Game and Fisheries Management in State Forests: social and health benefits and positive impacts for the local economies Dr. Jukka Bisi, Game and Fisheries Manager Eustafor, Rovaniemi 11.6. 2015 1
State-owned areas in Finland 12,4 million hectares of state-owned areas One key aim is to provide citizens with hunting and fishing opportunities More than 150 000 sold licenses in 2014 Estimated outdoor days over 0,5 million A strategic goal is to measure impacts for the local economics and health benefits BECAUSE OF IMPACTS ON SOCIETY 2
Background While traveling for recreational activities, visitors use money for e.g. supplies, food, accommodation and services Positive effects to the regional economies are being generated through these monetary flows In addition: customers will have social and health benefits 3
Previous studies / experiences Metsähallitus annually estimates the local economic impacts of the 37 National parks* MGM2 application (input/output) 2,3 million visitors in 2013 creating 115,5 million economic impact in the surroundings of the National parks Essential in showing the benefits of budget funding for the decision-makers: The state provides facilities - regional economies get the benefit Regional economic effects by grouse hunters on state owned hunting areas A case study in the region of Lapland (Matilainen and Keskinarkaus 2010**) 3,500 visiting hunters spent approximately 2.4 million euro during their stay in the region of Lapland * Local economic impacts of national park visitors spending in Finland: The development process of an estimation method ** The economic role of hunting tourism examples from Northern areas. University of Helsinki, Ruralia Institute, Reports 64. 4
Material Online survey during in 2013 More than 8000 responses The average expenditure / person during a fishing or hunting trip ( ) Background information (length of the trip, forms of accommodation, company of others, etc.) Scientific co-operation with University of Helsinki and University of Eastern Finland 5
Region Hunters and Fishermens Regional Economic Impacts in State own areas 2014 Total Impacts /sold license Regional Impacts total, mill. Change in the employment (person years) Lapland 360 14,0 119 Kainuu 286 5,9 53 Nothern Ostrobothnia 284 3,2 24 Northern Carelia 194 2,7 24 6 Others 91 2,4 18 TOTAL 255 28,2 238 The use of money while 2013 traveling Eräluvat 11
Discussion People fishing and hunting on state areas bring income to the regions Retail trade, service stations and garages, accommodation and catering services benefit the most Importance especially in regions with net out-migration and ageing of population By offering hunting and fishing opportunities Metsähallitus supports the regional economies and the development of services 7
Future Pilot study experiences can be exploited to develop similar approaches for private areas Potential future application: a tangible price tag for ecosystem services (economic value for wildlife and fish populations)? Wildlife sector needs numbers to prove its position and significance in society 8
TThe influence of hunting and fishing to the state of health and well-beingnce of hunting to the state of health and wellbeing Dr. Jukka Bisi, Game and Fisheries Manager Eustafor, Rovaniemi 11.6. 2015 9
The influence of hunting to the state of health and well-being 10 The impacts on well-being and health as experienced by customers who held a hunting or fishing license Focus on small game hunters 4653 responses (97 % men) The number of kilometers walked during an average hunting day (from bag reporting system) Scientific co-operation with ODL (Hospitals Oulu) * Kaikkonen & Rautiainen 2014: Health and well-being in State-owned land study of hunters and fishermen
How did this hunting trip influence the state of your health and well-being in the following sectors? (Answer, please, each point and choose the alternative, which describes your feeling the best.) 5 = totally agree, 4 = somewhat agree, 3 = no opinion, 2 = somewhat disagree, 1 = totally disagree) totally totally disagree 5 4 3 2 1 agree Increased social welfare (f. ex. strengthened social relations, improved working capacity, enjoyed doing things alone or together) Increased psychological welfare (f. ex. satisfaction with life, improved mood, recovery from mental stress, learned something new) Increased Physical welfare (f. ex. enjoyed sensing the nature, maintained the fitness, learned new skills, physical wellbeing)
Physical well-being Hunters, average 4,5 Hikers, average 4,4 Anglers, average 4,2 Huntíng and hiking are more active forms of recreation compared to angling In the Nothern Finland higher average. Reason: more space and easier to walk? Hikers walked on average 13 km/day. Grouse hunters walked on the average 8,1 km / hunting day. Small game hunters on the average 5,7 km/day 12
Social well-beeing Hunters, average 4,4 Anglers, average 4,3 Hikers, avarage 3,9 Hunting and fishing are more social activities Hunting is social activity: 82 % of the respondents were traveling in a group (friends, family) The experienced welfare was more intensive within a person in a group 13
Psychological well-beeing Hunters, average 4,5 Anglers, average 4,4 Hikers, average 4,1 Expecially ladies felt positive impacts in their psychological wellbeeing (average 4,7!!) Anglers appreciate to fish natural fish species in natural habitats Hikers feel to relax and have a good time 14
Key results 9/10 of the hunters experienced positive impacts towards their well-being and health The experienced well-being was especially intensive among women and respondents between the age of 25-44-years The length of the trip correlated positively with wellbeing A difference could be seen already among those who stayed overnight 15
Impacts on Health and Well-being Hikers valued their park trip well-being price on the average 208 Total sum of the hikers health value in the National Parks is 226 million /year Hikers walked together 35 million km/year Small game hunters walked in state forest together 1 million km/year In addition: wild food : berries, mushrooms, game meat, fish healthy and delicious 16
Conclusions Metsähallitus has also a role in improving the health and well-being of citizens The survey confirms previous studies regarding the revitalising and activating impacts of nature The set of questions is a good tool for measuring and disseminating health and well-being benefits experienced by hunters There is more (?): The economic value of health benefits Health benefits measured 17
Discussion There is a plenty of sickness and social exclusion in society / and being in nature increases well-being The question is: how can we activate people outdoors? AND HOW COULD WE CONNECT NATURE TO THE NATIONAL HEALTH CARE? 18
Thank you! Go outdoors- invest yourselves 19