• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Main
 Appendix














Group Title: Bulletin - University of Florida. Agricultural Experiment Station ; no. 690
Title: Resource use and income implications of outdoor recreation
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00027133/00001
 Material Information
Title: Resource use and income implications of outdoor recreation the impact of a demand for indigenous resources generated by nonresidents on the economy of a rural county in north Florida
Series Title: Bulletin University of Florida. Agricultural Experiment Station
Physical Description: 55 p. : chart, maps ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Murphree, Clyde E
Publisher: University of Florida Agricultural Experimemt Station
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1965
 Subjects
Subject: Outdoor recreation -- Florida -- Suwannee County   ( lcsh )
Outdoor recreation -- Economic aspects -- Florida -- Suwannee County   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Bibliography: p. 52.
Statement of Responsibility: by Clyde E. Murphree.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00027133
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 001595660
oclc - 01726698
notis - AHL9755
lccn - 65064838

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page 2
    Title Page
        Page 3
    Table of Contents
        Page 4
    Main
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
    Appendix
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
Full Text
BULLETIN 690
MARCH 1965

RESOURCE USE AND

INCOME IMPLICATIONS

OF OUTDOOR RECREATION
Clyde E. Murphree

AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, GAINESVILLE
J. R. BECKENBACH, DIRECTOR

/- ,- ~













RESOURCE USE AND INCOME IMPLICATIONS
OF OUTDOOR RECREATION


The Impact of a Demand for Indigenous Resources
Generated by Nonresidents on the Economy of a
Rural County in North Florida








CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION -. --.- 5
Purpose ..--.. ........ ... -- -- --- 7
Procedure -- ---- ----- 7
THE ASCENDENCY AND DECLINE OF POPULATION IN
SUWANNEE COUNTY ....... 8
Cotton Production in Florida .. -- - 8
Aftermath in Suwannee County -- 9
Economic Implications of the Population Decline
in Suwannee County ... .-. --- 10
OUTDOOR RECREATION A SOLUTION? 14
The Outdoor Recreation Base ..--.-- --- 16
Location and Land With Riverfrontage 16
Suitability of Riverfrontage for an
Intensive Outdoor Recreation Use 19
Class I Riverfrontage and Land 21
Class II Riverfrontage and Land 21
Class III Riverfrontage and Land ... -- ---22
Riverfrontage as a Source of County Revenue 22
Assessment Basis 23
Acreage Classification and Average Valuation .24
Marginal Change in Assessment Rate ..- 25
Aggregate Valuation Potential .... 26
The Private Sector of the Economy 27
The Analytical Framework -- 27
Pre-War Economy of Suwannee County 28
The Market Price for Riverfront Land:
A Change in Value Productivity 30
Value Productivity, 1950- 1962 33
Impact on Total Economy -. 36
Income Status of Residents ... .- .... 39
Income Estimates ... .. .. .. 44
Nonresident Investment and Consumption Expenditures 46
Industry Versus Outdoor Recreation 46
CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS ...... -48
LITERATURE CITED 52
APPENDIX 53







RESOURCE USE AND INCOME IMPLICATIONS
OF OUTDOOR RECREATION

Clyde E. Murphree1

INTRODUCTION

The rate of growth of the economy of Florida since 1950
suggests that by 1970, the per capital income of the residents
of the state will exceed the national average (1)2. However,
despite the prospective increase in per capital income for the
state, a relative improvement in income status for the residents
of the rural counties in north Florida is not consequently fore-
cast.
Evidence indicates that within the state, the economy of
areas with the greatest rate of growth since 1950 is based on
a combination of agriculture, industry, and recreation. If this
is a requirement for future growth, the rural counties of north
Florida are at a disadvantage. This area, relatively unattractive
to both industry and non-residents of Florida seeking recrea-
tion, traditionally has been dependent almost exclusively on
agriculture to generate a demand for the resources of the area.
With a future rate of growth comparable to that of the past
decade for the remainder of the state, effecting an improvement
in the relative income position of the rural counties of north
Florida appears to be a formidable task.
One possibility for sharing in the economic growth of the
state involves providing higher income non-county residents
with prized riverfront locations for outdoor recreational activi-
ties. The past increase in population and urban concentration
has created a high degree of competition between residents for
the use of local outdoor recreational facilities in peninsular
Florida. In contrast to the remainder of the state, a group of
rural counties in north Florida has experienced out-migrations of
population which have lessened the pressure on the outdoor
recreational base.
The use of riverfront land, of which there is a large amount
in the rural counties of north Florida, by residents of the more
Associate Agricultural Economist, Florida Agricultural Experiment Sta-
tion.
2 Numbers in parentheses refer to Literature Cited.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


populous areas of Florida for outdoor recreation appears to offer
a possibility for generating economic growth for the residents
from two standpoints. First, riverfront land shifted from a
use that, in many instances, is extensive to the point of border-
ing on idleness into outdoor recreation sites on. which cottages
are built increases the tax base of the county. An increased tax
base is a source of revenue which may be used to create a
favorable climate for economic growth from the standpoint of
public services.
A second effect of the widespread use of riverfront land by
non-residents of the area for outdoor recreation involves the
private sector of the economy. It is evident that the extractive
industries, limited almost exclusively to agriculture, have failed
to generate a rate of economic growth sufficient to utilize the
resources of the area. In addition to riverfront land, outdoor
recreation would create a demand for goods and services, the
use of which increases with the use of land. If dependent on
the use of riverfront land, a substantial part of the revenue
from the goods and services supplied those seeking outdoor
recreation in an area would accrue to locally owned resources.
With the surplus that exists, local resource earnings from out-
door recreation would represent a net increase in the income
of the area.
Finally, the use of riverfront land in north Florida by resi-
dents of other areas is not without implications for the economy
of the entire state. As it has been in the past, future growth
expectations of the state are based, in part, on an annual in-
crement of increase in the number of tourists who visit the state
seeking an opportunity for outdoor recreation. Because the out-
door recreational base of the state is more or less fixed, a limit
exists on the number of people it will support. When the outdoor
recreational base of the peninsular part of the state becomes
saturated with users both resident and tourist the rate of
economic growth dependent on this factor will come to a halt.
If Floridians utilize the outdoor recreational base of rural
north Florida, some of the pressure will be relieved in the more
populous areas with an economy heavily dependent on an annual
influx of tourists. In effect, the outdoor recreational base of
the state would be expanded and the expected growth period
from an expansion in outdoor recreation extended.
Rural north Florida may never achieve the status of the







Outdoor Recreation


peninsula as an outdoor recreational area for tourists, but this
does not preclude its development as a preferred area for penin-
sular Floridians. It is well within weekend commuting distance
for large concentrations of population with a per capital income
above the average for Florida. As the saturation of the local
recreational base becomes more intense, the remoteness of rural
north Florida may be an asset.

Purpose
A marked increase in the price of land with riverfrontage
in north Florida has occurred since World War II. This change
in price for riverfront land is attributed to the growing popu-
larity of outdoor recreation. The objective of this investigation
is to examine the potential impact of this development on the
income status of the residents of a rural county in north
Florida.

Procedure
Rather than examine the entire rural area of north Florida,
Suwannee County was selected for intensive study. A high
degree of similarity exists between this county and others with
respect to population growth, remoteness from large urban
areas, climate, opportunities for outdoor recreation, and de-
pendence on agriculture to generate economic activity.
To identify a quantity of land associated with riverfrontage
in Suwannee County, each section of land with frontage on a
river was located from a map of the county. The description
of each section was noted and located on the tax roll of the
county. The entire acreage in any section was considered river-
front land, provided ownership of a section was vested in a
single owner or if two or more owners were involved but the
division was such that each tract bordered the river. When
divided among two or more owners with some of the land with-
out frontage on the river, the land without frontage but in a
section with riverfrontage was excluded from the study. Each
tract of land with riverfrontage was examined from the stand-
point of use. After deleting built-up areas, public parks, farms,
and rural residences, 19,708 acres of land and 94.18 miles of
riverfrontage remained. The desired information pertaining to
the land was obtained from tax records of the county, county
officials, local residents, and personal observation.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


The agricultural development of north Florida and the river-
front resources base of Suwannee County are reviewed to estab-
lish a record of the economic plight of the area and legitimize
outdoor recreation as a possible solution from the standpoint
of physical requirements.
The effect of the increase in popularity of outdoor recreation
since World War II on the demand for resources in Suwannee
County is examined in terms of: 1, the county tax base and 2,
returns to resident-owned resources.

THE ASCENDENCY AND DECLINE OF POPULATION
IN SUWANNEE COUNTY
Cotton Production in Florida3
Florida's boundaries were established with its purchase from
Spain in 1819. It was organized as a territory in 1822 and ad-
mitted to the Union as the twenty-seventh state in 1845.
Among the first migrants to Florida after acquisition from
Spain were plantation operators from the border states of
Georgia and Alabama who settled along the northern boundary
where new land was available for cotton production. However,
instead of upland or short staple cotton exclusively, in Florida
more than one-half the maximum acreage reported for the state
in 1910 was devoted to the production of "Sea Island" or long
staple cotton.
The state apparently experienced a steady rate of growth
throughout the nineteenth and the first decade of the twentieth
century. Between 1830, the year in which the first enumeration
of the state was made, and 1910, the population increased from
34,730 to 752,619. Despite a substantial development of other
areas by 1910, the 20 counties with approximately 98 percent
of the cotton acreage in Florida contained 45 percent of the
population.4
About 1915, the boll weevil began its eastward movement
across the north Florida cotton-producing area with a devastat-
' This section except where noted was developed from "A Graphic Review
of Florida Agriculture," Florida Department of Agriculture, July 1938, and
"Population Statistics," Florida Department of Agriculture, Bulletin No. 48,
January 1931.
' These counties were Alachua, Baker, Bradford, Calhoun, Columbia, Es-
cambia, Gadsden, Hamilton, Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Leon,
Levy, Madison, Santa Rosa, Suwannee, Taylor, Walton, and Washington.







Outdoor Recreation


ing effect on the economy. With the advent of the boll weevil,
the production of "Sea Island" cotton came to an abrupt halt,
and the acreage of upland cotton was severely reduced. In
1910, the latest estimate prior to the boll weevil infestation,
cotton was produced on 263,454 acres. By 1920, the acreage
had dropped to 110,562. The reduction in cotton acreage which
was operated largely with hand labor not only left the cotton
area in dire need of an alternative use for a huge reservoir of
idle manpower, but it also brought to a halt migrations into the
cotton area which in the past had accounted for a large part of
the population growth of Florida. According to Table 1, the
growth rate of the population of Florida was at its lowest point
during the 1910-1920 decade.

Table 1.-Population of Florida, 1830 1960.
Population Increase
Census Year (Number) (Percent)
1830 34,730
1840 54,477 56.9
1850 87,445 60.5
1860 140,424 60.6
1870 187,748 33.7
1880 269,493 43.5
1890 391,422 45.2
1900 528,542 35.0
1910 752,619 42.4
1920 698,470 28.7
1930 1,468,211 51.6
1940 1,897,414 29.2
1950 2,771,305 46.1
1960 4,951,560 78.7
Source: Bureau of Census, United States Department of Commerce.

