Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596-0067
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2010-01-15T05:00Z

Economic Impact of Selected Florida Springs

on Surrounding Local Areas

Dr. Mark A. Bonn

Dedman School of Hospitality 

College of Business

Florida State University

Tallahassee, Florida

and

 Dr. Frederick W. Bell

Department of Economics

Florida State University

Tallahassee, Florida

for

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Division of State Lands

Florida Springs Task Force

April 10, 2003

Table of Contents

Page

List of
Tables…………………………………………………………
………………………..		v

List of
Figures………………………………………………………
…………………………	vii

Acknowledgement…………………………………………………
…………………………	viii

Authors’ Biographical
Information……………………………………………………
…….		ix

Executive
Summary………………………………………………………
…………….……..		xi

Chapter 1 	Scope and Purpose of the Economic Impact of
Selected……………………….		1

	Springs/Parks in Florida

 
Introduction……………………………………………………
………………...	1

	Scope of this
Report…………………………………………………………
….	2

	Study
Methodology……………………………………………………
………..	2

Chapter 2 	Direct Regional Economic Impact of Ichetucknee Springs,
Florida…….……..		4

 		on Surrounding Local Areas

	Description of the Ichetucknee
Springs…………………………………………	4

	Natural Resource
Protection…………………………………………………….
4

	Annual Trends and Seasonal Use of Ichetucknee Springs State
Park…………..	6

	Economic Profile of the Areas Surrounding Ichetucknee
Springs…………….	11

	Direct Economic Impact of Ichetucknee Springs: The
Model…………………	19

	Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of the Ichetucknee
Springs……….	22

Chapter 3 	Direct Regional Economic Impact of Wakulla Springs,
Florida……………	28	

		on Surrounding Local Areas

	Description of the Wakulla
Springs……………………………………………	28

	Natural Resource
Protection……………………………………………………
29

	Annual Trends and Seasonal Use of Wakulla Springs State
Park……………..	30

	Economic Profile of the Area Surrounding Wakulla
Springs………………….	36

	Direct Economic Impact of Wakulla Springs: The
Model…………………….	43

	Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of the Wakulla
Springs…………..	44

	

Chapter 4 	Direct Regional Economic Impact of Homosassa Springs,
Florida……………	51

 		on Surrounding Local Areas

	

	Description of the Homosassa
Springs…………………………………………	51

	Natural Resource
Protection……………………………………………………
52

	Annual Trends and Seasonal Use of Homosassa Springs State
Park………….	53

	Economic Profile of the Area Surrounding Homosassa
Springs………………	58

	Direct Economic Impact of Homosassa Springs: The
Model…………………	63

	Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of the Homosassa
Springs………..	63

	

Chapter 5 	Direct Regional Economic Impact of Blue Spring,
Florida…………….……..	69

 		on Surrounding Local Areas

		

	Description of the Blue
Spring………………………………………………..	69

	Natural Resource
Protection……………………………………………………
70

	Annual Trends and Seasonal Use of the Blue Spring State
Park……………...	71

	Economic Profile of the Area Surrounding Blue
Spring……………………...	74

	Direct Economic Impact of Blue Spring: The
Model…………………………	79

	Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of the Blue
Spring……………….	80	

Chapter 6 	Summary of the Economic Impact of Selective Springs in
Florida……………86

 		and Generalizations to Other Springs in Florida

		

	Introduction…………………………………………………
………………….	86

	Comparison and
Contrast………………………………………………………
87

	A Comparison with Another
Study…………………………………………….	91

		

References……………………………………………………
……………………………….	94

Appendices……………………………………………………
………………………………	96

	Appendix A: Florida Springs Visitor
Survey………………………………….	97

	Appendix B: Ichetucknee Springs Visitor Study
2003………………………...	98

	Appendix C: Wakulla Springs Visitor Study
2003…………………………….	99	

	Appendix D: Homosassa Springs Visitor Study
2003………………………..	100

	Appendix E: Blue Spring Visitor Study
2003……………………………….	101

	Appendix F: Springs Visitor Study Overall
2003…………………………….	102

List of Tables

Table 2.1: Population, Income, Per Capita Income, Jobs and Earnings Per
Job………………	13

	In and Around the Ichetucknee Springs Area, 1990 & 2000	

Table 2.2: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Counties in Florida
Containing………………...	17 

	the Ichetucknee Springs State Park, 2000

Table 2.3: Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Visitors
Associated………………..	24

	with Ichetucknee Springs, Fiscal Year 2002

Table 2.4: Estimation of Categories of Spending by Those Visitors
Outside…………………	27	

	the Ichetucknee Springs Area, Florida, 2002

Table 3.1: Population, Income, Per Capita Income, Jobs and Earnings Per
Job………………	37

	In Wakulla County, Florida Relating to Wakulla Springs State Park, 

	1999 & 2000

Table 3.2: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Wakulla County, Florida
………………………42

	Containing the Wakulla Springs State Park, 2000

Table 3.3: Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Visitors
Associated……………….. 	45

	with Wakulla Springs, Fiscal Year 2001-2002

Table 3.4: Estimation of Wakulla Springs Visitors by Category
in…………………………..	48

	Wakulla County, Florida, 2002

Table 4.1: Population, Income, Per Capita Income, Jobs and Earnings Per
Job………………	59

	In Citrus County, Florida Relating to Homosassa Springs State Park, 

	1999 & 2000

Table 4.2: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Citrus County,
Florida………………………... 	60		Containing the Homosassa
Springs State Park, 2000

Table 4.3: Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Visitors
Associated………………. 	65

	with Homosassa Springs, Fiscal Year 2001-2002

Table 4.4: Estimation of Homosassa Springs Visitors by Category
in……………………….	68

	Citrus County, Florida, 2002

Table 5.1: Population, Income, Per Capita Income, Jobs and Earnings Per
Job………………	77

	In Volusia County, Florida Relating to Blue Springs State Park, 

	1999 & 2000

Table 5.2: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Volusia County,
Florida………………………. 	78		Containing the Blue Springs
State Park, 2000

Table 5.3: Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Visitors
Associated………………. 	82

	with Blue Springs, Fiscal Year 2001-2002

Table 5.4: Estimation of Blue Springs Visitors by Category
in………………………………	85

	Volusia County, Florida, 2002

Table 6.1: A Summary of the Direct Economic Impact of Ichetucknee;
Wakulla; ………….	88

	Homosassa and Blue Springs State Parks on the Local Economy, 2002

List of Figures

Figure 2.1: Trend in Attendance at Ichetucknee Springs, Florida,
1992-2002………………..	7

Figure 2.2: Seasonal Attendance Index for Ichetucknee Springs, Florida,
1992-2002……….	10

Figure 3.1:Trend in Attendance at Wakulla Springs, Florida,
1992-2002……………………	31

Figure 3.2: Seasonal Attendance Index for Wakulla Springs, Florida,
1992-2002……………	34

Figure 4.1: Trend in Attendance at Homosassa Springs, Florida,
1992-2002………………...	54

Figure 4.2: Seasonal Attendance Index for Homosassa Springs, Florida,
1992-2002………..	57

Figure 5.1: Trend in Attendance at Blue Springs, Florida,
1992-2002………………………..	72

Figure 5.2: Seasonal Attendance Index for Blue Springs, Florida,
1992-2002………………..	75





ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

	This project owes its success to a number of individuals. First, Mr.
James A. Stevenson, Chairman of the Florida Springs Task Force,
Department of Environmental Protection, Division of State Lands, is
recognized for his vision to provide an accurate understanding of the
importance Florida springs have upon the state’s economy. His
leadership in allocating monetary resources to support the project is
acknowledged. 

Special recognition is given to all of the individuals responsible for
this study’s data collection efforts and include: Rhonda Upton, Greg
Brumfiel, Greg Fountain and Christine Brazier. Drew Moser, research
assistant, is to be thanked for data editing, coding and entry. Karen
Wells is to be recognized for her assistance with the typing of the
first draft. Finally, my research manager, Mo Dai, is to be recognized
for her invaluable assistance with all project tasks including: data
analysis, editing, and preparation of all reports and presentations. 

Mark A. Bonn, Ph. D.

Principal Investigator

AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

Mark A. Bonn, Ph.D. PRIVATE  

	Texas A&M University, 1982

	

	Mark A. Bonn received his Doctorate in Tourism Marketing and Research
with an emphasis on Resource Development, from Texas A&M University in
1982. He is a tenured Full Professor in the College of Business, Dedman
School of Hospitality, at Florida State University. He is a member of
the Graduate Faculty, Department of Marketing and also holds a
distinguished chair position entitled “The Robert Dedman Professor of
Services Management”.  He established, and directs the Resort &
Condominium Management summer program at Florida State University.

	Dr. Bonn serves on three editorial review boards for leading tourism
journals, and has published over 40 articles in the area of hospitality
and tourism as they relate to marketing, service quality, and
sustainable tourism. They appear in such scholarly journals as The
International Journal of Hospitality Management, The Journal of Travel
Research, The Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, and The Journal
of Hospitality & Tourism Research.  

	Some of his recent clients include Tourism Development Councils for
Bay, Broward, Dade, Escambia, Hillsborough, Leon, Monroe, Okaloosa,
Orange, Palm Beach, Pinellas, Santa Rosa, St. Johns, and Walton Counties
(Florida). Other clients include the American Hotel Foundation, Small
Business Administration, Amelia Island Chamber of Commerce, Abbott
Resorts, Tampa Bay Convention and Visitors Association, the United
States Army, the United Nations, the Governments of Argentina, Aruba,
Barbados, Bermuda, Costa Rica, Jamaica, St. Lucia, St. Martin, U.S.
Virgin Islands, and Venezuela, and the Suwannee River Water Management
District.

	Dr. Bonn's most recently completed projects entailed a four county
study of the economic costs and benefits associated with the State of
Florida's Artificial Reefs program in Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and
Monroe counties, and an eight county study of eco-tourism potential for
rural economic development in the Suwannee River.

	Dr. Bonn has worked in management positions with ski resorts in North
Carolina as well as with lodging properties in Florida.  He was the past
President of the South Carolina Hotel Sales and Marketing Association. 
Currently, he is a member of the American Marketing Association, the
Travel Research Association, and the Academy of Marketing Science. He is
a past member of the Board of Directors for the Society of Tourism and
Travel Educators. He completed a book entitled "Sustainable Tourism and
the Florida Environment: Marketing, Management and Operations", designed
for secondary and college level audiences as well as public and private
sector tourism related business.	

Dr. Fredrick W. Bell

Wayne State University

Dr. Frederick W. Bell is an authority on regional economic impact of
economic activity. He has been a part of the BMRG, Inc. research for the
past six years.  Dr. Bell specializes in economic impact studies, and
assists with the development of reports summarizing the impact of
visitation upon local salaries, wages, and jobs.

He was Senior Regional Economist for the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
He was also Chief of Economic Research for the National Marine Fisheries
Service, U.S. Department of Commerce. He has been a full professor of
economics at Florida State University since 1973 where he has
concentrated on environmental and resource economics in Florida. He has
authored many publications dealing with tourism and outdoor recreational
activity in the State of Florida including numerous contracts with the
Department of Environmental Protection involving an assessment of the
economics of outdoor recreation in Florida. 

Dr. Bell has authored numerous Sea Grant publications ranging from the
use of saltwater beaches to boating in the State of Florida. More
recently, Dr. Bell has worked on the Northwest and Southeast Florida
economic importance of artificial reefs, focusing upon the costs and
benefits of the State of Florida's program. He also teaches business
economics at FSU where the emphasis is upon running private enterprises,
including attractions, lodging, food service, and travel businesses in
an efficient manner.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Springs are one of the most valuable natural resources in the State of
Florida. Even though Florida Springs have been providing Floridians and
tourists with tremendous natural, recreational and economic values and
benefits, little has been done to assess the economic importance springs
have to their surrounding areas or to identify and analyze the
visitors’ characteristics and behavior. 

	This study was set forth to assess the economic value springs
contribute to their surrounding areas, and to document behavioral and
demographic characteristics of visitors to Florida’s four largest
springs. They are: Ichetucknee Springs, Wakulla Springs, Homosassa
Springs, and Volusia Blue Spring. 

	The study is divided into six chapters. Chapters Two through Chapter
Five address direct regional economic impact of each spring
respectively. Each spring group was approached utilizing the four steps
as follows:

Provide general information about each spring;

Analyze the annual trends and seasonal use of each spring state park;

Describe the economic profile of the areas surrounding each spring;

Estimate the direct economic impact of each spring.

Springs Characteristics

Ichetucknee Springs is well known for tubing, kayaking, scuba diving and
other recreational activities. The water is still in relatively good
condition, but contaminants are beginning to appear. Consequently, it is
restricted to only day use, and a maximum per day user capacity has been
administered.

Wakulla Springs is one of the largest natural springs in the world. It
is known for glass bottom boat tours through the natural spring area
where the movies Tarzan and Creature from the Black Lagoon were filmed.
It is also a popular place for swimming, snorkeling and observing
wildlife. The spring suffers from an invasion of hydrilla, a floating
plant that clog boat propellers and cause congestion of waterways. In
addition, there are increasing levels of nitrate, phosphorous and other
contaminants in the water. 

Homosassa Springs is the only natural area in the world that one can
observe manatees 365 days a year.  It is also a place for other wildlife
and marine fishes in the spring. Homosassa Springs has the best water
quality among the four springs in this study’s group.

Blue Spring is well known as a winter home for Florida’s endangered
manatees. The spring also provides recreationalists areas for swimming,
canoeing, hiking and birding. The spring water contains the highest
level of nitrates among the four springs and has led to ecological
decline.

Annual Trends and Seasonal Use 

From 1992-2002, the Ichetucknee Springs State Park visitors has
increased from 134 thousand people to nearly 189 thousand people, nearly
a 41% increase over the last 10 years. It is found that the peak season
at Ichetucknee Springs State Park is between May and August of each year
since the tubing is more enjoyable during the warm weather. This park
has a carrying capacity that balances recreation with preservation.

The Wakulla Springs visitor attendance has increased from 163 thousand
in 1992 to 184 thousand in 2002, an 11% increase over the last 11 years.
By Florida standards, this is a very slow growth in attendance at only
1% yearly. The peak season at the Wakulla Springs State Park is from
April to August when the weather is warm.

For Homosassa Springs State Park, there were over 200 thousand visitors
in 1992 and nearly 266 thousand visitors in 2002, a 33% increase over
the last 11 years. The seasonality of attendance is at its peak from
February through April. This coincides with the typical tourist season
for Florida when the typical snowbirds visit Florida.

The Blue Spring State Park attendance has decreased from 360 thousand in
1992 to 337 thousand in 2002, a 6.4% decline over the last 11 years. The
decrease is consistent with the economic model, which asserts that
increasing environmental problems are related to a decline in economic
activity as measured by park attendance. The peak seasonal attendance at
Blue Spring is December through March of each year. After that period,
one other seasonal peak was identified in July.

Economic Profiles

Ichetucknee Springs is in Suwannee and Columbia Counties in North
Central Florida. In 2000, the per capita income for both Columbia and
Suwannee Counties was well below the State of Florida average. This is
due to the fact that the Ichetucknee Springs area is not relatively
affluent when compared to the State of Florida. Both counties specialize
in low paying industries such as farming, forestry, paper and wood
manufacturing and service industries. On the other hand, the Ichetucknee
Springs economic area is growing at a faster rate as measured by wages
and employment than that of the State of Florida.

Wakulla Springs is near the center of Wakulla County in the Northeast
Florida panhandle region. From 1990 to 2000, the per capita income for
Wakulla County was growing faster than the State of Florida (i.e., 58%
vs. 40%). Even though the per capita income was still below the state
average (i.e., $22,556 vs. $27,765) in 2000,  Wakulla County is growing
more toward higher paying jobs that are accelerating its rate of growth
with respect to population, income, wages and employment.

 Homosassa Springs is in Citrus County in the Central West area of
Florida. From 1990 to 2000, the population growth in Citrus County was
entirely due to in-migration from outside the county. The median age in
Citrus County is nearly 53 years compared to only 39 years in the entire
State of Florida. Citrus County’s economy is heavily dependent on
retirement and tourism that generally produce an industrial base of
part-time and low-skilled jobs. The per capita income in Citrus County
was below the State of Florida average both in 1990 and 2000.

Blue Spring is located in Volusia County in the Central East region of
Florida. Since 1990 the level of affluence or per capita income has
risen in Volusia County. However, the level of per capita income in this
county still remained below that of the State of Florida. As the state
has grown through the advent of many high tech industries, Volusia
County has relied on retirement and tourism for its growth.

Direct Economic Impacts

For 2002, estimated spending by visitors at the four springs-related
state parks varied from nearly $23 million at Ichetucknee Springs to
only $10 million at Blue Spring.

The Ichetucknee Springs and Wakulla Springs have approximately the same
level of spending at about $22 million and have about the same total
attendance. However, Ichetucknee Springs has about one-third more
estimated visitors from outside the area than Wakulla Springs as shown
in the bottom of Table ES-1. 

Table ES-1

A Summary of the Direct Economic Impact of

Ichetucknee; Wakulla; Homosassa and Blue

Spring State Parks on the Local Economy, 2002

Springs

	Ichetucknee	Wakulla	Homosassa	Blue	Average Per Spring

Spending Expenditures (Mil $)	22.7

22.2	13.6	10.0	17.13

Spend Per Party Day ($)	215

409	90	61	193.75

	Spend Per Person Day ($)	34

89	25	19	45.50

Spending (Mil $)

	       Hotel & Motel

4.1

15.3	5.5	5.6	7.63

       Condos

1.5

1.8	0.1	0.9	1.08

       Friends/Family

12.3

4.3	4.3	1.2	5.53

       Campers

3.2

0.1	2.6	1.5	1.85

       Day

	1.6

0.7	1.1	0.8	1.05

Spending by Category (Mil $)

	         Lodging

1.44

4.01	3.43	5.67	3.64

         Restaurants

3.86

3.42	1.87	0.94	2.52

         Groceries

1.76

2.11	0.13	0	1.00

         Fees

4.34

1.21	4.22	0.69	2.62

         Evening Enter

2.31

2.51	2.36	1.26	2.11

         Transportation

2.95

1.47	0.32	0.34	1.27

         Shopping

3.75

3.56	1.08	0.95	2.34

         All other

2.27

3.99	0.11	0.15	1.63

Wages & Salaries (Mil $)	5.09

4.33	3.13	2.38	3.73

Employment

311

347	206	174	259.50

Other Characteristics

	        Party Size

6.4

4.6	3.6	3.3	4.48

        Length of Stay

2.7

2.1	3.3	2.6	2.68

Attendance

188,845

180,793	265,977	337,356	243,243

         Visitors

169,962

126,555	169,962	219,282	171,441

          Residents

18,883

54,238	96,015	118,074	71,802

          Percent Visitors (%)	90

70	64	65	70.48

Wakulla Springs visitors spend much more than those visiting Ichetucknee
Springs, which accounted for the parity in overall spending between the
two parks (e.g., spending per person day is $89 in Wakulla Springs
compared to only $34 in Ichetucknee Springs). Wakulla Springs has a
regionally acclaimed “low country” restaurant and a lodge that
offers overnight accommodations for visitors.

Homosassa Springs and Blue Spring are at the low end of the total
spending estimates with $13.6 million and $10 million respectively in
2002. These parks are more heavily attended by visitors from outside the
area (county). The spending per visitor party and per person day is
relatively low for these two parks.

Most of the visitors to natural springs use friends and family and
hotel/motel as modes of accommodation.

 In terms of wages and salaries, Ichetucknee Springs generated the most
wages ($5.09 million) and Wakulla Springs generated most employment
(347).

In general, springs exhibited visitors that have a party size of between
4-5 individuals whom spend about 2-3 days in the area as shown in the
Table ES-1.

CHAPTER 1

Scope and Purpose of the Economic Impact of

Selected Springs/Parks in Florida

Introduction

	Springs are one of the most valuable natural resources in the State of
Florida. Each year, Florida’s system of natural springs attract
thousands of visitors from all over the world to various sites for
leisure activities such as swimming, camping, tubing, canoeing,
kayaking, snorkeling, scuba diving, archeological studies and nature
studies. Even though Florida springs have been providing us with
tremendous natural, recreational and economic values and benefits,
little has been done to identify the visitors’ characteristics, their
behavior or quantify the economic importance springs have to their
surrounding areas. 

