a study of the economic impacts

Transcription

A STUDY OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS
of Oregon Inlet Navigability to Dare County, the
Surrounding Region, and the state of North Carolina
FINAL REPORT | May 2014
Photo Credits: NC Department of Commerce & Outerbanks.com
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
STUDY OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF OREGON INLET NAVIGABILITY TO DARE COUNTY,
THE SURROUNDING REGION, AND THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
FINAL REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The objective of this study was to examine the economic impacts of Oregon Inlet navigability to
Dare County, the surrounding region (Dare, Currituck, Camden, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrell,
and Hyde counties), and the state of North Carolina. The study was completed by Moffatt &
Nichol who was responsible for overall project management, interview/questionnaire
coordination, and compilation of the final report. Moffatt & Nichol was supported by Dr. Chris
Dumas (UNCW), Dr. John Whitehead (Appalachian State), and Dr. Craig Landry (ECU) who
completed all the economic impact analysis. This study involved a significant literature review
and data collection effort, on-site and telephone interviews with individuals knowledgeable of
inlet usage and related economic impacts, and detailed economic modeling and analyses.
Various economic sectors were considered in the economic analyses including:








Commercial Fishing
Seafood Packing/Processing
Boat Building and Support Services
Recreational Fishing (Charter and Private) and Tourism
Tournament Fishing
Offshore Drilling
Offshore Wind Energy
Soundside Flooding
For each economic sector listed above (except soundside flooding), several measures of
economic impacts were calculated:





Employment
Economic output / business activity
Wages/salaries/sole proprietor income/partnership income
Dividend, rent, and interest income
Government tax revenues
For each of the economic impact measures listed above, impacts are sub-divided into several
sub-categories:




Direct Impacts (the direct impacts of the activity itself) – listed in report tables
Indirect Impacts (the impacts associated with business activities supporting the direct
activity) – not listed in report tables
Induced Impacts (impacts associated with additional household spending by employees
and business owners who receive additional wages and profits due to the direct and
indirect impacts) - not listed in report tables
Total Impacts (the total of the direct, indirect, and induced impacts) - listed in report
tables
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
Together, the indirect and induced impacts are known as ―economic multiplier effects‖.
Multiplier effects track the ―trickle down‖ effect of direct impact activities in the regional
economy. These economic impacts were calculated using the widely accepted IMPLAN model
utilizing results from the field interviews and published data.
To avoid potential confusion about the report analysis and findings it is prudent to discuss the
difference between economic impacts versus economic benefits. The term ―economic impacts‖
refers to changes in economic activity in a specified geographic area. For example, if a change in
the economy causes sales to increase by $100 in Dare County, that is an economic impact.
However, the increase in sales does not measure the net gain to the economy. All relevant costs
must be subtracted from the sales before we arrive at the net gain. The term ―economic benefit‖
refers to net economic gains. Economic benefits can be measured using the concepts of
consumer surplus and producer surplus; however, such measurements involve a more detailed
analysis and require more data. As is typical for regional economic studies, this report presents
primarily economic impacts, not economic benefits.
Economic impacts can be positive or negative. For example, an increase in sales is a positive
economic impact, and a decrease in sales is a negative economic impact. Economic impacts that
are positive at one geographic scale (e.g., at the county level) may be cancelled out by negative
economic impacts at larger geographic scales. For example, if sales were to increase by $100 in
Dare County and to decrease by $100 in Carteret County, then there is a positive economic
impact in Dare County and a negative economic impact in Carteret County. However, at the
state level, the two impacts would cancel out, leaving a net economic impact of zero at the state
level. Similarly, for employment, if Dare County gains 100 jobs and Carteret County loses 100
jobs, there is a positive economic impact in Dare and an negative economic impact in Carteret,
but no net economic impact in jobs at the state level. Similarly, but at an even larger geographic
scale, if sales were to increase by $100 in North Carolina and to decrease by $100 in Virginia,
there is a positive economic impact in NC and a negative economic impact in VA, but no net
economic impact at the national level. Economic impacts are reported at three geographic
scales—county, region, and state—in this report to capture any ―cancelling out‖ of economic
impacts that occur at the county and regional levels.
All of the economic measures mentioned were calculated for three different inlet condition
scenarios (for the five main study sectors of commercial fishing, seafood packing & processing,
boat building & support services, recreational fishing & tourism, and tournament fishing) as
decided on by the project team members and the Dare County stakeholders based on historical
USACE survey data of the inlet:
(1) Recent Conditions – assumes a depth of 6 feet or greater in the navigation channel
only 40% of the time (based on an average over the last 3 years)
(2) Fully Open – assumes a depth of 14 feet or greater 85-100% of the time (14 feet is the
current federally authorized depth for the navigation channel)
(3) Essentially Closed – assumes a depth of 6 feet or greater only 5% of the time.
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
Economic measures for offshore drilling and offshore wind were only calculated for fully open
conditions since uncertain recent conditions or essentially closed conditions would preclude any
offshore energy development from using Oregon Inlet.
The reason for these separate analysis is that it is important to not only note the current economic
impact that Oregon Inlet brings to Dare County, the surrounding region (Dare, Currituck,
Camden, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrell, and Hyde counties), and the state of North Carolina
but also the potential economic impact it could bring if the inlet were to be fully maintained to its
authorized depth or the potential economic impact that could be lost if the channel were not
maintained.
Commercial Fishing
Oregon Inlet is considered one of the most commercially vital inlets along coastal North Carolina
with fishermen from the communities of Wanchese, Manteo, Manns Harbor, and Stumpy Point
in Dare County and communities in other coastal counties (e.g. Hyde, Pamlico) using the inlet.
The commercial fishing industry has seen a decline in the region over the past 30-40 years due to
several factors, which includes the declining condition of Oregon Inlet. It was noted that in the
1960s there were approximately 40-50 different commercial seafood businesses in Dare County.
However, presently there are approximately only 15-20 in Dare County. Of these businesses,
most landings are handled by the 4-5 largest dealers.
Present day commercial boats are significantly larger than those used historically. Due to
shallow and dangerous inlet conditions, fewer fishermen choose to operate through Oregon Inlet.
Potential trips are frequently lost or shortened due to dangerous inlet conditions, resulting in
reduced catch. It is important to also note that current Oregon Inlet conditions have caused many
smaller commercial drop net boats drafting 4-6 ft to use unmarked and unlighted narrow spans
bordered by concrete pillars, outside of the navigation span at the Bonner Bridge, in order to
traverse Oregon Inlet. This represents a major safety concern and exposes these users and their
equipment to extreme risk levels. Also, shallow draft conditions force commercial boats to
lighten tonnage so that they might be able to pass through the inlet with less chance of grounding
the boat or hitting the bridge. The few remaining commercial fishing boats that are now based
out of Oregon Inlet must sometimes offload their landings in Virginia due to current inlet
conditions and safety concerns of traveling the inlet under loaded conditions. If the navigability
of Oregon Inlet is not maintained, the field interview results indicate that the remaining few
commercial fishing vessels would choose to remain in the fishing business but would relocate
their fishing operations to other ports, most likely located in southern North Carolina or Virginia.
Recent Conditions
Oregon Inlet dependent commercial fishing currently provides a total annual economic impact of
604 jobs and $25.0 million to Dare County, 640 jobs and $26.2 million to the surrounding
region (including Dare County), and 748 jobs and $45.7 million to the state of North Carolina
(including Dare County and the surrounding region).
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
Fully Open Conditions
Oregon Inlet dependent commercial fishing could potentially provide a total annual economic
impact of 1,243 jobs and $67.0 million to Dare County, 1,323 jobs and $69.8 million to the
surrounding region (including Dare County), and 947 jobs and $58.0 million to the state of
North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be fully
open. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic
impact could reach up to $79.7 million in Dare County, $83.1 million in the surrounding region
(including Dare County), and $69.0 million in state of North Carolina (including Dare County
and the surrounding region).
Essentially Closed Conditions
Oregon Inlet dependent commercial fishing may only provide a total annual economic impact of
88 jobs and $5.1 million to Dare County, 94 jobs and $5.3 million to the surrounding region
(including Dare County), and 252 jobs and $15.4 million to the state of North Carolina
(including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be essentially closed.
Comparison to 2006 Study Results
The value of landings varies from year to year, depending upon inlet conditions, economic
conditions (including fish prices, and fuel prices, which effect landings by affecting the number
of trips taken), the availability of imported seafood products, natural fish abundance in the sea,
and fishing regulations. The value of ocean commercial fishery landings used in the 2006 report
was $12.5 million, based on data from 1994 to 2005 (Due to an oversight, this number was
incorrectly reported in the 2006 report which solely stated the impact of captain and crew labor
income, excluding the impacts of goods and services purchased by the industry which should
have been incorporated.). The value of Oregon Inlet-dependent landings used in the present
(2014) study for the "Recent Inlet Conditions" scenario (years 2011-2013) is $10.5 million.
Seafood Packing and Processing
A number of support businesses have located in Dare County to service and supply the
commercial fishing vessels. Once fish are landed, seafood packing and processing businesses
prepare the catch for market. In fact, several commercial fishermen also have packing and
processing operations within their businesses. All of these activities generate jobs, wages, and
profits for local workers and business owners, as well as tax revenues to support local
government services. Again, a recent trend is showing that some local businesses have also
begun packing and processing businesses in Virginia so that the loaded vessels are not dependent
on Oregon Inlet conditions. It is assumed that if Oregon Inlet is closed, Oregon Inlet dependent
fishery landings would be lost.
Recent Conditions
Oregon Inlet dependent seafood packing and processing currently provides a total annual
economic impact of 149 jobs and $31.6 million to Dare County, 176 jobs and $35.2 million to
the surrounding region (including Dare County), and 223 jobs and $42.7 million to the state of
North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) through Oregon Inlet
dependent landings.
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
Oregon Inlet dependent seafood packing and processing could potentially provide a total annual
economic impact of 526 jobs and $112 million to Dare County, 624 jobs and $124.7 million to
dependent landings if the inlet were to be fully open. If economic conditions improved to levels
seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic impact could reach up to $129.1 million in Dare
County, $143.8 million in the surrounding region (including Dare County), and $96.6 million in
state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).
Oregon Inlet dependent seafood packing and processing may only provide a total annual
economic impact of 43 jobs and $9.0 million to Dare County, 50 jobs and $10.1 million to the
surrounding region (including Dare County), and 143 jobs and $27.4 million to the state of
dependent landings if the inlet were to be essentially closed.
The value of Oregon Inlet-dependent seafood processing and packing depends on the level of
Oregon Inlet-dependent commercial fishery landings. For example, the direct impacts of
seafood processing and packing in the 2006 report were $25,000,000, based on commercial
fishery landings of $12,500,000. In 2014, the direct impacts of seafood processing and packing
were $21,678,000, based on commercial fishery landings of $10,500,000. The number of jobs
supported per dollar of sales by the Seafood Processing and Packing industry in 2014 is lower
than the number of jobs supported per dollar of sales in 2006 possibly due to improvements in
production efficiency, increases in sales dollars received per pound of seafood processed, or
change in the mix of workers from a large number of part time workers to fewer full time
workers.
The boat building business has a significant impact on the Dare County economy. The 15 boat
builders located in Dare County represent a substantial portion of the 47 manufacturing
businesses in the county (NCDC, 2014), directly employing 274 workers in 2012, who earned
$10.6 million in wages. Boat building accounted for approximately 274 of the 480
manufacturing jobs in Dare county in 2013 (NC-EDIS, 2014). Boat building jobs are relatively
high-paying, with an average weekly wage of $744 in 2012, compared to the county average weekly
wage for private industry of $517 (NC-EDIS 2014, NCDC 2014).
This region boasts the birthplace of ―Carolina Style‖ boat building, a style which originated to
withstand the incomparable Oregon Inlet waters and rough seas offshore of Bodie and Pea
Islands. Local boat builders are directly dependent on Oregon Inlet, as the valuable reputation of
the boats for strength and durability is maintained by continuous research and testing in the
uniquely rough waters offshore. Based on the field interviews, if Oregon Inlet were to close,
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
these businesses would close as well or relocate to places like South Carolina, Florida, and
Mexico.
Recent Conditions
Oregon Inlet dependent boat building and support services currently provide a total annual
North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).
Oregon Inlet dependent boat building and support services could potentially provide a total
annual economic impact of 887 jobs and $157.6 million to Dare County, 979 jobs and $166.1
million to the surrounding region (including Dare County), and 1,048 jobs and $179.7 million to
the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were
to be fully open. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual
economic impact could reach up to $198.7 million in Dare County, $209.3 million in the
surrounding region (including Dare County), and $226.5 million in state of North Carolina
Oregon Inlet dependent boat building and support services may only provide a total annual
North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be
essentially closed.
In the 2006 study, we assumed $75 million in Dare county boat builder sales under baseline
(2004-2005) inlet conditions. In 2014, Dare county boat builder sales are depressed for two
reasons: a bad economy in recent years (2011-2013) relative to 2004-2005, and bad inlet
conditions in recent years (2011-2013). The value of Dare county boat builder sales under
baseline (recent inlet) conditions used in the 2014 study is $59.5 million.
Recreational Fishing and Tourism
The area offshore of the northern Outer Banks is considered one of the prime sportfishing
regions along the East Coast due to its close proximity to the Gulf Stream and extended seasons
of abundant fishing opportunities (e.g. marlin, tuna). The recreational sport fishery is vast and
varied, including large ―headboat‖ recreational fishing vessels, smaller ―for-hire‖ charter fishing
vessels, and private fishing boats.
A significant number of jobs in the tourism industry are related to sport fishing, which is
dependent on the inlet for access to the ocean fishing grounds which contain the fish species
prized by sport fishermen.
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
Recent Conditions
Oregon Inlet dependent recreational fishing and tourism currently provide a total annual
economic impact of 1,997 jobs and $247.7 million to Dare County, 2,157 jobs and $257.5
the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).
Oregon Inlet dependent recreational fishing and tourism could potentially provide a total annual
economic impact of 2,397 jobs and $297.2 million to Dare County, 2,588 jobs and $309.0
the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were
to be fully open. In addition to these impacts, a fully open inlet would support an additional $1.3
million in consumer surplus per year. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 20052006, the total annual economic impact could reach up to $520.6 million in Dare County, $541.2
million in the surrounding region (including Dare County), and $635.5 million in state of North
Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).
Oregon Inlet dependent recreational fishing and tourism may only provide a total annual
the surrounding region (including Dare County), and 1,550 jobs and $197.8 million to the state
of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be
essentially closed. In addition to these impacts, an essentially closed inlet would produce a loss
of $25.7 million in consumer surplus per year.
In the 2006 study, we assumed 35,739 charter trips per year and 539,890 private boat trips per
year. In the 2014 study, we assume 93,000 charter trips per year (more than the 2006 study) and
169,000 private trips per year (less than the 2006 study). The difference in trip numbers is a
result of a change in boating trends from 2006 to 2014 as well as a change in the NMFS data
weighting scheme to convert its survey sample data to estimates of total trips. The expenditures
per charter trip are higher for restaurants, groceries and boat fuel in 2014, compared to 2006.
Expenditures per private boat trip are smaller for auto gasoline, restaurants and groceries, but
larger for boat fuel, in 2014, compared to 2006. Other expenditures per trip are similar between
2006 and 2014, for both charter and private boat trips.
Tournament Fishing
In addition to general recreational fishing, sportfishing tournaments are important to the Oregon
Inlet region. The Outer Banks is called "The Billfish Capital of the World," and for good reason.
Hundreds of blue marlin, white marlin and sailfish are caught and released in our waters every
year. The billfish season is long, with the peak for blue marlin in June and white marlin and
sailfish most plentiful in August and September. All are caught consistently from late spring to
early fall. Another big draw are yellowfin tuna, which are caught year-round. (Source:
https://www.outerbanks.org/outerbanks-fishing/). Approximately 5 known tournaments take
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
place annually in the County originating mainly at Pirates Cove marina, in Manteo (down from 9
in 2006). In summary, more than 173 boats annually are expected to participate in sportfishing
tournaments dependent on passage through Oregon Inlet. These tournaments draw significant
economic impacts to the County ranging from expenditures on fishing gear, lodging, food, retail
to custom boat sales, marine maintenance, and/or boat storage. These recreational fishing
activities generate additional economic impacts for the region, in particular for the tourism
industry.
Recent Conditions
Oregon Inlet dependent tournament fishing currently provides a total annual economic impact of
36 jobs and $4.6 million to Dare County, 41 jobs and $4.8 million to the surrounding region
(including Dare County), and 60 jobs and $7.0 million to the state of North Carolina (including
Dare County and the surrounding region).
Oregon Inlet dependent tournament fishing could potentially provide a total annual economic
impact of 67 jobs and $8.4 million to Dare County, 76 jobs and $8.9 million to the surrounding
region (including Dare County), and 76 jobs and $8.8 million to the state of North Carolina
(including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be fully open. If
economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic impact
could reach up to $24.6 million in Dare County, $25.8 million in the surrounding region
(including Dare County), and $25.5 million in state of North Carolina (including Dare County
and the surrounding region).
Oregon Inlet dependent tournament fishing may only provide a total annual economic impact of
1 job and $85.3 thousand to Dare County, 1 job and $89.7 thousand to the surrounding region
(including Dare County), and 42 jobs and $4.9 million to the state of North Carolina (including
Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be essentially closed.
The 2006 study listed 9 fishing tournaments in Dare County. The tournaments considered in the
2006 study supported a total of 970 boat-days and $14.4 million in direct impacts for
sales/output within Dare County. The 2014 study is based on the 4 tournaments from the 2006
study that have a solid track record of occurring over multiple years plus an additional
tournament that is statewide but that includes participants who use Oregon Inlet, for a total of 5
tournaments. The 5 tournaments considered in the 2014 study supported a total of 333 boatdays under fully open inlet conditions and $5.2 million in direct impacts for sales/output within
Dare County.
Offshore Drilling
Although there are currently no active leases in the Mid-Atlantic Region of the OCS, oil or
natural gas drilling might occur in the future. An estimated 0.95 billion barrels of oil and 9.72
trillion cubic feet of natural gas may be economically recoverable in the Mid-Atlantic Region.
The location of Oregon Inlet could potentially lend itself to be useful should offshore drilling be
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
developed in the future. While the shallow draft navigation channel limits the types and sizes of
ocean vessels that can safely traverse the inlet, it could be useful for crew and maintenance boats
which need to travel back and forth between land and ocean facilities. Based on conversations
with industry experts, the authorized depth of the channel would have to be significantly
deepened to allow construction equipment and supply vessels. However, operation and
maintenance of these facilities would be expected to increase employment, economic output /
business activity, and government revenues collected in Dare County and perhaps nearby
counties hosting commuting employees.
Offshore drilling could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 3,983 jobs and
$203.0 million to Dare County, 4,102 jobs and $210.2 million to the surrounding region
(including Dare County), and 4,990 jobs and $348.7 million to the state of North Carolina
(including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were fully navigable. Impacts
were only calculated for a fully open scenario since the recent conditions of Oregon Inlet or an
essentially closed inlet would preclude any use of the inlet for offshore drilling purposes. Please
note that these impact estimates are based on limited data and are highly speculative.
A study by the University of North Carolina (2009) finds that there is sufficient potential for
offshore wind development in Federal waters off the coast of North Carolina. Examining wind
potential, engineering and economic feasibility, as well as social, political, and environmental
constraints, the study concludes that there are 190 BOEM lease blocks with wind power capacity
in excess of 35%. Focusing on waters less than 50 m deep and within 50 miles of the coastline,
there are more than 2800 square miles of potential development area off the North Carolina
coast, a significant proportion of which is located adjacent to Dare and Currituck Counties.
In the wake of a series of North Carolina Department of Commerce stakeholder meetings in
August 2010, five renewable energy firms expressed interest in obtaining commercial leases for
wind energy projects (BOEM, 2013d). There is considerable interest in areas of the coast of
Dare County, North Carolina (BOEM, 2013d). The location of Oregon Inlet could potentially
lend itself to be useful should offshore wind energy be developed in the future given the high
wind capacity potential offshore of the inlet. While the shallow draft navigation channel limits
the types and sizes of ocean vessels that can safely traverse the inlet, it could be useful for crew
and maintenance boats which need to travel back and forth between land and ocean facilities.
Operation and maintenance would be expected to increase employment, economic output /
business activity, and government revenues collected in Dare County and perhaps nearby
counties hosting commuting employees.
Offshore wind could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 295 jobs and $15.0
million to Dare County, 303 jobs and $15.5 million to the surrounding region (including Dare
County), and 369 jobs and $25.8 million to the state of North Carolina (including Dare County
and the surrounding region) if the inlet were fully navigable. Impacts were only calculated for a
fully open scenario since the recent conditions of Oregon Inlet or an essentially closed inlet
would preclude any use of the inlet for offshore wind development purposes. Please note that
these impact estimates are based on limited data and are highly speculative.
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
Soundside Flooding
In recent years there have been some anecdotal observations of elevated water levels of 6 – 10
inches within the sounds behind Oregon Inlet. One theory as to the cause of the elevated water
levels is that Oregon Inlet shoaling is not allowing adequate water exchange, especially on
falling tides. It is posited that water has not been able to flush out of the inlet in a timely manner,
leaving the soundside coastline of portions of the Outer Banks and mainland Dare and other
Counties susceptible to flooding, affecting waterfront property containing residential homes and
commercial (agricultural) property.
Based on NOAA measurements at Oregon Inlet Marina, it appears that water levels at this station
(on the soundside of Oregon Inlet) have seen an average increase in water levels since 2010 of
approximately 0.075 m (~3 inches). This period of elevated water levels is similar to one that
occurred in the late 1990s. In both cases, USACE records indicate reduced dredging during
these time periods as compared to the time period in between which showed increased dredging
and lower water levels. It is possible that these increased water levels may be a result of a
combination of reduced dredging and other meteorological forcing functions.
Based on previous studies by Bin et al. 2007, a fully navigable inlet could save between $55.5
million and $106 million of lost property value in Dare and Bertie Counties (only ones studied)
due to elevated water levels between 3 in and 10 in, respectively.
Overall Summary of Economic Impacts
The economic impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare County is very significant and far outweighs the
costs necessary to keep the inlet passable through dredging. In fact, the annual economic impact
to the Federal Government alone greatly exceeds the recent and historical annual expenditures
for dredging. The following tables show the overall total annual economic impact of Oregon
Inlet to Dare County, the surrounding region (Dare, Currituck, Camden, Pasquotank,
Perquimans, Tyrell, and Hyde counties), and the state of North Carolina, given the three different
inlet condition scenarios and five main study sectors (commercial fishing, seafood packing &
processing, boat building & support services, recreational fishing & tourism, and tournament
fishing).
Impact Type
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Recent Conditions Scenario Summary
Wage, Salary,
Sales
and Sole
Employment
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
$236,921,456
1,826
$65,397,435
$403,490,444
3,319
$120,680,591
$236,921,456
1,877
$65,464,102
$423,321,308
3,601
$128,623,027
$237,094,330
1,949
$65,068,455
$548,412,578
4,348
$178,077,340
*Dollar Values Are Real (Inflation Adjuested) to Year 2012 Dollar Equivalents
May 2014
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$28,829,456
$81,874,461
$28,349,810
$87,147,691
$28,679,967
$109,174,056
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$16,510,699
----$18,869,801
----$23,243,574
----$22,235,073
----$23,940,286
----$33,723,522
FINAL REPORT
Impact Type
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Fully Open Scenario Summary
Wage, Salary,
Sales
and Sole
Employment
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
$389,230,080
2,879
$93,925,951
$642,176,331
5,120
$177,848,044
$389,230,080
2,952
$96,056,812
$678,444,866
5,590
$193,425,775
$308,143,490
2,385
$79,096,948
$693,048,179
5,397
$221,611,915
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$41,590,156
$122,125,581
$40,318,466
$130,972,130
$34,992,516
$136,249,886
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$24,550,271
----$28,346,500
----$28,983,477
----$33,215,776
----$36,435,323
----$42,194,327
*The impacts in the above table reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total
annual economic impact could reach up to $952.7 million in Dare County, $1.0 billion in the surrounding region (including Dare County), and
$1.1 billion in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) for fully open inlet conditions. However, it is also
possible that these projections could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest rates, higher
unemployment, etc.
Impact Type
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Essentially Closed Scenario Summary
Wage, Salary,
Sales
and Sole
Employment
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
$55,392,213
367
$12,162,678
$89,251,037
670
$23,452,069
$55,392,213
377
$12,218,813
$93,698,385
731
$25,237,241
$135,851,370
991
$33,629,789
$294,635,106
2,273
$93,391,284
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$6,175,712
$16,922,579
$6,106,514
$18,122,705
$15,838,904
$58,363,002
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$3,430,440
----$3,934,663
----$12,588,360
----$4,607,262
----$4,992,868
----$17,925,814
The following tables show both the potential additional annual economic impacts that may be
realized if the inlet were maintained to fully open conditions and the potential annual economic
impacts that may be lost if the inlet were not maintained and became essentially closed for the
five main study sectors. The comparison, in both cases, was made to the recent conditions
scenario.
Impact Type
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Potential Gained Impacts - Fully Open Scenario Compared to Recent Conditions Scenario
Wage, Salary,
Dividend,
Sales
and Sole
Rent, and
State and
Locale
Employment
(Output)
Proprietorship
Interest
Local Taxes
Income
Income
$152,308,624
1,053
$28,528,516
$12,760,700
----Dare County
$238,685,887
1,802
$57,167,453
$40,251,120
$8,039,572
Region
$152,308,624
1,075
$30,592,710
$11,968,656
----(Incl. Dare Co.)
$255,123,558
1,989
$64,802,748
$43,824,439
$9,476,699
State of NC
$71,049,160
436
$14,028,493
$6,312,549
$144,635,601
1,050
$43,534,575
$27,075,830
$5,739,903
Federal
Taxes
----$10,980,703
----$12,495,037
----$8,470,805
*The impacts in the above table reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the potential
additional annual economic impacts that may be realized could reach up to $549.2 million in Dare County, $580.0 million in the surrounding
region (including Dare County), and $504.8 million in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) for fully
open inlet conditions. However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices,
higher interest rates, higher unemployment, etc.
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
Impact Type
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Potential Lost Impacts - Essentially Closed Scenario Compared to Recent Conditions Scenario
Wage, Salary,
Dividend,
Sales
and Sole
Rent, and
State and
Locale
Employment
(Output)
Proprietorship
Interest
Local Taxes
Income
Income
-$181,529,243
-1,459
-$53,234,757
-$22,653,744
----Dare County
-$314,239,407
-2,648
-$97,228,522
-$64,951,882
-$13,080,259
Region
-$181,529,243
-1,501
-$53,245,289
-$22,243,296
-$329,622,923
-2,870
-$103,385,786
-$69,024,986
-$14,935,138
State of NC
-$101,242,960
-958
-$31,438,666
-$12,841,063
-$253,777,472
-2,075
-$84,686,056
-$50,811,054
-$10,655,214
Federal
Taxes
-----$17,627,811
-----$18,947,418
-----$15,797,708
The five main study sectors currently provide a total annual economic impact of 3,319 jobs
and $403.5 million to Dare County, 3,601 jobs and $423.3 million to the surrounding region
They could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 5,120 jobs and $642.2
million to Dare County, 5,590 jobs and $678.4 million to the surrounding region (including
Dare County), and 5,397 jobs and $693.0 million to the state of North Carolina (including
Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be fully open. If economic
conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic impact could
reach up to $952.7 million in Dare County, $1.0 billion in the surrounding region (including
Dare County), and $1.1 billion in state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the
surrounding region) for fully open conditions. Local interests feel that the impacts may be
even higher (over and above what could be modeled/justified with historical conditions)
once industries understand that Oregon Inlet will be fully open and maintained and its
reputation of uncertainty is changed. However, it is also possible that these projections
could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest rates,
higher unemployment, etc.
Conversely the economic sectors may only provide a total annual economic impact of 670
jobs and $89.3 million to Dare County, 731 jobs and $93.7 million to the surrounding
region (including Dare County), and 2,273 jobs and $294.6 million to the state of North
Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be
essentially closed.
In addition to these sectors, the inlet could be a valuable resource to the offshore energy
industry (wind and drilling) if it were fully navigable. Offshore drilling could potentially
provide a total annual economic impact of 3,983 jobs and $203.0 million to Dare County,
4,102 jobs and $210.2 million to the surrounding region (including Dare County), and 4,990
jobs and $348.7 million to the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the
surrounding region) if the inlet were fully navigable. However, please note that the impact
estimates for this sector are based on limited data and are highly speculative.
Offshore wind could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 295 jobs and
$15.0 million to Dare County, 303 jobs and $15.5 million to the surrounding region
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
(including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were fully navigable.
However, please note that the impact estimates for this sector are based on limited data and
are highly speculative.
Based on previous studies, a fully navigable inlet could save between $55.5 million and $106
million of lost property value in Dare and Bertie Counties (only ones studied) due to
elevated water levels between 3 in and 10 in, respectively.
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
II.
III.
INTRODUCTION & STUDY OVERVIEW...................................................................... 1
A.
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
B.
STUDY AREA & ECONOMIC SETTING ........................................................... 1
C.
STUDY OBJECTIVE ............................................................................................. 3
STUDY METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 5
A.
DATA COLLECTION & LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................. 5
B.
FIELD SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS .................................................................... 5
C.
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS METHODS .................................................................. 6
PREVIOUS ECONOMIC STUDIES ............................................................................... 11
A.
PREVIOUS STUDIES RELATED TO OREGON INLET .................................. 11
1.
USACE Studies......................................................................................... 11
2.
Dare County Economic Commission (1985) ............................................ 11
3.
The Horizon Planning Group (1995) ........................................................ 11
4.
Moffatt & Nichol and Dr. Chris Dumas, Dr. John Whitehead, and Dr.
Woody Hall (2006) ............................................................................................... 12
B.
C.
D.
IV.
OTHER/REGIONAL ECONOMIC STUDIES .................................................... 12
1.
Economic Study of Wanchese Seafood Industrial Park (2005) ................ 12
2.
Economic Study of Wanchese Seafood Industrial Park (2011) ................ 13
3.
Economic Study of Pirate‘s Cove Big Game Tournaments (1999) .......... 13
4.
Economic Study of Offshore Recreational Fishing Region (2002) .......... 14
5.
North Carolina Sea Grant Study (2009).................................................... 14
TOURISM STUDIES ........................................................................................... 15
1.
Outer Banks Visitors Bureau ―Wave‖ Studies (2006) .............................. 15
2.
Dare County Transient Boating Study (1995) .......................................... 16
SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 16
COMMERICIAL FISHING ............................................................................................. 17
A.
COMMERCIAL FISHING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS .................................. 17
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – COMMERCIAL FISHING............. 18
1.
May 2014
IMPLAN Modeling Analysis .................................................................... 24
i
FINAL REPORT
V.
a)
Dare County Economic Impacts ................................................... 24
b)
Regional Economic Impacts ......................................................... 27
c)
Statewide Economic Impacts ........................................................ 29
2.
Economic Impacts Summary .................................................................... 34
3.
Comparison to 2006 Economic Study (M&N, 2006) ............................... 37
SEAFOOD PACKING & PROCESSING ........................................................................ 39
A.
SEAFOOD PACKING AND PROCESSING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS ..... 39
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – SEAFOOD PACKING &
PROCESSING .................................................................................................................. 39
1.
VI.
a)
b)
c)
2.
3.
BOAT BUILDING & SUPPORT SERVICES ................................................................. 57
A.
BOAT BUILDING AND SUPPORT SERVICE SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS . 57
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – BOAT BUILDING & SUPPORT
SERVICES ........................................................................................................................ 58
1.
VII.
a)
b)
c)
2.
3.
RECREATIONAL FISHING & TOURISM .................................................................... 73
A.
RECREATIONAL FISHING AND TOURISM SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS .. 73
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – RECREATIONAL FISHING &
TOURISM......................................................................................................................... 74
1.
May 2014
a)
b)
ii
FINAL REPORT
c)
VIII.
2.
3.
Consumer Surplus ..................................................................................... 89
4.
TOURNAMENT FISHING .............................................................................................. 93
A.
TOURNAMENT FISHING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS ................................. 93
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – TOURNAMENT FISHING ............ 93
1.
IX.
IMPLAN Model Analysis ......................................................................... 98
a)
b)
Regional Economic Impacts ....................................................... 101
c)
Statewide Economic Impacts ...................................................... 104
2.
Economic Impacts Summary .................................................................. 107
3.
Comparison to 2006 Economic Study (M&N, 2006) ............................. 110
OFFSHORE DRILLING ................................................................................................ 113
A.
OFFSHORE DRILLING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS ................................... 114
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – OFFSHORE DRILLING .............. 115
1.
IMPLAN Modeling Analysis .................................................................. 117
a)
Dare County Economic Impacts - Oregon Inlet Fully Open
Conditions ............................................................................................... 118
X.
b)
Regional Economic Impacts - Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
…………………………………………………………………..118
c)
Statewide Economic Impacts - Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
…………………………………………………………………..119
OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY ....................................................................................... 121
A.
OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS .......................... 122
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY ..... 123
1.
IMPLAN Modeling Analysis .................................................................. 125
a)
Dare County Economic Impacts – Oregon Inlet Fully Open
Conditions ............................................................................................... 125
b)
May 2014
Regional Economic Impacts – Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
…………………………………………………………………..126
iii
FINAL REPORT
c)
Statewide Economic Impacts – Oregon Inlet Fully Open
Conditions ............................................................................................... 127
XI.
SOUNDSIDE FLOODING ............................................................................................ 129
A.
SOUNDSIDE FLOODING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS ................................ 129
B.
DATA COLLECTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW RESULTS –
SOUNDSIDE FLOODING ............................................................................................ 129
XII.
STUDY FINDINGS........................................................................................................ 135
XIII.
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 147
APPENDIX A
Field Surveys & Interviews
1) Contacts
2) Questionnaires
May 2014
iv
FINAL REPORT
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I-1. Location Map ............................................................................................................... 2
Figure IV-1. Nominal and Real (2010 dollars) Value of North Carolina Commercial Fishery
Landings Dependent on Oregon Inlet, 1994-2012 ............................................................ 21
Figure IX-1. Outer Continental Shelf Regions .......................................................................... 114
Figure X-1. The Estimated Spatial Distribution of Capacity Factor For A Typical 3-3.6 MW
Wind Turbine (UNC, 2009) ............................................................................................ 122
Figure XI-1. Interannual Variation Since 1990 8652587 Oregon Inlet Marina, North Carolina
......................................................................................................................................... 130
Figure XI-2. Location of Counties Analyzed for Property Impacts in Bin et al (2007) ............ 131
Figure XI-3. Example of Data Used in Bin et al. (2007) Property Value Study ....................... 133
May 2014
v
FINAL REPORT
LIST OF TABLES
Table II-1. Field Survey and Interview Summary ......................................................................... 6
Table III-1. 2006 Oregon Inlet Economic Study Summary ......................................................... 12
Table III-2. Statistics from Economic Study of Pirates Cove Big Game Tournaments (Ditton,
2000) ................................................................................................................................. 14
Table III-3. Outer Banks Visitor Profile Findings ........................................................................ 16
Table IV-1. Dare County Commercial Fishery Landings and Dockside (Ex-Vessel) Value, 19942012 (NCDMF, 2013) ....................................................................................................... 18
Table IV-2. Ports with Oregon Inlet-Dependent Landings .......................................................... 19
Table IV-3. Oregon Inlet-Dependent Commercial Fishing Landings and Dockside Value, 19942012 (Bianchi, 2014) ........................................................................................................ 20
Table IV-4. Ocean Fishing Participation by NC Ocean Commercial Fishermen (NCDMF, 2009)
........................................................................................................................................... 22
Table IV-5. Vessel Characteristics for NC Ocean Commercial Fishing Vessels (NCDMF, 2009)
........................................................................................................................................... 23
Table IV-6. Top Target Species of Commercial Fishing Questionnaire Respondents ................ 23
Table IV-7. Most Commonly Caught Fish Species In Ocean North of Cape Hatteras in 2012 (All
Ports) (NCDMF, 2013) ..................................................................................................... 24
Table IV-8. Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery in Dare County, Oregon Inlet
Recent Conditions ............................................................................................................. 25
Fully Open Conditions ...................................................................................................... 26
Essentially Closed Conditions .......................................................................................... 27
Table IV-11. Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery in Oregon Inlet Region, Oregon
Inlet Recent Conditions..................................................................................................... 28
Inlet Fully Open Conditions.............................................................................................. 28
Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions .................................................................................. 29
Table IV-14. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery Using Oregon Inlet,
Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions........................................................................................ 30
Table IV-15. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery Using Oregon Inlet,
Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions................................................................................. 32
May 2014
vi
FINAL REPORT
Table IV-16. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery that Had Been Using
Oregon Inlet, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions ............................................... 34
Table IV-17. Summary of Annual Oregon Inlet-Dependent Commercial Fishing Economic
Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario .......................................................................... 35
Impacts For Fully Open Scenario ..................................................................................... 35
Table IV-19. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from Commercial
Fishing for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario ................................................................. 36
Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario .......................................................................... 36
Table IV-21. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Commercial Fishing
for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario ................................................................... 37
Table V-1. Average Annual Expenditures of North Carolina Seafood Dealers (2009) (NCDMF,
2010) ................................................................................................................................. 40
Table V-2. Seafood Dealers Servicing Oregon Inlet-dependent Commercial Fishing Landings,
1992-2012 ......................................................................................................................... 42
Table V-3. Annual Economic Impacts of Seafood Processing and Packing in Dare County,
Oregon Inlet Recent Condition ......................................................................................... 43
Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions ..................................................................... 45
Table V-6. Annual Economic Impacts of Seafood Processing and Packing in Oregon Inlet
Region, Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions .......................................................................... 46
Region, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions ................................................................... 47
Region, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions ....................................................... 48
Table V-9. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Seafood Processing and Packing, Oregon
Inlet Recent Conditions..................................................................................................... 49
Inlet Fully Open Conditions.............................................................................................. 50
Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions .................................................................................. 51
Table V-12. Summary of Annual Oregon Inlet-Dependent Seafood Packing/Processing
Economic Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario ........................................................ 52
Economic Impacts For Fully Open Scenario .................................................................... 52
May 2014
vii
FINAL REPORT
Table V-14. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from Seafood
Packing/Processing for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario .............................................. 53
Economic Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario ........................................................ 53
Table V-16. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Seafood
Packing/Processing for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario................................... 54
Table VI-1. Boat Builders Located in Oregon Inlet Region, NC, 2014 ...................................... 57
Table VI-2. Annual Economic Impacts of Boat Building in Dare County, Oregon Inlet Recent
Conditions ......................................................................................................................... 60
Table VI-3. Annual Economic Impacts of Boat Building in Dare County, Oregon Inlet Fully
Open Conditions ............................................................................................................... 60
Table VI-4. Annual Economic Impacts of Boat Building in Dare County, Oregon Inlet
Table VI-5. Annual Economic Impacts of Boat Building in Oregon Inlet Region, Oregon Inlet
Table VI-8. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Dare County Boat Building, Oregon Inlet
Table VI-11. Summary of Annual Oregon Inlet-Dependent Boat Building and Support Services
Economic Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario ........................................................ 68
Economic Impacts For Fully Open Scenario .................................................................... 69
Table VI-13. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from Boat Building
and Support Services for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario ........................................... 70
Economic Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario ........................................................ 70
Table VI-15. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Boat Building and
Support Services for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario ....................................... 71
Table VII-1. North Carolina Resident and Non-Resident Fishing Trips (Angler Days) ............. 75
May 2014
viii
FINAL REPORT
Table VII-2. North Carolina Expenditures Per Angler, Per Fishing Day, Oregon Inlet Ocean
Fishing Trips, 2012 ........................................................................................................... 77
Table VII-3. Annual Economic Impacts of For-Hire and Private Boat Fishing in Dare County,
Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions........................................................................................ 79
Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions ..................................................................... 80
Table VII-6. Annual Economic Impacts of For-Hire and Private Boat Fishing in Oregon Inlet
Region, Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions .......................................................................... 81
Region, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions ................................................................... 82
Region, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions ....................................................... 83
Table VII-9. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of For-Hire and Private Boat Fishing Using
Oregon Inlet, Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions ................................................................. 84
Oregon Inlet, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions .......................................................... 85
Oregon Inlet, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions ............................................... 86
Table VII-12. Summary of Annual Oregon Inlet-Dependent Recreational Charter Fishing and
Private Boating Economic Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario .............................. 87
Private Boating Economic Impacts For Fully Open Scenario .......................................... 87
Table VII-14. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from Recreational
Fishing and Tourism for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario ............................................ 88
Private Boating Economic Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario .............................. 88
Table VII-16. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Recreational
Fishing and Tourism for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario................................. 89
Table VII-17. Nested RUM Fishing Trip Demand Model .......................................................... 91
Table VIII-1. Annual Fishing Tournaments Dependent on Oregon Inlet .................................... 95
Table VIII-2. Dare County Tournament Fishing Fees and Expenditures, Recent Oregon Inlet
Conditions ......................................................................................................................... 96
Table VIII-3. Annual Economic Impacts of Tournament Fishing in Dare County, Oregon Inlet
May 2014
ix
FINAL REPORT
Fully Open Conditions .................................................................................................... 100
Essentially Closed Conditions ........................................................................................ 101
Table VIII-6. Annual Economic Impacts of Tournament Fishing in Oregon Inlet Region, Oregon
Inlet Recent Conditions................................................................................................... 102
Inlet Fully Open Conditions............................................................................................ 103
Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions ................................................................................ 104
Table VIII-9. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Tournament Fishing Using Oregon Inlet,
Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions...................................................................................... 105
Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions............................................................................... 106
Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions ................................................................... 107
Table VIII-12. Summary of Annual Oregon Inlet-Dependent Tournament Fishing Economic
Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario ........................................................................ 108
Impacts For Fully Open Scenario ................................................................................... 108
Table VIII-14. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from Tournament
Fishing for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario ............................................................... 109
Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario ........................................................................ 109
Table VIII-16. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Tournament
Fishing for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario .................................................... 110
Table IX-1. May 2013 National Industry Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates ......................................................................................................................... 116
Table IX-2. Scenarios for Oil & Gas Development in Hatteras Bay ......................................... 117
Table IX-3. Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Oil Development in Dare County Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions .............. 118
Table IX-4. Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Oil Development in Oregon Inlet Region Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions .............. 119
Table IX-5. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Oil Development - Operations and
Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions ....................................... 120
Table X-1. May 2013 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates ......................................................................................................................... 124
May 2014
x
FINAL REPORT
Table X-2. Scenarios for Offshore Wind Development in Hatteras Bay (3.6 MW turbines).... 125
Table X-3. Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Wind Development in Dare County Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions .............. 126
Table X-4. Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Wind Development in the Oregon Inlet
Region - Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions 127
Table X-5. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Wind Development - Operations
and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions................................. 127
Table XI-1. Summary of Sea Level (Water Level) Rise Scenarios ........................................... 131
May 2014
xi
FINAL REPORT
May 2014
xii
FINAL REPORT
I.
INTRODUCTION & STUDY OVERVIEW
A.
INTRODUCTION
This report was prepared for Dare County and details the final results of a study examining
economic impacts of Oregon Inlet to the economy of Dare County, the surrounding region (Dare,
Currituck, Camden, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrell, and Hyde counties), and the state of North
Carolina. This study was commissioned in December 2013, with the expectation that the
economic findings could be used to assist lobbying efforts for inlet dredging on both state and
national levels.
Dredging is vital to the maintenance of transportation routes through state waterways and for
providing safe, reliable access to the Atlantic Ocean along the coast. Without the clearing of
shoals from navigation channels by dredging, mariners would face serious problems in
navigation along the North Carolina coast. Authorized shallow draft navigation channels in
North Carolina include many inlets and inlet crossings (including Oregon Inlet), sound and river
channels, the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), and numerous small harbors. While the
duty and cost of maintaining these shallow draft waterways has traditionally been undertaken by
the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) as part of the maintenance of federal
channels, it is becoming apparent that the funding for such efforts is declining. In fact, in recent
years, initial federal budgets have had little to no funding allotted to shallow draft navigation
projects, including Oregon Inlet.
B.
STUDY AREA & ECONOMIC SETTING
Dare County is located in northeastern North Carolina along the Atlantic seaboard. The County
contains much of North Carolina‘s island ―Outer Banks‖ beach resort and vacation area.
Although the County covers 800 square miles, only 391 square miles is land; the remainder is
bay, waterway and estuary. Of the County‘s 250,200 acres, only a small proportion,
approximately 16,000 acres, located primarily on Bodie Island, Pea Island and Roanoke Island
(situated just behind the Outer Banks islands), are available for development. The County has no
rail service, no interstate highway service, and only a small regional airport providing general
aviation service (the closest airport providing commercial air service is Norfolk (Virginia)
International Airport, approximately 100 miles away). These factors limit the ability of the
region to attract general industry and employers who do not require access to beaches or the
ocean. It is not surprising that coastal recreation and tourism is the leading service industry in
the region, and boat building is the leading manufacturing industry.
Dare County‘s permanent resident population is approximately 33,900. In the summer tourist
season, the population swells to an estimated 225,000 to 300,000. County unemployment is
lower during the summer tourist season but is much higher in the winter season, alternating
between 7.5% in the summer and 20% in the winter during recent years. Because Oregon Inletdependent commercial fishing occurs primarily in the winter season, and boat building is a yearround business, these industries are very important regional employers in the winter off season.
Oregon Inlet was formed in 1846 and is the only barrier island break in the northern part of the
Outer Banks (~100 miles of coastline), providing access to boats between the Atlantic Ocean and
May 2014
1
FINAL REPORT
the Albemarle-Pamlico Sound (Figure I-1). Many marine-related sectors help to build the
economy of Dare County and, in doing so, rely on safe and navigable passage through Oregon
Inlet.
Figure I-1. Location Map
Oregon Inlet is considered one of the most commercially vital inlets along coastal North
Carolina. Commercial fishermen from the communities of Wanchese, Manteo, Manns Harbor,
and Stumpy Point in Dare County and communities in other coastal counties (e.g. Hyde,
Pamlico) have been using Oregon Inlet for generations to access the rich fishing grounds off the
coast of the Outer Banks. In addition to the commercial fishing operations, a number of support
businesses have located in the county to service and supply the commercial fishing vessels.
Once the fish are landed, seafood packing and processing businesses prepare the catch for
market. All of these activities generate jobs, wages, and profits for local workers and business
owners, as well as tax revenues to support local government services.
Along with commercial traffic, Oregon Inlet receives significant boat traffic from recreational
boaters who are drawn to the region‘s unique and abundant sportfishing opportunities including
world renowned fishing tournaments. The recreational sport fishery is vast and varied, including
large ―headboat‖ recreational fishing vessels, smaller ―for-hire‖ charter fishing vessels, and
private fishing boats. Many tourists who visit the beaches on the Outer Banks islands of Dare
May 2014
2
FINAL REPORT
County include a recreational fishing trip through Oregon Inlet on their vacation itinerary. Dare
County also hosts world famous sport fishing tournaments that draw still more visitors to the
region. These recreational fishing activities generate additional economic impacts for the region
in the form of expenditures on fishing gear, lodging, food, retail to custom boat sales, marine
maintenance, and/or boat storage. In addition, a significant number of jobs in the industry are
related to sport fishing, which is dependent on the inlet for access to the ocean fishing grounds
which contain the fish species prized by sport fishermen.
The boat building business is a significant industry in the Oregon Inlet region and especially in
Dare County. Dare County boat builders represent a substantial portion of the manufacturing
businesses in the County. Boat building employment accounted for over half of the
manufacturing jobs in Dare County in 2013. Boat building jobs are relatively high-paying, with
an average weekly wage of $744 in 2012, compared to the County average weekly wage for
private industry of $517. This region boasts the birthplace of ―Carolina Style‖ boat building, a
style which originated to withstand the incomparable Oregon Inlet waters and rough seas
offshore of Bodie and Pea Islands. Numerous local boat builders are directly dependent on
Oregon Inlet, as the valuable reputation of the boats for strength and durability is maintained by
continuous research and testing in the uniquely-rough waters offshore. These boat builders
provide jobs and purchase supplies from local and regional marine supply businesses.
C.
STUDY OBJECTIVE
and Hyde counties), and the state of North Carolina. This study involved a thorough literature
review and data collection effort, on-site interviews with individuals knowledgeable of inlet
usage and related economic impacts, and detailed economic modeling and analyses. Various
economic sectors including commercial fishing, recreational fishing, tournament fishing, marine
trades industries, and tourism industries were considered in the economic analyses. In addition,
the potential sectors of offshore wind and offshore drilling were examined as well as the
occurrence of soundside flooding. The economic modeling and analyses organized economic
sectors to appropriately reflect inter-connected economic groups. For example, tourism impacts
were considered as those derived from recreational sport-fishing dependent on Oregon Inlet.
Following a discussion of methodologies (Chapter 0) and previous related studies (Chapter 0),
subsequent chapters will present economic analyses and associated data for the following
sectors:








Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Offshore Drilling
Soundside Flooding
May 2014
3
FINAL REPORT
May 2014
4
FINAL REPORT
II.
STUDY METHODOLOGY
The study was completed by Moffatt & Nichol who was responsible for overall project
management, interview/questionnaire coordination, and compilation of the final report. Moffatt
& Nichol was supported by Dr. Chris Dumas (UNCW), Dr. John Whitehead (Appalachian
State), and Dr. Craig Landry (ECU) who completed all the economic impact analysis. This study
involved a significant literature review and data collection effort, on-site interviews with
individuals knowledgeable of inlet usage and related economic impacts, and detailed economic
modeling and analyses. The following details the methodologies employed in each portion of
this study.
A.
DATA COLLECTION & LITERATURE REVIEW
A significant data and literature review was conducted to identify existing data and reports
describing the economic impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare County. Many historical economic
studies of Oregon Inlet have been completed by the USACE, Dare County, and others. In July
2006, Moffatt & Nichol (M&N) along with Dr. Chris Dumas and others evaluated the economic
impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare County and the surrounding region. For this study, extensive
data and information was obtained for key economic sectors, namely commercial fishing,
seafood packing and processing, recreational fishing/boating, marine trades (boat building and
support services), and tourism. Previous studies are summarized in Chapter 0, and data obtained
and utilized in the economic analyses are presented in subsequent chapters for each economic
sector analyzed.
B.
FIELD SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS
As part of the data collection effort, field surveys and interviews were conducted with
individuals knowledgeable of the economic significance of Oregon Inlet to the County or region.
An initial list of interview contacts was made following the project kickoff meeting through
coordination with Commission members and others involved on this study. Contacts were
provided for key economic sectors and included commercial fishermen, boat-builders, charter
boat captains, marina operators, other business officers and local tourism offices. Survey
questionnaires were developed for various sectors seeking to obtain information on inlet usage
and related economic indicators (e.g. sales, expenditures). All contacts and questionnaires for
the various sectors included in this study are presented in Appendix A. Table II-1 shows the
number of contacts and number of responses received for each sector.
May 2014
5
FINAL REPORT
Table II-1. Field Survey and Interview Summary
Economic Sector
# Contacts # Responses
Commercial Fishing
15
8
Seafood Packing & Processing
7
4
Boat Building & Support Services
25
17
Recreational For Hire Fishing
14
8
Recreational Private Fishing
6
3
Other Recreational Fishing
3
3
General Tourism
26
12
Tournament Fishing
3
2
Offshore Wind
8
0
Offshore Drilling
14
0
Soundside Flooding
14
0
TOTAL
135
57
The field interviews attempted to cover a large geographic area, to develop a better
understanding of inlet usage from various geographic regions. Along with providing modeling
assumptions and supporting existing data used in the economic analyses, the field interviews
were used to gain personal insight and perspective on how the declining condition of Oregon
Inlet has impacted individuals and businesses and the expected repercussions of potential inlet
closure or future maintenance to fully open conditions. Information and insight gained from
these interviews are discussed in subsequent chapters for each economic sector analyzed.
C.
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS METHODS
The following describes methodologies and assumptions employed in the economic impact
modeling and analyses. As discussed previously, for the purposes of the economic impacts
analysis, the economic impacts associated with Oregon Inlet navigability were classified into the
following categories:








Commercial Fishing and Support Services (fuel, nets, repair, dry dock, etc.)
Seafood Packing/Processing and Support Services
Boat Building and Support Services (materials, maintenance, etc.)
Recreational Fishing (charter and private) and Tourism (lodging, food service, fuel, etc.)
Tournament Fishing
Offshore Wind
Offshore Drilling
Soundside Flooding
For each economic sector listed above (except soundside flooding), several measures of
economic impacts were calculated:



Employment
Economic output / business activity
Wages/salaries/sole proprietor income/partnership income
May 2014
6
FINAL REPORT


Dividend, rent, and interest income
Government tax revenues
For each of the economic impact measures listed above, impacts are sub-divided into several
sub-categories:




Direct Impacts (the direct impacts of the activity itself) – listed in report tables
Indirect Impacts (the impacts associated with business activities supporting the direct
activity) – not listed in report tables
Induced Impacts (impacts associated with additional household spending by employees
and business owners who receive additional wages and profits due to the direct and
indirect impacts) – not listed in report tables
Total Impacts (the total of the direct, indirect, and induced impacts) - listed in report
tables
The direct impact component measures the immediate impacts of an initial change in the
economy, for example, a decrease in sales by a particular industry, or an increase in employment.
The indirect impact component measures the economic ―ripple effects‖ on industries that
supply/service the directly-impacted industries. The induced impact component measures
―household spending feedback effects‖ which are changes in household spending by the
employees and owners of the businesses affected by the direct and indirect impacts. Together,
the indirect and induced impacts are often called ―economic multiplier effects‖. Multiplier
effects track the ―trickle down‖ effect of direct impact activities in the regional economy.
Multiplier effects are calculated using the widely accepted industry standard economic inputoutput model methodology. The term ―total economic impact‖ refers to the total of the direct,
indirect and induced impact components. The impacts reported in this study are ―total economic
impacts‖, including all multiplier effects.
Input-output analysis is commonly used by economists to estimate economic multiplier effects.
Input-output analysis is an economic modeling methodology used to estimate the full economic
impacts of a given, initial change in spending in a regional economy. Input-output analysis
tracks the flow of dollars between and among businesses, consumers, workers, and government
agencies in a study region. (See Miller and Blair (1985) for additional information on inputoutput analysis.)
IMPLAN Professional® Input-Output Analysis computer software (IMPLAN Group LLC. 2014)
was used in this study to conduct the input-output analysis. IMPLAN is a leading input-output
modeling software package used by university researchers, government agencies, and consultants
nationwide. The IMPLAN software tracks over five hundred industry sectors, and local, state
and Federal government sectors, on a county-by-county basis.
In addition to the economic impacts described above, another economic impact calculated by
using other methods is the value that recreational sport fishermen receive from the experience of
Oregon Inlet-related sport fishing, value beyond what is spent on goods and services needed to
make the trip. This ―value of the sport fishing experience‖ is the difference between what a
fisherman would be willing to pay to take the fishing trip and what he actually paid to take the
May 2014
7
FINAL REPORT
trip. This difference is known as ―consumer surplus‖ value, because it measures the surplus
value consumers receive from an experience beyond what is actually paid for the experience.
This value is real and arises in many economic situations. The amount that a sport fisherman
would be willing to pay for an Oregon Inlet-related fishing trip is limited by the opportunity to
take other, though perhaps less satisfying, substitute trips to alternative fishing destinations. For
example, although a sport fisherman might be willing to pay more for an Oregon Inlet-related
sport fishing trip, due to the Oregon Inlet sport fishery‘s unique characteristics, the sport
fisherman would not be willing to pay an infinite amount more, due to the availability of
substitute fishing opportunities. This study develops an estimate of the loss in consumer surplus
value of recreational sportfishing that would occur with the loss of Oregon Inlet navigability.
To avoid potential confusion about the report analysis and findings it is prudent to discuss the
difference between economic impacts versus economic benefits. To avoid potential confusion
about the report analysis and findings it is prudent to discuss the difference between economic
impacts versus economic benefits. The term ―economic impacts‖ refers to changes in economic
activity in a specified geographic area. For example, if a change in the economy causes sales to
increase by $100 in Dare County, that is an economic impact. However, the increase in sales
does not measure the net gain to the economy. All relevant costs must be subtracted from the
sales before we arrive at the net gain. The term ―economic benefit‖ refers to net economic gains.
Economic benefits can be measured using the concepts of consumer surplus and producer
surplus; however, such measurements involve a more detailed analysis and require more data.
As is typical for regional economic studies, this report presents primarily economic impacts, not
economic benefits.
Economic impacts can be positive or negative. For example, an increase in sales is a positive
economic impact, and a decrease in sales is a negative economic impact. Economic impacts that
are positive at one geographic scale (e.g., at the county level) may be cancelled out by negative
economic impacts at larger geographic scales. For example, if sales were to increase by $100 in
Dare County and to decrease by $100 in Carteret County, then there is a positive economic
impact in Dare County and a negative economic impact in Carteret County. However, at the
state level, the two impacts would cancel out, leaving a net economic impact of zero at the state
level. Similarly, for employment, if Dare County gains 100 jobs and Carteret County loses 100
jobs, there is a positive economic impact in Dare and an negative economic impact in Carteret,
but no net economic impact in jobs at the state level. Similarly, but at an even larger geographic
scale, if sales were to increase by $100 in North Carolina and to decrease by $100 in Virginia,
there is a positive economic impact in NC and a negative economic impact in VA, but no net
economic impact at the national level. Economic impacts are reported at three geographic
scales—county, region, and state—in this report to capture any ―cancelling out‖ of economic
impacts that occur at the county and regional levels.
All of the economic measures mentioned were calculated for three different inlet condition
scenarios (for the five main study sectors of commercial fishing, seafood packing & processing,
boat building & support services, recreational fishing & tourism, and tournament fishing) as
decided on by the project team and the Dare County stakeholders and were based on historical
USACE survey data of the inlet:
May 2014
8
FINAL REPORT
(1) Recent Conditions – assumes a depth of 6 feet or greater in the navigation channel
only 40% of the time (based on an average over the last 3 years)
(2) Fully Open – assumes a depth of 14 feet or greater 85-100% of the time (14 feet is the
current federally authorized depth for the navigation channel)
(3) Essentially Closed – assumes a depth of 6 feet or greater only 5% of the time.
Economic measures for offshore drilling and offshore wind were only calculated for fully open
conditions since uncertain recent conditions or essentially closed conditions would preclude any
offshore energy development from using Oregon Inlet.
The reason for these separate analysis is that it is important to not only note the current economic
impact that Oregon Inlet brings to Dare County, the surrounding region (Dare, Currituck,
Camden, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrell, and Hyde counties), and the state of North Carolina
but also the potential economic impact it could bring if the inlet were to be fully maintained to its
authorized depth or the potential economic impact that could be lost if the channel were not
maintained.
Following Chapter 0, which discusses previous related studies, succeeding chapters of the report
provide detailed descriptions of the study methodology and impact estimate results for the
commercial fisheries, seafood packing/processing, boat building, recreational fishing (charter
and private), and tournament fishing sectors of the economy using the analysis procedures
outlined above. In addition, the potential sectors of offshore wind and offshore drilling as well
as the occurrence of soundside flooding are also examined with respect to their Oregon Inlet
dependent financial impact on Dare County.
May 2014
9
FINAL REPORT
May 2014
10
FINAL REPORT
III.
PREVIOUS ECONOMIC STUDIES
A.
PREVIOUS STUDIES RELATED TO OREGON INLET
As stated before, numerous studies have evaluated the economic impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare
County or other regions. In particular, a majority of historical studies attempted to reconcile
complex economic issues related to the proposed navigation channel and jetties, part of a project
which was authorized by Congress in 1970 and later vetoed (2003). Summaries of pertinent
previous work which includes studies done by USACE, Dare County, and private consultants are
discussed herein.
1.
USACE Studies
USACE studies of Oregon Inlet have been ongoing between 1970 – 2001, including various
project designs for the proposed navigation channel and jetties, four environmental impact
statements, and at least four updates of the District‘s economic analyses. Opposition to the
project has revolved around environmental concerns from Federal agencies. The Department of
the Interior (DOI) denied special use permits for the proposed project citing that it would be
incompatible with the existing management philosophy and guidelines for their lands adjacent to
the inlet. Economic impact studies were repeatedly reanalyzed due to questioning of the
viability of data utilized and key assumptions made for the cost-benefit analyses. Key
limitations noted in the economic analyses included 1) data used was outdated and incomplete,
2) analyses did not adequately examine inherent risk and uncertainty in key variables, and 3)
certain assumptions did not have adequate support. The estimated average annual benefits of the
proposed project were determined to be $7.2 million, yielding a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.6. In
2003, plans to stabilize the inlet with the proposed jetties and dredging, were laid to rest from a
federal perspective through a joint agreement between the USACE, National Park Service (NPS),
and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
2.
Dare County Economic Commission (1985)
In 1985, a study was completed by the Dare County Economic Commission evaluating the
impact of Oregon Inlet to the Pamlico Sound region by comparing the current value of the inlet
to a future projected value with jetty construction. Economic sectors considered included
commercial fishing, fish packing, and recreational fishing (including charter fishing). At the
time of the study, it was noted that approximately 401 commercial boats used Oregon Inlet on an
annual basis, including 289 transient boats and 112 full-time boats. The economic value of the
inlet based on these factors and all of the related businesses was estimated to be $30 million at
that time. The study then evaluated how much economic value would be added if the inlet were
jettied, which was estimated at $70 million (in addition to the existing benefit of $30 million).
Additionally, the report noted economic impacts which occurred during 1982-1983, when
Oregon Inlet closed to navigation due to poor conditions. During this time, it was noted that six
businesses closed, unemployment during the winter rose from 20% to 42%, packing houses
reduced operations, and local ice companies laid off workers.
3.
The Horizon Planning Group (1995)
An additional economic assessment was performed in 1995 by The Horizon Planning Group,
evaluating the regional economic benefits of the Oregon Inlet stabilization project. This study
May 2014
11
FINAL REPORT
updated a previous USACE study (1990), describing expected economic benefits derived from
commercial and recreational fishing with the proposed stabilization project in place. Key
findings included that approximately 50% of the 312 commercial fishing vessels which
previously used Oregon Inlet were landing their harvests in the Hampton Roads, Virginia area.
The study noted other related impacts such as loss of packing house jobs and truck driving jobs
due to regional shifts in the commercial fishing industry. The study determined that the
proposed stabilization project would have a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.7. With the stabilization
project in place, numerous national, state, and regional benefits were also described, such as
increasing inlet usage, local jobs, and providing a safe and reliable access to harbors of refuge.
4.
Moffatt & Nichol and Dr. Chris Dumas, Dr. John Whitehead, and Dr. Woody Hall
(2006)
In 2006, Moffatt & Nichol completed the initial study on the economic impacts of Oregon Inlet
to the economy of Dare County and the surrounding region. The economic sectors of
commercial fishing, seafood packing & processing, boat building and support services, and
recreational fishing and tourism were evaluated with respect to Oregon Inlet. The economic
impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare County and the surrounding region is very significant and far
outweighs the costs necessary to keep the inlet passable through dredging. In fact, the economic
impact to the Federal Government alone would more than 6 times pay the recent annual
expenditures for dredging. Table III-1 shows the overall total economic impact of Oregon Inlet
to Dare County and the surrounding region.
Table III-1. 2006 Oregon Inlet Economic Study Summary
Impact Category
Output1
Commercial
Fishing
$7,152,357
Seafood Packing
& Processing
$33,425,367
Boat Building &
Support Services
$139,841,563
Recreational
Fishing & Tourism
$502,286,350
$682,705,637
90
238
1,235
8,288
9,851
$2,720,657
$7,112,340
$45,669,308
$209,700,831
$265,203,136
$1,344,828
$1,384,746
$22,434,526
$69,375,235
$94,539,335
$895,555
$2,149,376
$7,441,012
$34,978,165
$45,464,108
$488,250
$890,092
$4,806,248
$37,460,831
$43,645,421
2
Employment
3
Wages/Salaries/ Proprietor Profits
4
Rent/Corp Profits
Federal Government5
5
State/Local Government
1
Total Impact
Output/Business Activity Impacts (2005 $‘s).
2
All jobs, full-time and part-time.
3
Wages/Salaries/Sole Proprietorship/Partnership Income Impacts (2005 $‘s).
4
Rental Income and Corporation Income Impacts (2005 $‘s).
5
Government Tax and Fee Revenue Impacts (2005 $‘s).
The four study sectors provide a total economic impact of 9,851 jobs and $682.7 million to Dare
County and the surrounding region.
B.
OTHER/REGIONAL ECONOMIC STUDIES
Numerous other studies, while not directly related to Oregon Inlet, are notable. Summaries are
presented herein.
1.
Economic Study of Wanchese Seafood Industrial Park (2005)
In July 2005, a detailed economic study of the Wanchese Seafood Industrial Park was completed
by Miley, Gallo & Associates, LLC. The purpose of the study was to develop a better
understanding of the business environment in the Park and to determine the economic impact of
May 2014
12
FINAL REPORT
the Park on three regions. The regions analyzed included Dare County, the area comprised
within the Northeast Regional Partnership (16 counties in northeastern North Carolina), and the
State. The study evaluated the economic activity impact, or the impact upon the respective
region from the current levels of employment and production occurring in the Park.
Findings of the study defined six primary categories of businesses in the Park, including:






Boatbuilding and Related Companies
Marinas and Related Companies
Charter Fishing
Fish Packing
Broadcasting
Regulation and Administration
The study employed the IMPLAN (Impact Analysis for Planning) to generate a set of balanced
economic/social accounts and multipliers. The analysis evaluated the direct, indirect, and
induced economic effects. The economic impact of the Park was determined to be $98 million
for Dare County, $101 million for the Northeast region, and $113 million to the State.
2.
Economic Study of Wanchese Seafood Industrial Park (2011)
In April 2011, an update to the 2005 economic study of the Wanchese Seafood Industrial Park
was completed by the East Carolina Bureau of Business Research. The purpose of the study was
to note the changes that had taken place since 2005 due to the downturn in the economy.
The study employed the IMPLAN (Impact Analysis for Planning) to generate a set of balanced
economic/social accounts and multipliers. The analysis evaluated the direct, indirect, and
induced economic effects. The economic impact of the Park was determined to be $38.5 million
for Dare County, $39.2 million for the Northeast region, and $48.6 million to the State.
3.
Economic Study of Pirate’s Cove Big Game Tournaments (1999)
In 1999, a comprehensive study of the Pirate‘s Cove Big Game Tournaments near Oregon Inlet,
Dare County (Ditton, 2000) was conducted under a research contract with North Carolina Sea
Grant and Texas A&M University. The study focused on two tournament events, namely the
Pirate‘s Cove Billfish Tournament (PCBT) and the Alice Kelly Ladies Only Memorial Billfish
Tournament (AKMBT). The goals of the study were to develop a better knowledge of angler
expenditures and associated economic impacts on the local area. Expenditures for tournament
participants from Dare County were separated from non-resident participants, in order to derive
only new monies coming into Dare County. Likewise, expenditures of North Carolina residents
were separated from out-of-state participants to evaluate state level impacts. A summary of
pertinent statistics derived from the study are presented in Table III-2. Results presented
represent direct economic impacts. Additionally, the study considered secondary or indirect
economic impacts from the tournaments, resulting from additional demands for goods and
services. These analyses were based on economic multipliers which in summary, determined
approximately $3 million in total economic output from the tournaments. In 1999, tournament
participants were 21% Dare co residents, 29% other NC, 50% out of state. In 1999, 76% of
tournament participants said that fishing was most important activity on trip to Dare County.
May 2014
13
FINAL REPORT
Table III-2. Statistics from Economic Study of Pirates Cove Big Game Tournaments
(Ditton, 2000)
Statistic
PCBT
Number of registered anglers
655
Percentage of anglers from locations outside of
79%
Dare County
Number of days fished
86% fished 3-4 days
Average number of nights staying in area
10 nights
Lodging, charter fees, gas and oil for boat –
Major categories of expense
59% of total direct purchases
Total expenditures spent in Dare County by non$1.6 million
Dare County residents
AKMBT
540
51%
97% fished 1 day
3 nights
Charter fees – 26% of total direct
purchases
$189,949
4.
Economic Study of Offshore Recreational Fishing Region (2002)
Finally, in 2002, a study of a prime recreational fishing area northeast of Cape Hatteras, known
as ―The Point‖ was performed to evaluate economic impacts that would result from the proposed
construction of exploratory wells for potential oil and gas production by Chevron Corporation.
Although not directly related to Oregon Inlet, the goals of the study included providing
information on the value of recreational fishing at ―The Point‖, and estimating the potential
losses to recreational fishing if an oil spill were to occur in this area. Given the location of ―The
Point‖, it is likely a large percentage of anglers fishing in this area come from Dare County
through Oregon Inlet. The study used MRFSS data from 1990 and NMFS statistics on trip
numbers to estimate losses, in dollars, to recreational anglers due to various closure scenarios.
The total number of trips involving private and charter boats originating in Dare County and
traveling to a location greater than 3 miles offshore was estimated at approximately 97,800 for
1990. Determined economic losses from various scenarios involving closure of the site and for
some scenarios prolonged reduction in available catch (e.g. 50% reduction in probability of
success for a 6-month period) ranged from as low as $1300 for off-season periods to $460,000
for peak periods and worst-case scenarios.
Based on the available recreational fishing data and information described in this section, the
goals for the field survey interviews and economic analyses were defined. The MRFSS data
formed the basis of the economic analysis. In support of the MRFSS data, field interviews
targeted major marinas and recreational fishing centers and attempted to determine usage of
Oregon Inlet from areas both North and South of the inlet. Furthermore, the field surveys
targeted the significance of local sportfishing tournaments and typical expenditures for
recreational anglers either fishing independently or in local tournaments.
5.
North Carolina Sea Grant Study (2009)
North Carolina Sea Grant sponsored a study of the economics of the North Carolina for-hire
ocean fishery. The data for this study came from two sources, 2007-2008 vessel data from the
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF), and new survey data collected in 20072008 specifically for this study. A field/mail survey of captains produced 158 completed surveys
(150 charter boat surveys and 8 head boat surveys). A dockside field survey of passengers
produced 1,317 completed surveys, and a telephone follow-up survey of passengers produced
296 additional surveys. The study found that approximately 750 charter boat vessels and head
boat vessels operate year-round along the coast of North Carolina and target a succession of fish
May 2014
14
FINAL REPORT
species depending on seasonal fish abundances and economic conditions. Coast-wide, about
70,000 for-hire vessel trips (not passenger trips) occur annually, split between about 66,000
charter trips and 3,780 head boat trips. Coast-wide, an estimated 431,000 passengers are
serviced annually by the North Carolina for-hire fleet. Approximately 303,000 of these
passengers take charter trips, and 128,000 take head boat trips. There are an estimated 1,445 forhire captain and crew jobs in North Carolina. The North Carolina for-hire fishery receives
approximately $65 million annually in fishing fees paid by passengers, with about $55 million
received by charter vessels and $10 million received by head boat vessels. An additional $3.3
million in revenue is received for items sold to passengers. Tips paid by passengers to
crewmembers bring in an additional $5.8 million per year. In total, for-hire fishing passengers
spend about $380.0 million per year, including both on- and off-vessel spending, in coastal North
Carolina. In the Northern region of the state (which includes the Oregon Inlet region), 45-55%
of charter boat passengers say that for-hire fishing was the primary reason for their visit to the
NC coast, 60-85% of charter passengers are from out of state, and almost all 98-100% of charter
passengers spend at least one night in a coastal county as part of their visit to the coast. Only
about 20% of head boat passengers report that for-hire fishing was their primary reason for
visiting the NC coast, about 80% of head boat passengers are from out of state, and about 95% of
head boat passengers in this region spend at least one night in a coastal county as part of their
visit. "Consumer surplus" is the economic value of the fishing experience to the passenger
beyond the expenditures necessary to take the trip. On average, consumer surplus for a charter
boat trip averaged $624 per fisher per trip.
C.
TOURISM STUDIES
Finally, studies of the economic impact of tourism to Dare County have also been completed. In
particular, these studies provide valuable information revealing the significance of fishing and
boating opportunities to the tourism industry and the overall economy of Dare County.
1.
Outer Banks Visitors Bureau “Wave” Studies (2006)
The Outer Banks Visitors Bureau, located in Manteo, initiated a year-long study detailing
visitors and their experiences on the Outer Banks, in an effort to aid in marketing of the area and
increase visitation. The study analyzed seasonal differences. Findings for the 2005 summer and
fall season were published in January 2006. This research, while regionally focused, has
significant findings, including percentage of visitors pursuing recreational boating activities, and
trip specifics (e.g. duration of stay, expenditures, etc.). The study involved surveying
approximately 4100 visitors, yielding an accuracy of ±3.2%. First, when asked about various
motivations to travel to the Outer Banks, approximately 5% of visitors noted fishing
opportunities as the most important factor for both the summer and fall seasons. Additionally,
the findings reported that 36% and 25%, of visitors reported that one of the activities during their
stay was to ―go fishing‖, during summer and fall, respectively. A significant percentage, 11% in
summer and 4% in fall, reported that they went charter fishing during their stay. Table III-3
details trip specifics including length of stay, party sizes, and typical expenditures either taken
directly or computed from results given in the report. While not specific to Oregon Inlet users,
these data may prove useful in determining related tourism impacts from recreational boating.
May 2014
15
FINAL REPORT
Table III-3. Outer Banks Visitor Profile Findings
Finding
Summer Fall
Average length of trip
6 nights 5.4 nights
Average party size
7 people 5 people
Percentage of Visitors Staying in Dare County North
63%
69%
of Oregon Inlet
Percentage of Visitors Staying in Dare County South
30%
27%
of Oregon Inlet
Average total expenditures per party per trip
$2,691
$1,641
Average expenditures per person per day
$61
$61
Expenditures on lodging per party per trip
$1,468
$827
Expenditures on meals per party per trip
$471
$340
Expenditures on entertainment per party per trip
$57
$23
Expenditures on shopping per party per trip
$284
$228
Expenditures on transportation per party per trip
$253
$139
2.
Dare County Transient Boating Study (1995)
In 1995, Dare County initiated a study geared at understanding transient boater trends through
the area in an effort to attract more boaters to Dare County ports (Professional Management
Group, Inc, 1995). In the context of the study, transient boaters were defined as those using the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW) to travel between Northern and Southern states. Since
the AIWW is within a few hours by boat to Dare County ports, the goal of the study was to
profile transient boaters and determine strategies to attract boaters along an alternative route
through the Pamlico Sound. The study profiled various marinas throughout NC and in other
States for comparison and surveyed boaters themselves, collecting data on boaters‘ perceptions
and typical expenditures. On average, boaters surveyed indicated average expenditures of $340
per day. For power boaters only, 40% stated they spent $500 to $700 per day including fuel and
dockage while approximately 25% indicated they spent $100 to $200 per day. Of those
surveyed, only 6-8% indicated they had docked previously at either Roanoke Island or Hatteras.
Finally, the economic analysis portion of the study summarized previous work including a 1994
study of the Pirates Cove Big Game tournaments looked at visitor expenditures on fuel, supplies,
lodging, meals, shopping, and entertainment. For the summer tournaments, it was determined
that average expenditures per boat per day ranged from $1,100 to $1,500. There were on
average 6 people per boat. For the Fall tournaments, expenses per boat per day ranged from
$750 to $1,000.
D.
SUMMARY
As can be seen from the above studies, the local economy of Dare County is very dependent on
tourism, recreational and commercial fishing, and boat building. Please note that various items
from the above studies were used within this study to supplement field interviews and survey
questionnaires when needed.
May 2014
16
FINAL REPORT
IV.
COMMERICIAL FISHING
Commercial fishing is a prominent sector of the North Carolina coastal economy. In 2012, there
were approximately 5,600 commercial fishing vessels, 3,200 commercial fishermen, and 629 fish
dealers in the State, landing seafood worth $72 million in dockside value (NCDMF, 2013).
Oregon Inlet is considered one of the most commercially vital inlets along coastal NC with
fishermen from the communities of Wanchese, Manteo, Manns Harbor, and Stumpy Point in
Dare County and communities in other coastal counties (e.g. Hyde, Pamlico) using the inlet. It
was noted that in the 1960s there were approximately 40-50 different commercial seafood
businesses in Dare County. However, presently there are approximately only 15-20 in Dare
County. Of these businesses, most landings are handled by the 4-5 largest dealers. First, this
chapter presents pertinent information and perspectives gained from field interviews conducted
with commercial fishermen. Then the modeling methodology and analysis results for Oregon
Inlet-dependent commercial fishing and support services are presented.
A.
COMMERCIAL FISHING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS
Surveys were sent out to approximately 14 individuals and/or companies who currently work in
the commercial fishing industry. M&N received 7 survey responses from individuals and/or
companies in Wanchese, Manteo, and Engelhard. Overall the survey responses indicated that
business had decreased since the 2006 study was performed, mostly due to inlet navigation
problems. In particular, sea scallop fishing has decreased significantly over the past two years.
Responses indicated that smaller boats, requiring only 5-6 foot draft, are still able to navigate
through the inlet and thus would not see much of a change in business by having a fully open
inlet. However, they would likely lose business if the inlet were to be essentially closed. Larger
trawlers and scallop vessels have not been able to navigate the inlet very successfully in recent
years and would see a large increase in business (on the order of double to triple the business) if
the inlet were to become fully open. These boats, which currently have trouble passing through
the inlet, have since gone to places like Morehead City, New Bern, or Virginia and would not be
able to return if the inlet were to essentially close.
M&N also conducted a phone interview with 1 individual who has been in the commercial
fishing industry as a fisherman and consultant for decades. He indicated that many commercial
fisherman have left North Carolina because of Oregon Inlet navigation issues (on the order of
25-35 fisherman). Those that have left either continued to fish, landing in places like Virginia,
Connecticut, and New York or they have sold their boats completely. This had caused a major
economic loss to North Carolina because many of the boats that left fished for sea scallops. Each
boat with a permit brought in approximately $1-$1.5 million per year which equates to
approximately $25-$35 million loss to North Carolina. It was this individual‘s opinion that it
would take jetties to get the fisherman to come back to North Carolina and fish out of Oregon
Inlet. Other issues that he mentioned include water flow in and out of the inlet that could
potentially support an aquaculture industry if the inlet opening were stabilized and flow was free
to move in and out of the inlet. Additionally, the poor navigability of the inlet has produced
issues with insurance premiums which are higher if passing through Oregon Inlet.
The survey contacts and questions for commercial fishing can be found in Appendix A. Overall
trends or business costs provided by the interviewees were used in the economic modeling and
May 2014
17
FINAL REPORT
analyses to not only determine the current economic value of Oregon Inlet but how that value
would change if the inlet were fully open or essentially closed.
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – COMMERCIAL FISHING
The North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF, 2014) provided data on commercial
fishing trips, vessels, landings and value for Dare County and the town of Engelhard (in Hyde
County), North Carolina, and for that portion of commercial fishing activity that used Oregon
Inlet to access the ocean. In addition, a recent study by the North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries provided additional information on ocean commercial fishing in North Carolina
(NCDMF 2009). This information was supplemented by personal interviews (conducted as part
of the present study) of ocean commercial fishing vessel owners in Dare County and Engelhard
(Hyde County), North Carolina. Owners of representative ocean fishing vessels were identified
and interviewed in January and February 2014. The personal interviews provided information on
how various types of ocean commercial fishing vessels might alter their activities depending on
navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet.
Table IV-1 presents data on the commercial fishery landings (pounds per year) and dockside
value of the landings (dollars per year) for years 1994-2012 (NCDMF, 2013). Dockside value is
presented in both nominal (not adjusted for inflation) and real (adjusted for inflation) terms. The
GDP price deflator was used to adjust for inflation. The real dockside values are presented in
year 2012-equivalent dollars.
Table IV-1. Dare County Commercial Fishery Landings and Dockside (Ex-Vessel) Value,
1994-2012 (NCDMF, 2013)
Year
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Average
(1994-2012)
May 2014
Pounds
Landed
Nominal
Dockside Value
38,183,420
38,983,539
43,052,953
37,965,834
36,570,105
33,693,109
33,330,693
31,515,245
28,885,154
32,531,807
31,185,781
27,042,154
26,592,842
22,379,838
22,712,673
25,447,498
25,613,532
24,598,213
16,748,284
$21,336,701
$27,251,217
$23,479,634
$24,148,242
$23,468,050
$22,667,632
$26,351,359
$24,829,692
$23,012,023
$20,075,541
$20,518,618
$20,870,854
$22,810,479
$23,136,322
$23,004,823
$21,932,064
$22,016,774
$22,466,359
$21,065,800
Real
Dockside Value
(2012 dollars)
$30,330,959
$37,947,011
$32,108,781
$32,467,908
$31,214,433
$29,725,452
$33,788,150
$31,124,410
$28,409,110
$24,298,268
$24,171,969
$23,822,781
$25,260,456
$24,958,752
$24,341,493
$23,029,106
$22,841,443
$22,858,871
$21,065,800
30,370,141
$22,865,378
$27,566,587
18
FINAL REPORT
Not all of these commercial fishery landings are dependent on Oregon Inlet navigability. A large
blue crab fishery operates on the sound side of the inlet, and other commercial catch also occurs
on the sound side of the inlet. On the other hand, some commercial fishermen based in
Engelhard in neighboring Hyde County use Oregon Inlet to access the ocean. For the purposes
of this study, we defined ―Oregon Inlet-dependent‖ commercial fishery landings to be those that
meet the following criteria:




The fish/seafood had to be caught in the ocean (rather than in Pamlico or Albemarle
sounds)
The vessel had to land the catch using ocean fish gear (trawl, longline, troll, gill net, fish
pot, sea scallop dredge or rod-and-reel)
Vessel landings had to occur in Dare County ports, or Engelhard (all ports in Hyde
County south of Engelhard are assumed to depend on Hatteras or Ocracoke inlets for
ocean access)
For the port of Engelhard, only ½ of landings and value are assumed to depend on
Oregon Inlet, with the remainder assumed to depend on Hatteras Inlet or other inlets.
Landings meeting the criteria above occurred in the ports listed in Table IV-2.
Table IV-2. Ports with Oregon Inlet-Dependent Landings
County
Port
Dare
Kill Devil Hills
Dare
Kitty Hawk
Dare Manns Harbor
Dare
Manteo
Dare
Nags Head
Dare
Rodanthe
Dare
Salvo
Dare
Stumpy Point
Dare
Wanchese
Hyde
Engelhard
Oregon Inlet-Depending landings and dockside (ex-vessel) value meeting the criteria above and
occurring in the ports listed above are presented in Table IV-3. Table IV-3 also presents data on
the number of commercial fishing trips and commercial vessels that landed Oregon Inletdependent catch, and the number of seafood dealers who purchased Oregon Inlet-dependent
catch. Figure IV-1 presents the nominal and real dockside values for Oregon Inlet-dependent
commercial fishing landings from 1994-2012.
May 2014
19
FINAL REPORT
Table IV-3. Oregon Inlet-Dependent Commercial Fishing Landings and Dockside Value,
1994-2012 (Bianchi, 2014)
Year
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Average
(1994-2012)
1
Commercial
Trips
Vessels
3453
3509
3803
3872
3625
3713
3176
3497
3059
2871
3078
2890
2801
3614
2649
2973
2515
2452
2259
271
299
286
284
325
389
306
415
346
323
385
345
263
408
345
295
249
301
238
3148
320
Nominal
Dockside
Value
21
31
32
25
29
31
30
27
23
25
22
20
20
22
19
20
20
20
18
17,659,564
16,820,517
18,376,320
17,333,315
14,541,486
16,368,681
18,168,801
17,214,210
16,748,310
20,857,071
21,493,106
18,681,530
18,897,632
14,119,381
11,128,654
14,583,673
14,419,564
11,528,024
6,522,985
$8,556,505
$11,129,902
$8,893,771
$8,391,674
$8,472,395
$9,316,364
$11,105,833
$10,917,272
$11,481,372
$10,174,576
$12,000,464
$11,766,613
$15,118,451
$13,506,116
$11,258,168
$11,545,991
$11,672,197
$10,761,456
$9,875,702
(Year 2012=1001 )
70.34628
71.81387
73.12527
74.37573
75.18333
76.25664
77.98994
79.77562
81.00227
82.62128
84.886
87.60881
90.30114
92.69823
94.50868
95.23628
96.38959
98.28289
100
24
16,076,991
$10,839,201
84.337
Source: USDC-BEA, 2014
May 2014
GDP Price
Deflator
Pounds
Landed
Dealers
20
Real
Dockside Value
(2012 dollars)
$12,163,408
$15,498,263
$12,162,377
$11,282,812
$11,268,980
$12,217,118
$14,240,084
$13,684,972
$14,174,137
$12,314,715
$14,137,153
$13,430,856
$16,742,260
$14,569,982
$11,912,312
$12,123,521
$12,109,396
$10,949,470
$9,875,702
$12,887,238
FINAL REPORT
Value of North Carolina Commercial Fishery Landings Dependent on Oregon Inlet,
1994-2012
$18,000,000
$16,000,000
$14,000,000
Value (dollars)
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$0
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Year
Nominal Dockside Value
Real Dockside Value (2010 dollars)
Figure IV-1. Nominal and Real (2010 dollars) Value of North Carolina Commercial
Fishery Landings Dependent on Oregon Inlet, 1994-2012
From 1994 to 2012, an average of 24 commercial fishing dealers and 320 commercial vessels
made an average of 3148 commercial fishing trips per year that landed catch in Dare County and
used Oregon Inlet. Over the most recent three years of data (2010-2012), the average number of
commercial fishing vessels landing catch in Dare County and using Oregon Inlet declined to 19,
the number of commercial fishermen declined to 263, and the number of trips per year declined
to 2409.
From 1994 to 2012, Oregon Inlet-dependent landings averaged 16.1 million pounds per year.
Over the most recent three years of data (2010-2012), Oregon Inlet-dependent landings averaged
10.8 million pounds per year—this is equal to approximately half of all seafood landings in Dare
County.
On average, the real value of Oregon Inlet-dependent landings from 1994 through 2012 was
$12.9 million per year in 2012-equivalent dollars. The real value of landings over the most
recent three years of data, from 2010 to 2012, averaged less, $11.0 million per year. Oregon
Inlet-dependent landings account for approximately half of the value of all seafood landings in
Dare County. From 1994 to 2012, the percentage of commercial fishing dockside value
May 2014
21
FINAL REPORT
supported by Oregon inlet in a given year has ranged as high as 66 percent and has been no
lower than 35 percent.
The NCDMF study of ocean commercial fishing in North Carolina found that most (85%) of the
oceangoing fishermen run their businesses as the sole proprietorship. Twelve percent (12%)
work as part of a corporation, mostly in Wanchese. Fifty-seven percent (57%) worked ocean
waters year-round. Table IV-4 shows the fishing participation by month for the fishermen in this
study.
Table IV-4. Ocean Fishing Participation by NC Ocean Commercial Fishermen (NCDMF,
2009)
Month Frequency Percent
January
142
80%
February
125
71%
March
122
69%
April
126
71%
May
135
76%
June
127
72%
July
125
71%
August
126
71%
September
136
77%
October
144
81%
November
155
88%
December
149
84%
October through January were the months of highest ocean fishing participation with over 80%
spending some time on the water, and summer was the slowest time. Again, these are different
peaks than for estuarine fishermen, who seldom work the water during the winter at all except to
oyster.
Table IV-5 presents a summary of ocean commercial fishing vessel characteristics from the
NCDMF study by vessel size. The numbers in the table are based on ocean commercial fishing
vessels based along the entire North Carolina coast, not just those based in Oregon Inlet. Vessel
value includes the value of gear used on that boat. Vessel size ranged from 40 feet to 165 feet in
the questionnaire responses collected for the present study, corresponding to vessels in the
medium and large categories of the NCDMF study. Vessel age ranged from 8 years to 35 years
in the questionnaire.
May 2014
22
FINAL REPORT
Table IV-5. Vessel Characteristics for NC Ocean Commercial Fishing Vessels (NCDMF,
2009)
Small Medium Large
(n=7) (n=127) (n=82)
Average
17
29
55
Length (ft)
Years
11
8
14
Owned
Vessel Value $5,000 $81,664 $240,743
The NCDMF study found that ocean fishing vessels may be docked at the owner‘s home (28%),
at fish houses (21%), or at a rented slip (45%). Rented slips cost an average of $3,234 per year.
The NCDMF study found that household incomes for the oceangoing fishermen were much
higher overall than those of estuarine fishermen. Over half of the these fishermen reported
household incomes of over $50,000/year, more than double the rate of the fishermen working
estuarine areas.
Table IV-6 presents a list of the top target species for each commercial fishermen responding to
our commercial fishing questionnaire.
Table IV-6. Top Target Species of Commercial Fishing Questionnaire Respondents
Croaker, Atlantic
Conger Eel
Sharks, Dogfishes
Mahi (Dolphin fish)
Flounder, Summer
Monkfish
Tunas
Ribbon Fish
Tilefishes
Sea Scallop
Sharks, Other
Shrimp
Bluefish
Squid
Black Sea Bass
Swordfish
Table IV-7 presents the most commonly caught fish species north of Cape Hatteras in 2012
(NCDMF 2013). Comparing the target species listed by our commercial fishing questionnaire
respondents with the species listed in Table IV-6, it appears that the questionnaire responses
reflect the range of commonly-caught species in the ocean waters off Oregon Inlet.
May 2014
23
FINAL REPORT
Table IV-7. Most Commonly Caught Fish Species In Ocean North of Cape Hatteras in
2012 (All Ports) (NCDMF, 2013)
Species
Pounds Landed
Croaker, Atlantic
2,416,348
Sharks, Dogfishes
1,274,042
Flounder, Summer
1,086,281
Tunas
1,069,206
Tilefishes
342,211
Sharks, Other
115,660
Mackerel, Spanish
101,959
Bluefish
74,518
1.
IMPLAN Modeling Analysis
The economic impacts of Oregon Inlet-dependent commercial fishing are calculated for three
geographic areas: Dare County, the Oregon Inlet region, and the State of North Carolina as a
whole. For each geographic region, three navigability scenarios are considered: Oregon Inlet
recent conditions, Oregon Inlet fully open, and Oregon Inlet closed.
The economic impact numbers reflect commercial fishing activity only; recreational and
tournament fishing activity are considered in other sections of this report. The economic impact
numbers reflect Oregon Inlet-dependent (i.e., ocean) commercial fishing only; the estuarine crab
and trawl fisheries are not considered. For the purposes of the present study, it is assumed that
estuarine commercial fishing is unaffected by Oregon Inlet conditions.
The impacts are intended to reflect average economic conditions and average weather
conditions—the purpose of the study is to examine the impacts of changing navigability
conditions under average economic and weather conditions. All dollar values are report in real
(inflation adjusted) 2012-year dollars. Employment numbers are the total of full-time and parttime jobs (not ―full-time equivalent‖ jobs). The impacts of changing Oregon Inlet navigability
conditions are calculated by finding the differences between impacts across navigability
scenarios.
a)
Dare County Economic Impacts
(i)
Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions
The direct economic impacts of commercial fishing under recent inlet conditions (2010-2012)
include the average of the last three years (2010-2012) of Oregon Inlet-dependent commercial
fishery Dare County landings value for trawl, longline, troll, gill net, fish pot, and rod-and-reel
vessels fishing in the ocean plus one-half of the value of similar Engelhard landings, a total of
$10.442 million. In addition, the direct economic impacts include scallop vessel landings in
Dare County plus one-half the value of scallop landings in Engelhard, a total of $58,000. In
addition to these direct economic impacts, the scallop vessels based in Dare County that land
their scallops in Virginia before returning to their home port in Dare County contribute to the
multiplier effects in Dare County when they spend money in Dare County for repairs and fishing
May 2014
24
FINAL REPORT
gear switch-out, and when the crews and their families (who live in Dare County) spend their
wages in the County. It is assumed that the scallop vessels landing their catch in Virginia buy
fuel and groceries in Virginia, so expenditures for these items for these vessels are not included
in the Dare County impacts.
The annual economic impacts of commercial fishery are presented in Table IV-8 (combined
impacts of Dare landings and VA scallop landings supported by Dare-based vessels). Economic
multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the
table. For example, dockside sales of $10.5 million in Dare County generate an additional
$14.59 million in economic multiplier effects, for a total economic impact of $25.1 million in
output (sales) sales. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the
table are interpreted in a similar way. The Total Effects listed in the table include the multiplier
effects of the Dare County-based scallop vessels that land scallops in Virginia (less the multiplier
effects of fuel and grocery purchases, which are assumed to occur in Virginia). Notice that the
estimated number of commercial fishermen supported by Oregon Inlet landings is consistent
with the number of fishing vessels reporting Oregon Inlet landings (250 to 300 vessels) in the
NCDMF data, assuming a few fishermen per vessel, on average. Remember that not all of the
estimated direct employment is full time, some of the employment reflects only part-time jobs or
fishermen who fish part-time using Oregon Inlet and part-time in the sounds/estuary.
Table IV-8. Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery in Dare County, Oregon
Inlet Recent Conditions
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$10,500,000
$25,085,701
466
604
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$8,957,670
$13,866,903
Dividend, Rent,
State and Local
and Interest
Taxes
Income
$1,310,669
$5,786,998
----$1,109,822
Federal Taxes
----$2,039,704
(ii)
Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
In terms of the commercial fishery, Oregon Inlet conditions affect primarily larger trawl,
longline, troll, gill net, fish pot, and rod-and-reel and scallop vessels that fish in the ocean. With
better navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet, larger vessels can make more trips per year, and
some additional, larger vessels may be attracted to switch their home port to Dare County from
other ports both inside and outside North Carolina.
The direct economic impacts of commercial fishing in Dare County under fully open inlet
conditions are based on the average value of Dare County non-scallop vessel landings over the
last three years $10.442 million, adjusted for a 30% increase in vessels, and a 30% increase in
trips per year for all vessels, yielding total Dare County non-scallop vessel landings value of
$17.65 million ($10.442M*1.3*1.3 = $17.65M). In addition, fisheries agency data indicate that
North Carolina scallop vessels based in Dare County have landed about $10 million in scallops
per year in Virginia. We assume that 50%, $5 million, of these scallop landings return to Dare
County. It is assumed that half the value of the scallops currently landed in Virginia, or $5
million, remains in Virginia, because a scallop processing plant located in Virginia that is owned
by a Dare county processor would likely support continued scallop landings in Virginia. For the
scallops that continue to be landed in Virginia, Dare County receives the multiplier effects of
May 2014
25
FINAL REPORT
these landings (but not the direct effects), as the vessels making these landings return to Dare
County for repair and gear switch-out, and the crews of these vessels and their families live in
Dare County (however, the economic impacts of fuel and grocery purchases made in Virginia do
not impact Dare County). Furthermore, it is assumed that 50% of the recent (2009-2011, 2012
data not available) scallop landings made elsewhere in North Carolina south of Dare County
(50% of about $29 million per year, or $14.5 million per year) return to Dare County as a home
port, as Dare County is much closer to the scallop fishing grounds that are off the coasts of
Virginia and other states farther north.
table. For example, dockside sales of $37.2 million in Dare County generate an additional $29.8
million in economic multiplier effects, for a total economic impact of $67.0 million in output
(sales) sales. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table
are interpreted in a similar way. The Total Effects listed in the table include the multiplier
effects of the Dare County-based scallop vessels that land scallops in Virginia (less the multiplier
effects of fuel and grocery purchases, which are assumed to occur in Virginia).
The economic impacts do not include the lower insurance premiums paid by commercial
fishermen using a safer, fully open, Oregon Inlet. Nor do the economic impacts include any
savings in fuel costs on fishing trips made through Oregon Inlet that otherwise would have used
more distant inlets to the south. These effects are likely minor relative to the effects included in
the analysis. In any event, the omission of these effects makes the estimated impacts of a fully
open inlet more conservative.
Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$37,204,980
$66,966,128
959
1,243
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$18,416,524
$28,614,947
Dividend, Rent,
State and Local
and Interest
Taxes
Income
$2,694,669
$11,808,271
----$2,262,162
Federal Taxes
----$4,203,544
The impacts in the above table reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions
improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic impact could reach up to $79.7
million in Dare County for fully open inlet conditions. These numbers were estimated by
determining the ratio between the 2014 and 2006 regional direct impacts and applying that ratio
to the total impacts for fully open conditions in Dare County. However, it is also possible that
these projections could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher
interest rates, higher unemployment, etc.
(iii) Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions
Under ―essentially closed‖ navigability conditions, larger vessels could not navigate Oregon
Inlet. Most of these larger vessels would shift to other homeports, likely more southern ports in
North Carolina (e.g., Beaufort/Morehead City) and Hampton, Virginia. Questionnaire responses
May 2014
26
FINAL REPORT
indicate that all scallop vessels would leave Dare County for other NC ports (New Bern,
Beaufort/Morehead City, etc.) and Virginia. However, based on questionnaire responses, some
smaller (less than 50 feet in length) non-scallop vessels could continue to navigate Oregon Inlet,
but with reduced trip frequency. For the purpose of this study, we assume that these remaining,
smaller vessels would land catch with a value of no more than $3 million per year.
table. For example, dockside sales of $3 million in Dare County generate an additional $2.1
are interpreted in a similar way.
Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$3,000,000
$5,118,661
68
88
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,310,879
$2,039,205
Dividend, Rent,
State and Local
and Interest
Taxes
Income
$191,805
$838,459
----$160,572
Federal Taxes
----$299,435
b)
Regional Economic Impacts
The Oregon Inlet region is defined as the counties surrounding Oregon Inlet and its tributaries:
Camden, Currituck, Dare, Hyde, Pasquotank, Perquimans and Tyrrell counties. The economic
impact results presented in this section include the direct impacts of Oregon Inlet-dependent
commercial fishing activity in Dare County and its multiplier effects in Dare County and the
other counties in the Oregon Inlet region. The results in this section do not include the economic
impacts supported by any commercial fishing activity occurring outside Dare County. The
results presented here for the Oregon Inlet Region differ from those presented for Dare County
only in the multiplier effects and total impacts—the only direct impacts in the region considered
here are those that occur in Dare County.
(i)
The Oregon Inlet Region economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario are
presented in Table IV-11 (combined impacts of Dare landings and VA landings supported by
Dare-based vessels). Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects
and the Total Effects listed in the table.
For example, dockside sales of $10.5 million in Dare County generate an additional $15.69
million in economic multiplier effects throughout the Oregon Inlet Region (including Dare
County), for a total economic impact of $26.2 million in output (sales) sales throughout the
Oregon Inlet Region (including Dare County). (Recall that the reason why the multiplier effects
are so large relative to the direct effects is that the multiplier effects include the indirect and
induced impacts of Dare County-based scallop vessels landing their catches in Virginia, whereas
May 2014
27
FINAL REPORT
the direct effects of these scallop vessel landings in Virginia are not included in the direct
impacts in Dare County or the state of North Carolina.)
Compared to the results for Dare County only, the multiplier effects for sales, for example,
occurring in the region are $1.1 million larger, resulting in $1.1 million larger total impacts for
sales, relative to the Dare County-only total impacts for sales. The Direct Effects and Total
Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
Table IV-11. Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery in Oregon Inlet Region,
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$10,500,000
$26,205,108
486
640
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$9,249,848
$14,686,464
Dividend, Rent,
State and Local
and Interest
Taxes
Income
$591,661
$5,479,768
----$1,266,227
Federal Taxes
----$2,162,937
(ii)
The Oregon Inlet Region economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions scenario
are presented in Table IV-12 (combined impacts of Dare landings and VA landings supported by
Dare-based vessels). Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects
and the Total Effects listed in the table. For example, dockside sales of $37.2 million in Dare
County generate an additional $32.6 million in economic multiplier effects throughout the
Oregon Inlet Region (including Dare County), for a total economic impact of $69.8 million in
output (sales) sales throughout the Oregon Inlet Region (including Dare County). Compared to
the results for Dare County only, the multiplier effects for sales, for example, occurring in the
Oregon Inlet region are $2.8 million larger, resulting in $2.8 million larger total impacts for
sales, relative to the Dare County-only total impacts for sales. The Direct Effects and Total
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$37,204,980
$69,828,252
999
1,323
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$19,017,236
$30,564,958
Dividend, Rent,
State and Local
and Interest
Taxes
Income
$1,216,429
$11,313,536
----$2,606,505
Federal Taxes
----$4,511,726
million in Dare County and the surrounding region for fully open inlet conditions. These
numbers were estimated by determining the ratio between the 2014 and 2006 regional direct
impacts and applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully open conditions in the surrounding
region (including Dare County). However, it is also possible that these projections could be
lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest rates, higher
unemployment, etc.
May 2014
28
FINAL REPORT
Inlet. Most of these larger vessels would shift to other homeports, likely more southern ports in
North Carolina (e.g., Beaufort/Morehead City) and Hampton, Virginia. Questionnaire responses
indicate that all scallop vessels would leave Dare County for other NC ports (New Bern,
Beaufort/Morehead City, etc.) and Virginia. However, based on questionnaire responses, some
smaller (less than 50 feet in length) non-scallop vessels could continue to navigate Oregon Inlet,
but with reduced trip frequency. For the purpose of this study, we assume that these remaining,
smaller vessels would land catch with a value of no more than $3 million per year.
The Oregon Inlet Region economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Closed Conditions scenario are
presented in Table IV-13 (impacts of Dare landings, no VA landings supported by Dare-based
vessels under closed inlet conditions). Economic multiplier effects are the difference between
the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. For example, dockside sales of $3
million in Dare County generate an additional $2.34 million in economic multiplier effects
throughout the Oregon Inlet Region (including Dare County), for a total economic impact of
$5.34 million in output (sales) sales throughout the Oregon Inlet Region (including Dare
County). Compared to the results for Dare County only, the multiplier effects for sales, for
example, occurring in the region are $0.24 million larger, resulting in $0.24 million larger total
impacts for sales, relative to the Dare County-only total impacts for sales. The Direct Effects
and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$3,000,000
$5,335,206
71
94
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,353,636
$2,184,066
Dividend, Rent,
State and Local
and Interest
Taxes
Income
$86,585
$806,376
----$185,603
Federal Taxes
----$322,625
c)
Statewide Economic Impacts
The economic impact results presented in this section include the direct impacts of Oregon Inletdependent commercial fishing activity in Dare County and its multiplier effects throughout the
state of North Carolina. Typically, when a larger geographic region is considered, multiplier
effects are larger, and so the total economic impacts of a given economic change are also larger.
However, some economic changes that result in net economic impacts at the county or regional
levels do not result in net economic changes at the state level. For example, a movement in
commercial fishing activity from a port outside Dare County, but inside North Carolina, such as
Beaufort, NC, to a port inside Dare County, such as Wanchese, NC, results in net economic
changes in Dare County but not at the state level. At the state level, there is simply a transfer of
economic activity from one location to another within the state. As a result, the answer to the
question of whether economic impacts will increase as larger geographic areas are considered
depends on the combined effects of (1) larger economic multiplier effects as we consider larger
geographic areas and (2) smaller direct effects as we consider larger geographic areas because
more economic changes are classified as transfers within a larger area. Therefore, the total
impacts in some impact categories may increase as we move from the consideration of county
May 2014
29
FINAL REPORT
and regional-level impacts to statewide impacts, but total impacts in other impact categories may
decrease.
(i)
For the Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario, there are no transfers of commercial fishing
economic activity between regions within the state, and so the direct economic impacts of
Oregon Inlet-using commercial fishing activity at the state level are the same as those at the
county and regional levels. However, the multiplier effects of this commercial fishing activity
will be larger, because the purchases of Oregon Inlet-using Dare County commercial fishermen
and their families that are made statewide are now considered in the analysis, rather than the
purchases made only within the County or within the Oregon Inlet region.
The statewide economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario are presented
in Table IV-14 (combined impacts of Dare landings and VA landings supported by Dare-based
vessels). Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects and the Total
Effects listed in the table. For example, dockside sales of $10.5 million in Dare County generate
an additional $35.2 million in economic multiplier effects statewide (including the Dare County
and Oregon Inlet region effects), for a total economic impact of $45.7 million in output (sales)
sales statewide. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table
Compared to the multiplier effects occurring within Dare County only, the multiplier effects for
sales (output), for example, occurring statewide are $20.6 million larger, resulting in $20.6
million larger total impacts for sales at the state level, relative to the Dare County-only total
impacts for sales.
Economic multiplier effects are larger at the state level than at the county or regional levels.
Under recent inlet conditions, every dollar of direct impact sales, for example, results in $1.39 of
multiplier effects at the county level, whereas every dollar of direct impact sales results in $3.35
of multiplier effects at the state level. (Recall that the reason why the multiplier effects are so
large relative to the direct effects is that the multiplier effects include the indirect and induced
impacts of Dare County-based scallop vessels landing their catches in Virginia, whereas the
direct effects of these scallop vessel landings in Virginia are not included in the direct impacts in
North Carolina.)
Table IV-14. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery Using Oregon
Inlet, Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$10,500,000
$45,695,883
536
748
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$7,653,236
$17,331,441
Dividend, Rent,
State and Local
and Interest
Taxes
Income
$1,074,595
$7,695,111
----$1,633,759
Federal Taxes
----$2,861,941
(ii)
In terms of commercial fishery activity, Oregon Inlet conditions affect primarily larger vessels.
With better navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet, larger vessels can make more trips per year,
May 2014
30
FINAL REPORT
and some additional, larger vessels may be attracted to switch their home port to Dare County
from other ports both inside and outside North Carolina (primarily Virginia).
The direct economic impacts at the state level of commercial fishing in Dare County under fully
open inlet conditions are based on the average value of Dare County non-scallop vessel landings
over the last three years $10.442 million, adjusted for a 30% increase in vessels, and a 30%
increase in trips per year for all vessels. However, at the state level, only half of the 30%
increase in vessels is assumed to come from other states, the other half is assumed to be a
transfer of vessels from other North Carolina ports (Beaufort/Morehead, New Bern, etc.) to Dare
county ports, and the economic impacts of these vessels that transfer home ports within the state
are not considered to be net gains from the perspective of the state. As a result, the direct effects
at the state level of the Dare County ocean non-scallop vessel landings under the fully open inlet
scenario are $15.61 million ($10.442M*1.15*1.3 = $15.61M), a bit less than the $17.65 million
in direct effects at the Dare county level, because a transfer of landings from Beaufort, NC, to
Dare county is a net gain from Dare county‘s perspective, but it is not a net gain from the state‘s
perspective.
Turning to scallop vessels, fisheries agency data indicate that North Carolina scallop vessels
based in Dare County have landed about $10 million in scallops per year in Virginia. We
continue to assume that 50%, $5 million, of these scallop landings return to Dare County.
Because these landings are coming to Dare County from another state, they are considered a net
gain to the state. It is assumed that half the value of the scallops currently landed in Virginia, or
$5 million, remains in Virginia, because a scallop processing plant owned by a Dare County
processor is located in Virginia and would likely support some continued scallop landings in
Virginia. For the scallops that continue to be landed in Virginia, Dare County (and, therefore,
the state) receives the multiplier effects of these landings (but not the direct effects), as the
vessels making these landings return to Dare County for repair and gear switch-out, and the
crews of these vessels and their families live in Dare County (however, the economic impacts of
fuel and grocery purchases made in Virginia do not impact Dare County or the state of North
Carolina).
Furthermore, it is assumed that 50% of the recent (2009-2011, 2012 data not available) scallop
landings made elsewhere in North Carolina south of Dare County (50% of about $29 million per
year, or $19.5 million per year) return to Dare County as a home port. Although the economic
impacts of these transferred landings are a net gain to Dare County, they are simply a transfer
and not a net gain from the perspective of the state. As a result, the value of these landings that
are simply transferred from one port to another within the state are not considered part of the
direct impact of a fully open Oregon Inlet at the state level.
The statewide impacts of the Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions scenario are presented in Table
IV-15 (combined impacts of Dare landings and VA landings supported by Dare-based vessels,
net of transfers to Dare from other NC counties). Economic multiplier effects are the difference
between the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. For example, Oregon Inletdependent dockside sales of $20.7 million in Dare County (not including the value of landings
transferred from other ports within the state to Dare County, which are not considered a net gain
to the state) under the Fully Open inlet scenario generate an additional $37.3 million in economic
May 2014
31
FINAL REPORT
multiplier effects throughout the state (including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region), for a
total economic impact of $58 million in output (sales) sales throughout the state (again, including
Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region). The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the
remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
Comparing the economic impacts at the state level with those that occur at the county level and
regional levels, the direct effects of a fully open Oregon Inlet at the state level are smaller than
those at the county and regional levels, because although transfers of economic activity from
other North Carolina ports to Dare County ports as a result of a fully open inlet are additions to
the direct economic effects in Dare County and the surrounding region, these transfers do not add
to the direct economic effects at the state level—they are simply transfers within the state.
However, in contrast to direct effects, multiplier effects are larger at the state level compared to
multiplier effects at the county or regional levels. For example, the multiplier effects for sales in
the Fully Open inlet scenario are $1.81 per dollar of sales at the state level, whereas the
multiplier effects are only $0.80 per dollar of sales at the county level.
Table IV-15. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery Using Oregon
Inlet, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$20,668,790
$58,001,057
670
947
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$9,561,319
$22,141,591
Dividend, Rent,
State and Local
and Interest
Taxes
Income
$1,342,510
$9,774,373
----$2,077,203
Federal Taxes
----$3,666,141
million in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) for
fully open inlet conditions. These numbers were estimated by determining the ratio between the
2014 and 2006 regional direct impacts and applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully open
conditions in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).
However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if economic conditions worsen
with higher gas prices, higher interest rates, higher unemployment, etc.
Inlet. However, based on questionnaire responses, some smaller (less than 50 feet in length)
vessels could continue to navigate Oregon Inlet, but with reduced trip frequency. For the
purpose of this study, we assume that these remaining, smaller vessels would land catch with a
value of no more than $3 million per year.
Most of the larger non-scallop vessels would shift their operations to other homeports, most
likely the more southern ports in North Carolina (e.g., Beaufort/Morehead City) and Hampton,
Virginia. For the purposes of this study, we assume that half of the reduction in the value of
non-scallop vessel landings (0.5*($10,442,000 - $3,000,000)= $3,721,000) is simply a transfer to
other, more southern ports in North Carolina, and half of the reduction in landings value is the
result of vessels either transferring to out-of-state homeports or leaving the fishing industry
May 2014
32
FINAL REPORT
altogether. From the state‘s perspective, vessels transferring their homeport out of state or
leaving the fishing industry altogether results in a loss of economic impacts to the state.
However, from the state‘s perspective, those vessels transferring their home port within the state
do not result in a loss of economic impacts to the state; instead, the economic impacts of these
vessels are simply transferred from one location to another within the state. As a result, the
economic impacts of the vessels that transfer home ports within the state as a result of closed
conditions in Oregon Inlet remain part of state-level economic impacts.
Questionnaire responses indicate that all scallop vessels would leave Dare County for other NC
ports (New Bern, Beaufort/Morehead City, etc.) and Virginia. For the purposes of this study,
under closed inlet conditions it is assumed that half of the value of scallops landed in Dare
County under recent inlet conditions (0.50*$58,000 = $29,000), and half of the value of scallops
landed in Virginia but supported by vessels with homeports in Dare County (0.50*$10,000,000 =
$5,000,000), will transfer to other, more southerly North Carolina ports such as
Beaufort/Morehead or New Bern. The other half of these landings are assumed to leave the state
altogether as their vessels move to out of state homeports. The economic impacts of the scallop
vessels transferring their homeport from Dare County to another port within North Carolina are
simply transferred from one location to another within the state and remain part of the state-level
economic impacts. The economic impacts of the vessels transferring their homeports out of state
are lost to the state of North Carolina.
The statewide economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Closed Conditions scenario are presented
in Table IV-16 (combined impacts of NC landings made in Dare County or formerly made in
Dare County, and VA landings supported by NC-based vessels formerly based in Dare County).
Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects and the Total Effects
listed in the table. For example, dockside sales of $6.75 million made in North Carolina by
commercial fishing vessels formerly based in Dare County generate an additional $8.70 million
in economic multiplier effects throughout the state (including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet
region), for a total economic impact of $15.45 million in output (sales) sales throughout the state
(again, including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region). The Direct Effects and Total
Comparing the county-level direct impacts with state-level direct impacts for the Oregon Inlet
Closed scenario, the direct impacts are smaller at the county level ($3 million) and larger at the
state level ($6.75 million), because the impacts of the vessels that transfer their operations from
Dare County to another port within North Carolina as a result of closed conditions in Oregon
Inlet are a loss when viewed from the County‘s perspective but are simply a transfer from one
port to another within the state, resulting in no net loss, from the state‘s perspective.
Under closed inlet conditions, every dollar of direct impact sales, for example, results in $0.71 of
multiplier effects at the county level, whereas every dollar of direct impact sales results in $1.29
of multiplier effects at the state level.
May 2014
33
FINAL REPORT
Table IV-16. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Commercial Fishery that Had Been
Using Oregon Inlet, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$6,750,000
$15,447,140
177
252
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$2,519,968
$5,921,628
Dividend, Rent,
State and Local
and Interest
Taxes
Income
$353,830
$2,604,389
----$553,818
Federal Taxes
----$982,188
2.
Economic Impacts Summary
If the navigability of Oregon Inlet is not maintained, then interview responses indicate that most
commercial fishing vessels would choose to remain in the fishing business but would relocate
their fishing operations to other ports, most likely located in Virginia. If the fishermen were to
relocate due to a loss of navigability in Oregon Inlet, Dare County would lose the employment,
wages, and profits of the crew, skippers and vessel owners. Other Dare County employees and
businesses owners would also suffer reductions in employment, wages, rents and profits due to
economic multiplier effects. These impacts can also be felt by the surrounding region and entire
state of North Carolina.
In terms of impacts on government tax and fee revenues, only the total impacts are presented, as
the IMPLAN modeling software produces estimates of total impacts only for taxes and fees. If
we assume that the Federal government would receive similar revenues and fees if the vessels
relocate to another state, then the Federal government portion of the impacts should not be
included in the overall impact estimate. However, should vessels relocate, the Dare County and
State of North Carolina governments would face reductions in tax collections and revenues. The
economic impacts on the Dare County and North Carolina state governments are given by the
―State and Local Taxes‖ values only.
Table IV-17 presents the direct and total economic impacts on Dare County, the surrounding
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent commercial fishing vessels for recent
conditions. As mentioned previously, recent conditions is based on an average of conditions
over the last 3 years (a depth of 6 ft or greater only 40% of the time). Landings in Dare County
plus half of the landings in Engelhard were considered. For scallops landed in Virginia, the Dare
County region only received the multiplier effects for everything (except fuel, groceries,
restaurant, and hotel which occur while in Virginia), not the direct effect (the direct effect goes to
Virginia).
May 2014
34
FINAL REPORT
Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$10,500,000
$25,085,701
$10,500,000
$26,205,108
$10,500,000
$45,695,883
466
604
486
640
536
748
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$8,957,670
$13,866,903
$9,249,848
$14,686,464
$7,653,236
$17,331,441
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$1,310,669
$5,786,998
$591,661
$5,479,768
$1,074,595
$7,695,111
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$1,109,822
----$1,266,227
----$1,633,759
----$2,039,704
----$2,162,937
----$2,861,941
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent commercial fishing vessels for fully open
conditions. As mentioned previously, fully open conditions are considered to be dredged to a
depth of 14 ft or greater 85-100% of the time. Fully open inlet conditions would affect primarily
trawlers and scallop vessels. There would be an increase in trawler trips per year plus some
additional larger size category trawlers would be attracted to the region. There would be a large
increase in scallop activity due to scallop vessels returning, a large increase in scallop population
due to restoration efforts, and a large increase in scallop prices. However, it is likely that much
of the scallop landings would still occur in Virginia as they have in the past when Oregon Inlet
were healthier.
Impacts For Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$37,204,980
$66,966,128
$37,204,980
$69,828,252
$20,668,790
$58,001,057
959
1,243
999
1,323
670
947
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$18,416,524
$28,614,947
$19,017,236
$30,564,958
$9,561,319
$22,141,591
Dividend,
Rent, and
State and
Interest
Local Taxes
Income
$2,694,669
----$11,808,271 $2,262,162
$1,216,429
----$11,313,536 $2,606,505
$1,342,510
----$9,774,373
$2,077,203
Federal
Taxes
----$4,203,544
----$4,511,726
----$3,666,141
The impacts in Table IV-18 reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions
million in Dare County, $83.1 million in the surrounding region (including Dare County), and
$69.0 million in state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) for
fully open inlet conditions. Again, these numbers were estimated by determining the ratio
between the 2014 and 2006 regional direct impacts and applying that ratio to the total impacts for
fully open conditions in each of the three geographic settings – Dare County, the surrounding
region (including Dare County), and the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the
surrounding region). However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if
May 2014
35
FINAL REPORT
economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest rates, higher unemployment,
etc.
Table IV-19 presents the potential additional economic impacts from commercial fishing that
may be realized if Oregon Inlet were maintained to fully open conditions. The results are
equivalent to the difference between Table IV-18 (fully open inlet scenario) and Table IV-17
(recent conditions scenario).
Table IV-19. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from Commercial
Fishing for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$26,704,980
$41,880,427
$26,704,980
$43,623,144
$10,168,790
$12,305,174
492
639
513
684
134
198
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$9,458,854
$14,748,044
$9,767,388
$15,878,494
$1,908,083
$4,810,150
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$1,384,000
$6,021,273
$624,768
$5,833,768
$267,915
$2,079,262
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$1,152,340
----$1,340,278
----$443,444
----$2,163,840
----$2,348,789
----$804,200
*The impacts in the above table reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 20052006, the potential additional annual economic impacts could reach up to $54.6 million in Dare County, $56.9 million in the
surrounding region (including Dare County), and $23.4 million in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the
surrounding region) for fully open inlet conditions. However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if economic
conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest rates, higher unemployment, etc.
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent commercial fishing vessels for essentially
closed conditions. As mentioned previously, essentially closed conditions are considered to be
dredged to a depth of 6 ft or greater only 5% of the time. These conditions would affect
primarily larger trawlers and scallop vessels. Smaller trawlers and longliners (<50 ft in length)
would still be able to pass through the inlet at certain times. There would be a large loss of
landings from trawlers that would move to Morehead City or Virginia. There would likely be no
scallop vessels at all. They would likely go to Morehead City, Virginia, or New Bern.
Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$3,000,000
$5,118,661
$3,000,000
$5,335,206
$6,750,000
$15,447,140
68
88
71
94
177
252
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,310,879
$2,039,205
$1,353,636
$2,184,066
$2,519,968
$5,921,628
May 2014
36
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$191,805
$838,459
$86,585
$806,376
$353,830
$2,604,389
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$160,572
----$185,603
----$553,818
----$299,435
----$322,625
----$982,188
FINAL REPORT
Table IV-21 presents the potential loss of economic impacts from commercial fishing that may
be realized if Oregon Inlet were allowed to essentially close. The results are equivalent to the
difference between Table IV-17 (recent conditions scenario) and Table IV-20 (essentially closed
inlet scenario).
Table IV-21. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Commercial
Fishing for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales (Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
-$7,500,000
-$19,967,040
-$7,500,000
-$20,869,902
-$3,750,000
-$30,248,743
-398
-516
-415
-545
-360
-497
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
-$7,646,791
-$11,827,698
-$7,896,212
-$12,502,398
-$5,133,268
-$11,409,813
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
-$1,118,864
-$4,948,539
-$505,076
-$4,673,392
-$720,765
-$5,090,722
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
---------$949,250 -$1,740,269
---------$1,080,624 -$1,840,312
---------$1,079,941 -$1,879,753
3.
Comparison to 2006 Economic Study (M&N, 2006)
Over the period 1994-2012 (the NCDMF changed its methodology in 1994, so earlier years are
not comparable), the value of Oregon Inlet-dependent commercial fishery landings has ranged
from $9.9 million in 2012 to $16.7 million in 2006, in inflation-adjusted 2012-year dollars. The
value of landings varies from year to year, depending upon inlet conditions, economic conditions
(including fish prices, and fuel prices, which effect landings by affecting the number of trips
taken), the availability of imported seafood products, natural fish abundance in the sea, and
fishing regulations. The value of ocean commercial fishery landings used in the 2006 was $12.5
million, based on data from 1994 to 2005 (data for 2006 were not yet available when the 2006
study was completed). It should be noted that in the 2006 report, the economic impacts of
commercial fishing were calculated in two parts: the impacts of goods and services purchased by
the commercial fishing industry, and the impacts of commercial fishing captain and crew labor
income. The two parts were to be added together and then presented as a table (Table IV-9) in
the report. Unfortunately, due to an oversight, only the impacts of captain and crew labor
income were included in Table IV-9. The correct, combined direct impact for output (sales)
reported in Table IV-9 should have been $12.5 million, and total impact for output (sales)
roughly $25 million. The value of Oregon Inlet-dependent landings used in the present (2014)
study for the "Recent Inlet Conditions" scenario (years 2011-2013) is $10.5 million. This
average assumes a value of landings of $9 million for 2013, because data for 2013 were not yet
available from NCDMF, and commercial fishermen interviewed for the study said that inlet
conditions were limiting trips in 2013, so a relatively low landings value was assumed for 2013.
If conditions (inlet, economic, biological, regulatory, etc.) in the future are similar to those in
year 2006 (the best year in the 1994-2012 period; again, note that year 2006 was not included in
the 2006 study, because data for 2006 were not available at the time that the 2006 study was
written), then commercial fishery landings and value would be larger than the values reported in
the present study under conditions similar to those that prevailed in 2006. On the other hand, if
non-inlet-related conditions (economic, biological, regulatory, etc.) become worse in the future,
then commercial fishery landings and value would be smaller than those presented in the 2014
May 2014
37
FINAL REPORT
study, and the value of inlet improvements would be smaller than that presented in the 2014
study.
Comparing tax revenue impacts from the 2006 study with those from the 2014 study, for
commercial fishing the percentage of each dollar of output collected in state and local taxes was
similar across the two studies. The percentage of each dollar of output collected in federal taxes
was also similar across the two studies.
May 2014
38
FINAL REPORT
V.
SEAFOOD PACKING & PROCESSING
profits for local workers and business owners, as well as tax revenues to support local
government services. For example, five days a week, Wanchese Fish Company‘s mauve trucks
deliver seafood caught by their boats and other North Carolina companies across the East Coast.
The trucks go to Boston, Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York markets. They send at least five
trucks a week to New York and sometimes as many as 10 to 15. This chapter presents detailed
information on modeling methodology and analysis results for the Oregon Inlet-dependent
seafood packing and processing sector of the Dare County economy.
A.
SEAFOOD PACKING AND PROCESSING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS
the commercial fishing industry. M&N received 4 survey responses from individuals and/or
companies in Wanchese and Columbia. Much like the commercial fishing response, the seafood
packing and processing surveys indicated that business had decreased since the 2006 study was
performed, mostly due to inlet navigation problems. In particular, sea scallop landings have
decreased significantly over the past two years. Responses indicated that they would see a large
increase in business (on the order of double to triple the business) if the inlet were to become
fully open due to the increase in the number and size of commercial fishing boats which could
safely traverse through the inlet. If the inlet were to essentially close, even the smaller trawlers,
which can currently navigate the inlet, would be forced to leave the area and the seafood packing
and processing business would likely die out as it is directly tied to the ability of commercial
fisherman to be able to travel through the inlet.
The survey contacts and questions for seafood packing and processing can be found in Appendix
A. Overall trends or business costs provided by the interviewees were used in the economic
modeling and analyses to not only determine the current economic value of Oregon Inlet but how
that value would change if the inlet were fully open or essentially closed.
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – SEAFOOD PACKING &
PROCESSING
In 2010, the NCDMF conducted a study that examined the expenditures and business profiles of
North Carolina seafood dealers in 2009 (NCDMF, 2010). In 2009, there were 683 licensed
dealers in North Carolina. The majority of the seafood dealers in the state are small single or
family owned businesses. A list of 298 seafood dealer license holders with more than $10,000 in
annual seafood sales in 2008 was extracted from the NCDMF license and trip ticket data base.
The $10,000 sales criterion was added to select seafood dealers with significant seafood sales.
To fit within the NCDMF study budget constraints, 109 of the 298 seafood dealers were
contacted to participate in a survey. Out of the 109 dealers contacted, 72 seafood dealers agreed
to take the NCDMF survey, for an overall response rate of 66%.
May 2014
39
FINAL REPORT
The NCDMF study found that seafood dealers vary greatly in size from small single owner
businesses that sell solely to their local community to large dealers that provide seafood to
customers on a state, national, and world-wide scale. Businesses considered seafood dealers in
North Carolina can include commercial fishermen holding a dealer license, wholesalers,
distributors, processors, bait and tackle shops, retail seafood shops, and restaurants. Any person
or business holding a dealer license is considered a seafood dealer. All wild caught seafood that
is landed in North Carolina must initially be sold through a licensed seafood dealer.
Among the surveyed dealers, total gross sales for 2009 ranged from $7,000 to $7.2 million
dollars per year per dealer. Twenty-two percent of the dealers had total sales of more than $1
million per year. The number of full time employees indicated by the study participants ranged
from 0 to 38 individuals and the number of seasonal employees ranged from 0 to 75. In addition
to the business owner, the average seafood dealer in the survey had 3 year-round employees and
6 seasonal employees. Some seafood dealers also indicated that family members would work for
the business without a regular wage or salary.
Business expense categories and average annual expenditures for each category are presented in
Table V-1 for the 72 seafood dealers that participated in the 2009 NCDMF survey:
Table V-1. Average Annual Expenditures of North Carolina Seafood Dealers (2009)
(NCDMF, 2010)
Business Expense Category
Purchases From Other NC
Fishermen
Purchases From Other NC Seafood
Dealers
Purchases of Seafood From Out of
State
Wages and Payroll
Transportation and Shipping
Mortgage, Loan, or Banking Cost
Shipping Containers
Building Repair and Maintenance
Insurance
Non-seafood Products Sold
Electricity
Spoilage
Rent
Telephone
Office Supplies
Water
Other
Total
May 2014
40
Average Annual
Expenditure
Percent of Annual
Expenditure
$322,692
44.13%
$103,555
14.16%
$72,909
9.97%
$69,481
$30,881
$29,212
$26,275
$13,385
$11,816
$11,649
$11,504
$6,900
$6,587
$2,944
$1,952
$1,152
$12,969
$735,863
9.50%
4.22%
4.00%
3.59%
1.83%
1.62%
1.59%
1.57%
0.94%
0.90%
0.40%
0.27%
0.16%
1.77%
100%
FINAL REPORT
Note that raw fish/seafood accounts for more than half (58.29%) of mean business expenses in
the NCDMF (2010 study), and the majority of the raw fish/seafood input was bought from North
Carolina commercial fishermen. The IMPLAN database provides average cost and earnings
information for the North Carolina seafood processing sector in 2012. On average, the cost of
raw fish alone accounts for $0.48436 of every sales dollar. Trow (1985) found that the cost of
raw fish accounted for $0.73 of every sales dollar for fish packing houses in Dare County in the
early 1980s, where fish were simply weighed, separated by species, graded by size, iced down,
and packaged in cartons. The National Fisheries Education and Research Foundation (NFERF,
1989) found that raw fish accounted for $0.42 to $0.52 of every sales dollar for whole flounder,
filleted flounder, and scallop seafood processors in the South Atlantic region of the U.S. in the
late 1980s. For the purposes of this study, the IMPLAN value of $0.48436 was used as the
average cost of raw fish per dollar of seafood dealer/processor /packer sales revenue, as this
value is based on the most recent data available.
The NCDMF study found that the estimated output (sales) of the North Carolina seafood
industry in 2009 was $150 million, which supported economic multiplier effects within the state
of $105 million, for a total economic impact of $255 million (NCDMF 2010). Of the $105
million in multiplier effects, $58.8 million was due to the commercial fishing activities that
provided the raw seafood inputs, and $46.2 million was due to seafood dealer activities
(processing, packing, marketing, distribution, etc.) Based on the NCDMF (2010) values for
2009, every dollar of seafood dealer sales supported $0.31 ($46.2M/$150M = $0.31) in non-fishrelated multiplier effects (multiplier effects not attributable to the commercial fishing activities
supporting the raw fish inputs).
1.
The economic impacts of Oregon Inlet-dependent seafood packing and processing are calculated
for three geographic areas: Dare County, the Oregon Inlet region, and the State of North Carolina
as a whole. For each geographic region, three navigability scenarios are considered: Oregon
Inlet recent conditions, Oregon Inlet fully open, and Oregon Inlet closed.
The economic impact numbers reflect seafood packing and processing related to Oregon Inletdependent (i.e., ocean) commercial fishing only; any packing and processing related to the
estuarine crab and trawl fisheries are not considered here. For the purposes of the present study,
it is assumed that estuarine-dependent seafood packing and processing is unaffected by Oregon
Inlet conditions.
scenarios.
May 2014
41
FINAL REPORT
a)
(i)
profits for local workers and business owners, as well as tax revenues. For example, five days a
week, Wanchese Fish Company‘s trucks deliver seafood caught by their boats and other North
Carolina companies across the East Coast. Their trucks go to Boston, Baltimore, Philadelphia
and New York markets. They send at least five trucks a week to New York and sometimes as
many as 10 to 15.
In 2012, there were approximately 629 fish dealers North Carolina (NCDMF, 2013). However,
many of these are commercial fishermen who occasionally sell some of their catch directly to the
public. In addition, many of the 629 dealers are located outside the Oregon Inlet region in other
areas of the state. Table V-2 presents data on the number of seafood dealer-processors servicing
Oregon Inlet-dependent commercial fishery landings from 1992 to 2012 (NCDMF, 2014).
Table V-2. Seafood Dealers Servicing Oregon Inlet-dependent Commercial Fishing
Landings, 1992-2012
Year
Dealer-Processors
1994
21
1995
31
1996
32
1997
25
1998
29
1999
31
2000
30
2001
27
2002
23
2003
25
2004
22
2005
20
2006
20
2007
22
2008
19
2009
20
2010
20
2011
20
2012
18
May 2014
42
FINAL REPORT
The economic analysis of Oregon Inlet-dependent seafood dealers/processors/packers is based on
the estimates of Oregon Inlet-dependent commercial fishery landings detailed in the Commercial
Fishing section of this report. Assuming that (1) $10,500,000 in Oregon Inlet-dependent
commercial fishery landings are purchased by Dare County seafood processors as raw fish input
under recent (2009-20010 Oregon Inlet navigability conditions, and (2) $0.48436 in raw fish
input is purchased for every dollar of sales revenue, an estimate of $21,678,000 is derived for
annual Oregon Inlet-dependent seafood packing/processing sales in Dare County. (2012-year
dollars). The multiplier effects of the seafood processing sales revenue beyond those attributable
to the commercial fishing activity supporting the raw fish/seafood inputs are calculated by
adjusting the model settings within IMPLAN such that all raw fish input is imported from
outside the region (this assumption ensures that IMPLAN does not double-count the regional
multiplier effects of the raw fish input, reported in the commercial fishing section of this study).
The economic impacts are presented in Table V-3 (combined impacts of Dare landings and VA
scallop landings supported by Dare-based vessels). Economic multiplier effects are the
difference between the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. For example,
seafood dealer/processor sales of $21.7 million in Dare County generate an additional $9.9
are interpreted in a similar way. The estimated direct employment of these seafood
dealer/processors, 63 employees, is consistent with the 61 employees reported by NC-EDIS
(2014) for the ―Fish and Seafood Merchant Wholesalers‖ industry (i.e., seafood
dealer/processors) in Dare County for 2012.
Each dollar of seafood dealer sales supported $0.46 ($9.9M/$21.7M = $0.46) in non-fish-related
multiplier effects (multiplier effects not attributable to the commercial fishing activities
supporting the raw fish inputs). This is somewhat higher than the $0.31 in non-fish-related
multiplier effects per dollar of seafood dealer sales found in the NCDMF (2010) study of all
North Carolina seafood dealers. However, the lower average value for all North Carolina
seafood dealers reflects a larger proportion of smaller, fisherman/dealers in the statewide
population of dealers. These smaller dealers do little processing, and therefore raw fish
constitutes a larger proportion of their expenses and is responsible for a larger proportion of the
multiplier effects arising from their activities. This leaves a smaller proportion of the multiplier
effects attributable to non-fish-related inputs for the statewide population of dealers.
Oregon Inlet Recent Condition
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$21,678,000
$31,644,092
63
149
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,097,434
$4,296,036
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$1,081,523
$4,306,368
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$963,787
----$1,020,826
(ii)
May 2014
43
FINAL REPORT
under fully open Oregon Inlet navigability conditions, and (2) $0.48436 in raw fish input is
purchased for every dollar of sales revenue, an estimate of $76,693,000 is derived for annual
Oregon Inlet-dependent seafood packing/processing sales in Dare County. (2012-year dollars).
The multiplier effects of the seafood processing sales revenue beyond those attributable to the
commercial fishing activity supporting the raw fish/seafood inputs are calculated by adjusting the
model settings within IMPLAN such that all raw fish input is imported from outside the region
(this assumption ensures that IMPLAN does not double-count the regional multiplier effects of
the raw fish input, reported in the commercial fishing section of this study).
seafood dealer/processor sales of $76.7 million in Dare County generate an additional $35.3
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$76,693,000
$111,951,642
224
526
Wage, Salary,
Dividend,
and Sole
Rent, and
State and
Proprietorship
Interest
Local Taxes
Income
Income
$3,882,532
$3,826,241
----$15,198,766 $15,235,237 $3,409,724
Federal
Taxes
----$3,611,528
improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic impact could reach up to
$129.1 million in Dare County for fully open inlet conditions. These numbers were estimated by
under essentially closed Oregon Inlet navigability conditions, and (2) $0.48436 in raw fish input
is purchased for every dollar of sales revenue, an estimate of $6,194,000 is derived for annual
May 2014
44
FINAL REPORT
seafood dealer/processor sales of $6.2 million in Dare County generate an additional $2.8 million
in economic multiplier effects, for a total economic impact of $9.0 million in output (sales) sales.
The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted
in a similar way. The decrease in Direct Effects from $21.7 million under recent Oregon Inlet
conditions to $6.2 million under closed Oregon Inlet conditions (a reduction of 71%) is
consistent with the estimated reduction in sales of 67-75% from recent to closed inlet conditions
reported by the Dare County seafood processors interviewed for this study.
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$6,194,000
$9,041,823
18
43
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$313,567
$1,227,589
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$309,021
$1,230,487
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$275,388
----$291,693
b)
seafood dealer/processor/packer activity in Dare County and its multiplier effects in Dare County
and the other counties in the Oregon Inlet region. The results presented here for the Oregon Inlet
Region differ from those presented for Dare County only in the multiplier effects and total
impacts—the only direct impacts considered here are those that occur in Dare County.
(i)
under recent Oregon Inlet navigability conditions, and (2) $0.48436 in raw fish input is
May 2014
45
FINAL REPORT
The Oregon Inlet Region economic impacts of seafood dealer/processor/packer sales for the
Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario are presented in Table V-6 (combined impacts of Dare
landings and VA landings supported by Dare-based vessels). For example, dealer sales of $21.7
County). Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects and the Total
Effects listed in the table. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns
of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
occurring in the region under recent Oregon Inlet conditions are $3.7 million larger, resulting in
$3.7 million larger total impacts for sales, relative to the Dare County-only total impacts for
sales.
Region, Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$21,678,000
$35,254,270
61
176
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,868,678
$6,068,833
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$1,040,994
$5,107,509
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$1,200,001
----$1,356,748
(ii)
Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions scenario are presented in Table VI-7 (combined impacts of
Dare landings and VA landings supported by Dare-based vessels). For example, dealer sales of
$76.7 million in Dare County generate an additional $48 million in economic multiplier effects
May 2014
46
FINAL REPORT
occurring in the region under fully open Oregon Inlet conditions are $12.7 million larger,
resulting in $12.7 million larger total impacts for sales, relative to the Dare County-only total
impacts for sales.
Region, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$76,693,000
$124,723,485
216
624
Wage, Salary,
Dividend,
and Sole
Rent, and
State and
Proprietorship
Interest
Local Taxes
Income
Income
$6,611,058
$3,682,856
----$21,470,479 $18,069,480 $4,245,395
Federal
Taxes
----$4,799,937
$143.8 million in Dare County and the surrounding region for fully open inlet conditions. These
unemployment, etc.
under closed Oregon Inlet navigability conditions, and (2) $0.48436 in raw fish input is
Oregon Inlet Closed Conditions scenario are presented in Table V-8 (combined impacts of Dare
landings and VA landings supported by Dare-based vessels). For example, dealer sales of $6.2
May 2014
47
FINAL REPORT
occurring in the region under closed Oregon Inlet conditions are $1.1 million larger, resulting in
$1.1 million larger total impacts for regional sales, relative to the Dare County-only total impacts
for sales.
Region, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$6,194,000
$10,073,113
17
50
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$533,933
$1,734,032
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$297,440
$1,459,356
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$342,872
----$387,660
c)
The economic impact results presented in this section include the direct impacts of Oregon Inletdependent seafood dealer/processor/packer activity in Dare County and its multiplier effects
throughout the state of North Carolina. Typically, when a larger geographic region is
considered, multiplier effects are larger, and so the total economic impacts of a given economic
change are also larger. However, some economic changes that result in net economic impacts at
the county or regional levels do not result in net economic changes at the state level. For
example, a movement in seafood processor activity from a port outside Dare County, but inside
North Carolina, such as Beaufort, NC, to a port inside Dare County, such as Wanchese, NC,
results in net economic changes in Dare County but not at the state level. At the state level, there
is simply a transfer of economic activity from one location to another within the state.
(i)
Fishing section of this report. For the Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario, there are no
transfers of commercial fishing economic activity between regions within the state, and so the
direct economic impacts of Oregon Inlet-using commercial fishing activity at the state level are
the same as those at the county and regional levels. However, the multiplier effects of this
commercial fishing activity will be larger, because the purchases of Oregon Inlet-using Dare
County commercial fishermen and their families that are made statewide are now considered in
the analysis, rather than the purchases made only within the county or within the Oregon Inlet
region.
Assuming that (1) $10,500,000 in Oregon Inlet-dependent commercial fishery landings are
purchased by Dare County seafood processors as raw fish input under recent Oregon Inlet
navigability conditions, and (2) $0.48436 in raw fish input is purchased for every dollar of sales
revenue, an estimate of $21,678,000 is derived for annual Oregon Inlet-dependent seafood
May 2014
48
FINAL REPORT
packing/processing sales in Dare County. (2012-year dollars). The multiplier effects of the
seafood processing sales revenue beyond those attributable to the commercial fishing activity
supporting the raw fish/seafood inputs are calculated by adjusting the model settings within
IMPLAN such that all raw fish input is imported from outside the region (this assumption
ensures that IMPLAN does not double-count the regional multiplier effects of the raw fish input,
reported in the commercial fishing section of this study).
The statewide economic impacts of seafood dealer/processor/packer sales for the Oregon Inlet
Recent Conditions scenario are presented in Table V-9 (combined impacts of Dare landings and
VA landings supported by Dare-based vessels). For example, dealer sales of $21.7 million in
Dare County generate an additional $21 million in economic multiplier effects throughout the
state (including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region), for a total economic impact of $42.7
million in output (sales) sales statewide. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between
the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. The Direct Effects and Total Effects
listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
Under fully open inlet conditions, every dollar of direct impact sales, for example, results in
$0.46 of multiplier effects at the county level, whereas every dollar of direct impact sales results
in $0.97 of multiplier effects at the state level.
Table V-9. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Seafood Processing and Packing,
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$21,678,000
$42,678,573
62
223
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,659,221
$9,457,846
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$1,052,001
$6,596,656
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$1,511,314
----$2,026,397
(ii)
Fully Open Conditions scenario are presented in Table V-10 (combined impacts of Dare landings
May 2014
49
FINAL REPORT
and VA landings supported by Dare-based vessels, net of transfers to Dare from other NC
counties). For example, dealer sales of $42.7 million in Dare County generate an additional
$41.1 million in economic multiplier effects throughout the state (including Dare County and the
Oregon Inlet region), for a total economic impact of $83.8 million in output (sales) sales
statewide. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects and the
Total Effects listed in the table. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining
columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$42,672,372
$83,776,239
121
437
Wage, Salary,
Dividend,
and Sole
Rent, and
State and
Proprietorship
Interest
Local Taxes
Income
Income
$3,256,981
$2,065,033
----$18,565,353 $12,948,957 $2,966,645
Federal
Taxes
----$3,977,733
2014 and 2006 regional direct impacts and applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully open
conditions in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).
under closed Oregon Inlet navigability conditions, and (2) $0.48436 in raw fish input is
May 2014
50
FINAL REPORT
Closed Conditions scenario are presented in Table V-11 (combined impacts of NC landings
made in Dare County or formerly made in Dare County, and VA landings supported by NCbased vessels formerly based in Dare County). For example, dealer sales of $13.9 million in
Dare County generate an additional $13.5 million in economic multiplier effects throughout the
million in output (sales) sales statewide. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between
the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. The Direct Effects and Total Effects
listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$13,936,000
$27,436,506
40
143
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,066,653
$6,080,106
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$676,293
$4,240,751
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$971,569
----$1,302,697
2.
Once fish are landed, seafood packing and processing businesses prepare the catch for market.
Several commercial fishermen also have packing and processing operations within their
businesses. There were an estimated 18 commercial seafood packing and processing businesses
dependant on Oregon Inlet in 2012. In addition, a number of support businesses which service
and supply the commercial fishing vessels are located in Dare County.
Table V-12 presents the direct and total economic impacts on Dare County, the surrounding
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent seafood packing and processing for recent
over the last 3 years (a depth of 6 ft or greater only 40% of the time). Landings in Dare County
plus half of the landings in Engelhard were considered. Annual processor sales supported by
Oregon Inlet dependent seafood assumes the raw seafood cost of $0.48 per dollar of processor
sales from the Moffatt & Nichol 2006 study. Multiplier effects do not include the multiplier
effects of raw seafood purchased from fishermen. These are included under the commercial
fishing multiplier effects.
May 2014
51
FINAL REPORT
Economic Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$21,678,000
$31,644,092
$21,678,000
$35,254,270
$21,678,000
$42,678,573
63
149
61
176
62
223
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,097,434
$4,296,036
$1,868,678
$6,068,833
$1,659,221
$9,457,846
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$1,081,523
$4,306,368
$1,040,994
$5,107,509
$1,052,001
$6,596,656
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$963,787
----$1,200,001
----$1,511,314
----$1,020,826
----$1,356,748
----$2,026,397
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent seafood packing and processing for fully open
conditions. As mentioned previously, fully open conditions are considered to be dredged to a
depth of 14 ft or greater 85-100% of the time. Fully open inlet conditions would affect primarily
trawlers and scallop vessels. There would be an increase in trawler trips per year plus some
additional larger size category trawlers would be attracted to the region. There would be a large
increase in scallop activity due to scallop vessels returning, a large increase in scallop population
due to restoration efforts, and a large increase in scallop prices. However, it is likely that much
of the scallop landings would still occur in Virginia as they have in the past when Oregon Inlet
were healthier.
Economic Impacts For Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$76,693,000
$111,951,642
$76,693,000
$124,723,485
$42,672,372
$83,776,239
224
526
216
624
121
437
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$3,882,532
$15,198,766
$6,611,058
$21,470,479
$3,256,981
$18,565,353
Dividend,
Rent, and
State and
Federal
Interest
Local Taxes
Taxes
Income
$3,826,241
--------$15,235,237 $3,409,724 $3,611,528
$3,682,856
--------$18,069,480 $4,245,395 $4,799,937
$2,065,033
--------$12,948,957 $2,966,645 $3,977,733
The impacts in Table V-13 reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions improved
to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic impact could reach up to $129.1 million
in Dare County, $143.8 million in the surrounding region (including Dare County), and $96.6
million in state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) for fully
open inlet conditions. Again, these numbers were estimated by determining the ratio between
the 2014 and 2006 regional direct impacts and applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully
open conditions in each of the three geographic settings – Dare County, the surrounding region
(including Dare County), and the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the
May 2014
52
FINAL REPORT
etc.
Table V-14 presents the potential additional economic impacts from seafood packing and
processing that may be realized if Oregon Inlet were maintained to fully open conditions. The
results are equivalent to the difference between Table V-13 (fully open inlet scenario) and Table
V-12 (recent conditions scenario).
Table V-14. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from Seafood
Packing/Processing for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$55,015,000
$80,307,550
$55,015,000
$89,469,215
$20,994,372
$41,097,666
161
377
155
447
59
215
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$2,785,098
$10,902,730
$4,742,380
$15,401,646
$1,597,760
$9,107,507
Dividend,
Rent, and
State and
Interest
Local Taxes
Income
$2,744,718
----$10,928,869 $2,445,937
$2,641,862
----$12,961,971 $3,045,394
$1,013,032
----$6,352,301
$1,455,331
Federal
Taxes
----$2,590,702
----$3,443,189
----$1,951,336
surrounding region) for fully open inlet conditions. However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if
economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest rates, higher unemployment, etc.
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent seafood packing and processing for essentially
closed conditions. As mentioned previously, essentially closed conditions are considered to be
dredged to a depth of 6 ft or greater only 5% of the time. These conditions would affect
primarily larger trawlers and scallop vessels. Smaller trawlers and longliners (<50 ft in length)
would still be able to pass through the inlet at certain times. There would be a large loss of
landings from trawlers that would move to Morehead City or Virginia. There would likely be no
scallop vessels at all. They would likely go to Morehead City, Virginia, or New Bern.
Economic Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$6,194,000
$9,041,823
$6,194,000
$10,073,113
$13,936,000
$27,436,506
18
43
17
50
40
143
May 2014
53
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$313,567
$1,227,589
$533,933
$1,734,032
$1,066,653
$6,080,106
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$309,021
$1,230,487
$297,440
$1,459,356
$676,293
$4,240,751
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$275,388
----$342,872
----$971,569
----$291,693
----$387,660
----$1,302,697
FINAL REPORT
Table V-16 presents the potential loss of economic impacts from seafood packing and processing
that may be realized if Oregon Inlet were allowed to essentially close. The results are equivalent
to the difference between Table V-12 (recent conditions scenario) and Table V-15 (essentially
closed inlet scenario).
Table V-16. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Seafood
Packing/Processing for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
-$15,484,000
-$22,602,269
-$15,484,000
-$25,181,157
-$7,742,000
-$15,242,067
-45
-106
-44
-126
-22
-80
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
-$783,867
-$3,068,447
-$1,334,745
-$4,334,801
-$592,568
-$3,377,740
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
-$772,502
-$3,075,881
-$743,554
-$3,648,153
-$375,708
-$2,355,905
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
-----$688,399
-----$857,129
-----$539,745
-----$729,133
-----$969,088
-----$723,700
3.
The value of Oregon Inlet-dependent seafood processing and packing depends on the level of
Oregon Inlet-dependent commercial fishery landings. Over the period 1994-2012 (the NCDMF
changed its methodology in 1994, so earlier years are not comparable), the value of Oregon
Inlet-dependent commercial fishery landings has ranged from $9.9 million in 2012 to $16.7
million in 2006, in inflation-adjusted 2012-year dollars. The value of landings varies from year
to year, depending upon inlet conditions, economic conditions (including fish prices, and fuel
prices, which effect landings by affecting the number of trips taken), the availability of imported
seafood products, natural fish abundance in the sea, and fishing regulations. The value of ocean
commercial fishery landings used in the 2006 was $12.5 million, based on data from 1994 to
2005 (data for 2006 were not yet available when the 2006 study was completed). The value of
Oregon Inlet-dependent landings used in the present (2014) study for the "Recent Inlet
Conditions" scenario (years 2011-2013) is $10.5 million. This average assumes a value of
landings of $9 million for 2013, because data for 2013 were not yet available from NCDMF, and
commercial fishermen interviewed for the study said that inlet conditions were limiting trips in
2013, so a relatively low landings value was assumed for 2013.
The number of direct jobs supported by the Seafood Processing and Packing industry is based on
three sources: the number of jobs for this industry as reported by the North Carolina EDIS
database, the number of jobs for this industry as reported by the IMPLAN database, and the
number of jobs for each of several large seafood processors in Dare county, as reported by the
processors in interviews conducted for the present (2014) study. All three sources produced
similar estimates of the number of direct jobs. The number of jobs supported per dollar of sales
by the Seafood Processing and Packing industry in 2014 is lower than the number of jobs
supported per dollar of sales in 2006. This could be due to several factors, including: (1)
improvements in production efficiency, which lower the number of jobs required to produce a
given amount of sales, (2) increases in sales dollars received per pound of seafood processed, (3)
a change in the mix of workers from a larger number of part-time workers to fewer, full-time
May 2014
54
FINAL REPORT
workers, or some combination of these, or other, factors. In both studies, the best available data
were used to estimate the number of jobs.
If conditions (inlet, economic, biological, regulatory, etc.) in the future are similar to those in
2006, then commercial fishery landings and value would be larger than the values reported in the
present 2014 study under conditions similar to those that prevailed in 2006. On the other hand, if
non-inlet-related conditions (economic, biological, regulatory, etc.) become worse in the future,
then commercial fishery landings and value would be smaller than those presented in the 2014
study, and the value of inlet improvements would be smaller than that presented in the 2014
study. We would expect the value of Oregon Inlet-dependent seafood processing and packing to
be roughly proportional to commercial fishery landings (assuming the mix of fishing vessel types
remained similar to those assumed in the commercial fishing analysis section of the report), such
that if commercial fishery landings were to increase for a given inlet conditions scenario, then
the value of seafood processing and packing would also likely increase by a similar proportion
under the same inlet conditions scenario. For example, the direct impacts of seafood processing
and packing in the 2006 report were $25,000,000, based on commercial fishery landings of
$12,500,000.
Comparing tax revenue impacts from the 2006 study with those from the 2014 study, for seafood
processing and packing the percentage of each dollar of output collected in state and local taxes
was similar across the two studies. The percentage of each dollar of output collected in federal
taxes was about twice as large in 2006 compared with 2014. The reason is that seafood
processors employed more workers per million dollars of sales in 2006 (5.28 workers per $1
million sales) than in 2014 (2.92 workers per $1 million sales), and having a larger number of
workers per million dollars of sales results in higher overall federal taxes paid per dollar of sales
(output) in 2006 relative to 2014.
May 2014
55
FINAL REPORT
May 2014
56
FINAL REPORT
VI.
BOAT BUILDING & SUPPORT SERVICES
The boat building business is a significant industry in the Oregon Inlet region and especially in
Dare County. NCWaterways.com, North Carolina‘s boating industry and marine trades
information website, lists 19 boat builders in the Oregon Inlet region in 2014 (see Table VI-1)
(NCWaterways.com, 2014). Of these, 15 are located in Dare County and represent a substantial
portion of the manufacturing business in the County (NCDC, 2014).
Table VI-1. Boat Builders Located in Oregon Inlet Region, NC, 2014
Boat Builder
County
Town
HML Boatworks
Camden
Shiloh
Sullivan Boatworks
Currituck Point Harbor
Paul Mann Custom Boats
Dare
Manns Harbor
B & B Boats, Inc.
Dare
Manteo
Harrison Boatworks, LLC
Dare
Manteo
Bayliss Boatworks
Dare
Wanchese
Blackwell Boatworks
Dare
Wanchese
Bradley Custom Boats
Dare
Wanchese
Briggs Boatworks Inc.
Dare
Wanchese
Briglia Boatworks, L.L.C
Dare
Wanchese
Carolina Custom Marine
Dare
Wanchese
Carolina Marine Group - Ritchie Howell Boats
Dare
Wanchese
Carolina Yacht Enterprises
Dare
Wanchese
Guthrie Boatworks
Dare
Wanchese
Johnson Boat Works
Dare
Wanchese
Scarborough Boat Works
Dare
Wanchese
Spencer Yachts
Dare
Wanchese
Foster Boats
Hyde
Hatteras
Laurel Point Boat Works
Tyrell
Columbia
This region boasts the birthplace of ―Carolina Style‖ boat building, a style which originated to
withstand the incomparable Oregon Inlet waters and rough seas offshore of Bodie and Pea
Islands. Local boat builders are directly dependent on Oregon Inlet, as the valuable reputation of
the boats for strength and durability is maintained by continuous research and testing in the
uniquely rough waters offshore.
This chapter will present pertinent information and perspectives gained from field interviews
conducted with several local boat-builders followed by modeling methodology and analysis
results for Oregon Inlet-dependent boat building and support services.
A.
BOAT BUILDING AND SUPPORT SERVICE SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS
the boat building and support services industries. M&N received 15 survey responses from
May 2014
57
FINAL REPORT
individuals and/or companies in Wanchese and Manns Harbor. The boat builders indicated that
while they have maintained a steady supply of business over the recent years, more of their
supplies are being bought outside of Dare County and North Carolina due to shutdown of
businesses. If the inlet were to fully open, they estimated that their business would increase on
the order of 50%-100%. If Oregon Inlet were to essentially close, approximately half of the boat
builders could continue operations with a 10%-50% reduction in sales. The other half would
likely move their businesses to places like South Carolina and Florida or they would shut down
completely. The support service businesses would see a similar increase in business to the boat
builders if Oregon Inlet were to be fully open and a similar decrease in business to the boat
builders if the inlet were to essentially closed. Most of the support service businesses indicated
that they would not relocate if the inlet were to close, but just continue to operate with the loss of
business.
M&N also conducted in person interviews with 2 individuals who are involved in the boat
building and support services industries. One of the individuals was a boat builder who indicated
that while his boat building business could continue, although downsized, if the inlet were to
close, the service yard operating within his business would go out of business. Many of the boat
builders in the area would have the same issue. They could continue to build boats, using
Beaufort Inlet. However, they would lose revenue due to the service yards going out of business.
He also indicated that he currently had the money to build another building to expand his
business but was not willing to do it unless he knows the inlet will be maintained. Otherwise, he
is currently looking at downsizing his business in Wanchese and relocating a majority of it to
South Carolina.
The survey contacts and questions for boat building and support services (marine trades) can be
found in Appendix A. Overall trends or business costs provided by the interviewees were used
in the economic modeling and analyses to not only determine the current economic value of
Oregon Inlet but how that value would change if the inlet were fully open or essentially closed.
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – BOAT BUILDING & SUPPORT
SERVICES
The 15 boat builders located in Dare County represent a substantial portion of the 47
manufacturing businesses in the County (NCDC, 2014), directly employing 274 workers in
2012, who earned $10.6 million in wages. Boat building accounted for approximately 274 of the
480 manufacturing jobs in Dare County in 2013 (NC-EDIS, 2014). Indeed, Spencer Yachts, Inc.,
is one of the top 25 employers in the County and is the largest manufacturing employer. Boat
building jobs are relatively high-paying, with an average weekly wage of $744 in 2012,
compared to the County average weekly wage for private industry of $517 (NC-EDIS, 2014,
NCDC, 2014). Dare County boat builders buy some of their materials locally, including glass,
electronics, fuel and water tanks, and miscellaneous small tools and hardware items. For
example, Harbor Welding provides fuel tanks and water tanks to boat builders. Many other
production inputs are purchased from vendors located outside Dare County, mostly in North
Carolina and Virginia.
May 2014
58
FINAL REPORT
1.
The economic impacts of Oregon Inlet-dependent boat building are calculated for three
geographic areas: Dare County, the Oregon Inlet region, and the State of North Carolina as a
whole. For each geographic region, three navigability scenarios are considered: Oregon Inlet
recent conditions, Oregon Inlet fully open, and Oregon Inlet closed.
The economic impact numbers reflect Oregon Inlet-using boat builders only. The impacts do not
include the effects of Oregon Inlet navigability on boat builders located outside the Oregon Inlet
region, such as builders located in Beaufort/Morehead City, NC.
scenarios.
a)
(i)
Information on recent sales of the boat building industry in Dare County come from three
sources. First, the five boat builders located in Dare County who were interviewed for the
present study report approximately $39 million in sales for 2012-2013; however, this figure does
not include the sales of all boat builders in the County. Second, the IMPLAN database for the
County reports $59.5 million in boat sales for the industry in 2012. Third, the NC-EDIS data
indicate that $10.6 million in wages were paid to boat building employees in Dare County in
2012, and direct employment in the boat building industry was 274; these figures are consistent
with annual sales figures as reported in the IMPLAN database when the sales per employee and
sales per wage dollar conversion factors in IMPLAN are used to convert the NC-EDIS wages
and employment figures to annual sale equivalents. Based on this information, for the purposes
of this study we assume a figure of $59.5 million for annual boat building industry sales in Dare
County under recent (2010-2012) conditions.
Based on $59.5 million per year in direct sales for the Dare County boat building industry,
economic impacts are calculated using IMPLAN and are presented in Table VI-2. Economic
table. The multiplier effects include the sales of the Dare County businesses that supply and
service the boat building industry, as well as the economic effects within Dare County of the
spending done by boat builder employees and their families within the County. In Table VI-2,
boat sales of $59.5 million in Dare County generate an additional $35.1 million in economic
multiplier effects, for a total economic impact of $94.6 million in sales (output). The Direct
Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar
way.
May 2014
59
FINAL REPORT
Recent Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$59,500,000
$94,550,051
274
532
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$10,078,571
$21,684,229
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$6,702,212
$17,909,579
----$3,059,496
----$4,769,732
(ii)
The five Dare County boat builders interviewed for this study estimate that their combined
annual sales would increase from $39 million under recent Oregon Inlet conditions to $65
million under Fully Open Oregon Inlet conditions, an increase of 67%. This percentage increase
is applied to the $59.5 million annual direct sales figure for all Dare County boat builders to
obtain an estimate of $99.2 million in annual direct sales for the Dare County boat building
industry under Fully Open Oregon Inlet conditions.
Based on an estimate of $99.2 million per year in direct sales for the Dare County boat building
industry under fully open Oregon Inlet conditions, economic impacts are calculated using
IMPLAN and are presented in Table VI-3. Economic multiplier effects are the difference
between the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. The multiplier effects include
the sales of the Dare County businesses that supply and service the boat building industry, as
well as the economic effects within Dare County of the spending done by boat builder employees
and their families within the County. In Table VI-3, boat sales of $99.2 million in Dare County
generate an additional $58.4 million in economic multiplier effects, for a total economic impact
of $157.6 million in sales (output). The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$99,200,000
$157,636,387
457
887
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$16,803,264
$36,152,529
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$11,174,109
$29,859,333
----$5,100,875
----$7,952,225
May 2014
60
FINAL REPORT
Under ―essentially closed‖ Oregon Inlet conditions, Dare County boat builders interviewed for
this study report that Dare County location would be a much less attractive location for their
operations, because they could not easily access the ocean to conduct ―sea trials‖ of their boat
designs, and the passive, but very substantial, marketing exposure they get from the many
boaters who come to the Oregon Inlet region to fish would be greatly diminished. In addition,
many boat builders also service and repair the charter and private boats using Oregon Inlet, and
this service and repair business would be greatly diminished if the ocean were not accessible via
Oregon Inlet.
Of the five Dare County boat builders interviewed for this study, two said that they would
continue operations in Dare County under closed inlet conditions, but with a 10% to 50%
reduction in sales. Two of the five builders would move their business to a location outside
North Carolina (one to South Carolina, and one to Florida). The remaining boat builder would
close his business and cease boat building altogether. Of the $39 million in annual boat sales
attributable to these five builders under recent Oregon Inlet conditions, the builders estimate that
only $8 million would remain in Dare County under closed Oregon Inlet conditions, a decrease
in sales of 79%. This percentage decrease in sales is applied to the $59.5 million in annual sales
by the Dare County boat building industry under recent Oregon Inlet conditions to obtain an
estimate of $12.2 million in annual boat sales in Dare County under closed Oregon Inlet
conditions.
Other North Carolina boat builders located outside the Dare County region could also suffer
reduced sales under closed conditions in Oregon Inlet. One large boat builder located in
Beaufort, NC, estimates that 50% of its customers use Oregon Inlet, and if the inlet were closed,
the builder estimates that his sales would decrease by one-third. This one-third decrease in sales
is the builder‘s estimate of the combined (net) effect of (1) increased sales due to some former
customers of Dare County builders buying from him instead and (2) decreased sales from his
own customers not having access to Oregon Inlet as the primary access point to world-class
fishing grounds. However, for the purposes of this study, it is assumed that existing boat
builders located outside the Dare County region would suffer no losses in sales from essentially
closed conditions in Oregon Inlet. This assumption makes the impact estimates more
conservative.
Based on an estimate of $12.2 million per year in direct sales for the Dare County boat building
industry under closed Oregon Inlet conditions, economic impacts are calculated using IMPLAN
and are presented in Table VI-4. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the
Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. The multiplier effects include the sales of
the Dare County businesses that supply and service the boat building industry, as well as the
economic effects within Dare County of the spending done by boat builder employees and their
families within the County. In Table VI-4, boat sales of $12.2 million in Dare County generate
an additional $7.2 million in economic multiplier effects, for a total economic impact of $19.4
million in sales (output). The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of
the table are interpreted in a similar way.
May 2014
61
FINAL REPORT
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$12,200,000
$19,386,733
56
109
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$2,066,530
$4,446,178
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$1,374,236
$3,672,216
----$627,326
----$977,996
b)
impact results presented in this section include the direct impacts of Oregon Inlet-dependent boat
builders that occur within Dare County, the economic multiplier effects that occur within Dare
County, and the economic multiplier effects that occur in the other counties of the Oregon Inlet
region. The results in this section do not include the economic impacts of any direct boat
building activity occurring outside Dare County. The results presented here for the Oregon Inlet
impacts—the only direct impacts in the region considered here are those that occur in Dare
County.
(i)
The Oregon Inlet Region economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario are
presented in Table VI-5. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct
Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. The multiplier effects include the sales of the
Oregon Inlet region businesses that supply and service the boat building industry in Dare
County, as well as the economic effects within the Oregon Inlet region of the spending done by
boat builder employees and their families within the region. In Table VI-5, boat sales of $59.5
$99.6 million in sales (output) throughout the Oregon Inlet Region (including Dare County).
in a similar way.
occurring in the Oregon Inlet region are $5 million larger, resulting in $5 million larger total
impacts for sales, relative to the Dare County-only total impacts for sales.
May 2014
62
FINAL REPORT
Table VI-5. Annual Economic Impacts of Boat Building in Oregon Inlet Region, Oregon
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$59,500,000
$99,596,745
274
588
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$10,078,571
$23,552,604
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$6,702,212
$19,431,044
----$3,560,704
----$5,224,739
(ii)
The Oregon Inlet Region economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions scenario
are presented in Table VI-6. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct
$166 million in sales (output) throughout the Oregon Inlet Region (including Dare County). The
Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a
similar way.
occurring in the Oregon Inlet region are $8.4 million larger, resulting in $8.4 million larger total
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$99,200,000
$166,050,373
457
979
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$16,803,264
$39,267,534
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$11,174,109
$32,395,960
----$5,936,501
----$8,710,824
unemployment, etc.
May 2014
63
FINAL REPORT
The Oregon Inlet Region economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Closed Conditions scenario are
presented in Table VI-7. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct
$20.4 million in sales (output) throughout the Oregon Inlet Region (including Dare County).
in a similar way.
occurring in the Oregon Inlet region are $1 million larger, resulting in $1 million larger total
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$12,200,000
$20,421,517
56
121
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$2,066,530
$4,829,273
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$1,374,236
$3,984,181
----$730,094
----$1,071,290
c)
The economic impact results presented in this section include the direct impacts of Oregon Inletdependent boat building in Dare County and its multiplier effects throughout the state of North
Carolina. Typically, when a larger geographic region is considered, multiplier effects are larger,
and so the total economic impacts of a given economic change are also larger. However, some
economic changes that result in net economic impacts at the county or regional levels do not
result in net economic changes at the state level. For example, a movement in boat building
activity from a location outside Dare County, but inside North Carolina, such as Beaufort, NC, to
Dare County results in net economic changes in Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region but not
at the state level. At the state level, there is simply a transfer of economic activity from one
location to another within the state. As a result, the answer to the question of whether economic
impacts will increase as larger geographic areas are considered depends on the combined effects
of (1) larger economic multiplier effects as we consider larger geographic areas and (2) smaller
direct effects as we consider larger geographic areas because more economic changes are
classified as transfers within a larger area. Therefore, the total impacts in some impact
