Differences among Nonresident Tourists Making Consumptive and Nonconsumptive Uses of Alaskan Wildlife

Abstract

Tourism is an important sector of Alaska's economy; 23% of 4202 parties of tourists vacationing in Alaska from October 1982 to September 1983 indicated they hunted or fished. Tourists making consumptive use (hunting or fishing) of wildlife differed significantly from other visitors. Those who hunted or fished: (1) were in larger groups that contained a higher proportion of males; (2) tended to be younger; (3) were more involved in planning their vacation as indicated by starting the planning for their trip earlier and using more sources of information; (4) spent longer in the state and camped more often; (5) were more likely to charter aircraft within Alaska; (6) rated their experience highly, but thought they received a lower value for monies spent; (7) expended fewer total funds on their vacation; and (8) were more likely to return to Alaska than their counterparts who neither hunted nor fished. Visitors who used wildlife consumptively provided funds directly to the state for the conservation of these species through the purchase of hunting and fishing licenses and the subsequent receipt by the state of federal funds via the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson acts. No formal mechanism exists for nonconsumptive users to aid wildlife conservation even though some nonconsumptive uses of resources are detrimental to wildlife. Although wildlife and their habitats are an important attractor for tourists, too little attention is given to the long-term benefits from the tourism industry in assessing the economic value of resource development and use that affects wildlife.