	Among the more than 700 recognized springs in Florida (Scott et al.,
2002), there are 33 first magnitude springs (>100 cubic feet per second
– 64.6 million gallons of water per day), more than any other state or
country (Rosenau et al., 1977). In this report, we will focus on the
four largest spring groups in the State of Florida. In 2001 alone, these
natural springs accounted for nearly one million visitors or over 50
percent of the total visitors to Florida’s twelve spring state parks
(http://www.dep.state.fl.us/springs/index.htm). These pristine, natural
springs parks are known for their unique ecosystem throughout the world.
The springs not only provide a unique habitat for endangered species
like the manatee but also provide Floridians and tourists a unique
opportunity to view these animals in their natural surroundings not
known to exist anywhere else. They are:

Wakulla Springs in the Northeast Florida

Ichetucknee Springs in the North Central of Florida

Homosassa Springs in the Central West of Florida

Volusia Blue Spring in the Central East of Florida

Scope of This Report

The scope of this report is to 1.) Assess the economic value natural
springs contribute to their surrounding areas, and 2.) Document
behavioral and demographic characteristics of visitors to Florida’s
four largest natural springs. This will allow us to promote, advertise,
and manage these unique natural resources to their fullest potential.
Seasonality, economic impact, and marketing strategies will be explored
in-depth to better Florida’s most valuable natural resources.

This study is divided into six chapters. Chapter One (this chapter)
reviews the scope and purpose of the economic impact of the four
selected springs. Chapter One also explains the methodology used for the
entire study. Chapters Two through Five address direct regional economic
impacts of Ichetucknee Springs, Homosassa Springs, Wakulla Springs and
Blue Spring respectively. Chapter Six provides a summary of all four
springs and offers generalization to other springs in Florida.

Study Methodology

During 2002-2003, professionally trained surveyors were assigned to
collect information from visitors (non-county residents) at four Florida
springs. Surveyors personally interviewed a minimum of 400 visitors at
each spring during this time period. Visitors were asked to respond to
31 items related to their springs visit (See Appendix 1). Information
was obtained related to such dimensions including but not limited to:
visitor socio-demographics, travel patterns, party size, length of stay,
trip purpose, satisfaction with the on-site experience, willingness to
return, type of accommodation used, and expenditures specific to eight
categories.

Information was then edited, coded and entered onto a statistical
program (S.P.S.S.). Summary tables were then created for all survey
items and visitor profiles were formulated for each spring. Results of
the Ichetucknee Springs Visitor Study; Wakulla Springs Visitor Study;
Homosassa Springs Visitor Study; and Blue Spring Visitor Study can be
found in Appendices B, C, D, and E. Finally, a comparison of visitors
from all four sites was developed (Appendix F). 

Economic data was generated for each spring in order to determine
characteristics of commercial overnight visitors, visitors staying with
friends/relatives, visitors staying at campgrounds, visitors staying in
condominiums, and day visitors (no overnights). This information was
then used to provide the economic model with necessary averages to
estimate the economic impact. 

CHAPTER 2

Direct Regional Economic Impact of 

Ichetucknee Springs State Park on Surrounding Areas

Description of the Ichetucknee Springs

Ichetucknee Springs State Park is located in Columbia and Suwannee
Counties in North Central Florida off Florida 238 north of Fort White.
This park consists of 2,600 acres and a shoreline of 37,400 feet along
the Ichetucknee River and Springs. This recreational area was acquired
by the State of Florida in 1970 to protect and preserve one of the
state’s outstanding wonders and still be accessible to the public. An
astounding daily average of 233 million gallons of water flows, from the
seven springs to form the Ichetucknee River. The 72-degree,
crystal-clear river travels five miles at one mile per hour before
emptying into the Santa Fe River. 

Recreational users can immerse themselves in the ever-flowing, clear
water; viewing the river bottom’s fish and plants that make the park a
“natural wonder”. One can canoe or kayak in the autumn, winter or
spring or swim at Ichetucknee Head Springs where the edges are shallow,
or scuba dive at Blue Hole Springs to depths of 40 feet. The park offers
many tubing options from 45 minutes to 3.5 hours. Tubes and snorkel gear
may be rented from private vendors just outside each park’s entrance.
Of significance, the Ichetucknee is restricted to one-day use only.
Therefore, there is no camping within the park. Food and soft drinks may
be obtained from the state-run concession stand. 

Natural Resource Protection

The Ichetucknee Springs and River is probably the most pristine spring
and river system remaining in Florida. It is the premier tubing river in
the United States. It is important to look at the threats to the springs
from increased human activities in and around the area when assessing
the direct economic impact of the natural springs resources afforded to
local communities surrounding the Ichetucknee Springs. The social value
of the springs critically depends upon the clear, clean waters that flow
from the seven named springs in the park.

In 1995, concerns about the future quality of the spring water led to
the formation of the Ichetucknee Springs Water Quality Working Group.
Government agencies, stakeholders and local citizens are included in the
group to protect the resources in these springs. The main resource to be
protected is the water flowing from the seven named springs. The
Ichetucknee Basin includes Lake City and reaches as far north as the
Osceola National Forest. The working group believes that the water of
Alligator Lake, Cannon Creek Clayhole Creek, and Rose Creak flows
through a cave system that connects with the Ichetucknee. Of critical
importance, these creeks receive contaminated stormwater run-off from
urban and agricultural areas in the basin. This is known as non-point
source pollution since individual entities as sources of the pollution
are difficult to identify. These pollutants can originate from a vast
spectrum of sources including agricultural lands, mining operations and
septic tanks. Storm water run-off is often contaminated with fertilizer,
pesticides, coliform, gasoline, turbidity, and other pollution. The
springs and river water sediments and fish tissue are regularly
monitored to detect the level of pollution that threatens the quality of
the natural springs resource. Recent monitoring of waters of the springs
indicate that this resource is still in relatively good condition
according to Protecting the Ichetucknee (2000); however, contaminants
are already showing up, including nitrates in the spring water,
pesticides in the fish in the river, hydrocarbons in sediments in
sinkholes, and coliform bacteria in the creeks. Such pollution not only
diminishes the quality of recreation, but is not attractive to visitors
to the area. Without resource protection, the visitors will be deterred
from the area, and consequently spend less money on local areas
surrounding the Ichetucknee Springs State Park. The main thrust of this
report is to quantify the level of Ichetucknee visitor spending in the
springs and the local communities surrounding the springs. This will
establish a baseline by which to measure the potential economic effects
of pollution on visitor spending in and around  Ichetucknee Springs. 

Protection activities for the Ichetucknee Springs include (1) building
storm water retention ponds; (2) establishing vegetative buffers along
the streams; (3) protecting sinkholes from refuse dumping; (4) limiting
the use of pesticides and fertilizers; (5) reducing septic tank impacts;
(6) eliminating leaking gasoline tanks; (7) purchasing sensitive lands
for water quality protection and (8) removing trash from the creeks. All
of these measures will involve either direct government expenditures
and/or higher cost to polluters (e.g., better septic tanks in
residential developments). Such measures will allow us to balance the
economic benefits associated with the protection of the entire water
resource with the actual cost of pollution control and water quality
management. 

Annual Trends and Seasonal Use of Ichetucknee Springs State Park 

In fiscal year 1992, a little over 134 thousand people visited
Ichetucknee Springs State Park. By fiscal year 2002 this number reached
nearly 189 thousand people, nearly a 41% increase over the last 11
years. In Figure 2.1, annual park attendance data is plotted over this
time period to calculate the annual trend in people attending the park
combined with the year-to-year fluctuations in park attendance. The
straight line through the attendance data indicates the annual trend in
park attendance where the trend equation (i.e., ICHAT) is given in the
lower right of Figure 2.1. All attendance data were obtained from the
Division of Recreation and Parks, Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (unpublished) (2002). 

 

The trend equation for Ichetucknee Springs State Park attendance shown
in Figure 2.1 indicates an annual growth in people attending this park
by 5.54 thousand per year. From the graph, it appears that the park
attendance growth was linear or, a constant number of attendees per year
rather than exponential where growth is maintained at a constant percent
yearly. The reader should also note the considerable fluctuation of
attendance from year to year around the annual trend. Using the RSQ
following the trend equation in Figure 2.1, it indicates that the annual
linear trend discussed above explains about 74% of Ichetucknee Springs
State Park over the 1992-2002 period while the balance (26%) is
attributed to annual cycles. The RSQ is a statistical measure that
identifies how much the linear trend “explains” attendance at the
springs over the period of analysis. Subtracting RSQ from unity, or one,
yields annual cycles or what is not explained by the annual trend. Such
cycles may be due to visitation trends in tourism to Florida, which are
determined by such forces as the national economic condition, the
weather and possibly changes in environmental conditions at the springs
themselves. It is beyond the scope of this report to investigate the
reasons for these observed cycles. However, it is important to recognize
that there are considerable cyclical fluctuations in Ichetucknee Springs
attendance from year-to-year which at their peak may strain the carrying
capacity of the resource. In Figure 2.1, it appears that annual
attendance peaked in the year 2000 at about 220 thousand or about 22% of
full permitted utilization. Ichetucknee Springs are subject to
considerable seasonality that might figure in the permitted number of
attendees at the springs per day.

Seasonal use of a park refers to the month-to-month variation in
attendance. Seasonal variation may be due to the nature of the resource
and/or man-made events that influence demand for goods and services such
as a pristine water resource. We obtained monthly data on Ichetucknee
Springs attendance from the Division of Recreation and Parks, Florida
Department of Environmental Protection. This was analyzed from 1992-2002
for these springs. The analysis was done by asking the question first of
what attendance would be per month assuming there was no seasonal
influence. This can easily be computed by dividing annual attendance by
the 12 months in the year. In the case of no seasonality, the monthly
attendance for any year would be constant. For example, annual
attendance for Ichetucknee Springs was 189 million persons for the 2002
fiscal year as discussed above. If we assume even demand over the year,
then monthly attendance would be 189 thousand divided by 12 or nearly 16
thousand visitors per month. Assume that we wish to find the degree of
seasonality (if any) for a given month (e.g., July 2002). Attendance
actually recorded in July 2002 was actually 54.6 thousand or about 3.4
times (54.6 divided by 16 thousand) the demand for July 2002. It is
quite apparent from the rather extreme case that seasonality for July
2002 is immense. One other adjustment to the measure of seasonality is
that we cannot base its measure on just one year (i.e. 2002). Any one
year may have a number of irregular events as a recession, labor strike,
extremely volatile weather such as hurricanes, or terrorist events
similar to those during September 11, 2001. Thus, we used all eleven
years (1992-2002) for each month to form our monthly demand without
seasonal events. In using eleven years, we average out any irregular
events to calculate the seasonal index. Returning to our example above,
we obtained 3.4 for July meaning that demand for the Ichetucknee Springs
in July for the year 2002 was 348% of demand without a seasonal
influence. Using all eleven years, we obtain 356.1% as shown in Figure
2.2. This would mean that seasonality is fairly regular from
year-to-year (i.e., 348% for 2002 is nearly the same as 356.1% averaged
over 11 years). The measurement of seasonality is rather straight
forward, but the reason(s) for seasonality and economic meaning of
seasonality must be discussed to see how, and if, the recreational
demand for the springs influence its use. 

 According to Figure 2.2, the peak seasonal index of demand for the
resources at Ichetucknee Springs State Park is decidedly between May and
August of each year reaching a peak of 350.1 in July. Without any
seasonal influence, demand was estimated at 16 thousand people per month
with an additional seasonal demand of 38.6 thousand people for a total 
demand of 54.6 thousand persons. On average this would mean that for the
month of July, there would be 1,761 individuals per day in July. This
could vary from day to day and especially on weekends.

The diverse assemblage of native aquatic plants forms the base of the
river’s entire ecosystem. The plants are particularly vulnerable to
physical damage. The many thousands of visitors each season have a
significant impact on plants, creating barren sandy troughs that are
void of aquatic live. When the State of Florida acquired the park,
virtually the entire river bottom was bare. Today, aquatic plants have
recovered. 

Ichetucknee Springs has long been famed for tubing. This is the most
important factor in attracting people to this area. According to Florida
County Maps and Recreation Guides, natural spring water is always
chilly. Because of this, tubing would be enjoyed more during the hot
weather. Thus, we believe in the extreme seasonality peaking during the
May-August period. Because seasonal visits decline precipitously during
the September-April period, it would appear that the relatively cold
weather in North Central Florida compared to Central and South Florida
makes tubing and general water recreation very sensitive to
temperatures. 

Economic Profile of the Areas Surrounding Ichetucknee Springs 

The thrust of this report is to identify the direct economic impact of
the springs in a particular area. So, it is important to look at the
economic setting in which the springs exist. Ichetucknee Springs is in
two counties in North Central Florida consisting of Suwannee and
Columbia Counties. Table 2.1 shows some relevant economic statistics
pertaining to these two counties. Two approaches may be taken. First,
the reader may wish to compare just one county with the economic impact
of the springs, which will be discussed below. This may especially be
true of Suwannee County, which contains so much of the Ichetucknee
Springs area. This county is relatively small and would make the Springs
look larger than if it were compared to Columbia County, and especially
both counties together. Second, since the Springs exist in two counties,
we may wish to compare the economic impact of the springs with both
counties which we have added together in Table 2.1.

Both Suwannee and Columbia Counties are not densely settled compared to
Florida. Columbia and Suwannee Counties have 71 and 50 persons per
square mile respectively compared to 303 persons per square mile for
Florida as a whole according to the Bureau of Economic and Business
Research, University of Florida (2001). This area includes a relative
abundance of land compared to people that is reasonably conducive to
park expansion. However, springs are not readily expandable as a natural
resource and we can see that park authorities are already limiting the
number of tubers per day. 

In terms of temporal changes in economic variables in the Ichetucknee
Springs area, let us first deal with resident population which has
expanded from just under 70 thousand people in 1990 to nearly 92
thousand at the turn of the century representing a 31.6% increase, a
much faster increase in growth than the State of Florida as a whole
(23.2%) which is shown in Table 2.1. The open space coupled with
relatively inexpensive land has not only attracted new resident to the
states, but even people from Southern Florida, which has become
increasingly congested. See Bonn and Bell (2002) for a discussion of
these factors. 





Table 2.1

Population, Income, Per Capita Income, Jobs and Earnings Per Job

In and Around the Ichetucknee Springs Area, 1990 & 2000

	Rank Among 67 Counties

1990	2000	%Change

in 2000

Population Growth

Columbia

42,861	56,801	32.5

	38

	Suwannee	26,918	35,054	30.2

	45

	Two Counties Total	69,779	91,855	31.6

	N/A

	Florida

 13,033,307	    16,054,328	23.2

Aggregate Income Growth ( Thous $)

	Columbia

581,698	1,086,464	86.8

	39

	Suwannee

385,737	   646,102	67.5

	45

	Two Counties Total	967,435	1,732,566	79.1

	N/A

	Florida 	258,479,049	    445,739,968	72.4

Per Capita Income Growth ($)

	Columbia

13,572	19,128	40.9

	43

	Suwannee

14,331	18,432	28.6

	45

	Two Counties Total	13,865	18,862	36.1

	N/A

	Florida 	19,832	27,765	40.1

Employment / Job Growth 

	Columbia 	14,650	20,221	38.1

	36

	Suwannee 	  7,970	  9,988	25.3

	46

	Two Counties Total	22,620	30,209	33.6

	N/A

	Florida 	  5,802,287	      7,566,198	30.4

Average Wages / Earnings Per Job ($)

	Columbia 	17,145	25,324	47.7

	32

	Suwannee 	15,746	20,606	30.9

	55

	Two Counties Total	16,652	23,764	42.7

	N/A

	Florida 

21,244	30,226	42.3

Source: Regional Economic Information System, U.S. Bureau of Economic
Analysis, CD ROM, 2002

The two counties containing the Ichetucknee Springs had a more rapid
economic expansion as measured by aggregate personal income shown in
Table 2.1 than the State of Florida. This should be clarified by calling
the reader’s attention to the fact that Columbia County containing
Lake City at the intersection of I-10 and I-75 was primarily responsible
for this faster economic expansion than that experienced by the State.
In terms of growth, Suwannee County is not growing as fast as the State
and a more rapid development of such attractions as Ichetucknee Springs
may serve to expand visitor growth over the next decade. This can be
seen by consulting Table 2.1. We have placed the ranking of the economic
variable on the right side of Table 2.1, which indicates for the year
2000 how the county ranks when compared to the 67 other counties
throughout Florida. For example, Suwannee County is ranked 45th in both
population and aggregate personal income among all 67 counties in
Florida with the number one county having the largest number for
whatever variable is considered. Notice that the sum of the two counties
which we have called “Ichetucknee Springs” in Table 2.1 cannot be
ranked since the number of counties will vary by the springs were are
analyzing. 

 	More than growth or many other economic variables, the level of per
capita income is the most important general measure of economic welfare.
Income comes from a variety of sources of which some may not be that
obvious. Of course, the largest and most obvious source of income comes
from earning from work by individuals in the county of residence or
adjoining counties. However, income also includes transfer payments such
as income maintenance (e.g., food stamps, etc); unemployment insurance
and retirement income. Finally, many individuals have been successful in
accumulating capital, which pays dividends, interest and rents. Thus,
relatively wealthy people as measured by the holding of income earning
assets will tend to elevate per capita income for a particular income.
Most of this capital producing income is counted on for retirement,
which characterizes many communities in Florida. Table 2.1 shows that in
the year 2000, the per capita income in both Columbia and Suwannee
Counties was well below the State of Florida. For example, Columbia
county’s per capita income for the year 2000 was $19,128 compared to
$27,765 for the State or about 69% of the state level. These data
indicate that the Ichetucknee Springs area is not relatively affluent
when compared to the State of Florida. Bonn and Bell (2002) have
examined this area and concluded that unless efforts are made to develop
these and other counties along the Suwannee River it would not appear
that this area will make much progress in achieving economic parity in
per capita income with the State of Florida by the year 2015. 

 	At the bottom of Table 2.1, we see one component of per capita income
or average earnings per job both from full and part time employment. As
we can see, earnings from the industrial structure of the area are
almost 17% below that obtained by all Floridians combined for Columbia
County and only nearly one-third for Suwannee County. Both counties
specialize in low paying industries such as farming, forestry, paper and
wood manufacturing and service industries. As previously documented,
Columbia County lies at the intersection of I-10 and I-75 enticing
visitors traveling to warmer destinations in Florida (e.g., Orlando) to
stop and spend money on hotels/motels and restaurants. Columbia County
has 2,040 hotel and motel rooms compared to just 309 rooms in Suwannee
County. Below, we shall look at the importance of visitor spending
associated with Ichetucknee Springs that supports many of the industries
in the two-county region. Notice that the number of jobs in both
Columbia and Suwannee Counties as shown near the bottom of Table 2.1
have grown more rapidly (33.6%) than those statewide (30.4%) over the
1990-2000 period. As pointed out by Bonn and Bell (2002), most of this
employment growth has come from service industries such as those
catering to visitors. Such visitors are primarily pleasure travelers,
campers; sightseers and general ecotourists. Table 2.1 shows that in
terms of earnings per job Columbia County is in the mid-range of
counties (i.e., 32nd out of 67) while Suwannee County has a relatively
low wage structure (i.e., 55th out of 67). 

 Table 2.2 shows some other important economic dimensions of the two
counties that contain Ichetucknee Springs. First, the measured
unemployment rate in the year 2000 in Columbia County is somewhat higher
than that for the State of Florida while Suwannee County is exactly at
the State average unemployment rate. Thus, we do not believe that
measured unemployment in these counties is a significant factor in
contributing to a lower level of economic welfare (i.e., per capita
income only 68% of state average). In fact, the Ichetucknee economic
area is growing at a faster rate as measured by income and employment
than that of the State of Florida, which helps moderate the level of
measured unemployment. 

A lesser-known measure of economic conditions in an area is the
“participation rate”. This is the ratio of those employed to the
area’s resident population between the ages of 15 and 65. The reason
for restricting the population to those between 15 and 65 years is to
isolate those that could be “potential workers” if there were enough
jobs. Of course, not all individuals in this population age bracket
would work under normal conditions since some in this group must be
available for caring for children and others are not able to work
because of health considerations. However, many rural areas just do not
have enough jobs to go around. Economics have labeled this insufficiency
“disguised unemployment” since it is not directly measured. As the
participation rate falls, it is more likely that disguised unemployment
will be present. Such unemployment is not measured as those either on
the unemployment roles or looking for work. This statistic is shown in
Table 2.2. For example, the participation rate for Suwannee County in
the year 2000 is 63.8%. 





Table 2.2: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Counties in Florida

Containing the Ichetucknee Springs State Park, 2000

	Rank Among 67

	Recorded Unemployment Rate	%	Counties in Florida

	    Columbia

	4.35

25

    Suwannee

	3.75

30

    Two Counties Average	4.05

N/A

    Florida

3.75

N/A

Labor Force Participation Rate*	%

     Columbia

	68.1

39

     Suwannee

	63.8

45

     Two Counties Average	66.5

N/A

     Florida

78.5

N/A

Poverty Rate (% of Population)

%

     Columbia

	20.4

22

     Suwannee

	19.1

26

     Two Counties Average	20.0

N/A

     Florida

15.2

N/A

	Income	Income From ($)

	Per Capita ($)	Earnings	Cap Inc	Trans Pay

	     Columbia

19,128	11,636	4,193	3,299

     Suwannee

18,432	10,254	3,222	4,956

     Two Counties Average	18,780	10,945	3,708	4,127

     Florida

27,764	16,560	7,005	4,199

 * Percent of population in the county between the ages of 15-64 who are
employed.

	SOURCE: FLORIDA STATISTICAL ABSTRACT 2001, BEBR, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
(2001)

However, for the State of Florida the participation rate is 78.5% or
nearly 15 percentage points above that for Suwannee County. A similar
pattern is true for Columbia County, but disguised unemployment may be
less severe in this county. Obviously, if a high segment of the
population is not gainfully employed, this tends to lower the level of
economic welfare or per capita income as we have discussed above. We
believe that much of the lower level of per capita income in the eight
counties surrounding the Suwannee River is a result of disguised
unemployment.  This was discussed recently by Bonn and Bell (2002). A
more rapid rate of job creation in the area would help to expand the job
base. Bonn and Bell (2002) concluded that employment related to visitors
and the location of retirement communities in the Suwannee River area
might have a comparative advantage over other areas such as those in
Central and South Florida. Thus, the valuable natural springs in North
Florida might be important for attracting visitors to the area. 

The poverty rate is another indicator of the economic welfare of a
region. This rate measures the number of “poor people” as a percent
of the population. A poor person is one earning less than $9,000 per
year. In Table 2.2, 20% of the Ichetucknee counties fall into the
poverty category. In the entire State of Florida, only slightly more
than 15% lie below the poverty line. This finding is consistent with our
hypothesis of disguised unemployment.

 	Finally, for those people receiving income, we might look into the
components of per capita income. This is shown at the bottom of Table
2.2. In essence, there are three large components of per capita income:
(1) earning from work; (2) income from investments such as bank
deposits, bonds and stocks and (3) transfer payments to individuals such
as income maintenance (e.g., unemployment compensation). For example,
Suwannee County residents received, on average, $18,432 in per capita
income, which consisted of $10,254 in earned income (i.e., 56%).
Transfer payments were $4,956 while income from capital investment was
$3,222 per year. Except for transfer payments, all components of per
capita income are considerably smaller than the State of Florida. This
is consistent with our economic analysis of Suwannee County. Residents
earned a relatively low income from work and investments. The industrial
structure of Suwannee County has relatively low-paying jobs and their
per capita income makes it difficult to save much to invest. Thus, their
flow of interest, dividends and rents per capita (i.e., Cap. Inc in
Table 2.2) is less than one-half of that received by other Floridians. 

Direct Economic Impact of Ichetucknee Springs: The Model

In this section, we shall first discuss the rudiments of the economic
model used to estimate spending, wages and job creating power of the
visitor sector for Ichetucknee Springs, Florida. As we have seen in
earlier sections, very good data are available on the universe (numbers)
of persons visiting a springs during any particular year, yet we know
very little about their actual behaviors such as the types of
accommodation modes they use, their spending patterns and the numbers of
jobs and wages they create by visiting the Springs and sending money in
the immediate area. Every time a person visits a natural spring, we can
call this a person visits (PVIS) which is composed of both visitors from
outside the economic area (e.g., Columbia; Suwannee or a combinations of
these counties) and residents from within the economic area. In this
report, we shall concentrate on visitors or eco-tourists from outside
the economic area in which the springs are located. Spending by visitors
is especially important since they have a multiplier effect throughout
the region. Small economic areas in which these natural springs are
located usually have low multiplier effects since their initial spending
is rapidly “leaked” out of the area. Because of this, we have only
included the direct economic effect of visitors. Also, resident spending
was not included since they are a result of the growth of the region and
not the prime stimulus such as tourism or physical exports from the
region. If we define “k” as the percent of persons attending the
springs whom are from outside the economic area or visitors (i.e.,
eco-tourists), then visitor person visits may be defined as follows:

(1) VIS = k PVIS

 where VIS = Number of visitors from outside the springs area;

 k = Percent of all visitors from outside the springs area

 PVIS = Total number of people attending the springs area

We have already looked at the trend in PVIS in Figure 2.1 above. Some
fraction of PVIS or “k” is from outside the economic area. To
estimate the total expenditures by VIS (i.e., non-residents), we can use
the following formula:

(2) $EVIS = VIS*LS* ($EPPD/ SP)

 where $EVIS = Total expenditures by visitors outside the springs area

 VIS = Person visits from outside the area (Equation 1)

 LS = Length of stay in the springs area

 $EPPD = Expenditures by VIS

 SP = Size of party

These total expenditures by visitors range from items such as camping
fees, costs of motel rooms, and dollars spent in local restaurants. They
will be discussed in detail below when we arrive at the empirical
implementation of this direct economic impact analyses. On the right
hand side of equation (2), we first multiply VIS by LS. LS is the
average number of days stayed in the springs area by the visitor. Note
that we are attributing all days spent in the area to the springs since
this was the primary motivation for the visit according to the survey
responses. This yields the total number of days spent in the springs
area. The last term or ($EPPD/SP) is the expenditures per person day.
The reason we express expenditures in per person days is because when
sampling visitors (i.e., covered below) the head of the party is asked
what is spent for the entire group. This is especially important in
families where the father or mother can speak for the entire group
including children. Equation (2) above is for all expenditures.
Individual items from $EPPS can also be isolated so that we may estimate
total expenditures on restaurants or gas stations, for example. 

Finally, we can derive the direct employment created by expenditures
using the following formula:

(3) E = $ELVIS / (SPEND/ EMP)

 E = Employment created by visitors from outside the Springs area;

 $ELVIS = Total expenditures by visitors from outside the Springs area;

 (SPEND/EMP) = Ratio of sales or spending to employment for those
categories such as motels, restaurants and camp fees by those from
outside the Springs area.

The sales or spending to employment ratio is obtained from Census data
collected by the Federal government within the region under
consideration. Finally, the same source yields the ratio of wages
generated to sales or

(4) WAGES = g $ELVIS

Again, both employment and wages can be estimated for aggregate spending
and spending on individual items by obtaining the sales to employment
ratio and percent wages of sales or spending from outside sources. Thus,
the economic impact of the Springs can be obtained by using the
combination of published data supported by data collected on-site during
the sampling of visitors actually using the natural springs. In
addition, visitors may also be categorized into groups based upon the
type of accommodation mode they used which includes (l) hotels/motels;
(2) condominiums; (3) family/friends; (4) campsites and (5) day
visitors. In the latter case, there is no real accommodation mode since
visitors spend the day and then return to home or elsewhere. Day
visitors might come from surrounding counties since the travel distance
to Ichetucknee Springs is not far, allowing visitors to return to their
home at night. This is probably more prevalent in Ichetucknee Springs
since there are no campsites in the Springs/Park. 

 	The above model may be illustrated by an example. Assume that
1,000,000 visitors attend the springs during a given year and 90% (k)
are from outside the springs area yielding 900,000 VIS. According to
sampling, it is determined that the average length of stay in the
springs area (LS) is 2 days and the size of the average party (SP)
visiting the springs is 4 individuals. These parties collectively spend
$400 per day (i.e., $EPPD). Using equation (2), spending by the VIS
would be estimated as follows:

(5) $ELVIS = $180 Million = 900,000*2 ($400/4)

Thus, visitors from outside the springs area are estimated to spend $180
million in this example. For the combination of goods and services
bought by visitors to the springs, assume that each employee sells
$250,000 per year. These sales would support 720 employees per year
($180 Million / $ .25 Million). Lastly, assume that wages are about 15%
of sales (“g”). This would mean that wages generated are $27 million
(.15*$180 Million) or $37,500 per employee as annual wages. This is just
an example; all numbers are hypothetical and may not reflect actual ones
in the case of this report’s natural springs. 

Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Ichetucknee Springs

Table 2.3 contains the result of implementing the model discussed above
to ascertain the direct economic impact of visitors from the area
surrounding the Ichetucknee Springs. During the 2002 fiscal year,
188,845 people visited the park of which 90% were from outside the
region (i.e., Columbia, Suwannee Counties). Thus, there are an estimated
169,962 person visits from outside the region of impact. These
individuals are from Florida and outside of Florida. From the sample
discussed above, we obtained the distribution of those person-visits
from outside the region of impact. Notice that day visitors make nearly
half of all person-visits. Ichetucknee Springs is a short drive from
such population centers as Jacksonville, Tallahassee, Tampa and Orlando,
Florida for example. In addition, the Springs offers no overnight
camping so it is not surprising that most of the visitors are classified
as day visitors. Day visitors are of interest since they spend less
because they have no lodging expenses. $EPPED or daily spending per
person was estimated from our sample at only $19 per person day as shown
in Table 2.3. Near the top of this table, we find non-resident visitors
segmented by their accommodation mode, their party size and their length
of stay in the area, which are all needed to calculated expenditures. 

We found that party size is largest for condominium use and smallest for
those staying in hotels and motels. Those staying with friends and
family stayed the longest in the Ichetucknee Springs area (i.e., 7 days)
while day visitors were, of course, limited to one day.

 Equation (5) was used to illustrate just how expenditures by visitors
are estimated. Such expenditures can be estimated for each category of
accommodation as shown in Table 2.3. Consider Friends and Family as an
illustration as follows:

(6) $ELVIS (Friends/Family) = 31,953 * 7 ($247 / 4.5) = $12.3 Million

Those staying with friends and family while being drawn to Ichetucknee
Springs for its amenities spent an estimated $12.3 million in fiscal
year 2002. This accommodation mode spending is shown at the bottom of
Table 2.3. There are 10 spending categories in the survey instrument.
The pattern of expenditures varies depending, in part, upon the
accommodation mode.





Table 2.3

Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Visitors 

Associated with Ichetucknee Springs, Fiscal Year 2002

All People	    X	Percent of	      =	Estimated

Attending

 Attendance

Outside

Springs

Visitors

Area Visitors

Non-Resident Visitors to the Springs	188,845

0.9

169,962

Percent of Visitors from Outside the Springs	Sample Size	Percent
Visitors	Party Size	Length of

by Accommodation Mode & Other Statistics	N	    (k)	(VIS)	(SP)	Stay (LS)

Hotels and Motels

	42	0.118	20,056	4	2

Condominiums

	7	0.020	3,399	6.5	5.6

	Friends and Family

	67	0.188	31,953	4.5	7

Camping

66	0.185	31,443	8	3

Day Visitors

	174	0.489	83,111	7	1

	Total

	356	1	169,962	6.4	2.7

Estimated Spending per Party and Individuals	$EPPD	$EPPED

by Accommodation Mode

	(Daily Spending	(Daily Spending

	Per Party)	Per Person)

Hotel and Motels

$410	$102

Condominiums

$451	$81 

	Friends and Family

$247	$55

Camping

	$275	$35

Day Visitors

$134	$19

	All

$215	$34

Estimated Spending, Wages and Employment	Spending	Wages	Employment

	(Mil $)	(Mil $)	   

	Hotel and Motels

	4.1	0.99	59

Condominiums

	1.5	0.37	21

Friends and Family

	12.3	2.63	160

Camping

3.2	0.78	48

Day Visitors

	1.6	0.32	23

	Total

	22.7	5.09	              311

For example, as pointed out above, day visitors will not have any
expenditures on hotels and motels. As pointed out in the last section,
the wages and employment derived from this spending are treated by the
kind of expenditure. For example, out of $12.3 million of spending by
those visiting friends and families, $1.99 million was spent on
restaurants. From the U.S. Census of Business (1997) and an update to
current or 2002 dollars for restaurants, this yields $37,939 in revenue
(i.e. customer spending) generated per employee annually for the
restaurant industry. Thus, 

$1.99 million will employ about 53 individuals (i.e., $1.99 Million
divided by $37,939). Wages generated by visitors staying with friends
and family was estimated at 26.94% from the U.S. Census of Business
(1997) or $.536 million by spending at restaurants, for example. On an
annual basis, full and part-time restaurant workers would earn about
$10,113 per year. 

Visitors staying with friends and family spent a total of $12.3 million
on goods and services related to Ichetucknee Springs of which $2.63
million were generated as wages and salaries employing an estimated 160
full and part-time individuals. This would mean that annual earning
would be about $16,438. This reflects many low wage industries such as
motels, restaurants, entertainment and shopping to mention a few. Also,
many of these jobs are part-time in nature yielding less income per
year. 

Looking at the bottom of Table 2.3, we see the direct economic impact of
visitors to the area in which the Ichetucknee Springs is located summed
across all accommodation modes. In terms of spending, the friends and
family category contributed the most spending while attending the
Springs (i.e., $12.3 million) while those using condominiums contributed
the least spending while attending the Springs (i.e., $1.5 million).
Eco-tourism that depends on visitors staying in hotels and motels would
contribute the most per party day to the area (i.e., $410). There are
camping facilities near the Ichetucknee Springs and these are apparently
used by those visiting the Springs. Campers visiting the Springs
contribute $3.2 million in spending while visiting the Springs. This
impact assumes that the Ichetucknee Springs was the main and fundamental
attraction to the area and that campsites were supportive of this visit.

In summary, visitors from out of the area to Ichetucknee Springs
contributed about $22.7 million in spending in Columbia and Suwannee
Counties. This direct spending created an estimate $5.09 million in
wages and salaries supporting 311 jobs in the area. Workers in this
visitor industry make $16,367 per year. Most of the spending and
employment is created in restaurants ($3.86 million); shopping ($3.75)
and ground transportation/gasoline ($2.95) or over 47% of all spending
in Table 2.4. More specifically, the distribution of spending and
related employment and wages is shown in detail for our ten categories
of spending by visitors in Table 2.4. These industries are rather labor
intensive. For example, the average wages per job in the two-county area
was $23,764 or 45% higher than that estimated for spending categories
related to the springs. Finally, if we combined the two counties of
Columbia and Suwannee as discussed above, Ichetucknee Springs accounted
for only 1% of employment and .7% of wages in the area. Of course, these
percentages would be higher if we compared the springs created
employment and wages to just Suwannee County where most of Ichetucknee
is located. If we did this, the springs direct employment would be 3.1%
of employment and 2.4% of wages when the Ichetucknee Springs created
employment and wages is compared to just Suwannee alone. Since most of
the industries are labor intensive compared to the entire county
employment, we would expect that the expansion in the industries
servicing the springs would add more jobs than a general expansion of
employment in the counties, but, of course, less wages.



Table 2.4

Estimation of Categories of Spending by Those Visitors Outside

the Ichetucknee Springs Area, Florida, 2002

	Spending Category 

Spending (Mil $)	Related Employment	Related Wages (Mil $)

	Lodging

	1.44	29	0.35

	Food & Beverages(Restaurants)	3.86	102	1.04

	Food & Beverages(Groceries)	1.78	13	0.18

	Sport Fees

1.04	12	0.48

	Event Admission Fees	1.67	18	0.29

	Admissions to Attractions	1.63	18	0.37

	Evening Entertainment	2.31	26	0.83

	Ground Transportation	2.95	14	0.94

	Shopping

	3.75	31	0.39

	All Other

	2.27	48	0.22

	All

	22.7	311	5.09

	Note: Aggregate Expenditures for All Categories Including Hotel/Motel;
Family/Friends; 

         Camping and Day Visitors to Ichetucknee Springs State Park. 

CHAPTER 3

 PRIVATE  

Direct Regional Economic Impact of

Wakulla Springs State Park, Florida

on Surrounding Areas

 PRIVATE   tc  \l 2 “” 

 PRIVATE  Description of Wakulla Springs tc  \l 2 “Description of
Wakulla Springs” 

	The Edward Ball Wakulla Springs State Park is located in Wakulla
County, Florida. This county is located on the Gulf of Mexico in the
northwestern part of Florida. More specifically, the park is located 14
miles south of Tallahassee on S.R. 267 at the intersection with S.R. 61.
Wakulla Springs is heralded as one of the largest natural spring basins
in the world. The spring, some four acres in size, boils from a
limestone foundation to form the head of the Wakulla River. The main
spring boil is very deep (about 200 feet) and so clear that the bottom
can be seen in detail. The central point of public areas includes a
grand lodge complete with 27 guest rooms. The building is listed on the
National Registry of Historic Places. Structured from local cypress
timbers, the main entrance to the lodge’s front desk creates a
spectacular ambiance with 30 foot high ceilings, a huge 20 foot hearth
fireplace constructed with lime rock boulders, a solarium, gift shop,
snack bar, and a regionally acclaimed restaurant capable of seating
several hundred guests for banquet-style events such as weddings.
Visitors are eventually lured to the dock, where informative Florida
Park Service rangers guide small groups of nature lovers through the
waterways in glass bottom tour boats. The boat tour meanders through
areas where Tarzan and Creature From the Black Lagoon were filmed
decades ago. Industrialist and Financier Edward Ball, built the massive
hotel and developed the property for public use. Picnicking and swimming
are popular park activities. Visitors are also commonly seen fishing and
snorkeling in the Wakulla River just below U.S. 319, outside the park
boundary. This natural area is known for abundant wildlife, especially
deer, turkey, wild boar, bald eagles, alligators, manatees and abundant
species of fresh and saltwater fish.

	Located within a pristine ecosystem, Wakulla Springs State Park is
surrounded by 4,741 acres of protected forest. This area has been
managed as a public state park since 1986. The actual natural spring is
semi-circular with a diameter of 400 feet. This natural spring generates
252 million gallons of water per day. This flow forms the Wakulla River,
which proceeds on a nine-mile journey where it merges with another
spring-fed water source named the St. Marks River. The confluence of
these two rivers then empty into Appalachee Bay where many marine
species of fish and shellfish thrive as a result of an optimal habitat
produced by the proper salinity which represents a balance of fresh and
salt water. 

	In 2001-2002, 12,662 individual used the lodge at Wakulla Springs State
Park for “night use” while 167,811 visitors came for just a day
visit. Over 3,500 individuals engaged in boat tours during the year. The
primary mission of Wakulla Springs is to ensure that guests have a
quality experience when visiting for dining, lodging, enjoying nature,
education, swimming, picnicking, or any other form of recreation.
Management of these precious natural and cultural resources for future
generations is also a key mission. The park slogan is “We Make
Memories”.

