- Employment Status
- Earnings and Income
- Self Employment and Income
- Poverty
- creating a business development planning process and initial business feasibility plans for natural resource-based products
- creating and implementing branding and trademarking of area products
- developing a full-scale marketing plan for natural and cultural resource-based tourism efforts and assets, and building on existing rural tourism efforts and assets
- creating management standards for visitor safety and resource impacts for tourism
- establishing educational programs for businesses operating in the region about how to operate in an environmentally conscious manner with respect to waste management, wildlife impact, and other resource considerations.
- Relationship to Neighboring Urban Areas
- Relationship to the Larger Edisto River Basin
To fully characterize the ecology of the ACE Basin, it is necessary to understand its human dimension. Ecologists are increasingly recognizing humans as an integral part of an ecosystem. Our interactions with the landscape – extraction of resources and alteration of the physical environment – have intentional, and often unintentional, results. For effective management, a synthesis of physical, biological, and human information is needed.
The aim of development is to provide economic benefits, but unchecked development can lead to problems, including conflict between uses and the degradation of natural resources and others. In the ACE Basin, high quality natural resources are seen as one of the area’s greatest economic assets, and the formulation of strategies for conserving and capitalizing on those assets is the focus of several economic development studies (ACE Basin Economic Forum 1996, Beasley et al. 1996, Corporation for Enterprise Development (CFED) 1995, Lowcountry Council of Governments (LCOG) 1994, Perry et al. undated).
The interconnection between the natural environment and human economic development is receiving increased recognition, resulting in intensified efforts to use environmental concepts and methodologies in economics. In the area of environmental economics, environmental costs are integrated into economic strategies, and environmental concerns are a central part of development plans (Grigalunas and Congar 1995, Costanza et al. 1997). The ACE Basin Economic Forum conducted in 1995 and the ACE Basin Project were both guided by these concepts and motivated by the view that the ACE Basin’s economic development and conservation agendas can be mutually beneficial.
The socio-economic information that follows is an attempt to synthesize demographic, social, and economic data relevant to the ACE Basin and frame them in this perspective.
In helping to characterize the basin’s residents and businesses, these data help complete the framework of information necessary for effective management of conservation and development in the ACE Basin. And the socio-economic data provide important perspective, because, not only are the individuals and businesses that reside in the ACE Basin the primary stakeholders in the region’s ecological health and economic development, ultimately, they are the determining factor for what strategies will or will not succeed in the area.
There is no economic unit that corresponds exactly with the ACE Basin study boundary, which is a
hydro-geographic, rather than a political or economic, distinction. The
study boundary
comprises
portions of five counties and divides county, subdivision, and block-group U.S. Census statistical
groupings. Because no socio-economic data have been compiled specifically for the ACE Basin,
discussion of the basin’s socio-economics must be qualified by a definition of the spatial
extent of the area for which data is presented. Although no one data set will capture the entire
study area, by looking at a variety of data from various spatial subsets of the area, a general
picture of the social and economic character of the ACE Basin can be cautiously inferred.
A
map of population density
within and
adjacent to the ACE Basin shows that population within the basin boundary is sparse, with a few
small clusters of higher density. Within the basin, population is centered near the three
incorporated municipalities of Walterboro, Cottageville, and Edisto Beach in Colleton County. In
the areas outside of, but within fifty miles of, the study boundary major population centers
include Beaufort and Hilton Head in Beaufort County, Charleston in Charleston County, and
Summerville in Dorchester County. All are significant tourism areas, and Charleston is also a major
metropolitan area. (See related section: Urban
Areas.)
The majority of the study area, 67%, is within Colleton County, so county-level economic data for Colleton will clearly help characterize the ACE Basin. A smaller percentage of the study area falls within Charleston and Beaufort Counties, 12% and 14%, respectively. However, economic data for these counties incorporate significant metropolitan and tourist areas adjacent to the basin. County-level data for Charleston and Beaufort are offered both to serve as point of comparison with Colleton County and to help capture the full diversity of socio-economic conditions from which economic development in the ACE Basin may proceed. Because just 5% of the ACE Basin study area lies within Hampton County and the area does not possess distinct socio-economic traits likely to skew the picture of the basin as a whole, data for Hampton County are not included here. Dorchester County data are also excluded, because only 1% of the study area falls within it.
U.S. Census county subdivision data (the primary subdivisions of counties, known as census
county divisions, or CCDs) provide finer resolution economic, social, and demographic
information
at a sub-county level that can reasonably be used to characterize smaller communities within the
basin. Data are presented from four Colleton County CCDs and one Charleston County CCD: Walterboro,
Cottageville, Hendersonville, Green Pond, and Edisto Island (See
map of economic units
). Several
of these subdivisions have distinguishing characteristics that should be borne in mind when
considering the demographic and economic data for the area.
The Walterboro subdivision contains the Town of Walterboro, the largest town in Colleton County. Fifty-four percent of Colleton County residents reside here, as does the majority of the county’s economic activity. Additionally, Walterboro is considered the only place in Colleton County with public water and sewer to support additional growth (Colleton County Land Use Planning Task Force 1997).
The Cottageville subdivision, which includes the Town of Cottageville appears to be serving a growing role as a bedroom community for Charleston and surrounding areas. The Cottageville subdivision has the highest commuting rates in Colleton County: 58% of its workers travel outside of the county to work (Colleton County Land Use Planning Task Force 1997).
