Fishing and Hunting 

1991-2001: Avid, Casual, 

and Intermediate 

Participation Trends

Addendum to the 2001 National 

Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and 

Wildlife-Associated Recreation

Report 2001-5

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Fishing and Hunting 

1991-2001: Avid, Casual, 

and Intermediate 

Participation Trends

Addendum to the 2001 National 

Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and 

Wildlife-Associated Recreation

Report 2001-5

July 2004

Richard Aiken

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Division of Federal Aid

Arlington VA

This report complements the National and State reports from the 2001 National 

Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. The conclusions 

are the author’s and do not represent official positions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

The author wishes to thank Sylvia Cabrera and Genevieve Pullis La Rouche for their 

valuable input into the analysis.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
2 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Part One – National Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Trends in Avid Fishing and Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Avid Anglers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Avid Hunters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Trends in Intermediate Fishing and Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Intermediate Anglers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Intermediate Hunters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Trends in Casual Fishing and Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Casual Anglers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Casual Hunters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Comparison of Avids, Intermediates, and Casual Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Part Two – State Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Number of In-State Anglers and Hunters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Number of Fishing and Hunting Days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Trends in State Fishing and Hunting Expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Fishing Trip-Related and Total Expenditures by State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Hunting Trip-Related and Total Expenditures by State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Appendix I – FHWAR Survey Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Appendix II – Sources of Comparable 1955-2001 Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Contents
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 3

Long-term trends of fishing and hunting 

in the United States interest different 

people for different reasons. State fish 

and game agencies want to know the 

number and demographics of their 

constituents, with an eye toward knowing 

what to expect in the future from 

them. Also, managers of fish and game 

populations want to know not only how 

many people are participating but also 

how often, since a drop-off (or increase) 

in the numbers of participants may not 

mean a decrease (or increase) of the 

pressure on the resource if the hunters 

and anglers that remain increase (or 

decrease) their days afield. Marketers 

want to know the state of the industry 

and where to put their efforts. Academics 

want to better understand the culture of 

hunting and angling. The ordinary hunter 

and angler wants to know how the culture 

that gives him or her so much enjoyment 

is evolving.

Americans’ participation in angling 

and hunting in 1991, 1996, and 

2001 is the focus of this analysis. In 

addition to changes in the number 

of participants and their days afield, 

avid, intermediate, and casual hunters 

and anglers are defined and analyzed. 

Trends in overall fishing and hunting 

can be better understood by examining 

important subgroups. Trends in days of 

participation and expenditures at the 

state level are presented also. The source 

of the information is the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service’s 1991, 1996, and 2001 

National Surveys of Fishing, Hunting, 

and Wildlife-Associated Recreation 

(FHWAR).1

 See Appendix I for details of 

the FHWAR Survey methodology.

Long Term Context of Trends

Figure 1 shows the trends in the number 

of all Americans, anglers, and hunters 

since 1955, the year of the first FHWAR 

survey. Indices of change are used, in 

which the 1955 estimates are set to 100 

and the succeeding years’ estimates are 

presented as the percent change. This 

makes it easier to compare the changes of 

the three groups.

Participation in fishing grew from 1955 

to 1990, both in absolute numbers and 

relative to the underlying trend of the 

U.S. population. Since 1990 there has been 

a downturn in the number of anglers.

Participation in hunting grew until 

1975 at a rate slightly greater than U.S. 

population growth. Since 1975 hunting 

has undergone a gradual decline.

Introduction

Figure 1. 1955-2001 Trend

Note: Due to methodological changes over the 46 years of this survey, assumptions and approximations 

were made to make the results comparable. See Appendix II for the assumptions.

�

��

���

���

���

���

���

��������������� ������� �������

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ��������� ���� ����

����������������������������

1

 These Surveys covered activity by 

Americans 16 years old and older 

participating in the U.S. It is important to 

note that the FHWAR Surveys measure 

the activity of every fifth year only. The 

intervening years’ activity is not included. 

Those hunters and anglers who participated 

in the intervening years but not the surveyed 

years are not part of this analysis. 
4 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Highlights

From 1991 to 2001 the number of 

Americans who hunted and/or fished in 

the U.S. decreased 5 percent, with the 

number of anglers decreasing 4 percent 

and the number of hunters decreasing 7 

percent. The drops for both fishing and 

hunting occurred primarily during the 

second half of the 1990’s.

Fishing

The number of anglers was stable 

from 1991 to 1996 (the 1% drop is not 

statistically significant at the 90% level2

), 

then fell 3 percent from 1996 to 2001. 

Freshwater fishing fell 8% from 1991 

to 2001, while saltwater fishing held 

roughly constant (the 2% increase is 

not statistically significant). Breaking 

the freshwater trend number into its 

coldwater and warmwater components, 

coldwater fishing participation fell 12%, 

led by the 15% drop in trout fishing. 

Similarly, warmwater fishing dropped 

13%, largely due to the 17% decline in 

black bass fishing.

While there was a decline in the number 

of anglers, their days on the water 

increased. The average days of fishing 

increased from 14 days in 1991 to 16 

days in 2001, and fishing days for both 

freshwater and saltwater increased 

significantly. This raises the question of 

how the increase in days is distributed. 

Did all anglers increase their angling 

days, or did an avid core of anglers 

increase their high level of participation? 

We will return to this subject later in 

this report.

Part One – National Trends

Table 1. Sportsperson Participation 1991-2001

(Numbers in thousands)

1991

Number

1996

Number

1991-1996

Percent 

Change

2001

Number

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

Sportspersons 39,979 39,694 -1 37,805 -5 -5

Anglers 35,578 35,246 -1 34,070 -3 -4

Hunters 14,063 13,975 -1 13,034 -7 -7

Table 2. National Fishing Participation Trends

(Numbers in thousands)

1991

Number

1996

Number

1991-1996

Percent 

Change

2001

Number

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

Fishing, total 35,578 35,246 -1 34,070 -3 -4

Freshwater 31,041 29,734 -4 28,439 -4 -8

Coldwater 10,158 9,994 -2 8,989 -10 -12

Trout 9,497 9,290 -2 8,118 -13 -15

Warmwater 23,971 22,030 -8 20,882 -5 -13

Black Bass 13,139 12,972 -1 10,956 -16 -17

Saltwater 8,885 9,438 6 9,051 -4 2

Table 3. National Fishing Days Participation Trends

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 

Number

1996 

Number

1991-1996 

Percent 

Change

2001 

Number

1996-2001 

Percent 

Change

1991-2001 

Percent 

Change

Fishing Days, total 511,329 625,893 22 557,394 -11 9

Freshwater 439,536 515,115 17 466,984 -9 6

Trout 86,626 97,978 13 89,285 -9 3

Black Bass 162,595 196,385 21 166,202 -15 2

Saltwater 74,696 103,034 38 90,838 -12 22 2

 All statistical significance tests will be at 

the 90% level. Statistical significance at the 

90% level means that for 90% of all possible 

samples, the estimate for one survey year 

cannot be shown to be different from the 

estimate for the other survey year.
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 5

Hunting

The number of Americans who hunted 

was roughly level from 1991 to 1996 

(the 1 percent drop is not statistically 

significant) and fell 7 percent from 

1996 to 2001. From 1991 to 2001 small 

game and other animal (fox, raccoon, 

groundhog, and other nongame) hunting 

participation dropped by over a quarter 

(29% for small game, 26% for other 

animals), while big game and migratory 

bird hunting participation has not 

dropped significantly (the +/-2% changes 

are not statistically significant).

As for the hunting of individual species, 

deer hunting was the single most 

popular hunting activity. It held steady 

at 10.3 million hunters in both 1991 

and 2001. From 1991 to 2001 turkey 

hunters increased 46% and duck hunters 

increased 37%. Elk hunters increased 

33%. Goose hunters increased 13% over 

the same time period. Species hunting 

that declined from 1991 to 2001 include 

dove hunting which decreased by 22%, 

pheasant hunting by 25%, squirrel 

hunting by 41%, and rabbit hunting 

by 47%.

The disparity in participation trends 

between big game and migratory bird 

hunters and small game and other animal 

hunters is also seen in days afield. Big 

game and migratory bird hunting days 

increased significantly from 1991 to 2001 

(19% for big game, 32% for migratory 

birds). Small game hunting days 

decreased 22%. Overall, the increasing 

days hunting group (big game, migratory 

bird) compensated for the decreasing 

days group (small game, other animals) in 

the total hunting days trend (the 3% drop 

is not statistically significant). Hunters as 

a whole hunted more days per capita over 

time. In 1991 the average hunter went 

out 17 days and in 2001 it was 18 days. 

The same question arises as for fishing. 

Did all hunters increase their hunting 

days, or did a particular subgroup 

increase their participation? We will 

return to this subject later in this report.

Trends in Avid Fishing and Hunting

There are several ways of defining 

avidity, e.g., days afield, dollars spent, 

variety of animals sought, years spent 

hunting and fishing. Each has its pros and 

cons. After examining each, days afield 

was chosen. People can spend money 

on equipment without participating in 

hunting or fishing, a person can be an 

avid deer hunter and not hunt any other 

game, a young person can be avid without 

a long history of hunting or fishing 

behind him/her. But participating in an 

Table 4. National Hunting Participation Trends

(Numbers in thousands)

1991

Number

1996

Number

1991-1996

Percent 

Change

2001

Number

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

Hunting, total 14,063 13,975 -1 13,034 -7 -7

Big Game 10,745 11,288 5 10,911 -3 2

Deer 10,277 10,722 4 10,272 -4 (Z)

Elk 682 959 41 910 -5 33

Turkey 1,720 2,189 27 2,504 14 46

Small Game 7,642 6,945 -9 5,434 -22 -29

Rabbit 3,980 3,146 -21 2,099 -33 -47

Squirrel 3,569 3,207 -10 2,119 -34 -41

Pheasant 2,285 2,261 -1 1,723 -24 -25

Migratory Bird 3,009 3,073 2 2,956 -4 -2

Duck 1,164 1,596 37 1,589 (Z) 37

Geese 882 915 4 1,000 9 13

Dove 1,851 1,581 -15 1,450 -8 -22

Other Animals 1,411 1,521 8 1047 -31 -26

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent.

Table 5. National Hunting Days Trends

(Numbers in thousands)

1991

Number

1996

Number

1991-1996

Percent 

Change

2001

Number

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

Hunting Days, total 235,806 256,676 9 228,368 -11 -3

Big Game 128,411 153,784 20 153,191 (Z) 19

Deer 112,853 131,345 16 133,457 2 18

Elk 5,048 7,174 42 6,402 -11 27

Turkey 13,483 18,532 37 23,165 25 72

Small Game 77,132 75,117 -3 60142 -20 -22

Rabbit 35,624 28,873 -19 22,768 -21 -36

Squirrel 29,602 25,401 -14 22,333 -12 -25

Pheasant 16,136 17,336 7 12,769 -26 -21

Migratory Bird 22,235 26,501 19 29310 11 32

Duck 8,800 13,800 57 18,290 33 108

Geese 6,584 8,451 28 10,508 24 60

Dove 9,480 8,141 -14 9,041 11 -5

Other Animals 19,340 24,522 27 19207 -22 -1

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent.
6 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

activity many times in a year requires 

commitment, which is a criterion of 

avidity.

See Figure 2 for a bar chart of the 

distribution of hunting days in 2001. 

736,000 people hunted one day, increasing 

to 936,000 people hunting two days. 

It drops off then, with the number of 

people hunting at each increment of 

days decreasing rapidly (with spikes at 

the numbers of days that respondents 

typically round to, such as 10, 20, and 25) 

to about 100 days, more than which only 

153,000 people hunted.

Figure 3 is a bar chart of how many days 

were contributed by hunters in 2001, 

in order of how many days each person 

hunted. This is an important perspective 

because if the determination of the most 

influential hunting group is those who 

hunted the most days, that information 

cannot be obtained from Figure 2, in 

which the hunters who hunted 2 days is 

the single biggest group. But as can be 

seen in Figure 3, they contributed a very 

low number of total days, while hunters 

who hunted 30 days in 2001 had by far the 

most days afield. Here is a more detailed 

example: 878,000 Americans hunted 10 

days (see Figure 2), so they accounted 

for 8,780,000 hunting days (see Figure 

3). The 736,000 people who hunted one 

day accounted for only 736,000 days, 

compared to the 33,000 people (4% of the 

people who hunted one day) who hunted 

100 days accounting for 3.3 million 

hunting days (nearly five times the total 

days of people who hunted one day). The 

sum of days increases from 736,000 days 

by one-day hunters to 11.8 million days 

by people who hunted 30 days. The sum 

of days trend then falls steadily to the 

6,000 hunters who hunted 150 days (who 

alone account for 873,000 days!), after 

which the line bumps along the x-axis.

Examination of Figures 2 and 3 

demonstrates that the top 10% of hunters 

in 2001, who hunted 41 days or more, 

can be considered avid,3

 and the number 

of hunters who hunt one or two days, 

13% of total hunters, can be considered 

casual. Examination of the data from the 

1991 and 1996 Surveys finds the same 

percentage of hunters can be defined to 

be avid, 10%, and 11% in 1996 and 16% 

in 1991 of hunters qualify as casual, i.e., 

hunt one or two days. The top 10% of 

Figure 2. 2001 Hunting Days: The Number of Hunters, by Number of Days Spent Hunting

(Number of People in thousands)

anglers can be defined to be avid as well, 

while anglers who fish only one day (11% 

of total anglers in 2001, 11% in 1996, 

and 14% in 1991) qualify as casual. The 

criteria for avid and casual participants 

used for all three surveys: avids are the 

top 10% of total participants based on 

their days afield, casual angling is made 

up of anglers who fished one day in the 

year, and casual hunting consists of 

hunters who hunted one or two days in 

the year. Everyone between these two 

extremes is considered intermediate.

Based on their total days participating in 

2001, the top 10% of anglers and hunters 

accounted for 45% of all fishing and 

hunting days. The avid angler fished an 

average of 73 days per year, compared to 

the average angler’s 16 days. Similarly, 

the average avid hunter in 2001 hunted 

70 days and the average hunter 18 days. 

Tables 3 and 4 present the trend in avid 

fishing and hunting over the past three 

surveys.

Looking at the avid trends, the number 

of avid anglers was 3.7 million in 1991, 

3.4 million in 1996, and 3.5 million in 2001, 

compared to all anglers (35.6 million, 35.2 

million, and 34.1 million, respectively). 

The number of avid hunters was 

relatively steady, with 1.4 million in 

1991 and 1996 and 1.3 million in 2001, 

compared to all hunters (14.1 million, 14.0 

million, and 13.0 million, respectively).

Figure 3. 2001 Hunting Days: The Contribution to Total Days by Casual, 

Intermediate, and Avid Hunters

(Sum of Days in thousands)

3

 Robert Southwick came to the same 

conclusion for the designation of avidity in his 

study Today’s Angler, A Statistical Profile of 

America’s Angler, Southwick, Inc., 2003.

�

���

���

���

���

�����

� �� �� �� �� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ���

��������������

���������

�������������

���������

����������������

��������������

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

������

������

� �� �� �� �� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ���

�����������

�������������� ���������������������������������� ����������������������

���������
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 7

Table 6. Avid Fishing Trends

(Numbers in thousands)

Fishing, total

Total

Participants

Avid

Participants

Percent of

Participants Total Days Avid Days

Percent 

of Days

Avid

Mean Days

2001 34,070 3,542 10 557,394 259,388 47 73

1996 35,246 3,362 10 625,893 286,388 46 85

1991 35,578 3,706 10 511,329 250,988 49 68

Non-Great Lakes Freshwater

2001 27,913 3,206 11 443,247 208,547 47 66

1996 28,921 3,060 11 485,474 223,090 46 73

1991 30,186 3,443 11 430,922 212,828 49 62

Great Lakes

2001 1,847 343 19 23,138 12,634 55 37

1996 2,039 299 15 20,095 9,247 46 32

1991 2,552 456 18 25,335 12,759 50 28

Saltwater

2001 9,051 1,036 11 90,838 39,038 43 38

1996 9,438 1,012 11 103,034 43,067 42 43

1991 8,885 1,088 12 74,696 33,255 45 31

Note: Avids determined by total days, not type of fishing days (e.g., Great Lakes days).

Table 7. Avid Hunting Trends

(Numbers in thousands)

Hunting

Total

Participants

Avid

Participants

Percent of

Participants Total Days Avid Days

Percent 

of Days

Avid 

Mean Days

2001 13,034 1,298 10 228,368 91,032 40 70

1996 13,975 1,384 10 256,676 99,190 39 72

1991 14,063 1,412 10 235,806 98,096 42 69

Big Game

2001 10,911 1,225 11 153,191 56,613 37 46

1996 11,288 1,284 11 153,784 53,731 35 42

1991 10,745 1,317 12 128,411 45,339 35 34

Small Game

2001 5,434 871 16 60,142 26,332 44 30

1996 6,945 1,094 16 75,117 28,413 38 26

1991 7,642 1,228 16 77,132 34,099 44 28

Migratory Birds

2001 2,956 447 15 29,310 11,399 39 25

1996 3,073 521 17 26,501 8,585 32 18

1991 3,009 603 20 22,235 8,894 40 15

Other Animals

2001 1,047 356 34 19,207 13,666 71 39

1996 1,521 465 31 24,522 15,945 65 38

1991 1,411 532 38 19,340 13,280 69 25

Note: Avids determined by total days, not type of hunting days (e.g., Small Game days).
8 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Avid Anglers

In 2001 avid anglers made up 11% of both 

non-Great Lakes freshwater anglers 

and saltwater anglers. This means that 

avid anglers as a group do not specialize 

in freshwater or saltwater angling, but 

distribute themselves equally between 

the two activities. This pattern held for 

1991 and 1996. This finding is borne out 

in the days data as well. In 2001 47% of 

all fishing days were provided by avid 

anglers. 47% of all freshwater days and 

43% of all saltwater days were provided 

by avid anglers. The observation that 

avids as a group do not specialize in 

freshwater or saltwater can be made for 

1991 and 1996 as well.

Avid anglers are an important subgroup 

of anglers as a whole, both economically 

and in terms of effort. Studying their 

sociodemographics gives us insight into 

who they are.

A majority, 56%, of avid anglers 

resided in urban areas in 2001. This is 

not surprising, since a majority of all 

anglers, 61%, resided in urban areas. 

The tendency of avid anglers to not be 

as urban-based as anglers as a whole has 

held steady over the past three surveys. 

In 2001 67% of avid anglers lived in 

Metropolitan Statistical Areas4

 (MSA) 

of 50,000 or more residents, compared to 

72% of all anglers. Viewed another way, 

9% of urban anglers (8% in 1996) and 12% 

of rural anglers were avid. Rural anglers 

are more likely to be avid than urban 

anglers.

In 2001 the age group that had the 

most avid anglers was 35-44 year olds. 

This was also true for all anglers. After 

combining 16-17 and 18-24 year olds 

into one age group for the purpose of 

comparison the age group that had the 

fewest avids was 65 years old and older, 

as was the case with all anglers.

As with anglers as a whole, avid anglers 

have become an older age group. 

Comparing 2001 and 1991 data, 16-34 

year olds made up more of the avid 

angler population in 1991 than in 2001 

(45% compared to 32%). Conversely, 45 

year old and older anglers were 47% of 

all avid anglers in 2001, 43% in 1996, and 

34% in 1991.

Angling is a recreational commodity, 

and economic theory suggests that as 

income increases people will be more 

likely to purchase “angling,” i.e., the 

angler with higher income will more 

likely be avid. And indeed, in 2001 60% of 

all avid anglers had a household income 

above national median income and 40% 

of all avid anglers had below median 

income. However, comparing that data 

to income data of anglers as a whole 

presents a different story. In 2001 60% 

of avid anglers had above median income, 

compared to 66% of all anglers. Nonavid 

anglers tended to have higher income 

than avid anglers. Higher income is not 

the indicator of avidity as predicted. 

Similarly, in 1991 53% of avid anglers had 

above median income, compared to 59% 

of all anglers. Although avid anglers tend 

to have an above median income, anglers 

as a whole show a stronger tendency for 

an above median income.

Another way of looking at income’s effect 

on avidity is the percent of anglers with 

above median income who are avid. In 

2001 9% of all anglers with above median 

income were avid anglers, compared to 

10% of all anglers being avid. Conversely, 

12% of all below median anglers were 

avid. A similar relationship held in 1991 

and 1996. Avid anglers are more likely 

to have below median income than the 

average angler.

Table 8. Avid Anglers by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Avid

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Avid

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Avid

Percent

of Total

Total 35,578 100 3,706 100 35,246 100 3,362 100 34,070 100 3,542 100

Urban 22,368 63 2,081 56 21,618 61 1,776 53 20,924 61 1,981 56

Rural 13,210 37 1,625 44 13,628 39 1,586 47 13,146 39 1,561 44

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)(1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 35,246 100 3,362 100 34,070 100 3,542 100

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 7,637 22 711 21 6,676 20 502 14

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 17,012 48 1,530 46 17,714 52 1,865 53

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 10,584 30 1,121 33 9,680 28 1,175 33

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available

4

 A Metropolitan Statistical Area is a town, 

county, or group of towns or counties with 

a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA 

must contain a central city. These areas are 

determined by the Census Bureau, unlike the 

urban/rural designation, which is determined 

by each respondent independently. MSA’s 

are included here because they remove the 

subjective element from the respondent’s 

urban/rural determination. 
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 9

Table 9. Avid Anglers by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

Total 35,578 3,706 10 35,246 3,362 10 34,070 3,542 10

Urban 22,368 2,081 9 21,618 1,776 8 20,924 1,981 9

Rural 13,210 1,625 12 13,628 1,586 12 13,146 1,561 12

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. 35,246 3,362 10 34,070 3,542 10

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 7,637 711 9 6,676 502 8

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 17,012 1,530 9 17,714 1,865 11

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. 10,584 1,121 11 9,680 1,175 12

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available

Table 10. Avid Anglers by Age Groups (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Avid

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Avid

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Avid

Percent

of Total

Total 35,578 100 3,705 100 35,246 100 3,361 100 34,070 100 3,544 100

16-17 1,481 4 146 4 1,406 4 145 4 1,319 4 140 4

18-24 4,589 13 564 15 3,321 9 309 9 2,931 9 319 9

25-34 9,927 28 955 26 7,175 20 765 23 6,578 19 672 19

35-44 8,583 24 824 22 9,673 27 682 20 9,047 27 772 22

45-54 4,891 14 501 14 7,020 20 767 23 6,940 20 696 20

55-64 3,270 9 397 11 3,537 10 352 10 4,168 12 566 16

65 and older 2,827 8 318 9 3,092 9 341 10 3,090 9 379 11

Table 11. Avid Anglers by Age Groups (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

Total 35,578 3,705 10 35,246 3,361 10 34,070 3,544 10

16-17 1,481 146 10 1,406 145 10 1,319 140 11

18-24 4,589 564 12 3,321 309 9 2,931 319 11

25-34 9,927 955 10 7,175 765 11 6,578 672 10

35-44 8,583 824 10 9,673 682 7 9,047 772 9

45-54 4,891 501 10 7,020 767 11 6,940 696 10

55-64 3,270 397 12 3,537 352 10 4,168 566 14

65 and older 2,827 318 11 3,092 341 11 3,090 379 12
10 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Table 12. Avid Anglers by Median Income (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household 

income

All

Participants

Percent

of total

Avid

Participants

Percent

of total

All

Participants

Percent

of total

Avid

Participants

Percent

of total

All

Participants

Percent

of total

Avid

Participants

Percent

of total

Total 32,351 100 3,385 100 30,980 100 3,025 100 28,851 100 3,013 100

Below median 13,301 41 1,607 47 13,516 44 1,649 55 9,793 34 1,216 40

Above median 19,050 59 1,778 53 17,464 56 1,376 45 19,058 66 1,797 60

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income.

Table 13. Avid Anglers by Median Income (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All

Participants

Avid

Participants

Percent of 

Participants

All

Participants

Avid

Participants

Percent of 

Participants

All

Participants

Avid 

Participants

Percent of 

Participants

Total 32,351 3,385 10 30,980 3,025 10 28,851 3,013 10

Below median 13,301 1,607 12 13,516 1,649 12 9,793 1,216 12

Above median 19,050 1,778 9 17,464 1,376 8 19,058 1,797 9

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income.

Pat Hagan/USFWS
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 11

Table 14. Avid Hunters by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total Avid

Percent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total Avid

Percent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total Avid

Percent 

of Total

Total 14,063 100 1,412 100 13,975 100 1,385 100 13,034 100 1,298 100

Urban 6,631 47 443 31 6,402 46 467 34 5,873 45 363 28

Rural 7,432 53 969 69 7,574 54 918 66 7,161 55 935 72

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 13,975 100 1,384 100 13,034 100 1,298 100

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 2,123 15 78 6 1,803 14 88 7

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 5,660 41 558 40 5,946 46 513 40

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 6,192 44 748 54 5,285 41 697 54

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available

Table 15. Avid Hunters by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

Total 14,063 1,412 10 13,975 1,385 10 13,034 1,298 10

Urban 6,631 443 7 6,402 467 7 5,873 363 6

Rural 7,432 969 13 7,574 918 12 7,161 935 13

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. 13,975 1,384 10 13,034 1,298 10

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 2,123 78 4 1,803 88 5

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 5,660 558 10 5,946 513 9

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. 6,192 748 12 5,285 697 13

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available

Avid Hunters

In 2001 avid hunters constituted 11% of 

big game hunters, 15% of migratory bird 

hunters, 16% of small game hunters, and 

34% of other animal hunters. Migratory 

bird, small game, and particularly other 

animal hunters tended to be more avid 

than big game hunters. This was true for 

1991 and 1996 as well.

Looking at the days data for 2001, 

avid hunters accounted for 40% of all 

hunting days: 37% of big game days, 

39% of migratory bird days, 44% of small 

game days, and a startling 71% of other 

animal days. Over two-thirds of other 

animal (nongame) hunting effort was 

supplied by avid hunters, compared to 

approximately one-third of big game 

hunting effort.

Sociodemographic characteristics of 

avid hunters help explain participation. 

In 2001 72% of all avid hunters resided 

in rural areas, compared to 55% of all 

hunters living in rural areas. A similar 

relationship held for 1991 and 1996. Rural 

hunters are twice as likely to be avid as 

urban hunters. In both 1991 and 2001 13% 

of all rural hunters were avid, compared 

to 6%-7% of urban hunters (6% in 2001, 

7% in 1991). Perhaps the easier access to 

hunting areas that rural residents have 

is a strong factor in the avidity level of 

hunters. The traditional rural culture is 

almost certainly a factor as well.

Age also is a significant factor in avidity 

levels. When the 16-17 and 18-24 year old 

age cohorts are combined, the age group 

with the fewest number of avid hunters in 

2001 was the 65 year old and older cohort. 

The age group with the most avid hunters 

was the 35-44 year olds. Compared to 

1991, when the age group with the most 

avid hunters was the 25-34 year olds, avid 

hunters in 2001 tended to be older. This is 

also true with hunters as a whole.

Avid hunters have a tendency toward 

having higher income, but not as strong 

a tendency as that of hunters as a whole. 

In 2001 42% of avid hunters had below 

median household income, compared to 

34% of all hunters. This pattern held in 

1991 and 1996. Avid hunter income tends 

to be lower than the income of hunters 

as a whole. The trend from 1991 to 2001 

was toward a bigger gap between the 

numbers of below median and above 

median income hunters.
12 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Table 16. Avid Hunters by Age Groups (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total Avid

Percent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total Avid

Percent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total Avid

Percent 

of Total

Total 14,063 100 1,412 100 13,975 100 1,385 100 13,034 100 1,299 100

16-17 662 5 61 4 672 5 62 4 584 4 69 5

18-24 2,008 14 262 19 1,397 10 170 12 1,251 10 155 12

25-34 3,928 28 431 31 2,783 20 374 27 2,413 19 280 22

35-44 3,363 24 348 25 3,819 27 372 27 3,551 27 307 24

45-54 2,071 15 191 14 2,851 20 277 20 2,821 22 261 20

55-64 1,177 8 68 5 1,487 11 87 6 1,449 11 156 12

65 and older 836 6 51 4 967 7 43 3 965 7 71 5

Table 17. Avid Hunters by Age Groups (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Avid

Percent of

Participants

Total 14,063 1,412 10 13,975 1,385 10 13,034 1,299 10

16-17 662 61 9 672 62 9 584 69 12

18-24 2,008 262 13 1,397 170 12 1,251 155 12

25-34 3,928 431 11 2,783 374 13 2,413 280 12

35-44 3,363 348 10 3,819 372 10 3,551 307 9

45-54 2,071 191 9 2,851 277 10 2,821 261 9

55-64 1,177 68 6 1,487 87 6 1,449 156 11

65 and older 836 51 6 967 43 4 965 71 7

Table 18. Avid Hunters by Median Income (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Avid

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Avid

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Avid

Percent

of Total

Total 12,714 100 1,290 100 12,219 100 1,228 100 10,979 100 1,084 100

Below median 5,424 43 602 47 5,272 43 603 49 3,703 34 460 42

Above median 7,290 57 688 53 6,947 57 625 51 7,276 66 624 58

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income.

Table 19. Avid Hunters by Median Income (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All

Participants

1991

Avid

Percent of

Participants

All

Participants

1996

Avid

Percent of

Participants

All

Participants

2001

Avid

Percent of

Participants

Total 12,714 1,290 10 12,219 1,228 10 10,979 1,084 10

Below median 5,424 602 11 5,272 603 11 3,703 460 12

Above median 7,290 688 9 6,947 625 9 7,276 624 9

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income.
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 13

Trends in Intermediate 

Fishing and Hunting

The largest subgroup of anglers and 

hunters is the intermediates, those people 

who participate more than once or twice 

a year but less than the avid threshold 

(i.e., between 35 and 45 days per year, 

depending on the activity and year). 

Intermediates make up approximately 

75% of participants and contribute 

about half of all angling and hunting 

days. What are their participation and 

sociodemographic characteristics?

