The Dolores River Basins Economy: Value from the Past, Promise for the Future

How have the economic roles of traditional occupations like farming, ranching
and mining changed over the years? What industries will be important for the region in coming years? What qualities equip communities to compete in a changing West? What can communities in the region do to be better prepared to meet these challenges while maintaining quality of life and important links to the traditions of the past? These sorts of questions face most Western communities, including the towns and cities of the Dolores River Basin. This profile is designed to help residents and elected officials find answers to such economic questions and shape the future of the region. This report shows regional trends in key industries for the area, along with several indicators that gauge the regions potential to take advantage of the changing economy of the rural West. The Dolores River Basin is located in west central Colorado and includes parts of five counties: Dolores, Mesa, Montrose, San Miguel, and Montezuma. To portray a more integrated regional picture, we include the adjacent counties of Ouray and Delta in this report. Since Dolores River Basin counties are large and rather diverse, whenever possible we will also present data on subsets of the counties to focus the picture of the region. The region encompassing the Dolores River watershed is exceptionally diverse across its local communities and natural settings. Steeped in western history, the region saw early habitation by native peoples who employed dryland agriculture and water works. Ute peoples then lived, traveled and hunted across the landscape. European settlement in the late 1880s brought mining, logging, ranching and farming to the river valleys and mountainsides. Today, the region is cherished by those who love the dramatic scenery, quiet solitude and rural western character of the Dolores River Basin. Among many values retained in this region, much history is visibly preserved in the landscape. Rock walls reveal game drive maps and other rock art of early native peoples; canyon ledges support remnants of the hanging flume, an engineering feat of early mining days; and hidden cabins still stand that once secreted outlaws of the McCarty Gang. This tapestry of human history is set against a backdrop of phenomenal geologic history, portrayed in richly-hued layers of ancient granite and sandstone along the Unaweep-Tabeguache Scenic Byway.

The Dolores River that lies at the heart of this landscape winds some 230 miles from its headwaters in Colorados snowy San Juan Mountains, through forests and desert canyons, to the rivers confluence with the Colorado River in Utah. Along the way, the Dolores River passes through five counties in Colorado and one in Utah, and more than a half dozen field offices and ranger districts of the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service. The Dolores River Basin remains a land of contrasts to this day. Traditional farming, ranching and mining continue alongside more recent resort development and active recreational pursuits. Wilderness areas are treasured by hunters, anglers, hikers, rafters and others; while expansive public lands provide abundant opportunities for a broad spectrum of outdoor recreation.

What We Found The Dolores River Basin has a diverse economy which includes many
industries and occupations.

As with most of the rural West, the Region has a varied professional and
service sector which produces most of the employment and income in the area.

A large portion of personal income Dolores River Basin comes from

retirement and investment sources, bringing potential investment capital and retiree-related business opportunities such as financial services, healthcare, recreation and arts to the region.

Mining and agriculture are a part of the Dolores River Basins economy and
culture; however, the current economic role of these two sectors is not large.

The Region enjoys high levels of human amenities, a creative and educated
workforce and a climate and topography that is desirable all of which correlate with income and employment growth.

May, 2012

Past to Present: Trends & Indicators for the Dolores River Basin Region This profile shows current industry contributions to income and employment for
key sectors (Table 1) and long-term trends for employment and income (Figures 1 and 2), as these together provide a more complete picture of the regions economic health and diversity. Examining changes in employment and income over time helps in understanding the overall direction in which an areas economy is moving and how it arrived at its current state. Trend analysis shows long-term patterns in income and employment that are not apparent when looking only at a point in time. For example, income and employment in some industries tends to fluctuate greatly from year to year, while others have more stable trends. Agriculture is particularly interesting, because often employment in this industry remains stable, but income varies greatly from year to year. Four key sectors are of particular interest: investment and retirement income, the professional and service sector, farming and ranching, and mining (see Table 1 for current income and employment). Each will be discussed in more detail in the following sections.
Table 1. Dolores River Basin Counties - Income and Employment by Industry (2010) Investmen t& Retirement Mining (includes oil & gas extraction) % of % of % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total Total Total Income Jobs Income Jobs Income Jobs Income 38.2% 51.0% 18.0% 11.6% 1.7% 3.9% 4.3% 39.6% 27.0% 7.5% 24.5% 5.1% *3.2% 3.1% 33.2% 61.1% 32.8% 2.9% 0.2% 4.4% 4.7% Farming & Ranching 34.4% 37.0% 48.1% 36.7% 50.5% 54.6% 56.3% 68.3% 22.6% 28.7% 21.8% 47.2% 9.0% 6.6% 4.1% 1.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.2% 0.0% 1.6% 1.3% *1.5% # 1.5% 2.5% 1.5% # Professional & Service Sector

Delta County Dolores County Mesa County Montezuma County Montrose County Ouray County San Miguel County

* Data are suppressed by BEA to avoid disclosure of confidential information. Estimates provided by Economic Profile System-Human Dimensions Toolkit, May 1, 2012, www.headwaterseconomics.org/eps-hdt.