The Green Pond subdivision contains the Town of Edisto Beach, a resort community economically atypical of the subdivision and county averages. Edisto Beach is characterized by a higher percentage of residents over age 65, a higher percentage of residents with bachelor’s degrees or higher, and significantly higher median household income than the rest of Colleton County. The Edisto Island subdivision of Charleston County is adjacent to the Town of Edisto Beach. Traditionally a rural population, the Edisto Island CCD has experienced some high-end residential development associated with Edisto Beach and with metropolitan Charleston.
The ACE Basin’s early heritage is that of a community of plantations with large slave
communities growing rice, indigo, and cotton for export. Walterboro’s historic position was as
a resort community for farmers and plantation holders.
Today, the ACE Basin has characteristics typical of rural farming communities. According to 1990 census figures, less than 1% of residents in the five Census subdivisions highlighted above were not citizens of the United States. Nearly 87% of the residents of these communities had lived in the same house or elsewhere in the county for the last five years, and another 7.4% had moved from elsewhere within the state. During the ACE Basin Economic Forum in 1995, local residents reflected with pride on their community’s stability and traditions, an indication that community ties are very important to local residents.
Demographics
The population inside the basin is concentrated in a few pockets of development as seen in the
population density map of the region. In 1990,
31,802 people were counted in the five census subdivisions of Walterboro, Hendersonville,
Cottageville, Green Pond, and Edisto Island, with the majority residing in the Walterboro CCD.
Population distribution among the five ACE Basin
Census subdivisions. (Source: United States Census 1990)
Of the residents of these five subdivisions, 55% described themselves in the 1990 census as Caucasian, and 44% described themselves as Black. This is in contrast to the state as a whole, which is approximately 69% Caucasian but in agreement with a recent report of the larger Edisto River Basin area (Roche 1993). Green Pond, Hendersonville, and Edisto Island report more African-American residents than Caucasian, while Cottageville and Walterboro report a majority of Caucasian residents.
Colleton County's population is expected to increase from 34,377 in 1990 to over 47,000 by the year 2010 (Colleton County Land Use Planning Task Force 1997). CFED (1995) suggested that this growth may be a "bedroom community" effect related to Charleston; this conclusion was based on the findings that of 15 similar rural counties in the United States Southeast, Colleton had the highest percentage of people commuting to work in another county. Perry et al. (undated) looked at Colleton County’s population growth for the period 1970-1990 and found that although the county’s growth was more rapid than that of the United States as a whole, it lagged behind the population growth rate for all of South Carolina over the same period.
Education
Educational attainment, as measured in the 1990 census, is low in the ACE Basin area. This
represents a potentially significant economic barrier for the region. In Colleton County, 38% of
residents 25 or older had no high school diploma, compared to 32% for South Carolina as a whole.
The largest concentration of low educational attainment in the five ACE Basin subdivisions was in
Edisto Island, where 22% of residents had not moved beyond the ninth grade. There are notable
disparities in educational attainment by race, as measured in the 1990 census figures for the five
subdivisions (Education
).
School attendance recorded in the 1990 census shows that nearly 93% of primary school students attended public schools. This may reflect limited incomes and opportunities in the area, as well as community preferences. However, this educational reality may enhance the strong local sense of community.
Employment Status
The United States has experienced record low unemployment rates in the late 1990s, and South
Carolina has been no exception, with a 4.5% unemployment rate for 1997 (United States Bureau of
Labor Statistics 1999). Walterboro, the main center of population within the ACE Basin, also had
strong employment conditions, with 1997 unemployment at 5.3% (SC Department of Commerce 1999).
Subdivision employment figures from the 1990 census indicate how well local sections of the
community are participating in the economic mainstream. In 1990, the unemployment rate across the
five subdivisions was 7%. Unemployment varied greatly among the subdivisions, from a low of 3% in
Cottageville to a high of 16% in Edisto Island. However, approximately 27% of Colleton County
residents traveled to work outside the county, compared to approximately 7% and 2% in neighboring
Charleston and Beaufort Counties, respectively (South Carolina Budget and Control Board 1999). This highlights the need for more opportunities in the Colleton
County area.
Earnings and Income
Average earnings per job have steadily increased in both South Carolina and Colleton County from
the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s. During the 10 years from 1986-1996, average earnings per job
increased by 46% in all of South Carolina and by 42% in Colleton County. Although the average
earnings per job in Colleton County grew, they did so at a slower rate than average earnings at the
state level. In 1996, the average earnings per job in Colleton County were $19,497, nearly $5,000
less than the state average (U.S. Department of Commerce 1998).
Income figures from the 1990 census are available for the identified subdivisions of the ACE
Basin. Comparisons of the subdivision and county data with state averages indicate that ACE Basin
residents, in general, earned below the state average (Comparison of household earnings
). In
1989, 40% of all households earned less than $15,000; the comparable figure for the entire state
was 28%. Approximately 7% of households in the 5 subdivisions earned $60,000 or more. Larger
portions of Hendersonville and Green Pond households earned less than $15,000 a year -- 50% and
43%, respectively. There was a notable income gap by race as well. Of Caucasian households in the 5
subdivisions, 27% earned less than $15,000, in contrast to 58% of African-American households.
Per capita income is the average income computed for every man, woman, and child in a particular geographic grouping. It varied significantly among the ACE Basin subdivisions, ranging from a high of $9,713 in Walterboro to a low of $7,447 in the Hendersonville CCD. A racial income gap is evident here as well. The per capita income of the Caucasian residents ranged from $10,110 in Hendersonville to $16,957 in Green Pond, while income for African-American residents remained in the $5,000 range for all subdivisions (United States Census Bureau 1990).