Natural Resource Protection 

	Wakulla Springs has special environmental factors that must be
considered when protecting the spring and its diversity of natural
resources. There is an established program to reduce the invasion of
hydrilla, a non-native plant in Florida. This floating plant crowds out
native vegetation and makes navigation with a boat more difficult due to
clogging of boat propellers with mats of hydrilla. In addition,
development in Wakulla County has increased the level of nitrate,
phosphorous and other contaminants, which have decreased the water
quality. Decreased water quality can seriously affect the river
ecosystem, its drinking water and eventually the visitations at the
park. It has been established by Leeworthy and Bowker (1997) that
decreased environmental quality is a leading indicator of decline in
economic activity. This is especially true where the local economy
depends heavily on eco-tourism that is based on natural resources. They
further state that the decline in the environmental quality or ecosystem
has had a negative effect on the market economy. The market economy
consists of sales, wages and employment that are directly dependent on
the maintenance of a high degree of environmental quality. This is
especially prevalent in Florida where one of the main attractions is the
quality of saltwater beaches. Beach erosion and appearance will act to
deter not only visitors, but also the visitor spending on hotels,
restaurants and other expenditures. This is no different for natural
springs that attract visitors due to their pristine nature now being
threatened by external forces such as exotic weeds and land development.
One way of documenting this effect is to survey visitors and ask them
over a period of time how many visits they have made to the area. If an
area has a situation of deteriorating springs, one might postulate that
attendance would be dominated by “first time visitors”. After a few
visits, tourists would decide to go elsewhere or pass up a particular
spring once the environment starts to decline. This is why we look at
the trend in attendance to the springs over time so we can identify such
effects. The environmental and economic attributes of parks based upon
springs should be subject to a periodic monitoring to ascertain how such
declines, if present, impacts the market economy of jobs, wages and
employment. We would encourage those with the responsibility of managing
natural springs throughout the state to make periodic assessments of how
attendance is impacted by changing environmental quality. This will
enable planners to estimate how the market benefits at a point in time
depend on the present environmental quality and how upward or downward
trends in this quality are impacting attendance and consequently sales,
jobs and wages in the local area. 

Annual Trends and Seasonal Use of Wakulla Springs State Park 

	In fiscal year 1992, about 163 thousand people visited Wakulla Springs
State Park. By fiscal year 2002, over 181 thousand persons visited the
springs, representing an 11% increase over the last 11 years. 

 

By Florida standards, the growth in attendance is slow at only 1% per
year. In Figure 3.1, annual park attendance data are plotted over this
time period to calculate the annual trend in people attending the park
combined with an idea of the year-to-year fluctuations in park
attendance. The straight line plotted through the attendance data
indicates the annual trend in Wakulla Springs State Park attendance
where the computed trend (WAKATT) is given in the lower right hand
corner of Figure 3.1. All attendance data were obtained from the
Division of Recreation and Parks, Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (unpublished)(2002).

	The trend equation for Wakulla Springs State Park indicates an annual
growth in people attending this park by 2.64 thousand per year. From the
Figure 3.1, it would appear that the growth in park attendance was
linear, on average, or a constant number of additional attendees per
year rather than exponential where the growth is maintained at a
constant percent per year with a rising number each year. Of great
interest, the reader should note a great fluctuation in attendance from
year-to-year where peaks occur about every two years over the 1992-2002
period. Compared to Ichetucknee Springs State Park reviewed in Chapter
2, Wakulla Springs State Park attracts only about half of the increase
in attendance per year (i.e., 5.54 compared to 2.64 thousand visitors
per year). In both absolute and percentage terms, it appears that
Wakulla Springs State Park is growing slower than Ichetucknee Springs
State Park as measured by attendance. Using the RSQ (i.e., the
coefficient of determination that indicates the percent of time trend
explained by the secular time trend) in Figure 3.1, it indicates that
the annual linear trend explains about 39% of Wakulla Springs State Park
over the 1992-2002 time period that is attributed to annual cycles or
what is not explained by the annual trend. Thus, cyclical behavior in
park attendance for Wakulla State Park nearly doubles what was observed
in Ichetucknee State Park as discussed in Chapter 2. High cyclical
behavior creates many economic problems for a park. For example, the
planning of a labor force to manage the park may need to involve
significant numbers of part-time employees. Over-utilization of
facilities during annual peaks involves crowding for attendees. Greater
fluctuations in revenue generated by the park makes it difficult to fund
infrastructure expansion in an orderly manner. Therefore, this analysis
of park attendance and the recurring cyclical pattern shown in Figure
3.1 may be very valuable to park managers and planners, especially if
they know the source of the fluctuation such as the national or regional
economy; shifts in demographic patterns or highway construction. The
source of such apparent recurrent cycles is beyond the scope of this
analysis and would be limited to just four park springs in Florida. Of
particular note, the trend is important since it will tell us how fast
the economic impact of this natural springs park might expand in the
future and thereby have a job creating effect on the surrounding rural
economy. This will be discussed below.

	Seasonal use of a park refers to the month-to-month variations in
attendance. Seasonal variation may be due to the nature of the resource
(e.g., change in water temperature) and/or man-made events that
influence demand for goods and services. Knowledge about park
seasonality will help park planners in assembling resources at the
proper intervals during the year to accommodate demand. We obtained
monthly data on Wakulla Springs State Park attendance from the Division
of Recreation and Parks, Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
This was analyzed from 1992 to 2002 for this spring. The analysis was
done, as in Chapter 2, by asking the question first of what attendance
would be per month assuming there was no seasonal influence. This can
easily be computed by dividing annual attendance for any year by the 12
months of the year. 

 

 For example, annual attendance for Wakulla Springs State Park in 2002
was about 181 thousand people. If we assumed even (steady or constant)
demand over the year, then monthly attendance would be 181 thousand
divided by 12 or about 15 thousand persons per month. Assume that we
wish to find the degree of seasonality for the month of January 2002.
Attendance actually recorded in the month of January was a little over 5
thousand persons or about one third. If we look at Figure 3.2, we see
that seasonality was 35.5 for 11 months of January over the 1992-2002
period or one third of 100 which indicates “no seasonality”.
Seasonality was discussed in some detail in Chapter 2. In our example
for Wakulla Springs State Park, January has the lowest seasonal
indicator at 35.5 in Figure 3.2 indicating that this month fails to
attract many visitors relative to other months during the year. From
Figure 3.2, we can see an obvious pattern to seasonality at Wakulla
Springs State Park. From April through August, there is a peak in
seasonal attendance while the winter and fall tend to be the period in
which the occupancy or use rate of this park falls considerably. We
consulted Wakulla Springs State Park manager Sandy Cook (2003) to
explore reasons for our seasonal findings. The period during the year
where seasonality begins (i.e., number or index is greater than 100) is
in late March and early April and peaks in July. According to Cook,
school groups plan field trips to the park around this time. Between
June and August, there is a strong positive seasonal effect (i.e.,
Seasonal Index above 100) due to children being out of school and
families using the park to swim and picnic. In addition, the colder
weather and lower water temperatures during fall and spring months deter
people from using the park as they do during hot summer months. Of
particular note, it is instructive to examine those influences that
apparently are not at work to create seasonality of attendance. It would
appear that Wakulla Springs is not exactly a haven for winter visitors
(ie. snowbirds). If it were, we would expect periods of high seasonal
demand would be in the January through May period of the year, which
occurs in North Florida as traffic flows toward Orlando, Tampa and Miami
for the peak of the year. It would appear that Wakulla Springs State
Park and Ichetucknee Springs State Park both have quite similar seasonal
patterns (i.e., compare Figure 2.2 with Figure 3.2). The distance
between Columbia/Suwannee Counties and Wakulla County is less than 100
miles so we might expect that these two springs (i.e., Ichetucknee and
Wakulla) are subject to the same seasonal influences such as weather,
animal habitat, changing seasons of the year, etc. It would appear that
the seasonality curves are somewhat different among the two springs.
Wakulla Springs State Park’s seasonality curve seems much flatter than
the one generated in Chapter 2 for Ichetucknee meaning that the seasonal
attendance pattern is much less pronounced for the former than the
latter. We think this can be explained since Wakulla Springs State Park
is much more diverse in potential activities at the park due to it’s
facilities and services (lodge, restaurant, glass bottom boats, etc.,
etc) while Ichetucknee Springs is known primarily for its tubing which
is much more prevalent in warm as compared to cold weather. Thus, we see
how facilities, services and products offered by Wakulla Springs State
Park can have a large influence on the seasonal demand experienced by
the area. Of great importance, we must now look at the economy of
Wakulla County to see how Wakulla Springs impacts sales, jobs and wages
in this community. 

Economic Profile of the Area Surrounding Wakulla Springs

	The thrust of this report is to identify the direct economic impact
visitation to natural springs has upon those specific counties
associated with natural springs. In this chapter, we examine the impact
Wakulla Springs has upon Wakulla County, Florida. It is important to
look at the economic setting in which the spring exists. Table 3.1 shows
some relevant economic statistics pertaining to Wakulla County.

Table 3.1

Population, Income, Per Capita Income, Jobs and Earnings Per

Job in Wakulla County, Florida Relating to Wakulla Springs State

Park, 1990 & 2000

   	Rank Among 67 Counties

       1990	              2000	%Change	in 2000

	Population Growth

	Wakulla County	14,437	              22,979  	59.5

56

	Florida

13,033,307	        16,054,328	23.2

	Aggregate Income Growth (Thous $)

	Wakulla County	206,494	            518,309	151.0

49

	 Florida 	258,479,049	      445,739,968	72.4

	Per Capita Income Growth ($)

 Wakulla County	14,303	              22,556	57.7

20

	 Florida 	19,832	               27,765	40.1

	Wage & Salary Job Growth

 Wakulla County	2,747	                 4,649	69.2

55

	 Florida

5,802,287	          7,566,198	30.4

	Average Earnings Per Job ($) 

 Wakulla County	17,349	              27,033	55.8

25

	 Florida 	21,244	               30,226	42.3

	SOURCE: REGIONAL ECONOMIC INFORMATION SYSTEM, U.S. BUREAU OF 

	ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ( CD ROM, 2002)

	

	Wakulla County is not densely settled compared to Florida. This county
has 39 persons per square mile compared to 303 for Florida as a whole
according to the Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of
Florida (2001). Thus, this area includes a relative abundance of land
compared to people which is very conducive to park expansion. Wakulla
County contains not only the developed and undeveloped areas of Wakulla
Springs State Park, but also the Apalachicola National Forest. 

	In terms of temporal changes in economic variables in Wakulla County,
the resident population has expanded from a little over 14.4 thousand in
1990 to a somewhat shy of 23 thousand at the turn of the century (i.e.,
2000), a 59.5% increase as shown in Figure 3.1. As with many Florida
counties, 90% of the population growth is due to in-migration to Wakulla
County rather than the natural increase (i.e., births minus deaths of
the resident population). Also, being on the Gulf of Mexico, this county
has witnessed a great deal of residential development on the coast. This
is especially true near Crawfordville, the largest city in Wakulla
County. The median age of Wakulla County is 36.7 years compared to 38.8
years for the State of Florida which indicates that this county so far,
has not attracted just retirees, but young workers as an ingredient of
its industrial structure which will be discussed below. Of special note,
population in Wakulla County has grown at a rate of over 2.5 times that
of the State of Florida (i.e., 59% versus 23.2%). Although part of this
growth may be explained by starting at a low base in 1990, most of the
growth is based on open space coupled with relatively inexpensive land
which has not only attracted new residents to the State of Florida, but
people from Southern Florida which has become increasingly congested.
See Bell and Bonn (2002) for a discussion of these factors. In Table
3.1, notice that we have also placed the ranking of Wakulla County
economic variables relative to the other 66 counties in the State of
Florida on the right hand side of this table. For example, Wakulla
County’s population is 56th out of 67 counties meaning its relative
population is very small. 

	Aggregate personal income in Wakulla County has increased by 151% over
the 1990 through 2000 period compared to a much slower growth for the
State of Florida as a whole of only 72.4%. Compared to the State of
Florida, Wakulla County has been growing at a faster rate of growth in
population and also in income per capita. The growth in income per
capita for Wakulla County rose from $14,303 in 1990 to $22,556 in 2000,
a nearly 58% increase compared to only about 40% increase for the State
of Florida which is shown in Table 3.1. In 1990, Wakulla County’s per
capita income was only 72% of the state average; however, by the year
2000, it had grown to a little over 81% of the state average. Thus, the
industrial base of Wakulla County is growing more and more toward higher
paying jobs relative to the State of Florida. The faster rate of growth
of this county will also raise wages. Therefore the rate of growth in
the demand for labor in this county exceeds the demand by the state. As
was true of population, wage and salary employment increased by nearly
70% over the last decade reflecting this rapid rate of growth as shown
in Table 3.1. Although somewhat lower than the State of Florida average
earnings per job, Wakulla County has narrowed the differential from 20%
to about 10% over the 1990-2000 period reflecting a more rapid rate of
growth in this county than experienced by the State of Florida. This can
been seen at the bottom of Table 3.1. The more rapid rate of growth in
population, income and wage and salary jobs and wages per job in Wakulla
County is reflected in the nature of the industrial structure in the
county. 

	The industrial structure of Wakulla County is dominated by Leon County
to the north which is the Capital of Florida. Over 43% of the personal
income generated in Wakulla comes from commuters using this county as a
so-called “bedroom community”. Although leveling in recent years,
State of Florida government employment has grown from 1990 to 2000. Such
state employment contains a number of high paid jobs such as those
working at FSU, FAMU and Tallahassee Community College. In addition,
Wakulla County had over 23% of its employment in manufacturing compared
to only 8.3% in Florida as a whole. This manufacturing employment is
concentrated in food and kindred products; paper and allied products as
well as chemical and petroleum commodities. In Florida as a whole,
manufacturing jobs paid in 2000 were about $41,920 per year while
non-manufacturing paid were about only $30,900, or 35.7% less. The
largest private manufacturing employer in Wakulla County is General
Dynamics (Saint Marks Powder Division) with 275 employees (Florida
Chamber of Commerce, 2002), which manufactures large caliber ammunition
and propellants under government contracts. However, the wage structure
in Wakulla is pulled down by employment in commercial fishing, forestry
and tourism.(e.g., Wakulla State Park Lodge and Springs) which typically
are low wage industries due to low skill levels demanded and, in the
case of tourism, the part-time nature of employment.

	Table 3.2 illustrates some of the other socioeconomic aspect of Wakulla
County that is important in ultimately evaluating the economic
importance of Wakulla Springs State Park. Because of the more rapid rate
of growth in employment, the unemployment rate has been well below that
of the State of Florida as shown in Table 3.2. Note that the
participation rate in this county is nearly 3 percentage points above
that of the entire state indicating that the labor market in Wakulla
County is especially tight and has induced more people to work. This is
in stark contrast to Columbia and Suwannee Counties discussed in Chapter
Two. For the Ichetucknee Springs State Park, we argued that “disguised
unemployment” or a slack labor market is very indicative of this area.
If we are examining a county in terms of adding jobs through the
location of state parks to the tourist sector, then it would appear that
the area surrounding Wakulla Springs would benefit more in terms of
“job needs” than the Wakulla Springs area. Of course, the location
of a springs state park is dictated more by the location and
characteristics of natural resources than by rural economic development
needs. That is, the rural economic development needs of an area through
the addition of jobs via the creation of parks would be heavily
qualified by the location of the natural resources and whether such
resources provide a significant attractant to visitors to Florida and
its regions. The per capita income and growth in Wakulla County has
helped to reduce the poverty rate in the county. Such a rate is much
lower in Wakulla County than the State of Florida.

Finally, the general welfare of a county can be measured in terms of
unemployment and poverty rates, but the bottom line is to be found in
the relative level of per capita income. Being at or above the state
average with respect to per capita income will reflect a somewhat higher
“quality of life.” Individuals can debate what factors determine the
quality of life, but our emphasis is upon being employed with a
relatively high level of income flowing to individuals in an area. More
narrowly, we may be defining the economic quality of life, but at least
we have defined what we mean by the concept as used in this report. At
the bottom of Table 3.2, we see per capita income broken down into its
important components. It should be noted that many counties throughout
Florida have a high quality of economic life by working less than the
State of Florida average participation rate. Such residents do not live
off their labor, but their possession of capital such as bonds, stocks
and rental housing. Collier and Palm Beach Counties in South Florida
have such a high amount of capital per individual, that this elevates
their per capita income even with an average level of earnings from
labor. For example, individuals may choose not to work (even though they
have skills in the medical or engineering fields) due to their
relatively large ownership of capital assets. In Table 3.2, per capita
income is broken down into all labor earnings, capital income (i.e., Cap
Inc) and transfer payments.

Table 3.2

Socioeconomic Characteristics of Wakulla County, Florida

Containing the Wakulla Springs State Park, 2000

Rank Among 67

Counties in Florida

Recorded Unemployment Rate	%

Wakulla County

3.01	50

Florida

	3.75	N/A

	Labor Force Participation Rate*	%

	 	Wakulla County

81.2	13

Florida

	78.5	N/A

	Poverty Rate (% of Population)	%

Wakulla County

13.9	45

Florida

	15.2	N/A

	Components of Per Capita Income ($)

Income	Income From ($)

	Per Capita ($)	Earnings	Cap Inc	Trans Pay

	Wakulla County	22,556	16,900	2,763	2,893

	Florida 

27,764	16,560	7,005	4,199

* Percent of population in the county between the ages of 15-64 who are
employed.

	SOURCE: FLORIDA STATISTICAL ABSTRACT 2001, BEBR, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
(2001)

This exhausts the flow of income to an individual. All labor earnings
(i.e., income from work to all that work including sole proprietors) per
capita in Wakulla County are about 2% higher than that for the State of
Florida. However, income from capital is much lower in Wakulla County
than that statewide. People tend to be younger in Wakulla County as
discussed above and also have a higher percentage of the population
between 15-64 who works (i.e., participation rate). Residents of Wakulla
County fall less into the retirement category and more into the category
where individuals are at the beginning phase of their work/life cycle.
Per capita “capital income” is only about 40% (i.e., $2,763/$7,005)
of the statewide average in Wakulla County. Finally, transfer payments
comprise the third component of per capita income. Transfer payments are
composed largely of retirement income, unemployment compensation and
other forms of personal aid (e.g., Medicaid). In Wakulla County, there
are less individuals in retirement (i.e., less retirement income); more
people employed (i.e., lower unemployment rate) and more income from
earnings to avoid needed transfer payments from government. While
Florida has a high ratio of capital to individual (i.e., they have
accumulated assets for retirement) and a high percent of the population
in retirement (i.e., more retirement income), Wakulla County is really
an opposite picture for the population whom depends more on wages than
on retirement income. Against this economic backdrop, we shall evaluate
the relative economic importance of Wakulla Springs State Park to
surrounding political area called Wakulla County. 

Direct Economic Impact of Wakulla Springs: The Model

	In Chapter 2 dealing with the economic importance of Ichetucknee
Springs, we developed an economic model in which to calculate the
spending, employment and wages generated by visitors coming from outside
the area of economic impact. We wished to see how much economic activity
and benefits are generated to the springs by having individuals visit
the area (e.g., county) surrounding the park. The model will be
identical for all four springs considered in this report. The impact of
visitors is based upon springs attendance and a sampling of the spending
habits of these visitors to the springs in question. Spending or sales
to these visitors were also broken down into the kinds of goods and
services (i.e., industries) supported in the surrounding area by these
purchases. Since the model or framework in which to develop these basic
economic impact variables for the springs in question has been explained
in some detail in Chapter Two, we shall not repeat it here. We advise
the reader to return to Chapter Two if he/she needs a detailed
discussion of the general model applied to Wakulla Springs in this
Chapter. A reader not interested in the technical model may skip such
sections and find the numbers reflecting the sales (expenditures);
wages; employment and a breakdown of the kinds of industries benefiting
from such spending in Wakulla Springs State Park and around the county. 

Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Wakulla Springs

	During 2002, a survey of non-resident visitors to Wakulla Springs State
Park was initiated to meet the objectives this study. Residents were
confined to anyone using the park that lived in Wakulla County. People
attending the springs were first identified as either residents or
non-residents. The latter were called “visitors” with reference to
people coming from outside the economic area under consideration (i.e.,
Wakulla County). This was the same method employed in Chapter 2 dealing
with the economic impact of Ichetucknee Spring State Park. In total, 340
visitors were interviewed to develop an economic profile to use in
conjunction with attendance to obtain the total economic impact on
Wakulla County discussed in some detail above. Consider Table 3.3.