Aftermath in Suwannee County Hardest hit by the boll
weevil were the eastermost counties in north Florida, of which
Suwannee County was one, that specialized in "Sea Island"
cotton. At or slightly past the middle of the 1910-1920 decade,
it is estimated that Suwannee County was populated by more
than 20,000 people and produced 30,000 or more acres of cotton
(Table 2). By 1920 a drastic reduction in cotton acreage had
been made. This triggered a decline in population which, with
the exception of a brief respite during the decade of the de-
pression, continued through 1960.
The introduction of flue-cured tobacco during the 1920-1930
decade, whether a deliberate effort to utilize idle resources or







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Table 2.-Population and Cotton Production for Selected Years,
Suwannee County, Florida, 1890 1960.
Population Cotton Production
Year (Number) (Acres)
1890 10,524 *
1900 14,554 18,062
1910 18,603 26,860
1920 19,789 13,727
1930 15,731 6,425
1940 17,073 1,014
1950 16,986 389
1960 14,961 330
Not available.
Source: Bureau of Census, United States Department of Commerce.

a fortuitous accident, provided a reasonably satisfactory alter-
native to cotton production in terms of adaptability to the soil
and climate of the county. Nevertheless, flue-cured tobacco
proved to be a poor substitute for cotton from the standpoint
of utilizing either the land or labor idled by the reduction in
cotton acreage. Consequently, labor which was mobile migrated
to other areas, and land formerly in cotton was diverted to
various forage crops for livestock or shifted out of agriculture.

Economic Implications of the Population
Decline in Suwannee County

Prior to the boll weevil infestation the population growth of
Suwannee County was approximately equal to the growth of
the state. It is presumed that changes in total personal income
and per capital income for the county and the state were then
similar. After the decline of cotton, however, a pronounced
divergence developed between Suwanne County and the state
with respect to population and total personal income which
since has persisted. For example, if Suwannee County had in-
creased in population and total personal income between 1910
and 1950 at the same rate as the entire state, population would
have been more than 85,000 and total personal income more
than $100,000,000.5
Rather than attempt to delve into the 1910-1950 period, an
analysis of the income status of Suwannee County relative to
the state as a whole is based on the 1950-1960 period for which
reliable income data exists.
Based on a relative change in population and an income per capital equal
to the average for the state in 1950.







Outdoor Recreation


Changes with respect to population and income for both the
state and Suwannee County are shown in Table 3. For Florida,
an increase, of 2,180,255 in population occurred, and the per
capital income or value of the average product of the population
of the state increased $671. An increase in the value of the
average product with an increase in population specifies that
the value of the marginal product is larger than the value of
the average product of the population. When the incremental
change in total personal income is divided by the incremental
change in population, it will be seen that the average value
of the marginal product for the population increase was $2,839.

Table 3.-Population, Total Personal Income and Per Capita Income for
Florida and Suwannee County, 1950 and 1960.
Population Total Personal Per Capita
(Number) Income Income
(Dollars) (Dollars)
Florida
1950 2,771,305 3,641,000,000 1,314
1960 4,951,560 9,830,000,000 1,985
Suwannee County
1950 16,986 11,711,000 689
1960 14,961 18,171,000 1,215
Source: Population from Bureau of Census, United States Department of Commerce.
Source: Income estimates from Bureau of Economic and Business Research, College of
Business Administration. University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.

The change in population for Suwannee County between 1950
and 1960 was a reduction of 2,025. But despite a reduction in
population, an increase in both total personal income and per
capital income occurred. It turns out that if the per capital
income or the value of the average product for the population
increases with a decrease in population, it must decrease with
an increase in population. Moreover, a decreasing value of the
average product for the population implies that the value of
the marginal product for the population is less than the value
of the average product for the population.
An interesting feature of the situation in Suwannee County
is that a decrease in total personal income is associated with
an increase in population. This implies that the value of the
marginal product is not only less than the value of the average
product for population but is also negative. When the incre-
mental change in total personal income is divided by the in-







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


cremental change in population, which is negative, it will be
seen that the average value of the marginal product for the
decrease in population during the 1950-1960 period was an
increase in total personal income amounting to $3,190.
The apparent paradox of an increase in total personal in-
come with a decrease in population can be explained in terms
of resource use. With a decline in resource returns in agricul-
ture brought on by the invasion of the boll weevil, resource
returns outside agriculture also declined. Therefore, idle re-
sources were not limited to agriculture but were also a problem
throughout the economy of the county. One of the major prob-
lems was that of resource returns to labor.
Apparently, the labor force of the economy of the county
began an out-migration soon after the decline in cotton produc-
tion. It subsided during the 1930-1940 decade but was resumed
with the outbreak of World War II in Europe. During the
period between the middle of the 1910-1920 decade and 1960,
resource returns in agriculture were insufficient to generate a
sufficiently competitive value productivity or demand for labor
both in and outside agriculture to maintain a constant popula-
tion. Hence, an out-migration of labor took place which, as one
would suspect, elevated the per capital income of those remain-
ing. However, this does not offer a full explanation. In Suwannee
County during the 1950-1960 period, a decrease in population
is associated with not only an increase in per capital income but
also an increase in total personal income. Rather than assume
a substantial negative marginal value productivity, a more plaus-
ible explanation is unemployment, which specifies a zero mar-
ginal value productivity. Involuntary idleness would lead to an
out-migration without a diminution in total personal income,
and technological progress would account for an incremental
increase in total personal income despite a decrease in popula-
tion. Because per capital income is total income divided by the
population and for Suwannee County an increase in output is
associated with an increase in total revenue, a loss of popula-
tion in conjunction with an increase in total personal income is
consistent.
At this point, the question of an equilibrium with respect
to a population shift between Suwannee County and the re-
mainder of the state is relevant. On the surface, it would
appear that the population shift would come to a halt when an







Outdoor Recreation


equality of the value of the average product or per capital in-
come is reached in both areas. However, for this to specify an
equilibrium under competitive conditions, the value of the mar-
ginal product must also be equal to the value of the average
product in both areas.
To meet the conditions of an equilibrium with respect to
population shifts, it must be assumed that a population for
Suwannee County exists that will equate the value for the
average and marginal products between the areas. The possi-
bility exists that the agricultural economy of the county, if
operating at the point of maximum value of the average product
for the population, might fail to compete effectively with the
remainder of the state for population. If so, the county would
continue to lose population and, in the absence of an alternative
to agriculture, eventually reach a virtual de-population.
The evidence indicates that the agricultural area may be in-
capable of generating a per capital income equal to the average
for the state. Even if possible to exploit to a maximum an in-
crease in the value of the average product through an out-migra-
tion of population and new technology, to equal the per capital
income of the state, the increase in Suwannee County can not be
less than the sum of the existing deficiency plus the increase in
the remainder of the state from an added increment of popula-
tion. Nor would it be in the best interests of the economy of the
state as a whole to discourage an out-migration from Suwannee
County to the more productive areas of the state. If during the
1950-1960 period the marginal value productivity of the popula-
tion increase for the state was $2,839 and for Suwannee County
it was zero, the effect of the out-migration from Suwannee
County on the total personal income of the state can be calcu-
lated." Between 1950 and 1960 the out-migration amounted to
2,025 people which, in turn, did not lower the total personal
income of Suwannee County. The out-migration from Suwannee
County was added to the economy of the remainder of the state,
and the average marginal value productivity of each of them
was $2,839. Hence, an additional $5,748,975 was added to the
total personal income of the state. Despite a failure to deal
with such considerations as changes in technology and the price
level, it is possible roughly to associate an increase in total

" It is assumed that the population that left Suwannee County settled in
another area within the state.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


personal income at the state level with an out-migration from
Suwannee County during the 1950-1960 period.
While a large segment of the remaining population, especially
those responsible for operating the county government and the
service and trade group, may with ample reason view with alarm
the declining population of the county, as long as the wide
differential with respect to the marginal value productivity of
the population between areas persists, efforts to prevent an
out-migration from the county are apt to meet with failure.7


OUTDOOR RECREATION A SOLUTION?

The dismal appraisal of the efficacy of agriculture to reverse
the downward trend in population that has persisted with a
single exception for almost five decades, suggests an examina-
tion of alternative solutions to the problem. The most frequently
proposed remedy for both idle resources and low resource re-
turns, an appropriate description of the problem in Suwannee
County, is to create industrial employment opportunities in the
county. Without a valid reason to suspect that if in the county
employment opportunities existed equal to those in other areas,
the out-migration would continue, this constitutes a solution
to the labor resource problem. But finding a means to entice
industry into the county is a formidable problem in itself.
In many instances, a prospective industrialist may demand
tax concessions, capital stock subscriptions, reduced sewage and
water rates, construction of roadways, and the like. Counties
with the greatest need for industry to absorb the labor released
from agriculture and a contraction of the service industries due
to a decline in population, find themselves in a disadvantaged
position with respect to competing with equally aggressive
counties which have an expanding economy and revenue base.
Consequently, in the main, the success of the rural counties of
north Florida in attracting industry has been limited. With

* An out-migration of population has a deleterious effect on the tax base
of the county in several ways; however, one of the most important involves
ad valorem taxes on real estate. Housing without occupants is allowed to
deteriorate and is finally abandoned and removed from the tax roll. The
service and trade industries may suffer from a decline in population even
if total personal income increases. An individual with an annual personal
income of $1,000,000, if endowed with a propensity to consume his entire
annual earnings within the year, would not generate an economic effect
identical with $1,000,000 in personal income distributed among 1,000 people.







Outdoor Recreation


opportunities for attracting industry into a rural county quite
limited and, moreover, with resident resource returns from in-
dustry limited largely to labor, this hardly constitutes a solution
to the problem of surplus land. In fact, a sizable industry in a
sparsely populated rural county, with a labor requirement in
excess of the surplus, and offering a superior income alterna-
tive to agriculture could idle agricultural land.
Compared to a hypothetical industry with a weekly payroll,
the income effect of an expansion in the use of land for outdoor
recreation is discouragingly nebulous. But, on the other hand,
as a solution to the problem of idle resources in a rural county,
there are advantages. The riverfront land in Suwannee County
selected for study, with few exceptions unsuited for both agri-
culture and forestry, is, judging from the market price, highly
productive in an outdoor recreation use. And with its use for
outdoor recreation which of necessity must take place in the
county, a demand is created for goods and services, the produc-
tion of which will employ other resources, among which is labor.
Moreover, the labor employed in the output of goods and services
which are used as inputs for outdoor recreation is not subject
to the same specifications which characterize eligibility for in-
dustrial employment. In some instances, a rural resident may
not qualify for industrial employment because of age, sex, edu-
cation, or any one of a number of reasons, but the basis for
rejection may actually qualify the person for employment in
outdoor recreation in a rural setting. Consider, for example,
the widespread suspicion of youth and even literacy among
hunters seeking a dog trainer or fishermen employing a guide.
There are also food items, the preparation of which is indigen-
ous to a favorite rural area of urbanites seeking outdoor recrea-
tion, that home economists never encounter, notwithstanding
prolonged graduate training. In short, given an adequate out-
door recreation land base, the most valuable asset of an area
from the standpoint of meeting the requirements of non-
residents appears to be local residents. The information of the
area they possess, while valueless in a factory, is a resource
that can be used to an advantage in supplying the large number
of goods and services which serve as inputs for those seeking
outdoor recreation. It is a rare specimen who ventures into a
strange or infrequently visited area for outdoor recreation with-
out stopping for an appraisal of the current situation with re-







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


spect to his activity. A failure to make a purchase in return
for the information is a serious violation of etiquette that, if
an opportunity presents itself, invites retaliation in the form of
misinformation. There are other ways that knowledge of con-
ditions in the area may be used by the local residents to capital-
ize on the demand for goods and services generated by outdoor
recreation. For example, when fish are biting a certain type of
bait indigenous to an area, a ready sale exists to establishments
that service fishermen. With riverfront land available for out-
door recreation in Suwannee County and a segment of the popu-
lation otherwise unemployable, the problem at hand is one of
examining the resource base and the potentialities of outdoor
recreation as a source of income for the residents of the county.
To simplify the analysis, the public and private sectors of the
economy are examined individually.

