The Economic Impact Of
Arizona State Parks

Prepared by

The Arizona Hospitality Research & Resource Center
School of Hotel & Restaurant Management
Northern Arizona University
May 2002

Economic Impact of State Parks

July 9, 2002
Dear Reader:
Arizona is blessed with incomparable natural and cultural diversity. Many of these unique
assets are preserved and protected in 26 State Parks, spread throughout 13 Arizona counties.
This economic impact analysis is a collaborative effort of the Arizona Departments of
Commerce, State Parks and Tourism to further the understanding of the impact and
importance of State Parks to Arizona - and rural communities in particular. This is the first
time the State Parks have been studied from an economic perspective and this report provides
new information about these unique assets.
We see several practical applications for this information. First, quantifying the impact of the
Parks will help communities recognize the development potential of tourism-related
businesses and the need for extended services. Second, the report provides information based in data - communities can use in recruiting companies to fill the retail gaps in the area.
Third, policy makers have a new tool in understanding and making decisions related to bed,
board and beverage taxes. Finally, local companies may benefit by using this information to
tap into the market represented by Park visitors to increase their sales and plan for growth.
Prepared by Northern Arizona University’s Hospitality Research and Resource Center, the
analysis is based on expenditure data from comprehensive State Park visitor surveys
conducted in 1996 and 2001. An economic impact model was used to estimate the
contribution of State Parks to the economies of the counties in which they are located.
But the value of Arizona’s State Parks cannot be measured solely in economic terms. They
enhance quality of life and preserve priceless scenic and recreational resources. They help
explain our culture and heritage, and are part of the very fabric of Arizona.
This report will help communities better understand the contributions and economic potential
represented by the State Parks, as well as the need to protect and preserve these precious
resources for the future.
Sincerely,

Margie A. Emmermann
Director, Arizona Department of
Commerce

Mark McDermott
Director, Arizona Office of
Tourism

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Ken Travous
Director, Arizona State
Parks
Page 2

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the special partnership that came together
in the preparation of this report. This report was prepared for the Arizona State
Parks Board with special funding provided by the Arizona Department of
Commerce and the Arizona Office of Tourism. Without their help, this report
would not have been possible.
The report was prepared by the Arizona Hospitality Research & Resource
Center (AHRRC), which is part of the School of Hotel & Restaurant
Management at Northern Arizona University. AHRRC would like to
acknowledge the assistance of NAU’s Bureau of Business & Economic
Research in facilitating the partnership and editing the report.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 3

Table of Contents
Executive Summary
County Reports
Apache County
Lyman Lake State Park
Cochise County
Tombstone Courthouse State Park
Kartchner Caverns State Park
Coconino County
Riordan Mansion State Park
Slide Rock State Park
Gila County
Tonto Natural Bridge State Park
Graham County
Roper Lake State Park
La Paz County
Alamo Lake
Buckskin Mountain State Park
Mohave County
Cattail Cove State Park
Lake Havasu State Park
Navajo County
Fool Hollow Lake State Park
Homolovi Ruins State Park
Pima County
Catalina Lake State Park
Pinal County
Boyce Thompson State Park
Lost Dutchman State Park
McFarland State Park
Picacho Peak State Park
Santa Cruz County
Patagonia Lake State Park
Tubac Presidio State Park
Yavapai County
Dead Horse State Park
Fort Verde State Park
Jerome State Park
Red Rock State Park
Yuma County
Yuma Prison State Park
Yuma Crossing State Park
Appendix
Visitor Attendance

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page
4
9
13
18
24
28
32
38
44
50
54

64
70

80
86

Page 4

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ARIZONA STATE PARKS
Executive Summary
Arizona State Parks have a significant economic impact on the communities and counties
in which they are located. A state park’s value is, of course, not measured by economic
impact alone. Parks enhance community quality-of-life and preserve priceless historic,
cultural, and recreational resources for residents and visitors from around the world.
However, communities are increasingly recognizing the economic impact of State Parks
as a tourism resource.
This report analyzes the impact of 26 Arizona State Parks on the economies of the 13
counties in which they are located. The economic impact of a state park is a function of
visitor population and direct visitor spending, combined with multipliers (that vary across
counties) reflecting the extent of re-circulation of visitors’ money in the local economy.
Table One shows total visitation for each park in fiscal years 1995-96 and 2000-01, and
the percent change in visitation over that time.
Table One: Visitation by Park
County
Apache
Cochise
Cochise
Coconino
Coconino
Gila
Graham
La Paz
La Paz
Mohave
Mohave
Navajo
Navajo
Pima
Pinal
Pinal
Pinal
Pinal
Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz
Yavapai
Yavapai
Yavapai
Yavapai
Yuma
Yuma

State Park Name
Lyman Lake
Kartchner Caverns
Tombstone
Riordan
Slide Rock
Tonto Natural Bridge
Roper lake
Alamo Lake
Buckskin Mountain
Cattail Cove
Lake Havasu
Fool Hollow
Homolovi
Catalina
Boyce Thompson Arboretum
Lost Dutchman
McFarland
Picacho Peak
Patagonia Lake
Tubac Presidio
Dead Horse
Fort Verde
Jerome
Red Rock
Yuma Crossing
Yuma Prison
Total Visitation

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Park Visitation Park Visitation Percent
1995-1996
2000-2001
Change
50,495
28,304
-43.9%
199,115
100,759
74,105
-26.5%
20,972
19,194
-8.5%
316,301
275,554
-12.9%
97,127
100,178
3.1%
63,468
60,242
-5.1%
62,102
70,969
14.3%
94,474
93,999
-0.5%
96,459
106,939
10.9%
371,700
345,590
-7.0%
54,148
84,527
56.1%
20,733
20,644
-0.4%
132,213
154,806
17.1%
84,876
87,238
2.8%
84,795
114,253
34.7%
4,514
4,273
-5.3%
68,289
117,652
72.3%
208,959
196,332
-6.0%
24,090
18,770
-22.1%
74,503
103,089
38.4%
31,181
21,450
-31.2%
87,749
53,128
-39.5%
66,442
76,393
15.0%
16,959
84,606
69,698
-17.6%
2,300,955
2,513,401
9.2%

Page 5

It is clear that a number of individual parks in the State Park system experienced
declining visitation over this period, while others grew. In any given year, park visitation
can fluctuate greatly due to a wide range of influences, both internal and external to the
park. Therefore, information is provided in each chapter of this report to explain some of
the more dramatic visitor fluctuations in Table 1. For the same reason, visitor attendance
totals for Arizona State Parks in the intervening years – 1996-97 through 1999-00 – are
also included in the Appendix; these provide a more complete picture of visitation over
time.
Expenditure data represents visitor spending inside and within a 50-mile radius of each
park, and is derived from two State Park Visitor Surveys, the first conducted in 1995-96
and the second in 2000-01.1 These surveys estimate direct visitor expenditures for each
park and are the basis of the economic impact analyses contained in this report. The
survey instruments differed in one respect. The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey,
asked respondents to separate their “in-park” expenditures from those within 50 miles of
the park; the 1996 survey did not separate in-park from other expenditures. This
distinction is reflected in the expenditure data shown in Table Two below, perhaps
accounting for some of the larger totals in 1995-96 categories (e.g., shopping,
lodging/camping).
Total direct expenditures of visitors to each Arizona State Park were categorized as
shown in Table Two below.
Table Two: Total Visitor Expenditures in Arizona State Parks
Expenditure Categories
Expenditures in park
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other
Total
*Adjusted for inflation.

1995-96
5,097,889
25,403,534
19,139,544
3,968,144
17,414,585
27,165,509
5,049,731
$103,238,936

2000-01*
$16,669,802
$6,816,727
$21,283,405
$30,667,049
$3,856,638
$21,075,702
$21,512,901
$4,480,810
$126,363,033

1

Arizona Hospitality Research & Resource Center, NAU, 1995-96 Survey of Arizona State Park Visitors,
Final Report; Arizona Hospitality Research & Resource Center, NAU, 2000-01 Arizona State Parks Visitor
Survey, Final Report.
Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 6

To estimate the total economic impact of each park, the AHRRC at NAU used the
Silvers-Pavlakovich economic impact model2 to estimate the total income generated in
the county economy, including direct, indirect and induced income, and the number of
jobs in the county supported by visitor spending. The spending of visitors with ZIP codes
in the county or within 60 miles of the park was excluded since such visitors do not add
to the local economy by spending their money within it. Only expenditures by those from
farther away were considered in the analysis.
Using this model, the full set of economic impact calculations are produced for each of
26 Arizona State Parks. These data are organized in the report that follows by county,
including the State Parks within each county; each county report stands as a discrete
document. The Silvers-Pavlakovich model is designed to estimate economic impacts for
each park at the county level; it is not designed for summing county economic impacts to
estimate an overall statewide impact.
Table Three summarizes the Total County Income and Total County Jobs for each park
for both the 1995-96 and 2000-01 periods. Maricopa and Greenlee Counties are not
included in this study because they contain no Arizona State Parks. Expenditures in
2000-01 were adjusted by the average increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from
1996 to 2001 of 12.87 percent.3 Adjusting for inflation allows for comparisons between
survey years in constant dollars. See economic impact calculations for each park in
Table Three.

2

Silvers, Art and Vera Pavlakovich, 1990. TIMM – Tourism Impact Multiplier Model. College of
Business & Public Administration, University of Arizona.
3
The CPI is a measure of the average change in prices over time in a market basket of goods and services,
including food, clothing, shelter, fuels, transportation, and retail shopping – many of which are typical
travel expenditures. Taxes associated with the purchase of these items are also included in the index. The
figure used here represents a U.S. average. CPI calculation derived from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
website at: www.bls.gov/cpi
Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 7

Table Three: Summary of Economic Impacts for Each State Park

County / Park
Apache County
Lyman Lake (Rec)
Cochise County
Tombstone (His)
Kartchner Caverns (Con)
Coconino County
Riordan Mansion (His)
Slide Rock (Rec)
Gila County
Tonto Nat. Bridge (Rec)
Graham County
Roper Lake (Rec)
La Paz County
Alamo Lake (Rec)
Buckskin Island (Rec)
Mohave County
Cattail Cove (Rec)
Lake Havasu (Rec)
Navajo County
Fool Hollow Lake (Rec)
Homolovi Ruins (His)
Pima County
Catalina (Rec)
Pinal County
Boyce Thompson (Con)
Lost Dutchman (Rec)
McFarland (His)
Picacho Peak (Rec)
Santa Cruz County
Patagonia Lake (Rec)
Tubac Presidio (His)
Yavapai County
Dead Horse (Rec)
Fort Verde (His)
Jerome (His)
Red Rock (Con)
Yuma County
Yuma Prison (His)
Yuma Crossing (His)

1995-96
Total County
Total County
Income ($)
Jobs

2000-01
Total County Total County
Income ($)
Jobs

2,010,450

71

2,124,106

78

8,395,836
0

291
0

8,961,295
11,201,585

314
399

2,245,211
24,269,913

79
840

2,009,254
23,801,930

71
830

3,266,827

114

3,443,189

123

2,252,743

73

4,192,879

141

3,165,097
2,989,961

108
101

2,592,788
2,838,786

91
100

9,644,078
29,198,847

328
994

23,806,391
32,725,420

831
1,143

5,325,419
1,329,937

182
46

6,459,828
1,887,694

230
65

14,458,887

465

16,649,651

544

3,624,111
6,480,361
195,379
1,541,321

126
221
7
53

3,747,240
7,967,529
88,730
1,417,237

131
280
4
51

3,177,358
1,420,571

111
48

3,396,464
1,602,891

118
54

4,764,448
1,489,789
8,247,510
7,867,713

155
49
271
262

9,812,791
1,653,652
7,949,592
9,919,216

330
55
262
331

7,449,721
0

252
0

6,267,295
2,392,956

216
80

NOTE: Abbreviations in Parentheses refer to Park Type.
Rec = Recreation Park; His = Historic Park; Con = Conservation Park.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 8

In conclusion, this study of the economic impact of Arizona State Parks produced the
following findings:
•

Total visitation to the Arizona State Park system grew from 2,300,955 in 1995-96
to 2,513,401 in 2000-01, an increase of 9.2 percent.

•

Direct spending by Arizona State Park visitors totaled $103,238,936 in 1995-96
and $126,363,033 million in 2000-01, an increase of 22.4 percent (adjusted for
inflation; the Consumer Price Index grew by 12.87 percent during this 5-year
period).

•

Per person spending at Arizona State Parks totaled $44.86 in 1995-96 and $50.28
in 2000-01, an increase of 12 percent (adjusted for inflation).

•

Arizona State Parks are divided into three types – Conservation Parks (3 parks),
Historic Parks (9 parks), and Recreation Parks (14 parks). As a group, recreation
parks generate the largest visitation and economic impact. The three recreation
parks with the largest total economic impact are:
o Lake Havasu State Park (Mohave County) - $32.72 million in 2001
o Cattail Cove State Park (Mohave County) - $23.80 million in 2001
o Slide Rock State Park (Coconino County) - $23.80 million in 2001.

•

In 2001, the average total economic impact of each park type on counties was:
o Conservation parks – $8.29 million
o Historic parks – $3.65 million
o Recreation parks – $10.09 million.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 9

Apache County State Parks

Lyman Lake

Economic Impact of State Parks

Apache County State Parks
Apache County contains one Arizona State Park – Lyman Lake State Park. Table 1
below shows total visitation to Lyman Lake State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation
Park
Lyman Lake

1995-1996

2000-2001

% change

50,495

28,304

-43.9%

Source: Arizona State Parks Board.

Lyman Lake visitation declined sharply over this period. The level of the water in
Lyman Lake fluctuates because water is taken out for agricultural and other area uses; the
remainder is available for recreation. When the water level is low, visitation declines.
Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey did not separate inpark expenditures from those within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1
presents mean (average) direct expenditures for Lyman Lake in each category for both
the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 11

Figure 1. Mean expenditures by Visitors to Lyman Lake State Park, 1996 & 2001

Apache County - Lyman Lake
$135

Mean expenditures

1996
2001

$125

$70
$62
$49

$46

$32

$42
$34

$26

$23

$22
$15
$2
In park
expenditure

Entrance
fee/permits

Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

Tourist
services

$2
Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure One) by visitor population totals (Table One) to produce
Total Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Lyman Lake had an increase of $113,656 or
5.4 percent in direct state park expenditures for 2001 when compared to the same period
in 1996.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 12

Table 2. Economic Impact of Lyman Lake State Park on Apache County
1996 & 2001
Direct Expenditures by Visitors ($)
In-park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other
Total direct expenditures
Indirect and Induced County Income ($)

1996

2001

177,010
387,346
264,912
29,763
410,287
281,755
19,983

383,775
177,734
110,683
427,974
44,594
253,608
240,615
16,683

1,571,056

1,655,665

1996

2001

Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

295,350
144,044

321,527
146,913

Total County Income

439,394

468,441

Indirect and Direct County Employment

1996

2001

Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

58
13

64
14

Total County Jobs

71

78

Total County Income

$2,010,450

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$2,124,106

Page 13

Cochise County State Parks

Kartchner Caverns

Economic Impact of State Parks

Cochise County State Parks
Cochise County contains two Arizona State Parks – Tombstone Courthouse State Park
and Kartchner Caverns State Park. Table 1 below shows total visitation to Tombstone
Courthouse and Kartchner Caverns State Parks for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation

Park

Percent
Change

1996

2001

Tombstone
Kartchner Caverns

100,759

74,105
199,115

-26.5

Total County Visitation

100,759

275,221

173.1

Tombstone visitation declined over this period. Several major motion pictures about
Tombstone and the OK Corral appeared in the mid-90s and gave a big boost to visitation;
since then, visitation has settled at more historical levels. Kartchner was not open in
1996.
Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey did not separate inpark expenditures from those within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1
presents mean (average) direct expenditures for Tombstone Courthouse in each category
for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys. Figure 2 presents similar data for Kartchner
Caverns.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 15

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Cochise County - Tombstone Courthouse
$121

Mean expenditures

1996
2001

$100
$86

$78
$63

$61

$68

$66
$53
$35

$31

$30

$17
$6

In park
expenditure

Entrance
fee/permits

$2
Shopping &
gifts

Food & drink

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure One) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce
Total Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Tombstone Courthouse State Park saw an
increase of $565,459 or 6.7 percent in direct expenditures compared to the same period in
1996.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.
Kartchner Caverns State Park, which was not open in 1996, saw direct expenditures of
$7,364,864 in 2001.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 16

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Cochise County - Kartchner Caverns 2001
$133

Mean expenditures

$125

In park
expenditure

$122

$81
$65
$46

$47

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

$26

Entrance
fee/permits

Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Lodging

Other

Page 17

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Cochise County Parks

1996
2001
2001
Tombstone Tombstone Kartchner
Courthouse Courthouse Caverns

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

$128,751
$1,355,231
$1,149,125
$365,014
$647,362
$1,856,011
$39,727

$194,033
$347,686
$1,085,062
$1,332,752
$457,317
$863,551
$1,517,383
$113,619

Total direct expenditures

$5,541,221

$5,911,403 $7,364,864

Indirect and Induced County Income Income
$1,691,310
Direct Income
$1,163,306
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
Income
$1,834,076 $2,364,864
$1,215,816 $1,517,398

Total County Income

$3049,892 $3,836,721

$2,854,615

$1,176,517
$306,688
$944,092
$1,789,248
$454,136
$838,583
$1,712,841
$142,759

Indirect and Direct County
Employment

Jobs

Jobs

Jobs

Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

202
89

220
94

280
119

Total County Jobs

291

314

399

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$8,395,836

$8,961,295 $11,201,585

Page 18

Coconino County State Parks

Slide Rock

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 19

Coconino County State Parks
State Park Visitation
Coconino County contains two Arizona State Parks – Riordan Mansion State Park and
Slide Rock State Park. Table 1 below shows total visitation to Riordan Mansion State
Park and Slide Rock State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. Sate Park Visitation
Park

1996

2001

Riordan Mansion State Park
Slide Rock State Park

20,972
316,301

19,194
275,554

Total County Visitation

438,032

296,749

Percent
Change
-8.5%
-12.9%

Riordan Mansion visitation declined somewhat over this period; Slide Rock declined
more. Slide Rock is dependent on rainfall and snowmelt. The water in Oak Creek is
also tested three times/day for micro-organisms and microbes; when found to be present,
attendance is restricted or the park is closed.
Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 20

Figure 1. Mean expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Coconino County - Riordan Mansion
$226

Mean expenditures

1996
2001
$140
$114
$91
$75
$55
$42 $41
$15

$9

In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

$18 $23

$22 $20

$18

Food &
drink

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Riordan Mansion State Park saw a decrease of
$235,957or –10.5 percent in direct expenditures by state park visitors. On the other hand,
Slide Rock State Park with larger visitation numbers also saw a decrease of $467,983 or
–1.9 percent between 1996 and 2001.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 21