Table 3.3

Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Visitors Associated

with Wakulla Springs, Florida, Fiscal Year 2001-2002

All People	X	Percent of	 =	Estimated

Attending

Attendance

Outside

Springs

Visitors

Area Visitors

Non-Resident Visitors to the Springs	180,793

0.7

126,555

Percent of Visitors from Outside the Springs	Sample Size	Percent
Visitors	Party Size	Length of

by Accommodation Mode & Other Statistics	N	(k)	(VIS)	(SP)	Stay(LS)

Hotels and Motels

	130	         0.382	48,389	3.99	2.78

Condominiums

	15	         0.044	  5,583	3.67	4.80

Friends and Family

	161	         0.474	 59,928	4.48	1.40

Camping

2	         0.006	     744	4.00	2.50

Day Visitors

	32	         0.094	   11,911	4.76	1.00

	Total

	      340	1	  126,555	4.63	2.05

Estimated Spending Per Party and Individuals	$EPPD	$EPPED

by Accommodation Mode

	(Daily Spending	(Daily Spending

	Per Party)	Per Person)

Hotel and Motels

$453	$114 

Condominiums

$337	$92

Friends and Family

$231	$52

Camping

	$191	$48

Day Visitors

$291	$61

	All

$409	$89

	Estimated Spending, Wages and Employment	Spending	 Wages	Employment

	(Mil $)	(Mil $)	 

Hotel and Motels

15.3	2.98	 246

Condominiums

1.8	0.31	   31

Friends and Family

4.3	0.88	   58

Camping

	0.1	0.02	    1

Day Visitors

0.7	0.14	   11

Total

22.2	4.33	  347



	In fiscal year 2002, 180,793 individuals were attracted to the Wakulla
Springs State Park. From our sampling, it was estimated that about 70%
of these individuals could be designated as visitors from outside
Wakulla County. Thus, in Table 3.3, it is estimated that nearly 127
thousand Wakulla Springs visitors injected money into the local economy.
These visitors were divided into five classifications based primarily on
accommodation mode with one category included especially for day
visitors from outside of Wakulla County. According to our sample, the
two prime accommodation modes were (1) staying with friends and family
and (2) hotel and motels, constituting about 86% of all visitors
sampled. The Wakulla Springs Lodge is primarily the one providing one of
the most prominent amenities of the park. There was not much variance
found in party size to Wakulla Springs averaging about 4-5 individuals
shown in Table 3.3. Parties of visitors stayed from one to nearly five
days (i.e., condominiums). 

	Of interest, spending per party day varied from $191 for those that
camped to $453 for those staying in the hotels and motels in Wakulla
County. It should be noted that to be included in the economic impact, a
visitors’ primary objective must be to see the amenities of the
Springs. Thus, one could camp outside the Springs, but still be counted
as a by-product of primarily attending the Springs. As a group, visitors
spent about $409 per party and $89 per person day. It should be noted
that spending per party and person by visitors is about double that
found in Ichetucknee Springs in Chapter Two. This is a reasonable
finding given that Wakulla Springs contains an historic lodge which is
an attraction in itself. At the end of our economic analysis of the four
springs in northern and central Florida, we shall compare the spending
among the springs as well as our finding with other studies in this
area.

	The economic model used to estimate the economic impact of Wakulla
Springs-related visitors on Wakulla County was described extensively in
Chapter 2 dealing with Ichetucknee Springs. Table 3.3 contains the
necessary information to estimate the economic impact defined as the
estimated spending, wages, and employment generated by visitors to the
Wakulla Springs State Park. Spending by visitors is a function of
attendance, length of stay per visitor in the area and spending per
individual. In addition, we must know what commodities are purchased by
visitors in order to estimate tourist-related wages and employment. All
of these computations are easily implemented by the use of a fairly
complicated spreadsheet analysis which can be made available to park
researchers. 

	At the bottom of Table 3.3, the end result of these rather complicated
computations are shown by accommodation mode and also include day
visitors. For the year 2002, it is estimated that Wakulla
Springs-related visitors spent $22.19 million in Wakulla County. This is
very close to our estimated total spending by visitors to Ichetucknee
Springs (i.e., $22.7 million). The latter springs has about a third more
visitors than Wakulla Springs; however, we have indicated that spending
per visitor day is about twice that found by research presented in
Chapter Two for Ichetucknee Springs. Based upon the kind of spending by
visitors (e.g., shopping; restaurants; hotels, etc), it was estimated
that this generated $4.33 million in salaries and wages supporting 347
jobs. Such jobs are largely part-time and low skilled based upon the
kind of spending by visitors which is true throughout Florida where
tourism is the number one industry in terms of employment and wages.
Dividing wages by employment generated by visitors to Wakulla Springs,
the annual wage rate of those working in the visitor sector averaged
only $12,478 per year.

	

Table 3.4

Estimation of Wakulla Springs Visitors by Category in

Wakulla County, Florida, 2002

Spending Category 

Spending

Related Employment	Related Wages

(Mil $)

(Mil $)

	Lodging

	4.01

81

0.96

	Food & Beverages (Restaurants)	3.42

90

0.92

	Food & Beverages (Groceries)	2.11

15

0.21

	Admission Fees

1.21

13

0.21

	Evening Entertainment	2.51

28

0.81

	Ground Transportation	1.47

7

0.47

	Shopping

	3.59

30

0.37

	All Other

	3.99

83

0.38

	Total

	22.31

            347

4.33

	Note: Aggregate expenditures for all modes including Hotels/Motels;
Friends/Families; 

         Campgrounds; Condominiums plus Day Visitors to Wakulla Springs
Park.

	

Table 3.4 shows the distribution of spending by all visitors based upon
the overall spending pattern. Each visitor surveyed was asked to provide
information about their spending according to the eight commodities
shown in Table 3.4. These commodities, as expected, range from lodging
to local shopping. The four largest categories of spending in Table 3.4
are lodging ($4.01 million); all other ($3.99 million); shopping ($3.59
million) and restaurants ($3.42 million) representing $15.01 million
which computes to over two thirds of all spending. The existence of the
Wakulla Lodge (i.e., hotel) probably stimulates the spending on this
category of lodging. These spending categories represent the benefactors
of having Wakulla Springs State Park in Wakulla County.	

	What is the relative contribution of Wakulla Springs to the economy of
Wakulla County? In 2000, Wakulla County generated $126 million in wage
and salary disbursements supporting 4,648 full and part time jobs. 
Wakulla Springs State Park contributes about 3.4% of wages and salaries
($4.33 milllion/$126 million), but 7.5% of total employment (347/4,648).
In terms of jobs, Wakulla Springs is a fairly substantial part of the
Wakulla County economy. As pointed out in the earlier discussion above,
we indicated that the leading firm in Wakulla County or General Dynamics
(i.e., Saint Marks Powder Division) employs about 275 persons, which
would put this firm in second place in Wakulla County. Of course, jobs
with General Dynamics probably pay considerably higher wage rates
because of the highly technical skills demanded in this firm. In
addition, such jobs with General Dynamics are likely to be fulltime
rather than part time, which is obvious at Wakulla Springs by looking at
Figure 3.2 showing the seasonal pattern of attendance at the park.
Finally, the growth in Wakulla Springs State Park adds jobs to the
economy of Wakulla County. Although largely part time and low wage jobs,
they should be welcome to keep the entire labor force almost fully
employed. There are many counties in the Suwannee River Basis (e.g.,
Hamilton, Suwannee, Madison, etc), which would welcome such jobs to a
labor force that is underemployed. This was discussed in Chapter Two
where we pointed out that the participation rate in Suwannee County, for
example, is evidence that this county needs more jobs of any nature to
reduce “disguised unemployment” which is roughly measured by how low
the participation rate is for a given labor force. This topic will be
revisited in Chapter 6 on our comparison of the findings from all four
Springs on the agenda.

 

CHAPTER 4

Direct Regional Economic Impact

of Homosassa Springs State Park

on Citrus County, Florida

Description of the Homosassa Springs 

Homosassa Springs State Park offers a showcase of Florida wildlife and
endangered species on 185 acres close to Florida’s west coast of the
Gulf of Mexico in Citrus County. The park was purchased from Citrus
County in 1989. This county is bordered on the west and south by the
Gulf of Mexico and on the east by the Withlacoochee River. The main
entrance to Homosassa Springs is located on U.S. Highway 19 in Homosassa
and is 75 miles north of Tampa and St. Petersburg and 90 miles from
Orlando.

This park contains a spring plus a floating underwater observatory in
45-foot deep spring where one can view fresh and saltwater fish and
endangered Florida manatees. A huge spring, of which millions of gallons
of fresh clear water flows every hour, is the centerpiece of Homosassa
Springs, which is the headwater of the Homosassa River. This river flows
9 miles west into the Gulf of Mexico providing a mixture of both fresh
and saltwater fisheries. These fish are attracted to the
“first-magnitude” spring with its constant year around water
temperature of 72 degrees Fahrenheit. There are daily educational
programs that focus upon the manatee, alligators and Florida snakes.
Viewing the endangered manatee is difficult in the wild, but it is an
every day occurrence at Homosassa Springs. In fact, the park is the only
natural area in the world where many manatees may be observed 365 days a
year. Wildlife displays include a Florida black bear, bobcat,
alligators, foxes, deer, otter, and numerous native and migratory birds.
Boat transportation is provided from the Visitor Center on U.S. 19 to
the Wildlife Park. Also, nature trails throughout the park encourage
nature study and give visitors a chance to experience wetland and hydric
hammock environments. Most of the birds and animals living in Homosassa
Springs could not survive in the wild, but can only survive in the
natural habitat and diet supplied by the personnel at the park. Also,
visitors may picnic at the park and walk nature trails. Finally, the
park has many other amenities such as the Wildlife Café, a snack bar
located at the west entrance to the wildlife park and the Riverside
Buffet House, featuring home cooking, Florida style, and is open daily
for lunch and dinner at the park’s Visitor Center off U.S. 19.

Once the park came under state control in 1989, substantial efforts were
made and continue to be made to improve this natural asset. More
specifically, there has been an emphasis to provide resource-related
recreation while preserving, interpreting and restoring natural and
cultural resources. According to Linley (2003), “the primary shifts
were to move the exotic and farm animals out and bring wildlife from
Florida in and shift the public programs from entertainment to
environmental education/interpretation”.

Natural Resource Protection

 	Research on the environmental issues facing the park at Homosassa
Springs revealed that this park might be somewhat less adversely
impacted by water quality than, for example, Wakulla Springs. The
Friends of Homosassa Springs Wildlife Park along with the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection do monitor environmental
conditions at these springs. The public and government have developed a
Master Site Plan to guide the direction of the park. The prime objective
is to conserve and enhance the wildlife and other park resources.
Contained in this is to provide living space for the wildlife that is as
natural as possible while allowing observations for visitors. The water
quality will continue to be monitored as it is in other natural springs.
The usual cause of diminished water quality is uncontrolled residential
and commercial development in the surrounding area. One crude indicator
of this possibility is the population density in Citrus County. In 2000,
this county had 206 persons per square mile compared to 303 for the
entire State of Florida. In terms of density, Citrus County is ranked
27th in population density among the 67 counties in the State of
Florida. In addition, tourists are an emerging sector in Citrus County
and are partially attracted by the appeal of Homosassa Springs State
Park. The manatee does not have such problems in Homosassa Springs when
compared to Blue Spring (i.e., see Chapter 5) where the drawing down of
water levels could have mortality rendered to the population due to
overcrowding. What is happening in other springs does not seem to be an
immediate environmental problem in Homosassa Springs, but could be a
problem if not factored into and acted upon in following the local
comprehensive plan and Site Plan as Citrus and other surrounding
counties expand.

Annual Trend and Seasonal Use of Homosassa Springs State Park

In fiscal year 1992, slightly over 200 thousand people visited Homosassa
Springs State Park. By fiscal year 2002, visitors numbered nearly 266
thousand people, a 33% increase over the last 11 years. In Figure 4.1,
annual park attendance data are plotted over this time period to
calculate the annual trend in people attending the park combined with
year-to-year fluctuations in park attendance. The straight line through
the attendance data indicates the annual trend in park attendance where
the trend equation (i.e., HOMOATT) is given in the lower right hand part
of Figure 4.1. All attendance data were obtained from the Division of
Recreation and Parks, Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(unpublished, 2002). 

The trend equation for Homosassa Springs State Park attendance shown in
Figure 4.1 indicates an annual growth in people attending this park by
8.2 thousand per year. 



 From the appearance of this graph, it would appear that growth in park
attendance was linear, or on average, a constant number of additional
attendees per year rather than exponential where annual growth is
sustained by a constant percent per year. Of course, the reader should
note that there is considerable fluctuation of attendance from year to
year around the annual trend. Using the RSQ following the trend equation
in Figure 4.1, indications suggest that the annual linear trend line
explains about 90% the attendance at of Homosassa Springs State Park
over the 1992-2002 period while the balance (i.e., 10%) is attributed to
annual cycles. The RSQ is a widely used statistical measure that
explains how much the linear trend “explains” attendance at the
springs over the period of analysis. Subtracting RSQ from unity or one
yields annual cycles or what is explained by national economic
conditions, weather and possibly changes in environmental conditions at
the springs themselves. Upon review of the trend equation, Linley (2002)
felt that part of the upward trend may be due to improvement in the park
itself ranging from repairs and new facilities such as new sidewalks,
facelifts to various buildings, upgrading the gift shop, paving roads
and renovation of the Visitor Center. Further, Linley (2002) feels that
the change in policy to that based upon resource-based recreation and
away from exotic animals and plants including those used on farms may
also be responsible. In addition, tourism declined after September 11,
2002 and the slow economy is still continuing to have an impact on park
attendance, thereby explaining the drop in attendance between 2001 and
2002. Also, Homosassa Springs had a special October 2000 event that may
have pushed up attendance only for this period. One would expect that
increases in the national and Florida populations plus rises in per
capita disposable income yield more money to recreation would be the
primary factors explaining the decidedly upward trend. In our economic
analysis in this report, it is necessary to know the historical growth
in attendance since such trends are likely to continue into the future
and thereby adding more park-related spending in the study area. We
cannot say how much each factor may contribute to the annual growth in
attendance without further study of the entire springs park system in
Florida and is well beyond the scope of this study. In addition to this
annual analysis, we can also look at the seasonality of park attendance.

	Seasonal use of a park refers to the month-to-month variation, if any,
in attendance. Seasonal variation may be due to the nature of the
resource and/or man-made events that influence the demand for goods and
services such as a water resource (e.g., most people do not want to go
diving during winter months). We obtained monthly attendance data on
Homosassa Springs State Park from the Division of Recreation and Parks,
Florida Department of Environmental Regulations. This was analyzed from
1992-2002 for these springs. If there is no seasonality, then annual
attendance placed on a monthly basis would be 1/12 of the annual figure.
This was discussed with examples in the previous two chapters and will
not be reviewed in great detail in this chapter. Consider Figure 4.2. If
a month is 1/12 of the annual attendance, then we assign it a value of
100 (i.e., no seasonality). For Homosassa Springs, seasonality of
attendance is at its peak from February through April. This coincides
with the typical tourist season for Florida. Citrus County is considered
in the Tampa Bay area where the typical visitors from northern states
visit Florida. Linley (2002) states, “ our (Homosassa Springs)
seasonal trends are typical for tourism in this part of Florida”. From
May-December of each year, Homosassa Springs exhibits a trough in
attendance as visitors exit Florida. Such seasonality is important for
park management. For example, major renovations might take place in
September, which is at seasonal ebb. Part time employment would be hired
for the February-April peak seasonal period. Compared to Ichetucknee and
Wakulla Springs, the seasonal pattern in Homosassa Springs is less
pronounced. Generally speaking, extreme seasonality is associated with
economic inefficiency since resources including labor, building and
other attributes of a spring go idle for a good part of the year.

 

Economic Profile of the Areas Surrounding Homosassa Springs

 	The thrust of this report is to identify the direct economic impact
visitors to the springs have upon a particular area. So, it is important
to look at the economic setting in which the springs exists. As
discussed above, Homosassa Springs is located in Citrus County, Florida.
This is outlined in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. 

Table 4.1 shows the growth in some strategic economic variables over the
1990 to 2000 in Citrus County. In terms of resident population, Citrus
County expanded from a little under 95 thousand in 1990 to nearly 119
thousand, a 25.4% increase. This is slightly faster than the growth in
population at the state level. The population growth in Citrus County is
entirely due to in-migration from outside the county, which is very
characteristic of Florida counties. The county is faced with managing
such growth in terms of the pressure placed upon natural resources such
as the fisheries, wetlands and other resources. The median age in Citrus
County is nearly 53 years compared to only 39 years in the entire State
of Florida, meaning that the in-migration is largely due to retirees to
this coastal Gulf of Mexico county. In fact, Homosassa Springs in itself
is an attraction to retirees and visitors from outside the county. The
sustainability of the environment as argued in Chapter 1 is necessary in
order to attract balanced and healthy economic growth as indicated by
experience throughout many Florida counties. 

 	Aggregate personal income in Citrus County grew by nearly 74% over the
1990-2000 period based upon the increase in population (i.e. bringing
more people to the county receiving income from various sources) and
rises in per capita income as the standard of living grew due to a rapid
growth in technological change both in the U.S. and in Florida.



Table 4.1

Population, Income, Per Capita Income, Jobs and Earnings Per

Job in Citrus Country, Florida Relating to Homosassa Springs

State Park, 1990 and 2000

Rank Among 67 Counties

1990	2000	%Change

      in Year 2000*

	Population Growth

	    Citrus County	94,545	118,680	25.4

	30

	    Florida

13,033,307	16,054,328	23.2

	N/A

	Aggregate Income Growth (Thous $)

	    Citrus County	1,468,252	2,551,242	73.8

	34

	    Florida 	258,479,049	445,739,968	72.4

	N/A

	Per Capita Income Growth ($)

	     Citrus County	15,513	21,397	38.6

	40

	     Florida 	19,832	27,765	40.1

	N/A

	Employment / Job Growth

     Citrus County	23,253	30,466	31.1

	34

	     Florida

5,802,287	7,566,198	30.4

	N/A

	Average Wages / Earnings Per Job ($) 

     Citrus County 	18,183	23,296	28.1

	50

	     Florida

21,244	30,226	42.3

	N/A

	*Ranked in descending numerical order except for ascending where lower
numbers are more "favorable".

SOURCE: REGIONAL ECONOMIC INFORMATION SYSTEM, U.S. BUREAU OF 

	ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ( CD ROM, 2002)



Table 4.2

Socioeconomic Characteristics of Citrus County, Florida

Containing Homosassa Springs State Park, 2000

Rank Among 67

Recorded Unemployment Rate	%

Counties in Florida*

	Citrus County	4.7

23

Florida

3.8

N/A

Labor Force Participation Rate*	%

             	Citrus County	58.8

52

Florida

78.5

N/A

Poverty Rate(% of Population)**	%

	Citrus County	15.3

38

Florida

15.2

N/A

Components of Per Capita Income ($)

Income	Income From

	Per Capita	Earnings	Cap Inc	Trans Pay

Citrus County	21,497	8,153	7,281	6,063

	Florida

27,764	16,560	7,005	4,199

*Ranked in descending numerical order except for ascending where lower
number is more "favorable"

**Percent of population in the county between the ages of 15-64 who are
employed. 

	SOURCE: FLORIDA STATISTICAL ABSTRACT 2001, BEBR, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
(2001)

This leads us to an investigation of the rise in per capita income in
Citrus County, which is one of the best indicators of the economic
health of an area (i.e., the unemployment rate might be another). In
Table 4.1, we see that the per capita income in Citrus County is below
the State of Florida average both in 1990 and 2000. Per capita income in
Citrus County grew by almost 39% over this period, but did not catch up
to that of Florida as a whole. This is most probably due to the
industrial structure of the county, which appears to be based upon
retirement and tourism, which generally produce an industrial base of
part-time and low-skilled jobs. Employment growth matched the State of
Florida rate of growth over the 1990-2000 period. However, the rise in
earnings per job greatly trailed the state level as indicated at the
bottom of Table 4.1. It would appear that Citrus County has remained on
a course of economic expansion that was characteristic of Florida during
the 1970’s and l980’s where in-migration and tourism were more
pronounced. Since then, Florida has become more diversified into
high-tech jobs paying a larger average annual wage.

Table 4.2 shows a different perspective on what has been said above
under this section on the economic profile of the area. Citrus County
has a measured unemployment rate that is comparable to the State of
Florida. It would appear there is no problem in employing idle resources
(e.g., labor). However, the reader should look at the “participation
rate” which is the ratio of employable people (15-64 years of age) to
total population. For Citrus County, this rate is only 58.8% compared to
78.5% for the State of Florida. This could be interpreted in two ways.
In Chapter 1, we talked about Suwannee County also having a low
participation rate and interpreted that as a lack of jobs for all that
want to work. In many counties around the Suwannee River, Bell and Bonn
(2002) have pointed out a second kind of unemployment called
“disguised unemployment”. The massive in-migration coupled with the
age structure would indicate that Citrus County’s economy is heavily
dependent on retirement income where people choose not to work. They
have come to Florida or from elsewhere in Florida to retire, thereby
explaining the low participation rate. We see no lack of jobs in this
county as was true in Suwannee County.

Finally, Table 4.2 breaks down per capita income into its parts.
Earnings per capita are decidedly below the state average indicating not
only that the industrial structure is one based on low-income jobs, but
that many of those Citrus County residents choose not to work, and
remain retired. The retirement hypothesis is further reinforced by the
fact that residents of Citrus County receive more “capital income”
than the state average. This represents stocks, bonds and other assets
yielding a flow of income primarily for retirement. Finally, transfer
payments contain many things, but largely consists of retirement income
from private companies and social security payments from the Federal
government. The reader should note that transfer payments per capita are
50% higher than those received by the average resident in Florida while
capital income per capita is about 4% above the state average. These
income statistics are very consistent with our hypothesis that a pillar
of the Citrus County economic based is directly dependent on the
retirement sector. The fact that capital income per capita is only 4%
above the State of Florida average would indicate that the average
retiree to Citrus County is not overly affluent, but is typical of the
economic status of most Florida retirees. Some counties such as Collier
(i.e., Naples) and Palm Beach have capital income per capita 50 to over
100 percent above the state average and are a rough guide to the
economic status of retirees. This completes the economic profile of
Citrus County and now we shall move on to see how the income, employment
and wages generated by Homosassa Springs fit into this profile.

Direct Economic Impact of Homosassa Springs: The Model

In Chapter 2 dealing with the economic importance of Ichetucknee
Springs, we developed an economic model in which to calculate the
spending, employment and wages generated by visitors coming from outside
the area of economic impact. We wished to see how much economic activity
and benefits are generated to the springs by having individuals visit
the area (i.e., county) surrounding the park. The model is identical for
all four springs considered in this report. The impact of visitors is
based upon springs attendance and data generated from sampling visitors
about their spending habits to the springs in question, and within the
surrounding county. Spending or sales by these visitors were also broken
down into the types of goods and services (i.e., industries) supported
in the surrounding area by these purchases. Since the model or framework
in which to develop these basic economic variables for the springs in
question has been discussed in great detail in Chapter 2, we shall not
repeat it here. We advise the reader to return to Chapter 2, if he/she
has not read this chapter to get the exposition of the detailed model. A
reader not interested in the technical model may skip Chapter 2 and find
the numbers reflecting the sales (i.e., expenditures), wages and
employment and a breakdown of the kinds of industries benefiting from
such spending in and around Homosassa Springs State Park. 

Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Homosassa Springs

 During 2002 and 2003, a survey of visitors to Homosassa Springs State
Park was initiated as a critical part of this study. Visitors were
divided into residents and non-residents of Citrus County. Since the
thrust of this study is to look at the economic impact of non-residents,
400 visitors from outside Citrus County were interviewed to ascertain
critical information on such variables as party size, length of stay and
spending patterns of these park attendees. This was the same method
employed in Chapters 2 and 3 dealing with the economic impact of
Ichetucknee Springs State Park and Wakulla Springs State Park.

During fiscal year 2002, 265,977 individuals were attracted to Homosassa
Springs State Park. From our sampling, it was estimated that 64% of
these individuals could be designated as visitors from outside Citrus
County. Thus, in Table 4.3, it is estimated that nearly 170 thousand
Homosassa Springs visitors from outside Citrus County injected money
into the local economy. These visitors were divided into five
classifications based on their selected accommodation mode. One category
was included for those day visitors traveling from outside of Citrus
County. According to our sample, day visitors and those staying with
friends and family, constituting about 75% of all visitors sampled. This
is shown in Table 4.3. There were not many variations in party size
ranging from 3.5 (i.e., day visitors) to 4.28 (campground users). A
party of visitors stays from 1 (i.e., day visitors) to as many as 7
(i.e., campers) days as shown in Table 4.3.

Of interest, spending per party day varied from $46 for day visitors to
$148 per party day for those staying in hotels and motels in Citrus
County. It should be noted that to be included in the economic impact, a
visitors primary objective must be to see the amenities connected to the
springs. Thus, one could camp outside the springs, but still be counted
as a by-product of primarily attending the springs. As one can see from
Table 4.3, campers in the area constitute only 9% of all visitors to
Homosassa Springs. As a group, visitors spent about $90 per party day
and $25 per person day. These spending rates by visitors from outside
Citrus County have a lower spending rate (e.g., per party day) for
Citrus County than either Ichetucknee and Wakulla Springs analyzed in
Chapters 2 and 3. A comparison for all four parks may be seen later in
Chapter 6.

Table 4.3

Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Visitors Associated

with Homosassa Springs, Fiscal Year 2001-2002

	All People	X	Percent of	=	Estimated

Attending

Attendance

Outside Area

Springs

Visitors

Visitors

 

	Non-Resident Visitors to the Springs	265,977

0.64

169,962

Percent of Visitors from Outside the Springs    Sample Size	Percent
Visitors	Party Size	Length of

by Accommodation Mode & Other Statistics	N	(k)	(VIS)	(SP)	Stay (LS)

Hotels and Motels

	62	0.155	26,344	3.65	5.14

Condominiums

	   2	0.005	       850	5.60	3.50

Friends and Family

	119	0.298	50,564	3.80	4.58

Camping

 36	0.090	15,297	4.28	7.11

Day Visitors

	181	0.453	76,908	3.50	     1.00

	Total

	400	   1	    169,962	3.69	3.27

	Estimated Spending Per Party and Individuals	$EPPD	$EPPED

by Accommodation Mode

	(Daily Spending	(Daily Spending

	Per Party)	Per Person)

Hotel and Motels

$148 	$40 

Condominiums

$80 	$20 

Friends and Family

$70 	$18 

Camping

	$107 	$25 

Day Visitors

$46 	$13 

	All

$90 	$25 

	Estimated Spending, Wages and Employment	 Spending	  Wages	Employment

	  (Mil $)	   (Mil $)

Hotel and Motels

5.5	1.28	93

	Condominiums

0.1	0.01	1

	Friends and Family

4.3	0.98	57

	Camping

	2.6	0.64	40

	Day Visitors

1.1	0.21	15

Total

       13.6	3.12	206

	

The economic model used to estimate the economic impact of Homosassa
Springs-related visitors on Citrus County was described extensively in
Chapter 2 dealing with Ichetucknee Springs. Table 4.3 contains the
necessary information to estimate the total economic impact defined as
the estimated spending, wages and employment generated by visitors to
Homosassa Springs State Park from outside Citrus County. Spending by
accommodation mode and day visitors is a function of attendance, length
of stay per visitor in the area and spending per individual. Multiplying
these three factors together for motels and hotels as an example yields
about $5.5 million spent by these Homosassa Springs-related visitors
from outside Citrus County. In addition, we must know what commodities
are bought by visitors to estimate visitor-related wages and employment
generated by their expenditures. All of these computations are easily
implemented by the use of a fairly complicated spreadsheet analysis
which can be made available to park researchers. 

At the bottom of Table 4.3, the end result of these rather complicated
computations are shown by accommodation mode plus day visitors. For the
year 2002, it is estimated that Homosassa Springs State Park-related
visitors spend about $13.6 million in Citrus County. This is
considerably lower than the expenditures generated by Ichetucknee or
Wakulla Springs considered in Chapters 2 and 3 above. Based upon the
kind of spending by visitors (shopping, restaurants, hotels), it was
estimated that these expenditures generated $3.12 million in wages and
206 jobs. Such jobs as discussed before are largely part-time and low
skilled based upon the kind of spending by visitors which is true
throughout Florida where tourism is the number one industry in terms of
employment and wages. Dividing wages by employment generated by
visitors, the annual wage rate of those working in the visitor sector
averaged only $15,146 per year. As shown in Table 4.1, the average
annual earning per job in Citrus County is $23,296.

Table 4.4 shows the distribution of spending by all visitors based upon
the overall spending pattern. Each visitor surveyed was asked to provide
their spending according to eight commodities shown in Table 4.4. The
four largest categories of spending in Table 4.4 are admission fees
($4.22 million); lodging ($3.43 million), evening entertainment ($2.36
million) and restaurants ($1.87 million) or $11.88 million which is 88%
of all visitor spending. It should be pointed out that admission fees
embrace a host of spending such as charter boats used in Citrus County
while the primary purpose is to visit Homosassa Springs. 

What is the relative contribution of Homosassa Springs to the economy of
Citrus County? In 2000, Citrus County generated $758 million in wage and
salaries supporting 30,466 jobs according to the U.S. Department of
Commerce (2002), the most reliable source of data on wages and
employment. Thus, Homosassa Springs State Park visitors contributed
about .4% of wages and salaries ($3.13 million/$758 million), but .6% of
total employment (206/30,466). In terms of wages and jobs, Homosassa
Springs does not constitute a substantial part of the Citrus County
economy. The trend in visitation to Homosassa Springs is decidedly
upward based upon our analysis of the secular trend earlier in this
chapter. Therefore, more jobs will be added by this attraction in the
future. Finally, we have only measured the direct injection of money
into this regional economy or what is called the “direct economic
effect”. Such outside income injections are subject to a multiplier
effect likely to be from 1.1 to 1.3 for a small regional economy. Thus,
the primary or direct injection of spending of visitors to Homosassa
Springs will probably produce from !0% to 30% more wages and jobs than
shown in Table 4.4 of this report. Now, we shall continue on to our last
spring to analyze. In Chapter 5, we shall consider the local economic
impact of Blue Spring State Park in Volusia County. 

Table 4.4:

Estimation of Homosassa Springs Visitors

Citrus County, Florida, 2002

Expenditures by Category, Florida, 2002

Spending Category 

Spending

Related

Related Wages

	(Mil $)

Employment

(Mil $)

	Lodging

	3.43

70

0.82

	Restaurants	1.87

49

0.51

	Groceries	0.13

1

0.01

	Admission Fees

4.22

47

0.74

	Evening Entertainment	2.36

26

0.82

	Ground Transportation	0.32

2

0.11

	Shopping

	1.08

9

0.11

	All Other

	0.11

2

0.01

	Total

	13.52

206

3.13

	Note: Aggregate expenditures for all modes including Hotels/Motels;
Friends/Families; 

         Campgrounds; Condominiums plus Day Visitors to Homosassa
Springs Park.

CHAPTER 5

Direct Regional Economic Impact

of Blue Spring State Park, Florida

on Surrounding Areas

Description of Blue Spring

Blue Spring State Park is located in Orange City in the Central East
part of Florida. Orange City is in the western part of Volusia County,
which has an east coast on the Atlantic Ocean. This county is important
for tourists visiting the beaches of Florida whom are also attracted to
auto racing. On the western side of Volusia County, springs have been a
magnet for humans and wildlife for centuries. Timucuan Indians lived at
the springs long before the Spaniards arrived. In the late 1800’s,
there was heavy steamboat traffic on the St. Johns River between
Jacksonville and Orange City. This was the first path for settlers and
visitors to Florida. The “blossoming” of Orange City was typical of
the development that occurred all along the St.Johns River in the late
1800’s and early twentieth century. This early regional growth,
combined with tourism, provided the economic base for the Golden Age:
the steamboat set the pace and style of the era. The “Thursby
family” built a landing to receive these travelers. But, this golden
age declined as visitors streaming to Florida headed south with the
railroad that considerably cut traveling time and extended the travel
distances possible in Florida.

Now, the spring is much more than a scenic wonder for swimming,
canoeing, hiking and birding. Blue Spring is well known as a winter home
for Florida’s endangered manatee. One can view these mammals each
winter between November and March. Blue Spring is one of only three
areas in Florida in which a manatee may be “adopted” (i.e., others
are at Homosassa Springs Wildlife State Park and Tampa Bay). In 1972,
the State of Florida purchased Blue Spring as a state park and manatee
refuge. For certified cave divers, the spring provides an underwater
adventure as another form of recreation. A limited number of fully
equipped family cabins are located in the park. The spring maintains a
year-around temperature of 72 degrees. However, Blue Spring and its
recreational opportunities critically depend on the maintenance of the
environment surrounding the area. This aspect will be briefly considered
next. 

Natural Resource Protection

Historically, many had said that Blue Spring “boils up with great
force”. However, dropping water levels in the aquifer have resulted in
reduced water flow to Blue Spring. The amount of water discharging from
the spring has been declining since the mid-1980’s. The flow reduction
threatens the future of Blue Spring as a manatee refuge and recreation
area. Blue Spring’s water comes from the same Floridian aquifer as our
drinking water. Thus, suburban development within the Blue Spring Basin
means more water is being pumped from the aquifer for household and
commercial use. That is, increased water use means lower aquifer levels
and reduced flow to the Blue Spring. This may produce manatee crowding
and possibly death for this creature.

In addition, Blue Spring’s water now carries about 87 tons of nitrates
per year according the Florida DEP (2002). This increases the growth of
algae and leads to ecological decline. Nitrates and other nutrients come
from fertilizer and human waste. Nutrients and other pollutants are
picked up by storm water as it flows over lawns, gardens, pastures,
agricultural fields, and golf courses. Polluted storm water can flow
into sinkholes or work it way through the soil to reach the aquifer. The
survival of the delicate spring ecosystem requires good water quality
and sufficient water quantity. Recreational visitors to Blue Spring will
also be deterred from a diminished water quality via its appearance,
adverse impact on the ecosystem and deterrence of manatees from the
springs area. A boardwalk and observation deck was built in 1974 to
protect the shoreline while allowing visitors to view the manatees and
the spring. On the positive side, a record 153 manatees took refuge in
the warm spring water in 2001

To protect the environment, water consumption can be reduced; septic
tanks can be better constructed and maintained; fertilizer and
pesticides can be limited; and the St. John’s River Water Management
District should be encouraged to protect and restore the flow of Blue
Spring Basin that covers 130 square miles in Volusia County.

Annual Trend and Seasonal Use of Blue Spring State Park 

In fiscal year 1992, a little over 360 thousand people visited Blue
Spring State Park. However, by the fiscal year 2002, slightly more than
337 thousand people visited this park indicating a 6.4% decline in
attendance over the last 11 years. In Figure 5.1. annual park attendance
data are plotted over this time period to calculate the annual trend in
people attending the park combined with the year to year fluctuations in
park attendance. The straight line through the attendance data indicates
the annual trend in park attendance where the trend equation (i.e.,
BLUEATT) is given in the lower right hand corner of Figure 5.1. All
attendance data were obtained from the Division of Recreation and Parks,
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (unpublished, 2002). 

The trend equation for Blue Spring State Park attendance shown in Figure
5.1 indicates no annual growth in people attending the park. There is
virtually no trend in park attendance. That is, there is really no
correlation between park attendance and time. 

 

The RSQ measures how much the passage of time explains park attendance.
Further, the attendance trend appears to be headed downward or static in
nature. With population growth in the region and increasing tourism in
the area over the last 11 years, it would be reasonable to conclude that
the trend would be upward for Blue Spring State Park. But, this is
clearly not the case. We have pointed out that there are many
environmental problems associated with Blue Spring. Nitrates continue to
create water quality problems while falling water levels threaten the
manatee populations. Further, official are at a loss to explain the
obvious flat behavior of park attendance over the last 11 years. The
explanation for this finding is beyond the scope of this study, but it
is consistent with the economic model which asserts that increasing
environmental problems are related to a decline in economic activity as
measured by park attendance. As in other chapters, there are
considerable cyclical fluctuations in park attendance over the 1992-2002
period. In fact, there appears to be a downward trend in attendance from
1992 to 1997 while there appears to be an upward trend from 1997 to the
year 2002. The fall off in attendance from 2001 to 2002 may be due to
the terrorist events on September 11, 2001, combined with the poor
performance of the U.S. economy. Cycles are usually created by
oscillations in economic activity such as expansion in consumer spending
or a drop in business spending or a combination of both. It is important
to know the cyclical attendance in park attendance due to a need for
proper facility planning such as hiring part-time workers, etc. Clearly,
we have pointed out a problem at Blue Spring, and can offer a working
hypothesis between environmental quality and economic activity.

Seasonal use of a park refers to the month-to-month variation in
attendance. Seasonal variation may be due to the nature of the resource
and/or man-made events that influence demand for goods and services such
as a water resource (e.g., cold versus warm water). We obtained monthly
data on Blue Spring State Park from the Division of Recreation and
Parks, Florida Department of Environmental Protection. This was analyzed
from 1992-2002 for Blue Spring. The analysis was done by assuming that
no seasonal variation during a year would dictate 1/12 of annual demand
(i.e., attendance). Deviations from the 1/12 in any month would identify
a seasonal pattern. A detailed example of the calculation of a seasonal
index can be read in Chapter 2 dealing with Ichetucknee Springs. For
Blue Spring, the seasonal index in attendance is plotted in Figure 5.2.
One should remember before we review the results that Blue Spring is
close to Orlando and provides a haven for visitors to Florida not only
for its beaches on the Atlantic Ocean, but NASCAR racing in Daytona. In
addition, those seeking to view the manatees should remember that this
animal migrates to warmer waters in Blue Spring during the winter
months. According to Figure 5.2, the peak seasonal attendance at Blue
Springs is December through March of each year. After that period, one
other seasonal peak was identified in July. The rest of the months of
the year exhibit seasonal “lows”. The influx of tourists to the
general area coupled with the seasonal peak in the flow of the manatees
as they herd down the St. Johns River to Orange City or Blue Spring as
an attractant to visitors may explain the seasonal pattern observed in
Figure 5.2. The reader can read the index in the following manner. For
example, in January of each year, attendance shows an index of 193.9.
This means that attendance for January is 93.9%, higher or almost
doubled the number of visitors if there were no seasonal peak (i.e., no
seasonal peak would be a January attendance which is 1/12 of annual
attendance).

Economic Profile of the Area Surrounding Blue Springs

The thrust of this report is to identify the direct economic impact of
natural springs in  particular areas. It is important to look at the
economic setting in which springs exists. We have gathered such data
available from the U.S. Department of Commerce (2002).

 

Consider Table 5.1. Volusia County in which Blue Spring State Park
exists has experienced an 18.9% growth in population over the 1990-2000
period, which is slower than that for the State of Florida as a whole.
This county’s population is the 10th largest in the State of Florida.
So the percentage growth may be, in part, a function of the relatively
large population base in 1990. Today, nearly one-half million people
live in Volusia County. Aggregate personal income changes with the
number receiving income and the amount of income per person. Usually,
over time, aggregate personal income increases because of growth in
population and per capita income that will be discussed below. Total
personal income in Volusia County increased by 61.5% over the 1990-2000,
which was behind the growth of Florida as a whole. 

Of special interest, the growth of income per capita over the 1990-2000
period in Volusia County was nearly 40% which is comparable to the
growth in this indicator for the entire State of Florida. Thus, the
level of affluence or per capita income has risen in Volusia County at
about the state average. However, the level of per capita income in this
county still remained nearly 23% below that of the State of Florida. As
the state has grown on the shoulders of many high tech industries,
Volusia County has relied more on retirement and tourism. Although still
very important, such industries have not grown as rapidly as other
sectors based on improvements in technology during the last decade.
Finally, jobs in Volusia County have grown at about the rate of growth
in population, but trailed the rate of growth for the state (19.9%
versus 30.4%). Earnings per job in Volusia County has remained below the
state average and grew at a slower pace than that in the State of
Florida as shown in Table 5.1. The measured unemployment rate is
comparable to that of the State of Florida. Of particular significance,
the participation rate or the percent of the population potentially able
to work is much lower for Volusia County than the state average.