The Outdoor Recreation Base8

Location and Land With Riverfrontage The position of
Suwannee County with respect to the remainder of the state is
shown in Figure 1. Live Oak, the county seat and single urban
area of consequence in the county, is approximately 100 miles
west of Jacksonville and an estimated 200 miles north of the
concentration of population in the central part of the state that
extends eastward from Tampa through Orlando to the Cape
Kennedy area.
Two federal highways pass through the county, but neither
carries a heavy volume of tourist traffic from out of the state.
Federal Highway 90, which originates in Jacksonville, traverses
the county from east to west. Federal Highway 129 is a north-
south traffic artery. Later, the county will be served by Inter-
state 10, which parallels Federal Highway 90 and Interstate 75,
from north to south.
In addition to the federal highways, a network of state and
county roads exists in the county (Figure 2). From the stand-
point of accessibility to either the county or points within the
county, roads do not appear to be a problem where the terrain
is adequately drained. The construction of a road adequate for
light traffic involves little more than the removal of vegetation.

" The outdoor recreation base of Suwannee County is by no means limited
to riverfrontage, but the study was limited exclusively to this category of
land.







Outdoor Recreation


'~ ow ,OU.' rs.MCS
I U( -'. 2- _. .
....I


Figure 1.-Location of Suwannee County.


It is estimated that Suwannee County, with an area of 677
square miles, has a boundary 136 miles in circumference. With
the exception of 26 miles, three rivers identify the boundary
of the county. The Suwannee River originates in the Okefenokee
Swamp in southeast Georgia and enters Florida on a course
consistent with its Gulf of Mexico destination. However, soon
after entering Florida, the river executes a number of turns,
the first of which is to the southeast. But at the boundary of
Columbia and Suwannee counties, its direction of travel is to
the northwest. The deviation of the river to the west prior to
a resumption of its original southwestward heading, which may
be observed in Figure 2, defines almost three-fourths of the
boundary of Suwannee County. It is approximately 164 miles







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Figure 2.-Suwannee County, Florida.


via the river from the boundary between Columbia and Suwan-
nee counties to the Gulf of Mexico.
The Santa Fe River merges with the Suwannee River 64
miles upstream from the Gulf of Mexico. The Santa Fe and its
tributary, the Ichetucknee, specify 10.50 miles of the boundary
of Suwannee County. Both the riverfrontage and land associated
with each of the rivers included in the study are shown in
Table 4.







Outdoor Recreation 19

Table 4.-Riverfrontage and Adjacent Riparian Land, Suwannee County,
Florida, 1961.*
Riparian
River Riverfrontage Land**
(Miles) (Acres)
Suwannee 83.57 15,723
Santa Fe 5.50 2,000
Ichetucknee 5.00 1,983
Totals 94.07 19,706
* For the definition of riparian land used in this study, see page 4.
** Riverfrontage and land associated with built-up areas, farms, public parks, or other
intensive uses deleted.

Suitability of Riverfrontage For An Intensive Outdoor Recre-
ation Use To classify the riverfrontage in Suwannee County
with respect to suitability for an intensive outdoor recreational
use, a single criterion was used: the elevation of riverfront land
relative to that of the adjacent stream. While other criteria
exist for example, remoteness, vegetative cover, river depth,
or view all seem to be less restrictive on all types of uses
than elevation, which is inversely related to flooding.
The rate at which the Suwannee River discharges water is
highly variable. An examination of Table 5 shows that at Bran-
ford the annual maximum height of the river above mean sea
level during the 1932-1960 period varied between 10.75 feet and
38.88 feet." Because the river flows across a relatively flat
terrain, with each change in the rate of discharge of the river,
which is accompanied by a change in the height of the river
above mean sea level, a change in the surface area of the river
occurs.
Under normal conditions, the rise and fall of the river follows
a well-developed pattern. When the river is at or near its sea-
sonal minimum rate of discharge, the main body of the stream
is well defined by the elevation of the adjoining land. As the
seasonal increase in the rate of discharge of the river progresses,
the differential between the elevation of the river and the ad-
joining land decreases. As the river rises, the surface area ex-
pands to include the least elevated of the riverfront land. These
"sloughs" or depressions are natural reservoirs which normally
store excess water during the peak of the annual discharge of
the river. However, a period of high water which began late
in 1947 and peaked early in 1948 proved to be far in excess of
" The differential between the lowest and highest level of the river during
this period was more than the variation in the annual maximum height.







Florida Agricultural Experim)ent Stations


Table 5.-Annual Maximum Height of Suwannee River Above Mean Sea
Level, Branford, Florida, 1932-1960.

Maximum Above Mean Maximum Above Mean
Year Sea Level Year Sea Level
(Feet) (Feet)
1932 21.47 1947 31.76
1933 26.77 1948 38.88
1934 17.57 1949 22.92
1935 23.89 1950 15.56
1936 20.99 1951 17.00
1937 26.46 1952 21.21
1938 13.12 1953 23.76
1939 19.29 1954 22.45
1940 16.89 1955 10.75
1941 13.67 1956 16.49
1942 28.51 1957 20.65
1943 14.01 1958 27.89
1944 26.23 1959 -32.30
1945 27.25 1960 29.26
1946 22.58
Source: United States Geographical Survey, United States Department of Interior.

the capacity of the normal storage areas of the river. Conse-
quently, the surface area of the rivers encompassed a substan-
tial portion of the county. The only continuous segment of
riverfrontage of consequence that escaped inundation during
this flood was located in the northwestern part of the county.
Riverfrontage which escaped flooding during the 1947-1948
period of high water was placed in Class I.
A second flood of lesser magnitude occurred in 1959. (See
Table 5.) It is estimated that at the peak discharge of the river
during this flood, the entire natural storage capacity of the river
was completely filled. Riverfrontage which was flooded during
the 1947-1948 flood, but which was not flooded during the 1959
flood, was placed in Class II.
A third category includes all frontage which was flooded in
both the 1947-1948 and 1959 floods. Riverfrontage and land in
this category are considered a potential part of the surface area
of the river. The most elevated of this frontage approximates
the boundaries of the river when all the capacity for storing
the excess water is in use.
To classify riverfrontage and land according to these criteria,
profiles of the rivers were developed for both the 1947-1948 and
1959 floods. This involved estimating the distance between
gaging stations on the Suwannee River from which the peak
stage of the river was obtained during these floods. The height







Outdoor Recreation


of the river above mean sea level at any particular point be-
tween gaging stations was assumed to be a function of distance.
Using this procedure, the height of the river at each section
with riverfrontage in the county was estimated for both floods
(Appendix).
Next, topogeographic maps were used to estimate the eleva-
tion of the riverfront land in each of the sections. Because the
maps used were not sufficiently detailed with respect to contour
intervals, the classification of the land with respect to elevation
is crude and does not necessarily hold for any given location.
On the other hand, it seems to identify with a reasonable degree
of accuracy the major areas which are flooded with a seasonal
expansion in the surface area of the rivers.
Class I Riverfrontage and Land The single continuous
segment of riverfrontage of consequence in the county which
escaped inundation during the 1947-1948 flood is located in the
northwestern part of the county between Ellaville and Suwannee
Springs. This area is a part of the central highlands, while the
frontage downstream is in the coastal lowlands (2). Upstream
from Suwannee Springs to the Columbia County line, the river
also flows across the central highlands, but the high swampy
plain is subject to frequent flooding.
The acreage and riverfrontage distribution with respect to
suitability and location are shown in Table 6. It is assumed that
relative to the remainder of the riverfrontage in the county, the
restrictions on the intensive use of this land for outdoor recrea-
tion are the least.

Table 6.-Classification and Location of Riverfrontage with Respect to
Suitability for an Intensive Use for Outdoor Recreation,
Suwannee County, Florida.
Class I Class II Class III
Location Miles Acres Miles Acres Miles Acres
Suwannee 8.95 1,894 37.03 7,055 37.59 7,774
Santa Fe -2.75 1,146 2.75 854
Ichetucknee 4.75 883 .25 100


Class II Riverfrontage and Land Unlike Class I, Class II
riverfrontage is not limited to a single general area. It is widely
distributed and in some instances may include isolated eleva-
tions in excess of the crest of the 1947-1948 flood.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


The single restriction on the intensive use of this land for
outdoor recreation is the possibility of flooding. However, pre-
cautions exist which minimize this restriction. For example, if
structures placed on a site are sufficiently elevated, damage from
flooding is slight.

Class III Riverfrontage and Land The remaining land is
subject to flooding within the normal seasonal expansion and
contraction of the surface area of the rivers. But, because the
expansion and contraction does not follow a precise pattern, the
danger of any particular Class III site flooding will vary. When
the annual expansion and contraction is at a minimum, very
little, if any, of the Class III land floods during the year; how-
ever, as pointed out above, with a maximum seasonal expansion
in the surface area of the rivers, riverfrontage is limited to
Class I and Class II land.
With a possibility of flooding, if not annually at least once
each decade, a distinct restriction exists on an individual de-
veloping a site for an intensive outdoor recreational use. How-
ever, the problem of flooding can be controlled by filling an area
or using a canal to connect the river with a nearby site with
adequate elevation. While these are distinct possibilities for
public development, the quantity of Class I and Class II land
available seems to rule out this procedure for private develop-
ment in the near future.

Riverfrontage as a Source of County Revenue
The assessed value for all land and improvements in Suwan-
nee County for 1961 amounted to $7.8 million. With a land area
of 433,000 acres, of which approximately 425,000 acres were
subject to taxation, the average rate of assessment was approxi-
mately $18.35 per acre.10 Since the average rate of assessment
per acre for all land and improvements for the county was
within the limits of the range in assessment per acre, land
rather than improvements appears to have been the major
source of revenue for the county (Table 7).
Further evidence of the importance of land to the tax base
of the county is revealed by the fact that in 1960, the population
of the county, which amounted to 14,961, was divided into 4,231
10 It is estimated that the county contained 8,000 acres of either public-
owned submerged land or land otherwise exempted from assessment.







Outdoor Recreation


Table 7.-Range of Valuation Per Acre for Agricultural and Forestry
Land, Suwannee County, Florida, 1961.
Assessed Value Per Acre
Category From To
(Dollars) (Dollars)
Cropland, pasture, and range
Cropland 10.00 18.00
Improved pasture 10.00 18.00
Unimproved pasture 5.00 7.50
Forest and woodland
Planted pine 10.00 20.00
Native pine 8.00 12.00
Other 5.00 7.50
Source: Tax Assessor, Suwannee County, Florida.

households (5). With more than 100 acres of land for each
household and outside a small number of manufacturing con-
cerns, a generating plant for a utility company, and the usual
number of trade and service establishments, housing for its
residents was the major category of capital improvements added
to land. But housing, if occupied by the owner as of January 1,
was eligible for a $5,000 tax exemption as a homestead. There-
fore, with a large part of the improvements to land in the form
of housing and most of the housing units assessed at less than
$5,000, the major burden of taxation was on land outside the
urban and built-up areas in the county.
After deleting built-up areas, farms, public parks, and any
other intensive uses, it was found that 19,706 acres of land with
riverfrontage either were in woodland, had been subdivided and
sold, or were being offered for sale as cottage sites and other
intensive outdoor recreational uses.