The most recent data for San Miguel County (2001) shows that mining accounted for less than 1% of income and jobs. Data on employment by occupation are available for the rural sections of these counties which fall within the Dolores River Basin, and provide a more refined look at the local economy which confirms the overall distribution of industries in this table. (See Table A-1 in the appendix for details.) Source: Regional Economic Information System, Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce

(www.bea.gov)

The Significant Role of Investment and Retirement Income

Investment and retirement income is the largest single source of income for most
counties in the Dolores River Basin region, currently comprising at least 33% and as much as 48% of total personal income (Table 1). Even as early as 1969 this non-labor income comprised over 22% of total personal income in the region and has remained a very substantial portion ever since (Figure 2). Because they are not bound to a particular location by a job, retirees can choose a place to live based on other factors, including the amenities it offers. People who rely on retirement and investment income are concentrated in the coastal and mountain regions of the western United States, precisely because of the natural amenities these areas possess (Nelson 1999). An influx of retirees to rural communities has been shown to have positive effects on both income and employment (Deller 1995). When a person receives dividends on his or her investments or a retiree receives a pension check, the money represents an influx of income for the entire local economy, and in turn fuels increases in employment and income for many other sectors. The Increasing Role of the Professional and Service Sector

One of the most important features of the regions economy is the professional
and service sector which produces a significant portion of employment and income (Figures 1 and 2). While always historically a large part of the economy, this sector has been increasing in relative importance in recent years. This is a trend that has occurred nationwide, and is often particularly evident in rural areas which have historically been more focused on agriculture or resource extraction. This trend has positive implications for the Dolores River Basin because the professional and service sector remains key to a healthy economy, even when resource extraction and agriculture have larger roles. The professional and service sector contributes to economic diversity, which mitigates the inherent boom and bust fluctuations in extractive industries. The professional and service sector includes a wide range of occupations providing diverse employment opportunities in the region. Such diversity in employment opportunities helps ensure that there are jobs for residents with various education and skill levels, ranging from high-paying professional fields to more entry level jobs (see Figure 3). As discussed further below, employment diversity is important for the long-term economic and social health of the Dolores River Basin region. The Role of Traditional Industries: Mining and Agriculture

Mining and agriculture, while clearly somewhat important to the regions

economy, had a relatively stable role throughout the period. Mining and 4

May, 2012

agriculture provided less personal income than professional and service occupations, and investment and retirement income, for most counties in the Basin. (Figures 1 and 2, see also Figures A-1 through A-5 in the Appendix for individual counties). At its peak in 1981, mining provided 6% of jobs (Figure 1) in the Basin, and 9% of personal income (Figure 2). 1 Agriculture has declined steadily, from a high of 14% of total jobs in 1969 to its current level of 5% of total employment. Income from farming and ranching has also declined from a peak of 8% of total income in 1973 to the current level of 0.5%, with income below zero in some years for individual counties in the region.2

1 Figures 1 and 2 and Figures A-1 through A-5 combine data classified under both the Standard Industry Classification system (SIC) for 1969-2000 and the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) for 2001 forward. We have indicated where the classification changes with a break in the graph and a vertical line. See Appendix C (page 38) for a more detailed explanation of these two systems and a list of the specific industries and sectors used in these figures. Some data are not disclosed due to small sample size. When possible, rather than assume zero for no data, we interpolate from other years or use other data sources to derive estimates.
1

2 Detailed figures showing employment and income for the individual Basin counties can be found in Appendix A beginning on page 21.
2

Economic Diversity the Key to a Prosperous Future

Economic diversity in the Dolores River Basin is advantageous. Communities

which depend heavily on only one or a few industries experience a number of economic and social difficulties. Extractive industries in particular are prone to cycles of boom and bust, and researchers have found that communities dependent on resource extraction often experience high rates of poverty even during boom times (Brabant and Gramling 1997). It is also important to consider an industrys role in long-term economic sustainability and community stability. Rural sociologist Louise P. Fortmann, along with several colleagues, distinguishes between community stability and community well-being with respect to land management for resource extraction (Fortmann et al. 1989). These scholars note that an over-emphasis on industry employment (in this case the timber industry, but applicable to other extractive industries) has not led to employment stability, but rather timber dependent communities experience periods of higher than average unemployment when the industry is in a downturn. Dr. Scott Goldsmith of the University of Alaska documents the same kind of cyclical high unemployment in communities heavily dependent on the oil and gas industry (1992). And Colorados Western Slope saw the impact of the shutdown of oil shale development due to declining world oil prices in 1982 which left many people unemployed, and communities with large debt incurred in building facilities for anticipated boom times which never came (Gulliford 1989).3 Economists at Headwaters Economics (2008) studied several counties in the West and found that, Counties that have focused on energy development are underperforming economically compared to peer counties that have little or no energy development. (page 2). They also found that this energy focus reduced these counties potential for future competitiveness by reducing the level of education, creating a large gap between high and low income households and between high and low wage earners, reducing economic diversity and resiliency and reducing the ability to attract investment dollars. As Figure 3 illustrates, the professional and service sector provides a key contribution to the regions economic diversity. John E. Wagner (2000), a professor of forest economics at the State University of New York, notes that pursuit of a growing industry such as energy is an appropriate short-term strategy for economic growth, but is best coupled with policies designed to increase economic diversity to provide long-term stability. Increased economic diversity can help protect rural economies from industry downturns, because when one industry experiences a downturn, if an area has a larger variety of industries there will be more potential opportunities to absorb the unemployed. Conversely, areas dominated by one industry often lack this capacity (Wagner 1998, Malizia and Ke 1993, Wagner and Deller 1998).

