United States Department of Agriculture

Forest 

Service

Pacific Northwest 

Research Station

General Technical Report

PNW-GTR-945

November

2016

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: 

Effects on Economic Opportunities

Eric M. White, J.M. Bowker, Ashley E. Askew, Linda L. Langner, J. Ross Arnold, 

and Donald B.K. English 
In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 

civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and 

institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating 

based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender 

expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income 

derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior 

civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases 

apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. 

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program 

information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should 

contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and 

TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, 

program information may be made available in languages other than English. 

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination 

Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html 

and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the 

information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. 

Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, 

D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov. 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Authors

Eric M. White is a research social scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3625 93rd Avenue SW, Olympia, WA 

98512-1101; J.M. Bowker is a research social scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 320 Green Street, Athens, GA 

30602-2044; Ashley E. Askew is a postdoctoral research associate, Warnell School 

of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, 180 East Green Street, 

Athens, GA 30602-2152; Linda L. Langner is Resources Planning Act Assessment 

national program leader and J. Ross Arnold is a resource analyst, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Research and Development, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-0003; and Donald B.K. English is National 

Visitor Use Monitoring program manager, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, National Forest System, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 

20250-0003.

Cover photos: Undeveloped skiing on the Willamette National Forest. Photo by 

Emily Jane Davis.
Abstract

White, Eric M.; Bowker, J.M.; Askew, Ashley E.; Langner, Linda L.; Arnold, 

J. Ross; English, Donald B.K. 2016. Federal outdoor recreation trends: effects 

on economic opportunities. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-945. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Station. 46 p.

Outdoor recreation is a central way that people interact with the natural environment. Federal land agencies are key providers of settings, facilities, and landscapes 

for recreation. Outdoor recreation is also an important driver of economic activity 

in rural communities near recreation destinations and across the United States. 

Future participation in outdoor recreation, and associated economic activity, will 

be influenced by demographic changes in population, lowering per capita land 

available for recreation, and changing recreation resource conditions, influenced 

partially by climate change. In this report, we summarize recent trends and current 

projections to 2030 of recreation participation and total days of recreation for 17 

key outdoor recreation activities common on federal lands. We report the current 

economic activity supported by outdoor recreation on the seven agencies participating in the Federal Interagency Council on Outdoor Recreation and describe how 

anticipated future changes in recreation participation and climate may change the 

economic activity supported by outdoor recreation. 

Keywords: Outdoor recreation, trends and projections, climate change impacts, 

demographic trends, federal lands, recreation opportunities, trip spending patterns, 

economic contributions.

Preface

This general technical report was sponsored by the National Center for Natural 

Resource Economics Research. The center is a virtual collaborative effort of the 

Washington office and the regional research stations within U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Research and Development. The center was founded to 

respond rapidly to emerging natural resource economic issues of national significance by leveraging expertise across the Forest Service. The center sponsors research 

with funding from client organizations and regional research station contributions.
Contents

1 Introduction

2 Outdoor Recreation Participation

2 Measuring Outdoor Recreation Participation in the United States

2 Historical Outdoor Recreation Trends

5 Recreation Participation in the Future

11 Climate Change and Recreation Trends and Projections

13 Dominant Factors in Recreation Projections

15 Federal Land Base for Outdoor Recreation

16 Local and State Government Lands

17 Federal Lands

21 Economic Contributions From Recreation on Federal Lands

22 Factors Contributing to Economic Activity From Federal Recreation 

25 Classification of Trip Spending and Recreation Visits

27 Economic Contribution From Federal Recreation Opportunities

28 Economic Activity Associated With Future Recreation Participation

28 Visitor Spending on Day Trips 

30 Visitor Spending on Overnight Trips

30 High Spending Trip Types and Recreation Activity Projections

31 Distribution of Visitor Use by Trip Type and Activity

33 The Potential Influence of Climate Change

34 Demographic Change and Recreation Spending

36 Other Considerations for Future Economic Contributions From Recreation

39 Other Economic Outcomes From Federal Recreation Resources

39 Amenity Migration

40 Business Relocation

40 Health Benefits

40 Recreation Backdrops

41 Summary and Conclusions

43 English Equivalents

44 Acknowledgments

44 Literature Cited
1

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Introduction

Outdoor recreation plays a significant role in American lives. It provides physical 

challenges and a sense of well-being, helps develop lifelong skills, provokes interest 

and inquiry, inspires wonder and awe of the natural world, and often provides an 

alternative to daily routines. Recreation contributes greatly to the physical, mental, 

and spiritual health of individuals; bonds family and friends; and instills pride in 

natural and cultural heritage. Federal lands contribute significantly, and in many 

cases uniquely, to the provision of nature-based outdoor recreation opportunities.

This report, prepared for the Federal Interagency Council on Outdoor Recreation (FICOR), focuses on the potential future role of federal lands in supplying 

outdoor recreation opportunities and therefore supporting associated jobs and 

income. The FICOR is a seven-agency council that promotes better coordination 

and collaboration among federal agencies whose missions or programs include 

providing outdoor recreation and conserving or managing natural and cultural 

resources. The FICOR agencies include the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI), 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Bureau of Reclamation (BOR); Fish and 

Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS); U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (FS); U.S. Department of Comerce (USDC); U.S. Department 

of Defence (USDOD); National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

and the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).

We begin with an overview of recent trends in outdoor recreation activity 

participation in the United States and projected recreation participation to 2030. 

The primary driving forces for participation are reviewed, and their effects on 

future recreation use are discussed. The federal land base for outdoor recreation 

and expectations for future availability are also described. Recreation visitation in 

2012 on lands and waters managed by the FICOR agencies and the associated jobs 

provide the baseline for considering how projected recreation use might influence 

future economic effects.

The “future” look takes into account (1) the key factors that determine the level 

of economic activity in and around federal lands, (2) potential changes in recreation 

activities and associated spending patterns, and (3) other factors that influence 

spending. Finally, we discuss other contributions to local economies that may be 

influenced by federal recreation opportunities, including amenity migration, business relocation, and natural backdrops.
2

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Outdoor Recreation Participation

Measuring Outdoor Recreation Participation in the United States

National trends in outdoor recreation participation are based primarily on the 

National Survey on Recreation and the Environment (NSRE). The NSRE was a 

general population telephone survey of people 16 years of age and older designed to 

measure participation in outdoor recreation activities and people’s environmental 

behaviors and attitudes (Cordell 2012). The NSRE sampling was population-based, 

occurring across both rural and urban areas of the country, and included all activity 

participation whether on public or private land and water.

Historical Outdoor Recreation Trends

Choices for outdoor recreation today are different from choices made by previous 

generations of Americans, both in the mix of activities and relative popularity. 

Outdoor recreation participation grew through the 1960s and 1980s. Activities such 

as camping, canoeing, kayaking, and bicycling grew rapidly, influenced partly by 

improving equipment technology. New activities appeared, while a few activities 

declined in participation (Cordell 2012).

Between 1999 and 2009, nature-based outdoor recreation generally increased, 

although trends differ across individual activities. The number of U.S. participants1

in 50 nature-based outdoor recreation activities increased 7.1 percent between 1999 

and 2009, while the number of activity days2 increased at least that much (table 1). 

Activities oriented toward viewing and photographing nature have been among the 

fastest growing activities, both in terms of number of participants and activity days 

of participation. Off-highway vehicle driving realized a 34-percent increase in participants. Several physically challenging activities, such as kayaking, snowboarding, 

and surfing also had relatively large increases in this timeframe (Cordell 2012). 

Although there were increases in the number of participants for the majority of 

activities between 1999 and 2009, there were declines in some activities. Most of the 

traditional winter recreation activities experienced decreasing participation rates and 

days of activity, with the exception of snowboarding. In addition, several activities 

that had increased numbers of participants experienced a drop in total days of activity, 

indicating that the average number of days per participant declined. Examples included 

day hiking and horseback riding on trails. While more people recreate in the Eastern 

1 A participant is any individual 16 years of age or older who engaged in one or more 

recreation activities during the 12 months prior to the survey interview date. 

2 An activity day is any amount of time during the course of a calendar day in which an 

individual participates in a given activity. Thus, an individual may report multiple activity 

days for a given calendar day.

Choices for outdoor 

recreation today are 

different from choices 

made by previous 

generations of 

Americans, both in the 

mix of activities and 

relative popularity.
3

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Table 1—Percentage change between 1999–2001 and 2005–2009 in total participants and total 

days for people age 16 and older participating in nature-based outdoor activities (continued)

Activity groups

Percentage change 

in total participants

Percentage change 

in total daysa

1999–2009

Visiting developed sites:

Developed site use—

Family gathering 10.5 21.5

Picnicking 2.8 -5.8

Developed camping 1.1 0.5

Visiting interpretive sites—

Visit outdoor nature center/zoo 10.2 18.6

Visit historical sites 8.1 7.0

Visit prehistoric sites 11.1 9.4

Viewing/photographing nature:

Birding—

Viewing/photographing birds 22.8 36.7

Viewing—

Viewing/photographing natural scenery 17.9 62.6

Viewing/photographing flowers, etc. 29.4 83.5

Viewing/photographing other wildlife 25.4 51.8

Viewing/photographing birds 22.8 36.7

Gathering mushrooms, berries, etc. 28.6 30.1

Backcountry activities:

Challenge—

Mountain climbing -5.9 -4.3

Caving 18.4 14.0

Rock climbing 9.5 12.3

Equestrian—

Horseback riding on trails 1.6 -9.7

Hiking—

Day hiking 15.4 -4.9

Visiting primitive areas—

Backpacking 7.9 26.6

Primitive camping 3.2 6.6

Visit a wilderness 17.7 31.8

Motorized activities:

Motorized off-road use—

Off-highway vehicle driving 34.5 47.6

Motorized water—

Motorboating 8.6 12.3

Waterskiing 33.1 20.0

Use personal watercraft 10.9 12.7
4

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Table 1—Percentage change between 1999–2001 and 2005–2009 in total participants and total 

days for people age 16 and older participating in nature-based outdoor activities (continued)

Activity groups

Percentage change 

in total participants

Percentage change 

in total daysa

1999–2009

Motorized snow

Snowmobiling -5.5 -23.7

Hunting and fishing:

Hunting—

Small game hunting 11.4 -0.7

Big game hunting 17.1 22.2

Migratory bird hunting -1.1 0.4

Fishing—

Anadromous fishing 24.1 9.7

Coldwater fishing 8.7 1.4

Saltwater fishing 17.2 -0.7

Warmwater fishing 17.1 13.1

Nonmotorized winter activities:

Developed skiing—

Downhill skiing -8.5 -19.4

Snowboarding 33.7 32.6

Undeveloped skiing—

Cross-country skiing -21.7 -32.9

Snowshoeing -9.4 -25.1

Nonmotorized water activities

Swimming—

Swimming in lakes, streams, etc. 14.0 16.0

Snorkeling 11.8 -0.6

Surfing 46.3 18.6

Scuba diving -5.6 -15.6

Visit a beach 20.7 28.2

Visit waterside besides beach 6.3 28.1

Windsurfing -10.1 -24.7

Floating—

Canoeing 18.2 8.0

Kayaking 103.8 86.3

Rafting -2.8 7.9

a

 Because individuals may report multiple activity days for a given calendar day, these increases are not additive across activities.

Source: Cordell 2012
5

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

United States because of the U.S. population distribution, participation rates are uniformly higher in the West for all activities except hunting and fishing (Cordell 2012).

Recreation Participation in the Future

Past and recent outdoor recreation trends are important indicators of what might 

happen in the near future. However, simple trends do not address the underlying 

factors and associations that may be driving these trends. Thus, a trend may be 

of limited value as an indicator if the time horizon is long or if the trend’s driving 

factors are expected to deviate substantially from historical patterns. Therefore, projection models developed for the 2010 Resources Planning Act (RPA) Assessment3

(USDA FS 2012a) are used in conjunction with external projections of relevant 

factors, including demographic, economic, land use, and climate factors, to simulate 

future recreation participation (Bowker et al. 2012). Outdoor recreation participation 

was projected for 17 recreation activity composites that were organized into seven 

activity groups that either occur in similar recreation settings or have a similar 

focus (table 2). These projections are based on the NSRE data described above and 

include nature-based recreation on all ownerships of land and water.

The 2010 RPA Assessment used multiple scenarios to explore a range of possible futures that account for uncertainties about future political, economic, social, 

and environmental change. A detailed description of these scenarios can be found 

in USDA FS (2012b). Projections to 2060, at 10-year intervals, associated with these 

scenarios incorporate changing population, socioeconomic characteristics, land 

availability, and the potential effects of climate change. For this report, we chose 

to use projected recreation participation through 2030 to focus on the timeframe 

most consistent with federal land management planning. We also chose to focus 

on the results from one socioeconomic scenario and its associated climate projections—the scenario referred to as RPA A1B in the 2010 RPA Assessment. Because 

population growth is an important determinant of recreation demand in the future, 

we chose the RPA A1B scenario because it is the most consistent with the U.S. 

Census Bureau’s projected population growth in the United States at the time the 

RPA scenarios were developed (U.S. Census Bureau Population Division 2012).

The outdoor recreation projections resulted in estimates of per capita participation and average annual days per participant. Total participants and total annual days 

of participation were calculated by multiplying the RPA population projections by 

the participation rate and average days per participant (Bowker et al. 2012). Table 3 

summarizes projected participation and use for the activity groups shown in table 2.

3 See http://www.fs.fed.us/research/rpa/ for additional information about the RPA Assessment. 

Outdoor recreation 

participation was 

projected for 17 

recreation activity 

composites.
6

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Visiting developed sites—

The activities associated with developed-site use include venues popular with 

all age groups. Per capita participation in this activity group is currently highest 

among the 17 activity groups and is projected to remain the most popular through 

2030. The number of potential developed-site users increases from over 190 to 

246 million participants over the projection period, driven primarily by increasing population. Although the total number of participants is projected to increase, 

those participants are projected to have slightly fewer numbers of days recreating 

at developed sites each year, on average, compared to the current pattern.

Visiting interpretive sites is also popular across all ages and occurs primarily in 

developed settings. The projections indicate that participation rates of the population could increase by more than 3 percent, translating into a gain of more than 30 

percent in the total number of participants by 2030. Two factors might influence the 

greater participation rate growth in this activity group compared to developed-site 

Table 2—Outdoor recreation activity groups and associated activity composites

Activity group Modeled activity composite Activities included in modeled activity composite

Visiting developed sites Developed site use Family gathering; picnicking; developed camping

Visiting interpretive sites Visiting nature centers, zoos, historic sites, and prehistoric sites

Viewing and 

photographing nature

Birding Viewing/photographing birds

Viewing Viewing/photographing natural scenery, flowers, birds, other 

wildlife; gather mushrooms, berries, etc. 

Backcountry activities Challenge activities Caving; mountain climbing; rock climbing

Day hiking Day hiking

Equestrian Horseback riding on trails

Visiting primitive areas Backpacking; primitive camping; visiting wilderness

Motorized activities Motorized off-road use Off-road driving

Motorized snow use Snowmobiling

Motorized water use Motorboating; waterskiing; personal watercraft use

Hunting and fishing Hunting Big game; small game; migratory birds

Fishing Anadromous; coldwater; warmwater; saltwater

Nonmotorized winter 

activities

Developed skiing Downhill skiing; snowboarding

Undeveloped skiing Cross-country skiing; snowshoeing

Nonmotorized water 

activities

Swimming Swimming in lakes, streams; snorkeling; surfing; scuba diving; 

visiting a beach; visiting waterside besides beach; windsurfing

Floating Canoeing; kayaking; rafting
7

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Table 3—Projected participation and use for activity groups between 2008 and 2030

Per capita participation Adult participants (millions) Days per participant Total days (millions)

2008 

rate

2030 

rate

Percent 

change

2008 

number

2030 

number

Percent 

change

2008 

rate

2030 

rate

Percent 

change

2008 

number

2030 

number

Percent 

change Activity groups

Visiting developed sites:

Developed-site use 0.819 0.825 0.7 192.7 245.9 27.6 11.67 11.58 -0.8 2,235 2,830 26.6Visiting interpretive sites 0.669 0.690 3.2 157.4 205.7 30.7 7.81 8.02 2.6 1,243 1,666 34.1

Viewing/photographing nature:

Birding 0.346 0.361 4.4 81.4 107.7 32.3 97.71 97.91 0.2 8,215 10,889 32.5Viewing 0.805 0.814 1.2 189.4 242.7 28.1 169.59 163.96 -3.3 32,303 40,019 23.9

Backcountry activities:

Challenge 0.107 0.111 3.6 25.1 33 31.3 4.77 4.74 -0.6 120 156 30.5Equestrian 0.070 0.072 2.7 16.4 21.3 30.1 16.28 16.48 1.2 262 345 31.7

Hiking 0.333 0.343 3.1 78.3 102.2 30.5 22.89 23.41 2.3 1,826 2,437 33.5Visiting primitive areas 0.383 0.375 -2.1 90.2 111.8 24.0 13.22 13.08 -1.1 1,233 1,512 22.6

Motorized activities:

Motorized off-road use 0.204 0.194 -4.7 47.9 57.8 20.7 21.65 21.04 -2.8 1,048 1,229 17.3Motorized water use 0.263 0.270 2.5 62.0 80.5 29.9 15.27 15.35 0.5 953 1,244 30.6Motorized snow use 0.040 0.036 -10.4 9.4 10.7 13.6 7.25 7.16 -1.3 68 77 12.1

Hunting and fishing:

Hunting 0.119 0.105 -11.6 27.9 31.3 12.0 19.13 18.17 -5.0 535 570 6.4

Fishing 0.309 0.301 -2.6 72.7 89.7 23.4 18.48 18.15 -1.8 1,363 1,651 21.1

Nonmotorized winter activities:

Developed skiing 0.101 0.108 6.7 23.7 32.1 35.1 7.19 7.42 3.2 171 238 39.5Undeveloped skiing 0.033 0.033 -0.6 7.8 9.8 25.9 6.58 6.72 2.1 51 66 28.6

Nonmotorized water activities:

Swimming 0.609 0.630 3.4 143.2 187.5 31.0 23.98 24.12 0.6 3,459 4,558 31.7

Floating 0.169 0.162 -3.9 39.8 48.4 21.7 6.50 6.53 0.5 261 318 22.1
8

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

use. First, developed-site use is negatively correlated with age, which is expected to 

rise by 2030, and positively correlated with available federal land per capita, which 

is expected to decline. Those variables are less important in interpretive site participation. Secondly, in comparison to the other activity groups, visiting interpretive 

sites has one of the higher percentage increases in both average days per participant 

and total days of participation.

Viewing and photographing nature—

This category comprises birding and nature viewing, which includes viewing 

wildlife and nature, gathering, and nature study. Adult participation in birding 

averaged 35 percent in 2008. Nearly 81 percent of adults participated in the more 

broadly defined nature viewing during the same period. The participation rate for 

nature viewing is projected to increase by slightly more than 1 percent through 2030, 

whereas the participation rate for birding could increase by 4 percent. The viewing 

days per participant are anticipated to decline by over 3 percent. This decline is 

influenced by projected increases in population density and minority populations, 

as well as projected decreases in both forest and rangeland and national park acres 

per capita. The average annual days of participation exceed 160 and contribute to 

an estimate of total days nearly 10 times higher than any other nonviewing activity 

group. However, given the broad definition of viewing, much of this activity occurs 

in proximity to home, in transit to other recreation activities, or while participating 

in another activity.

Backcountry activities—

Backcountry activities are pursued in undeveloped, but accessible lands. This 

activity group includes challenge activities, equestrian activities, hiking, and 

visiting primitive areas. Challenge activities are often associated with young and 

affluent adults and include caving, mountain climbing, and rock climbing. Over 

11 percent of adults are expected to participate in challenge activities by 2030, an 

increase of about 3.6 percent from 2008. The growth in the rate of participation 

is driven mostly by projected increases in income. The projected days per participant are almost unchanged through 2030. Participants in challenge activities 

report fewer than 5 days of participation per year, which is the lowest among all 

activity groups.

Participation in equestrian activities or trail riding per capita is projected to 

increase about 2.7 percent by 2030. As with the challenge activities, income also 

has a strong positive influence on the participation rate for trail riding. However, 

the days per participant change very little, perhaps suggesting that higher income 

participants have more competing uses for their time.
9

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Hiking is the most popular single backcountry activity, with 33 percent adult 

participation in 2008. By 2030, the participation rate is projected to increase about 3 

percent with the number of projected participants exceeding 100 million. Total days 

of hiking are projected to increase by about 33 percent, which is slightly more than 

the increase in participation (30 percent). The increase in hiking days is among the 

highest for all activity groups.

The final backcountry activity is visiting primitive areas. It is a composite activity consisting of people who backpack, primitive camp, or visit wilderness areas. 

The participation rate is projected to decline by over 2 percent by 2030. Increased 

population density and projected decreases in wilderness, forest, and rangeland 

acres per capita appear to correlate with the participation rate decline. Activity days 

per participant are projected to decline slightly less than participation rates.

Motorized activities—

Three categories of motorized activities were considered: off-road driving, 

motorized water use, and motorized snow use. Participation in off-road driving 

averaged a little more than 20 percent among the adult population in 2008. An 

expected decrease in the participation rate between 4 and 5 percent will lower 

participation to below 20 percent by 2030. The decrease is correlated with 

expected increases in the average age and the increasing proportion of Hispanics 

in the population. Annual days per participant are also projected to decline by 

almost 3 percent. The declines in both the participation rate and days per participant imply that the overall increases in total days will be less than the respective 

increase in population.

Motorized water use has the highest participation rate of the motorized activities. More than 80 million adults or 27 percent of the adult population are projected 

to participate in 2030. It is the only motorized activity with positive percentage 

increases in both participation rate and days per participant. Income growth appears 

to be a significant factor in the positive growth rates. Both total participants and 

total days grow by about 30 percent between 2008 and 2030.

Motorized snow use (snowmobiling) has one of the largest projected declines 

in participation rates across all activities. Snowmobiling is geographically limited to areas with adequate recreation opportunities and snow conditions and is 

undertaken by only about 4 percent of the population. By 2030, rates are projected 

to decline by more than 10 percent. Similar to off-road driving, these declines are 

correlated with increasing average age and increasing proportion of Hispanics in 

the population. Days per participant also decline, but at a much lower percentage 

than the participation rate. Snowmobilers will still average about 7 days per year 

on the snow.

Hiking is the most 

popular single 

backcountry activity.
10

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Hunting and fishing—

The traditional wildlife pursuits of hunting and fishing remain popular outdoor 

activities, with about 28 million and 73 million annual adult participants, respectively, in 2008. However, on a per capita basis, these activities continue a decline 

from levels of past decades. The adult hunting participation rate is projected to 

decline by 11 to 12 percent by 2030. Increased education levels, increased population density, diminishing availability of private and public land, and strong negative 

relationships between growing minority populations and hunting appear to be 

influencing the decline in participation rate. Days per hunter are also projected to 

decline by about 5 percent. Total participants and total days of hunting continue 

to grow because of population growth, but at small increases of about 12 and 6.4 

percent, respectively. Hunting exhibits the largest drop in the rates of participation 

and days per participant and the smallest increases in the number of participants 

and total days of participation.

The overall rate of decline in per capita participation and days per participant 

are not as drastic for fishing as hunting. The participation rate for fishing is projected to decline between 2 and 3 percent. The number of adult participants is still 

expected to increase by about 23 percent to over 89 million anglers. Average annual 

fishing days per participant are projected to fall a little less than 2 percent.

Nonmotorized winter activities—

Developed skiing (downhill skiing and snowboarding) is the only winter activity 

with projected percentage increases in both per capita participation and days per 

participant. The participation rates increase by 6 to 7 percent by 2030, the largest 

increase among all activity groups. Income growth is a strong driver in skiing 

participation. Days per participant also increase but at a more modest rate of 3 

percent. The total days of 238 million in 2030 reflect an almost 40-percent increase 

above the 2008 levels.

Undeveloped skiing (cross-country skiing and snowshoeing) has the lowest 

participation rate for any of the activity groups. About 3 percent of the population 

participates, with the number of adult participants expected to remain below 10 million in 2030. Although per capita participation is expected to change little, the days 

per participant are projected to increase slightly owing to a positive correlation with 

mean population age. However, given this small increase and a static participation 

rate, the increase in annual undeveloped skiing days per year will most likely track 

population growth at about 29 percent.
11

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Nonmotorized water activities—

This category consists of floating and various kinds of outdoor swimming activities, 

including snorkeling, surfing, diving, and visiting beaches or watersides. Swimming 

is the fourth most popular outdoor activity, with a 63 percent adult participation rate 

and 187 million participants projected for 2030. Although the projected percentage 

increase in days per participant is relatively flat, the projected total days will exceed 

4.5 billion by 2030. This is driven by the popularity of swimming and the relatively 

high number of days people swim each year.

Floating activities include canoeing, kayaking, and rafting. By 2030, the participation rate is projected to decrease by almost 4 percent. The days per participant are 

projected to be virtually unchanged between 2008 and 2030 at about 6.5 days per 

year. Both the total adult participants and total days increase in future decades, but 

at levels less than the expected increase in population.

Climate Change and Recreation Trends and Projections

The results shown in table 3 were estimated without incorporating climate change 

into the projections. Climate variables were added to the projection models to assess 

whether participation and participation intensity were sensitive to climate effects 

(see Bowker et al. 2012 for details about the climate variables).

Except for a few activities, adding climate variables to the projection models 

does not greatly change projected future participation (Bowker et al. 2012). 

Generally, the effect of the climate variables is a minor change in both per capita 

participation and average days per year compared to the “no climate change” 

projection. The effect of climate is easier to understand when expressed as 

changes in total participation or total days. Table 4 shows the percentage changes 

between 2008 and 2030 for activity projections with and without climate effects 

in the model. It also displays the net difference, in percentage points, between 

the no climate change (no CC) versus climate change (CC) estimates as increases 

or decreases from the percentage for the no climate change projection. Overall, 

14 of 17 activities showed average declines in total days of participation when 

accounting for climate change. Most of those reductions lower future projected 

percentage increases in total days by 5 percentage points or less. The percentage point decline was greatest for three activities: snowmobiling, undeveloped 

skiing (cross-country skiing, snowshoeing), and floating (canoeing, kayaking, 

rafting), accounting for average net decreases of 39, 36, and 9 percentage points, 

respectively. The effect of climate change on snowmobiling and undeveloped 

skiing actually reduced the projected days of participation in 2030 to levels lower 

Snowmobiling, 

undeveloped skiing, 

and floating are the 

activities projected 

to have the greatest 

declines in participant 

days under climate 

change.
12

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

than those observed in 2008. The effects of climate change surpassed the gains 

in participant days resulting from population growth. Activities that could show a 

slight increase in total days under projected climate changes include interpretive 

site use, challenge sports, and off-road driving.

The general effects of climate change on projected percentage change in the 

number of total participants for 2030 is also shown and has similar results to the 

Table 4—Projected percentage of change in participants and days to 2030 with climate change (CC) and 

without climate change (No CC) the effects of climate change (Scenario RPA A1B), by recreation activity

Adult participants (millions) Total days (millions)

Average % change, 

2008 to 2030

Effects of 

CC

Average % change, 

2008 to 2030

Effects of 

CC

Activity groups No CC CC

% point 

difference No CC CC

% point 

difference

Visiting developed sites:

Developed site use 27.6 26.5 -1.1 26.6 24.3 -2.3

Visiting interpretive sites 30.7 30.0 -0.6 34.1 35.4 1.4

Viewing and photographing nature:

Birding 32.3 28.8 -3.5 32.5 28.3 -4.3

Viewing 28.1 27.8 -0.4 23.9 22.2 -1.6

Backcountry activities:

Challenge 31.3 32.6 1.4 30.5 32.9 2.5

Equestrian 30.1 35.0 4.9 31.7 27.2 -4.5

Hiking 30.5 27.7 -2.8 33.5 31.0 -2.5

Visiting primitive areas 24.0 22.3 -1.6 22.6 18.8 -3.8

Motorized activities:

Motorized off-road use 20.7 21.2 0.5 17.3 19.3 2.1

Motorized water use 29.9 26.3 -3.5 30.6 25.5 -5.1

Motorized snow use 13.6 -18.4 -32.0 12.1 -26.8 -38.9

Hunting and fishing:

Hunting 12.0 10.5 -1.5 6.4 4.0 -2.4

Fishing 23.4 19.1 -4.2 21.1 16.1 -5.0

Nonmotorized winter activities:

Developed skiing 35.1 34.7 -0.4 39.5 38.7 -0.8

Undeveloped skiing 25.9 -5.9 -31.8 28.6 -6.9 -35.5

Nonmotorized water activities:

Swimming 31.0 31.0 0.0 31.7 29.8 -1.9

Floating 21.7 13.1 -8.5 22.1 13.1 -9.0
13

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

climate effect on total days. The direction (increase or decrease) of the climate 

effect is often the same, but the magnitude of the difference is more muted for the 

analysis of participants. The primary exception is for equestrian activities, where 

the climate change models reduced the estimate of days by 4.5 percentage points 

and increased the number of participants by 4.9 percentage points. The opposite 

effect was evident for visiting interpretive sites, as climate change had a negative 

effect on the number of participants and a positive effect on days. The magnitude of 

the effect was relatively low at -0.6 and 1.4 percentage points, respectively. Thirteen of 17 activities are expected to experience fewer participants when climate 

change is included into the projection estimates.

However, the small percentage increases or decreases from incorporating 

climate change can have a noticeable impact on total participants and days if the 

activity has high levels of participation and average days. For example, climate 

change effects associated with developed-site use could result in 2 million fewer 

participants and 52 million fewer activity days in 2030, on average, than would 

be expected with no climate change (tables 3 and 4). The overall decline is 1.1 

percentage points for total participants and 2.3 percentage points for days. In contrast, the 36 percentage point drop in days for undeveloped skiing only reduces 

the total activity days by only 18 million because participants engage in only 6 to 

7 days of skiing annually.

The effects of climate change on outdoor recreation activities vary across 

alternative climate projections. In the set of climate projections used in the 2010 

RPA Assessment (USDA FS 2012a), the most pronounced effects of anticipated 

climate change were associated with the climate projections with the greatest 

projected increases in average temperature and decreases in precipitation (Bowker 

et al. 2012).

Dominant Factors in Recreation Projections

Previous research (e.g., Cordell 2012) has established that population size, 

gender, race, ethnicity, education, income, and supply of and proximity to 

recreation settings can be highly correlated with the rate of outdoor recreation 

participation as well as age, place of residence, and participation intensity. The 

results of the recreation projections (Bowker et al. 2012) reinforce those findings, as summarized below. 

Key differences in the model variables drive the projections of recreation 

participation. Population growth often is the most important factor. Income 

growth also has differential effects on projected participation, particularly for 

those activities that require wherewithal for effective participation, such as 
14

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

developed skiing, challenge activities, equestrian activities, hunting, and motorized activities. The effects of population growth were often offset by more 

indirect effects. For example, increased population density in the vicinity of 

recreation sites can cause crowding onsite, which has been shown to reduce the 

quality of many nature-based recreation experiences. In most cases, population 

growth is sufficient to result in overall growth in total participants and total days 

of participation, even when participation rates or average days of participation 

are projected to decline.

Males are more apt to participate in backcountry activities, hunting and fishing, 

motorized activities, nonmotorized winter activities, and floating than are females, 

while the latter are more likely to participate in the viewing activities, swimming, 

equestrian, and visiting developed sites.

Ethnicity is still a strong factor on the decision to participate. However, it has 

little influence on the annual days of participation, once an individual chooses 

to participate. Minorities including African Americans, Hispanics, and Asians, 

are almost always less likely than Whites to participate in the various activities 

examined in this report. A notable exception occurs with hiking where, controlling 

for other socioeconomic and supply factors, Hispanics are more likely than Whites 

to participate. Respondents claiming American Indian, non-Hispanic identity 

are often more likely than Whites to participate in remote activities like hunting 

and fishing, motorized off-road use, motorized snow use, hiking, equestrian, and 

viewing. In absolute numbers, 70 to 75 percent of total participants across all activity groups are non-Hispanic Whites with Hispanic participants the next highest, 

averaging about 14 percent.

Those with an education beyond high school generally have higher participation rates for most activities. However, the level of education attained can 

influence participation somewhat. For example, the greater the education level, 

the more likely one would participate in birding, nonmotorized winter activities, 

backcountry activities, and viewing activities. More than a high school education lowers the probability of participation for fishing and hunting, motorized 

off-road use, and motorized snow activities. While participation rate generally 

increases with education, around 50 percent (± 5 percent) of participants across 

all activity groups have maximum education attainment of either a high school 

education or some college.

Income is positively associated with participation and use across all activities. However, for some activities such as birding, hiking, and hunting, the 
15

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

effect is small, while for others, such as developed skiing and motorized water 

use, the effect is large. An important aspect of income growth, omitted from 

the analysis in this report, is that RPA Assessment scenarios used in this study 

accounted only for aggregate income growth and omitted any consideration of 

changing income distribution. This omission is serious and likely overlooks the 

fact that recreation access will probably become more partitioned by income 

class in the future.

Generally, land and water available per capita positively influence activity 

participation. Population growth combined with a stable public land base and 

declining private natural land base (from urbanization) resulted in a decline 

in per capita recreation opportunities over the projection period. This decline 

is likely to reduce participation rates for activities that require large spatial 

extents, such as hunting, off-road driving, and visiting primitive areas. Similarly, participation in water-based activities such as swimming, motorized boating, and nonmotorized boating are all positively correlated with the per capita 

water area. Fishing is positively correlated with both per capita water area and 

forest and rangeland area. A seemingly counterintuitive result occurred with 

the variable indicating whether the respondent lived in a coastal community. 

Here, participation in fishing, hunting, and viewing are negatively correlated 

with residence in a coastal county. Such a result could be driven by the fact that 

coastal populations in the country are dominated by highly urban areas. Finally, 

note that these results and projections do not account for factors outside the 

range of available data such as climate change effects on recreation resources, 

new technology, changes in relative costs, new infrastructure, and changes in 

tastes and preferences.

Federal Land Base for Outdoor Recreation

The United States has extensive land and water resources. Public lands held in 

trust by local, state, and federal governments are critical resources for naturebased outdoor recreation. While focusing on the federal land base, we briefly 

describe the role of state and local lands in providing recreation opportunities, based on Cordell et al. (2013). The distribution of federal land is uneven 

between the Eastern and Western United States, which influences the role of 

federal lands in providing outdoor recreation opportunities in different regions 

of the United States. Some of the information is provided by regions used in the 

RPA Assessment (fig. 1).

The amount of land and 

water available per 

capita for recreation

influences recreation 

participation.
16

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Local and State Government Lands

Local governments own a small percentage of total public lands, but these holdings 

are very important because they tend to be located close to population centers. Urban 

parklands are an important resource in areas of high population density. These 

resources typically fill a key recreation niche, providing places for activities such as 

team sports and daily exercise such as walking or jogging. Generally, these resources 

are designed and managed to accommodate frequent and heavy density of use.

States manage a variety of lands that can provide recreation opportunities, 

including state parks, state forests, state wildlife areas, and other designations. 

State lands tend to occupy a niche between the more undeveloped and dispersed 

recreation opportunities of federal lands and the much more facility and development-oriented local lands. Similar to local government lands, state resources tend 

to occur in proximity to populated areas, especially in the Eastern United States, 

Figure 1—Resources Planning Act (RPA) Assessment regions of the United States.
17

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

where state lands play a much more significant role in providing outdoor recreation 

opportunities than in the West. Still, because of the lower population in the West, 

there are more state park system acres per capita in the West than in the East 

(Cordell et al. 2013).

States manage more than 6,500 individual parks and other categories of areas 

(e.g., natural areas, historic sites) that account for about 14 million acres. The North 

and Pacific Coast regions have the largest areas (about 5.2 million acres each), 

while the South has about 2.2 million acres, and the Rocky Mountain region about 

1.4 million acres. About 25 million acres of U.S. forestland are managed by state 

forestry agencies. These lands are often available for recreation purposes, especially 

fishing, hunting, and wildlife watching. The largest percentage (64 percent) is in 

the North region, followed by the Pacific Coast region (20 percent). State forests 

and state wildlife and fish areas provide additional outdoor recreation opportunities 

(Cordell et al. 2013). 

Federal Lands

Federal lands cover about 640 million acres in the United States,4 about 28 percent 

of the total land area. Nearly all federal land is open and available to the public for 

recreation. More than 92 percent of federal land is located in the West, with about 

36 percent of all federal land in Alaska. The BLM and FS manage the majority of 

federal land. The acres of land managed by six of the seven FICOR agencies are 

shown in table 5, as well as the distribution of federal lands by RPA region. Because 

the Pacific Coast includes large federal holdings in Alaska, table 5 shows acreage 

for Alaska separately. The NOAA manages 14 marine-protected areas encompassing more than 170,000 square miles of marine and Great Lakes water from 

Washington State to the Florida Keys, and from Lake Huron to American Samoa. 

The network includes a system of 13 national marine sanctuaries and one marine 

national monument.5

Congressional designations offer additional direction to the management of 

federal lands that often affect the recreation opportunities available on those lands. 

The National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS) includes more than 109 

million acres of wilderness areas that represent the most pristine and protected of 

federal lands. More than half of the NWPS area is in Alaska, while the remainder 

is almost entirely in the Western United States. Other Congressionally designated 

areas provide unique recreation resources: national recreation areas (NRAs), 

4The 640 million acres does not include land managed by the Department of Defense. 

5 http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/.
18

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

national wild and scenic rivers (NWSRs), and the national trail system (NTS). The 

NRAs are intended to serve primarily as a recreation resource and be accessible to 

population centers. In 2008, 41 NRAs covered 7.4 million acres, with 90 percent 

of that acreage in the Western United States. The NWSR designation requires 

qualifying rivers to have outstanding scenic, wild, and recreation values. Almost 

12,600 miles of 203 rivers in 39 states and Puerto Rico were designated as of April 

2012;6 the Pacific Coast region contained more than half of the designated NWSR 

areas in 2009 (Cordell et al. 2013). Areas in the NTS include national historic trails 

and national recreation trails (NRTs). Currently, the NTS totals over 60,000 miles 

in all 50 states and comprises 11 national scenic trails and 19 national historic 

trails authorized by Congress, and more than 1,000 NRTs designated by the U.S. 

Departments of the Interior or Agriculture. The NRT system is unique in that it 

can be managed by any government agency at any level of government. In 2009, 

there were slightly more than 20,000 miles in the system, with the East accounting 

for almost 70 percent of the total trail miles (Cordell et al. 2013).

Table 5—Area of federal landa in the United States by Federal Interagency Council on Outdoor 

Recreation agency and Resources Planning Act region

Federal agency North South

Rocky 

Mountain

Pacific 

Coastb Alaska

United 

States

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Thousand acres - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Forest Service 12,161 13,396 100,096 45,101 22,207 192,961

National Park Service 1,225 5,129 10,763 9,954 52,621 79,691

Fish and Wildlife Service 1,568 4,522 10,496 1,767 76,886 95,239

Bureau of Reclamation — 197 5,470 854 — 6,522

Bureau of Land Management 4 25 142,956 31,906 72,423 247,314

Army Corps of Engineers 2,557 7,104 3,540 526 19 13,746

Total 17,515 30,373 273,321 90,108 224,156 635,473

—= not applicable. a

Acres reported by the Bureau of Reclamation and Army Corps of Engineers include water area. 

b

Pacific Coast acreage in this column does not include Alaska.

Sources: USDA FS (2013) data: http://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/lar/LAR2013/Table_03.pdf

USDI National Park Service, (2010) data as reported in Gorte et al. (2012).

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (2013 data): http://www.fws.gov/refuges/realty/archives/pdf/2013_Annual_Report_of_LandsDataTables.pdf.

USDI Bureau of Reclamation, Recreation Fast Facts: http://www.usbr.gov/recreation. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2012 data: http://www.blm.gov/public_land_statistics/pls12/pls2012-web.pdf.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources in partnership with the Engineer Research and Development Center and 

Natural Resources Management, Value to the Nation website: http://www.CorpsResults.us (last updated 2006). 

6 http://www.rivers.gov/national-system.php.
19

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Federal land availability and facilities—

The seven FICOR agencies are critical providers of outdoor recreation opportunities to the American public as well as foreign tourists. The key activities for each 

agency focus on connecting the visiting public with the resources under their stewardship. All of the FICOR agencies balance recreation activity with resource management, where “management” can be construed as either preserving a specific 

resource or balancing joint production of several outputs from one resource unit. 

All of the FICOR agencies have goals that include some combination of providing 

public access to the resource base, promoting health of benefits from the resource, 

and improving connections with our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage.

The recreation resources managed by the FICOR agencies are extensive. 

However, if the area of federal lands and waters is assumed to remain stable, per 

capita availability can only decline over time as population increases. The ability of 

federal resources to meet future recreation participation depends on future recreation 

participation rates, the distribution of recreation participants in relation to recreation 

resources, and substitutes for federal opportunities. Transportation systems will continue to be critical for providing access to recreation opportunities. Figure 2 overlays 

the current land base of six of the FICOR agencies (excluding NOAA) in the United 

States on a map of county-level projected population change to 2030, following the 

population projections of the RPA A1B scenario from the 2010 RPA Assessment.

Although the federal land base may remain relatively static, legislative and 

executive designations, along with agency regulations and rules, can alter the mix of 

recreation opportunities available. Changes in designations can affect the mix between 

recreation activities (e.g., a change from motorized to nonmotorized use) or the mix 

between recreation and other uses (e.g., recreation and logging or mineral extraction). 

These types of changes can effectively increase or decrease federal acreage available 

for recreation.

The NPS, FWS, BLM, and FS provide a wide range of recreation opportunities, 

with dominant activities including sightseeing (including auto touring or pleasure 

driving), viewing nature and wildlife (including birds), and hiking and walking. Top 

activities across all NPS units are sightseeing, day hiking, visitor center use, and 

creative arts (photography, writing, painting, drawing, etc.).7 The greatest participation rates on FWS lands are for wildlife observation and birding, photography, 

hiking/walking, auto-tour driving, and freshwater fishing, although other popular 

7 https://irma.nps.gov/Stats/Reports/National.

The ability of federal 

resources to meet 

future recreation 

participation depends 

on future recreation 

participation rates, 

the distribution of 

recreation participants 

in relation to recreation 

resources, and 

substitutes for federal 

opportunities.
20

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

activities are hunting, bicycling, and nonmotorized boating.8 Bureau of Land 

Management officials indicated the activities with the highest recreational visitation on BLM lands are camping and picnicking, nonmotorized travel, off-highway 

travel, and hunting (USDI BLM 2013). The most common activities in which people 

participate on FS lands include viewing scenery/natural features, hiking/walking, 

relaxing/hanging out, and viewing wildlife.9

Figure 2—Federal lands (brown shading) overlaid on population change by county in the United States projected from 2010 to 2030, 

RPA A1B scenario. (Source of federal ownership overlay for six Federal Interagency Council on Outdoor Recreation agencies: Protected 

Area Database-United States [PAD-US]).

8 Kilcullen, K. 2014. Personal communication. Chief of Visitor Services, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 4401 N Fairfax Dr., Arlington, VA 22203. 

9 http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/nvum/.
21

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

The USACE, BOR, and NOAA are more focused on opportunities associated 

with water recreation. The USACE sites host 33 percent of all U.S. freshwater 

lake fishing; provide other water-based activities, and camping and hiking/walking opportunities.10 Similarly, the BOR provides extensive water-based opportunities. The BOR’s day use and dispersed opportunities areas also accommodate 

activities such as camping, picnicking, hiking, wildlife viewing, and photography. The most common activities at NOAA marine sanctuaries are fishing, 

SCUBA, and snorkeling. 

Proximity is important for many recreation visitors. For several agencies, 

including BLM, FS, FWS, and USACE, at least half of the visits come from people 

who live within 50 miles.11 Thus, population growth or change in the communities 

in those proximate zones greatly affect the volume and nature of visitation. Even so, 

these agencies all have resources that can have regional, national, or international 

markets. Although there is considerable overlap in the recreation opportunities 

across the FICOR agencies, they could be segmented into dominant niches. The 

BLM and FS offer a range of opportunities from “big backyard” to backcountry; 

the FWS opportunities emphasize wildlife, fish, and birds, while the NPS is often 

associated with iconic natural and cultural resources. The USACE, BOR, and 

NOAA tend to focus on water and underwater resources.

Economic Contributions From Recreation on 

Federal Lands

Federal recreation resources offer opportunities for individuals to interact with 

forests and other natural resources. Federally managed public areas supply places 

individuals can use to recreate or exercise and landscapes that are aesthetically 

pleasing and provide desirable backdrops for living or working. Through these 

interactions with federal recreation resources, a number of positive economic 

effects accrue to people, individually and as communities. The most commonly 

recognized economic outcomes from federal recreation resources include business 

activity generated from spending by recreation visitors, increased property values 

and business attraction because of natural amenities those resources provide, and 

health benefits from physical activity and stress reduction.

Of the economic outcomes associated with federal recreation resources noted 

above, the most attention is typically given to the business activity created when 

10 http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Recreation.aspx.

11 http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/nvum/2012%20National_Summary_

Report_061413.pdf.
22

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

visitors spend money to recreate. This economic outcome is often a key consideration in federal natural resource planning; is a focus of local, regional, and national 

business groups; and is a primary interest of local and state community leaders. 

Americans spend an estimated $646 billion annually on recreation equipment 

and the goods and services connected with outdoor recreation (Outdoor Industry 

Association 2013). The majority of that spending—$525 billion—is made while 

recreating for purchasing food, lodging, fuel, and entertainment. Recreation trip 

spending includes purchases at home in preparation for the trip, enroute, and at the 

recreation destination. In total, American spending for recreation supports about 6.1 

million full- and part-time jobs (Outdoor Industry Association 2013). How spending 

in support of recreation influences the economy in the future will be influenced, in 

large part, by future patterns of recreation participation.

People spend money at businesses while recreating on both public and private 

lands. But, from the standpoint of public lands management, there is substantial 

interest in how government provision of opportunities for recreation on public 

lands translates into economic activity in communities around federal recreation 

resources. Studies specific to federal lands indicate that those recreating on federal 

recreation resources spend at least $51 billion in the local economies around their 

federal recreation destination (English et al. 2014, USDI 2014). This is a conservative estimate of overall spending relative to spending reported in national recreation 

industry analyses. Federal contribution analyses typically limit visitor expenditures 

to a geographic area in proximity to the federal recreation sites. The at-home and 

enroute spending of visitors traveling longer distances is typically not included 

in economic contribution analyses for agencies. Rather, the intent typically is to 

attribute the spending to a single destination and a single trip and focus the effects 

in and around federal recreation opportunities. This limits the magnitude and scope 

of what is included in federal contributions, but links the spending to resources and 

opportunities provided.

Factors Contributing to Economic Activity From Federal 

Recreation 

The magnitude of business activity in local communities associated with outdoor 

recreation on federal lands is dependent on (1) the presence of people recreating on 

federal recreation lands, (2) the existence of businesses where visitors can spend 

money, and (3) spending by recreation visitors.

Recreation participation—

Recreation occurring on federal lands results from individual visitor preferences for 

outdoor recreation as well as the quality and quantity of recreation opportunities 
23

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

supplied by federal agencies. The quality of opportunities for recreation activities 

such as camping, hiking, picnicking, observing nature, fishing, hunting, viewing 

wildlife, driving off-road, and others, will influence the amount and type of recreation on federal lands. Visitors to communities around federal recreation opportunities generate economic activity. A number of federal recreation destinations are 

unique, premier recreation destinations (i.e., “crown jewels”) that consistently attract 

large numbers of tourists who travel long distances to reach the site. The recreation 

activity at these sites often drives substantial economic activity in local communities. 

Tourism is the primary economic driver in many of these communities. Some other 

federal recreation destinations are in remote rural communities that tend to have few 

visitors, many of whom reside in the local area. Visitor spending in these locales is 

often relatively low with limited associated business activity. The majority of federal 

recreation areas are likely somewhere in the middle, receiving moderate levels of 

visitation that drive an important, but modest, component of local economic activity.

Opportunities for visitor spending—

The amount of visitor spending stimulated by federal recreation opportunities 

depends, in large part, on the presence of private businesses in nearby communities. 

Communities that are able to capture the most spending from recreation visitors 

have businesses that offer services and goods desired by those engaged in outdoor 

recreation. On average, expenditures for lodging; food, and drink in restaurants, 

bars, and grocery stores; and fuel account for the majority of recreation trip spending. Communities may increase the likelihood and magnitude of visitor spending by 

including complementary attractions/activities to lengthen visitor stays, or provide 

incentives for return visits.

The presence of private businesses operating as concessionaires or offering 

outfitter/guide services on federal lands often enhances the recreation opportunities accessible to visitors and leads to increased spending in local communities. 

Concessionaire and guide businesses are attracted to, and dependent on, the 

innate features of federal recreation resources and operate within guidelines set by 

federal agencies. Concessionaires and guides can provide key services and create 

access opportunities for a broader spectrum of recreation visitors. In some cases, 

concessionaires and guides may encourage longer stays and enhance the amount of 

spending in local communities by selling recreation packages that include services 

or products offered by other local businesses.

The primary effects of visitor purchases of goods and services are realized by 

businesses catering directly to visitor needs. However, the total economic activity 

is greatest when there are other local businesses that are intermediate suppliers to 

businesses selling directly to recreationists. For example, if a restaurant purchases 
24

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

meats, vegetables, or beverages from producers in the local area, money spent by 

recreationists accrues both to the restaurant serving recreationists as well as local 

food producers. Alternately, if a restaurant must source food from outside the local 

area, the money spent by recreationists leaks out of the local economy more rapidly 

as restaurant supplies are purchased from elsewhere.

Recreation visitor spending—

Spending from visitors in and around federal recreation resources creates economic 

activity in local communities. A variety of factors, including the size of the travel 

party, time spent in the local area, personal preferences and income, and shopping 

opportunities influence how much money people spend in local communities and 

their types of purchases. The specific recreation activity of the visitor has a secondary, and limited, influence on visitor spending.

Visitor spending is strongly influenced by the type of recreation trip: day use 

versus overnight trips, and destinations far from or close to home. Those characteristics of trip type alter the array of items and services a visitor must purchase during 

the recreation visit. Those staying overnight away from home usually spend money 

for lodging in hotels/motels, bed and breakfasts, or public or private campgrounds. 

An individual on a day trip does not need to purchase lodging. Visitors staying one 

or more nights in a community eat more meals in the area and often spend more 

money in local restaurants/bars and grocery stores. A day visitor may spend a relatively brief time in local communities and may eat meals at home before and after 

the trip. Finally, visitors staying more than one day in an area are more likely to 

spend money on entertainment, souvenirs, and other retail items. A visitor traveling 

a long distance from home, whether on a day trip or overnight trip, often has greater 

spending because the trip length requires increased purchases of items such as fuel.

Generally, the specific recreation activity has a secondary influence on visitor 

spending. Some activities have greater or lesser spending, on average, because of the 

types of purchases (e.g., lift tickets, fuel, and guide services) required to complete 

the trip. For example, downhill skiers at sites on federal lands are among the highest 

recreation spenders. On a per-night basis, these visitors spend significantly more than 

other visitors for recreation fees (e.g., lift tickets), restaurants and bars, and lodging. 

Conversely, some activities such as backpacking and hiking have spending levels that 

are lower than those of visitors on the same type of trip but engaged in a different primary activity. Visitors on backpacking trips are likely to make purchases near their 

home and have limited or no opportunities to spend money while recreating in the 

backcountry. Despite lower than average spending, hiking is one of the most popular 

activities on federal lands. The aggregate total spending of hikers and backpackers 

can be an important contribution to the economies of many rural communities.

Spending from visitors 

in and around federal 

recreation resources 

creates economic 

activity in local 

communities.
25

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Classification of Trip Spending and Recreation Visits

The FICOR agencies each develop estimates of total recreation use, the amount of 

money visitors spend in local communities, and how that spending affects local 

economies. In many cases, agencies have implemented monitoring systems to 

update estimates of total recreation use, visitor characteristics, and trip spending 

on a regular basis. For this discussion, we use spending estimates developed from 

the FS National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) Program as an indicator of how 

projected future recreation participation could change the amount of recreation 

spending in local communities. The NVUM data are a useful source for this 

analysis because they are collected throughout the United States, represent visitors 

engaged in a broad range of recreation trips and activities, and come from surveys 

of users in a variety of settings near a diverse group of communities. The approach 

for estimating visitor spending through NVUM is generally consistent with that 

used by other FICOR agencies. Further, spending averages estimated from the 

NVUM data are consistent with spending averages estimated from the monitoring 

programs of other agencies. For the purpose of economic contribution analysis, the 

FICOR agencies are consistent and only consider visitor spending within about 50 

miles of federal recreation resources. The marine sanctuaries managed by NOAA 

are one notable exception.

Visitor spending attributed to recreation on federal lands is categorized by 

the type of recreation trip. At the most aggregate level, trips are classified by the 

proximity of their origin to the destination and if the trip lasted more than one 

day. Trip origin distinguishes trips to recreation sites close to home (local trips) 

from trips involving longer distance travel (nonlocal trips). The cutoff distance 

can vary based on the recreation market area, but local trips are often less than 50 

miles from the visitor’s home to the recreation destination. The length of the trip 

is classified as (1) recreation trips that start and finish at home on the same day 

(day trips) or (2) trips that involve an overnight stay on federal lands or in local 

communities nearby (overnight trips). The combination of these trip types creates 

four separate categories and forms the core of trip types considered across all federal agencies. Most agencies refine the categories to explain more of the spending 

variation between trips. For example, the NPS classifies overnight trips into those 

staying in NPS campgrounds, NPS lodges, private hotels/motels outside the park, 

and private campgrounds (Cullinane et al. 2014). Further, the FS partitions overnight stays into those that include stays at hotels, motels, or campgrounds outside 

the national forest versus those in campgrounds, or other lodging on national 

forest lands (White et al. 2013). Lastly, recreation visitors who do not consider 

the federal site to be the primary motivating reason for the trip are often grouped 
26

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

into a separate category. The spending of visitors in that “nonprimary” category is 

typically fully or partially excluded from analysis of economic contribution, leading to a more conservative estimate of the economic contribution of federal lands. 

At the national level across all activities, the FS uses seven trip types to classify 

all recreation visits to national forests (table 6). The FS visitor spending figures 

and the distribution of recreation visits across the trip types demonstrate the key 

features of classifying trips.

The type of recreation trip is the most important factor in explaining variation 

in visitor trip spending to federal recreation sites (White and Stynes 2008). Average 

spending figures estimated from NVUM data illustrate how recreation spending 

varies by trip type. Visitors traveling outside the local area of their home (nonlocal visitors) to recreate spend up to twice as much as visitors recreating near their 

homes (local visitors) (table 6). Further, those visitors who take trips where they 

stay overnight away from home (whether local or nonlocal trips) spend more than 

visitors on day trips. The greatest spending comes from visitors who travel far from 

home and stay overnight in communities near federal lands. These visitors spend on 

average 15 times more than those on local day trips.

Communities often make a considerable effort to attract overnight visitors 

(who tend to have higher spending). However, recreation visitors take a variety of 

trip types and total spending in communities is dependent on both the patterns of 

average spending and the distribution of visitation across trip types (table 6). Most 

visits to FS lands are associated with people on day trips recreating locally, near 

their homes (49 percent). Although day trips have relatively low levels of average 

spending, the high number of trips yields a significant amount of total spending. 

Table 6—Average spending in local communities and the distribution recreation visits across Forest Service 

trip type categories

Nonlocal 

day trips

Nonlocal 

overnight 

trips 

(camping)

Nonlocal 

overnight 

trips 

(hotels or 

motels)

Local day 

trips

Local 

overnight 

trips 

(camping)

Local 

overnight 

trips 

(hotels or 

motels)

Not 

primarya

Average party spending 

within 50 miles of 

recreation destinationsb

$63 $233 $514 $33 $162 $213 NA

Percentage of all tripsc 10 9 14 49 4 1 13

NA = not applicable.

a The Forest Service recognizes a group termed “not primary” travelers. These visitors recreate on Forest Service land as part of a larger leisure or 

business trip that has some primary purpose other than Forest Service recreation. These visitors typically have high levels of spending, but only a portion 

of that spending is directly attributable to Forest Service land.

b

Average spending by trip type in local communities of travel parties recreating on U.S. Forest Service land.

c Percentage distribution of U.S. Forest Service recreation trips across trip type categories.

Source: White et al. 2013.
27

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

The second most common type of trip to FS lands is by nonlocal visitors staying 

overnight. The high spending of that group, and the fairly large number of trips, 

combine to generate high levels of total spending. Relatively small changes in the 

level of visitation in that group can produce large swings in total spending.

Total spending in local communities is largely a function of the numbers of 

each trip type taken by visitors. The recreation activity can also play an important 

role if opportunities for expensive activities such as developed skiing and motorized 

vehicle use are available. Conversely, low spending activities, such as backcountry 

camping and hiking usually support less spending. However, lower spending for 

these activities may not hold for unique recreation opportunities or high-quality 

environments that draw visitors for extended stays. The recreation activity can 

provide important information about visitor spending, but except for special cases, 

like developed skiing, it should be considered as a secondary attribute after trip 

type when evaluating recreation spending.

Economic Contribution From Federal Recreation Opportunities

A recently completed analysis by the FICOR agencies uses spending and reported 

recreation visitation to provide estimates of the economic contribution of federal 

recreation to the national economy (English et al. 2014, USDI 2014). Outdoor 

recreationists made more than 938 million visits to federal lands in 2012, spending 

$51 billion and supporting 880,000 jobs (English et al. 2014, USDI 2014). Table 7 

provides a snapshot of the contributions that outdoor recreation had on jobs and the 

economy in 2012.

Table 7—2012 economic contributions of visitor spending for recreation on federal 

lands and waters (2012 dollars)

Agency

Recreation 

visits

Total visitor 

spending

Jobs 

supported

Millions Billion dollars Thousands

National Park Service 283 15 243

Bureau of Land Management 59 3 58

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 47 2 37

Bureau of Reclamation 28 1 26

Forest Service 161 11 194

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NRa 5 135

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 360 13 187

Total 938 51 880

a NR = not reported.

Source: English 2014.

Outdoor recreationists 

made more than 

938 million visits 

to federal lands in 

2012, spending $51 

billion and supporting 

880,000 jobs.
28

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Economic Activity Associated With Future 

Recreation Participation

The RPA Assessment projections described earlier are used in this section as a reasonable estimate of the overall patterns of future recreation participation on federal 

lands. Those projections do not differentiate recreation participation on public or 

private lands. Moreover, while the projections are not specific to federal lands, the 

set of nature-based activities considered are closely related to many federal opportunities. Because consideration of trip type is fundamental to understanding visitor 

spending in local communities, we separately discuss activity spending for day and 

overnight trips and the distribution of visitation by activity across trip types. The 

effects of climate change on future recreation participation are discussed at the end 

of this section.

Visitor Spending on Day Trips 

The level of average spending for day trips ranges from a low of $21 dollars for 

local visitors to $130 for visitors coming from longer distances (table 8). At the high 

end of spending are visitors engaged in developed skiing (downhill, snowboarding), all motorized activities, undeveloped skiing (cross country, snowshoeing), and 

hunting. These activities often require a significant investment in recreation fees, 

fuel, and supplies for completing the trip. Of these activities, developed skiing and 

motorized water recreation are projected to see the greatest percentage increases 

in participant days by 2030. Motorized off-road use, snowmobiling, and hunting 

are projected to have the lowest increases in participant days, ranging from 6 to 17 

percent. Motorized recreation activities on federal lands are typically restricted to 

specific areas. Snowmobiling is further limited to times and regions of the country 

where weather conditions are conducive. Changes in recreation participation in 

motorized activities (and the associated changes in visitor spending) will likely 

affect a select subset of communities near federal lands. Because hunting occurs 

across a broad range of recreation resources and is distributed across the United 

States, although seasonally restricted, the effects of slow growth in participation 

could influence many communities.

Hiking, birding, and interpretive site use occur across a broad spectrum of 

recreation environments and represent three of the top four projected percentage 

increases in participant days. Hiking is currently the most common recreation 

activity on FS lands. The average spending of day trip visitors engaged in these 

general activities is among the lowest and is significantly less than specialized 

activities like motorized recreation or skiing. However, recreation participation 
29

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

in general activities is so great that the total spending is substantial. Most federal 

lands offer opportunities for visitors to engage in these activities. Therefore, 

anticipated future participation increases in these generalized activities is likely to 

have positive economic effects on numerous communities located around federal 

recreation resources. 

Table 8—Projected change in participant daysa and average spending of parties in local 

communities on recreation trips to U.S. Forest Service lands

Spending per party per trip in federal recreation communities 

(2007 dollars) (White and Stynes 2010)

Activity groups

Projected change 

in participant 

days, 2008–2030

Non 

local day 

trips

Nonlocal 

overnight 

trips

Local 

day 

trips

Local 

overnight 

trips

Percent - - - - - - - - - - - Dollars - - - - - - - - - - -

Visiting developed sites 27 $72 $206 $40 $171 

Visiting interpretive sites 34 $65 $473 $37 $195 

Viewing/photographing nature: 

Birding 33 $65 $473 $37 $195 

Viewing 24 $65 $473 $37 $195 

Backcountry activities:

Challenge 30 $50 $473 $21 $150 

Equestrian 32 $50 $473 $21 $150 

Hiking 33 $50 $473 $21 $150 

Visiting primitive areas 23 $50 $134 $21 $120 

Motorized activities:

Motorized off-road use 17 $109 $277 $58 $134 

Motorized water use 31 $109 $277 $58 $134 

Motorized snow use 12 $129 $642 $74 $311 

Hunting and fishing:

Hunting 6 $88 $368 $51 $248 

Fishing 21 $55 $331 $38 $161 

Nonmotorized winter activities:

Developed skiing 39 $130 $798 $64 $386

Undeveloped skiing 29 $97 $537 $27 $259

Nonmotorized water activities:

Swimming 32 $72 $330 $40 $187

Floating 22 $72 $330 $40 $187

a Results do not include climate change effects; see table 3.
30

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Visitor Spending on Overnight Trips

Visitors traveling on overnight trips have the highest per-trip spending of any visitor 

type (table 8). Spending ranges from about $120 for locals visiting primitive areas to 

almost $800 for nonlocal developed-area skiers. The pattern of high spending noted for 

day trip visitors engaged in developed and undeveloped skiing and snowmobiling continues for overnight visitors as all three groups exceed $500 per trip. Motorized water 

and off-road use are generally on the lower end of the overnight spending spectrum in 

contrast to their high spending as day use activities. In many cases, visitors engaged in 

these activities are camping and spending less on lodging than other overnight visitors.

Visitors on overnight trips use a variety of lodging types and have varying patterns of visitor spending. Campers tend to have high levels of spending for groceries and fuel, although some campers bring food purchased outside the local area. 

In many settings, these visitors also have relatively high spending on entertainment 

and souvenirs. Public or private area camping is split between developed site use 

(which includes developed campground camping) and visiting primitive areas 

(backcountry camping). Participation in both those activities is projected to increase 

in the coming decades (27 and 23 percent, respectively). Increased rates of camping 

will promote increased spending for groceries, fuel, souvenirs, and entertainment.

Those staying overnight in hotels/motels and lodges spend more in restaurants 

and bars and on entertainment than do campers. Winter recreationists engaged in 

developed skiing or snowmobiling have some of the highest levels of overnight 

visitor spending and use hotels/motels and lodges more than visitors engaged in 

other activities. Participation growth in developed skiing is projected to be very 

high, while motorized snow recreation is projected to see lower levels of growth. 

Visitors using cabins, seasonal homes, or staying with friends and relatives have 

spending patterns that are a mix of those camping and those using hotels/motels 

or lodges. They often eat some meals at the cabin (leading to grocery spending) 

and some meals in restaurants (leading to restaurant spending). Like campers, 

some of these visitors may bring food purchased from outside the local area. 

Cabin and seasonal home users participate in a variety of activities but have high 

levels of participation in winter recreation and general recreation activities like 

viewing and photographing nature, hiking, or visiting developed sites. All of those 

activities are projected to see increases in recreation participation in the future. 

High Spending Trip Types and Recreation Activity Projections

A few activities (e.g., developed skiing and motorized recreation) have higher 

than average spending because participants need to purchase specific items 

(e.g., lift tickets or additional fuel) regardless of the type of trip taken. Other 
31

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

activities generate high trip spending because visitors often stay overnight or 

take trips far from home. Both trip types lead to high trip spending and create 

significant economic effects for local communities. Federal recreation opportunities that facilitate overnight stays or encourage long-distance travel support 

these types of activities. The RPA projections, coupled with an understanding 

of what activities are most associated with overnight and long-distance trips, 

can provide insight into how total spending may change in the future because of 

changing trip type.

Distribution of Visitor Use by Trip Type and Activity

The intensity of visitor use within each of the trip types significantly affects 

total spending. Overnight trips from nonlocals, some coming from very long 

distances, are most common among visitors who engage in developed skiing, 

developed site use, swimming, and floating (table 9). A quarter or more of the 

trips in each of those activities occur in that trip type. Those four activities, 

along with the wildlife-related activities (birding, hunting, and fishing), have 

over 30 percent of their visitor use from people traveling 50 or more miles from 

home. Developed skiing is the only activity with greater than 50 percent of 

reported visitation (58 percent) coming from distances more than 50 miles from 

the site. Large percentage increases in participant days are projected for both 

developed skiing and birding. Relatively small percentage increases are projected 

for hunting, fishing, and floating. Federal recreation opportunities supporting 

birding and developed skiing should yield increased out-of-town travelers to 

communities near the visited sites. Communities close to federal hunting and 

fishing opportunities will probably see gains in out-of-town visitors, although 

those gains will not be as large because those activities require low densities of 

use for quality experiences.

Local day users tend to dominate recreation trips to FS lands with about 

two-thirds of the activities having 50 percent or more trips in that category; the 

largest proportions in backcountry activities, motorized activities, and undeveloped skiing. Relatively large increases in participant days are projected for most 

backcountry activities and motorized water use. If the distribution of trips across 

trip types is stable over time, the relatively large increases in participant days in 

these activities will likely yield associated increases in local trips. Although the 

spending of these visitors is lower than that of nonlocals, it can be an important 

economic activity in some communities. Thus, the volume of use from local day 

users generates significant cumulative economic activity despite their lower average trip spending.

The volume of use 

from local day users 

generates significant 

cumulative economic 

activity despite their 

lower average trip 

spending.
32

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Table 9—Projected change in participant days and current distribution of recreation trips across trip type 

categories for visitors to U.S. Forest Service lands engaged in a variety of recreation activitiesa

Activity groups

Projected 

change in 

participant 

days, 2008–2030

Nonlocal 

day trips

Nonlocal 

overnight 

trips

Local 

day trips

Local 

overnight 

trips

Not 

primary

Percent

Visiting developed sites:

Developed site use 27 9 25 43 8 15

Visiting interpretive sites 34 10 16 39 2 33

Viewing/photographing nature: 

Birding 33 10 21 55 7 7

Viewing 24 10 16 39 2 33

Backcountry activities:

Challenge 30 8 13 62 2 15

Equestrian 32 8 13 62 2 15

Hiking 33 8 13 62 2 15

Visiting primitive areas 23 8 13 62 2 15

Motorized activities:

Motorized off-road use 17 7 21 62 5 5

Motorized water use 31 7 21 62 5 5

Motorized snow use 12 7 21 62 5 5

Hunting and fishing:

Hunting 6 10 21 55 7 7

Fishing 21 10 21 55 7 7

Nonmotorized winter activities:

Developed skiing 39 14 44 36 2 4

Undeveloped skiing 29 7 16 68 2 7

Nonmotorized water activities:

Swimming 32 9 25 43 8 15

Floating 22 9 25 43 8 15

a Recreation trip type source: White and Stynes (2010).
33

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

The Potential Influence of Climate Change

Future climate conditions—along with population growth, increasing wealth, and 

changing preferences, as alluded to above—will likely influence participation 

patterns in outdoor recreation. The recreation participation projections for 2030 

displayed in table 9 do not include the influence of climate changes. Additional 

RPA Assessment projection models were estimated with the inclusion of variables 

to account for future climate conditions. Incorporating climate variables slightly 

lowered the estimates of participation days in 2030 for most activities relative 

to the projections without climate change (see table 4). In general, the effects of 

climate change were overwhelmed by increases in participation because of greater 

future population and income. Although most of the differences between the 

climate and no climate estimates are small and considered insignificant, three key 

recreation activities have much lower participation rates when climate change is 

incorporated (table 10).

Accounting for anticipated future climate change substantively reduces the 

projections of future recreation participation in motorized snow use, undeveloped 

skiing, and floating. Climate change is projected to decrease total participation in 

2030 for the former two activities and to slow the growth of participation in floating. 

Some places that still have adequate snow in the future may see muted reductions, 

or even increases, as visitors are displaced from areas with poor snow conditions. 

Other locales could experience more significant variations in climate and have more 

extreme reductions in participation. Recreationists who engage in snowmobiling or 

undeveloped skiing on federal lands have some of the highest trip expenditures of 

federal lands recreationists. Large changes in the numbers of participant days in these 

activities could lead to meaningful reductions in the economic inputs to communities 

where those activities are currently popular. However, because winter recreation is 

constrained to areas with specific recreation opportunities and climate conditions, the 

effects of reductions in spending would not be felt across all communities near federal 

Table 10—Projected future recreation participation with (CC) and without climate change 

(no CC) for select recreation activities

Activity group

Projected change in days of 

participation (no CC), 2008–2030

Projected change in days of 

participation (CC), 2008–2030

Percent

Motorized snow use 12 -27

Undeveloped skiing 29 -7

Floating 22 13

CC = climate change.
34

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

recreation opportunities. In those places that are affected, reductions could result in 

significant local economic changes unless the winter activities can be substituted for 

others in the same region. For example, in the absence of snow cover, snowmobile 

areas might be suitable for other forms of dispersed recreation.

Climate change is also projected to slow participation growth in floating 

(rafting, tubing, canoeing, kayaking). Floating is a general recreation activity that 

occurs on a wide range of locations across most federal land management agencies. Those engaged in floating have average levels of spending during their trips, 

although the popularity of floating creates an important contribution to the economies of many locales near federal lands. With changing climate, floating participation may grow more slowly than it might otherwise. Similar to nonmotorized 

winter activities, areas offering floating activities will be differentially affected 

as climate change effects will vary across regions. Some areas will improve and 

benefit in terms of local conditions, while other areas experience declines.

Demographic Change and Recreation Spending

The racial and ethnic diversity of the U.S. population is projected to continue 

to increase in the coming decades. Table 11 displays recreation participation by 

different race/ethnicity groups for the seven composite activity groups. Although 

the composite groups obscure important differences in individual activities, some 

overall trends are evident. Amongst all racial and ethnic groups, visiting developed 

sites and viewing nature have the highest levels of participation. Comparing across 

racial and ethnic groups, American Indians have the highest rates of participation in 

those activities, while African Americans report the lowest rates.

Racial and ethnic groups show greater differences in participation for more specialized recreation activities. African Americans and Asian/Pacific Islanders have 

Table 11—Percentage of participation in outdoor recreation activity groups by racial and 

ethnic group, 2005–2009

Activity groups White

African 

American

Asian/Pacific 

Islander Hispanic

American 

Indian

Visiting developed sites 80 69 82 75 84

Viewing/photographing nature 78 59 73 71 79

Backcountry activities 46 21 34 43 60

Motorized activities 41 15 24 35 42

Hunting and fishing 38 21 19 32 38

Nonmotorized winter activities 13 4 11 12 7

Nonmotorized water activities 24 7 21 19 21

Source: Cordell 2012.

Amongst all racial 

and ethnic groups, 

visiting developed 

sites and viewing 

nature have the highest 

levels of participation. 

Racial and ethnic 

groups show greater 

differences in 

participation for more 

specialized recreation 

activities.
35

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

relatively low levels of participation in backcountry activities, motorized activities, 

and hunting and fishing. Hispanics have rates of participation in those aggregate 

activities that are more similar to, but lower than, participation by Whites. American Indians have by far the highest rate of participation in backcountry activities 

and participate in motorized activities and hunting and fishing similar to participation rates of Whites. The increasing share of Hispanic, African American, and 

Asian/Pacific Islanders in the population is projected to contribute to slower gains 

in participation in motorized recreation and hunting and fishing. Communities that 

currently see high levels of spending from visitors engaged in those activities may 

see slower growth in spending in the future.

Increasing diversity in the population is unlikely to decrease future levels of 

spending for people engaged in general activities such as visiting developed sites and 

viewing and photographing nature. Those sorts of activities account for a large share 

of current recreation visits to federal lands, are popular among most groups, and 

contribute significant levels of spending. Spending attributed to those general activities will likely remain largely unchanged as the population continues to diversify.

Winter recreation sports are key drivers of local economic activity in some communities. Visitors engaged in developed and undeveloped skiing and snowmobiling 

have the highest spending per trip in local communities. Among racial and ethnic 

groups, Whites, Hispanics, and Asian/Pacific Islanders show the greatest rates of 

participation in winter recreation. Anticipated increases in the number of Hispanics 

and Asian/Pacific Islanders will likely lead to continued popularity of winter snow 

sports, especially if the opportunities are not diminished by climate change.

Americans 45 and older report participating in fewer types of recreation activities as they age (table 12). Projected participation drops significantly for hunting 

and fishing, motorized activities, backcountry activities, and nonmotorized winter 

activities. However, general activities like visiting developed sites and viewing and 

photographing nature remain popular for almost two-thirds of older individuals. 

Local communities can expect to continue to see older Americans participating in 

these general recreation activities. Because most federal lands offer opportunities to 

participate in those activities, many local communities are in a position to continue 

to capture the economic benefits associated with these visitors.

Men typically report higher overall rates of participation in outdoor recreation 

activities than women. The largest differences occur for nonmotorized winter 

activities, hunting and fishing, and to a lesser extent motorized and backcountry 

activities. Therefore, continued slowing of hunting and fishing participation, as the 

population diversifies, and associated changes in spending may affect communities 

with high dependency on those activities.
36

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Other Considerations for Future Economic Contributions 

From Recreation

Future visitor spending patterns—

Expectations for the future effects on local communities from federal recreation 

opportunities are sensitive to a number of considerations beyond future participation rates. Effects of future changes in recreation participation on economic activity 

in communities are based on current visitor spending patterns. The current patterns in the expenditures for goods and services by federal recreation visitors have 

appeared stable in recent years. For example, after accounting for inflation, there 

has been relatively little change in the relative amounts that visitors spend on food 

versus gasoline versus lodging. In the future, aside from any inflationary differences, the types and amounts of things that visitors buy could change from current 

patterns. Changing technology, economic conditions, or preferences could result in 

unforeseen effects to local economies dependent on tourism associated with federal 

recreation resources.

User and entrance fee changes—

Changes in entrance or user fees charged by providers of federal recreation opportunities or concessionaires and guides operating on federal lands could change 

the amount of recreation visits to those resources or the patterns of spending of 

recreation visitors. The relationship between fees and recreation use is complex, 

making it difficult to accurately project changes. Bowker et al. (1999) reported that 

95 percent of the public found fees or a combination of fees and taxes acceptable 

to fund recreation opportunities on public lands. Further, fees can be a relatively 

insignificant share of trip costs for some types of trips. Nonetheless, changes in 

Table 12—Participation rates in outdoor recreation activity groups by age group and gender, 

(2005–2009)

Activity group Age 45–54 Age 55–64 Age 65+ Male Female

Percent

Visiting developed sites 81 75 62 76 79

Viewing and photographing nature 80 75 65 74 75

Backcountry activities 48 37 22 49 35

Motorized activities 37 27 17 41 30

Hunting and fishing 38 29 20 46 23

Nonmotorized winter activities 10 5 2 15 8

Nonmotorized water activities 22 15 7 23 19
37

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

fees to recreate at federal sites could change future recreation activity participation beyond the projected levels noted in this report. There is some evidence that 

increased user fees are associated with reductions in recreation visits (e.g., Brown 

et al. 2008, Stevens et al. 2014). Conversely, a reduction in fees could lead to an 

increase in recreation use. However, to the extent that user fees are essential for site 

maintenance and improvements, a reduction in fees could affect the quality of visitor experiences, which may negatively affect participation. Unanticipated changes 

in recreation visits because of fee changes could lead to economic effects to local 

communities that differ from the reported projections.

Aside from entrance or access-fee changes, changes in the rates charged by 

concessionaires (e.g., increased lift-ticket fees or guide fees) could also affect 

recreation visit numbers (and the magnitude of future recreation visitor spending) 

or the patterns of recreation visitor spending. Differential changes in concessionaire 

fees could lead to substitution between activities or displacement to other sites for 

the same activities. Ultimately, however, the outcomes from changes in concessionaire fees are difficult to predict. In many cases, the recreation experience or 

novel recreation opportunity may be great enough to overwhelm the effect of minor 

increases in concessionaire fees.

Transportation costs—

Future, unforeseen cost increases for transportation fuels could result in recreation 

participation patterns that differ from those discussed here. Fuel constitutes a 

primary expense for visitors on recreation trips and increased transportation costs 

can greatly increase overall trip costs. With increased transportation expenses, 

individuals may complete fewer recreation trips or complete trips that are closer 

to home and require less transportation expense. There is some indication of this 

behavior by recreation visitors during fuel price increases experienced in the early 

2000s (Cho et al. 2014, Stevens et al. 2014). A reduction in the number of recreation 

trips would likely reduce the overall amount of visitor spending injected in communities surrounding federal lands; visitors spend more when they take recreation 

trips that are away from their local home area. Further, communities that can attract 

visitors who have traveled from outside the local area achieve the greatest positive 

economic effect. Increased fuel cost could reduce the economic effects to federal 

recreation communities as recreationists change their trip behavior and travel 

shorter distances from home and less often leave their local areas. Conversely, 

changes in transportation technology, such as increased availability of electric/

hybrid vehicles, could have a counter effect.

With increased 

transportation 

expenses, individuals 

may complete fewer 

recreation trips 

or complete trips 

that are closer to 

home and require 

less transportation 

expense.
38

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Climate change—

For most activities, population increases and economic improvements are projected 

to yield increases in participant numbers that mute any negative effects of a changing climate. At the national level, most future recreation participation numbers 

are projected to continue to grow even after taking into account future climate. 

However, the anticipated climate changes differ across U.S. regions, and there 

will likely be variation in the regional effects on recreation from climate change. 

Because of regional variation in the effects of climate change, there will likely be 

some regions that experience positive responses in recreation participation because 

of changing climate. Such positive changes might come about, for example if 

shoulder seasons become longer, thereby increasing opportunities for activities such 

as camping and off-road vehicle use. At the same time, there will likely be other 

regions that experience deleterious effects from climate change that are more severe 

than that experienced elsewhere. For instance, we project that developed skiing 

participation will remain steady to increasing nationally under anticipated future 

climates; however, regions that are unable to maintain artificial snow production 

or that experience increased rain on snow or high overnight low temperatures may 

see significant declines in developed skiing because of poor snow conditions. This 

may be even more of a concern for more localized winter activities like snowmobiling and undeveloped skiing. Ultimately, for some activities, regional participation 

in outdoor recreation under a climate-changed environment may differ from the 

overall national pattern. 

Capacity of recreation resources and community congestion—

There are constraints in the amount of recreation use that federal resources can 

accommodate with current infrastructure. For example, there are only so many 

camping sites at existing campgrounds; trailhead parking lots can provide access to 

a set number of vehicles; and some trails already have limited, permit-only access. 

It is uncertain whether existing federal facilities and lands will be able to provide 

expanded opportunities for all the future increases in recreation. Limitations in the 

capacities of federal opportunities may limit the extent to which federal resources 

capture expected future increases in recreation participation. If future users are 

unable to access federal opportunities (perhaps because campgrounds are full or 

permits cannot be obtained), potential participants may choose not to recreate, 

choose alternative activities where capacity is not an issue, or use substitute sites 

provided by other government or private providers.

Large increases in recreation participation days may bring large numbers of 

visitors into local communities around federal recreation resources. Although initial 

increases may bring about positive economic gains, significant increases in the 
39

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

numbers of tourists in towns can also bring about many negative effects. Traffic 

congestion, wear to roads and infrastructure, increased costs for public safety, and 

noise and air pollution are just some of the costs that can accrue to communities 

because of high rates of tourism. Increased recreation participation may lead to 

gains to some local businesses, but those gains may be overwhelmed by costs to the 

broader community.

Economic dependence of local communities—

Some communities located around federal recreation lands have a high dependence 

on economic inputs from recreation spending and natural amenity economic inputs. 

Although strong connections between communities and federal recreation often 

lead to positive economic outcomes, high economic dependence on a single economic sector can leave a community vulnerable to changes in economic conditions. 

In the case of recreation, communities with a high dependence on recreation visitor 

spending may experience negative economic conditions if participation numbers 

decline or visitor spending patterns change significantly in the future.

Other Economic Outcomes From Federal 

Recreation Resources

Federal recreation lands also can provide positive economic outcomes for communities in a number of ways beyond attracting recreation visitors and promoting their 

spending. Commonly noted positive economic effects include aesthetic benefits 

that attract new residents and businesses to communities, contributions to improved 

health of rural populations, and the provision of scenic landscapes that serve as backdrops to those passing nearby. Several of these outcomes are briefly described below.

Amenity Migration

The populations and numbers of homes in communities around federal lands have 

been increasing more rapidly relative to other similar communities. The presence 

of large expanses of undeveloped, aesthetically pleasing views and opportunities 

for recreation has led to high levels of amenity migration to many communities 

around federal lands (McGranahan et al. 2011, Radeloff et al. 2010, Stein et al. 

2007). In-migration of new residents and expansion in local housing stock can lead 

to increased tax bases for local governments, increased demand from the financial, 

real-estate, and construction sectors of local economies, and expansion in the 

service and retail businesses (e.g., restaurants and bars, stores, and entertainment). 

Although amenity migration can be traced in part to recreation opportunities, the 

economic effects of amenity migration on local economies and tax bases is additional to that reported in studies of the economic effects of visitor spending.

The presence of 

large expanses 

of undeveloped, 

aesthetically 

pleasing views and 

opportunities for 

recreation has led to 

high levels of amenity 

migration to many 

communities around 

federal lands.
40

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Business Relocation

In addition to attracting new residents, the presence of appealing landscapes and 

the natural resource amenities of federal lands can encourage business to relocate 

to communities adjacent to federal lands. Businesses, especially those not tied 

to location-dependent manufacturing inputs, have relocated to areas that offer 

desirable amenities to potential employees. Relocation of businesses in particular 

industries (e.g., technology) can lead to further relocation of related businesses and 

the creation of business hubs—agglomerations of related businesses. In addition to 

business relocation, the appeal of some locales as convention destinations (and the 

success of convention-related businesses) can be credited in at least some part to 

the presence of amenity-rich federal resources. The role of federal lands in making 

convention destinations attractive has not been studied.

Health Benefits

With increasing rates of obesity, poor cardiovascular health, diabetes, and stress, 

positive economic effects can accrue to individuals and communities who take 

advantage of recreation opportunities on federal lands to pursue activities that 

can contribute to health. Urban residents often find places for rest, relaxation, and 

exercise at local- and county-government parks. In rural communities, which often 

lack those sorts of recreation resources, federal recreation resources may substitute 

for local government recreation resources. Across the United States, people living 

in the vicinity of FS land—many of them in rural locations—are estimated to burn 

about 146 billion calories annually while using FS recreation resources (Kline et 

al. 2011). With increased attention to healthcare costs, the role of federal recreation 

resources in contributing to improved individual and community health and wellbeing deserves more attention.

Recreation Backdrops

In addition to providing places for people to recreate, federal lands can provide the 

backdrop for recreation outings that never involve a formal visit to federal lands. 

