Go to Travel Michigan Homepage
Michigan Tourism 
Goto Travel Michigan Site
image/arrw30b.gif (222 bytes)image/arrw30b.gif (222 bytes)image/arrw30b.gif (222 bytes)image/arrw30b.gif (222 bytes)

On these pages we have assembled a variety of statistics documenting the size, characteristics and economic importance of tourism to the state and sub-regions of Michigan.  This site focuses on economic aspects of tourism covering both our own research and a variety of federal, state and local sources.  Thanks to the Michigan State University Agricultural Expmt. Station, Travel Michigan, and a variety of recreation and tourism industry groups for supporting the research provided here.

At top are new additions to the site. Jump to table below for rough guide to older materials.

Updated January 5, 2004

1.  Commonly requested information/links:  Travel Michigan industry newsletter

My own estimates of tourism spending and impacts for Michigan 2. We continue to refine tourism spending and impact estimates at the county level.  We are seeking some missing counties to be able to complete all 83 counties.. 3. A working draft of statewide tourism spending and impact estimates for Michigan in 2000 is available. We have been refining estimates using both our MITEIM model and tourism satellite methods. If we include airport activity, imputed rents on seasonal homes, and pro-rated vehicle operating  expenses (as does TIA),  tourism sales in Michigan was near $15 billion in 2000. Focusing just on out-of-pocket expenses of travelers at Michigan destinations on trips of 60 miles or more, spending was about $12 billion with airfares and $8.8 billion without.  The report also includes some estimates of the relative size of Michigan's vertical markets including outdoor recreation markets. Michigan Statewide Tourism Impacts, 2000 (PDF). Comments are invite

4. The next in our series of economic studies of vertical markets will cover Michigan museums. Gail Vander Stoep is coordinating this study funded by Travel Michigan. As a preview, we've estimated economic impacts of the Frank Lloyd Wright Leaded Glass Exhibit at the Grand Rapids Art Museum. Total sales/revenue to Kent county from this three month special exhibit was $2 million. See full report for details. Download Acrobat Version of Final GRAM Report.

5.  Updated MITEIM Model (Excel spreadsheet, 313K) - year 2002 spending data, 2002 price indices, and updated multipliers using 1999 IMPLAN data

A. Michigan Statewide Tourism Spending & Economic Impacts B. Tourism Activity and Spending for Michigan Counties  
C. Spending/Economic Impact Estimates for Selected Michigan Vertical Market Segments
  •   Lodging segments
  •  Outdoor Recreation Segments

  • Downhill Ski Report, 2000-01 and  Executive Summary
      Golf Report, 2000
  • D. Selected Recent Michigan Studies 
  • Downhill Ski Report, 2000-01 and  Executive Summary
  • Golf Report, 2000
  • 1998 Michigan State Welcome Center Visitor Survey (HTML)
  • 1996/97 Snowmobile study  PDF
  • 1997 Michigan State Park Visitors  PDF
  • Eastern UP tourism impacts, 1997 PDF
  • 1995 Michigan Seasonal home study report (HTML)
  • 1994 Boater Survey  PDF
  • E. MITEIM Model and Economic Impact Calculator   F. 1997 Economic Census - Sales, payroll by county & NAICS sector 
     GIQ Symposium-background reports on Economic Census and NAICS 

    Michigan Reports ( PDF) by sector group 
     Michigan Accomodations and Foodservice 
     Michigan Arts Entertainment and Recreation
     Michigan Retail Trade
     Michigan Transportation

    Michigan Statewide Tourism Spending and Economic Impacts

    TIA - 2001 Estimates of Tourist Spending and Impacts in Michigan

    $12.1 billion spending (Down 5.3% from 2000)
    $3.4 billion tourism payroll
    157,200 direct tourism jobs
    $2.25 billion in tax receipts (federal, state & local)
    TIA - 2000 Estimates of Tourist Spending and Impacts in Michigan
    $12.8 billion spending (Up 6.6% over 1999)
    $3.8 billion tourism payroll
    173,000 diret tourism jobs
    $2.4 billion in tax receipts
    USTDC/TIA - 1999 Estimates of Tourism spending in Michigan
                $11.5 billion spending on trips of 100 miles or more (Up 9% over 1998)
                $3.5 billion tourism payroll
                163,500 direct tourism jobs
                $2.2 billion in tax receipts