More recent figures are available for Colleton County in comparison to South Carolina. Since 1970, per capita income in Colleton has been below the state average. From 1987 to 1997, per capita personal income at the county and state level rose significantly and at similar rates, growing 63.8% for all of South Carolina and 61.6% for Colleton County. In 1997, the per capita personal income for Colleton County was $16,017, well below the state figure of $20,508 (U.S. Department of Commerce 1998).
Annual data on dividends, interest, and rent (a figure which is often used to estimate the value of assets individuals possess) for Colleton County and South Carolina illustrate that the county lags behind the state in this measure as well. In 1997, dividends, interest, and rent per person were $2,987 for South Carolina, but only $1,657 in Colleton County (U.S. Department of Commerce 1998).
Self-Employment
About 7% to 9% of the United States working population were self-employed in the 1990s (Small
Business Administration 1997). According to the 1990 census, 7% of the working residents of the
five ACE Basin subdivisions were self-employed. Across all five subdivisions, 1,201 households
received an average $15,752 from non-farm self-employment income for 1989. Self-employed farmers
earned much less, $2,867 per self-employed farming household on average (United States Census
Bureau 1990).
An examination of a decade of non-farm proprietors’ earnings in all of Colleton County as compared to all of South Carolina indicates that although proprietors in Colleton once earned more than proprietors in the rest of the state, the growth in Colleton proprietors’ income has slowed in the last decade. In 1986, Colleton non-farm proprietors earned an average of $13,682 compared to $11,312 for all of the state. By 1996, proprietors’ earnings in Colleton had grown by 8% to $14,722, while earnings in the entire state had increased by 33% to $15,015 (U.S. Department of Commerce 1998).
Poverty
According to the 1990 census, 24% of the residents of the five ACE Basin subdivisions lived in
poverty (incomes below the federally defined minimum, by family size, needed to meet basic needs),
and 12.5% received public assistance (United States Census Bureau 1990). The difference in the 1990
poverty and public assistance rates reported implies that the region is not drawing upon state
resources at a level equal to its poverty. More recent data show that in 1998 an estimated 15.1% of
Colleton County residents received either food stamps or Family Independence income support (South
Carolina Department of Social Services 1998). However, poverty data for the same year is not
available.
Focus on Edisto Beach
Although census figures for 1990 show low average incomes for many ACE
Basin residents, it is misleading to assume that average figures are representative of the whole
region. The urban areas, and especially the pocket resort and high-end residential communities,
have higher relative wealth and educational backgrounds than is apparent from the county or
subdivision averages.
The Town of Edisto Beach is one such pocket community within the Green Pond subdivision of Colleton County. It is a quiet resort community located on a 6-mile long barrier island at the mouth of the Edisto River. Its demographic characteristics differ significantly from the Colleton County average demographics and from those of the adjacent Edisto Island subdivision in Charleston County. Persons over age 65 make up just 13% of the population of all of Colleton County, yet they make up 36% of the population of Edisto Beach (United States Census Bureau 1990). The over-65 age group is increasing in the permanent population of Edisto Beach as people who have owned second homes there retire and move to the town full-time (Wood 1996). The education and income profile of Edisto Beach residents is significantly different from Colleton County as a whole. While just 9.6% of the Colleton County population hold a bachelor’s degree or higher, 34% of Edisto Beach residents have attained this education level, and the median household income is nearly $13,000 higher for Edisto Beach than for Colleton County (United States Census Bureau 1990).
Adjacent to the Town of Edisto Beach is the Edisto Island census subdivision of Charleston County. Off the only highway leading into the town, there are marsh-view residential developments outside the Edisto Beach town limits and in the Edisto Island subdivision. These developments are socio-economically associated with the Town of Edisto Beach. The Edisto Island subdivision is currently predominantly rural in character and agricultural in economy, but increasingly, large plantations are moving from being farmed to being developed as high-end residential subdivisions (Wood 1996). The 1990 population of the Charleston County portion of Edisto Island (which does not include Edisto Beach) is expected to double by the year 2015 (Wood 1996). Those new residents, like the current residents of Edisto Beach, will likely have education and income profiles distinct from the traditional rural population.
Industry
In the 1990 census, 14,161 persons over the age of 16 in Colleton County were reported as employed.
They were working in a variety of industries (Employment by job
category
). Of the
12 job categories listed, five are commonly classified as services. These five are health,
educational, and other professional services (17%); personal services (5%); public administration
(4%); business and repair services (2%); and entertainment and recreational services (<1%).
Services accounted for approximately 29% of Colleton County’s employment in 1990, roughly one
third of which was in low-end service sectors. Services and retail (18%) account for over 45% of
the county’s employment. Based on the high percentage of workers in these sectors, the ACE
Basin Economic Forum report (1996) concluded that Colleton County’s economy shows a tendency
toward low-end, low-tech, and low-value-added sectors because these categories are reported to have
some of the lowest earnings of all sectors.
Although retail trade is reported to be one of the fastest growing industries in America (United States Department of Commerce 1996), it appears to be having little impact on the economic health of the ACE Basin. Detailed data for 1992 show that the average retail sales per capita in Colleton County was $5,386, approximately 75% of the state average (U.S. Department of Commerce 1998). The majority of ACE Basin retail activity is centered in the greater Walterboro area.