categories may increase as we move from the consideration of county and regional-level impacts
to statewide impacts, but total impacts in other impact categories may decrease.
May 2014
64
FINAL REPORT
(i)
For the Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario, there are no transfers of boat building activity
between regions within the state, and so the direct economic impacts of boat building activity at
the state level are the same as those at the county and regional levels. However, the multiplier
effects of this boat building activity will be larger, because the statewide purchases of Dare
County boat builders, their employees and their families are now considered in the analysis,
rather than the purchases made only within the County or within the Oregon Inlet region.
The statewide economic impacts of Dare County boat building for the Oregon Inlet Recent
Conditions scenario are presented in Table VI-8. Economic multiplier effects are the difference
between the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. The multiplier effects include
the sales of the statewide businesses that supply and service the boat building industry in Dare
County, as well as the economic effects statewide of the spending done by boat builder
employees and their families. For example, boat sales of $59.5 million in Dare County generate
an additional $75.2 million in economic multiplier effects statewide (including the Dare County
and Oregon Inlet region effects), for a total economic impact of $134.7 million in sales (output)
statewide. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are
interpreted in a similar way.
Compared to the multiplier effects occurring within Dare County only, the multiplier effects for
sales (output), for example, occurring statewide are $40.1 million larger, resulting in $40.1
million larger total impacts for sales at the state level, relative to the Dare County-only total
impacts for sales. Under recent inlet conditions, every dollar of direct impact sales, for example,
results in $0.59 of multiplier effects at the county level, whereas every dollar of direct impact
sales results in $1.26 of multiplier effects at the state level.
Table VI-8. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Dare County Boat Building, Oregon
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$59,500,000
$134,743,983
274
786
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$11,436,303
$38,954,238
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$6,518,086
$25,833,107
----$4,905,638
----$8,172,590
(ii)
The statewide direct economic impacts of boat building activity in Dare County under fully open
inlet conditions are based on the assumption that 50% of the increase in Dare County boat sales
from recent inlet conditions to fully open conditions is simply a transfer of existing boat building
activity from other areas within North Carolina (Beaufort/Morehead, Washington, NC, etc.) to
Dare County. The economic impacts of this boat building activity that transfers to Dare County
from other locations within the state is not considered to be a net gain from the perspective of the
state. As a result, the direct effects at the state level of Dare County boat building under the fully
open inlet scenario are $79.4 million ($59.5M + 0.50($99.2M - $59.5M) = $79.4M), somewhat
less than the $99.2 million in direct effects at the Dare County level under the fully open inlet
May 2014
65
FINAL REPORT
scenario, because a transfer of boat building from Beaufort, NC, for example, to Dare County is
a net gain from Dare County‘s perspective, but it is not a net gain from the state‘s perspective.
The statewide impacts of the Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions scenario are presented in Table
VI-9 below. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects and the
Total Effects listed in the table. The multiplier effects include the sales of the statewide
businesses that supply and service the boat building industry in Dare County, as well as the
economic effects statewide of the spending done by boat builder employees and their families.
For example, Dare County boat sales of $79.3 million (not including the value of boat building
activity transferred from other locations within the state to Dare County, which are not
considered a net gain to the state) under the Fully Open inlet scenario generate an additional
$100.3 million in economic multiplier effects throughout the state (including Dare County and
the Oregon Inlet region), for a total economic impact of $179.7 million in sales (output)
statewide (again, including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region). The Direct Effects and
Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
Comparing the economic impacts at the state level with those that occur at the county and
regional levels, the direct effects of a fully open Oregon Inlet at the state level ($79.4M) are
smaller than those at the county and regional levels ($99.2M) , because although transfers of
economic activity from other North Carolina locations to Dare County ports as a result of a fully
open inlet are additions to the direct economic effects in Dare County and the surrounding
region, these transfers to not add to the direct economic effects at the state level—they are
simply transfers within the state. However, in contrast to direct effects, multiplier effects are
larger at the state level compared to multiplier effects at the county or regional levels. For
example, the multiplier effects for sales at the state level in the Fully Open inlet scenario are
$1.26 per dollar of sales, whereas the multiplier effects are only $0.59 per dollar of sales at the
county level.
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$79,350,000
$179,696,388
365
1,048
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$15,251,607
$51,949,895
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$8,692,607
$34,451,380
----$6,542,226
----$10,899,077
$226.5 million in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region)
for fully open inlet conditions. These numbers were estimated by determining the ratio between
the 2014 and 2006 regional direct impacts and applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully
open conditions in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding
region). However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if economic
May 2014
66
FINAL REPORT
Although none of the five Dare County boat builders interviewed for this study indicated that
they would move their boat building activities to another location within North Carolina in the
event that Oregon Inlet were closed, it seems reasonable that at least some of the other boat
builders would move some of their operations elsewhere in NC, as other locations in the state
currently host (e.g., Beaufort/Morehead City, NC), or recently hosted (Brunswick County, NC),
boat building activities. For the purpose of this study, it is assumed that 20% of the decrease in
Dare County boat sales resulting from closed conditions in Oregon Inlet, or $9.46 million
(0.20*[$59.5M - $12.2M] = $9.46M) is simply a transfer of boat building activity to other
locations within the state, so this portion of the original Dare County boat sales under recent
Oregon Inlet conditions remains part of the boat sales direct effect when calculating the
statewide impacts. The remainder of the estimated decrease in Dare County boat sales is
assumed to reflect--as indicated by the interviews with Dare County boat builders--reductions in
sales of boat builders that remain active in Dare County, transfers of boat building activity from
Dare County to locations outside the state, or the complete shut-down of some boat builders
currently active in Dare County.
The statewide economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Closed Conditions scenario are presented
in Table VI-10. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects and
the Total Effects listed in the table. The multiplier effects include the sales of the statewide
businesses that supply and service the boat building industry in (or formerly in, but now located
elsewhere in NC) Dare County, as well as the economic effects statewide of the spending done
by Dare County boat builder employees and their families. For example, boat sales of $21.7
million made in North Carolina by boat builders remaining in Dare County (or formerly based in
Dare County) generate an additional $27.4 million in economic multiplier effects throughout the
million in sales (output) throughout the state (again, including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet
region). The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are
Comparing the county-level direct impacts with state-level direct impacts for the Oregon Inlet
Closed scenario, the direct impacts are smaller at the county level ($12.2 million) and larger at
the state level ($21.7 million), because the impacts of the boat building activity that transfers
from Dare County to other locations within North Carolina as a result of closed conditions in
Oregon Inlet are a loss when viewed from the County‘s perspective but are simply a transfer
from one port to another within the state, resulting in no net loss, from the state‘s perspective. In
contrast to direct impacts, economic multiplier effects are larger at the state level than at the
county or regional levels. Under closed inlet conditions, every dollar of direct impact sales, for
example, results in $0.59 of multiplier effects at the county level, whereas every dollar of direct
impact sales results in $1.26 of multiplier effects at the state level.
May 2014
67
FINAL REPORT
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$21,660,000
$49,051,338
100
286
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$4,163,199
$14,180,652
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$2,372,802
$9,404,119
----$1,785,818
----$2,975,097
2.
If the navigability of Oregon Inlet is not maintained, then interview responses indicate that some
businesses would remain open with a decrease in business while others would relocate outside of
North Carolina or close altogether. If the boat builders were to relocate or cease operation due to
a loss of navigability in Oregon Inlet, Dare County would lose not only the boat building
employment, wages, and profits but also those of the immediate support businesses. Other Dare
County employees and businesses owners would also suffer reductions in employment, wages,
rents and profits due to economic multiplier effects. These impacts can also be felt by the
surrounding region and entire state of North Carolina.
In terms of impacts on government tax and fee revenues, only the total impacts are presented, as
the IMPLAN modeling software produces estimates of total impacts only for taxes and fees. If
we assume that the Federal government would receive similar revenues and fees if the businesses
relocate to another state, then the Federal government portion of the impacts should not be
included in the overall impact estimate. However, should businesses relocate, the Dare County
and State of North Carolina governments would face reductions in tax collections and revenues.
The economic impacts on the Dare County and North Carolina state governments are given by
the ―State and Local Taxes‖ values only.
Table VI-11 presents the direct and total economic impacts on Dare County, the surrounding
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent boat building and support services for recent
over the last 3 years (a depth of 6 ft or greater only 40% of the time).
Table VI-11. Summary of Annual Oregon Inlet-Dependent Boat Building and Support
Services Economic Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$59,500,000
$94,550,051
$59,500,000
$99,596,745
$59,500,000
$134,743,983
274
532
274
588
274
786
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$10,078,571
$21,684,229
$10,078,571
$23,552,604
$11,436,303
$38,954,238
May 2014
68
Dividend,
Rent, and
State and
Federal
Interest
Local Taxes
Taxes
Income
$6,702,212
--------$17,909,579 $3,059,496 $4,769,732
$6,702,212
--------$19,431,044 $3,560,704 $5,224,739
$6,518,086
--------$25,833,107 $4,905,638 $8,172,590
FINAL REPORT
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent boat building and support services for fully
open conditions. As mentioned previously, fully open conditions are considered to be dredged to
a depth of 14 ft or greater 85-100% of the time.
Services Economic Impacts For Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$99,200,000
$157,636,387
$99,200,000
$166,050,373
$79,350,000
$179,696,388
457
887
457
979
365
1,048
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$16,803,264
$36,152,529
$16,803,264
$39,267,534
$15,251,607
$51,949,895
Dividend,
Rent, and
State and
Federal
Interest
Local Taxes
Taxes
Income
$11,174,109
--------$29,859,333 $5,100,875 $7,952,225
$11,174,109
--------$32,395,960 $5,936,501 $8,710,824
$8,692,607
--------$34,451,380 $6,542,226 $10,899,077
The impacts in Table VI-12 reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions
$198.7 million in Dare County, $209.3 million in the surrounding region (including Dare
County), and $226.5 million in state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the
surrounding region) for fully open inlet conditions. Again, these numbers were estimated by
to the total impacts for fully open conditions in each of the three geographic settings – Dare
County, the surrounding region (including Dare County), and the state of North Carolina
(including Dare County and the surrounding region). However, it is also possible that these
projections could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest
rates, higher unemployment, etc.
Table VI-13 presents the potential additional economic impacts from boat building and support
services that may be realized if Oregon Inlet were maintained to fully open conditions. The
results are equivalent to the difference between Table VI-12 (fully open inlet scenario) and Table
VI-11 (recent conditions scenario).
May 2014
69
FINAL REPORT
Table VI-13. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from Boat
Building and Support Services for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$39,700,000
$63,086,336
$39,700,000
$66,453,628
$19,850,000
$44,952,405
183
355
183
392
91
262
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$6,724,693
$14,468,300
$6,724,693
$15,714,930
$3,815,304
$12,995,657
Dividend,
Rent, and
State and
Interest
Local Taxes
Income
$4,471,897
----$11,949,754 $2,041,379
$4,471,897
----$12,964,916 $2,375,797
$2,174,521
----$8,618,273
$1,636,588
Federal
Taxes
----$3,182,493
----$3,486,085
----$2,726,487
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent boat building and support services for
essentially closed conditions. As mentioned previously, essentially closed conditions are
considered to be dredged to a depth of 6 ft or greater only 5% of the time. Based on the boat
building field interviews, some boat builders would continue operations but with a 10% to 50%
drop in sales while others would either relocate to South Carolina or Florida or shut down the
business completely.
Services Economic Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$12,200,000
$19,386,733
$12,200,000
$20,421,517
$21,660,000
$49,051,338
56
109
56
121
100
286
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$2,066,530
$4,446,178
$2,066,530
$4,829,273
$4,163,199
$14,180,652
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$1,374,236
$3,672,216
$1,374,236
$3,984,181
$2,372,802
$9,404,119
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$627,326
----$730,094
----$1,785,818
----$977,996
----$1,071,290
----$2,975,097
Table VI-15 presents the potential loss of economic impacts from boat building and support services
that may be realized if Oregon Inlet were allowed to essentially close. The results are equivalent to
the difference between Table VI-11 (recent conditions scenario) and Table VI-14 (essentially
May 2014
70
FINAL REPORT
Table VI-15. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Boat Building
and Support Services for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
-$47,300,000
-$75,163,318
-$47,300,000
-$79,175,228
-$37,840,000
-$85,692,645
-218
-423
-218
-467
-174
-500
Wage, Salary,
Dividend,
and Sole
Rent, and
State and
Federal
Proprietorship
Interest
Local Taxes
Taxes
Income
Income
-$8,012,041
-$5,327,976
---------$17,238,051 -$14,237,363 -$2,432,170 -$3,791,736
-$8,012,041
-$5,327,976
---------$18,723,331 -$15,446,863 -$2,830,610 -$4,153,449
-$7,273,104
-$4,145,284
---------$24,773,586 -$16,428,988 -$3,119,820 -$5,197,493
3.
In the 2006 study, we assumed $75 million in Dare County boat builder sales under baseline
(2004-2005) inlet conditions. In 2014, Dare County boat builder sales are depressed for two
reasons: a bad economy in recent years (2011-2013) relative to 2004-2005, and bad inlet
conditions in recent years (2011-2013). Data on inboard boat sales for the United States as a
whole (unaffected by Oregon Inlet conditions) from the National Marine Manufacturers
Association show that years 2004-2005 were among the best years for US boat sales in the
period 1980-2012. While 20,000 inboard boats were sold per year in 2004-2005, over the period
1980-2012 only 15,000 inboard boats were sold per year over, on average. Hence, boats sold in
an average year are about 25% less than boats sold per year in the 2004-2005 period. The value
of Dare County boat builder sales under baseline (recent inlet) conditions used in the 2014 study
is $59.5 million; this value is about 21% less than the $75 million value used in the 2006 study.
As a result, we feel that Dare County boat sales under recent inlet conditions as given in the 2014
study are close to what sales would be under average economic conditions (which are assumed in
the 2014 study), and sales in 2004-2005 should not be used as a baseline, as they represent years
with above-average economic conditions. However, if general economic conditions improve
such that they are similar to the conditions that existed in 2004-2005, and inlet conditions were
similar to inlet conditions in 2004-2005, then Dare County boat sales would likely be larger,
perhaps $75 million. (The increase in sales could be due to existing boat builders selling more
boats, or existing boat builders selling larger or more expensive boats, or new boat builders
beginning new businesses, or existing boat builders moving to Dare County from locations
outside North Carolina, or any combination of these factors.) In this case, any further
improvement in inlet conditions (beyond conditions in 2004-2005) might improve boat sales
such that they would reach a level higher than $75 million. On the other hand, were economic
conditions to deteriorate, boat sales under recent inlet conditions could be less than those
presented in this study, and improvements in inlet conditions would result in smaller increases in
boat sales (due to worse economic conditions).
Comparing tax revenue impacts from the 2006 study with those from the 2014 study, for boat
building the percentage of each dollar of output collected in state and local taxes was similar
across the two studies. The percentage of each dollar of output collected in federal taxes was
also similar across the two studies.
May 2014
71
FINAL REPORT
May 2014
72
FINAL REPORT
VII. RECREATIONAL FISHING & TOURISM
regions along the East Coast due to its close proximity to the Gulf Stream and extended seasons
of abundant fishing opportunities (e.g. marlin, tuna). The Outer Banks is called "The Billfish
Capital of the World," and for good reason. Hundreds of blue marlin, white marlin and sailfish
are caught and released in our waters every year. The billfish season is long, with the peak for
blue marlin in June and white marlin and sailfish most plentiful in August and September. All
are caught consistently from late spring to early fall. Another big draw are yellowfin tuna, which
are caught year-round. The recreational sport fishery is vast and varied, including large
―headboat‖ recreational fishing vessels, smaller ―for-hire‖ charter fishing vessels, and private
fishing boats. Many tourists who visit the beaches on the Outer Banks islands of Dare County
include a recreational fishing trip through Oregon Inlet on their vacation itinerary.
These recreational fishing activities generate additional economic impacts for the region, in
particular for the tourism industry. Although many of these jobs are related to beach tourism and
recreation, which is not dependent on Oregon Inlet navigability, a significant number of jobs in
the industry are related to sport fishing, which is dependent on the inlet for access to the ocean
fishing grounds which contain the fish species prized by sport fishermen.
A.
RECREATIONAL FISHING AND TOURISM SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS
The recreational fishing sector includes both for-hire (charter) fishing and private boating.
Surveys were sent to approximately 14 individuals who work in the charter boat industry. M&N
received 8 responses from charter boat operators. They indicated that if the inlet were to fully
open, the number of trips they take would increase around 10%-25%. Approximately half of the
respondents would not operate their business anymore if Oregon Inlet were to essentially close.
Others indicated they would move their business in state (i.e. Hatteras), out of state (i.e.
Virginia), or out of country (i.e. Mexico). A few would close their business and find other
means of employment.
Surveys were sent to 6 individuals and/or businesses that operate in the private boating industry.
M&N received 2 responses from marinas which house private boats and 1 response from a
recreational fisherman. Both marinas indicated that they would not continue to operate if
Oregon Inlet were to essentially close. One of the marinas indicated that business would double
if Oregon Inlet were to be fully open while the other indicated that business would not change.
In addition to those active in the charter and private boating industries, interviews were
conducted with 3 members of the USCG and USACE who deal with the surveying and safety of
the inlet on a daily basis. The recreational fishermen, as well as commercial fishermen, rely on
the efforts of the Coast Guard and USACE in order to be able to traverse the inlet. The USACE
surveys the worst parts of the navigation channel on a weekly basis. They freely hand out the
survey information to fishermen who need to know how the location of deep water has changed
each week. The USACE surveys the entire navigation channel approximately once a month.
They are also in charge of the dredging that occurs. Unfortunately funding for maintenance
dredging has decreased from approximately $8 million per year to $1 million per year, allowing
for little maintenance to occur. Meanwhile, based on the USACE surveys, the Coast Guard is
May 2014
73
FINAL REPORT
responsible for placing and maintaining the buoys that highlight the navigation channel.
Unfortunately, the navigation channel moves so quickly that the buoys are often out of place.
Not only is this an issue for the fishermen, but also for search and rescue vessels should there be
an accident.
The recreational fishing industry, whether it be charter or private boating, lends itself to the
general tourism of Dare County. Approximately 26 individuals and/or businesses were sent
questionnaires regarding general tourism (restaurants, lodging, tackle shops, etc.). M&N
received 12 responses from various businesses in the area. Restaurants indicated that they would
probably have slight increases (10%) if Oregon Inlet were fully open and slight decreases (10%)
if it were fully closed. The surveys indicated that tackle shops would be the most susceptible to
the conditions of Oregon Inlet with large increases (50%) in business if the inlet were to be fully
open and large decreases (50%) or go out of business if the inlet were to essentially close. Some
lodging entities did not feel like they would be affected by the condition of the inlet although less
expensive areas like campgrounds and possibly motels may see an impact because that is where
visiting fisherman often stay.
The survey contacts and questions for recreational fishing, both charter (for-hire fishing) and
private boating (marine trades), and general tourism can be found in Appendix A. Overall trends
or business costs provided by the interviewees were used in the economic modeling and analyses
to not only determine the current economic value of Oregon Inlet but how that value would
change if the inlet were fully open or essentially closed.
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – RECREATIONAL FISHING &
TOURISM
A study of the For-Hire Recreational Fishing Industry in North Carolina in 2008 conducted by
Dumas et al. (2009) found that there were 166 for-hire recreational fishing vessels (160 charter
vessels and 6 headboat vessels) based in Dare County north of Oregon Inlet. Most of these
vessels have a captain and one or two additional crewmembers. The Dumas study found that
309 individuals are directly employed as for-hire recreational fishermen, 289 aboard charter
boats, and 20 aboard headboats. Of these fishermen, a few work on vessels that may fish in
sound/estuary waters, so approximately 300 individuals work on for-hire fishing vessels that
access ocean waters via Oregon Inlet. The Dumas study found that charter vessels based in the
northern coastal region of North Carolina make an average of 120 one-day fishing trips per year
(Dumas at al. 2009). Each charter vessel carries 6 angler passengers. A rough estimate of the
number of charter fishing angler days per year is 160 charter vessels * 6 passengers per vessel *
120 fishing days per year = 115,200 charter fishing angler days per year. The Dumas study
found that 55% of anglers taking charter vessel trips in the northern coastal region of the state
said that charter fishing was the primary purpose of their visit to the North Carolina coast.
Ninety-eight percent of these charter boat anglers made overnight trips to the North Carolina
coast, rather than day trips, and 85% were from out of state.
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS 2011) periodically conducts a nationwide survey
of saltwater recreational fishermen, the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP). The
2011 MRIP survey data are used to estimate the number of for-hire (primarily charter) and
private boat recreational fishing trips that access the ocean via Oregon Inlet. A recreational
May 2014
74
FINAL REPORT
fishing trip is defined in the MRIP data as an angler-day: one angler spending one day fishing.
(Thus, one charter boat carrying 6 anglers for one day of fishing would be counted as 6 trips.)
The 2011 data are chosen since they are the most recent with an economic expenditure add-on
survey. The 2011 MRIP dataset contains surveys from 20,634 hook and line trips that took place
in seven North Carolina counties; these 20,634 surveys represent the estimated 4.85 million total
hook and line trips taken in 2011 in these counties. The seven counties are Dare, Hyde, Carteret,
Onslow, Pender, New Hanover and Brunswick.
Thirty-seven percent of all North Carolina saltwater fishing trips occur in Dare County. Twenty
percent occur in Carteret County, 14% in New Hanover County and 11% in Brunswick County.
Seventeen percent of trips occur in Onslow (8%), Pender (6%) and Hyde (2%) counties.
Of the 1.8 million Dare County saltwater hook and line fishing trips, 86% are ocean fishing trips
and 14% are inland (sound/estuary) trips. Seventy-one percent of all Dare County saltwater
fishing trips are shore fishing trips, 8% are for-hire trips and 21% are private boat trips. Thirtyfive percent of Dare County saltwater fishing trips are made by North Carolina residents and
65% are made by non-residents.
Since almost all of Dare County ocean fishing trips in the MRIP dataset reach the ocean through
Oregon Inlet we consider each of these as Oregon Inlet fishing trips. (Dare County ocean fishing
trips that enter the ocean through Hatteras Inlet are reclassified as Hyde County trips for
modeling purposes.)
Based on the MRIP data, an estimated 93,000 charter trips and an additional 169,000 private boat
trips reach the ocean through Oregon Inlet each year. (The estimate of 93,000 charter trips per
year for 2011 based on the MRIP data compares well with the 115,200 charter trips per year
estimate for 2008 (presented above) based on the Dumas et al. (2009) study, assuming a
moderate decrease in charter fishing trips per year from 2008 to 2011 due to deteriorating inlet
conditions. Boat fuel prices were similar in the two years.) An estimated 109,000 Oregon Inlet
fishing trips per year are taken by North Carolina residents, and an additional 153,000 trips are
taken by non-residents (Table VII-1).
Table VII-1. North Carolina Resident and Non-Resident Fishing Trips (Angler Days)
Trip Mode
Resident
Non-Resident
Total
Oregon Inlet Charter Boat
15,000
78,000
93,000
Trips/Year
Oregon Inlet Private Boat
94,000
75,000
169,000
Trips/Year
Total
109,000
153,000
262,000
The expenditures made by For-Hire and Private Boat fisherpersons accessing the ocean via
Oregon Inlet are based on two sources. Lovell, Steinbeck and Hilger (2013) present average
trip-related expenditures by fishing mode (for-hire boat, private boat, or shore) and resident
status in North Carolina. The Lovell study presents expenditure estimates on a ―per angler, per
fishing day‖ basis, and includes expenditures made by the angler for him/herself and any non-
May 2014
75
FINAL REPORT
fishing family/friends accompanying the angler on the trip to the coast (but not accompanying
the angler when surveyed). The Lovell study considers only those trip expenditures made inside
North Carolina; however, the Lovell study report presents values that are averages across all
North Carolina saltwater fishing locations. A study by Dumas, Whitehead, Landry and Herstine
(2009) collected data on the expenditures made by North Carolina for-hire vessels and anglers by
county and region in North Carolina. The Dumas study data show that expenditures made by
Dare County ocean fishing anglers are higher than those made by ocean fishing anglers in other
areas of North Carolina. Like the Lovell study, the Dumas study includes expenditures made by
the angler for him/herself and any non-fishing family/friends accompanying the angler on the
trip to the coast (but not accompanying the angler when surveyed).
Data from both the Lovell study and the Dumas study are used to estimate the average
expenditures (2012-year dollars) per angler, per fishing day, for ocean for-hire and private boat
trips using Oregon Inlet, presented in Table VII-2. For example, to estimate the expenditures
made by the anglers aboard a typical 6-passenger charter boat, multiply the figures in the ForHire Trip column of Table VII-2 by six. In Table VII-2, any expenditures made for charter or
headboat fees have been distributed to the various expenditure categories based on vessel
expenditure and returns data in Dumas (2009).
May 2014
76
FINAL REPORT
Table VII-2. North Carolina Expenditures Per Angler, Per Fishing Day, Oregon Inlet Ocean Fishing Trips, 2012
For-Hire Trip
Private Boat Trip
NC Expenditures NC Expenditures
IMPLAN Model Sector
Expenditure Category
Per Angler
Per Angler
Per Fishing Day
Per Fishing Day
Fuel for car/truck
$110.51
$20.02
gas stations
326
Car/truck Rental
$14.92
$0.00
rental car
362
Fuel for Boat
$94.00
$94.00
gas stations
326
Slip/Dock/Ramp/Parking Fees
$5.92
$10.62
transport by water
334
Bait
$7.50
$7.50
commercial fishing
17
Fishing Tackle
$4.97
$4.97
sporting goods
328
Boat repairs
$17.18
$17.18
boat building & repairing
291
Lodging
$367.59
$66.36
hotels
411
Restaurants
$91.42
$34.32
restaurants
413
Groceries
$123.82
$76.52
grocery stores
324
Ice
$3.83
$3.83
ice manufacturing
70
Charter Crew Wages & Tips (Note 1)
$57.83
$0.00
household expenditures
direct labor income
Boat insurance
$10.77
$10.77
Insurance carriers
357
Interest on Boat Loan
$6.65
$6.65
Commercial Banking
354
Other (Producer Services)
$7.46
$0.00
advertising
377
Other (Consumer Retail) (Note 2)
$25.41
$0.13
retail--general merchandise
329
Return to Charter Vessel Owner/Captain
direct labor income
$108.17
$0.00
Sources: Lovell et al. 2013. Dumas et al. 2009.
Note: Assumes charter vessels based in the northern coastal region of North Carolina make an average of 120 one-day fishing trips per year (Dumas at al. 2009).
Note: Expenditures include that made by the angler for him/herself and any non-fishing family/friends accompanying the angler on the trip to the coast (but not
accompanying the angler on the boat on the day of the survey).
Note: Any charter or headboat fees have been distributed to the various expenditure categories.
Note 1: Assumes half of charter tips go to crew, and half go to captain/owner.
Note 2: This expenditure reflects spending by tournament participants and their families at retail stores in Dare County during the tournament (based on Ditton 2000).
May 2014
77
FINAL REPORT
1.
Economic impacts are presented below for Dare County, the Oregon Inlet Region, and the state
of North Carolina as a whole. For each geographic region, impacts are provided for three
Oregon Inlet navigability scenarios: Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions, Oregon Inlet Fully Open,
and Oregon Inlet closed.
The economic impact numbers reflect for-hire and private boat fishing activity only; commercial
fishing activity, and tournament fishing activity, are considered in other sections of this report.
The economic impact numbers reflect Oregon Inlet-dependent (i.e., ocean) fishing only; any
fishing inside the sounds or estuaries is not considered. For the purposes of the present study, it
is assumed that any sound or estuarine tournament fishing is unaffected by Oregon Inlet
conditions.
scenarios.
a)
(i)
The numbers of fishing trips occurring by fishing mode (for-hire boat vs. private boat) in Table
VII-1 are multiplied by the respective expenditure values in Table VII-2 to calculate the annual
direct economic impacts of for-hire and private boat fishing in Dare County for the ―Recent
Conditions‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario.1
The economic impacts are presented in Table VII-3. Economic multiplier effects are the
difference between the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. For example, sales
(output) of $142 million in Dare County generate an additional $105 million in economic
multiplier effects within the County, for a total economic impact of $248 million in output (sales)
sales within the County. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of
1
For the purpose of calculating economic multiplier effects, the for-hire expenditures are grouped into two spending
classes, direct labor income (crew wages and tips, and the returns to the vessel owners/captains) and direct
expenditures on goods and services (all other expenditures). It is assumed that direct labor income is spent
according to a household expenditure pattern typical of households with income of $50,000 to $75,000 per year.
May 2014
78
FINAL REPORT
Table VII-3. Annual Economic Impacts of For-Hire and Private Boat Fishing in Dare
County, Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$142,423,427
$247,659,426
1,002
1,997
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$44,486,518
$79,482,082
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$19,408,480
$52,987,290
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$11,186,935
----$14,155,440
(ii)
For the Oregon Inlet Fully Open scenario, Dare County charter fishermen interviewed for this
study anticipate a 20% increase in the number of Dare County-based charter fishing trips using
Oregon Inlet. These are charter fishing trips that would not have been made, or that would have
been made outside Dare County, if Oregon Inlet were not fully open.
In the absence of other information, we assume that the percentage increase in private boat
fishing trips using Oregon Inlet under Fully Open conditions would be similar to the percentage
increase in charter fishing trips, or 20%. This increase represents private boat fishing trips that
would not have been made, or that would have been made outside Dare County, if Oregon Inlet
were not fully open.
(output) of $171 million in Dare County generate an additional $126 million in economic
multiplier effects within the County, for a total economic impact of $297 million in output (sales)
sales within the County. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of
County, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$170,908,112
$297,191,311
1,203
2,397
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$53,383,822
$95,378,498
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$23,290,176
$63,584,748
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$13,424,322
----$16,986,528
determining the ratio between the 2014 and 2006 regional direct impacts (weighted by charter
and private boating trips) and applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully open conditions in
Dare County. However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if economic
May 2014
79
FINAL REPORT
For the Oregon Inlet Closed Conditions scenario, we assume that zero charter trips would be
made through Oregon Inlet, based on interviews of charter captains conducted for this study.
However, Dumas et al. (2009) found that only 55% of anglers taking charter vessel trips in the
northern coastal region of North Carolina stated that charter fishing was the primary purpose of
their visit to the North Carolina coast. With Oregon Inlet closed, we assume that 55% of the
charter boat anglers decide to take charter fishing trips elsewhere, outside Dare County. We
assume that the remaining 45% of (former) charter boat anglers decide to visit Dare County even
when Oregon Inlet is closed and engage in ocean shore fishing rather than charter boat fishing.
The Lovell et al. (2013) study found that ocean shore fishing expenditures per angler day in
North Carolina were 73% less than charter boat fishing expenditures per angler day. Therefore,
we assume that expenditures made in Dare County by visitors who formerly made charter fishing
trips in the County are 88% less (0.55 + 0.45*0.73 = 0.8785) than the expenditures made when
charter trips were taken under recent Oregon Inlet conditions.
Based on the MRIP data (Table VII-1), 55% of the Oregon Inlet private boat trips are made by
North Carolina residents and 45% are made by non-residents. The MRIP data also show that
only 5% of all Oregon Inlet private boat trips are made in boats greater than 40 feet in length.
For the 5% of private boat trips using boats greater than 40 feet in length, we assume that zero
Oregon Inlet fishing trips are made; we assume that private boat trips (in boats greater than 40
feet) made by North Carolina residents shift to other North Carolina inlets, and we assume that
half of the private boat trips (in boats greater than 40 feet) made by non-residents shift to other
NC inlets and half shift to locations outside North Carolina. For the 95% of private boats trips
made using boats less than 40 feet, we assume that of the 55% NC residents, half still come to
Dare County and boat in the sound/estuary, and half go elsewhere in North Carolina. Of the
45% non-NC residents, we assume one-third still come to Dare County and boat in the
sound/estuary, one-third shift to other NC inlets, and one-third shift to locations outside North
Carolina.
(output) of $34 million in Dare County generate an additional $22 million in economic multiplier
effects within the County, for a total economic impact of $56 million in output (sales) sales
within the County. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the
table are interpreted in a similar way.
County, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$33,945,379
$55,618,552
225
429
May 2014
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$8,457,140
$15,713,779
80
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$4,294,532
$11,164,851
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$2,363,582
----$3,033,466
FINAL REPORT
b)
impact results presented in this section include the direct impacts of Oregon Inlet-dependent forhire and private boat fishing that occurs within Dare County, the economic multiplier effects that
occur within Dare County, and the economic multiplier effects that occur in the other counties of
the Oregon Inlet region. The results in this section do not include the economic impacts of any
fishing activity occurring outside Dare County. The results presented here for the Oregon Inlet
impacts—the direct impacts are the same (i.e., the only direct impacts in the region considered
here are those that occur in Dare County).
(i)
The results presented here for the Oregon Inlet Region differ from those presented for Dare
County only in the multiplier effects and total impacts—the direct impacts are the same.
The economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Region for the Recent Conditions inlet scenario are
presented in Table VII-6. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct
Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. For example, sales (output) of $142 million in
the Oregon Inlet region generate an additional $115 million in economic multiplier effects within
the region (including Dare County), for a total economic impact of $257 million in output (sales)
sales within the region (including Dare County). The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in
the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
Compared to the multiplier effects occurring within Dare County only, the multiplier effects that
occur throughout the Oregon Inlet region are larger. For example, every dollar of direct impact
sales, for example, results in $0.75 of multiplier effects at the county level, whereas every dollar
of direct impact sales results in $0.81 of multiplier effects at the regional level.
Table VII-6. Annual Economic Impacts of For-Hire and Private Boat Fishing in Oregon
Inlet Region, Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$142,423,427
$257,476,326
1,034
2,157
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$43,493,243
$82,867,291
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$19,666,812
$56,151,669
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$12,618,095
----$14,923,351
(ii)
The economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Region for the Fully Open inlet scenario are
presented in Table VII-7. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct
Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. For example, sales (output) of $171 million in
the Oregon Inlet region generate an additional $138 million in economic multiplier effects within
May 2014
81
FINAL REPORT
the region (including Dare County), for a total economic impact of $309 million in output (sales)
sales within the region (including Dare County). The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in
the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
Inlet Region, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$170,908,112
$308,971,591
1,241
2,588
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$52,191,892
$99,440,749
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$23,600,174
$67,382,003
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$15,141,714
----$17,908,021
impacts (weighted by charter and private boating trips) and applying that ratio to the total
impacts for fully open conditions in the surrounding region (including Dare County). However,
it is also possible that these projections could be lower if economic conditions worsen with
higher gas prices, higher interest rates, higher unemployment, etc.
The economic impacts for the Oregon Inlet Region for the Closed inlet scenario are presented in
Table VII-8. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects and the
Total Effects listed in the table. For example, sales (output) of $34 million in the Oregon Inlet
region generate an additional $24 million in economic multiplier effects within the region
(including Dare County), for a total economic impact of $58 million in output (sales) sales within
the region (including Dare County). The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining
May 2014
82
FINAL REPORT
Inlet Region, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$33,945,379
$57,778,828
232
465
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$8,250,217
$16,462,744
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$4,341,731
$11,854,474
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$2,671,883
----$3,206,187
c)
The economic impact results presented in this section include the direct impacts of Oregon Inletdependent for-hire and private boat fishing in Dare County and its multiplier effects throughout
the state of North Carolina. Typically, when a larger geographic region is considered, multiplier
effects are larger, and so the total economic impacts of a given economic change are also larger.
However, some economic changes that result in net economic impacts at the county or regional
levels do not result in net economic changes at the state level. For example, a movement in forhire and private boat fishing activity from a location outside Dare County, but inside North
Carolina, such as Morehead City, NC, to Dare County results in net economic changes in Dare
County and the Oregon Inlet region but not at the state level. At the state level, there is simply a
transfer of economic activity from one location to another within the state. As a result, the
answer to the question of whether economic impacts will increase as larger geographic areas are
considered depends on the combined effects of (1) larger economic multiplier effects as we
consider larger geographic areas and (2) smaller direct effects as we consider larger geographic
areas because more economic changes are classified as transfers within a larger area.
(i)
The statewide impacts of charter and private boat fishing via Oregon Inlet differ from those
presented for Dare County and the Oregon Inlet Region only in the multiplier effects and total
impacts—the direct impacts are the same.
The statewide economic impacts for the Recent Conditions inlet scenario are presented in Table
VII-9. Economic multiplier effects are the difference between the Direct Effects and the Total
Effects listed in the table. For example, sales (output) of $142 million in Dare County generate
an additional $176 million in economic multiplier effects throughout the state (including Dare
County and the Oregon Inlet region), for a statewide total economic impact of $318 million in
output (sales) sales (including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region). The Direct Effects and
Compared to the multiplier effects occurring within Dare County or the Oregon Inlet region, the
statewide multiplier effects are larger. For example, whereas every dollar of direct impact sales
results in $0.75 of multiplier effects at the county level (or $0.81 of multiplier effects at the
regional level, every dollar of direct impact sales results in $1.24 of multiplier effects statewide.
May 2014
83
FINAL REPORT
Table VII-9. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of For-Hire and Private Boat Fishing
Using Oregon Inlet, Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$142,423,427
$318,323,866
1,050
2,530
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$43,222,542
$109,735,743
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$19,636,251
$67,558,971
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$14,858,147
----$20,197,848
(ii)
For the Oregon Inlet Fully Open scenario, Dare County charter fishermen interviewed for this
study anticipate a 20% increase in the number of Dare County-based charter fishing trips using
Oregon Inlet. We assume these charter fishing trips would be made elsewhere if Oregon Inlet
were not fully open. We assume that the origin of the new trips is similar to that of recent
charter trips (based on trip numbers in Table VII-1): 16% of the trips would be made by NC
residents, and 84% by non-NC residents. The new trips to Oregon Inlet made by NC residents
do not increase economic impacts at the state level, because these trips are simply transfers of
economic activity within the state, rather than a net gain to the state. The new trips to Oregon
Inlet made by non-NC residents do increase economic impacts at the state level.
In the absence of other information, we assume that the percentage increase in private boat
fishing trips using Oregon Inlet under Fully Open conditions would be similar to the percentage
increase in charter fishing trips, or a 20% increase. We assume these private boat fishing trips
would be made elsewhere if Oregon Inlet were not fully open. We assume that the origin of the
new trips is similar to that of recent private boat trips (based on trip numbers in Table VII-1):
55% NC residents, and 45% non-NC residents. The new trips to Oregon Inlet made by NC
residents do not increase economic impacts at the state level, because these trips are simply
transfers of economic activity within the state, rather than a net gain to the state. The new trips
to Oregon Inlet made by non-NC residents do increase economic impacts at the state level.
The statewide economic impacts for the Fully Open Oregon Inlet scenario are presented in Table
Effects listed in the table. For example, sales (output) of $162 million in Dare County (not
including the expenditures from trips shifted into Dare County from other inlets within the state)
generate an additional $201 million in economic multiplier effects statewide (including Dare
County and the Oregon Inlet region), for a total economic impact of $363 million in output
(sales) statewide (including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region). The Direct Effects and
regional level), every dollar of direct impact sales results in $1.24 of multiplier effects statewide.
May 2014
84
FINAL REPORT
Using Oregon Inlet, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$161,694,027
$362,821,660
1,196
2,889
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$49,649,305
$125,692,579
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$22,391,284
$77,203,862
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$16,977,087
----$23,067,777
$635.5 million in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region)
for fully open inlet conditions. These numbers were estimated by determining the ratio between
the 2014 and 2006 regional direct impacts (weighted by charter and private boating trips) and
applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully open conditions in the state of North Carolina
(including Dare County and the surrounding region). However, it is also possible that these
projections could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest
rates, higher unemployment, etc.
For the Oregon Inlet Closed Conditions scenario, we assume that zero charter trips would be
made through Oregon Inlet, based on interviews of charter captains conducted for this study.
However, Dumas et al. (2009) found that only 55% of anglers taking charter vessel trips in the
northern coastal region of North Carolina stated that charter fishing was the primary purpose of
their visit to the North Carolina coast. With Oregon Inlet closed, we assume that 55% of the
charter boat anglers decide to take charter fishing trips elsewhere, outside Dare County, but the
remaining 45% decide to visit Dare County (even though Oregon Inlet is closed) and engage in
ocean shore fishing.
Of the 55% of (former) Oregon Inlet charter boat anglers who decide to take charter fishing trips
outside Dare County, 16% are North Carolina residents and 84% are non-NC residents (based on
trip numbers in Table VII-1). We assume that the NC residents shift their charter trips to other
inlets within North Carolina, resulting in no reduction in statewide economic impacts. However,
of the non-NC residents, we assume that half shift their charter trips to other NC inlets (resulting
in no reduction in statewide economic impacts), but the other half shift their charter trips out of
state, resulting in a reduction in statewide economic impacts.
The remaining 45% of (former) Oregon Inlet charter boat anglers decide to visit Dare County
(even though Oregon Inlet is closed) and engage in ocean shore fishing rather than charter boat
fishing. Of these, 16% are North Carolina residents and 84% are non-NC residents (based on
trip numbers in Table VII-1). The Lovell et al. (2013) study found that ocean shore fishing
expenditures per angler day in North Carolina were 73% less than charter boat fishing
expenditures per angler day. We assume that although NC residents may spend less on their
shore fishing trip to Dare County than they would have spent on a charter fishing trip to Dare
County, the difference in trip expenditures would still be spent (on something else, maybe
restaurants or movies back home) within North Carolina, resulting in little reduction in statewide
May 2014
85
FINAL REPORT
economic impacts. However, for the non-NC residents, the difference in expenditures between a
shore fishing trip and a charter fishing trip is spent in their state of residence, outside North
Carolina, resulting in a reduction in economic impacts within North Carolina.
Based on the MRIP trip data (Table VII-1), 55% of the Oregon Inlet private boat trips are made
by North Carolina residents and 45% are made by non-residents. The MRIP data also show that
only 5% of all Oregon Inlet private boat trips are made in boats greater than 40 feet in length.
For the 5% of private boat trips using boats greater than 40 feet in length, we assume that zero
Oregon Inlet fishing trips are made. We assume that private boat trips (in boats greater than 40
feet) made by North Carolina residents shift to other North Carolina inlets, resulting in no
reduction in statewide economic impacts. For non-NC residents, we assume that half of the
private boat trips (in boats greater than 40 feet) shift to other NC inlets and half shift to locations
outside North Carolina. The trips that shift to locations outside North Carolina result in a
reduction in economic impacts within the state.
For the 95% of private boats trips made using boats less than 40 feet, we assume that of the 55%
NC residents, half still come to Dare County and boat in the sound/estuary, and half go
elsewhere in North Carolina. Because these trips made by NC residents still occur within the
state, they cause no reduction in statewide economic impacts. Of the 45% non-NC residents, we
assume that one-third still come to Dare County and boat in the sound/estuary, one-third shift to
other NC inlets, and one-third shift to locations outside North Carolina. The trips that shift to
locations outside North Carolina result in a reduction in economic impacts within the state.
The statewide economic impacts for the Closed Oregon Inlet scenario are presented in Table
Effects listed in the table. For example, sales (output) of $91 million in Dare County (or
elsewhere in NC due to fishing trips shifted from Oregon Inlet to other inlets in NC) generate an
additional $107 million in economic multiplier effects statewide (including Dare County and the
Oregon Inlet region), for a total economic impact of $198 million in output (sales) statewide
(including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region). The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed
in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
regional level), every dollar of direct impact sales results in $1.18 of multiplier effects statewide.
Using Oregon Inlet, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$91,393,516
$197,781,754
656
1,550
May 2014
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$25,105,795
$65,375,645
86
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$12,154,412
$41,062,219
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$9,040,972
----$12,337,898
FINAL REPORT
2.
An estimated 109,000 Oregon Inlet fishing trips per year are taken by North Carolina residents,
and an additional 153,000 trips are taken by non-residents. Expenditures on transportation (cars
and boats), fishing supplies, lodging, and food make the recreational fishing and tourism sector
the largest contributor to the economic impact of Oregon Inlet of the five main sectors studied.
Table VII-12 presents the direct and total economic impacts on Dare County, the surrounding
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent recreational (charter and private) fishing for
recent conditions. As mentioned previously, the recent condition is based on an average of
conditions over the last 3 years (a depth of 6 ft or greater only 40% of the time).
Table VII-12. Summary of Annual Oregon Inlet-Dependent Recreational Charter Fishing
and Private Boating Economic Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$142,423,427
$247,659,426
$142,423,427
$257,476,326
$142,423,427
$318,323,866
1,002
1,997
1,034
2,157
1,050
2,530
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$44,486,518
$79,482,082
$43,493,243
$82,867,291
$43,222,542
$109,735,743
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$19,408,480
$52,987,290
$19,666,812
$56,151,669
$19,636,251
$67,558,971
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$11,186,935
----$12,618,095
----$14,858,147
----$14,155,440
----$14,923,351
----$20,197,848
fully open conditions. As mentioned previously, fully open conditions are considered to be
dredged to a depth of 14 ft or greater 85-100% of the time.
and Private Boating Economic Impacts For Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$170,908,112
$297,191,311
$170,908,112
$308,971,591
$161,694,027
$362,821,660
1,203
2,397
1,241
2,588
1,196
2,889
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$53,383,822
$95,378,498
$52,191,892
$99,440,749
$49,649,305
$125,692,579
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$23,290,176
$63,584,748
$23,600,174
$67,382,003
$22,391,284
$77,203,862
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$13,424,322
----$15,141,714
----$16,977,087
----$16,986,528
----$17,908,021
----$23,067,777
The impacts in Table VII-13 reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions
$520.6 million in Dare County, $541.2 million in the surrounding region (including Dare
surrounding region) for fully open inlet conditions. Again, these numbers were estimated by
determining the ratio between the 2014 and 2006 regional direct impacts (weighted by charter
May 2014
87
FINAL REPORT
and private boating trips) and applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully open conditions in
each of the three geographic settings – Dare County, the surrounding region (including Dare
County), and the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).
Table VII-14 presents the potential additional economic impacts from recreational fishing and
tourism that may be realized if Oregon Inlet were maintained to fully open conditions. The
results are equivalent to the difference between Table VII-13 (fully open inlet scenario) and
Table VII-12 (recent conditions scenario).
Table VII-14. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from
Recreational Fishing and Tourism for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$28,484,685
$49,531,885
$28,484,685
$51,495,265
$19,270,600
$44,497,794
201
400
207
431
146
359
Wage, Salary,
Dividend,
and Sole
Rent, and
Proprietorship
Interest
Income
Income
$8,897,304
$3,881,696
$15,896,416
$10,597,458
$8,698,649
$3,933,362
$16,573,458
$11,230,334
$6,426,763
$2,755,033
$15,956,836
$9,644,891
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$2,237,387
----$2,523,619
----$2,118,940
----$2,831,088
----$2,984,670
----$2,869,929
*The impacts in the above table reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006,
the potential additional annual economic impacts could reach up to $272.9 million in Dare County, $283.7 million in the
surrounding region) for fully open inlet conditions. However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if economic
essentially closed conditions. As mentioned previously, essentially closed conditions are
considered to be dredged to a depth of 6 ft or greater only 5% of the time.
and Private Boating Economic Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$33,945,379
$55,618,552
$33,945,379
$57,778,828
$91,393,516
$197,781,754
225
429
232
465
656
1,550
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$8,457,140
$15,713,779
$8,250,217
$16,462,744
$25,105,795
$65,375,645
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$4,294,532
$11,164,851
$4,341,731
$11,854,474
$12,154,412
$41,062,219
State and
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
----$2,363,582
----$2,671,883
----$9,040,972
----$3,033,466
----$3,206,187
----$12,337,898
Table VII-16 presents the potential loss of economic impacts from recreational fishing and
tourism that may be realized if Oregon Inlet were allowed to essentially close. The results are
May 2014
88
FINAL REPORT
equivalent to the difference between Table VII-12 (recent conditions scenario) and Table VII-15
(essentially closed inlet scenario).
Table VII-16. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Recreational
Fishing and Tourism for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
-$108,478,048
-$192,040,874
-$108,478,048
-$199,697,498
-$51,029,911
-$120,542,112
-777
-1,568
-802
-1,692
-394
-980
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
-$36,029,378
-$63,768,303
-$35,243,026
-$66,404,547
-$18,116,747
-$44,360,098
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
-$15,113,948
-$41,822,439
-$15,325,081
-$44,297,195
-$7,481,839
-$26,496,752
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
---------$8,823,353 -$11,121,974
---------$9,946,212 -$11,717,164
---------$5,817,175 -$7,859,950
3.
Consumer Surplus
In addition to the economic impacts described above, recreational sport fishermen receive value
from the experience of Oregon Inlet-related sport fishing. This value―value of the sport fishing
experience--is the difference between what a fisherman would be willing to pay to take the
fishing trip and what he actually paid to take the trip. This difference is known as ―consumer
surplus‖ value, because it measures the surplus value consumers receive from an experience
beyond what is actually paid for the experience. This value is real and arises in many economic
situations. The amount that a sport fisherman would be willing to pay for an Oregon Inletrelated fishing trip is limited by the opportunity to take other, though perhaps less satisfying,
substitute trips to alternative fishing destinations. For example, although a sport fisherman might
be willing to pay more for an Oregon Inlet-related sport fishing trip, due to the Oregon Inlet sport
fishery‗s unique characteristics, the sport fisherman would not be willing to pay an infinite
amount more, due to the availability of substitute fishing opportunities, such as sport fishing via
Hatteras Inlet, NC.
The travel cost method is used to provide an estimate of the consumer surplus loss associated
with the lost navigability of Oregon Inlet. In the case of a loss of Oregon Inlet navigability,
consumer surplus is the angler‗s willingness to pay to avoid the loss of access to the inlet. For
example, a boater who could not travel to the ocean via Oregon Inlet would spend time and
money boating or driving to Hyde County to make the trip via Hatteras Inlet. This angler would
be willing to pay some amount of additional money in order to avoid closure of Oregon Inlet in
order to avoid the additional time and expense associated with using Hatteras Inlet. Consumer
surplus is an economic effect that is separate from the economic impact estimates presented
above.
A ―random utility model‖ (RUM) uses information from multiple recreation sites to explain the
recreation site selection decision. A RUM exploits the empirical observation that anglers tend to
choose fishing sites with relatively low travel costs and relatively high chances of fishing
success. Individuals choose a recreation site based on differences in trip costs and site
characteristics between the alternative sites. Statistical analysis of the relationship between site
characteristics and anglers site choices using logistic regression allows estimation of changes in
May 2014
89
FINAL REPORT
consumer surplus arising from many changes in site availability or site characteristics (Haab and
McConnell, 2002).
Nested random utility models (NRUM) allow for sequential choices required for the analysis.
For example, in the standard NMFS travel cost marine recreational fishing model anglers are
assumed to choose (1) target species and fishing mode and (2) fishing sites based on their
attributes, including the potential cost of travelling to each site (Haab, Whitehead and
McConnell, 2000).
The mode-site choice NRUM developed here is based on the standard NMFS model. First, the
angler chooses among three fishing modes (shore, charter boat, and private boat fishing).
Conditional on the mode choice from the first stage decision, the angler chooses the fishing site.
We estimate a NRUM model of recreational fishing trip demand using day trip anglers who have
valid zip code and fishing days data2 and who would travel no more than 300 miles (one-way) to
at-least one fishing site (Haab and McConnell 2012). (The consumer surplus estimates are
applicable to all anglers, not just those taking day trips.) With this subsample, 10,141 MRIP
interviews represent 2.5 million trips.
We consider 37 fishing alternatives in the model: seven county level sites, two fishing areas
(ocean and sounds) and three fishing modes. Some of the fishing alternatives have no interview
data in the database; these alternatives drop out of the model 3. We add one additional alternative
to separately account for Carolina Beach Inlet in New Hanover County.
The travel cost variable is constructed from the round trip distance the angler would travel to the
centroid of each county. We use the $0.20 cost per mile estimate from the AAA North Carolina
for 2011. We value time costs at one-third of the zip code level household income hourly wage
rate. For-hire trip costs include $267 and $355 for in-state and out-of-state anglers.
The other independent variables in the nested logit model are site characteristics variables. The
number of parking spaces, boat slips, charter boats, head boats, boat ramps and piers and bridges
for each fishing alternative are included. In a typical National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
demand model (e.g., Haab et al. 2012) the natural log of the number of interview sites from the
MRIP Site Register4 is included to account for interview pressure. Instead, we use the
aggregation of characteristics of these fishing sites found at the Site Register to take account of
site heterogeneity. We also include alternative specific constants for each of the alternatives that
are not linear combinations of the alternative specific characteristics.
The demand model is set up with the assumption that anglers first choose fishing mode and then
choose fishing site and area combinations. We weight the demand model so that the parameter
2
We delete anglers who report more than 61 two-month wave and 361 annual fishing days.
3
The missing alternatives are the inland for-hire mode in Hyde, Carteret, Onslow, Pender and Brunswick Counties.
The ocean for-hire mode is missing in Pender County.
4
https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/siteregister/html/siteRegister.jsp
May 2014
90
FINAL REPORT
estimates represent a typical trip. The model behaves as expected. The travel cost has a negative
effect on fishing choice. The natural log of total interview site parking spaces (LNCARS) and
boat slips (LNSLIPS) has a positive effect on fishing alternative choice. The natural log of total
interview site piers and bridges (LNPIERS) and boat ramps (LNRAMPS) has a negative effect
on alterative choice. The inclusive values are statistically different from zero and one indicating
that the nesting structure is appropriate (Table VII-17).
Table VII-17. Nested RUM Fishing Trip Demand Model
Variable
Coefficient Standard Error
z
Travel Cost
-0.059
0.00085
-69.27
LNCARS
1.58
0.0802
19.72
LNSLIPS
0.76
0.05433
13.98
LNHIRE
0.45
0.26167
1.72
LNPIERS
-1.06
0.08964
-11.84
LNRAMPS
-1.23
0.08449
-14.57
IV parameters
SHORE
0.42
0.0227
18.59
FORHIRE
0.21
0.01769
11.6
PRIVATE
0.54
0.02387
22.65
Consumer surplus changes resulting from the closure of Oregon Inlet are estimated using the
results from the NRUM demand model according to the standard formula given in Haab and
McConnell (page 228, 2012). The consumer surplus loss is $2.83 per charter angler day and
$2.46 per private angler day, on average, for all 4.85 million NC saltwater angler days (shore
fishing, charter fishing and private boat fishing combined) represented by the interviews in the
MRIP database, or $25.7 million in total consumer surplus loss. This measures the loss in
satisfaction associated with taking a fishing trip in a less-preferred mode (for example, a shore
fishing trip rather than a charter fishing grip) or at a less preferred location (Morehead City rather
than Oregon Inlet) as a result of Oregon Inlet closure. These changes in consumer surplus are
separate from (and not included in) the economic impact estimates presented elsewhere in this
study.
As a check on the consumer surplus estimates for charter trips, the consumer surplus losses
equate to an average loss of $27 in consumer surplus per angler per day for the Oregon Inlet
charter boat fishing trips that occurred under recent Oregon Inlet conditions. The $27 loss in
consumer surplus per angler trip measures the loss in satisfaction associated with taking a charter
trip at a less preferred location rather than the preferred Oregon Inlet location. The Dumas et al.
(2009, p.100) study of for-hire fishing in North Carolina found that consumer surplus averaged a
comparable $17.45-$28.04 (2012-year dollars) per angler per day of for-hire fishing in the Outer
Banks. (The Dumas study did not consider private boat trips.)
If we assume similar marginal changes in consumer surplus per additional day of charter fishing
resulting from a fully open Oregon Inlet, the estimated 20 % increase in angler days (an
additional 93,000*0.20 = 18,600 charter angler days per year) under the Fully Open Oregon Inlet
scenario would support an additional $502,000 in consumer surplus per year (18,600 additional
May 2014
91
FINAL REPORT
charter days * $27 per day = $502,000). If we assume that the ratio of private boat consumer
surplus to charter boat consumer surplus from additional days of Oregon Inlet fishing is the same
as the consumer surplus ratio for lost fishing days (i.e., $2.46/$2.83 = 0.87), then the 20%
increase in private boat fishing days (169,000*0.20 = 33,800 additional private boat fishing days
per year) under the Fully Open Oregon Inlet scenario would support an additional $794,000 in
consumer surplus per year (33,800 additional private boat days * $27 per day * 0.87 =
$794,000). In summary, we estimate that consumer surplus would increase about $1.30 million
if inlet navigability were to improve from recent conditions to fully open conditions.
4.
In the 2006 study, we assumed 35,739 charter trips per year and 539,890 private boat trips per
year (a trip is defined as one angler fishing one day; so, one charter boat full of six anglers
fishing one day counts as six trips). In the 2014 study, we assume 93,000 charter trips per year
(more than the 2006 study) and 169,000 private trips per year (less than the 2006 study).
The number of private boat trips is lower in 2014 than in 2006 because the number of private
boat trips in North Carolina, in general, is much lower in 2014 than it was in 2006. A second
reason for the difference in private boat trips is that the National Marine Fishery Service used a
different weighting scheme in 2006 to convert its survey sample data to estimates of total trips.
In 2006, the weighting scheme over-weighted private boat trips and under-weighted charter boat
trips.
The number of charter boat trips is higher in 2014 than in 2006 because, even though the overall
number of charter trips declined in North Carolina from 2006 to 2014, the NMFS data weighting
scheme under-weighted charter trips in 2006. Using the correct weights, the number of charter
trips in 2006 would have been higher, and the number of estimated charter trips would have
declined from 2006 to 2014.
The expenditures per charter trip are higher for restaurants, groceries and boat fuel in 2014,
compared to 2006. Expenditures per private boat trip are smaller for auto gasoline, restaurants
and groceries, but larger for boat fuel, in 2014, compared to 2006. Other expenditures per trip
are similar between 2006 and 2014, for both charter and private boat trips.
Comparing tax revenue impacts from the 2006 study with those from the 2014 study, for charter
and private boat fishing the percentage of each dollar of output collected in state and local taxes
was about 1/2 lower in 2014. The percentage of each dollar of output collected in federal taxes
was about 1/3rd lower in 2014. The difference is caused by shifts in spending across spending
categories. In 2014, private boaters spent less on auto fuel, less on restaurants and groceries, and
more for boat fuel. In 2014, charter boaters spent more on restaurants and groceries and more
for boat fuel. Because tax rates are different on different spending categories, the average taxes
collected per dollar of output changed.
May 2014
92
FINAL REPORT
VIII. TOURNAMENT FISHING
In addition to general recreational fishing, sportfishing tournaments are important within the
Oregon Inlet region. Approximately 5 known tournaments take place annually in the County
(down from 9 tournaments in 2006), originating mainly at Pirates Cove marina, in Manteo or at
various locations in Hatteras Village. Table VIII-1 contains a list of these tournaments and
estimates of the length of each tournament (days) and the number of participants. In summary,
more than 173 boats annually are expected to participate in sportfishing tournaments dependent
on passage through Oregon Inlet. These tournaments draw significant economic benefits to the
County ranging from expenditures on fishing gear, lodging, food, retail to custom boat sales,
marine maintenance, and/or boat storage.
A.
TOURNAMENT FISHING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS
Surveys were sent to 3 individuals and/or organizations that run fishing tournaments that use
Oregon Inlet. M&N received 2 responses incorporating 3 of the fishing tournaments which take
place annually. The surveys indicated that the tournament participation would increase 30%50% if the inlet were to be fully open. Two of the tournaments would cease to exist if the inlet
closed. The remaining tournament could still operate but only at 10% of its original
participation.
A follow up in person interview was done with one of the respondents who indicated that the
previous year there had been an accident in the inlet one week prior to a tournament and
approximately 15 boats pulled out of the tournament at the last minute due to the poor
conditions.
The survey contacts and questions for tournament fishing can be found in Appendix A. Overall
trends or business costs provided by the interviewees were used in the economic modeling and
analyses to not only determine the current economic value of Oregon Inlet but how that value
would change if the inlet were fully open or essentially closed.
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – TOURNAMENT FISHING
The MRFSS database does not include sportfishing tournament trips. These tournaments are
dependent on Oregon Inlet because vessels fishing in the tournaments must use Oregon Inlet to
access offshore ocean waters where trophy fish species, such as the billfish species, are located.
Over 100 saltwater fishing tournaments occurring in North Carolina (and locations in South
Carolina adjacent to North Carolina) between October 2013 and September 2014 are listed on
the Tournament List of the FishermansPost.com fishing information website located in
Wilmington, NC. (Source: http://www.fishermanspost.com/tournament-list) However, not all of
these tournaments would be close substitutes for the offshore ocean fishing tournaments in Dare
County that are Oregon Inlet-dependent. For example, some of the tournaments focus on target
species different from the larger, offshore species targeted by Oregon Inlet-dependent
tournaments. Other tournaments focus of fishing locations, such as rivers, sounds, beaches, or
piers, that don‘t require access via an inlet. Still other tournaments focus on vessels, such as
kayaks, that are very different from the large, charter and private trolling vessels used the OIdependent tournaments. Finally, all of the North Carolina fishing tournaments, with the possible
May 2014
93
FINAL REPORT
exception of the tournaments using Hatteras inlet, are farther from the prime Gulf Stream fishing
area than Oregon Inlet, requiring longer boat rides to reach the prime fishing areas, leaving less
time for actual fishing. Even Hatteras tournaments are a different recreational experience
relative to Oregon Inlet tournaments in that Hatteras is a more remote location geographically,
and the available amenities (hotels, restaurants, shopping, etc.) are much more limited, which can
make for a less enjoyable time spent on shore for some fishermen and their families.
Additionally, it should be noted that interviewees in the boat-building industry commented that a
large percentage of their sales came from fishing tournament participants drawn to the area‘s
unique sport-fishing yachts and that many of these sales were from repeat customers.
There are currently five fishing tournaments located in Dare County that focus on offshore
fishing that requires access to Oregon Inlet (Table VIII-1). Average expenditures per boat day
are listed separately for charter boats and private boats in Table VIII-2. Although the
tournaments are relatively short in duration, from one to four days in length, they occur
throughout the summer and fall fishing season, from May through November. Other fishing
tournaments are held in Dare County, but these other tournaments focus on target species, fishing
locations, or fishing vessels that would not require Oregon Inlet access. It should be noted that,
in the past, several more offshore fishing tournaments requiring Oregon Inlet access were held
each year (9 different tournaments were noted in the 2006 Oregon Inlet Impacts Study), so it is
possible that more tournaments could occur if Oregon Inlet navigability conditions were to
improve. Table VIII-1 also provides estimates of the number of participating boats under the
Fully Open and Essentially Closed scenarios. These estimates were provided by tournament
organizers interviewed for this study.
The tournaments listed in Table VIII-1 are dependent on Oregon Inlet because vessels fishing in
the tournaments must use Oregon Inlet to access offshore ocean waters where trophy fish
species, such as the billfish species, are located. In terms of inlet usage, ocean fishing
tournaments originating from Pirates Cove are usually required under tournament regulations to
use Oregon Inlet for ocean access. During one recent tournament, however, tournament
participants were re-routed to Hatteras Inlet due to bad weather and dangerous inlet conditions at
Oregon Inlet. While tournament participation was generally high for all tournaments, it was
noted that the big Billfish tournament dropped in participants from 2004 to 2005 due to
perceived inlet conditions. Additionally, 32 boats ran aground in Oregon Inlet during the 2005
Billfish tournament. Of these, 3 boats were replaced because damages caused by running
aground were too severe to continue in the tournament. Additionally, approximately 15 boats
pulled out of a 2013 tournament due to an incident in the inlet 1 week before the tournament.
May 2014
94
FINAL REPORT
Table VIII-1. Annual Fishing Tournaments Dependent on Oregon Inlet
Tournament Name and Date
North Carolina Offshore Challenge
Dolphinfish Tournament (May 16-18)
Dare County Boat Builders Tournament
(July 24-27)
Alice Kelly Ladies Tournament
August (9-10)
Pirates’ Cove Billfish Tournament
(August 11-15)
Manteo Rotary Rockfish Rodeo
(November 22)
TOTALS
Number
of
Fishing
Days
Out of State
Participants
2
unknown
3
Number of Boats and Percentage using
Oregon Inlet
Recent
Average
4 (100%)
(see Note 1)
8 (100%)
(see Note 1)
unknown
20 (100%)
30 (100%)
0 (100%)
1
30%
55-65 (100%)
90 (100%)
4
30%
70 (100%)
1
5%
Fully
Open
Essentially
Closed
16
0
60
90
0
0 (0%)
60
90
0
130 (100%)
0 (0%)
280
520
0
75 (25%)
75 (100%)
75 (10%)
19
75
8
173
333
8
427
791
8
Note 1.: Estimated number of boats using OI out of an unknown number of boats participating in tournament statewide.
95
May 2014
Number of Boat-Days
Fully Open
Essentially Recent
Closed
Average
0 (100%)
8
(see Note 1)
FINAL REPORT
Table VIII-2. Dare County Tournament Fishing Fees and Expenditures, Recent Oregon Inlet Conditions
Average
Annual Direct
Expenditure in NC
Expenditures
(Note 3) Per Boat PER
in NC
TOURNAMENT
(2012 $'s)
DAY (2012 $'s)
Charter Private
----Boat
Boat
Percentage of Tournament Boats (Note 6)
0.23
0.77
----Charter fees (Note 4)
$2,100
$0
(Note 4)
Expenditures (Note 5)
Tourn Entry Fee (Note 1) (Note 9)
$44,809
$1,750
$1,750
Tourn Entry Fee (Note 12)
$351,002
Auto Transport in NC
$152
$152
$65,039
Other Transport in NC (Note 11)
$674
$674
$0
Fuel for boat (Note 2)
$1,250
$1,250
$533,438
Slip/Dock fees (Note 2)
$150
$150
$64,013
Bait
$48
$48
$20,320
Fishing Tackle
$76
$255
$91,410
Boat repairs
$138
$138
$59,023
Lodging
$1,424
$1,424
$607,533
Restaurants
$768
$768
$327,615
Groceries
$552
$552
$235,705
Ice
$24
$24
$10,386
Charter Crew Wages & Tips (Note 8)
$270
$0
$26,546
Boat insurance
$67
$67
$28,683
Interest on Boat Loan
$42
$42
$17,721
Other (Producer Services)
$76
$76
$32,540
Other (Consumer Retail) (Note 10)
$2,003
$2,003
$854,671
Return to Charter Vessel Owner
$243
$0
$23,837
*See next page for notes
96
May 2014
Percentage of
NC
Expenditures
Spent in Dare
Co (Note 7)
Annual Direct
Expenditures
in Dare County
(2012 $'s)
Assigned
IMPLAN Sector
Description
-----
-----
-----
----99%
----(Note 4)
-----
100%
42%
76%
91%
95%
97%
86%
99%
99%
98%
95%
91%
89%
100%
21%
21%
96%
96%
100%
$44,809
$147,421
$49,662
$0
$506,811
$62,242
$17,526
$90,837
$58,653
$596,176
$311,959
$214,149
$9,210
$26,546
$6,023
$3,721
$31,111
$817,140
$23,837
advertising
gas stations
gas stations
gas stations
transport by water
commercial fishing
sporting goods
boat building & repairing
hotels
restaurants
grocery stores
ice manufacturing
Insurance carriers
Commercial Banking
Business support services
Retail--General Merchandise
FINAL REPORT
Table VIII-2 Notes:
Note 1. Tournament entry fee based on Pirates Cove Big Game Tournament fee schedule 2013. 2013 tournament entry fees ranged from $5000 to $15,000 per
boat; assume an average of $7000 per boat.
Note 2: Personal communication (April 2014) with Mr. Jim Tobin, Pirates Cove Marina:
Aver Charter fee per full day trip 2013:
$2,100
Dock fees per tourn week 2013:
$1,200 (but, not all boats use commercial dock, so assume an average of $600 per boat)
Ave fuel cost per tournament, per boat, 2013:
$5,000
Note 3: All prices from 1999 Ditton data were deflated from 1999 to 2012 using GDP deflator EXCEPT fuel cost. Dollar values deflated using GDP implicit
price deflator for 1999 to 2012 = 76.25664
Fuel cost deflated using relative nominal price of gas (USEIA 2014).
Date
Gas price $/gal
1999 1st week of Aug
$1.195
2012 1st week of August
$3.645
Note 4: Charter fees are distributed across the expenditure categories based on charter boat costs and returns data in Ditton (2000) and Dumas et al. (2009).
Note 5. Expenditure values in Ditton (2000) are given in units of dollars per angler. These values are adjusted to dollars per boat by assuming 6 anglers per boat.
Note 6: Dare County tournament boats included a mix of 23% charter anglers and 77% private boat anglers in 1999 (Ditton 2000). Assume charter/private mix
same in 2012.
Note 7: Percentage of NC expenditures made in Dare County by expenditure category based on Ditton (2000).
Note 8: Assumes half of charter tips go to crew, and half go to captain/owner.
Note 9: Assumes 6% of tournament fees are retained by the tournament organizer and spent in Dare County on advertising.
Note 10: This expenditure reflects spending by tournament participants and their families at retail stores in Dare County during the tournament (based on Ditton
2000).
Note 11: Other transport includes primarily airline travel. Assume this is purchased outside NC and has no economic impact on NC or Dare County.
Note 12: Assumes that of the 94% of tournament fees paid in prizes to the tournament participants, 21% is spent inside Dare County, an additional 29% is spent
within NC, and the remaining 50% is spent out of state, based on 1999 data from Ditton (2000) Assumes prize money is spent according to typical household
expenditure patterns for geographic region.
97
May 2014
FINAL REPORT
1.
IMPLAN Model Analysis
Economic impacts are presented below for Dare County, the Oregon Inlet Region, and the state
of North Carolina as a whole. For each geographic region, impacts are provided for three
Oregon Inlet navigability scenarios: Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions, Oregon Inlet Fully Open,
and Oregon Inlet closed.
The economic impact numbers reflect tournament fishing activity only; commercial fishing
activity, and non-tournament recreational fishing activity, are considered in other sections of this
report. The economic impact numbers reflect Oregon Inlet-dependent (i.e., ocean) tournament
fishing only; any tournament fishing inside the sounds or estuaries is not considered. For the
purposes of the present study, it is assumed that any sound or estuarine tournament fishing is
unaffected by Oregon Inlet conditions.
scenarios.
a)
(i)
To calculate the direct economic impacts of tournament fishing in Dare County for the ―Recent
Conditions‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario, the number of tournament boat-days per year for
the Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario, or 427 boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom row), is
first multiplied by the percentage of boats that are charter boats (Table VIII-2, top row), and then
multiplied by the expenditure values per charter boat, per tournament day, given in Table VIII-2,
to find the annual expenditures made by Oregon Inlet-using charter tournament boats in North
Carolina. A similar calculation is done to obtain the annual expenditures made by Oregon Inletusing private tournament boats in North Carolina. These two sets of expenditures, one for
charter boats, and one for private boats, are added together to obtain the expenditures listed in
Table VIII-2, column 3. The expenditure values in Table VIII-2, column 3, are then multiplied
by the percentage of expenditure that occurs in Dare County for each expenditure category,
Table VIII-2, column 4, to find the expenditures made within Dare County in each expenditure
category, Table VIII-2, column 5.
The expenditures in Table VIII-2, column 5, are then separated into two categories, direct labor
income, and direct expenditures on goods and services. The expenditures for the portion of the
tournament entry fee paid as prizes ($147,421), charter crew wages and tips ($26,546) and
returns to charter vessel owners ($23,837), for a total of $197,804, is categorized as direct labor
income. The prize money spent in Dare County ($147,421) is assumed to be spent by
households with a spending pattern typical of households with an annual household income
May 2014
98
FINAL REPORT
greater than $150,000 (i.e., it is assumed that relatively wealthy households can afford to pay the
tournament entry fees, and charter fees or private boat expenses). The charter crew and vessel
owner labor income ($26,546 + $23,837 = $50,383) is assumed to be spent by households with a
spending pattern typical of those with annual household incomes of $50,000 to $75,000, on
average (of course, some crew may have household incomes less than $50,000/year, and some
vessel owners may have household incomes greater than $75,000/year; the range $50,000 to
$75,000 is used as an average).
The remaining expenditures in Table VIII-2, column 5, or $2,820,029 are classified as direct
expenditures on goods and services.
The economic impacts are presented in Table VIII-3. Economic multiplier effects are the
of $2.8 million in Dare County generate an additional $1.7 million in economic multiplier effects
within the County, for a total economic impact of $4.6 million in output (sales) sales within the
County. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are
Table VIII-3. Annual Economic Impacts of Tournament Fishing in Dare County, Oregon
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$2,820,029
$4,551,174
20
36
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$777,242
$1,351,341
Dividend, Rent,
State and
and Interest
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
Income
$326,572
$884,226
----$190,659
----$249,371
(ii)
To calculate the direct economic impacts of tournament fishing in Dare County for the ―Fully
Open‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario, a method similar to that used for the ―Recent
Conditions‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario is used, but with a larger number of tournament
boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom row). The larger number of tournament boat days possible
under ―Fully Open‖ inlet conditions is based on estimates provided by tournament organizers
interviewed for the present study.
The number of tournament boat-days per year for the Oregon Inlet ―Fully Open‖ Conditions
scenario, or 791 boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom row), is first multiplied by the percentage of
boats that are charter boats (Table VIII-2, top row), and then multiplied by the expenditure
values per charter boat, per tournament day, given in Table VIII-2, to find the annual
expenditures made by Oregon Inlet-using charter tournament boats in North Carolina. A similar
calculation is done to obtain the annual expenditures made by Oregon Inlet-using private
tournament boats in North Carolina. These two sets of expenditures, one for charter boats, and
one for private boats, are added together. The expenditure values are then multiplied by the
percentage of expenditure that occurs in Dare County for each expenditure category to find the
expenditures made within Dare County in each expenditure category.
May 2014
99
FINAL REPORT
The expenditures are then separated into two categories, direct labor income, and direct
expenditures on goods and services. The expenditures for the portion of the tournament entry fee
paid as prizes, charter crew wages and tips, and returns to charter vessel owners is categorized as
direct labor income. The prize money spent in Dare County is assumed to be spent by
greater than $150,000. The charter crew and vessel owner labor income is assumed to be spent
by households with a spending pattern typical of those with annual household incomes of
$50,000 to $75,000, on average.
The second category of expenditures, direct expenditures on goods and services, total $5,223,988
under the Fully Open navigability scenario.
The combined economic impacts of the direct labor income and the direct expenditures on goods
and services are presented in Table VIII-4 below. Economic multiplier effects are the difference
between the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. For example, sales of $5.2
million in Dare County generate an additional $3.2 million in economic multiplier effects within
the County, for a total economic impact of $8.4 million in output (sales) sales within the County.
in a similar way.
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$5,223,988
$8,430,863
36
67
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,439,809
$2,503,304
Dividend, Rent,
State and
and Interest
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
Income
$604,961
$1,637,992
----$353,188
----$461,950
million in Dare County for fully open inlet conditions. These numbers were estimated by
determining the ratio between the 2014 and 2006 tournament boat days (a ―boat-day‖ is one boat,
fishing for one day, in a tournament) and applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully open
conditions in Dare County. However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if
etc.
To calculate the direct economic impacts of tournament fishing in Dare County for the ―Closed‖
Oregon Inlet navigability scenario, a method similar to that used for the ―Recent Conditions‖
Oregon Inlet navigability scenario is used, but with a smaller number of tournament boat days
(Table VIII-1, bottom row). The smaller number of tournament boat days possible under
―Closed‖ inlet conditions is based on estimates provided by tournament organizers interviewed
for the present study.
May 2014
100
FINAL REPORT
The number of tournament boat-days per year for the Oregon Inlet ―Closed‖ Conditions scenario,
or 8 boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom row), is first multiplied by the percentage of boats that are
charter boats (Table VIII-2, top row), and then multiplied by the expenditure values per charter
boat, per tournament day, given in Table VIII-2, to find the annual expenditures made by Oregon
Inlet-using charter tournament boats in North Carolina. A similar calculation is done to obtain
the annual expenditures made by Oregon Inlet-using private tournament boats in North Carolina.
These two sets of expenditures, one for charter boats, and one for private boats, are added
together. The expenditure values are then multiplied by the percentage of expenditure that
occurs in Dare County for each expenditure category to find the expenditures made within Dare
County in each expenditure category.
The expenditures are then separated into two categories, direct labor income, and direct
expenditures on goods and services. The expenditures for the portion of the tournament entry fee
paid as prizes, charter crew wages and tips, and returns to charter vessel owners is categorized as
direct labor income. The prize money spent in Dare County is assumed to be spent by
greater than $150,000. The charter crew and vessel owner labor income is assumed to be spent
by households with a spending pattern typical of those with annual household incomes of
$50,000 to $75,000, on average.
The second category of expenditures, direct expenditures on goods and services, total $52,834
under the closed navigability scenario.
The combined economic impacts of the direct labor income and the direct expenditures on goods
and services are presented in Table VIII-5. Economic multiplier effects are the difference
between the Direct Effects and the Total Effects listed in the table. For example, sales of
$53,000 in Dare County generate an additional $33,000 in economic multiplier effects within the
County, for a total economic impact of $85,000 in output (sales) sales within the County. The
Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a
similar way.
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$52,834
$85,268
0
1
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$14,562
$25,318
Dividend, Rent,
State and
and Interest
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
Income
$6,118
$16,566
----$3,572
----$4,672
b)
tournament fishing that occurs within Dare County, the economic multiplier effects that occur
within Dare County, and the economic multiplier effects that occur in the other counties of the
May 2014
101
FINAL REPORT
Oregon Inlet region. The results in this section do not include the economic impacts of any
tournament fishing activity occurring outside Dare County. The results presented here for the
Oregon Inlet Region differ from those presented for Dare County only in the multiplier effects
and total impacts—the direct impacts are the same (i.e., the only direct impacts in the region
considered here are those that occur in Dare County).
(i)
To calculate the direct economic impacts of tournament fishing in the Oregon Inlet region for the
―Recent Conditions‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario, the number of tournament boat-days per
year for the Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario, or 427 boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom
row), is used together with the method described above in the ―Recent Conditions‖ Oregon Inlet
navigability scenario for Dare County. The results presented here for the Oregon Inlet Region
differ from those presented for Dare County only in the multiplier effects and total impacts—the
direct impacts are the same.
throughout the Oregon Inlet region, for a total economic impact of $4.8 million in output (sales)
sales throughout the Oregon Inlet region. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the
Table VIII-6. Annual Economic Impacts of Tournament Fishing in Oregon Inlet Region,
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$2,820,029
$4,788,859
22
41
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$773,762
$1,447,835
Dividend, Rent,
State and
and Interest
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
Income
$348,131
$977,701
----$224,774
----$272,511
(ii)
―Fully Open‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario, the number of tournament boat-days per year
for the Oregon Inlet ―Fully Open‖ scenario, or 791 boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom row), is used
together with the method described above in the ―Fully Open‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario
for Dare County. The results presented here for the Oregon Inlet Region differ from those
presented for Dare County only in the multiplier effects and total impacts—the direct impacts are
the same.
May 2014
102
FINAL REPORT
throughout the Oregon Inlet region, for a total economic impact of $8.9 million in output (sales)
sales throughout the Oregon Inlet region. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$5,223,988
$8,871,165
40
76
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,433,362
$2,682,055
Dividend, Rent,
State and
and Interest
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
Income
$644,898
$1,811,151
----$416,385
----$504,815
million in Dare County and the surrounding region for fully open inlet conditions. These
numbers were estimated by determining the ratio between the 2014 and 2006 tournament boat
days (a ―boat-day‖ is one boat, fishing for one day, in a tournament) and applying that ratio to
the total impacts for fully open conditions in the surrounding region (including Dare County).
―Closed‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario, the number of tournament boat-days per year for
the Oregon Inlet ―Closed‖ scenario, or 8 boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom row), is used together
with the method described above in the ―Closed‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario for Dare
County. The results presented here for the Oregon Inlet Region differ from those presented for
Dare County only in the multiplier effects and total impacts—the direct impacts are the same.
of $53,000 in Dare County generate an additional $37,000 in economic multiplier effects
throughout the Oregon Inlet region, for a total economic impact of $90,000 in output (sales) sales
throughout the Oregon Inlet region. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining
May 2014
103
FINAL REPORT
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$52,834
$89,721
0
1
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$14,497
$27,126
Dividend, Rent,
State and
and Interest
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
Income
$6,522
$18,318
----$4,211
----$5,106
c)
The economic impact results presented in this section include the direct impacts of Oregon Inletdependent tournament fishing in Dare County and its multiplier effects throughout the state of
North Carolina. Typically, when a larger geographic region is considered, multiplier effects are
larger, and so the total economic impacts of a given economic change are also larger. However,
some economic changes that result in net economic impacts at the county or regional levels do
not result in net economic changes at the state level. For example, a movement in tournament
fishing activity from a location outside Dare County, but inside North Carolina, such as
Morehead City, NC, to Dare County results in net economic changes in Dare County and the
Oregon Inlet region but not at the state level. At the state level, there is simply a transfer of
economic activity from one location to another within the state. As a result, the answer to the
question of whether economic impacts will increase as larger geographic areas are considered
depends on the combined effects of (1) larger economic multiplier effects as we consider larger
geographic areas and (2) smaller direct effects as we consider larger geographic areas because
more economic changes are classified as transfers within a larger area. Therefore, the total
impacts in some impact categories may increase as we move from the consideration of county
and regional-level impacts to statewide impacts, but total impacts in other impact categories may
decrease.
(i)
To calculate the statewide direct economic impacts of tournament fishing for the ―Recent
Conditions‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario, the number of tournament boat-days per year for
the Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions scenario, or 427 boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom row), is
used together with the method described above in the ―Recent Conditions‖ Oregon Inlet
navigability scenario for Dare County, except that statewide expenditures (Table VIII-2, column
3) are used instead of expenditures occurring only within Dare County (Table VIII-2, column 5).
of $2.99 million in Dare County generate an additional $3.98 million in economic multiplier
effects throughout the state (including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region), for a total
May 2014
104
FINAL REPORT
economic impact of $6.97 million in output (sales) sales throughout the state. The Direct Effects
and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the table are interpreted in a similar way.
occur at the state level are larger. For example, every dollar of direct impact sales, for example,
Table VIII-9. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Tournament Fishing Using Oregon
Inlet, Oregon Inlet Recent Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$2,992,903
$6,970,273
27
60
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,097,153
$2,598,072
Dividend, Rent,
State and
and Interest
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
Income
$399,034
$1,490,211
----$334,716
----$464,746
(ii)
To calculate the statewide direct economic impacts of tournament fishing for the ―Fully Open‖
Oregon Inlet navigability scenario, the number of tournament boat-days per year for the Oregon
Inlet Fully Open Conditions scenario, or 791 boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom row), is used
together with the method described above in the ―Fully Open Conditions‖ Oregon Inlet
navigability scenario for Dare County, with two exceptions:

Statewide expenditures (Table VIII-2, column 3) are used instead of those expenditures
occurring only within Dare County (Table VIII-2, column 5).

Only 30 percent of the increase in tournament boat days due to Fully Open Oregon Inlet
conditions is attributable to out-of-state tournament participants, while 70 percent of the
increase is due to North Carolina residents shifting their tournament participation from
other tournaments in the state to Dare County-based tournaments (this is based on
interviews with Dare County tournament organizers who report that 30 percent of
tournament participants, on average, are from out of state). The 70 percent of the
increase in tournament boat days that represents a shift to Dare County from other
tournaments within the state is not considered a net gain to the state and is not included in
the statewide economic impact.
throughout the state (including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region), for a total economic
impact of $8.8 million in output (sales) sales throughout the state. The Direct Effects and Total
May 2014
105
FINAL REPORT
Inlet, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$3,758,301
$8,752,835
33
76
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,377,736
$3,262,497
Dividend, Rent,
State and
and Interest
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
Income
$501,082
$1,871,314
----$420,316
----$583,599
2014 and 2006 tournament boat days (a ―boat-day‖ is one boat, fishing for one day, in a
tournament) and applying that ratio to the total impacts for fully open conditions in the state of
North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region). However, it is also possible
that these projections could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices,
higher interest rates, higher unemployment, etc.
To calculate the statewide direct economic impacts of tournament fishing for the ―Closed‖
Oregon Inlet navigability scenario, the number of tournament boat-days per year for the Oregon
Inlet Closed Conditions scenario, or 8 boat days (Table VIII-1, bottom row), is used together
with the method described above in the ―Closed Conditions‖ Oregon Inlet navigability scenario
for Dare County, with two exceptions:

Statewide expenditures (Table VIII-2, column 3) are used instead of those expenditures
occurring only within Dare County (Table VIII-2, column 5).

Only 30 percent of the decrease in tournament boat days due to Closed Oregon Inlet
conditions is attributable to out-of-state tournament participants, while 70 percent of the
decrease is due to North Carolina residents shifting their tournament participation from
Dare County tournaments to other tournaments within the state (this is based on
interviews with Dare County tournament organizers who report that 30 percent of
tournament participants, on average, are from out of state). The 70 percent of the
decrease in tournament boat days that represents a shift from Dare County from other
tournaments within the state is not considered a net loss to the state and is not included in
the statewide economic impact.
of $2.1 million in Dare County and elsewhere in the state as a result of tournament boats shifting
their activities from Dare County to other tournaments in the state generate an additional $2.8
May 2014
106
FINAL REPORT
million in economic multiplier effects throughout the state (including Dare County and the
Oregon Inlet region), for a total economic impact of $4.9 million in output (sales) sales
throughout the state. The Direct Effects and Total Effects listed in the remaining columns of the
table are interpreted in a similar way.
Inlet, Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$2,111,854
$4,918,368
19
42
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$774,174
$1,833,253
Dividend, Rent,
State and
and Interest
Federal Taxes
Local Taxes
Income
$281,567
$1,051,524
----$236,183
----$327,934
2.
There are currently five fishing tournaments (down from nine in 2006) located in Dare County
that focus on offshore fishing that requires access to Oregon Inlet. More than 173 boats annually
are expected to participate in sportfishing tournaments dependent on passage through Oregon
Inlet. Although the tournaments are relatively short in duration, from one to four days in length,
they occur throughout the summer and fall fishing season, from May through November. The
tournaments are dependent on Oregon Inlet because vessels fishing in the tournaments must use
Oregon Inlet to access offshore ocean waters where trophy fish species, such as the billfish
species, are located. Fees and expenditures from these tournaments also generate a large
economic impact to Dare County in the form of lodging, restaurants, tackle, fuel, and crew
wages.
Table VIII-12 presents the direct and total economic impacts on Dare County, the surrounding
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent tournament fishing for recent conditions. As
mentioned previously, the recent condition is based on an average of conditions over the last 3
years (a depth of 6 ft or greater only 40% of the time).
May 2014
107
FINAL REPORT
Table VIII-12. Summary of Annual Oregon Inlet-Dependent Tournament Fishing
Economic Impacts For Recent Conditions Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$2,820,029
$4,551,174
$2,820,029
$4,788,859
$2,992,903
$6,970,273
20
36
22
41
27
60
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$777,242
$1,351,341
$773,762
$1,447,835
$1,097,153
$2,598,072
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$326,572
$884,226
$348,131
$977,701
$399,034
$1,490,211
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$190,659
----$224,774
----$334,716
----$249,371
----$272,511
----$464,746
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent tournament fishing for fully open conditions.
As mentioned previously, fully open conditions are considered to be dredged to a depth of 14 ft
or greater 85-100% of the time.
Economic Impacts For Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$5,223,988
$8,430,863
$5,223,988
$8,871,165
$3,758,301
$8,752,835
36
67
40
76
33
76
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$1,439,809
$2,503,304
$1,433,362
$2,682,055
$1,377,736
$3,262,497
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$604,961
$1,637,992
$644,898
$1,811,151
$501,082
$1,871,314
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$353,188
----$416,385
----$420,316
----$461,950
----$504,815
----$583,599
The impacts in Table VIII-13 reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions
million in Dare County, $25.8 million in the surrounding region (including Dare County), and
$25.5 million in state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) for
fully open inlet conditions. Again, these numbers were estimated by determining the ratio
between the 2014 and 2006 tournament boat days and applying that ratio to the total impacts for
fully open conditions in each of the three geographic settings – Dare County, the surrounding
region (including Dare County), and the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the
etc.
Table VIII-14 presents the potential additional economic impacts from tournament fishing that
may be realized if Oregon Inlet were maintained to fully open conditions. The results are
equivalent to the difference between Table VIII-13 (fully open inlet scenario) and Table VIII-12
(recent conditions scenario).
May 2014
108
FINAL REPORT
Table VIII-14. Summary of Potentially Gained Annual Economic Impacts from
Tournament Fishing for Oregon Inlet Fully Open Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$2,403,959
$3,879,689
$2,403,959
$4,082,306
$765,398
$1,782,562
16
31
18
35
6
16
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$662,567
$1,151,963
$659,600
$1,234,220
$280,583
$664,425
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$278,389
$753,766
$296,767
$833,450
$102,048
$381,103
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$162,529
----$191,611
----$85,600
----$212,579
----$232,304
----$118,853
region, and the State for Oregon Inlet dependent tournament fishing for essentially closed
conditions. As mentioned previously, essentially closed conditions are considered to be dredged
to a depth of 6 ft or greater only 5% of the time.
Economic Impacts For Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
$52,834
$85,268
$52,834
$89,721
$2,111,854
$4,918,368
0
1
0
1
19
42
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$14,562
$25,318
$14,497
$27,126
$774,174
$1,833,253
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
$6,118
$16,566
$6,522
$18,318
$281,567
$1,051,524
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$3,572
----$4,211
----$236,183
----$4,672
----$5,106
----$327,934
Table VIII-16 presents the potential loss of economic impacts from tournament fishing that may
be realized if Oregon Inlet were allowed to essentially close. The results are equivalent to the
difference between Table VIII-12 (recent conditions scenario) and Table VIII-15 (essentially
May 2014
109
FINAL REPORT
Table VIII-16. Summary of Potentially Lost Annual Economic Impacts from Tournament
Fishing for Oregon Inlet Essentially Closed Scenario
Locale
Dare County
Region
(Incl. Dare Co.)
State of NC
(Incl. Dare Co.)
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
-$2,767,195
-$4,465,906
-$2,767,195
-$4,699,138
-$881,049
-$2,051,905
-20
-35
-22
-40
-8
-18
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
-$762,680
-$1,326,023
-$759,265
-$1,420,709
-$322,979
-$764,819
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
-$320,454
-$867,660
-$341,609
-$959,383
-$117,467
-$438,687
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
-----$187,087
-----$220,563
-----$98,533
-----$244,699
-----$267,405
-----$136,812
3.
The 2006 study listed 9 fishing tournaments in Dare County. Also, the Rockfish tournament
concerns mainly small vessels that may be able to navigate Oregon Inlet under most conditions.
In addition, several of the tournaments are no longer held, and apparently were only held for one
or two years.
The 2014 study is based on the 4 tournaments from the 2006 study that have a solid track record
of occurring over multiple years, Pirates‘ Cove Billfish Tournament (August 11-15), Alice Kelly
Ladies Tournament (August 9-10), Dare County Boat Builders Tournament (July 24-27), and the
Manteo Rotary Rockfish Rodeo (November 22), plus an additional tournament that is statewide
but that includes participants who use Oregon Inlet, the North Carolina Offshore Challenge
Dolphinfish Tournament (May 16-18), for a total of 5 tournaments. The other tournaments
considered in the 2006 study were held for only one year, or died out over time for reasons not
clearly related to inlet navigability conditions, and so they are not included in the 2014 study.
The 9 tournaments considered in the 2006 study supported a total of 970 boat-days (a ―boat-day‖
is one boat, fishing for one day, in a tournament) and $14.4 million in direct impacts for
sales/output within Dare County. It is assumed that the inlet conditions in 2004-2005, on which
the 2006 study were based, were relatively good inlet conditions. (Perhaps the conditions were
not perfect, but apparently they were sufficiently good to support 970 boat-days of tournament
fishing.) The economic impacts for tournaments presented in the 2006 study were based on
economic conditions in 2004-2005, which were unusually good years for recreational fishing
activity (see data from National Marine Manufacturers Association on annual boat sales), due to
a good economy and relatively low gas prices ($2.00-$2.25/gallon). These years do not
represent the ―average economic conditions‖ considered in the 2014 study.
The 5 tournaments considered in the 2014 study supported a total of 333 boat-days under fully
open inlet conditions and $5.2 million in direct impacts for sales/output within Dare County.
Compared to the 2006 study results, the 2014 study found about 2/3rds fewer boat days under
fully open inlet conditions and about 2/3rds less economic impact. Basing tournament fishing
impacts on the 5 tournaments considered in the 2014 study appears reasonable based on
interviews with Dare County officials familiar with Dare County fishing tournaments, who
mentioned no plans for any new tournaments under improved fishing conditions. The 2014
May 2014
110
FINAL REPORT
study allows for additional participation in the existing 5 tournaments under improved inlet
conditions. Perhaps additional Dare County tournaments will be organized in the future, but
perhaps not. There are currently many other fishing tournaments held in North Carolina (over
100 in 2013-2014), and it‘s not clear that the market would support more tournaments on a
sustained basis. Nevertheless, if the economy were to improve such that economic conditions
were similar to those in 2004-2005, and inlet conditions were to improve to ―fully open,‖ then
economic impacts could perhaps reach the levels presented in the 2006 study (that is, three times
the levels presented in the 2014 study). On the other hand, if economic conditions were to
deteriorate, then economic impacts under each inlet navigability scenario could be lower than
those presented in the 2014 study.
In the 2006 study, tournament fishermen were assumed to spend about $6000 per fisherman, per
4-day tournament. This includes money spent on lodging, restaurants, groceries, gas for
cars/trucks, boat fuel, retail shopping, and other things. In the 2014 study, tournament fishermen
spent similar amounts per 4-day tournament, $6,874 for tournament anglers using charter boats,
and $5,260 for tournament anglers using private boats.
Comparing tax revenue impacts from the 2006 study with those from the 2014 study, for
tournament boat fishing the percentage of each dollar of output collected in state and local taxes
in 2014 was about half the 2006 percentage. The percentage of each dollar of output collected in
federal taxes in 2014 was also about half the 2006 percentage. The difference is caused by shifts
in spending across spending categories. In 2014, tournament boaters spent less on boat repairs,
dock fees, ice, and bait, but more on lodging, restaurants and groceries. Also, the portion of the
charter fishing fee earned by the charter boat owner, after expenses, was lower in 2014. Because
tax rates are different on different spending categories, the average taxes collected per dollar of
output changed.
May 2014
111
FINAL REPORT
May 2014
112
FINAL REPORT
IX.
OFFSHORE DRILLING
Opening the U.S. Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) to offshore oil and natural gas
exploration and production could have significant economic impacts, in terms of job creation,
U.S. energy security, domestic investment, and revenue to the government (American Petroleum
Institute, 2014). North Carolina, in particular, benefits from its proximity to OCS oil and gas
resources and its current extensive port infrastructures at both Morehead City and Wilmington.
According to the National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA, 2013), North Carolina is
predicted to see the highest levels of spending, employment and contributions to the economy if
OCS oil and natural gas resources are developed. Within the next decade, offshore oil and
natural gas development off of the North Carolina Coast could create an estimated 10,542 jobs
and generate over $28 million in revenue (Quest Offshore Resources, 2013). A 2009 study by
the American Energy Alliance projects an increase of 30,979 jobs by 2035 from offshore oil and
gas recovery operations in North Carolina (Mason, 2009).
Determining the quantity of recoverable resources offshore and their prices are the main factors
in determining the economic potential of energy resource development in North Carolina
(Walden and Reynolds, 2013). The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) (2013a)
estimates that the offshore areas of the United States contain significant quantities of resources in
yet-to-be-discovered fields. The Bureau estimates of oil and gas resources in undiscovered fields
on the outer continental shelf OCS (2006, mean estimates) total 86 billion barrels of oil and 420
trillion cubic feet of gas. These volumes represent about 60 percent of the oil and 40 percent of
the natural gas resources estimated to be contained in remaining undiscovered fields in the
United States.
The area offshore of the northern Outer Banks is located in the Mid-Atlantic region of the U.S.
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) shown in Figure IX-1. BOEM conducted an assessment of the
total Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources (UTRR) of the OCS in
2011. The estimates of this resource were recorded as a potential minimum (95% probability),
mean (50% probability), and maximum (5% probability). The minimum, mean, and maximum
UTRR for oil in the Mid-Atlantic OCS region is 0.06, 1.42, and 2.85 billions of barrels (Bbo)
respectively (BOEM, 2011). The minimum, mean, and maximum UTRR for gas in the MidAtlantic OCS region is 1.01, 19.36, and 38.94 trillion cubic feet of gas (Tcfg) respectively
(BOEM, 2011). Of these amounts, an estimated 0.95 billion barrels of oil and 9.72 trillion cubic
feet of natural gas would be economically recoverable at a price of $110 per barrel of oil and
$7.38 per thousand cubic feet of natural gas.
May 2014
113
FINAL REPORT
Figure IX-1. Outer Continental Shelf Regions
The OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 2012-2017 establishes a schedule that is used as a
basis for considering where and when oil and gas leasing might be appropriate over a five-year
period (BOEM, 2013b). This five-year program proposes leases off the coast of Alaska and the
Gulf of Mexico only; no leases are scheduled for sale off the coasts of states in the Mid-Atlantic
Region, including North Carolina. Although there are currently no active leases in the MidAtlantic Region of the OCS, oil or natural gas drilling might occur in the future. The location of
Oregon Inlet could potentially lend itself to be useful should offshore drilling be developed in the
future. While the shallow draft navigation channel limits the types and sizes of ocean vessels
that can safely traverse, it could be useful for crew and maintenance boats which need to pass
back and forth between land and ocean facilities. Operation and maintenance would be expected
to increase employment, economic output / business activity, and government revenues collected
in Dare County and perhaps nearby counties hosting commuting employees.
A.
OFFSHORE DRILLING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS
Surveys were sent to approximately 8 individuals and/or companies that are familiar with the
recent push to explore offshore energy in the Atlantic. None of the individuals contacted were
able to provide answers to the survey questions. However, a majority indicated that while
offshore drilling in the mid-Atlantic region is a possibility for the future, Oregon Inlet would not
May 2014
114
FINAL REPORT
play a large role. The presence of the bridge and the poor conditions of the channel make the
inlet not an option for the larger vessels that would be required to build and maintain the offshore
infrastructure. However, they did indicate that Oregon Inlet could potentially be used for crew
boats.
Since M&N was unable to get survey responses, a literature search was performed to find
potential information in other parts of the country and world where this type of infrastructure
exists. The North Carolina General Assembly‘s research commission performed a very valuable
study on offshore energy exploration in 2010, which included discussion of offshore energy
resource availability and the financial impacts on coastal industries and profit sharing. From this
study, helpful information from the Minerals Management Service (now known as BOEM) was
also obtained which included data on onshore infrastructure and employment necessary for
operation of offshore drilling sites. In addition, presenters from the Offshore Energy in the
Southeast 2014 Conference were contacted to gain helpful information from speakers about the
topic.
The survey contacts and questions for offshore drilling can be found in Appendix A.
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – OFFSHORE DRILLING
Utilizing data from The Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the U.S. Department of
Energy and the World Bank, Walden and Reynolds (2013) forecast an average oil price between
2013-2035 of $101 per barrel (2012 USD), and an average of $5.21 per 1000 cubic feet of
natural gas. Using these predicted prices, this study estimates a quantity of economically
recoverable offshore oil in North Carolina of 595 million barrels and 5.1 trillion cubic feet of
offshore natural gas. The American Energy Alliance (2009) used data from recent offshore
energy projects within varying U.S. regions and calculated annual infrastructure costs of $1.65
(2012 USD) per barrel of oil and $0.30 per 1000 cubic feet of natural gas during the initial
construction period.
In the United States, there are two main types of offshore drilling rigs – floating rigs (formally
known as semisubmersible or drillships) and jackup rigs. Floating rigs hover above the well
construction site and are held in position by anchors or dynamic positioning, while a jackup is a
barge with legs that can be adjusted to suit a given location (Kaiser and Snyder, 2013). A 2013
study examining the offshore contract drilling industry, reported a total world fleet of 868
existing offshore drilling rigs, of which 539 are jackup rigs and 329 are floaters. According to
RigZone, a leading international online resource for the oil and gas industry, there are currently
88 contracted rigs in the Gulf of Mexico out of a total rig fleet of 226 rigs. Using data acquired
by RigLogix, RigZone reported the average daily rate for using a floating rig at $295,833 per
day, and a jackup rig costing approximately $96,700 per day (2014 USD).
The amount of crew members required per oil rig varies depending on the type of offshore rig, its
location, and the nature of the job the rig is performing. The typical drilling rig crew is
comprised of supervisory, specialized, and crew staff members5. On average, the number of
5
Rigs supervisors are responsible for rig maintenance and installation, while specialized staff includes vessel
support, drillers, subsea engineers, and electricians. The crew includes entry-level staff, maintenance and IT staff,
and mechanics.
May 2014
115
FINAL REPORT
drilling contractor employees staffing a jackup rig is estimated at 110 personnel, while floating
rigs are estimated to require 170 personnel per rig (Oilpro.com; Tripke, 2014). On average, U.S.
employees in the Oil and Gas Industry make an hourly wage of $43.95 and an annual income of
$91,410 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 2013). Broken down further, Table IX-1 describes the
average hourly and annual wages for the following industries directly involved with offshore oil
and gas: (1) Oil and Gas Extraction, (2) Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil, (3) Petroleum and
Coal Products Manufacturing, and (4) Support Activities for Mining.
Table IX-1. May 2013 National Industry Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates
Industry
Hourly Wage Annual Income
Oil and Gas Extraction:
$43.95
$91,410
Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil:
$36.50
$75,920
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing:
$33.46
$69,600
Support Activities for Mining:
$25.56
$53,160
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics;
M ay 2013 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates
A 2012 study completed by IFP Energies Nouvelles, estimated the 2010 rate of offshore oil
production at 23.6 million barrels per day (Mbbld), or 30% of global production, and 2.4 billion
cubic-meters per day (bcmd) of gas, or 27% of global production. In 2012, the U.S. Energy
Information Administration reported the Gulf of Mexico‘s Federal offshore oil production at
being 1,252,000 barrels per day. NOAA reported 3858 active oil and gas platforms in the Gulf
of Mexico in 2012 (http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/06mexico/background/oil/media
/platform_600.html). Combining these two reports, it is estimated that each oil rig has the
capability of producing 324.5 barrels of oil per day in the off-shore Gulf of Mexico region. We
assume that this average reflects downtime, repairs, and coordination of transportation to and
from the drill site to the shoreline. Thus, we employ this average in analyzing oil and gas
development in Hatteras Bay off of Currituck and Dare Counties, North Carolina.
Using the Gulf of Mexico average daily output level of 324.5 barrels of oil, we calculate the
number of necessary rigs to extract oil and gas resources in Hatteras Bay over a 20 year period.
As indicated above, data from US DOE Energy Information Administration indicates that 595
million barrels of oil and 5.1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas could be economically recoverable
through 2035. As these numbers are coast-wide and we do not have a detailed spatial
breakdown, we make the simple assumption that one-third of the economically recoverable
resources (or 198.333 million barrels of oil) is located in the region of Hatteras Bay. Since oil
and gas are extracted jointly, we focus only on oil, assuming that natural gas will be a valuable
byproduct.
If all of the oil and gas were to be extracted during a 20-year project lifespan (which would run
through roughly 2035), approximately 84 offshore rigs would be required. We make this
calculation by scaling up the average daily production of rigs in the Gulf-of-Mexico (324.5
barrels of oil/day) to produce a 20 year lifespan estimate of 2.37 million barrels of oil. As we are
uncertain what types of offshore rigs would be utilized, we use the average proportion of jack-up
May 2014
116
FINAL REPORT
rigs (62%) and floater rigs (38%) in the global fleet. Under Scenario 1, this would entail 52 jackup rigs and 32 floaters. The 8,840 jack-up rig workers would earn approximately $808 million
per year, and the 3,520 floating rig workers would earn about $321.7 million per year, for total
income of $1.129 billion per year. Table IX-2 depicts the scenarios mentioned above.
Table IX-2. Scenarios for Oil & Gas Development in Hatteras Bay
Scenario
84 rigs in Hatteras Bay to extract all
1 economically viable oil & gas
resources
42 rigs in Hatteras Bay to extract
2 approx. one-half of economically viable
oil & gas resources
21 rigs in Hatteras Bay to extract
3 approx. one-quarter of economically
viable oil & gas resources
Employment
8840 jack-up rig workers
3520 floater rig workers
Income
$808 million / year (jack-up)
$321.7 million / year (floater)
$1.129 billion / year (TOTAL)
$565 million / year (TOTAL)
$282.5 million / year (TOTAL)
Since this level of oil and gas development might not be feasible in the near to middle term, we
also consider to scenarios that involve lower levels of investment, consisting of one-half and
one-quarter the level of development in scenario number one. Total employment is between
3,090 and 6,180 workers, and annual income varies between $282.5 million and $564.9 million.
Using the infrastructure cost estimate from the American Energy Alliance (2009) of $1.65 per
barrel of oil (2012 USD), we estimate total infrastructure costs for the scenarios as follows:
$327.25 million for scenario one; $163.63 million for scenario two; and $81.81 million for
scenario three. These numbers do not include projected infrastructure costs for natural gas, and
thus can be considered conservative.
1.
The economic impacts of Oregon Inlet-dependent offshore oil and gas development are
calculated for three geographic areas: Dare County, the Oregon Inlet region, and the State of
North Carolina as a whole. For each geographic region, only the fully open navigability scenario
is considered, as recent navigability conditions would not provide the consistent ocean access
required to support such a large capital investment. It is assumed that a closed inlet would
support no offshore oil and gas development.
For this study, we consider the middle scenario (scenario 2) in which 42 drilling rigs are located
in Hatteras Bay to extract approximately one-half of the economically viable offshore oil and gas
resources over a 20-year operational project lifespan. We assume this would require 26 jack-up
rigs and 16 floating rigs. The economic impacts of offshore oil and gas development occur in
two phases, a construction phase lasting one or two years, and an operations and maintenance
phase lasting 20 or more years. It is assumed that offshore construction activities would be
supported by the more extensive port and rail facilities located in Norfolk, Virginia, and possibly
Morehead City, North Carolina. During the operations and maintenance phase, the jack-up rigs
require 4420 workers, earning annual income of $404 million, and the floater rigs require an
additional 1760 workers, earning annual income of $160.9 million. It is assumed that one-third
May 2014
117
FINAL REPORT
of these workers would be based in Dare County, NC, one-third in Beaufort/Morehead City, NC,
and one-third in Norfolk, Virginia.
The impacts are intended to reflect average economic conditions and average weather conditions.
All dollar values are report in real (inflation adjusted) 2012-year dollars. Employment numbers
are the total of full-time and part-time jobs (not ―full-time equivalent‖ jobs).
a)
Dare County Economic Impacts - Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
The annual economic impacts of the operations and maintenance activities that occur within
Dare County are presented in Table IX-3. The operations and maintenance phase lasts 20 years.
It is assumed that 2,060 jobs (one-third of 6180) jobs paying a total of $188.3 million (one-third
of $565 million) per year will be based in Dare County, NC. It is assumed that, on average,
these workers earn $91,408 per year ($188.3 million / 2060 jobs = $91,408). The household
spending pattern of these workers is assumed to be similar to that of households with $75,000$100,000 annual income in the IMPLAN database. It is assumed that the workers find housing
in the existing, extensive, Dare County rental housing stock, and it is assumed that any required
machine shop, warehouse storage and dock facilities are found from the existing stock of vacant
commercial and industrial property in Dare County.
Economic impacts are calculated using IMPLAN and are presented in Table X-3. Economic
table. For example, direct labor income of $188.3 million in Dare County generates an
additional $66.2 million in labor income within the County due to economic multiplier effects,
for a total labor income impact of $254.5 million. This labor income supports an additional 1923
jobs (3983 – 2060 = 1923) in Dare County, and an estimated $203 million in sales (output) in
Dare County, $68.5 million in dividends, rents and interest income, $10.7 million in state and
local taxes, and $15.3 million in federal taxes.
Table IX-3. Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Oil Development in Dare County Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
N/A
$203,010,800
2,060
3,983
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$188,333,333
$254,517,135
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
N/A
$68,506,146
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$10,657,583
----$15,306,411
b)
Regional Economic Impacts - Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
impact results presented in this section include the direct economic impacts that occur within
Dare County, the economic multiplier effects that occur within Dare County, and the economic
multiplier effects that occur in the other counties of the Oregon Inlet region. The results
presented here for the Oregon Inlet Region differ from those presented for Dare County in the
multiplier effects and total impacts only—the direct effects are the same.
May 2014
118
FINAL REPORT
Economic impacts are calculated using IMPLAN and are presented in Table IX-4. Economic
additional $69.4 million in labor income in the Oregon Inlet region (including Dare County) due
to economic multiplier effects, for a total labor income impact in the Oregon Inlet region of
$257.5 million. This labor income supports an additional 2042 jobs (4102 – 2060 = 2042) in the
Oregon Inlet region (including Dare County), and a total of $210.2 million in sales (output) in
the Oregon Inlet region, $71.7 million in dividends, rents and interest income, $12.1 million in
state and local taxes, and $16.1 million in federal taxes.
Multiplier effects are typically larger at the regional level, compared to the county level. For
example, every dollar of labor income supports $0.35 of labor income multiplier effects at the
county level, whereas every dollar of labor income results in $0.37 of labor income multiplier
effects in the Oregon Inlet region.
Table IX-4. Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Oil Development in Oregon Inlet
Region - Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
N/A
$210,187,400
2,060
4,102
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$188,333,333
$257,675,997
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
N/A
$71,708,549
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$12,085,400
----$16,110,779
c)
Statewide Economic Impacts - Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
The economic impact results presented in this section include the direct economic impacts that
occur within Dare County and the economic multiplier effects that occur statewide (including
Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region). The statewide results presented here differ from
those presented for Dare County in the multiplier effects and total impacts only—the direct
effects are the same. (The impacts presented here do not include any effects of any direct
economic activity (crew jobs) that might occur in Morehead City or elsewhere in North
Carolina.)
Economic impacts are calculated using IMPLAN and are presented in Table IX-5. Economic
additional $128.4 million in labor income throughout the state (including Dare County and the
Oregon Inlet region) due to economic multiplier effects, for a total labor income impact in the
state of $316.7 million. This labor income supports an additional 2930 jobs (4990 – 2060 =
2930) statewide (including Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region), and a total of $348.7
million in sales (output) in the state, $99.8 million in dividends, rents and interest income, $17.9
million in state and local taxes, and $27.8 million in federal taxes.
Multiplier effects are typically larger at the state level, compared to the county or regional level.
For example, every dollar of labor income supports $0.35 of labor income multiplier effects at
May 2014
119
FINAL REPORT
the county level, whereas every dollar of labor income supports $0.68 of labor income multiplier
effects statewide.
Table IX-5. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Oil Development Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
N/A
$348,680,682
2,060
4,990
May 2014
Wage, Salary,
and Sole
Proprietorship
Income
$188,333,333
$316,667,622
120
Dividend,
Rent, and
Interest
Income
N/A
$99,841,617
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$17,934,112
----$27,765,277
FINAL REPORT
X.
OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY
In the interest of promotion of renewable energy, the US Department of Energy (DOE) has set a
goal to develop 54 GW of offshore wind capacity by 2030 (US DOE, 2008). The Bureau of
Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is responsible for managing development of the nation‘s
offshore resources, including renewable energy development such as wind energy (BOEMRE,
2013). ―BOEM has seen very strong interest in offshore renewable energy projects on the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS). BOEM is working closely with several states regarding offshore
energy development and is in the process of coordinating federal-state task forces in certain
coastal states.‖
A study by the University of North Carolina (2009) finds that there is sufficient potential for
offshore wind development in Federal waters off the coast of North Carolina. According to the
Renewables Program of the North Carolina Energy Office (NCEO, 2013), North Carolina is a
desirable location for offshore wind energy production for the following reasons:

North Carolina has the largest offshore wind resource on the U.S. east coast in shallow
water

North Carolina has strategically located ports that could support offshore wind farm
development and operation, and