Assessment Basis Rural land in Suwannee County in 1961
appeared to be assessed on the basis of a use in either agricul-
ture or forestry. And as suggested in Table 7, several uses
within each of the categories were recognized. While the use
of riverfront land for outdoor recreation was gradually gaining
recognition, it was not a factor in the valuation of riverfront
land until the process of transferring from a forestry into an
outdoor recreational use was well underway.
The valuation of rural land on the basis of agricultural or
forestry productivity seems to be a logical outgrowth of the
economic background of the county. To illustrate, the riverfront
land included in the study was in public ownership during the







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


latter one-half of the 1930-1940 decade and through most of
World War II. Following World War II and the increase in
popularity of outdoor recreation, this land was withdrawn from
the public domain almost without exception in response to an
anticipated demand for its use by those seeking outdoor recrea-
tion. To deal with the new and developing use for the land
from the standpoint of valuation, earnings in forestry were used
rather than the value of subjective outdoor recreation product.
But with the virgin growth of cypress depleted, riverfront land
was among the least productive in the county. Hence, it was
also at the bottom of the range in valuation per acre for rural
land in the county.
In reality, it was not until riverfront land had been sub-
divided into outdoor recreational sites and individually assessed
that valuation on the basis of its productivity in forestry was
abandoned altogether. With a shift to outdoor recreation, con-
siderations similar to those employed in the valuation of urban
land were introduced. But an intermediate stage in the transi-
tion from forestry to recreation existed. After the land had
been subdivided and before 60 percent of the lots were sold,
the tax assessor was required by law to assess the unsold lots
in the subdivision on an acreage rather than individual lot
basis. The rate at which this acreage was assessed suggested
a rate in excess of its productivity in forestry but less than its
productivity in outdoor recreation.
Acreage Classification and Average Valuation Of the total,
value productivity in forestry appeared to be the single con-
sideration for placing a valuation for tax purposes on 83 percent
of the land with riverfrontage in the county examined in the
study (Table 8). In terms of the total for all the land, the 83
percent viewed as in a forestry use contributed 48 percent of
the assessment. That the influence of a value productivity in
outdoor recreation was minimal is suggested by the absence of
a substantial differential between this category of land with
riverfrontage and the range in valuation for forestry land in the
county.
A second category of land classed as recreational acreage,
but which apparently was assessed on a combination value pro-
ductivity in both forestry and outdoor recreation, accounted for
16 percent of the land with riverfrontage in the county and 20
percent of the valuation. Since combined, the forestry and







Outdoor Recreation


Table 8.-Total Acres, Total Assessed Value, and the Average Rate of
Assessment Per Acre by Category of Use for Riverfront Land,
Suwannee County, Florida, 1961.
Total Average
Use Acres Assessed Assessment
Value Per Acre
(Number) (Dollars) (Dollars)
Forestry 16,379 125,560 7.66
Recreation, acreage 3,088 52,284 16.96
Recreation, individual lots 220 44,475 202.16
Recreation, individual lots
with improvements 24 39,496 1,645.66

recreational acreage included 99 percent of the land with river-
frontage and 68 percent of the assessed value, the remaining
1 percent of the land and its improvements accounted for 32
percent of the total assessment. It is clear that for riverfront
land to move into a valuation class in excess of an intensive use
in either agriculture or forestry under the 1961 arrangement,
the assessment must have been on an individual lot basis.
In terms of the per capital valuation of land and improve-
ments in 1961, the average was an estimated $521. In the
absence of the influence of outdoor recreation on the valuation
placed on riverfront land, that is, with all riverfront land assess-
ed exclusively on the basis of its value productivity in forestry,
the per capital valuation would have been approximately $10
less. As pointed out previously, the decrease in actual revenue
would have been proportionately greater than the decrease in
the per capital valuation because none of the riverfront land
included in the study was exempt from taxation.
Marginal Change in Assessment Rate From the average
rate of assessment for land in each of the categories shown in
Table 7, it was possible to calculate an average marginal rate
of change in valuation between categories (Table 9). For exam-
ple, with an average assessment per acre of $7.66 for riverfront
land in forestry and an average assessment per acre of $16.96
for land in recreational acreage, a shift of land from the former
to the latter category would create a marginal or additional
valuation of $9.30 per acre.
The information in Table 9 suggests that under 1961 condi-
tions, each individually owned riverfront recreational site with
improvements increased the assessment from $7.66 to $1,645.66
per acre. Therefore, the incremental change in the assessment







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Table 9.-Marginal Rate of Change in Average Valuation Per Acre for
Riverfront Land for Stages in the Shift to Outdoor Recreation,
Suwannee County, Florida, 1961.
Additional
Category Valuation
(Dollars)
Forestry
Recreation, acreage 9.30
Recreation, lots 185.20
Recreation, lots with improvements 1,443.50

attributable to the shift in land use and the resulting capital
improvements was $1,638. But it is clear that from the stand-
point of the tax base of the county, capital improvements to the
land are responsible for most of the increase. Of the average
assessment of $1,645.66 for individual lots with improvements,
only 13 percent of the valuation is based on land. Hence, the
possibilities for a substantial improvement in the tax revenue
status of the county through a shift in the use of land from
forestry to an outdoor recreational use in the absence of taxable
improvements appear to be quite limited under the 1961 assess-
ment schedule.

Aggregate Valuation Potential For an estimate of the
potential impact of a shift in the use of riverfront land in
Suwannee County from forestry to outdoor recreation on the
tax base of the county, it is assumed that of the total assess-
ment for improved sites, the 1961 proportional division between
land and improvements will prevail in the future. Therefore,
the potential increase in the assessed value of riverfront land in
the county is a function of the amount of land shifted from
forestry to subdivisions assessed as acreage, land shifted from
subdivision acreage to individually assessed lots, and the growth
in the number of individual sites with improvements.
Based on the classification with respect to suitability, 10,978
acres of riverfront land in Suwannee County are deemed to be
suitable for a level of intensity of outdoor recreational use re-
quiring permanent structures, while the remainder is considered
more suitable for a less intensive use. In this context, a pos-
sibility exists for the addition of an estimated $15 million to
the tax base of the county from improvements to land with
riverfrontage. With the entire acreage in the county with river-
frontage subdivided into recreational sites and assessed in-
dividually, the contribution of riverfront land to the tax base of







Outdoor Recreation


the county would be approximately $2 million. In view of the
assessed value in 1961, the estimated potential is an impressive
increase in the tax base.
Granted, the desirability of a total shift of riverfront land
from forestry into its most intensive outdoor recreational use
brings up the question of probability.
If the hypothesis that the demand for riverfront land in
Suwannee County for outdoor recreation is a function of the
pressure of population on the local resource base for outdoor
recreation in peninsular Florida is valid, all the evidence sug-
gests an eventual use of the land for this purpose. While esti-
mates vary, it is generally assumed that the population of
Florida will reach eight million by 1970 and, moreover, one of
the major areas of concentration will be a belt across the state
eastward from Tampa to Cape Kennedy. The largest concentra-
tion of those owning riverfront recreational sites in Suwannee
County in 1962, was from this area. With both an increase in
the concentration of population in the area and completion of
Interstate 75, which will increase the accessibility of Suwannee
County for central Floridians, more will probably seek river-
front land for outdoor recreation in the rural area of north
Florida.

The Private Sector of the Economy
In the public sector of the economy valuations placed on
riverfront land are a part of the county record, consequently,
a change in the revenue generating capacity of this resource is
readily determinate. An examination of the impact of a, shift of
riverfront land on the private sector of the economy is more
complex. While it is clear that the impact of outdoor recreation
on the economy of the county is traceable to an increase in the
value productivity of riverfront land, and hence, an increase
in the earnings of this resource, the effect of an increase in the
earnings of an indigenous resource on the economy of the area
is not so clear. For this reason, the development of an analytical
framework was suggested.

The Analytical Framework To examine outdoor recreation
as an income factor, the economy of Suwannee County is viewed
as an entity similar in status to that of a firm in a competitive
industry. As such, the relationship between inputs and outputs,







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


factor prices, and product prices are accepted as given. At
equilibrium, the distribution of the total product is specified;
each factor is compensated on the basis of marginal productivity,
and the distributive shares of each input exactly exhausts the
total product.
Because owners are the recipients of resource earnings, the
impact of a change in total product on resident income is deter-
minate. Benefits from an incremental increase in total revenue
attributable to outdoor recreation are distributed to factors on
the basis of marginal value productivity but geographically on
ownership. Therefore, income benefits from outdoor recreation
that accrue to Suwannee County, presumed to define the econo-
mic entity under consideration, are limited to the distributive
share for resident-owned resources. Within this framework, the
market price for a resource is indicative of value productivity,
which may be viewed as income that accrues to the resource
owner.
Pre-War Economy of Suwannee County As a starting
point, consider the situation with respect to the economy of
Suwannee County at the beginning of World War II. A study of
tax delinquency in six north Florida counties during the 1928-
1933 period states that more than 22 percent of the total land
area of Suwannee County was tax delinquent in 1933 (6). A
later report suggests that the problem became more acute with
the passage of time. In 1937, 16 million acres, which is almost
one-half the land area of Florida, was tax delinquent. Comments
relative to the problem include the following statement: "It is
further disclosed that of the taxes collected, the higher per-
centage came from improved property and that unimproved
property, to a serious extent, passed out of the tax paying
status." (3). With approximately one-half the land in Suwannee
County outside farms and the amount of improved land outside
farms inconsequential, this statement is indicative of a severe
decline in the value productivity of a resource on which the
economy was highly dependent for earnings.
An inspection of the tax delinquent records of the county
covering the 1935-1943 period was made. A part or all the land
in 80 percent of the sections with riverfrontage in the county
was tax delinquent for one or more years during the period.
When the land outside the tax delinquent category was examin-
ed, it was found that it was either owned by a corporation that







Outdoor Recreation


remained solvent during the depression and paid real estate
taxes on holdings or a part of a homestead and exempt from
taxation.
On the basis of wholesale reversion of land to public
ownership, it is assumed that the aggregate value productivity
of perhaps one-half or more of the land was at a low level at
the beginning of World War II, and returns were less than the
cost involved in retaining ownership. Indicated is a low level
of demand for land by the economy of the county. Or more
specifically, in agriculture and forestry, the only visible use for
land in the county at the time, a decline in the price of the
output forced an equilibrium in the use of this factor at a level
far less than that of full employment. Because the resource
involved was indigenously owned, the effect on resident resource
returns was disastrous." With a decline in the price of the
major product of the economy, the decline in the demand for
factors was not limited exclusively to land; a decline in the
demand for labor and capital also occurred.12
By virtue of an increase in population during the 1930-1940
decade, it does not appear that the size or scale of the economic
entity under consideration declined. On the contrary, it ex-
panded, but resources were shifted from products for the market
to products for consumption. Instead of employing resources to
generate a product with a market value and using the distribu-
tive share to owned resources to purchase the product of firms
that dealt in consumption goods, the economy concentrated al-
most exclusively in the production of goods for consumption.
Most of the product of the economy was retained by resident
resource owners; however, consider the limitations placed on the