Table 5.1

Population, Income, Per Capita Income, Jobs and Earnings Per Job

in Volusia County, Florida Containing Blue Spring State Park 1990 & 2000

Rank Among 67 Counties

1990	2000	%Change

          in 2000

	Population Growth

    Volusia County	374,200	445,067	18.9	10

	    Florida

13,033,307	16,054,328	23.2	N/A

	Aggregate Income Growth (Thous $)

	    Volusia County	6,219,227	10,046,808	61.5	13

	    Florida 	258,479,049	445,739,968	72.4	N/A

	Per Capita Income Growth ($)

	     Volusia County	16,190	22,574	39.4	31

	     Florida 	19,832	27,765	40.1	N/A

	Employment / Job Growth

	     Volusia County	129,660	155,494	19.9	11

	     Florida

5,802,287	7,566,198	30.4	N/A

	Average Wages / Earnings Per Job ($)

	     Volusia County	19,583	26,484	35.2	35

	     Florida

21,244	30,226	42.3	N/A

	SOURCE: REGIONAL ECONOMIC INFORMATION SYSTEM, U.S. BUREAU OF 

     ECONOMIC ANALYSIS (CD ROM, 2002)

	

Table 5.2

Socioeconomic Characteristics of Volusia County, Florida

Containing the Blue Spring State Park, 2000

Rank Among 67

Recorded Unemployment Rate

%

Counties in Florida

Volusia County

3.1

47

	Florida

	3.75

N/A

Labor Force Participation Rate*

%

	             	Volusia County

68.4

36

	Florida

	78.5

N/A

Poverty Rate (% of Population)

%

Volusia County

14.8

40

	Florida

	15.2

N/A

Components of Per Capita Income

Income	Income From

	Per Capita	Earnings	Cap Inc	Trans Pay

	Volusia County	22,574	11,455	6,337	4,781

	Florida

27,764	16,560	7,005	4,199

* Percent of population in the county between the ages of 15-64 who are
employed.

	SOURCE: FLORIDA STATISTICAL ABSTRACT 2001, BEBR, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
(2001)

From Chapter 4, we found this same pattern for Citrus County. We
interpreted this as a reflection of retirees moving to Citrus County.
This is probably true in Volusia County where the participation rate is
10 percentage points below the state average. Further, there is no
difference in the poverty rate when this county is compared to the state
of Florida. 

Finally, at the bottom of Figure 5.2, we have a breakdown in per capita
income that may tell us a lot. It tells us that earnings from labor in
Volusia County are much lower than the state average, which reflects the
industrial structure of this county (i.e., lower paying jobs in the
visitor and retirement sectors). Capital income per capita reflects the
amount of interest, dividends and rents flowing to residents. This is
below the state average indicating that retirees from out of state and
those retiring from jobs in Volusia County are somewhat below state
averages. Finally, transfer payments that include social security and
retirement income are much higher in Volusia County where the average
age is over 42 years of age compared to about 39 years for the State of
Florida. How does Blue Spring fit into this economic pattern? With
substantial growth in Volusia County, it makes the amazing static
attendance in Blue Springs even more puzzling. Adding to this, the
influx of tourists to this county should have the usual fraction that
wish to take this opportunity to see the manatee population which
gathers at Blue Spring during the peak of the tourist season in the
first quarter of the year (i.e., January-March). We have no answers to
this riddle, but will have to wait for further research.

Direct Economic Impact of Blue Springs: The Model

In Chapter 2 dealing with the economic importance of Ichetucknee
Springs, we developed an economic model in which to calculate the
spending; employment and wages generate by visitors coming from outside
the area of economic impact. We wished to see how much economic activity
and benefits are generated by the springs from having individuals visit
the area (e.g., county) surrounding the park. The model is the same for
all four springs considered in this report. The impact of visitors is
based upon springs attendance and a sampling of the spending habits of
those visitors to the spring in question. Spending or sales to these
visitors are also broken down into kinds of good and services (i.e.,
industries) supported in the surrounding area by these purchases. The
model or framework in which to develop these basic economic impact
variables for the springs in question was extensively discussed in
Chapter 2. We advise the reader to return to Chapter 2 if he/she has not
read this previous chapter and is interested in greater detail. A reader
not interested in the technical model may skip such sections and find
the numbers reflecting the sales (i.e., expenditures); wages and
employment and a breakdown of the kind of industries benefiting from
such spending in Blue Spring State Park. It is the choice of the reader
as to which way the results of our analyses may be absorbed. 

Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Blue Spring

In the last part of 2002, a survey of attendees to Blue Spring State
Park was conducted. The initial intent of the survey was first to
determine what percentage of park attendance comes from outside Volusia
County. The next step was to interview visitors from outside the
immediate area of Volusia County in terms of size of party; length of
stay during their trip and kinds of expenditures made during their visit
to Blue Springs. This was the same method employed in Chapter 2 dealing
with the economic impact of Ichetucknee Springs State Park. In total,
809 visitors were interviewed to get an economic profile to use in
conjunction with attendance to obtain the total economic impact on
Volusia County discussed in some detail above. Consider Table 5.3.

In fiscal year 2002, 337,356 individuals were attracted to Blue Spring
State Park. From our sampling, it was estimated that about 65% of these
individuals could be designated as from outside Volusia County. Thus, in
Table 5.3, it is estimated that 219,282 visitors injected money into the
local economy. These visitors were divided into five classifications
based primarily on accommodation mode. One category was included for day
visitors coming to the spring from outside the county. According to our
sample, the two primary modes were (1) hotels and motels and (2) day
visitors, constituting 84.5% of all visitors from outside Volusia
County. In Table 5.3, we can see that among these categories there was
not too much variation in party size running from 2.63 (Condominiums) to
3.36 (Day visitors). There was a large variance in length of stay as
camper stayed in and around the park for nearly 14 days compared to only
a little over 5 days for those using hotels and motels. Of course, day
visitors by definition stay in the area for only one day.

Of interest, spending per party day varied from $142 for those using
condominiums to only $17 per day for day visitors in Volusia County. As
a group, visitors spent only about $61 per party day which is the lowest
found among the four springs in this study. Not only does Blue Spring
State Park raise questions as to the trend in attendance discussed
above, but for some reason it has the lowest spending per attendees
observed among our four spring-parks examined in this study. At the end
of our economic analysis of the four springs in northern and central
Florida, we shall compare the spending among the springs and how our
study compares with other similar studies. This will be presented in
Chapter 6. 



Table 5.3

Estimation of the Direct Economic Impact of Visitors Associated

with Blue Springs, Florida, Fiscal Year 2001-2002

	All People	X	Percent of	=	Estimated

	Attending

Attendance

 Outside Area

	  Springs

Visitors

Visitors

	 

	Non-Resident Visitors to the Springs	337,356

0.65

219,282

Percent of Visitors from Outside the Springs      Sample Size	Percent
Visitors	Party Size	Length of

by Accommodation Mode & Other Statistics	N	(k)	(VIS)	(SP)	Stay(LS)

Hotels and Motels

	130	0.160	35,237	3.08	5.09

Condominiums

	24	0.030	6,505	2.63	7.71

Friends and Family

	86	0.106	23,311	3.12	5.80

Camping

15	0.019	4,066	2.73	13.47

Day Visitors

	554	0.685	150,163	3.36	       1

	Total

	809	      1	219,282	3.26	2.60

Estimated Spending Per Party and Individuals	$EPPD	$EPPED

by Accommodation Mode

	(Daily Spending	(Daily Spending

	Per Party)	Per Person)

Hotel and Motels

$97 	$32 

Condominiums

$143 	$55 

Friends and Family

$28 	$9 

Camping

	$74 	$28

Day Visitors

$17 	$5 

	All

$61 	$19 

Estimated Spending, Wages and Employment

 Spending	  Wages	Employment

	  (Mil $)	   (Mil $)	  

	Hotel and Motels

	5.6	1.33	106

	Condominiums

	0.9	0.21	18

	Friends and Family

	1.2	0.29	16

	Camping

1.5	0.38	23

	Day Visitors

	0.8	0.17	11

	Total

	10.0	2.38	174

	

The economic model used to estimate the economic impact of Blue
Spring-related on Volusia County was described extensively in Chapter 2
dealing with Ichetucknee Springs. Table 5.3 contains the necessary
information to estimate the economic impact defined as estimated
spending; wages; and employment generated by visitor to Blue Spring
State Park. Spending by visitors is a function of attendance; length of
stay per visitor in the area and spending per individual per day. When
these three factors are multiplied together it calculates the spending
by any group or all visitors to the area under analysis. In addition, we
must know what goods and service are bought by visitors to estimate
visitor-related wages and employment. All these computations are
implemented by the use of a fairly complicated spreadsheet analysis
which can be made available to park researchers.

At the bottom of Table 5.3, the end result of these rather complicated
computations are shown by accommodation mode plus day visitors. For the
year 2002, it is estimated that the Blue Spring-related visitors spent
$10 million in Volusia County. This is the lowest spending figure among
our four springs under analysis in the report despite the fact that the
total attendance for Blue Spring exceeds the other three springs. Much
is due to the low percentage of attendees that live outside Volusia
County coupled with the relatively low spending per person day as
discussed above. Based upon the spending by good and services (e.g.,
shopping; restaurants; grocery stores, etc), it is estimated that this
spending by visitors generated $2.38 million in salaries and wages and
174 full and par-time jobs. As discussed in earlier chapters, such jobs
are largely part-time and low skilled based upon the kind of spending by
visitors which is true throughout Florida where tourism is the number
one industry in terms of employment and wages. Dividing wages by
employment generated by visitors to Blue Spring, the annual wage rate of
those working in the visitor sector averaged only $13,678 per year.

Table 5.4 shows the distribution of spending by all visitors based upon
the overall spending pattern. Each visitor surveyed was asked to give
their spending by the eight categories shown in Table 5.4. The four
largest categories of spending in Table 5.4 are lodging ($5.67 million);
evening entertainment ($1.26 million); shopping ($.95 million) and
restaurants ($.94 million) or 88% of all spending by visitors to Blue
Spring. These spending categories represent the benefactors of having
Blue Spring State Park located in Volusia County.

What is the relative contribution of Blue Spring to the economy of
Volusia County? In 2000, Volusia County generated $3.9 billion in wages
and salary disbursements supporting over 155 thousands jobs. Obviously,
Blue Spring State Park is not going to be a major industry in such a
large economy. This economy is several times the size of the other three
or four counties we have considered in conjunction with the other three
springs discussed in Chapters 2-4. Blue Springs constitutes only .061%
of wages and .11% of employment in Volusia County’s economy, which
represents a relatively small contribution. Finally, the industries
supported by Blue Spring is a rather low paid, averaging only $13,678
per year compared to $26,484 for Volusia County has a whole. This
concludes our economic analysis for Blue Spring. 

In the last chapter of this report, we shall compare and contrast the
economic contribution of the four springs considered in Chapters 2-5.
This will give us a composite of all four parks and form, if we assume
these springs are reasonably representative of all springs in Florida, a
general idea of the average economic contribution visitors to a
springs-based park have upon rural economic development in an immediate
surrounding area. 

Table 5.4

Estimation of Blue Spring Visitors by Category in

Volusia County, Florida, Fiscal Year 2001-2002

Spending Category                   

Spending

Related Employment

Related Wages

(Mil $)

(Mil $)

	Lodging

	5.67

115

1.35

	Food & Beverages(Restaurants)	0.94

24

0.25

	Food & Beverages(Groceries)	0

0

0

	Admission Fees

0.69

8

0.12

	Evening Entertainment	1.26

14

0.44

	Ground Transportation	0.34

2

0.11

	Shopping

	0.95

8

0.09

	All Other

	0.15

3

0.02

	Total

	10.00

174

2.38

	Note: Aggregate expenditures for all modes including Hotels/Motels;
Friends/Families; 

         Campgrounds; Condominiums plus Day Visitors to Blue Spring
Park.

	

CHAPTER 6

A Comparison and Conclusions of

the Direct Economic Impact for

the Four Springs State Parks In This Study

Introduction

In Chapters 1-5, we have presented extensive material related to the
direct economic impact of springs-based parks on the local economies in
which they exist. In this final chapter, we shall summarize this
information so the reader can compare the relative results for the four
spring-related state parks in Florida. This sample of such parks was
determined by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to be,
in their opinion, representative of the nearly 70 percent
springs-related state parks in Florida. We shall compare and contrast
the estimated direct economic impact of the sample of four springs.
Hopefully, this study will aid park management in evaluating the
economic impact of other parks in Florida. We have also pointed out
various situations that need further examination such as the static
nature of attendance at Blue Spring State Park and the role of the
environment (e.g., habitat for the manatee) in influencing the economic
prosperity of a local area (i.e., state parks as a leading economic
indicator of the development of the local economy). We also think that
the Division of Recreation and Parks can use this report to better
analyze how the park system serves the patrons and how much the park
system adds to the local economy. Our analysis of attendance trends and
seasonal behavior of attendance can be a management tool to evaluate
where the parks have been, and to project future attendance so that
planning may be implemented for facilities and services. 

Comparison and Contrast

In Table 6.1, we have pulled together some of the prominent statistics
that were developed in previous chapters. For 2002, estimated spending
by visitors at the four springs-related state parks varied from nearly
$23 million at Ichetucknee Springs in Suwannee County to only $10
million at Blue Spring. It is important to note that this is spending by
visitors who live outside the economic area of economic impact. This
kind of spending is an export industry that drives the local economy.
Residents of the area not only benefit from having the park for their
enjoyment, but also benefit by having visitors contribute to job
creation in their area. Local resident spending is the result of this
impact and not the impetus. This is true since bringing money into the
local economy by selling good or providing services to tourists results
in eventual multiplier effects which support income received by local
residents. They, in turn, spend some of this money on attending the
park. Of further interest, Table 6.1 shows that Ichetucknee Springs and
Wakulla Springs have approximately the same level of spending at about
$22 million and have about the same total attendance. However,
Ichetucknee Springs has about one-third more estimated visitors (i.e.,
from outside the area) than Wakulla Springs as shown in the bottom of
Table 6.1. As measured by spending per party and per person day, Wakulla
Springs visitors spend much more than those visiting Ichetucknee Springs
which account for the parity in overall spending between the two parks
(e.g., spending per person day is $89 in Wakulla Springs compared to
only $34 in Ichetucknee Springs). This is shown near the top of Table
6.1. We do not know why there is such a difference in spending. One
working hypothesis may be found in the nature of the two springs-related
parks. Ichetucknee Springs appeals to those desiring tubing down the
river while Wakulla Springs is more “up-scale” with a grand lodge,
an outstanding restaurant and glass bottom boats set against the history
of being part of the Tarzan and Creature 

Table 6.1

A Summary of the Direct Economic Impact of

Ichetucknee; Wakulla; Homosassa and Blue

Springs State Parks on the Local Economy, 2002

Springs

	Ichetucknee	Wakulla	Homosassa	Blue	Average Per Spring

Spending Expenditures (Mil $)	22.7

22.2	13.6	10.0	17.13

Spend Per Party Day ($)	215

409	90	61	193.75

	Spend Per Person Day ($)	34

89	25	19	45.50

Spending (Mil $)

	       Hotel & Motel

4.1

15.3	5.5	5.6	7.63

       Condos

1.5

1.8	0.1	0.9	1.08

       Friends/Family

12.3

4.3	4.3	1.2	5.53

       Campers

3.2

0.1	2.6	1.5	1.85

       Day

	1.6

0.7	1.1	0.8	1.05

Spending by Category (Mil $)

	         Lodging

1.44

4.01	3.43	5.67	3.64

         Restaurants

3.86

3.42	1.87	0.94	2.52

         Groceries

1.76

2.11	0.13	0	1.00

         Fees

4.34

1.21	4.22	0.69	2.62

         Evening Enter

2.31

2.51	2.36	1.26	2.11

         Transportation

2.95

1.47	0.32	0.34	1.27

         Shopping

3.75

3.56	1.08	0.95	2.34

         All other

2.27

3.99	0.11	0.15	1.63

Wages & Salaries (Mil $)	5.09

4.33	3.13	2.38	3.73

Employment

311

347	206	174	259.50

Other Characteristics

	        Party Size

6.4

4.6	3.6	3.3	4.48

        Length of Stay

2.7

2.1	3.3	2.6	2.68

Attendance

188,845

180,793	265,977	337,356	243,243

         Visitors

169,962

126,555	169,962	219,282	171,441

          Residents

18,883

54,238	96,015	118,074	71,802

          Percent Visitors (%)	90

70	64	65	70.48

from the Black Lagoon traditions. Homosassa and Blue Spring are at the
lower end of the total spending estimates with $13.6 million and $10
million respectively in 2002. These parks are more heavily attended by
visitors as shown in the bottom of Table 6.1. But, here again, the
spending per visitor party and per person day is relatively low for
these two parks. In our sample of parks, Blue Spring exhibited the
lowest spending per visitor, which was directly responsible for its
relatively low economic impact (i.e., $10 million). Another working
hypothesis is that springs located in relatively rural areas (e.g.,
Wakulla Springs) and immersed in varied natural resources may be more
appealing to more affluent visitors wishing to spend more time in the
area. In urbanized areas such as Blue Spring just a short distance from
Orlando and Daytona Beach may attract a vast cross-section of tourists
willing to spend only a fraction of their time in this area while in
Florida. If the four springs this study are representative of other
springs in Florida, it would appear that visitors spend a little over
$17 million at the “typical spring” as shown in the simple average
column of Table 6.1. Spring visitors average about $194 per party and
about $46 per person day. The reader should remember the $46 per person
day since it will be compared to an ad hoc study done by Gregory (2002)
discussed below. 

Among the accommodation modes and day visitors in Table 6.1, spending
varied greatly. For example, the simple average of spending by those
visitors using hotels and motels was more than $7.6 million which was
only about one-half of that spent at Wakulla Springs with the $15.3
million in spending, mostly at the lodge and restaurant we suspect
(i.e., sample respondents were not asked at what hotel or motel they
stayed). Overwhelmingly, most of the spending by mode was done on hotels
and motels or with friends and family (i.e., 77% of the total for all
modes/day visitors). This does indicate that visitors to springs use
friends and family as a mode of accommodation. Even though the hotels
and motels do not benefit from this group, other merchants in the area
do. 

In Table 6.1, we see a breakdown of spending by visitors. This varies
considerably from spring to spring. Out of the eight categories,
lodging, restaurants, admission fees and shopping constitute about
two-thirds of all spending. Spending on these categories has a varied
impact in terms of creating wages and employment. For example,
restaurants are a very labor-intensive industry. This greatly contrasts
with shopping where only a sales clerk is needed. The reason we mention
this is that the economic impact of spending as measured by wages and
employment will vary depending on how labor-intensive the pattern of
spending happens to be. Also, how much is spent on each category is an
important factor as well. 

In terms of wages and salaries, Ichetucknee Springs generated the most
wages as might be expected since spending was highest among this spring.
Generally, the generation of wages was positively related to spending as
the reader can see from Table 6.1. Note that employment generated by
this spending from spring to spring generally followed this pattern, but
more employment was generated in Wakulla Springs (i.e., 347) than in
Ichetucknee (i.e., 311) due to spending pattern in the former being more
labor intensive than the latter (e.g., lodging is very labor intensive
with a restaurant, etc). 

In general, springs exhibited visitors that had a party size of between
4-5 individuals and spending about 2-3 days as shown in the simple
average column in Table 6.1.

Finally, the typical spring-related park in this study had more than 243
thousand visitors of which 172 thousand or about 70 percent of all
visitors are from the outside of the area. In terms of important ratios
that could be used to extrapolate to other springs, using the data in
Table 6.1, there is one job created by $65,865 of spending by visitors
from outside the area of economic impact. Or, $1 million in spending
would create about 15.2 jobs based upon our sample of parks. Wages
average about 22% of all spending. That is, $1 million in spring-related
spending would create $220,000 in wages and salaries. The annual wage
rate per employee in the visitor sector was be about $14,474 or $220,000
divided by 15.2. Thus, if we knew the attendance for a particular
spring, all we would need to know would be what percent of the attendees
are from out of the area of economic impact. A sampling of license
plates in the parking lot might be a rough indicator of what percent are
from outside a particular county. However, the use of such
“averages” may obscure differences between springs as explained and
shown below.