    USTDC/TIA - 1998 Estimates of Tourism spending in Michigan
                $10.6 billion spending on trips of 100 miles or more (Up 5.5% over 1997)
                $3.2 billion tourism payroll
                157,000 direct tourism jobs
                $2.0 billion in tax receipts
    USTDC/TIA - 1997 Estimates of Tourism spending in Michigan
                $10.0 billion spending on trips of 100 miles or more (Up 5.1% over 1996)
                $3.0 billion tourism payroll
                157,000 direct tourism jobs
                $1.8 billion in tax receipt

    USTDC/TIA - 1996 Estimates of Tourism spending in Michigan
                $9.6 billion spending on trips of 100 miles or more (Up 5.8% over 1995)
                $2.4 billion tourism payroll
                143,000 direct tourism jobs
                $1.5 billion in tax receipts

    MITEIM Model Estimates for 2000

    Our preliminary estimates of tourism spending in Michigan in 2000 is $12.5 billion. We are completing an update of MITEIM model to 2000 and also will be posting tourism satellite accounts for Michigan that are consistent with the MITEIM estimates.

    MITEIM Model Estimates for 1997

                $9.8 billion tourist spending on trips of 50 miles or more to Michigan
                $2.6 billion spent on air-related travel spending
                $7.2 billion spending in Michigan excluding air-related spending

    Notes: We are awaiting receipt of the Michigan lodging tax data for 1998 to update the MITEIM estimates to 1998. While MITEIM and TIA total estimates are very similar, the aggregate totals mask some significant differences. MITEIM does not directly estimate air-related spending as MITEIM spending is based on what visitors spend at destinations. MITEIM will therefore omit some en-route travel expenses. The TIA model includes some imputed costs for vehicle depreciation and use of owned seasonal homes, while MITEIM only counts out-of-pocket expenses while on trips. MITEIM captures spending for trips of 50 miles or more, while TIA covers trips of 100 miles or more. The MITEIM model estimates larger portions of traveler spending on retail goods and less in auto transportation. MITEIM estimates are based on estimates of the volume of travel activity (party nights) within 5 lodging-based segments and spending profiles for each segment on a party-night basis. This allows the MITEIM model to generate more reliable estimates at the county level and also within particular market segments. See our county level tourism spending estimator for details.

    Tourist spending by spending category


            Michigan Tourist spending by lodging segment, 1997


    Lodging Segment
    Party Nights (millions)
    ($ billions)
    Percent of Spending
    $ 2.71
    $   .36
    Seasonal Home
    $ 1.04
    Stay with Friends and Relatives
    $ 2.18
    Day Trips
    $   .94
    $ 7.23
                                                        Excludes air-related spending.
    Economic Impacts of $7.2 billion in spending at Michigan tourist destinations:

    Technical note : The following estimates exclude air-related spending. Also, only the retail and wholesale margins are included for goods bought at retail by tourists, but not made in Michigan  (e.g. gas, clothing, groceries, and souvenirs). This is why  $7.2 billion in tourist spending only has a $5.7 billion direct sales impact in Michigan. To estimate secondary effects, we use IMPLAN Type SAM multipliers, which adjust for employee benefits and workers commuting across state boundaries when estimating induced effects. Our overall tourism sales multiplier for Michigan is 1.6, more conservative than those being used by many other tourism analysts (sales multipliers of 2.0 or more are common).  Our impact estimates will therefore be lower than others you may see that simply multiply tourist spending by larger multipliers. Check our economic impact bulletins or the MITEIM model itself for further details.

                Direct Effects
                $5.7 billion in direct sales ($1.5 billion in spending goes to purchase goods made outside Michigan)
                $2.2 billion in personal income to Michigan (includes wage and salary income and  proprietor's income)
                $3.3 billion valued added (personal income plus rents and profits and indirect business taxes)
                134,000 direct jobs

                Total Effects with secondary effects
                $9.1 billion in sales
                $3.4 billion in personal income
                $5.4 billion value added
                175,000 total jobs