Manufacturing is a significant sector of the Colleton County
economy. During the early part of this century, manufacturing was the
driving engine of the American economy and often provided high-wage jobs to low and moderately
skilled labor. Throughout the country, employment in manufacturing has declined in recent years, as
services have become more important. However, manufacturing continues to be strong in Colleton
County. In 1990, manufacturing employed 25% of Colleton County workers, compared with 7% and 11% of
Beaufort and Charleston County workers, respectively.
The ACE Basin Economic Forum report (1996) notes that manufacturing has shown significant increases in pay and the in number of large establishments in Colleton County, compared to all of South Carolina. According to the United States Department of Commerce, Regional Economic Information System (1998), earnings from those working in manufacturing have increased significantly, growing by 42% from 1991 to 1996, which is double the rate at which manufacturing earnings grew for the entire state of South Carolina. Records for 1996 show that 25% of Colleton’s earnings came from manufacturing, far above the percentage of Beaufort and Charleston Counties' earnings from this sector (2% and 7%, respectively). There are almost 1 dozen manufacturers listed in the Colleton County Chamber of Commerce’s Industrial Directory. Much of Colleton’s manufacturing is in value-added wood products and thus closely tied to the natural resource-based forestry industry.
Further economic development in the region is dependent on the critical factors of transportation, water, and sewer infrastructure. For residential development, water and sewer infrastructure is desirable, though wells and septic systems can substitute. Walterboro is the only area in the county with current water and sewer capacity to accommodate additional growth (Colleton County Land Use Planning Task Force 1997). Access to transportation is critical for commercial and industrial development. In the Walterboro area, access to transportation is good, with Interstate 95, two United States highways, three South Carolina highways, and CSX railroad lines serving the area. These road and rail lines provide access to Charleston’s international port facilities 48 miles away. For the ACE Basin to support traditional commercial or industrial expansion outside of the Walterboro area, however, a significant investment in infrastructure would be necessary.
Natural Resource Value
Most areas of the ACE Basin, outside of the few prosperous population clusters, are relatively poor
by traditional economic measures. However, the traditional economic picture of "wealth"
as captured in wage and income statistics does not include natural assets being held for future use
or the market, as well as nonmarket, value of a conservation
site. Nonmarket values are those not
captured in the market place, such as the value of the pollution filtering services provided by a
wetland or the value of a recreational activity like canoeing a scenic river. The characteristics
that are preserved by conservation -- such as biological diversity, wildlife habitat, scenic views,
and recreational opportunities -- help maintain a region’s rural character and quality of
life. These characteristics in turn have nonmarket value as well as market value associated with
natural resource-based businesses. Unspoiled natural resources have nonmarket value, and natural
resource-based businesses like nature tourism, outdoor recreational services, farming, fishing, and
forestry can make important market contributions to an economy. Because these assets have been left
uncounted in traditional economic statistics or development strategies, the true "wealth"
of communities where such activities take place is commonly underestimated. (See related section:
Natural Resource Value.)
Perry et al. (undated) argued that the ACE Basin Project conservation goals could negatively affect Colleton County, as some of the most attractive county land is made unavailable to developers. The study views Colleton’s options for economic growth as reduced because the county will not be able to follow the development patterns of Beaufort or Charleston Counties. Consequently, it recommends the development of alternative types of economic growth, such as ecotourism and other nonconsumptive activities like birdwatching and hiking. The study also advances the point that the loss of tax revenues to the county due to the acquisition of county lands by conservation organizations and the establishment of conservation easements is, and will continue to be, of significant detriment to the county. However, studies in other areas indicate that traditional sprawling growth may not be the economic boon it was once thought to be, as the costs of providing the necessary services and infrastructure for a parcel of land developed for residential use are found to exceed the tax revenues generated by it (Smith 1998, Vineyard Conservation Society 1998). Also, it is widely recognized that land adjacent to protected resources increases in value.
How and in what sectors would ACE Basin residents like to see their economy grow? During the ACE Basin Economic Forum in 1995, task groups were formed to develop an action agenda for economic development. The work of the task groups resulted in three key strategies: 1) to create a framework for responsible growth; 2) to enhance the awareness, understanding and appreciation of the ACE Basin; and 3) to promote environmentally compatible business development.
Natural resource-based industries have played a key role in the ACE Basin’s heritage, and they form much of the basis of the economic forum’s business development strategy. Recommendations for accomplishing this strategy involve exploring new ways to make the ACE Basin’s traditional natural resource-based industries in agriculture, timber, seafood, and local crafts develop higher value-added products and operate in a more sustainable fashion (ACE Basin Economic Forum 1996). New and increased nature-based tourism development is also desired. Specific recommended actions include
Nature-based tourism and small business developments, along with the region’s traditional natural resource-based industries such as forestry, hunting, farming, and fishing, are among the desirable and environmentally compatible endeavors that hold the potential to capitalize on and protect the region’s character and natural assets. The following section looks at each of these natural resource-based industries more closely. (See related section: Land Use Module.)
Tourism
Tourism is the focus of additional community efforts in the ACE Basin. Strategy two of the ACE
Basin Economic Forum (1996) includes raising the profile of the area as a tourism destination and a
quality living environment with rich cultural traditions so that the area’s tourism potential
could be increased. The Artisans Center in Walterboro is one successful new initiative that drew
20,000 visitors and generated $275,000 in its first year.