" Under a competitive equilibrium, revenue generated by a factor and its
cost are always equal. For purchased factors, the economy is indifferent
as to level of use, but not so for immobile indigenously owned factors, such
as land. Returns to the economy accrue exclusively from "owned" factors,
which are equal to opportunity costs in the market.
" The postulated decline in the demand for labor may appear inconsistent
with the modest gain in population experienced by the county during the
1930-1940 decade. It is generally accepted that the brief reversal in the
out-migration of population from agriculture during this decade was in-
voluntary. The attractiveness of agriculture for the unemployed urban
resident during the depression was based on the perquisites such as housing
and an opportunity to produce food which was supplied labor rather than
money income. The share rental arrangement exchanged product for labor
and the requirements of subsistence, which for many was a superior
arrangement to idleness in an urban area and complete dependence on
inadequate unearned income transfers.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


product. Because all but a small number of products are a com-
bination of a large number of resources, production limited to
the range of possibilities from indigenous resources in an area
such as Suwannee County severely limits consumption and the
level of resource use and returns.
With production limited to consumptive items, demand for
resources is limited to inputs with a product of value in terms
of utility at the local level. Under these conditions, resources
for which a local demand does not exist remain idle. Suggested
is the achievement of an equilibrium at less than full employ-
ment of the resources of the economy. Presumably, under these
conditions, unlike a competitive industry which increases output
as long as marginal cost is less than average revenue, zero mar-
ginal revenue would define the limit on output of an economy
oriented toward a product of utility.
It is held that at the beginning of World War II, despite a
decline in the level of economic activity or market value of the
total product during the preceding decade, an increase in popu-
lation during the period was consistent. The shift to subsistence
agriculture constituted a preferable alternative to participation
in a market economy unable to provide resource employment.
In terms of a product of value and full employment of indigenous
resources, the level of economic activity in the county was per-
haps at its lowest point during the twentieth century. Under
its organization at the time, the returns to resident factor
owners by the market were sufficiently low to discourage use
severely, and the returns to factors in the form of products for
consumption reached the point of marginal revenue or utility
at a low level of resource use.
The Market Price for Riverfront Land: A Change in Value
Productivity With an upsurge in the total economy following
the outbreak of World War II a gradual improvement in the
price of agricultural products occurred. With an improvement
in the demand for resources in agriculture that grew out of
the increase in price for agricultural products, resources were
shifted from subsistence units into either market oriented agri-
cultural production or some phase of the nonagricultural sector
of the economy. The evidence suggests that with its relatively
high degree of mobility, an increase in value productivity re-
sulted in a wide dispersion of labor previously devoted exclu-
sively to production of consumptive goods, hence, a continuation







Outdoor Recreation


of the interrupted decline in population of the county. On the
other hand, immobility prevented land released from subsistence
agriculture from being used elsewhere, and the increase in de-
mand brought about by an increase in the product of agriculture
was insufficient to bring all the land of the county into produc-
tion. One category which remained idle after commercial agri-
culture was flourishing as a result of World War II was river-
front land. This land had never been considered suitable for
agriculture, and the change upward in agricultural product
prices did not create a demand for its use. Consequently, after
a shift in resource use in response to the change in prices, the
riverfront land remained without a product of value by the
private sector of the economy. One of the most pressing prob-
lems of the time from the standpoint of the economy of the
county was the low level of value productivity for that part of
the land in the county unsuited for agriculture.
Following World War II, an "overnight" demand for river-
front land developed. Contrary to the rural counties of north
Florida, peninsular Florida had been steadily increasing in popu-
lation since the acquisition of the territory from Spain. With
the end of World War II, many uprooted by the war decided
to settle in Florida. A rapidly growing population, a high per
capital income, a shorter work-week, better transportation, and
a mild climate, all led to what appears to have been a diligent
search by most for outdoor recreational opportunities. Suwannee
County, with 100 miles of its boundary defined by the nationally
known Suwannee River did not remain undiscovered. And with
its discovery, the previously worthless riverfront land was
simultaneously transferred from public to private ownership.
Suddenly, riverfront land, which had, in many instances, been
in public ownership since the creation of the county except for
a brief period of acquisition by private interests to harvest the
virgin growth of cypress, was greatly in demand. So elated
were the county officials at returning the land to a tax paying
status, apparently the cost of holding the land until the develop-
ment of a demand for its use in outdoor recreation was canceled.
The series of events which led to an increase in the popularity
of outdoor recreation in Florida and ultimately an increase in
the demand for riverfront land as an input by those seeking
the pleasures of outdoor recreation is viewed as analogous to
the invasion of the county by the boll weevil during the 1910-







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


1920 decade. Despite the fact that the popularity of outdoor
recreation increased the demand for riverfront land and the
boll weevil decreased the demand for cropland as an input for
cotton production, the analytical framework for evaluating the
impact of each of the events on the private sector of the economy
is identical. With the boll weevil invasion, the physical produc-
tivity of resources involved in cotton production declined. Hence,
in the absence of a change in product price, the value produc-
tivity of resources employed in the production of cotton de-
clined. For a new equilibrium in cotton production for the
county after the advent of the boll weevil, both resource use
and resource returns in cotton production were less than prior
to the boll weevil infestation.
Observe the similarity with respect to riverfront land. Prior
to the war, a use for riverfront land sufficient to warrant private
ownership did not exist. This implies a marginal value produc-
tivity or demand for the factor in the private sector of the
economy less than the cost of taxes. Without a product of
value, the land was allowed to revert to public ownership.
However, after World War II, a demand for riverfront .land by
those interested in its use for outdoor recreation elevated its
value productivity. A value productivity in excess of tax cost
resulted in its immediate withdrawal from public ownership.
While a parallel between the two events exists in a conceptual
sense, one bothersome difference must be dealt with. In the
case of cotton, the decline in resource returns involved a mea-
surable annual physical output which fell precipitously during
the peak price years of World War I. The effect on the economy
was immediate and observable. The withdrawal of resources,
mainly land and labor, triggered by the boll weevil left wide-
spread unemployment of resources and drastically reduced the
returns to resources that remained in cotton production.
On the other hand, the postwar popularity of outdoor recre-
ation changed the demand for riverfront, which was reflected
in price. However, unlike cotton, where the decrease in returns
was traceable to a change in the relationship between inputs
and outputs, the price of riverfront land advanced in response
to a change in demand. Moreover, in contrast to the infinitely
elastic demand relation for the cotton output of the county, the
demand for riverfront land would appear to be nonlinear, and
the product of the land difficult to quantify.







Outdoor Recreation


In summary, for cotton, an upward shift in the supply func-
tion of the county occurred with the invasion of the boll weevil.
In the absence of a change in demand, resource earnings in
cotton production decreased, and without an equally attractive
alternative use for resources withdrawn from cotton production,
the value of the total product of the economy of the county
declined. But with riverfront land, the effect on the level of
activity of the economy was in an opposite direction. An upward
shift in the demand relation for riverfront land elevated price.
Because supply remained unchanged, the change in demand was
both temporarily and permanently reflected in the price of
riverfront land. Therefore, the value of the total product of
the economy of the county was elevated by the amount of the
increase in the price of riverfront land.

Value Productivity, 1950-1962 Perhaps the most persua-
sive empirical evidence of an impact of outdoor recreation on
the economy of Suwannee County is found in the change in the
market price of land with riverfrontage following World War II.
To demonstrate the upward trend in prices county records were
examined, and each transaction involving land with riverfront-
age was tabulated. A summary of the information obtained is
shown in Table 10.
To reiterate, it is assumed that prior to and throughout most
of World War II, the riverfront land in Suwannee County under
consideration was valueless. Therefore, a sale of land in 1950

Table 10.-Average Price Per Acre for Land with Riverfrontage, 1950-1962,
Suwannee County, Florida.
Aggregate Average Selling
Year Sales Acreage Price Per Acre*
(Number) (Number) (Dollars)
1950 1 478 10
1951 1 180 29
1952 3 1,667 19
1953 2 210 126
1954 3 2,350 27
1955 1 160 50
1956 6 5,380 39
1957 15 2,926 81
1958 11 2,058 127
1959 7 458 193
1960 4 160 150
1961 8 715 208
1962 5 734 143
SRounded to the nearest whole number.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


at a price of $10 per acre was accepted as evidence of a change
in the status of riverfront land from the standpoint of value
productivity. In the absence of a change in physical productivity,
an increase in value productivity dictates an upward shift in
demand for the product. The effect of an upward shift in the
demand for a product of the county between the end of World
War II and 1950 was an increase in the total revenue of the
economy. Moreover, it is apparent that despite some exceptions,
the trend in riverfront land prices continued upward and the
revenue position of the economy of the county continued to
improve throughout the period examined. For example, if it
is assumed the average selling price per acre is indicative of
the average value productivity of riverfront land, the value of
the total product of riverfront land in the county increased
from $197,060 in 1950 to more than $4 million in 1961. However,
when accepted at face value, a decline in average price per acre
from $208 in 1961 to $143 in 1962 indicates a downward ad-
justment in the value of the total product to approximately
$2.8 million.
While the assumption that market price reflects the value
productivity of a resource is defensible, the heterogeneity of
riverfront land is such that it is unrealistic to assume that each
variation in the average price per acre accurately reflects a
change in demand for the product. A more reasonable hypothe-
sis would seem to be that for a given tract, an upward trend in
market price over a period of time suggests a shift in demand
for the product. But for year to year changes, the reliability of
demand for output to explain average price per acre diminishes.
For example, riverfront land varies with respect to productivity
in an outdoor recreational use; therefore, a change in average
price per acre for any given year may more nearly reflect a
variation in quality than a change in demand.
For these and similar reasons, it seems logical to visualize
the change in demand for riverfront land between 1950-1962
as an upward trend paralleled by a comparable increase in value
productivity rather than an erratic shifting demand relation
given to altering radically the total value productivity of the
riverfront land in the county through short range changes in
product price. In an attempt to minimize the effect of the varia-
tion in demand for various qualities of riverfront land on the
annual average price per acre, the observed annual average







Outdoor Recreation


prices per acre were used to estimate the trend line shown in
Figure 3. The annual incremental increase for riverfront land
turns out to be $13 per acre. And with a total value productivity
of $197,060 in 1950, it is estimated to have increased to $3,271,-
196 in 1962.



220

200

180

160
the
140

120

100

80


60

40

20

0

O C CO Cg C\S


Year

Figure 3. Observed average prices for riverfront land per acre and
estimated trend in prices, Suwannee County, Florida, 1950-1962.

With a precise value of the output of riverfront land in
Suwannee County all but indeterminate, rather than attempt to.
validate the estimate, it is offered as evidence of an upward
trend in price that prevailed during the 1950-1962 period. The
usefulness of the quantitative estimates, that is, the value
productivity of the riverfront land in the county increased ap-
proximately $3 million during the 1950-1962 period, is in demon-







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


strating the impact of an increase in the value productivity of
an indigenous resource on the economy of the county.

Impact on Total Economy To determine the distribution
of the income benefits from the increase in the value productivity
of riverfront land in Suwannee County, owners were placed in two
categories, namely, resident and nonresident. As shown in Table
11, of the total in 1962, 5,321 acres were owned by residents of the
county. The remaining 14,385 acres were owned by nonresidents.
But the pattern of ownership in 1962 was the result of a transfer
of land from residents to nonresidents which began soon after
World War II. While the 1962 division is useful for predicting
the future distribution of income benefits from the land, it does
not specify how the past income benefits were distributed.

Table 11.-Pattern of Ownership of Land with Riverfrontage, Suwannee
County Florida, 1962.*
Estimated
Owners River Frontage Acres
(Number) (Miles) (Number)
County Resident 20 24 5,321
Nonresident of County-
Corporate owned** 8 24 5,174
Individual ownership 37 39 5,884
* 3,327 acres of land in subdivisions or adjoining land in subdivisions held for future
development excluded.
;* Limited to corporations interested primarily in the production of forestry products.