            Excluded Spending Categories

    The impact estimates based on the MITEIM model do not include air transportation, travel arrangements, car rentals, or purchases and maintenance of durable goods  (boats, RV's, seasonal homes, etc.). Due in part to data sources, we also exclude spending on trips through Michigan that do not include an overnight stay and expenses incurred en route (without an overnight stop) or at home in preparation for a trip. As our model was designed to estimate impacts at the destination for local regions, the per party night spending averages only cover spending near the primary destination (or in the vicinity of an overnight stay). Airfares, car rentals, travel arrangements, and durable good expenses are frequently made at home or outside the final travel destination area. Passenger airfares are also difficult to assign to where the economic impacts occur. Including the excluded categories in statewide estimates would likely bring direct Michigan sales to roughly $10 billion and tourism-related direct employment to near 175,000 jobs. Total impacts including secondary effects would increase proportionally. However, the "tourism" part of sales in these other sectors is not easily sorted out. The amount of economic activity in the excluded sectors may be estimated from other sources, but the figures are generally contaminated with non-tourism sales (e.g. air transportation will include air freight and travel by Michigan residents outside the state). For example,
  • Air Transportation: IMPLAN reports $ 3.1 billion in sales in the Michigan air transportation sector in 1996, supporting 28,413 jobs.
  • Travel Arrangements : IMPLAN reports $ 502 million in sales by Michigan travel agencies (their margins on sales) and 8,000 jobs.
  • Michigan manufacturers sold $ 410 million in boats, travel trailers, and motor homes in 1996 employing 3,175 people.

     Our Michigan Travel Spending model estimates tourist spending in individual counties by lodging segment. Follow these links for county level estimates.
  • Michigan county level tourism spending estimates by lodging segments, 1997
  •  Other county level information appears below.

  • Statewide Travel Volume and Traveler Characteristics

    General household surveys of travelers provide estimates of the numbers and types of travelers in Michigan. National surveys of sufficient size to yield estimates for individual states are conducted on a regular basis by Travel Industry Association of America (TIA) (USTDC/TIA- Travelscope), D.K. Shifflet & Associates,  and others. National tourism statistics are reported in the Bureau of Transportation Statistics American Travel Survey and TIA's web site (TIA's National Tourism Statistics).

    The U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics conducted  a "long-distance" travel survey in 1995 (American Travel Survey ). The national report and reports for each state may be downloaded from their web site in PDF format. The Michigan report is available in several forms

    We've conducted additional analysis of the ATS Michigan data and have assembled several additional tables, that are posted at the following link : View 1995 American Travel Survey Tables for Michigan.

    The ATS survey and other national travel surveys provide excellent structural information about the size and nature of tourism activity in Michigan. The studies are less useful for tracking trends as changes over the short run tend to fall within the survey's sampling errors. Longer range changes are often masked by changes in study methods. As these studies are widely cited, users should be aware that even basic parameters like party size and length of stay can vary considerably across different studies conducted in the same year due to subtle differences in definitions of terms, sampling procedures, and question wording. Even when the studies agree on overall aggregate measures of travel activity, they frequently differ widely in what percent are day trips, from out-of-state, etc. Based on comparisons of three recent surveys for Michigan, the American Travel Survey seems to provide the best overall picture of tourism in Michigan and therefore this study provides the baseline for our tourism economic impact model. A brief summary of ATS survey results for Michigan along with tables from the original report and our supplementary analysis are provided below.

    Here's a few basic results from the 1995 American Travel Survey (results are on a household trip basis):

    1995 All trips to, from or within Michigan (100 miles or more)

    25.4 Million Household trips (HH) originated in Michigan in 1995
    21.9 Million HH Trips with primary destination in Michigan in 1995
    13.5 Million HH Trips Within MI  in 1995

    Michigan's Travel deficit-- Michigan sent 11.9 million trips outside the state and attracted 8.4 million from outside for a net loss of 3.5 million trips in 1995.  Trips entering Michigan are more likely to be for outdoor recreation or visiting friends and relatives, while trips leaving Michigan are more likely to be for sightseeing ,entertainment, or shopping.  Business trips account for about 800,000 of the household trip deficit. Outdoor recreation is the only trip purpose with a net in-flow over outflow, in spite of a camping deficit. Deficits are largest in the "off-season". A large deficit appears in trips for rest and relaxation, sightseeing, and entertainment. Florida accounts for 21% of the R&R and sightsee trips out-of-state. Ohio (likely Cedar Point) and  Nevada (likely gambling) dominate the entertainment trips out of state. Michiganders tend to go out-of-state for their longer vacation trips, while relatively fewer residents of other states come to Michigan for these kinds of trips.