The Town of Edisto Beach in the Green Pond subdivision of Colleton County is currently a popular seasonal destination for beach vacationers seeking a quiet community without the carnival-like commercial atmosphere found in and around many other beach resort areas (Wood 1996). Based on water usage, one estimate of summer population averages 5,500 people, which is nearly 4,900 more than the estimated 1995 permanent population (Wood 1996). The nearby Edisto Beach State Park in the Edisto Island subdivision of Charleston County is listed by the South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism (SCPRT) as one of the top 12 attractions in the state, based on attendance records for 1997.
Tourism impacts the economy through the money visitors spend in an area, which helps create new jobs and encourages the establishment of new small businesses. When local residents employed by a tourist business spend their money in the community, they help strengthen the local economy as well. Local and state governments also benefit through sales taxes, hotel taxes, user fees, and additional income taxes from tourism workers.
In 1997, visitor spending in Colleton County was estimated at $53.1 million, compared to $666.7 million and $956.4 million in Beaufort and Charleston Counties, respectively (SCPRT 1997). Colleton County’s tourism wage impacts for 1997 are estimated at $10.8 million (SCPRT 1997). In 1995, the direct payroll impacts (dollars initially spent and resulting employment where sales occurred) of tourism jobs in the four-county Lowcountry/resort islands region defined as Beaufort, Colleton, Hampton, and Jasper Counties, was estimated to be $267 million, approximately 3% above the 1994 estimate (SCPRT 1995).
Throughout Colleton County, there are a number of businesses to support tourism. Forty-three
eating and drinking establishments, 13 hotels and other lodging places, and at least eight
amusement/recreational services are recorded. Lodging and amusement businesses have grown in
numbers of establishments and numbers of employees between 1993 and 1996 (Tourism-Related Businesses
).
Amusement services show the highest wages and have experienced the fastest growth. However, the
small percentage of Colleton County residents employed in entertainment and recreational services
suggests that this component of the tourism sector is not at strong as it might be.
The vast majority of hotels in Colleton County are chains in Walterboro and near Interstate 95.
These lodgings provide a place for tourists, but because they are franchises, a portion of the
corporate income flows out of the region, dampening its economic impact. The accommodations tax
collected, however, does provide revenue to the county (Tax Collections and Net Revenues
). The
higher accommodations tax collections in neighboring Beaufort and Charleston Counties reflect the
significant tourist centers of Charleston in Charleston County and Hilton Head and Beaufort in
Beaufort County. Tourists in these adjacent areas could potentially be drawn to activities
highlighting natural resources and cultural heritage in the ACE Basin. And increased nature-based
tourism in the ACE Basin could lead to more place-based lodging and dining in the area rather than
people patronizing chains as through-travelers or on day visits from Charleston or Beaufort. (See
related section: Tourism Land Use Issues.)
Hunting
Hunting as a recreational activity is closely tied to the tourism industry. It has a significant
economic impact statewide and, by inference, in the ACE Basin as well. A postal survey of South
Carolina resident and nonresident hunting licensees estimated total hunter expenditures for the
1992-93 hunting season in the state at $125.2 million (Shipes 1993). Economic data on the impact of
hunting at local levels are not specific to the ACE Basin region. However, a survey of the economic
effect of hunting in neighboring rural Jasper County was conducted in 1990 (Richardson et al.
1996). The Jasper County survey found that half of the hunters surveyed paid for access at an
average of $2.74 to $3.13 an acre. The lower average rates were paid to small landowners, and the
higher average rates to large landowners. The hunters also directly supported community businesses
through food, lodging, transportation, and equipment expenditures. Based on hunter expenditures
reported in 19 categories, 2,395 private hunters in Jasper County spent $6 million in 1990. Because
the study did not include private lands less than 50 acres, the total is considered conservative.
The study concludes that hunting on private lands has a major impact on the local economy of Jasper
County and may be a significant economic driving force in rural South Carolina.
In the ACE Basin, as in many rural areas, the demand for available hunting land has made the
leasing of hunting rights on private property a growing enterprise. More than 90
hunting clubs
have
been formed in the ACE Basin, indicating clubs are a popular means of gaining access to private
land. The existence of these clubs and inferences drawn from the Richardson study suggest that
recreational hunting is a valuable supplement to the income of rural landowners and community
businesses and may contribute significantly to the ACE Basin economy. (See related section:
Hunting.)
Commercial harvesting of furbearers takes place in the region, but harvest values have declined
rapidly since 1989 due to low market demand. The raccoon, opossum, and gray fox are the primary
species of interest in commercial fur harvesting in Colleton County. The state’s most
commercialized furbearer is the raccoon, and raccoon harvest in Colleton County is similar to the
state pattern in that numbers have drastically declined since 1989. Although the 1995-96 commercial
harvest showed an increase of 43% over the previous year’s harvest, it was 61% below the
20-year average (SC Furbearer Data
). The
traditional sale of furbearers as pelts has decreased drastically, with approximately 85% of the
total 1995-96 sales estimated to be from live furbearer sales, for which there is still a limited
market. During the 1995-96 season, the estimated total value to South Carolina harvesters for all
furbearers combined was just $113,897, nearly 85% below the peak values reached in 1987-88.
(SCDNR 1996)
Forestry
Forestry has had a long and important economic role in South Carolina and in the ACE Basin region.