A Comparison with Another Study

How much have we learned from the study of these four springs? It has
raised some important policy questions, but has yielded a database that
could be used by the Division of Recreation and Parks, DEP. Gregory
(2002) of the DEP puts out estimates of the total direct economic impact
of all of the parks in the Florida system. He uses attendance,
expenditures per person day and a ratio of jobs to spending. This can be
compared with our very specific study of four springs to see how close
Gregory’s study comes to on-site sampling. Of interest, he uses the
same spending per person-day and jobs per $1 million in total spending
among all parks in the system. He uses spending per person-day of $42.20
and employment generated per $1 million in spending of 20 jobs. Of great
interest, with our on-site sample using just four springs in Florida, we
find that the simple average of spending per person-day is $ 45.50.
Spending at the $1 million level would create a little over 15 jobs.
Thus, it would appear that this study comes strikingly close to those
ratios used by Gregory (2002). He estimates out of area visitors
represent 65% of all total park visitors, which is close to our finding
of about 70%. Total spending between the two studies can be compared as
follows:

Springs Study	Spending (Mil $)	Employment 

Bell & Bonn (2003)

 Ichetucknee	22.7	311

	Wakulla 	22.2 	347

 	Homosassa 	13.6 	206

 	Blue 	10.0 	174

 Gregory (2003)

 	Ichetucknee 	7.4 	160

 	Wakulla 	4.9 	150

 	Homosassa 	7.3	 184

 	Blue 	9.2 	194

By looking at the statistics, it is apparent that using overall averages
may miss great individual variations at any site such as spending per
party; size of the party or length of stay. Given that the sampling is
done properly, it is apparent that on-site studies may be more accurate
since variations in parameters may be great from spring to spring (see
Table 6.1). Spending numbers from the Gregory study are lower since he
limited all visitors to one day in the area. The Bonn and Bell (2003)
study counted all days visitors stayed in the area because of the
importance the springs had upon their trip purpose.  This means that one
cannot apply the average of the four springs in this study to other
springs not studied in order to estimate the economic impact on an area.
This is because there is too much variance in spending per party; size
of the party and number of days spent in the area based upon the
findings from this study. As we saw in the trend and seasonal analysis
of attendance data, there is too much variation from spring to spring.
Of course, each spring is so unique and has different factors that
attract visitors. This completes our summary of our spring studies and
the discussion of our results. We have also compared our study to the
approximation used by the Division of Recreation and Parks, Department
of Environmental Protection.

References

Scott, T. M.,  P. G. #99, Means, G. H., Means, R. C., and Meegan, R. P.,
2002. First Magnitude Springs of Florida – Open File Report No. 85:
Florida Geological Survey.

Rosenau, J. C., Faulkner, G. L., Hendry, C. W., Jr., and Hull, R. W.,
1977. Springs of Florida: Florida Geological Survey Bulletin 31 Revised.

Bonn, Mark A. and Frederick W. Bell, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
THROUGH 2015 FOR THE SUWANNEE RIVER COUNTIES IN FLORIDA, Report for the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Suwannee River Water
Management District, Florida States University, College of Business and
Department of Economics, November 7, 2002.

Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Florida,
Statistical 

Abstract of Florida,  2002.

Cook, Sandy, Park Manager, Wakulla Springs State Park (Personal        

Correspondence, 2003.

Division of Recreation and Parks, Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection, Unpublished Monthly and Annual Park Attendance Data,
1992-2002, 

Tallahassee, Florida, 2002.

     

Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Let’s Protect Blue
Springs, May

2002. 

Florida Atlas and Gazetteer, 2002 Delorme Six Addition, Yarmouth, Maine,
2002

Florida County Maps and Recreational Guide, Lyndon Station, Wisconsin,
1990.

Gregory, Albert, Florida State Park System Economic Impact Assessment
for Fiscal Year 2001/2002, Division of Recreation and Parks, Department
of Environmental Protection, October 7, 2002.

Ichetucknee Springs Water Quality Working Group, Protecting the
Ichetucknee, 

Ichetucknee Springs, Florida, 2000.

  

Ichetucknee Springs State Park, Fort White, Florida, Natural Resource 

Management, Restoring the “Real Florida”, 2000.

  

Ichetucknee Springs State Park, Fort White, Florida, Ichetucknee Springs
State

Park, Fort White, Florida, Ichetucknee Springs State Park, Florida’s
Most Pristine Springs Fed River, 2000.

Leeworthy, Vernon R. and J. M. Bowker, “Linking the Economy and 

Environment of Florida Keys/Florida Bay – Nonmarket Economic User
Values of the Florida Keys/Key West.” Strategic Environmental
Assessment Division, NOAA and Outdoor Recreation Assessment Group,
USDA-Forest Service, respectively,  October, 1997.

Linley, Tom, Park Manager, Homosassa Springs, Personal Correspondence,
2003.

 U.S. Department of Commerce, Census of Business, Washington, D.C. 1997.



APPENDICES

Appendix A: Florida Springs Visitor Survey 2003

Appendix B: Ichetucknee Springs Visitor Study 2003

Appendix C: Wakulla Springs Visitor Study 2003

Appendix D: Homosassa Springs Visitor Study 2003

Appendix E: Blue Springs Visitor Study 2003

Appendix F: Springs Visitor Study Overall

  

Appendix A: Florida Springs Visitor Survey

Surveyor’s Initials________

Q01	Date: ______________________

Q02	Site (circle one): WS   IS    HS   VB

Q03	Gender:	1=Male	2=Female

What is your:

Q04	City: ______________________

Q05	County: ____________________

	

Q06	State: ______ Country: _______

Q07	Zip Code: __________________

Q08	What best describe your reason for 	today’s visit?
_________________

Q09	Number of nights spent in the area during this trip: __________		

					

Q10	Where did you stay overnight?		

	1=  Locally  				

	2=  In another county			

3=  Other (specify)___________							

Q11	Accommodations Used:			

	1=  No nights spent in area		

	2=  Hotel/Motel				

	3=  Condominium			

	4=  Private Home

	5=  Other _______________

		

Q12	How many people are in your travel party? ________

Q13	How many in your travel party are NOT county residents? _______

Q14	Is this your first visit to this spring?  Y      N				

Q15	If Y, how did you hear about this spring? _______________________

Q16	Will you come back to this spring in the near future? Y    N

Q17	If Y, Within the next 6 months?		   

       Y     N

Within the next year?		                               Y     N

	

During the past 24 hours, please indicate the amount spent by your
party:

Q18	$_____   Lodging

Q19	$_____   Restaurant Meals/Beverages

Q20	$_____   Grocery/Convenience Stores

Q21	$_____   Admission Fees 

Q22	$_____	  Evening Entertainment

Q23      $_____	Ground Transportation

Q24	$_____   Shopping

Q25	$_____   All Other

Q26	Please rate your visit to this spring:	

	Poor     1     2   3   4    5     Excellent

					

Q27	Ethnicity:	

	1=  Caucasian

	2=  African-American

	3=  Hispanic

	4=  Asian

	5=  Other_______________

Q28	Education:	

	1=  High School Graduate

	2=  Technical School

	3=  Some College/College Graduate

4=  Post Graduate Degree

Q29	Total Household Income:

	1=Under $20,000	2=$20,000-49,999

3=$50,000-$79,999	4=$80,000+

	

Q30	Marital Status:

	1=Married  2=Single  3=Widowed/Divorced

Q31	How much more would you be willing to spend on the entrance fee for
each visit if you knew the money would go to the maintenance and
protection of this natural spring?    $________ 

 

 

Appendix F: Springs Visitor Study Overall 2003

	Ichetucknee	Wakulla	Homosassa	Blue	Overall

Gender (%)

	Male	41.4	56.5	36.0	38.7	43.1

Female	58.6	43.5	64.0	61.3	56.9

	Ethnicity (%)

	Caucasian	87.4	82.5	89.3	93.9	88.3

African American	1.0	3.8	2.7	2.7	2.6

Hispanic	5.3	9.1	3.3	2.4	5.0

Asian	3.3	4.6	1.4	0.0	2.3

Other	3.0	0.0	3.3	0.7	1.7

	Marital Status(%)

	Married	59.3	68.3	79.4	82.8	72.5

Single	31.8	23.5	11.0	8.5	18.6

Divorced/Widowed	8.9	8.2	1.6	1.7	5.1

	Education (%)

	College Grad.	50.9	63.9	40.1	53.3	52.1

Post Graduate	11.9	17.2	30.8	22.0	20.5

High School	25.3	8.0	3.8	5.6	10.6

Tech. School	10.9	10.9	18.1	12.1	13.0

	Income (%)

	<$20,000	10.1	6.6	2.7	3.6	5.7

$20K-$49,999	33.3	32.5	25.3	24.7	28.9

$50k-$79,999	25.2	39.1	33.8	47.7	36.5

>$80,000	20.4	21.9	20.9	13.3	19.1

	Accommodation (%)

	No Overnight	48.9	9.4	41.2	38.5	34.5

Hotel/Motel	11.8	38.2	17.0	30.3	24.4

Private Home	18.8	47.4	31.7	21.8	29.9

Campground	18.5	0.9	9.6	3.6	8.1

Condominium	2.0	4.1	0.5	5.8	3.1

	Daily Expenditures ($)

	Lodging	$13.64 	$73.88 	$22.70 	$34.59 	$41.17

Restaurant	36.56 	63.01 	12.38 	5.73 	28.50

Groceries	16.67 	38.87 	0.86 	0.00 	11.31

Fees	41.11 	21.29 	27.93 	4.21 	29.63

Eve. Entertainment	21.88 	46.24 	15.62 	7.69 	23.87

Transportation	27.94 	27.08 	2.12 	2.07 	14.36

Shopping	35.52 	65.59 	7.15 	5.80 	26.47

All Other	21.50 	73.51 	0.73 	0.92 	18.44

Total 	$214.82 	$409.47 	$89.49 	$61.01 	$193.75 





       

      

 The 12 state parks that are named for springs are: 1. (Volusia) Blue
Springs State Park; 2. DeLeon Springs State Park; 3. Fanning Springs
State Park; 4. Homosassa Springs Wildlife State Park; 5. Ichetcuknee
Springs State Pak; 6. Manatee Springs State Park; 7. Peacock Springs
State Park; 8. Rainbow Springs State Park; 9. Ponce de Leon Springs
State Park; 10. Silver (Springs) River State Park; 11. Wakulla Springs
State Park; 12. Wekiwa Springs State Park

 PAGE   ii 

 PAGE   xvi 

 PAGE   

 PAGE   59 

 PAGE   99 

Ichetucknee Springs Visitors Study 2003                         Appendix
B		

The Bonn Marketing Research Group, Inc.	

Total visitors:  Sample Size = 400

Education	Total	Sex	Total	Marital Status	Total	Ethnicity	Total	Income
Total

	

Some College/College Grad	50.9%	Male	41.4%	Married	59.3%	Caucasian	87.4%
Under $20,000	10.1%

Post Graduate Degree	11.9	Female	58.6	Single	31.8	African-American	1.0
$20,000-$49,999	33.3

High School Graduate	25.3			Divorced/Widowed	8.9	Hispanic	5.3
$50,000-$74,999	25.2

Technical School	10.9					Asian	3.3	$75,000 or More	20.4

No Answer	0.5					Other	3.0	No Answer	10.9

				

	

Top Visitor Origins (Top 5)	 	

Jacksonville	21.8%

Gainesville	13.4

Tallahassee	4.8

Valdosta	3.0

Lake City	2.6	

		

	Expenditures	Avg. Nights	Avg. 	# In Party	              Likely To
Return:	Will Not	Is This 

Date	Per Party	Spent	Party Size	Not Resident	Next Year	6 Mos.	2 Years
Return	Your First Visit?  

04/02-07/02	$214.81	2.7	6.4	N/A	26.9%	55.6%	17.5	7.3%	N/A

Accommodations Used 	Total 

No Overnight Stay	48.9%

Private Home	18.8

Campground	18.5

Hotel/Motel	11.8

Condominium	2.0

	

Average Daily Expenditures

By Type 	Total               

Admission Fees	$41.10

Restaurants	36.56

Shopping	35.52

Ground Transportation	27.95

Evening Entertainment	21.88

Other Items	21.50

Groceries	16.67

Lodging	13.64	

Total Avg. Daily Expenditure	$214.81

How Heard About Ichetucknee Spring	Total

Family/Friends	68.5%

Brochure/Newspaper	15.4

In Area	5.6

Other	4.8

Repeat Visitor	2.7

Internet	1.6	

Travel Agent	1.4

		

Main Purpose For Visit	  	

	

Leisure Vacation	85.6%

Friends/Family	7.9

Other	5.0

Attend Meetings	1.0

Business	0.5

				

Where Stayed Overnight	Total

Locally	51.1%

No Overnight Stay	48.9

Wakulla Springs Visitors Study 2003                            Appendix
C	

The Bonn Marketing Research Group, Inc.	

Total visitors:  Sample Size = 400

Education	Total	Sex	Total	Marital Status	Total	Ethnicity	Total	Income
Total

	

Some College/College Grad	63.9%	Male	56.5%	Married	68.3%	Caucasian	82.5%
Under $20,000	6.6%

Post Graduate Degree	17.2	Female	43.5	Single	23.5	African-American	3.8
$20,000-$49,999	32.5

High School Graduate	8.0			Divorced/Widowed	8.2	Hispanic	9.1
$50,000-$79,999	39.1

Technical School	10.9					Asian	4.6	$80,000 or More	21.9

						

				

	

Top Visitor Origins (Top 5)	 	

Tallahassee	17.0%

Panama City	6.0

Orlando	4.2

Tampa	3.7

Jacksonville	3.5	

		

	Expenditures	Avg. Nights	Avg. 	# In Party	              Likely To
Return:	Will Not	Is This 

Date	Per Party	Spent	Party Size	Not Resident	Next Year	6 Mos.	Don’t
Know	Return	Your First Visit?  

09/02-03/03	$409.47	2.0	4.3	3.4	85.0%	74.2%	N/A	13.3%	Yes  47.2%    No 
52.8%

Accommodations Used 	Total 

Private Home	47.4%

Hotel/Motel	38.2

No Overnight Stay	9.4

Condominium	4.1

Campground	0.9	

Average Daily Expenditures

By Type 	Total               

Lodging	$73.88

Other Items	73.51

Shopping	65.59

Restaurants	63.01

Evening Entertainment	46.24

Groceries	38.87	

Ground Transportation	27.08

Admission Fees	21.29

Total Avg. Daily Expenditure	$409.47

How Heard About Wakulla Spring	Total

Family	63.8%

Brochure	17.5

Other	10.2

Travel Agent	2.8

In Area	2.3

Repeat Visitor	2.3	

Internet	1.1		

Main Purpose For Visit	  	

	

Manatees	14.2%

Eco-Tourism	9.7

Vacation	7.9

Wedding	7.2

Homecoming	6.2

	

				

Where Stayed Overnight	Total

Another County	59.9%

Locally	31.2

No Overnight Stay	9.0

Homosassa Springs Visitors Study 2003	Appendix D	

The Bonn Marketing Research Group, Inc.	

TotaL visitors:  Sample Size = 400 

Education	Total	Sex	Total	Marital Status	Total	Ethnicity	Total	Income
Total

	

Some College/College Grad	40.1%	Male	36.0%	Married	79.4%	Caucasian	89.3%
Under $20,000	2.7%

Post Graduate Degree	30.8	Female	64.0	Single	11.0	Hispanic	3.3
$20,000-$49,999	25.3

High School Graduate	3.8			Divorced/Widowed	1.6	African-American	2.7
$50,000-$79,999	33.8

Technical School	18.1			No Answer	7.9	Other	3.3	$80,000 or More	20.9

No Answer	7.1					No Answer	1.4	No Answer	17.3

				

	

Top Visitor Origins		 	

New York	8.0%	England	2.5

Michigan	7.1	Miami	2.2

St. Petersburg	4.7	Orlando	2.2

New jersey	3.8	Sarasota	2.2

Illinois	3.8	Lakeland	2.2

Canada	3.6	Tennessee	2.2

Pasco	3.0	California	2.2

New Hampshire	3.0	Indiana	1.9

Virginia	2.7	Maryland	1.9

Jacksonville	2.5	Kentucky	1.9

Chiefland	2.5	South Carolina	1.6

Pennsylvania	2.5	

		

	Expenditures	Avg. Nights	Avg. 	# In Party	              Likely To
Return:	Will Not	Is This 

Date	Per Party	Spent	Party Size	Not Resident	Next Year	6 Mos.	Don’t
Know	Return	Your First Visit?  

Jan-Feb 2003	$89.47	3.1	3.7	2.9	45.0%	19.0%	9.3%	17.8%	Yes  46.4%    No 
53.6%

Accommodations Used 	Total 

No Overnight Stay	41.2%

Private Home	31.7

Hotel/Motel	17.0

Campground	9.6

Condominium	0.5	

Average Daily Expenditures

By Type 	Total               

Admission Fees	$27.93

Lodging	22.70

Evening Entertainment	15.62

Restaurants	12.38

Shopping	7.15

Ground Transportation	2.11

Other Items	0.72

Groceries	0.86

Total Avg. Daily Expenditure	$89.47

How Heard About Volusia Blue	Total

Repeat Visitor	44.2%

Family	26.6

Word of Mouth	13.2

In Area	6.0

Internet	4.4

Hotel	2.7

Brochure	2.5

No Answer	0.3

	

		

Main Purpose For Visit	  	

	

Manatees	43.7%	Wild Life	3.3

Vacation	21.4	To Take Pictures	0.8

Sightseeing	17.6

Family Outing	5.5

Grandchildren	3.8

Entertaining Visitors	3.8

				

Where Stayed Overnight	Total

No Overnight Stay	41.2%

Locally	30.5

Another County	25.5

Other	2.7

 

Volusia Blue Spring Visitors Study 2003	Appendix E

The Bonn Marketing Research Group, Inc.	Page   PAGE  1 

Education	Total	Sex	Total	Marital Status	Total	Ethnicity	Total	Income
Total

	

Some College/College Grad	53.3%	Male	38.7%	Married	82.8%	Caucasian	93.9%
Under $20,000	3.6%

Post Graduate Degree	22.0	Female	61.3	Single	8.5	African-American	2.7
$20,000-$49,999	24.7

High School Graduate	5.6			Divorced/Widowed	1.7	Hispanic	2.4
$50,000-$79,999	47.7

Technical School	12.1			No Answer	7.0	Other	0.7	$80,000 or More	13.3

No Answer	7.0					No Answer	0.2	No Answer	10.7

				

	

Where Stayed Overnight	Total

Locally	52.1%

No Overnight Stay	38.5

Another County	6.5

Other	2.9

How Heard About Volusia Blue	Total

Repeat Visitor	44.8%

Family	20.6

Word of Mouth	10.9

Brochure	9.0

Hotel	8.5

Internet	4.4

In Area	1.9

	

		

Average Daily Expenditures

By Type 	Total               

Lodging	$34.59

Evening Entertainment	7.69

Shopping	5.78

Restaurants	5.73

Admission Fees	4.21

Ground Transportation	2.07

Other Items	0.92

Groceries	0.00

Total Avg. Daily Expenditure	$61.00

Accommodations Used 	Total 

No Overnight Stay	38.5%

Hotel/Motel	30.3

Private Home	21.8

Condominium	5.8

Campground	3.6	

	Expenditures	Avg. Nights	Avg. 	# In Party	              Likely To
Return:	Will Not	Is This 

Date	Per Party	Spent	Party Size	Not Resident	Next Year	6 Mos.	Don’t
Know	Return	Your First Visit?  

Jan-Feb 2003	$61.00	3.7	3.2	2.6	40.4%	19.6%	9.7%	28.3%	Yes  52.3%    No 
47.7%

Top Visitor Origins		 	

Canada	5.3%	Michigan	2.4

New York	5.1	Georgia	2.4

Massachusetts	3.9	Miami	2.2

New Jersey	3.6	Texas	2.2

England	3.6	Astor	1.9

Tampa	2.9	Virginia	1.9

Jacksonville	2.7	Orlando	1.7

Illinois	2.7	Indiana	1.7

New Hampshire	2.7	Boca Raton	1.5

Missouri	2.7	Connecticut	1.5

Ohio	2.4	California	1.5

Pennsylvania	2.4	

		

Total non RESIDENT visitors:  Sample Size = 413

Main Purpose For Visit	  	

	

Manatees	65.6%	Entertaining Visitors	2.4

Vacation	11.1	To Take Pictures	1.2

Sightseeing	7.3	Grandchildren	0.5

Wild Life	7.3

Family Outing	4.6