3 For additional research on resource-dependent economies see Freudenburg 1992, Freudenburg and Gramling 1994, Hoffman and Fortmann 1996, Humphrey et al. 1993, Limerick et al. 2002.
3

The good news is that recent research shows that most western counties are not overly dependent on resource extraction, and have instead developed diversified economies based on recreation, tourism, knowledge-based industries and the service sector. Rasker et al. (2004) examined the impact of public lands on economic well-being in 11 western states and found that only 3 percent of western counties could be classified as resource extraction dependent. At the same time, Shumway and Otterstrom (2001) found that there is also a significant trend in the rural West toward economies that are more dependent on service sector industries.

Population Trends and Demographic Characteristics

Population Growth

Between 1990 and 2000, the western United States grew at a rate faster than
any other region, and was second-fastest after the South from 2000 to 2010 (U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau 2001). Furthermore, and counter to the norm, population growth preceded employment growth in the rural West between 1970 and 1995 (Vias 1999). The regions amenities continue to fuel this trend. Between 1969 and 2010, Colorados population grew by 133% - more than twice the rate of the rest of the country. Mesa, San Miguel, and Ouray Counties all experienced rapid growth. Mesa grew 170%, from just over 54,000 in 1969 to over 146,000 in 2010, with a slight drop from the previous year. San Miguel Countys growth was even more rapid (281%) - from under 2,000 to 7,360 during the same period (Figure 4). Ouray County also grew rapidly at 186%, from 1,159 to over 4,400. The remaining counties in the Region did not grow as rapidly. Montrose County grew 122% (from about 18,000 to over 41,000), and Montezuma County doubled (going from 12,600 to over 25,000). Delta Countys population also doubled from just over 15,600 to nearly 31,000. Dolores County, with the smallest population in the region, also grew most slowly (35%), adding just over 500 people in nearly 40 years for a current population just over 2,000.

Demographics of the Basin

The Dolores River Basin areas population is somewhat older than the rest of
Colorado, even when compared with only the rural portions of the state which tend to be older than the state as a whole (See Table A-2 in the Appendix for details). The median age in the rural portion of the Dolores Basin ranges from 41 to 52, while the median age for rural Colorado counties as a whole is 41 and for the state its 36. The area is also less racially diverse than the state as a whole, although similar in makeup to the rural portions (Table A-2). The Dolores River Basin has a higher proportion of residents who were born in the state, and slightly lower education levels (Table A-2). Home Prices

Housing affordability varies across the region due to both variations in home
value and average incomes. Home prices in Rico, Cortez, Mancos and Nucla are less affordable than in rural Colorado or the state as a whole, and more affordable in Glade Park-Gateway and Pleasant View. Rental housing is more affordable than for rural Colorado or the state as a whole in Dove Creek, Rico, and Cortez, less affordable in Dolores, Nucla and Norwood, and intermediate in Mancos. (See Table A-3 in the Appendix for details). About 8% of the housing in the Dolores River Basin Region is for seasonal or recreational use, compared with 5% statewide and 14% in the rural portions overall.4 Unaffordable housing can often lead to more commuters, as workers must live far from their jobs in order to find housing. With some local variations, commute times for workers in the Dolores River Basin Region are generally similar to those for all of rural Colorado and the state as a whole. Commute times may also be an indication of overall job availability as well (See Table A-4 in the Appendix for details). The poverty rate in the Dolores River Basin region is higher than both the state and higher than the rural portions. The highest rate of poverty occurs in the Gladel County Census Division in San Miguel County, which also has the least affordable housing in the region. This may be the result of a more seasonal (not year-round) workforce in the area.5

4 U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau

4

5 U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau

5

Regional Asset Indicators

Assessing regional characteristics in terms of asset indicators may provide

helpful tools to plan for future economic success. The Center for the Study of Rural America, at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (the Rural Center) has developed a set of Regional Asset Indicators that are linked to the potential for economic growth in rural counties (Weiler 2004). The Rural Center describes the regional asset indicators as providing new, forward-looking metrics that regions can use to better understand their economic assets and to help inform private, public, and nonprofit regional development strategies. 6 These asset indicators include entrepreneurship, a creative and skilled workforce, and the presence of human and natural amenities. Small Business Owners

Business owners create jobs and wealth in a local economy and stimulate growth
as the income and employment they generate filters through the economy. The Rural Center ties entrepreneurship and long-term economic growth together (Low 2004). Entrepreneurs can have both small and large impacts in local communities. Some small businesses may not produce large employment or income benefits; however, they enhance the local quality of life and the level of human amenities (for example local restaurants may not produce large numbers of jobs, but do contribute to the areas amenity index). Others bring both direct and indirect employment and income. The Rural Center (Low 2004) calculates both a measure of the quantity of entrepreneurs (as a proportion of overall employment) and quality of entrepreneurs (proprietors income and percentage of business receipts that are proprietors income). All the Dolores River Basin Counties have a high level of entrepreneurship, but with average income lower than Colorado. (Table 2).