The larger Edisto and Combahee River Basins, which cover the Lowcountry and southern parts of the
Piedmont area, have historically supplied lumber to wood yards throughout South Carolina and
Georgia (SCWRC 1992). Cash receipts from forest products sold from all South Carolina
forests in 1994 totaled more than $760 million (South Carolina Budget and Control Board 1998). In the ACE Basin project area, approximately one half of the land
cover is forest. From the 1960s through the 1980s, the volume of trees in the area increased
significantly to become the region’s largest "commodity" (SCWRC 1992).
From 1986 to 1992, the volume of standing timber in Colleton County increased by 6% to 8% annually
(Colleton County Land Use Planning Task Force 1997).
In Colleton County, forestry is considered one of the main local economic engines (Colleton
County Land Use Task Force 1997). The county’s 1993 cash receipts from forest products were
more than $24 million, the second highest value of any county in the state. Colleton County’s
1994 receipts, at more than $34 million, were the highest for all South Carolina counties (South
Carolina Budget and Control Board 1998), and additional
revenues of $12 million were generated from the logging and delivery of timber. Ownership patterns
in the area are similar to those of the rest of the state, with the majority of timberland
privately owned (Forest ownership
). The
stumpage
value paid to nonindustrial private forest owners in Colleton County in 1996 was $22.2
million (SC Forestry Commission 1996).
In 1995, two sawmills, one veneer, or plywood, mill, and one
miscellaneous mill were identified in Colleton County (Johnson et al. 1997). These enterprises
represent the processing side of the forestry industry. Because the government does not release
data for four or fewer firms, there are no employment or payroll data for these individual forestry
concerns. In addition to these four forestry enterprises, there were 30 lumber and wood products
companies in Colleton County in 1995. All these businesses provide additional money for the local
economy by employing local residents and paying taxes on their profits.
Though partly indicative of the demand for construction in the area, the lumber and wood products companies, being supplied by the forestry industry, help illustrate its strength as well. The 30 lumber firms in Colleton employed nearly 500 people at an annual 1995 payroll of $11.5 million, nearly 8% of the total 1995 payroll reported for county industries (United States Census County Business Patterns 1995). Much of this went to residents of the ACE Basin. It is also important to recognize that these earnings are taxed, generating revenue for the local government.
All these figures point to the productivity and strength of forestry in Colleton County and the ACE Basin region. Recognizing the significance of forestry in the county’s economy, the Draft Colleton County Land Use Plan has placed a high priority on protecting forests through sound management and stewardship. Forest management is also one of the traditional natural resource uses that is endorsed by the ACE Basin Project. The natural beauty of the area’s forests is an additional component of the forests’ economic asset to the area, as both natural and planted forests provide a wide range of benefits for wildlife and people. (See related section: Forestry.)
Agriculture
Farming is an important economic activity in
South Carolina, and agriculture was the dominant industry in the ACE Basin in the previous two
centuries. Farming continues to be important economically, though it is no longer dominant,
accounting directly and indirectly for approximately 18% of the state economy (Beasley et al.
1996). Although farming in the ACE Basin has declined, it continues to be a significant economic
activity. In 1995, farms contributed more than $15.4 million in cash receipts to the Colleton
County economy (South Carolina Budget and Control Board 1998).
Most of Colleton County farming is for crops, with comparatively little livestock. Of 1995 farm
receipts, 72% were for crops and 28% for livestock (South Carolina Budget and Control 1998). (See related section: Agriculture Land Use Issues.)
From 1978 to 1996, the number of farms in Colleton County declined by nearly 22%, and the acres of land farmed declined by 37% over the same period. According to 1992 Census of Agriculture statistics, 42% of Colleton County farmers were farming full time, and in the 1997 Census of Agriculture 40% percent were considered full-time farms. The implication is that it may be difficult for the majority of farming individuals to support themselves as full-time farmers.
Agriculture in Colleton County, 1978-1996.
In addition to the decline in farms and farmland, statistics from 1970 and 1996 show that the
farming sector of the ACE Basin economy has weakened. Though the decline in farming employment was
greater statewide than in Colleton County, the percentage of monetary increases over the same
period was much smaller in Colleton County than in the state as a whole (Farm Employment and Earnings
). Both net sales and proprietors’ incomes have increased over the period -- likely
attributable to technological and productivity advancements -- but the percentage gains in Colleton
County are less than half those at the state level.
Fisheries
At the state level, total personal income in the fishing industry was $9.3 million in 1996, and
fishing industry income in Colleton County was $407,000, approximately 4% of the state fishing
industry total (U.S. Department of Commerce 1998). These figures represent earnings through fishing industry businesses,
of which there are few in Colleton County. Undoubtedly, there are more individual fishing boat
proprietors, but county-level census economic data on individual fishing proprietors are subsumed
in self-employment income figures.
More than 90% of the commercial fishing industry in Colleton County is in shrimp. (Shrimp
landings and their values are shown for Colleton County for the period 1979-1996 in
commercial shrimp landings
.)
Perry et al. (undated) described the fishing industry in Colleton County as a relatively small but
important component of the local economy, based of the total value of fishery landings in the
county.
The total value of fisheries for Colleton County for 1988 through 1998 has been relatively flat at approximately $1 million annually, indicating an industry that is stable, but not growing. Comparison of the total fisheries values of Colleton, Beaufort, and Charleston Counties shows not only a much greater fishing effort in Charleston and Beaufort Counties, but perhaps a trend toward growth in fisheries values in those counties as well.
Colleton County’s total fisheries value and growth in comparison to
Beaufort and Charleston Counties, 1988-1998.
Recreational fishing in the rivers and creeks of the ACE Basin also contributes to the region’s economy, though it is difficult to document just how much. In 1997, there were 4,325 boats registered in Colleton County, and 10,111 and 28,686 boats registered in Beaufort and Charleston Counties, respectively (South Carolina Budget & Control Board Office of Research and Statistics 1998). During 1989-90, a creel census conducted on the Edisto and Combahee Rivers estimated the economic worth of these systems as freshwater sport fisheries to be $1.725 million annually.
Relationship to Neighboring Urban
Areas
An analysis of 1990 census data found that Colleton County’s strongest economic ties at that
time were to the north (CFED 1995). Journey-to-work data (which records where people live and where
they work) found strong commuting patterns among Charleston, Berkeley, Dorchester, and Colleton
Counties (CFED 1993). That study did not find significant commuting patterns between Colleton,
Beaufort, and Jasper Counties. The Charleston economy has been very robust in the 1990s (Williams
1998, McDermott 1998), and the larger Charleston region ranks in the best third for its type, both
in employment growth and the unemployment rates over the late 1980s and early 1990s. The region
also ranks in the best third in average earnings per job and in the growth in average earnings per
job (CFED 1995). These statistics indicate a strong regional economy centered on Charleston. During
the economic expansion of the late 1990s, Charleston researchers and South Carolina Employment
Commission officials noted the economic pull that an abundance of jobs in Charleston had on
residents of Colleton County (Williams 1998). As the Charleston region becomes increasingly more
metropolitan, the quality of life offered by the ACE Basin’s unspoiled natural areas
may grow
more appealing.
The Beaufort County Comprehensive Plan (Land Ethics, Inc. 1997) indicates that Beaufort County’s economic base is also strong. From 1960 to 1990, Beaufort County was the fastest growing county in South Carolina, with the majority of its growth occurring on Hilton Head Island. The county has a higher per capita income and median household income than the rest of the Lowcountry (Colleton, Hampton, and Jasper Counties) and the state, with a higher labor participation rate and employment by occupation more weighted towards the executive/administrative and technical positions that pay higher wages. From 1951 to 1993, Beaufort County’s job base grew 13 times over compared to a statewide increase of 3 times, and conservative estimates from the Bureau of Economic Analysis predict that job growth will continue to be strong in the county from 1995 to 2020. Much of the job base growth has been in expansion of low-wage employment concentrated in the services and retail trade, which may be a draw for Colleton County workers. Military jobs, as well as tourism and retirement/second income developments, are also an important component of Beaufort County’s economy. The county’s current economic development plan targets high technology, knowledge-based businesses that seek the higher-amenity surroundings and quality of life the county offers.
That nearly 27% of Colleton County residents travel to work outside the county, compared to approximately 7% and 2% in Charleston and Beaufort Counties, respectively (United States Census Bureau 1990), highlights the need for more opportunities in the Colleton area. It also highlights the potential for Colleton to become a bedroom community to more prosperous areas and the increased threat of subdivision of natural areas into residential developments. Colleton County appears much more likely to experience residential development pressure from Charleston County than from Beaufort County. Land use planning in the ACE Basin will be an important tool to guide development in a way that does not compromise the potential benefits of the area’s natural resources.
If the ACE Basin’s proximity to the economic resources of neighboring areas is used to support sustainable economic development of the Basin’s natural resources, then the outflowing tide of economic benefits can be turned back toward the Basin. One promising and sustainable avenue for capitalizing on the proximity of more economically robust areas is in increased nature and heritage-based tourism. The continued encouragement of sustainable practices in natural resource-based industries, such as farming, forestry, and fishing, will further enhance the natural assets that form the basis of these industries themselves, as well as the nature tourism industry.
Relationship to the Larger Edisto River
Basin
The larger Edisto River Basin comprises roughly 2 million acres draining into the longest
undisturbed blackwater
river in the United States. The southern end of the area extends into the
ACE Basin along the Edisto River and includes Edisto Island, such that 18.4% of Colleton and 27.7%
of Charleston Counties are within the larger basin boundary. The Edisto River Basin Project
(Beasley et al. 1996) was an extensive community-based effort to evaluate the basin’s assets
and plan for its future, using local knowledge and geographic information systems (GIS
) analysis.
The demographic and employment characteristics of the Edisto River Basin are much like those of the ACE Basin. Economic development is a high priority among Edisto Basin residents because unemployment is high in some areas, personal incomes are relatively low, and educational attainment levels are below the state average. Similar to the ACE Basin, about 26% of the workforce was employed in manufacturing in 1990, and farming accounts for about 5% of total employment, although the number of farms and the extent of farmland has steadily decreased since 1950. The recommendations resulting from the Edisto River Basin Project centered on the common themes of conservation and sustainable use of natural resources and compatible economic development. Recommended methods for achieving these goals included partnerships, education, local planning and decision-making, best management practices, incentives, and research.
Author
D. Clones, Corporation for Enterprise Development
ACE Basin Economic Forum. 1996. ACE Basin economic forum: healthy economy, healthy environment. An action agenda for compatible economic development. June 1996. Walterboro, SC.
Beasley, B. R., W. D. Marshall, A. H. Miglarese, J. D. Scurry, and C. E. Vanden Houten. 1996. Managing resources for a sustainable future: The Edisto River Basin Project. Report. No. 12. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Water Resources Division, Columbia, SC.