For example, a tourist to Alaska might take a cruise or a ferry through the Inland 

Passage and view the Tongass National Forest but never set foot on federal lands. 

Likewise, a visitor to Las Vegas might take a helicopter ride over Grand Canyon 

National Park to view natural features but may never enter the park. In typical studies of the economic impact of federal recreation opportunities, the spending of those 

individuals is not counted. Although the spending of these visitors is excluded from 

official estimates, and not considered here, the spending of those who view federal 

recreation resources also generates positive economic effects in local communities.
41

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Summary and Conclusions

Public lands are crucial resources for nature-based outdoor recreation. Assuming that the public land base for outdoor recreation remains stable into the future, 

an increasing population will result in decreasing per-person opportunities for 

recreation across most of the United States. Although there are many other factors 

involved in recreation supply, recreation resources will likely become less available 

and perhaps less desirable, as more people compete to use them. A major challenge 

for public natural resource managers and planners will be to ensure that recreation 

opportunities remain viable and adapt to a changing population. This could be 

accomplished through more creative and efficient management of existing federal 

recreation resources.

Choices in outdoor recreation activities have changed over time in response to 

changing preferences, demographics, and recreation opportunities. Overall, participation in nature-based outdoor recreation has grown in the last decade, continuing 

a long-term trend. At the same time, recreation visitation to state parks and federal 

lands has not increased at similar rates (Walls et al. 2009), indicating that recreationists are increasing their use of other lands. The change in recreation preferences at least partly reflects changing demographics in the American public. As 

the population ages and becomes more racially and ethnically diverse, it is unclear 

whether current recreation opportunities will meet future needs.

Given the growing diversity of the American population, and despite studies 

tha have found increasing acculturation related to natural resource-based recreation 

(Johnson et al. 2005), the relatively low participation rates of all groups except nonHispanic Whites may signal a shift in overall future recreation participation. The 

aging population may require different types of recreation opportunities. Recreation 

activities that have been dominated by rural residents are also likely to decline, 

as the American population becomes increasingly urbanized. Understanding the 

constraints on recreation participation of various groups could improve the ability 

of recreation providers to deliver recreation opportunities to underserved groups. 

Social factors such as time, money, lack of transportation, lack of facilities, lack 

of information, crowding at sites, poorly maintained facilities, and pollution are 

constraints felt by potential recreationists.

Based on the available data, future growth is projected for most recreation 

activities between 2008 and 2030. The five outdoor recreation activities projected 

to have the highest percentage growth in total days of participation are developed 

skiing, visiting interpretive sites, day hiking, birding, and equestrian activities. In 

contrast, the five activities expected to grow the least are hunting, motorized snow 

activities, motorized off-road use, floating, and fishing. Several of the activities 

A major challenge 

for public natural 

resource managers 

and planners will be to 

ensure that recreation 

opportunities remain 

viable and adapt to a 

changing population.
42

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

with high projected growth, such as downhill skiing and equestrian activities, tend 

to require substantial financial commitments. This factor partially explains the 

low current participation rates and may limit growth in participant numbers and 

participant days depending on the distribution of future income growth. Projected 

population growth is high enough that the total number of participants and the total 

number of days for most recreation activities are projected to increase regardless of 

the direction of the trends in participation rates or days per participant.

Climate can affect individual willingness to participate in recreation activities 

or affect recreation resource availability and quality. The climate variables used 

in the recreation projection models discussed in this report were limited to those 

coming directly from the 2010 RPA Assessment climate projections, or variables 

derived from those basic variables. Generally, the climate variables used in these 

recreation models were presumed to affect willingness to participate and frequency 

of participation directly. Despite the lack of existing data, it is reasonable to expect 

that climate change will affect resource availability. For example, in the case of 

hunting and fishing, increasing temperatures will likely affect the distribution of 

plant and animal species that are fundamental to maintaining fish and game populations. Moreover, changes in precipitation may influence local snow cover and 

thus affect seasonal availability for activities like snowmobiling and undeveloped 

skiing. Disentangling the effects of the climate variables on recreation participation is difficult. Further exploration of these direct and indirect relationships at 

different scales will be fundamental to improving forecasts of recreation behavior 

in the future.

The magnitude of business activity in local communities associated with 

outdoor recreation on federal lands results from the combination of (1) people 

recreating on federal recreation lands, (2) the presence of businesses where visitors 

can spend money, and (3) the trip spending of those recreation visitors. Communities best able to capitalize from recreation visitor spending offer services and goods 

that cater to those engaged in outdoor recreation. Communities that have attractive 

combinations of lodging, restaurants/bars, and entertainment will see more spending from recreation visitors than communities without those things, all else being 

equal. Resource managers and policymakers can help facilitate positive economic 

outcomes in local communities by providing recreation opportunities that are 

consistent with activities that tend to involve overnight stays or long-distance travel, 

like skiing, developed site recreation, and water use. Providing “bundled” recreation 

sites or groups of interpretive sites that make it easy for visitors to engage in longer 

periods of recreation by visiting multiple sites in one area can promote longer stays, 

and thus, more opportunities to spend money in the community.
43

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Studies specific to recreation on federal lands indicate that visitors spend at 

least $51 billion in the local economies around the federal destination. Anticipated 

future increased participation in general recreation activities like hiking, viewing 

nature, and visiting developed sites will likely have positive economic effects on 

the numerous communities located around federal lands. Projected increases in 

more specialized recreation activities, like developed skiing, motorized vehicle 

use, and motorized water use, will likely lead to increased economic activity in 

communities located near those specialized places where visitors can engage in 

those types of activities.

Racial and ethnic diversity and the age of the U.S. population may alter future 

participation patterns for some recreation activities. However, generalist activities 

like hiking, viewing nature, and visiting developed recreation and historic sites 

remain popular with all population subgroups. Recreation sites that can provide 

recreation opportunities supporting those types of activities, and local communities 

around those sites, are in a position to see continued high levels of recreation use. 

Those engaged in winter recreation have the highest spending of any visitor group. 

Developed skiing remains popular with people from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, especially among young people. Developed skiing is expected to remain a 

popular recreation activity—and local economic driver—even in the context of an 

increasingly diverse population.

A changing climate may alter future recreation participation and lead to 

change in the amount and distribution of money spent in local communities. 

Expected future climate conditions may lead to lower participation in motorized 

snow activities and undeveloped skiing. Recreationists engaged in those activities have some of the highest trip expenditures of any federal lands recreationists. 

Thus, large reductions in the numbers of participant days in those activities would 

likely lead to reductions in the economic activity in communities dependent on 

those recreationists. 

English Equivalents

When you know: Multiply by: To find:

Miles 1.609 Kilometers

Acres .405 Hectares

Square miles 2.59 Square kilometers
44

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Karen Abt, David Allen, Daniel McCollum, and 

Susan Winter for their reviews. Thanks also to Kurt Riitters for providing figure 2. 

Literature Cited

Bowker, J.M.; Askew, A.; Cordell, H.K. [et al.]. 2012. Outdoor recreation 

participation in the United States: projections to 2060: a technical document 

supporting the Forest Service 2010 RPA Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRSGTR-160. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station. 34 p.

Bowker, J.M.; Cordell, H.K.; Johnson, C.Y. 1999. User fees for recreation 

services on public lands: a national assessment. Journal of Park and Recreation 

Administration. 17: 1–14. 

Brown, R.N.K.; Rosenberger, R.S.; Kline, J.D.; Hall, T.E.; Needham, M.D. 

2008. Visitor preferences for managing wilderness recreation after wildfire. 

Journal of Forestry. 1/2: 9–16.

Cho, S-H.; Bowker, J.M.; English, D.B.K.; Roberts, R.K.; Kim, T. 2014. Effects 

of travel cost and participation in national forest visits. Journal of Forest Policy 

and Economics. 40: 21–30.

Cordell, H.K. 2012. Outdoor recreation trends and futures: a technical document 

supporting the Forest Service 2010 RPA Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS150. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern 

Research Station. 167 p.

Cordell, H.K.; Betz, C.J.; Zarnoch, S.J. 2013. Recreation and protected land 

resources in the United States: a technical document supporting the Forest 

Service 2010 RPA Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-169. Asheville, NC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 198 p.

Cullinane, T.C.; Huber C.; Koontz L. 2014. 2013 National park visitor spending 

effects: economic contributions to local communities, states, and the nation. 

Natural Resources Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR—2014/824. Fort Collins, CO: 

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 42 p.

English, D.B.K. [et al.]. 2014. Outdoor recreation: jobs and income. Federal 

Interagency Council on Outdoor Recreation. http//www.fs.fed.us/research/docs/

outdoor-recreation/recreation-economy.pdf. (September 26, 2016).
45

Federal Outdoor Recreation Trends: Effects on Economic Opportunities

Johnson, C.J.; Bowker, J.M.; Cordell, H.K. 2005. Acculturation via nature-based 

outdoor recreation: a comparison of Mexican and Chinese origin groups in the 

U.S. Environmental Practice. 7: 257–272.

Kline, J.D.; Rosenberger R.S.; White E.M. 2011. A national assessment of 

physical activity on U.S. national forests. Journal of Forestry. 109(6): 343–353.

McGranahan, D.A.; Wojan, T.R.; Lambert, D.M. 2011. The rural growth 

trifecta: outdoor amenities, creative class and entrepreneurial context. Journal of 

Economic Geography. 11(3): 529–557.

Outdoor Industry Association. 2013. The outdoor recreation economy. http://

outdoorindustry.org/images/researchfiles/OIA_OutdoorRecEconomyReport2012.

pdf?167. (October 5, 2014).

Radeloff, V.C.; Stewart, S.I.; Hawbaker, T.J.; Gimmi, U.; Pidgeon, A.M.; 

Flather, C.H.; Hammer, R.B.; Helmers, D.P. 2010. Housing growth in and 

near United States protected areas limits their conservation value. Proceedings 

of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 107(2): 

940–945.

Stein, S.M.; Alig, R.J.; White, E.M.; Comas, S.J.; Carr, M.; Eley, M. 2007.

National forests on the edge: development pressures on America’s national forests 

and grasslands. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-728. Portland, OR: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 26 p.

Stevens, T.H.; More, T.A.; Markowski-Lindsay, M. 2014. Declining national 

park visitation. Journal of Leisure Research. 46(2): 153–164. 

U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. 2012. Projections of the population 

and components of change for the United States 2015 to 2060. NP2012-T1. http://

www.census.gov/population/projections/data/national/2012.html. (July 18, 2014).

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2012a. Future of 

America’s forests and rangelands: Forest Service 2010 Resources Planning Act 

Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-87. Washington, DC. 198 p. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2012b. Future 

scenarios: a technical document supporting the Forest Service 2010 RPA 

Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-272. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 34 p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDI BLM]. 

2013. Public land statistics 2012. BLM/OC/ST-12/002+1165 -108-2. Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 271 p. 
46

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-945

U.S. Department of the Interior. 2014. FY 2014 economic contributions. 

https://my.usgs.gov/doidv/. (May 10, 2016).

Walls, M.; Darley, S.; Siikamäki, J. 2009. The state of the great outdoors: 

America’s parks, public lands, and recreation resources. Washington, DC: 

Resources for the Future. 97 p.

White, E.M.; Stynes, D.J. 2008. National forest visitor spending averages and the 

influence of trip-type and recreation activity. Journal of Forestry. 116(1): 17–24.

White, E.M.; Stynes, D.J. 2010. Updated spending profiles for national forest 

recreation visitors by activity. [Corvallis, OR]: [Oregon State University]; report, 

Joint Venture Agreement No. 10-JV-11261955-018. 40 p. On file with: Eric 

M. White, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3625 93rd Ave SW, Olympia, 

WA 98512. 

White, E.M.; Goodding, D.B.; Stynes, D.J. 2013. Estimation of national forest 

visitor spending averages from National Visitor Use Monitoring: round 2. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-883. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 65 p.


Pacific Northwest Research Station

Website http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/

Telephone (503) 808–2592

Publication requests (503) 808–2138

FAX (503) 808–2130

E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us

Mailing address Publications Distribution

Pacific Northwest Research Station

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208–3890
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Pacific Northwest Research Station

1220 SW 3rd Ave., Suite 1400

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208–3890

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300