,538 $545,559 N/A * Long $712,212 $994,040 N/A * Lowndes $2,823,215 $575,523 N/A * Lumpkin $1,651,814 $1,963,615 N/A * Macon $222,505 $70,293 N/A * Madison $1,347,632 $627,457 N/A * Marion $370,989 $0 N/A * McDuffie $1,173,578 $1,384,751 N/A * McIntosh $2,561,461 $3,691,236 N/A * Meriwether $533,581 $1,286,048 N/A * Miller $118,447 $352,914 N/A * Mitchell $1,009,497 $0 N/A * Monroe $1,390,080 $1,266,447 N/A * Montgomery * $60,350 N/A * Morgan $802,479 $1,121,509 N/A * Murray $3,117,521 $1,988,638 N/A * Muscogee $3,323,986 $311,987 N/A * Newton $7,000,931 $3,547,820 N/A * Oconee $1,709,204 $1,083,487 N/A * Oglethorpe $192,629 $309,701 N/A * Paulding $4,888,957 $2,436,398 N/A * Peach $2,412,624 $0 N/A * Pickens $2,459,003 $1,447,813 N/A * Pierce $1,011,881 $237,342 N/A * Pike $1,225,335 $0 N/A * Polk $2,085,684 $793,112 N/A * Pulaski $334,055 $1,299,391 N/A * 14

Table 6 (cont). Estimated spending by selected WMA visitor group: statewide and by county Residents Nonresidents Near home Near WMA Near Home1 Near WMA Putnam $570,787 $2,746,606 N/A * Quitman * $31,344 N/A * Rabun $496,766 $2,326,547 N/A * Randolph * * N/A * Richmond $3,086,656 $245,985 N/A * Rockdale $2,007,260 $0 N/A * Schley $111,117 $0 N/A * Screven $1,168,956 $1,370,793 N/A * Seminole $352,795 $205,033 N/A * Spalding $1,259,603 $0 N/A * Stephens $1,651,484 $896,368 N/A * Stewart $111,117 $982,185 N/A * Sumter $1,132,457 $0 N/A * Talbot $591,384 $590,612 N/A * Taliaferro $192,629 $0 N/A * Tattnall $1,925,624 $1,639,293 N/A * Taylor $619,606 $0 N/A * Telfair $236,894 $782,791 N/A * Terrell * * N/A * Thomas $1,162,604 $394,133 N/A * Tift $2,498,957 $0 N/A * Toombs $851,987 $72,419 N/A * Towns $1,216,353 $2,455,049 N/A * Treutlen $229,835 $0 N/A * Troup $1,118,527 $1,899,884 N/A * Turner $1,191,934 $0 N/A * Twiggs $315,589 $618,169 N/A * Union $2,410,713 $4,739,287 N/A * Upson $2,336,366 $2,598,659 N/A * Walker $3,044,084 $1,949,601 N/A * Walton $5,118,444 $139,448 N/A * Ware $1,354,364 $713,667 N/A * Warren $545,424 $90,232 N/A * Washington $363,659 $0 N/A * Wayne $2,025,455 $2,164,363 N/A * Webster * * N/A * Wheeler $111,117 $0 N/A * White $2,950,732 $4,775,232 N/A * Whitfield $3,875,073 $1,171,494 N/A * 15

Table 6 (cont). Estimated spending by selected WMA visitor group: statewide and by county Residents Nonresidents Near home Near WMA Near Home1 Near WMA Wilcox $334,164 $0 N/A * Wilkes $679,248 $768,182 N/A * Wilkinson $363,659 $153,766 N/A * Worth $575,461 $0 N/A * 1 Spending near home by nonresidents is excluded from this study. * Sample sizes are too low to report reliably.

Economic contributions

Direct retail spending by visitors to Georgia’s WMAs supports more than 3,700 jobs that provide labor income of $118 million dollars (Table 7). An estimated $206 million is contributed to the state’s GDP and $60 million in tax revenue is generated. The indirect and induced (aka “multiplier”) effects spurred by the initial spending supports an additional 2,188 jobs, and generate $98 million in labor income. These multiplier effects contribute $177 million to the state’s GDP and generate $38 million in tax revenue. Collectively, spending by this group of WMA visitors supports more than 5,955 full and part-time jobs and $217 million of income. More than $383 million is contributed to the state’s GDP and $98 million in local, state and federal tax revenues is generated.

Table 7. Economic contributions associated with Georgia’s WMAs Tax Revenues Jobs Labor Income State GDP State & local Federal Residents Direct Effect 3,656 $115,147,794 $199,947,087 $28,655,287 $29,461,406 Multiplier Effect 2,122 $95,275,117 $171,999,153 $14,098,282 $22,776,311 Total Effect 5,778 $210,422,911 $371,946,240 $42,753,569 $52,237,717

Nonresidents Direct Effect 112 $3,394,015 $5,639,699 $780,607 $839,150 Multiplier Effect 66 $2,915,437 $5,272,901 $431,815 $697,552 Total Effect 178 $6,309,452 $10,912,600 $1,212,422 $1,536,702

Direct Effect 3,768 $118,541,809 $205,586,786 $29,435,894 $30,300,556 Multiplier Effect 2,188 $98,190,554 $177,272,053 $14,530,097 $23,473,863 Total Effect 5,955 $216,732,363 $382,858,840 $43,965,991 $53,774,419

The total economic contributions for the state as well as for each county are shown in Table 8.

Table 8 . Total economic contributions associated with spending by target visitor group: statewide and by county Tax Revenues Jobs Labor Income State GDP State & local Federal Georgia 5,955 $216,732,363 $382,858,840 $43,965,991 $53,774,419 Counties Appling 26 $936,969 $1,655,160 $190,072 $232,475 Atkinson 2 $66,135 $116,827 $13,416 $16,409 Bacon 2 $66,135 $116,827 $13,416 $16,409 Baker 9 $331,292 $585,229 $67,205 $82,198 Baldwin 12 $443,875 $784,107 $90,044 $110,132 Banks 43 $1,556,527 $2,749,612 $315,755 $386,197 Barrow 34 $1,244,256 $2,197,985 $252,408 $308,718 Bartow 101 $3,683,755 $6,507,373 $747,281 $913,993 Ben Hill 7 $267,124 $471,875 $54,188 $66,277 Berrien 23 $847,472 $1,497,064 $171,917 $210,270 Bibb 46 $1,680,535 $2,968,674 $340,911 $416,965 Bleckley 45 $1,629,951 $2,879,317 $330,649 $404,414 Brantley 28 $1,018,234 $1,798,716 $206,557 $252,639 Brooks * * * * * Bryan 60 $2,174,062 $3,840,492 $441,027 $539,416 Bulloch 28 $1,016,086 $1,794,921 $206,122 $252,105 Burke 37 $1,342,215 $2,371,030 $272,280 $333,023 Butts 23 $836,236 $1,477,215 $169,637 $207,482 Calhoun * * * * * Camden 16 $595,281 $1,051,566 $120,758 $147,698 Candler 2 $66,135 $116,827 $13,416 $16,409 Carroll 50 $1,834,158 $3,240,049 $372,074 $455,081 Catoosa 35 $1,286,348 $2,272,340 $260,947 $319,161 Charlton 5 $185,810 $328,235 $37,693 $46,102 Chatham 67 $2,439,628 $4,309,616 $494,899 $605,307 Chattahoochee 9 $323,011 $570,600 $65,525 $80,144 Chattooga 14 $496,229 $876,592 $100,664 $123,122 Cherokee 224 $8,140,910 $14,380,960 $1,651,452 $2,019,877 Clarke 46 $1,685,877 $2,978,110 $341,994 $418,290 Clay 4 $141,712 $250,335 $28,747 $35,161 Clayton 24 $889,653 $1,571,576 $180,474 $220,736 Clinch 2 $76,067 $134,372 $15,431 $18,873 Cobb 163 $5,931,672 $10,478,329 $1,203,290 $1,471,733 Coffee 26 $958,932 $1,693,958 $194,527 $237,925

Table 8 (cont.) Total economic contributions associated with spending: statewide and by county Tax Revenues Jobs Labor Income State GDP State & local Federal Colquitt 23 $836,685 $1,478,009 $169,729 $207,594 Columbia 87 $3,160,949 $5,583,833 $641,225 $784,277 Cook 10 $369,047 $651,924 $74,864 $91,566 Coweta 81 $2,949,407 $5,210,143 $598,312 $731,790 Crawford 2 $63,707 $112,539 $12,924 $15,807 Crisp 7 $265,819 $469,571 $53,924 $65,954 Dade 10 $372,990 $658,888 $75,664 $92,544 Dawson 75 $2,716,666 $4,799,004 $551,099 $674,044 Decatur 46 $1,661,656 $2,935,324 $337,081 $412,281 DeKalb 74 $2,702,739 $4,774,402 $548,273 $670,588 Dodge 5 $189,753 $335,199 $38,493 $47,080 Dooly 14 $521,605 $921,418 $105,812 $129,418 Dougherty 75 $2,741,390 $4,842,680 $556,114 $680,178 Douglas 26 $929,975 $1,642,806 $188,653 $230,740 Early 4 $163,371 $288,596 $33,141 $40,535 Echols * * * * * Effingham 27 $974,553 $1,721,553 $197,696 $241,801 Elbert 11 $383,131 $676,804 $77,721 $95,060 Emanuel 4 $156,413 $276,304 $31,730 $38,808 Evans 5 $195,742 $345,779 $39,708 $48,566 Fannin 130 $4,716,171 $8,331,141 $956,715 $1,170,150 Fayette 19 $698,596 $1,234,073 $141,716 $173,332 Floyd 101 $3,687,592 $6,514,150 $748,059 $914,945 Forsyth 81 $2,956,315 $5,222,345 $599,713 $733,504 Franklin 15 $556,751 $983,503 $112,942 $138,138 Fulton 126 $4,587,877 $8,104,508 $930,690 $1,138,318 Gilmer 69 $2,506,736 $4,428,163 $508,513 $621,957 Glascock 2 $59,911 $105,832 $12,153 $14,865 Glynn 63 $2,303,019 $4,068,295 $467,187 $571,412 Gordon 50 $1,824,323 $3,222,676 $370,079 $452,641 Grady 5 $185,810 $328,235 $37,693 $46,102 Greene 48 $1,738,852 $3,071,691 $352,741 $431,434 Gwinnett 132 $4,807,431 $8,492,351 $975,228 $1,192,793 Habersham 88 $3,195,035 $5,644,046 $648,140 $792,734 Hall 123 $4,458,839 $7,876,562 $904,513 $1,106,302 Hancock * * * * * Haralson 12 $436,989 $771,943 $88,647 $108,423 Harris 32 $1,164,531 $2,057,151 $236,235 $288,937 Hart 14 $520,709 $919,835 $105,630 $129,195 18

Table 8 (cont.) Total economic contributions associated with spending: statewide and by county Tax Revenues Jobs Labor Income State GDP State & local Federal Heard 16 $573,329 $1,012,788 $116,305 $142,251 Henry 92 $3,342,964 $5,905,364 $678,149 $829,438 Houston 167 $6,089,234 $10,756,664 $1,235,253 $1,510,827 Irwin 2 $63,707 $112,539 $12,924 $15,807 Jackson 49 $1,775,553 $3,136,524 $360,186 $440,540 Jasper 42 $1,512,687 $2,672,169 $306,861 $375,319 Jeff Davis 17 $632,703 $1,117,672 $128,349 $156,983 Jefferson * * * * * Jenkins 5 $187,959 $332,030 $38,129 $46,635 Johnson 3 $123,618 $218,372 $25,077 $30,671 Jones 41 $1,487,096 $2,626,963 $301,670 $368,970 Lamar 8 $289,271 $510,998 $58,681 $71,772 Lanier 8 $281,121 $496,603 $57,028 $69,750 Laurens 78 $2,853,428 $5,040,595 $578,842 $707,977 Lee 34 $1,247,818 $2,204,277 $253,130 $309,602 Liberty 23 $846,144 $1,494,717 $171,647 $209,940 Lincoln 21 $758,657 $1,340,172 $153,900 $188,234 Long 27 $972,031 $1,717,099 $197,185 $241,175 Lowndes 51 $1,859,197 $3,284,281 $377,154 $461,293 Lumpkin 56 $2,050,564 $3,622,332 $415,974 $508,774 Macon 4 $161,277 $284,897 $32,716 $40,015 Madison 30 $1,097,205 $1,938,219 $222,577 $272,232 Marion 5 $199,539 $352,486 $40,478 $49,508 McDuffie 40 $1,450,197 $2,561,781 $294,185 $359,815 McIntosh 98 $3,562,264 $6,292,758 $722,635 $883,849 Meriwether 29 $1,052,123 $1,858,581 $213,432 $261,047 Miller 8 $273,892 $483,831 $55,561 $67,957 Mitchell 15 $542,963 $959,148 $110,145 $134,717 Monroe 41 $1,498,079 $2,646,364 $303,898 $371,695 Montgomery * * * * * Morgan 30 $1,099,099 $1,941,563 $222,961 $272,702 Murray 79 $2,858,382 $5,049,347 $579,847 $709,206 Muscogee 54 $1,972,757 $3,484,886 $400,190 $489,469 Newton 161 $5,873,393 $10,375,379 $1,191,467 $1,457,273 Oconee 43 $1,566,683 $2,767,553 $317,815 $388,717 Oglethorpe 8 $283,322 $500,490 $57,474 $70,296 Paulding 112 $4,079,708 $7,206,825 $827,603 $1,012,234 Peach 36 $1,297,643 $2,292,294 $263,238 $321,964 Pickens 60 $2,179,051 $3,849,304 $442,039 $540,654

Table 8 (cont.) Total economic contributions associated with spending: statewide and by county Tax Revenues Jobs Labor Income State GDP State & local Federal Pierce 19 $685,192 $1,210,395 $138,997 $170,006 Pike 18 $659,053 $1,164,220 $133,694 $163,521 Polk 44 $1,591,083 $2,810,656 $322,765 $394,771 Pulaski 26 $948,943 $1,676,313 $192,501 $235,446 Putnam 54 $1,948,503 $3,442,042 $395,270 $483,452 Quitman * * * * * Rabun 45 $1,637,049 $2,891,855 $332,089 $406,175 Randolph * * * * * Richmond 50 $1,806,297 $3,190,834 $366,423 $448,168 Rockdale 30 $1,079,616 $1,907,147 $219,009 $267,868 Schley 2 $59,765 $105,575 $12,124 $14,829 Screven 40 $1,441,697 $2,546,765 $292,460 $357,706 Seminole 9 $310,912 $549,227 $63,071 $77,142 Spalding 19 $677,484 $1,196,780 $137,433 $168,094 Stephens 39 $1,418,562 $2,505,897 $287,767 $351,966 Stewart 18 $646,916 $1,142,781 $131,232 $160,509 Sumter 17 $609,098 $1,075,975 $123,561 $151,126 Talbot 18 $661,289 $1,168,170 $134,148 $164,075 Taliaferro 3 $103,607 $183,021 $21,017 $25,706 Tattnall 55 $2,006,565 $3,544,607 $407,049 $497,858 Taylor 9 $333,258 $588,703 $67,604 $82,686 Telfair 16 $592,499 $1,046,653 $120,193 $147,008 Terrell * * * * * Thomas 24 $859,032 $1,517,484 $174,262 $213,138 Tift 37 $1,344,078 $2,374,321 $272,658 $333,485 Toombs 14 $501,070 $885,143 $101,646 $124,323 Towns 58 $2,097,780 $3,705,740 $425,552 $520,489 Treutlen 3 $123,618 $218,372 $25,077 $30,671 Troup 47 $1,726,677 $3,050,184 $350,271 $428,413 Turner 18 $641,088 $1,132,486 $130,050 $159,063 Twiggs 15 $536,796 $948,253 $108,894 $133,187 Union 113 $4,103,497 $7,248,849 $832,429 $1,018,137 Upson 77 $2,799,899 $4,946,035 $567,983 $694,695 Walker 77 $2,794,318 $4,936,177 $566,851 $693,310 Walton 78 $2,836,566 $5,010,809 $575,421 $703,793 Ware 32 $1,152,485 $2,035,871 $233,791 $285,948 Warren 10 $346,385 $611,892 $70,267 $85,943 Washington 5 $195,596 $345,522 $39,678 $48,530 Wayne 65 $2,373,992 $4,193,670 $481,584 $589,022 20

Table 8 (cont.) Total economic contributions associated with spending: statewide and by county Tax Revenues Jobs Labor Income State GDP State & local Federal Webster * * * * * Wheeler 2 $59,765 $105,575 $12,124 $14,829 White 121 $4,400,969 $7,774,335 $892,774 $1,091,944 Whitfield 76 $2,777,673 $4,906,773 $563,474 $689,181 Wilcox 5 $179,732 $317,497 $36,460 $44,594 Wilkes 23 $819,029 $1,446,820 $166,147 $203,213 Wilkinson 8 $285,958 $505,146 $58,009 $70,950 Worth 9 $309,515 $546,760 $62,788 $76,795 * Sample sizes are too low to report reliably.

Public Fishing Area activity

In addition to the many WMA tracts located across the state where anglers can fish, there are 10 Public Fishing Areas (PFA) around the state. These PFA offer family friendly opportunities for shoreline and boat fishing as well as other outdoor activities. Through the process of the survey, participants were asked to share if they visited at either a WMA or PFA.

Table 9. Public Fishing Area and Wildlife Management Area visitation by GORP holders % GORP Population Visited WMA 61.56% Visited WMA & PFA* 22.20% * Only respondents who indicated participating in a WMA were asked about their PFA participation.

Table 9 explores the percent of GORP holders who visit only WMAs or visited both WMAs and PFAs. Sixty two percent of GORP holders indicate they visited a WMA in the past year for the purpose of outdoor recreational activity. Within that group of GORP holders who visited a WMA, 22% also visited PFAs.

WMA importance to outdoor recreation

Georgia’s Wildlife Management Areas play an integral part in outdoor recreational opportunities. Interested in how visitors might adjust their recreational behavior in the event a particular WMA was no longer available, respondents were asked to share how they might change their plans. Forty four percent of the target visitor group says that they would have gone to a different WMA in the state to participate in an outdoor activity (Figure 1). Outdoor activity is important to this group of WMA visitors who is motivated to

21 find an alternative in the event of a WMA closure. Thirty one percent say they would still participate in outdoor activity but would find a non-WMA location in Georgia to recreate.

I probably would have gone to a different WMA in 44% Georgia to go to I probably would have found a non-WMA location in 31% Georgia to go to I probably would have stayed home or found a 10% different non-outdoor activity to do I probably would have traveled outside of Georgia to 7% engage in outdoor recreation I probably would have found a different outdoor 4% activity

Don't know 3%

None of these 1%

0% 20% 40% 60% Figure 1. Change in recreational behavior if a particular WMA was no longer available

Interested in how visitors might adjust their recreational behavior in the event all WMAs were no longer available, respondents were asked to share how they might change their plans. Fifty five percent of the target visitor group says that a closure of all WMAs would likely decrease their participation in hunting and other outdoor recreation activities (Figure 2). Another 39% say complete closure of WMAs would likely have no effect, rather they would find other places to recreate.

It would probably decrease my participation 55%

It would have no effect; I would find others places to go 39%

It would probably increase my participation 4%

Don't know 1%

Neither 1%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Figure 2. Change in recreational behavior if all WMAs were no longer available

To what degree would spending associated with outdoor recreation change with decreased participation in outdoor recreation in the event all of the WMAs were closed? Fifty percent of the target visitor group says their spending would decline. Among those who say their spending would decline, they estimate they would spend $768 less each year. Thirty percent say their spending would stay the same.

Increase 19%

Stay the same 30%

Decrease 50%

Don't know 2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Figure 3. Change in spending if all WMAs were no longer available

To what degree would participation in a particular activity decrease in the event of all of the WMAs were closed? Table 10 shows the degree of decline among those who indicated that their participation would fall. Hunting, the most popular activity for residents and nonresidents, participation would fall by 59%. Fishing and hiking, the second and third most popular activity for residents and nonresidents, participation would fall by 50% and 53% respectively.

Table 10. Declines in participation in the event of complete WMA closure Activity Percent decrease Cycling 35% Canoeing/kayaking (not fishing) 46% Camping 60% Caving 69% Fishing (2) 50% Hiking (not hunting) (3) 53% Hunting (1) 59% Picnicking 44% Horseback riding 48% Target shooting 58% Bird/wildlife watching 56% Note: numbers in parentheses indicate popularity rank of that activity.

GORP and WMA license awareness and attitudes

Satisfaction with their outdoor experience at WMAs is high among the target visitor group. Ninety four percent of them were somewhat to very satisfied with their overall experience (Table 11).

Table 11. Satisfaction with selected characteristics of visitor experience at WMAs Neither satisfied Very Somewhat nor Somewhat Very Don't Characteristic satisfied satisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied know Overall quality of the natural 71% 23% 2% 2% 1% 1% environment? Diversity of wildlife? 60% 27% 4% 3% 1% 4% Abundance of wildlife? 49% 32% 6% 7% 3% 4% Quality of wildlife habitat? 61% 28% 3% 4% 2% 2% Extent of access roads, that is, how much of 54% 29% 4% 7% 4% 2% the WMA the roads provide access to?? Condition of access roads? 56% 32% 3% 5% 3% 2% Availability of parking 61% 27% 4% 5% 2% 1% areas? Number of other people 46% 36% 7% 6% 3% 2% using the WMAs? Availability of shooting 22% 13% 23% 5% 6% 31% ranges? Condition of shooting 26% 11% 24% 2% 2% 36% ranges?

More than 80% of visitors are satisfied with the diversity, abundance, and quality of wildlife and their habitat. Similarly, more than 80% are satisfied with the extent and condition of access roads and availability of parking areas. One third of visitors indicate they are satisfied with the availability and condition of shooting ranges. Another third of visitors indicate that they are not familiar with the shooting ranges available. And 81% of visitors are satisfied with the number of people using WMAs.

In 2012, the Georgia DNR, with public input, designated 31 popular WMAs for more intensive management to better accommodate non-hunting recreational uses. Hunters with a valid WMA license may continue to use these areas for hunting and non-hunting recreational uses. In addition, the Georgia DNR created the Georgia Outdoor Recreational Pass, or GORP, to allow non-hunters to also use those WMAs for other forms of outdoor recreation such as fishing, target shooting, hiking, bicycling and bird watching. Similar to the WMA license, proceeds from the sale of GORP passes are used to maintain or improve access and facilities on those lands.

Yes, 49%

No, 49% Don't know, 2%

Figure 4. Awareness of the GORP to use selected WMAs

Awareness of the ability to utilize selected WMAs using the GORP privilege was evenly split among the respondents (Figure 4). Support for a requirement to possess a GORP or WMA stamp in order to utilize selected WMA lands is strong. Three quarters of the respondents show support (Figure 5).

Strongly support 54%

Somewhat support 21%

Neither support nor oppose 5%

Somewhat oppose 7%

Strongly oppose 9%

Don't know 5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Figure 5. Opinion about requirement of GORP or WMA license for uses other than hunting on selected WMAs

Strongly support 54%

Somewhat support 21%

Neither support nor oppose 6%

Somewhat oppose 5%

Strongly oppose 9%

Don't know 6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Figure 6. Opinion about expanding GORP program to include additional WMA lands

Similarly, there is support for an expansion of the GORP program to include additional selected WMA lands. Three quarters of the respondents would somewhat or strongly support that action (Figure 6).

Summary

The goal of this analysis was to help provide insight about jobs, tax revenues and other economic contributions at a state and county level that result from visits to Georgia’s WMAs by a target group of hunting license holders with WMA privileges or GORP holders. Georgia’s WMAs draw thousands of resident and non-resident visitors every year. This target population is motivated to recreate outdoors and WMAs play an important role in their outdoor recreational activities. And, their level of satisfaction with access, congestion, and the natural environment at the WMAs they visit is high. Spending associated with these visits leads to significant economic contributions to the Georgia economy.

Specifically, Georgia hosts more than 137,000 resident and 8,600 nonresident visitors from among a targeted visitor group of hunters with WMA privileges or GORP holders (Table 12). These visitors spend 3.7 million and 179,000 days at WMAs during the year, respectively. Direct spending associated with these visits is estimated at $391 million among residents and $11 million among nonresidents.

Table 12. Summary of WMA visitation related expenditures and economic contributions in Georgia WMA visitation and spending in Georgia Residents Nonresidents Participants 137,523 8,563 Days of visitation 3,681,807 179,253 Total WMA-related visitor spending $391,458,755 $11,497,728 Direct economic contributions Jobs 3,656 112 Salaries, wages, business profits $115,147,794 $3,394,015 State GDP $199,947,087 $5,639,699 State & Local Tax Revenues $58,116,693 $1,619,757

Direct retail spending by these visitors to Georgia’s WMAs supports more than 3,700 jobs that provide labor income of $118 million dollars (Table 12). An estimated $206 million is contributed to the state’s GDP and $60 million in tax revenue is generated. Incorporating both resident and nonresident spending as well as both direct and indirect economic contributions, spending by WMA visitors supports more than 5,955 full and part-time jobs and $217 million of income (Table 13). More than $383 million is contributed to the state’s GDP and $98 million in local, state and federal tax revenues is generated.

Table 13. Total economic contributions associated with Georgia WMAs. Tax Revenues Jobs Labor Income State GDP State & local Federal Direct Effect 3,768 $118,541,809 $205,586,786 $29,435,894 $30,300,556 Multiplier Effect 2,188 $98,190,554 $177,272,053 $14,530,097 $23,473,863 Total Effect 5,955 $216,732,363 $382,858,840 $43,965,991 $53,774,419

Evidence shows that the economic contributions of direct spending by WMA visitors ranges across the 159 counties within the state. This variation stems, in large part, from the presence of a WMA within a county boundary. However, it is important to note that spending associated with WMA visitation occurs both close to home and close to the WMA. As a result, economic contributions are felt within all counties across the state.

Appendix

Appendix A: Spending profiles by selected activities Appendix B: Average days per participant for each activity Appendix C: Percent of expenditures spent Near Home vs. Near WMA for each item Appendix D: Methodology for estimating economic contributions Appendix E: Explanation of Economic Contribution Appendix F: Economic contributions of WMA lands in Georgia: Phone survey outline

Appendix A: Spending profiles by selected activities

Table A 1. Boating recreation spending per participant per day Residents Nonresidents* Item mean std. error mean std. error Groceries and snacks $26.92 $3.79 $31.24 N/A Food and drink at a restaurant $12.33 $2.89 $14.30 N/A Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. $32.09 $6.18 $37.23 N/A Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A etc.) Lodging $1.41 $1.44 $1.64 N/A Vehicle/equipment rental $2.03 $1.52 $2.36 N/A Guide fees $3.86 $3.85 $4.47 N/A Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) $2.46 $1.20 $2.86 N/A Bait for fishing $2.68 $0.79 $3.11 N/A Ammunition $13.06 $4.32 $15.15 N/A Souvenirs $4.54 $2.29 $5.27 N/A Meat processor/cooler $6.32 $3.80 $7.33 N/A Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A Other trip-related spending $3.25 $2.90 $3.78 N/A Number of Respondents 52 N/A * Nonresident sample size was insufficient for estimating profiles. The residential profile was used with an adjustment factor of 1.16 to account for higher nonresident spending observed on average.

Table A 2. Camping recreation spending per participant per day Residents Nonresidents* Item mean std. error mean std. error Groceries and snacks $39.30 $7.89 $45.60 N/A Food and drink at a restaurant $5.63 $1.78 $6.53 N/A Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. $28.15 $5.80 $32.66 N/A Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A etc.) Lodging $2.12 $1.09 $2.46 N/A Vehicle/equipment rental $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A Guide fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) $0.27 $0.22 $0.31 N/A Bait for fishing $3.11 $1.00 $3.61 N/A Ammunition $5.65 $3.52 $6.55 N/A Souvenirs $0.31 $0.34 $0.36 N/A Meat processor/cooler $22.58 $14.57 $26.20 N/A Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) $0.47 $0.52 $0.54 N/A Other trip-related spending $0.18 $0.17 $0.21 N/A Number of Respondents 29 N/A * Nonresident sample size was insufficient for estimating profiles. The residential profile was used with an adjustment factor of 1.16 to account for higher nonresident spending observed on average.

Table A 3. Fishing recreation spending per participant per day Residents Nonresidents* Item mean std. error mean std. error Groceries and snacks $25.34 $2.06 $29.40 N/A Food and drink at a restaurant $8.97 $0.90 $10.40 N/A Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. $36.98 $2.34 $42.91 N/A Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 N/A etc.) Lodging $9.18 $2.16 $10.65 N/A Vehicle/equipment rental $0.53 $0.36 $0.61 N/A Guide fees $0.55 $0.58 $0.64 N/A Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) $1.50 $0.27 $1.74 N/A Bait for fishing $11.89 $0.93 $13.80 N/A Ammunition $8.15 $1.84 $9.45 N/A Souvenirs $1.09 $0.43 $1.27 N/A Meat processor/cooler $4.09 $1.03 $4.75 N/A Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) $0.54 $0.21 $0.63 N/A Other trip-related spending $1.84 $0.74 $2.13 N/A Number of Respondents 580 N/A * Nonresident sample size was insufficient for estimating profiles. The residential profile was used with an adjustment factor of 1.16 to account for higher nonresident spending observed on average.

Table A 4. Hiking recreation spending per participant per day Residents Nonresidents* Item mean std. error mean std. error Groceries and snacks $24.39 $3.97 $28.30 N/A Food and drink at a restaurant $10.78 $1.55 $12.50 N/A Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. $28.35 $2.29 $32.89 N/A Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 N/A etc.) Lodging $8.62 $3.13 $10.00 N/A Vehicle/equipment rental $1.27 $0.90 $1.48 N/A Guide fees $0.42 $0.28 $0.48 N/A Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) $2.66 $2.26 $3.09 N/A Bait for fishing $2.95 $0.79 $3.42 N/A Ammunition $8.80 $2.67 $10.21 N/A Souvenirs $1.34 $0.51 $1.55 N/A Meat processor/cooler $3.35 $1.73 $3.88 N/A Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) $0.27 $0.14 $0.31 N/A Other trip-related spending $0.87 $0.61 $1.01 N/A Number of Respondents 178 N/A * Nonresident sample size was insufficient for estimating profiles. The residential profile was used with an adjustment factor of 1.16 to account for higher nonresident spending observed on average.

Table A 5. Hunting recreation spending per participant per day Residents Nonresidents* Item mean std. error mean std. error Groceries and snacks $22.24 $1.39 $25.80 N/A Food and drink at a restaurant $7.61 $0.62 $8.83 N/A Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. $36.39 $2.26 $42.22 N/A Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, $0.11 $0.07 $0.13 N/A etc.) Lodging $3.06 $0.71 $3.55 N/A Vehicle/equipment rental $0.12 $0.12 $0.14 N/A Guide fees $0.41 $0.36 $0.47 N/A Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) $0.62 $0.20 $0.72 N/A Bait for fishing $3.28 $0.44 $3.80 N/A Ammunition $23.47 $1.87 $27.23 N/A Souvenirs $0.16 $0.07 $0.19 N/A Meat processor/cooler $13.38 $1.67 $15.52 N/A Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) $0.26 $0.16 $0.30 N/A Other trip-related spending $0.77 $0.26 $0.89 N/A Number of Respondents 839 N/A * Nonresident sample size was insufficient for estimating profiles. The residential profile was used with an adjustment factor of 1.16 to account for higher nonresident spending observed on average.

Table A 6. Picnic recreation spending per participant per day Residents Nonresidents* Item mean std. error mean std. error Groceries and snacks $39.60 $4.20 $45.95 N/A Food and drink at a restaurant $12.69 $2.99 $14.72 N/A Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. $51.04 $11.75 $59.22 N/A Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A etc.) Lodging $6.28 $3.29 $7.29 N/A Vehicle/equipment rental $3.21 $3.61 $3.73 N/A Guide fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) $1.70 $0.92 $1.98 N/A Bait for fishing $4.63 $0.93 $5.37 N/A Ammunition $6.63 $2.75 $7.69 N/A Souvenirs $1.99 $1.35 $2.31 N/A Meat processor/cooler $10.21 $4.43 $11.85 N/A Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) $1.14 $1.20 $1.33 N/A Other trip-related spending $3.38 $2.02 $3.93 N/A Number of Respondents 83 N/A * Nonresident sample size was insufficient for estimating profiles. The residential profile was used with an adjustment factor of 1.16 to account for higher nonresident spending observed on average.

Table A 7. Target shooting spending per participant per day Residents Nonresidents* Item mean std. error mean std. error Groceries and snacks $9.87 $1.51 $11.45 N/A Food and drink at a restaurant $6.89 $1.67 $7.99 N/A Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. $23.07 $2.54 $26.76 N/A Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A etc.) Lodging $1.19 $1.19 $1.39 N/A Vehicle/equipment rental $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A Guide fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) $0.28 $0.14 $0.32 N/A Bait for fishing $0.99 $0.33 $1.15 N/A Ammunition $53.35 $6.13 $61.90 N/A Souvenirs $0.10 $0.12 $0.12 N/A Meat processor/cooler $2.06 $1.48 $2.39 N/A Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A Other trip-related spending $0.27 $0.14 $0.32 N/A Number of Respondents 169 N/A * Nonresident sample size was insufficient for estimating profiles. The residential profile was used with an adjustment factor of 1.16 to account for higher nonresident spending observed on average.

Table A 8. Wildlife watching spending per participant per day Residents Nonresidents* Item mean std. error mean std. error Groceries and snacks $21.24 $2.84 $24.65 N/A Food and drink at a restaurant $9.07 $1.88 $10.52 N/A Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. $31.98 $5.10 $37.10 N/A Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, $0.08 $0.06 $0.09 N/A etc.) Lodging $7.49 $4.26 $8.69 N/A Vehicle/equipment rental $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A Guide fees $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N/A Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) $1.51 $0.71 $1.75 N/A Bait for fishing $2.81 $0.93 $3.26 N/A Ammunition $4.82 $2.24 $5.59 N/A Souvenirs $2.23 $1.17 $2.59 N/A Meat processor/cooler $7.64 $2.86 $8.86 N/A Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) $0.19 $0.23 $0.22 N/A Other trip-related spending $0.13 $0.08 $0.16 N/A Number of Respondents 88 N/A * Nonresident sample size was insufficient for estimating profiles. The residential profile was used with an adjustment factor of 1.16 to account for higher nonresident spending observed on average.

Appendix B: Average days per participant for each activity

Table A 9. Average days per participant for each activity Per WMA Visited avg. days* n std. error Residents Cycling 5.79 42 2.17 Canoeing/kayaking (not fishing) 5.65 121 0.74 Camping 5.17 84 0.66 Caving 7.23 13 2.24 Fishing 7.09 680 0.35 Hiking (not hunting) 4.63 415 0.26 Hunting 7.21 1250 0.23 Picnicking 4.73 229 0.42 Horseback riding 8.11 29 2.57 Target Shooting 4.81 219 0.45 Bird/wildlife Watching 4.99 235 0.42 Nonresidents** Cycling 4.52 N/A N/A Canoeing/kayaking (not fishing) 4.42 N/A N/A Camping 4.05 N/A N/A Caving 5.65 N/A N/A Fishing 5.54 N/A N/A Hiking (not hunting) 3.62 N/A N/A Hunting 5.64 N/A N/A Picnicking 3.70 N/A N/A Horseback riding 6.34 N/A N/A Target Shooting 3.76 N/A N/A Bird/wildlife Watching 3.90 N/A N/A * Total average days is smaller than sum across activities since each participant pursues a subset of activities . ** Nonresident sample size was insufficient for estimating profiles. The residential profile was used with an adjustment factor of 0.78 to account for lower nonresident participation observed on average.

Appendix C: Percent of expenditures spent Near Home vs. Near WMA for each item

Table A 10. Percent of expenditures spent near home vs. near WMA for each item Home WMA std. % % n error Residents Ammunition 91.8% 8.2% 818 0.9% Bait for fishing 67.2% 32.8% 644 1.8% Food and drink at a restaurant 30.3% 69.7% 642 1.7% Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) 11.6% 88.4% 163 2.6% Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. 81.3% 18.7% 1731 0.7% Groceries and snacks 75.5% 24.5% 1518 1.0% Guide fees 0.0% 100.0% 6 0.0% Lodging 16.5% 83.5% 119 3.3% Meat processor/cooler 75.9% 24.1% 199 3.0% Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) 35.9% 64.1% 22 10.2% Other trip-related spending 58.1% 41.9% 46 6.9% Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, etc.) 40.8% 59.2% 7 20.2% Vehicle/equipment rental 26.2% 73.8% 12 13.0% Souvenirs 4.2% 95.8% 62 2.7% Nonresidents Ammunition 70.9% 29.1% 29 8.0% Bait for fishing 57.6% 42.4% 21 10.9% Food and drink at a restaurant 13.4% 86.6% 46 4.4% Other fees (launch/mooring fees, etc.) 0.0% 100.0% 16 0.0% Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. 61.1% 38.9% 84 3.9% Groceries and snacks 51.8% 48.2% 84 5.0% Guide fees 0.0% 100.0% 1 0.0% Lodging 7.0% 93.0% 19 5.8% Meat processor/cooler 12.8% 87.2% 7 14.3% Entertainment (movies, nightclub, etc.) 0.0% 100.0% 4 0.0% Other trip-related spending 54.7% 45.3% 5 24.5% Public transportation (bus, taxi, airfare, etc.) 65.1% 34.9% 5 24.5% Vehicle/equipment rental 0.0% 100.0% 1 0.0% Souvenirs 0.0% 100.0% 6 0.0%

Appendix D: Methodology for estimating economic contributions

The extent of the economic contributions associated with spending for outdoor recreation can be estimated in two ways:  Direct effects: These include the jobs, income and tax revenues that are tied directly to the spending by outdoor recreationists without including multiplier effects.  Total effects: These include the jobs, income and tax revenues that are tied directly to the spending by outdoor recreationists plus the jobs, income and tax revenues that result from the multiplier effects of outdoor recreation spending. The multiplier effect occurs when a direct purchase from a business leads to increased demand for goods and services from other businesses along their supply chain. Also included is economic activity associated with household spending of incomes earned in the affected businesses.

The economic contributions from outdoor recreation, both direct effects and total effects, were estimated with an IMPLAN input-output model for the state and regional economies of Georgia, and the county economies for hunting economic contributions. The IMPLAN model was developed by MIG, Inc. originally for use by the U.S. Forest Service. Inherent in each IMPLAN model is the relationship between the economic output of each industry (i.e. sales) and the jobs, income and taxes associated with a given level of output. Through those models, it is possible to determine the jobs, income and taxes supported directly by wildlife-based recreationists with and without the multiplier effects.

Input-output models describe how sales in one industry affect other industries. For example, once a consumer makes a purchase, the retailer buys more merchandise from wholesalers, who buy more from manufacturers, who, in turn, purchase new inputs and supplies. In addition, the salaries and wages paid by these businesses stimulate more benefits. Simply, the first purchase creates numerous rounds of purchasing. Input-output analysis tracks the flow of dollars from the consumer through all of the businesses that are affected, either directly or indirectly.

To apply the IMPLAN model, each specific expenditure for outdoor recreation activities was matched to the appropriate industry sector affected by the initial purchase. The spending was estimated with models of the Georgia economy, therefore all of the resulting contributions represent salaries and wages, total economic effects, jobs and tax revenues that occur within the state of Georgia. Likewise, models based on specific regions or counties represent the economic effects within the selected region or county. The results do not include any economic activity or indirect contributions that leak out of the state, region, or county of interest. As a result of this leakage, economic contributions at the state level are larger than the sum of corresponding regional or county contributions. This occurs because a portion spending in a particular region (or county) leaks to other regions (or counties) within the state, and this within-state leakage is captured in the Georgia model.

Appendix E: Explanation of Economic Contribution

Estimations of economic benefits can be calculated through two types of measures: economic contributions and economic values. An economic contribution addresses the business and financial activity resulting from the use of a resource. Economic value, on the other hand, is a non-business measure that estimates the value people receive from an activity after subtracting for their costs and expenditures. This concept is also known as consumer surplus.

There are three types of economic contribution: direct, indirect and induced. A direct contribution is defined as the economic contribution of the initial purchase made by the consumer (the original retail sale). Indirect contributions are the secondary effects generated from a direct contribution, such as the retailer buying additional inventory, and the wholesaler and manufacturers buying additional materials. Indirect contributions affect not only the industry being studied, but also the industries that supply the first industry. An induced contribution results from the salaries and wages paid by the directly and indirectly effected industries. The employees of these industries spend their income on various goods and services. These expenditures are induced contributions, which, in turn, create a continual cycle of indirect and induced effects.

The direct, indirect and induced contribution effects sum together to provide the overall economic contribution of the activity under study. As the original retail purchase (direct contribution) goes through round after round of indirect and induced effects, the economic contribution of the original purchase is multiplied, benefiting many industries and individuals. Likewise, the reverse is true. If a particular item or industry is removed from the economy, the economic loss is greater than the original lost retail sale. Once the original retail purchase is made, each successive round of spending is smaller than the previous round. When the economic benefits are no longer measurable, the economic examination ends.

This study presents several important measures: Retail Sales – these include expenditures made by outdoor recreationists for equipment, travel expenses and services related to their outdoor activities over the course of the year. These combined initial retail sales represent the “direct output”. Total Economic Effect – also known as “total output” or “total multiplier effect,” this measure reports the sum of the direct, indirect and induced contributions resulting from the original retail sale. This figure explains the total activity in the economy generated by a retail sale. Another way to look at this figure is, if the activity in question were to disappear and participants did not spend their money elsewhere, the economy would contract by this amount. Salaries & Wages – this figure reports the total salaries and wages paid in all sectors of the economy as a result of the activity under study. These are not just the paychecks of those employees directly serving recreationists or manufacturing their goods, it also includes portions of the paychecks of, for example, the truck driver who delivers food to the restaurants serving recreationists and the accountants who manage the

books for companies down the supply chain, etc. This figure is based on the direct, indirect and induced effects, and is essentially a portion of the total economic effect figure reported in this study. Jobs – much like Salaries and Wages, this figure reports the total jobs in all sectors of the economy as a result of the activity under study. These are not just the employees directly serving recreationists or manufacturing their goods, they also include, for example, the truck driver who delivers food to the restaurants serving recreationists and the accountants who manage the books for companies down the supply chain, etc. This figure is based on direct, indirect and induced effects. GDP Contribution – this represents the total “value added” contribution of economic output made by the industries involved in the production of outdoor recreation goods and services. For a given industry, value added equals the difference between gross output (sales and other income) and intermediate inputs (goods and services imported or purchased from other industries). It represents the contribution to GDP in a given industry for production related to outdoor recreation. Tax Revenue- The IMPLAN model estimates detailed tax revenues at the state and local level and at the federal level. The summary estimates provided in this report represent the total taxes estimated by the IMPLAN model including all income, sales, property and other taxes and fees that accrue to the various local, state and federal taxing authorities.

Appendix F: Economic contributions of WMA lands in Georgia: Phone survey outline

Hello, We are conducting a survey on behalf of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Resources Division to learn how people use Wildlife Management Areas (or WMAs) in Georgia for hunting and other outdoor recreation. We’d like to ask you a few questions about your use of WMAs over the past 12 months from June 1, 2013 through May 31, 2014 along with expenditures that you made as part of your use of those lands. This will help the Georgia Department of Natural Resources to better understand the activities taking place on WMAs and manage their use more effectively.

[If asked about WMAs] “The Wildlife Management Areas include more than 100 tracts of public lands throughout Georgia managed by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Resources Division. While hunting is a primary use of the WMAs, many tracts also support other non-hunting recreation activities such shooting ranges, fishing, hiking, cycling and bird watching, among others. Selected ranges require the purchase of a WMA hunting license or a Georgia Outdoor Recreation Pass (GORP). In addition to providing a range of recreation opportunities, these publicly supported areas also contribute to the state and local economies through the expenditures by people who use these areas.”

 During the past 12 months, from June 1, 2013 through May 31, 2014 did you visit any Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) or Pubic Fishing Areas (PFAs) in Georgia to hunt, fish or engage in other outdoor recreation activities?

o Yes o No[SKIP TO QXX]

 Approximately how many days total did you participate in each of the following outdoor activities on Georgia WMAs or PFAs in the last 12 months when the activity was your PRIMARY purpose for your visit? Please count portions of a day as one day and multiple outings within a single day as one day. How about [activity]?

o Hunting _____ days o Fishing _____ days o Target shooting at a range _____ days o Hiking [not hunting] _____ days o Cycling _____ days o Caving _____ days o Bird/wildlife watching _____ days o Horseback riding _____ days o Canoeing/kayaking (not fishing) _____ days o Picnicking _____ days o Other:______days

[If they indicate >0 FISHING days]  Approximately how many different days did you fish in WMAs and PFAs?

o WMAs ______days o PFAs ______days

 Which WMAs did you visit in the past 12 months? [May need to provide prompts to help some respondents recall the specific WMA, e.g., ask for region of the state, then use map to list specific WMAs] [For each WMA visited ask the following:]

o How many days did you participate in the following activities when you visited [specify] WMA?

. Hunting [If HUNT]What animals did you hunt at that WMA?  Deer _____ days  Bear _____ days  Turkey _____ days  Upland game birds _____ days  Waterfowl _____ days  All other _____ days  Fishing _____ days  Hiking [not hunting] _____ days  Target shooting at a range _____ days  Cycling _____ days  Caving _____ days  Bird/wildlife watching _____ days  Horseback riding _____ days  Canoeing/kayaking (not fishing) _____ days  Picnicking _____ days  Other:______days

Please consider a typical trip when you visited [randomly select one WMA [ignore PFAs] from those that the respondent visited] WMA to go [randomly select one activity from those in which respondent participated – hunt, fish, other specific activity]. We’d like to ask you some detailed questions about your typical usage of that WMA when you went [specify activity].  Not counting yourself, how many people usually accompanied you when you visited [specify] WMA for [specify activity]?

____ children (15 and under) ____ children age 16 or 17 ____ adults

 How many days long is your typical trip to [specify] WMA for [specify activity]?

______days

 On a typical trip to [specify] WMA to go [specify activity], how much did you spend for the following? Include the amount that you spent for all persons for whom you were financially responsible (e.g., children, spouse, etc.). Include expenditures that you made at home before you left for your trip as well as expenditures that you made on the way there and in the vicinity of the WMA.

% % near near home WMA o Groceries and snacks $______

o Food and drink at a restaurant $______

o Fuel and oil for autos, boats, etc. $______

o Public transportation $______(bus, taxi, airfare, etc.) o Lodging $______

o Vehicle/equipment rental $______

o Guide fees $______

o Other fees $______(launch/mooring fees, etc.) o Bait for fishing $______

o Ammunition $______

o Souvenirs $______

o Meat processor/cooler $______

o Entertainment $______(movies, nightclub, etc.) o Other trip-related spending: $______

______

 If the [specify] WMA did not exist or was closed to the public, which of the following best describes how that would that have affected the trips that you took there in the past 12 months to go [specify activity]?

o I probably would have gone to a different WMA in Georgia to go [specify activity]

o I probably would have found a non-WMA location in Georgia to go [specify activity]

o I probably would have found a different outdoor activity to do in Georgia at that time

o I probably would have traveled outside of Georgia to engage in outdoor recreation

o I probably would have stayed home or found a different non-outdoors activity to do

o Other:______

 If all of the WMAs in Georgia were closed to the public, how would that affect your overall participation in hunting and other outdoor recreation activities that you do at WMAs?

o It would have no effect. I would find others places to go and take as many trips.

. If all of the WMAs were closed, would your overall spending on outdoor recreation increase, stay the same, or decrease?

 [If increase or decrease] Approximately how much [more/less] would you spend each year?

o It probably would decrease my participation.

. Approximately how much would your overall participation decrease for [list each activity selected by the respondent]?

 Hunting _____ %  Fishing _____ %  Target shooting at a range _____ %

 Hiking [not hunting] _____ %  Cycling _____ %  Caving _____ %  Bird/wildlife watching _____ %  Horseback riding _____ %  Canoeing/kayaking (not fishing) _____ %  Picnicking _____ %  Other:______%

 We’d like to get your opinion on several aspects of the [specify] WMAs that you visited in the past 12 months. For each of the following, please rate your level of satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1=Very unsatisfied, 3=Neutral, and 5=Very Satisfied. Or tell me if you have no opinion.

o The overall quality of the natural environment

o The diversity of wildlife

o The abundance of wildlife

o The quality of wildlife habitat

o The extent of access roads

o The condition of access roads

o The availability of parking areas

o The number of other people using the WMAs

o The availability of shooting ranges

o The condition of shooting ranges

 In 2012, the Georgia DNR, with public input, designated 31 popular WMAs for more intensive management to better accommodate non-hunting recreational uses. Hunters with a valid WMA stamp may continue to use these areas for hunting and non-hunting recreational uses. In addition, the Georgia DNR created the Georgia Outdoor Recreational Pass, or GORP, to allow non-hunters to also use those WMAs for other forms of outdoor recreation such as fishing, target shooting, hiking, bicycling and bird watching. Similar to the WMA stamp, proceeds from the sale of GORP passes are used to maintain or improve access and facilities on those lands.

o Prior to today, were you aware of the availability of the GORP to use certain WMAs?

. Yes . No o In general, do you support or oppose requiring a GORP or WMA stamp for recreation uses other than hunting on certain WMA lands?

. Strongly support . Somewhat support . Neither support nor oppose . Somewhat oppose . Strongly oppose

o Would you support or oppose expanding the GORP program to include additional WMA lands?

. Strongly support . Somewhat support . Neither support nor oppose . Somewhat oppose . Strongly oppose

 What is the ZIP code of your primary residence?  What is your age?  What is your gender?  What is your approximate household income?