2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation

              U.S. Department of Commerce
Donald L. Evans,
Secretary
Samuel W. Bodman,
Deputy Secretary
Economics and Statistics Administration
Kathleen B. Cooper,
Under Secretary for Economic Affairs
U.S. CENSUS BUREAU
Charles Louis Kincannon,
Director
2001 National Survey of
Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife-Associated Recreation
U.S. Department of the Interior
Gale A. Norton,
Secretary
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Steve Williams,
Director
Issued October 2002
FHW/01-NAT
Suggested Citation
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Commerce,
U.S. Census Bureau. 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.
Economics and Statistics
Administration
Kathleen B. Cooper,
Under Secretary for Economic Affairs
U.S. CENSUS BUREAU
Charles Louis Kincannon,
Director
ECONOMICS
AND STATISTICS
ADMINISTRATION
Department of Interior
Gale A. Norton, Secretary
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Steve Williams, Director
Division of Federal Aid
Kris E. LaMontagne, Chief
As the Nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for
most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use
of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and
cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life
through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to
assure their development in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major
responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories
under U.S. administration.
The mission of the Department’s Fish and Wildlife Service is to conserve, protect, and enhance fish and
wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service is responsible
for national programs of vital importance to our natural resources, including administration of the
Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration and the Federal Aid of Wildlife Restoration Programs. These two
grant programs provide financial assistance to the States for projects to enhance and protect fish and
wildlife resources and to assure their availability to the public for recreational purposes. Multistate
grants from these programs pay for the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated
Recreation.
List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
Survey Background and Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. vii
Highlights
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Fishing Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Hunting Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Wildlife-Watching Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Tables
Guide to Statistical Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Fishing and Hunting Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Wildlife-Watching Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
State Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Appendices
A. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-2
B. Comparability With Previous Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-2
C. Selected Data From Screening Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-2
D. Sample Design and Statistical Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-2
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service iii
Contents
Fishing and Hunting: 2001
1. Anglers and Hunters 16 Years Old and Older, Days of Participation, and Trips by Type of Fishing and Hunting . . . . . . . 57
2. Anglers, Trips, and Days of Fishing by Type of Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
3. Freshwater Anglers and Days of Fishing by Type of Fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4. Great Lakes Anglers and Days of Fishing by Type of Fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
5. Saltwater Anglers and Days of Fishing by Type of Fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
6. Hunters, Trips, and Days of Hunting by Type of Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
7. Hunters and Days of Hunting by Type of Game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
8. Selected Characteristics of Anglers and Hunters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
9. Selected Characteristics of Anglers by Type of Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
10. Selected Characteristics of Hunters by Type of Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
11. Persons With Disabilities Who Participated in Fishing and Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
12. Summary of Expenditures for Fishing and Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
13. Expenditures for Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
14. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Freshwater Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
15. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Freshwater Fishing Except Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
16. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Great Lakes Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
17. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Saltwater Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
18. Expenditures for Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
19. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Big Game Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
20. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Small Game Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
21. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Migratory Bird Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
22. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Hunting Other Animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
23. Special Equipment Expenditures for Fishing and Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
24. Anglers and Hunters Who Purchased Licenses or Were Exempt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
25. Selected Characteristics of Anglers and Hunters Who Purchased Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
26. Freshwater Anglers and Days of Fishing by Type of Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
27. Great Lakes Anglers and Days of Fishing by Great Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
28. Hunters and Days of Hunting on Public and Private Land by Type of Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
29. Hunters and Days of Hunting on Public Land by Selected Characteristic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
30. Hunters and Days of Hunting on Private Land by Selected Characteristic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
31. Anglers Fishing From Boats and Days of Participation by Type of Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
32. Participation in Ice Fishing and Fly-Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
33. Hunters Using Bows and Arrows, Muzzleloaders, and Other Primitive Firearms for Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
34. Land Owned or Leased for the Primary Purpose of Fishing or Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
35. Why Anglers and Hunters Did Not Participate More in 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
iv U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
List of Tables
Wildlife-Watching Activities: 2001
36. Wildlife-Watching Participants by Type of Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
37. Participants, Trips, and Days of Participation in Nonresidential (Away From Home) Wildlife-Watching Activities . . . . . 86
38. Nonresidential (Away From Home) Wildlife-Watching Participants by Area or Site Visited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
39. Participation in Residential (Around the Home) Wildlife-Watching Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
40. Nonresidential (Away From Home) Wildlife-Watching Participants by Wildlife Observed,
Photographed, or Fed and Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
41. Wild Bird Observers and Days of Observation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
42. Number of Participants Who Can Identify Wild Birds by Sight or Sound and Who Keep Birding Life Lists . . . . . . . . . . 88
43. Expenditures for Wildlife Watching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
44. Selected Characteristics of Participants in Nonresidential (Away From Home) Wildlife-Watching Activities . . . . . . . . . 90
45. Selected Characteristics of Participants in Residential (Around the Home) Wildlife-Watching Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
46. Land Owned or Leased for the Primary Purpose of Wildlife Watching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
47. Persons With Disabilities Who Participated in Wildlife Watching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
48. Participation of Wildlife-Watching Participants in Fishing and Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
49. Participation of Sportspersons in Wildlife-Watching Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
State Wildlife-Related Recreation: 2001
50. Participants in Wildlife-Related Recreation by Participant’s State of Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
51. Participants in Wildlife-Related Recreation by State Where Activity Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
52. Expenditures for Wildlife-Related Recreation by State Where Spending Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
53. Expenditures for Wildlife-Related Recreation by Participant’s State of Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
54. Anglers and Hunters by Sportsperson’s State of Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
55. Anglers and Hunters by State Where Fishing or Hunting Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
56. Hunters by Type of Hunting and State Where Hunting Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
57. Days of Hunting by State Where Hunting Took Place and Hunter’s State of Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
58. Days of Hunting by Type of Hunting and State Where Hunting Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
59. Expenditures for Hunting by State Where Spending Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
60. Freshwater (Except Great Lakes) Anglers and Days of Fishing by State Where Fishing Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
61. Great Lakes Anglers and Days of Great Lakes Fishing by State Where Fishing Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
62. Saltwater Anglers and Days of Saltwater Fishing by State Where Fishing Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
63. Days of Fishing by State Where Fishing Took Place and Angler’s State of Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
64. Expenditures for Fishing by State Where Spending Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
65. Participants in Wildlife-Watching Activities by Participant’s State of Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
66. Participants in Wildlife-Watching Activities by State Where Activity Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
67. Participants in Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Activities by State Where Activity Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
68. Days of Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Activity by State Where Activity Took Place
and Participant’s State of Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
69. Expenditures for Wildlife-Watching Activities by State Where Spending Took Place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service v
vi U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Fish and wildlife resources are part of our
American culture. Whether we are
fishing, hunting, watching wildlife or
feeding backyard birds, Americans derive
many hours of enjoyment from wildlife-related
recreation. Wildlife recreation is
the cornerstone of our Nation’s great
conservation ethic.
The 2001 National Survey of Fishing,
Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated
Recreation is a partnership effort with the
States and national conservation
organizations, and has become one of the
most important sources of information on
fish and wildlife recreation in the United
States. It is a useful tool that quantifies
the economic impact of wildlife-based
recreation. Federal, State, and private
organizations use this detailed information
to manage wildlife, market products, and
look for trends. The 2001 Survey is the
tenth in a series that began in 1955.
More than 82 million U.S. residents fished,
hunted, and watched wildlife in 2001.
They spent over $108 billion pursuing their
recreational activities, contributing to
millions of jobs in industries and
businesses that support wildlife-related
recreation. Furthermore, funds generated
by licenses and taxes on hunting and
fishing equipment pay for many of the
conservation efforts in this country.
Wildlife recreationists are among the
Nation’s most ardent conservationists.
They not only contribute financially to
conservation efforts, but also spend time
and effort to introduce children and other
newcomers to the enjoyment of the
outdoors and wildlife.
I appreciate the assistance of those who
took time to participate in this valuable
survey. We all can be grateful that
America’s great tradition of wildlife-related
recreation remains strong.
Steve Williams
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
Foreword
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service vii
The National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
and Wildlife-Associated Recreation
(Survey) has been conducted since 1955
and is one of the oldest and most
comprehensive continuing recreation
surveys. The purpose of the Survey is to
gather information on the number of
anglers, hunters, and wildlife-watching
participants (formerly known as
nonconsumptive wildlife-related
participants) in the United States.
Information also is collected on how often
these recreationists participate and how
much they spend on their activities.
Preparations for the 2001 Survey began in
1999 when the International Association
of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA)
asked us, the Fish and Wildlife Service, to
conduct the tenth national survey of
wildlife-related recreation. Funding came
from the Multistate Conservation Grant
Programs, authorized by Sport Fish and
Wildlife Restoration Acts, as amended.
We consulted with State and Federal
agencies and nongovernmental
organizations such as the Wildlife
Management Institute and American
Sportfishing Association to determine
survey content. Other sportspersons’
organizations and conservation groups,
industry representatives, and researchers
also provided valuable advice.
Four regional technical committees were
set up under the auspices of the IAFWA
to ensure that State fish and wildlife
agencies had an opportunity to participate
in all phases of survey planning and
design. The committees were made up of
agency representatives.
Data collection for the Survey was carried
out in two phases by the U.S. Census
Bureau. The first phase was the screen
which began in April 2001. During the
screening phase, the Census Bureau
interviewed a sample of 80,000
households nationwide to determine who
in the household had fished, hunted, or
engaged in wildlife-watching activities in
2000, and who had engaged or planned to
engage in those activities in 2001. In
most cases, one adult household member
provided information for all household
members. The screen primarily covered
2000 activities while the next, more in-depth
phase covered 2001 activities. For
more information on the 2000 data, refer
to Appendix C.
The second phase of the data collection
consisted of three detailed interview
waves. The first wave began in April
2001, the second in September 2001, and
the last in January 2002. Interviews were
conducted with samples of likely anglers,
hunters, and wildlife watchers who were
identified in the initial screening phase.
These interviews were conducted
primarily by telephone, with in-person
interviews for those respondents who
could not be reached by telephone.
Respondents in the second survey phase
were limited to those at least 16 years old.
Each respondent provided information
pertaining only to his or her activities and
expenditures. Sample sizes were
designed to provide statistically reliable
results at the State level. Altogether,
interviews were completed for 25,070
respondents from the sportspersons
sample and 15,303 from the wildlife
watchers sample. More detailed
information on sampling procedures and
response rates is found in Appendix D.
Comparability With Previous Surveys
The 2001 Survey’s questions and
methodology were similar to those used
in the 1996 and 1991 Surveys. Therefore,
the estimates of all three surveys are
comparable.
The methodology of the 2001, 1996, and
1991 Surveys did differ significantly from
the 1985 and 1980 Surveys, so their
estimates are not directly comparable to
those earlier surveys. The changes in
methodology included reducing the recall
period over which respondents had to
report their activities and expenditures.
Previous Surveys used a 12-month recall
period which resulted in greater reporting
bias. Research found that the amount of
activity and expenditures reported in 12-
month recall surveys was overestimated
in comparison with that reported using
shorter recall periods.
The trend information presented in this
report takes into account the differences
of the earlier surveys in comparing their
estimates with those of the 1991, 1996,
and 2001 Surveys. See the Summary
Section and Appendix B.
Survey Background and Method
Highlights
The National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
and Wildlife-Associated Recreation
reports results from interviews with U.S.
residents about their fishing, hunting, and
other wildlife-related recreation. This
report focuses on 2001 participation and
expenditures of U.S. residents 16 years of
age and older.
In addition to the 2001 numbers, we also
provide 11-year trend data. The 2001
numbers reported can be compared with
those in the 1991 and 1996 Survey reports
because these three surveys used similar
methodologies. However, the 2001
estimates should not be directly compared
with the results from Surveys earlier than
1991 because of changes in methodology.
These changes were made to improve
accuracy in the information provided.
Trend information from 1955 to 1985 is
presented in Appendix B.
The report also provides information on
participation in wildlife-related recreation
in 2000, particularly of persons 6 to 15
years of age. The 2000 information is
provided in Appendix C. Additional
information about the scope and coverage
of the Survey can be found in the Survey
Background and Method section of this
report. The remainder of this section
defines important terms used in the
Survey.
Wildlife-Associated Recreation
Wildlife-associated recreation includes
fishing, hunting, and wildlife-watching
activities. These categories are not
mutually exclusive because many
individuals enjoyed fish and wildlife in
several ways in 2001. Wildlife-associated
recreation is reported in two major
categories: (1) fishing and hunting and
(2) wildlife watching (formerly
nonconsumptive wildlife-related
recreation). Wildlife watching includes
observing, photographing, and feeding
fish and wildlife.
Fishing and Hunting
This Survey reports information about
residents of the United States who fished
or hunted in 2001, regardless of whether
they were licensed. The fishing and
hunting sections of this report are
organized to report three groups: (1)
sportspersons, (2) anglers, and (3) hunters.
Sportspersons
Sportspersons are those who fished or
hunted. Individuals who fished or hunted
commercially in 2001 are reported as
sportspersons only if they also fished or
hunted for recreation. The sportspersons
group is composed of the three subgroups
in the diagram below: (1) those who
fished and hunted, (2) those who only
fished, and (3) those who only hunted.
The total number of sportspersons is
equal to the sum of people who only
fished, only hunted, and both hunted and
fished. It is not the sum of all anglers and
all hunters, because those people who
both fished and hunted are included in
both the angler and hunter population and
would be incorrectly counted twice.
Anglers
Anglers are sportspersons who only
fished plus those who fished and hunted.
Anglers include not only licensed hook-and-
line anglers, but also those who have
no license and those who use special
methods such as fishing with spears.
Three types of fishing are reported: (1)
freshwater, excluding the Great Lakes,
(2) Great Lakes, and (3) saltwater. Since
many anglers participated in more than
one type of fishing, the total number of
anglers is less than the sum of the three
types of fishing.
Hunters
Hunters are sportspersons who only
hunted plus those who hunted and fished.
Hunters include not only licensed hunters
using common hunting practices, but also
those who have no license and those who
engaged in hunting with a bow and arrow,
muzzleloader, other primitive firearms, or
a pistol or handgun. Four types of hunting
are reported: (1) big game, (2) small
game, (3) migratory bird, and (4) other
animals. Since many hunters participated
in more than one type of hunting, the sum
of hunters for big game, small game,
migratory bird, and other animals exceeds
the total number of hunters.
Wildlife-Watching Activities
(formerly Nonconsumptive
Wildlife-Related Recreation)
Since 1980, the National Survey of
Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated
Recreation has included information on
wildlife-watching activities in addition to
fishing and hunting. However, the 1991,
1996, and 2001 Surveys, unlike the 1980
and 1985 Surveys, collected data only for
those activities where the primary purpose
was wildlife watching (observing,
photographing, or feeding wildlife). The
Survey uses a strict definition of wildlife
watching. Participants must either take a
“special interest” in wildlife around their
homes or take a trip for the “primary
purpose” of wildlife watching. Secondary
wildlife-watching activities such as
incidentally observing wildlife while
pleasure driving were included in the
1980 and 1985 Surveys but not in the
succeeding ones.
Two types of wildlife-watching activity
are reported: (1) nonresidential and (2)
residential. Because some people
participate in more than one type of
wildlife-watching activity, the sum of
Introduction
Sportspersons
Anglers Hunters
Fished
only
Fished
and
hunted
Hunted
only
2 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 3
participants in each type will be greater
than the total number of wildlife
watchers. The two types of wildlife-watching
activities are defined below.
Nonresidential (away from the home)
This group included persons who took
trips or outings of at least 1 mile for the
primary purpose of observing, feeding, or
photographing fish and wildlife. Trips to
fish, hunt, or scout and trips to zoos,
circuses, aquariums, or museums were not
considered wildlife-watching activities.
Residential (around the home)
This group included those whose
activities are within 1 mile of home and
involve one or more of the following:
(1) closely observing or trying to identify
birds or other wildlife; (2) photographing
wildlife; (3) feeding birds or other
wildlife on a regular basis; (4)
maintaining natural areas of at least one-quarter
acre where benefit to wildlife is
the primary concern; (5) maintaining
plantings (shrubs, agricultural crops, etc.)
where benefit to wildlife is the primary
concern; or (6) visiting public parks
within 1 mile of home for the primary
purpose of observing, feeding, or
photographing wildlife.
4 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
The 2001 Survey revealed that 82 million
U.S. residents 16 years old and older
participated in wildlife-related recreation.
During that year, 34.1 million people
fished, 13.0 million hunted, and 66.1
million participated in at least one type of
wildlife-watching activity including
observing, feeding, or photographing fish
and other wildlife in the United States.
The information for participation and
expenditures of persons 16 years old and
older is based on estimates from the
detailed phase of the 2001 Survey. This
information is comparable with estimates
from the 1991 and 1996 Surveys, but not
with earlier ones because of changes in
methodology. A complete explanation is
provided in Appendix B.
Although the focus of this report is based
on the detailed phase of the Survey of
persons 16 years old and older, we do
include information on individuals 6 to 15
years old. An estimate of their
participation was calculated using data
from the 2001 screening Survey. Based
on this data, there were 1.6 million
hunters, 10.2 million anglers, and 12.6
million wildlife-watching participants 6 to
15 years old in 2001. More information
on 6- to 15-year-olds is provided in
Appendix C. For the rest of this report all
information pertains to participants 16
years old and older, unless otherwise
indicated.
Among anglers, hunters, and wildlife
watchers, there was a considerable
overlap in activities. In 2001, 71 percent
of hunters also fished, and 27 percent of
anglers hunted. In addition, 58 percent of
anglers and 62 percent of hunters
participated in wildlife-watching
activities, while 33 percent of all wildlife
watchers reported hunting and/or fishing
during the year.
Wildlife recreationists’ avidity also was
reflected in their spending which totaled
$108 billion in 2001. This amounted to
1.1 percent of the GDP. Of the total
amount spent, $28.1 billion was trip-related,
$64.5 billion was spent on
equipment, and $15.8 billion was spent on
other items.
Sportspersons spent a total of $70 billion
in 2001—$35.6 billion on fishing, $20.6
billion on hunting, and $13.8 million on
items used for both hunting and fishing.
Wildlife watchers spent $38.4 billion on
their activities around the home and on
trips away from home.
Summary
Total Wildlife-Related Recreation
Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 million
Expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $108 billion
Sportspersons
Total participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.8 million
Anglers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.1 million
Hunters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.0 million
Total days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 786 million
Anglers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557 million
Hunters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 million
Total expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $70.0 billion
Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $35.6 billion
Hunting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20.6 billion
Unspecified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $13.8 billion
Wildlife Watchers
Total participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66.1 million
Residential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.9 million
Nonresidential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.8 million
Total expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $38.4 billion
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5
Fishing and Hunting
In 2001, 38 million U.S. residents 16
years old and older went fishing and/or
hunting. This includes 34.1 million who
fished and 13 million who hunted. The
overage is accounted for by those who
both fished and hunted, 9.3 million.
In 2001, expenditures by sportspersons
totaled $70.0 billion. Trip-related
expenditures, including those for food,
lodging, and transportation, were almost
$20.0 billion—28 percent of all fishing and
hunting expenditures. Total equipment
expenditures amounted to nearly $41.0
billion, 59 percent of the total. Other
expenditures—magazines, membership
dues, contributions, land leasing and
ownership, and licenses, stamps, tags, and
permits—accounted for $9.1 billion or 13
percent of all sportspersons’ expenditures.
Wildlife-Watching Recreation
Observing, feeding, or photographing
wildlife was enjoyed by 66.1 million
people 16 years old and older in 2001.
Among this group, 21.8 million people
took trips away from home
(nonresidential) for the purpose of
enjoying wildlife, while 62.9 million
stayed within a mile of their homes
(residential) participating in wildlife-watching
activities.
In 2001, wildlife-watching participants
spent $38.4 billion. Trip-related expenses,
including food, lodging, and
transportation, totaled $8.2 billion, 20
percent of all expenditures. A total of
$23.5 billion was spent on equipment,
63 percent of all wildlife-watching
expenses. The remaining $6.7 billion,
17 percent of the total, was spent on
magazines, membership dues, and
contributions made to conservation or
wildlife-related organizations.
1991, 1996, and 2001 Comparison
A comparison of estimates from the 1991,
1996, and 2001 Surveys reveals that
millions of Americans continue to enjoy
wildlife-related recreation. While the
number of sportspersons fell from 40
million in 1991 to 37.8 million in 2001,
expenditures by sportspersons increased
from $53 billion (in 2001 dollars) in 1991
to $70 billion in 2001. In 1991, there
were 35.6 million anglers and 14.1
million hunters. In 1996, 35.2 million
fished and 14.0 million hunted. And in
2001, there were 34.1 million anglers and
13.0 million hunters. In 2001, hunters
spent 29 percent more than they did in
1991 for their trips and equipment, while
anglers’ expenditures showed a 14 percent
increase that was not a statistically
significant difference1.
Participation in wildlife watching
(observing, feeding, and photographing
wildlife) decreased from 76.1 million in
1991 to 62.9 million in 1996, but it
increased to 66.1 million from 1996 to
2001. Expenditures for trips and
equipment increased by 21 percent from
1991 to 1996 and 10 percent from 1996 to
2001.
Expenditures for Wildlife-Related Recreation
(Total expenditures: $108 billion)
Expenditures by Sportspersons
(Total expenditures: $70.0 billion)
Expenditures by Wildlife-Watching Participants
(Total expenditures: $38.4 billion)
Unspecified
13%
$13.8 billion
Hunting
19%
$20.6 billion
Wildlife watching
36%
$38.4 billion
Fishing
32%
$35.6 billion
Other
14%
$15.8 billion
Trip-related
26%
$28.1 billion
Equipment
60%
$64.5 billion
Other
13%
$9.1 billion
Trip-related
28%
$19.9 billion
Equipment
59%
$41.0 billion
Other
17%
$6.7 billion
Trip-related
20%
$8.2 billion
Equipment
63%
$23.5 billion
1At a 5 percent level of significance.
6 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
1955 to 2001 Findings
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has
conducted these National Surveys at
approximate 5-year intervals since 1955
(see Appendix B). A 46-year trend can be
traced for the number of anglers and
hunters that participated in a given year.
The number of wildlife-watching
participants can be traced over 21 years
because wildlife watching has been part
of the Survey only since 1980.
Trends show that the number of anglers
increased at nearly twice the rate of the
U.S. population growth from 1955 to
2001. The U.S. population increased by
71 percent while the fishing population
increased by 130 percent during that
period.
The number of hunters also increased
over the 46-year period, but not at a rate
equal to the overall 71 percent population
growth. The number of hunters increased
31 percent from 1955 to 2001.
The number of wildlife-watching
participants who took trips away from
home to observe, feed, or photograph
wildlife decreased 19 percent from 1980
to 2001. The number of people who fed
wildlife around their home decreased by
18 percent.
This trend information is based on
published findings from the 1955 to the
2001 Survey reports and unpublished
screening data from the 1985 to 1990
Surveys. As explained in Appendix B,
the estimates from the published reports
of the 1985 and 1991 Surveys are not
directly comparable because of
methodological changes.
Anglers and Hunters: 1955-2001
(Indices are used to simplify comparisons between the wildlife-related
recreation activities.)
0
50
100
150
200
250
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990/1991 1996 2001
Index (1955=100)
U.S. population
Hunters
Anglers
Wildlife-Watching Participants: 1980-2001
(Indices are used to simplify comparisons between the wildlife-related
recreation activities.)
0
50
100
150
200
250
1980 1985 1990/1991 1996 2001
Index (1980=100)
U.S. population
Nonresidential
Residential feeders
Fishing
8 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
In 2001, 34.1 million U.S. residents 16
years old and older enjoyed a variety of
fishing opportunities throughout the
United States. Anglers fished 557 million
days and took 437 million fishing trips.
They spent over $35.6 billion on
fishing-related expenses during the year.
Freshwater anglers numbered 28.4
million and spent 467 million days
fishing on 365 million trips in 2001.
Freshwater anglers spent more than $21.3
billion on freshwater fishing trips and
equipment. Saltwater fishing attracted
9.1 million anglers who enjoyed nearly 72
million trips on 91 million days. They
spent $8.4 billion on their trips and
equipment.
Fishing Highlights
Fishing
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Total Freshwater Saltwater
Million
Days Trips
Freshwater
Saltwater
Detail does not add to total because of multiple responses and nonresponse.
557 million
437 million
467
91
365
72
Anglers
Anglers Total Fishing
Anglers . . . . . . . . . . 34.1 million
Freshwater . . . . . . 28.4 million
Saltwater . . . . . . . 9.1 million
Days . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557 million
Freshwater . . . . . . 467 million
Saltwater . . . . . . . 91 million
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . 437 million
Freshwater . . . . . . 365 million
Saltwater . . . . . . . 72 million
Expenditures . . . . . . $35.6 billion
Freshwater . . . . . . 21.3 billion
Saltwater . . . . . . . 8.4 billion
Unspecified . . . . . 5.9 billion
Detail does not add to total because of multiple
responses and nonresponse.
Source: Tables 1, 13, 14, and 17.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 9
Fishing Expenditures
Anglers spent $35.6 billion in 2001
including $14.7 billion on travel-related
costs, 41 percent of all fishing
expenditures. Food and lodging resulted
in $6 billion, 40 percent of all trip-related
costs, and $3.5 billion, 24 percent of trip-related
expenditures, was spent on
transportation. Other trip expenditures
such as land use fees, guide fees,
equipment rental, boating expenses, and
bait cost anglers nearly $5.3 billion, 36
percent of all trip expenses.
For that same year, fishing equipment
expenditures totaled $17 billion, 48 percent
of all fishing expenditures. Anglers spent
$4.6 billion on fishing equipment such as
rods, reels, tackle boxes, depth finders, and
artificial lures and flies. This amounted to
27 percent of all equipment expenditures.
Auxiliary equipment—camping
equipment, binoculars, and special fishing
clothing—amounted to $721 million, 4
percent of equipment costs. Special
equipment such as boats, vans, and cabins
cost anglers $11.6 billion, 69 percent of all
equipment costs.
Anglers also spent a considerable amount
on land leasing and ownership—nearly
$3.2 billion or 9 percent of all
expenditures. They spent $860 million on
magazines, books, membership dues and
contributions, licenses, stamps, tags, and
permits.
Total Fishing Expenditures
Total fishing expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $35.6 billion
Total trip-related . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14.7 billion
Food and lodging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0 billion
Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 billion
Other trip costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3 billion
Total equipment expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $17.0 billion
Fishing equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6 billion
Auxiliary equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.7 billion
Special equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6 billion
Total other fishing expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4.0 billion
Magazines, books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1 billion
Membership dues and contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1 billion
Land leasing and ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 billion
Licenses, stamps, tags, and permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6 billion
Source: Table 13.
Percent of Total Fishing Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $35.6 billion)
Fishing Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $35.6 billion)
Freshwater
60%
$21.3 billion
Saltwater
24%
$8.4 billion
Unspecified
17%
$5.9 billion
Other
11%
Trip-related
41%
Equipment
48%
Freshwater Fishing Highlights
Freshwater fishing was the most popular
type of fishing. In 2001, 28.4 million
Americans fished 467 million days and took
365 million trips. Their expenditures for trips
and equipment totaled $21.3 billion for the
year. Excluding those who fished the Great
Lakes, freshwater anglers numbered 28.0
million, 82 percent of all anglers. Freshwater
anglers who did not fish the Great Lakes
took 349 million trips on 443 million days
and spent $20 billion on trips and equipment
for an average of $716 per angler.
The 1.8 million anglers who fished the Great
Lakes enjoyed 23 million days and 16
million trips fishing. Their trip and
equipment expenditures, $1.3 billion, were 6
percent of the total freshwater trip and
equipment expenditures. Great Lakes anglers
averaged $690 for the year.
Freshwater Fishing Expenditures
Trip and equipment expenditures for
freshwater fishing (excluding the Great
Lakes) totaled $20 billion in 2001. Total
trip-related expenditures came to $9.4
billion. Food and lodging amounted to $4.0
billion, 43 percent of all trip costs.
Transportation costs slightly exceeded $2.6
billion, 28 percent of trip costs. Other trip-related
expenses amounted to $2.7 billion
and included guide fees, equipment rental,
and bait.
Nearly $10.6 billion was spent on equipment
for freshwater fishing, excluding the Great
Lakes. Non-Great Lakes freshwater anglers
purchased $3.0 billion of fishing equipment
such as rods and reels, tackle boxes, depth
finders, and artificial lures and flies.
Expenditures for auxiliary equipment,
including camping equipment and
binoculars, totaled $498 million for the year.
Expenditures for special equipment such as
boats, vans, and cabins accounted for $7.1
billion.
Great Lakes anglers spent $1.3 billion on
trips and equipment in 2001. Trip-related
expenses totaled $776 million. Of these
expenditures, $310 million was spent on
food and lodging, 40 percent of trip costs;
$158 million went for transportation, 20
percent of trip costs; and $308 million was
spent on other items such as guide fees,
equipment rental, and bait, 40 percent of trip
costs. Great Lakes anglers spent $498
million on equipment. They bought $175
million worth of fishing equipment (rods,
reels, etc.). They spent $33 million on
auxiliary equipment (camping equipment,
binoculars, etc.) and $290 million on special
equipment (boats, vans, etc.).
10 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Freshwater Trip and Equipment Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $21.3 billion)
Freshwater except Great Lakes
94%
$20.0 billion
Great Lakes
6%
$1.3 billion
Freshwater Fishing
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Great
Lakes
Freshwater
except Great
Lakes
Total
Million
Freshwater
trips
Freshwater
days
Freshwater except Great Lakes
Great Lakes
Detail does not add to total because of multiple responses.
467 million
365 million
443
23
349
16
Freshwater anglers
Freshwater Fishing
Anglers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.4 million
Freshwater except Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.0 million
Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8 million
Days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467 million
Freshwater except Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 million
Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 million
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365 million
Freshwater except Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 million
Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 million
Trip and equipment expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $21.3 billion
Freshwater except Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.0 billion
Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 billion
Detail does not add to total because of multiple responses and nonresponse.
Source: Tables 1, 14, and 15.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 11
Saltwater Fishing Highlights
In 2001, almost 9.1 million anglers
enjoyed saltwater fishing on 72 million
trips totaling 91 million days. Overall,
they spent $8.4 billion during the year on
trips and equipment. Of their
expenditures, trip-related costs garnered
the largest portion, $4.5 billion. Food and
lodging cost $1.5 billion, 34 percent of
trip expenditures; transportation costs
totaled $773 million, 16 percent of trip
costs; and other trip costs such as
equipment rental, bait, and guide fees
were $2.2 billion.
Saltwater anglers spent a total of $3.9
billion on equipment—$987 million on
fishing equipment (rods, reels, etc.), $103
million on auxiliary equipment (camping
equipment, binoculars, etc.), and $2.8
billion on special equipment (boats, vans,
etc.).
Comparative Trip and Equipment Expenditures
Freshwater
except
Great Lakes
Great Saltwater
Lakes
Freshwater
except
Great Lakes
Great Saltwater
Lakes
Total expenses
Trip-related
Equipment
$1.3 billion
$8.4 billion
$20.0 billion
61%
53%
47%
39%
47%
53%
Saltwater Fishing
Anglers . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1 million
Days . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 million
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures . . . . . . $8.4 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 17.
12 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Comparative Fishing Highlights
In 2001, anglers spent an average of 16
days fishing and took an average of 13
fishing trips. Freshwater, non-Great
Lakes anglers averaged 16 days fishing
and 13 trips while Great Lakes anglers
averaged 13 days fishing and 9 trips.
Saltwater anglers fished less frequently—
an average of 10 days with an average of
8 trips.
Overall, anglers spent an average of
$1,046 on fishing-related expenses in
2001. They averaged $430 per angler on
their trips, a daily average of $26.
Freshwater anglers, excluding the Great
Lakes, averaged $337 per participant for
their trips in 2001, equaling $21 per day.
Great Lakes anglers spent an average of
$420 on trip-related expenses, $34 per
day. Saltwater anglers had the highest
average expenditure rate at $496—
amounting to an average of $49 per day.
Fishing for Selected Fish
Of the 28.0 million anglers who fished
freshwater other than the Great Lakes, 10.7
million spent 160 million days fishing for
black bass. Panfish were sought by 7.9
million anglers on 103 million days.
Catfish and bullheads drew 7.5 million
anglers on 104 million days. Nearly 6.7
million anglers fished for crappie on 95
million days. Trout fishing attracted 7.8
million anglers on 83 million days, and 4.9
million anglers fished for white bass and
striped bass on 62 million days. Freshwater
anglers also commonly fished for walleye,
sauger, salmon, and steelhead.
In 2001, 1.8 million anglers fished the
Great Lakes. Perch, the most commonly
sought fish for these waters, attracted 693
thousand anglers, fishing 7 million days.
Next, black bass drew 589 thousand
anglers on 6.4 million days, followed by
walleye which appealed to 570 thousand
anglers who fished more than 5 million
days. Salmon drew 516 thousand anglers
for almost 4 million days of fishing.
Among the nearly 9.1 million saltwater
anglers, 2.3 million fished for flatfish,
including flounder and halibut on 21
million days. Bluefish were a favorite of
1.1 million anglers on 12 million days.
Sea trout were sought by 1.5 million
anglers on 17 million days, and 609
thousand anglers fished for mackerel on 6
million days. Striped bass were sought by
1.7 million anglers on 17 million days.
Five million days were spent fishing for
salmon by 722 thousand anglers.
Comparative Fishing by Type of Fishing
All fishing
Freshwater except Great Lakes
Great Lakes
Saltwater
16
16
13
10
13
13
9
8
$430
$337
$420
$496
$26
$21
$34
$49
Trips per angler
Days per angler
Trip expenditures
per day
Trip expenditures
per angler
Selected Fish by Type of Fishing
(In millions)
Type of Fishing Anglers Days
Freshwater except Great Lakes
Black bass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7 160
Panfish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.9 103
Trout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.8 83
Catfish/bullhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.5 104
Crappie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.7 95
White bass, striped bass, and striped bass hybrids . . . . . 4.9 62
Great Lakes
Perch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.7 7
Walleye, sauger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6 6
Black bass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6 6
Salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.5 4
Lake trout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3 4
Steelhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3 4
Saltwater
Flatfish (flounder, halibut) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 21
Striped bass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.7 17
Sea trout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 17
Bluefish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 12
Salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.7 5
Mackerel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6 6
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 13
Participation by Geographic Division
In 2001, 212 million people 16 years old
and older lived in the United State and 1
of every 6 went fishing. While the
national participation rate was 16 percent,
the regional rates ranged from 11 percent
in the Middle Atlantic to 27 percent in the
West North Central. The East North
Central, East South Central, West South
Central, and Mountain Regions all
reported participation rates above the
national rate. The South Atlantic tied the
national rate with 16 percent while the
New England (13 percent) and Pacific (12
percent) Regions fell below the national
rate.
Fishing in State of Residence
and in Other States
A vast majority of the 34.1 million
anglers who fished in 2001 did so within
their home state. Approximately 31.2
million participants, 92 percent of all
anglers, fished in their resident state,
while nearly 7.9 million, 23 percent,
fished out-of-state. Percentages do not
add to 100 because those anglers who
fished both in-state and out-of-state were
included in both categories.
Of the 28 million non-Great Lakes
anglers, 93 percent (25.8 million) fished
within their resident state. Nearly 6
million, 20 percent, of these freshwater
anglers fished out-of-state.
Eighty-seven percent, 1.6 million, of all
Great Lakes anglers enjoyed fishing
within their home state in 2001. Nineteen
percent, 348 thousand, of all Great Lakes
anglers fished out-of-state.
Of all the different types of fishing,
saltwater fishing had both the highest
percentage of anglers fishing outside their
resident state (29 percent) and the lowest
percentage fishing within their resident
state (76 percent). Nonresident saltwater
anglers numbered 2.7 million and resident
anglers, 6.9 million.
AK
WA
OR
CA
MT
WY
ID
NV
UT
AZ
CO
NM
ND
SD
NE
KS
OK
TX
MN
IA
MO
AR
LA
WI
IL
MI
IN OH
KY
TN
MS AL
FL
GA
SC
NC
WV VA
PA
NY
NH ME
VT
MA
RI
CT
NJ
DE
MD
DC
HI
Fishing Participation
(National participation rate: 16%)
Pacific
12%
Mountain
18%
West North
Central
27%
East
North
Central
17%
Middle
Atlantic
11%
New England
13%
South Atlantic
16%
East South
Central
West South 20%
Central
19%
Percent of All Fishing—in State of Residence and Other States
(Total: 34.1 million participants)
In state of residence and
other states
15%
In state of residence only
77% Other states only
8%
Fishing in State of Residence
and in Other States
(In millions)
Out-of-
In-State State
Total Anglers . . . . . 31.2 7.9
Freshwater except
Great Lakes . . . . . 25.8 5.6
Great Lakes . . . . . . . 1.6 0.3
Saltwater . . . . . . . . . 6.9 2.7
Source: Table 2.
14 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Types of Freshwater Fished,
Excluding Great Lakes
Freshwater anglers fished in a variety of
waters. Most non-Great Lakes freshwater
anglers, 23.6 million (85 percent), fished
in flatwater including ponds, lakes, or
reservoirs on 318 million days. Rivers and
streams were utilized by 12.3 million
freshwater anglers (44 percent) on 141
million days.
Great Lakes Anglers
Great Lakes fishing includes not only the
Great Lakes, but also their tributaries,
bodies of water that connect the Great
Lakes, and the St. Lawrence River south
of the bridge at Cornwall. The most
popular of the lakes among anglers was
Lake Erie, attracting 35 percent of all the
Great Lakes anglers on an average of 12
days during 2001. Lake Michigan ranked
second in popularity and hosted 30
percent of the anglers with an average of
9 days per angler. The tributaries to the
lakes drew 15 percent of all Great Lakes
anglers with an average of 12 days per
angler. Lake Ontario attracted 13 percent
of the anglers, 241 thousand, averaging
15 fishing day; Lake Huron drew 8
percent, 155 thousand anglers, who
averaged 8 days of fishing.
Types of Freshwater Fished Excluding Great Lakes
(In millions)
27.9
23.6
12.3
443
318
141
Anglers
Days
Rivers and streams
Lakes and reservoirs
Total freshwater
excluding Great Lakes
Rivers and streams
Lakes and reservoirs
Total freshwater
excluding Great Lakes
Great Lakes Fishing
Percentage
Anglers of all Great
(thousands) Lakes anglers
Total, all Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,847 100
Lake Erie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 645 35
Lake Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 561 30
Tributaries to the Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . 284 15
Lake Ontario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 13
Lake Huron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 8
St. Lawrence River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 6
Lake St. Clair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 5
Lake Superior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 5
Source: Table 27.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 15
Sex and Age of Anglers
Although more males than females fished
in 2001, a substantial number of females
fished as well. Approximately 25 percent
of all males 16 years and older went
fishing, while 8 percent of all females
fished. Of the 34.1 million anglers who
fished in the United States, 74 percent
(25.2 million) were male and 26 percent
(8.9 million) were female.
Of the age categories, 9 million anglers,
27 percent of all anglers, were 35 to 44
years old—21 percent of the U.S.
population in that age group. They were
followed by 6.9 million anglers 45 to 54
years old who comprised 20 percent of all
anglers and had a participation rate of 17
percent. Next came the 25- to 34-year-old
age group, 6.6 million participants
who accounted for 19 percent of all
anglers and had a participation rate of 19
percent. The 4.2 million 55- to 64-year-olds
who fished comprised 12 percent of
all anglers and had a participation rate of
16 percent. Anglers 65 years old and
older numbered 3.1 million, 9 percent of
total anglers, and recorded an 8 percent
participation rate. The 2.9 million anglers
18 to 24 years old also made up 9 percent
of the angler population, but they had a
participation rate of 13 percent. The 16-
and 17-year-olds added 1.3 million
individuals to the angler population.
They made up 4 percent of the total
angler population and had a 17 percent
participation rate.
Percent of Anglers—by Gender
Percent of Males and Females Who Fished in the United States
Percent of Anglers—by Age
Males
74%
Females
26%
65 and older
9%
55 to 64
12%
16 and 17
4%
45 to 54
20%
35 to 44
27%
25 to 34
19%
18 to 24
9%
Females
Males 25%
8%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Fished—by Age
65 and older
55 to 64
45 to 54
35 to 44
25 to 34
18 to 24
16 and 17 17%
13%
19%
21%
17%
16%
8%
Anglers—by Gender and Age
Total, both sexes . . . . 34.1 million
Male . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.2 million
Female . . . . . . . . . . 8.9 million
Total, all ages . . . . . . . 34.1 million
16 and 17 . . . . . . . . 1.3 million
18 to 24 . . . . . . . . . 2.9 million
25 to 34 . . . . . . . . . 6.6 million
35 to 44 . . . . . . . . . 9.0 million
45 to 54 . . . . . . . . . 6.9 million
55 to 64 . . . . . . . . . 4.2 million
65 and older . . . . . . 3.1 million
Source: Table 9.
16 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Metropolitan and
Nonmetropolitan Anglers
In 2001, 72 percent of U.S. residents who
fished lived in a metropolitan statistical
area (MSA) with most anglers coming
from large MSAs. People living in MSAs
with populations of 1,000,000 or more
had a participation rate of 12 percent.
Forty percent of all anglers came from
these large urban areas. Residents of
MSAs with a population of 250,000 to
999,999 had a 17 percent participation
rate and represented 20 percent of all
anglers. MSAs with populations of
50,000 to 249,999 had a participation rate
of 22 percent; they made up 11 percent of
all anglers. In areas outside of MSAs, 24
percent of the population fished in 2001.
These participants made up 28 percent of
all anglers.
Income of Anglers
Anglers at all income levels fished in
2001. Participation rates ranged from 8
percent of all individuals with household
incomes of $10,000 or less to 23 percent
for those who reported incomes of
$50,000 to $99,999. Those living in
households with incomes of $10,000 or
less comprised 3 percent of all anglers,
while those with $50,000 to $74,999
incomes made up 21 percent. Those with
$75,000 to $99,999 incomes comprised
12 percent of all anglers. Both household
groups with incomes of $40,000 to
$49,999 and $100,000 or more garnered
participation rates of 22 percent, but only
comprised 11 and 12 percent of all
anglers, respectively. Next came
households earning $35,000 to $39,999
with a participation rate of 20 percent and
comprising 6 percent of all anglers.
Anglers with household incomes of
$30,000 to $34,999 had a participation
rate of 18 percent and made up 6 percent
of all anglers. A 16 percent participation
rate was reported by households with
incomes of $25,000 to $29,999—they
represented 5 percent of all anglers.
Households with $20,000 to $24,999
incomes represented 4 percent of all
anglers and had a participation rate of 14
percent. Lastly, 5 percent of all anglers
lived in households earning $10,000 to
$19,999. These households had a
participation rate of 11 percent. Fifteen
percent of anglers did not report their
income.
Percent of Anglers—by Residence
(Angler population: 34.1 million)
Outside MSA
Large MSA 28%
40%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Fished—by Residence
(16% of total U.S. population fished)
Outside MSA
Small MSA
(50,000 to 249,999)
Medium MSA
(250,000 to 999,999)
Large MSA
(1,000,000 or more)
12%
17%
22%
24%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Fished—by Household Income
$100,000 or more
$75,000 to 99,999
$50,000 to 74,999
$40,000 to 49,999
$35,000 to 39,999
$30,000 to 34,999
$25,000 to 29,999
$20,000 to 24,999
$10,000 to 19,999
Less than $10,000
Small MSA
11%
Medium MSA
20%
22%
23%
23%
22%
20%
18%
16%
14%
11%
8%
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 17
Education, Race, and Ethnicity
People from a variety of educational
backgrounds fished in 2001. The lowest
participation rate, 13 percent, was found
among those with 11 years of education
or less. They made up 12 percent of all
anglers. The highest participation rate,
18 percent, was found among those
individuals with 1 to 3 years of college.
They made up 27 percent of all anglers.
Persons who had 12 years of education, 4
years of college, or 5 years or more of
college all had a participation rate of 16
percent. The 12 year education category
represented 35 percent of all anglers,
while the 4 years of college and the 5
years of more college categories were
significantly lower—16 and 10 percent of
all anglers.
Fishing was a popular pastime among
diverse racial and ethnic populations in
the United States. Eighteen percent of the
White population fished, compared with 7
percent of the Black population and 5
percent of the Asian population. Among
anglers, 93 percent of the total were
White, 5 percent Black, 1 percent Asian,
and 1 percent other races. Hispanics, a
growing percentage of the U.S.
population, participated at a rate of 7
percent and represented 5 percent of all
anglers.
Percent of Anglers—by Education
Percent of U.S. Population Who Fished—by Ethnicity
Percent of Anglers—by Race
4 years of college
16%
11 years or less
12%
White 93%
Other 1%
Black 5%
Asian 1%
Hispanic
Non-Hispanic 17%
7%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Fished—by Education
5 years or more
of college
4 years of college
1 to 3 years of college
12 years
11 years or less 13%
16%
18%
16%
16%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Fished—by Race
Other
Asian
Black
White
5 years or more of college
10%
1 to 3 years of college
27%
12 years
35%
18%
7%
5%
18%
Anglers—by Education, Race,
and Ethnicity
(In millions)
Total anglers . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.1
Education
0-11 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1
12 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8
1 to 3 years of college . . . . 9.1
4 years of college . . . . . . . 5.5
5 years or more of college . 3.5
Race
White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.7
Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6
Asian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.4
Ethnicity
Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6
Non-Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . 32.5
Source: Table 9.
18 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
1991-2001 Comparison of
Fishing Activity
The number of all anglers in the United
States has not changed significantly1 over
the past three Surveys. There was a drop
of 1 percent in the number of anglers
from 1991 to 1996 and a drop of 3
percent from 1996 to 2001—all well
within the survey’s margin of error (the
95 percent confidence interval). However,
when the angling estimates are examined
by type of fishing, there are significant
differences. For example, the number
of freshwater anglers did change
significantly, with an 8 percent drop in the
number of non-Great Lakes freshwater
anglers from 1991 to 2001 and a 28
percent drop in the number of Great
Lakes anglers over the same time period.
Although saltwater fishing participation
shows an increase of 2 percent from 1991
to 2001, it is not statistically significant.
The number of fishing days rose 22
percent from 1991 to 1996 and dropped
11 percent—a statistically insignificant
change from 1996 to 2001. This pattern
held true for both freshwater fishing and
saltwater fishing.
Total fishing expenditures rose 37 percent
from 1991 to 1996 and fell 17 percent
from 1996 to 2001. Comparing 1991
fishing expenditures with 2001
expenditures finds a 14 percent increase,
but this is not a statistically significant
change. Looking at the trip-related
expenditure component, there was a
similar trend with a 13 percent increase
from 1991 to 1996, a 16 percent decrease
from 1996 to 2001, and a 5 percent drop
(not statistically significant) from 1991 to
2001. Equipment expenditures had a
different pattern, with a 78 percent
increase from 1991 to 1996, a 22 percent
decrease from 1996 to 2001, and a
significant 39 percent increase from 1991
to 2001. The purchase of special
equipment, such as boats and campers,
was primarily responsible for the increase
in total equipment purchases.
Expenditures for fishing equipment, such
as rods and reels, decreased 23 percent
from 1996 to 2001 and 5 percent (which
is not statistically significant) from 1991
to 2001.
Number of Anglers
(Millions)
1991 1996 2001
Days of Fishing
(Millions)
1991 1996 2001
Fishing Expenditures
(Billions. In 2001 dollars)
1991 1996 2001
35.6 35.2 34.1
511
626
557
$31.2
$42.7
$35.6
1At the 5 percent level of significance.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 19
1991-2001 Fishing Participants, Days, and Expenditures
(U.S. population 16 years old and older. Numbers in thousands)
1991 2001
1991-2001
Number Percent Number Percent percent change
Anglers, total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,578 100 34,067 100 -4*
All freshwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,041 87 28,439 83 -8
Freshwater except Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,186 85 27,913 82 -8
Great Lakes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,552 7 1,847 5 -28
Saltwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,885 25 9,051 26 2*
Days, total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511,329 100 557,394 100 9*
All freshwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439,536 86 466,984 84 6*
Freshwater except Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430,922 84 443,247 80 3*
Great Lakes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,335 5 23,138 4 -9*
Saltwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74,696 15 90,838 16 22*
Fishing expenditures, total (2001 dollars) . . . . . . . . . . . . $31,175,168 100 $35,632,132 100 14*
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,396,151 49 14,656,001 41 -5*
Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,170,062 39 16,963,398 48 39
Fishing equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,860,266 16 4,617,488 13 -5*
Auxiliary equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804,953 3 721,048 2 -10*
Special equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,504,844 21 11,624,862 33 79
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,608,953 12 4,012,733 11 11*
* Not different from zero at the 5 percent level.
1996-2001 Fishing Participants, Days, and Expenditures
(U.S. population 16 years old and older. Numbers in thousands)
1996 2001
1996-2001
Number Percent Number Percent percent change
Anglers, total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,246 100 34,067 100 -3*
All freshwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,734 84 28,439 83 -4*
Freshwater except Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,921 82 27,913 82 -3*
Great Lakes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,039 6 1,847 5 -9*
Saltwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,438 27 9,051 26 -4*
Days, total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 625,893 100 557,394 100 -11*
All freshwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 515,115 82 466,984 84 -9*
Freshwater except Great Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485,474 78 443,247 80 -9*
Great Lakes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,095 3 23,138 4 15*
Saltwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103,034 17 90,838 16 -12*
Fishing expenditures, total (2001 dollars) . . . . . . . . . . . . $42,710,679 100 $35,632,132 100 -17
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,380,775 41 14,656,001 41 -16
Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,666,341 51 16,963,398 48 -22
Fishing equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,998,802 14 4,617,488 13 -23
Auxiliary equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,171,540 3 721,048 2 -38
Special equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,495,999 34 11,624,862 33 -20*
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,663,563 9 4,012,733 11 10*
* Not different from zero at the 5 percent level.
Hunting
22 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
In 2001, 13 million people 16 years old
and older enjoyed hunting a variety of
animals within the United States. They
hunted 228 million days and took 200
million trips. Hunting expenditures
totaled $20.6 billion.
Big game hunting was most popular in
2001. Approximately 11.0 million
hunters pursued big game such as deer
and elk on 153 million days. They spent
$10.1 billion on trips and equipment
during the year. A total of 5.4 million
people hunted small game including
squirrels and rabbits. They hunted small
game on 60 million days and spent $1.8
billion on their hunting trips and
equipment. Migratory bird hunters
numbered 3.0 million. They spent 29
million days hunting birds such as
waterfowl and dove. Their trip and
equipment expenditures totaled $1.4
billion. More than 1.0 million hunters
sought other animals such as raccoons
and groundhogs on 19 million days. They
spent $244 million on trips and equipment
for the year.
Hunting Highlights
Hunting
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Other
animals
Migratory
bird
Small
game
Big
game
Total
hunting
Million
Days Trips
Big game
Small game
Migratory bird
Other animals
Detail does not add to total because of multiple responses and nonresponse.
228 million
200 million
Hunters
153
114
60
46
29 24
19 15
Total Hunting
Hunters . . . . . . . . . . 13.0 million
Big game . . . . . . . 10.9 million
Small game . . . . . 5.4 million
Migratory bird . . . 3.0 million
Other animals . . . . 1.0 million
Days . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 million
Big game . . . . . . . 153 million
Small game . . . . . 60 million
Migratory bird . . . 29 million
Other animals . . . . 19 million
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 million
Big game . . . . . . . 114 million
Small game . . . . . 46 million
Migratory bird . . . 24 million
Other animals . . . . 15 million
Expenditures . . . . . . $20.6 billion
Big game . . . . . . . 10.1 billion
Small game . . . . . 1.8 billion
Migratory game . . 1.4 billion
Other animals . . . . 0.2 billion
Unspecified . . . . . 7.1 billion
Detail does not add to total because of multiple
responses and nonresponse.
Source: Tables 1 and 18-22.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 23
Hunting Expenditures
Of the $20.6 billion spent by hunters in
2001, 25 percent, $5.3 billion, was spent
on trip-related expenses. Food and
lodging totaled to $2.4 billion—47
percent of all trip-related expenses.
Transportation cost hunters $1.8 billion,
34 percent of their trip expenditures.
Other trip expenses such as guide fees,
land use fees, and equipment rental were
$1.0 billion or 19 percent of all trip-related
expenses.
Total hunting equipment expenditures
were $10.4 billion in 2001—50 percent of
all hunting expenses. Hunting equipment,
such as guns and rifles, telescopic sights,
and ammunition, cost hunters $4.6 billion,
44 percent of all equipment costs.
Expenditures for auxiliary equipment,
including camping equipment, binoculars,
and special hunting clothing, accounted
for $1.2 billion or 12 percent of all
equipment expenses. Special equipment,
such as campers or trail bikes, amounted
to $4.6 billion or 44 percent of all
equipment expenditures.
Land leasing and ownership for hunting
was a large expenditure category.
Hunters spent $4.0 billion on land leasing
and ownership—19 percent of their total
expenditures in 2001. Expenditures for
magazines, books, membership dues, and
contributions, and licenses, tags, and
permits totaled $1 billion.
Total Hunting Expenditures
Total hunting expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20.6 billion
Total trip-related . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5.3 billion
Food and lodging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 billion
Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8 billion
Other trip costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0 billion
Total equipment expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10.4 billion
Hunting equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4.6 billion
Auxiliary equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 billion
Special equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6 billion
Total other hunting expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5.0 billion
Magazines, books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1 billion
Membership dues and contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.2 billion
Land leasing and ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.0 billion
Licenses, stamps, tags, and permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.7 billion
Source: Table 18.
Percent of Total Hunting Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $20.6 billion)
Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $20.6 billion)
Big game
$10.1 billion
Other animals 49%
$0.2 billion
1%
Unspecified
$7.1 billion
34%
Other
24%
Trip-related
25%
Equipment
50%
Small game
$1.8 billion
9%
Migratory bird
$1.4 billion
7%
24 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Big Game Hunting
In 2001, the majority of hunters, 11.0
million, devoted 153 million days to
hunting big game including deer, elk,
bear, and wild turkey. They took 114
million trips and spent an average of 14
days hunting big game during the year.
Trip and equipment expenditures for big
game hunters amounted to $10.1 billion.
Trip-related expenses totaled $3.6 billion.
Of that amount, food and lodging totaled
$1.7 billion or 47 percent of all trip-related
costs. Transportation costs reached
$1.1 billion—32 percent of trip costs.
Other trip-related expenses amounted to
$749 million or 21 percent of trip costs.
Big game hunters spent the majority of
their money on equipment—$6.5 billion.
Hunting equipment (guns, ammunition,
etc.) accounted for $2.2 billion.
Purchases of auxiliary equipment
(camping equipment, binoculars, etc.)
totaled $935 million. And special
equipment (vans, trail bikes, etc.) cost big
game hunters $3.4 billion.
Small Game Hunting
Also popular with hunters was small
game such as rabbits, squirrel, pheasants,
quail, and grouse. In 2001, approximately
5.4 million hunters pursued small game
on a total of 60 million days. They took
46 million trips. Small game hunters
averaged 11 days in the field hunting.
These hunters spent $1.8 billion on trips
and equipment. Of their $909 million trip
expenditures, $438 million or 48 percent
was spent on food and lodging.
Transportation costs totaled $348 million
or 38 percent of small game trip expenses.
Other trip-related expenditures amounted
to $124 million or 14 percent of all trip
costs.
During 2001, equipment expenditures for
small game hunting totaled $907 million.
Of that amount, hunting equipment (guns,
ammunition, etc.) amounted to $660
million, auxiliary equipment (camping
equipment, binoculars, etc.) $63 million,
and special equipment (vans, trail bikes,
etc.) $183 million.
Big Game
Hunters . . . . . . . . . . 11.0 million
Days . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 million
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures . . . . . $10.1 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 19.
Big Game Hunting Trip and Equipment Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $10.1 billion)
Small Game Hunting Trip and Equipment Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $1.8 million)
Trip-related
Equipment $6.5 billion
$3.6 billion
Trip-related
Equipment $907 million
$909 million
Small Game
Hunters . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 million
Days . . . . . . . . . . . . 60.1 million
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures . . . . . $1.8 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 20.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 25
Migratory Bird Hunting
In 2001, 3.0 million migratory bird
hunters devoted 29 million days on 24
million trips for hunting birds such as
doves, ducks, and geese. Migratory bird
hunters spent an average of 10 days
hunting for the year.
The $1.4 billion spent by migratory bird
hunters in 2001 was for hunting trips and
equipment. Of the items contributing to
this sum, $657 million was spent on
hunting trips, including $280 million on
food and lodging (43 percent of trip-related
expenses), and $247 million on
transportation (38 percent of all trip
costs). Other trip expenses amounted to
$130 million—20 percent of the total
trip-related expenditures for migratory
bird hunters.
Migratory bird hunters purchased nearly
$732 million worth of equipment in 2001.
They spent $534 million on hunting
equipment (guns, ammunition, etc.).
Another $68 million was spent by
migratory bird hunters on auxiliary
equipment (camping equipment,
binoculars, etc.), and $130 million was
spent on special equipment (vans, trail
bikes, etc.).
Hunting Other Animals
During 2001, more than 1 million hunters
reported spending 19 million days on 15
million trips pursuing animals such as
groundhogs, raccoons, foxes, and coyotes.
They averaged 18 days of hunting for the
year.
These hunters spent $244 million in 2001
on trips and equipment. Trip-related costs
totaled $121 million. Of that, food and
lodging were $44 million or 36 percent of
all trip costs; transportation was $67
million, 55 percent of trip expenses; and
other trip expenses were $10 million, 9
percent of all trip costs.
Equipment expenditures for hunting other
animals totaled $123 million. Hunters
pursuing other animals spent $85 million
on hunting equipment (guns, ammunition,
etc.), and $6 million on auxiliary
equipment (camping equipment,
binoculars, etc.).
Comparative Hunting Highlights
In 2001, big game hunters averaged 14
days of hunting and 10 trips per hunter.
Small game hunters spent an average of
11 days hunting in the field on an average
of 9 trips. In comparison, migratory bird
Migratory Birds
Hunters . . . . . . . . . . 3.0 million
Days . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 million
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures . . . . . $1.4 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 21.
Migratory Bird Hunting Trip and Equipment Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $1.4 million)
Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Hunting Other Animals
(Total expenditures: $244 million)
Trip-related
Equipment $732 million
$657 million
Trip-related
Equipment $123 million
$121 million
Other Animals
Hunters . . . . . . . . . . 1.0 million
Days . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 million
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures . . . . . $244 million
Source: Table 1 and 22.
hunters spent an average of 10 days and 8
trips hunting. Individuals hunting other
animals averaged 18 days and 14 trips
pursuing their game.
On average, big game hunters spent more
money on trips and equipment than other
hunters in 2001. They averaged $925 per
hunter for the year. Small game hunters
spent an average of $334 per hunter while
migratory bird hunters averaged $470.
Those hunting other animals spent $233
per hunter for the year.
During 2001, trip expenditures for all
hunting averaged $403 per hunter, a daily
average of $23. The average for trip
expenditures varied by type of hunting.
Big game hunting trips averaged $327 per
hunter for lodging, food, transportation,
and other trip-related expenses ($23 per
day). Small game hunters spent $167 on
average for trip expenses ($15 per day).
Persons taking trips for migratory bird
hunting spent an average of $222 ($22 per
day) while for hunting other animals
averaged $116 per hunter for their trips
($6 per day).
Hunting for Selected Game
For big game hunting, deer was the most
popular animal pursued—attracting 10.3
million hunters on 133 million days.
Turkey attracted 2.5 million hunters on 23
million days, while elk drew 910 thousand
on 6 million days, and bear 360 thousand
on 3 million days. In addition, 527
thousand hunters spent 5 million days
hunting other big game animals.
In 2001, nearly 2.1 million small game
hunters hunted rabbits and hares on 23
million days. Quail was flushed by 991
thousand hunters on 8 million days, while
grouse and prairie chicken were favorites
of 1 million hunters on 9 million days.
Squirrels were hunted by 2.1 million
participants on 22 million days, and
pheasants attracted 1.7 million hunters on
13 million days. In addition, 505
thousand hunters spent 5.2 million days
hunting other small game animals.
Among those hunting migratory birds,
1.6 million enthusiasts hunted duck on
18 million days. Nearly 1.5 million
participants hunted dove on 9 million
days. On 11 million days, 1 million
hunters hunted geese in 2001. Other
migratory bird species attracted 210
thousand people who hunted on 1.5
million days.
26 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Hunting for Selected Game
(In millions)
Type of Hunting Hunters Days
Big game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.9 153
Deer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3 133
Wild turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 23
Elk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.9 6
Bear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3 3
Small game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 60
Squirrel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 22
Rabbit and hare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 23
Pheasant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.7 13
Grouse/prairie chicken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0 9
Quail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.9 8
Migratory birds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0 29
Ducks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6 18
Doves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 9
Geese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0 11
Other animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0 19
Source: Table 7.
Comparative Hunting by Type of Hunting
Total
Big game
Small game
Migratory birds
Other animals
18
14
11
10
15
10
9
8
$403
$327
$167
$222
$23
$23
$15
$22
18
14
$116
$6
Trips per hunter
Days per hunter
Trip expenditures
per day
Trip expenditures
per hunter
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 27
Participation by Geographic Regions
In 2001, 212 million people 16 years old
and older lived in the United States. Six
percent of all those people hunted that
year.
Regionally, participation rates ranged
from 2 percent in the Pacific Region to 12
percent in the West North Central Region.
The East North Central, East South
Central, West South Central, and
Mountain Regions also had participation
rates above the national average of 6
percent. Both the East South Central and
the West South Central Regions garnered
participation rates of 9 percent. While the
Mountain Region’s rate was 8 percent, the
East North Central’s was 7 percent. The
Middle Atlantic and South Atlantic
Regions’ participation rate was 5 percent,
and New England’s was 4 percent.
Hunting in State of Residence and
in Other States
An overwhelming majority of participants
hunted within their resident state—12.4
million or 95 percent of all hunters. Only
2.1 million, 16 percent, hunted in another
state. Percentages do not add to 100
because those sportspersons who hunted
both in-state and out-of-state were
included in both categories.
In 2001, 10.4 million big game hunters,
95 percent of all big game hunters, hunted
within their state of residence, while only
13 percent, 1.5 million people, traveled to
another state to hunt big game. Nearly 5.1
million small game hunters, 94 percent of
all small game hunters, pursued game in
their resident state. Approximately 672
thousand, 12 percent, ventured across
state lines to hunt small game. Ninety-four
percent of all migratory bird hunters,
2.8 million participants, hunted within
their resident state. Fourteen percent or
410 thousand of these sportspersons
hunted out-of-state. Among sportspersons
who hunted other animals, 96 percent, 1.0
million, hunted in-state and 10 percent,
102 thousand participants, hunted out-of-state.
AK
WA
OR
CA
MT
WY
ID
NV
UT
AZ
CO
NM
ND
SD
NE
KS
OK
TX
MN
IA
MO
AR
LA
WI
IL
MI
IN OH
KY
TN
MS AL
FL
GA
SC
NC
WV VA
PA
NY
NH ME
VT
MA
RI
CT
NJ
DE
MD
DC
HI
Hunting Participation
(National participation rate: 6%)
Pacific
2%
Mountain
8%
West North
Central
12%
East
North
Central
7%
Middle
Atlantic
5%
New England
4%
South Atlantic
5%
East South
Central
West South 9%
Central
9%
Hunting in State of Residence
and in Other States
(In millions)
Out-of-
In-State State
All hunters . . . . . . . . 12.4 2.1
Big game . . . . . . . . . 10.4 1.5
Small game . . . . . . . 5.1 0.7
Migratory birds . . . . 2.8 0.4
Other animals . . . . . 1.0 0.1
Source: Table 6.
28 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Hunting on Public and Private Lands
In 2001, 13 million hunters 16 years old
and older hunted on public land, private
land, or both. Of this number, 5.2 million
or 40 percent hunted on publicly owned
lands compared to 10.7 million or 82
percent who hunted on privately owned
land. Some hunters, 1.9 million—14
percent of all hunters—used publicly
owned lands exclusively while 7.4 million
hunted only on private land and
represented 57 percent of all hunters.
Slightly over 3 million hunters (25
percent) hunted on both public and
private lands.
During 2001, 5.2 million hunters used
public lands on 60 million days—
26 percent of all hunting days.
Thirty-seven percent of big game hunters
spent 36 million days on public lands.
Among the 5.4 million small game
hunters, 36 percent used public land on 16
million days. Approximately 1.0 million
migratory bird hunters, 35 percent of all
migratory bird hunters, spent 9.1 million
days on public lands. Twenty-seven
percent, 287 thousand of other animal
hunters pursued their game on public land
for 3 million days.
In contrast, 10.7 million hunters spent 170
million days—74 percent of all hunting
days—pursuing their sport on private
lands in 2001. A vast majority of all
hunters (82 percent) pursued their game
on private lands as did big game hunters
(80 percent), small game hunters
(80 percent), migratory bird hunters
(76 percent), and other animal hunters
(86 percent).
Days spent hunting on private land also
varied by type of hunting. In 2001, big
game hunters spent 72 percent (110 million
days) of their total hunting days on private
lands; small game hunters spent 70 percent
(42 million days) of their hunting days on
private lands, and migratory bird hunters
spent 67 percent (20 million days) of their
hunting days on private lands. Participants
hunting other animals spent 84 percent (16
million days) of their hunting days on
private lands.
People Hunting on Public and Private Lands
Percent of All Hunting—in State of Residence and Other States
(Total: 13.0 million participants)
In state of residence only
84%
In state of residence
and other states
11%
Private only
57%
Public only
14%
Other states only
5%
Public and private
25%
Unspecified
4%
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 29
Sex and Age of Hunters
Of the U.S. population 16 years old and
older, 12 percent of the males and 1
percent of the females enjoyed hunting in
2001. Of the 13 million participants who
hunted, 91 percent (11.8 million) were
male and 9 percent (1.2 million) were
female.
Hunter participation was seen in all age
groups across the country. The proportion
of hunters by age group ranged from 4
percent among hunters 16 and 17 years
old to 27 percent for those hunters 35 to
44 years old. During 2001, 8 percent of
all 16- and 17-year olds hunted. They
numbered 584 thousand hunters. The
participation rate for 35- to 44-year olds
also was 8 percent, but they numbered 3.6
million hunters. The 18- to 24-year olds
showed a 6 percent participant rate with
nearly 1.3 million participants (10 percent
of all hunters). The participation rate for
the 25- to 34-year olds was 7 percent,
numbering 2.4 million hunters—19
percent of all hunters. Hunters 45 to
54 years old also had a 7 percent
participation rate with approximately 2.8
million hunters (22 percent of all hunters).
The 55- to 64-year old hunters numbered
1.5 million, capturing 11 percent of all
hunters with a participation rate of 6
percent. Finally, 965 thousand people 65
years old and older made up 7 percent of
all hunters and garnered a participation
rate of 3 percent.
Hunters—by Gender and Age
Total, both sexes . . . . 13.0 million
Male . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8 million
Female . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 million
Total, all ages
16 and 17 . . . . . . . . 0.6 million
18 to 24 . . . . . . . . . 1.3 million
25 to 34 . . . . . . . . . 2.4 million
35 to 44 . . . . . . . . . 3.6 million
45 to 54 . . . . . . . . . 2.8 million
55 to 64 . . . . . . . . . 1.5 million
65 and older . . . . . . 1.0 million
Source: Table 10.
Percent of Hunters—by Gender
Percent of Males and Females Who Hunted in the United States
Percent of Hunters—by Age
Males
91%
Females
9%
65 and older
7%
55 to 64
11%
16 and 17
4%
45 to 54
22%
35 to 44
27%
25 to 34
19%
18 to 24
10%
Females
Males 12%
1%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Hunted—by Age
65 and older
55 to 64
45 to 54
35 to 44
25 to 34
18 to 24
16 and 17 8%
6%
7%
8%
7%
6%
3%
30 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Metropolitan and
Nonmetropolitan Hunters
While most hunters in 2001 resided
outside the nation’s largest metropolitan
statistical areas (MSAs), a substantial
number of those area residents were
hunters. Twenty-eight percent of all
hunters were from MSAs with
populations of 1,000,000 or more. Three
percent of the total residents of these large
MSAs hunted. For MSAs with
populations of 250,000 to 999,999,
6 percent of their residents hunted and
comprised 18 percent of all hunters. Ten
percent of all residents of MSAs with
populations of 50,000 to 249,999 hunted
in 2001. Thirteen percent of all hunters
resided in these areas.
Although only 19 percent of the U.S.
population 16 years of age and older
resided in areas outside of MSAs in 2001,
41 percent of all hunters lived outside
MSAs. Thirteen percent of those
nonmetropolitan residents hunted in 2001
in contrast with 5 percent of all
metropolitan residents who hunted.
Income of Hunters
Participation rates among hunters varied
by household income from 2 percent of
persons with household incomes of less
than $10,000 a year (2 percent of all
hunters came from these households) to 9
percent of those reporting incomes of
$40,000 to $49,999 (13 percent of all
hunters), $50,000 to $74,999 (22 percent
of all hunters), and $75,999 to $99,999
(12 percent of all hunters). Households
reporting $10,000 to $19,999 incomes had
a 3 percent participation rate and
comprised 4 percent of all hunters. Five
percent of the nation’s population with
household incomes of $20,000 to $24,999
hunted in 2001 and made up 4 percent of
all hunters. Households with incomes of
$25,000 to $29,999 had a 7 percent
participation rate, representing 6 percent
of all hunters. In households reporting
incomes of $30,000 to $34,999, 7 percent
was the participation rate. Residents of
these households represented 6 percent of
all hunters. Eight percent of the persons in
households reporting incomes of $35,000
to $39,999 totaled 6 percent of all
hunters. Finally, 7 percent of persons
with household incomes of $100,000 or
more hunted and comprised 10 percent of
all hunters.
Percent of Hunters—by Residence
(Hunter population: 13.0 million)
Outside MSA
41%
Large MSA
28%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Hunted—by Residence
(6% of total U.S. population hunted)
Outside MSA
Small MSA
(50,000 to 249,999)
Medium MSA
(250,000 to 999,999)
Large MSA
(1,000,000 or more)
3%
6%
10%
13%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Hunted—by Household Income
$100,000 or more
$75,000 to 99,999
$50,000 to 74,999
$40,000 to 49,999
$35,000 to 39,999
$30,000 to 34,999
$25,000 to 29,999
$20,000 to 24,999
$10,000 to 19,999
Less than $10,000
Small MSA
13%
7%
9%
9%
9%
8%
7%
7%
5%
3%
2%
Medium MSA
18%
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 31
Education and Race of Hunters
During 2001, people from a variety of
educational backgrounds went hunting in
the United States. Participation rates
ranged from 5 percent for individuals
with less than 12 years of school or 4
years or more of college to 7 percent for
individuals with 12 years of school or 1 to
3 years of college.
Hunters with 12 years of education
accounted for 38 percent of the hunting
population. Those possessing 1 to 3 years
of college represented 26 percent of all
hunters. Those with 11 years or less of
education represented 14 percent of all
hunters. Others with at least 4 years of
college comprised 14 percent of all
hunters. And individuals with 5 years of
more of college totaled 8 percent of all
hunters.
While 6 percent of the U.S. population
went hunting in 2001, participation
among races varied. Seven percent of the
nation’s White population hunted, 1
percent of the Black population hunted,
and 6 percent of the other races hunted.
Of the 13 million hunters, 96 percent
were White, 2 percent were Black, and 1
percent were of other races.
Percent of Hunters—by Education
Percent of U.S. Population Who Hunted—by Ethnicity
Percent of Hunters—by Race
4 years of college
14%
11 years or less
14%
White 96%
Other 2%
Black 2%
Hispanic
Non-Hispanic 7%
2%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Hunted—by Education
5 years or more
of college
4 years of college
1 to 3 years of college
12 years
11 years or less 5%
7%
7%
5%
5%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Hunted—by Race
Other
Black
White
5 years or more of college
8%
1 to 3 years of college
26%
12 years
38%
7%
1%
2%
Hunters—by Education and Race
(In millions)
Total hunters . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.0
Education
0-11 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8
12 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.0
1 to 3 years of college . . . . 3.4
4 years of college . . . . . . . 1.8
5 years or more of college . 1.1
Race
White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.6
Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.2
Source: Table 10.
32 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
1991, 1996, 2001 Comparison of
Hunting Activity
The overall number of people who hunted
in 2001 dropped 7 percent from the
1991/1996 level, and their days afield
tended downward as well. However,
looking at the various types of hunting,
big game and migratory bird hunting
did not see this drop in hunting
participation—either in the number of
hunters or the number of hunting days.
The number of big game and migratory
bird hunters stayed roughly the same
throughout the three surveys, and the
number of days hunting these animals
increased from 1991 to 2001. The drop in
hunting participation can be traced to
small game and other animal hunting,
which saw significant drops in both
hunters and days.
Hunting expenditures increased from
1991 to 1996 for both trip-related and
equipment expenditures and then tended
downward from 1996 to 2001. The
robust 1996 economy, compared to the
recessionary years of 1991 and 2001, can
at least partly explain this finding. The
category that experienced the biggest
increase from 1991 to 2001 was special
equipment, such as pickups and campers,
which nearly tripled. Purchases of
hunting equipment, such as firearms and
ammunition, increased by 7 percent—not
a statistically significant change at the 95
percent confidence level.
1991-2001 Hunting Participants, Days, and Expenditures
(U.S. population 16 years old and older. Numbers in thousands)
1991 2001
1991-2001
Number Percent Number Percent percent change
Hunters, total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,063 100 13,034 100 -7
Big game. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,745 76 10,911 84 2*
Small game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,642 54 5,434 42 -29
Migratory bird. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,009 21 2,956 23 -2*
Other animal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,411 10 1,047 8 -26
Days, total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235,806 100 228,368 100 -3*
Big game. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128,411 54 153,191 67 19
Small game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77,132 33 60,142 26 -22
Migratory bird. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,235 9 29,310 13 32
Other animal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,340 8 19,207 8 -1*
Hunting expenditures, total (2001 dollars) . . . . . . . . . . . $16,031,197 100 $20,611,025 100 29
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,471,065 28 5,252,391 25 17*
Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,716,497 42 10,361,495 50 54
Hunting equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,266,795 27 4,561,708 22 7*
Auxiliary equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825,616 5 1,202,845 6 46
Special equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,624,086 10 4,596,942 22 183
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,843,635 30 4,997,139 24 3*
* Not different from zero at the 5 percent level.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 33
1996-2001 Hunting Participants, Days, and Expenditures
(U.S. population 16 years old and older. Numbers in thousands)
1996 2001
1996-2001
Number Percent Number Percent percent change
Hunters, total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,975 100 13,034 100 -7
Big game. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,288 81 10,911 84 -3*
Small game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,945 50 5,434 42 -22
Migratory bird. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,073 22 2,956 23 -4*
Other animal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,521 11 1,047 8 -31
Days, total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256,676 100 228,368 100 -11*
Big game. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153,784 60 153,191 67 0
Small game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,117 29 60,142 26 -20
Migratory bird. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,501 10 29,310 13 11*
Other animal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,522 10 19,207 8 -22*
Hunting expenditures, total (2001 dollars) . . . . . . . . . . . $23,293,156 100 $20,611,025 100 -12*
Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,825,510 25 5,252,391 25 -10*
Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,738,229 55 10,361,495 50 -19*
Hunting equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,236,625 27 4,561,708 22 -27
Auxiliary equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,393,423 6 1,202,845 6 -14*
Special equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,108,181 22 4,596,942 22 -10*
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,729,416 20 4,997,139 24 6*
* Not different from zero at the 5 percent level.
Number of Hunters
(Millions)
1991 1996 2001
Days of Hunting
(Millions)
1991 1996 2001
Hunting Expenditures
(Billions. In 2001 dollars)
1991 1996 2001
14.1 14.0
13.0 236
257
228
$16.0
$23.3
$20.6
Wildlife Watching
36 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Wildlife-watching (formerly called
nonconsumptive) activities including
observing, feeding, and photographing
wildlife continue to be popular in the
United States. These activities are
categorized as residential (within a mile
of one’s home) or nonresidential (at least
one mile away from home).
The 2001 Survey collected information
only on wildlife-watching activities in
which the primary objective was to
observe, feed, or photograph wildlife.
Secondary or incidental participation such
as observing wildlife while pleasure
driving was not included in the Survey.
During 2001, 66.1 million U.S. residents,
31 percent of the U.S. population 16 years
old and older, participated in a myriad of
wildlife-watching activities. People who
took an interest in wildlife around their
homes (residential) numbered 63 million,
while those who took trips away from
their homes to watch wildlife
(nonresidential) numbered close to
22 million people.
Wild Bird Observers
Of all the wildlife watching in the United
States, bird watching attracted the biggest
following. Forty-six million people
observed birds around the home and on
trips in 2001. A large majority, 88 percent
(40 million), observed wild birds around
the home while 40 percent, 18 million,
took birdwatching trips.
Birders varied in their ability to identify
different bird species. Seventy-four
percent, 34 million, of these 46 million
birders could identify 1 to 20 different
types of birds; 13 percent, 6 million
birders, could identify 21 to 40 types of
birds; and 8 percent, almost 4 million
birders, could identify 41 or more types of
birds.
Over 2.3 million wild bird enthusiasts
kept birding life lists in 2001.
Participants keeping these lists—a tally of
bird species seen by a birder during his or
her lifetime—comprised 5 percent of all
wild bird observers.
Wildlife-Watching Highlights
Wildlife-Watching Participants—
by Activity
(In millions)
Total wildlife-watching
participants . . . . . . . . . . 66.1
Nonresidential . . . . . . . . . 21.8
Observed wildlife . . . . . 20.1
Photographed wildlife . . 9.4
Fed wildlife . . . . . . . . . . 7.1
Residential . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.9
Fed wildlife . . . . . . . . . . 54.0
Observed wildlife . . . . . 42.1
Photographed wildlife . . 13.9
Maintained plantings
or natural areas . . . . . . 13.1
Visited public parks
or areas . . . . . . . . . . . 11.0
Detail does not add to total because of multiple
responses and nonresponse.
Source: Table 36.
Wildlife-Watching Participants
(In millions)
Nonresidential
Residential
Total 66.1
62.9
21.8
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 37
Wildlife-Watching Expenditures
Wildlife watching generated heavy
spending. In 2001, 79 percent of all
wildlife watchers 16 years old and older
spent $38.4 billion, an average of $738
per spender. These expenditures represent
35 percent of the total dollars spent for all
wildlife-related recreation.
Wildlife watchers spent nearly $8.2
billion on trips pursuing their activities.
Food and lodging accounted for $4.8
billion, transportation expenses totaled
$2.6 billion, and other trip costs, such as
land use fees and equipment rental,
amounted to $748 million for the year.
These recreationists purchased $23.5
billion worth of equipment. They spent
$7.4 billion on wildlife-watching
equipment, including binoculars, cameras,
bird food, and special clothing.
Expenditures for auxiliary equipment—
tents, backpacking equipment, etc.—
totaled almost $717 million for the year.
Participants spent over $15.5 billion on
special equipment, including big ticket
items such as off-road vehicles, campers,
and boats.
Also for the year, wildlife watchers spent
$332 million on magazines and books;
$920 million on membership dues and
contributions; $4.8 billion on land leasing
and ownership; and $699 million on
plantings for the benefit of wildlife.
Wildlife-Watching Expenditures
Total wildlife-watching expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $38.4 billion
Total trip-related . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $8.2 billion
Food and lodging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4.8 billion
Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.6 billion
Other trip costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $0.7 billion
Total equipment expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $23.5 billion
Wildlife-watching equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7.4 billion
Auxiliary equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $0.7 billion
Special equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $15.5 billion
Total other expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6.7 billion
Magazines, books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $0.3 billion
Membership dues and contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $0.9 billion
Land leasing and ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4.8 billion
Plantings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $0.7 billion
Source: Table 43.
Trip-Related Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $8.2 billion)
Wildlife-Watching Expenditures
(Total expenditures: $38.4 billion)
Transportation
$2.6 billion
32%
Other trip-related costs
$0.7 billion
9%
Other
$6.7 billion
17%
Trip-related
$8.2 billion
21%
Equipment
$23.5 billion
61%
Food
$2.8 billion
35%
Lodging
$2.0 billion
24%
38 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Residential (Around the Home)
Activities Highlights
In 2001 residential participants 16 years
old and older numbered 62.9 million—
95 percent of all wildlife-watching
recreationists. The most popular activity,
feeding birds and other wildlife, appealed
to almost 54 million people, 86 percent of
all residential wildlife watchers. More
than 42 million people observed wildlife,
representing 67 percent of all residential
participants.
Nearly 14 million (22 percent)
recreationists photographed wildlife
around their homes. Close in number
were the 13 million who maintained
plantings or natural areas for the benefit
of wildlife. They represented 21 percent
of all residential participants. Lastly, 11
million individuals visited public areas
including parks within a mile of their
homes to wildlife watch. They comprised
17 percent of all residential participants.
Residential Participants
(In millions)
Total participants . . . . . . . 62.9
Feed wild birds . . . . . . . 52.6
Observe wildlife . . . . . . 42.1
Feed other wildlife . . . . 18.8
Photograph wildlife . . . . 13.9
Visit public areas . . . . . . 11.0
Maintain plantings . . . . . 8.7
Maintain natural areas . . 8.7
Detail does not add to total because of multiple
responses and nonresponse.
Source: Table 39.
Percent of Total Residential Participants—by Activity
(Total: 62.9 million participants)
Maintain
natural
areas
Maintain
plantings
Visit
public
areas
Feed Photograph
other
wildlife
Feed Observe
wild
birds
84%
14% 14%
17%
22%
30%
67%
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 39
Wildlife Fed, Observed, or
Photographed by Residential
Participants
Of the 54 million people feeding wildlife
around their homes in 2001, 97 percent
(52.6 million) fed wild birds while 35
percent (18.8 million) fed other wildlife.
Of the 42.1 million participants who
reported observing wildlife around their
homes, 40.3 million observed birds.
Observing mammals was popular among
34.6 million participants. Insects and
spiders attracted the attention of 13.8
million people; 9.8 million observed
amphibians or reptiles; and 7.9 million
people reported observing fish or other
wildlife.
Almost 14 million people photographed
wildlife around their homes. The largest
number, 3.9 million—28 percent of all
wildlife photographers—spent 2 to 3 days
taking wildlife pictures during the year.
Seventeen percent (2.3 million) spent 6 to
10 days; 16 percent (2.2 million), 4 to 5
days; 15 percent (2.1 million), 1 day; 13
percent (1.8 million), 21 or more days; and
10 percent (1.3 million), 11 to 20 days.
Residential Participation by
Geographic Region
In 2001, 212 million people 16 years old
and older lived in the United States. Of
those individuals, 30 percent fed,
observed, or photographed wildlife
around their homes. The participation
rates of these residential participants
varied from region to region.
Participation rates for around the home
wildlife watching ranged from 24 percent
for residents in the West South Central
Region to 41 percent for those in the West
North Central Region. The New England,
East North Central, East South Central,
and Mountain Regions also had
participation rates above the national
average of 30 percent.
New England’s participation rate was 36
percent. The East South Central reported
a participation rate of 34 percent.
Following closely was East North Central
with a 33 percent participation rate and
the Mountain Region with a 32 percent
participation rate. Both the Middle
Atlantic and South Atlantic Regions had
participation rates of 28 percent, while the
Pacific Region’s was 25 percent.
AK
WA
OR
CA
MT
WY
ID
NV
UT
AZ
CO
NM
ND
SD
NE
KS
OK
TX
MN
IA
MO
AR
LA
WI
IL
MI
IN OH
KY
TN
MS AL
FL
GA
SC
NC
WV VA
PA
NY
NH ME
VT
MA
RI
CT
NJ
DE
MD
DC
HI
Residential Wildlife-Watching Participation
(National participation rate: 30%)
Pacific
25%
Mountain
32%
West North
Central
41%
East
North
Central
33%
Middle
Atlantic
28%
New England
36%
South Atlantic
28%
East South
Central
West South 34%
Central
24%
Percent of Residential Wildlife Observers—
by Type of Wildlife Observed
(Total wildlife observers: 42.1 million)
Days Spent Photographing Wildlife
(Total wildlife photographers: 13.9 million)
21 days or more
13%
11-20 days
10%
6-10 days
17%
Fish and
other wildlife
Reptiles and
amphibians
Insects and
spiders
Mammals
Birds 96%
19%
23%
33%
82%
4-5 days
16%
2-3 days
28%
1 day
15%
40 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Sex and Age of Residential Participants
Males and females alike enjoyed
residential wildlife-watching activities. In
2001, 28 percent of American males 16
years old and older enjoyed residential
activities, as did 31 percent of American
females of the same age group. Of the
62.9 million residential wildlife watchers,
46 percent (28.8 million) were males, and
54 percent (34.1 million) were females.
Two age groups—the 35- to 44-year-olds
(14.1 million) and the 45- to 54-year-olds
(13.9 million)—each comprised 22
percent of all residential wildlife
watchers. Their participation rates were
32 percent and 34 percent, respectively.
Individuals 55 to 64 years old represented
16 percent of all residential participants
(10.1 million) and participated at a 39
percent rate. The participation rate for the
65 years old and older group was 34
percent, accounting for 12.5 million
people—20 percent of all residential
participants. The 25- to 34-year-old
participants totaled 8.1 million, comprised
13 percent of all residential participants,
and had a participation rate of 23 percent.
The participation rate for the 18 to 24-
year-old group was 12 percent. They
numbered 2.7 million and comprised 4
percent of all participants. Finally, the
16- and 17- year-old participants, 1.5
million, had a participation rate of 20
percent and accounted for 2 percent of all
residential wildlife-watching participants.
Residential Participants—
by Gender and Age
(In millions)
Total, both sexes . . . . . . . . 62.9
Male . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.8
Female . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.1
Total, all ages . . . . . . . . . . 62.9
16 and 17 . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5
18 to 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7
25 to 34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1
35 to 44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.1
45 to 54 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.9
55 to 64 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1
65 and older . . . . . . . . . 12.5
Source: Table 45.
Percent of Residential Participants—by Gender
Percent of U.S. Males and Females Who Participated
Percent of Residential Participants—by Age
Males
46%
Females
54%
65 and older
20%
55 to 64
16%
16 and 17
2%
45 to 54
22%
35 to 44
22%
25 to 34
13%
18 to 24
4%
Females
Males 28%
31%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Participated—by Age
65 and older
55 to 64
45 to 54
35 to 44
25 to 34
18 to 24
16 and 17 20%
12%
23%
32%
34%
39%
34%
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 41
Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan
Residential Participants
In 2001, 30 percent of all U.S. residents
16 years old and older participated in
wildlife watching around their homes.
Seventy-five percent of these residential
wildlife participants lived in metropolitan
areas. Participation rates varied by
population size of metropolitan areas.
People living in metropolitan statistical
areas (MSAs) with populations of
1,000,000 or more had a participation rate
of 25 percent. These recreationists
comprised 45 percent of all residential
wildlife watchers. In MSAs of 250,000 to
999,999 the participation rate was 29
percent, reflecting 19 percent of all
residential recreationists. Ten percent of
the residential wildlife watchers lived in
MSAs with a population of 50,000 to
249,999. The population of these areas
had a participation rate of 39 percent.
Likewise, the participation rate for
nonmetropolitan populations in the United
States was 39 percent. While 19 percent
of the total U.S. population lived outside
metropolitan areas in 2001, they
represented 25 percent of all residential
wildlife watchers.
Percent of U.S. Population Who Participated—by Residence
(30% of total U.S. population participated)
Percent of Residential Participants—by Residence
(Total residential participants: 62.9 million)
Outside MSA
25%
Small MSA
10%
Outside MSA
Small MSA
(50,000 to 249,999)
Medium MSA
(250,000 to 999,999)
Large MSA
(1,000,000 or more)
39%
39%
29%
25%
Medium MSA
19%
Large MSA
45%
42 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Income of Residential Participants
Individuals from all levels of household
incomes engaged in residential wildlife-watching
activities in 2001. Participation
rates ranged from 22 percent among U.S.
residents living in households earning less
than $10,000 per year to 41 percent
among participants living in households
earning $75,000 to $99,999 annually.
These groups represented 4 percent and
12 percent of all residential wildlife-watching
participants, respectively.
Participants in households earning
$10,000 to $19,999 a year had a
participation rate of 24 percent and
constituted 6 percent of all residential
recreationists. The participation rate
among recreationists with household
incomes of $20,000 to $24,999 was 25
percent, making up 4 percent of all
residential participants. People with
household incomes of $25,000 to $29,999
participated at a rate of 29 percent and
made up 5 percent of all residential
participants. Those people with household
incomes of $30,000 to $34,999
represented 6 percent of the residential
participants and had a participation rate of
33 percent. Those whose incomes totaled
$35,000 to $39,999 garnered a
participation rate of 30 percent while
representing 5 percent of all residential
participants. Persons from households
with incomes of $40,000 to $49,999
chalked up a participation rate of 36
percent and represented 10 percent of all
residential participants. For the 18 percent
of residential participants who reported
annual household incomes of $50,000 to
$74,999, the participation rate was 37
percent. Finally, those individuals with
annual household incomes of $100,000 or
more reported a participation rate of 40
percent, representing 12 percent of all
residential recreationists. Eighteen
percent of the residential wildlife-watching
sample did not report their
income.
Percent of U.S. Population Who Participated—
by Household Income
$100,000 or more
$75,000 to 99,999
$50,000 to 74,999
$40,000 to 49,999
$35,000 to 39,999
$30,000 to 34,999
$25,000 to 29,999
$20,000 to 24,999
$10,000 to 19,999
Less than $10,000
40%
41%
37%
36%
30%
33%
29%
25%
24%
22%
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 43
Education, Race, and Ethnicity of
Residential Participants
Among residential participants, a wide
range of educational backgrounds was
recorded. The highest rate of participation
was found among recreationists with 5
years or more of college, 41 percent. They
made up 14 percent of all residential
wildlife watchers. The lowest
participation rate, 21 percent, was among
people with less than 12 years of
education—11 percent of all residential
participants. Residential recreationists
with 12 years of education, 32 percent of
all residential participants, had a
participation rate of 27 percent.
Participants with 1 to 3 years of college
had a participation rate of 31 percent,
while those with 4 years of college had a
participation rate of 34 percent. Those
groups represented 24 percent and 19
percent of all residential wildlife
watchers, respectively.
A wide variety of participation rates was
found among the different races residing
in the United States. Thirty-three percent
of the White population engaged in
residential wildlife-watching activities, 9
percent of the Black population, 8 percent
of the Asian population, and 26 percent of
individuals comprising the “other” race
category. Of the total number of
residential participants, 95 percent were
White, 3 percent were Black, 1 percent
was Asian, and 1 percent all other races.
Percent of U.S. Population Who Participated—by Education
Percent of Residential Participants—by Education
5 years or more of college
14%
4 years of college
19%
5 years or more
of college
4 years of college
1 to 3 years of college
12 years
11 years or less 21%
1 to 3 years of college
24%
12 years
32%
11 years or less
11%
41%
34%
31%
27%
Percent of U.S. Population Who Participated—by Ethnicity
Percent of Residential Participants—by Race
Hispanic
Non-Hispanic 32%
White 95%
Asian 1%
Black 3%
11%
Other 1%
Residential Participants—by
Education and Race
(In millions)
Total participants . . . . . . . 62.9
Education
0-11 years . . . . . . . . . . . 6.8
12 years . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.3
1 to 3 years of college . . 15.2
4 years of college . . . . . 11.9
5 years or more
of college . . . . . . . . . . 8.7
Race
White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59.8
Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.9
Asian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6
Source: Table 45.
44 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Eleven percent of the U.S. Hispanic
population engaged in wildlife watching
around their homes in comparison with 32
percent of the non-Hispanic population.
The 60.4 million non-Hispanic
participants comprised 96 percent of all
residential wildlife watchers and the 2.5
million Hispanic participants, 4 percent.
Nonresidential (Away From Home)
Activities Highlights
In 2001, nearly 22 million people 16
years old and older took trips away from
home to feed, observe, or photograph
wildlife. They comprised 33 percent of all
wildlife-watching participants. Most
popular with nonresidential participants
was observing wildlife. Approximately
20.1 million participants, 92 percent of all
nonresidential participants, observed
wildlife on an average of 15 days during
the year. Photographing wildlife was
enjoyed by 9.4 million people, 43 percent
of all nonresidential participants. They
averaged 8 days per participant. Almost
7.1 million people fed wildlife on an
average of 15 days and comprised 32
percent of all nonresidential recreationists.
Eighty-three percent of all nonresidential
participants took trips within their
resident state to participate in wildlife
watching. Seventy percent took trips only
in their resident state, 13 percent took
trips both inside and outside their resident
state, and 17 percent took trips only to
other states. Altogether, 30 percent of all
nonresidential participants took at least
some of their trips to other states.
Percent of Total Nonresidential Participation—by Activity
(Total: 21.8 million participants)
Percent of Nonresidential Participants—
in State of Residence and Other States
Feed
Photograph
Observe 92%
In state of residence and
in other states
13%
32%
43%
In state of residence only
70%
Other states only
17%
Nonresidential Participants
(In millions)
Total participants . . . . . . . 21.8
Observers . . . . . . . . . . . 20.1
Photographers . . . . . . . . 9.4
Feeders . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1
Total days . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372
Observing . . . . . . . . . . . 295
Photographing . . . . . . . . 76
Feeding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Detail does not add to total because of multiple
responses.
Source: Table 37.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 45
Wildlife Observed, Fed, or
Photographed by Nonresidential
Participants
In 2001, 21.8 million recreationists took
trips to observe, feed, or photograph a
variety of wildlife in the United States.
Wild birds attracted the most, 85 percent
of all nonresidential participants—18.6
million individuals. More than 14.4
million people observed waterfowl such
as ducks and geese on their trips. Next on
the list of favorites were songbirds which
attracted 12.9 million enthusiasts and
birds of prey which drew 12.5 million.
Herons, pelicans, and other water birds
intrigued 10.3 million recreationists.
Lastly, other birds such as pheasants and
turkeys attracted 7.9 million wildlife
watchers while on their trips.
Land mammals such as deer, bear, and
coyotes were observed, fed, or
photographed by 15.5 million wildlife
watchers, 71 percent of all nonresidential
participants. Fish attracted the attention
of 6.3 million participants, 29 percent of
all nonresidential recreationists.
More than 3.0 million people, 14 percent
of all nonresidential participants,
observed, fed, or photographed marine
mammals such as whales, seals, and
dolphins. Other wildlife such as
butterflies, snakes, and turtles appealed to
9.4 million people—43 percent of all
nonresidential wildlife watchers.
Percent of Nonresidential Participants Who Observed,
Fed, or Photographed Wildlife
(Total participants: 21.8 million)
Other (turtles,
butterflies, etc.)
Marine mammals
Fish
Land mammals
Birds 85%
43%
14%
29%
71%
Nonresidential Participants—
by Type of Wildlife Observed, Fed,
or Photographed
(In millions)
Total participants . . . . . . . 21.8
Birds, total . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.6
Waterfowl . . . . . . . . . . . 14.4
Songbirds . . . . . . . . . . . 12.9
Birds of prey . . . . . . . . . 12.5
Other water birds . . . . . . 10.3
Other birds . . . . . . . . . . 7.9
Land mammals, total . . . . 15.5
Small land mammals . . . 13.0
Large land mammals . . . 12.2
Fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3
Marine mammals . . . . . . . 3.0
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4
(turtles, butterflies, etc.)
Detail does not add to total because of multiple
responses.
Source: Table 40.
46 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Area or Site Visited by
Nonresidential Participants
In 2001, both public and private areas
provided significant opportunities for
Americans to observe, feed, or
photograph wildlife on trips away from
home. Over 6 million, 28 percent of all
nonresidential participants, reported
having visited both public and private
areas. More nonresidential participants,
10.6 million or 49 percent, reported