In an effort to establish the pattern of transfer of riverfront
land prior to 1962, the aggregate acreage sold each year during
the 1950-1962 period shown in Table 12 was used. It was assumed
that the entire acreage of land in the county with riverfrontage
was resident-owned at the beginning of 1950 and during the
year a sale of 478 acres was made to a nonresident. But because
the aggregate acreage sold during the period exceeded the
amount held by nonresidents in 1962, it was necessary to con-
vert the acreage sold in each of the years to a percentage of the
total. The percentage of land transferred each year was used to
prorate the lesser amount owned by nonresidents over the 13-
year period. The results of the calculation are shown in Table 12.13

1: The fact that the total acreage involved in the observed sales exceeds
the total acreage owned by residents is attributed to some sales between
nonresidents. However, this is consistent with the assumption that all sales
involved a transfer of title either from a resident to a nonresident or
between nonresidents.







Outdoor Recreation


Table 12.-Observed and Estimated Acreages of Land With Riverfrontage
Transferred from Residents to Nonresidents, Suwannee County,
Florida, 1950-1962.
Observed Estimated
Year Sales Transfers
(Acres) (Acres)
1950 478 388
1951 180 144
1952 1,667 1,352
1953 210 173
1954 2,350 1,899
1955 160 129
1956 5,380 4,358
1957 2,926 2,375
1958 2,058 1,669
1959 458 374
1960 160 129
1961 715 604
1962 734 791

Given the transfer of land to nonresidents by years, the total
acreage of riverfront land in the county was multiplied by the
appropriate price of land from Figure 3 to calculate the market
price of riverfront land in the county by years for the 1950-1962
period (Table 13). Observe that the annual incremental increase
in the value productivity of the land during the period was
$256,178. Hence, with a total value productivity of $197,060 in
1950, after a period of 12 years during which the marginal value
productivity was $256,178 annually, the total value productivity
was $3,271,196.
An allocation of the increase in the value productivity of
the riverfront land between residents and nonresidents was
accomplished in the following manner. Starting in 1950, it was
assumed that the 19,706 acres of land was owned by county
residents and, therefore, represented an increase in the total
revenue of the economy of the county. During 1950, however,
388 acres of land were sold by a resident to a nonresident for
$3,880. But because the market price for land was $10 per acre
at the time, the economy of the county neither lost nor gained
on the transaction. With the value productivity of the land $10
per acre, the resident who sold received from outside the eco-
nomy $10 for land, the earnings of which no longer accrued to
the local economy.
On the other hand, during 1951 and each succeeding year
through 1962, the value productivity of riverfront land increased







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Table 13.-Estimated Increase and Distribution of the Value Productivity
from 19,706 Acres of Riverfront Land, Suwannee County,
Florida 1950-1962.


Year Total Value Incremental
of Product Chan'ge


Distribution
Residents Nonresidents


Total Incremental


(Dollars) (Dollars) (Dollars)
197,060 448,194
453,238 256,178 197,060
709,416 256,178 697,456
965,594 256,178 929,142
1,221,772 256,178 1,158,179
1,477,950 256,178 1,363,329
1,734,128 256,178 1,566,402
1,990,306 256,178 1,712,821
2,246,484 256,178 1,828,356
2,502,662 .256,178 1,922,212
2,758,840 256,178 2,011,197
3,015,018 256,178 2,098,505
3,271,196 256,178 2,177,961


(Dollars)
251,134

249,262
231,682
229,437
204,750
203,078
146,419
115,544
93,847
88,985
87,308
79,456


Total Incremental
(Dollars) (Dollars)
5,044

11,960 6,916
36,452 24,496
63,193 26,741
114,621 51,428
167,726 53,105
277,485 109,559
418,119 140,634
580,450 162,331
747,643 167,193
916,513 168,870
1,093,235 176,722


Source: Bnsed on an increase of $13 per acre per year for riverfront land and a transfer
of land from residents to non-residents at a rate comparable to observed sales.

$13 per acre annually. From the annual incremental increase
of $256,178 for all the riverfront land in the county, $13 per
acre or a total of $5,044 for the 388 acres sold in 1950 must be
subtracted. The 388 acres owned by a nonresident has this
claim on the total increase in the value productivity of the land.
In addition, the distribution of both the total and the annual
incremental increase in value productivity of riverfront land in
the county with respect to residents and nonresidents is shown.
While the economy of the county captured almost two-thirds
of the increase in the value productivity of the riverfront land
between the end of World War II and 1962, observe the change
that occurred with respect to the distribution of the annual
incremental increase in value productivity. Approximately 75
percent of the future value productivity of the riverfront land
in the county in 1962 was owned by nonresidents. In the future,
the income benefits from any additional increase in the value
productivity of riverfront land will accrue mainly to nonresidents.
From the information in Table 13, a comparison of the
income benefits of riverfront land to the economy of the county
prior to and following 1962 is possible. Of the total increase
in value productivity through 1962, $1,093,235 went to non-
residents of the county, and residents of the county received
$2,177,961. However, a total of $883,286 of the income benefits


1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962







Outdoor Recreation


received by county residents was invested in land. The actual
cash which entered the economy of the county during the period
amounted to $1,294,675.

Income Status of Residents When defined as an increase
in the value of the total product, the change in price following
World War II of riverfront land suggests an expansion in the
economy of the county attributable to outdoor recreation. But
growth or an increase in the value of the total product does not
in itself guarantee an improvement in the income status of
the residents of the county. With earnings distributed on the
basis of ownership, the income benefits of an increase in the
value of the total product of an economy such as Suwannee
County may accrue exclusively to nonresidents. Hence, a pro-
cedure was devised and employed to demonstrate a distribution
of an upward trend in the value productivity of riverfront land
with respect to resident owners. But does the estimate that
resident income benefits were more than $2 million between
the end of World War II and 1962 define the impact of outdoor
recreation on the income status of county residents?
Within the framework employed, economic growth is viewed
as an expansion in total value productivity which halts at the
point of equality between total revenue and total cost. While
the inequality between total revenue and total cost can be
disturbed, it is a temporary and transitory state characterized
by constant change until a new equality is established.14 Given
an equality of total revenue and total cost, the distribution of
the total revenue is predictable. Each resource will receive the
value of its marginal product, and the distributive shares of
each input will exactly exhaust total revenue. Because total
revenue does not accrue to the firm but to the owners of resources
employed by the firm, for purchased resources cost is equal to
the value of the product generated by the resource. Therefore,
the economic status of the firm is dependent exclusively on the
value productivity of owned resources. And the return to
owned resources is equal to opportunity cost.
Because all revenue must be allocated to factors and the return to factor
owners is a cost, that an inequality between total revenue and total cost
can exist is questionable. When TR>TC it is argued that factor returns
have been understated, and when TR stated. Commonly, understated and overstated factor returns are labeled
profits or losses, respectively.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


From the standpoint of the economy of the county, the
relevance of resident ownership of riverfront land is clear.
The upward trend in the value productivity of riverfront land
following World War II increased the total revenue of the
economy of the county, but with the sale of the land by residents
to nonresidents, the status of that which was sold with respect
to the economy of the county changed. Instead of "owned," it
became a purchased resource, the revenue from which was
exactly equal to cost. Therefore, the value of the product from
riverfront land when purchased by nonresidents became the
property of owners who either consumed or invested it elsewhere.
However, in exchange for the value productivity of river-
front land, nonresidents paid residents money, which at the
time of sale was exactly equal to the current and discounted
future value productivity of the riverfront land involved. It is
estimated that the transfer of money to residents through the
sale of riverfront land between the end of World War II and
1962 amounted to more than $1 million. In addition, residents
owned riverfront land with an estimated market value of slightly
less than $1 million. While nothing is known of the internal
distribution or disposition by recipients, the role of resource
returns in the development and growth of an economic entity
is known.
The personal income position of the residents of Suwannee
County in 1961 is shown in Table 14. In a functional sense, the
three broad categories may be combined into two: a single cate-
gory which combines extractivee industries" and "other," on
the one hand, and "nonextractive industries." The first of these
categories which amounted to $8.67 million in 1962 and ac-
counted for $583 per capital income, provides a rough estimate
of resident-owned resource earnings in agriculture and income
transfers. It is this category of income on which the "non-
extractive industries" (mainly the trades, services, and related
industries) or residents owning resources without a use in
agriculture have traditionally been dependent for a product of
value in a rural area. Observe that in 1962, resource use outside
agriculture generated earnings of $9.77 million, which is in
excess of resource earnings in agriculture plus income transfers.
The relationship postulated between the two income cate-
gories is that the second is a function of the first. Moreover,
the use of resident resources in response to the demand for








Outdoor Recreation


goods and services by owners with resources employed in agri-
culture generates income benefits which, in turn, create a demand
for additional goods and services.1'


Table 14.-Personal Income; Amount Received by Civilians for Participat-
ing in Production, by Major Source, Suwannee County, Florida,
1961.
Amount Per
Capita
(Dollars) (Dollars)
Extractive industries 4,968,000 3341
Nonextractive industries ** 9,768,000 6554
Other t 3,703,000 249
Totals 18,439,000 1,238

* Agriculture, forestry, and mining
** Production other than in the extractive industries.
Dividends, interest, rent, transfer payments, and military compensation.
$ Estimated from a total for both the extractive and nonextractive industries.
Source: Statistics of Personal Income, Population, Employment and Construction for Florida
Counties, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, College of Business Admini-
stration, University of Florida. State Economic Studies No. 15, May 1963, Tables
7 and 8, pages, 16-17.

If in 1962, an average price of $166 per acre accurately re-
flected the market price, which since the end of the war had
advanced from zero, the increase in value productivity amounted
to approximately $3.3 million. This represents an increase in
the earnings of a resource indigenous to the economy. However, it
is estimated that of this amount $1.1 million accrued to non-
residents, while resident owners received $2.2 million. The

' The impact of an investment in Suwannee County under two sets of
assumptions demonstrates the multiplier effect of an increase in demand
for resident-owned resources. First, assume a defense installation of public
land without remuneration in the county with a cost of $10 million. How-
ever, the installation, fabricated elsewhere, is installed by a group of tech-
nicians in a brief time. Since the personnel who made the installation do
not make a single purchase in the county, and operation is automatic, the
value productivity of resident-owned resources is not changed in any way.
Therefore, the economic impact of an expenditure of $10 million for an
installation located in the county is zero.
As an alternative, consider the establishment of an installation in the
county under identical circumstances with one exception. The operation
of the installation requires a labor force with eligibility for employment
limited to county residents. Without further details, the objective of the
comparison is apparent. The local recruitment of a labor force constitutes
an increase in the demand for the product of a resident-owned resource.
While the increase in value productivity of the economy of the area attri-
butable to the venture is unknown, from the standpoint of the residents it
is of little consequence. Because resident income is dependent on the earn-
ings of owned resources, a shift of nonresident-owned resources into an
area must elevate the value productivity of resident-owned resources to
effect an upward shift in the per capital income for the local economy.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


problem at hand is to examine the impact of an increase in re-
source earnings of this magnitude on the economy of the county.
The relationship between resource returns from the extrac-
tive industries and transfer payments and other income in 1961
provides a clue. If accepted without reservation, in 1961 each
$1 in income from the extractive industries plus income trans-
fers generated a personal income of $1.13 in the remainder of
the economy.
When applied to the returns from riverfront land, it appears
that the $2.2 million which accrued to resident owners of river-
front land during the 1950-1962 period generated an additional
increase in personal income of $2.5 million for resource owners
outside the extractive industries. While it is a rough approxima-
tion that assumed an almost simultaneous multiplier effect of an
increase in resident income from riverfront land, Table 15 pre-
sents an annual distribution of the $4.7 million increase in
personal income attributed to riverfront land.