North Carolina has a renewable energy manufacturing tax credit (25%) and a low cost of
manufacturing.
Examining wind potential, engineering and economic feasibility, as well as social, political, and
environmental constraints, the 2009 study concludes that there are 190 BOEM lease blocks with
wind power capacity in excess of 35%. Focusing on waters less than 50 m deep and within 50
miles of the coastline, there are more than 2800 square miles of potential development area off
the North Carolina coast, a significant proportion of which is located adjacent to Dare and
Currituck Counties. UNC (2009) estimates that wind power class 6 is common in these areas
and projected costs are on the order of $101 per MWh. Figure X-1 shows the estimated wind
power capacity as determined by the 2009 UNC study. Utility transmission infrastructure in
eastern North Carolina has some capacity to accommodate offshore generation but upgrades may
be required. Existing State law presents significant legal and permitting barriers to development
in state waters and few regulatory incentives exist for wind energy. However, significant carbon
emission reduction is anticipated as a result of a utility-scale generation facility assuming an
offset of fossil fuel power.
May 2014
121
FINAL REPORT
Figure X-1. The Estimated Spatial Distribution of Capacity Factor For A Typical 3-3.6
MW Wind Turbine (UNC, 2009)
In the wake of a series of North Carolina Department of Commerce stakeholder meetings in
August 2010, five renewable energy firms expressed interest in obtaining commercial leases for
wind energy projects (BOEM, 2013d). There is considerable interest in areas of the coast of
Dare County, North Carolina (BOEM, 2013d). BOEM has initiated a review of these parties‘
submissions to assess filing completeness; evaluate legal, technical, and financial qualifications
to hold an OCS renewable energy commercial lease; and, determine competitive interest.
The location of Oregon Inlet could potentially lend itself to be useful should offshore wind
energy be developed in the future given the high wind capacity potential offshore of the inlet.
While the shallow draft navigation channel limits the types and sizes of ocean vessels that can
safely traverse, it could be useful for crew and maintenance boats which need to pass back and
forth between land and ocean facilities. Operation and maintenance would be expected to
increase employment, economic output / business activity, and government revenues collected in
Dare County and perhaps nearby counties hosting commuting employees.
A.
OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS
recent push to explore offshore energy in the Atlantic. None of the individuals contacted were
able to provide answers to the survey questions. However, a majority indicated that while
May 2014
122
FINAL REPORT
offshore wind in the mid-Atlantic region is a possibility for the future, Oregon Inlet would not
play a large role. The presence of the bridge and the poor conditions of the channel make the
inlet not an option for the larger vessels that would be required to build and maintain the offshore
infrastructure. However, they did indicate that Oregon Inlet could potentially be used for crew
boats.
Since M&N was unable to get survey responses, a literature search was performed to find
potential information in other parts of the country and world where this type of infrastructure
exists. The University of North Carolina Coastal Wind Feasibility Study (2009) was a helpful
resource to be used, indicating the high wind power capacity offshore of Oregon Inlet. BOEM
has also reported on stakeholder meetings held in 2013 for offshore wind energy call areas off of
the North Carolina coast, one of which was held in Manteo and discussed, among other topics,
the use of Oregon Inlet in the development and operation of offshore wind energy farms. In
addition, presenters from the Offshore Energy in the Southeast 2014 Conference were contacted
to gain helpful information from speakers about the topic.
The survey contacts and questions for offshore wind energy can be found in Appendix A.
B.
ECONOMIC MODELING & RESULTS – OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY
A life cycle assessment of wind farm technology reveals that the payback times can be as short
as 0.39 years (less than 2% of typical capital investments 20-year service life) for offshore wind
(Schleisner 2000). Offshore wind turbines operate with higher efficient due to greater and more
uniform wind velocity, which also reduces turbulent stress on turbine hardware (Snyder and
Kaiser 2009; Musial, Butterfield and Ram 2006). Consistent and reliable wind implies higher
capacity credit and smaller back-up costs (Milborrow 2009). Economic impacts of offshore
wind development include creation of short-term construction jobs and long-term operation and
maintenance jobs (Strachan and Lal 2004).
The Horns Rev wind project in Denmark - consisting for eighty 2 MW offshore turbines - is
predicted to have created over 1700 man-years of local jobs during the construction period and
2000 man-years of jobs maintained over the 20-year life cycle of the project (of which about
one-quarter are locally based). The proposed Cape Wind project in Massachusetts - 130 wind
turbines with the capacity to produce 420 MW of energy - was predicted to create 50 permanent
jobs and 100 indirect jobs, according to Snyder and Kaiser (2009), while the predicted impacts
were 600 - 1000 jobs in the region according to Capewind.org (accessed 4 April 2014).
A report on North Carolina wind potential by US DOE (2009) predicts that expected impacts of
1,000 MW of wind power could produce a total of $1.1 billion in economic impacts (over 20
years of operation - 2007 constant dollars), reduce CO2 emissions by 2.9 million tons, and save
1.558 billion gallons of water annually. Direct beneficiaries of offshore wind development
include constructions workers (an estimated 1,628 jobs lasting 1 - 2 years), operation and
maintenance (O&M) staff (an estimated 243 jobs), and turbine manufacturers and other suppliers
(some of which could be in-state). Using the National Renewable Energy Laboratory‘s Jobs &
Economic Development Impacts (JEDI) model, they calculate unit construction costs of $1,650
/kW and unit O&M costs of $24.70 / kW.
May 2014
123
FINAL REPORT
Dare County is adjacent to Hatteras bay, which has about 14 miles of shore-perpendicular
submarine sand shoals (somewhat less than Raleigh Bay (30 miles) and Onslow Bay (50 miles)
to the south). Nonetheless, the criteria employed by the University of North Carolina study
group (2009), indicates approximately 120 BOEM lease blocks that were declared potentially
developable for offshore wind energy. Hatteras Bay is ―dominated by unconsolidated sediments
with substantial amounts of surficial relief‖ within the 50 meter depth contour (UNC 2009).
Perhaps the largest barrier to offshore wind development in this region, the Dominion Power
transmission system was not designed to accommodate significant power delivery from the
offshore region, and would thus require upgrading (UNC 2009). Costs of upgrading the
transmission system are highly dependent upon the distance required to reach the transmission
system from the offshore turbines.
BOEM lease blocks are 3 miles by 3 miles. We consider 3.6 MW turbines erected on monopole
foundations (70 - 100 meters to the nacelle, with 45 meter blades); with a recommended 700
meters between turbines, each BOEM lease block can accommodate 49 turbines. Our baseline
development scenario follows the economic analysis contained in the UNC study - the
development of 9 BOEM blocks with 441 3.6 MW turbines, for a total installed capacity of
1,588 MW. Using the estimates from US DOE (2009) study, this would create 2586
construction jobs lasting 1 - 2 years and 385 full- time O&M staff jobs over an assumed 20-year
project life. Using recent BLS estimates (Table X-1), the construction jobs would create annual
income of $165.7 million per year during the construction phase. Assuming a 1:9 ratio for
management to operations/maintenance, O&M staff jobs would create annual income of $27.86
million per year over the 20 year lifespan of the project.
Table X-1. May 2013 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates
Industry
Hourly Wage Annual Income
Electric Power Generation - Management:
$59.44
$123,640
Electric Power Generation - Maintenance:
$32.02
$66,590
Electric Power Generation - Construction:
$30.81
$64,080
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics;
M ay 2013 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates
In order to assess scenario sensitivity, we also consider a smaller project that fully develops only
4 BOEM lease blocks, as well as a larger scenario that fully develop 18 and lease blocks. The
results are depicted in Table X-2, which shows that construction jobs can range from a low of
1150 to a high of 5,169, generating total income of almost $74 million to $331 million per year,
respectively. Operations and Maintenance jobs vary from 172 to 772 in our scenarios,
generating total income of $12.4 million to almost $56 million per year for each year of
operation of the offshore wind project. Construction and infrastructure investment costs are
estimated by applying the cost estimate of $1,650 /kW from the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory‘s JEDI model (US DOE 2009). For scenario 1 (1,588 MW: 441 turbines within 9
BOEM blocks), this procedure produces an estimate of $2.62 billion. For scenarios 2 (706 MW:
196 turbines within 4 BOEM blocks) and 3 (3,175 MW: 882 turbines within 18 BOEM blocks),
May 2014
124
FINAL REPORT
the construction and infrastructure cost estimates are $1.65 billion and $5.24 billion,
respectively.
Table X-2. Scenarios for Offshore Wind Development in Hatteras Bay (3.6 MW turbines)
Scenario
Employment
Income
1,588 MW (441 turbines
2,586 construction jobs
$165.7 million / year (construction)
1
within 9 BOEM blocks)
385 O&M staff jobs
$27.86 million / year (operation)
706 MW (196 turbines
1150 construction jobs
2
172 O&M staff jobs
3,175 MW (882 turbines
5,169 construction jobs
3
772 O&M staff jobs
1.
The economic impacts of Oregon Inlet-dependent offshore wind energy development are
calculated for three geographic areas: Dare County, the Oregon Inlet region, and the State of
North Carolina as a whole. For each geographic region, only the fully open navigability scenario
is considered, as recent navigability conditions would not provide the consistent ocean access
required to support such a large capital investment. It is assumed that a closed inlet would
support no offshore wind energy development.
For this study, we consider the middle scenario (scenario 1) in which 441 wind turbines are
constructed within 9 BOEM blocks. Each turbine is 1,588 MW. The economic impacts of
offshore wind energy development occur in two phases, a construction phase lasting one or two
years, and an operations and maintenance phase lasting 20 or more years. It is assumed that
offshore construction activities would be supported by the more extensive port and rail facilities
located in Norfolk, Virginia, and possibly Morehead City, North Carolina. This analysis
considers the potential economic impacts of post-construction operations and maintenance
activities. Based on the locations off the coast of North Carolina that have been identified for
possible wind energy development, it is assumed that one-half of the operations and maintenance
activities would be based in Dare County, NC, and one-half would be based in
Beaufort/Morehead City, NC.
The impacts are intended to reflect average economic conditions and average weather conditions.
All dollar values are report in real (inflation adjusted) 2012-year dollars. Employment numbers
are the total of full-time and part-time jobs (not ―full-time equivalent‖ jobs).
a)
Dare County Economic Impacts – Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
The annual economic impacts of the operations and maintenance activities that occur within
Dare County are presented in Table X-3. The operations and maintenance phase may last 20
years or longer. It is assumed that 385 jobs earning a total of $27.86 million per year will be
required to operate and maintain the offshore wind turbines. It is assumed that one-half of these
jobs, or 193 jobs, are based in Dare County, NC (It is assumed that the other half are based in
Beaufort/Morehead City, NC.). It is assumed that, on average, workers earn $72,364 per year
($27.86 million / 385 jobs = $72,364). The household spending pattern of these workers is
assumed to be similar to that of households with $75,000-$100,000 annual income in the
May 2014
125
FINAL REPORT
IMPLAN database. It is assumed that the workers find housing in the existing, extensive, Dare
County rental housing stock, and it is assumed that any required machine shop, warehouse
storage and dock facilities are found from the existing stock of vacant commercial and industrial
property in Dare County.
additional $4.9 million in labor income within the County due to economic multiplier effects, for
a total labor income impact of $18.8 million. This labor income supports an estimated $15
million in sales (output) in Dare County, $5.1 million in dividends, rents and interest income,
$788,000 in state and local taxes, and $1.1 million in federal taxes.
Table X-3. Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Wind Development in Dare County Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
N/A
$15,015,613
193
295
Wage, Salary,
Dividend, Rent,
and Sole
State and
and Interest
Proprietorship
Local Taxes
Income
Income
----$13,930,000
N/A
$18,825,259
$5,067,030
$788,284
Federal
Taxes
----$1,132,133
b)
Regional Economic Impacts – Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
impact results presented in this section include the direct economic impacts that occur within
Dare County, the economic multiplier effects that occur within Dare County, and the economic
multiplier effects that occur in the other counties of the Oregon Inlet region. The results
presented here for the Oregon Inlet Region differ from those presented for Dare County in the
multiplier effects and total impacts only—the direct effects are the same.
additional $5.13 million in labor income in the Oregon Inlet region (including Dare County) due
to economic multiplier effects, for a total labor income impact in the Oregon Inlet region of
$19.06 million. This labor income supports an additional 110 jobs (303 – 193 = 110), and a
total of $15.5 million in sales (output) in the Oregon Inlet region, $5.3 million in dividends, rents
and interest income, $894,000 in state and local taxes, and $1.2 million in federal taxes.
Multiplier effects are typically larger at the regional level, compared to the county level. For
example, every dollar of labor income supports $0.35 of labor income multiplier effects at the
county level, whereas every dollar of labor income results in $0.37 of labor income multiplier
effects in the Oregon Inlet region.
May 2014
126
FINAL REPORT
Table X-4. Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Wind Development in the Oregon Inlet
Region - Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
N/A
$15,546,427
193
303
Wage, Salary,
Dividend, Rent,
and Sole
State and
and Interest
Proprietorship
Local Taxes
Income
Income
$13,930,000
N/A
----$19,058,903
$5,303,894
$893,892
Federal
Taxes
----$1,191,627
c)
Statewide Economic Impacts – Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
The economic impact results presented in this section include the direct economic impacts that
occur within Dare County and the economic multiplier effects that occur statewide (including
Dare County and the Oregon Inlet region). The statewide results presented here differ from
those presented for Dare County in the multiplier effects and total impacts only—the direct
effects are the same. (The impacts presented here do not include any effects of any direct
economic activity (crew jobs) that might occur in Morehead City or elsewhere in North
Carolina.)
additional $9.5 million in labor income throughout the state (including Dare County and the
Oregon Inlet region) due to economic multiplier effects, for a total labor income impact in the
state of $23.42 million. This labor income supports an additional 176 jobs (369 – 193 = 176),
and a total of $25.8 million in sales (output) in the state, $7.4 million in dividends, rents and
interest income, $1.3 million in state and local taxes, and $2.1 million in federal taxes.
Multiplier effects are typically larger at the state level, compared to the county or regional level.
For example, every dollar of labor income supports $0.35 of labor income multiplier effects at
the county level, whereas every dollar of labor income supports $0.68 of labor income multiplier
effects statewide.
Table X-5. Statewide Annual Economic Impacts of Offshore Wind Development Operations and Maintenance Activities, Oregon Inlet Fully Open Conditions
Impact Type
Sales
(Output)
Employment
Direct Effect
Total Effect
N/A
$25,790,028
193
369
May 2014
Wage, Salary,
Dividend, Rent,
and Sole
State and
and Interest
Proprietorship
Local Taxes
Income
Income
$13,930,000
N/A
----$23,422,195
$7,384,745
$1,326,489
127
Federal
Taxes
----$2,053,648
FINAL REPORT
May 2014
128
FINAL REPORT
XI.
SOUNDSIDE FLOODING
In recent years there have been some anecdotal observations of elevated water levels of 6 – 10
inches within the sounds behind Oregon Inlet. One theory as to the cause of the elevated water
levels is that Oregon Inlet shoaling is not allowing adequate water exchange, especially on
falling tides. It is posited that water has not been able to flush out of the inlet in a timely manner,
leaving the soundside coastline of portions of the Outer Banks and mainland Dare and Tyrell
Counties susceptible to flooding, affecting waterfront property containing residential homes and
commercial (agricultural) property.
A.
SOUNDSIDE FLOODING SURVEYS & INTERVIEWS
recent rise in soundside water levels and correlation to the condition of Oregon Inlet. None of
the individuals contacted were able to provide answers to the survey questions in order to
complete an economic analysis as in other sections of the report. However, a majority indicated
that they had noticed an increase in soundside water levels, especially when the condition of
Oregon Inlet is at its worst. It appears that water from the sound is not able to drain properly,
thus causing trouble amongst waterfront property (both residential and commercial) on the
sound.
Since M&N was unable to get survey responses, a data search was performed to find potential
information on Dare County concerning elevated water levels.
The survey contacts and questions for soundside flooding can be found in Appendix A.
B.
DATA COLLECTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW RESULTS – SOUNDSIDE
FLOODING
The NOAA website for tides and currents was first reviewed to see if any trends were present in
measured water level data. Figure XI-1 shows the interannual variation of monthly mean sea
level and the 5-month running average for water levels at Oregon Inlet Marina. The average
seasonal cycle and linear sea level trends have been removed. According to the NOAA website,
―interannual variation is caused by irregular fluctuations in coastal ocean temperatures, salinities,
winds, atmospheric pressures, and ocean currents.‖
Based on the plot (http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/residual1980.shtml?stnid=8652587) ,
it appears that water levels at this station (on the soundside of Oregon Inlet) have seen an
average increase in water levels since 2010 of approximately 0.075 m (~3 inches). At this time it
is not possible to know if this elevation is due to meteorological forcing functions (listed above)
or a lack of dredging.
Nonetheless, a review of the USACE dredging records
(http://www.navigationdatacenter.us/dredge/dredge.htm) show that dredging of Oregon Inlet on
the order of 500,000 – 1,000,000 cy/yr was completed regularly from 2001-2009 until the time
period of 2010-2012 where no dredging (except sidecasting) was completed. Reduced dredging
volumes were also noted in early 90s to 2000 dredging records. Therefore, the lack of dredging
may also be contributing to this elevated water level in addition to storms and other
meteorological forcing functions.
May 2014
129
FINAL REPORT
Figure XI-1. Interannual Variation Since 1990 8652587 Oregon Inlet Marina, North
Carolina
As for the potential effects of elevated water levels on property values, the most applicable study
found was completed by Bin et al. (2007) which provided parcel-level property value, both
residential and commercial, for selected coastal counties examining the impacts of sea level
(water level) rise due to climate change on North Carolina coastal resources. The authors
estimated the impacts of sea level (water level) rise on coastal real estate markets in New
Hanover, Dare, Carteret and Bertie Counties (Figure XI-2). The study area represents a crosssection of the North Carolina coastline in geographical distribution and economic development.
May 2014
130
FINAL REPORT
Figure XI-2. Location of Counties Analyzed for Property Impacts in Bin et al (2007)
Six climate scenarios generated from recent global climate models, consisting of low, medium,
and high sea level (water level) rise rates from the present day to 2030 and the present day to
2080 were used to calculate ranges of property loss values, depending on the severity of sea level
(water level) rise. Table XI-1 presents the sea level (water level) rise scenarios considered.
Table XI-1. Summary of Sea Level (Water Level) Rise Scenarios
Projected Sea Level
Year Scenario (Water Level) Rise,
(feet)
Low
0.36
2030 Mid
0.52
High
0.69
Low
0.85
2080 Mid
1.51
High
2.66
May 2014
131
FINAL REPORT
The loss of property values due to sea level (water level) rise were estimated using a simulation
approach based on hedonic property value models (using location, structural, and environmental
attributes as value) for the four counties. Data on property values came from the county tax
offices. These offices maintain property parcel records that contain assessed values of property
as well as lot size, total square footage, the year the structure was built, and other structural
characteristics of the property. Other spatial amenities such as property elevation, ocean and
sound/estuarine frontage and distance to shoreline were obtained using GIS data (Figure XI-3).
Study results indicated that the impacts of sea level (water level) rise on coastal property values
vary across the North Carolina coastline. Overall, the northern part of the North Carolina
coastline is comparatively more vulnerable to the effect of sea level (water level) rise than the
southern part. Low-lying and heavily developed areas along the northern coastline are especially
at high risk from sea level (water level) rise. Without discounting, the residential property value
loss in Dare County was approximately 2.18% percent of the total residential property value (in
2030, assuming 0.36 ft of sea level (water level) rise from 2004 to 2030). Bertie County showed
a relatively small impact with 0.3% loss in residential property value (in 2030, assuming 0.36
feet of sea level (water level) rise from 2004 to 2030).
Since Dare and Bertie Counties would both be affected by elevated water levels soundside of
Oregon Inlet, it was determined that these results could be used to develop rough estimates of
property value losses with the recent measured water level increases of 3 inches at Oregon Inlet
Marina. It should be noted that the estimates outlined below are solely based on the Bin 2007
study and more accurate and complete estimates could be made with a more detailed study.
However, the level of study needed to develop accurate estimates would be a significant project
unto itself and would also need to include all the counties affected by elevated water levels
soundside of Oregon Inlet. Nonetheless, the Bin 2007 study would allow for estimates to at least
be made for Dare and Bertie counties.
For Dare County, the total 2014 property value was requested from the tax office and received.
The total property tax value for the county is reported to be $12.05B. Once areas that would not
be as affected by Oregon Inlet were subtracted (Avon, Buxton, Frisco, and Hatteras – due to
another nearby inlet) the total tax value was estimated to be 10.56B. Multiplying this value
times 2.18% would show that $230M of property value loss would be realized with a 0.36 ft (4.3
in) water level rise. Assuming linearity, for a 3 in water level rise the property value loss would
be $160M. Finally, since these estimates would include both oceanfront and soundfront
properties, the oceanfront property value loss would need to be subtracted so that only the
soundfront impacts remained. Based on the Bin 2007 study and interviews with the Dare County
Tax Office, an assumption was made that 2/3 of the value loss would be to oceanfront properties
while 1/3 would be to soundfront. Therefore, the final estimate of property value loss in Dare
County for a 3 in water level rise was estimated to be $53.2M.
For Bertie County, the total 2012 property value was requested from the tax office and received.
The total property tax value for the county is reported to be $1.107B. Multiplying this value
times 0.3% would show that $3.3M of property value loss would be realized with a 0.36 ft (4.3
in) water level rise. Assuming linearity, for a 3 in water level rise the property value loss would
be $2.3M. Therefore the final estimate of property value loss in Bertie County for a 3 inch water
level rise was estimated to be $2.3M.
May 2014
132
FINAL REPORT
From upper-left: (a) Carteret County shoreline location, (b) LiDAR elevation surface, (c) distance to shoreline, and (d) tax parcel
centroids.
(a) Shoreline location. Oceanfront and estuarine-front properties were identified for all four counties for current sea level. Attributes
were added to these tax parcels indicating what type of shoreline position they currently occupy.
(b) LiDAR Elevation. Elevation was sampled and assigned as an attribute to each tax parcel using the centroid. The LIDAR derived
DEM was used as the source of elevation data. This DEM has had buildings systematically removed although there may still be errors
that are greater than the average +/- 0.25 m. Therefore, it is most likely that the elevation values reported for tax parcels in dense urban
areas represent an over-estimate for elevation.
(c) Shoreline distance. Distance to shoreline was created for each inundation scenario. We used Euclidean distance to describe the
proximity of a tax parcel to the shoreline. Tax parcel centroids were then used to sample the seven distance surfaces (current and 6scenarios).
(d) Tax Parcel centroids. The six inundation grids representing the new shoreline-ocean interface following sea level rise was sampled
by the tax parcel centroids. Attributes reflecting whether a tax parcel was inundated were added to each centroid
Figure XI-3. Example of Data Used in Bin et al. (2007) Property Value Study
Therefore, the combined estimated property value loss in Dare and Bertie Counties for a 3 in
water level rise would be $55.5M. Completing the same analyses for a 6 in and 10 in water level
rise results in property value losses of $90.1M and $106 M respectively for both Dare and Bertie
Counties. It is expected that the other counties affected (Tyrell, Washington, Currituck, Camden,
Pasquotank, Perquimans and Chowan) would also add to this total but data was not available for
these counties. Nonetheless, the above simple analysis does show that elevated water levels
within the sound can have a measureable impact on properties and their value.
May 2014
133
FINAL REPORT
May 2014
134
FINAL REPORT
XII. STUDY FINDINGS
and Hyde counties), and the state of North Carolina. The study was completed by Moffatt &
Nichol who was responsible for overall project management, interview/questionnaire
coordination, and compilation of the final report. Moffatt & Nichol was supported by Dr. Chris
Dumas (UNCW), Dr. John Whitehead (Appalachian State), and Dr. Craig Landry (ECU) who
completed all the economic impact analysis. This study involved a significant literature review
and data collection effort, on-site and telephone interviews with individuals knowledgeable of
inlet usage and related economic impacts, and detailed economic modeling and analyses. Various
economic sectors were considered in the economic analyses including:








Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Offshore Drilling
Soundside Flooding
Commercial Fishing

Oregon Inlet is considered one of the most commercially vital inlets along coastal NC
with fishermen from the communities of Wanchese, Manteo, Manns Harbor, and Stumpy
Point in Dare County and communities in other coastal counties (e.g. Hyde, Pamlico)
using the inlet.

The commercial fishing industry has seen a decline in the region over the past 30-40
years due to several factors, which includes the declining condition of Oregon Inlet. It
was noted that in the 1960s there were approximately 40-50 different commercial seafood
businesses in Dare County. However, presently there are approximately only 15-20 in
Dare County. However, of these businesses, most landings are handled by the 4-5 largest
dealers.

Present day commercial boats are significantly larger than those used historically. Due to
shallow and dangerous inlet conditions, fewer fishermen choose to operate through
Oregon Inlet. Potential trips are frequently lost or shortened due to dangerous inlet
conditions, resulting in reduced catch. It is important to also note that current Oregon
Inlet conditions have caused many smaller commercial drop net boats drafting 4-6 ft to
use unmarked and unlighted narrow spans bordered by concrete pillars, outside of the
navigation span at the Bonner Bridge, in order to transit Oregon Inlet. This represents a
major safety concern and exposes these users and their equipment to extreme risk levels.
May 2014
135
FINAL REPORT
Also, shallow draft conditions force commercial boats to lighten tonnage so that they can
pass through the inlet with less chance of grounding the boat or hitting the bridge.

If the navigability of Oregon Inlet is not maintained, the field interview results indicate
that most commercial fishing vessels would choose to remain in the fishing business but
would relocate their fishing operations to other ports, most likely located in Southern
North Carolina or Virginia.

Commercial fishing currently provides a total annual economic impact of 604 jobs and

Commercial fishing could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 1,243
jobs and $67.0 million to Dare County, 1,323 jobs and $69.8 million to the surrounding
region (including Dare County), and 947 jobs and $58.0 million to the state of North
Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be fully
open. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual
economic impact could reach up to $79.7 million in Dare County, $83.1 million in the
surrounding region (including Dare County), and $69.0 million in state of North Carolina

Commercial fishing may only provide a total annual economic impact of 88 jobs and $5.1
million to Dare County, 94 jobs and $5.3 million to the surrounding region (including
Dare County), and 252 jobs and $15.4 million to the state of North Carolina (including
Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be essentially closed.

The value of landings varies from year to year, depending upon inlet conditions,
economic conditions (including fish prices, and fuel prices, which effect landings by
affecting the number of trips taken), the availability of imported seafood products, natural
fish abundance in the sea, and fishing regulations. The value of ocean commercial fishery
landings used in the 2006 was $12.5 million, based on data from 1994 to 2005 (Due to an
oversight, this number was incorrectly reported in the 2006 report which solely stated the
impact of captain and crew labor income, excluding the impacts of goods and services
purchased by the industry which should have been incorporated.). The value of Oregon
Inlet-dependent landings used in the present (2014) study for the "Recent Inlet
Conditions" scenario (years 2011-2013) is $10.5 million.

commercial fishing vessels.

Once fish are landed, seafood packing and processing businesses prepare the catch for
market. Several commercial fishermen also have packing and processing operations
May 2014
136
FINAL REPORT
within their businesses. There were an estimated 18 commercial seafood packing and
processing businesses dependant on Oregon Inlet in 2012.

It is assumed that if Oregon Inlet is closed, the seafood packer/processors might remain
in business, but the economic impacts to the region would be reduced by the amount of
Oregon Inlet dependent fishery landings.

Seafood packing and processing currently provides a total annual economic impact of
Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) through Oregon Inlet
dependent landings.

Seafood packing and processing could potential provide a total annual economic impact
of 526 jobs and $112 million to Dare County, 624 jobs and $124.7 million to the
surrounding region (including Dare County), and 437 jobs and $83.8 million to the state
of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) through Oregon
Inlet dependent landings if the inlet were to be fully open. If economic conditions
improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic impact could reach up
to $129.1 million in Dare County, $143.8 million in the surrounding region (including
Dare County), and $96.6 million in state of North Carolina (including Dare County and
the surrounding region).

Seafood packing and processing may only provide a total annual economic impact of 43
Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) through Oregon Inlet
dependent landings if the inlet were to be essentially closed.

The value of Oregon Inlet-dependent seafood processing and packing depends on the
level of Oregon Inlet-dependent commercial fishery landings. For example, the direct
impacts of seafood processing and packing in the 2006 report were $25,000,000, based
on commercial fishery landings of $12,500,000. In 2014, the direct impacts of seafood
processing and packing were $21,678,000, based on commercial fishery landings of
$10,500,000. The number of jobs supported per dollar of sales by the Seafood
Processing and Packing industry in 2014 is lower than the number of jobs supported per
dollar of sales in 2006 possibly due to improvements in production efficiency, increases
in sales dollars received per pound of seafood processed, or change in the mix of workers
from a large number of part time workers to fewer full time workers.

Fifteen boat building companies exist in Dare County producing custom sport fishing
yachts. These companies directly employ a total of 274 workers, earning $10.6 million in
wages, and represent over half of the 480 manufacturing jobs in the County as of 2013.
dollars.
May 2014
137
FINAL REPORT

Boat building jobs are relatively high-paying, with an average weekly wage of $744 in
2012, compared to the County average weekly wage for private industry of $517.

This region boasts the birthplace of ―Carolina Style‖ boat building, a style which
originated to withstand the incomparable Oregon Inlet waters and rough seas offshore of
Bodie and Pea Islands. Local boat builders are directly dependent on Oregon Inlet, as the
valuable reputation of the boats for strength and durability is maintained by continuous
research and testing in the uniquely rough waters offshore. Based on the field interviews,
if Oregon Inlet were to close, these businesses would as well.

Boat building and support services currently provide a total annual economic impact of
Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).

Boat building and support services could potentially provide a total annual economic
impact of 887 jobs and $157.6 million to Dare County, 979 jobs and $166.1 million to the
surrounding region (including Dare County), and 1,048 jobs and $179.7 million to the
state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet
were to be fully open. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the
total annual economic impact could reach up to $198.7 million in Dare County, $209.3
million in the surrounding region (including Dare County), and $226.5 million in state of
North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).

Boat building and support services may only provide a total annual economic impact of
essentially closed.

In the 2006 study, we assumed $75 million in Dare county boat builder sales under
baseline (2004-2005) inlet conditions. In 2014, Dare county boat builder sales are
depressed for two reasons: a bad economy in recent years (2011-2013) relative to 20042005, and bad inlet conditions in recent years (2011-2013). The value of Dare county
boat builder sales under baseline (recent inlet) conditions used in the 2014 study is $59.5
million.
Recreational Fishing & Tourism

regions along the East Coast due to its close proximity to the Gulf Stream and extended
seasons of abundant fishing opportunities (e.g. marlin, tuna).

An estimated 109,000 Oregon Inlet fishing trips per year are taken by North Carolina
residents, and an additional 153,000 trips are taken by non-residents.
May 2014
138
FINAL REPORT

Recreational fishing and tourism currently provide a total annual economic impact of
1,997 jobs and $247.7 million to Dare County, 2,157 jobs and $257.5 million to the
surrounding region (including Dare County), and 2,530 jobs and $318.3 million to the
state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region).

Recreational fishing and tourism could potentially provide a total annual economic
impact of 2,397 jobs and $297.2 million to Dare County, 2,588 jobs and $309.0 million to
the surrounding region (including Dare County), and 2,889 jobs and $362.8 million to the
state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet
were to be fully open. In addition to these impacts, a fully open inlet would support an
additional $1.3 million in consumer surplus per year. If economic conditions improved
to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic impact could reach up to $520.6
million in Dare County, $541.2 million in the surrounding region (including Dare
surrounding region).

Recreational fishing and tourism may only provide a total annual economic impact of 429
essentially closed. In addition to these impacts, an essentially closed inlet would produce
a loss of $25.7 million in consumer surplus per year.

In the 2006 study, we assumed 35,739 charter trips per year and 539,890 private boat
trips per year. In the 2014 study, we assume 93,000 charter trips per year (more than the
2006 study) and 169,000 private trips per year (less than the 2006 study). The difference
in trip numbers is a result of a change in boating trends from 2006 to 2014 as well as a
change in the NMFS data weighting scheme to convert its survey sample data to
estimates of total trips. The expenditures per charter trip are higher for restaurants,
groceries and boat fuel in 2014, compared to 2006. Expenditures per private boat trip are
smaller for auto gasoline, restaurants and groceries, but larger for boat fuel, in 2014,
compared to 2006. Other expenditures per trip are similar between 2006 and 2014, for
both charter and private boat trips.
Tournament Fishing

Sportfishing tournaments are also thriving in the Oregon Inlet region. Approximately 5
known tournaments (down from 9 in 2006) take place annually in the County originating
mainly at Pirates Cove marina, in Manteo. In summary, more than 173 boats annually
are expected to participate in sportfishing tournaments dependent on passage through
Oregon Inlet. These tournaments draw significant economic impacts to the County
ranging from expenditures on fishing gear, lodging, food, retail to custom boat sales,
marine maintenance, and/or boat storage.
May 2014
139
FINAL REPORT

While tournament participation was generally high for all tournaments, it was noted that
the big Billfish tournament dropped in participants from 2004 to 2005 due to ―perceived‖
inlet conditions. Additionally, 32 boats ran aground in Oregon Inlet during the 2005
Billfish tournament. Of these, 3 boats were replaced because damages caused by running
aground were too severe to continue in the tournament. In addition, approximately 15
boats pulled out of a 2013 tournament due to an accident in the inlet 1 week prior
resulting from poor conditions.

Interviewees in the boat-building industry commented that a large percentage of their
sales came from fishing tournament participants drawn to the area‘s unique sport-fishing
yachts and that many of these sales were from repeat customers. Therefore, it is clear the
fishing tournament industry alone has a tremendous ripple effect on supporting
businesses and the local economy.

Tournament fishing currently provides a total annual economic impact of 36 jobs and

Tournament fishing could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 67 jobs
and $8.4 million to Dare County, 76 jobs and $8.9 million to the surrounding region
(including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be fully open. If
economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic
impact could reach up to $24.6 million in Dare County, $25.8 million in the surrounding
region (including Dare County), and $25.5 million in state of North Carolina (including
Dare County and the surrounding region).

Tournament fishing may only provide a total annual economic impact of 1 job and $85.3
thousand to Dare County, 1 job and $89.7 thousand to the surrounding region (including
Dare County), and 42 jobs and $4.9 million to the state of North Carolina (including Dare
County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be essentially closed.

The 2006 study listed 9 fishing tournaments in Dare County. The tournaments
considered in the 2006 study supported a total of 970 boat-days and $14.4 million in
direct impacts for sales/output within Dare County. The 2014 study is based on the 4
tournaments from the 2006 study that have a solid track record of occurring over multiple
years plus an additional tournament that is statewide but that includes participants who
use Oregon Inlet, for a total of 5 tournaments. The 5 tournaments considered in the 2014
study supported a total of 333 boat-days under fully open inlet conditions and $5.2
million in direct impacts for sales/output within Dare County.
May 2014
140
FINAL REPORT
Offshore Drilling

An estimated 0.95 billion barrels of oil and 9.72 trillion cubic feet of natural gas would be
economically recoverable in the Mid-Atlantic Region recoverable at a price of $110 per
barrel of oil and $7.38 per thousand cubic feet of natural gas.

The location of Oregon Inlet could potentially lend itself to be useful should offshore
drilling be developed in the future. While the shallow draft navigation channel limits the
types and sizes of ocean vessels that can pass through, it could be useful for crew and
maintenance boats which need to pass back and forth between land and ocean facilities.
Operation and maintenance would be expected to increase employment, economic output
/ business activity, and government revenues collected in Dare County and perhaps
nearby counties hosting commuting employees.

Offshore drilling could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 3,983 jobs
and $203.0 million to Dare County, 4,102 jobs and $210.2 million to the surrounding
Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were fully
navigable. Impacts were only calculated for a fully open scenario since the recent
conditions of Oregon Inlet or an essentially closed inlet would preclude any use of the
inlet for offshore drilling purposes.

Due to a promising wind resource, large areas offshore of the North Carolina coastline
are potentially well-suited for wind energy development. Extensive areas off the coast of
Dare County, North Carolina, have received either four or five indications of interest
wishing to obtain a commercial lease for a wind energy project.

The location of Oregon Inlet could potentially lend itself to be useful should offshore
wind energy be developed in the future given the high wind capacity potential offshore of
the inlet. While the shallow draft navigation channel limits the types and sizes of ocean
vessels that can pass through, it could be useful for crew and maintenance boats which
need to pass back and forth between land and ocean facilities. Operation and
maintenance would be expected to increase employment, economic output / business
activity, and government revenues collected in Dare County and perhaps nearby counties
hosting commuting employees.

Impacts were only calculated for a fully open scenario since the recent conditions of
Oregon Inlet or an essentially closed inlet would preclude any use of the inlet for offshore
wind development purposes.
May 2014
141
FINAL REPORT
Soundside Flooding

In recent years there have been some anecdotal observations of elevated water levels of 6
– 10 inches within the sounds behind Oregon Inlet. One theory as to the cause of the
elevated water levels is that Oregon Inlet shoaling is not allowing adequate water
exchange, especially on falling tides, leaving waterfront property containing residential
homes and commercial (agricultural) property susceptible to flooding.

Based on NOAA measurements at Oregon Inlet Marina, it appears that water levels at
this station (on the soundside of Oregon Inlet) have seen an average increase in water
levels since 2010 of approximately 0.075 m (~3 inches). This period of elevated water
levels is similar to one that occurred in the late 1990s. In both cases, USACE records
indicate reduced dredging during these time periods as compared to the time period in
between which showed increased dredging and lower water levels. It is possible that
these increased water levels may be a result of a combination of reduced dredging and
other meteorological forcing functions.

Based on previous studies by Bin et al. 2007, a fully navigable inlet could save between
$55.5 million and $106 million of lost property value in Dare and Bertie Counties (only
ones studied) due to elevated water levels between 3 in and 10 in, respectively.
Overall Summary of Economic Impacts
The economic impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare County is very significant and far outweighs the
costs necessary to keep the inlet passable through dredging. In fact, the economic benefit to the
Federal Government alone greatly exceeds the recent annual expenditures for dredging.
The following tables show the overall total annual economic impact of Oregon Inlet to Dare
County, given the three different inlet condition scenarios and five main study sectors
(commercial fishing, seafood packing & processing, boat building & support services,
recreational fishing & tourism, and tournament fishing).
Economic Sector
Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Impact Type
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Recent Conditions Scenario Summary - Dare County
Wage, Salary,
Sales
and Sole
Employment
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
$10,500,000
466
$8,957,670
$25,085,701
604
$13,866,903
$21,678,000
63
$1,097,434
$31,644,092
149
$4,296,036
$59,500,000
274
$10,078,571
$94,550,051
532
$21,684,229
$142,423,427
1,002
$44,486,518
$247,659,426
1,997
$79,482,082
$2,820,029
20
$777,242
$4,551,174
36
$1,351,341
$236,921,456
1,826
$65,397,435
$403,490,444
3,319
$120,680,591
May 2014
142
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$1,310,669
$5,786,998
$1,081,523
$4,306,368
$6,702,212
$17,909,579
$19,408,480
$52,987,290
$326,572
$884,226
$28,829,456
$81,874,461
----$1,109,822
----$963,787
----$3,059,496
----$11,186,935
----$190,659
----$16,510,699
----$2,039,704
----$1,020,826
----$4,769,732
----$14,155,440
----$249,371
----$22,235,073
FINAL REPORT
Economic Sector
Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Impact Type
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Fully Open Scenario Summary - Dare County
Wage, Salary,
Sales
and Sole
Employment
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
$37,204,980
959
$18,416,524
$66,966,128
1,243
$28,614,947
$76,693,000
224
$3,882,532
$111,951,642
526
$15,198,766
$99,200,000
457
$16,803,264
$157,636,387
887
$36,152,529
$170,908,112
1,203
$53,383,822
$297,191,311
2,397
$95,378,498
$5,223,988
36
$1,439,809
$8,430,863
67
$2,503,304
$389,230,080
2,879
$93,925,951
$642,176,331
5,120
$177,848,044
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$2,694,669
$11,808,271
$3,826,241
$15,235,237
$11,174,109
$29,859,333
$23,290,176
$63,584,748
$604,961
$1,637,992
$41,590,156
$122,125,581
----$2,262,162
----$3,409,724
----$5,100,875
----$13,424,322
----$353,188
----$24,550,271
----$4,203,544
----$3,611,528
----$7,952,225
----$16,986,528
----$461,950
----$33,215,776
*The impacts in the above table reflect recent economic conditions. If economic conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total economic impact
could reach up to $952.7 million in Dare County for fully open inlet conditions. However, it is also possible that these projections could be lower if economic
Economic Sector
Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Impact Type
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Total Effect
Essentially Closed Scenario Summary - Dare County
Wage, Salary,
Sales
and Sole
Employment
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
$3,000,000
68
$1,310,879
$5,118,661
88
$2,039,205
$6,194,000
18
$313,567
$9,041,823
43
$1,227,589
$12,200,000
56
$2,066,530
$19,386,733
109
$4,446,178
$33,945,379
225
$8,457,140
$55,618,552
429
$15,713,779
$52,834
0
$14,562
$85,268
1
$25,318
$55,392,213
367
$12,162,678
$89,251,037
670
$23,452,069
Dividend, Rent,
and Interest
Income
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
$191,805
$838,459
$309,021
$1,230,487
$1,374,236
$3,672,216
$4,294,532
$11,164,851
$6,118
$16,566
$6,175,712
$16,922,579
----$160,572
----$275,388
----$627,326
----$2,363,582
----$3,572
----$3,430,440
----$299,435
----$291,693
----$977,996
----$3,033,466
----$4,672
----$4,607,262
The following tables show the overall total annual economic impact of Oregon Inlet to the
surrounding region (Dare, Currituck, Camden, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrell, and Hyde
counties), given the three different inlet condition scenarios and five main study sectors
(commercial fishing, seafood packing & processing, boat building & support services,
recreational fishing & tourism, and tournament fishing).
May 2014
143
FINAL REPORT
Economic Sector
Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Recent Conditions Scenario Summary - Region (Including Dare Co.)
Wage, Salary,
Dividend, Rent,
Sales
and Sole
Impact Type
Employment
and Interest
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
Income
Direct Effect
$10,500,000
486
$9,249,848
$591,661
Total Effect
$26,205,108
640
$14,686,464
$5,479,768
Direct Effect
$21,678,000
61
$1,868,678
$1,040,994
Total Effect
$35,254,270
176
$6,068,833
$5,107,509
Direct Effect
$59,500,000
274
$10,078,571
$6,702,212
Total Effect
$99,596,745
588
$23,552,604
$19,431,044
Direct Effect
$142,423,427
1,034
$43,493,243
$19,666,812
Total Effect
$257,476,326
2,157
$82,867,291
$56,151,669
Direct Effect
$2,820,029
22
$773,762
$348,131
Total Effect
$4,788,859
41
$1,447,835
$977,701
$236,921,456
1,877
$65,464,102
$28,349,810
$423,321,308
3,601
$128,623,027
$87,147,691
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$1,266,227
----$1,200,001
----$3,560,704
----$12,618,095
----$224,774
----$18,869,801
----$2,162,937
----$1,356,748
----$5,224,739
----$14,923,351
----$272,511
----$23,940,286
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$2,606,505
----$4,245,395
----$5,936,501
----$15,141,714
----$416,385
----$28,346,500
----$4,511,726
----$4,799,937
----$8,710,824
----$17,908,021
----$504,815
----$36,435,323
Economic Sector
Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Fully Open Scenario Summary - Region (Including Dare Co.)
Wage, Salary,
Dividend, Rent,
Sales
and Sole
Impact Type
Employment
and Interest
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
Income
Direct Effect
$37,204,980
999
$19,017,236
$1,216,429
Total Effect
$69,828,252
1,323
$30,564,958
$11,313,536
Direct Effect
$76,693,000
216
$6,611,058
$3,682,856
Total Effect
$124,723,485
624
$21,470,479
$18,069,480
Direct Effect
$99,200,000
457
$16,803,264
$11,174,109
Total Effect
$166,050,373
979
$39,267,534
$32,395,960
Direct Effect
$170,908,112
1,241
$52,191,892
$23,600,174
Total Effect
$308,971,591
2,588
$99,440,749
$67,382,003
Direct Effect
$5,223,988
40
$1,433,362
$644,898
Total Effect
$8,871,165
76
$2,682,055
$1,811,151
$389,230,080
2,952
$96,056,812
$40,318,466
$678,444,866
5,590
$193,425,775
$130,972,130
could reach up to $1.0 billion in Dare County and the surrounding region for fully open inlet conditions. However, it is also possible that these projections
could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest rates, higher unemployment, etc.
Economic Sector
Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Essentially Closed Scenario Summary - Region (Including Dare Co.)
Wage, Salary,
Dividend, Rent,
Sales
and Sole
Impact Type
Employment
and Interest
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
Income
Direct Effect
$3,000,000
71
$1,353,636
$86,585
Total Effect
$5,335,206
94
$2,184,066
$806,376
Direct Effect
$6,194,000
17
$533,933
$297,440
Total Effect
$10,073,113
50
$1,734,032
$1,459,356
Direct Effect
$12,200,000
56
$2,066,530
$1,374,236
Total Effect
$20,421,517
121
$4,829,273
$3,984,181
Direct Effect
$33,945,379
232
$8,250,217
$4,341,731
Total Effect
$57,778,828
465
$16,462,744
$11,854,474
Direct Effect
$52,834
0
$14,497
$6,522
Total Effect
$89,721
1
$27,126
$18,318
$55,392,213
377
$12,218,813
$6,106,514
$93,698,385
731
$25,237,241
$18,122,705
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$185,603
----$342,872
----$730,094
----$2,671,883
----$4,211
----$3,934,663
----$322,625
----$387,660
----$1,071,290
----$3,206,187
----$5,106
----$4,992,868
The following tables show the overall total annual economic impact of Oregon Inlet to the State
of North Carolina (including Dare County), given the three different inlet condition scenarios
and five main study sectors (commercial fishing, seafood packing & processing, boat building &
support services, recreational fishing & tourism, and tournament fishing).
May 2014
144
FINAL REPORT
Economic Sector
Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Recent Conditions Scenario Summary - State (Including Dare Co.)
Wage, Salary,
Dividend, Rent,
Sales
and Sole
Impact Type
Employment
and Interest
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
Income
Direct Effect
$10,500,000
536
$7,653,236
$1,074,595
Total Effect
$45,695,883
748
$17,331,441
$7,695,111
Direct Effect
$21,678,000
62
$1,659,221
$1,052,001
Total Effect
$42,678,573
223
$9,457,846
$6,596,656
Direct Effect
$59,500,000
274
$11,436,303
$6,518,086
Total Effect
$134,743,983
786
$38,954,238
$25,833,107
Direct Effect
$142,423,427
1,050
$43,222,542
$19,636,251
Total Effect
$318,323,866
2,530
$109,735,743
$67,558,971
Direct Effect
$2,992,903
27
$1,097,153
$399,034
Total Effect
$6,970,273
60
$2,598,072
$1,490,211
$237,094,330
1,949
$65,068,455
$28,679,967
$548,412,578
4,348
$178,077,340
$109,174,056
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$1,633,759
----$1,511,314
----$4,905,638
----$14,858,147
----$334,716
----$23,243,574
----$2,861,941
----$2,026,397
----$8,172,590
----$20,197,848
----$464,746
----$33,723,522
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$2,077,203
----$2,966,645
----$6,542,226
----$16,977,087
----$420,316
----$28,983,477
----$3,666,141
----$3,977,733
----$10,899,077
----$23,067,777
----$583,599
----$42,194,327
Economic Sector
Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Fully Open Scenario Summary - State (Including Dare Co.)
Wage, Salary,
Dividend, Rent,
Sales
and Sole
Impact Type
Employment
and Interest
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
Income
Direct Effect
$20,668,790
670
$9,561,319
$1,342,510
Total Effect
$58,001,057
947
$22,141,591
$9,774,373
Direct Effect
$42,672,372
121
$3,256,981
$2,065,033
Total Effect
$83,776,239
437
$18,565,353
$12,948,957
Direct Effect
$79,350,000
365
$15,251,607
$8,692,607
Total Effect
$179,696,388
1,048
$51,949,895
$34,451,380
Direct Effect
$161,694,027
1,196
$49,649,305
$22,391,284
Total Effect
$362,821,660
2,889
$125,692,579
$77,203,862
Direct Effect
$3,758,301
33
$1,377,736
$501,082
Total Effect
$8,752,835
76
$3,262,497
$1,871,314
$308,143,490
2,385
$79,096,948
$34,992,516
$693,048,179
5,397
$221,611,915
$136,249,886
could reach up to $1.1 billion in the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the surrounding region) for fully open inlet conditions. However, it is
also possible that these projections could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest rates, higher unemployment, etc.
Economic Sector
Commercial Fishing
Tournament Fishing
Total Direct Effect
Total Effect
Essentially Closed Scenario Summary - State (Including Dare Co.)
Wage, Salary,
Dividend, Rent,
Sales
and Sole
Impact Type
Employment
and Interest
(Output)
Proprietorship
Income
Income
Direct Effect
$6,750,000
177
$2,519,968
$353,830
Total Effect
$15,447,140
252
$5,921,628
$2,604,389
Direct Effect
$13,936,000
40
$1,066,653
$676,293
Total Effect
$27,436,506
143
$6,080,106
$4,240,751
Direct Effect
$21,660,000
100
$4,163,199
$2,372,802
Total Effect
$49,051,338
286
$14,180,652
$9,404,119
Direct Effect
$91,393,516
656
$25,105,795
$12,154,412
Total Effect
$197,781,754
1,550
$65,375,645
$41,062,219
Direct Effect
$2,111,854
19
$774,174
$281,567
Total Effect
$4,918,368
42
$1,833,253
$1,051,524
$135,851,370
991
$33,629,789
$15,838,904
$294,635,106
2,273
$93,391,284
$58,363,002
State and
Local Taxes
Federal
Taxes
----$553,818
----$971,569
----$1,785,818
----$9,040,972
----$236,183
----$12,588,360
----$982,188
----$1,302,697
----$2,975,097
----$12,337,898
----$327,934
----$17,925,814
The five main study sectors currently provide a total annual economic impact of 3,319 jobs
and $403.5 million to Dare County, 3,601 jobs and $423.3 million to the surrounding region
May 2014
145
FINAL REPORT
They could potentially provide a total annual economic impact of 5,120 jobs and $642.2
million to Dare County, 5,590 jobs and $678.4 million to the surrounding region (including
Dare County), and 5,397 jobs and $693.0 million to the state of North Carolina (including
Dare County and the surrounding region) if the inlet were to be fully open. If economic
conditions improved to levels seen in 2005-2006, the total annual economic impact could
reach up to $952.7 million in Dare County, $1.0 billion in the surrounding region (including
Dare County), and $1.1 billion in state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the
surrounding region) for fully open conditions. Local interests feel that the impacts may be
even higher (over and above what could be modeled/justified with historical conditions)
once industries understand that Oregon Inlet will be fully open and maintained and its
reputation of uncertainty is changed. However, it is also possible that these projections
could be lower if economic conditions worsen with higher gas prices, higher interest rates,
higher unemployment, etc.
Conversely the economic sectors may only provide a total annual economic impact of 670
essentially closed.
In addition to these sectors, the inlet could be a valuable resource to the offshore energy
industry (wind and drilling) if it were fully navigable. Offshore drilling could potentially
provide a total annual economic impact of 3,983 jobs and $203.0 million to Dare County,
4,102 jobs and $210.2 million to the surrounding region (including Dare County), and 4,990
jobs and $348.7 million to the state of North Carolina (including Dare County and the
surrounding region) if the inlet were fully navigable. However, please note that the impact
estimates for this sector are based on limited data and are highly speculative.
However, please note that the impact estimates for this sector are based on limited data and
are highly speculative.
Based on previous studies, a fully navigable inlet could save between $55.5 million and $106
million of lost property value in Dare and Bertie Counties (only ones studied) due to
elevated water levels between 3 in and 10 in, respectively.
May 2014
146
FINAL REPORT
XIII. REFERENCES
American Petroleum Institute. "The Benefits of U.S. Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Development
in the Atlantic". Web. 05 Apr. 2014. http://www.api.org/.
Bin, O, C. Dumas, B. Poulter and J. Whitehead. 2007. ―Measuring the Impacts of Climate
Change on North Carolina Coastal Resources‖. Prepared for: Bipartisan Policy Center,
Inc. Washington, DC.
BOEM. 2011. ―Assessment of Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources of
the Nation‘s Outer Continental Shelf, 2011‖. Available: http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-GasEnergy-Program/Resource-Evaluation/Resource-Assessment/2011-RA-Assessments.aspx
BOEM. 2013a. ―BOEM Oil & Gas Energy Program‖. Available: http://www.boem.gov/Oil-andGas-Energy-Program/.
BOEM. 2013b. ―Five Year Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing Program‖.
Available: http://www.boem.gov/5-year/2012-2017/
BOEM. 2013c. ―BOEM Fact Sheet: Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing
Program 2012-2017‖. Available: http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM/Oil_and_Gas_
Energy_Program/Leasing/Five_Year_Program/2012-2017_Five_Year_Program/Factsheet.pdf
BOEM. 2013d. ―Commercial Leasing for Wind Power on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)
Offshore North Carolina – Call for Information and Nominations Docket No. BOEM-20120088‖. March 2013.
BOEMRE. 2013. ―Reorganization of The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and
Enforcement‖. Available: http://www.boemre.gov/
Ditton, Robert B., David K. Anderson, John F. Thigpen, III, Brian L. Bohnsack, and Stephen G.
Sutton. 2000. ―1999 Pirates Cove Big Game Tournaments: Participants‘ Characteristics,
Participation in Fishing, Attitudes, Expenditures, and Economic Impacts‖. Report prepared for
the Pirates Cove Big Game Tournaments, Inc., through a research contract with the North
Carolina Sea Grant Program, Manteo, NC, and the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas
A&M University, College Station, TX.
Dumas, Christopher, John Whitehead, Craig Landry and James Herstine. 2009. ―Economic
Impacts and Recreation Value of the North Carolina For-Hire Fishing Fleet‖. North Carolina Sea
Grant. Fishery Resource Grant (FRG) Report 07-FEG-05.
Haab, Timothy C., John C. Whitehead, and Ted McConnell. 2000. ―The Economic Value of
Marine Recreational Fishing in the Southeast United States: 1997 Southeast Economic Data
Analysis‖. Final Report for NMFS Contract No. 40WCNF802079 (353 kb PDF file), National
Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Regional Office, St. Petersburg, FL. 2000.
May 2014
147
FINAL REPORT
Haab, Timothy C., and Kenneth E. McConnell. 2002. ―Valuing Environmental and Natural
Resources: The Econometrics of Non-market Valuation‖. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2002.
Haab, Timothy, Robert Hicks, Kurt Schnier, and John C. Whitehead. 2012. "Angler
Heterogeneity and the Species-Specific Demand for Marine Recreational Fishing." Marine
Resource Economics 27, no. 3 (2012): 229-251.
IFP Energies Nouvelles. "Offshore Hydrocarbons." Sept. 2012. Available: http://www
.ifpenergiesnouvelles.fr/.
IMPLAN Group LLC. 2014. IMPLAN version 3.0 software and 2012 dataset. Huntersville,
NC. Available: http://implan.com/
Kaiser, Mark J., and Brian Snyder. 2013. "A Primer on the Offshore Contract Drilling Industry".
Ocean Development & International Law 44.3 (2013): 287-314 p. Web.
Lovell, Sabrina, Scott Steinback, and James Hilger. 2013. ―The Economic Contribution of
Marine Angler Expenditures in the United States, 2011‖. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA Tech.
Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-134, 188 p.
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources.
2013.
Facts and Figures. Available:
http://dnr.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=navigation&tmp=iframe&pnid=0&nid=336
Mason, Joseph R. 2009. ―The Economic Contribution of Increased Offshore Oil Production in
Regional and National Economies‖. American Energy Alliance, February 2009.
Milborrow, D. 2009. ―Quantifying the Impacts of Wind Variability‖. Proceedings of the ICE Energy 162(3): 105.
Miller, R. E., and P. D. Blair. 1985. ―Input-Output Analysis: Foundations and Extensions‖.
Prentice Hall. 464 pp.
Moffatt & Nichol. 2014. Field survey of commercial fishermen, recreational fishermen, seafood
processors, and boat builders, conducted by Moffatt and Nichol in Dare County, NC, JanuaryMarch, 2014.
Moffatt & Nichol. 2009. ―North Carolina Beach and Inlet Management Plan‖. September 2009.
Moffatt & Nichol. 2006. ―A Study of the Benefits of Oregon Inlet to the Economy of Dare
County and the Surrounding Region‖. July 2006.
Musial, W., S. Butterfield, and B. Ram. 2006. "Energy from Offshore Wind". National
Renewable Energy Laboratory.
May 2014
148
FINAL REPORT
Musial, Walter, and Bonnie Ram. 2010. ―Large-Scale Offshore Wind Power in the United States:
Assessment of Opportunities and Barriers‖. Proceedings of the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory.
NCDC. 2014. Dare County NC County Profile. North Carolina Department of Commerce, Labor
& Economic Analysis Division. April 2014.
NCDMF. 2014. Personal communication. Mr. Alan Bianchi, Trip Ticket Coordinator, License
and Statistics Section, North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. Morehead City, NC. March
6, 2014.
NCDMF. 2013. ―2013 Annual Report‖. North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries License and
Statistics Section. November 2013. pp. 333.
NCDMF. 2010. ―A Business and Economic Profile of Seafood Dealers in North Carolina‖. North
Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. Morehead City, NC. pp. 23.
NCDMF. 2009. ―A Social and Economic Analysis of Commercial Fisheries in North Carolina—
Atlantic Ocean‖. North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. Morehead, NC. pp. 26.
NCDMF. 2007. ―A Social and Economic Analysis of Commercial Fisheries in North Carolina—
Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds‖. North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. Morehead, NC.
pp. 25.
NC-EDIS. 2014. North Caroline Economic Development Information System. North Carolina
Department of Commerce. Raleigh, NC. Available: http://accessnc.commerce.state.nc.us/EDIS
/page1.html
NCEO. 2013. ―Background for NC Offshore Wind—Foundation for BOEM‖. Renewables
Program, Energy Office, North Carolina Department of Commerce. BOEM Public Meetings,
January 7 & 9, 2013. Available:http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM/Renewable_Energy
_Program/State_Activities/NC_OffshoreWind_Background.pdf
NC-LINC. 2014. ―Log Into North Carolina‖ (LINC) online state data system. State Data Center,
North Carolina Office of State Management and Budget. Raleigh, NC.
Available:
http://linc.state.nc.us/
NCWaterways.com. 2014. NCwaterways.com—North Carolina’s Marine Trades and Boating
Resource. Accessed April 2014: http://www.ncwaterways.com/
NEFMC. 2013. ―Framework 24 to the Sea Scallop FMP, Appendices I and II‖. New England
Fisheries Management Council. Newburyport, MA. Available:http://www.nefmc.org/scallops
/index.html
May 2014
149
FINAL REPORT
NEFMC. 2010. ―Amendment 15 to the Scallop Fishery Management Plan Including a Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)‖. New England Fisheries Management Council.
Newburyport, MA. Available: http://www.nefmc.org/scallops/index.html
NMFS. 2011. Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP). National Marine Fisheries
Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Available:http://www.st.nmfs
.noaa.gov/recreational-fisheries/access-data/data-downloads/index.
NOAA. 2010. ―Seafood Industry Impact Query 2008‖. US National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. National Marine Fisheries Service. 15 Dec. 2010. Available:
https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/economics/index
Quest Offshore Resources: Hillegeist, Paul, Sean Shafer, Matt Gross. 2013. ―The Economic
Benefits of Increasing U.S. Access to Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Atlantic‖.
Prepared for: National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA); American Petroleum Institute
(API), Dec. 2013. Web. 05 Apr. 2014.
RIG LOGIX. 2014. Available: http://www.rigzone.com/data/rig_report.asp?rpt=reg
Schleisner, L. 2000. "Life Cycle Assessment of a Wind Farm and Related Externalities".
Renewable Energy. 279-288 p.
Snyder, Brian, and Mark Kaiser. 2009. "Ecological and Economic Cost-Benefit Analysis of
Offshore Wind Energy". Renewable Energy. 1567-1578 p.
Strachan, Peter A., and David Lal. 2004. "Wind Energy Policy, Planning and Management
Practice in the UK: Hot Air or a Gathering Storm?" Regional Studies 38(5), July: 551-571.
Strategic Marketing & Research, Inc. 2006. ―Visitor Research – Wave 1&2 – Summer/Fall
2005‖. Prepared for Outer Banks Tourist Bureau, January 2006.
Triepke, Joseph. 2014. "Typical Offshore Drilling Rig Crew Requirements". Oilpro. Feb. 2014.
Web. 07 Apr. 2014. Available: http://oilpro.com/q/380/how-many-people-work-on-offshoredrilling-rigs
University of North Carolina (UNC). 2009. ―Coastal Wind: Energy for North Carolina‘s Future‖.
Chapel Hill, NC, 371 pp.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2013. May 2013 National Industry-Specific Occupational
Employment and Wage Estimates. Available: http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_211000
.htm#00-0000.
USDC-BEA. 2014. ―Gross domestic product (implicit price deflator)‖. Series ID:
A191RD3A086NBEA. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.
Washington, DC.
May 2014
150
FINAL REPORT
U.S. Department of Energy. 2008. "20% Wind Energy by 2030".
U.S. Department of Energy. 2009. ―Economic Benefits, Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions
Reductions, and Water Conservation Benefits from 1,000 Megawatts (MW) of New Wind Power
in North Carolina‖ DOE/GO-102009-2755.
U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2013. ―Annual Energy Outlook 2013‖. DOE/EIA0383ER (2013), December 5, 2012. The oil price is for West Texas intermediate spot crude, and
the natural gas price is the Henry Hub value.
Walden, Michael L., and William N. Reynolds. 2013. ―The Economic Potential from Developing
North Carolina's On-Shore and Off-Shore Energy Resources‖. Rep. Dept. of Agricultural and
Resource Economics North Carolina State University, Apr. 2013. Available: http://agecon.ncsu.edu/sites/ag-econ.ncsu.edu/files/faculty/walden/drillingnc.pdf
May 2014
151
APPENDIX A
Field Surveys & Interviews
1. Contact List
2. Questionnaires
1. Contact List
Commercial Fishing Contacts



15 Contacts
Received 7 Questionnaire Responses
Conducted 1 Phone Interview
Commercial Fishing Contacts
Name
Organization
Glen Hopkins
Commercial Fisherman - Manteo
Russell Firth
Commercial Fisherman - Wanchese
Matt Huth
Commercial Fisherman - Wanchese
Dewey Hemilwright Commercial Fisherman - Engelhard
Robby Midgett
Commercial Fisherman - Stumpy Point
Sandy Siemens
Commercial Fisherman - Stumpy Point
Scott Bridges
Commercial Fisherman - Colington
Donald G. Elliott
Commercial Fisherman
Mike Daniels
Wanchese Fish Company
Micah Daniels
Sammy Williams
Commercial Fisherman - Engelhard
Phillip Carawan
Commercial Fisherman - Columbia
Rom Whitaker
Release Sport Fishing Charters
Britt Shackleford
Doghouse Sport Fishing Charters
James Fletcher
Commercial Fisherman/Consultant
Seafood Packing & Processing Contacts


7 Contacts
Seafood Packing & Processing Contacts
Name
Organization
Micah Daniels
Sammy Williams Williams Seafood Inc.
Phillip Carawan Captain Neill's Seafood
Rom Whitaker
Willy Phillips
Full Circle Crab Company
Steve George
Etheridge Fish Company
Benny O'Neal
O'Neal's Seafood Harvest
Boat Building & Support Services Contacts



25 Contacts
Conducted 2 In Person Interviews
Boat Building & Support Services Contacts
Name
Organization
Dean Johnson
Dean Johnson Boatworks
Wayne Umphlett
Harbor Welding
Fara Daniels
Wanchese Trawl & Supply
John Bayliss
Bayliss Boatworks
Bob Peele
NC Commerce - Wanchese
Robin Mann
Mann Custom Boats
Paul Spencer
Spencer Yachts
Jim Polatty
Bluewater Yachts
Ritchie Howell
Ritchie Howell Custom Carolina Yachts
Sunny Briggs
Briggs Boatworks
Randy Ramsey
Jarrett Bay Boatworks
Harry Schiffman
Towboat U.S.
Jed Dixon
DOT, Manns Harbor Shipyard
Chris Parker
Gregory Poole Equipment Company
Howard Rock
Marine Electronics
Lori Polatty
Watkins Custom Sewing
Debbie Jones
The Recovery Shop
Russell Phelps
Insurance
Brant Murray
Murray Auto Supply
Don Griffin
Griffin Marine
Kelly Mederios
The Welding Shop
Craig Blackwell
Blackwell Boatworks
Ricky Scarborough Jr.
Scarborough Boatworks
Peter Johnstone
Gunboat
Hank Rose
Crane Service
Recreational Fishing & Tourism Contacts
Recreational For-Hire Fishing


14 Contacts
Recreational For-Hire Fishing Contacts
Name
Organization
Rom Whitaker
Britt Shackleford Doghouse Sport Fishing Charters
Ned Ashby
Seabreeze Sport Fishing
Brian White
Wave Runner Gulf Stream Fishing
Jamie Reibel
Phideaux Charters
Adam LaRosa
Canyon Runner
Jesse Granitzki
BI-OP-SEA Fishing Charters
Russell Firth
Grandpas Charters
Allan Foreman
Crystal Dawn Headboat, Country Girl Charters
Buddy Hooper
Hatteras Fever Sportfishing
John E. Collins
Colington Harbour Association
Ted Kramer
Recreational Fishing (Private Captain)
Jim Tobin
Pirates Cove Fishing Center
Dean Johnson
Sea Era Sportfishing
Recreational Private Fishing


6 Contacts
Recreational Private Fishing Contacts
Name
Organization
John E. Collins
Colington Harbour Association
Ted Kramer
Recreational Fisherman
Jim Tobin
Pirates Cove Fishing Center
David Wiggington Recreational Fisherman
Minta Meekins
Oregon Inlet Fishing Center
Wayne Umphlett Broad Creek Fishing Center & Marina
Other Recreational Fishing

Conducted 2 Phone Interviews and 1 In Person Interview
Name
Steve Shriver
Paul Bertram
Wayne Gray
Other Recreational Fishing Contacts
Organization
USACE Survey Office - Wanchese
USCG Aids To Navigation Team - Wanchese
USCG Oregon Inlet Station - Former Chief
General Tourism


26 Contacts
Name
Lee Nettles
Karen Brown
Angie Brady-Daniels
Dave Dawson
Susan Boncek
Ann Wood
Willo Kelly
Ervin Bateman
Lionel Shannon
Vicki Basnight
Micah Daniels
Bill McCaskill
Terry Stewert
Jackie Myers
Jackie Smanski
Anthony Fletcher
Ali Breaux
Janice Farr
Peggy Corbell Langley
Ariadna Vucinovic
Renee Cahoon
Jeanette Straight
Leslie Painter
Nancy Scarborough
Sterling Webster
Malcolm Fearing
General Tourism Contacts
Organization
Outer Banks Visitors Bureau
Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce
Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce
Cape Hatteras Motel
Sandspur Motel & Cottage Court
Surf or Sound Realty
Kelly's Restaurant
Sugar Creek Restaurant
Owens Restaurant
Basnight's Lone Cedar Café
Fisherman's Wharf Restaurant
Whale Bone Tackle
T.W.'s Tackle
Village Realty
Quality Inn
Midgett Realty
Sun Realty
Sun Reatly
Oasis Suites
Ramada Plaza
Cahoon's Cottages
Camp Hatteras - Hatteras Island
Colony Realty Corporation
Dolphin Realty
Dare County Tourism Board, Hilton Garden Inn
Campground - Manteo
Tournament Fishing Contacts


3 Contacts
Name
Rom Whitaker
Jim Tobin
Brent Tomlinson
Sport Fishing Tournament Contacts
Organization
Alice Kelly Ladies Billfish Tournament, Pirates Cove Big Game Tournament
Manteo Rotary Rockfish Rodeo
Offshore Drilling Contacts


8 Contacts
Name
Gary Perry
Billy Edge
Brian O'Hara
Rick Palmer
Simon Rich
Dr. Rick Mercier
Elmer Danenberger
David Welch
Offshore Drilling Contacts
Organization
Kitty Hawk, Mayor
UNC Coastal Studies Institute
Southeast Coastal Wind Coalition
Weeks Marine
Stevens Towing
TAMU Offshore Technology Research Center
BOEM - Retired
Stone Energy
Offshore Wind Contacts


14 Contacts
Offshore Wind Power Contacts
Name
Organization
Nancy White
Billy Edge
Jen Culbertson
BOEM
Brian Hooker
BOEM
Will Waskes
BOEM
Calvin Lau
Ming Yang Wind
Guojian Lin
Ming Yang Wind
Chandra Yerramalli
Ming Yang Wind
Simon Yu
Ming Yang Wind
Gary Perry
Kitty Hawk - Mayor
Brian O'Hara
Southeast Coastal Wind Coalition
Rick Palmer
Weeks Marine
Simon Rich
Stevens Towing
Stanley White
Stanley White Engineering LLC
Soundside Flooding Contacts


14 Contacts
Name
JP Walsh
Spencer Rogers
Stan Riggs
Ed Goodwin
Tommy Everett
David Clegg
Ty Flemming
Mark Powell
John Spencer
Thomas Spruill
Sandy Sanderson
Earl Pugh
Matt Wood
George Wood
Soundside Flooding Contacts
Organization
East Carolina University
North Carolina Sea Grant
East Carolina University
Eastern Director for Office of Governor McCrory
Tyrrell County Commissioner
Tyrrell County Manager
Tyrrell County Soil and Water Conservation Director
Albemarle RC&D
Tyrrell County Fire Chief
Tyrrell County Commissioner Chairman
Dare County Emergency Management
Middelton Farms - Engelhard
Pasquotank
Environmental Professionals
2. Questionnaires
The Economic Impacts of Oregon Inlet Navigability
Field Interview Questions
COMMERCIAL FISHING
The main purpose of this interview is to determine how navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet affect your
business.
General Interview Information
Date of interview: _____________________
Location of interview (business name (if any), address, city, county):_____________________________
_____________________________
Name of person interviewed: _________________________
Who is completing this interview (captain, owner, owner/captain, etc.)? ________________________
Number of years’ experience working with/in/around Oregon Inlet: ____________
Contact information for person interviewed (phone number, email address): _______________________
_______________________
Vessel Information
What is your vessel’s age? __________
What is your vessel’s overall length? ___________________
What is your vessel’s beam? _____________
What is your vessel’s hull material (wood, steel, etc.)? ___________________
What is your vessel’s draft light/unloaded? ________________
What is your vessel’s typical draft loaded? _________________
What type of engine(s) does your vessel carry? (type, number, and horsepower of engines)
________________________________________________________________________
Besides the captain, how many other full-time crewmembers typically work on the vessel? __________________
Besides the captain, how many other part-time crewmembers typically work on the vessel? __________________
Would you say that your fishing operations are similar to, or different from, the fishing operations of other vessels
of similar type and size based in Dare County? _____________________
If DIFFERENT FROM, how are your fishing operations different from those of other vessels of similar type and
size based in Dare County? _____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Effects of Oregon Inlet Navigability on Fishing Trips
Some fishing vessels participate in several fisheries / fishing seasons (target different species, use different gear,
etc.) in different months of the year. The following pages allow you to tell us which fisheries / fishing seasons
you participate in and how Oregon Inlet navigability would affect your fishing in each fishery / fishing season.
Complete one of the following pages for each fishery in which you participate.
When completing the following pages, assume that weather conditions and economic conditions are average. The
goal is to determine how any changes in Oregon Inlet navigability would affect your business in years when
weather and economic conditions are average.
Fishing Season / Fishery #1.
Name of Fishing Season / Fishery: ___________________
Which months are included in this Fishing Season / Fishery?: ___________________
Which type of fishing gear do you use in this Fishing Season / Fishery?: _________________________
What are your top three target species in this Fishing Season / Fishery?: ___________________________
On average, of your top 3 target species and “other”, how many pounds of sellable catch do you land PER TRIP:
Species 1: ______ Species 2: ______ Species 3: _____ Other Species: ____________
In this Fishing Season / Fishery, what percentage of the fishing occurs: less than 3 miles from shore _____,
between 3 and 200 miles from shore _____,
greater than 200 miles from shore_____?
“Recent Average” Navigability Conditions (average over last 3 years) in Oregon Inlet navigation channel
(assume a depth of 6 feet or greater in navigation channel only 40 percent of the time)
In this Fishing Season/Fishery, and with “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions in Oregon Inlet,
where would you dock your vessel? (state, county/city)? ______________________
where would you typically land your catch? (state, county/city)? ______________________
How many fishing trips would you typically make in this season (assume average weather and economic
conditions)? ______ What percentage of fishing trips involves travel through Oregon Inlet in this
season? ____ Costs per trip: Fuel ______, Crew______, Bait_______, Other_______
For any trips that do not involve travel through Oregon Inlet, where do those trips occur (port and inlet
used)? __________________ Costs per trip: Fuel ______, Crew______, Bait_______, Other_______
“Fully Open” Navigability Conditions in Oregon Inlet navigation channel (assume a depth of 14 feet or greater
in navigation channel 85-100 percent of the time)
In this Fishing Season/Fishery, and with “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions in Oregon Inlet, where
would you dock your vessel? (state, county/city)? ______________________
would you typically land your catch? (state, county/city)? ______________________
conditions)? ______ What percentage of fishing trips would involve travel through Oregon Inlet in this
For any trips that would not involve travel through Oregon Inlet, where would those trips occur (port and
inlet used)? ________________ Costs per trip: Fuel ______, Crew______, Bait_______, Other_______
“Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions in Oregon Inlet navigation channel (assume a depth of 6 feet or
greater in navigation channel only 5 percent of the time)
Under “Essentially Closed” conditions, would you continue to fish at all in this season? YES or NO
If YES, you would continue to fish:
In this Fishing Season/Fishery, and with “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions in Oregon Inlet,
where would you dock your vessel? (state, county/city)? _________________________
where would you typically land your catch? (state, county/city)? ___________________
If NO, you would not continue to fish, then what would you likely do instead? ___________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
Fishing Season / Fishery #2. (complete this page only if you participate in more than one fishing season)
___________________________________________________________________________________
Fishing Season / Fishery #3. (complete this page only if you participate in more than two fishing seasons)
___________________________________________________________________________________
MARINE TRADES
business.
_____________________________
Title of person interviewed (owner, manager, etc.)? ________________________
Number of years’ experience working with/in/around Oregon Inlet / Dare County: ____________
_______________________
Business Description
What type of products/services does your company provide? __________________________________
What is your target market? (commercial/recreational fishermen, boat builders, etc?)
___________________________________________________________________________________
How many employees do you have in each of the following salary categories, and do they live inside or outside
Dare County (to the best of your knowledge)?
Salary Category
Number of Employees
Living Inside Dare Co.
Number of Employees
Living Outside Dare Co.
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
What percentage of your spending on supplies and materials occurs inside North Carolina? __________
What percentage of your spending on supplies and materials occurs inside Dare County? ____________
Would you say that your business operations are similar to, or different from, the operations of other businesses in
your industry that are based in Dare County? _____________________
If DIFFERENT FROM, how are your operations different from those of other businesses in your industry based
in Dare County? _____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Effects of Oregon Inlet Navigability on Business Operations
The questions below ask you to assess how changes in Oregon Inlet navigability might affect your business.
When completing the following pages, assume that weather conditions and economic conditions are average.
The goal is to determine how any changes in Oregon Inlet navigability would affect your business in years when
On average, what would be your best estimate of your annual sales in a year with “Recent Average”
navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet? _______________________
What percentage of your sales would be made to customers using Oregon Inlet? _________________
What percentage of your sales would be made to customers who live in North Carolina? __________
What percentage of your sales would be made to customers who live in Dare County? ____________
On average, what would be your best estimate of your annual sales in a year with “Fully Open”
Under “Essentially Closed” conditions, would your business continue to operate at all? YES or NO
If YES, you would continue to operate your business:
Would you continue to operate the business its present location? _________
If you would not continue to operate in the same location, where would you relocate?
(city and state) ________________________________
On average, what would be your best estimate of your annual sales in a year with “Essentially Closed”
If NO, you would not continue to operate your business, then what would you likely do instead?
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
FOR-HIRE (CHARTER AND HEADBOAT) FISHING
business.
_____________________________
Who is completing this interview (captain, owner, owner/captain, etc.)? ________________________
_______________________
Vessel Information
What is your boat’s overall length? ___________________
What is your boat’s typical draft? ___________________
What type of engine(s) does your boat carry? (type, number, and horsepower of engines) ___________________
Where is your vessel docked? (county, town, marina) ___________________
Besides the captain, how many other crewmembers typically work on the vessel? ___________________
Would you say that your fishing operations are similar to, or different from, the fishing operations of other vessels
of similar type and size based in Dare County? _____________________
If DIFFERENT FROM, how are your fishing operations different from those of other vessels of similar type and
size based in Dare County? _____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Effects of Oregon Inlet Navigability on Fishing Trips
Some fishing vessels participate in several fisheries / fishing seasons (target different species, use different gear,
etc.) in different months of the year. The following pages allow you to tell us which fisheries / fishing seasons
you participate in and how Oregon Inlet navigability would affect your fishing in each fishery / fishing season.
Complete one of the following pages for each fishery in which you participate.
When completing the following pages, assume that weather conditions and economic conditions are average. The
goal is to determine how any changes in Oregon Inlet navigability would affect your business in years when
Fishing Season / Fishery #1.
In this Fishing Season / Fishery, what percentage of your fishing trips are: charter _____ headboat _____
What are your primary target species in this Fishing Season / Fishery?: ___________________________
In this Fishing Season / Fishery, how many paying customers do you typically take per fishing trip?: _______
In this Fishing Season / Fishery, what is the average charter/headboat fee PER CUSTOMER? __________
In this Fishing Season / Fishery, what percentage of your customers lives outside Dare County? _____
In this Fishing Season / Fishery, what percentage of your customers lives outside North Carolina? _____
___________________________________________________________________________________
Fishing Season / Fishery #2. (complete this page only if you participate in more than one fishing season)
___________________________________________________________________________________
Fishing Season / Fishery #3. (complete this page only if you participate in more than two fishing seasons)
___________________________________________________________________________________
FISHING TOURNAMENTS
The main purpose of this interview is to determine how navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet affect the
tournament fishing business in Dare County.
_____________________________
Who is completing this interview (owner, manager, etc.)? ________________________
_______________________
Effects of Oregon Inlet Navigability on Fishing Tournament Business

The questions on the following pages ask how changes in Oregon Inlet navigability might affect fishing
tournament business.

Complete one of the following pages for each tournament.

When completing the following pages, assume that weather conditions and economic conditions are
average.

The goal is to determine how any changes in Oregon Inlet navigability would affect tournament business
in years when weather and economic conditions are average.
Fishing Tournament #1
What is the name of the tournament? _____________________
Where does the tournament occur (county, town, marina(s) )? ________________________________________
When does the tournament occur (month, days of month?)? _____________
How many days does the tournament last? _______
Do other, similar tournaments occur along the Atlantic Coast anywhere from Virginia to Florida during the same
month? YES/NO If so, where?__________________
How about earlier or later during the same season? YES/NO If so, where?__________________
If other tournaments occur during the same month or season, what is unique about the Dare County tournament
described here? _____________________________________________________________________________
How many employees does the tournament organization itself directly employ in each of the following salary
categories, and do the employees live inside or outside Dare County (to the best of your knowledge)?
Salary Category
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
Number of Employees Living Inside Dare Co.
Number of Employees Living Outside Dare Co.
What percentage of tournament organization spending on supplies/materials occurs inside North Carolina? _____
What percentage of spending on supplies/materials occurs inside Dare County? ____
Which species are typically targeted by tournament participants? _____________________________________
What percentage of the fishing occurs: less than 3 miles from shore _____,
What is the typical length ___________ and draft _________ of the vessels participating in this tournament?
What percentage of the participating vessels is: Charter ______, Headboat _____, Private vessel _____?
In addition to the captain, how many crew typically serve per vessel: Charter _____, Headboat ______?
How many passengers are carried per vessel (don’t include captain/crew): Charter ______, Headboat _____?
How many passengers are typically carried per private boat (including the skipper)? ______
Regarding the private vessels, what percentage are local / permanently docked in Dare County ______,
and what percentage travels (by trailer or by water) to Dare County just for the tournament ______?
For those private vessels that travel to Dare County just for the tournament, what percentage travels to Dare
County from other locations in North Carolina ________, and what percentage travels to Dare County from
locations out-of-state?____
Assuming average weather and economic conditions, and assuming “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions
(average over last 3 years) in Oregon Inlet navigation channel (assume a depth of 6 feet or greater in navigation
channel only 40 percent of the time), How many vessels would typically participate in this tournament? _____
How many trips would be made during the tournament per vessel: Charter _____, Headboat ____, Private _____?
What percentage of the trips would pass through Oregon Inlet: Charter _____, Headboat ____, Private _____?
If the tournament were cancelled because Oregon Inlet was not navigable, what percentage of the tournament
participants would likely visit Dare County anyway to enjoy the beach, nature, sound-side fishing, etc? ________
Assuming average weather and economic conditions, and “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions in Oregon
Inlet navigation channel (assume a depth of 14 feet or greater in navigation channel 85-100 percent of the time),
How many vessels would typically participate in this tournament? _____
Assuming average weather and economic conditions, and “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions in
Oregon Inlet navigation channel (assume a depth of 6 feet or greater in navigation channel only 5 percent of the
time), How many vessels would typically participate in this tournament? _____
Economic Impacts of Oregon Inlet Navigability
GENERAL TOURISM (LODGING, RESTAURANTS, ETC.)
business.
_____________________________
_______________________
Business Description
What type of products/services does your company provide? __________________________________
Salary Category
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
your industry that are based in Dare County? _____________________
in Dare County? _____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Effects of Oregon Inlet Navigability on Business Operations
On average, what would be your best estimate of your annual sales in a year with “Recent Average”
On average, what would be your best estimate of your annual sales in a year with “Fully Open”
Under “Essentially Closed” conditions, would your business continue to operate at all? YES or NO
If YES, you would continue to operate your business:
Would you continue to operate the business its present location? _________
If you would not continue to operate in the same location, where would you relocate?
(city and state) ________________________________
On average, what would be your best estimate of your annual sales in a year with “Essentially Closed”
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
OFFSHORE DRILLING
The main purpose of this interview is to determine how navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet might affect plans
for the construction and operation of facilities to support offshore drilling development near Oregon Inlet.
_____________________________
Number of years’ experience working in the drilling industry: __________________
_______________________
_______________________
Effects of Oregon Inlet Navigability on Facility Construction and Business Operations
The questions below ask you to assess how changes in Oregon Inlet navigability might affect facilities and
operations to support offshore drilling near Oregon Inlet. Three navigability scenarios are considered, and the
questions ask you to assess likely facility construction and operations under each navigability scenario.
The goal is to determine how any changes in Oregon Inlet navigability would affect operations in years when
NAVIGABILITY SCENARIO 1: “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions (average over last 3 years) in
time).
Land Facility Construction
Assuming “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions, estimate the dollar amount to be spent on facility
construction ON LAND in the following categories (if physical unit quantities, such as acres of land, square feet
of warehouse, etc., are known instead of dollar amounts, please provide these physical quantities):
Facility Type/Activity
Dollar Amount or Physical Units
Land Clearing
Road Construction
Rail Construction
Water and Sewer Construction
Electrical Service Construction
Natural Gas Service Construction
Gasoline/Diesel Refueling Facility Construction
Warehouse and Storage Facility Construction
Manufacturing/Assembly/Repair Facility Construction
Oil Refining Facility Construction
Marina/Dockyard Facility Construction
Office Facility Construction
Other
Would you say that drilling support facilities constructed on land in or near Dare County to support offshore
drilling operations would be similar to, or different from, the operations of other facilities in your industry that are
located elsewhere? _____________________
If DIFFERENT FROM, how would your operations be different from those of other facilities in your industry
located elsewhere? _____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Offshore/Ocean Facility Construction
construction OFFSHORE in the following categories (if physical unit quantities, such as numbers of drilling
platforms, type/size of platform, miles of pipeline laid, type of pipeline ,etc., are known instead of dollar amounts,
please provide these physical quantities):
Activity
Offshore drilling
Offshore drilling platform installation
Offshore marker (buoy, etc.) installation
Offshore pipeline installation
Other
Would you say that drilling facilities constructed offshore in or near Dare County to support drilling operations
would be similar to, or different from, the operations of other facilities in your industry that are located
elsewhere? _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Facility Operations (after initial land facility construction and after offshore facility construction)
Assuming “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions, please estimate the number of employees that would be
employed by the land facility in each of the following salary categories, and indicate whether they would live
inside or outside Dare County (to the best of your knowledge). DO NOT INCLUDE OCEAN VESSEL
CREWMEMBERS. (Crewmembers are considered elsewhere below.)
Salary Category
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
Assuming “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions, please estimate ANNUAL EXPENDITURES under
normal operations in each category below. For each category, estimate the percentage of expenditures spent on
vendors located inside North Carolina and inside Dare County:
Type of Expenditure
Water and Sewer Service
Electrical Service
Natural Gas Service
Gasoline/Diesel Refueling (for
cars/trucks)
Admin./Managerial/Office
Operations
Onshore Refining Operations
Drilling/Platform Equipment
Construction/Repair
Marina—Oil/gas
offloading/onloading
Marina—Refueling of Vessels
Marina—Dockyard/Vessel Repair
Operations
Service Vessel Trips per Year to
Offshore Rig/Platform Sites
Percentage of Trips that will utilize
Oregon Inlet
Crewmembers per Vessel
Other
Annual
Expenditure
Percentage Spent on
Vendors
Located Inside North
Carolina.
Percentage Spent
on Vendors
Located Inside
Dare Co
Sales
Assuming “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions, on average, what would be your best estimate of your
annual sales? _______________________
NAVIGABILITY SCENARIO 2: “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions in Oregon Inlet navigation channel
(assume a depth of 14 feet or greater in navigation channel 85-100 percent of the time)
Assuming “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions, estimate the dollar amount to be spent on facility construction
ON LAND in the following categories (if physical unit quantities, such as acres of land, square feet of warehouse,
etc., are known instead of dollar amounts, please provide these physical quantities):
Land Clearing
Road Construction
Rail Construction
Other
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
OFFSHORE in the following categories (if physical unit quantities, such as numbers of drilling platforms,
type/size of platform, miles of pipeline laid, type of pipeline ,etc., are known instead of dollar amounts, please
provide these physical quantities):
Activity
Offshore drilling
Other
elsewhere? _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Assuming “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions, please estimate the number of employees that would be
Salary Category
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
Assuming “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions, please estimate ANNUAL EXPENDITURES under normal
operations in each category below. For each category, estimate the percentage of expenditures spent on vendors
located inside North Carolina and inside Dare County:
Type of Expenditure
Electrical Service
Natural Gas Service
cars/trucks)
Operations
Construction/Repair
Marina—Oil/gas
Operations
Oregon Inlet
Other
Annual
Expenditure
Percentage Spent on
Vendors
Carolina.
Percentage Spent
on Vendors
Located Inside
Dare Co
Sales
Assuming “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions, on average, what would be your best estimate of your annual
sales? _______________________
NAVIGABILITY SCENARIO 3: “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions in Oregon Inlet navigation
channel (assume a depth of 6 feet or greater in navigation channel only 5 percent of the time)
Under “Essentially Closed” conditions, would the offshore drilling business continue to operate at all in or near
Dare County? YES or NO
If NO, you would not continue to operate the offshore drilling business in or near Dare County, then what would
likely be done instead?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
If YES, you would continue to operate the offshore drilling business in or near Dare County, please answer the
questions below.
Assuming “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions, estimate the dollar amount to be spent on facility
Land Clearing
Road Construction
Rail Construction
Other
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
construction OFFSHORE in the following categories (if physical unit quantities, such as numbers of drilling
platforms, type/size of platform, miles of pipeline laid, type of pipeline ,etc., are known instead of dollar amounts,
please provide these physical quantities):
Activity
Offshore drilling
Other
elsewhere? _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Assuming “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions, please estimate the number of employees that would be
Salary Category
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
Assuming “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions, please estimate ANNUAL EXPENDITURES under
Type of Expenditure
Electrical Service
Natural Gas Service
cars/trucks)
Operations
Construction/Repair
Marina—Oil/gas
Operations
Oregon Inlet
Other
Annual
Expenditure
Percentage Spent on
Vendors
Carolina.
Percentage Spent
on Vendors
Located Inside
Dare Co
Sales
Assuming “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions, on average, what would be your best estimate of your
annual sales? _______________________
OFFSHORE WIND POWER
The main purpose of this interview is to determine how navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet might affect plans
for the construction and operation of facilities to support offshore wind power development near Oregon Inlet.
_____________________________
Number of years’ experience working in wind power industry: __________________
_______________________
_______________________
Effects of Oregon Inlet Navigability on Facility Construction and Business Operations
Three navigability scenarios are considered, and the questions ask you to assess likely facility construction and
operations under each navigability scenario.
NAVIGABILITY SCENARIO 1: “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions (average over last 3 years) in
time).
Land Clearing
Road Construction
Rail Construction
Other
Would you say that wind power facilities constructed on land in or near Dare County to support offshore wind
operations would be similar to, or different from, the operations of other facilities in your industry that are located
elsewhere? _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
construction OFFSHORE in the following categories (if physical unit quantities, such as numbers of wind
turbines, type of turbine, miles of cable laid, type of cable, etc., are known instead of dollar amounts, please
Activity
Offshore wind turbine installation
Offshore cable installation
Offshore electrical switching facility installation
Other
Would you say that wind power facilities constructed offshore in or near Dare County to support offshore wind
elsewhere? _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Assuming “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions, please estimate the number of employees that will be
employed by the land facility in each of the following salary categories, and indicate whether they will live inside
or outside Dare County (to the best of your knowledge). DO NOT INCLUDE OCEAN VESSEL
Salary Category
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
Assuming “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions, please estimate ANNUAL EXPENDITURES under
Type of Expenditure
Electrical Service
Natural Gas Service
cars/trucks)
Operations
Wind Power Equipment
Construction/Repair
Marina—Refueling Vessels
Operations
Service Vessel Trips per Year
Oregon Inlet
Other
Annual
Expenditure
Percentage Spent on
Vendors
Carolina.
Percentage Spent
on Vendors
Located Inside
Dare Co
Sales
Assuming “Recent Average” Navigability Conditions, on average, what would be your best estimate of your
annual sales? _______________________
NAVIGABILITY SCENARIO 2: “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions in Oregon Inlet navigation channel
(assume a depth of 14 feet or greater in navigation channel 85-100 percent of the time)
ON LAND in the following categories (if physical unit quantities, such as acres of land, square feet of warehouse,
etc., are known instead of dollar amounts, please provide these physical quantities):
Land Clearing
Road Construction
Rail Construction
Other
elsewhere? _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
OFFSHORE in the following categories (if physical unit quantities, such as numbers of wind turbines, type of
turbine, miles of cable laid, type of cable, etc., are known instead of dollar amounts, please provide these physical
quantities):
Activity
Other
elsewhere? _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Assuming “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions, please estimate the number of employees that will be employed
by the land facility in each of the following salary categories, and indicate whether they will live inside or outside
Dare County (to the best of your knowledge). DO NOT INCLUDE OCEAN VESSEL CREWMEMBERS.
(Crewmembers are considered elsewhere below.)
Salary Category
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
Assuming “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions, please estimate ANNUAL EXPENDITURES under normal
operations in each category below. For each category, estimate the percentage of expenditures spent on vendors
located inside North Carolina and inside Dare County:
Type of Expenditure
Electrical Service
Natural Gas Service
cars/trucks)
Operations
Construction/Repair
Operations
Oregon Inlet
Other
Annual
Expenditure
Percentage Spent on
Vendors
Carolina.
Percentage Spent
on Vendors
Located Inside
Dare Co
Sales
Assuming “Fully Open” Navigability Conditions, on average, what would be your best estimate of your annual
sales? _______________________
NAVIGABILITY SCENARIO 3: “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions in Oregon Inlet navigation
channel (assume a depth of 6 feet or greater in navigation channel only 5 percent of the time)
Under “Essentially Closed” conditions, would the business continue to operate at all? YES or NO
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
If YES, please answer the questions below.
Land Clearing
Road Construction
Rail Construction
Other
elsewhere? _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
construction OFFSHORE in the following categories (if physical unit quantities, such as numbers of wind
turbines, type of turbine, miles of cable laid, type of cable, etc., are known instead of dollar amounts, please
Activity
Other
elsewhere? _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Assuming “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions, please estimate the number of employees that will be
employed by the land facility in each of the following salary categories, and indicate whether they will live inside
or outside Dare County (to the best of your knowledge). DO NOT INCLUDE OCEAN VESSEL
Salary Category
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
Assuming “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions, please estimate ANNUAL EXPENDITURES under
Type of Expenditure
Electrical Service
Natural Gas Service
cars/trucks)
Operations
Construction/Repair
Operations
Oregon Inlet
Other
Annual
Expenditure
Percentage Spent on
Vendors
Carolina.
Percentage Spent
on Vendors
Located Inside
Dare Co
Sales
Assuming “Essentially Closed” Navigability Conditions, on average, what would be your best estimate of your
annual sales? _______________________
SOUNDSIDE FLOODING
The main purpose of this interview is to determine how Soundside Flooding due to navigability conditions in
Oregon Inlet might affect business activity and/or the value of soundside real estate. For the purposes of this
interview: Soundside Flooding is defined as flooding resulting from abnormally high water levels in Albemarle
Sound and/or Pamlico Sound due to restricted water flow through Oregon Inlet.
_____________________________
_______________________
Business Description and Real Estate Description
Soundside flooding might affect your business activity or the value of your soundside real estate.
Do you own any soundside real estate? If yes, what type of property? _____________, how many acres? ______
What type of products/services does your business provide? __________________________________________
What is your target market? (commercial/recreational fishermen, boat builders, etc?) ______________________
What percentage of your sales are typically made to customers who live in North Carolina? __________
What percentage of your sales are typically made to customers who live in Dare County? ____________
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
Salary Category
$0 to $34,999
$35,000 to $74,999
$75,000+
your industry that are based in northeastern North Carolina? _____________________
in northeastern North Carolina? _________________________________________________________________
Effects of Soundside Flooding on Real Estate Value and Business Operations
The questions below ask you to assess how changes in Oregon Inlet navigability might affect your business
activity or the value of your soundside real estate. When completing the following pages, assume that weather
conditions and economic conditions are average. The goal is to determine how any changes in Oregon Inlet
navigability would affect your business or real estate value in years when weather and economic conditions are
average.
Effects on Real Estate Value
Has the value of your soundside real estate been affected by Soundside Flooding in a year with “Recent
Average” navigability condidtions? YES or NO. If yes, what is your estimate of the value of the
property in a year with “Recent Average” navigability conditions? ____________
Effects on Business Sales and/or Costs
Have you lost any business sales due to Soundside Flooding in a year with “Recent Average” navigability
conditions in Oregon Inlet? YES or NO. If yes, how much have you lost in sales (dollars per year, on
average) due to Soundside Flooding in a year with “Recent Average” navigability conditions?_________
Aside from any changes in sales, have you suffered any other costs (dollars per year) due to Soundside
Flooding in a year with “Recent Average” navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet? YES or NO.
If yes, estimate the dollar costs per year ________ and briefly describe the costs ___________________
Do you think that your soundside real estate would be affected by Soundside Flooding in a year with
“Fully Open” navigability condidtions? YES or NO. If yes, what is your estimate of the value of the
property in a year with “Fully Open” navigability conditions? ____________
Do you think that you would lose any business sales due to Soundside Flooding in a year with “Fully
Open” navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet? YES or NO. If yes, how much do you think that you
would lose in sales (dollars per year, on average) due to Soundside Flooding in a year with “Fully Open”
navigability conditions?_________
Aside from any changes in sales, do you think that you would suffer any other costs (dollars per year) due
to Soundside Flooding in a year with “Fully Open” navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet? YES or NO.
If yes, estimate the dollar costs per year ________ and briefly describe the costs ___________________
Do you think that your soundside real estate would be affected by Soundside Flooding in a year with
“Essentially Closed” navigability condidtions? YES or NO. If yes, what is your estimate of the value of
the property in a year with “Essentially Closed” navigability conditions? ____________
Do you think that you would lose any business sales due to Soundside Flooding in a year with
“Essentially Closed” navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet? YES or NO. If yes, how much do you
think that you would lose in sales (dollars per year, on average) due to Soundside Flooding in a year with
“Essentially Closed” navigability conditions?_________
Aside from any changes in sales, do you think that you would suffer any other costs due to Soundside
Flooding in a year with “Essentially Closed” navigability conditions in Oregon Inlet? YES or NO. If yes,
estimate the dollar costs per year ________ and briefly describe the costs _________________________
Would you completely close your business under “Essentially Closed” navigability conditions? YES or
NO. If you would completely close your business, what would you likely do instead?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
1616 East Millbrook Road, Suite 160
Raleigh, NC 27609
P: 919. 781. 4626 | F: 919. 781. 4869

a study of the economic impacts

Transcription

Similar documents

CitiStreet P.O. Box 5166 Oregon Savings Growth Plan Boston, MA

SunDog School of Natural Building 4 week Balecob Workshop on

T H E C O R B I N

SHUTTLE VALVE “SHV”

Read The Full Article

OB-30 Oxygen Booster For Charter and Commercial Aircraft

NEEDS YOUR ARTWORK

Oregon Entomological Society - Odonata of the Northwest (Oregon

resume for Godfrey Coppinger

the makenna 4-car