Table 2. Dolores River Basin Counties, Colorado: Entrepreneurship Indicators Entrepreneurs (% of total
workers)
a

Average Income of Entrepreneurs $12,693 $6,758 $16,049 $14,029 $21,665 $22,060 $15,640

Delta County Dolores County Mesa County Montezuma County Montrose County Ouray County San Miguel County

37% 52% 25% 30% 33% 39% 49%

6
6

The Center For the Study of Rural America, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, http://www.kc.frb.org/publications/research/mse/regional-asset-indicators.cfm

Average of all Colorado Counties Average of All U.S. Counties

a

25% 21%

$27,129 $27,482

Calculated using the indicator definitions from the Center for the Study of Rural America, Data source: Bureau of Economic Analysis (2010 data)

Thompson et al. (2006) studied rural economies and found that areas with higher levels of entrepreneurship experienced higher employment growth between 1972 and 1999. Low et al. (2005) analyzed the characteristics of rural economies to assess their potential for entrepreneurship and economic growth. They found that lifestyle amenities, local workforce skills, access to capital and information and innovative activity were the strongest indicators of an areas ability to attract and maintain entrepreneurial activity.7 Research into the motivation that drives entrepreneurs and businesses to choose particular locations consistently finds that amenities and quality of life top the list (Johnson and Rasker 1993 and 1995, Rasker and Hansen 2000, Snepenger et al. 1995, Rasker and Glick 1994, Whitelaw and Niemi 1989). This presents an opportunity for the Dolores River Basin Counties to attract more small businesses into the area to further enhance this important sector. High Quality Workforce

In order to attract knowledge-based industries such as engineering, computer

and technology occupations, health care, financial services and legal services which are often higher paying, rural areas must have a supply of creative, skilled workers (Henderson and Abraham 2004). The Rural Center has measured the level of available highly skilled workers in each county, referring to them as an areas skill surplus (Moore 2005). A creative work force increases a regions human capital and its level of innovation and entrepreneurship. The Rural Centers creativity index draws upon the work of Richard Florida (2002), who wrote about creative occupations, along with the work of other researchers and is a measure of the level of specialized, highly creative occupations that are unique to an area, making a distinction between these unique concentrations and creative jobs that can be found in almost any location. Table 3 shows the Regions skilled and creative workers.
Table 3. Dolores River Basin Counties, Colorado: Workforce Indicators Supply of Skilled Workers a, c Dolores County Mesa County 18% 22% Supply Compared with Demand b, c 1.1 (surplus) -3.0 (deficit) % of the Workforce In Creative Occupations c 17% 21%

7 Other factors contributing to higher levels of entrepreneurship were a higher number of foreign-born citizens. Rasker et al
7

(2004) also found that rural counties with higher numbers of newcomers were more likely to experience greater economic growth.

Montezuma County Montrose County San Miguel County Ouray County Delta County Average of all Colorado Counties Average of All U.S. Counties
a b

22% 19% 47% 35% 19% 26% 18%

0.9 (surplus) 2.0 (surplus) 25.0 (huge surplus) 12.0 (large surplus) 1.0 (surplus) 3.8 (surplus) -2.7 (deficit)

20% 18% 36% 30% 18% 23% 17%

Share of labor force with at least a college degree Surplus/Deficit = Demand for skilled workers supply of skilled workers (demand calculated by the Center for the Study of Rural America, Winter 2004, Data from U.S. Census EEO File, 2000) c Calculated by the Center for the Study of Rural America, Summer 2006

It is probably not surprising that San Miguel and Ouray Counties have a very creative, educated workforce given proximity to the resort community of Telluride (Table 3). However it should be noted that the other counties in the Region also have highly educated creative workers which are an asset for rural counties (Center for the Study of Rural America 2006a, b). Human and Natural Amenities

An areas amenities often act as a key driver of economic prosperity, attracting

entrepreneurs, skilled workers, retirees and those with investment capital. The Rural Center has developed an index to measure the level of human amenities for each county, which includes a measure of natural amenities (developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture), access to healthcare, innovation (which is also measured separately as an additional Regional Asset Indicator below), recreation areas and restaurants. These are then standardized into one index for each county (Center for the Study of Rural America 2006a). As the Rural Center points out, the human amenity index is highest in mountain and coastal regions. This helps to explain the high index scores for the Dolores River Basin Counties as well as Colorado as a whole when compared to the entire country (Table 4). One of the factors that the Center for the Study of Rural America includes in its Human Amenities Index is the Natural Amenities score calculated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This index is based on topography, proximity to water and climate factors (warm winters and mild summers). Colorados Natural Amenity Score is much higher than the U.S. average, and Dolores, Montezuma, San Miguel and Ouray Counties scores are even higher. Mesa and Montrose Counties also have natural amenity scores higher than the national average. The region clearly enjoys an advantage in terms of natural amenities which enhances its score for human amenities (Table 8). Counties with high levels of natural amenities (such as varied topography, access to water bodies, and a pleasant climate) are more likely to experience both higher population and economic growth than those counties with fewer such amenities (McGranahan 1999).
Table 4. Dolores River Basin Counties, Colorado: Human Amenity

Index and Natural Amenities Scores Human Amenity Index Dolores County Mesa County Montezuma County Montrose County San Miguel County Ouray County Delta County Average of all Colorado Counties Average of All U.S. Counties
a b