    Trips to Michigan : 21.9 Million household trips

    By lodging type:

    Pct of HH trips -- Stays with friends and relatives 35%;  motels 28%, day trips 24%,
     owned  seasonal home 8%, camping 5%.

    Pct of party nights -- Stays with F&R 43% , motels 25%, seasonal homes 20%, day trips 7%, camping 5%.

    By origin : Michigan residents account for 62% of the trips to Michigan, but only 42% of the party nights.

    By transportation mode: 85% by personal vehicle, 12.6% by air

    By quarter: 1st quarter 17.9%, 2nd quarter 25.1%, 3rd quarter 35.0%, 4th quarter 21.9%

    By travel party: 1 adult no children 54%, 2+ adults & no children 29%, 2+ adults & 1+ children 10%

    By trip Purpose:  VFR 33% , leisure 32%, business 25%, personal reasons 11%.
            5.6 million business trips to Michigan: 50% stay in motels 38% are day trips. Just over half are from MI.

    By destination (Metro-Nonmetro areras): About half of trips are to metro areas. Trips to metro areas are more likely to be day trips or stays with F&R. Business, VFR and personal reasons dominate trips to metro areas. 17% of nonmetro trips are for outdoor recreation and 24% for rest and relaxation. Motel stays are longer in non-metro areas, while VFR stays are longer in metro areas.

    For more details,  View 1995 American Travel Survey Tables for Michigan

    MSU's, Travel, Tourism and Recreation Resource Center has conducted a household travel survey in Michigan's prime market area for the past three years. Check their web site for further information.  Michigan Travel, Tourism and Recreation Resource Center .

     Tourism Activity and Spending for Michigan Counties
    State and National household surveys do not have sufficient sample sizes to make reliable tourism estimates at the county level and local areas generally do not gather reliable tourism statistics. Satellite accounting methods are also problematic at the local level as there are no good estimates of what proportion of sales in various sectors may be attributed to tourism. The USTDC  generates county level tourism spending estimates for individual states using simple formulas to allocate statewide spending to individual counties. USTDC allocations are based on the distribution of  receipts and employment in the hotel and air transportation sectors. These allocations tend to underestimate spending in rural counties that are more dependent on seasonal home and camping segments. Michigan's room use tax provides a solid basis for estimating tourist activity associated with stays in commercial lodging (although there are some problems associated with motel chain reporting) , however, visitors in motels constitute only about a third of all tourism spending in Michigan.
    We have developed a tourist spending model for Michigan that combines statewide survey results with available local data (e.g. room taxes, inventories of motels, campgrounds, and seasonal homes, airport arrivals) to estimate tourist spending at the county level within 5 lodging-based segments. The 1995 and 1997 estimates are posted below. Overall volumes of trips are benchmarked using the 1995 American Travel Survey. 1997 room use tax data and price indices were used to update the 1995 figures to 1997. The volume of trips in 1997 is largely unchanged from 1995, although day trip estimates were adjusted upward in 1997 to include trips of 50-100 miles.
    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes) Michigan county level tourism spending estimates by lodging segments, 1995

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Michigan county level tourism spending estimates by lodging segments, 1997

  • pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Michigan county tourism profiles  - from TTRRC/ MSU Tourism AOE

  • Size and Importance of Vertical Market Segments

    We have begun a program of research to estimate the relative size of various Michigan travel market segments in terms of visits, spending and economic impact on the state. During 2000-2001 we will be estimating spending and economic impacts of golf and downhill skiing in  Michigan. We will also estimate impacts of B&B visitors separately from the "motel" lodging segment identified below. Finally, we will estimate impacts of selected festivals, events, and cultural attractions. We will also continue to compile and organize available secondary data that help estimate the relative size and importance of Michigan travel market segments.

     1.  Lodging Segments

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Seasonal Homes : Michigan has more than 223,000 seasonal homes accounting for almost six percent of all housing units in the state. Seasonal homes are concentrated in high amenity areas in northern Michigan. While seasonal homes trips are difficult to identify in most tourism data, we can assemble a general picture from studies in selected subareas of Michigan. Seasonal homes are used about 70 days per year accounting for 18% of all tourism party nights in Michigan in 1997 and over a billion dollars in trip spending (15% of all tourism spending). The average seasonal home owner spends about $10,000 a year, $6,000 for operations and maintenance of the seasonal home (not included in trip expense figures) plus another $4,000 on trips to the seasonal home. The estimate of trip spending does not include spending by guests and visitors. As one of our primary lodging segments in the MITEIM model, seasonal home-related trip spending is estimated by county ( SeeMichigan county level tourism spending estimates by lodging segments, 1997).  . A systematic survey of seasonal home owners in six counties was conducted in 1995, see  Michigan Seasonal home study report (HTML).  As seasonal home owners are an important sub-segment  of most outdoor recreation activity markets in Michigan, it overlaps with most of these segments, N.B boating, hunting, and fishing. For example, 25% of Michigan's registered watercraft are stored and used at waterfront seasonal homes. (Stynes and Stewart)