Table 15.-Estimated Annual Distribution of the Personal Income Benefits
From the Increase in Value Productivity of Riverfront Land,
Suwannee County, Florida, 1951-1962.
Resident Income Resident Income
Benefits From Benefits Generated by Total Resident
Year Riverfront Land Riverfront Land Benefits Income Benefits
(Dollars) (Dollars) (Dollars)
1951 251,134 283,781 534,915
1952 249,262 281,666 530,928
1953 231,682 261,801 493,483
1954 229,437 259,264 488,701
1955 204,750 231,368 436,118
1956 203,078 229,478 432,556
1957 146,419 165,453 311,872
1958 115,544 130,565 246,109
1959 93,847 106,047 199,984
1960 88,985 100,553 189,538
1961 87,308 98,658 185,966
1962 79,456 89,785 169,241
Source: Calculated from the incremental annual increase in the value productivity of
resident-owned riverfront land with the assumption that the multiplier effect of personal in-
come from the riverfront land was $1.13.

Notwithstanding the crudity of the estimates, the informa-
tion in Table 15 strongly suggests the major impact of the
increase in value of the product of riverfront land following
World War II on personal income in Suwannee County occurred
prior to 1962. With a valid claim by nonresidents for the future
earnings of approximately three-fourths of the riverfront land







Outdoor Recreation


in the county, it is difficult to visualize an increase in earnings
by the remaining one-fourth equal to the 1950-1962 period.
However, this does not specify dwindling personal income bene-
fits that will ultimately reach zero when all the land is owned
by nonresidents. For most nonresident owners to develop fully
the potential of the riverfront land as an input for outdoor
recreation, other resources are required. It is the requirement
for consumption goods which increases the demand for resources
other than riverfront land that may elevate the personal income
of the county residents more than the income benefits from the
change in the value productivity of the land.
Relying on the multiplier effect of resource earnings in the
extractive industries, it is assumed that each $1 spent by
nonresidents in Suwannee County in the development and use
of a riverfront site after the acquisition of the land will generate
an increase of $1.13 in the total personal income of the economy
of the county. This amounts to an exchange of resident-owned
goods and services in various forms for the money of non-
residents. Therefore the initial additions of personal income
to the economy of the county are limited to the value pro-
ductivity of the resident-owned resources involved in the pro-
duction of purchased goods and services. But with an addition
to the personal income of the county, the purchasing power of
the recipients is increased, and the total value productivity of
the economy expands. Of the incremental increase in the total
value productivity of the economy, resident resource owners re-
ceive a distributive share.
To evaluate the impact of nonresident spending in the
county for outdoor recreation on the personal income status
of the residents, for convenience, two categories are recognized
and examined separately. In addition to a purchase of land for
a site, the economic impact of which has been examined, for an
intensive use, shelter is a usual requirement. And once plans
have been made for a shelter, in addition to the utilization of a
wide range of building materials and craftsmen, if used for pro-
longed periods, a water supply and provisions for sewage disposal
are critical problems. Finally, after the development of a site
for an intensive use as an outdoor recreational unit by non-
residents, with use a second source of demand for resident-owned
resources is created. Expenditures for such items as food, elec-
tricity, insurance, appliance repairs, gasoline, fish bait, and the







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


like create a demand and elevate the value productivity of resi-
dent-owned resources."
Whether a part or all the purchase price for a good or service
by a nonresident accrues to resident-owned resources, that which
does constitutes an incremental increase in the value productivity
of resident-owned resources. Expended locally for goods and
services and distributed on the basis of the value of inputs be-
tween resident and nonresident resource owners, a second in-
cremental increase in the value productivity of resident-owned
resources occurs. Subsequent transactions involving a distribu-
tive share of the value of the product to resident-owned resources
continue to increase resident-owned resource returns but at a
decreasing rate, and, it is assumed, are zero when the total in-
crease in resident-owned resource earnings from $1 spent by a
nonresident in the county reaches $1.13.

Income Estimates-Despite only 20 sites in the county, a
wide variation in expenditures for shelter was observable. En-
countered were house trailers, shell houses, and crude cottages
obviously constructed from used lumber, as well as a number of
units which appeared to represent an investment in excess of
$10,000. A wide variation existed with respect to the investment
in shelter and it is possible that the future development of these
sites may fail to follow the initial trend. It, therefore, appeared
necessary to rely exclusively on hypothetical data.
Within the limitations of the assumptions, Table 16 shows the
relationship between investment by nonresidents and both total
and per capital income for the residents of the county. An annual
increase in per capital income of $100 from this source would re-
quire an average investment of $5,000 by 265 nonresidents. With
a per capital income of $1,238 in 1961, an increase of $100 would
elevate income approximately eight percent. Perhaps a more
realistic problem is that of the investment required to elevate

" To demonstrate through the use of a concrete example, assume a non-
resident purchases, for $1, earthworms for fish bait from a resident who
captured them on resident-owned land in an area adjacent to the point of
sale. The objective of the details of the transaction is to specify a situation
wherein the value of the product accrues exclusively to resident-owned
resources.
On the other hand, assume a nonresident purchases an outboard motor,
manufactured in another state, from a resident dealer. While the local
dealer receives the purchase price, custody is temporary. The distributor or
manufacturer from whom the outboard motor was purchased as well as
resources involved in such services as transportation and communication
must be compensated.







Outdoor Recreation


per capital income one percent or $12.38. According to Table 16,
an investment of $164,336 is required, which is equal to ap-
proximately 33 investments with an average of $5,000. Finally,
an increase of $1 in per capital income for the county requires an
investment of $13,274 by nonresidents in housing.

Table 16.-Hypothetical Requirements for Investment in Outdoor Recrea-
tion Housing to Achieve Specified Increases in Total and Per
Capita Personal Income, Suwannee County, Florida.*
Total Personal Per Capita Investment
Income Income Required
(Dollars) (Dollars) (Dollars)
150,000 10 132,743
300,000 20 265,487
450,000 30 398,230
600,000 40 530,973
750,000 50 663,717
900,000 60 796,460
1,050,000 70 929,203
1,200,000 80 1,061,946
1,350,000 90 1,194,690
1,500,000 100 1,327,433
Based on an assumed population of 15,000 and that each $1 of nonresident investment
generates an increase of $1.13 in resident personal income.

Because the income effect of a housing investment in the
county is temporary, a more important aspect of the impact of
outdoor recreation on the personal income status of county resi-
dents is that of the demand for goods and services created by
the use of the site. Goods and services affected include a range
of items that initially may be met by the existing economy of
the county. Therefore, as with the investment in housing, the
personal income effect is examined in terms of a fixed population
of 15,000. However, with an appreciable increase in personal in-
come for the county, it is reasonable to assume that this would
lead to an increase in population.
Using Table 16 again, for an -annual increase in total personal
income of $1.5 million or $100 per capital, an increase in expendi-
tures by nonresidents for goods and services amounting to
$1,327,433 is required. In terms of the annual per capital ex-
penditures by nonresidents, either directly or indirectly attracted
to the county through the existence of outdoor recreation sites
on the river, 13,274 visitors with an average expenditure of
$100 annually are required.
Another interesting area for speculation involves a narrow-
ing of the gap in per capital income between the state and







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Suwannee County through an increase in personal income gen-
erated by outdoor recreation. In 1961, the per capital income was
$1,990 and $1,238 for Florida and Suwannee County, respectively.
With an annual increase in construction amounting to approxi-
mately $500,000 and an incremental increase in consumption ex-
penditures by nonresidents of, say $1.5 million, in five years the
per capital income of Suwannee County would equal that of Florida
in 1961. At the end of the period, the total investments by non-
residents in outdoor recreation housing would amount to $2.5
million, and the annual rate of consumption expenditures would
be $7.5 million. However, per capital income would not be equal
to that for the state except in the absence of an increase for the
state during the period. Judging from past trends, an increase
of $752 in per capital income in Suwannee County over a 5-year
period would reduce the 1961 inequality but fall short of the
average for the state as much as perhaps $250.

Nonresident Investment and Consumption Expenditures-
In terms of personal income for the residents of the county,
results of an investment by nonresidents for housing or other
site improvements in Suwannee County are identical with ex-
penditures for consumptive items generated by the use of the
investment. With expenditures for consumptive items dependent
on site investments, site investment apparently limits con-
sumptive expenditures. In the event those who purchase sites
do not develop them, and owners of acreage with riverfrontage
choose to await higher prices, investment which triggers con-
sumptive expenditures may not materialize.

Industry Versus Outdoor Recreation
While outdoor recreation has advocates, industry is a more
popular solution to the inadequate income problem in Suwannee
County. When examined, the attractiveness of industry is ap-
parent.
In the preceding section, total personal income was viewed as
a linear function of resident-owned resource returns from the
extractive industries in the county." If the industry, in addition
to local labor, elevated the demand for other resident-owned
resources, per capital income would be increased accordingly.
However, a word of caution is necessary. If, for example, the
" Unearned income transfers with an identical effect were placed in the
extractive industry category.







Outdoor Recreation


industry with a local payroll of $235,000 processes agricultural
products locally, for an increase in per capital income, resident-
owned resource earnings must be increased. And unless the local
industry results in an increase in demand or price for the product
used, resource returns are not altered.
The major difference between opportunities for per capital
income elevation in outdoor recreation and industry seems to lie
in the relationship between each and the remainder of the econo-
my. For industry, the major potentiality for an increase in per
capital income rests on: 1, the availability and utilization of a
resident labor force and 2, the impact of an increase in the value
productivity of the resident labor force on the value productivity
of resident-owned resources employed in supplying goods and
services. Unless the resident labor force employed by industry
is unemployed, the addition of an industrial payroll to the econo-
my of the county does not represent a net addition to the value
productivity of resident-owned resources. The increase is limited
to the difference between industrial employment and earnings
prior to industrial employment. But if recruited from agricul-
ture, for example, personal income for the individual work-
er may increase from industrial employment, and per capital in-
come for the county decline.
Consider the farm operator with gross sales of $4,000 per
year of which $1,500 is the distributive share for owned re-
sources. The remaining $2,500 is for purchased resources. The
$1,500 return to owned resources generates a resource return
of $1,695 for a total of $3,195. In addition, the $2,500 expendi-
ture for purchased resources generates resource returns amount-
ing to $2,825. Therefore, total resident-owned resource returns
generated by the farm operation are $6,020.
On the other hand, suppose the farm operator discontinues
farming and accepts employment at a newly established local
industry at an hourly wage of $1.25, which amounts to $50 per
week or $2,600 annually. The annual value productivity of his
labor is increased from $1,500 to $2,600 but resident resource
earnings for the economy decline from $6,020 to $4,038.18
The paradox of an increase in the value productivity by an

Implied is that a departure of the farm operator for industrial employ-
ment will idle the farm. However, this assumption is not altogether unreal-
istic. Given the opportunity for local industrial employment, one arrange-
ment is to abandon agricultural production but use the farmhouse as a
rural residence.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


individual and at the same time a decrease in total value pro-
ductivity for resident-owned resources is explained by the ag-
gregate level of resource use. The average value productivity of
labor in agriculture is low as compared to industry, but in agri-
culture labor is combined with a large number of other resources
many of which are resident owned. Hence, the share of the value
of the total product of a farm operation which is sacrificed by
the area is greater than the added value productivity of the labor
of the farm operator in industrial employment.
In contrast to industry, after the initial impact on the econo-
my of the increase in demand for riverfront land and invest-
ment in site improvement, resident resource returns from out-
door recreation are dependent on an increase in the value
productivity of resources employed in the service industries.
Presumably, this is the sector of the economy in which idle
resources exist.19 The effect of an increase in the demand for
goods and services by those seeking outdoor recreation in the
county is analogous to utilizing the idle capacity of the economy
of the county in contrast to a shift of resources to industry
which elevates the value productivity of labor, but, through the
creation of idle resources, decreases the product of value of the
economy.

CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS
The information is convincing that a substantial shift in the
demand for riverfront land in Suwannee County occurred be-
tween the end of World War II and 1962. And if the observed
change in price for riverfront land during the period is indicative
of the eventual value productivity of riverfront land in outdoor
recreation, both an expansion of the tax base of the county and
an increase in resident-owned resource returns is suggested.
However, the barriers to a realization of the potential impact
of the use of riverfront land for outdoor recreation on the econo-
my of the county are formidable.
The two most important anticipated impediments to the
gradual and ultimate shift of all the riverfront land in Suwannee
County into outdoor recreation are: competition from other uses,

19 One may argue that idle resources exist in agriculture; however, a more
logical formulation of the problem is that resident-owned resource returns
in agriculture are insufficient to generate a demand for resident-owned
resources for which a use does not exist in agriculture.







Outdoor Recreation


and, a lack of services adequate to meet the requirements of a
concentration of users.
While the prevailing disposition to place the burden of local
taxation on improvements rather than land may be an attraction
to nonresidents to acquire a recreational site on the river to be
developed and used at some indefinite date in the future, the
practice may also impede a shift of land from forestry to a use
for recreation. As long as the upward trend in riverfront land
prices is substantial, and the holding cost of the land is nominal,
there is a strong tendency for the use of land as an investment
to compete with the use of land for outdoor recreation. Un-
fortunately, from the standpoint of county tax base, until land
has been shifted into recreation, it is among the least productive
in the county.
One guard against a delay in the shift of land into outdoor
recreation is for the county to enter the investment field. How-
ever, instead of cottages, it could be in the form of public camp-
ing areas, boat launching facilities, nature trails, and the like.
With the impact of investment on the economy minor as com-
pared to that of consumptive expenditures which follow, public
facilities attractive to nonresidents seeking outdoor recreation
are potentially more productive from the standpoint of generat-
ing consumptive expenditures in the county than individually
developed cottages.
To illustrate, Camp O'Leno, a state park located between Lake
City and High Springs on U. S. Highways 441 and 41, provides
overnight camping facilities as well as the necessary require-
ments for group meeting. Despite a sparse rural population, a
large number of business establishments are operating in the
vicinity of the park. A large part of the volume of business in
the area is attributable to purchases by nonresidents and campers
at the park. The economic potentialities of the use of public
facilities by nonresidents is also demonstrated by the expendi-
tures of those visiting the Great Smoky Mountains National
Park located in southeastern Tennessee and southwestern North
Carolina in 1958. It is estimated that approximately 3.2 million
persons spent $35 million within an area extending 30 miles be-
yond the park boundaries (4). According to this estimate, the
average per capital expenditure by visitors was slightly less than
$11. Using Table 16 and the average per capital expenditure for
the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, reveals that 120,000







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


nonresident park visitors would elevate the average per capital
income of the county $100, and 1 million annually would raise
it to more than $2,000.
In view of the fact that in 1962 more than 1,000 individual
outdoor recreational sites were identified, and more than two-
thirds of the land with riverfrontage in the county was owned
by nonresidents, apparently the optimum arrangement from the
standpoint of elevating the personal income of the residents
would be the promotion of a combination of the two. In reality,
the suitability of the riverfront land for outdoor recreation sug-
gests such an arrangement. Flooding may discourage permanent
structures and the intensive use of perhaps 40 percent of the
land with riverfrontage in the county for several decades, but
the handicap of periodic flooding may be much less when develop-
ed and used as a public facility. The only difference in impact
on the economy of the county between public and private develop-
ment would be in the area of investment. With private develop-
ment from nonresident funds, each $1 of investment would
generate an increase of $1.13 in personal income; an investment
by the county would be at the expense of an alternative.
A second barrier to a complete shift of riverfront land in the
county into an outdoor recreation use is more serious. While more
than 200 individually owned outdoor recreational sites in Suwan-
nee County were identified in 1962, those with improvements
in the form of cottages or permanently placed house trailers
were limited to 24. Among these, sewage disposal varied from
the most primitive arrangements to modern septic tanks. Like-
wise, arrangements for water were equally varied; some de-
pended on the river, while others were serviced by a drilled well
and electric pump. Apparently, each had provided individual
services in line with desires and, perhaps, financial capabilities.
Admittedly, in 1962 the arrangement appeared to be satis-
factory. But while there was a tendency for the developed recre-
ation units to be clustered in subdivisions, the 24 units involved
were distributed among approximately 1,000 sites located in nine
subdivisions. It is apparent that with 1,000 units occupying 248
acres of land, such an arrangement would be intolerable. In addi-
tion to the requirement for a systematic procedure for garbage
disposal in order to preserve the esthetic values of the area, there
are health considerations. With an estimated 90 percent of the
riverfrontage in the county subject to periodic flooding and with







Outdoor Recreation


a concentration of make-shift septic tanks intermingled with
various and sundry arrangements for water, conditions seem to
be optimum for an overflow of the river to result in an inter-
change between the two. In the absence of interference in ad-
vance by public health authorities, one would suspect that it
would occur after an epidemic of a communicable disease trace-
able to the arrangement.
The effects of the use of the existing outdoor recreation units
in the county were visible in 1962. Without a means for garbage
disposal, at the end of a weekend at the river, one solution seems
to have been to assemble the garbage and either throw it in the
river or dump it alongside the road in the neighborhood of the
subdivision.
In contacts with the residents of the county relative to the
growth in the popularity of the area for outdoor recreation and
the potentialities of outdoor recreation as a source of income
for the area, a belief was detected that any effort to direct the
development of the riverfront subdivision along desired lines
would retard the shift of riverfront land into outdoor recreation.
And without more evidence to the contrary, this possibility can-
not be completely dismissed. On the other hand, for an ultimate
shift of the entire riverfrontage of the county into an intensive
outdoor recreation use, to assume the county will be able to
escape all responsibility for the orderly development and solu-
tion to problems that will inevitably develop is highly debatable.
Moreover, to solve the envisioned problems may require a sub-
stantial amount of funds.
Various devices or tools have been used to cope with the
growth problems of a geographic area. Some of the tools are
used to prevent the development of problems, while others take
as given a problem and provide a framework for testing alter-
native solutions.
To illustrate, zoning may be used to prevent the creation and
development of a subdivision in an area where septic tanks are
an inadequate means for the disposal of sewage. But given the
existence of a group of cottages with a septic tank problem,
authority for a special assessment to construct a sewage disposal
unit may be the most logical solution to the problem.
While sewage disposal is viewed as the major problem, others
are visualized. Police and fire protection, maintenance of roads,
and a host of other but less important public services must be







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


provided. With occupancy largely limited to summer weekend
residents and a lesser number of retired permanent residents,
an expansion in the school system is considered unlikely. How-
ever, a scattering of permanent residents throughout such an
area with schoolage children that will require an expansion in
school bus lines is a distinct possibility.
If eventually shifted into an intensive use for outdoor recrea-
tion, riverfront land could develop into the largest single source
of local revenue. In addition, the anticipated consumptive ex-
penditures would result in a substantial increase in resident-
owned resource returns. However, in the absence of a solution
to the many problems such a shift will create, the impact of
outdoor recreation on the economy of the county may never
exceed, say, 10 percent of the visualized potential.


LITERATURE CITED

1. Bureau of Economic and Business Research, College of Business Ad-
ministration, University of Florida, Gainesville, Economic Leaflets, "The
Per Capita Income of Florida Residents," February, 1961.
2. Cooke, C. Wythe, Scenery of Florida, Florida Geological Survey, Bulle-
tin No. 17, 1939.
3. Report of Governor's Commission on the Conservation of Florida's
Natural Resources, March 25, 1937, p. 14.
4. Report to the President and to the Congress by the Outdoor Recreation
Resources Review Commission, Outdoor Recreation for America, Janu-
ary 1962, Washington, D. C. p. 79.
5. United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, United
States Census of-Population, 1960.
6. United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Agricultural Eco-
nomics, Division of Agricultural Finance, Tax Delinquency in Rural
Real Estate in Six Florida Counties, 1928-1933, December 24, 1935.







Outdoor Recreation 53



APPENDIX

Appendix Table 1.-Estimated Height of Suwannee River above Mean Sea
Level at Crest During 1948 and 1959 Floods at
Specified Locations.

Location Height of River Above
Mean Sea Level
Section Township Range 1948 1959
(Feet) (Feet)
11 7S 14E 32.33 25.75
3 7S 14E 33.55 26.97
10 7S 14E 34.37 27.79
9 7S 14E 34.83 28.25
4 7S 14E 35.29 28.71
33 6S 14E 36.08 29.44
28 6S 14E 36.78 30.20
21 6S 14E 37.51 30.93
20 6S 14E 38.88 32.30
17 6S 14E 39.73 33.15
18 6S 14E 40.65 34.07
7 6S 14E 41.32 34.74
12 6S 13E 41.38 34.80
1 6S 13E 42.45 35.87
36 5S 13E 42.83 36.25
35 5S 13E 43.59 37.01
34 5S 13E 43.97 37.39
27 5S 13E 44.73 38.15
22 5S 13E 44.88 38.30
21 5S 13E 45.49 38.91
16 5S 13E 45.64 39.06
17 5S 13E 46.46 39.88
7 5S 13E 46.92 40.34
12 5S 12E 47.38 40.80
1 5S 12E 47.93 41.35
2 5S 12E 48.31 41.73
35 4S 12E 49.30 42.72
34 4S 12E 49.54 42.96
33 4S 12E 50.18 43.60
28 4S 12E 50.87 44.29
32 4S 12E 51.18 44.60
29 4S 12E 51.94 45.36
30 4S 12E 53.01 46.43
25 4S 11E 53.25 46.67
36 4S 11E 53.49 46.91
35 4S 11E 53.90 47.32
26 4S 11E 54.26 47.68
27 4S 11E 54.76 48.18








Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Table 1 (continued)

Location


Section Township Range


Height of River Above
Mean Sea Level
1948 1959
(Feet) (Feet)
55.32 48.74
55.96 49.38
56.67 50.09
56.77 50.19
57.39 50.81
57.80 51.22
58.06 51.48
58.50 51.92
59.06 52.48
59.77 53.19
60.36 53.78
60.95 54.37
60.96 54.38
61.52 54.94
62.23 55.65
62.82 56.24
63.04 56.46
63.36 56.78
63.39 56.81
63.97 57.39
64.40 57.82
65.04 58.46
65.60 59.02
65.93 59.35
66.80 60.22
67.51 60.93
67.83 61.25
68.70 62.12
69.31 62.73
69.92 63.34
70.15 63.57
70.32 63.74
70.93 64.35
71.36 64.78
71.97 65.39
72.14 65.56
72.86 66.28
73.47 66.89
73.97 67.39
74.47 67.89
75.08 68.50
75.47 68.89
75.64 69.06







Outdoor Recreation


Table 1 (continued)
Location Height of River Above
Mean Sea Level
Section Township Range 1948 1959


(Feet)
76.25
76.62
76.90
77.29
77.79
78.51
79.34
79.79
80.40
80.48
80.87
81.26
81.61
82.22
82.99
83.71


(Feet)
69.67
70.04
70.32
70.31
71.21
71.93
72.76
73.21
73.82
73.90
74.29
74.68
75.03
75.64
76.32
77.04




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs