Trends in Selected 

Northeast Region Marine Industries 

 

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

Woods Hole, Massachusetts 

July 2008

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-211 
Recent Issues in This Series:

193. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Longfin Inshore Squid, Loligo pealeii, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. 

2nd ed. By Larry D. Jacobson. August 2005. v + 42 p., 20 figs., 1 table. NTIS Access. No. PB2005-110684. [Online publication only.]

194. U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessments -- 2005. By Gordon T. Waring, Elizabeth Josephson, 

Carol P. Fairfield, and Katherine Maze-Foley, eds. Dana Belden, Timothy V.N. Cole, Lance P. Garrison, Keith D. Mullin, Christopher 

Orphanides, Richard M. Pace III, Debra L. Palka, Marjorie C. Rossman, and Fredrick W. Wenzel, contribs. March 2006. v + 392 p., 45 

figs, 79 tables, 5 app., index. NTIS Access No. PB 2007-104395. 

195. A Large Marine Ecosystem Voluntary Environmental Management System Approach to Fisheries Practices. By Frank J. 

Gable. December 2005. v + 84 p., 38 figs., 10 tables. NTIS Access. No. PB____-______. 

196. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Haddock, Melanogrammus aeglefinus, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. 

2nd ed. By Jon K.T. Brodziak. December 2005. vi + 64 p., 27 figs., 2 tables. NTIS Access. No. PB2006-103439. [Online publication 

only.]

197.Withdrawn from series. 

198. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. 2nd ed. 

By Jon K.T. Brodziak. December 2005. vi + 89 p., 48 figs., 5 tables, 1 app. NTIS Access. No. PB2006-103439. [Online publication 

only.]

199. Distribution and Abundance of Fish Eggs Collected during the GLOBEC Broad-Scale Georges Bank Surveys, 1995-1999. 

By John D. Sibunka, Donna L. Johnson, and Peter L. Berrien. August 2006. iv + 72 p., 28 figs., 1 table. NTIS Access. No. PB2008-

107379. [Online publication only.] 

200. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Black Sea Bass, Centropristis striata, Life History and Habitat Characteristics (2nd 

ed. By Amy F. Drohan, John P. Manderson, and David B. Packer. February 2007. vi + 68 p., 33 figs., 2 tables. NTIS Access No. 

PB2008-107378. [Online publication only.]

201. U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessments -- 2006. By Gordon T. Waring, Elizabeth Josephson, 

Carol P. Fairfield, and Katherine Maze-Foley, eds. Dana Belden, Timothy V.N. Cole, Lance P. Garrison, Keith D. Mullin, Christopher 

Orphanides, Richard M. Pace III, Debra L. Palka, Marjorie C. Rossman, and Fredrick W. Wenzel, contribs. March 2007. vi + 378 p., 92 

figs, 84 tables, 5 app., index. NTIS Access No. PB2007-112570. 

202. Evaluation of Northern Right Whale Ship Strike Reduction Measures in the Great South Channel of Massachusetts. By RL 

Merrick and TVN Cole. March 2007. NTIS Access No. PB 2008-107377. 

203. Essential fish habitat source document: Spiny dogfish, Squalus acanthias, life history and habitat characteristics, 2nd 

edition. By LL Stehlik. December 2007. NTIS Access No. PB2008-107376. 

204. An Evaluation of the Northeast Region’s Study Fleet pilot program and Electronic Logbook System: Phases I and II. By 

Michael C. Palmer, Susan E. Wigley, John J. Hoey, and Joan E. Palmer. December 2007. NTIS Access No PB2008-107374. 

205. U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessments -- 2007. By GT Waring, E Josephson, CP Fairfield, and 

K Maze-Foley, Editors. November 2007. NTIS Access No _______. 

206. Growth of Black Sea Bass (Centropristis striata) in Recirculating Aquaculture Systems. By Dean M. Perry, David A. Nelson, 

Dylan H. Redman, Stephan Metzler, and Robin Katersky. October 2007. NTIS Access No. PB2008-107374. 

207. Analysis of Atlantic Sea Scallop (Placopecten magellanicus) Fishery Impacts on the North Atlantic Population of 

Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta caretta). By Richard Merrick and Heather Haas. February 2008. NTIS Access No PB2008-107373. 

208. Global Applications of the Large Marine Ecosystem Concept 2007-2010. By Kenneth Sherman, Marie-Chirstine Aquarone, and 

Sally Adams. June 2007. NTIS Access No. PB______-_______. 

209. Impacts to Marine Fisheries Habitat from Nonfishing Activities in the Northeastern United States. By Michael R. Johnson, 

Christopher Boelke, Louis A. Chiarella, Peter D. Colosi, Karen Greene, Kimberly Lellis-Dibble, Heather Ludemann, Michael Ludwig, 

Sean McDermott, Jill Ortiz, Diane Rusanowsky, Marcy Scott, and Jeff Smith February 2008. NTIS Access No. PB______-_______. 

210. U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessments -- 2008. By GT Waring, E Josephson, CP Fairfield, and 

K Maze-Foley, Editors. February 2009. NTIS Access No _______. 
Trends in Selected 

Northeast Region Marine Industries 

Eric M. Thunberg 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, MA 02543 

 

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., USN (ret.), Administrator 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

James W. Balsiger, Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

Woods Hole, Massachusetts 

July 2009

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-211 

This series represents a secondary level of scientific publishing. All issues employ thorough internal 

scientific review; some issues employ external scientific review. Reviews are transparent collegial 

reviews, not anonymous peer reviews. All issues may be cited in formal scientific communications. 
Editorial Notes 

Species Names: The NEFSC Editorial Office’s policy on the use of species names in all 

technical communications is generally to follow the American Fisheries Society’s lists of 

scientific and common names for fishes, mollusks, and decapod crustaceans and to follow the 

Society for Marine Mammalogy's guidance on scientific and common names for marine 

mammals. Exceptions to this policy occur when there are subsequent compelling revisions in the 

classifications of species, resulting in changes in the names of species. 

Statistical Terms: The NEFSC Editorial Office’s policy on the use of statistical terms in all 

technical communications is generally to follow the International Standards Organization’s 

handbook of statistical methods. 

Internet Availability: This issue of the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE series is 

being as a paper and Web document in HTML (and thus searchable) and PDF formats and can be 

accessed at: http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/.
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ......................................................................................................viii 

Introduction ..................................................................................................1 

Marine Sectors ...............................................................................................2 

Data ............................................................................................................2 

Performance Indicators .....................................................................................6 

Marine Industry Trends .....................................................................................8 

Seafood Commerce ................................................................................12 

Commercial fishing NAICS 1141 ......................................................14 

Seafood wholesale NAICS 42446 ......................................................32

Seafood processing NAICS 3117 .......................................................38 

Seafood retail NAICS 44522 ............................................................46 

Marine Recreational Boating .....................................................................51 

Boat building and repair NAICS 336612 ...............................................54 

Boat dealers NAICS 441222 .............................................................58 

Marinas NAICS 71393 ...................................................................66 

Sightseeing water transportation NAICS 487210 .....................................75 

Shipping and Shipping-related Industries .......................................................78 

Deep sea and coastal water transportation NAICS 48311 ...........................80 

Ship building and repairing NAICS 336611 ...........................................84 

Water transportation service NAICS 4883 .............................................90 

Endnotes ......................................................................................................94 

References Cited .............................................................................................95 

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Maine coastal counties ..........................................................................21 

Figure 2. New Hampshire coastal counties...............................................................22 

Figure 3. Massachusetts coastal counties.................................................................23 

Figure 4. Rhode Island coastal counties ..................................................................24 

Figure 5. Connecticut coastal counties ...................................................................25 

Figure 6. New York coastal counties .....................................................................26 

Figure 7. New Jersey coastal counties ....................................................................27 

Figure 8. Delaware coastal counties ......................................................................28 

Figure 9. Maryland coastal counties ......................................................................29 

Figure 10. Virginia coastal counties ......................................................................30 

Figure 11. North Carolina coastal counties ...............................................................31 

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Summary of marine sector groupings and individual sectors by 2002 North American 

Industry Classification (NAICS)............................................................................3 

Table 2. County Business Patterns (CBP) available time series by marine sector ...................4 
iv

Table 3. Example summary of establishments by size for New Jersey ship and boat building 

sectors ..........................................................................................................6 

Table 4. Total Northeast Region (NER) marine sector establishments by state (1998-2005)...... 8 

Table 5. Northeast Region (NER) marine sector percent of total establishments by state (1998-

2005) ............................................................................................................9 

Table 6. Northeast Region (NER) marine sector establishment shares by state (1998-2005).......9 

Table 7. Total Northeast Region (NER) marine sector mid-March employment by state (1998-

2005)...........................................................................................................10 

Table 8. Northeast Region (NER) marine sector percent of total employment by state (1998-

2005) ..........................................................................................................10 

Table 9. Marine sector employment shares by state (1998-2005) ....................................10 

Table 10. Marine sector location quotient by state (1998-2005) ......................................11 

Table 11. Northeast Region establishment and employment shares by marine sector group (1998-

2005) ..........................................................................................................11 

Table 12. Total number of Northeast Region (NER) seafood commerce establishments (1998-

2005) ..........................................................................................................12 

Table 13. Total Northeast Region (NER) seafood commerce employment (1998-2005) .........13 

Table 14. Aggregate seafood commerce employment shares by state (2001-2005) ...............13 

Table 15. Northeast Region (NER) seafood commerce employment composition by state (1998-

2005) ..........................................................................................................14 

Table 16. Northeast Region number of reporting units for fishing by state (quarterly census of 

employment and wages 1997–2005) .....................................................................15 

Table 17. Northeast Region number of fishing employees by state (quarterly census of 

employment and wages 1997–2005) .....................................................................15 

Table 18. Northeast Region consumer price index adjusted average annual fishing wages ($) 

(1997–2005) ..................................................................................................16 

Table 19. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) sole proprietorships engaged in fishing by 

state (1997–2005) ............................................................................................16 

Table 20. Shares of Northeast Region fishing sole proprietorships by state (1997–2005) .........17 

Table 21. Consumer price index adjusted average receipts for sole proprietorships in the 

Northeast Region (NER) ....................................................................................18 

Table 22. Northeast Region annual fishing location quotient by state (1997–2005) ...............18 

Table 23. Annual number of fishing employees and sole proprietorships by coastal county with a 

location quotient greater than one (1997-2005) .........................................................19 

Table 24. Annual Northeast Region (NER) seafood dealer mid-March employment by state 

(1986–2005) ..................................................................................................32 

Table 25. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) seafood dealer establishments by state 

(1986–2005) ..................................................................................................33 

Table 26. Annual Northeast Region seafood dealer location quotient by state (1986–2005) .....34 

Table 27. Annual Northeast Region (NER) seafood dealer Herfindahl Index by state (1986–

2005) ..........................................................................................................35 

Table 28. Annual seafood dealer employees in coastal counties with a location quotient greater 

than one (1998–2005) .......................................................................................36 

Table 29. Annual number of seafood dealer establishments in coastal counties with a location 

quotient greater than one (1998–2005) ...................................................................37 
v

Table 30. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) seafood processing establishments by state 

(1986-2005) ...................................................................................................40 

Table 31. Annual number of mid-March employees in the Northeast Region (NER) seafood 

processing sector by state (1986-2005) ...................................................................41 

Table 32. Annual Northeast Region seafood processing location quotient by state (1986-

2005)...........................................................................................................42 

Table 33. Annual Northeast Region (NER) processing sector Herfindahl Index by state (1986- 

2005) ..........................................................................................................43 

Table 34. Number of seafood processing establishments in coastal counties where the location 

quotient exceeded one by county (1998-2005) ..........................................................44 

Table 35. Seafood processing mid-March employment in coastal counties where the location 

quotient exceeded one by county (1998-2005) ..........................................................45 

Table 36. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) retail seafood market establishments by 

state (1998-2005) ............................................................................................46 

Table 37. Annual Northeast Region (NER) retail seafood market mid-March employment by 

state (1998-2005) ............................................................................................47 

Table 38. Annual retail seafood market location quotient by state (1998-2005) ....................47 

Table 39. Annual Northeast Region (NER) retail seafood market Herfindahl Index by state 

(1998-2005) ...................................................................................................48 

Table 40. Annual number of coastal county retail seafood market establishments by county 

(1998-2005) ...................................................................................................49 

Table 41. Annual coastal county retail seafood market mid-March employees by county (1998-

2005) ..........................................................................................................50 

Table 42. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) marine recreational boating subgroup 

establishments by state (1998-2005) ......................................................................51 

Table 43. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) marine recreational boating subgroup 

employees by state (1998-2005) ...........................................................................51 

Table 44. Annual Northeast Region (NER) marine recreational boating subgroup employment 

shares by state (1998-2005) ................................................................................52 

Table 45. Composition of Northeast Region (NER) marine recreational boating subgroup 

employment by state (1998-2005) ........................................................................53 

Table 46. Number of Northeast Region (NER) boat building establishments by state (1998–

2005) ..........................................................................................................54 

Table 47. Northeast Region (NER) boat building mid-March employment by state (1998–

2005)...........................................................................................................55 

Table 48. Boat building location quotient by state (1998–2005) ......................................55 

Table 49. Northeast Region (NER) boat building Herfindahl Index by state (1998–2005)........55 

Table 50. Number of boat building employees in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient was greater than one ....................................................................57 

Table 51. Number of boat building establishments in Northeast Region coastal counties where 

the location quotient was greater than one ...............................................................58 

Table 52. Number of Northeast Region (NER) boat dealer establishments by state (1986-

2005)...........................................................................................................59 

Table 53. Number of Northeast Region (NER) boat dealer employees by state (1986-2005) ....60 

Table 54. Boat dealer location quotient by Northeast Region state ...................................61 

Table 55. Northeast Region (NER) boat dealer Herfindahl Index by state (1986-2005)...........62 
vi

Table 56. Number of boat dealer establishments in coastal counties with a location quotient 

greater than one (1998-2005) ..............................................................................63 

Table 57. Number of boat dealer employees in coastal counties with a location quotient greater 

than one (1998-2005) .......................................................................................65 

Table 58. Number of Northeast Region (NER) marina establishments by state (1988-2005) ....67 

Table 59. Annual mid-March employees in Northeast Region (NER) marinas by state (1988-

2005) ..........................................................................................................68 

Table 60. Marina location quotient by state (1988-2005) ..............................................69 

Table 61. Northeast Region (NER) marina sector Herfindahl Index by state (1988-2005) .......70 

Table 62. Number of marina establishments in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) ............................................................71 

Table 63. Number of marina employees in Northeast Region coastal counties where the location 

quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) .......................................................................73 

Table 64. Number of Northeast Region (NER) water excursion establishments by state (1998-

2005) ..........................................................................................................75 

Table 65. Number of Northeast Region (NER) water excursion mid-March employees by state 

(1998-2005)...................................................................................................76 

Table 66. Water excursion sector location quotient by state (1998-2005) ...........................76 

Table 67. Northeast Region (NER) water excursion sector Herfindahl Index by state (1998-

2005)...........................................................................................................77 

Table 68. Number of excursion establishments in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) ............................................................77 

Table 69. Number of excursion employees in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) ............................................................78 

Table 70. Number of Northeast Region (NER) shipping and shipping-related sector 

establishments (1998–2005) ...............................................................................79 

Table 71. Total Northeast Region (NER) shipping and shipping-related sector mid-March 

employment by state (1998–2005) ........................................................................79 

Table 72. Shipping and shipping-related sector employment shares by state (1998–2005) .......80 

Table 73. Composition of shipping and shipping-related sector by state and year (1998–

2005)..............................................................................................................................................80 

Table 74. Northeast Region (NER) Water transportation total establishments by state (1998-

2005) ..........................................................................................................81 

Table 75. Number of Northeast Region (NER) water transportation mid-March employees by 

state (1998–2005)............................................................................................82 

Table 76. Water transportation service location quotient (1998 – 2005) ............................82 

Table 77. Northeast Region (NER) deep sea and coastal water transportation Herfindahl Index 

(1998-2005) ...................................................................................................83 

Table 78. Number of deep sea and coastal water transportation establishments by coastal county 

with a location quotient greater than one (1998-2005) .................................................83 

Table 79. Deep sea and coastal water transportation employees in coastal counties where the 

location quotient exceeded one (1998–2005) ............................................................84 

Table 80. Number of Northeast Region (NER) ship building establishments by state (1986–

2005)...........................................................................................................85 

Table 81. Northeast Region (NER) ship building mid-March employment by state (1986–

2005)...........................................................................................................86 
vii

Table 82. Ship building location quotient by state (1986–2005) ......................................87 

Table 83. Northeast Region (NER) ship building Herfindahl Index by state (1986–2005) .......88 

Table 84. Number of ship building establishments in Northeast Region coastal counties where 

the location quotient exceeded one ........................................................................89 

Table 85. Ship building employment in Northeast Region coastal counties where the location 

quotient exceeded one .......................................................................................89 

Table 86. Total Northeast Region (NER) water transportation service establishments by state 

(1998–2005) ..................................................................................................90 

Table 87. Northeast Region (NER) water transportation service mid-March employment by state 

(1998–2005) ..................................................................................................90 

Table 88. Northeast Region water transportation service location quotient by state (1998–

2005)...........................................................................................................91 

Table 89. Northeast Region (NER) water transportation services Herfindahl Index by state 

(1998–2005) ..................................................................................................91 

Table 90. Number of water transportation services establishments in Northeast Region coastal 

counties where the location quotient exceeded one .....................................................92 

Table 91. Water transportation services employment in Northeast Region coastal counties where 

the location quotient exceeded one ........................................................................93 
viii

ABSTRACT

 The Northeast Fisheries Science Center provides scientific assessments and management 

advice for managed fishery resources in the “Northeast region” ranging from the US/Canada 

border in Maine to Cape Hatteras, NC. This study examines the performance and relative 

contribution of marine industries in coastal states bordering this Northeast region over time. 

These states include the New England states of Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode 

Island, and Connecticut. The “mid-Atlantic region” is defined for study purposes as New York, 

New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina. For purposes of this study, the 

Northeast region marine-based economy identifies 14 industrial sectors classified under the 

North American Industry Classification System and/or the Standard Industrial Classification 

system, depending on year. In addition to a combined marine-based sector, trends in performance 

of these sectors are reported separately as well as in three industry groupings: seafood commerce 

(commercial fishing, seafood dealers, seafood processors, and retail fish markets), recreational 

boating (boat building, boat dealers, marinas, and sightseeing excursion services), and water 

transportation (shipping, ship building, marine cargo handling, port operations, and navigational 

services). Measures of performance include total employment, number of establishments, the 

location quotient, and the Herfindahl index. The location quotient provides a relative measure of 

regional specialization while the Herfindahl index measures changes in industry concentration. 

 The principal source of data used in this study was annual County Business Patterns data 

for the years 1986-2005. Methods to estimate employment where data have been suppressed 

because of confidentiality concerns are described. For commercial fishing, nonemployer 

statistics from the US Census Bureau and quarterly employment data from the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics were used. 

 The marine sector represents about 0.5% of total employment in the Northeast region. 

Employment growth has been positive, increasing at about the same rate as employment in the 

general economy. However, important differences exist in performance among the three marine 

subgroups and across states. Employment has been declining in both the seafood commerce and 

the water transportation subgroups, albeit at an average annual rate of less than 1%. Overall 

employment growth has been positive only because employment growth in the marine 

recreational boating subgroup has more than offset the employment declines in the seafood 

commerce and water transportation sectors. This also implies that employment in the marine 

recreational boating subgroup has been expanding at a rate greater than that of the general 

economy. Among the Northeast states marine sector employment has been declining in 

Maryland, Maine, New York, and Virginia. In each of these states positive growth in marine 

recreational boating employment has not been sufficient to offset declines in other marine 

subgroups. 
1

INTRODUCTION

 Although the principal focus of social and economic analysis of fisheries regulation is on 

fishing and fishing-related entities, the marine economy consists of a broader range of activities 

that take place in the coastal zone. Pontecorvo et al. (1980) defined the marine economy as 

including any activity that utilizes the ocean in a productive process or that exists because the 

demand for the sector’s output is due to some attribute of the ocean. On the production side, 

Pontecorvo et al. distinguished between activities that extracted living (fish) or nonliving 

(minerals) resources from those that directly utilized the ocean (shipping). On the demand side, 

a distinction was drawn between activities that are attributable to the ocean (seafood processing) 

and activities that were located in proximity to the ocean (a gift shop). This conceptual 

framework has been used to estimate the economic activity supported by Large Marine 

Ecosystems (Hoagland et al. 2005) and to examine the role of the marine economy in the state of 

Massachusetts (Georgianna 2000; Donahue Institute 2006). 

 As conceived by Pontecorvo et al. (1980), proper delineation of the ocean sector would 

require a change in data collection protocol to what was then the Standard Industrial 

Classification (SIC) system to apportion activity in specific sectors between ocean and nonocean 

components1

. For example, ice is used both by commercial fishing vessels and, among other 

things, by consumers to chill beverages. Apportionment to the marine economy would require an 

accounting of how much ice was used in its various marine and nonmarine uses. Such a change 

was never adopted. This means that the data upon which most studies of marine economies 

depend contain a mixture of marine and nonmarine related establishments (i.e., businesses). 

Depending on which sectors are included, the economic activity attributed to the marine 

environment may be under- or overestimated. For purposes of this study, only sectors that (1) are 

associated with extractive uses of the marine environment, (2) are directly associated with 

extractive uses, or (3) make direct use of the ocean were included. 

 Changes in the marine economy may be attributable to many different factors. For fishing 

and fishing-related industries, change may be driven by resource conditions and the regulatory 

actions taken to rebuild a fishery. These changes may also be driven by demand for alternative 

uses of shore-front property. The objective of this report is to document trends in numbers of 

establishments and level of employment for selected marine industries. In each case indicators of 

performance are developed to identify sectors that may be increasing or decreasing or those 

sectors whose structure or relative role in a local or regional economy may be changing over 

time. Spatial differences in performance among states as well as coastal counties within states 

are identified. 

 The remainder of this report contains four major sections. The first section identifies the 

marine sectors that were selected. The second section describes the data used in the report. 

Special considerations made because of changes in industrial classification as well as data 

suppression are discussed. The third section identifies the performance indicators, their 

calculation, and their interpretation. The last section identifies specific groupings of marine 

sectors to evaluate how commercial fishing and fishing-related sectors as a whole may be 

changing as compared to recreation-based or shipping/water transportation sectors. Finally, 

results for individual marine sectors are also presented. 
2

MARINE SECTORS

 The study objective is to examine how the relative contribution of fishing and fishingrelated industries to the Northeast regional economy has been changing over time. In this study 

the “Northeast region” is defined as the New England states of Maine, New Hampshire, 

Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, and the “mid-Atlantic region” states of New 

York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina. These New England and 

mid-Atlantic states border the fishery resources assessed by the Northeast Fisheries Science 

Center. 

 In this study the range of marine industries considered is somewhat narrower in scope 

than the more general treatments of the contribution of the marine-related sectors as a whole that 

were done by Georgianna (2000) and the Donahue Institute (2006). The latter study grouped 56 

different industrial sectors based on North American Industy Classification System (NAICS) 

codes into five major sectors: commercial seafood, marine transportation, coastal tourism and 

recreation, marine science and technology, and coastal construction2. 

 Neither the SIC nor NAICS-based industrial classification systems provides the level of 

detail necessary to distinguish between many types of establishments that primarily service 

fishing or fishing-related activities from establishments that serve nonfishing clients (e.g., 

welding, trucking, ice manufacturing). For this reason, construction of a marine sector for 

purposes of this study was limited to a smaller set of industries that are more likely to be 

predominately associated with direct use of coastal waters or directly related to those uses. These 

industries include seafood harvest; seafood processing; seafood wholesale; retail fish markets; 

boat building; boat dealers; marinas; marine sightseeing; ship building; water transportation of 

passengers and cargo; and water transportation services, including marine cargo handling, dock 

and pier operations, and navigation services to shipping. These sectors were classified into three 

groupings: commercial seafood, marine recreational boating, and water transportation (see Table 

1). Note that these groupings bear some similarities to the groupings used in the Donahue 

Institute report (2006). 

DATA

 Data for this study come from County Business Patterns (CBP) from the US Census 

Bureau for calendar years 1986-2005 (US Census Bureau 2008). County Business Patterns is an 

annual series that provides detailed employment and payroll data by industrial classification for 

counties and states. These data are obtained through several sources including annual surveys 

conducted by the Census Bureau and the administrative records of the Internal Revenue Service 

and the Social Security Administration (US Census Bureau 2007). The unit of observation is an 

establishment, which is defined as a single physical location or place of business. In cases where 

multiple activities are carried out under the same ownership, all activities are classified under a 

single establishment. The industrial classification for that multiactivity establishment is based on 

its major activity. This means that the reported number of establishments may underestimate the 

total number of establishments that may be engaged in a particular kind of activity. For example, 

seafood businesses may process fish or shellfish and may also act as wholesale distributors or 

buyers/sellers of unprocessed seafood. Any such establishment would be assigned to a single 

industrial classification (either processing or wholesale trade) depending on which activity was 
3

the larger source of revenue. Note that this also means that from one year to the next, the 

industrial classification of an establishment may change as the major activity changes. 

Table 1. Summary of marine sector groupings and individual sectors by 2002 North American 

Industry Classification (NAICS) 

2002 NAICS 

Code 

Description 

Seafood Commerce 

1141 Commercial Fishing 

42246 Fish and Seafood Wholesale 

31171 Seafood Canning and Fresh and Frozen Seafood Processing 

44522 Fish and Seafood Retail Markets 

Marine Recreational Boating 

336612 Boat Building and Repairing 

441222 Boat Dealers 

713930 Marinas 

487210 Scenic and Sightseeing Water Transportation 

Water Transportation 

48311 Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation 

336611 Ship Building and Repairing 

48831 Port and Harbor Operations 

48832 Marine Cargo Handling 

48833 Navigational Services to Shipping 

48839 Other Support Activities to Water Transportation 

 Covered establishments include any business with paid employees during the mid-March 

pay period. That is, the CBP data represent a point-in-time estimate rather than an annual 

estimate of employment throughout the year. For businesses with a strong seasonal pattern of 

employment, the CBP data would tend to underestimate total employment unless March is an 

average or above average season. Additionally, sole proprietorships or self-employed 

individuals are not covered nor are railroad, domestic service, agricultural production, 

government, or foreign workers. 

 Data collected over the time series were based on two different major industrial 

classification systems: 1986-1997 were SIC-based while 1998-2005 data were based on the 

newer NAICS. Additionally, the time series covers two sets of revised industry codes for both 

SIC and NAICS. Specifically, 1986-1987 data were based on the 1972 SIC codes while 1988-

1997 data were based on 1987 SIC codes, and 1998-2002 data were based on 1998 NAICS codes 

while 2003-2005 data were based on the 2002 NAICS codes. In some cases no changes were 

made to the types of activities that were included in an industrial classification while in others 

substantial revisions were made. For sectors where the SIC and NAICS codes are consistent, all 

available years were used (see Table 2). Where the changeover from SIC to NAICS 

classification systems created a discontinuity in the time series, only data from 1998-2005 were 

used. 

 In accordance with federal statute, employment and payroll data may be suppressed 

where disclosure would violate confidentiality restrictions. However, neither the total number of 

establishments nor their distribution by employment size class is considered disclosure. 
4

Table 2. County Business Patterns (CBP) available time series by marine sector 

Sector Available Time Series

Seafood Commerce 

Commercial Fishing 1986 - 2005

Fish and Seafood Wholesale 1986 - 2005

Seafood Canning and Fresh and Frozen Seafood Processing 1986 - 2005

Fish and Seafood Retail Markets 1998 – 2005

Marine Recreational Boating 

Boat Building and Repairing 1998 – 2005

Boat Dealers 1986 – 2005

Marinasa 1988 – 2005

Scenic and Sightseeing Water Transportation 1998 – 2005

Water Transportation 

Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation 1998 – 2005

Ship Building and Repairing 1986 – 2005

Port and Harbor Operations 1998 – 2005

Marine Cargo Handling 1998 – 2005

Navigational Services to Shipping 1998 – 2005

Other Water Transportation Support Activities 1998 - 2005 a

 1986 and 1987 CBP data were based on 1972 Standard Industrial Classification codes 

which did not provide a unique code for marinas. 

 The amount of suppressed data differed by industrial sector and level of aggregation (i.e., 

state or county). Data suppression was particularly prevalent for industrial sectors such as mining 

which have only a small presence in the Northeast region. Similarly, data suppression was more 

prevalent at the county level than at the state level. 

 Proration of suppressed data followed a procedure similar to that described in Minnesota 

IMPLAN Group (2000). Both SIC and NAICS industrial classification systems are organized at 

major industry levels as well as by subgroupings within each major industry where employment 

data at each level of aggregation sum to the totals at the next higher level of aggregation. For a 

SIC-based classification scheme, this means that employment for all 4-digit codes add up to the 

3-digit codes, the 3-digit codes add up to the 2-digit codes, and so on. An estimate of 

employment is obtained by multiplying an adjustment factor Ai to an initial estimate of 

employment Êi where Ai is calculated as: 

[1] Ai = [Ei+1 – ΣEi]/ΣÊi, 

where i denotes the level of aggregation for the suppressed sector, i+1 denotes employment at the 

next higher level of aggregation, E denotes unsuppressed employment and Êi denotes the initial 

estimate of employment for suppressed data. The initial estimate for Êi was obtained by taking 

advantage of the fact that numbers of establishments are reported by employee size class (1-4, 5-

9, 10-19, 20-49, 50-99, 100-249, 250-499, 500-999, 1,000-1,499, 1,500-2,499, 2,500-4,999, 

5,000+). For all but the terminal size class, employment in each size class was estimated by 

multiplying the midpoint of the size class interval by the number of establishments. Since the 

upper bound for the terminal size class is indeterminate, a different approach was required. 
5

 To derive an initial estimate for the 5,000+ size class, one approach would be to make an 

assumption about the average number of employees then multiply by the number of 

establishments to get an estimate of total employment in the terminal size class. Unfortunately 

the choice of average employees is arbitrary and could introduce a downward or upward bias to 

the adjustment factor if employment is over- or underestimated. For suppressed employment 

data, a suppression flag is included where each flag corresponds to a range estimate of total 

employment. These ranges and suppression flags include 0-19 (A), 20-99 (B), 100-249 (C), 250-

499 (E), 500-999 (F), 1,000-2,499 (G), 2,500-4,999 (H), 5,000-9,999 (I), 10,000-24,999 (J), 

25,000-49,999 (K), 50,000-99,999 (L), and 100,000 or More (M). Of these intervals only the last 

five (I-M) were used to estimate employment in the 5,000+ size class since any other suppression 

flags would correspond with total employment of less than 5,000. Procedurally, employment in 

the 5,000+ size class was estimated by subtracting the sum of the estimated employment in all 

size classes below 5000+ (described above) from the midpoint of the total employment interval. 

For example, the midpoint estimate for the suppression flag K would be 37,499. Since actual 

employment is uncertain, this estimate may still under- or overestimate the adjustment factor, but 

rather than being set at an arbitrary average, the initial estimate of employment in the terminal 

size class is allowed to vary by industry and is grounded in reported total employment. 

 The initial estimate of total employment (Êi) is obtained by summing the estimated 

employment in all size classes. Note that it would have been possible, and simpler, to obtain Êi

by using the midpoint of the employment range corresponding to the data suppression flag. This 

method was not selected because it does not take into account potential changes in employment 

as the number of establishments change from one year to the next. That is, total employment 

may fall within the same range but may increase/decrease as establishments enter/exit. The 

method used for this study permits these changes to be reflected in the employment estimate. 

 The initial employment estimate is adjusted as in [1] from the bottom up to obtain an 

adjusted estimate of total employment. For example, ship and boat building (NAICS 33661) is a 

4-digit NAICS industry that is further broken out into two 5-digit subsectors (ship building and 

boat building). To illustrate the procedure, consider that New Jersey employment at the 4-digit 

NAICS code for ship and boat building was 2,030 people in 2005. However, the separate 5-digit 

codes for boat building and ship building were suppressed. The reported number of 

establishments in each employee size class interval for each sector is shown in Table 3. 

Multiplying the number of establishments in each size class by the size-class midpoint and then 

summing these counts results in an initial employment estimate of 825.5 and 1,376 for boat 

building and ship building respectively. 

 Applying [1] to these data yields an adjustment factor of 1.054 (2320/825.5 + 1376). 

Note that in this example, 2,320 corresponds to the unsuppressed Ei+1 in [1], (825.5 + 1376) 

corresponds to ΣÊi, and ΣEi is set to zero since there were no unsuppressed sectors at the 5-digit 

level. Multiplying the adjustment factor by the initial employment estimate produces a final 

estimate of 870 employees in the boat building sector and 1,450 employees in ship building. If, 

for example, employment for the 4-digit code was also suppressed, then employment for NAICS 

33661 would have to be estimated by proration to total employment at the 3-digit level before 

adjusting the suppressed 5-digit data. Once all suppressed data have been adjusted from bottom 

to top, a second pass is made from top to bottom to make any final adjustment to ensure that all 

data add to the overall total. 

 Because a large amount of data had been suppressed for fishing establishments in the 

CBP data, employment for fishing was estimated by using Quarterly Census of Employment and 
6

Wages (QCEW) data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), and from nonemployer statistics 

from the Census Bureau. The QCEW data are based on the quarterly census of employment and 

wages, and this data collection program is administered jointly by the US Department of Labor 

and state Employment Security agencies. As a quarterly census, the QCEW data represent annual 

employment, unlike the CBP data which are point-in-time estimates. Data reported in the QCEW 

program include employment and wages covered under state unemployment insurance programs 

and federal workers covered by the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees 

program. Like the CBP data, reported information is subject to confidentiality restrictions, but 

since establishments by size class are not reported, it is difficult to estimate employment for 

nondisclosures. Data for the entire time series from 1986-2005 were obtained from the BLS, 

where all data from 1986-2000 were based on the SIC classification system and from 2001-2005 

were based on NAICS codes3

. No adjustments to the data were necessary since there is direct 

correspondence between the two industrial classification systems for commercial fishing. 

Table 3. Example summary of establishments by size for New Jersey ship and boat building 

sectors 

Boat Building Ship Building 

Employment 

Size Class 

Size 

Class 

Midpoint 

Number of 

Establishments

Midpoint 

Employment 

Estimate 

Number of 

Establishments 

Midpoint 

Employment 

Estimate 

1 to 4 2.5 14 35 6 15

5 to 9 7 0 0 4 28

10 to 19 14.5 2 29 1 14.5

20 to 49 34.5 4 138 2 69

50 to 99 74.5 1 74.5 0 0

100 to 249 174.5 1 174.5 0 0

250 to 499 374.5 1 374.5 0 0

500 to 999 749.5 0 0 0 0

1000 to 

1499 1249.5 0 0 1 1249.5

Initial 

Employment 

Estimate 825.5 1376

 The QCEW data includes individuals who are covered by unemployment insurance, 

whereas the fishing industry includes a large number of individuals who may be self-employed 

crew or owner-operators. These sole proprietorships are covered under the nonemployer series 

available from the Census Bureau. The nonemployer series contains numbers of individuals and 

total receipts for any business that file federal income tax but that did not report any paid 

employees. Data are reported for calendar years 1997-2005 on a NAICS basis. Total fishing 

employment was then the sum of QCEW employment and the number of sole proprietorships. 

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

 Four performance indicators were used: employment, number of establishments, location 

quotient, and Herfindahl index. Employment and number of establishments provide a direct 

indicator of the presence or absence of a marine sector in a given region as well as how either 
7

may be changing over time. The location quotient provides a measure of the relative role of a 

marine sector within a given region, while the Herfindahl index provides a measure of the firm 

size structure for a given industry. 

 The location quotient (L) is calculated as: 

[2] Lij = [Eij/EiR]/[Ej/ER], 

where Eij is employment in sector i in region j, EiR is total employment in sector i across all 

regions, Ej is total employment in region j for all sectors, and ER is total employment across all 

regions and sectors. The numerator in the location quotient is equivalent to the employment 

share in region j for sector i, while the denominator is essentially the average employment share 

for region j across all sectors. If the employment share for sector i exceeds its regional average, 

the location quotient will be greater than 1 and industry i may be said to play a proportionally 

larger role in the regional economy relative to other regions. From the standpoint of impact 

assessment, the relative impact in a region with a location quotient above 1 is likely to be larger 

compared to regions where employment in an affected marine sector may be proportionally 

lower. 

 The Herfindahl index (H) for a given sector is calculated as: 

[3] H = Σ(ei)

2

/E2, 

where ei is employment in establishment i and E is total employment in the sector. The 

Herfindahl index is bounded between 1 and 1/N. That is, the index takes on a value of 1 if there 

is a single establishment and 1/N if every establishment is of equal size. The Herfindahl index 

provides a measure of industry concentration. In general terms, a high Herfindahl index is 

indicative of an industry that is dominated by a few large firms whereas a low index is indicative 

of an industry with many small firms. A Herfindahl index that is increasing over time suggests 

that industry consolidation may be occurring whereas a decline in the index suggests that the 

industry is becoming more dispersed. Note that the Herfindahl index calculated herein is only a 

rough approximation of industry consolidation for two reasons. First, the CBP definition of an 

establishment does not take into account the potential for ownership control over multiple 

establishments at different sites. This means that the Herfindahl index calculated for this report 

cannot be used to measure changes in consolidation in ownership control or market power, the 

more traditional use of the index. Second, a precise measure of the Herfindahl index requires 

employment data for each individual establishment, which are not available in the CBP data. 

Instead, an approximation of the index was derived by assuming that the number of employees in 

each establishment in a given employment size class was equal to the size class midpoint. Thus 

this approximation of the Herfindahl index (Ĥ) was calculated as: 

[4] Ĥ = Σ(êi)

2

ni/[Σêini]

2

, 

where êi is the midpoint estimate for the employee size class i and ni is the number of 

establishments in the size class. 

 As noted above, the value of the Herfindahl index depends on the number of 

establishments and the size of each establishment. Kelly (1981) showed that the Herfindahl could 

be decomposed into “fewness” and “standardized dispersion” effects. These effects provide a 
8

means for determining whether a change in the Herfindahl is predominately due to a change in 

the number of establishments or to a change in the size structure of the sector. Specifically, the 

fewness effect is measured by 1/N while the standardized dispersion effect is measured by the 

ratio of the observed variance in establishment size and the variance if the sector were a “virtual 

monopoly,” that is, the sector is dominated by a single large establishment. The dispersion effect 

is bounded between 0 and 1. As the dispersion effect approaches 1, the sector is trending toward 

virtual monopoly. Conversely, the sector is trending toward uniform size as the dispersion effect 

approaches zero. 

MARINE INDUSTRY TRENDS

 Although data for some marine sectors were available for the entire time series, a 

consistent time series for all sectors was only available from 1998-2005. These data include the 

combined seafood commerce, marine recreational boating, and water transportation industry 

groups defined herein. Note that because of data suppression in the QCEW series during 

calendar years 1998, 1999, and 2000 for seafood harvest in Maine and Massachusetts in 

particular, total marine industry establishments and employment were underestimated in these 

two states. This means that Northeast region totals for those years were also underestimated but 

that the relative magnitude of the underestimate was less pronounced. For purposes of reporting, 

the number of establishments only includes reporting units that had paid employees. Sole 

proprietorships included in the nonemployer series for seafood harvesting were included in 

employment totals. 

 The number of combined establishments in the seafood commerce, marine recreational 

boating, and marine transportation sectors totaled an average of about 6,700 from 1998-2005 

(Table 4). These establishments represented less than 0.5% of total establishments in all 

industrial sectors in the Northeast region (Table 5). Across states, New York had the largest 

number of marine industry establishments and averaged more than 1,700 establishments from 

1998-2005 although the marine sector only accounted for 0.35% of total establishments in the 

state. By contrast, marine sector establishments represented nearly 2% of establishments in 

Maine, highest among Northeast region states. 

Table 4. Total Northeast Region (NER) marine sector establishments by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 360 90 1,202 704 593 648 135 977 1,744 255 633 6,736

1999 356 94 800 703 707 657 139 987 1,704 280 637 6,688

2000 344 98 783 700 586 639 133 991 1,711 277 644 6,644

2001 340 95 1,180 714 727 648 146 982 1,685 288 649 6,665

2002 362 104 1,221 716 771 658 139 975 1,779 286 668 6,868

2003 336 119 1,208 722 767 644 148 937 1,770 303 665 6,782

2004 367 112 1,197 719 805 655 148 920 1,767 305 670 6,769

2005 367 107 1,132 709 805 655 136 913 1,747 305 643 6,627

Bolded text denotes underestimate caused by data suppression in the commercial fishing sector. 
9

Table 5. Northeast Region (NER) marine sector percent of total establishments by state (1998-

2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 0.39% 0.39% 0.72% 0.56% 1.55% 0.33% 0.37% 0.42% 0.36% 0.90% 0.37% 0.42%

1999 0.39% 0.40% 0.46% 0.55% 1.82% 0.33% 0.37% 0.43% 0.35% 0.99% 0.37% 0.41%

2000 0.37% 0.41% 0.44% 0.54% 1.48% 0.31% 0.36% 0.42% 0.35% 0.97% 0.37% 0.41%

2001 0.37% 0.39% 0.67% 0.55% 1.83% 0.32% 0.39% 0.42% 0.34% 1.01% 0.37% 0.41%

2002 0.39% 0.43% 0.69% 0.54% 1.91% 0.32% 0.37% 0.41% 0.36% 0.99% 0.37% 0.41%

2003 0.37% 0.48% 0.68% 0.54% 1.88% 0.31% 0.39% 0.39% 0.35% 1.03% 0.36% 0.41%

2004 0.39% 0.44% 0.68% 0.53% 1.95% 0.31% 0.38% 0.38% 0.35% 1.02% 0.35% 0.40%

2005 0.39% 0.42% 0.65% 0.51% 1.92% 0.30% 0.35% 0.38% 0.35% 1.01% 0.33% 0.39%

Bolded text denotes underestimate caused by data suppression in the commercial fishing sector. 

 The share of total marine industry establishments was at least 25% in New York from 

1998-2005 (Table 6). In Massachusetts the share of establishments was at least 18% in 1998 and 

from 2001-2003, but declined in 2004 and in 2005 to 17.1%. For the most part, however, the 

share of marine industry establishments has been quite stable with only a small increase in Maine 

and small decreases in Massachusetts and New Jersey. 

Table 6. Northeast Region (NER) marine sector establishment shares by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1998 5.3% 1.3% 17.8% 10.5% 8.8% 9.6% 2.0% 14.5% 25.9% 3.8% 9.4%

1999 5.3% 1.4% 12.0% 10.5% 10.6% 9.8% 2.1% 14.8% 25.5% 4.2% 9.5%

2000 5.2% 1.5% 11.8% 10.5% 8.8% 9.6% 2.0% 14.9% 25.8% 4.2% 9.7%

2001 5.1% 1.4% 17.7% 10.7% 10.9% 9.7% 2.2% 14.7% 25.3% 4.3% 9.7%

2002 5.3% 1.5% 17.8% 10.4% 11.2% 9.6% 2.0% 14.3% 25.9% 4.2% 9.7%

2003 5.0% 1.8% 17.8% 10.6% 11.3% 9.5% 2.2% 13.8% 26.1% 4.5% 9.7%

2004 5.4% 1.7% 17.7% 10.6% 11.9% 9.7% 2.2% 13.6% 26.1% 4.5% 9.8%

2005 5.5% 1.6% 17.1% 10.7% 12.1% 9.9% 2.1% 13.8% 26.4% 4.6% 9.7%

Bolded text denotes underestimate caused by data suppression in the commercial fishing sector. 

 Combined marine industry mid-March employment averaged 137,000 employees in the 

Northeast region from 1998-2005 (Table 7). Total employment was a time series low of 133,700 

in 2002 but increased in each of the last three years reaching 140,000 employees in 2005. 

Virginia had the largest number of employees (an average of 32,000 employees) primarily 

because of the state’s dominance in the ship building sector. 

 Total marine industry employment was approximately 0.5% of total Northeast region 

employment ranging from 0.52% in 2001 to 0.57% in 1998 (Table 8). Because of the large ship 

building sector in Virginia, total marine industry employment was at least 1% of total 

employment in all sectors of the Virginia economy. Marine sector employment was also at least 

1% of total state employment in Rhode Island, and in Maine marine employment represented 

about 3.6% of total state employment. 

 The share of Northeast region marine sector employment was largest in Virginia 

averaging 23.7% from 1998-2000 (Table 9). Maine’s share of regionwide marine sector 
10

employment was as high as 15.3% in 1999 but has been on a slight declining trend to 13.5% in 

2005. By contrast, the employment share in Connecticut has been increasing in every year since 

2002. In other states the regionwide employment share has fluctuated without any notable trend 

from one year to the next. 

Table 7. Total Northeast Region (NER) marine sector mid-March employment by state (1998-2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER 

1998 11,413 1,701 13,157 11,248 20,134 10,472 1,353 17,068 14,586 4,173 33,055 138,360

1999 11,064 1,870 12,684 11,509 20,755 10,828 1,391 14,017 14,603 4,258 32,544 135,524

2000 10,544 1,656 13,341 11,464 18,781 11,488 1,446 15,561 14,925 4,329 33,482 137,017

2001 10,903 1,903 14,835 10,861 19,097 11,490 1,414 15,504 15,112 4,604 31,384 137,107

2002 10,272 1,873 14,909 10,376 16,941 11,470 1,500 14,708 15,480 4,451 31,738 133,719

2003 11,410 1,856 15,659 10,871 17,818 12,130 1,783 15,140 15,264 4,551 32,955 139,437

2004 11,953 1,942 15,545 11,039 17,878 11,825 1,862 15,751 15,120 4,558 32,758 140,232

2005 12,303 1,838 15,130 11,166 17,220 11,623 1,772 16,463 14,446 4,665 33,562 140,187

Bolded text denotes underestimate caused by data suppression in the commercial fishing sector. 

Table 8. Northeast Region (NER) marine sector percent of total employment by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 0.76% 0.48% 0.45% 0.58% 4.41% 0.32% 0.26% 0.51% 0.21% 1.04% 1.22% 0.57%

1999 0.72% 0.52% 0.43% 0.58% 4.37% 0.33% 0.26% 0.41% 0.20% 1.05% 1.17% 0.54%

2000 0.68% 0.44% 0.43% 0.56% 3.82% 0.34% 0.26% 0.44% 0.20% 1.04% 1.15% 0.53%

2001 0.70% 0.49% 0.47% 0.52% 3.82% 0.33% 0.25% 0.43% 0.20% 1.11% 1.07% 0.53%

2002 0.66% 0.48% 0.49% 0.50% 3.48% 0.35% 0.27% 0.41% 0.21% 1.07% 1.09% 0.52%

2003 0.74% 0.48% 0.53% 0.52% 3.64% 0.36% 0.33% 0.42% 0.21% 1.06% 1.12% 0.54%

2004 0.78% 0.50% 0.52% 0.51% 3.62% 0.35% 0.34% 0.44% 0.20% 1.05% 1.07% 0.54%

2005 0.80% 0.47% 0.50% 0.52% 3.46% 0.34% 0.32% 0.46% 0.19% 1.05% 1.10% 0.54%

Bolded text denotes underestimate caused by data suppression in the commercial fishing sector. 

Table 9. Marine sector employment shares by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1998 8.2% 1.2% 9.5% 8.1% 14.6% 7.6% 1.0% 12.3% 10.5% 3.0% 23.9%

1999 8.2% 1.4% 9.4% 8.5% 15.3% 8.0% 1.0% 10.3% 10.8% 3.1% 24.0%

2000 7.7% 1.2% 9.7% 8.4% 13.7% 8.4% 1.1% 11.4% 10.9% 3.2% 24.5%

2001 8.0% 1.4% 10.9% 7.9% 13.9% 8.4% 1.0% 11.3% 11.0% 3.4% 22.9%

2002 7.7% 1.4% 11.1% 7.8% 12.7% 8.6% 1.1% 10.9% 11.6% 3.3% 23.7%

2003 8.2% 1.3% 11.2% 7.8% 12.8% 8.7% 1.3% 11.2% 10.9% 3.3% 23.6%

2004 8.5% 1.4% 11.1% 8.0% 12.3% 8.4% 1.3% 11.7% 10.8% 3.3% 23.4%

2005 8.8% 1.3% 10.5% 8.0% 13.5% 8.3% 1.1% 11.3% 10.3% 3.3% 23.9%

Bolded text denotes underestimate caused by data suppression in the commercial fishing sector. 

 As a measure that takes into account both differences in sector employment and total 

employment shares among parts of a larger region, the location quotient provides a means for 

comparing the relative role of specified economic sectors across states. For example, New 

York’s marine employment share was about three times that of Rhode Island’s. However, since 

the share of total employment in Rhode Island in 2005 was much less than that of New York, the 

Rhode Island marine sector location quotient was 2.0 while New York’s was 0.4 (Table 10). 
11

Note that the location quotient provides only a comparative measure of relative importance 

among states; it does not provide a measure of the magnitude or importance of any given sector 

to a state. The location quotient exceeded one in Connecticut, Maine, Rhode Island, and 

Virginia. This means that marine sector employment is overrepresented in these states relative to 

their total employment share. 

Table 10. Marine sector location quotient by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1998 1.3 0.8 0.8 1.0 7.8 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.4 1.8 2.2

1999 1.3 1.0 0.8 1.1 8.0 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.4 1.9 2.1

2000 1.3 0.8 0.8 1.0 7.2 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.4 2.0 2.2

2001 1.3 0.9 0.9 1.0 7.3 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.4 2.1 2.0

2002 1.3 0.9 0.9 1.0 6.7 0.7 0.5 0.8 0.4 2.0 2.1

2003 1.4 0.9 1.0 1.0 6.7 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.4 2.0 2.0

2004 1.5 0.9 1.0 1.0 6.7 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.4 1.9 2.0

2005 1.5 0.9 0.9 1.0 6.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.4 2.0 2.0

 

 The marine sector includes three subgroups representing commerce in seafood products: 

marine recreational boating activities and sectors related to shipping and ship building. Seafood 

commerce represented similar proportions of both numbers of establishments and employment in 

the Northeast region from 1998-2005 (Table 11). That is, the share of establishments and 

employment in the seafood commerce marine sector subgroup was approximately one-third of 

total marine sector establishments and employment. Note that the share of seafood commerce 

establishments has been declining from 35.1% in 2002 to 30.2% in 2005 while the share of 

employment declined from 34.4% in 2002 to 32.7% in 2003 but held steady in both 2004 and 

2005. 

 Marine recreational boating establishments accounted for over one-half of all marine 

sector establishments in the Northeast but accounted for between 17-22% of employment. The 

opposite was the case for the water transportation marine subgroup. Primarily because of the 

underlying structure of the ship building sector within the water transportation subgroup, the 

subgroup accounted for about 12% of total establishments but represented more than 45% of 

total employment. 

Table 11. Northeast Region establishment and employment shares by marine sector group (1998-

2005) 

 Establishments Employment 

Year 

Seafood 

Commerce 

Marine 

Recreational 

Boating 

Water 

Transportation 

Seafood 

Commerce

Marine 

Recreational 

Boating 

Water 

Transportation

1998 34.7% 50.6% 14.8% 34.2% 17.3% 48.5%

1999 34.6% 50.6% 14.8% 34.3% 18.3% 47.4%

2000 34.2% 50.9% 15.0% 33.9% 19.3% 46.8%

2001 34.1% 51.1% 14.8% 34.7% 19.7% 45.6%

2002 35.1% 50.8% 14.1% 34.4% 19.6% 46.0%

2003 33.1% 53.1% 13.8% 32.7% 21.0% 46.3%

2004 32.9% 53.4% 13.6% 33.0% 21.4% 45.6%

2005 30.2% 55.8% 14.0% 32.7% 21.3% 46.0%
12

 In the following sections, trends in establishments and employment for each of the 

marine sector subgroups are reported. In each case, trends for the subgroup as a whole as well as 

trends for each sector that comprise the subgroup are discussed. 

Seafood Commerce 

 The seafood commerce subgroup includes commercial fishing, seafood dealers, seafood 

processors, and retail seafood markets. The available time series for each of these sectors 

differed, and trends for each are reported for the longest period of time possible. However, trends 

for the seafood commerce sector subgroup were available for all sectors only for the period 

1998-2005. As noted previously, available data for the commercial fishing sector include 

establishments with hired employees and sole proprietorships. For reporting purposes, the former 

were included as establishments to be consistent with the CBP definition of establishment while 

the latter were included with total seafood commerce employment. 

 The total number of seafood commerce establishments in the Northeast region ranged 

from a high of 2,409 in 2002 to a low of 2,001 in calendar year 2005 (Table 12). The decline in 

number of establishments was most notable from 2002-2003 and from 2004-2005. In each of 

these cases, the number of seafood commerce establishments fell by 163 and 229 reporting units, 

respectively. Note that this pattern was evident across all states, so the decline in seafood 

commerce establishments was a regionwide phenomenon not associated with a precipitous 

decline in any one state. At least some of these declines were attributable to data suppression in 

the QCEW data used to estimate commercial fishing establishments and employment. However, 

other than in Maine and Massachusetts, the number of establishments subject to suppression was 

quite low, so any underestimation in numbers of establishments at the Northeast region level 

from 2001 onward would be small. 

Table 12. Total number of Northeast Region (NER) seafood commerce establishments (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 83 19 798 209 273 194 35 313 701 79 236 2,335

1999 87 21 400 209 386 197 36 324 686 112 233 2,315

2000 76 23 380 211 268 187 32 320 688 110 238 2,271

2001 75 18 764 220 404 189 35 323 689 112 233 2,273

2002 78 23 793 212 437 199 32 333 768 104 241 2,409

2003 55 28 763 206 440 189 34 299 738 104 227 2,246

2004 74 24 752 198 472 193 37 302 733 105 236 2,230

2005 69 21 689 177 460 179 25 274 708 92 199 2,001

Bolded text denotes underestimate caused by data suppression in the commercial fishing sector. 

 Total Northeast region employment in the seafood commerce subgroup was 47,341 

employees in 1998 and 45,817 employees in 2005 (Table 13). Note that the effects of 

underestimation of employment in the seafood harvesting sector are less than that of 

establishments because in states other than Massachusetts fishing employment associated with 

sole proprietorships was 80% and in most cases more than 90% of commercial fishing 

employment. This means that even though some data suppression occurs in one or more states 

from 1998-2003, underestimation of total employment in the Northeast region and of 

employment in each state for that matter is likely to be a concern only in years (1999 and 2000) 

where Massachusetts data were suppressed. 
13

 In a manner similar to that of total establishments, total employment declined from 2002-

2003 and from 2004-2005. However, the proportional reduction in employment was substantially 

less than that of the change in establishments, suggesting potential employment loss from the 

reduced number of establishments was at least partially absorbed by those that remained. 

Table 13. Total Northeast Region (NER) seafood commerce employment (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 910 720 9,744 4,482 9,821 4,904 795 3,707 5,220 2,083 4,955 47,341

1999 856 718 8,634 4,446 9,848 5,044 758 3,699 5,362 2,291 4,810 46,466

2000 892 513 9,177 4,359 9,470 5,325 734 3,833 5,375 2,240 4,584 46,503

2001 898 662 10,404 4,305 9,404 5,154 750 4,122 5,271 2,235 4,327 47,531

2002 920 683 10,358 4,097 8,762 4,850 809 3,864 5,534 2,057 4,022 45,956

2003 856 535 10,604 3,809 8,827 4,787 803 3,595 5,453 2,225 4,065 45,559

2004 884 638 10,592 4,067 8,731 4,937 918 3,697 5,583 2,057 4,170 46,275

2005 937 638 10,405 4,303 8,843 4,494 921 3,838 5,355 1,925 4,158 45,817

Bolded text denotes underestimate caused by data suppression in the commercial fishing sector. 

 Since data suppression is likely to misrepresent seafood commerce employment in 

Massachusetts, employment shares were calculated for calendar years 2001-2005 (Table 14). 

Employment share has been declining in Virginia from 10.5% in 2001 to 8.8% in 2005 while 

employment share has been increasing in Massachusetts from 18.6% in 2002 to 22.5% in 2005. 

Employment shares in other states have been relatively stable although Maine’s share of seafood 

commerce employment has been gradually eroding since 2002. 

Table 14. Aggregate seafood commerce employment shares by state (2001-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

2001 1.9% 1.5% 20.6% 9.5% 20.7% 10.4% 1.7% 7.8% 11.0% 4.4% 10.5%

2002 1.8% 1.5% 18.6% 9.6% 21.2% 10.9% 1.6% 8.0% 11.5% 4.9% 10.4%

2003 1.9% 1.1% 19.7% 9.4% 20.4% 11.5% 1.6% 8.2% 11.6% 4.8% 9.9%

2004 1.9% 1.4% 21.9% 9.1% 19.8% 10.8% 1.6% 8.7% 11.1% 4.7% 9.1%

2005 2.0% 1.5% 22.5% 8.9% 19.1% 10.6% 1.8% 8.4% 12.0% 4.5% 8.8%

 In the Northeast region, more than half of seafood commerce employment is composed of 

commercial fishing employees (Table 15). Compared to 2001, commercial fishing employment 

in 2005 declined by only one percentage point while seafood dealer employment declined by 4.6 

percentage points. Offsetting decline in fishing and seafood dealer employment shares was an 

increase in the employment share of both the seafood processing and the retail seafood market 

sectors. Among some states the pattern in changes in employment shares matched that of the 

region as a whole (Massachusetts, for example), while others did not. In Maine, the commercial 

fishing employment share increased in 2005 compared to 2001, but the seafood processing 

employment share declined. The following provides a discussion of trends in each of the seafood 

commerce sectors. 
14

Table 15. Northeast Region (NER) seafood commerce employment composition by state (1998-

2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

 Commercial Fishing 

2001 51.6% 31.3% 50.8% 47.1% 74.6% 68.8% 45.8% 35.2% 30.1% 66.1% 46.0% 53.4%

2002 47.1% 29.1% 50.6% 47.2% 76.4% 68.2% 37.8% 36.4% 27.0% 65.2% 48.2% 52.9%

2003 46.9% 37.4% 49.9% 49.9% 79.4% 70.4% 39.5% 38.2% 27.2% 59.1% 46.8% 53.9%

2004 44.7% 29.9% 49.8% 45.7% 79.2% 67.8% 35.1% 39.3% 28.1% 62.2% 45.2% 52.9%

2005 42.9% 30.3% 50.2% 43.6% 77.9% 67.1% 36.4% 37.3% 28.3% 68.0% 44.8% 52.5%

 Seafood Dealer 

2001 25.6% 8.0% 24.1% 21.2% 13.1% 19.1% 10.0% 24.8% 40.9% 17.1% 20.2% 22.0%

2002 26.5% 9.5% 23.1% 21.2% 14.3% 19.8% 9.6% 25.1% 41.0% 18.5% 19.6% 22.4%

2003 19.7% 8.4% 17.7% 18.0% 11.2% 13.1% 9.7% 25.6% 40.0% 17.7% 18.3% 19.1%

2004 20.5% 1.1% 17.8% 18.0% 12.0% 12.7% 8.9% 25.6% 37.5% 12.6% 18.1% 18.6%

2005 25.1% 1.6% 17.6% 16.5% 13.0% 15.6% 9.7% 23.8% 37.4% 10.7% 16.2% 18.6%

 Seafood Processor 

2001 8.2% 50.9% 20.8% 20.7% 10.7% 7.4% 34.3% 26.7% 7.0% 10.7% 29.1% 17.0%

2002 8.4% 47.6% 21.5% 19.7% 7.3% 5.8% 45.5% 24.0% 6.4% 8.9% 25.7% 15.7%

2003 9.3% 31.1% 25.6% 20.0% 7.4% 10.2% 40.1% 23.5% 5.0% 16.0% 30.9% 17.4%

2004 12.0% 46.4% 25.9% 22.0% 6.6% 12.6% 48.8% 20.3% 5.8% 17.3% 29.5% 18.0%

2005 12.1% 46.5% 25.7% 26.5% 6.9% 10.2% 45.4% 25.2% 6.1% 14.0% 32.1% 18.8%

Retail Seafood Market 

2001 14.6% 9.8% 4.3% 11.0% 1.6% 4.8% 10.0% 13.3% 21.9% 6.0% 4.7% 7.6%

2002 17.9% 13.8% 4.7% 11.9% 2.0% 6.2% 7.1% 14.5% 25.7% 7.3% 6.4% 9.0%

2003 24.1% 23.2% 6.8% 12.1% 2.1% 6.4% 10.7% 12.6% 27.8% 7.3% 4.1% 9.6%

2004 22.8% 22.6% 6.5% 14.2% 2.2% 6.9% 7.2% 14.8% 28.7% 7.9% 7.1% 10.4%

2005 20.0% 21.6% 6.5% 13.4% 2.1% 7.0% 8.6% 13.7% 28.3% 7.3% 6.9% 10.1%

Commercial fishing NAICS 1141

 The commercial fishing sector is composed of establishments engaged in the harvest of 

finfish, shellfish, and other marine products taken from their natural habitat. Any sector engaged 

in husbandry activities is included in the animal aquaculture sector (NAICS 1125). Animal 

aquaculture was excluded from this report because it is classified with agricultural production 

which is not covered by CBP. The CBP data were not adequate to characterize fishing 

employment for two reasons. First, a large portion of available data were suppressed since many 

engaged in the fishing industry are considered self-employed. Second, commercial fishing has a 

strong seasonal component meaning that a substantial amount of employment would be missed 

during the mid-March survey period used by CBP. For these reasons fishing employment was 

estimated by using QCEW and nonemployer statistics. Both of these data sources provide an 

estimate of total annual employment. The former captures establishments subject to payroll taxes 

while the latter captures self-employed or sole proprietorships. Data for both series were 

available from 1997-2005. 

 Massachusetts had the largest number of reporting units (Table 16) and the most 

employees (Table 17) in all years where data were not suppressed. These data indicate that the 

number of Massachusetts reporting units was larger in 2005 than in 1998 but has remained 

relatively constant from 2003-2005. However, the number of fishing employees has declined 

recently from 1,701 in 2003 to 1,682 in 2005, a reduction of about 1%. By contrast the number 
15

of reporting units and fishing employees in Maine has increased in consecutive years from 2001-

2005. 

Table 16. Northeast Region number of reporting units for fishing by state (quarterly census of 

employment and wages 1997–2005) 

Year CT DE ME MD MA NH NJ NY NC RI VA

1997 21 S S S S S 72 52 S S 27

1998 20 S S 23 393 3 76 57 S S 33

1999 19 4 113 24 S 3 75 58 9 39 32

2000 17 5 S 22 S 3 70 55 13 38 34

2001 14 S 148 24 392 3 69 54 14 36 35

2002 12 S 165 24 405 S 66 54 16 31 40

2003 S 4 180 23 423 S 67 54 16 30 40

2004 14 5 218 21 426 3 66 55 16 29 43

2005 13 4 234 23 422 3 61 47 12 29 44

S denotes suppressed data 

 In addition to number of reporting units and employees, the QCEW data report total 

annual wages paid to employees. Adjusting for inflationary effects by using the Consumer Price 

Index (CPI) indicates that average annual wages paid to fishing employees have been increasing 

in most states, particularly from 2003-2005 (Table 18). For example, average annual wages in 

Maine increased from $21,640 in 2003 to $23,825 in 2005. Similarly, average annual wages paid 

to fishing employees in Massachusetts has increased to a time series high of $38,333 in 2005. 

Compared to state per capita personal income, adjusted by the CPI, average fishing wages were 

above the statewide average in Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island (US Bureau of 

Economic Analysis 2009). By contrast, average fishing wages tended to be 40-60% lower than 

statewide per capita personal income in Delaware and North Carolina and 10-20% less than 

statewide amounts elsewhere. 

Table 17. Northeast Region number of fishing employees by state (quarterly census of 

employment and wages 1997–2005) 

Year CT DE ME MD MA NH NJ NY NC RI VA

1997 100 S S S S S 267 129 S S 85

1998 100 S S 43 1,271 3 258 127 S S 91

1999 90 5 252 41 S 3 257 131 81 112 75

2000 80 5 S 40 S 3 241 114 70 92 79

2001 60 S 279 102 1,499 3 268 106 50 81 74

2002 48 S 302 96 1,623 S 229 100 63 63 97

2003 S 3 336 105 1,701 S 228 85 54 90 97

2004 S S 341 102 1,693 S 224 99 83 103 104

2005 S S 367 95 1,682 S 207 59 22 98 96

S denotes suppressed data 

The number of sole proprietorships reporting fishing income averaged 22,300 from 1997-2005 

(Table 19), representing almost 88% more people engaged in fishing as a sole proprietor either as 

captain, crew, or sole operator of a fishing boat compared to wage-based employment. Over 

time, the total number of sole proprietorships engaged in fishing has been declining at an average 

rate of 0.6% per year. The average annual change in sole proprietorships was positive in 
16

Delaware, New Hampshire, New York, and New Jersey while annual change in sole 

proprietorships was negative in all other states. This negative change was at least 1% per year in 

the states of Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia. 

Table 18. Northeast Region consumer price index adjusted average annual fishing wages ($) 

(1997–2005) 

Year CT DE ME MD MA NH NJ NY NC RI VA

1997 18,173 S S S S S 17,087 18,712 S S 17,105

1998 20,450 S S 13,259 23,814 24,621 19,130 17,088 S S 15,965

1999 19,420 8,657 26,875 12,915 S 20,861 18,102 17,528 7,459 22,304 15,289

2000 19,664 6,929 S 13,566 S 24,805 19,804 18,310 6,337 19,184 12,871

2001 16,891 S 22,430 14,618 29,123 26,959 18,785 15,827 7,425 19,471 14,558

2002 18,381 S 23,078 14,937 28,769 S 19,334 16,145 6,992 19,991 13,059

2003 S 9,842 21,640 17,992 27,824 S 18,232 14,739 9,729 24,593 13,986

2004 S S 22,787 19,520 31,385 S 19,087 17,106 5,769 33,153 14,830

2005 S S 23,825 20,877 38,333 S 18,069 18,012 14,062 31,546 15,973

S denotes suppressed data 

Table 19. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) sole proprietorships engaged in fishing by 

state (1997–2005) 

Year CT DE ME MD MA NH NJ NY NC RI VA NER

1997 410 196 6,617 2,042 3,711 318 1,202 1,378 3,367 1,317 2,035 22,593

1998 431 224 6,759 2,057 3,782 316 1,282 1,555 3,301 1,409 2,050 23,166

1999 404 224 6,704 2,089 3,817 304 1,123 1,564 3,460 1,443 1,997 23,129

2000 402 221 6,714 2,048 3,806 304 1,177 1,509 3,574 1,413 1,960 23,128

2001 403 207 6,734 1,926 3,782 340 1,182 1,483 3,495 1,397 1,916 22,865

2002 385 199 6,392 1,836 3,621 306 1,179 1,392 3,245 1,279 1,841 21,675

2003 401 197 6,669 1,797 3,586 317 1,147 1,396 3,314 1,224 1,805 21,853

2004 395 191 6,577 1,758 3,580 322 1,229 1,468 3,263 1,177 1,782 21,742

2005 402 193 6,526 1,782 3,539 335 1,224 1,456 2,995 1,211 1,765 21,428

Annual 

Average 

Change -0.2% 0.0% -0.1% -1.7% -0.6% 0.8% 0.4% 0.8% -1.4% -0.9% -1.8% -0.6% 

 The number of fishing sole proprietorships in Maine was nearly twice as great as that of 

any other state, accounting for 27-29% of all such proprietorships from 1997-2005 (Table 20). 

Massachusetts also accounted for at least 20% of fishing sole proprietorships while the 

remaining New England states combined accounted for less than 10%. 

 Gross receipts for Northeast region fishing sole proprietorships adjusted by the CPI were 

nearly constant at about $22,000 (Table 21). Annual receipts were above the Northeast region 

average in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. Compared to 

average QCEW wages paid to fishing employees, gross receipts to sole proprietorships tended to 

be slightly higher in Maine and New York, and substantially higher in New Jersey, North 

Carolina, and Virginia. By contrast, wage-based income tended to be higher than sole 

proprietorship receipts in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. 

An estimated location quotient was obtained by adding QCEW and sole proprietorship 

data. Note that this estimate would be biased downward in cases where QCEW data were 
17

suppressed. This downward bias is likely to be larger where QCEW data were suppressed since 

wage-based employment was somewhat higher (Maine and Massachusetts, for example) 

compared to others. 

Table 20. Shares of Northeast Region fishing sole proprietorships by state (1997–2005)

Year CT DE ME MD MA NH NJ NY NC RI VA

1997 2.0% 0.8% 27.4% 8.2% 21.0% 1.3% 5.8% 6.0% 13.5% 5.6% 8.4%

1998 2.1% 0.9% 27.7% 8.2% 19.8% 1.2% 6.0% 6.6% 13.2% 5.9% 8.4%

1999 1.9% 0.9% 26.9% 8.2% 21.2% 1.2% 5.3% 6.6% 13.7% 6.0% 8.0%

2000 1.9% 0.9% 27.2% 8.1% 21.1% 1.2% 5.5% 6.3% 14.1% 5.8% 7.9%

2001 1.8% 0.8% 27.6% 8.0% 20.8% 1.4% 5.7% 6.3% 14.0% 5.8% 7.8%

2002 1.8% 0.8% 27.5% 7.9% 21.6% 1.3% 5.8% 6.1% 13.6% 5.5% 8.0%

2003 1.8% 0.8% 28.5% 7.7% 21.5% 1.3% 5.6% 6.0% 13.7% 5.3% 7.7%

2004 1.8% 0.8% 28.2% 7.6% 21.5% 1.3% 5.9% 6.4% 13.6% 5.2% 7.7%

2005 1.9% 0.8% 28.6% 7.8% 21.7% 1.4% 5.9% 6.3% 12.5% 5.4% 7.7%

Annual 

Average 

Change -0.8% 0.5% 0.5% -0.7% 0.4% 1.4% 0.4% 0.8% -0.9% -0.3% -1.0%

The location quotient was consistently greater than one in the states of Maine, 

Massachusetts, Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia (Table 22). These five states accounted 

for approximately 70% of total Northeast region fishing employment. A location quotient above 

one means that the commercial fishing employment share in a given state was higher than the 

state’s total employment share, relative to other states in the Northeast region. Thus a reduction 

in commercial fishing employment in these states would be expected to have a proportionally 

greater impact on the state economy compared to other states. 

 The location quotient for states was calculated relative to the Northeast region as a whole. 

However, fishing employment may be comparatively more important to coastal areas within 

states than to the state as a whole. To examine the relative importance of fishing in coastal areas, 

the location quotient was recalculated for coastal counties in each state. The selected coastal 

counties correspond to the coastal regions developed by Steinback and Thunberg (2006). These 

coastal regions include a total of 143 counties and independent cities (see Figures 1-11). The 

location quotient for each county was calculated by using the fishing employment and total 

employment in the state as a base. For example, the location quotient for Washington County, 

ME, was the county’s share of fishing employment in all coastal counties in Maine, divided by 

Washington County’s share of total employment in all Maine coastal counties. 

 The location quotient exceeded one in 63 of the 143 coastal counties (Table 23). On 

average, these counties accounted for 75% of total fishing employment in the Northeast Region. 

As noted previously, counties where the location quotient exceeds one provide an indication of 

where changes in fishing employment would be expected to have a larger impact on the local 

economy as compared to counties where the location quotient was less than one. Note that 

counties where the location quotient exceeds one include those with more than 1,000 people 

working as sole proprietorships or wage employees (Hancock, Knox, and Washington Counties 

in Maine and Bristol and Essex Counties in Massachusetts) as well as counties where there were 

fewer than 50 people were engaged in fishing (Middlesex County, CT, Richmond County, NY, 

Middlesex and Salem Counties, NJ, and Wicomico County, MD). These large differences in 

employment levels highlight the difference between measuring the role of fishing in coastal 
18

Table 21. Consumer price index adjusted average receipts for sole proprietorships in the Northeast Re

Year CT DE ME MD MA NH NJ NY NC 1997 30,726 24,603 21,451 14,966 21,618 35,085 45,536 18,709 16,623 281998 31,704 26,266 20,823 15,323 21,547 31,376 47,516 18,636 17,315 291999 24,286 27,231 24,667 14,517 24,883 34,598 39,022 18,132 17,467 272000 19,108 24,861 25,177 14,207 26,025 38,211 36,770 17,185 18,517 292001 19,164 24,538 22,649 13,526 23,658 29,709 33,658 17,440 15,984 262002 16,239 23,504 24,942 13,929 25,002 30,022 33,957 18,453 16,904 272003 17,316 20,349 25,212 12,546 24,770 28,504 33,637 16,703 17,757 272004 20,330 21,992 24,805 14,667 23,253 28,297 32,107 17,242 17,418 272005 20,075 23,350 25,190 14,634 25,560 25,426 32,143 18,581 17,081 27Annual Average Change -4.2% -0.4% 2.3% 0.0% 2.4% -3.4% -4.0% 0.1% 0.5% -0

Table 22. Northeast Region annual fishing location quotient by state (1997–2005) 

Year CT DE ME MD MA NH NJ NY NC 1997 0.3 0.1 4.1 1.2 3.1 0.2 0.9 0.9 2.0 1998 0.3 0.1 4.1 1.2 2.9 0.2 0.9 1.0 1.9 1999 0.3 0.1 4.0 1.2 3.1 0.2 0.8 1.0 2.0 2000 0.3 0.1 4.2 1.2 3.2 0.2 0.8 1.0 2.2 2001 0.3 0.1 4.3 1.2 3.2 0.2 0.9 1.0 2.2 2002 0.3 0.1 4.2 1.2 3.3 0.2 0.9 0.9 2.1 2003 0.3 0.1 4.4 1.2 3.3 0.2 0.9 0.9 2.1 2004 0.3 0.1 4.4 1.2 3.4 0.2 0.9 1.0 2.1 2005 0.3 0.1 4.6 1.3 3.5 0.2 1.0 1.0 2.0 
19

economies in terms of absolute numbers as compared to a relative measure like the location 

quotient. That is, even seemingly low levels of fishing employment may play a large role in 

coastal counties that have a small population and a comparatively smaller labor force. 

Table 23. Annual number of fishing employees and sole proprietorships by coastal county with a 

location quotient greater than one (1997-2005)

 Year 

County, State 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 1228 1264 1250 1232 1244 1199 1278 1264 1304

Knox County, ME 1252 1269 1277 1293 1478 1452 1524 1541 1492

Lincoln County, ME 929 938 925 908 938 868 904 875 823

Sagadahoc County, ME 299 309 290 268 297 S 288 292 305

Washington County, ME 1196 1283 1326 1362 1314 1252 1300 1323 1313

Barnstable County, MA 902 976 952 1039 1043 1028 981 958 910

Bristol County, MA 1889 1763 1739 1837 1984 2047 2164 2139 2170

Dukes County, MA 103 109 109 110 102 114 100 97 93

Essex County, MA 1077 1118 1094 1059 1023 987 989 991 975

Plymouth County, MA 502 551 569 547 540 522 520 493 544

Bristol County, RI 86 91 103 107 100 95 78 80 76

Newport County, RI 213 204 206 193 242 222 203 199 198

Washington County, RI 185 167 167 108 151 136 158 162 176

Middlesex County, CT 46 41 33 38 S S 53 45 44

New London County, CT 163 170 153 153 161 162 16 172 166

Nassau County, NY 124 183 181 167 148 145 161 175 171

Richmond County, NY 20 27 28 27 28 28 33 31 29

Suffolk County, NY 841 970 942 895 967 787 735 835 743

Atlantic County, NJ 99 115 108 108 120 113 S S 109

Camden County, NJ 201 205 204 197 195 166 158 156 162

Cape May County, NJ 336 349 302 349 345 352 320 358 356

Cumberland County, NJ 82 87 85 75 S 79 69 62 65

Middlesex County, NJ 22 22 23 24 35 S S S 25

Monmouth County, NJ 163 172 165 166 158 152 153 163 178

Ocean County, NJ 345 394 302 314 331 316 307 340 314

Salem County, NJ 28 21 29 24 19 24 S 20 18

Kent County, DE 66 67 65 S 73 72 68 64 64

Sussex County, DE S S 114 112 93 87 84 82 83

Calvert County, MD 62 57 54 63 73 70 59 63 69

Charles County, MD 76 78 82 81 75 66 69 69 69

Dorchester County, MD 332 319 339 332 311 289 261 257 257

Kent County, MD 134 128 145 130 115 111 112 105 108

Queen Anne's County, MD 201 201 200 186 184 155 144 153 155

Somerset County, MD 338 345 331 328 314 317 311 300 283

St. Mary's County, MD 154 164 168 164 169 S 144 128 139

Talbot County, MD 290 312 305 307 263 248 225 221 228

Wicomico County, MD 55 53 54 53 46 43 52 78 43

Worcester County, MD 77 94 104 99 110 119 110 98 86

S denotes suppressed data. 
20

Table 23 (continued). Annual number of fishing employees and sole proprietorships by coastal 

county with a location quotient greater than one (1997-2005)

 Year 

County, State 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Accomack County, VA 415 433 414 403 388 367 356 351 325

Gloucester County, VA 232 240 223 207 185 192 185 188 177

Hampton City, VA 78 90 91 81 80 75 83 86 76

Isle of Wight County, VA 20 19 15 12 18 15 21 15 17

King George County, VA 22 19 20 17 17 20 12 15 19

Lancaster County, VA 87 98 94 97 92 86 92 85 79

Mathews County, VA 107 99 87 93 88 92 78 74 71

Middlesex County, VA 89 90 78 89 77 71 65 65 72

Northampton County, VA 130 124 133 126 138 134 151 145 157

Northumberland County, VA 145 141 140 118 125 129 124 118 108

Poquoson City, VA S 90 90 86 83 75 68 68 64

Richmond County, VA 23 29 30 28 28 24 20 24 16

Stafford County, VA 20 23 28 25 26 30 25 27 29

Westmoreland County, VA 119 123 119 111 98 98 88 83 86

York County, VA 68 72 65 52 43 47 42 29 32

Beaufort County, NC 296 274 295 293 264 239 283 264 213

Brunswick County, NC 239 226 232 210 218 219 265 253 191

Camden County, NC 24 26 30 28 44 S 41 S 39

Carteret County, NC 640 603 631 635 610 586 565 557 475

Currituck County, NC 93 87 82 90 85 84 75 71 62

Dare County, NC 551 564 562 579 568 496 510 527 495

Hyde County, NC 197 202 207 211 203 176 163 163 140

Pamlico County, NC 240 226 228 207 202 199 182 176 171

Pender County, NC 59 45 50 61 64 64 65 73 61

Perquimans County, NC 41 43 38 45 45 39 40 35 31

Tyrrell County, NC 57 62 64 68 72 68 63 68 62

S denotes suppressed data. 
21

Washington

Hancock

York

Waldo

Kennebec

Cumberland

Lincoln

Knox 

Androscoggin



Sagadahoc

Figure 1. Maine coastal counties 
22

Hillsborough

Hillsborough

Rockingham

Strafford

Figure 2. New Hampshire coastal counties 
23

Middlesex

Bristol

Essex

Plymouth

 

B



Dukes



Suf

Norfolk

Figure 3. Massachusetts coastal counties 
24

Providence

Kent

Newport

Bristol

Washington 

Newport



Newport

Figure 4. Rhode Island coastal counties 
25

Litchfield

Hartford

Fairfield

Tolland

New 

New Haven

Middlesex

Figure 5. Connecticut coastal counties 
26

S

 

 We

 Rockland



Q



K

 Bron

 Richmond  New York

Figure 6. New York coastal counties 
27

Ocean

Atlantic

Burlington

Morris

Sussex

Salem

Warren

Monmouth

Hunterdon

Cumberland

Bergen

Mercer

Somerset

Middlesex

Gloucester

Cape May

Camden

Passaic

Essex

Union

 Hudson

Figure 7. New Jersey coastal counties 
28

Sussex

Kent

New Castle

Figure 8. Delaware coastal counties
29

Baltimore

Carroll Cecil

Charles

Harford

Kent

Talbot

Montgomery

St. Mary’s

 

 Anne Arundel 

Prince George’s



Ca

Howard





Som

Dorchester

Figure 9. Maryland coastal counties 
30

3 4  5 6 7  8 9

10

11

13 

15

18 

20 21 22 

2728 30 29 32 31 33 34 35

3

40 Norfolk

38 Virginia Beach

37 Chesapeake

36 Suffolk

39 Portsmouth

24 Poquoson

25 Hampton

22 James City

29 Charles City

32 Prince George

21 New Kent

20 King William

35 Isle of Wight

23 York

27 Henrico

30 Chesterfield

34 Surry

33 Sussex

26 Newport News

28 Richmond City31 Colonial Heights

5 Alexandria

4 Arlington

17 Mathews

12 Northumberland

16 Middlesex

10 King George

14 Lancaster

11 Westmoreland

18 King and Queen

13 Richmond

19 Gloucester

7 Prince William

2 Northampton

9 Stafford

15 Essex

1 Accomack

3 Fairfax

6 Falls Church8 Manassas

Figure 10. Virginia coastal counties 
31

1 

Pitt

Bertie

Pender

Beaufort

Onslow

Craven

Carte

Brunswick



5 Currituck



4 Camden

1 Chowan

2 Perquimans3 Pasquotank  New Hanover

Figure 11. North Carolina coastal counties 
32

Seafood wholesale NAICS 42446 

 The seafood wholesale sector includes establishments that purchase fish and seafood 

directly from fishing vessels as well as establishments engaged in the distribution of fish and 

seafood that may have been processed. These establishments do not include wholesalers that 

distribute either canned or frozen packaged seafood. 

 Employment in the seafood wholesale sector was increasing at an average rate of 1.1% 

per year from 1986-1996 (Table 24). Regionwide employment began falling in 1997 and has 

declined in almost every year. That is, total wholesale dealer employment has been declining at 

an average annual rate of 3.3% from 11,683 employees in 1996 to 8,532 in 2005. Over the same 

period employment attrition in the wholesale dealer sector declined at a higher average annual 

rate in Delaware, Maine, Rhode Island, and Virginia while New Hampshire was the only state 

with positive average annual employment growth from 1997-2005. 

Table 24. Annual Northeast Region (NER) seafood dealer mid-March employment by state (1986–

2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 175 45 2,079 891 969 1,069 63 1,246 2,494 274 1,178 10,483

1987 189 61 2,248 894 1,038 1,153 98 1,182 2,595 550 1,104 11,111

1988 238 28 2,273 870 1,158 1,146 104 1,032 2,313 607 1,151 10,919

1989 229 30 2,365 831 1,162 1,102 124 1,010 2,324 613 1,414 11,204

1990 204 31 2,498 848 1,066 928 107 1,229 2,137 544 1,359 10,952

1991 197 20 2,417 888 1,156 1,084 148 837 2,034 554 1,240 10,574

1992 195 53 2,148 789 1,295 1,021 121 1,013 1,843 531 1,518 10,528

1993 206 43 2,150 910 1,299 1,093 98 831 2,427 459 1,210 10,724

1994 186 46 2,411 975 1,241 1,005 89 874 2,629 404 1,382 11,242

1995 185 84 2,272 929 1,521 961 92 1,280 2,594 484 1,338 11,739

1996 185 99 2,370 891 1,792 900 88 969 2,617 513 1,260 11,683

1997 199 85 2,469 1,121 1,739 923 80 864 2,226 367 1,147 11,220

1998 194 77 2,408 1,001 1,840 905 81 936 2,195 401 1,087 11,125

1999 187 55 2,486 950 1,722 880 79 1,027 2,189 393 1,056 11,024

2000 203 56 2,685 903 1,631 969 68 1,028 2,265 411 1,072 11,292

2001 230 53 2,508 913 1,235 983 75 1,023 2,158 382 875 10,435

2002 244 65 2,393 870 1,256 961 78 969 2,269 380 790 10,275

2003 169 45 1,880 686 985 628 78 920 2,183 394 742 8,710

2004 181 7 1,890 733 1,048 627 82 948 2,091 259 756 8,622

2005 235 10 1,836 709 1,152 703 89 914 2,003 206 675 8,532

1986 - 

1996 

Average 

Change 1.0% 21.0% 1.5% 0.2% 6.7% -1.3% 5.9% 0.0% 1.1% 9.9% 1.6% 1.1%

1997-

2005 

Average 

Change 4.0% -12.2% -2.4% -1.8% -4.1% -1.7% 0.4% -0.4% -2.8% -8.4% -6.5% -3.3%

 The number of wholesale seafood establishments increased from 1,003 in 1986 to 1,324 

in 1996, a time series high (Table 25). Since 1996 the number of establishments declined to 

fewer than 1,000 businesses in both 2004 and 2005. The same general trend has been occurring 
33

across all Northeast region states although the average annual decline in number of wholesale 

seafood distributors from 1997-2005 was higher than the regionwide average in all New England 

states except Maine. By contrast, attrition in numbers of wholesale seafood distributors has 

occurred at lower average annual rates in most mid-Atlantic states. 

Table 25. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) seafood dealer establishments by state 

(1986–2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 22 6 171 82 123 77 11 96 266 45 104 1,003

1987 27 6 205 96 146 92 16 110 306 49 107 1,160

1988 25 4 200 90 138 95 17 97 265 54 98 1,083

1989 26 4 202 81 132 91 16 91 257 57 104 1,061

1990 24 4 210 86 130 85 13 84 266 66 107 1,075

1991 26 5 202 89 130 90 18 77 265 61 103 1,066

1992 31 4 223 82 160 84 17 89 275 60 105 1,130

1993 32 8 243 100 173 88 21 94 311 66 110 1,246

1994 32 9 252 98 174 83 22 110 317 65 110 1,272

1995 29 10 245 100 174 85 22 101 313 62 105 1,246

1996 33 8 264 105 189 91 20 105 335 62 112 1,324

1997 27 6 255 98 195 89 17 108 310 52 104 1,261

1998 28 7 256 94 210 97 17 101 323 49 108 1,290

1999 29 5 247 93 201 90 16 110 313 43 108 1,255

2000 26 4 229 92 194 86 14 107 305 40 105 1,202

2001 25 5 212 94 182 84 14 112 296 41 100 1,165

2002 28 7 207 77 190 84 14 102 315 39 89 1,152

2003 19 5 163 63 181 68 11 84 291 38 84 1,007

2004 19 2 148 58 177 72 12 85 274 35 86 968

2005 17 3 151 59 177 77 10 85 269 32 86 966

1986 - 

1996 

Average 

Change 4.7% 7.5% 4.7% 3.0% 4.8% 2.0% 7.9% 1.5% 2.6% 3.5% 0.9% 3.0%

1997-

2005 

Average 

Change -6.2% -3.4% -5.8% -5.9% -0.6% -1.5% -6.9% -2.0% -2.3% -6.9% -2.8% -3.4%

 The location quotient exceeded one in the states of Massachusetts, Maine, and Rhode 

Island in every year from 1986-2005 (Table 26). In relative terms, a change in seafood dealer 

employment in these New England states may be expected to have a larger impact than in other 

Northeast region states. The location quotient was greater than one in Virginia up to 1995 but has 

since fallen below one, indicating a decline in the share of wholesale employment in Virginia 

relative to the state’s share of total regional employment. 

The Herfindahl index depends on the number of establishments as well as the size 

distribution of the industry. Since the seafood dealer sector is predominantly composed of 

establishments with fewer than 100 employees, the value of the index as well as changes in the 

index are largely determined by the number of establishments. This is why the Herfindahl index 

for the seafood dealer sector in the Northeast region as a whole is substantially lower than the 
34

index value for individual states (Table 27). This is also why the index value increases so much 

in Delaware, as the number of seafood dealers has declined to only two establishments in 2005. 

Since 1997 the average annual change in the Herfindahl index has been positive in all states 

except Maine. In most cases the change in the Herfindahl has been due primarily to changes in 

the size structure of the seafood dealer sector as the dispersion effect exceeded the fewness effect 

at least for states other than Delaware. 

Table 26. Annual Northeast Region seafood dealer location quotient by state (1986–2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1986 0.2 0.4 1.5 1.1 5.3 0.9 0.3 0.8 0.8 1.4 1.2

1987 0.3 0.4 1.6 1.0 5.2 0.9 0.4 0.7 0.7 2.7 1.0

1988 0.3 0.2 1.7 1.0 5.7 0.9 0.5 0.7 0.7 3.1 1.1

1989 0.3 0.2 1.7 1.0 5.4 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.7 3.1 1.3

1990 0.3 0.2 1.9 1.0 5.3 0.7 0.5 0.8 0.6 2.9 1.2

1991 0.3 0.1 1.9 1.1 6.0 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.6 3.1 1.2

1992 0.3 0.4 1.7 1.0 6.7 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.6 3.0 1.4

1993 0.3 0.3 1.7 1.1 6.5 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.8 2.5 1.1

1994 0.3 0.3 1.8 1.1 5.9 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.8 2.2 1.1

1995 0.3 0.5 1.6 1.0 6.9 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.7 2.5 1.1

1996 0.3 0.6 1.7 1.0 8.2 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.8 2.7 1.0

1997 0.3 0.5 1.8 1.3 8.3 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.7 2.0 0.9

1998 0.3 0.5 1.8 1.1 8.8 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.7 2.2 0.9

1999 0.3 0.3 1.9 1.1 8.2 0.6 0.3 0.7 0.7 2.2 0.9

2000 0.3 0.3 2.0 1.0 7.6 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.7 2.3 0.8

2001 0.4 0.3 2.0 1.1 6.2 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.7 2.3 0.7

2002 0.4 0.4 2.0 1.0 6.4 0.7 0.4 0.7 0.8 2.3 0.7

2003 0.3 0.3 1.9 1.0 5.9 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.9 2.7 0.7

2004 0.4 0.1 1.9 1.0 6.4 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.8 1.8 0.7

2005 0.5 0.1 1.9 1.0 7.1 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.8 1.4 0.7

 

 Of the 143 coastal counties from Maine to North Carolina, the location quotient was 

greater than one in 55. Seafood dealer employment (Table 28, see Table 29 for numbers of 

establishments) in these counties ranges from fewer than 10 to several hundred, highlighting the 

fact that the relative importance of marine industries within a region or state is not solely 

measured by numbers of employees alone. For example, Cumberland County, ME, has the 

largest number of seafood dealer employees in the state but also accounts for the largest share of 

total employment in Maine such that the location quotient for the county is less than one. Note 

that this does not mean that seafood dealer employment is unimportant to Cumberland County, it 

only means that in relative terms, other Maine counties have a higher dependence on seafood 

dealer employment. 
35

Table 27. Annual Northeast Region (NER) seafood dealer Herfindahl Index by state (1986–200

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI V1986 0.092 0.204 0.018 0.032 0.021 0.050 0.220 0.044 0.016 0.046 0.021987 0.085 0.190 0.015 0.024 0.016 0.041 0.152 0.030 0.015 0.113 0.021988 0.116 0.321 0.013 0.028 0.031 0.027 0.120 0.034 0.017 0.097 0.01989 0.117 0.327 0.016 0.034 0.025 0.028 0.130 0.050 0.017 0.094 0.01990 0.145 0.327 0.019 0.035 0.021 0.047 0.166 0.053 0.018 0.046 0.01991 0.132 0.253 0.018 0.033 0.019 0.045 0.113 0.058 0.016 0.089 0.021992 0.138 0.473 0.016 0.036 0.028 0.054 0.115 0.058 0.016 0.104 0.01993 0.127 0.213 0.012 0.031 0.034 0.046 0.114 0.032 0.013 0.036 0.01994 0.075 0.267 0.016 0.032 0.028 0.033 0.077 0.030 0.015 0.048 0.01995 0.070 0.204 0.015 0.028 0.028 0.049 0.078 0.086 0.016 0.046 0.01996 0.067 0.238 0.012 0.029 0.052 0.034 0.086 0.026 0.015 0.056 0.01997 0.082 0.266 0.012 0.043 0.051 0.052 0.097 0.049 0.017 0.059 0.01998 0.080 0.252 0.013 0.044 0.022 0.050 0.092 0.043 0.016 0.055 0.041999 0.081 0.393 0.012 0.035 0.026 0.036 0.100 0.040 0.013 0.046 0.042000 0.128 0.425 0.016 0.035 0.028 0.052 0.123 0.041 0.015 0.057 0.02001 0.087 0.393 0.020 0.049 0.019 0.064 0.116 0.042 0.013 0.048 0.022002 0.111 0.332 0.017 0.072 0.031 0.051 0.124 0.047 0.012 0.065 0.02003 0.114 0.524 0.020 0.076 0.022 0.047 0.204 0.048 0.013 0.146 0.02004 0.123 0.612 0.018 0.077 0.023 0.046 0.181 0.047 0.014 0.055 0.02005 0.122 0.427 0.017 0.056 0.023 0.065 0.187 0.048 0.015 0.055 0.041986-1996 Average Change -1.1% 9.2% -2.5% 0.0% 16.5% 0.9% -6.8% 10.9% 0.5% 17.5% 3.61997-2005 Average Change 9.6% 10.2% 5.6% 10.7% -3.1% 10.8% 10.8% 9.5% 0.2% 10.0% 5.4
36

Table 28. Annual seafood dealer employees in coastal counties with a location quotient greater 

than one (1998–2005) 

County, State 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 237 210 221 172 169 181 175 186

Knox County, ME 273 277 253 247 210 178 181 179

Lincoln County, ME 146 167 203 147 95 113 93 105

Washington County, ME 139 118 105 123 76 88 105 108

York County, ME 100 104 95 99 94 170 191 172

Rockingham County, NH 72 68 60 61 62 72 79 74

Barnstable County, MA 165 161 173 198 152 112 92 88

Bristol County, MA 710 780 917 703 625 603 585 548

Essex County, MA 516 446 440 387 412 247 279 357

Suffolk County, MA 649 671 715 779 841 615 601 633

Newport County, RI 70 76 86 103 128 173 83 61

Washington County, RI 172 152 142 148 121 89 75 70

Middlesex County, CT 7 3 14 31 32 31 35 33

New London County, CT 33 41 48 50 29 38 33 34

Kings County, NY 422 427 443 391 457 558 524 538

Queens County, NY 334 278 357 323 280 257 199 214

Rockland County, NY 30 61 47 46 57 56 53 45

Burlington County, NJ 60 44 58 80 63 42 47 50

Cape May County, NJ 82 83 84 83 33 36 31 43

Cumberland County, NJ 67 68 52 29 66 44 39 36

Essex County, NJ 145 187 213 204 97 66 65 74

Hudson County, NJ 58 62 62 87 74 56 60 101

Monmouth County, NJ 71 75 51 56 48 87 106 111

Ocean County, NJ 56 56 53 45 54 61 77 66

Passaic County, NJ 2 34 12 17 56 56 63 60

Union County, NJ 196 198 196 207 255 264 253 185

New Castle County, DE 25 20 19 21 32 33 11 7

Sussex County, DE 30 34 28 30 34 2 2

Anne Arundel County, MD 16 9 12 9 115 126 131 120

Dorchester County, MD 62 55 31 33 21 19 12 12

Howard County, MD 238 267 239 247 166 237 266 283

Kent County, MD 33 38 18 17 7 5 6 31

Queen Anne's County, MD 166 148 173 182 174 156 150 94

Somerset County, MD 119 127 131 100 62 43 70 66

Talbot County, MD 44 29 37 28 19 13 23 11

Worcester County, MD 49 28 51 33 26 5 5 7

Accomack County, VA 49 49 40 51 17 12 10 13

Gloucester County, VA 256 246 207 104 55 94 84 54

Hampton City, VA 70 85 72 84 94 111 117 85

Lancaster County, VA 67 48 72 73 64 94 131 89

Mathews County, VA 15 17 18 20 19 26 25 32

Middlesex County, VA 36 32 44 43 39 11 14 22

Newport News City, VA 16 32 38 34 33 38 45 37

Northampton County, VA 68 78 96 55 57 46 38 38

Northumberland County, VA 136 120 130 112 106 24 33 23

Poquoson City, VA 48 39 23 23 5 2 3 4

Westmoreland County, VA 4 5 2 4 4 7 9 9

York County, VA 46 14 14 15 54 11 5 11
37

Table 28 (continued). Annual seafood dealer employees in coastal counties with a location 

quotient greater than one (1998–2005)

County, State 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Beaufort County, NC 36 46 51 48 56 58 58 59

Brunswick County, NC 73 72 91 85 97 59 25 51

Carteret County, NC 67 55 35 42 47 42 24 41

Chowan County, NC 61 68 59 60 33 13 12 36

Dare County, NC 183 149 211 210 185 40 35 53

Hyde County, NC 18 27 50 33 22 15 21 22

Pamlico County, NC 83 49 54 59 44 34 58 76

Pasquotank County, NC 48 58 63 62 119 88 93 95

Pender County, NC 57 45 50 48 53 14 29 15

Perquimans County, NC 2 6 7 14 7 6 8 7

Table 29. Annual number of seafood dealer establishments in coastal counties with a location 

quotient greater than one (1998–2005) 

County/State 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 37 36 37 33 34 37 34 32

Knox County, ME 41 38 36 34 35 33 33 33

Lincoln County, ME 26 23 24 24 25 24 22 22

Washington County, ME 32 32 29 25 30 30 27 31

York County, ME 20 19 21 20 16 16 18 16

Rockingham County, NH 12 12 10 9 9 9 9 9

Barnstable County, MA 30 29 28 24 20 15 13 13

Bristol County, MA 57 54 51 43 39 31 26 27

Essex County, MA 66 57 51 47 53 33 32 31

Suffolk County, MA 46 49 48 44 46 43 41 44

Newport County, RI 11 9 8 8 11 10 9 8

Washington County, RI 18 15 14 16 14 11 12 12

Middlesex County, CT 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

New London County, CT 5 4 5 3 4 4 4 4

Kings County, NY 49 49 45 43 53 56 50 52

Queens County, NY 38 35 40 35 38 33 35 41

Rockland County, NY 6 7 6 6 7 6 5 4

Burlington County, NJ 5 4 4 4 3 5 3 4

Cape May County, NJ 6 6 6 6 5 4 4 3

Cumberland County, NJ 5 6 4 4 4 4 4 4

Essex County, NJ 13 15 13 13 11 9 9 8

Hudson County, NJ 6 5 4 7 5 2 2 3

Monmouth County, NJ 9 9 8 9 7 11 11 13

Ocean County, NJ 6 7 7 6 6 6 9 9

Passaic County, NJ 1 1 2 4 2 2 2 1

Union County, NJ 6 5 4 4 6 7 7 7

New Castle County, DE 3 2 2 2 3 4 2 2

Sussex County, DE 3 3 2 3 4 1 1
38

Table 29 (continued). Annual number of seafood dealer establishments in coastal counties with a 

location quotient greater than one (1998–2005)

County/State 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Anne Arundel County, MD 7 7 6 4 7 6 3 3

Dorchester County, MD 15 13 12 12 10 7 6 5

Howard County, MD 9 9 8 9 6 8 7 8

Kent County, MD 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 4

Queen Anne's County, MD 9 8 8 7 6 5 5 4

Somerset County, MD 12 10 9 8 5 6 6 7

Talbot County, MD 8 9 10 9 9 8 8 8

Worcester County, MD 5 5 6 5 5 3 3 3

Accomack County, VA 13 10 11 9 6 5 6 6

Accomack County, VA 13 10 11 9 6 5 6 6

Gloucester County, VA 13 12 11 10 7 8 8 7

Hampton City, VA 3 4 3 3 3 5 4 4

Lancaster County, VA 5 5 4 5 7 7 7 6

Mathews County, VA 4 3 3 3 4 5 5 4

Middlesex County, VA 3 3 3 3 4 3 5 6

Newport News City, VA 2 2 2 1 3 4 4 4

Northampton County, VA 10 11 11 11 8 6 6 5

Northumberland County, VA 11 10 10 10 10 7 6 6

Poquoson City, VA 5 5 3 2 1 1 2 2

Westmoreland County, VA 2 4 3 3 2 4 4 4

York County, VA 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1

Beaufort County, NC 6 5 5 5 6 7 6 7

Brunswick County, NC 9 8 7 7 7 7 7 8

Carteret County, NC 15 13 13 13 13 11 12 13

Chowan County, NC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Dare County, NC 10 9 9 8 9 8 9 9

Hyde County, NC 5 4 4 5 4 3 3 3

Pamlico County, NC 9 8 8 7 6 7 7 8

Pasquotank County, NC 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3

Pender County, NC 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1

Perquimans County, NC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Seafood processing NAICS 3117 

 Seafood processing is a subgroup included in the industry group of food manufacturing. 

Under the NAICS seafood processing is further broken down into seafood canning (NAICS 

311711) and fresh and frozen seafood processing (NAICS 311712). The former includes 

canning, smoking, curing of seafood as well as factory ships that harvest and can seafood onboard. The latter includes fresh and frozen processing of finfish and shellfish as well as 

processing of marine fats and oils. From 1986-1997 these activities were included in SIC codes 

2091 (canning), 2092 (fresh, frozen processing), and 2077 (animal and marine fats and oils). The 

two classification systems made no change to the classification of establishments engaged in 

seafood canning, but establishments engaged in processing marine fats and oils formerly 

included in SIC 2077 were reclassified to NAICS 311712 creating a discontinuity between SIC 

2092 and 311712 at least at the national level. As will be noted below, no evidence of such a 

discontinuity between SIC and NAICS years was apparent in the Northeast region. 
39

 For purpose of analysis, seafood canning and fresh/frozen processing were combined into 

a single higher subgroup (NAICS 3117 and SIC 2090). Since this also resulted in higher numbers 

of total establishments in each state, the number of instances of data suppression that required 

estimation of employment was reduced. In 1986 there were 309 seafood processing 

establishments (Table 30). The number of establishments declined by an average of 2.7% from 

1986-1996 after which the number of seafood processors stabilized at about 235 establishments 

through calendar year 2000. In 2001 the number of processors in the Northeast region declined to 

228 and fell again to 216 establishments in 2002. Although the number of processing 

establishments rebounded to 224 in 2003, the number of processors declined in both 2004 and 

2005 to a time series low of 212 establishments in 2005. 

 The general decline in seafood processing establishments resulted in a decline in seafood 

processing employment in the Northeast region by an average annual rate of 5% from 1986-1996 

(Table 31). By 1995 this declining trend appears to have been halted as processing employment 

hovered around 8,000 people from 1996-2001. Processing employment fell to a time series low 

of 7,227 employees in 2002. However, even as the number of seafood establishments declined in 

both 2004 and 2005, seafood employment actually increased in these years to 8,611 in 2005. 

 Performance of seafood processing employment and number of establishments varied 

considerably across states. Connecticut, New Jersey, and New Hampshire were the only states 

that showed an increasing trend in both processing establishments and employment both from 

1986-1997 and from 1998-2005. By contrast, Maine was the only state that experienced a decline 

in employment and in the number of processing establishments over the same time periods. 

Since 1996 the average annual change in number of processing establishments was negative in 

the states of Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia. However, the average annual change in 

total seafood processing employment was actually positive in these states, suggesting that at least 

some of the processing employment was being absorbed by other processors as establishments 

were closed. 
40

Table 30. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) seafood processing establishments by state (19

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI 1986 1 3 62 36 39 32 4 16 23 13 1987 2 53 36 34 34 5 17 22 12 1988 1 2 51 35 32 35 5 17 19 11 1989 1 2 48 34 29 33 6 19 18 8 1990 1 2 46 33 32 32 5 17 16 8 1991 1 3 45 32 30 33 5 17 15 9 1992 1 2 46 33 30 34 10 17 12 9 1993 3 2 44 29 30 35 10 16 13 6 1994 2 2 45 32 30 33 10 13 11 5 1995 2 2 42 37 32 33 10 13 11 7 1996 3 1 36 38 32 31 9 16 13 6 1997 4 1 42 33 35 30 8 14 12 9 1998 4 1 41 28 35 33 8 14 18 8 1999 3 1 42 27 43 27 8 18 19 6 2000 3 1 42 27 40 32 10 16 18 6 2001 2 1 41 26 36 27 8 18 21 6 2002 2 1 45 24 33 21 9 17 16 9 2003 2 1 55 23 35 18 11 16 18 7 2004 3 1 53 23 28 18 10 15 17 7 2005 3 1 50 23 27 17 10 17 18 7 1986-1996 Average Change 27.1% -6.7% -5.1% 0 . 8 % - 1 . 7 % - 0 . 2 % 11.8% 0 . 6 % -4.9% - 5 . 5 % 1997-2005 Average Change 2 . 8 % 0 . 0 % 4 . 1 % - 5 . 3 % - 1 . 2 % - 5 . 6 % 2 . 2 % 1 . 5 % 5 . 4 % 4 . 6 % 
41

Table 31. Annual number of mid-March employees in the Northeast Region (NER) seafood 

processing sector by state (1986-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 14 835 3,560 1,229 1,693 1080 172 789 562 499 3,228 13,662

1987 500 3,505 1,197 1,633 997 194 1,098 552 301 2,582 12,558

1988 145 335 3,484 1,182 1,483 918 368 969 458 280 2,394 12,016

1989 144 503 3,430 1,077 1,536 894 457 1,126 445 176 2,173 11,961

1990 129 499 3,116 919 1,458 667 345 1,273 444 197 2,141 11,188

1991 126 711 2,685 997 1,051 816 243 1,308 458 202 2,232 10,829

1992 142 456 2,319 1,034 984 822 354 1,384 305 189 1,377 9,365

1993 77 432 2,171 1,009 772 854 437 1,451 328 116 1,328 8,974

1994 157 497 2,025 928 998 655 607 1,089 270 119 1,209 8,552

1995 74 394 1,960 981 1,227 581 526 1,263 274 115 1,439 8,833

1996 86 387 1,806 912 1,232 458 383 1,133 269 142 1,213 8,021

1997 84 410 1,782 967 1,146 576 308 807 268 201 1,070 7,618

1998 96 344 1,841 1,006 1,084 448 340 803 339 194 1,515 8,010

1999 84 370 1,880 967 1,024 383 298 863 452 241 1,515 8,076

2000 95 163 2,251 894 992 474 298 816 374 227 1,230 7,814

2001 74 337 2,164 889 1,007 381 257 1,100 370 240 1,259 8,078

2002 78 325 2,231 807 639 280 368 928 352 184 1,035 7,227

2003 80 166 2,717 762 656 487 322 846 271 355 1,256 7,918

2004 106 296 2,743 895 576 624 448 749 323 355 1,231 8,347

2005 113 297 2,671 1,141 614 458 418 969 324 270 1,336 8,611

1986-

1996 

Average 

Change 2.6% -3.0% -6.5% -2.7% -1.7% -7.2% 14.0% 5.1% -6.2% -9.2% -8.1% -5.1% 

1997-

2005 

Average 

Change 4.1% 8.3% 4.8% 3.1% -6.6% 4.7% 3.1% 0.1% 3.6% 12.0% 2.6% 1.0% 

 The location quotient for seafood processing exceeded one in all years for Delaware, 

Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, and Virginia (Table 32). In New Hampshire and Rhode Island, 

the location quotient was above one in most years and has remained above one in both states in 

every year since 1996. Notably, the location quotient in Maine has been declining because of its 

falling share of regional processing employment. However, Maine’s processing employment 

share is still much larger than Maine’s share of total regional employment. This means that in 

relative terms, a change affecting processing employment would have a larger impact in Maine 

than in other states. 
42

Table 32. Annual Northeast Region seafood processing location quotient by state (1986-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1986 0.0 5.1 2.0 1.2 7.1 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.1 2.0 2.5

1987 0.0 3.2 2.2 1.2 7.3 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.1 1.3 2.2

1988 0.2 2.2 2.3 1.3 6.6 0.7 1.5 0.6 0.1 1.3 2.1

1989 0.2 3.2 2.3 1.2 6.7 0.7 1.9 0.7 0.1 0.8 1.8

1990 0.2 3.3 2.3 1.0 7.0 0.5 1.6 0.8 0.1 1.0 1.9

1991 0.2 4.7 2.1 1.2 5.3 0.6 1.2 0.9 0.1 1.1 2.0

1992 0.2 3.5 2.1 1.4 5.8 0.7 2.0 1.1 0.1 1.2 1.4

1993 0.1 3.5 2.0 1.4 4.6 0.8 2.5 1.2 0.1 0.8 1.4

1994 0.3 4.2 2.0 1.4 6.2 0.6 3.6 0.9 0.1 0.8 1.3

1995 0.1 3.2 1.9 1.4 7.4 0.5 3.0 1.0 0.1 0.8 1.5

1996 0.2 3.4 1.9 1.4 8.2 0.4 2.3 1.0 0.1 1.1 1.4

1997 0.2 3.7 2.0 1.6 8.0 0.6 2.0 0.8 0.1 1.6 1.3

1998 0.2 3.0 1.9 1.6 7.2 0.4 2.0 0.7 0.1 1.5 1.7

1999 0.2 3.2 2.0 1.5 6.7 0.4 1.7 0.8 0.2 1.8 1.7

2000 0.2 1.4 2.4 1.4 6.6 0.5 1.8 0.8 0.2 1.8 1.4

2001 0.2 2.8 2.2 1.4 6.5 0.4 1.5 1.0 0.2 1.9 1.4

2002 0.2 3.0 2.6 1.4 4.6 0.3 2.4 0.9 0.2 1.6 1.3

2003 0.2 1.4 3.0 1.2 4.4 0.5 1.9 0.8 0.1 2.7 1.4

2004 0.2 2.4 2.9 1.3 3.6 0.6 2.5 0.6 0.1 2.5 1.3

2005 0.2 2.3 2.7 1.6 3.7 0.4 2.3 0.8 0.1 1.8 1.3

 The seafood processing Herfindahl index for the Northeast Region remained quite low in 

all years, a finding consistent with a sector with a large number of establishments not dominated 

by a few large establishments (Table 33). Over time the regional Herfindahl index has increased, 

averaging an annual change of 5.2% and 6.0% respectively from 1986-1996 and from 1997-

2005. The majority of this change was accounted for by changes in dispersion rather than by 

changes in the number of establishments. That is, standardized dispersion has been increasing, 

indicating a slight trend toward larger establishment size. Note that standardized dispersion and 

the Herfindahl index itself are still very low, so the processing sector is far from becoming 

dominated by a few large entities, at least at the level of individual establishments. 

 Because of very low numbers of establishments in Connecticut and Delaware, the 

Herfindahl index was 1.0 or nearly so for much of the time series. The Herfindahl index for New 

Hampshire declined from 0.78 in 1986 to 0.23 in 1994 because of increasing numbers of 

establishments as well as a trend toward a more uniform distribution of establishment size. More 

recently the New Hampshire processing Herfindahl has increased, but only slightly. Over the 

time series of analysis, the processing sector in North Carolina exhibited the largest change in the 

Herfindahl index. 

 In 1986 North Carolina had 32 seafood processing establishments with a Herfindahl of 

0.05. At least through 2001 the North Carolina Herfindahl index increased modestly to 0.08, 

which is still characteristic of a processing sector comprised of similarly sized establishments. 

Since 2001 the Herfindahl index has risen dramatically from 0.12 in 2002, to 0.21 in 2003, 0.36 

in 2004, and to 0.41 in 2005. Since the number of establishments over these years has not 
43

changed very much, the majority of this increase has been attributed to a trend toward greater 

dominance by a small number of larger establishments. For example, in 2002 the largest 

processing establishment had fewer than 100 employees. In 2004 and 2005 the largest processing 

establishment employed 250-499 employees. Although the Herfindahl index has been increasing 

in most other states, the shift in the size structure of individual processing establishments that has 

occurred in North Carolina does not appear to be occurring elsewhere. 

Table 33. Annual Northeast Region (NER) processing sector Herfindahl Index by state (1986- 2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 1.000 0.384 0.068 0.118 0.089 0.054 0.780 0.145 0.089 0.196 0.028 0.011

1987 0.566 0.069 0.133 0.093 0.056 0.729 0.137 0.097 0.178 0.030 0.012

1988 1.000 0.500 0.075 0.272 0.076 0.050 0.808 0.165 0.168 0.209 0.035 0.015

1989 1.000 0.566 0.080 0.152 0.099 0.076 0.642 0.111 0.174 0.313 0.053 0.015

1990 1.000 0.566 0.091 0.195 0.100 0.082 0.808 0.114 0.183 0.294 0.073 0.017

1991 1.000 0.384 0.100 0.194 0.095 0.052 0.588 0.111 0.200 0.292 0.105 0.018

1992 1.000 0.566 0.128 0.160 0.124 0.049 0.330 0.146 0.283 0.275 0.062 0.018

1993 0.630 0.723 0.130 0.341 0.110 0.072 0.517 0.155 0.255 0.452 0.069 0.023

1994 0.972 0.723 0.141 0.221 0.111 0.064 0.251 0.188 0.356 0.472 0.068 0.022

1995 0.937 0.987 0.150 0.165 0.093 0.063 0.234 0.157 0.347 0.434 0.112 0.021

1996 0.689 1.000 0.100 0.192 0.085 0.071 0.291 0.142 0.328 0.360 0.073 0.017

1997 0.653 1.000 0.165 0.208 0.092 0.065 0.370 0.147 0.301 0.262 0.078 0.021

1998 0.532 1.000 0.159 0.385 0.086 0.065 0.313 0.141 0.227 0.300 0.181 0.028

1999 0.630 1.000 0.151 0.206 0.085 0.070 0.370 0.121 0.212 0.304 0.108 0.022

2000 0.794 1.000 0.132 0.211 0.080 0.080 0.398 0.137 0.220 0.427 0.107 0.021

2001 0.843 1.000 0.107 0.229 0.087 0.086 0.396 0.119 0.190 0.427 0.109 0.019

2002 0.727 1.000 0.094 0.236 0.105 0.116 0.287 0.131 0.203 0.494 0.132 0.021

2003 0.727 1.000 0.077 0.246 0.117 0.208 0.312 0.148 0.272 0.295 0.115 0.019

2004 0.557 1.000 0.073 0.209 0.091 0.355 0.301 0.156 0.242 0.301 0.125 0.020

2005 0.630 1.000 0.113 0.287 0.162 0.413 0.308 0.117 0.241 0.401 0.113 0.026

1986-1996 

Average 

Change -1.6% 13.0% 5.2% 15.2% 0.9% 5.7% -3.9% 1.5% 16.3% 8.9% 15.8% 5.2%

1997-2005 

Average 

Change 0.3% 0.0% 5.0% 9.7% 10.1% 24.7% 1.9% -1.3% -2.2% 4.4% 11.8% 6.0%

 Among coastal counties in the Northeast region, there were 43 where the location 

quotient was greater than one in most, if not all years from 1998-2005. These counties accounted 

for the majority of processing establishments and employment in their respective states, and for 

70% of the total number of establishments (Table 34), and 81% of employment (Table 35) in the 

Northeast region. 
44

Table 34. Number of seafood processing establishments in coastal counties where the location 

quotient exceeded one by county (1998-2005) 

County, State 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 171 160 188 220 150 152 107 153

Knox County, ME 128 77 139 154 35 2 2 2

Lincoln County, ME 19 16 63 26 11 25 10 31

Sagadahoc County, ME 112 82 109 193 64 90 88 5

Waldo County, ME 155 131 168 162 2 2 3 

Washington County, ME 360 387 165 203 213 237 203 179

Rockingham County, NH 241 208 209 202 283 250 358 250

Bristol County, MA 424 429 688 600 736 952 1120 1129

Essex County, MA 981 965 1132 1053 1036 1093 1034 998

Bristol County, RI 86 76 106 136 121 221 242 192

Newport County, RI 2 2 2 2 2 79 69 63

Washington County, RI 95 92 83 72 26 6 7 2

New Haven County, CT 96 80 78 66 72 79 91 113

Kings County, NY 75 201 15 67 36 176 186 192

Rockland County, NY 18 13 12 19 12 13 13 13

Westchester County, NY 11 12 27 30 20 35 41 41

Cape May County, NJ 161 156 207 269 198 137 135 355

Cumberland County, NJ 240 255 274 271 183 176 182 211

Essex County, NJ 225 238 235 399 374 377 339 296

Sussex County, DE 346 164 338 359

Dorchester County, MD 588 482 522 478 412 373 406 610

Queen Anne's County, MD 26 30 30 31 26 11 30

Somerset County, MD 65 145 89 90 36 94 107 106

Talbot County, MD 91 87 34 34 25 26 29 62

Wicomico County, MD 56 28 87 29 72 58 77 56

Worcester County, MD 57 66 73 63 58 67 133 146

Accomack County, VA 209 216 258 181 91 164 206 191

Gloucester County, VA 3 2 2 2 10 7 7 13

Hampton City, VA 57 56 35 70 38 34 38 37

Lancaster County, VA 60 60 54 49 39 39 23 33

Mathews County, VA 4 2 2 2 2 2 13 2

Middlesex County, VA 30 45 32 35 42 40 34 34

Newport News City, VA 668 596 424 483 368 384 418 455

Norfolk City, VA 59 69 74 76 125 149 134 144

Northumberland County, VA 169 252 190 97 93 180 165 205

Richmond County, VA 7 6 8 8 6 2 2 6

Westmoreland County, VA 236 239 239 235 253 287 221 263

Beaufort County, NC 157 109 123 52 29 22 40 12

Bertie County, NC 36 37 35 40 19 28 17 13

Brunswick County, NC 49 39 92 90 44 57 58 26

Hyde County, NC 90 86 79 115 39 81 41 65

Pamlico County, NC 36 63 58 47 35 37 59 46

Tyrrell County, NC 4 15 18 17 64 12 29 32
45

Table 35. Seafood processing mid-March employment in coastal counties where the location 

quotient exceeded one by county (1998-2005) 

County, State 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 4 5 5 5 5 6 5 5

Knox County, ME 3 2 3 2 2 1 1 1

Lincoln County, ME 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

Sagadahoc County, ME 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1

Waldo County, ME 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 

Washington County, ME 9 10 8 10 11 10 7 8

Rockingham County, NH 6 6 6 5 6 8 7 7

Bristol County, MA 15 14 15 13 18 21 22 21

Essex County, MA 9 12 13 13 12 14 14 11

Bristol County, RI 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2

Newport County, RI 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2

Washington County, RI 2 2 2 2 3 1 1 1

New Haven County, CT 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3

Kings County, NY 5 4 2 3 3 5 5 6

Rockland County, NY 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1

Westchester County, NY 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1

Cape May County, NJ 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 3

Cumberland County, NJ 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6

Essex County, NJ 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 2

Sussex County, DE 1 1 1 1

Dorchester County, MD 14 12 11 10 12 12 13 12

Queen Anne's County, MD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Somerset County, MD 6 5 6 5 4 4 4 4

Talbot County, MD 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1

Wicomico County, MD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Worcester County, MD 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2

Accomack County, VA 9 8 8 8 7 6 7 7

Gloucester County, VA 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

Hampton City, VA 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2

Lancaster County, VA 6 6 6 5 5 4 6 3

Mathews County, VA 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Middlesex County, VA 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 1

Newport News City, VA 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2

Norfolk City, VA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Northumberland County, VA 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 5

Richmond County, VA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Westmoreland County, VA 9 9 8 8 8 6 7 7

Beaufort County, NC 9 8 10 7 5 4 4 4

Bertie County, NC 2 2 2 2 3 1 2 1

Brunswick County, NC 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Hyde County, NC 7 4 4 4 3 3 3 4

Pamlico County, NC 4 4 5 5 4 3 3 3

Tyrrell County, NC 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
46

Seafood retail NAICS 44522 

 Establishments engaged in selling processed or cured finfish and shellfish to retail 

customers compose one of three sectors included in the specialty food stores industry group 

(NAICS 4452). In addition to retail fish markets, this group includes meat markets and fruit and 

vegetable markets. Under the SIC classification system, seafood markets and meat shops were 

combined, making it impossible to track trends in seafood retail establishments and employment 

prior to 1998. 

 The number of seafood retail establishments has increased in the Northeast region from 

809 in 1998 to 1,035 in 2005 (Table 36), an average annual change of 3.7%. The number of retail 

seafood establishments in New York was at least twice that of any other state, ranging from 302 

establishments in 1998 to 392 seafood markets in 2005. In all other states, the number of seafood 

retail markets was 100 or more in only Massachusetts and New Jersey. The average annual 

change in seafood markets was positive in all states and was highest (8.6%) in Maine, growing 

from 28 establishments in 1998 to about 50 over the past 3 years. 

Table 36. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) retail seafood market establishments by state 

(1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 32 11 107 65 28 64 7 118 302 22 53 809

1999 36 11 111 65 32 66 7 123 297 24 52 824

2000 31 13 109 71 34 61 7 125 307 26 57 841

2001 34 12 115 78 41 70 9 125 323 26 59 892

2002 36 15 126 88 47 81 9 149 381 27 74 1,033

2003 34 18 124 97 51 87 12 133 376 29 61 1,022

2004 38 16 128 96 50 88 12 134 386 34 68 1,050

2005 39 14 116 95 49 90 12 128 392 31 69 1,035

Average 

Annual 

Change 3.3% 4.6% 1.3% 5.7% 8.6% 5.3% 8.8% 1.5% 4.0% 5.3% 4.6% 3.7% 

 Employment in the seafood retail market sector changed by an average of 5.8% from 

3,148 in 1998 to 4,620 employees in 2005 (Table 37). The average annual change in seafood 

market employment was positive in all states ranging from 3.8% in North Carolina to almost 

12% in Connecticut. New York accounted for almost one-third of regionwide employment while 

the combined employment in New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts accounted for 

approximately 60% of total retail seafood employment. 

 The location quotient for seafood retail markets exceeded one in all years in Delaware, 

Maryland, Maine, New York, and Rhode Island (Table 38). Note that New York’s location 

quotient was only slightly above one even though it had twice the number of establishments and 

employment of any other state because New York’s share of total regionwide employment was 

only slightly less than its retail seafood market employment share. Conversely, Maine’s location 

quotient was at least 2.0 because Maine’s retail seafood employment share was twice that of its 

share of total regionwide employment. Thus, a change affecting retail seafood markets would be 

expected to have a comparatively larger impact in Maine than it would in New York, but the 

impact on New York would still be expected to be larger than that of states where the location 

quotient was less than one. 
47

Table 37. Annual Northeast Region (NER) retail seafood market mid-March employment by state 

(1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 89 75 442 375 138 250 55 428 1,004 79 212 3,148

1999 91 64 451 399 146 240 74 429 1,026 102 167 3,189

2000 112 68 435 474 133 238 61 571 1,113 97 243 3,545

2001 131 65 451 475 149 245 75 549 1,154 135 203 3,632

2002 165 94 490 488 173 301 57 559 1,421 151 259 4,158

2003 206 124 720 459 181 304 86 454 1,518 162 165 4,379

2004 202 144 686 579 189 340 66 547 1,602 163 297 4,815

2005 187 138 677 576 184 316 79 524 1,513 140 286 4,620

Average 

Annual 

Change 11.9% 10.8% 7.4% 6.8% 4.5% 3.8% 8.9% 4.1% 6.3% 9.9% 10.8% 5.8%

Table 38. Annual retail seafood market location quotient by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA 

1998 0.5 1.6 1.2 1.5 2.3 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.5 0.6 

1999 0.5 1.4 1.2 1.6 2.4 0.6 1.1 1.0 1.1 2.0 0.5 

2000 0.5 1.3 1.0 1.7 2.0 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.1 1.7 0.6 

2001 0.6 1.2 1.0 1.6 2.1 0.5 1.0 1.1 1.1 2.3 0.5 

2002 0.7 1.5 1.0 1.5 2.2 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.2 2.2 0.5 

2003 0.8 1.9 1.4 1.3 2.2 0.5 0.9 0.7 1.2 2.2 0.3 

2004 0.7 2.0 1.2 1.5 2.1 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.2 2.0 0.5 

2005 0.7 2.0 1.3 1.5 2.1 0.5 0.8 0.8 1.2 1.8 0.5 

 The Herfindahl index for the Northeast region retail seafood market sector was very low; 

this measure is indicative of a sector characterized by a large number of establishments not 

dominated by a small number of large entities (Table 39). The regionwide Herfindahl index has 

increased but by only a very small amount. Among states, the average annual change in the 

Herfindahl was positive in Massachusetts, North Carolina, New Jersey, New York, and Virginia. 

However, in these states the value of the Herfindahl index itself as well as the standardized 

measure of dispersion is suggestive of an industrial structure of predominantly small sized 

establishments at least in terms of employment. 

 There were 47 coastal counties that had a location quotient for the retail seafood market 

sector that exceeded one in most, if not all, years. Note that these counties were determined by 

comparing coastal counties within a state. This accounts for the large range in terms of 

establishments and employment reported in Tables 40 and 41, respectively. 
48

Table 39. Annual Northeast Region (NER) retail seafood market Herfindahl Index by state (1998-2

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI V1998 0.0394 0.2045 0.0200 0.0426 0.1126 0.0428 0.1898 0.0297 0.0060 0.1307 0.0491999 0.0415 0.2045 0.0189 0.0397 0.0973 0.0343 0.1898 0.0300 0.0089 0.0718 0.0472000 0.0530 0.1385 0.0207 0.0346 0.0840 0.0359 0.1703 0.0351 0.0089 0.0566 0.0462001 0.0678 0.2088 0.0205 0.0329 0.0753 0.0425 0.1515 0.0184 0.0086 0.0883 0.0472002 0.0622 0.1732 0.0175 0.0276 0.0506 0.0371 0.1627 0.0224 0.0063 0.0810 0.0402003 0.1120 0.1381 0.0577 0.0260 0.0431 0.0354 0.1290 0.0189 0.0083 0.0689 0.0252004 0.0557 0.1247 0.0295 0.0272 0.0546 0.0373 0.1262 0.0252 0.0092 0.0621 0.0642005 0.0672 0.1524 0.0614 0.0243 0.0561 0.0472 0.1216 0.0295 0.0077 0.0470 0.065Average Annual Change 14.7% -0.9% 39.7% -7.5% -8.0% 2.5% -5.8% 3.8% 6.4% -9.6% 14.5% 
49

Table 40. Annual number of coastal county retail seafood market establishments by county (1998-

2005) 

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Cumberland County, ME 11 12 14 14 16 16 15 18

Knox County, ME 2 2 2 3 4 3 2 2

Lincoln County, ME 4 5 5 5 6 8 8 8

Rockingham County, NH 5 5 5 6 6 7 7 8

Barnstable County, MA 21 23 21 20 20 21 19 18

Bristol County, MA 12 11 10 10 12 13 12 12

Dukes County, MA 1 1 1 1 1 4 5 5

Essex County, MA 15 15 17 19 18 21 20 16

Nantucket County, MA 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3

Plymouth County, MA 10 13 13 13 18 11 13 14

Bristol County, RI 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Newport County, RI 3 3 3 3 2 3 4 3

Washington County, RI 3 3 3 3 4 5 4 5

New London County, CT 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 6

Bronx County, NY 26 24 25 26 28 29 33 31

Kings County, NY 60 58 67 71 83 96 97 101

Nassau County, NY 30 33 34 38 40 34 33 32

Suffolk County, NY 33 34 32 32 35 40 35 40

Cape May County, NJ 14 13 14 14 12 10 10 8

Hudson County, NJ 10 9 11 10 13 12 12 11

Monmouth County, NJ 10 12 12 10 13 12 14 15

Ocean County, NJ 8 10 8 9 11 14 17 15

Salem County, NJ 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2

Union County, NJ 11 11 11 12 12 10 10 12

New Castle County, DE 6 6 8 7 8 7 9 6

Sussex County, DE 3 3 3 3 5 9 5 6

Anne Arundel County, MD 9 8 8 10 12 13 11 11

Calvert County, MD 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3

Dorchester County, MD 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 3

Harford County, MD 3 3 4 4 5 4 4 6

Kent County, MD 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2

Queen Anne's County, MD 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1

Somerset County, MD 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

St. Mary's County, MD 3 4 4 4 5 6 5 5

Accomack County, VA 1 2 2 2 3 1 2

Gloucester County, VA 1 1 1 1 3 4 3

Hampton City, VA 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2

Henrico County, VA 8 8 9 7 8 7 8 9

King William County, VA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Northampton County, VA 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 2

Poquoson City, VA 1 1 1 1 1 1

Suffolk City, VA 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1

Virginia Beach City, VA 9 7 9 6 8 6 10 10

Westmoreland County, VA 2 1 1 2 2 2 3 3

Carteret County, NC 3 3 2 2 6 6 6 6

Dare County, NC 5 7 5 6 8 9 10 10

Pender County, NC 3 3 3 4 3 2 2 1
50

Table 41. Annual coastal county retail seafood market mid-March employees by county (1998-

2005) 

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Cumberland County, ME 87 89 94 89 77 88 87 84

Knox County, ME 8 7 4 5 11 9 9 11

Lincoln County, ME 15 14 11 14 24 18 25 24

Rockingham County, NH 50 48 51 55 55 62 56 61

Barnstable County, MA 79 82 91 97 53 63 48 53

Bristol County, MA 43 49 35 31 54 194 171 164

Dukes County, MA 0 3 1 2 3 14 9 16

Essex County, MA 94 92 83 89 86 102 98 72

Nantucket County, MA 4 4 6 11 13 5 10 7

Plymouth County, MA 33 33 40 39 62 34 48 42

Bristol County, RI 10 8 7 7 6 7 5 5

Newport County, RI 27 14 8 9 8 14 17 23

Washington County, RI 8 9 13 13 21 40 30 34

New London County, CT 13 19 23 26 26 40 36 45

Bronx County, NY 49 49 50 61 81 90 89 80

Kings County, NY 168 167 177 192 237 324 349 255

Nassau County, NY 102 118 146 144 180 196 196 167

Suffolk County, NY 101 95 112 111 125 152 155 162

Cape May County, NJ 34 28 27 30 37 1 5 3

Hudson County, NJ 21 20 21 26 28 63 69 64

Monmouth County, NJ 53 57 94 118 104 90 100 104

Ocean County, NJ 13 17 26 26 28 19 34 33

Salem County, NJ 6 2 5 4 4 4 4 4

Union County, NJ 35 36 37 37 33 35 38 36

New Castle County, DE 67 51 53 54 74 77 75 70

Sussex County, DE 1 4 4 5 11 55 47 53

Anne Arundel County, MD 123 125 149 154 137 151 187 185

Calvert County, MD 4 4 4 5 2 1 10 8

Dorchester County, MD 3 4 5 6 11 12 21 20

Harford County, MD 5 14 10 16 23 28 26 38

Kent County, MD 7 4 4 6 13 12 12 14

Queen Anne's County, MD 2 3 2 4 4 6 3 1

Somerset County, MD 2 2 2 4 2 2 7 6

St. Mary's County, MD 6 10 10 11 12 19 14 10

Accomack County, VA 2 3 4 4 2 3 2

Gloucester County, VA 2 3 2 2 10 8 7

Hampton City, VA 2 7 2 6 6 6 8 8

Henrico County, VA 52 21 70 34 56 27 35 24

King William County, VA 2 2 2 3 6 7 2 7

Northampton County, VA 2 2 5 4 11 8 8 10

Poquoson City, VA 3 2 2 3 2 2

Suffolk City, VA 2 2 2 2 11 4 2 2

Virginia Beach City, VA 66 61 70 68 55 12 115 126

Westmoreland County, VA 12 2 2 4 6 5 9 8

Carteret County, NC 14 7 12 5 15 10 8 11

Dare County, NC 42 42 39 16 29 17 13 16

Pender County, NC 6 6 5 8 6 3 4 2
51

Marine Recreational Boating 

 The marine recreational boating subgroup is composed of establishments engaged in 

building boats for personal use, retail boat dealers, and marinas. Additionally, the subgroup 

includes establishments that provide water-based excursions, which includes activities such as 

whale watching, recreational fishing, and harbor or sightseeing cruises. The number of Northeast 

region establishments engaged in these activities has increased from 3,407 in 1998 to 3,696 

establishments in 2005 (Table 42). The number of establishments has increased in each year 

since 1999 by an average of 1.8% per year. Among states New York had nearly two-thirds more 

marine recreational boating establishments compared to New Jersey, the state with the secondmost establishments. However, the number of boating-related establishments in New York 

changed at a lower average annual rate (0.8%) than was the case for Delaware (4.9%), Rhode 

Island (3.7%), and Maine (2.0%). 

Table 42. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) marine recreational boating subgroup 

establishments by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 212 46 331 402 251 387 94 486 792 138 268 3,407

1999 204 46 328 399 253 394 95 485 778 128 271 3,381

2000 204 48 333 396 254 385 92 485 778 127 277 3,379

2001 205 48 343 396 261 393 102 476 756 137 287 3,404

2002 225 48 361 402 268 395 99 464 797 145 285 3,489

2003 225 63 369 409 270 403 106 471 824 159 300 3,599

2004 233 64 366 417 279 408 104 461 824 164 298 3,618

2005 236 62 372 431 289 417 100 476 833 176 304 3,696

 The marine recreational boating subgroup employed almost 24,000 people in the 

Northeast region in 1998 (Table 43). Employment in the subgroup has been trending upward at 

an average annual rate of 3.3% to 30,000 people in 2004 and 2005. Among states, North 

Carolina experienced the largest growth in recreational boating subsector employment at an 

average of 8.4% per year. Although the average annual change in employment was positive in all 

states, employment levels in six of the ten states declined in 2005 compared to 2004 levels. 

Table 43. Annual number of Northeast Region (NER) marine recreational boating subgroup 

employees by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 1,458 484 2,323 3,160 1,859 3,504 537 3,060 4,063 1,702 1,788 23,937

1999 1,386 594 2,347 3,349 1,957 3,886 613 3,148 3,978 1,595 1,926 24,778

2000 1,478 698 2,545 3,590 1,935 4,142 679 3,339 4,166 1,731 2,121 26,424

2001 1,618 687 2,679 3,452 2,014 4,186 630 3,368 4,149 1,981 2,259 27,022

2002 1,484 712 2,694 3,344 1,795 4,655 655 3,095 3,919 1,872 2,048 26,271

2003 1,807 409 2,806 3,488 2,011 5,475 773 2,998 4,592 1,698 3,287 29,345

2004 1,888 438 2,735 3,620 2,157 5,808 832 3,173 4,715 1,934 2,713 30,012

2005 1,830 440 2,699 3,805 2,042 6,146 638 3,246 4,585 2,071 2,404 29,907

 In excess of two-thirds of the marine recreational boating subgroup employees were 

employed in a mid-Atlantic state (Table 44). Within mid-Atlantic states, employment has been 
52

shifting to North Carolina as the state’s employment share has increased from 14.6% in 1998 to 

20.6% in 2005. 

Table 44. Annual Northeast Region (NER) marine recreational boating subgroup employment 

shares by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1998 6.1% 2.0% 9.7% 13.2% 7.8% 14.6% 2.2% 12.8% 17.0% 7.1% 7.5%

1999 5.6% 2.4% 9.5% 13.5% 7.9% 15.7% 2.5% 12.7% 16.1% 6.4% 7.8%

2000 5.6% 2.6% 9.6% 13.6% 7.3% 15.7% 2.6% 12.6% 15.8% 6.6% 8.0%

2001 6.0% 2.5% 9.9% 12.8% 7.5% 15.5% 2.3% 12.5% 15.4% 7.3% 8.4%

2002 5.6% 2.7% 10.3% 12.7% 6.8% 17.7% 2.5% 11.8% 14.9% 7.1% 7.8%

2003 6.2% 1.4% 9.6% 11.9% 6.9% 18.7% 2.6% 10.2% 15.6% 5.8% 11.2%

2004 6.3% 1.5% 9.1% 12.1% 7.2% 19.4% 2.8% 10.6% 15.7% 6.4% 9.0%

2005 6.1% 1.5% 9.0% 12.7% 6.8% 20.6% 2.1% 10.9% 15.3% 6.9% 8.0%

 Regionwide employment in boat dealers and marinas averaged one-third each of the 

marine recreational boating subsector employment (Table 45). The balance was composed of 8% 

employment in the marine excursion sector and 27% in the boat building sector. Employment 

shares of these marine sectors varied across states. For example, boat building was nearly 50% or 

more of the marine recreational boating subgroup employment in Maine, North Carolina, and 

Rhode Island. 
53

Table 45. Composition of Northeast Region (NER) marine recreational boating subgroup 

employment by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

 Boat Building 

1998 10.8% 5.6% 13.5% 22.1% 53.7% 47.2% 10.2% 25.0% 7.3% 57.2% 9.2% 25.5%

1999 9.6% 3.7% 13.5% 27.0% 50.0% 50.5% 9.5% 25.5% 6.4% 53.1% 12.1% 26.3%

2000 17.3% 8.9% 14.4% 26.7% 45.2% 52.2% 7.7% 22.6% 6.5% 51.8% 11.5% 26.1%

2001 5.9% 4.1% 11.8% 22.9% 46.1% 53.2% 11.8% 23.6% 4.3% 53.6% 13.3% 25.1%

2002 5.2% 0.0% 12.6% 20.4% 42.1% 59.9% 10.6% 26.4% 4.9% 52.4% 13.2% 26.5%

2003 2.9% 0.0% 12.6% 22.4% 50.3% 58.8% 25.5% 23.7% 2.7% 51.2% 11.1% 26.2%

2004 5.0% 0.0% 10.5% 21.6% 49.8% 61.5% 23.8% 24.6% 2.6% 50.7% 12.8% 27.4%

2005 4.4% 0.0% 11.9% 24.7% 49.3% 63.7% 4.0% 26.8% 3.5% 58.3% 7.9% 29.1%

 Boat Dealers 

1998 29.7% 47.5% 33.6% 37.2% 16.9% 31.6% 43.2% 35.9% 33.1% 13.7% 39.9% 32.0%

1999 32.8% 42.4% 32.9% 34.3% 19.1% 30.2% 45.0% 36.0% 35.9% 14.1% 37.8% 32.2%

2000 32.2% 39.8% 35.5% 34.1% 19.5% 29.9% 44.6% 38.8% 38.1% 12.7% 37.7% 32.9%

2001 29.2% 41.9% 34.1% 36.5% 18.6% 27.3% 44.1% 38.2% 39.6% 10.9% 35.0% 32.1%

2002 40.2% 41.1% 35.6% 37.6% 25.0% 24.4% 43.2% 35.2% 39.2% 14.9% 39.6% 33.1%

2003 38.0% 76.8% 42.7% 36.5% 25.2% 25.7% 44.8% 36.9% 35.7% 18.8% 27.7% 33.1%

2004 38.6% 77.7% 42.2% 38.6% 25.6% 24.3% 45.1% 37.6% 35.0% 18.6% 34.4% 33.6%

2005 39.1% 74.1% 41.9% 39.1% 27.4% 22.6% 54.7% 37.4% 35.7% 16.8% 37.9% 33.7%

 Water Excursion 

1998 4.6% 2.5% 16.0% 4.5% 4.3% 5.4% 7.4% 8.2% 15.1% 6.3% 12.7% 8.8%

1999 5.6% 2.4% 17.9% 5.7% 5.0% 5.6% 7.5% 7.7% 15.5% 6.8% 10.0% 9.0%

2000 4.7% 1.5% 16.1% 6.6% 4.7% 4.5% 11.0% 8.0% 12.7% 6.5% 7.5% 8.1%

2001 6.6% 3.2% 16.9% 4.6% 5.5% 4.8% 10.9% 7.6% 12.7% 7.5% 8.8% 8.3%

2002 6.0% 4.2% 15.1% 5.2% 5.0% 3.7% 11.4% 8.5% 13.0% 4.9% 10.1% 8.0%

2003 3.4% 9.1% 10.2% 3.9% 3.8% 4.1% 4.4% 7.7% 14.4% 6.1% 8.8% 7.3%

2004 2.6% 5.0% 11.1% 3.3% 5.8% 3.2% 4.0% 8.1% 16.1% 6.2% 12.2% 7.7%

2005 2.3% 10.1% 10.1% 4.0% 3.1% 3.1% 10.9% 5.7% 15.1% 5.2% 12.6% 7.1%

 Marinas 

1998 54.9% 44.3% 36.8% 36.1% 25.1% 15.7% 39.1% 31.0% 44.6% 22.8% 38.2% 33.7%

1999 51.9% 51.5% 35.7% 32.9% 26.0% 13.7% 38.0% 30.7% 42.3% 26.0% 40.1% 32.6%

2000 45.7% 49.8% 34.0% 32.6% 30.6% 13.4% 36.7% 30.6% 42.7% 29.1% 43.3% 32.8%

2001 58.4% 50.8% 37.2% 35.9% 29.8% 14.7% 33.2% 30.5% 43.5% 28.0% 42.9% 34.5%

2002 48.7% 54.7% 36.7% 36.8% 28.0% 12.0% 34.8% 30.0% 42.9% 27.9% 37.2% 32.4%

2003 55.7% 14.1% 34.5% 37.2% 20.7% 11.4% 25.4% 31.7% 47.2% 23.9% 52.4% 33.4%

2004 53.8% 17.3% 36.2% 36.5% 18.8% 11.1% 27.2% 29.8% 46.3% 24.6% 40.6% 31.3%

2005 54.3% 15.8% 36.0% 32.3% 20.1% 10.6% 30.4% 30.1% 45.7% 19.7% 41.7% 30.1%
54

Boat building and repair NAICS 336612 

 The boat building sector comprises establishments engaged in building watercraft that are 

not built in shipyards and that are primarily intended for personal use. Boats may include 

dinghies, motorboats, rowboats, and sailboats. Boat building was also included as a separate 

sector under the SIC system but was subdivided into two sectors under the NAICS (boat building 

and other personal household goods; NAICS 81149), a division which created a break in the time 

series. The number of boat building establishments has been increasing over time. These 

establishments increased from 283 in 1998 to 316 in 2005 (Table 46) at an average annual 

change of 1.7%. The increase in establishments was lower than the relative increase in 

employment (Table 47). This difference in growth rate between employment and number of 

establishments is reflected in an increase in the number of employees per establishment from 

21.6 in 1998 to 27.6 in 2005. 

Table 46. Number of Northeast Region (NER) boat building establishments by state (1998–2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 10 2 34 24 63 46 5 22 29 28 20 283

1999 10 2 31 18 62 44 4 23 29 23 19 265

2000 9 2 35 21 59 45 5 22 25 22 21 266

2001 7 1 39 23 67 49 6 26 20 26 28 292

2002 5 0 35 26 73 52 8 23 24 24 23 293

2003 4 0 34 35 78 48 8 22 26 28 20 303

2004 7 0 36 37 75 56 6 20 25 30 20 312

2005 7 0 36 37 80 59 4 23 27 26 17 316

Annual 

Average 

Change -0.8% n/a 1.2% 7.8% 3.7% 3.9% 0.0% 1.2% -0.2% -0.2% -1.0% 1.7% 

 Total employment in the boat building sector has been increasing since 1998, growing 

from 6,104 in 1998 to 8,715 in 2005; this is an average annual increase of 5.3% (Table 47). 

Much of this growth was accounted for by increased boat building employment in North 

Carolina which more than doubled from 1,655 in 1998 to 3,917 in 2005. Boat building 

employment in North Carolina, Maryland, Maine, New Jersey, and Rhode Island combined 

accounted for over 80% of the Northeast region total in 1998 and increased to over 90% of the 

total in 2005. 

 As reflected by a location quotient greater than one, the share of boat building 

employment in Maryland, Maine, North Carolina, and Rhode Island was proportionally greater 

than each state’s respective share of total employment in the region (Table 48). That is, boat 

building employment in these four states plays a proportionally larger role in total state 

employment than in other Northeast region states. Therefore, a change in boat building 

employment would have a proportionally greater impact in Maryland, Maine, North Carolina, 

and Rhode Island than in other states. 

 The Herfindahl index for the boat building industry was quite low (0.02 or 0.03 in all 

years), suggesting an industry that has few large establishments (Table 49). Note that the 

Herfindahl index was higher in some states than in others. However, since the lower bound of the 

index is affected by the number of establishments, comparisons across states are not valid unless 

each state has approximately the same number of establishments. For example, Massachusetts 

and Maryland had nearly identical number of establishments from 2003-2005. Over these years, 
55

the Maryland index was larger than the Massachusetts index, suggesting that the boat building 

industry in Maryland tended to be composed of larger establishments over these years than those 

in Massachusetts. Similarly, the number of establishments in New Jersey, New York, and Rhode 

Island was similar in all years, yet the New Jersey Herfindahl index was higher, indicating an 

industry that is composed of larger establishments than those in either New York or Rhode 

Island. The Herfindal index was nearly constant in most states from 1998 through 2005. 

However, the index has generally declined in Maryland and increased in Virginia, suggesting a 

trend toward small firm size in Maryland while the industry has tended toward consolidation in 

Virginia. 

Table 47. Northeast Region (NER) boat building mid-March employment by state (1998–2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 157 27 314 698 999 1,655 55 764 296 974 165 6,104

1999 133 22 317 904 979 1,961 58 803 254 847 233 6,510

2000 256 62 367 958 874 2,162 52 755 271 896 244 6,897

2001 96 28 317 792 927 2,226 74 795 177 1,062 301 6,796

2002 77 0 340 681 755 2,788 69 817 192 980 270 6,969

2003 52 0 354 783 1,011 3,219 197 711 124 870 366 7,687

2004 94 0 287 782 1,073 3,571 198 780 123 980 348 8,236

2005 80 0 322 939 1,007 3,917 26 870 159 1,207 189 8,715

Annual 

Average 

Change 3.8% n/a 1.1% 5.6% 1.2% 13.3% 18.5% 2.2% -5.8% 4.0% 6.3% 5.3%

Table 48. Boat building location quotient by state (1998–2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1998 0.4 0.3 0.4 1.4 8.7 2.1 0.4 0.9 0.2 9.7 0.2

1999 0.3 0.2 0.4 1.7 7.9 2.3 0.4 0.9 0.1 8.0 0.3

2000 0.6 0.6 0.4 1.7 6.6 2.4 0.4 0.8 0.1 8.0 0.3

2001 0.2 0.3 0.4 1.5 7.1 2.5 0.5 0.8 0.1 9.8 0.4

2002 0.2 0.0 0.4 1.2 5.7 3.1 0.5 0.8 0.1 8.6 0.3

2003 0.1 0.0 0.4 1.3 6.9 3.2 1.2 0.7 0.1 6.8 0.4

2004 0.2 0.0 0.3 1.1 6.9 3.4 1.1 0.7 0.1 7.1 0.4

2005 0.2 0.0 0.3 1.3 6.1 3.4 0.1 0.7 0.1 8.2 0.2

Table 49. Northeast Region (NER) boat building Herfindahl Index by state (1998–2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 0.31 0.87 0.06 0.30 0.09 0.12 0.39 0.29 0.10 0.16 0.12 0.02

1999 0.36 0.50 0.08 0.35 0.10 0.10 0.43 0.31 0.10 0.19 0.10 0.03

2000 0.45 0.50 0.06 0.32 0.09 0.09 0.39 0.28 0.12 0.18 0.15 0.02

2001 0.26 1.00 0.05 0.33 0.09 0.08 0.32 0.28 0.11 0.15 0.11 0.02

2002 0.37 0.00 0.06 0.34 0.09 0.07 0.29 0.23 0.08 0.15 0.11 0.02

2003 0.50 0.00 0.06 0.27 0.10 0.10 0.68 0.30 0.10 0.16 0.15 0.03

2004 0.33 0.00 0.06 0.26 0.09 0.08 0.71 0.25 0.11 0.16 0.16 0.02

2005 0.31 0.00 0.06 0.27 0.09 0.08 0.39 0.27 0.10 0.15 0.17 0.02

Annual 

Average 

Change 4.5% n/a 0.9% -0.8% -0.5% -4.9% 9.7% 0.0% 1.4% -0.4% 7.4% 0.4%
56

Businesses engaged in boat building may be more concentrated within certain counties 

and less so in others. Given the large number of coastal counties throughout the Northeast 

region, the location quotient was used to identify a subset of counties where boat building may 

be a proportionally larger share of local employment compared to other coastal counties within a 

state. Note that the location quotient can exceed one even in cases where employment in the 

sector of interest is very small. This circumstance occurs in counties with a small labor force 

relative to the total employment in the region. 

 Boat building employment and number of establishments varies considerably in 

Northeast region coastal counties. Consistent with the generally higher level of boat building 

employment at the state level, employment in coastal counties in Maine, Maryland, North 

Carolina, and Rhode Island was generally larger than that of coastal counties in other states 

(Table 50). In Maine, the boat building sector was concentrated in the downeast counties of 

Hancock and Washington County as well in the midcoast counties of Lincoln and Knox. The 

number of establishments in these Maine counties, Hancock County in particular, also tended to 

be higher than elsewhere in Maine and other coastal counties throughout the Northeast region 

(Table 51). 

 The boat building industry in Maryland is clustered around the Chesapeake Bay with 

Anne Arundel County located on the western side of the bay while all other establishments were 

clustered in a nearly contiguous string on the eastern side of the bay including counties from 

Kent to Wicomico Counties. Note that of these Maryland counties, the majority of boat building 

employment was in Wicomico County even though the number of boat building establishments 

was higher elsewhere, in Anne Arundel and Kent Counties in particular. That is, the boat 

building industry in Wicomico has a small number of large establishments while other Maryland 

counties tend to have a larger number of smaller establishments. 

 Boat building employment in North Carolina is geographically dispersed from north to 

south with Chowan, and Dare Counties in the north; Beaufort, Craven, and Carteret Counties on 

the central coast; and Brunswick County to the south. Pitt County also accounted for a 

substantial share of coastal county boat building employment. However, the boat building 

location quotient in Pitt County did not exceed one, indicating that relative to other coastal 

counties boat building employment was a lower proportion of the Pitt County work force. In 

2005 boat building employment in Craven County was about 25% of the coastal county total but 

was around 10% in each of the other four counties. In terms of establishment size, the boat 

building industry in Carteret and Dare Counties had at least twice as many establishments 

indicating that boat building in these counties consists of smaller establishments as compared to 

Chowan, Beaufort, Brunswick, and Craven Counties. 

 In Rhode Island the boat building industry was clustered in the adjacent counties of 

Bristol and Newport. These two counties accounted for nearly all of the boat building 

employment in the state. Since 1998, boat building employment has been shifting somewhat 

from Newport to Bristol County as the share of employment in Bristol County has been 

increasing relative to Newport County. The number of establishments has also been increasing in 

Bristol County but has been declining in Newport County. 
57

Table 50. Number of boat building employees in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient was greater than one 

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 438 206 244 238 234 405 438 455

Knox County, ME 85 97 123 126 125 168 194 208

Lincoln County, ME 41 29 34 36 36 93 93 89

Washington County, ME 23 30 28 29 48 26 48 42

Strafford County, NH 41 43 52 64 38 12 13 11

Barnstable County, MA 76 48 74 65 46 20 29 26

Bristol County, MA 101 107 99 113 242 218 152 259

Plymouth County, MA 73 73 89 90 100 75 68 60

Bristol County, RI 485 502 517 510 525 490 601 775

Newport County, RI 371 307 333 538 479 423 380 425

New Haven County, CT 102 99 190 43 31 30 30 34

New London County, CT 3 5 41 29 34 53 25

Suffolk County, NY 89 45 38 30 84 95 82 96

Atlantic County, NJ 295 306 347 329 345 184 282 363

Burlington County, NJ 41 52 45 52 49 47 36 44

Cape May County, NJ 28 15 12 13 13 19 11 11

Cumberland County, NJ 408 368 366 343 343 422 322 400

Ocean County, NJ 48 61 52 57 53 57 64 54

Anne Arundel County, MD 82 39 59 70 39 122 146 111

Kent County, MD 7 7 12 10 6 9 13 9

Queen Anne's County, MD 2 6 5 10 10 16 19 21

Somerset County, MD 14 12 20 12 6 6 6 14

Talbot County, MD 37 14 14 12 6 11 9

Wicomico County, MD 179 334 329 331 207 189 175 410

Gloucester County, VA 4 4 4 6 2 2 4 4

Lancaster County, VA 2 6 6 9 3 2 2 2

Middlesex County, VA 3 12 13 20 26 25 34

Norfolk City, VA 61 82 99 85 96 92 78 90

Northampton County, VA 8 13 29 52 33 13 16 35

Northumberland County, VA 28 16 27 28 39 27 40 37

Beaufort County, NC 369 387 392 378 328 327 342 358

Brunswick County, NC 2 153 170 206 207 493

Carteret County, NC 225 297 304 327 353 359 372 345

Chowan County, NC 198 206 244 297 282 330 359 363

Craven County, NC 3 15 2 2 3 811 747 847

Dare County, NC 84 109 137 177 341 194 285 354
58

Table 51. Number of boat building establishments in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient was greater than one 

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 17 17 16 14 21 22 19 22

Knox County, ME 12 10 9 11 12 13 11 14

Lincoln County, ME 8 8 9 9 9 12 14 13

Washington County, ME 3 4 3 4 5 4 4 4

Strafford County, NH 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1

Barnstable County, MA 7 6 7 8 8 8 8 9

Bristol County, MA 10 7 8 10 11 9 10 10

Plymouth County, MA 9 8 9 9 9 10 10 8

Bristol County, RI 9 9 9 9 10 15 16 13

Newport County, RI 16 12 12 15 14 12 11 10

New Haven County, CT 2 2 3 3 1 1 1 2

New London County, CT 1 2211 12

Suffolk County, NY 10 10 7 7 10 13 11 11

Atlantic County, NJ 5 5 6 6 7 4 4 5

Burlington County, NJ 4 6 5 5 5 6 4 6

Cape May County, NJ 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1

Cumberland County, NJ 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Ocean County, NJ 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6

Anne Arundel County, MD 6 4 6 6 7 13 14 13

Kent County, MD 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4

Queen Anne's County, MD 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3

Somerset County, MD 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

Talbot County, MD 3 1 1 1 1 3 2

Wicomico County, MD 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2

Gloucester County, VA 2 2 2 3 1 1 2 2

Lancaster County, VA 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

Middlesex County, VA 1 1 1 1 2 2 2

Norfolk City, VA 5 4 3 2 2 2 2 2

Northampton County, VA 1 1 2 3 2 2 2 2

Northumberland County, VA 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1

Beaufort County, NC 2 3 3 3 3 1 2 3

Brunswick County, NC 1 2 2 2 1 2

Carteret County, NC 11 9 8 8 13 13 15 14

Chowan County, NC 5 4 4 5 5 4 4 5

Craven County, NC 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3

Dare County, NC 8 9 11 12 12 10 11 14
59

Boat dealers NAICS 441222 

 The boat dealer sector includes establishments that retail new and used boats. Dealers 

may also offer repair services as well as retail outboard motors, boat trailers, accessories, and 

other marine supplies. The number of boat dealer establishments increased from 1,040 in 1986 to 

1,334 in 2005 (Table 52). Growth in the boat dealer sector averaged 0.9% per year from 1986-

1996 and grew at nearly 2% per year from 1997-2005. Among Northeast region states, the 

average annual change in number of establishments was negative from 1986-1997 in 

Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. However, from 1997-2005 the number of boat 

dealer establishments increased in all states, ranging from 6.7% per year in Rhode Island to less 

than 1% in New Hampshire, New York, and Virginia. 

Table 52. Number of Northeast Region (NER) boat dealer establishments by state (1986-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 87 14 110 118 42 125 30 113 265 42 94 1,040

1987 99 18 125 142 53 138 36 133 277 44 105 1,170

1988 98 16 128 145 56 147 41 153 292 40 111 1,227

1989 93 17 126 142 49 139 39 153 271 36 111 1,176

1990 89 16 113 146 48 147 35 157 266 33 107 1,157

1991 77 20 101 143 40 134 34 143 257 30 109 1,088

1992 72 17 98 149 45 119 29 143 249 32 118 1,071

1993 69 17 96 155 54 137 29 137 256 28 107 1,085

1994 67 20 95 138 53 136 32 136 255 30 106 1,068

1995 70 19 96 139 56 142 34 130 243 31 105 1,065

1996 75 20 106 138 63 151 37 138 262 31 107 1,128

1997 72 23 116 151 66 164 33 148 262 38 98 1,171

1998 77 22 114 153 67 167 33 154 253 39 99 1,178

1999 74 25 113 148 68 181 34 162 257 37 106 1,205

2000 80 27 113 150 70 176 32 172 261 35 109 1,225

2001 81 26 118 146 71 176 34 158 257 36 103 1,206

2002 97 21 131 151 71 172 36 154 281 46 109 1,269

2003 91 28 135 157 72 181 37 161 276 51 111 1,300

2004 95 29 137 156 74 185 39 157 276 50 105 1,303

2005 98 28 137 166 79 184 38 158 279 53 114 1,334

1986-

1996 

Average 

Change -1.2% 4.6% -0.1% 1.8% 4.9% 2.2% 2.7% 2.3% 0.0% -2.7% 1.5% 0.9%

1997-

2005 

Average 

Change 3.3% 4.8% 3.0% 2.1% 2.6% 2.3% 0.5% 1.6% 0.8% 6.7% 0.9% 1.9%
60

 Employment in the boat dealer sector increased each year from 1986-1988 before 

entering a period of decline from 1989-1993 (Table 53). Since 1994, employment in the boat 

dealer sector has been trending upward, averaging an increase of 3.6% per year from 1997-2005. 

