In 2018, Leah Wzientek and her husband, Rusty Donlon, opened Gear Hut, a multisport used gear shop, in midtown Reno.

That winter, they took a cross-country ski setup — boots, skis, poles — in for consignment and watched the setup collect dust. The following winter, it still didn’t move.

But then Nevada Nordic, a nonprofit group dedicated to making cross-country skiing on public lands accessible, started grooming free cross-country ski trails in the Mount Rose area. Now, cross-country skis are the most popular item Gear Hut sells, Wzientek said. She estimates they sell more than 120 pairs a season, most within less than 24 hours of being consigned.

“We can’t hold on to them,” she said.

Outdoor recreation is big business. A record 180 million Americans recreated outside last year, according to the Outdoor Industry Association. And while the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis has loosely tracked the industry’s effects on state economies for several years, Nevada has long lacked state-specific data on how hiking, boating, skiing and other outdoor activities are affecting its economy.  

An economic analysis released in November by the Nevada Division of Outdoor Recreation answers that question, finding that outdoor recreation across Nevada and the Tahoe Basin (including the California side) provided an estimated $24 billion in economic benefits in 2023 and jobs for more than 75,000 people. 

The analysis had a broad definition of outdoor recreation, measuring the economic impact of the 159 million annual visits to recreation areas across the state ranging from neighborhood parks to Great Basin National Park, and it substantially dwarfs federal estimates that took a narrower definition and estimate around $8 billion and 58,000 jobs. 

It provides the state’s first data-driven picture of the full scope of outdoor recreation, according to division administrator Denise Beronio. 

“People come here for a quality of life they might not be able to get somewhere else because of the diverse and vast public lands we have,” Beronio said. “It’s really a pillar for Nevada’s identity.”

The ensuing outdoor recreation “is an economic driver for our state,” Beronio said. “And this shows the data, shows the importance.”

The analysis includes key findings such as the percent of recreation that occurs in rural versus urban communities, tax revenue and division of local versus nonlocal visitors. Using federal data, it also shows outdoor recreation having a larger effect on the state’s gross domestic product than another flagship industry — mining.

It also highlights opportunities for improvement, including workforce development and creating a dedicated funding source for outdoor recreation initiatives in the state.

“Outdoor recreation isn’t a ‘nice-to-have,’” Beronio said. “‘It’s a ‘must-have.’”

A little California bonus …

The statewide analysis paints the sector as more of an economic powerhouse than federal data, which shows the outdoor recreation industry contributed $8.1 billion to Nevada’s gross domestic product in 2023. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) cited the federal numbers earlier this year while questioning some of President Donald Trump’s policies.

But authors of the state-commissioned report say differences in data sources and methods, including the federal bureau’s decision not to include self-employed workers (common in outdoor recreation sectors such as guiding), means the agency paints an incomplete picture of Nevada’s benefits from outdoor recreation.

Mandi Elliott, executive director of the Nevada Outdoor Business Coalition, did not return calls or emails from The Nevada Independent. But in a recent op-ed, she pointed out that Nevada’s numbers are “significant.”  

“They reflect real livelihoods: outfitters, guide services, gear shops, lodging, trail maintenance contractors, transportation, food services and countless small businesses across rural and urban Nevada,” she wrote. “Many small business owners say they chose Nevada precisely because of access to public lands.”

Comparing federal data, outdoor recreation substantially surpasses mining’s $5.1 billion to the state’s GDP, although it still trails manufacturing and gaming, according to the analysis. 

The numbers also don’t fully align with federal data because they include the financial benefits garnered from outdoor recreation on the California side of Lake Tahoe (which accounts for roughly $1 billion of economic output).

“When you go to the Tahoe Basin, visitors don’t care too much about the state line,” said Johnny Mojica, chief operating officer and recreation economist at Radbridge, the firm that drafted the analysis. “We felt that it would be a more useful tool for the land managers there to have a more holistic look at the whole basin.”

The report also highlighted intangible benefits, which amount to an additional $10 billion for the state, including offsetting more than $2 billion in health costs by getting outside each year and an extra $8.2 billion in what the analysis referred to as “consumer surplus” — the difference between what someone is willing to pay and what they actually spend on a trip. For example, if a person is willing to spend up to $120 for a daylong hiking trip but their actual expenses only amount to $40, they receive $80 in consumer surplus.

These numbers are important for policymakers to consider when making decisions, Mojica said.

“Are people going to be happier, are people going to be better off?” he asked. “That allows us to say, ‘OK, it’s a worthwhile investment.’”

Moving forward

Although outdoor recreation is growing, the report suggests there is more the state can do to spur further activity.

The creation of the outdoor recreation division in 2019 through legislation was a big step — Nevada is now one of roughly two dozen states that have dedicated outdoor recreation divisions.

Next steps outlined by the report could include creating a dedicated outdoor recreation trust fund and building a structured workforce development pipeline.

In 2019, Nevada lawmakers passed AB331 to develop a grant program “within the limits of available resources” for outdoor education and recreation programs. During the 2025 session, lawmakers expanded that scope through SB21 to create a second bucket for funding infrastructure, although there is no money in that pot yet. 

Creating a permanent trust fund similar to those in other states could provide consistent funding for infrastructure and maintenance needs, the report pointed out.

In Texas, revenue from state sales tax on sporting goods is directed to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the Texas Historical Commission where it helps address state park maintenance backlogs and supports park grants. In Missouri, a one-tenth-of-1-percent sales tax generates approximately $90 to 100 million annually for state parks and conservation efforts, helping make all of Missouri’s 92 state parks free to enter.

And having a trained workforce to fill positions at parks and recreation sites would also benefit the state. The division and UNR recently partnered to launch a specialization in sustainable outdoor recreation management and a minor in outdoor adventure and leadership, but the state’s universities don’t currently offer a broader outdoor recreation degree. 

The report shows “what resources we need, where we need funding, where we need people,” Beronio said. “This is a bipartisan effort that outdoor recreation is for everybody.”