Economic Impacts of Grand Canyon 

River Runners and the 2000 LSSF of 

the Colorado River 

Yeon-Su Kim and Evan E. Hjerpe 

School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University 
Two studies 

• Regional Economic Impacts of Grand 

Canyon River Runners 

Hjerpe, E.E. and Y. Kim (2007). Regional economic impacts of Grand Canyon

 river runners. Journal of Environmental Management 85 (2007) 137–149 

• Economic impacts of the 2000 LSSF of the

 Colorado River 

Hjerpe, E.E. and Y. Kim. “Economic Impacts of the Low Summer Steady Flows

 of the Colorado River to Private Whitewater Boaters and Anglers and River

 Concessionaires,” 2001. Technical Report for Grand Canyon Monitoring

 and Research Center, 21 pages. Flagstaff, AZ.

http://www.gcmrc.gov/library/reports/cultural/Recreation/LSSF_Report.pdf
Regional Economic Impacts of Grand Canyon 

River Runners
The objective was: 

• To estimate the regional economic 

impacts of Grand Canyon boaters 

(commercial and non-commercial boating 

expenditures). 
Methods 
Data Collection 

• Regional expenditures by 

commercial rafters were 

obtained by surveying the 

16 licensed 

concessionaires. 

• For non-commercial 

rafting expenditures, all 

2001 non-commercial trip 

leaders (254) were sent 

an expenditure survey. 
Regional Economic Impact

 Analysis with IMPLAN 

IMPLAN (Impact Analysis for Planning): A database containing 

information of regional economies, and an economic modeling 

program that traces the flow of materials and services to estimates the 

economic impact of industries on the regional economy. The IMPLAN 

data files include information for 520 (now 450) different industries and 

21 different economic variables. 

This ‘‘Grand Canyon’’ economic region: Coconino County, Arizona, 

and the two bordering towns of Peach Springs, AZ (Mohave County) 

and Kanab,UT (Kane County). 

Trip expenditures were allocated to: rafting fees, gas and oil, 

transportation, grocery, restaurant, personal gear, lodging, boat gear, 

equipment rentals, miscellaneous retail, and other. 
Results 
Commercial Sector 

• Total number of commercial rafters served in 2001 was 

18,621. 

• These boaters generated $18.6 million of regional 

expenditures. 

• Average regional expenditure of $1,001 per commercial 

rafter 
Most affected industries by Grand Canyon regional 

 commercial1 rafting expenditures for 2001

Affected Industrial 

Sector 

Regional Commercial 

Rafting Expenditures

Average Regional 

Expenditure Per 

Commercial Rafter

Amusement and 

Recreation Services

$7,716,000 $414

Federal, Non-military 

(NPS Franchise/Park 

Fees)

$2,542,000 $137

Eating and Drinking and 

Food Stores

$1,826,000 $98

Passenger Transportation $1,654,000 $89

Miscellaneous Retail $1,621,000 $87

Total for all Sectors $18,640,000 $1,001
Effects1 and Multipliers of $18.6 million of 

Regional Expenditures by Commercial Boaters

Economic 

Impacts

Direct 

Effects

Indirect 

Effects

Induced 

Effects

Total 

Effects

Type SAM 

Multipliers

Total Output 

($)

16,225,000 1,643,000 3,211,000 21,079,000 1.30

Total 

Employment 

(jobs)

283 23 51 357 1.26

Total Labor 

Income ($)2

6,064,000 558,000 1,163,000 7,785,000 1.28

1Effects are presented in 1999 dollars.

2Total labor income includes employee compensation and proprietor income.
Non-Commercial Sector 

• A total of 3,620 people 

participated in noncommercial Grand 

Canyon river trips in 

2001. 

• Non-commercial boaters 

were responsible for $2.5 

million of regional 

expenditures 

• Average regional 

expenditure of $680 per 

non-commercial rafter 
Most affected industries by Grand Canyon regional1 

non-commercial rafting expenditures in 2001

Affected Industrial Sector Regional Non-Commercial 

Rafting Expenditures

Average Regional 

Expenditure Per NonCommercial Rafter

Eating and Drinking and 

Food Stores 

$795,000 $221 

Recreational Equipment $619,000 $171 

Federal, Non-Military 

(Park fees) 

$373,000 $103 

Arrangement of Passenger 

Transportation 

$194,000 $54 

Lodging $133,000 $37 

Other $346,000 $94 

Total for all Sectors $2,460,000 $680
Effects1 and Multipliers of $2.5 million of 

Regional Expenditures by Non-Commercial 

Boaters

Economic 

Impacts

Direct 

Effects

Indirect 

Effects

Induced 

Effects

Total 

Effects

Type SAM 

Multipliers

Total Output 

($)

1,826,000 116,000 394,000 2,336,000 1.28

Total 

Employment 

(jobs)

29 2 6 37 1.28

Total Labor 

Income ($)2

776,000 40,000 143,000 959,000 1.24

1Effects are presented in 1999 dollars.

2Total labor income includes employee compensation and proprietor income.
Commercial and Non-commercial 

Sectors Combined 

• Over 22,000 people rafted on the 

Colorado River through GCNP in 

2001 

• An estimated $21 million of regional 

expenditures were generated by 

these boaters 

• Including indirect and induced 

effects, potential total impact of $23 

million (in 1999 dollars) 

• Supported approximately 394 jobs in 

the region 
Conclusions 

• Commercial and Non-commercial comparison – 

gray area for many reasons 

• Both sectors affected over 220 industries and is

 an important industry to northern Arizona. 

• The adverse, and constraining socioeconomic

 impacts of outdoor recreation on rural areas

 also need to be examined Promote resilient

 communities. 
Economic Impacts of the 2000 Low Summer 

Steady Flow of the Colorado River
The 2000 LSSF 

• Dam-controlled releases varied from 3,000 cfs to 

40,000 cfs, with typical fluctuations ranging 

between 10,000 cfs and 25,000 cfs. 

• In the summer of water year 2000, the Bureau of 

Reclamation conducted an experimental low 

summer steady flow (LSSF) of 8,000 cfs with two 

four-day spike flows of 31,000 cfs. 
The objectives are: 

• To estimate the economic impacts of the 

LSSF on private whitewater boaters, 

anglers, and river concessionaires; 

• To estimate their extended effects on the 

regional economy; 

• To understand the economic impacts on 

recreation associated with different flow 

levels of the Colorado River; 
Methods 
Data Collection/Analysis 

• All the boating and angling

 concessionaires operating in the

 Grand Canyon and Lee’s Ferry

 received economic impact surveys 

• Personal interviews with: 

– the Grand Canyon Private Boaters

 Association 

– the Grand Canyon River Outfitters

 Association. 

– private anglers and angling guides located in

 Lee’s Ferry. 

– Grand Canyon National Park officials and

 Grand Canyon River Guides. 

IMPLAN 
Results 
Rafting concessionaires 

• The reported costs ($70,000): boat and motor damage 

caused by newly exposed rocks, raft retrieval efforts, 

increased fuel costs, and personal injuries as well as 

longer “on-river” times, added stress to trip leaders and 

crews. 

• Three major search and rescue operations, which cost the 

national park approximately $30,000. 

• The overall volume of trips remained unchanged. 
Angling concessionaires 

• A slight increase in the number of guided trips and revenue 

• The reported costs ($33,000): loss in guiding services 

during the spike flows 

• Does the LSSF improve the overall fishing opportunities? 

Tamarisk? 
Private anglers and boaters 

• A few equipment-damaging incidents < Increased interest 

in lower flows 

• Private boaters are better suited for lower flows. 
IMPLAN Analysis 

Output Impact of $88,000 expenditure loss

 in recreation sector (Coconino county) 

Indirect effects = $15,368 

Induced Effects = $18,812 

Total Effects = $117,706 

* In 1998 dollars 
Conclusions 

Short-term economic effects of the LSSF

 were analyzed. The long-term effects are

 likely to be different. 

The economic impacts of the LSSF were not

 significant and can be mitigated by

 advanced planning. 
Overall conclusions 

• Rafting in the Colorado river is an important

 industry 

• Economic impacts =\=economic benefits. 

• The 2000 LSSF had some negative impacts on

 rafting and angling concessionaries but the

 subsequent regional economic impacts was not

 significant. 

• Regional economic Impacts should be evaluated

 within the social and economic contexts of the

 affected area.