    Outdoor Recreation Markets

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Boating Owners of registered watercraft spent about $1 billion in Michigan in 1998, about $700 million on trips and another $370 million on annual craft expenses (slips, insurance, repairs and storage). About $300 million of the trip spending occurs on trips away from home. Boats kept at seasonal homes account for 20% of all boater trip spending. Roughly half of all boating activity involves fishing.  Boating therefore overlaps considerably with trips to seasonal homes and fishing. The $135 million spent by boaters using seasonal homes covers spending for the boat outing, not spending associated with the trip to the seasonal home. Spending on boating while at a seasonal home constitutes about 13% of the estimated $1 billion spent on trips to seasonal homes (see lodging segment estimates above). 1994 boating summary-HTML, Full 1994 Report- PDF. (Stynes, Mahoney, Lee and Wu, 1994 and 1998)

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Fishing: Download Michigan report from 1997 National Survey of Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Associated Recreation http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/fishing.html

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Hunting:Download Michigan report from 1997 National Survey of Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Associated Recreation http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/fishing.html
    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Camping:Camping is both a lodging type and an activity in itself. The MITEIM county model estimates that campers account for about $360 million in spending. A typical camping party spends about $80 per night in Michigan. The Michigan State Park camper study (see below) estimated that state park campers spent $80 million in 1997. State Parks provide about a quarter of the camping nights in Michigan, and a slightly lower percentage of camper spending, as state park campers spend somewhat less than campers staying in private campgrounds.

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Golf : A 1997 study by Sports Research Ltd. estimates the total direct economic impact of golfing in Michigan to be $761 million, divided $327 million at daily fee golf courses and $434 million (using their more conservative estimate) in trip expenses off the course. With multiplier effects, the total sales impact of golfer trip spending is reported at about $1.3 billion. This does not include purchases of golf equipment at home. The study oversampled golfers at major resorts, so we cannot derive a firm estimate of what portion of golfer spending would be counted as tourism (trips of 100 miles or more or overnight). The Sports Ltd. study estimates are likely biased upward due to the sampling procedures. Almost 70% of this sample took at least one golf vacation, about half drove more than 120 miles to the course, and 60% stayed overnight, averaging 2.6 nights.  A typical golfer staying overnight in Michigan spends an average of  $225 per day.  The majority of rounds of golf are, however,  played near home and involve only a short day trip. These outings are not considered as tourism. We will be conducting a study this sumnmer to better pin down an estimate of golf's contribution to tourism in Michigan. Download 1997 Michigan Golf Study" Attitude, Play and Economic Impact.

    Golf Update: A new study ( Golf Report, 2000) estimates total golfer spending in 2000 in Michigan at $800 million for all outings at about 800 courses available to the public.  $300 million of this spending occurs on trips away from home. The direct economic impact of golf travel is $100 million in personal income, $150 million value added and 7,300 direct jobs. With secondary effects the impact on the state economy is $150 million in personal income, $250 million value added and  9,500 total jobs. These estimates do not include golfer purchases of equipment or any airfares.

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Downhill Ski: Michigan Downhill ski areas generated $146 million in skier and snowboarder trip spending in 2000-01. $110 million of this spending was on trips of 60 miles or more. The direct economic impacts on the state of the $146 milion in spending are $136 million is sales, $54 million in personal income, $86 million in value added and 3,900 jobs. With secondary effects total impact is $84 million in personal income and $136 million value added to the state economy. Spending estimates are based on 2.2 million skier visits in 2000-01. Skiers on overnight trips staying in commercial lodging spend $812 per spending party per trip, $354 per party per night and $112 per skier visit. Skiers on day trips or staying in seasonal homes or with friends and relatives spend about $140 per party per night and $50 per skier visit. Ski areas capture 72% of skier spending (44% ski revenue plus 28% nonski revenue) while 28% accrues to other businesses in the local area. Ski areas capture about half of the "non-ski" spending (i.e., lodging, food, retail). The Northern LP captures 55% of skier spending, SLP 26% and UP 19%. Two thirds of skier visits are by Michigan residents.Downhill Ski Report, 2000-01 - PDF   . The 2000-01 estimate of Michigan skier spending and impacts is lower than a previous estimate in 1994-95 conducted by Leisure Trends Group (SABRES Report). The SABRES report estimated trip spending of $215 million, with substantially higher spending on retail items and entertainment than was measured in 2000-01.

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Michigan State Park Visitors:  State park visitors in 1997 spend $464 million on trips to Michigan State Parks. Out of state visitors account for 34% of all state park visitor spending. Campers spent $80 million, day users on day trips spent $157 million  and day visitors on overnight trips spent $227 million. About half of the trip expenses are made within 20 miles of the park while 29% are made at home and 23% on route.  Excluding $133 million spent at home in preparation for trips, MSP visitors spent $331 million in the state, contributing $118 million in direct income and $261 million with multiplier effects. This state park spending away from home supported 6,000 direct jobs in the tourism industry and almost 10,000 with secondary effects. Each million dollars of state park visitor spending supports about 20 direct jobs and generates $350,000 in income for the state. (Stynes 1998). (Download report in PDF format)

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Snowmobiling: 100,000 households with snowmobile trail permits spent $160 million in Michigan on snowmobile trips and $400 million on equipment during the winter of 1996/97. $110 million of the trip spending is spending away from home on trips of 100 miles or more. This spending generated $84 million in sales to Michigan businesses, $48 million in income and supported about 2,500 jobs. With multiplier effects, the impact on state economy is $168 million in sales, $93 million income and 3,800 jobs. Snowmobilers from out-of-state accounted for 37% of the spending and impacts. (Nelson, LKynch and Stynes, 1998). Download Full report in PDF format.

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)ORV Trips : Owners of 124,731 licensed ORV's took 152,000 trips outside their region in 1998-99 involving at least one day of ORV trail riding. ORV users spent $368 per party per trip on trips averaging about 4 nights away from home - $94 on a per night basis. Excluding spending at home in preparation for the trip, ORV users spent $40 million in Michigan in 1998-99 (one year period). The $40 million in spending resulted in $31 million in direct sales, about $10 million in personal income and supported about 600 jobs. With secondary effects, the total impact on the Michigan economy is $49 millin in sales,  $16 million in personal income, $26 million in value added and 822 jobs. ORV license owners also spent $134 million on equipment.  If we also include spending at home, ORV trips near home and activity on private land, total spending is $250 million (including equipment purchases). Michigan captures about $120 million of this as direct sales. (Nelson, Kynch and Stynes, 2000).

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Canoe livery users.  Michigan canoe liveries rented 165,000 canoes in 1999. This translates into 75,000 party trips for canoeing and 200,000 party days/nights away from home. Canoe renters spent an aveage of $190 per party per trip, including $40 in  canoe rental fees. Total spending on trips involving a canoe rental was $18 million in 1999. Counting ony one day/night of spending for trips where canoeing was not the primary purpose, yields $12 million in spending that can be directly associated with the canoe liveries. The direct effects on the Michigan economy are $10.6 million in sales, $3.7 million in personal income, $5.9 million in value added and 266 jobs. With secondary effects, canoe liveries generate $17 million in sales, $6 million in personal income, almost $10 million in value added and 350 jobs. For every dollar spent at the canoe livery, another dollar in sales is generated in other area businesses (restaurants, lodging, gas, retail trade). (Mahoney, Kim and Stynes 2000).

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Other Segments:  Have information or interest in other vertical market segments? Let us know. We will evaluate and post other information as it becomes available and will help groups who want to better document the size and economic importance of particular travel market segments. We are aware of the interest in cultural tourism and special events, but haven't found a good way yet to get a handle on them statewide. See download page for some specific studies of special events.

    Selected Michigan Recreation and Tourism Economic Impact Studies

    pr_ball.gif (238 bytes)Go to Our Download Page for Michigan Studies in PDF format

    Other states with tourism statistics on web:

    Illinois: http://www.tourism.uiuc.edu/tourismfact/

     Tourism Associations and Organizations  (from Illinois web page)