Natural Amenity Scale b 4.38 2.26 4.41 2.94 5.14 6.08 3.68 4.03 0.06

34 35 41 36 40 49 37 36 29

Source: Calculated by the Center for the Study of Rural America, Summer 2006 Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Natural Amenities Typology

The Dolores region can make certain that its human amenity index score remains high by ensuring that local recreational and scenic amenities remain wellprotected and that other factors in the index are also supported. Because areas which have abundant amenities are more able to attract and retain a high quality workforce, the Human Amenity Index is very important for the region, as it may be the key to enhancing and maintaining the other important workforce and demographic indicators discussed above. Human amenities have been found to be positively correlated with both income and employment growth (Center for the Study of Rural America 2006a). In addition to attracting a quality workforce, amenities also attract retirees and others with non-traditional sources of income (Nelson 1999). These new residents in turn spur economic development (Deller

1995). For example, residents who rely on non-labor income become both a pool of customers and clients for new business and a potential source of investment capital. The Particular Role of Natural Amenities and Public Lands

Research indicates that natural amenities, many of which are provided by

undeveloped public lands, are an important economic asset for rural western communities.8 Local communities with abundant outdoor recreation opportunities, scenic vistas, and plentiful open space reap measurable benefits in terms of employment and personal income. Counties with high levels of natural amenities are more likely to experience both greater population and economic growth than counties with fewer such amenities (McGranahan 1999). Many counties in the rural West are isolated from larger markets and this often hinders economic growth. However, Rasker et al. (2004) found that such out-of-the-way counties which had abundant protected public lands9 actually grew at a rate 60 percent faster than similar counties without protected lands, perhaps indicating that these lands and the amenities they provide may help overcome the handicap of remoteness. Even those western counties that are well connected to markets can benefit from the presence of some public lands that are protected from development. As technology makes it easier to telecommute, more workers are able to choose where they live and work. Technology also makes it easier for businesses to conduct national or international commerce from any location they choose. Other entrepreneurs simply choose to live in a particular place and build a business in response to local needs. Retirees and others who collect non-labor income are not tied by a job to a specific location. All of these important activities are often tied to an areas quality of life, including the scenic and recreation amenities provided by public lands. Preserved areas such as wilderness often motivate residents and business to locate in a particular area (Rudzitis and Johansen 1989, Johnson and Rasker 1995). Local and regional economies also benefit from recreation and tourism activities on public lands. Over 2.2 million people participated in wildlife-associated recreation (hunting, fishing and wildlife watching) in Colorado in 2006, generating nearly $3 billion in expenditures (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and U.S. Census Bureau 2007). Researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City have noted that wildlife recreation has the potential to be an important industry for rural America (Henderson 2004).

8 See Rudzitis and Johansen 1989; Johnson and Rasker 1993, 1995; Rasker 1994; Power 1995, 1996; Duffy-Deno 1998; Rudzitis 1999; Lorah 2000; Rudzitis and Johnson 2000; Whitelaw et al. 2003; Holmes and Hecox 2004; Rasker et al. 2004; Haefele et al. 2007.
8

9 Protected public lands are defined by Rasker et al. as lands, that have been set aside, through legal and permanent designation, to be managed primarily for wild land characteristics, such as scenery, wildlife habitat, water quality, and solitude. These lands are protected from resource development (p. 5)
9

A more recent study focusing on Colorado (BBC Research and Consulting 2008) found that hunters and anglers in Colorado spent $1 billion on equipment and trip-related expenses in 2007.This spending resulted in a total impact, including spillover effects of over $1.8 billion. Another result of the spending on hunting and fishing is the creation of 21,000 full-time jobs in Colorado. The majority of these impacts are from Colorado residents enjoying the lifestyle afforded by the states abundant wildlife and wildlife habitat. Table 5 shows the impacts of hunting and fishing in the Dolores River Basin Counties.
Table 5. Dolores River Basin Counties, Colorado: Economic Impacts from Hunting and Fishing Direct Expenditures (thousands of $)
a

Total Economic Impact (thousands of $) b 2,570 76,100 20,790 29,180 17,380 3,440 27,840

Jobs 26 813 221 320 227 37 297

Dolores County Mesa County Montezuma County Montrose County San Miguel County Ouray County Delta County

1,640 43,980 12,230 17,150 10,090 2,111 16,310

Source: The Economic Impacts of Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Watching in Colorado. Final Report, Sept. 26, 2008. BBC Research and Consulting(http://wildlife.state.co.us/About/Reports/EconomicImpacts/) a Includes trip expenditures and equipment purchases as well as spending by the CDOW b Direct expenditures plus spillover effects c Jobs created by both direct and spillover effects

The Outdoor Foundation estimates that people participating in active recreation spent more than $298 billion in 2006 spurring other spending in local economies and generating significant local tax revenuemaking the total national economic contribution of outdoor recreation more than $730 billion (Outdoor Industry Foundation 2006a). In Colorado, activities like hunting and fishing, hiking, bicycling, and skiing contribute $10 billion to the states economy, generating 107,000 jobs. Outdoor recreation by residents and tourists alike is an important component of western economies (Outdoor Foundation 2006b). Rural sociologists and economists have highlighted the role of natural resource protection in economic growth. Freudenburg and Gramling (1994) concluded, the future economic hope for resource-dependent communities of...the United States could have less to do with the consumption of natural resources than with their preservation. Deller et al. (2001) echo this finding, Rural areas endowed with key natural resource amenities can manage those resources to capture growth more effectively. This may entail expansion beyond policies that have historically been focused on extraction of the resource base. And finally, Whitelaw et al. (2003) state, The West's natural environment is, arguably, its greatest long-run economic strength.