Virginia was the only state with a negative average annual change in boat dealer employment 

over the same time period. However, this period includes the change in Virginia employment 

from 1996-1997 which was -36%. Omission of this one year results in an average annual change 

of 4.4%. Note that in most states the average annual change in employment from 1997-2005 

exceeds the average increase in boat dealer establishments, indicating that employment growth 

has resulted from a combination of increasing numbers of dealers and adding employees at 

existing establishments. 

Table 53. Number of Northeast Region (NER) boat dealer employees by state (1986-2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 603 80 920 862 333 784 167 966 1,834 231 774 7,554

1987 745 92 889 1,171 214 805 210 1,125 2,186 232 801 8,471

1988 832 147 990 1,388 320 883 311 1,621 2,256 298 1,073 10,119

1989 760 173 1,011 1,436 306 931 254 1,469 2,341 264 1,023 9,967

1990 675 168 852 1,309 288 889 251 1,396 2,305 215 954 9,304

1991 496 159 507 967 258 761 179 918 1,698 147 756 6,845

1992 405 155 556 925 231 663 171 738 1,533 114 715 6,204

1993 351 154 534 826 239 857 186 835 1,338 119 708 6,148

1994 367 178 521 857 243 847 190 796 1,265 144 816 6,225

1995 375 201 613 945 271 954 237 886 1,335 165 860 6,842

1996 414 214 680 961 294 997 281 942 1,403 157 1,023 7,366

1997 419 230 765 1,109 344 1,101 240 1,101 1,415 183 653 7,560

1998 433 230 781 1,177 314 1,107 232 1,099 1,343 233 713 7,662

1999 455 252 772 1,150 373 1,174 276 1,134 1,427 225 728 7,966

2000 476 278 904 1,224 377 1,237 303 1,296 1,589 219 799 8,702

2001 472 288 913 1,260 375 1,143 278 1,287 1,641 215 790 8,662

2002 596 293 958 1,257 448 1,136 283 1,088 1,538 278 810 8,685

2003 687 314 1,197 1,273 507 1,406 346 1,107 1,638 319 910 9,704

2004 728 340 1,155 1,397 552 1,410 375 1,192 1,649 360 933 10,091

2005 715 326 1,131 1,487 560 1,386 349 1,214 1,639 349 910 10,066

1986-

1996 

Average 

Change -2.5% 11.6% -1.4% 2.4% 0.8% 3.1% 7.5% 1.8% -1.9% -2.0% 3.8% 0.6%

1997-

2005 

Average 

Change 6.6% 4.9% 6.2% 5.1% 7.8% 4.1% 3.1% 3.3% 1.9% 10.0% -0.1% 3.6%
61

 The location quotient for boat dealers was consistently greater than one in Delaware, 

Maryland, Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island (Table 54). In relative terms, the boat 

dealer sector plays a proportionally larger role in these states compared to other Northeast region 

states. For this reason a change in the boat dealer sector may be expected to have a larger 

proportional effect in these states even though total boat dealer employment was larger in 

absolute terms in states such as New York and North Carolina. 

Table 54. Boat dealer location quotient by Northeast Region state 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1986 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.5 2.5 0.9 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.7 1.1

1987 1.3 0.9 0.8 1.8 1.4 0.9 1.2 0.9 0.8 1.5 1.0

1988 1.2 1.1 0.8 1.8 1.7 0.8 1.5 1.1 0.7 1.6 1.1

1989 1.2 1.3 0.8 1.9 1.6 0.8 1.3 1.0 0.8 1.5 1.0

1990 1.1 1.3 0.8 1.8 1.7 0.8 1.4 1.1 0.8 1.3 1.0

1991 1.1 1.7 0.6 1.8 2.1 0.9 1.4 1.0 0.8 1.3 1.1

1992 1.0 1.8 0.8 1.9 2.0 0.9 1.4 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.1

1993 0.9 1.8 0.7 1.7 2.1 1.1 1.6 1.0 0.7 1.1 1.1

1994 1.0 2.1 0.7 1.8 2.1 1.1 1.5 0.9 0.7 1.4 1.2

1995 0.9 2.1 0.8 1.7 2.1 1.1 1.7 0.9 0.7 1.5 1.2

1996 0.9 2.0 0.8 1.7 2.1 1.0 1.8 0.9 0.7 1.3 1.3

1997 0.9 2.1 0.8 1.8 2.4 1.1 1.5 1.1 0.6 1.5 0.8

1998 0.9 2.1 0.8 1.9 2.2 1.1 1.4 1.0 0.6 1.8 0.8

1999 0.9 2.2 0.8 1.8 2.5 1.1 1.6 1.0 0.6 1.7 0.8

2000 0.9 2.2 0.9 1.8 2.3 1.1 1.6 1.1 0.6 1.6 0.8

2001 0.9 2.2 0.9 1.8 2.3 1.0 1.5 1.1 0.7 1.6 0.8

2002 1.1 2.2 0.9 1.8 2.7 1.0 1.5 0.9 0.6 2.0 0.8

2003 1.2 2.2 1.1 1.6 2.7 1.1 1.7 0.8 0.6 2.0 0.8

2004 1.2 2.2 1.0 1.7 2.9 1.1 1.8 0.9 0.6 2.1 0.8

2005 1.2 2.1 1.0 1.8 2.9 1.1 1.6 0.9 0.6 2.0 0.8

 The Herfindahl index for the Northeast region as a whole, as well as across states, was 

very low from 1986-2005 (Table 55). Additionally, the index has changed relatively little over 

time although the average annual change in the index indicates some decline in the Herfindahl 

because of increasing numbers of establishments. That is, the underlying size structure of the 

industry has remained relatively stable even as new establishments have been added. 

 The location quotient was greater than one for 59 of the 143 coastal counties included in 

the analysis. These counties accounted for 53% of the Northeast regional total number of 

establishments (Table 56) and 57% of regionwide employment (Table 57). Since the location 

quotient was calculated for coastal counties on a state-by-state basis, these counties include 

coastal counties with a large number of establishments and employees as well as counties with 

only a few. 
62

Table 55. Northeast Region (NER) boat dealer Herfindahl Index by state (1986-2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 0.025 0.104 0.042 0.018 0.055 0.020 0.071 0.028 0.010 0.046 0.020 0.003

1987 0.026 0.072 0.020 0.017 0.048 0.015 0.056 0.024 0.010 0.050 0.019 0.002

1988 0.022 0.213 0.019 0.015 0.039 0.012 0.047 0.024 0.009 0.057 0.022 0.002

1989 0.027 0.096 0.019 0.014 0.040 0.012 0.050 0.026 0.009 0.054 0.018 0.002

1990 0.033 0.110 0.023 0.015 0.046 0.013 0.057 0.027 0.016 0.062 0.019 0.003

1991 0.029 0.095 0.022 0.015 0.052 0.014 0.063 0.035 0.017 0.072 0.020 0.003

1992 0.031 0.105 0.021 0.015 0.052 0.015 0.070 0.016 0.010 0.045 0.017 0.002

1993 0.032 0.095 0.022 0.014 0.045 0.013 0.065 0.020 0.008 0.043 0.018 0.002

1994 0.032 0.087 0.020 0.016 0.047 0.014 0.060 0.021 0.008 0.047 0.023 0.002

1995 0.029 0.090 0.021 0.017 0.042 0.014 0.062 0.020 0.008 0.051 0.022 0.002

1996 0.027 0.090 0.021 0.018 0.062 0.013 0.052 0.019 0.008 0.052 0.039 0.002

1997 0.024 0.111 0.018 0.014 0.053 0.011 0.059 0.019 0.009 0.040 0.022 0.002

1998 0.025 0.079 0.018 0.013 0.073 0.012 0.060 0.016 0.009 0.048 0.026 0.002

1999 0.026 0.072 0.018 0.014 0.066 0.012 0.061 0.016 0.016 0.050 0.019 0.002

2000 0.024 0.095 0.021 0.015 0.066 0.011 0.084 0.014 0.016 0.053 0.019 0.002

2001 0.021 0.091 0.021 0.015 0.067 0.012 0.086 0.015 0.016 0.054 0.019 0.002

2002 0.019 0.090 0.021 0.014 0.056 0.012 0.050 0.014 0.008 0.037 0.019 0.002

2003 0.019 0.082 0.019 0.014 0.058 0.022 0.067 0.016 0.008 0.034 0.018 0.002

2004 0.018 0.072 0.018 0.013 0.055 0.020 0.066 0.015 0.007 0.033 0.024 0.002

2005 0.019 0.078 0.017 0.015 0.054 0.021 0.050 0.015 0.008 0.039 0.022 0.002

1986-

1996 

Average 

Change 1.7% 10.9% -4.7% -0.1% 2.9% -3.7% -2.4% -0.8% 1.3% 2.5% 9.4% -0.3%

1997-

2005 

Average 

Change -3.5% 0.0% -1.5% -1.5% -0.6% 8.3% 2.6% -2.1% 5.1% -1.9% -3.5% -1.3%
63

Table 56. Number of boat dealer establishments in coastal counties with a location quotient 

greater than one (1998-2005) 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 8 9 10 9 8 7 6 7

Knox County, ME 10 9 9 7 6 7 7 4

Lincoln County, ME 9 9 8 9 9 7 6 6

Waldo County, ME 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2

Washington County, ME 6 6 7 6 6 6 8 10

Rockingham County, NH 5 6 4 5 6 7 7 7

Barnstable County, MA 27 27 27 30 32 31 30 30

Bristol County, MA 11 12 13 13 18 19 19 20

Essex County, MA 24 24 24 24 24 25 26 27

Nantucket County, MA 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5

Plymouth County, MA 14 13 12 13 19 21 21 20

Bristol County, RI 6 5 5 6 5 6 5 6

Kent County, RI 6 5 4 4 7 9 9 9

Newport County, RI 15 14 13 13 17 18 19 22

Washington County, RI 8 9 9 9 12 12 13 12

Middlesex County, CT 20 19 21 20 23 20 20 22

New London County, CT 12 12 12 13 19 17 19 19

Nassau County, NY 27 27 27 27 33 33 30 30

Richmond County, NY 6 5 6 6 6 5 5 5

Rockland County, NY 4 4 4 3 2 3 4 5

Suffolk County, NY 63 63 61 60 74 78 73 76

Atlantic County, NJ 13 13 14 12 14 11 12 11

Burlington County, NJ 12 13 14 15 10 8 12 12

Cape May County, NJ 15 15 15 16 16 16 15 14

Monmouth County, NJ 15 14 13 13 16 20 18 18

Ocean County, NJ 50 57 64 59 54 57 58 60

Sussex County, DE 11 13 14 15 13 16 17 16

Anne Arundel County, MD 50 49 52 52 57 58 51 59

Calvert County, MD 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4

Cecil County, MD 9 9 10 8 8 9 10 10

Dorchester County, MD 5 5 6 6 4 3 4 5

Harford County, MD 4 4 4 5 6 5 6 5

Kent County, MD 4 4 5 6 6 5 5 5

Queen Anne's County, MD 17 17 14 15 15 12 13 14 

Somerset County, MD 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 

Talbot County, MD 9 8 8 7 8 13 12 13 

Worcester County, MD 8 8 8 6 7 7 7 7 
64

Table 56 (continued). Number of boat dealer establishments in coastal counties with a location 

quotient greater than one (1998-2005)

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Accomack County, VA 3 3 3 3 3 6 4 5

Chesterfield County, VA 2 4 4 5 6 6 6 7

Gloucester County, VA 3 2 3 2 1 2 4

Hampton City, VA 4 5 5 4 6 6 6 6

Mathews County, VA 4 3 4 5 5 2 2 2

Middlesex County, VA 7 6 6 7 8 9 10 10

Norfolk City, VA 8 10 10 8 7 8 9 9

Northampton County, VA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Northumberland County, VA 2 2 2 2 4 4 3 3

Portsmouth City, VA 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2

Prince William County, VA 5 6 4 5 4 6 5 5

Richmond County, VA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Stafford County, VA 2 4 5 3 3 1 1 1

Suffolk City, VA 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2

Virginia Beach City, VA 9 10 11 10 11 10 10 12

Beaufort County, NC 5 6 4 3 3 3 3 4

Camden County, NC 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Carteret County, NC 15 16 15 15 17 16 20 20

New Hanover County, NC 21 23 19 16 22 23 23 21

Pamlico County, NC 5 5 5 6 5 5 6 6

Tyrrell County, NC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
65

Table 57. Number of boat dealer employees in coastal counties with a location quotient greater 

than one (1998-2005) 

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 20 27 28 30 28 29 22 25

Knox County, ME 44 44 44 25 34 28 27 19

Lincoln County, ME 13 13 10 15 22 17 11 12

Waldo County, ME 60 62 59 62 63 69 77 71

Washington County, ME 18 27 16 18 24 27 24 43

Rockingham County, NH 29 29 27 33 56 41 52 53

Barnstable County, MA 240 262 280 272 277 350 364 355

Bristol County, MA 67 79 90 92 104 146 138 138

Essex County, MA 121 115 152 128 145 177 177 183

Nantucket County, MA 11 14 18 22 21 25 24 25

Plymouth County, MA 70 76 74 82 110 128 135 132

Bristol County, RI 31 23 24 21 25 24 35 22

Kent County, RI 32 33 50 54 74 89 93 102

Newport County, RI 114 73 80 68 97 110 121 126

Washington County, RI 39 75 42 47 59 78 87 78

Middlesex County, CT 132 142 150 153 164 160 181 165

New London County, CT 75 74 89 97 129 133 139 128

Nassau County, NY 158 171 187 185 224 211 241 227

Richmond County, NY 60 55 77 80 75 65 49 60

Rockland County, NY 26 24 29 25 8 27 33 35

Suffolk County, NY 360 354 368 371 444 525 538 527

Atlantic County, NJ 143 150 227 231 130 118 123 137

Burlington County, NJ 91 92 93 105 87 50 101 98

Cape May County, NJ 125 140 142 137 105 121 114 96

Monmouth County, NJ 91 80 99 84 107 106 107 101

Ocean County, NJ 336 385 417 446 407 434 460 472

Sussex County, DE 139 151 169 181 176 193 211 195

Anne Arundel County, MD 397 376 389 398 404 401 416 501

Calvert County, MD 9 19 24 17 35 28 30 31

Cecil County, MD 79 79 84 69 78 87 112 97

Dorchester County, MD 22 24 23 25 18 22 22 30

Harford County, MD 67 68 72 81 85 72 88 84

Kent County, MD 21 22 25 27 42 37 26 33

Queen Anne's County, MD 150 173 180 216 214 167 215 253

Somerset County, MD 30 25 27 32 27 31 41 41

Talbot County, MD 53 49 55 53 48 74 67 63

Worcester County, MD 53 31 34 38 41 35 32 29
66

Table 57 (continued). Number of boat dealer employees in coastal counties with a location 

quotient greater than one (1998-2005) 

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Accomack County, VA 9 10 9 9 10 12 14 15

Chesterfield County, VA 16 32 37 33 39 41 44 54

Gloucester County, VA 5 5 6 8 7 17 20

Hampton City, VA 71 82 77 72 77 80 91 90

Mathews County, VA 12 12 11 10 15 13 10 7

Middlesex County, VA 86 37 42 49 50 64 63 67

Norfolk City, VA 77 87 102 105 74 75 83 95

Northampton County, VA 8 8 8 9 8 7 7 9

Northumberland County, VA 10 10 13 13 18 19 21 22

Portsmouth City, VA 8 10 8 9 11 9 18 17

Prince William County, VA 65 83 84 81 65 96 116 120

Richmond County, VA 2 2 2 12 12 12 10

Stafford County, VA 4 10 17 10 35 29 28 26

Suffolk City, VA 5 5 9 5 8 14 10 13

Virginia Beach City, VA 62 79 83 84 90 100 104 77

Beaufort County, NC 33 41 34 23 42 35 31 44

Camden County, NC 6 6 13 9 9 8 9 6

Carteret County, NC 112 131 134 113 115 112 120 135

New Hanover County, NC 160 163 158 142 203 225 189 189

Pamlico County, NC 17 22 17 16 13 22 23 16

Tyrrell County, NC 14 14 13 10 6 7 6 5

Marinas NAICS 71393

 Marinas include establishments engaged in operating dockage or mooring facilities for 

owners of pleasure craft. These establishments may also provide related services such as retailing 

fuel and boating supplies and providing maintenance, repair, and rental of pleasure boats. The 

number of establishments offering marina services increased from 984 in 1988 to 1,511 in 2005 

(Table 58). On average the annual change in number of marinas was 5.8% from 1988-1996 and 

was slightly negative (-0.1%) from 1997-2005. Much of the growth in numbers of marinas 

occurred from 1988-1996. Since 1996, the number of establishments has ranged, without trend, 

between 1,400 and 1,500 establishments. This general pattern is evident across states as growth 

in the number of marinas was positive in all states from 1988-1996 while the average annual 

change in establishments was lower and in some cases (Maryland, North Carolina, and New 

Jersey) was slightly negative. 

 Regionwide marina employment has increased from 6,487 in 1998 to 9,004 in 2005 

(Table 59). Growth in marina employment trended upward throughout the time period even as 

the number of establishments was relatively stable from 1996-2005. This suggests that, on 

average, the number of employees per establishment has been increasing. Among states 

expansion in marina employment was highest in New York and Virginia as employment in the 

latter nearly doubled from 532 in 1988 to more than 1,000 employees in 2005. By contrast 

marina employment in Delaware expanded from 1996 through 2002 but has dropped to less than 

100 in 2003, 2004, and 2005. 
67

Table 58. Number of Northeast Region (NER) marina establishments by state (1988-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA N1988 69 7 93 126 45 80 19 147 273 41 84 1989 64 5 94 111 48 77 19 133 242 37 87 1990 71 6 91 116 49 80 19 134 253 40 90 1991 73 8 91 138 53 90 24 140 278 39 96 11992 79 9 97 149 62 108 25 151 340 43 99 11993 92 12 120 180 79 117 29 184 371 47 106 11994 95 13 115 187 79 122 30 195 371 48 110 11995 91 13 117 200 80 120 32 195 365 47 114 11996 108 15 137 215 88 120 37 223 411 53 114 11997 115 13 131 204 86 110 41 216 403 55 119 11998 115 15 132 193 88 113 42 224 405 55 121 11999 107 12 133 196 91 113 43 220 389 51 119 12000 101 14 131 187 91 114 39 209 392 55 121 12001 101 12 136 185 89 111 42 211 386 54 129 12002 108 13 139 188 85 103 36 199 386 56 122 12003 116 17 145 180 79 104 40 203 417 61 136 12004 117 17 135 183 84 97 40 201 413 60 137 12005 117 16 139 185 84 103 38 206 416 66 141 11988-1996 Average Change 6.1% 11.8% 5.4% 7.3% 9.1% 5.5% 9.0% 5.7% 5.7% 3.5% 3.9% 51997-2005 Average Change 1.0% 2.0% 0.2% -1.6% -0.4% -1.6% 0.6% -0.8% 0.2% 2.6% 2.5% -0
68

Table 59. Annual mid-March employees in Northeast Region (NER) marinas by state (1988-200

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA N1988 631 10 763 1,010 422 545 162 817 1,298 297 532 61989 658 7 738 1,021 416 540 178 865 1,446 293 595 61990 612 12 652 967 330 481 142 673 1,154 353 648 61991 512 40 567 967 325 413 148 631 1,209 311 546 51992 587 23 563 977 356 500 150 591 1,198 340 558 51993 658 30 690 1,007 471 493 121 659 1,345 348 613 61994 585 34 633 1,018 476 498 111 721 1,291 322 636 61995 630 43 690 1,085 482 502 138 793 1,294 321 736 61996 690 229 734 1,216 455 528 147 823 1,465 346 776 71997 791 130 751 1,177 453 536 184 853 1,525 348 740 71998 800 215 856 1,142 467 551 210 947 1,811 388 683 81999 720 306 838 1,103 508 533 233 968 1,682 414 772 82000 676 347 865 1,172 592 557 249 1,021 1,778 504 918 82001 944 349 996 1,240 600 616 209 1,029 1,805 555 969 92002 722 389 988 1,232 503 557 228 927 1,680 522 761 82003 1,006 58 969 1,296 416 625 196 951 2,167 405 1,723 92004 1,016 76 989 1,321 406 644 226 945 2,185 475 1,100 92005 994 69 973 1,228 411 654 194 978 2,093 408 1,002 91988-1996 Average Change 1.7% 92.4% 0.1% 2.5% 1.9% 0.1% -0.2% 0.7% 2.1% 2.4% 5.2% 11997-2005 Average Change 6.0% 3.1% 3.4% 0.2% -0.6% 2.6% 4.1% 2.1% 4.6% 2.8% 9.5% 2
69

 The marina sector location quotient exceeded one in Connecticut, Maryland, Maine, and 

Rhode Island (Table 60). In New Hampshire the location quotient exceeded one in most years 

although barely so. 

Table 60. Marina location quotient by state (1988-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1988 1.4 0.1 0.9 2.0 3.5 0.7 1.2 0.9 0.6 2.5 0.8

1989 1.5 0.1 0.9 2.0 3.2 0.7 1.3 0.9 0.7 2.4 0.9

1990 1.6 0.1 0.9 2.0 3.0 0.7 1.2 0.8 0.6 3.4 1.1

1991 1.4 0.5 0.8 2.2 3.1 0.6 1.4 0.8 0.7 3.2 0.9

1992 1.6 0.3 0.8 2.1 3.3 0.7 1.3 0.7 0.7 3.5 0.9

1993 1.6 0.3 0.9 2.0 3.9 0.6 1.0 0.7 0.7 3.2 0.9

1994 1.5 0.4 0.8 2.1 4.0 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.7 3.1 0.9

1995 1.5 0.5 0.9 2.0 3.8 0.6 1.0 0.9 0.7 2.9 1.0

1996 1.5 2.2 0.8 2.1 3.3 0.5 1.0 0.8 0.7 2.8 1.0

1997 1.7 1.2 0.8 2.0 3.2 0.5 1.2 0.8 0.7 2.8 0.9

1998 1.6 1.8 0.9 1.8 3.1 0.5 1.2 0.8 0.8 2.9 0.8

1999 1.5 2.6 0.9 1.7 3.3 0.5 1.4 0.9 0.7 3.2 0.9

2000 1.3 2.7 0.8 1.7 3.6 0.5 1.4 0.9 0.7 3.6 0.9

2001 1.7 2.5 0.9 1.7 3.4 0.5 1.1 0.8 0.7 3.7 0.9

2002 1.4 3.0 1.0 1.8 3.1 0.5 1.2 0.8 0.7 3.8 0.8

2003 1.7 0.4 0.9 1.6 2.2 0.5 1.0 0.7 0.8 2.5 1.5

2004 1.8 0.5 0.9 1.7 2.3 0.5 1.1 0.7 0.8 3.0 1.0

2005 1.9 0.5 0.9 1.6 2.4 0.6 1.0 0.8 0.8 2.7 0.9

 The marina sector Herfindahl index was very low for the Northeast region as a whole and 

for all states except for Delaware (Table 61). From 1988-1996 the average annual change in the 

Herfindahl index was negative in the Northeast region. This declining trend was due to the 

expansion in number of establishments that was occurring over that time. The average annual 

change from 1997-2005 was positive because of some small changes in the size structure of 

Northeast region establishments. However, these changes had little impact on the Herfindahl 

index as it remained constant from 2003-2005 at 0.002. 

 The Herfindahl index in Delaware was higher than any other state because of a 

combination of a small number of marina establishments and a change in the size structure of the 

industry which was particularly notable from 1996-2002. Prior to 1996, mid-March employment 

did not exceed 19 for any marina establishment in Delaware. From 1996-2002 there was at least 

one establishment that had anywhere from 50-500 employees. This means that a single 

establishment accounted for large proportion of total Delaware marina employment in these 

years, hence the relatively high Herfindahl index. 

The location quotient exceeded one in 53 of the 143 coastal counties included in the 

analysis. These counties included counties with a large number of establishments (Table 62) and 

employees (Table 63) as well as counties with only a few of either. Among coastal counties, the 

number of establishments exceeded 50 in only Suffolk County, NY, Anne Arundel County, MD, 

and Ocean County, NJ. These three counties alone accounted for about 15% of total marina 

employment in the Northeast region. 
70

Table 61. Northeast Region (NER) marina sector Herfindahl Index by state (1988-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA 1988 0.039 0.143 0.029 0.035 0.078 0.089 0.091 0.019 0.010 0.052 0.081989 0.043 0.200 0.025 0.039 0.070 0.037 0.094 0.026 0.019 0.060 0.071990 0.045 0.211 0.030 0.039 0.045 0.033 0.101 0.022 0.008 0.056 0.031991 0.044 0.223 0.027 0.035 0.041 0.022 0.087 0.019 0.008 0.077 0.021992 0.048 0.143 0.027 0.038 0.054 0.028 0.102 0.017 0.007 0.072 0.021993 0.040 0.106 0.020 0.017 0.050 0.017 0.089 0.014 0.006 0.067 0.021994 0.042 0.099 0.022 0.015 0.040 0.018 0.064 0.016 0.006 0.072 0.021995 0.039 0.123 0.026 0.015 0.037 0.015 0.075 0.015 0.009 0.075 0.021996 0.034 0.559 0.018 0.010 0.024 0.014 0.046 0.011 0.007 0.063 0.021997 0.053 0.376 0.018 0.013 0.023 0.018 0.043 0.010 0.006 0.059 0.021998 0.028 0.603 0.021 0.013 0.025 0.019 0.041 0.013 0.012 0.057 0.021999 0.026 0.820 0.024 0.013 0.033 0.016 0.044 0.014 0.007 0.061 0.022000 0.026 0.800 0.025 0.013 0.025 0.019 0.052 0.014 0.006 0.058 0.022001 0.026 0.698 0.023 0.013 0.032 0.021 0.056 0.016 0.011 0.095 0.022002 0.025 0.761 0.024 0.013 0.029 0.023 0.066 0.017 0.012 0.101 0.022003 0.028 0.105 0.023 0.016 0.030 0.026 0.063 0.013 0.008 0.040 0.032004 0.027 0.105 0.023 0.013 0.028 0.029 0.054 0.012 0.010 0.045 0.032005 0.027 0.110 0.022 0.013 0.026 0.028 0.054 0.015 0.010 0.034 0.031988-1996 Average Change -1.1% 45.2% -4.0% -10.7% -11.7% -17.2% -6.1% -4.4% 4.7% 3.5% -7.8% 1997-2005 Average Change 0.5% -2.6% 2.7% 3.3% 2.3% 9.0% 2.4% 4.0% 11.3% -1.1% 4.7% 
71

Table 62. Number of marina establishments in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) 

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 19 18 17 16 17 11 11 9

Knox County, ME 8 8 8 8 6 7 7 9

Lincoln County, ME 14 16 16 15 14 14 14 13

Sagadahoc County, ME 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2

Waldo County, ME 5 6 7 7 6 5 5 5

Rockingham County, NH 7 7 6 9 6 8 7 7

Barnstable County, MA 25 22 23 26 27 29 28 29

Dukes County, MA 6 7 5 5 7 6 6 6

Essex County, MA 33 32 28 29 30 35 34 34

Nantucket County, MA 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 3

Plymouth County, MA 28 29 28 28 27 26 22 25

Bristol County, RI 5 4 5 5 6 7 6 6

Newport County, RI 12 11 13 11 14 15 14 16

Washington County, RI 20 20 18 20 23 23 25 27

Middlesex County, CT 24 23 22 23 23 23 23 22

New London County, CT 29 28 26 26 30 32 33 33

Nassau County, NY 44 43 49 46 41 41 42 44

Richmond County, NY 8 8 9 8 8 8 7 6

Suffolk County, NY 123 117 106 102 114 120 113 116

Atlantic County, NJ 25 24 20 20 20 17 20 19

Cape May County, NJ 29 27 26 25 27 27 26 28

Monmouth County, NJ 35 36 37 39 32 34 37 39

Ocean County, NJ 80 78 72 75 74 74 71 74

Anne Arundel County, MD 64 65 62 62 63 61 59 61

Calvert County, MD 12 12 11 12 14 13 13 14

Cecil County, MD 20 19 19 20 25 23 21 20

Dorchester County, MD 3 3 4 3 2 2 2 2

Kent County, MD 19 18 17 17 16 16 18 18

Queen Anne's County, MD 11 11 10 11 13 9 11 9

St. Mary's County, MD 7 9 8 7 7 7 8 8

Talbot County, MD 11 9 10 9 7 9 8 6

Worcester County, MD 3 5 4 5 4 5 4 5
72

Table 62 (continued). Number of marina establishments in Northeast Region coastal counties 

where the location quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) 

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Essex County, VA 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3

Gloucester County, VA 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 4

Hampton City, VA 6 5 5 5 4 7 7 8

Hopewell City, VA 3 3 3 3 2 1 1 1

King George County, VA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Lancaster County, VA 4 3 3 4 3 4 5 3

Mathews County, VA 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2

Middlesex County, VA 15 15 18 21 18 19 17 20

New Kent County, VA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2

Norfolk City, VA 8 8 8 8 9 11 10 10

Northumberland County, VA 6 6 7 6 6 6 6 6

Portsmouth City, VA 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3

Prince George County, VA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Prince William County, VA 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 6

Richmond County, VA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Virginia Beach City, VA 8 8 9 11 7 10 12 10

Westmoreland County, VA 5 5 5 5 4 4 5 4

York County, VA 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2

Carteret County, NC 19 22 20 17 19 18 19 17

Currituck County, NC 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2

Dare County, NC 7 7 8 8 9 11 9 11

Pamlico County, NC 7 7 6 6 8 7 6 5
73

Table 63. Number of marina employees in Northeast Region coastal counties where the location 

quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 107 117 117 118 128 27 41 35

Knox County, ME 29 28 42 41 37 46 35 42

Lincoln County, ME 45 54 84 89 47 55 49 53

Sagadahoc County, ME 28 32 36 29 24 25 26 24

Waldo County, ME 41 59 78 73 59 58 54 62

Rockingham County, NH 62 37 52 36 29 29 55 44

Barnstable County, MA 258 272 300 340 311 306 337 337

Dukes County, MA 38 26 31 34 27 40 34 28

Essex County, MA 147 155 192 183 176 226 237 225

Nantucket County, MA 21 14 16 13 15 21 20 16

Plymouth County, MA 231 244 205 228 260 204 174 204

Bristol County, RI 36 58 55 78 55 53 58 59

Newport County, RI 174 185 203 236 275 154 186 163

Washington County, RI 64 85 99 106 108 105 138 104

Middlesex County, CT 166 191 196 206 226 262 246 242

New London County, CT 182 198 154 175 173 223 240 230

Nassau County, NY 230 240 254 245 237 306 301 295

Richmond County, NY 46 42 45 40 32 53 55 38

Suffolk County, NY 664 686 709 741 725 695 728 718

Atlantic County, NJ 84 76 66 62 69 63 71 74

Cape May County, NJ 122 119 131 137 149 217 209 197

Monmouth County, NJ 60 67 82 89 64 76 73 73

Ocean County, NJ 315 319 350 303 329 333 324 322

Anne Arundel County, MD 358 341 347 352 393 432 443 397

Calvert County, MD 127 128 151 160 152 156 146 157

Cecil County, MD 108 114 79 92 136 132 137 136

Dorchester County, MD 11 11 16 9 9 8 9 7

Kent County, MD 158 163 185 197 147 178 141 151

Queen Anne's County, MD 57 56 72 78 78 44 52 41

St. Mary's County, MD 35 38 35 42 35 37 55 50

Talbot County, MD 49 54 52 60 52 76 68 56

Worcester County, MD 28 24 37 45 33 27 47 38
74

Table 63 (continued). Number of marina employees in Northeast Region coastal counties where 

the location quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Essex County, VA 11 10 8 7 9 12 15 6

Gloucester County, VA 43 40 46 47 55 59 64 40

Hampton City, VA 38 27 27 31 30 67 80 56

Hopewell City, VA 4 10 14 11 4 3 7 7

King George County, VA 3 4 4 8 6 4 4 5

Lancaster County, VA 31 46 51 56 42 51 59 58

Mathews County, VA 4 7 5 9 7 4 4 3

Middlesex County, VA 99 126 137 148 119 125 115 105

New Kent County, VA 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 4

Norfolk City, VA 75 70 74 71 69 181 169 161

Northumberland County, VA 21 22 25 17 19 25 24 24

Portsmouth City, VA 13 23 22 15 32 16 11 20

Prince George County, VA 7 8 7 6 6 7 7 6

Prince William County, VA 37 45 44 38 49 64 64 88

Richmond County, VA 5 6 5 11 11 11 12 12

Virginia Beach City, VA 117 123 119 129 102 114 118 114

Westmoreland County, VA 25 23 36 36 29 19 24 17

York County, VA 20 18 20 22 12 34 30 32

Carteret County, NC 115 111 126 164 185 183 171 151

Currituck County, NC 23 24 4 4 5 44 36 32

Dare County, NC 41 32 40 47 54 55 36 39

Pamlico County, NC 33 29 30 27 25 24 15 17
75

Sightseeing water transportation NAICS 487210

 Establishments included in the scenic and sightseeing water transportation sector provide 

local excursion services that typically return to the point of origin on the same day of departure. 

These services include such activities as party or charter fishing, whale watches, dinner cruises, 

and harbor or lighthouse sightseeing tours. In the Northeast region the number of establishments 

offering these sightseeing opportunities increased in every year from 2000-2005 (Table 64). On 

average, the number of establishments increased 2.8% per year from 1998-2005. Among states, 

the number of water-based excursion establishments was highest in New York and New Jersey 

although the average annual change in number of establishments in these two states was less than 

1%. By contrast, the number of establishments more than doubled in 2005 compared to 1998 in 

Delaware and nearly doubled in Rhode Island. In other states, the change in number of 

establishments was more modest, ranging from 2.3% per year in Virginia to 5.8% in New 

Hampshire. 

Table 64. Number of Northeast Region (NER) water excursion establishments by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 10 7 51 32 33 61 14 86 105 16 28 443

1999 13 7 51 37 32 56 14 80 103 17 27 437

2000 14 5 54 38 34 50 16 82 100 15 26 434

2001 16 9 50 42 34 57 20 81 93 21 27 450

2002 15 14 56 37 39 68 19 88 106 19 31 492

2003 14 18 55 37 41 70 21 85 105 19 33 498

2004 14 18 58 41 46 70 19 83 110 24 36 519

2005 14 18 60 43 46 71 20 89 111 31 32 535

Annual 

Average 

Change 5.6% 19.4% 2.5% 4.7% 5.0% 2.7% 5.8% 0.6% 1.0% 11.5% 2.3% 2.8%

 Although the number of water-based excursion establishments increased, the number of 

employees changed little from 1998-2005 (Table 65). Growth in employment averaged less than 

1% per year. Among states average annual growth was negative in Connecticut, Massachusetts, 

and New Jersey. Elsewhere the average annual change in employment was positive although 

employment in 2005 was below 1998 levels in Maine and North Carolina. 

 The location quotient exceeded one in every year from 1998-2005 in only Massachusetts, 

Maine, and Rhode Island (Table 66). Note that in Massachusetts employment in the water 

excursion sector has been declining, which means that the Massachusetts share of sector 

employment has also been declining, hence the decline in the location quotient. If water 

excursion employment continues to decline in Massachusetts, the location quotient would likely 

fall below one as long as regionwide employment remains constant or increases. 

 The Northeast region Herfindahl index was low, ranging from 0.019 in 1998 to 0.013 in 

2000. The low value of the index is indicative of an industry with a large number of 

establishments not dominated by a small number of large establishments. The index value 

declined by an average of 1% per year from 1998-2005 (Table 67). This decline was primarily 

due to increasing numbers of establishments although the size structure of the regionwide sector 

also became slightly more dispersed (i.e., a slight reduction in the proportion of employment in 

the largest size class in the sector). 
76

Table 65. Number of Northeast Region (NER) water excursion mid-March employees by state 

(1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 67 12 372 143 79 191 40 250 613 107 227 2,101

1999 78 14 420 192 97 218 46 243 615 109 193 2,225

2000 70 10 409 236 92 186 75 268 528 112 160 2,146

2001 106 22 452 160 111 201 69 257 526 149 199 2,253

2002 89 30 408 174 89 174 74 262 509 92 207 2,108

2003 62 37 287 136 77 225 34 229 663 104 288 2,143

2004 50 22 304 120 126 183 33 256 758 119 331 2,302

2005 42 44 274 151 64 189 70 184 694 107 303 2,121

Annual 

Average 

Change -3.7% 31.9% -3.2% 3.7% 2.7% 1.2% 19.0% -3.4% 2.7% 2.5% 6.0% 0.3%

Table 66. Water excursion sector location quotient by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1998 0.5 0.4 1.5 0.9 2.0 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.0 3.1 1.0

1999 0.6 0.4 1.6 1.1 2.3 0.7 1.0 0.8 1.0 3.0 0.8

2000 0.5 0.3 1.6 1.4 2.2 0.7 1.6 0.9 0.9 3.2 0.7

2001 0.8 0.7 1.7 0.9 2.6 0.7 1.4 0.8 0.8 4.2 0.8

2002 0.7 0.9 1.6 1.0 2.2 0.6 1.6 0.9 0.9 2.7 0.9

2003 0.5 1.2 1.2 0.8 1.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.1 2.9 1.2

2004 0.4 0.6 1.2 0.6 2.9 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.2 3.1 1.2

2005 0.3 1.4 1.1 0.9 1.6 0.7 1.5 0.6 1.1 3.0 1.2

 Among states the Herfindahl index was generally higher than that of the region as a 

whole because of a smaller number of establishments. The Herfindahl index declined, on 

average, in Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Maine, North Carolina, and Rhode Island. 

The location quotient exceeded one in only 27 of the 143 coastal counties included in the 

analysis. The combined totals for these counties accounted for just over 50% of total Northeast 

region establishments (Table 68) but accounted for more than 70% of water excursion 

employment (Table 69). This indicates that the water excursion industry is more geographically 

concentrated than are other industries in the marine recreational boating subgroup. Note that of 

the counties listed in Tables 68 and 69 three (Suffolk County, MA, New York County, NY, and 

the City of Norfolk, VA) accounted for at least 40% of regionwide employment from 2003-2005. 
77

Table 67. Northeast Region (NER) water excursion sector Herfindahl Index by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 0.167 0.143 0.151 0.076 0.046 0.089 0.126 0.025 0.078 0.380 0.348 0.019

1999 0.214 0.143 0.150 0.125 0.048 0.103 0.120 0.028 0.080 0.332 0.184 0.016

2000 0.187 0.200 0.100 0.107 0.049 0.102 0.195 0.032 0.080 0.348 0.188 0.013

2001 0.158 0.136 0.150 0.074 0.049 0.094 0.093 0.059 0.090 0.249 0.172 0.015

2002 0.183 0.071 0.093 0.137 0.042 0.079 0.089 0.158 0.111 0.158 0.135 0.017

2003 0.187 0.056 0.115 0.169 0.036 0.053 0.079 0.034 0.093 0.320 0.250 0.017

2004 0.092 0.056 0.104 0.088 0.027 0.075 0.089 0.060 0.085 0.219 0.200 0.016

2005 0.089 0.063 0.101 0.126 0.026 0.049 0.181 0.031 0.095 0.094 0.277 0.017

Annual 

Average 

Change -5.1% -6.8% -1.5% 17.7% -7.3% -5.0% 15.0% 32.7% 3.7% -8.4% 4.2% -1.0%

Table 68. Number of excursion establishments in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) 

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 9 11 11 9 9 8 8 7

Knox County, ME 12 11 11 11 12 13 15 17

Rockingham County, NH 11 11 12 16 16 16 15 15

Barnstable County, MA 20 17 19 20 23 23 21 22

Dukes County, MA 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2

Suffolk County, MA 11 11 11 10 12 10 10 10

Bristol County, RI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Newport County, RI 9 10 8 14 12 13 15 19

Washington County, RI 4 4 4 4 5 5 6 6

Middlesex County, CT 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 1

New London County, CT 6 5 5 5 5 7 6 6

New York County, NY 11 15 15 14 14 15 17 21

Cape May County, NJ 21 19 18 21 22 22 24 25

Hudson County, NJ 4 3 3 3 6 5 3 4

Monmouth County, NJ 30 29 28 27 31 25 22 24

Ocean County, NJ 15 13 13 12 15 16 19 20

Anne Arundel County, MD 5 7 7 7 6 10 11 13

Baltimore City, MD 3 5 5 5 4 4 5 4

Somerset County, MD 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 4

St. Mary's County, MD 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Worcester County, MD 7 7 7 6 5 6 9 9

Accomack County, VA 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1

Essex County, VA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Norfolk City, VA 2 2 2 3 3 4 5 4

Northumberland County, VA 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 1

Dare County, NC 31 28 25 30 39 42 42 40

Hyde County, NC 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1
78

Table 69. Number of excursion employees in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient exceeded one (1998-2005) 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Hancock County, ME 17 29 40 34 17 21 15 16

Knox County, ME 24 30 39 47 30 22 35 40

Rockingham County, NH 30 28 50 53 41 35 14 35

Barnstable County, MA 84 112 98 102 121 25 28 37

Dukes County, MA 4 4 4 6 4 4 3 4

Suffolk County, MA 251 270 277 297 260 232 245 205

Bristol County, RI 53 65 53 51 30 59 55 30

Newport County, RI 27 31 26 44 31 32 31 30

Washington County, RI 8 13 17 18 20 10 12 16

Middlesex County, CT 28 34 33 64 54 39 13 3

New London County, CT 21 27 20 22 11 31 10 20

New York County, NY 287 309 226 258 209 463 572 546

Cape May County, NJ 32 39 36 45 37 32 37 44

Hudson County, NJ 17 54 34 49 257 66 90 41

Monmouth County, NJ 66 59 95 57 49 26 35 30

Ocean County, NJ 41 58 54 61 29 23 29 40

Anne Arundel County, MD 27 41 34 51 33 22 57 72

Baltimore City, MD 33 56 68 48 74 83 41 77

Somerset County, MD 2 8 8 8 5 3 5 4

St. Mary's County, MD 16 37 30 12 4 4 4 4

Worcester County, MD 4 16 9 14 5 3 6 4

Accomack County, VA 3 2 2 0 2 2 2 3

Essex County, VA 2 2 2 2 7 3 3 3

Norfolk City, VA 142 72 77 75 82 207 218 210

Northumberland County, VA 4 3 4 5 8 1 4 2

Dare County, NC 53 47 35 43 46 74 63 67

Hyde County, NC 2 2 2 1 4 4 4 2

Shipping and Shipping-related Industries

 Shipping and shipping-related industries include water transportation of passengers and 

cargo (NAICS 48311), ship building (NAICS 336611), and water transportation services 

(NAICS 4883). Water transportation services includes handling of marine cargo (NAICS 48832), 

businesses providing navigation services to shipping, (NAICS 48833), port and harbor 

operations (NAICS 48831), and other water transportation services (NAICS 48839). However, 

the number of establishments in each of these four sectors is small, and this results in a 

substantial number of occasions in which employment data are suppressed. Since employment 

for suppressed fields had to be estimated, the reliability of employment data reported herein is 

subject to greater uncertainty. To reduce this uncertainty, only data for the industry group as a 

whole (NAICS 4883) are reported. 

 Compared to the other marine sectors previously described, shipping and shipping-related 

industries tend to be more concentrated in terms of both industrial organization and geography. 

Not surprisingly, water transportation service industries like cargo handling, navigation services, 

and port operations tend to be colocated with shipping in states and locations with large shipping 

facilities. Ship building locations do not necessarily correspond to where the shipping industry is 
79

active. However, like shipping, the ship building industry is geographically concentrated with 

more than 90% of employment in only three states (Connecticut, Maine, and Virginia). 

 In 1998 there were a total of 994 shipping and shipping-related establishments (Table 70) 

employing 67,000 people (Table 71). Across states, declines in the number of establishments, 

particularly in Maine and New York, have been partially offset by increases in states like Rhode 

Island, Maryland, and Virginia. The net effect has been a gradual declining trend in the 

regionwide number of establishments from a peak of 988 in 2000 to 930 establishments in 2005. 

Table 70. Number of Northeast Region (NER) shipping and shipping-related sector establishments 

(1998–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 65 25 73 93 69 67 6 178 251 38 129 994

1999 65 27 72 95 68 66 8 178 240 40 133 992

2000 64 27 70 93 64 67 9 186 245 40 129 994

2001 60 29 73 98 62 66 9 183 240 39 129 988

2002 59 33 67 102 66 64 8 178 214 37 142 970

2003 56 28 76 107 57 52 8 167 208 40 138 937

2004 60 24 79 104 54 54 7 157 210 36 136 921

2005 62 24 71 101 56 59 11 163 206 37 140 930

 Total mid-March employment in the shipping and shipping-related sector was highest in 

1998 but has fluctuated without any notable trend between 61,000–64,000 employees ever since 

(Table 71). Primarily because of the size of the ship building industry, Virginia employment was 

nearly 25,000 in all years, representing about 41% of regionwide shipping and shipping-related 

employment (Table 72). In Connecticut, after experiencing employment declines from 1998-

2002, shipping and shipping-related employment increased from 7,800 employees in 2002 to a 

high of 9,500 in 2005. By contrast, employment in Maine has been on a declining trend from 

nearly 9,000 in 1999 to 6,300 in 2005. 

Employment in shipping and shipping-related industries indicates a degree of 

specialization across states. For example, ship building represented more than 80% of total 

industry group employment in Connecticut, Maine, and Virginia and was a substantial majority 

of employment in Rhode Island (Table 73). By contrast, water transportation and water 

transportation services were the dominant sectors in Massachusetts, Delaware, New Jersey, and 

New York. Notably each of these states has one or more major ports that are regional hubs for 

loading and offloading ocean-going freight and passengers. 

Table 71. Total Northeast Region (NER) shipping and shipping-related sector mid-March 

employment by state (1998–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 9,045 498 1,090 3,606 8,455 2,063 21 10,301 5,303 389 26,311 67,082

1999 8,822 558 1,703 3,714 8,950 1,898 20 7,170 5,263 372 25,808 64,280

2000 8,174 445 1,618 3,515 7,375 2,021 33 8,389 5,384 358 26,777 64,090

2001 8,387 554 1,753 3,104 7,680 2,150 34 8,014 5,692 388 24,799 62,554

2002 7,869 478 1,857 2,935 6,384 1,965 37 7,750 6,027 523 25,668 61,492

2003 8,747 911 2,249 3,574 6,980 1,868 207 8,547 5,219 628 25,603 64,533

2004 9,181 867 2,218 3,352 6,990 1,079 112 8,881 4,822 567 25,876 63,945

2005 9,535 761 2,025 3,058 6,335 983 212 9,379 4,506 668 27,000 64,464
80

Table 72. Shipping and shipping-related sector employment shares by state (1998–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1998 13.5% 0.7% 1.6% 5.4% 12.6% 3.1% 0.0% 15.4% 7.9% 0.6% 39.2%

1999 13.7% 0.9% 2.6% 5.8% 13.9% 3.0% 0.0% 11.2% 8.2% 0.6% 40.1%

2000 12.8% 0.7% 2.5% 5.5% 11.5% 3.2% 0.1% 13.1% 8.4% 0.6% 41.8%

2001 13.4% 0.9% 2.8% 5.0% 12.3% 3.4% 0.1% 12.8% 9.1% 0.6% 39.6%

2002 12.8% 0.8% 3.0% 4.8% 10.4% 3.2% 0.1% 12.6% 9.8% 0.8% 41.7%

2003 13.6% 1.4% 3.5% 5.5% 10.8% 2.9% 0.3% 13.2% 8.1% 1.0% 39.7%

2004 14.4% 1.4% 3.5% 5.2% 10.9% 1.7% 0.2% 13.9% 7.5% 0.9% 40.5%

2005 14.8% 1.2% 3.1% 4.7% 9.8% 1.5% 0.3% 14.5% 7.0% 1.0% 41.9%

Table 73. Composition of shipping and shipping-related sector by state and year (1998–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

Ship Building Employment Share 

1998 87.0% 1.4% 17.8% 27.7% 95.7% 40.1% 0.0% 10.0% 12.8% 55.6% 81.9%

1999 82.2% 1.3% 16.7% 26.9% 97.2% 43.7% 0.0% 16.6% 11.2% 58.1% 81.1%

2000 86.3% 1.9% 14.3% 21.3% 96.3% 44.0% 0.0% 17.0% 11.3% 51.1% 79.1%

2001 86.0% 1.4% 14.8% 20.3% 95.2% 53.8% 0.0% 17.3% 10.2% 61.1% 80.2%

2002 90.5% 1.6% 14.9% 18.5% 95.3% 39.6% 0.0% 18.1% 6.2% 66.8% 81.7%

2003 88.2% 0.7% 12.7% 18.0% 94.8% 3.8% 84.6% 15.1% 7.1% 73.5% 79.5%

2004 89.4% 0.8% 17.8% 7.2% 95.6% 4.7% 75.2% 14.2% 8.8% 63.6% 79.9%

2005 89.2% 0.8% 13.1% 6.4% 95.4% 4.1% 85.8% 15.5% 9.6% 74.7% 77.9%

Water Transportation Employment Share 

1998 10.1% 5.9% 46.0% 5.6% 1.6% 6.7% 0.0% 44.9% 49.3% 5.3% 5.3%

1999 16.1% 9.5% 57.6% 6.8% 1.4% 9.3% 20.3% 26.2% 48.7% 7.0% 5.6%

2000 12.0% 18.1% 64.0% 7.4% 1.8% 11.6% 57.1% 21.4% 44.7% 11.2% 6.2%

2001 11.3% 37.0% 70.8% 8.2% 1.5% 9.1% 56.2% 25.1% 52.7% 7.7% 6.4%

2002 6.4% 36.9% 71.9% 9.6% 1.6% 13.0% 61.8% 23.8% 59.7% 5.8% 7.1%

2003 8.3% 23.7% 77.6% 10.8% 0.9% 52.0% 0.9% 24.7% 56.1% 6.6% 6.6%

2004 7.1% 28.0% 73.6% 12.8% 1.1% 15.1% 1.7% 21.6% 47.4% 6.8% 6.7%

2005 7.2% 18.3% 72.3% 15.2% 1.0% 11.5% 2.8% 20.5% 46.6% 9.1% 7.4%

Water Transportation Services Employment Share 

1998 2.9% 92.7% 36.2% 66.7% 2.8% 53.3% 100.0% 45.0% 37.9% 39.1% 12.8%

1999 1.7% 89.2% 25.7% 66.3% 1.5% 47.0% 79.7% 57.2% 40.2% 34.9% 13.2%

2000 1.7% 80.0% 21.6% 71.4% 1.9% 44.5% 42.9% 61.7% 44.0% 37.7% 14.7%

2001 2.7% 61.6% 14.4% 71.6% 3.3% 37.1% 43.8% 57.6% 37.1% 31.2% 13.3%

2002 3.1% 61.5% 13.2% 71.9% 3.1% 47.4% 38.2% 58.0% 34.1% 27.4% 11.2%

2003 3.5% 75.6% 9.7% 71.2% 4.2% 44.2% 14.5% 60.2% 36.8% 19.9% 13.9%

2004 3.5% 71.2% 8.6% 80.1% 3.3% 80.1% 23.1% 64.2% 43.8% 29.6% 13.4%

2005 3.6% 80.8% 14.6% 78.4% 3.6% 84.4% 11.3% 64.0% 43.8% 16.2% 14.6%

Deep sea and coastal water transportation NAICS 48311

 Establishments engaged in deep sea and coastal water transportation include conveyance 

of freight or passengers between foreign or domestic ports. These establishments may provide 

deep sea transportation or may operate solely in coastal waters. Establishments operating in 

inland lakes or rivers are excluded as are floating casinos and scenic or sightseeing water 

transportation. The distinguishing features of establishments classified in NAICS 48311 are that 
81

they primarily operate on the open ocean or in coastal bays and the point of departure differs 

from their destination. 

 The total number of deep sea and coastal water transportation establishments ranged from 

a high of 375 in 2000 to 342 in 2004 (Table 74). On average, the annual change in the number of 

Northeast region establishments has declined by 0.4%. Across states, there were nearly twice as 

many water transportation establishments in New York than in any other state although the 

number of establishments declined by an average of 2.1%. The average annual change in 

establishments was also negative in Connecticut, Maine, and North Carolina. By contrast, the 

average annual change in number of water transportation establishments was positive in 

Delaware, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Virginia. 

 

Table 74. Northeast Region (NER) Water transportation total establishments by state (1998-2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 29 4 31 18 22 23 60 132 6 36 361

1999 29 5 34 21 20 22 2 62 124 9 42 370

2000 31 5 32 22 20 24 4 61 125 11 40 375

2001 27 8 36 24 20 24 4 61 119 9 38 370

2002 22 12 33 28 19 27 3 54 118 8 40 364

2003 24 8 34 29 15 16 1 59 111 13 41 351

2004 26 5 33 29 14 17 1 58 111 11 37 342

2005 24 6 31 27 12 17 3 66 113 10 42 351

Annual 

Average 

Change -2.1% 12.0% 0.3% 6.3% -8.0% -2.5% 34.7% 1.7% -2.1% 11.6% 2.6% -0.4%

 Northeast region annual employment in water transportation establishments was more 

variable, ranging from a low of 8,600 employees in 2000 to more than 10,000 in both 1998 and 

2003 (Table 75). On average the annual change in employment (-1.7%) was higher than the 

annual change in establishments; this difference suggests an industry where employment per 

establishment has been declining. Across states employment in New York, New Jersey, Virginia, 

and Massachusetts accounted for about 80% of regionwide employment. Among these states 

New York had the lowest numbers of employees per establishment; this ratio suggests an 

industry size structure consisting of a large number of smaller establishments. As will be shown 

below, this difference in industry size structure is reflected in the Herfindahl index. 

The location quotient for the deep sea and coastal water transportation sector exceeded 

one in all years only in Virginia and New Jersey (Table 76). The location quotient exceeded one 

in Connecticut in all years expect 2002 and has exceeded one in Massachusetts in every year 

since 2001. Thus, there is some evidence of an increase in the relative importance of the water 

transportation employment share in Massachusetts. By contrast the location quotient in New 

York fell below one in every year since 2003; this pattern suggests a decline in the relative 

importance of the water transportation industry in the New York coastal economy. 

The Northeast region Herfindahl index ranged between 0.04-0.02 from 1998-2005 (Table 

77). The low level of the index indicates a diversified industry in terms of employment size that 

is not dominated by a small number of large employers. The average annual change in the 

Herfindahl index was negative; this change indicates a decline in concentration, or equivalently, 

an increase in diversity in employment size class. 
82

Table 75. Number of Northeast Region (NER) water transportation mid-March employees by state 

(1998–2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 915 30 501 201 132 138 4,629 2,612 21 1,396 10,575

1999 1,422 53 981 252 121 177 4 1,881 2,562 26 1,455 8,934

2000 978 81 1,037 259 133 234 19 1,793 2,406 40 1,650 8,629

2001 949 205 1,241 253 115 195 19 2,009 2,997 30 1,599 9,611

2002 504 176 1,335 282 102 256 23 1,846 3,600 31 1,825 9,979

2003 726 216 1,746 385 66 971 2 2,110 2,928 41 1,689 10,880

2004 651 243 1,633 427 77 163 2 1,920 2,285 39 1,726 9,166

2005 689 139 1,464 465 61 113 6 1,924 2,102 61 2,005 9,030

Annual 

Average 

Change 2.0% 37.7% 20.4% 13.3% -8.9% 34.5% 84.6% -7.8% -1.7% 20.5% 5.7% -1.7%

Table 76. Water transportation service location quotient (1998 – 2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1998 1.4 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.0 3.2 0.9 0.1 1.2

1999 2.6 0.4 0.9 0.4 0.7 0.1 0.0 1.5 1.0 0.2 1.5

2000 1.9 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.8 0.2 0.1 1.5 1.0 0.3 1.7

2001 1.7 1.4 1.1 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.1 1.5 1.1 0.2 1.5

2002 0.8 1.2 1.1 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.1 1.3 1.3 0.2 1.6

2003 1.1 1.3 1.4 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.0 1.4 0.9 0.2 1.4

2004 1.2 1.8 1.6 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.0 1.5 0.9 0.3 1.6

2005 1.3 1.0 1.4 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.0 1.5 0.8 0.4 1.9

 As noted previously, the Herfindahl index for the deep sea and coastal water 

transportation sector in New York was lower than any other state. Since the Herfindahl index is a 

function of numbers of entities and employment size class, the low index value for New York is 

because of the large number of establishments and a low value of the dispersion effect. That is, 

the water transportation sector in New York consists of a large number of small establishments. 

By contrast the water transportation sector in Massachusetts exhibits a Herfindahl index ranging 

from 0.18-0.35. Given the relative stability in numbers of establishments and a fewness effect 

(1/N) of 0.03, the dominant effect behind the Massachusetts Herfindahl index is the dispersion 

effect which averaged nearly 0.26. Thus, the magnitude of the Herfindahl index in Massachusetts 

is primarily due to an establishment size distribution skewed toward fewer large employers. The 

same may be said of the water transportation industry structure in Virginia although the 

Herfindahl index has been declining. In Virginia’s case the decline has been primarily due to a 

decline in the standardized dispersion, indicating a trend toward smaller establishment size in 

terms of employment. 

Just as the industry group as a whole exhibited clear patterns of regional specialization, 

the deep sea and coastal water transportation sector tended to be concentrated in a small number 

of Northeast region coastal counties. The location quotient exceeded one in 23 of the 143 coastal 

counties in the Northeast region. The number of establishments in these counties ranged from a 

single establishment in Pasquotank County, NC, to more than 100 in Cecil County, MD (Table 

78). In terms of employment, the number of employees was highest in Norfolk County, VA, 

averaging just over 1,200 people (Table 79). Employment in the remaining counties ranged 

widely from fewer than ten to several hundred. 
83

Table 77. Northeast Region (NER) deep sea and coastal water transportation Herfindahl Index 

(1998-2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 0.112 0.280 0.187 0.173 0.095 0.100 0.170 0.052 0.214 0.218 0.041

1999 0.292 0.351 0.273 0.128 0.107 0.115 0.500 0.069 0.042 0.143 0.201 0.022

2000 0.165 0.306 0.260 0.125 0.093 0.119 0.473 0.074 0.054 0.152 0.206 0.020

2001 0.184 0.504 0.354 0.140 0.119 0.131 0.473 0.076 0.051 0.143 0.203 0.022

2002 0.189 0.216 0.323 0.122 0.083 0.150 0.586 0.091 0.048 0.159 0.191 0.022

2003 0.134 0.485 0.297 0.191 0.101 0.790 1.000 0.091 0.054 0.130 0.184 0.025

2004 0.142 0.514 0.267 0.208 0.116 0.221 1.000 0.106 0.056 0.143 0.185 0.025

2005 0.124 0.331 0.291 0.213 0.126 0.145 0.333 0.106 0.068 0.232 0.163 0.027

Annual 

Average 

Change 13.6% 16.4% 8.5% 5.5% 6.1% 52.0% 3.7% -1.9% 5.0% 4.7% -4.0% -3.2%

Table 78. Number of deep sea and coastal water transportation establishments by coastal county 

with a location quotient greater than one (1998-2005)

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Cumberland County, ME 54 69 63 64 51 35 37 24

Hancock County, ME 11 6 14 12 9 21 20 20

Knox County, ME 32 30 39 21 21 10 14 9

Lincoln County, ME 16 10 16 14 14 4 4 4

Barnstable County, MA 18 409 473 600 620 647 646 720

Dukes County, MA 11 10 12 8 16 14 8 7

Norfolk County, MA 211 343 315 431 309 755 641 584

Bristol County, RI 10 12 10 10 12 6 5 6

Newport County, RI 6 11 11 11 10 30 21 17

New London County, CT 200 132 228 213 235 262 264 263

Nassau County, NY 390 442 452 550 541 661 635 388

Richmond County, NY 594 741 695 848 1336 1046 802 778

Bergen County, NJ 396 510 648 771 846 690 449 417

Camden County, NJ 337 311 316 308 269 191 176 180

Hudson County, NJ 867 276 209 346 205 208 222 213

New Castle County, DE 19 35 64 157 180 216 238 148

Cecil County, MD 73 67 63 65 70 77 145 131

Queen Anne's County, MD 3 11 18 6 6 6 5

Chesapeake City, VA 115 111 115 121 107 96 89 96

Norfolk City, VA 1041 1074 1261 1175 1291 1241 1299 1268

Portsmouth City, VA 36 69 83 48 80 105 98 55

Brunswick County, NC 14 29 90 66 63 65 33

Pasquotank County, NC 6 11 5 10 6 6 6 12
84

Table 79. Deep sea and coastal water transportation employees in coastal counties where the 

location quotient exceeded one (1998–2005)

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Cumberland County, ME 8 8 8 8 7 6 5 4

Hancock County, ME 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3

Knox County, ME 7 6 6 5 5 3 3 3

Lincoln County, ME 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2

Barnstable County, MA 2 3 4 5 7 7 7 8

Dukes County, MA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Norfolk County, MA 5 4 3 3 3 3 2 2

Bristol County, RI 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1

Newport County, RI 3 5 5 5 5 6 5 4

New London County, CT 5 5 5 5 5 3 4 4

Nassau County, NY 49 48 49 48 49 48 49 15

Richmond County, NY 7 7 7 5 6 5 6 7

Bergen County, NJ 7 7 8 6 8 7 5 8

Camden County, NJ 6 6 5 3 3 3 3 3

Hudson County, NJ 10 9 8 12 10 11 11 14

New Castle County, DE 2 3 3 6 9 6 4 5

Cecil County, MD 73 67 63 65 70 77 145 131

Queen Anne's County, MD 3 11 18 6 6 6 5

Chesapeake City, VA 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 5

Norfolk City, VA 15 15 15 12 13 13 13 15

Portsmouth City, VA 2 5 4 4 4 4 4 4

Brunswick County, NC 1 2 3 3 2 1 1

Pasquotank County, NC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Ship building and repairing NAICS 336611 

 The ship building and repair sector comprises establishments engaged in the fabrication 

or repair of watercraft intended for commercial use. This industry includes shipyards that may be 

dedicated to the construction of very large ocean-going vessels such as cargo or tankers or the 

construction of smaller vessels such as commercial fishing or lobster boats. The ship building 

industry accounts for a comparatively small number of Northeast region establishments but 

employs a large number of people through a small number of large establishments primarily in 

Connecticut, Maine, and Virginia. Regionwide, the number of establishments was 139 in 1986 

and 142 in 2005 (Table 80). On average the annual change in number of establishment was 

positive (0.5%) from 1986-1996, but was effectively zero from 1997-2005 although the number 

of establishments has been trending downward since peaking at 156 in 1999. 