Intermediate participants in 2001 were 

78% of all anglers. They provided 53% 

of all fishing days — an average of 

11 days per angler, compared to 10 days 

in 1991. Hunting is a similar picture. 

Intermediate hunters were 76% of all 

hunters in 2001 and provided a total of 

59% of all hunting days — an average 

of 14 days per hunter, compared to 

13 days in 1991.

Intermediate anglers numbered 26.8 

million in 1991, 27.7 million in 1996, and 

26.6 million in 2001, compared to all 

anglers (35.6 million, 35.2 million, and 

34.1 million, successively). Intermediate 

hunters numbered 10.3 million, 10.9 

million, and 10.0 million, compared to all 

hunters (14.1 million to 14.0 million to 

13.0 million) in the three survey years.

Intermediate Anglers

In 2001 intermediate anglers made up 

79% of non-Great Lakes freshwater 

anglers and 78% of saltwater anglers. 

Intermediate anglers as a group did 

not specialize in one type of fishing, but 

as a group participated in freshwater 

and saltwater roughly equally. 52% of 

all freshwater days were provided by 

intermediate anglers, while slightly 

more, 56%, of all saltwater days were 

provided by intermediate anglers. The 

intermediate angler contributed nearly 

the same proportion of all fishing days 

for both freshwater and saltwater 

fisheries. The data for 1991 and 1996 

show similar patterns.

Table 20. Intermediate Angler Trends

(Numbers in thousands)

Fishing

Total

Participants

Intermediate

Participants

Percent of

Participants

Total

Days

Intermediate

Days

Percent 

of Days

Intermediate

Mean Days

2001 34,070 26,588 78 557,394 294,411 53 11

1996 35,246 27,724 79 625,893 335,690 54 12

1991 35,578 26,835 75 511,329 255,478 50 10

Non-Great Lakes Freshwater

2001 27,913 22,153 79 443,247 232,297 52 10

1996 28,921 23,143 80 485,474 259,748 54 11

1991 30,186 23,067 76 430,922 213,409 50 9

Great Lakes

2001 1,847 1,374 74 23,138 10,405 45 8

1996 2,039 1,553 76 20,095 10,710 53 7

1991 2,552 1,894 74 25,335 12,360 49 7

Saltwater

2001 9,051 7,104 78 90,838 50,948 56 7

1996 9,438 7,392 78 103,034 58,961 57 8

1991 8,885 6,632 75 74,696 40,043 54 6

Note: Intermediate anglers determined by all fishing days, not type of fishing days (e.g., Great Lakes days).
14 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

A majority of intermediate anglers 

resided in urban areas (63% in 1991 and 

62% in 1996 and 2001). All demographic 

findings for intermediates closely follow 

those of all anglers. Focusing on urban 

areas, in 2001 19.1 million intermediate 

anglers, 72% of all intermediate anglers, 

lived in a Metropolitan Statistical Area, 

compared to 24.4 million total anglers, 

72% of anglers as a whole, living in a 

MSA.

In 2001 the age group that had the most 

intermediate anglers was 35-44 year olds. 

This was also true for all anglers. The age 

group (after combining 16-17 and 18-24 

year olds into one age group) that had 

the fewest intermediates was 65 years 

old and older, as was the case with all 

anglers.

The average age of intermediate 

anglers has increased from 1991 to 

2001. Comparing 2001 and 1991 data, 

16-34 year olds made up more of the 

intermediate angler population in 1991 

than in 2001 (44% compared to 32%). 

Conversely, 45 year olds and older were 

42% of all intermediate anglers in 2001, 

39% in 1996, and 31% in 1991.

Intermediate anglers had nearly the 

same proportion of below median income 

anglers and above median income anglers 

as the general angling population for all 

three surveys. Above median income 

anglers were slightly more likely to 

be intermediate anglers — 76% of all 

below median income anglers and 80% 

of all above median income anglers were 

intermediate anglers in 2001.

Table 21. Intermediate Anglers by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

Total 35,578 100 26,836 100 35,246 100 27,725 100 34,070 100 26,588 100

Urban 22,368 63 16,968 63 21,618 61 17,112 62 20,924 61 16,407 62

Rural 13,210 37 9,868 37 13,628 39 10,613 38 13,146 39 10,181 38

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 35,246 100 27,725 100 34,070 100 26,588 100

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 7,637 22 5,747 21 6,676 20 5,456 21

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 17,012 48 13,736 50 17,714 52 13,617 51

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 10,584 30 8,242 30 9,680 28 7,515 28

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available

Table 22. Intermediate Anglers by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

Total 35,578 26,836 75 35,246 27,725 79 34,070 26,588 78

Urban 22,368 16,968 76 21,618 17,112 79 20,924 16,407 78

Rural 13,210 9,868 75 13,628 10,613 78 13,146 10,181 77

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. 35,246 27,725 79 34,070 26,588 78

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 7,637 5,747 75 6,676 5,456 82

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 17,012 13,736 81 17,714 13,617 77

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. 10,584 8,242 78 9,680 7,515 78

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 15

Table 23. Intermediate Anglers by Age Group (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total

IntermediatePercent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total

IntermediatePercent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total

IntermediatePercent

of Total

Total 35,578 100 26,835 100 35,246 100 27,724 100 34,070 100 26,589 100

16-17 1,481 4 1,127 4 1,406 4 1,100 4 1,319 4 1,028 4

18-24 4,589 13 3,338 12 3,321 9 2,594 9 2,931 9 2,319 9

25-34 9,927 28 7,442 28 7,175 20 5,636 20 6,578 19 5,112 19

35-44 8,583 24 6,560 24 9,673 27 7,735 28 9,047 27 7,147 27

45-54 4,891 14 3,870 14 7,020 20 5,460 20 6,940 20 5,495 21

55-64 3,270 9 2,449 9 3,537 10 2,763 10 4,168 12 3,113 12

65 and older 2,827 8 2,049 8 3,092 9 2,436 9 3,090 9 2,375 9

Table 24. Intermediate Anglers by Age Group (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

Total 35,578 26,835 75 35,246 27,724 79 34,070 26,589 78

16-17 1,481 1,127 76 1,406 1,100 78 1,319 1,028 78

18-24 4,589 3,338 73 3,321 2,594 78 2,931 2,319 79

25-34 9,927 7,442 75 7,175 5,636 79 6,578 5,112 78

35-44 8,583 6,560 76 9,673 7,735 80 9,047 7,147 79

45-54 4,891 3,870 79 7,020 5,460 78 6,940 5,495 79

55-64 3,270 2,449 75 3,537 2,763 78 4,168 3,113 75

65 and older 2,827 2,049 72 3,092 2,436 79 3,090 2,375 77

Table 25. Intermediate Anglers by Median Income (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All

Participants

Percent

of total

IntermediatePercent

of total

All

Participants

Percent 

of total

IntermediatePercent 

of total

All

Participants

Percent

of total

IntermediatePercent

of total

Total 32,351 100 24,424 100 30,980 100 24,452 100 28,851 100 22,607 100

Below median 13,301 41 9,784 40 13,516 44 10,368 42 9,793 34 7,450 33

Above median 19,050 59 14,640 60 17,464 56 14,084 58 19,058 66 15,157 67

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income.

Table 26. Intermediate Anglers by Median Income (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

Total 32,351 24,424 75 30,980 24,452 79 28,851 22,607 78

Below median 13,301 9,784 74 13,516 10,368 77 9,793 7,450 76

Above median 19,050 14,640 77 17,464 14,084 81 19,058 15,157 80

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income.
16 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Intermediate Hunters

In 2001 intermediate hunters, 76% of all 

hunters, constituted 79% of big game 

hunters, 77% of migratory bird hunters, 

75% of small game hunters, and 63% of 

other animal hunters. Big game hunting 

was the biggest draw for intermediate 

hunters, as it is for the avid and casual 

subcategories of hunters, and as it was in 

1991 and 1996.

Looking at the days data, 59% of all 

hunting days in 2001 were provided by 

intermediate hunters: 62% of all big 

game days, 60% of all migratory bird 

days, 55% of all small game days, and 

29% of all other animal days. In 1991, 

the days afield by intermediate hunters 

were very close to 2001, with 57% of all 

hunting days, 63% of big game days, 

58% of migratory bird days, 54% of small 

game days, and 30% of other animal 

hunting days contributed by intermediate 

hunters. The intermediate hunter has 

maintained his/her share of all hunting 

activity over the past three surveys, with 

a small bump up in 1996 and a fall to 1991 

levels in 2001.

The discussion of the sociodemographic 

characteristics of intermediate hunters 

begins with their urban/rural residence. 

In 2001 54% of intermediate hunters 

resided in rural areas, similar to the 53% 

of intermediate hunters in 1991 and 1996. 

Again, these percentages are very close 

to those of hunters as a whole.

When the 16-17 and 18-24 year old age 

cohorts are combined, the age group 

with the fewest number of intermediate 

hunters in 2001 was the 65 years old 

and older cohort. 7% of intermediate 

hunters were 65 years old and older, 

compared to 5% of avids and 10% of 

casuals of the same age. The age group 

with the most intermediate hunters was 

the 25-34 year olds in 1991 and the 35-44 

year olds in 2001. This aging trend holds 

for all subcategories of hunters: avid, 

intermediate, and casual.

Intermediate hunters had a strong 

tendency toward having higher income 

in 2001. 33% of intermediate hunters had 

below median household income. 34% 

of hunters as a whole had below median 

household income. Above median income 

is a strong determinant for intermediate 

hunting, as it is for hunting as a whole. 

This is a difference between intermediate 

hunters and avid hunters: the below 

median income hunting group tends to 

be less intermediate than the average 

hunter, while the same group tends to be 

more avid than the average hunter.

Table 27. Intermediate Hunting Trends

(Numbers in thousands)

Hunting

Total

Participants

Intermediate

Participants

Percent of 

Participants

Total

Days

Intermediate

Days

Percent 

of Days

Intermediate

Mean Days

2001 13,034 9,969 76 228,368 134,728 59 14

1996 13,975 10,916 78 256,676 154,945 60 14

1991 14,063 10,262 73 235,806 134,150 57 13

Big Game

2001 10,911 8,570 79 153,191 94,904 62 11

1996 11,288 8,957 79 153,784 98,477 64 11

1991 10,745 8,203 76 128,411 80,869 63 10

Small Game

2001 5,434 4,079 75 60,142 33,177 55 8

1996 6,945 5,379 77 75,117 46,043 61 9

1991 7,642 5,526 72 77,132 41,645 54 8

Migratory Birds

2001 2,956 2,278 77 29,310 17,601 60 8

1996 3,073 2,372 77 26,501 17,662 67 7

1991 3,009 2,063 69 22,235 12,800 58 6

Other Animals

2001 1,047 662 63 19,207 5,514 29 8

1996 1,521 977 64 24,522 8,497 35 9

1991 1,411 832 59 19,340 5,870 30 7

Note: Intermediate hunters determined by total days, not type of hunting days (e.g., Small Game days).
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 17

Table 28. Intermediate Hunters by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

Total 14,063 100 10,262 100 13,975 100 10,916 100 13,034 100 9,969 100

Urban 6,631 47 4,854 47 6,402 46 5,121 47 5,873 45 4,628 46

Rural 7,432 53 5,408 53 7,574 54 5,795 53 7,161 55 5,341 54

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 13,975 100 10,916 100 13,034 100 9,969 100

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 2,123 15 1,723 16 1,803 14 1,414 14

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 5,660 41 4,544 42 5,946 46 4,615 46

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 6,192 44 4649 43 5,285 41 3,940 40

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available

Table 29. Intermediate Hunters by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

Total 14,063 10,262 73 13,975 10,916 78 13,034 9,969 76

Urban 6,631 4,854 73 6,402 5,121 80 5,873 4,628 79

Rural 7,432 5,408 73 7,574 5,795 77 7,161 5,341 75

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. 13,975 10,916 78 13,034 9,969 76

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 2,123 1,723 81 1,803 1,414 78

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 5,660 4,544 80 5,946 4,615 78

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. 6,192 4,649 75 5,285 3,940 75

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available
18 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Table 30. Intermediate Hunters by Age Group (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

Total 14,063 100 10,261 100 13,975 100 10,915 100 13,034 100 9,970 100

16-17 662 5 449 4 672 5 540 5 584 4 434 4

18-24 2,008 14 1,392 14 1,397 10 1,037 10 1,251 10 878 9

25-34 3,928 28 2,847 28 2,783 20 2,080 19 2,413 19 1,775 18

35-44 3,363 24 2,524 25 3,819 27 3,024 28 3,551 27 2,807 28

45-54 2,071 15 1,560 15 2,851 20 2,248 21 2,821 22 2,251 23

55-64 1,177 8 925 9 1,487 11 1,239 11 1,449 11 1,101 11

65 and older 836 6 564 5 967 7 747 7 965 7 724 7

Table 31. Intermediate Hunters by Age Group (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

Total 14,063 10,261 73 13,975 10,915 78 13,034 9,970 76

16-17 662 449 68 672 540 80 584 434 74

18-24 2,008 1,392 69 1,397 1,037 74 1,251 878 70

25-34 3,928 2,847 72 2,783 2,080 75 2,413 1,775 74

35-44 3,363 2,524 75 3,819 3,024 79 3,551 2,807 79

45-54 2,071 1,560 75 2,851 2,248 79 2,821 2,251 80

55-64 1,177 925 79 1,487 1,239 83 1,449 1,101 76

65 and older 836 564 67 967 747 77 965 724 75

Table 32. Intermediate Hunters by Median Income (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All

Participants

Percent

of Total

IntermediatePercent

of Total

All

Participants

Percent 

of Total

IntermediatePercent 

of Total

All

Participants

Percent

of Total

IntermediatePercent

of Total

Total 12,714 100 9,297 100 12,219 100 9,525 100 10,979 100 8,441 100

Below median 5,424 43 3,890 42 5,272 43 3,986 42 3,703 34 2,763 33

Above median 7,290 57 5,407 58 6,947 57 5,539 58 7,276 66 5,678 67

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income. 

Table 33. Intermediate Hunters by Median Income (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

All 

Participants

IntermediatePercent of

Participants

Total 12,714 9,297 73 12,219 9,525 78 10,979 8,441 77

Below median 5,424 3,890 72 5,272 3,986 76 3,703 2,763 75

Above median 7,290 5,407 74 6,947 5,539 80 7,276 5,678 78

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income. 
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 19

Trends in Casual Fishing and Hunting

Another interesting subgroup of 

anglers and hunters is the casuals, 

those people who participate one or two 

days in a year. Casuals barely made it 

into the field compared to their avid 

counterparts, and yet count as equal to 

avids in participation tallies. What are 

their behavior and sociodemographic 

characteristics?

People who went fishing one day in 

2001 made up 11% of all anglers. They 

participated 1% of all fishing days. 

Hunting is similar. 13% of all hunters 

went one or two days in 2001 which is 1% 

of all hunting days. 1991’s casual hunters 

contributed 2% of all hunting days, and 

1996’s went 1% of all hunting days. The 

definition of a casual angler is one who 

fished one day in the year and the casual 

hunter is one who hunted one or two days 

in the year.

As with all anglers, the number of casual 

anglers has decreased with each survey, 

from 4.9 million in 1991 to 3.8 million in 

1996 to 3.6 million in 2001. In contrast, 

the number of casual hunters decreased 

then stabilized, from 2.3 million to 1.6 

million to 1.7 million, compared to all 

hunters (14.1 million to 14.0 million to 

13.0 million). Both casual anglers and 

casual hunters had their biggest drop 

in numbers from 1991 to 1996, when the 

overall numbers of anglers and hunters 

remained the same. Further, the numbers 

of casual anglers and hunters roughly 

stabilized from 1996 to 2001 when 

overall angling and hunting dropped 

significantly. The trends in casual angling 

and hunting have run counter to the 

trends in overall angling and hunting.

Phyllis Cooper/USFWS
20 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Casual Anglers

In 2001 casual anglers made up 9% of 

both non-Great Lakes freshwater anglers 

and saltwater anglers. Casual anglers as 

a group did not specialize in one type of 

fishing, but participated in each in equal 

proportions. This finding is supported 

by the days data. 1% of all freshwater 

days were provided by casual anglers. 

The same was true of all saltwater days. 

Again, the casual angler fishes the same 

proportion of all days for both freshwater 

fishing and saltwater fishing, without 

preference for either. There was a slight 

preference for saltwater fishing in 1991 

and 1996.

One-third of casual anglers in 1991 

and 1996 (and 36% in 2001) resided 

in rural areas, compared to 39% of 

anglers as a whole in 1996 and 2001. 

A similar conclusion can be made using 

the Metropolitan Statistical Area 

information. The casual angler is less 

likely than the average angler to come 

from a rural area.

In 2001 the age group that had the most 

casual anglers was 35-44 year olds. This 

was also true for anglers as a whole (and 

avid and intermediate anglers). And 

again, in 1991 the age group that had 

the most casual participation was the 

25-34 year olds. The age group (after 

combining 16-17 and 18-24 year olds 

into one age group) that had the fewest 

casuals was 65 years old and older. This 

was the case with all anglers as well. The 

casual angler age distribution closely 

followed that of anglers as a whole.

Comparing 1991 and 2001 data, 16-34 

year olds made up more of the casual 

angler population in 1991 than in 2001 

(49% compared to 33%). By contrast, 45 

year olds and older were 28% of casual 

anglers in 1991, 37% in 1996, and 39% in 

2001. The overall angling population has 

aged from 1991 to 2001, and the casual 

angling population has followed suit.

In 2001 66% of all casual anglers had 

an above median household income and 

34% of all casual anglers had a household 

income less than the median. The casual 

angler income distribution approximately 

followed that of anglers as a whole for all 

three surveys.

Table 34. Casual Fishing Trends

(Numbers in thousands) Total

Participants

Casual

Participants

Percent of

Participants

Total

Days

Casual

Days

Percent 

of Days

Casual

Mean Days

Fishing

2001 34,070 3,595 11 557,394 3,595 1 1

1996 35,246 3,816 11 625,893 3,816 1 1

1991 35,578 4,862 14 511,329 4,862 1 1

Non-Great Lakes Freshwater

2001 27,913 2,389 9 443,247 2,404 1 1

1996 28,921 2,623 9 485,474 2,636 1 1

1991 30,186 3,548 12 430,922 4,066 1 1

Great Lakes

2001 1,847 100 5 23,138 100 (Z) 1

1996 2,039 139 7 20,095 139 1 1

1991 2,552 198 8 25,335 198 1 1

Saltwater

2001 9,051 851 9 90,838 853 1 1

1996 9,438 992 11 103,034 1,006 1 1

1991 8,885 1,120 13 74,696 1,246 2 1

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent.

Note: Casuals determined by total days, not type of fishing days (e.g., Great Lakes days).
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 21

Table 35. Casual Anglers by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

Total 35,578 100 4,862 100 35,246 100 3,816 100 34,070 100 3,595 100

Urban 22,368 63 3,199 66 21,618 61 2,521 66 20,925 61 2,297 64

Rural 13,210 37 1,663 34 13,628 39 1,295 34 13,146 39 1,298 36

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 35,246 100 3,815 100 34,070 100 3,595 100

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 7,637 22 1,073 28 6,676 20 665 18

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 17,012 48 1,680 44 17,714 52 2,035 57

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 10,584 30 1,062 28 9,680 28 895 25

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available

Table 36. Casual Anglers by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

Total 35,578 4,862 14 35,246 3,816 11 34,070 3,595 11

Urban 22,368 3,199 14 21,618 2,521 12 20,925 2,297 11

Rural 13,210 1,663 13 13,628 1,295 10 13,146 1,298 10

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. 35,246 3,815 11 34,070 3,595 11

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 7,637 1,073 14 6,676 665 10

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 17,012 1,680 10 17,714 2,035 11

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. 10,584 1,062 10 9,680 895 9

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available
22 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Table 37. Casual Anglers by Age Group (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

Total 35,578 100 4,862 100 35,246 100 3,816 100 34,070 100 3,595 100

16-17 1,481 4 198 4 1,406 4 151 4 1,319 4 149 4

18-24 4,589 13 659 14 3,321 9 389 10 2,931 9 270 8

25-34 9,927 28 1,492 31 7,175 20 700 18 6,578 19 750 21

35-44 8,583 24 1,150 24 9,673 27 1,178 31 9,047 27 1,009 28

45-54 4,891 14 513 11 7,020 20 722 19 6,940 20 692 19

55-64 3,270 9 407 8 3,537 10 379 10 4,168 12 443 12

65 and older 2,827 8 443 9 3,092 9 297 8 3,090 9 282 8

Table 38. Casual Anglers by Age Group (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

Total 35,578 4,862 14 35,246 3,816 11 34,070 3,595 11

16-17 1,481 198 13 1,406 151 11 1,319 149 11

18-24 4,589 659 14 3,321 389 12 2,931 270 9

25-34 9,927 1,492 15 7,175 700 10 6,578 750 11

35-44 8,583 1,150 13 9,673 1,178 12 9,047 1,009 11

45-54 4,891 513 10 7,020 722 10 6,940 692 10

55-64 3,270 407 12 3,537 379 11 4,168 443 11

65 and older 2,827 443 16 3,092 297 10 3,090 282 9

Table 39. Casual Anglers by Median Income (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

Total 32,351 100 4,389 100 30,980 100 3,230 100 28,851 100 2,998 100

Below median 13,301 41 1,848 42 13,516 44 1,340 41 9,793 34 1,020 34

Above median 19,050 59 2,541 58 17,464 56 1,890 59 19,058 66 1,978 66

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income. 

Table 40. Casual Anglers by Median Income (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

Total 32,351 4,389 14 30,980 3,230 10 28,851 2,998 10

Below median 13,301 1,848 14 13,516 1,340 10 9,793 1,020 10

Above median 19,050 2,541 13 17,464 1,890 11 19,058 1,978 10

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income. 
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 23

Casual Hunters

In 2001 casual hunters constituted 10% 

of big game hunters, 8% of small game 

hunters, 7% of migratory bird hunters, 

and 2% of other animal hunters. Big 

game hunting was the biggest draw for 

casual hunters, as it was for all hunters. 

Looking at this trend over the last 

three surveys, it is interesting that in 

1991 the participation rate of casuals in 

big game hunting was matched by the 

participation rate of both small game 

and migratory bird casual hunting 

whereas small game and migratory 

bird hunting participation dropped 

in 2001 more than big game hunting 

participation. There are two points to be 

made about the changes in small game 

and migratory bird hunting from 1991 

to 2001. The 29% drop in overall small 

game hunting from 1991 to 2001 was 

reflected in the three subgroups, led 

by the 47% drop in small game hunting 

by casuals. However, migratory bird 

hunting remained level from 1991-2001, 

with the drop in casuals of 37% balanced 

by a 10% increase in intermediate 

migratory bird hunters.

1% of all hunting days in 2001 was 

provided by casual hunters. Casual 

hunters contributed 1% of big game, 

1% of migratory bird, 1% of small game, 

and less than 0.5% of other animal 

hunting days. In 1991, casual hunters 

accounted for 2% of all hunting days, as 

well as 2% of big game, small game, and 

migratory bird hunting days, and 1% of 

other animal days. The casual hunter 

did not participate as much in 2001 as in 

1991, which partly explains the change in 

hunting participation numbers, although 

their influence on total hunting days is 

very small.

The discussion of the sociodemographic 

characteristics of casual hunters 

begins with the urban/rural residence 

of participants. In 2001, 50% of all 

casual hunters resided in rural areas, 

compared to 55% of hunters as a whole 

living in rural areas. This pattern of 

casual hunters tending to be more urban 

than hunters as a whole held in 1991 

and 1996 as well. Furthermore, 14% 

of urban-based hunters were casual in 

2001, compared to 19% in 1991. 12% of 

rural-based hunters were casual in 2001, 

compared to 14% in 1991. This means 

that while the number of casual hunters 

declined from 1991 to 2001, the number 

of urban-based casual hunters declined 

more than rural-based casual hunters.

Table 41. Casual Hunting Trends

(Numbers in thousands) Total

Participants

Casual

Participants

Percent of

Participants

Total

Days

Casual

Days

Percent 

of Days

Casual

Mean Days

Hunting, total

2001 13,034 1,672 13 228,368 2,607 1 2

1996 13,975 1,606 11 256,676 2,541 1 2

1991 14,063 2,301 16 235,806 3,559 2 2

Big Game

2001 10,911 1,054 10 153,191 1,673 1 2

1996 11,288 989 9 153,784 1,576 1 2

1991 10,745 1,184 11 128,411 1,989 2 2

Small Game

2001 5,434 443 8 60,142 633 1 1

1996 6,945 452 7 75,117 662 1 1

1991 7,642 836 11 77,132 1,261 2 2

Migratory Birds

2001 2,956 214 7 29,310 310 1 1

1996 3,073 170 6 26,501 254 1 1

1991 3,009 338 11 22,235 504 2 1

Other Animals

2001 1,047 19 2 19,207 27 (Z) 1

1996 1,521 54 4 24,522 80 (Z) 1

1991 1,411 45 3 19,340 189 1 4

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent.

Note: Casuals determined by total days, not type of hunting days (e.g., Small Game days).
24 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

When the 16-17 and 18-24 year old age 

cohorts are combined, the age group 

with the fewest number of casual hunters 

in 2001 was the 65 years old and older 

cohort. 10% of casual hunters were 65 

years old and older, compared to 7% of 

hunters as a whole. The age group with 

the most casual hunters was the 35-44 

year olds in 2001, compared to 1991 

when it was the 25-34 year olds. As with 

hunters as a whole, the casual hunter in 

2001 tended to be older than in 1991.

Casual hunters had a stronger tendency 

toward having higher incomes in 2001 

than in 1991 or 1996. Only 32% of casual 

hunters had a below median household 

income in 2001, similar to the 34% of 

hunters as a whole who had below median 

income. If one is trying to find hunters 

among the general population, above 

median income is a determinant in casual 

(and intermediate) hunting levels. But if 

one is trying to find casual hunters in the 

general hunter population, above median 

income is no help in selecting casual (and 

intermediate) hunters, since hunters as a 

whole tend to have above median income. 

In short, casual (and intermediate) 

hunters had income distributions that 

closely followed that of hunters as a 

whole. This conclusion also holds for 

1991 and 1996. 

The percentages of below and above 

median income for hunters as a whole 

in 1991 and 1996 were 43% and 57% 

respectively, compared to 2001’s 34% 

below median income and 66% above 

median income. The tendency toward 

above median income by hunters held in 

each survey, but it was more pronounced 

in 2001.

Table 42. Casual Hunters by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

Total 14,063 100 2,300 100 13,975 100 1,606 100 13,034 100 1,672 100

Urban 6,631 47 1,270 55 6,402 46 805 50 5,873 45 843 50

Rural 7,432 53 1,030 45 7,573 54 801 50 7,161 55 829 50

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 13,975 100 1,606 100 13,034 100 1,672 100

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 2,120 15 319 20 1,792 14 290 17

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 5,637 40 535 33 5,889 45 761 46

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 6,192 44 752 47 5,285 41 621 37

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available

Table 43. Casual Hunters by Urban/Rural Residence (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Urban/Rural Cohorts

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

Total 14,063 2,300 16 13,975 1,606 11 13,034 1,672 13

Urban 6,631 1,270 19 6,402 805 13 5,873 843 14

Rural 7,432 1,030 14 7,573 801 11 7,161 829 12

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (1)

Total N.A. N.A. N.A. 13,975 1,606 11 13,034 1,672 13

In MSA in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 2,120 319 15 1,792 290 16

In MSA not in Central City N.A. N.A. N.A. 5,637 535 9 5,889 761 13

Not MSA N.A. N.A. N.A. 6,192 752 12 5,285 621 12

(1) A town, county, or group of towns or counties with a population of at least 50,000. Each MSA must contain a central city. MSA’s are determined by the Bureau 

of Census, unlike the urban/rural designation, which is determined by each respondent independently.

N.A. Not available
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 25

Table 44. Casual Hunters by Age Group (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total Casual

Percent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total Casual

Percent 

of Total

All 

Participants

Percent 

of Total Casual

Percent 

of Total

Total 14,063 100 2,300 100 13,975 100 1,606 100 13,034 100 1,671 100

16-17 662 5 139 6 672 5 67 4 584 4 78 5

18-24 2,008 14 351 15 1,397 10 169 11 1,251 10 216 13

25-34 3,928 28 636 28 2,783 20 322 20 2,413 19 338 20

35-44 3,363 24 479 21 3,819 27 414 26 3,551 27 401 24

45-54 2,071 15 313 14 2,851 20 315 20 2,821 22 293 18

55-64 1,177 8 181 8 1,487 11 143 9 1,449 11 178 11

65 and older 836 6 201 9 967 7 176 11 965 7 167 10

Table 45. Casual Hunters by Age Group (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Age Cohorts

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All 

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

Total 14,063 2,300 16 13,975 1,606 11 13,034 1,671 13

16-17 662 139 21 672 67 10 584 78 13

18-24 2,008 351 17 1,397 169 12 1,251 216 17

25-34 3,928 636 16 2,783 322 12 2,413 338 14

35-44 3,363 479 14 3,819 414 11 3,551 401 11

45-54 2,071 313 15 2,851 315 11 2,821 293 10

55-64 1,177 181 15 1,487 143 10 1,449 178 12

65 and older 836 201 24 967 176 18 965 167 17

Table 46. Casual Hunters by Median Income (With Percent of Totals)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

All

Participants

Percent

of Total Casual

Percent

of Total

Total 12,714 100 2,062 100 12,219 100 1,417 100 10,979 100 1,377 100

Below median 5,424 43 900 44 5,272 43 654 46 3,703 34 446 32

Above median 7,290 57 1,162 56 6,947 57 763 54 7,276 66 931 68

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income. 

Table 47. Casual Hunters by Median Income (With Percent of Participants)

(Numbers in thousands)

1991 1996 2001

Household income

All

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

All

Participants Casual

Percent of

Participants

Total 12,714 2,062 16 12,219 1,417 12 10,979 1,377 13

Below median 5,424 900 17 5,272 654 12 3,703 446 12

Above median 7,290 1,162 16 6,947 763 11 7,276 931 13

Note: “All Participants” totals do not match totals from other non-income tables because all respondents did not report their income. 
26 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Comparison of Avid, Intermediate, and 

Casual Participants

Going into this research, the assumption 

was that avid participants would 

be markedly different from casual 

participants. Indeed, the difference in 

average days is huge. But what about 

the circumstances of the participants’ 

age and urban/rural status? What 

about household income? What are the 

differences there?

Figures 4, 5, and 6 illustrate avid, 

intermediate, and casual angling in 

1991, 1996, and 2001. The year with the 

most casuals was 1991, when 4.9 million 

anglers fished only one day. This dropped 

significantly in 1996 to 3.8 million. 

The increase in intermediate anglers 

maintained the overall level of angling for 

1996 compared to 1991. Of note for 2001 

is the drop in intermediate anglers, from 

27.7 million in 1996 to 26.6 million in 2001. 

This was not compensated by an increase 

in avid or casual angling, so overall 

angling decreased from 1996 to 2001.

Figure 4. 1991 Fishing 

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 5. 1996 Fishing 

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 6. 2001 Fishing 

(Numbers in thousands)

Avids 3,705

Casuals 4,862 Intermediates 26,835

Avids 3,361

Intermediates 27,724 Casuals 3,816

Avids 3,544

Casuals 3,595 Intermediates 26,589

Total 35.6 million anglers

Total 35.2 million anglers

Total 34.1 million anglers
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 27

Figures 7, 8, and 9 graphically illustrate 

the hunting subgroups for the three 

survey years. As with fishing, there 

was a significant drop in casual 

participation from 1991 to 1996 which 

was compensated by an increase in 

intermediate hunting. And again as in 

fishing, there was a drop in intermediate 

hunters from 1996 to 2001 which was not 

counterbalanced by an increase in avid or 

casual hunting.

Figure 7. 1991 Hunting

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 8. 1996 Hunting

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 9. 2001 Hunting

(Numbers in thousands)

Avids 1,412

Casuals 2,301

Intermediates 10,261

Avids 1,385

Intermediates 10,915 Casuals 1,606

Avids 1,299

Casuals 1,671 Intermediates 9,970

Total 14.1 million hunters

Total 14.0 million hunters

Total 13.0 million hunters
28 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

For fishing, the age cohort with the most 

participants was 25-34 year olds for all 

three groups in 1991, and 35-44 year olds 

for all three groups in 1996 and 2001. The 

age group with the fewest participants 

for all three subgroups was 65 years old 

and older for all three surveys (there was 

one exception: the 55-64 year old group 

was smaller than the 65 year old and 

older group for casual anglers in 1991).

In addition to comparing the number of 

participants by age cohort, comparing 

the percentage of age cohorts that are 

avid, intermediate, and casual anglers 

yields insights. Keeping in mind that 10% 

of all anglers in each survey year were 

avid, one looks for the age cohorts in 

which there is variation from this overall 

norm. The pattern that stands out for 

avids is the age group with the lowest 

percentage of avidity across surveys: 

35-44 year olds consistently have the 

lowest percentage of avids for angling. 

The fact that this age group also provided 

the most avids in 1996 and 2001 is due to 

35-44 year olds being the biggest group 

of anglers for those years. There is no 

noteworthy variation across age groups 

for intermediates or casuals.

Figure 10. 1991 Fishing 

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 11. 1996 Fishing 

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 12. 2001 Fishing 

(Numbers in thousands)

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

������

����� ������������� �������

����� ����� ����� ����� ����� ������������

����������������������

����������

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

������

����� ������������� �������

����� ����� ����� ����� ����� ������������

����������������������

����������

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

������

����� ������������� �������

����� ����� ����� ����� ����� ������������

����������������������

����������
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 29

Avid, intermediate, and casual anglers 

were more likely to live in urban areas. 

A range of 53-56% of avids, 62-63% of 

intermediates, and 64-66% of casuals 

lived in urban areas the three surveyed 

years. These percentages show that 

anglers are more likely urban-based, 

although not as likely as the average 

American. The general American 

population’s urban-based range is 

72-74%.5 Avids tended to be less urban 

than the other two subgroups, but were 

still more likely to be urbanites than 

ruralites.

5

 Source: 1991, 1996, and 2001 National 

Reports of Fishing, Hunting, and WildlifeAssociated Recreation. They can be accessed 

at http://fa.r9.fws.gov/surveys/surveys.html

Figure 13. 1991 Fishing 

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 14. 1996 Fishing 

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 15. 2001 Fishing 

(Numbers in thousands)

�

�����

������

������

������

������

����� ������������� �������

����� �����

�����������������

�

�����

������

������

������

������

����� ������������� �������

����� �����

�����������������

�

�����

������

������

������

������

����� ������������� �������

����� �����

�����������������
30 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

For hunting, the age cohort with the most 

participants was 25-34 year olds for avids, 

intermediates, and casuals in 1991, and 

35-44 year olds for the three groups in 

1996 and 2001. The age group with the 

fewest participants was 65 years old and 

older for nearly all three subgroups for 

all three surveys (the exception was in 

1991 and 1996 when the 55-64 year old 

group numbered fewer than the 65 year 

old and older group for casual hunters).

Another approach is to compare 

percentages of age cohorts that are 

avid, intermediate, and casual hunters. 

The age group that had the lowest 

avidity percentage (and highest casual 

percentage) across the three surveys 

is the 65 year old and older cohort (in 

1991 the 55-64 year old group joined 

them). The age group that consistently 

rated above the overall norm in avidity 

was the 18-34 year olds. If people 18-34 

years old decide to hunt, they are more 

likely to hunt a lot. 35-44 year olds have 

been at or slightly under the national 

norm in avidity percentage. As for casual 

hunting, the age group with the lowest 

percentage in 1991 was the 35-44 year 

old group, and ten years later in 2001 

it was the 45-54 year olds. Finally, the 

highest intermediate hunters percentage 

in 2001 was the 45-54 year olds and the 

lowest was the 18-24 year olds. In 1991 

the lowest percentage was that of the 65 

year old and older hunters, and in 1996 it 

was the 18-24 year olds. There has been 

a significant decline in participation by 

the 18-24 year old group, as also noted 

in the 1996 Survey trends report, “1980-

1995 Participation in Fishing, Hunting, 

and Wildlife Watching,” Washington, 

D.C. 1999.

Figure 16. 1991 Hunting

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 17. 1996 Hunting

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 18. 2001 Hunting

(Numbers in thousands)

�

���

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

����� ������������� �������

����� ����� ����� ����� ����� ������������

�����������������

����������

�

���

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

����� ������������� �������

����� ����� ����� ����� ����� ������������

�����������������

����������

�

���

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

����� ������������� �������

����� ����� ����� ����� ����� ������������

�����������������

����������
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 31

A significant area where there were 

differences among subcategories 

for hunting was the urban/rural 

demographic. Casual hunters in 1996 and 

2001 lived in urban areas and rural areas 

equally and in 1991 lived more in urban 

areas than in rural areas. But for the 

intermediate and avid hunting groups in 

the three surveyed years, the majority 

(53%) of the intermediates and the strong 

majority (nearly 70%) of avids lived in 

rural areas.

Figure 19. 1991 Hunting

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 20. 1996 Hunting

(Numbers in thousands)

Figure 21. 2001 Hunting

(Numbers in thousands)

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

����� ������������� �������

����� �����

�����������������

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

����� ������������� �������

����� �����

�����������������

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

����� ������������� �������

����� �����

�����������������
32 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Number of In-State Anglers and Hunters

State trends in fishing and hunting 

do not necessarily follow national 

trends. National fishing and hunting 

participation trends encompass a wide 

variation at the state level.

For example, while national fishing 

participation fell 4% from 1991 to 2001, in 

North Dakota fishing increased 81% and 

in Michigan fishing decreased 23%. The 

three states with the largest increases 

were North Dakota, Utah (63%), and 

Alaska (36%, 25% for freshwater anglers, 

48% for saltwater anglers), all western 

states with small populations and 

significant wilderness expanse. The one 

other state with a significant increase 

in fishing activity was Florida, with a 

16% uptick (interestingly, this increase 

is solely due to the increase in saltwater 

anglers). The eastern seaboard states 

of New York, New Jersey, and North 

Carolina saw significant decreases in 

fishing. Two states with a 16% drop in 

participation from 1991 to 2001, New 

York (-28% for freshwater anglers and 

-17% for saltwater anglers) and New 

Jersey (-19% for freshwater anglers 

and -23% for saltwater anglers), are 

states that abut each other. Another 

state with a significant decrease is North 

Carolina, with a 13% downturn (-17% 

for freshwater anglers and +5% for 

saltwater anglers). The changes for all 

other states were not significant, which 

means the apparent upturn or downturn 

in fishing activity may not be a real 

change, but instead due to sampling 

factors.

Part Two – State Trends

Table 48. State Freshwater Fishing Participation Trends 

(In-state participation, numbers in thousands)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 31,041 29,734 -4 28,439 -4 -8

Alabama 831 843 1 732 -13 -12

Alaska 213 313 47 266 -15 25

Arizona 480 483 1 419 -13 -13

Arkansas 769 739 -4 782 6 2

California 2,118 2,175 3 1,865 -14 -12

Colorado 778 787 1 915 16 18

Connecticut 255 318 25 254 -20 (Z)

Delaware 45 66 47 73 11 62

Florida 1,311 1,137 -13 1,316 16 (Z)

Georgia 1,066 967 -9 1,017 5 -5

Hawaii 32 22 -31 12 -45 -63

Idaho 365 474 30 416 -12 14

Illinois 1,359 1,351 -1 1,237 -8 -9

Indiana 986 992 1 874 -12 -11

Iowa 556 477 -14 542 14 -3

Kansas 453 341 -25 404 18 -11

Kentucky 766 772 1 780 1 2

Louisiana 785 815 4 659 -19 -16

Maine 361 290 -20 272 -6 -25

Maryland 392 319 -19 367 15 -6

Massachusetts 373 377 1 325 -14 -13

Michigan 1,762 1,824 4 1,354 -26 -23

Minnesota 1,450 1,538 6 1,624 6 12

Mississippi 565 487 -14 494 1 -13

Missouri 1,329 1,138 -14 1,215 7 -9

Montana 342 329 -4 349 6 2

Nebraska 252 247 -2 296 20 17

Nevada 171 219 28 172 -21 1

New Hampshire 267 237 -11 221 -7 -17

New Jersey 411 428 4 331 -23 -19

New Mexico 281 312 11 314 1 12

New York 1,454 1,295 -11 1,052 -19 -28

North Carolina 1,019 1,009 -1 848 -16 -17

North Dakota 99 90 -9 179 99 81

Ohio 1,515 1,231 -19 1,371 11 -10

Oklahoma 804 891 11 774 -13 -4

Oregon 605 589 -3 611 4 1

Pennsylvania 1,397 1,277 -9 1,266 -1 -9

Rhode Island 66 72 9 51 -29 -23

South Carolina 645 716 11 591 -17 -8

South Dakota 158 213 35 214 (Z) 35

Tennessee 996 767 -23 903 18 -9

Texas 2,074 2,147 4 1,842 -14 -11

Utah 317 397 25 517 30 63

Vermont 181 176 -3 171 -3 -6

Virginia 780 761 -2 721 -5 -8

Washington 681 768 13 659 -14 -3

West Virginia 339 323 -5 318 -2 -6

Wisconsin 1,470 1,474 (Z) 1,412 -4 -4

Wyoming 301 379 26 293 -23 -3

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 33

Table 49. State Saltwater Fishing Participation Trends

(In-state participation, numbers in thousands)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 8,885 9,438 6 9,051 -4 2

Alabama 137 160 17 167 4 22

Alaska 183 283 55 271 -4 48

California 1,057 1,049 -1 932 -11 -12

Connecticut 145 178 23 161 -10 11

Delaware 130 148 14 88 -41 -32

Florida 2,051 2,255 10 2,437 8 19

Georgia 72 137 90 98 -28 36

Hawaii 192 244 27 144 -41 -25

Louisiana 240 346 44 504 46 110

Maine 143 106 -26 150 42 5

Maryland 431 498 16 370 -26 -14

Massachusetts 393 429 9 376 -12 -4

Mississippi 148 121 -18 106 -12 -28

New Hampshire 75 46 -39 70 52 -7

New Jersey 746 841 13 572 -32 -23

New York 491 476 -3 406 -15 -17

North Carolina 626 770 23 657 -15 5

Oregon 225 162 -28 183 13 -19

Rhode Island 125 108 -14 149 38 19

South Carolina 298 382 28 348 -9 17

Texas 828 862 4 860 (Z) 4

Virginia 339 377 11 385 2 14

Washington 504 378 -25 386 2 -23

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent
34 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

The 7% drop in the number of hunters 

nationally from 1991 to 2001 saw 

extremes of a 42% increase in hunters in 

South Dakota and a 39% drop in hunters 

in both California and Massachusetts. 

Three states experienced significant 

increases in hunting activity, South 

Dakota (largely due to non-big game 

hunting6), Arkansas (37%, with big game 

hunting increasing 29% and non-big game 

hunting 42%), and Minnesota (30%, with 

big game hunting increasing 47% and 

non-big game hunting decreasing 16%).

States with statistically significant 

hunting downturns were California (big 

game decreased 34% and non-big game 

hunting decreased 50%), Massachusetts 

(big game hunting decreased 32% and 

non-big game hunting decreased 52%), 

Illinois (-31%, with big game hunting a 

mere -4% and non-big game hunting a 

whopping -58%), Iowa (-26%, with big 

game hunting dropping 11% and non-big 

game hunting decreasing 34%), North 

Carolina (-26%, with big game hunting 

-22% and non-big game hunting -33%), 

and Ohio (-20%, with big game hunting 

increasing 8% and non-big game hunting 

decreasing 31%). All other states had 

statistically insignificant changes in 

hunting activity.

Table 50. State Big Game Hunting Participation Trends 

(In-state participation, numbers in thousands)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 10,745 11,288 5 10,911 -3 2

Alabama 262 279 6 392 41 50

Alaska 60 64 7 84 31 40

Arizona 103 100 -3 81 -19 -21

Arkansas 249 298 20 322 8 29

California 195 294 51 129 -56 -34

Colorado 286 411 44 235 -43 -18

Connecticut 30 43 43 33 -23 10

Delaware 16 28 75 11 -61 -31

Florida 191 159 -17 188 18 -2

Georgia 329 322 -2 342 6 4

Hawaii 16 20 25 15 -25 -6

Idaho 160 215 34 156 -27 -3

Illinois 256 264 3 245 -7 -4

Indiana 206 262 27 215 -18 4

Iowa 156 203 30 139 -32 -11

Kansas 71 114 61 159 39 124

Kentucky 209 282 35 264 -6 26

Louisiana 203 228 12 212 -7 4

Maine 158 172 9 156 -9 -1

Maryland 102 111 9 126 14 24

Massachusetts 85 76 -11 58 -24 -32

Michigan 757 855 13 680 -20 -10

Minnesota 336 486 45 493 1 47

Mississippi 305 352 15 295 -16 -3

Missouri 411 457 11 423 -7 3

Montana 202 161 -20 206 28 2

Nebraska 67 77 15 89 16 33

Nevada 28 28 (Z) 25 -11 -11

New Hampshire 62 66 6 71 8 15

New Jersey 101 75 -26 111 48 10

New Mexico 87 73 -16 112 53 29

New York 666 596 -11 664 11 (Z)

North Carolina 288 266 -8 224 -16 -22

North Dakota 58 59 2 74 25 28

Ohio 390 322 -17 422 31 8

Oklahoma 130 226 74 212 -6 63

Oregon 223 254 14 226 -11 1

Pennsylvania 969 816 -16 956 17 -1

Rhode Island 16 20 25 6 -70 -63

South Carolina 184 245 33 217 -11 18

South Dakota 69 79 14 75 -5 9

Tennessee 231 277 20 262 -5 13

Texas 739 775 5 888 15 20

Utah 151 118 -22 171 45 13

Vermont 93 91 -2 94 3 1

Virginia 328 332 1 322 -3 -2

Washington 197 233 18 187 -20 -5

West Virginia 308 352 14 269 -24 -13

Wisconsin 672 584 -13 606 4 -10

Wyoming 123 109 -11 110 1 -11

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent

6

 Due to sample size considerations, hunting 

at the state level is divided into big game and 

non-big game hunting.
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 35

Table 51. State Non-Big Game Hunting Participation Trends

(In-state participation, numbers in thousands)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 9,065 8,445 -7 7,098 -16 -22

Alabama 226 160 -29 170 6 -25

Alaska 33 38 17 27 -29 -17

Arizona 112 105 -6 103 -2 -8

Arkansas 190 255 34 268 5 41

California 378 391 4 188 -52 -50

Colorado 121 141 17 107 -24 -12

Connecticut 39 31 -20 24 -24 -39

Delaware 21 27 30 10 -64 -53

Florida 162 81 -50 120 49 -26

Georgia 199 218 10 201 -8 1

Hawaii 5 10 80 8 -18 48

Idaho 91 111 22 85 -23 -7

Illinois 332 312 -6 141 -55 -58

Indiana 253 213 -16 170 -20 -33

Iowa 277 292 6 183 -37 -34

Kansas 218 241 11 231 -4 6

Kentucky 289 252 -13 180 -28 -38

Louisiana 262 290 11 230 -21 -12

Maine 72 91 28 71 -22 -1

Maryland 97 86 -11 83 -3 -14

Massachusetts 71 45 -37 35 -23 -52

Michigan 421 493 17 245 -50 -42

Minnesota 295 349 18 342 -2 16

Mississippi 226 261 15 214 -18 -6

Missouri 331 344 4 207 -40 -38

Montana 74 74 (Z) 62 -16 -16

Nebraska 153 148 -3 130 -12 -15

Nevada 41 36 -13 37 5 -9

New Hampshire 40 45 11 27 -40 -34

New Jersey 93 48 -49 67 41 -28

New Mexico 41 39 -5 48 22 16

New York 362 285 -21 342 20 -5

North Carolina 265 276 4 177 -36 -33

North Dakota 73 52 -28 104 99 42

Ohio 486 347 -29 337 -3 -31

Oklahoma 195 179 -8 157 -12 -19

Oregon 84 115 37 86 -25 2

Pennsylvania 628 458 -27 500 9 -20

Rhode Island 16 13 -18 6 -53 -62

South Carolina 132 163 23 142 -12 8

South Dakota 129 154 20 219 42 71

Tennessee 278 279 (Z) 226 -19 -19

Texas 704 519 -26 797 54 13

Utah 71 63 -11 93 48 31

Vermont 61 49 -20 34 -31 -45

Virginia 275 187 -32 153 -18 -44

Washington 134 147 10 101 -31 -24

West Virginia 212 198 -7 135 -32 -36

Wisconsin 335 343 3 239 -30 -29

Wyoming 35 52 48 44 -14 28

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent
36 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Number of Fishing and Hunting Days

The number of fishing days rose 9% 

from 1991 to 2001 nationally. At the state 

level there were significant drops in 

only two states: Pennsylvania’s 25% and 

Michigan’s 24% decreases. Four states 

had significant increases: Utah’s 96%, 

Minnesota’s 66%, Colorado’s 47%, and 

Florida’s 28% (with freshwater’s 35% 

increase and saltwater’s 33%).

Table 52. State Freshwater Fishing Days Trend

(In-state participation, numbers in thousands)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 439,536 515,115 17 466,984 -9 6

Alabama 11,215 14,256 27 9,877 -31 -12

Alaska 2,086 3,602 73 2,110 -41 1

Arizona 4,074 4,689 15 4,246 -9 4

Arkansas 11,002 9,661 -12 13,006 35 18

California 18,712 28,987 55 19,385 -33 4

Colorado 6,284 8,232 31 9,267 13 47

Connecticut 3,460 3,880 12 3,516 -9 2

Delaware 569 980 72 609 -38 7

Florida 15,465 18,409 19 20,840 13 35

Georgia 15,341 12,857 -16 13,076 2 -15

Hawaii 207 189 -9 194 3 -6

Idaho 3,157 4,411 40 4,070 -8 29

Illinois 16,808 20,459 22 16,133 -21 -4

Indiana 12,306 15,811 28 14,192 -10 15

Iowa 6,062 7,062 16 7,485 6 23

Kansas 4,981 6,355 28 5,662 -11 14

Kentucky 9,895 9,631 -3 12,394 29 25

Louisiana 12,026 18,493 54 8,419 -54 -30

Maine 3,960 4,108 4 3,422 -17 -14

Maryland 4,354 4,290 -1 4,269 (Z) -2

Massachusetts 6,011 6,746 12 4,560 -32 -24

Michigan 25,319 28,709 13 19,320 -33 -24

Minnesota 18,080 27,002 49 30,083 11 66

Mississippi 8,338 8,213 -1 8,466 3 2

Missouri 15,136 14,682 -3 13,279 -10 -12

Montana 3,156 2,617 -17 4,068 55 29

Nebraska 2,734 3,004 10 3,204 7 17

Nevada 1,218 1,976 62 1,575 -20 29

New Hampshire 2,720 3,139 15 2,871 -9 6

New Jersey 5,911 6,021 2 5,553 -8 -6

New Mexico 1,943 2,836 46 2,485 -12 28

New York N.A. 21,010 N.A. 17,379 -17 N.A.

North Carolina 13,015 15,831 22 12,073 -24 -7

North Dakota 993 1,321 33 2,186 65 120

Ohio 18,880 17,848 -5 19,882 11 5

Oklahoma 12,079 14,674 21 12,741 -13 5

Oregon 6,490 7,118 10 7,895 11 22

Pennsylvania 24,313 20,901 -14 18,313 -12 -25

Rhode Island 1,049 1,347 28 649 -52 -38

South Carolina 9,329 11,342 22 8,713 -23 -7

South Dakota 1,722 2,748 60 2,984 9 73

Tennessee 13,690 11,317 -17 15,035 33 10

Texas 29,092 37,575 29 25,650 -32 -12

Utah 2,672 3,926 47 5,238 33 96

Vermont 2,258 1,951 -14 2,321 19 3

Virginia 10,504 9,282 -12 10,849 17 3

Washington 8,583 10,975 28 9,800 -11 14

West Virginia 4,107 5,040 23 4,152 -18 1

Wisconsin 21,257 17,130 -19 22,042 29 4

Wyoming 2,348 2,415 3 2,497 3 6

N.A. Not available

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 37

Table 53. State Saltwater Fishing Days Trend 

(In-state participation, numbers in thousands)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 74,696 103,034 38 90,838 -12 22

Alabama 1,173 1,561 33 1,340 -14 14

Alaska 1,066 1,949 83 1,531 -21 44

California 5,499 7,302 33 8,345 14 52

Connecticut 1,226 1,747 42 1,398 -20 14

Delaware 759 1,612 112 698 -57 -8

Florida 22,634 25,140 11 30,123 20 33

Georgia 606 993 64 467 -53 -23

Hawaii 2,189 2,901 33 2,567 -12 17

Louisiana 2,612 2,083 -20 4,673 124 79

Maine 843 989 17 727 -26 -14

Maryland 2,526 5,264 108 3,169 -40 25

Massachusetts 3,282 3,954 20 3,304 -16 1

Mississippi 807 1,443 79 988 -32 22

New Hampshire 293 314 7 320 2 9

New Jersey 6,071 10,366 71 5,114 -51 -16

New York 3,598 5,151 43 4,430 -14 23

North Carolina 3,525 5,677 61 3,402 -40 -3

Oregon 1,072 870 -19 953 10 -11

Rhode Island 1,091 947 -13 1,508 59 38

South Carolina 1,556 2,451 58 2,013 -18 29

Texas 6,823 13,030 91 7,538 -42 10

Virginia 1,853 5,156 178 3,279 -36 77

Washington 3,557 2,135 -40 2,941 38 -17
38 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

The number of hunting days nationally 

declined a statistically insignificant 3% 

from 1991 to 2001. Three states had 

significant increases: Utah with 81% (27% 

big game hunting, 235% non-big game 

hunting), Minnesota with 61% (117% big 

game, 29% non-big game), and Arkansas 

with 53% (80% big game, 46% non-big 

game). Four states had significant losses: 

Michigan’s -40% (-29% big game, -48% 

non-big game), California’s -34% (-42% 

big game, -26% non-big game), Illinois’ 

-34% (24% big game, -63% non-big game), 

and Virginia’s -33% (-17% big game, -54% 

non-big game).

Table 54. State Big Game Hunting Days Trend 

(In-state participation, numbers in thousands)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 128,411 153,784 20 153,191 (Z) 19

Alabama 3,705 5,276 42 6,658 26 80

Alaska 612 748 22 944 26 54

Arizona 886 681 -23 860 26 -3

Arkansas 3,194 4,631 45 5,740 24 80

California 2,225 2,773 25 1,285 -54 -42

Colorado 1,934 3,004 55 1,634 -46 -16

Connecticut 491 607 24 522 -14 6

Delaware 162 407 151 158 -61 -2

Florida 2,820 4,189 49 3,493 -17 24

Georgia 4,419 5,323 20 6,131 15 39

Hawaii 191 193 1 285 48 49

Idaho 1,248 2,085 67 1,384 -34 11

Illinois 2,632 3,628 38 3,274 -10 24

Indiana 3,212 3,602 12 2,696 -25 -16

Iowa 1,188 1,764 48 1,449 -18 22

Kansas 681 1,184 74 1,570 33 131

Kentucky 2,032 2,380 17 2,828 19 39

Louisiana 3,138 3,348 7 4,365 30 39

Maine 1,496 2,529 69 2,021 -20 35

Maryland 1,434 1,321 -8 1,350 2 -6

Massachusetts 558 702 26 683 -3 22

Michigan 9,219 11,227 22 6,532 -42 -29

Minnesota 2,245 2,883 28 4,869 69 117

Mississippi 5,767 6,210 8 7,196 16 25

Missouri 3,513 5,127 46 4,591 -10 31

Montana 1,983 1,235 -38 1,797 46 -9

Nebraska 479 703 47 763 9 59

Nevada 213 172 -19 169 -2 -21

New Hampshire 688 783 14 1,127 44 64

New Jersey 1,222 1,169 -4 2,813 141 130

New Mexico 600 387 -36 711 84 19

New York 8,297 8,166 -2 10,864 33 31

North Carolina 4,145 4,286 3 5,117 19 23

North Dakota 346 390 13 574 47 66

Ohio 3,505 3,927 12 4,290 9 22

Oklahoma 1,719 2,877 67 3,465 20 102

Oregon 1,905 2,781 46 2,500 -10 31

Pennsylvania 9,606 8,973 -7 8,816 -2 -8

Rhode Island 187 424 127 65 -85 -65

South Carolina 2,703 4,750 76 3,757 -21 39

South Dakota 458 684 49 534 -22 17

Tennessee 3,544 4,340 22 4,112 -5 16

Texas 7,667 11,122 45 8,868 -20 16

Utah 983 830 -16 1,252 51 27

Vermont 1,037 1,158 12 1,218 5 17

Virginia 5,216 5,132 -2 4,305 -16 -17

Washington 1,780 2,829 59 1,841 -35 3

West Virginia 3,364 3,933 17 3,167 -19 -6

Wisconsin 6,936 5,804 -16 7,505 29 8

Wyoming 826 1,105 34 1,001 -9 21

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 39

Table 55. State Non-Big Game Hunting Days Trend 

(In-state participation, numbers in thousands)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 118,709 126,140 6 108,659 -14 -8

Alabama 2,309 1,981 -14 1,689 -15 -27

Alaska 349 496 42 305 -39 -13

Arizona 762 1,151 51 1,067 -7 40

Arkansas 2,452 4,494 83 3,590 -20 46

California 3,428 5,630 64 2,532 -55 -26

Colorado 883 1,561 77 1,253 -20 42

Connecticut 369 344 -7 296 -14 -20

Delaware 254 397 56 92 -77 -64

Florida 1,948 816 -58 1,807 121 -7

Georgia 1,806 2,106 17 2,811 33 56

Hawaii 56 130 132 107 -18 91

Idaho 1,034 1,805 75 1,028 -43 -1

Illinois 4,416 3,422 -23 1,614 -53 -63

Indiana 4,383 2,745 -37 3,056 11 -30

Iowa 3,031 3,906 29 2,875 -26 -5

Kansas 2,324 3,498 51 2,682 -23 15

Kentucky 4,326 3,519 -19 2,586 -27 -40

Louisiana 3,751 4,328 15 2,665 -38 -29

Maine 1,020 1,344 32 813 -40 -20

Maryland 926 515 -44 615 19 -34

Massachusetts 939 745 -21 729 -2 -22

Michigan 6,479 7,619 18 3,378 -56 -48

Minnesota 3,350 4,403 31 4,323 -2 29

Mississippi 3,185 2,886 -9 2,852 -1 -10

Missouri 3,813 4,078 7 3,046 -25 -20

Montana 715 864 21 868 (Z) 21

Nebraska 1,903 1,846 -3 1,691 -8 -11

Nevada 391 491 26 429 -13 10

New Hampshire 517 640 24 452 -29 -13

New Jersey 1,246 612 -51 675 10 -46

New Mexico 536 305 -43 1,110 264 107

New York 5,427 4,214 -22 5,077 20 -6

North Carolina 2,945 4,996 70 2,935 -41 (Z)

North Dakota 994 683 -31 1,278 87 29

Ohio 5,818 5,220 -10 7,685 47 32

Oklahoma 2,040 2,580 26 3,847 49 89

Oregon 783 1,730 121 796 -54 2

Pennsylvania 6,645 5,199 -22 6,257 20 -6

Rhode Island 175 114 -35 66 -42 -62

South Carolina 1,552 2,217 43 1,417 -36 -9

South Dakota 1,588 1,730 9 2,366 37 49

Tennessee 3,952 5,110 29 4,231 -17 7

Texas 8,679 9,092 5 8,310 -9 -4

Utah 431 823 91 1,442 75 235

Vermont 880 598 -32 484 -19 -45

Virginia 3,925 2,009 -49 1,817 -10 -54

Washington 1,848 2,685 45 1,396 -48 -24

West Virginia 3,067 2,924 -5 2,734 -6 -11

Wisconsin 4,749 4,942 4 3,035 -39 -36

Wyoming 310 597 93 450 -25 45

Note: These day estimates are sums of days of small game, migratory bird, and other animal hunting, 

which is an overestimate, since different kinds of hunting can be done on the same day. The typical 

overestimate is 6%, based on 1991 data.

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent

Trends in State Fishing and 

Hunting Expenditures

The state trend information for 

expenditures in this report covers triprelated expenditures by state where each 

purchase took place and all fishing and 

hunting expenditures (trip-related and 

equipment purchases) by state residents. 

The 1991 Survey did not ask for the state 

in which equipment was purchased, so 

the 1991-2001 total expenditure trend 

data cannot be presented by state where 

expenditures took place.
40 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Fishing Trip-Related and Total 

Expenditures by State

Nationally trip-related expenditures for 

fishing increased from 1991 to 1996 (13%) 

and decreased from 1996 to 2001 (-16%), 

making the 1991 to 2001 comparison 

(-5%) statistically insignificant. Although 

state resident total expenditures also saw 

an increase from 1991 to 1996 (37%) and a 

decrease from 1996 to 2001 (-17%), unlike 

trip-related expenditures there was a 

significant difference (14%) comparing 

1991 to 2001. The inclusion of equipment 

expenditures literally made a significant 

difference.

Focusing on the 1991 to 2001 trip-related 

expenditures comparison, anglers in 

two states increased their expenditures 

significantly: Florida (34%) and 

Minnesota (32%). Six states experienced 

significant decreases: New York (-43%), 

Indiana (-40%), Arkansas (-35%), Illinois 

(-35%), Michigan (-26%), and Ohio (-25%).

Looking at the state resident fishing 

expenditures total (which include 

both trip-related and equipment 

expenditures), nine states saw a 

significant increase from 1991 to 2001 

and four states a significant decrease. 

The states with increases were Nevada 

(126%), Montana (118%), North Dakota 

(102%), Utah (99%), Colorado (86%), 

New Hampshire (65%), Florida (59%), 

Wyoming (56%), and Rhode Island (42%). 

The states with decreases were Michigan 

(-43%), Alaska (-32%), Washington 

(-26%), and Iowa (-24%).

Table 56. State Trip-Related Fishing Expenditure Trends 

(In-state expenditures, in thousands, 2001 dollars)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 15,396,151 17,380,775 13* 14,656,001 -16* -5

Alabama 332,656 407,730 23 355,883 -13 7

Alaska 311,389 495,717 59 423,139 -15 36

Arizona 203,936 207,236 2 140,567 -32 -31

Arkansas 282,023 202,475 -28 182,772 -10 -35*

California 1,078,873 1,632,823 51* 1,116,707 -32 4

Colorado 220,432 303,747 38 303,412 (Z) 38

Connecticut 81,030 113,382 40 100,286 -12 24

Delaware 52,008 88,234 70 30,547 -65 -41

Florida 1,563,048 1,831,307 17 2,087,721 14 34*

Georgia 330,307 348,211 5 245,288 -30 -26

Hawaii 93,333 107,933 16 66,198 -39 -29

Idaho 97,270 147,741 52 115,142 -22 18

Illinois 316,403 328,385 4 204,724 -38* -35*

Indiana 251,941 226,380 -10 152,287 -33 -40*

Iowa 94,359 120,687 28 104,706 -13 11

Kansas 98,130 88,462 -10 80,360 -9 -18

Kentucky 211,025 249,580 18 220,918 -11 5

Louisiana 437,731 432,809 -1 397,183 -8 -9

Maine 150,284 161,575 8 94,931 -41 -37

Maryland 202,064 298,123 48 245,088 -18 21

Massachusetts 249,887 267,611 7 217,216 -19 -13

Michigan 696,455 653,074 -6 516,682 -21 -26*

Minnesota 593,970 746,501 26 785,922 5 32*

Mississippi 177,719 191,413 8 117,694 -39 -34

Missouri 402,385 386,460 -4 317,368 -18 -21

Montana 157,789 194,444 23 148,042 -24 -6

Nebraska 59,518 52,866 -11 60,000 13 1

Nevada 53,079 82,767 56 76,293 -8 44

New Hampshire 79,952 77,495 -3 75,876 -2 -5

New Jersey 476,156 530,377 11 373,755 -30 -22

New Mexico 83,863 118,077 41 89,623 -24 7

New York 669,267 676,325 1 378,967 -44* -43*

North Carolina 490,302 561,324 14 449,830 -20 -8

North Dakota 27,134 34,631 28 57,066 65 110

Ohio 508,991 325,717 -36* 379,730 17 -25*

Oklahoma 255,375 293,220 15 211,301 -28 -17

Oregon 266,167 299,258 12 256,958 -14 -3

Pennsylvania 345,743 332,379 -4 282,022 -15 -18

Rhode Island 51,465 49,856 -3 69,274 39 35

South Carolina 313,809 339,670 8 316,887 -7 1

South Dakota 50,791 87,024 71 85,428 -2 68

Tennessee 336,685 242,477 -28 263,252 9 -22

Texas 1,029,347 1,311,286 27 866,813 -34* -16

Utah 125,397 133,478 6 170,530 28 36

Vermont 58,153 47,165 -19 59,094 25 2

Virginia 260,098 353,107 36 276,985 -22 6

Washington 370,026 367,309 -1 340,322 -7 -8

West Virginia 72,002 70,877 -2 64,115 -10 -11

Wisconsin 618,202 496,268 -20 508,636 2 -18

Wyoming 107,163 124,771 16 94,289 -24 -12

*Significant difference at the 90% level of significance.

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 41

Table 57. State Resident Fishing Expenditure Trends 

(In-state expenditures, in thousands, 2001 dollars)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 31,175,168 42,710,679 37* 35,632,132 -17* 14*

Alabama 582,304 851,693 46 598,037 -30 3

Alaska 310,916 243,383 -22 212,738 -13 -32*

Arizona 389,470 361,957 -7 324,426 -10 -17

Arkansas 371,918 244,918 -34* 385,217 57* 4

California 2,334,734 4,189,242 79* 2,149,634 -49* -8

Colorado 415,068 725,154 75* 770,233 6 86*

Connecticut 328,896 315,557 -4 327,512 4 (Z)

Delaware 103,293 202,820 96* 92,418 -54* -11

Florida 2,150,972 3,142,568 46 3,423,204 9 59*

Georgia 694,900 1,367,724 97* 611,235 -55* -12

Hawaii 98,174 99,257 1 97,187 -2 -1

Idaho 189,093 265,451 40 228,926 -14 21

Illinois 1,444,641 2,219,810 54* 1,145,764 -48* -21

Indiana 525,677 901,890 72* 468,909 -48* -11

Iowa 416,950 473,252 14 318,518 -33* -24*

Kansas 375,323 311,553 -17 330,607 6 -12

Kentucky 609,609 809,932 33 550,903 -32 -10

Louisiana 892,062 1,012,401 13 646,717 -36* -28

Maine 182,827 149,214 -18 157,926 6 -14

Maryland 367,532 750,949 104* 494,919 -34 35

Massachusetts 590,512 797,485 35 460,028 -42* -22

Michigan 1,672,278 1,666,469 (Z) 958,598 -42* -43*

Minnesota 1,100,120 1,688,978 54* 1,243,224 -26 13

Mississippi 342,009 605,738 77* 316,900 -48* -7

Missouri 571,004 711,659 25 757,224 6 33

Montana 92,560 114,626 24 201,969 76* 118*

Nebraska 192,148 213,264 11 179,595 -16 -7

Nevada 104,160 366,708 252* 235,357 -36* 126*

New Hampshire 113,071 247,526 119* 186,257 -25 65*

New Jersey 868,961 1,324,141 52* 712,408 -46* -18

New Mexico 146,722 203,779 39 195,631 -4 33

New York 1,127,415 1,585,969 41 919,978 -42* -18

North Carolina 750,802 1,488,085 98* 922,464 -38 23

North Dakota 90,369 154,287 71* 182,109 18 102*

Ohio 1,120,020 1,078,212 -4 904,493 -16 -19

Oklahoma 548,646 600,010 9 492,682 -18 -10

Oregon 599,686 701,382 17 588,733 -16 -2

Pennsylvania 880,765 1,063,284 21 761,512 -28* -14

Rhode Island 82,580 169,342 105* 116,918 -31 42*

South Carolina 518,163 841,669 62* 495,895 -41* -4

South Dakota 113,382 183,401 62* 100,882 -45* -11

Tennessee 641,126 555,662 -13 467,108 -16 -27

Texas 1,918,111 3,414,000 78* 2,125,366 -38 11

Utah 200,466 214,001 7 398,344 86* 99*

Vermont 83,510 153,274 84* 72,158 -53* -14

Virginia 560,407 1,021,051 82* 688,345 -33* 23

Washington 1,312,102 763,399 -42* 964,827 26 -26*

West Virginia 141,972 214,125 51* 145,730 -32 3

Wisconsin 860,632 1,056,844 23 840,828 -20 -2

Wyoming 86,151 107,993 25 134,391 24 56*

*Significant difference at the 90% level of significance.

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent
42 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Hunting Trip-Related and Total 

Expenditures by State

Nationally trip-related expenditures 

for hunting increased significantly 

from 1991 to 1996 (30%) and decreased 

insignificantly from 1996 to 2001 (-10%), 

making the 1991 to 2001 comparison a 

significant increase of 17%. Similarly, for 

state resident total expenditures, there 

was a significant increase from 1991 to 

1996 (45%) and an insignificant decrease 

from 1996 to 2001 (-12%), winding up with 

a significant increase from 1991 to 2001 

of 29%.

Focusing on the 1991 to 2001 trip-related 

expenditures comparison, hunters in 

two states increased their expenditures 

significantly: Arkansas (82%) and Texas 

(46%). One state experienced a significant 

decrease: Michigan (-36%).

Regarding the state resident hunting 

trip-related and equipment expenditures, 

seven states saw a significant increase 

from 1991 to 2001 and three states a 

significant decrease. The states with 

increases were Utah (173%), Oregon 

(169%), New Mexico (130%), Alabama 

(79%), South Carolina (68%), Tennessee 

(62%), Minnesota (58%). The states 

with decreases were California (-56%), 

Michigan (-51%), and Mississippi (-42%).

Table 58. State Trip-Related Hunting Expenditure Trends 

(In-state expenditures, in thousands, 2001 dollars)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S., total 4,471,065 5,825,510 30* 5,252,391 -10 17*

Alabama 116,555 128,690 10 185,360 44 59

Alaska 57,622 97,875 70 146,488 50 154

Arizona 50,362 73,582 46 64,291 -13 28

Arkansas 110,562 97,467 -12 200,929 106* 82*

California 140,249 301,217 115* 154,412 -49* 10

Colorado 203,397 250,420 23 183,451 -27 -10

Connecticut 7,065 9,271 31 6,930 -25 -2

Delaware 4,128 8,842 114 3,108 -65 -25

Florida 110,317 132,959 21 115,085 -13 4

Georgia 137,942 117,057 -15 188,684 61 37

Hawaii 12,606 8,808 -30 7,999 -9 -37

Idaho 57,519 84,716 47 81,783 -3 42

Illinois 73,372 121,868 66 104,018 -15 42

Indiana 72,922 49,009 -33 43,894 -10 -40

Iowa 60,525 83,513 38 60,083 -28 -1

Kansas 57,654 99,386 72 95,568 -4 66

Kentucky 93,460 75,421 -19 61,891 -18 -34

Louisiana 106,393 139,647 31 109,978 -21 3

Maine 41,088 77,936 90 52,240 -33 27

Maryland 39,350 32,621 -17 31,202 -4 -21

Massachusetts 18,329 22,151 21 10,042 -55 -45

Michigan 246,638 317,738 29 156,703 -51* -36*

Minnesota 110,061 141,378 28 171,040 21 55

Mississippi 124,073 194,472 57 126,653 -35 2

Missouri 106,817 161,239 51 102,319 -37 -4

Montana 137,407 111,990 -18 106,179 -5 -23

Nebraska 49,004 80,953 65 74,345 -8 52

Nevada 24,293 22,942 -6 20,194 -12 -17

New Hampshire 12,549 15,341 22 15,421 1 23

New Jersey 39,277 46,167 18 67,284 46 71

New Mexico 45,238 33,316 -26 58,503 76 29

New York 210,928 238,919 13 152,059 -36 -28

North Carolina 75,462 111,694 48 90,279 -19 20

North Dakota 31,767 26,506 -17 53,245 101 68

Ohio 88,190 91,038 3 112,104 23 27

Oklahoma 70,578 86,327 22 95,502 11 35

Oregon 73,166 141,902 94 105,253 -26 44

Pennsylvania 215,546 204,242 -5 187,713 -8 -13

Rhode Island 3,704 4,477 21 800 -82 -78

South Carolina 80,357 122,260 52 94,626 -23 18

South Dakota 62,328 120,286 93 112,206 -7 80

Tennessee 100,391 118,966 19 113,886 -4 13

Texas 367,820 503,040 37 535,668 6 46*

Utah 53,867 40,621 -25 86,018 112 60

Vermont 42,440 31,276 -26 16,286 -48 -62

Virginia 110,011 103,028 -6 94,592 -8 -14

Washington 86,456 101,784 18 99,145 -3 15

West Virginia 69,912 75,669 8 62,354 -18 -11

Wisconsin 195,876 142,641 -27 159,396 12 -19

Wyoming 66,962 102,460 53 70,390 -31 5

*Significant difference at the 90% level of significance.
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 43

Table 59. State Resident Hunting Expenditure Trends 

(In-state expenditures, in thousands, 2001 dollars)

1991 1996

1991-1996

Percent 

Change 2001

1996-2001

Percent 

Change

1991-2001

Percent 

Change

U.S. total 16,031,197 23,293,156 45* 20,611,025 -12 29*

Alabama 358,648 600,645 67 642,336 7 79*

Alaska 115,166 152,097 32 97,650 -36 -15

Arizona 199,681 235,054 18 224,791 -4 13

Arkansas 374,479 598,963 60 381,003 -36 2

California 836,095 1,144,663 37 364,008 -68* -56*

Colorado 200,849 536,620 167* 182,990 -66* -9

Connecticut 56,335 96,721 72 69,313 -28 23

Delaware 26,710 34,883 31 18,154 -48 -32

Florida 420,874 528,179 25 540,767 2 28

Georgia 358,874 966,612 169* 503,047 -48 40

Hawaii 22,426 22,628 1 17,163 -24 -23

Idaho 127,332 204,145 60 166,780 -18 31

Illinois 425,044 589,824 39 527,368 -11 24

Indiana 316,715 312,624 -1 278,165 -11 -12

Iowa 221,821 250,257 13 184,830 -26 -17

Kansas 163,302 356,915 119 222,396 -38 36

Kentucky 307,458 383,676 25 383,789 (Z) 25

Louisiana 563,951 711,807 26 517,465 -27 -8

Maine 86,731 229,208 164* 117,605 -49 36

Maryland 209,848 108,933 -48* 141,895 30 -32

Massachusetts 147,497 156,902 6 113,461 -28 -23

Michigan 1,135,475 1,360,925 20 550,378 -60* -52*

Minnesota 376,596 581,709 54 593,246 2 58*

Mississippi 522,725 554,832 6 300,669 -46* -42*

Missouri 440,993 740,985 68 486,198 -34 10

Montana 114,655 109,548 -4 160,346 46* 40

Nebraska 87,913 110,154 25 134,618 22 53

Nevada 84,949 128,219 51 147,992 15 74

New Hampshire 57,266 67,414 18 55,697 -17 -3

New Jersey 160,712 203,487 27 156,659 -23 -3

New Mexico 74,207 97,156 31 170,345 75 130*

New York 655,838 967,054 47 948,523 -2 45

North Carolina 351,858 630,052 79 565,044 -10 61

North Dakota 67,301 102,482 52 78,267 -24 16

Ohio 496,224 550,998 11 645,319 17 30

Oklahoma 206,320 474,836 130 321,775 -32 56

Oregon 159,560 673,247 322* 429,277 -36 169*

Pennsylvania 697,992 728,165 4 899,005 23 29

Rhode Island 27,021 26,838 -1 15,143 -44 -44

South Carolina 166,413 387,024 133* 279,013 -28 68*

South Dakota 102,641 110,458 8 111,837 1 9

Tennessee 405,238 909,687 124* 654,682 -28 62*

Texas 1,308,362 1,382,378 6 1,446,869 5 11

Utah 112,078 189,500 69 306,204 62 173*

Vermont 62,642 107,743 72* 53,622 -50* -14

Virginia 332,568 478,236 44 338,494 -29 2

Washington 249,092 383,684 54 336,061 -12 35

West Virginia 214,606 263,480 23 199,449 -24 -7

Wisconsin 655,294 959,455 46 626,616 -35 -4

Wyoming 65,324 119,944 84 62,451 -48 -4

*Significant difference at the 90% level of significance.

(Z) Less than 0.5 percent
44 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

Sportspersons

Hunting and fishing are important to 

millions of Americans, with nearly one 

in five people participating in hunting 

and fishing in 2001. From 1991 to 2001 

the number of Americans 16 years 

old and older who fished and hunted 

decreased 5%. The number of anglers 

decreased by 4% and the number of 

hunters decreased by 7%. Despite these 

drops in sportsperson numbers, the 

number of days afield increased 5% 

for sportspersons, 9% for anglers, and 

decreased a statistically insignificant 3% 

for hunters.

The 1991-2001 trend can be broken up 

into two phases: the 1991-1996 trend 

and the 1996-2001 trend. The 1991-

1996 national trend for both hunting 

and fishing consisted of level numbers 

of participants and increases in days 

afield. The 1996-2001 national trend for 

both hunting and fishing consisted of 

decreases in participants and decreases 

in the number of days.

Trends in overall fishing and hunting are 

better understood by an examination of 

the trends of sportsperson subgroups 

such as avid and casual anglers and 

hunters. Avid anglers and hunters, 

the 10% of all participants who fished 

or hunted the most days in a year, 

accounted for 40% to 50% of all days 

afield in 1991, 1996, and 2001. Another 

subgroup of anglers and hunters were 

the casual participants, those who fished 

or hunted one or two days in the year. 

Losing a casual participant would have 

little effect on overall days totals (unlike 

losing an avid participant), but would 

have the same effect as losing an avid 

or intermediate participant on overall 

participant numbers. The trends in casual 

angling and hunting have run counter to 

the trends in overall angling and hunting, 

with drops when overall trends were level 

and stability when overall trends were 

declining.

Summary

Fishing

The number of freshwater anglers fell 

8% from 1991 to 2001, while saltwater 

angling held relatively constant. 

Coldwater fishing participation fell 12% 

and warmwater fishing dropped 13%.

The average days of avid anglers, 68 in 

1991, 85 in 1996, and 73 in 2001, were 

about eight times more than the average 

days of nonavid anglers, 8 in 1991, 11 in 

1996, and 10 in 2001.

The percentage of casual anglers fell 

from 14% of all anglers in 1991 to 11% in 

2001. They accounted for only 1% of all 

fishing days in each survey year.

The intermediate group between avid 

and casual anglers was the bulk of total 

participants. The intermediate angler 

group made up over 75% of all anglers 

in the three surveyed years, although 

they contributed only slightly more than 

half the days. In 2001 their average days 

spent fishing were 11, which was less than 

the 16 days spent by the average angler.

The increase in intermediate anglers from 

1991 to 1996 compensated for the loss 

of casual and avid anglers, maintaining 

the overall number of anglers. In 2001 

the number of intermediate anglers 

dropped, and avid and casual angling did 

not increase, so the number of anglers 

decreased from 1996 to 2001. Also, days on 

the water by intermediate anglers went 

up 15% from 1991 to 2001, avid days went 

up 3% and casual days went down 26%, 

so the intermediate angler was largely 

responsible for the overall increase in 

angling days.

Looking at percent comparisons of 

subgroup demographics with those 

of total participants, a generalization 

is that the demographics of casuals 

and intermediates in general followed 

those of participants as a whole, but the 

demographics of avids did not.

■ Avid anglers are more likely to live 

in a rural area

■ Avid anglers have lower income

LaVonda Walton/USFWS
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 45

Hunting

The number of big game and migratory 

bird hunters in 2001 was the same as in 

1991, while the number of small game and 

other animal hunters fell significantly. 

The 29% drop in small game hunting 

from 1991 to 2001 was led by the 47% 

drop in casual hunters’ pursuit of small 

game, although avid and intermediate 

hunters also cut back on small game 

hunting. The loss of small game habitat 

in many states could partially explain the 

drop.

As for days, small game hunting days 

decreased 22% from 1991 to 2001, big 

game hunting days increased 25%, 

migratory bird hunting days increased 

28%, and other animal days stayed 

the same. Overall, the increasing days 

hunting group (big game, migratory bird) 

counterbalanced the decreasing days 

group (small game, other animals) in the 

total hunting days trend.

The average days of avid hunters were 

approximately six times greater than 

those of nonavid hunters. Avid hunters 

went 69 days in 1991, 72 days in 1996, 

and 70 days in 2001. The nonavid hunter 

hunted an average of 11 days in 1991, 

13 days in 1996, and 12 days in 2001.

The intermediate hunter group was about 

75% of the total hunter group for the 

three surveyed years, and their average 

days were 14, compared to 18 for the 

average hunter.

Casual participants in hunting fell from 

16% of all hunters in 1991 to 13% in 2001. 

They accounted for 2% of all hunting days 

in 1991 and 1% in both 1996 and 2001.

Demographic findings include

■ Casual hunters tend to live in urban 

areas more than intermediate and 

avid hunters. Casual hunters were 

equally split between urban and rural 

residences in 1996 and 2001 and in 

1991 were more likely to live in urban 

areas than in rural areas.

■ Avid hunters are strongly rural-based. 

Rural hunters are twice as likely to be 

avid than are urban-based hunters.

■ The average age of hunters of every 

subgroup has increased. Younger 

people are not hunting as much in 

2001 as they did in 1991. However, if 

younger people decide to hunt, they 

are more likely to be avid.

■ Avid hunters were more likely to have 

a household income below the national 

median than intermediate, casual, or 

hunters as a whole.

There was a significant drop in casual 

participation from 1991 to 1996 which 

was compensated by an increase in 

intermediate hunting, maintaining the 

overall numbers of hunters. However, 

there was a drop in intermediate 

hunters from 1996 to 2001 which was not 

compensated by an increase in avid or 

casual hunting.

The fact that in 2001 11% of anglers 

fished 1% of all days while 10% fished 

47% of all days illustrates the diversity 

of fishing activity in the United States. 

Hunters were even more diverse, with 

13% of all hunters hunting 1% of all days 

afield and 10% hunting 40% of all days in 

2001. However, there is something they 

all have in common. While tens of millions 

of American sportspersons are widely 

varied in both the demographic qualities 

they possess and in the type and amount 

of hunting and fishing they do, they share 

an appreciation of and fervor for hunting 

and fishing.

Ryan Hagerty/USFWS
46 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

The National Survey of Fishing and 

Hunting was first conducted in 1955, 

gathering demographic, participation, 

and expenditure data at the national 

level. A similar survey has been 

undertaken every fifth year since 1955. 

The National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, 

and Wildlife-Associated Recreation 

began collecting regional and state data 

in 1980, as well as wildlife-watching data. 

Each National Survey of Fishing, 

Hunting and Wildlife-Associated 

Recreation has been conducted in two 

phases. First, a screening interview 

of households is conducted to identify 

wildlife-related recreation participants 

6 years old and older. This screening 

survey is used to select sportspersons 

and wildlife-watching participants to 

be included in the second phase. In the 

second phase an interview or multiple 

Appendix I – FHWAR Survey Methodology

interviews are conducted to collect 

detailed information on participation 

and expenditures for persons 16 years 

old and older.

Screening interviews were conducted 

in January and February of 1991 and 

in April through June of 1996 and 2001. 

A representative sample of the United 

States population was contacted by 

telephone or face-to-face. A household 

representative 18 years old or older 

is asked to provide estimates of the 

wildlife-associated recreation activity of 

all household members 6 years old and 

older. The demographic characteristics of 

the household members are also obtained 

in the screening survey. The screening 

interview information is used to construct 

a representative sample of wildlifeassociated recreation participants for the 

detailed survey that follows.

The detailed phases of the Surveys 

asked respondents 16 years old and 

older to recall their recreation activities 

and expenditures over a 4-month period 

(an exception being for respondents 

who reported participation in the first 

interview wave in 1996 and 2001, who 

were then not given the second interview, 

but rather were next interviewed in 

January 1997 and 2002, making the 

recall six to eight months for their 

second interview). Respondents were 

interviewed three times in 1991 and 

two or three times in 1996 and 2001 to 

get their entire year’s activity. Previous 

Surveys used a 12-month recall period, 

i.e., respondents were asked at the 

end of the survey year to recall their 

entire year’s activity. Research on 

recall bias7

 found that 12-month recall 

periods involving detailed information 

on participation and expenditures 

resulted in overestimations. As a result 

of shortening the recall period beginning 

in 1991, the estimates from previous 

Surveys are not directly comparable 

with the 1991 and later FHWAR Survey 

estimates.

The total screening sample for each 

survey consisted of households in the 

U.S. drawn from expired Current 

Population Survey samples by the U.S. 

Bureau of the Census. 

Information for each state is available 

since 1980 only. The 1955-1970 Surveys 

obtained national-level data only, and the 

1975 Survey used a sampling procedure 

by a private firm that makes comparison 

of its state-level data with the following 

Surveys conducted by the U.S. Bureau of 

the Census unreliable.

7

 Investigation of Possible Recall/Reference 

Period Bias in National Surveys of Fishing, 

Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, 

Westat, Inc. under contract to the U.S. 

Department of the Interior, 1989.

Kenneth O. Butts/USFWS
Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends 47

Table A-1. Major Characteristics of Surveys: 1955 to 2001

Characteristic 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1991 1996 2001 

Survey Design

Screening 

interview mode 

and population 

of interest

Combined 

with detailed 

phase 

Personal 

interview, 

12 years old 

and older 

Personal 

interview, 

9 years old 

and older 

Mail questionnaire, 

9 years old 

and older 

Telephone 

interview, 

6 years old 

and older 

Telephone/ 

personal 

interview, 

6 years old 

and older 

Telephone/ 

personal 

interview, 

6 years old 

and older 

Telephone/ 

personal 

interview, 

6 years old 

and older 

Telephone/ 

personal 

interview, 

6 years old 

and older 

Telephone/ 

personal 

interview, 

6 years old 

and older 

Detailed 

interview mode 

and population 

of interest

Personal 

interview, 

12 years old 

and older 

Personal 

interview, 

12 years old 

and older. 

Substantial 

participants1

Personal 

interview, 

12 years old 

and older. 

Substantial 

participants1

Personal 

interview, 

12 years old 

and older. 

Substantial 

participants2

Mail questionnaire, 

9 years old 

and older 

Personal 

interview, 

16 years old 

and older 

Personal 

interview, 

16 years old 

and older 

Telephone/ 

personal 

interview, 

16 years old 

and older

Telephone/ 

personal 

interview, 

16 years old 

and older 

Telephone/ 

personal 

interview, 

16 years old 

and older 

Respondent’s 

Recall Period

1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 4 months 4-8 months 4-8 months 

Sample Sizes

Screening 

phase 

(households) 

20,000 18,000 16,000 24,000 106,294 116,025 102,694 102,804 44,000 52,508 

Detailed phase 

(individuals) 

Fishing and 

hunting

9,328 10,300 6,400 8,700 20,211 30,291 28,011 23,179 13,222 25,070 

Wildlife 

watching3

(X) (X) (X) (X) (X) 5,997 26,671 22,723 9,802 15,303 

Response Rates

Screening 

phase 

(NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 95 percent 95 percent 93 percent 95 percent 71 percent 75 percent 

Detailed phase

Fishing and 

hunting

(NA) 93 percent (NA) (NA) 37 percent 90 percent 92 percent 95 percent 80 percent 88 percent 

Wildlife 

watching3

(X) (X) (X) (X) (X) 95 percent 94 percent 95 percent 82 percent 90 percent 

Level of 

Reporting

National National National National State and 

National 

State and 

National 

State and 

National 

State and 

National 

State and 

National 

State and 

National 

Data Collection 

Agent

Private 

contractor 

U.S. Census 

Bureau 

U.S. Census 

Bureau 

U.S. Census 

Bureau 

Private 

contractor 

U.S. Census 

Bureau 

U.S. Census 

Bureau 

U.S. Census 

Bureau 

U.S. Census 

Bureau 

U.S. Census 

Bureau 

(NA) Not available. 

(X) Not applicable; wildlife-watching (nonconsumptive) interviews were not conducted prior to 1980.

1

 Spent $5.00 or more or participated 3 days or more during the year.

2

 Spent $7.50 or more or participated 3 days or more during the year.

3

 Termed “nonconsumptive” in 1980, 1985, and 1991 surveys.
48 Fishing and Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and Intermediate Participation Trends

The U.S. population trend is of 

Americans 12 years old and older. The 

1955-1970 Surveys covered the activity of 

people 12 years old and older.

The angler and hunter trend numbers 

for 1955-1980 came from Appendix B of 

the 2001 National Report. The survey 

results were made comparable for 

publication in Table B-4. The 1980-1985 

trend comes from the 1980 and 1985 

National Reports, covering the activity 

of Americans 16 years old and older. 

The 1985-1990 trend comes from Report 

91-2, “1980-1990 Fishing, Hunting, 

and Wildlife-Associated Recreation 

Trends.” The source of these estimates 

is the screening data from the 1985 and 

1990 surveys, covering the activity of 

Americans 6 years old and older. The 

1991-2001 trend estimates come from 

the National Reports of those Surveys, 

covering the activity of Americans 16 

years old and older.

Appendix II – Sources of Comparable 

1955-2001 Estimates

USFWS

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Division of Federal Aid

Washington, DC 20240

http://federalaid.fws.gov

July 2004

Cover: R. Will Roach/USFWS