While an historic emphasis on resource extraction has been important to western Colorado, it is clear that economic diversity will be the key to a more sustainable economy. The Dolores River Basin region can capitalize on its wealth of natural amenities and still retain the high quality of life that residents treasure by maintaining a diverse economy (including a diverse professional and service sector), maintaining affordable housing, developing carefully planned growth guided by zoning and preserving open space (including agricultural lands and ranches).

Planning for Amenity Development

While amenity development may be desirable, it doeslike any development

have economic and ecological costs (Hansen et al. 2002, Rasker et al. 2004). For example, negative ecological effects of amenity development can include loss of native species, changes in natural disturbance regimes (such as wildfires) and the spread of invasive species (Hansen et al. 2002). In addition, areas that grow too quickly, regardless of the drivers of this growth, can experience rising housing costs (Morton 2000, Rasker et al. 2004). Rising housing costs can squeeze longtime residents out of the area and diminish the social amenities that drew new residents to the area in the first place. Community planners should prepare for these possibilities and develop strategies to ensure that an amenity boom doesnt have the same negative impacts as any other boom. The Sonoran Institute (2007) succinctly states the challenges faced by growing communities in the West: Ranches and open space are giving way to subdivisions. Homes and jobs are often far apart, and streets are gridlocked. Many rural communities outgrow their small town character. Retirees also look south of the border for affordable, resort-style living. Sources of energy and water are strained. Communities that actively plan for amenity-driven growth are better able to face the related challenges and can find a balance between growth and maintaining their quality of life (Howe et al. 1997). Communities that engage the broadest spectrum of residents in a planning process based on a sound understanding of local resources often fare best. Most successful communities also actively protect local amenities by purchasing open space and implementing other strategies, such as conservation easements, that complement the existing management of local public lands. The integration of private and public land management also helps to ensure that the ecological values and amenities of open space are protected (Hansen et al. 2002). By employing such strategies, local communities can slow the pace and scale of amenity-based development, and ensure that scenic beauty, small-town character and a sense of community are not sacrificed.

Conclusion

Overall the Dolores River Basin region is well-equipped for continued economic success. It is particularly important that that regions counties enjoy very high scores for the broadly defined human amenities and natural amenities that draw entrepreneurs and skilled workers to the area. The Dolores River Basin region also has a diverse professional and service sector to complement the traditional agriculture and mining employment in the area, helping to create a resilient and durable economy that will sustain the region well in to the future.

For more information, contact:

Barbara Hawke, Barbara_hawke@tws.org 970-596-6697

References
BBC Research and Consulting. 2008. The Economic Impacts of Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Watching in Colorado. Final Report, Sept. 26, 2008. BBC Research and Consulting. 22pp. Available from http://wildlife.state.co.us/About/Reports/EconomicImpacts/ (accessed April 8, 2011). Bennett, K. and M.K. McBeth. 1998. Contemporary Western Rural USA Economic Composition: Potential Implications for Environmental Policy and Research. Environmental Management 22(3): 371-381. Center for the Study of Rural America. 2006a. Regional Asset Indicators: Human Amenities. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. May 16, 2006. Available from http://www.kansascityfed.org/publications/research/mse/regional-asset-indicators.cfm (accessed April 8, 2011). Center for the Study of Rural America. 2006b. Regional asset Indicators: The Creative Workforce. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. July 2006. Available from http://www.kansascityfed.org/publications/research/mse/regional-asset-indicators.cfm (accessed April 8, 2011). Center for the Study of Rural America. 2006c. Regional Asset Indicators: Innovation. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. July 2006. Available from http://www.kansascityfed.org/publications/research/mse/regional-asset-indicators.cfm (accessed April 8, 2011). Center for the Study of Rural America. 2006d. Regional Asset Indicators: Infrastructure. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. May 16, 2006. Available from http://www.kansascityfed.org/publications/research/mse/regional-asset-indicators.cfm (accessed April 8, 2011). Cordell H.K., C.J. Betz, G.T. Green and S. Mou. 2004 Outdoor Recreation for 21st Century America A Report to the Nation: The National Survey on Recreation and the Environment. State College, PA: Venture Publishing Inc. Deller, S.C. 1995. Economic Impacts of Retirement Migration. Economic Development Quarterly 9(1): 25-38. Deller, S.C., T. Tsai, D.W. Marcouiller, and D.B.K. English. 2001. The Role of Amenities and Quality of Life in Rural Economic Growth. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 83(2): 352-365. Florida, Richard. 2002. The Rise of the Creative Class And How Its Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. Basic Books. New York. Cited by the Center for the Study of Rural America. Freudenburg, W.R. 1992. Addictive economies: extractive industries and vulnerable localities in a changing world economy. Rural Sociology. Vol. 57:305-332. Freudenburg, W.R. and R. Gramling. 1994. Natural Resources and Rural Poverty: A Closer Look. Society and Natural Resources 7: 5-22 Fortmann, L.P., J. Kusel, and S.K. Fairfax. 1989. Community stability: The foresters' fig leaf. Pages 44-50 in: Le Master, D.C., and J.H. Beuter, Eds. Community Stability in ForestBased Economies . Timber Press, Portland, OR. Goldsmith, O.S. 1992. Economic instability in petroleum-based economies. Presented at OPEC/Alaska Conference on Energy Issues in the 1990s. Anchorage AK, July 23-24, 1992. Gulliford, A. 1989. Boomtown Blues: Colorado Oil Shale 1885-1985. Niwot, CO: University Press of Colorado.