[CFED] Corporation for Enterprise Development. 1993. The regional performance benchmarks system: policymaker's guide and users manual. Corporation for Enterprise Development, Washington, DC.
[CFED] Corporation for Enterprise Development. 1995. Economic health assessment of Colleton County. Prepared for the ACE Basin Economic Forum. Corporation for Enterprise Development, Washington, DC.
Colleton County Land Use Planning Task Force. 1997. Draft Colleton County land use plan. March 1997. Colleton County, Walterboro, SC.
Costanza R., R. d'Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. V. O'Neill, J. Paruelo, R. G. Raskin, P. Sutton, M. van den Belt. 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature. 387:253-260.
Grigalunas, T. A. and R. Conger (eds.). 1995. Environmental economics for integrated coastal area management: valuation methods and policy instruments. Regional Seas Reports and Studies No. 164. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Johnson, T. G., A. Jenkins, D. P. Stratton, and P. S. Bischoff. 1997. South Carolina's timber industry: an assessment of timber product output and use, 1995. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. Asheville, NC.
Land Ethics, Inc. 1997. Beaufort County comprehensive plan: get a grip on our future. Final Draft October 1997.
[LCOG] Lowcountry Council of Governments. 1994. Lowcountry enterprise community strategic plan and application. June 1994. Lowcountry Council of Governments, Yemassee, SC.
McDermott, J. P. 1998. Jobless rate in South Carolina hits 40-year low. The Post and Courier. 23 April 1998. Charleston, SC.
Perry, J. M., L. A. Woods, and J. W. Steagall. Undated. A study of the economic impact of the ACE Basin Project on Colleton County, South Carolina. University of North Florida. Jacksonville, FL.
Richardson. C. L., G. K. Yarrow, and W. M. Smoathers, Jr. 1996. Economic impact of hunting on rural communities. Quality Whitetails 3(2):5-8.
Roche, M. 1993. Socioeconomic conditions in the Edisto River Basin. Part 1: current conditions. Open File Report SCWRC-NRDSS-OFR 93-02. South Carolina Water Resources Commission, Columbia, SC.
Shipes, D. A. 1993. The utilization of wildlife resources by hunters licensed to hunt in South Carolina during 1991-1992 as determined by a postal survey. South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department. Columbia, SC.
Smith, L. J. 1998. Cost of community services for West Tisbury Massachusetts: a report on the fiscal implications of different landuses.
[SCBCB] South Carolina Budget and Control Board. 1998. South Carolina Statistical Abstract. http://orss.state.sc.us/ (accessed 9 June 1999).
[SCBCB] South Carolina Budget and Control Board. 1999. South Carolina County Profiles. http://plato.drss.state.sc.us/censusfrm.html (accessed 15 June 1999).
[SCDNR] South Carolina Department of Commerce. 1999. Walterboro, South Carolina: a community profile. http://www.callsouthcarolina.com/communitytable/mapframeLowCountry.htm (accessed 9 June 1999).
[SCDNR] South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. 1996. Furbearer Project 1995-96. South Carolina commercial furbearer harvest summary. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Columbia, SC.
[SCPRT] South Carolina Department of Parks Recreation and Tourism. 1995. The Tourism Industry in South Carolina: Annual report for 1995. South Carolina Department of Parks Recreation and Tourism. Columbia, SC.
[SCPRT] South Carolina Department of Parks Recreation and Tourism. 1997. The Tourism Industry in South Carolina: Annual report for 1996. South Carolina Department of Parks Recreation and Tourism. Columbia, SC.
South Carolina Department of Social Services. 1998. Statistical Report. Vols. 56, 61, and 62. South Carolina Department of Social Services. Columbia, SC.
South Carolina Forestry Commission. 1996. Value of South Carolina's Forest Resource and Industry. http://www.state.sc.us/forest/mval.htm (accessed 17 June 1999). South Carolina Forestry Commission, Columbia, SC.
[SCWRC] South Carolina Water Resources Commission. 1992. The economy of the Edisto River Basin. Volumes I-IV and Executive Summary. South Carolina Water Resources Commission, Columbia, SC. (Drafts prepared by the Fontaine Company).
United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1999. Region IV-Atlanta Ready Facts, South Carolina Annual Averages Employment Indicators. http://stats.bls.gov/ro4fxdm.htm (accessed 15 June 1999).
United States Census Bureau. Not dated. 1990 Census Summary Tape Files. United States Department of Commerce. http://www.census.gov/cdrom/lookup (accessed 9 June 1999).
United States Census Bureau. Not dated. County Business Patterns. Economic Profile: 1993, 1995, and 1996, Colleton County, South Carolina. http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/datamap/cnty?45=029 (accessed 9 June 1999).
United States Department of Commerce. 1996. United States Industrial Outlook: 1994, 1995, 1996. United States Department of Commerce, Washington, DC.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1998. The regional economic information system [CD-ROM]. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Economics Measurement Division, Washington, DC.
Vineyard Conservation Society. 1998. Open space pays off for all. http://www.vineyard.net/org/vcs/html/open.html (accessed 9 June 1999).
Williams, C. 1998. Local economy upbeat. The Post and Courier, section D-11. 28 September 1998. Charleston, SC.
Wood, L. (ed.). 1996. Town of Edisto Beach comprehensive plan. Town of Edisto Beach and the Lowcountry Council of Governments, Yemassee, SC.