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Riordan Mansion
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

1996

2001

$38,973
$225,874
$309,453
$92,316
$174,561
$578,460
$76,154

$16,528
$36,462
$206,236
$340,186
$35,308
$113,615
$593,557
$1,634

$1,495,791

$1,343,525

Indirect and Induced County
Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$456,890
$292,530

Income
$403,138
$262,591

Total County Income

$749,420

$665,729

Jobs
56
23

Jobs
51
20

79

71

$2,245,211

$2,009,254

Total direct expenditures

Indirect and Induced County
Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs
Total County Jobs
Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 22

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Mean expenditures

Coconino County - Slide Rock
$250

1996
2001

$123

$120

$113
$95

$208

$82

$82
$41 $45

$33

$19

$10 $14
In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$1
Food &
drink

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 23

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Slide Rock State Park

1996

2001
$347,775
$355,684
$3,238,494
$4,104,728
$1,124,314
$1,447,513
$5,278,035
$137,649

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

$429,893
$4,182,416
$3,629,881
$834,554
$1,785,626
$5,448,718
$33,583

Total direct expenditures

$16,344,671 $16,034,192

Indirect and Induced County Income

Income

Income

Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

$4,732,316 $4,668,928
$3,192,925 $3,098,810

Total County Income

$7,925,242 $7,767,738

Indirect and Induced County
Employment

Jobs

Jobs

Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

590
250

587
243

Total County Jobs

840

830

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$24,269,913$23,801,930

Page 24

Gila County State Parks

Tonto Natural Bridge

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 25

Gila County State Parks
State Park Visitation
Gila County contains one Arizona State Park – Tonto Natural Bridge State Park. Table 1
below shows total visitation to Tonto Bridge State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation

Park
Tonto Natural Bridge

1996

2001

97,127

100,178

Percent
Change
3.1%

Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 26

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Gila County - Tonto Bridge

Mean expenditures

$57

1996
$41

$39

2001

$28

$27
$20 $21

$27

$18

$7 $6

In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

$28

$4

Food &
drink

$2

Tourist
services

$3
Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Tonto Bridge State Park saw an increase of
$176,362 or 5.4 percent in direct expenditures by state park visitors.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.
.
Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 27

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Tonto Natural Bridge
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

1996

$139,007
$418,167
$560,165
$89,957
$376,719
$597,763
$54,840

2001
$292,889
$89,428
$239,482
$669,554
$18,320
$438,767
$543,906
$63,720

$2,236,618

$2,356,066

Indirect & Induced County Income

Income

Income

Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

$619,789
$410,420

Total direct expenditures

Total County Income

Indirect & Induced County
Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs
Total County Jobs
Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$664,505
$422,618

$1,030,209

$1,087,123

Jobs

Jobs

83
31

91
32

114

123

$3,266,827

$3,443,189

Page 28

Graham County State Parks

Roper Lake

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 29

Graham County State Parks
State Park Visitation
Gila County contains one Arizona State Park – Roper Lake State Park. Table 1 below
shows total visitation to Roper Lake State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation

Park
Roper lake

1996

2001

63,468

60,242

Percent
Change
-5.1%

Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 30

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Graham County - Roper Lake

Mean expenditures

$140

$139

1996
2001

$76

$76

$64
$51

$50
$38
$15

$30

$24

$32

$16

$11

$2
In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

Food &
drink

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Roper Lake State Park saw an increase of
$1,940,136 more than 86 percent in direct expenditures by state park visitors.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 31

Other

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

$143,629
$480,362
$236,391
$17,000
$291,205
$313,857
$106,712

2001
$565,321
$206,093
$349,873
$708,604
$39,900
$677,029
$161,556
$252,901

$1,589,156

$2,961,278

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$432,773
$230,814

Income
$833,702
$397,899

Total County Income

$663,587

$1,231,601

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
57
17

Jobs
112
29

73

141

$2,252,743

$4,192,879

Roper Lake
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other
Total direct expenditures

Total County Jobs

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

1996

Page 32

La Paz County State Parks

Alamo Lake

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 33

La Paz County State Parks
State Park Visitation
La Paz County contains two Arizona State Parks – Alamo Lake State Park and Buckskin
Mountain State Park. Table 1 below shows total visitation to Alamo Lake State Park and
Buckskin Mountain State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation

La Paz County

1996

2001

Alamo Lake
Buckskin

62,102
94,474

70,969
93,999

156,576

164,968

Total

Percent
Change
14.3%
-0.5%

Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 34

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

La Paz County - Alamo Lake
$157

Mean expenditures

1996
2001

$57
$41

$42
$29

$17

$29

$21

$49
$32

$14
$3 $0

$3 $0
In park
expenditure

Entrance
fee/permits

Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Alamo Lake State Park saw a decrease of
$573,209 or -22 percent in direct visitor expenditures. Buckskin Island State Park also
saw a decrease of $151,175 or -5.1 percent in direct expenditures by state park visitors.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 35

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Alamo Lake
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other
Total direct expenditures

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

1996

2001

$393,560
$389,811
$195,539
$39,974
$768,110
$429,521
$44,779

$667,604
$114,673
$81,345
$348,815
$0
$347,568
$290,872
$0

$2,261,293

$1,850,877

Income
$619,359
$284,444

Income
$513,712
$228,198

Total County Income

$903,803

$741,910

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
88
20

Jobs
75
17

Total County Jobs

108

91

$3,165,097

$2,592,788

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 36

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

La Paz County - Buckskin Island
$257

Mean expenditures

1996
2001

$90

$85

$93
$76

$84

$63

$75

$80

$66
$37

$13

In park
expenditure

Entrance
fee/permits

$5 $7
Shopping &
gifts

Food & drink

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Tourist
services

$3
Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 37

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Buckskin Mountain
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other
Total direct expenditures

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income
Total County Income

1996

$94,347
$340,764
$532,229
$16,182
$712,351
$478,486
$3,186

2001
$719,537
$293,416
$142,412
$367,300
$11,663
$296,253
$183,908
$17,262

$2,177,545 $2,031,751

Income
$558.012
$254,403
$812,416

Income
$554,828
$252,206
$807,035

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
83
18

Jobs
81
19

Total County Jobs

101

100

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$2,989,961 $2,838,786

Page 38

Mohave County State Parks

Cattail Cove

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 39

Mohave County State Parks

State Park Visitation
La Paz County contains two Arizona State Parks – Cattail Cove State Park and Lake
Havasu State Park. Table 1 below shows total visitation to Cattail Cove State Park and
Lake Havasu State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation

Mohave
County

Percent
Change
1996

2001

Cattail Cove
Lake Havasu

96,459
371,700

106,939
345,590

Total

468,159

452,529

10.9%
-7.0%

Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 40

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Mohave County - Cattail Cove

Mean expenditures

$344

1996
2001
$167

$156
$102

$252

$113

$88

$85
$57

$21

In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

$57
$7

Food &
drink

$81
$51

$21

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Cattail Cove State Park saw an increase of
$4,408,067 or more than 100 percent in direct visitor expenditures. Lake Havasu State
Park also saw an increase of $3,526,573 or 12.1 percent increase in direct expenditures
by state park visitors.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.
Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 41

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 – 2001

Cattail Cove

1996

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
$355,609
Shopping & gifts
$1,479,493
Food & drink
$959,688
Tourist services (museums, tours) $114,614
Gas and transportation services
$1,435,655
Lodging (hotels, camping)
$1,366,720
Other
$851,320

2001
$3,876,102
$1,496,588
$2,942,100
$3,969,308
$114,477
$2,602,974
$436,272
$879,524

Total direct expenditures

$6,563,098 $16,317,346

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$1,972,147
$1,108,833

Income
$4,768,532
$2,720,514

Total County Income

$3,080,979

$7,489,046

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
237
91

Jobs
603
228

Total County Jobs

328

831

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$9,644,078 $23,806,391

Page 42

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Mohave County - Lake Havasu
$232

Mean expenditure

2001
$166
$151
$123
$100

$91

$81

$66

$76
$47

$40
$22

In park
expenditure

$234

1996

Entrance
fee/permits

$15

Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$3

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 43

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Lake Havasu

1996

2001

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

$1,095,876
$4,526,771
$3,294,819
$775,578
$4,062,795
$3,816,899
$2,352,620

$2,293,664
$943,052
$3,751,456
$5,789,937
$22,531
$6,169,535
$2,903,009
$563,282

Total direct expenditures

$19,925,356

$22,436,467

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$5,924,181
$3,349,308

Income
$6,628,279
$3,660,674

Total County Income

$9,273,489

$10,288,953

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
718
277

Jobs
845
298

Total County Jobs

994

1,143

$29,198,847

$32,725,420

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 44

Navajo County State Parks

Fool Hollow

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 45

Navajo County State Parks
State Park Visitation
Navajo County contains two Arizona State Parks – Fool Hollow State Park and
Homolovi Ruins State Park. Table 1 below shows total visitation to Fool Hollow and
Homolovi Ruins State Parks for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation

Navajo County

1996

2001

Fool Hollow
Homolovi Ruins

54,148
20,733

84,527
20,644

Total

74,881

105,171

Percent
Change
56.1%
-0.4%

Fool Hollow visitation increased substantially over this period. Fool Hollow only opened
in 1994. Word-of-mouth is bringing much larger numbers of visitors to this park than
when it first opened.
Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 46

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Navajo County - Fool Hollow

$250

1996

Mean expenditures

2001

$74

$123

$114

$99
$76

$70
$43

$14
In park
Entrance
expenditure fee/permits

$45
$3

Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

$71 $70

$14

Tourist
services

$8
Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Fool Hollow State Park saw an increase of
$170,409 or 22 percent in direct visitor expenditures. Homolovi Ruins State Park also
saw an increase of $557,575 or 41.9 percent increase in direct expenditures by state park
visitors.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 47

Table 1. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

1996
Fool Hollow
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
$196,109
Shopping & gifts
$1,067,302
Food & drink
$596,885
Tourist services (museums, tours)
$41,884
Gas and transportation services
$634,920
Lodging (hotels, camping)
$995,714
Other
$110,982

2001
$1,235,185
$440,943
$650,626
$1,131,142
$20,615
$668,342
$186,726
$126,371

Total direct expenditures

$3,643,797

$4,459,949

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$1,010,729
$670,894

Income
$1,253,748
$782,131

Total County Income

$1,681,623

$2,035,879

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
130
51

Jobs
168
62

Total County Jobs

182

230

$5,325,419

$6,495,828

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 48

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Navajo County - Homolovi Ruins
$82

$83

Mean expenditures

$71
$65

1996
2001

$53

$46

$48

$39
$30

$8

In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

$31

$30

$6

Food &
drink

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$11

Tourist
services

$2
Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 49

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Homolovi Ruins

1996

2001

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

$39,385
$268,760
$154,926
$30,443
$160,553
$244,546
$11,675

$164,423
$72,794
$286,877
$217,649
$18,892
$307,795
$174,925
$45,480

Total direct expenditures

$910,288

$1,288,834

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$252,021
$167,628

Income
$367,795
$231,065

Total County Income

$419,649

$598,860

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
33
13

Jobs
48
17

46

65

$1,329,937

$1,887,694

Total County Jobs
Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 50

Pima County State Parks

Catalina

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 51

Pima County State Parks

State Park Visitation
Pima County contains one Arizona State Park – Catalina State Park. Table 1 below shows
total visitation to Catalina State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation
1996

2001

Percent
Change

132,213

154,806

17.1%

Pima County
Catalina

Visitation at Catalina increased substantially over this period. Catalina has become a
much bigger draw for the growing population of the Tucson metro area. It is especially
popular with day visitors who hike its many trails. Viewing wildflowers, in good years,
can also push visitation up sharply.
Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 52

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Pima County - Catalina
$253

Mean expenditures

1996
2001

$131

$129

$113
$92

$86

$80

$106 $100

$61
$18

$32

In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

$15
Food &
drink

$30

$21

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 2) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Catalina State Park saw an increase of
$2,190,764 or 15.2 percent in direct visitor expenditures.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 53

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Catalina

1996

2001

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

$361,983
$2,593,305
$1,586,998
$290,098
$1,205,950
$2,090,276
$582,590

$1,116,120
$482,576
$1,636,381
$2,752,537
$232,024
$1,799,590
$1,252,442
$916,613

Total direct expenditures

$8,711,201

$10,188,283

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
Income
$3,040,336 $3,598,552
$2,707,351 $2,862,816

Total County Income

$5,747,687 $6,461,367

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
305
160

Jobs
373
171

Total County Jobs

465

544

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$14,458,887 $16,649,651

Page 54

Pinal County State Parks

Lost Dutchman

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 55

Pinal County State Parks
State Park Visitation
Pinal County contains four Arizona State Parks – Picacho Peak State Park, Boyce
Thompson State Park, Lost Dutchman State Park and McFarland State Park. Table 1
below shows total visitation to Picacho Peak State Park, Boyce Thompson State Park,
Lost Dutchman State Park and McFarland State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation

Pinal County
Boyce Thompson Arboretum
Lost Dutchman
McFarland
Picacho Peak

1996
84,876
84,795
4,514
68,289

2001
87,238
114,253
4,273
117,652

Total

306,398

360,570

Percent
Change
2.8%
34.7%
-5.3%
72.3%

Visitation at Lost Dutchman and Picacho Peak increased substantially. Located near the
rapidly growing East Valley of the Phoenix metropolitan area, Lost Dutchman has seen
visitation rise. This park also draws large numbers of visitors in years when spring
wildflowers are prolific. Located halfway between the metro areas of Phoenix and
Tucson and near Apache Junction, Picacho Peak also benefited from population growth.
This park also has had years when the wildflowers are an exceptional draw for visitors.
Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.
Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 56

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys
Pinal County - Boyce Thompson Arboretum

Mean expenditures

$112

1996
2001

$82

$50

$46
$36

$35

$35
$25

$14

$19

$14

$21

$19
$4

$2
In park
Entrance
expenditure fee/permits

Shopping &
gifts

Food &
drink

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Boyce Thompson Arboretum State Park saw an
increase of $123,129 or 3.4 percent in 2001 as compared to 1996. Lost Dutchman State
park also saw an increase in visitor expenditure, with an increase of $1,487,168 or 22.9
percent over 1996. McFarland State Park, however, saw a decline of 54.6 percent in
visitor expenditures losing an estimated $106,649 in visitor revenue. Finally, Picacho
Peak State Park saw a decrease of - 8.1 percent or $124,084 during the same period.
(Despite the large increase in visitation at Picacho Peak, large party sizes reduced per
person spending to account for this decline.)
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.
Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 57

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Boyce Thompson
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other
Total direct expenditures

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income
Total County Income

1996

2001

$221,016
$567,598
$405,770
$35,812
$330,475
$801,800
$58,513

$338,593
$123,561
$494,986
$536,418
$120,778
$254,766
$487,937
$166,603

$2,420,983

$2,523,642

Income
$690,411
$512,716

Income
$706,068
$517,530

$1,203,127

$1,223,598

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
89
37

Jobs
92
38

Total County Jobs

126

131

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$3,624,111

$3,747,240

Page 58

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Pinal County - Lost Dutchman

Mean expenditures

$234

1996
2001

$68

$62

$43
$10

In park
expenditure

$42

$46

$13

Entrance
fee/permits

$43

$34

$45 $48

$10 $8
Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Tourist
services

$6
Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 59

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

1996
2001
Lost Dutchman
In park expenditures
$1,003,772
Entrance fees or permits
$200,713
$328,342
Shopping & gifts
$1,333,540
$638,808
Food & drink
$825,418 $1,220,929
Tourist services (museums, tours)
$192,804
$87,209
Gas and transportation services
$832,303
$854,650
Lodging (hotels, camping)
$882,686
$625,116
Other
$124,627
$612,641
Total direct expenditures

$4,392,091 $5,371,467

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$1,193,481
$894,790

Income
$1,534,751
$1,061,311

Total County Income

$2,088,270

$2,596,062

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
156
65

Jobs
201
78

Total County Jobs

221

280

$6,480,361

$7,967,529

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 60

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Pinal County - McFarland
$46

Mean expenditures

$42

1996
2001

$35

$25

$24
$18

$17

$13
$8
$4

$7

$5

$1 $0

$0
In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

Food &
drink

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 61

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

McFarland

1996

2001

$6,724
$34,121
$28,129
$5,658
$19,450
$37,303
$445

$3,259
$2,414
$3,447
$18,443
$0
$14,996
$17,236
$0

Total direct expenditures

$131,830

$59,794

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$36,299
$27,250

Income
$17,301
$11,635

Total County Income

$63,549

$28,936

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
5
2

Jobs
3
1

7

4

$195,379

$88,730

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

Total County Jobs
Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 62

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Pinal County - Picacho Peak

Mean expenditures

$62

1996
2001
$40

$38
$31

$32

$27

In park
Entrance
expenditure fee/permits

$5

Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$34

$25

$12
$7

$37

$10

$8

Tourist
services

$5

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 63

Figure 1. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Picacho Peak
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other
Total direct expenditures

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income
Total County Income

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs
Total County Jobs
Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

1996

2001

$77,507
$248,238
$255,494
$14,939
$303,971
$147,935
$1,664

$150,459
$43,079
$122,609
$218,678
$27,381
$200,059
$136,902
$54,761

$1,049,748

$953,928

Income
$287,647
$203,926
$491,573

Income
$274,271
$189,038
$463,309

Jobs
39
15

Jobs
37
14

53

51

$1,541,321

$1,417,237

Page 64

Santa Cruz County State Parks

Tubac Presidio

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 65

Santa Cruz County State Parks

State Park Visitation
Santa Cruz County contains two Arizona State Parks – Patagonia Lake State Parks, and
Tubac Presidio State Park. Table 1 below shows total visitation to Patagonia Lake State
Parks, and Tubac Presidio State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation

Santa Cruz County

1996

2001

Patagonia Lake
Tubac Presidio

208,959
24,090

196,332
18,770

Total

233,049

215,102

Percent
Change
-6.0%
-22.1%

Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 66

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Santa Cruz County - Patagonia Lake
$88

1996

Mean expenditures

$77

2001

$66
$55

$41
$32

$31

$23
$15

$19

$19

$14

$14
$6

$3
In park
Entrance
expenditure fee/permits

Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Patagonia Lake saw an estimated increase of
$210.106 or 6.9 percent, while Tubac Presidio saw an estimated $182,320 increase or
11.4 percent when compared to the same period.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 67

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Patagonia Lake

1996

2001

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

$304,748
$484,539
$347,275
$27,301
$769,388
$200,211
$40,446

$345,826
$178,053
$449,180
$517,123
$62,408
$390,561
$347,774
$35,141

$2,173,907

$2,326,066

Total direct expenditures

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$661,692
$341,759

Income
$690,765
$379,633

Total County Income

$1,003,450

$1,070,398

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
82
28

Jobs
87
31

Total County Jobs

111

118

$3,177,358

$3,396,464

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 68

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Mean expenditures

Santa Cruz County - Tubac Presidio

$96

$94

1996
2001

$71
$64

$63
$52
$45

$39

$39
$28
$17

$7

In park
expenditure

$11

Entrance
fee/permits

$6

Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Tourist
services

$3
Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 69

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

1996

2001

In park experience
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

$25,008
$254,290
$186,073
$22,613
$137,254
$334,960
$12,248

$129,868
$36,461
$404,447
$171,185
$66,573
$240,392
$47,838
$10,959

Total direct expenditures

$972,447

$1,107,723

Tubac Presidio

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$285,925
$162,200

Income
$313,585
$181,583

Total County Income

$448,125

$495,169

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs
Total County Jobs
Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Jobs
35
13

Jobs
39
15

48

54

$1,420,571

$1,602,891

Page 70

Yavapai County State Parks

Red Rock

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 71

Yavapai County State Parks
Yavapai County contains four Arizona State Parks – Dead Horse State Park, Fort Verde
State Park, Jerome State Park and Red Rock State Park. Table 1 below shows total
visitation to Dead Horse State Park, Fort Verde State Park, Jerome State Park and Red
Rock State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation
1996

2001

Percent
Change

Dead Horse
Fort Verde
Jerome
Red Rock

74,503
31,181
87,749
66,442

103,089
21,450
53,128
76,393

38.4%
-31.2%
-39.5%
15.0%

County Total

259,875

254,060

Yavapai County

Visitation at Dead Horse increased greatly. Located in the rapidly growing Verde Valley,
Dead Horse, a recreation park, has benefited from this population growth. On the other
hand, both Fort Verde and Jerome saw visitation decline sharply during the same period.
Fort Verde has had signage problems, making the entrance to the park hard to find.
State Parks are in discussions with ADOT to resolve this problem. Jerome has had
maintenance work performed in the park, requiring occasional closures.
Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 72

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys
Yavapai County - Dead Horse

Mean expenditures

$169

1996
2001

$77

$73

$60
$30

$53
$38

$17

In park
Entrance
expenditure fee/permits

$37
$6

Shopping & Food & drink
gifts

$45

$13

Tourist
services

$65

$55

$11
Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Dead Horse State Park saw an estimated increase
of $5,048,343 or more than 100 percent in 2001 as compared to 1996. Fort Verde State
Park also saw an increase in visitor expenditure, with an increase of $163,863 or 9.9
percent over 1996. Jerome State Park, saw a decrease of -3.6 percent in visitor
expenditures losing an estimated $297,918. Finally, Red Rock State Park saw an increase
of 26.1 percent or $2,051,503 during the same period.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 73

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

1996

2001

$240,519
$864,387
$558,552
$85,439
$530,207
$658,043
$165,586

$1,578,859
$438,747
$1,203,504
$1,356,238
$113,988
$948,105
$531,381
$197,504

Total direct expenditures

$3,102,733

$6,368,326

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$1,031,495
$630,220

Income
$2,168,377
$1,276,088

Total County Income

$1,661,715

$3,444,465

Dead Horse
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
111
44

Jobs
238
92

Total County Jobs

155

330

$4,764,448

$9,812,791

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 74

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Mean expenditures

Yavapai County - Fort Verde

$96

1996
$83

2001
$65 $65
$56 $54

$24

$19 $19

$17

$25 $25

$9

In park
expenditure

Entrance
fee/permits

Shopping &
gifts

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Food & drink

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Page 75

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

1996

2001

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

$25,008
$254,290
$186,073
$22,613
$137,254
$334,960
$0

$33,404
$94,299
$237,228
$259,004
$41,588
$84,144
$323,760
$0

Total direct expenditures

$960,198

$1,073,427

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$327,239
$202,352

Income
$357,652
$222,573

Total County Income

$529,591

$580,225

Fort Verde

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs
Total County Jobs
Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Jobs
35
14

Jobs
39
16

49

55

$1,489,789

$1,653,652

Page 76

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Yavapai County - Jerome

Mean expenditures

$253
$224

1996
2001

$77

$102

$97

$89
$67

$40
$20

$19

$9 $14

In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

Food &
drink

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Tourist
services

$49
$30
$4
Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 77

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Jerome

1996

2001

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
$160,460
Shopping & gifts
$1,351,424
Food & drink
$1,167,339
Tourist services (museums, tours) $324,438
Gas and transportation services
$523,099
Lodging (hotels, camping)
$1,784,212
Other
$75,957

$85,454
$99,917
$1,019,084
$1,251,368
$187,257
$543,026
$1,797,567
$176,251

Total direct expenditures

$5,386,930

$5,159,923

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$1,783,303
$1,113,278

Income
$1,732,790
$1,056,879

Total County Income

$2,896,581

$2,789,669

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
193
78

Jobs
188
74

Total County Jobs

271

262

$8,247,510

$7,949,592

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 78

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys
Yavapai County - Red Rock

$194

Mean expenditures

1996

$173

2001

$87
$67

$11

$81

$88

$23

$10 $8

In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

$79

$67
$34

$37
$7

Food &
drink

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 79

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

1996

2001
$75,626
$87,640
$1,045,386
$1,633,347
$634,252
$576,383
$2,263,797
$100,591

Red Rock
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other

$118,265
$1,001,664
$936,635
$269,062
$395,685
$2,234,288
$82,923

Total direct expenditures

$5,038,523 $6,417,022

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
$1,753,266
$1,075,925

Income
$2,182,667
$1,319,528

Total County Income

$2,829,191

$3,502,195

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
187
79

Jobs
239
92

Total County Jobs

266

331

$7,867,713

$9,919,216

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 80

Yuma County State Parks

Yuma Territorial Prison

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 81

Yuma County State Parks
State Park Visitation
Yuma County contains two Arizona State Parks – Yuma Prison State Park, and Yuma
Crossing State Park. Table 1 below shows total visitation to Yuma Prison State Park, and
Yuma Crossing State Park for FY 1995-96 and FY 2000-01.
Table 1. State Park Visitation

Yuma County

1996

2001

Yuma Prison
Yuma Crossing

84,606

69,698
16,959

County Total

84,606

86,657

Percent
Change
-17.6%

Visitor surveys were conducted at Arizona State Parks during the 12 months of FY 199596 and FY 2000-01. These surveys asked visitors to estimate total park expenditures in
relevant categories:
• Entrance fees & permits
• Shopping & gifts
• Food & drink
• Tourist services
• Gas & transportation
• Lodging
• Other
The 2001 survey, unlike the 1996 survey, asked respondents to separate their “in-park”
expenditures from those within 50 miles of the park; the 1996 survey totaled all
expenditures within a 50-mile radius surrounding the park. Figure 1 presents mean
(average) direct expenditures in each category for both the 1996 and 2001 surveys.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 82

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Yuma County - Yuma Prison

Mean expenditures

$113

1996

$90

$87

2001

$79
$67

$63

$54

$54
$47

$19
$9

$16

$13

In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

Food &
drink

$19

Tourist
services

$13

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Table 2 is presented in four sections. The first section multiplies mean direct expenditure
totals in each category (Figure 1) by visitor population totals (Table 1) to produce Total
Direct Expenditures in 1996 and 2001. Yuma Prison State Park saw an estimated
decrease of $1,60,418 or -20.3 percent in 2001 as compared to 1996. Yuma Crossing
State Park had estimated direct visitor expenditures of $1,499,895 for 2001.
The second section runs these total direct expenditures through an economic impact
model that uses multipliers to estimate total county income generated as a result of the
park. This is comprised of: (1) Direct Income, reflecting the spending of local businesses
on salaries, wages, taxes, and goods and services required to serve visitors; (2) Indirect &
Induced Income, as businesses invest in new equipment, suppliers replenish stocks, pay
their employees’ wages, or improve local public services – that is, as tourist dollars work
their way through the local and county economy.
The third section of the Table estimates the number of Direct and Indirect jobs supported
by this economic output. Table 2 ends with an estimate of Total County Jobs and Total
County Income, representing the total impact of state parks on the county economy.

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 83

Table 2. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Yuma Prison

1996

2001

In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
$123,788
Shopping & gifts
$1,293,842
Food & drink
$771,776
Tourist services (museums, tours)
$230,086
Gas and transportation services
$769,404
Lodging (hotels, camping)
$1,250,385
Other
$186,926

$84,858
$123,269
$760,090
$803,311
$102,989
$724,297
$1,228,519
$47,273

$4,626,207

$3,874,605

Total direct expenditures

County Income
Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

Income
Income
$1,626,323 $1,396,679
$1,197,191 $996,011

Total County Income

$2,823,514 $2,392,690

County Employment
Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

Jobs
166
86

Jobs
145
71

Total County Jobs

252

216

$7,449,721

$6,267,295

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 84

Figure 1. Mean Expenditures 1996, 2001 state park surveys

Yuma County - Yuma Crossing

Mean expenditures

$115
$100
$86

$45
$30
$21

$25

$13

In park
Entrance Shopping &
expenditure fee/permits
gifts

Food &
drink

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Tourist
services

Gas/transp

Lodging

Other

Page 85

Table 1. County Economic Impact 1996 - 2001

Yuma Crossing
In park expenditures
Entrance fees or permits
Shopping & gifts
Food & drink
Tourist services (museums, tours)
Gas and transportation services
Lodging (hotels, camping)
Other
3Total direct expenditures

County Income

2001
$35,610
$45,785
$456,402
$341,252
$73,256
$105,001
$428,854
$13,736
$1,499,895

Income

Direct Income
Indirect & Induced Income

$504,030
$389,030

Total County Income

$893,060

County Employment

Jobs

Direct Jobs
Indirect Jobs

53
27

Total County Jobs

80

Total County Income

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

$2,392,956

Page 86

APPENDIX

Economic Impact of Arizona State Parks

Page 87

Arizona State Park Visitation, Intervening Years
Arizona State Park Visitation FY 1995/96 to 2000/01
County
Apache
Cochise
Cochise
Coconino
Coconino
Gila
Graham
La Paz
La Paz
Mohave
Mohave
Navajo
Navajo
Pima
Pinal
Pinal
Pinal
Pinal
Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz
Yavapai
Yavapai
Yavapai
Yavapai
Yuma
Yuma

Park Name
Lyman Lake
Kartchner Cavern
Tombstone
Riordan
Slide Rock
Tonto Natural Bridge
Roper Lake
Alamo Lake
Buckskin
Cattail Cove
Lake Havasu
Fool Hollow
Homolovi
Catalina
Boyce Thompson
Lost Dutchman
McFarland
Picacho Peak
Patagonia Lake
Tubac Presidio
Dead Horse
Fort Verde
Jerome
Red Rock
Yuma Crossing
Yuma Prison

1995/96 1996/97
50,495
44,303
100,759
20,972
316,301
97,127
63,468
62,102
94,474
96,459
371,700
54,148
20,733
132,213
84,876
84,795
4,514
68,289
208,959
24,090
74,503
31,181
87,749
66,442
84,606

84,408
21,000
294,213
112,576
70,869
59,834
93,809
94,876
319,329
59,801
21,734
143,085
90,823
83,740
4,733
67,734
203,209
25,969
83,683
29,200
75,417
76,061
3,137
79,675

Park Visitation
1997/98 1998/99
32,936
26,599
70,333
19,348
267,789
100,892
60,138
55,779
97,291
87,702
292,360
64,781
22,426
155,791
100,188
104,218
3,688
168,772
191,951
21,688
89,225
29,024
70,093
73,699
20,892
74,391

Source: Arizona State Parks Board: Revenue and Attendance Reports

Economic Impact of State Parks

72,988
16,525
279,812
103,972
61,717
75,246
102,593
72,281
302,014
74,590
26,195
148,545
76,549
87,472
4,015
66,327
200,489
23,744
100,176
27,941
70,563
67,711
16,321
72,497

1999/00
27,623
120,337
69,656
16,791
296,602
113,807
64,984
66,279
105,942
98,406
325,723
81,388
24,380
146,428
76,422
82,054
3,518
60,252
203,998
21,350
104,935
22,315
70,370
75,964
14,830
75,053

2000/01
28,304
199,115
74,105
19,194
275,554
100,178
60,242
70,969
93,999
106,939
345,590
84,527
20,644
154,806
87,238
114,253
4,273
117,652
196,332
18,770
103,089
21,450
53,128
76,393
16,959
69,698