Haefele, M., P. Morton, and N. Culver. 2007. Natural Dividends: Wildland Protection and the Changing Economy of the Rocky Mountain West. Washington, D.C.: The Wilderness Society. Hansen, A.J., R. Rasker, B. Maxwell, J.J. Rotella, J.D. Johnson, A.W. Parmenter, U. Langner, W.B. Cohen, R.L. Lawrence, and M.P.V. Kraska. 2002. Ecological causes and consequences of demographic change in the New West. BioScience 20(2): 151-162. Headwaters Economics. 2008. Fossil Fuel Extraction as a County Economic Development Strategy. 26 pp. Available from www.headwaterseconomics.org/energy (accessed April 8, 2011). Henderson, J. 2004. Wildlife recreation: Rural Americas newest billion dollar industry. The Main Street Economist (April 2004). Available from: http://www.kansascityfed.org/publications/research/mse/archive.cfm (accessed April 8, 2011). Henderson, J. and B. Abraham. 2004. Can rural America support a knowledge economy? Economic Review, Third Quarter 2004 pp. 71-96. Available from http://www.kc.frb.org/PUBLICAT/ECONREV/Pdf/3q04hend.pdf (accessed April 8, 2011). Hoffman, S.A. and Fortmann, L. 1996. Poverty in forested counties: an analysis based on aid to families with dependent children. In Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final report to Congress, vol. II, Assessments and scientific basis for management options. Davis: University of California, Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, 1996. Holmes, F.P., and W.E. Hecox. 2004. Does wilderness impoverish rural regions? International Journal of Wilderness 10(3): 34-39. Howe, J., E. McMahon, and L. Propst. 1997. Balancing Nature and Commerce in Gateway Communities. Island Press, Washington, D.C., and Covelo, CA. Humphrey, C.R.; G. Berardi, M.S. Carroll, S. Fairfax, L. Fortman, C. Geisler, T.G. Johnson, J. Kusel, R.G. Lee, S. Macinko, M.D. Schulman, P.C. West. 1993. Theories in the study of natural resource-dependent communities and persistent poverty in the United States. In: Rural Sociological Society Task Force on Persistent Rural Poverty, Ed. Persistent Poverty in Rural America.. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Johnson, J. and R. Rasker. 1993. Local Government: Local Business Climate and Quality of Life. Montana Policy Review 3(2). Johnson, J., and R. Rasker. 1995. The Role of Economic and Quality of Life Values in Rural Business Location. Journal of Rural Studies 11(4): 405-416. Johnson, T.G. 2001. The Rural Economy in a New Century. International Regional Science Review 24(1): 21-37. Limerick, Patricia Nelson; Travis, William; Scoggin, Tamar. 2002. Boom and bust in the American West. Workshop Report. Center of the American West, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO. Lorah, P. 2000. Population growth, economic security and cultural change in wilderness counties. Pages 230-237 in: McCool, S.F., D.N. Cole, W.T. Borrie, and J. O'Loughlin, Comps. Wilderness Science in a Time of Change Conference, Volume 2:Wilderness within the context of larger systems, 1999 May 23-27, Missoula, MT. Proceedings RMRS-P-15-VOL 2., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. Low, S. 2004. Regional Asset Indicators: Entrepreneurship Breadth and Depth. The Main Street Economist, September, 2004. Center for the Study of Rural America, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Kansas City, MO.