Across states the number of establishments ranges from one or two in Delaware and in 

New Hampshire to more than 30 in Virginia. On average, the annual change in numbers of 

shipyards was positive for most states, but was negative in Massachusetts, North Carolina, New 

Jersey, and New York. 

 Total employment in the ship building sector exceeded 60,000 from 1986-1992 but has 

since declined to less than 40,000 employees in every year since 2000 (Table 81). Ship building 

exhibits substantial regional concentration in terms of employment with approximately 91% of 

regionwide employment in three states; Maine (17%), Connecticut (23%), and Virginia (51%). 

Much of the regional decline in ship building employment has been due to reduced employment 
85

in these three states, although employment has stabilized at around 20,000 in Virginia and has 

been increasing since 2002 in Connecticut. 

Table 80. Number of Northeast Region (NER) ship building establishments by state (1986–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 5 1 12 16 10 2 1 19 38 8 27 139

1987 7 1 13 14 14 2 2 21 35 11 26 146

1988 7 1 11 13 13 7 1 22 29 11 33 148

1989 7 1 10 13 13 7 0 20 28 12 34 145

1990 7 1 12 13 12 7 0 21 29 9 33 144

1991 7 1 14 11 13 6 0 22 29 7 37 147

1992 10 1 13 12 13 7 0 22 29 8 41 156

1993 9 1 15 12 14 11 0 19 29 6 37 153

1994 7 1 15 14 10 11 0 18 26 6 31 139

1995 6 1 15 14 13 7 0 16 23 5 26 126

1996 7 1 20 14 13 8 0 20 23 7 30 143

1997 9 2 20 18 10 10 0 18 22 6 35 150

1998 10 2 19 17 13 8 0 22 21 7 33 152

1999 8 2 20 18 13 8 0 20 23 9 35 156

2000 9 2 19 17 13 10 0 21 23 6 31 151

2001 7 2 17 17 12 10 0 19 24 7 35 150

2002 7 1 15 18 14 10 0 18 17 7 39 146

2003 10 1 19 20 13 7 2 15 18 9 30 144

2004 10 1 19 21 11 6 2 15 20 8 32 145

2005 10 1 14 20 12 6 2 14 20 10 33 142

1986-

1996 

Average 

Change 5.3% 0.0% 6.2% -0.9% 4.3% 28.7% n/a 1.1% -4.7% 1.2% 2.0% 0.5%

1997-

2005 

Average 

Change 5.9% 5.6% -3.0% 4.5% 0.3% -1.6% n/a -3.3% -0.8% 6.3% 1.8% 0.0%
86

 

Table 81. Northeast Region (NER) ship building mid-March employment by state (1986–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 17,734 5 2048 756 7,386 4 2 1,261 1,836 1,139 32,278 64,449

1987 17,981 8 473 1,865 6,951 5 9 1,216 970 944 29,773 60,195

1988 17,566 7 575 2,003 7,665 1,609 7 1,117 986 1,310 32,245 65,089

1989 17,038 18 468 1,226 10,800 1,877 0 1,137 850 1,429 32,310 67,152

1990 13,326 6 462 966 11,800 1,360 0 1,010 1,021 1,237 30,551 61,739

1991 13,304 7 454 474 11,325 982 0 784 814 911 31,946 61,001

1992 16,324 6 428 905 9,277 562 0 533 1,077 429 31,060 60,601

1993 14,787 12 403 1,239 8,823 1,323 0 564 985 241 26,912 55,290

1994 13,887 12 360 1,019 8,602 1,149 0 653 545 117 24,659 51,003

1995 13,686 6 231 1,283 8,779 1,142 0 820 509 113 23,635 50,205

1996 12,323 7 270 928 8,139 1,094 0 952 550 118 22,631 47,013

1997 11,147 9 288 942 7,691 1,099 0 962 606 133 21,975 44,852

1998 7,870 7 194 999 8,088 827 0 1,032 680 216 21,546 41,459

1999 7,250 7 284 998 8,699 829 0 1,189 587 216 20,943 41,004

2000 7,056 9 232 747 7,100 888 0 1,423 609 183 21,185 39,432

2001 7,215 8 260 629 7,315 1,157 0 1,390 582 237 19,897 38,689

2002 7,118 8 277 542 6,081 778 0 1,406 373 349 20,970 37,901

2003 7,712 7 285 643 6,619 71 175 1,294 372 462 20,354 37,993

2004 8,207 7 395 240 6,680 51 85 1,260 424 361 20,674 38,383

2005 8,502 6 266 197 6,044 40 182 1,450 431 499 21,041 38,660

1986-1996 

Average 

Change -3.0% 20.4% -11.8% 15.1% 2.0% 4.5% n/a -1.2% -7.9% -15.6% -3.3% -3.0%

1997-2005 

Average 

Change -3.4% 1.4% 3.3% -12.1% -2.8% -17.8% n/a 5.2% -1.4% 20.6% -0.8% -2.1%

 Consistent with the regional dominance in ship building employment, the location 

quotient exceeded one in only Maine, Connecticut, and Virginia (Table 82). In relative terms, 

this means that the share of ship building employment in these states was substantially greater 

than the average employment share. Thus, a change in ship building employment in these states 

would have a proportionally greater effect on coastal economies as compared to other states in 

the Northeast region. 

 The ship building Herfindahl index for the Northeast region ranged from 0.152 in 1988 

and 1989 to 0.216 in 2004 (Table 83). The index value was the highest among all other marine 

sectors identified herein and has been increasing over time. The magnitude of the ship building 

Herfindahl index is due to the dominance of a small number of large employers. The Herfindahl 

index exceeded 0.9 in both Connecticut and Maine because there was a single employer in each 

of these states that employed more than 5,000 people. Since 1998, no other establishment in 

either state employed more than 100. The Herfindahl index was also quite high in Virginia, but 

the state was more diverse in terms of the range of employment size class compared to either 

Maine or Connecticut. 
87

Table 82. Ship building location quotient by state (1986–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1986 4.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.0 5.4

1987 4.4 0.0 0.1 0.4 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.9 5.2

1988 4.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 6.3 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.1 5.1

1989 3.9 0.0 0.1 0.2 8.4 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.2 4.9

1990 3.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 10.3 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.2 4.9

1991 3.4 0.0 0.1 0.1 10.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.9 5.1

1992 4.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 8.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 4.9

1993 4.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 8.6 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 4.6

1994 4.4 0.0 0.1 0.3 9.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 4.5

1995 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.3 9.3 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 4.4

1996 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 9.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 4.4

1997 4.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 9.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 4.5

1998 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 10.4 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.3 4.7

1999 2.9 0.0 0.1 0.3 11.1 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.3 4.6

2000 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 9.4 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.3 4.8

2001 3.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 9.9 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.4 4.6

2002 3.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 8.4 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.6 4.9

2003 3.4 0.0 0.1 0.2 9.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.7 4.7

2004 3.6 0.0 0.1 0.1 9.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.6 4.6

2005 3.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 8.2 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.8 4.6
88

Table 83. Northeast Region (NER) ship building Herfindahl Index by state (1986–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1986 0.991 1.000 0.625 0.645 0.937 0.500 1.000 0.200 0.189 0.504 0.520 0.173

1987 0.985 1.000 0.439 0.856 0.930 0.500 0.612 0.300 0.092 0.470 0.477 0.177

1988 0.971 1.000 0.496 0.861 0.948 0.424 1.000 0.369 0.097 0.348 0.375 0.152

1989 0.982 1.000 0.425 0.820 0.962 0.472 n/a 0.389 0.107 0.343 0.370 0.152

1990 0.973 1.000 0.526 0.716 0.964 0.439 n/a 0.448 0.107 0.308 0.402 0.165

1991 0.977 1.000 0.224 0.561 0.972 0.503 n/a 0.136 0.186 0.326 0.398 0.181

1992 0.970 1.000 0.277 0.732 0.977 0.463 n/a 0.135 0.154 0.260 0.374 0.181

1993 0.978 1.000 0.207 0.774 0.962 0.374 n/a 0.175 0.215 0.250 0.438 0.181

1994 0.977 1.000 0.234 0.598 0.966 0.351 n/a 0.300 0.142 0.291 0.488 0.199

1995 0.978 1.000 0.160 0.497 0.972 0.452 n/a 0.292 0.164 0.306 0.484 0.201

1996 0.976 1.000 0.138 0.500 0.959 0.499 n/a 0.445 0.315 0.241 0.487 0.196

1997 0.964 0.612 0.148 0.498 0.964 0.456 n/a 0.505 0.154 0.406 0.474 0.195

1998 0.947 0.612 0.175 0.496 0.924 0.814 n/a 0.423 0.208 0.306 0.517 0.198

1999 0.942 0.612 0.153 0.578 0.956 0.772 n/a 0.496 0.290 0.283 0.582 0.211

2000 0.969 0.612 0.157 0.327 0.955 0.743 n/a 0.696 0.141 0.312 0.503 0.202

2001 0.974 0.612 0.326 0.349 0.941 0.884 n/a 0.624 0.137 0.364 0.513 0.197

2002 0.970 1.000 0.272 0.394 0.948 0.828 n/a 0.642 0.211 0.320 0.557 0.209

2003 0.958 1.000 0.264 0.456 0.947 0.233 0.858 0.799 0.207 0.231 0.566 0.207

2004 0.955 1.000 0.267 0.105 0.948 0.327 0.727 0.818 0.189 0.291 0.527 0.216

2005 0.968 1.000 0.307 0.096 0.948 0.477 0.858 0.826 0.178 0.240 0.507 0.214

1986-

1996 

Average 

Change -0.2% 0.0% -9.9% -0.9% 0.2% 3.1% n/a 17.4% 13.4% -6.2% -0.1% 1.5%

1997-

2005 

Average 

Change -0.1% 2.7% 13.3% -8.6% -0.1% 9.8% n/a 8.3% 0.8% 3.5% 0.7% 1.0%

 Among Northeast region coastal counties, the ship building location quotient exceeded 

one in 19 of 143 counties. These counties include major ship building facilities in New London 

County, CT, Sagahadoc County, ME, and in Newport News City, VA. In 2005, these three 

counties alone accounted for 42% of the regionwide total number of establishments (Table 84) 

and 83% of total Northeast region employment (Table 85).
89

Table 84. Number of ship building establishments in Northeast Region coastal counties where the 

location quotient exceeded one

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Sagadahoc County, ME 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1

Bristol County, MA 4 5 6 5 6 7 7 5

Essex County, MA 6 6 5 6 5 7 6 4

Bristol County, RI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3

Newport County, RI 2 3 2 2 2 4 3 3

New London County, CT 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4

Kings County, NY 5 5 5 7 5 6 6 6

Richmond County, NY 3 4 4 3 2 1 2 2

Burlington County, NJ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Hudson County, NJ 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4

Sussex County, DE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Anne Arundel County, MD 6 7 8 6 5 6 6 6

Baltimore City, MD 4 4 4 5 6 5 6 5

Baltimore County, MD 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 1

Calvert County, MD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Dorchester County, MD 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

Newport News City, VA 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 2

Norfolk City, VA 12 12 9 11 12 11 11 9

Portsmouth City, VA 1 1 2 3 7 5 7 8

Table 85. Ship building employment in Northeast Region coastal counties where the location 

quotient exceeded one

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Sagadahoc County, ME 6992 7188 7027 6931 6270 5849 5910 5809

Bristol County, MA 151 147 134 200 214 215 214 190

Essex County, MA 29 33 40 25 43 45 52 33

Bristol County, RI 58 61 64 64 30 57 2 60

Newport County, RI 67 74 70 64 60 135 150 84

New London County, CT 8226 8208 8214 6397 7346 7312 7802 8636

Kings County, NY 145 62 70 61 61 93 139 116

Richmond County, NY 358 409 377 289 212 148 173 162

Burlington County, NJ 668 830 1062 1123 1143 1054 1074 1181

Hudson County, NJ 106 82 68 86 104 89 73 93

Sussex County, DE 7 7 7 6 7 7 6 6

Anne Arundel County, MD 55 47 93 62 52 77 131 67

Baltimore City, MD 153 153 152 144 112 77 100 65

Baltimore County, MD 554 702 338 369 386 446 12 3

Calvert County, MD 28 28 31 15 16 2 6 12

Dorchester County, MD 14 12 11 13 18 9 18 10

Newport News City, VA 17459 17604 16806 16165 17551 12347 13667 17698

Norfolk City, VA 3373 2442 2784 2485 2125 2063 1921 2529

Portsmouth City, VA 7 6 626 616 536 322 618 684
90

Water transportation service NAICS 4883

 Establishments in the water transportation services include a wide range of activities that 

facilitate the flow of marine cargo and passengers from one port to another. These activities 

include port and harbor operations (docking and pier facilities as well as waterfront terminals and 

canals), marine cargo handling (stevedoring and lumping services), navigation services to 

shipping (piloting, tugboats, and ship traffic reporting), as well as floating drydocks, marine 

surveyors, and cargo checkers. The number of water transportation service establishments was 

481 in 1998 but has been declining over time to 437 establishments in 2005 (Table 86). 

Table 86. Total Northeast Region (NER) water transportation service establishments by state 

(1998–2005) 

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER 

Total

1998 26 19 23 58 34 36 6 96 98 25 60 481

1999 28 20 18 56 35 36 6 96 93 22 56 466

2000 24 20 19 54 31 33 5 104 97 23 58 468

2001 26 19 20 57 30 32 5 103 97 23 56 468

2002 30 20 19 56 33 27 5 106 79 22 63 460

2003 22 19 23 58 29 29 5 93 79 18 67 442

2004 24 18 27 54 29 31 4 84 79 17 67 434

2005 28 17 26 54 32 36 6 83 73 17 65 437

Annual 

Average 

Change 2.3% -1.5% 2.7% -0.9% -0.5% 0.5% 2.2% -1.8% -3.9% -5.1% 1.3% -1.3%

 Total employment in water transportation services grew from 15,048 in 1998 to 16,773 in 

2005 (Table 87). Note that employment has been increasing even as the number of 

establishments has been falling. Employment in this sector was concentrated in the mid-Atlantic 

states of New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and Virginia. These four states accounted for an 

average of 85% of Northeast region water transportation services employment. The average 

annual change in employment was positive in all but three states: Massachusetts, North Carolina, 

and Rhode Island. 

Table 87. Northeast Region (NER) water transportation service mid-March employment by state 

(1998–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER

1998 260 461 395 2,406 234 1099 21 4,640 2,011 152 3,369 15,048

1999 150 498 438 2,464 130 892 16 4,100 2,114 130 3,410 14,342

2000 140 356 350 2,509 142 899 14 5,173 2,369 135 3,942 16,029

2001 223 341 252 2,222 250 798 15 4,615 2,113 121 3,303 14,253

2002 247 294 245 2,111 201 931 14 4,498 2,054 143 2,873 13,611

2003 309 689 218 2,546 295 826 30 5,143 1,919 125 3,560 15,660

2004 323 617 190 2,685 233 865 26 5,700 2,113 168 3,476 16,396

2005 344 615 295 2,396 229 830 24 6,005 1,973 108 3,954 16,773

Annual 

Average 

Change 8.2% 12.2% -1.2% 0.4% 6.5% -3.3% 13.5% 4.5% 0.1% -2.4% 3.3% 1.9%
91

 The location quotient exceeded one in all years in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, and 

Virginia (Table 88). Note that these states form a contiguous area from Virginia to New Jersey 

where the share of employment in water transportation services is greater than both the 

employment share for the Northeast region as a whole and the average employment share within 

each state. 

 

Table 88. Northeast Region water transportation service location quotient by state (1998–2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA

1998 0.3 2.1 0.2 2.0 0.8 0.6 0.1 2.2 0.5 0.6 2.0

1999 0.2 2.4 0.3 2.2 0.5 0.5 0.1 2.1 0.5 0.6 2.1

2000 0.1 1.5 0.2 2.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 2.3 0.5 0.5 2.2

2001 0.3 1.6 0.1 1.9 0.9 0.4 0.0 2.3 0.5 0.5 2.1

2002 0.3 1.4 0.2 1.9 0.8 0.5 0.0 2.3 0.5 0.6 1.9

2003 0.3 2.9 0.1 2.0 1.0 0.4 0.1 2.4 0.4 0.5 2.0

2004 0.3 2.5 0.1 2.0 0.7 0.4 0.1 2.5 0.5 0.6 1.8

2005 0.3 2.4 0.2 1.7 0.7 0.4 0.1 2.6 0.4 0.4 2.0

 The Northeast region water transportation services Herfindahl index was 0.019 in 1998 

but has increased to 0.022 in 2005 (Table 89). The higher index in 2005 was due to a small 

increase in the dispersion effect which is suggestive of a slight shift toward greater concentration 

of employment in large establishments at least for the region as a whole. Note that this trend in 

the Herfindahl index is reflected in the overall downward trend in number of establishments 

coupled with the upward trend in total employment. 

This does not mean that any such concentration has been significant since the regional 

Herfindahl index is still quite low. Among states the Herfindahl was highest in New Hampshire, 

Connecticut, and Delaware. The New Hampshire Herfindahl index was high because of the small 

number of establishments (the fewness effect) as none of the establishments in New Hampshire 

employed more than 19 people. By contrast, the Herfindahl index in Connecticut and Delaware 

were comparatively high because proportionally more people were employed by a small number 

of larger establishments. 

Table 89. Northeast Region (NER) water transportation services Herfindahl Index by state (1998–

2005)

Year CT DE MA MD ME NC NH NJ NY RI VA NER 

1998 0.262 0.258 0.266 0.139 0.087 0.194 0.214 0.072 0.136 0.115 0.092 0.019

1999 0.099 0.260 0.481 0.143 0.068 0.173 0.211 0.104 0.123 0.130 0.103 0.022

2000 0.113 0.264 0.578 0.173 0.074 0.174 0.256 0.085 0.201 0.121 0.132 0.026

2001 0.394 0.278 0.380 0.163 0.332 0.212 0.256 0.068 0.115 0.121 0.101 0.020

2002 0.332 0.232 0.339 0.151 0.116 0.117 0.256 0.074 0.132 0.110 0.112 0.020

2003 0.351 0.347 0.150 0.126 0.079 0.124 0.330 0.080 0.075 0.134 0.088 0.019

2004 0.331 0.376 0.100 0.123 0.079 0.120 0.375 0.094 0.126 0.192 0.094 0.022

2005 0.222 0.370 0.245 0.136 0.102 0.104 0.286 0.089 0.118 0.138 0.124 0.022

Annual 

Average 

Change 21.8% 6.8% 15.9% 0.4% 38.0% -6.2% 5.6% 5.1% 6.4% 4.9% 6.3% 3.7%
92

 Among counties the water transportation services sector location quotient exceeded one 

in 22 of 143 Northeast region coastal counties. Many of these counties include a major port and 

accounted for 43% of the total number of water transportation service establishments (Table 90) 

and 84% of regional employment (Table 91). 

Table 90. Number of water transportation services establishments in Northeast Region coastal 

counties where the location quotient exceeded one

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Lincoln County, ME 5 5 5 7 6 7 7 8

Waldo County, ME 3 3 2 3 5 5 6 5

Washington County, ME 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Suffolk County, MA 5 5 6 6 5 5 5 5

Newport County, RI 9 8 8 7 6 7 6 6

Washington County, RI 7 6 6 7 6 4 5 6

New Haven County, CT 7 8 5 8 7 6 5 8

Kings County, NY 10 10 11 11 8 5 6 5

Richmond County, NY 19 16 15 15 13 15 15 14

Camden County, NJ 14 13 11 12 12 10 10 10

Essex County, NJ 8 9 9 8 9 9 5 6

Hudson County, NJ 17 15 20 18 18 17 16 15

Union County, NJ 12 15 16 15 13 12 11 11

New Castle County, DE 13 14 14 13 16 14 14 13

Baltimore City, MD 22 22 20 23 20 23 20 21

Newport News City, VA 7 8 7 7 8 8 9 8

Norfolk City, VA 23 21 20 19 16 14 16 16

Portsmouth City, VA 3 3 4 5 7 9 6 7

Brunswick County, NC 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2

Carteret County, NC 5 5 5 5 6 5 6 7

New Hanover County, NC 16 17 15 13 12 12 11 13
93

Table 91. Water transportation services employment in Northeast Region coastal counties where 

the location quotient exceeded one

 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Lincoln County, ME 11 17 11 17 19 34 29 69

Waldo County, ME 65 14 17 17 60 55 52 22

Washington County, ME 39 0 13 13 7 25 28 62

Suffolk County, MA 327 365 310 207 204 134 93 212

Newport County, RI 46 36 42 39 36 30 31 26

Washington County, RI 20 17 21 18 18 16 76 16

New Haven County, CT 182 83 62 184 186 251 262 183

Kings County, NY 481 388 279 244 215 196 365 225

Richmond County, NY 796 1034 1367 1019 1043 892 893 929

Camden County, NJ 390 414 529 411 496 903 1045 916

Essex County, NJ 1054 1051 1055 850 835 478 541 478

Hudson County, NJ 750 729 986 813 602 1244 1213 1502

Union County, NJ 1850 1277 2269 2263 2267 2125 2567 2696

New Castle County, DE 424 459 330 310 256 634 577 514

Baltimore City, MD 2051 2059 2099 1867 1659 2255 2123 2055

Newport News City, VA 424 400 373 342 286 337 351 333

Norfolk City, VA 1999 1787 1780 1748 1508 1613 1813 2058

Portsmouth City, VA 675 912 1439 966 910 1232 944 1267

Brunswick County, NC 299 231 201 334 175 164 165 132

Carteret County, NC 128 120 121 92 79 64 56 63

New Hanover County, NC 656 523 538 280 647 321 318 333
94

ENDNOTES

1. Industrial classification systems are used by governments to categorize individual 

establishments based on similarities in products and/or production technologies for purposes 

of tracking trends in industries. The Standard Industrial Classification was the classification 

system in use in the United States until it was replaced in 1997 by the North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS). 

2. The North American Industry Classification System codes were developed by the Office of 

Management and Budget in cooperation with Statistics Canada, and the Instituto Nacional de 

Estadística y Geografía of Mexico. 

3. http://www.bls.gov/cew/data.htm 
95

REFERNECES CITED

Donahue Institute. 2006. An assessment of the coastal and marine economies of Massachusetts. 

Report 1, RFR#:ENV 06 CZM 09. Amherst (MA): University of Massachusetts. 

Georgiana D. 2000. The Massachusetts marine economy. Dartmouth (MA): University of 

Massachusetts Donahue Institute, Center for Policy Analysis. 

Hoaglund P, Di Jin, Thunberg E, Steinback S. 2005. Economic activity associated with the 

northeast continental shelf large marine ecosystem: an input-output approach. In: 

Sustaining Large Marine Ecosystems: the human dimension. Hennessey T, and Sutinen J 

Editors. Amsterdam (The Netherlands):Elsevier. 157-179. 

Kelly W A 1981. A generalized interpretation of the Herfindahl index. Southern Economic 

Journal. 48(1):50-57. 

Minnesota IMPLAN Group. 2000. Data guide, IMPLAN professional 2.0. Stillwater (MN): 

Minnesota IMPLAN Group Inc. 

Pontecorvo G, Wilkinson M, Holdowsky M. 1980. Contribution of the ocean sector to the United 

States economy. Science. 208:1000-1006.

Steinback S, Thunberg E. 2006. Northeast regional commercial fishing input-output model. 

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-188. Woods Hole (MA): National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

US Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2009. State annual personal income [Internet]. Regional 

Economic Accounts. [cited 2009 March 23] Available from: 

http://www.bea.gov/regional/spi/default.cfm?satable=SA04&series=ancillary 

US Census Bureau. 2007. County business patterns [Internet]. Economic Planning and 

Coordination Division, Register Analysis Branch. [cited 2007 September 13] Available 

from: http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/intro.html. 

US Census Bureau. 2008. County business patterns download page [Internet]. Economic 

Planning and Coordination Division, Register Analysis Branch. [cited 2008 June 27] 

Available from: http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/download/cbpdownload.html. 
Publishing in NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE

Manuscript Qualification

This series represents a secondary level of scientific

publishing in the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).

For all issues, the series employs thorough internal scientific

review, but not necessarily external scientific review. For most

issues, the series employs rigorous technical and copy editing.

Manuscripts that may warrant a primary level of scientific

publishing should be initially submitted to one of NMFS's

primary series (i.e., Fishery Bulletin, NOAA Professional Paper

NMFS, or Marine Fisheries Review).

Identical, or fundamentally identical, manuscripts should

not be concurrently submitted to this and any other publication

series. Manuscripts which have been rejected by any primary

series strictly because of geographic or temporal limitations

may be submitted to this series.

Manuscripts by Northeast Fisheries Science Center

(NEFSC) authors will be published in this series upon approval

by the NEFSC's Deputy Science & Research Director. Manuscripts by non-NEFSC authors may be published in this series

if: 1) the manuscript serves the NEFSC's mission; 2) the

manuscript meets the Deputy Science & Research Director's

approval; and 3) the author arranges for the printing and binding

funds to be transferred to the NEFSC's Research Communications Branch account from another federal account. For all

manuscripts submitted by non-NEFSC authors and published

in this series, the NEFSC will disavow all responsibility for the

manuscripts' contents; authors must accept such responsibility.

The ethics of scientific research and scientific publishing

are a serious matter. All manuscripts submitted to this series

are expected to adhere -- at a minimum -- to the ethical guidelines

contained in Chapter 2 ("Publication Policies and Practices") of

the Scientific Style and Format: the CSE Manual for Authors,

Editors, and Publishers, seventh edition (Reston VA: Council

of Science Editors). Copies of the manual are available at

virtually all scientific libraries.

edition of the United States Government Printing Office Style

Manual. That style manual is silent on many aspects of scientific

manuscripts. NEFSC publication and report series rely more on the

CSE Style Manual, seventh edition.

For in-text citations, use the name-date system. A special

effort should be made to ensure that the list of cited works contains

all necessary bibliographic information. For abbreviating serial

titles in such lists, use the guidance of the International Standards

Organization; such guidance is easily accessed through the various

Cambridge Scientific Abstracts’ serials source lists (see http://

www.public.iastate.edu/~CYBERSTACKS/JAS.htm). Personal communications must include date of contact and full name and mailing

address of source.

For spelling of scientific and common names of fishes, mollusks, and decapod crustaceans from the United States and Canada,

use Special Publications No. 29 (fishes), 26 (mollusks), and 17

(decapod crustaceans) of the American Fisheries Society (Bethesda

MD). For spelling of scientific and common names of marine

mammals, use Special Publication No. 4 of the Society for Marine

Mammalogy (Lawrence KS). For spelling in general, use the most

recent edition of Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of

the English Language Unabridged (Springfield MA: G. & C.

Merriam).

Typing text, tables, and figure captions: Text, tables, and

figure captions should be converted to Word. In general, keep text

simple (e.g., do not switch fonts and type sizes, do not use hard

returns within paragraphs, do not indent except to begin paragraphs). Also, do not use an automatic footnoting function; all notes

should be indicated in the text by simple numerical superscripts, and

listed together in an "Endnotes" section prior to the "References

Cited" section. Especially, do not use a graphics function for

embedding tables and figures in text.

Tables should be prepared with a table formatting function.

Each figure should be supplied in digital format (preferably GIF or

JPG), unless there is no digital file of a given figure. Except under

extraordinary circumstances, color will not be used in illustrations.

Manuscript Preparation

Organization: Manuscripts must have an abstract, table

of contents, and -- if applicable -- lists of tables, figures, and

acronyms. As much as possible, use traditional scientific

manuscript organization for sections: "Introduction," "Study

Area," "Methods & Materials," "Results," "Discussion" and/

or "Conclusions," "Acknowledgments," and "References Cited."

Style: All NEFSC publication and report series are

obligated to conform to the style contained in the most recent

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

Operations, Management & Information Division

Research Communications Branch

Editorial Office

Manuscript Submission

Authors must submit separate digital files of the manuscript

text, tables, and figures. The manuscript must have cleared

NEFSC's online internal review system. Non-NEFSC authors who

are not federal employees will be required to sign a "Release of

Copyright" form.

Send all materials and address all correspondence to: Jarita A.

Davis (Editor), Editorial Office, NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026.
National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA

166 Water St.

Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026

Publications and Reports

of the

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

The mission of NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is "stewardship of living marine resources 

for the benefit of the nation through their science-based conservation and management and promotion of the 

health of their environment." As the research arm of the NMFS's Northeast Region, the Northeast Fisheries 

Science Center (NEFSC) supports the NMFS mission by "conducting ecosystem-based research and assessments of living marine resources, with a focus on the Northeast Shelf, to promote the recovery and long-term 

sustainability of these resources and to generate social and economic opportunities and benefits from their use." 

Results of NEFSC research are largely reported in primary scientific media (e.g., anonymously-peer-reviewed 

scientific journals). However, to assist itself in providing data, information, and advice to its constituents, the 

NEFSC occasionally releases its results in its own media. Currently, there are three such media:

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE -- This series is issued irregularly. The series typically includes: data reports of 

long-term field or lab studies of important species or habitats; synthesis reports for important species or habitats; annual reports 

of overall assessment or monitoring programs; manuals describing program-wide surveying or experimental techniques; literature 

surveys of important species or habitat topics; proceedings and collected papers of scientific meetings; and indexed and/or annotated 

bibliographies. All issues receive internal scientific review and most issues receive technical and copy editing.

Northeast Fisheries Science Center Reference Document -- This series is issued irregularly. The series typically includes: data 

reports on field and lab studies; progress reports on experiments, monitoring, and assessments; background papers for, collected

abstracts of, and/or summary reports of scientific meetings; and simple bibliographies. Issues receive internal scientific review, but 

no technical or copy editing.

Resource Survey Report (formerly Fishermen's Report) -- This information report is a quick-turnaround report on the distribution 

and relative abundance of selected living marine resources as derived from each of the NEFSC's periodic research vessel surveys

of the Northeast's continental shelf. There is no scientific review, nor any technical or copy editing, of this report.

OBTAINING A COPY: To obtain a copy of a NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE or a Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

Reference Document, or to subscribe to the Resource Survey Report, either contact the NEFSC Editorial Office (166 Water St., 

Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026; 508-495-2228) or consult the NEFSC webpage on "Reports and Publications" (http://www.nefsc.

noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/).

ANY USE OF TRADE OR BRAND NAMES IN ANY NEFSC PUBLICATION OR REPORT DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT.

MEDIA

 MAIL