Low, S. 2005a. Regional Asset Indicators: The Wealth of Regions. The Main Street Economist, September, 2005. Center for the Study of Rural America, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Kansas City, MO. Low, S. 2005b. Regional Asset Indicators: Bank Deposit Depth and Evolution. The Main Street Economist, April, 2005. Center for the Study of Rural America, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Kansas City, MO. Low, S., J. Henderson, and S. Weiler. 2005. Gauging a Regions Entrepreneurial Potential. Economic Review (Third Quarter) Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. McGranahan, D.A. 1999. Natural Amenities Drive Rural Population Change. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Food and Rural Economics Division. Agricultural Economics Report No. 781. Moore, S. 2005. Regional Asset Indicator: Tapping the Skills Surplus in Rural America. The Main Street Economist, February 2005. Center for the Study of Rural America, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Kansas City, MO. Morton, P. 2000 A critique of the Squirrel Meadows Grand Targhee Land Exchange Proposal, Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Appendix G in: Final Environmental Impact Statement, Squirrel Meadows Grand Targhee Land Exchange Proposal, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Caribou-Targhee National Forest Nelson, P.B. 1999. Quality of Life, Nontraditional Income, and Economic Growth: New Development Opportunities for the Rural West. Rural Development Perspectives 14(2): 32-37. Outdoor Industry Foundation. 2006a. Outdoor Recreation Participation Study 8th Edition for the Year 2005 Trend Analysis for the United States. Outdoor Industry Foundation, Boulder, CO. Available from http://www.outdoorfoundation.org/research.participation.html (accessed April 8, 2011). Outdoor Industry Foundation. 2006b. The Active Outdoor Recreation Economy. Outdoor Industry Foundation, Boulder, CO. Available from http://www.outdoorfoundation.org/research.recreation.html (accessed April 8, 2011). Power, T. 1995. Economic Well-Being and Environmental Protection in the Pacific Northwest: A Consensus Report by Pacific Northwest Economists. University of Montana, Missoula, MT. Power, T.M. 1996. Lost Landscapes and Failed Economies. Island Press, Covelo, CA. Rasker, R. 1994. A New Look at Old Vistas: the Economic Role of Environmental Quality in Western Public Lands. University of Colorado Law Review 52(2): 369-399. Rasker, R. and D. Glick. 1994. Footloose Entrepreneurs: Pioneers of the New West? Illahee 10(1): 34-43. Rasker, R. and A. Hansen. 2000. Natural Amenities and Population Growth in the Greater Yellowstone Region. Human Ecology Review 7(2): 30-40 Rasker, R., B. Alexander, J. van den Noort, and R. Carter. 2004. Public Lands Conservation and Economic Well-Being. The Sonoran Institute, Tucson, AZ. Rudzitis, G. 1999. Amenities Increasingly Draw People to the Rural West. Rural Development Perspectives 14(3): 9-13. Rudzitis, G., and H.E. Johansen. 1989. Amenities, Migration, and Nonmetropolitan Regional Development. Report to National Science Foundation. Department of Geography, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID. Rudzitis, G. and R. Johnson. 2000. The Impact of Wilderness and Other Wildlands on Local Economies and Regional Development Trends. In McCool, S.F., D.N. Cole, W.T. Borrie,

and J. O'Loughlin, comps. Wilderness Science in a Time of Change Conference, Volume 2: Wilderness within the Context of Larger Systems, 1999 May 23-27. Missoula, MT. Proceedings RMRS-P-15-VOL 2., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. Shields, D.J., I.M. Martin, W.E. Martin, and M.A. Haefele. 2002. Survey results for the American publics values, objectives, beliefs, and attitudes regarding forests and grasslands: A technical document supporting the 2000 USDA Forest Service RPA Assessment Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-95. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 111 p. Shumway, J.M. and S.M. Otterstrom. 2001. Spatial Patterns of Migration and Income Change in the Mountain West: the Dominance of Service-Based, Amenity-Rich Counties. Professional Geographer 53(4): 492-501. Smith, Edward J. 1986. Boom and bust in energy extraction. Agriculture and Rural Economics Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. Staff Report No. AGES860423. Snepenger, D.J., J.D. Johnson, and R. Rasker. 1995. Travel-Stimulated Entrepreneurial Migration. Journal of Travel Research 34(1): 40-44 Sonoran Institute. 2007. Creating a civilization to match the scenery in western North America. Westword, 7(1):1, The Sonoran Institute, Tucson, AZ. Stynes, D.J. and E. White. 2005. Spending Profiles of National Forest Visitors, NVUM Four Year Report to USDA Forest Service. East Lansing MI: Michigan State University Thompson, E., G. Hammond, and S. Weiler. 2006. Amenities, Local Conditions, and Fiscal Determinants of Factor Growth in Rural America. RWP 06-08, Research Working Papers, The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Economic Research Department. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2004. National Visitor Use Monitoring Program, National Project Results, January 2000 through September 2003. Available from: http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/nvum/national_report_final_draft.pdf U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau. 2011. Largest Census-to-Census Population in US History As Every State Gains, Census Bureau Reports (press release, April 2, 2001). Available at: http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/apportionment-poptext.php (accessed May 2, 2012) U.S. Department of Commerce. Census Bureau. 2012. American Community Survey 2010. Accessed from American FactFinder, http://factfinder2.census.gov (Accessed May, 2012). U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. 2007. 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and WildlifeAssociated Recreation: State Overview. Available from: http://federalasst.fws.gov/surveys/surveys.html Vias, A. 1999. Jobs Follow People in the Rural Rocky Mountain West. Rural Development Perspectives Vol. 14 (2): 14-23. Wagner, J. E. 2000. Regional Economic Diversity: Action, Concept, or State of Confusion. Journal of Region Analysis and Policy 30(2):1-22. Wagner, J.E. 1998. Measuring the Effects of Economic Diversity on Growth and Stability. Land Economics 74(4): 541-56. Weiler, S. 2004. Racing Toward New Frontiers: Helping Regions Compete in the Global Marketplace. The Main Street Economist, March 2004. Center for the Study of Rural America, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Kansas City, MO.

Whitelaw, E., and E.G. Niemi. 1989. Migration, Economic Growth, and the Quality of Life. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Pacific Northwest Regional Economic Conference, Corvallis, OR, pp 36-38. Whitelaw, E., and 99 others. 2003.A letter from economists to President Bush and the governors of eleven western states regarding the economic importance of the West's natural environment.