1. The Impact of the Deepwater Horizon-BP Oil Spill on Coastal and Inland Tourist Attraction Attendance
Dr. Randall Dupont
Associate Professor of Business
University of Mobile
September 11, 2014

2. Purpose of Study Perceptions in media:
Examine the effect of BP Gulf Oil Spill on visitor attendance at coastal and inland tourist attractions in the Mobile, AL area.
Perceptions in media:
Negatively impacting leisure travelers’ plans to visit.
Coastal tourist attractions
were assumed to be hit harder than inland attractions, and would take longer to recover.
Inland tourism less affected.
Coastal tourism received much national attention following the April 2010 Deepwater Horizon-BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico, while inland tourism was assumed to have been less affected. Did the oil spill impact coastal and inland tourism differently?

3. Literature Review fishing industry environment regional tourism
Previous Studies on
No Studies on
fishing industry
environment
regional tourism
hospitality industry
economic impact
tourist attraction visitor attendance
coastal vs inland
Early on, the assumption was that inland tourism areas were not seriously impacted because of their location away from the coast. Coastal tourism was the focus of media attention. These areas were expected to be the hardest hit and take the longest to recover. Initially, BP claims administrators routinely delayed or denied claims for businesses located away from the beach.

4. Economic Impact Studies
Oxford Economics –
US Travel Association
University of Alabama
Expected visitor patterns disrupted from months
Costing $7.6B to $22.7B in tourism revenue.
Average duration of impact after an oil spill was months.
Exxon Valdez took 25 months for normal visitor patterns to return.
BP spill 19X larger.
$9.6B tourism industry in AL in 2008
$3.2B from coastal counties
~$1B from Mobile area
Worst case 30% statewide loss in tourism.
Likely scenario 15%
But the U.S. Travel Association’s 2010 Oxford Economics report, Potential Impact of Gulf Oil Spill on Tourism, found that tourists shifted away from the Gulf Coast region as a destination in significant numbers, impacting all tourism in the region. Travelers believed the disastrous effects would be felt for a long time and had misperceptions over which areas were affected.
The Oxford Economics’ study analyzed 25 natural and manmade disasters, five of which were oil spills. It found the average duration of impact on tourism ranged from 12 to 28 months. After the Exxon Valdez oil spill, for example, tourism took 25 months to return to the region in terms of visitors and spending. In addition, the study found a clear and direct relationship between the length or duration of a disaster and the overall impact on tourism. Bearing in mind the Deepwater Horizon-BP Oil Spill is 19 times the size of Exxon Valdez, the report estimates in all likelihood the disruption and impact on tourism will be greater than earlier spills suggest.
More specific to this research, the Oxford Economics study expects visitor patterns in the region to be disrupted for a minimum of 15 months, which means a normal level would not return until late 2011, costing an estimated $7.6 billion in tourism revenue. However, “due to the scale of the current oil spill it is more likely that the disruption to tourism in the region will be towards the upper end of the historic range of impacts…” (p. 21). The upper end or high impact scenario is that the crisis will disrupt tourist visitor patterns for up to 36 months, with tourism not expected to return to normal until early 2013, costing an estimated $22.7 billion in tourism revenue.
A September 2010 study on the oil spill’s economic impact on Alabama estimated a worst case scenario of $3.3 billion in losses to Alabama’s economic output, and $1.6 billion to individuals and businesses. The best case scenario was $1.0 billion in lost economic output and $463 million for individuals and businesses (Addy & Ijaz, 2010).
As recently as 2008, $3.2 billion of Alabama’s $9.6 billion or 33.4 percent of the tourism industry came from two coastal counties, Mobile and Baldwin. Of the $3.21 billion from the coastal counties, nearly $1 billion came from Mobile County alone. In a worst case scenario, the study estimates a 30 percent statewide annual loss on tourism, with the bulk of that coming from the two coastal counties. The best case scenario is a 7.5 percent loss, with a very likely scenario at 15 percent loss (Addy & Ijaz, 2010).

5. Methodology Null Hypothesis
No difference in visitor attendance on a pre- and post-oil spill basis over various time frames (below)
Three time frames studied
1 year pre- & post-spill
2 years pre- & post-spill
1st year pre-spill & 2nd year post-spill
T-test analysis used
Since the focus of this research is to determine if there are any effects on visitor attendance at tourist attractions resulting from the oil spill, the research compares visitor attendance on a pre- and post-oil spill basis. T-Test analysis is used to determine statistical significance.
The average monthly visitor attendance for each attraction is examined for three time frames on a pre- and post-oil spill basis. First, average monthly visitor attendance is compared in the year following the oil spill with the immediate preceding year. Second, average monthly visitor attendance is compared in the two years following the oil spill with the two preceding years. And third, average monthly visitor attendance is compared in the second year following the spill with the year immediately preceding the oil spill.
Therefore the null hypothesis for each attraction is there is no difference in visitor attendance before and after the oil spill during a given time frame comparison. P-values for each comparison are listed in the results section, with special notation of those results with statistical significance at the 90%, 95% and 99% confidence levels.
In addition to visitor attendance, pre- and post-spill tests were conducted on tax revenues, room nights, convention attendees, and motor vehicle visitors. Although not the primary focus of this study, these factors should provide further understanding of the results.
May 2008 – Apr 2010
May – Apr 2012
Hypothesis
2 Y Pre-
1 Y Pre-
1Y Post-
2 Y Post- H1 H2 H3

6. Data Mobile Bay and Convention Visitor’s Bureau
13 Mobile, AL area tourist attractions
Data collected monthly, covering 4 years
Pre-spill (May 2008 – April 2010)
Post-spill (May 2010 – April 2012)
Oil spill occurred April 20, 2010
Attraction attendance, tax revenues, and other tourist activity data were taken from the Mobile Bay and Convention Visitor’s Bureau (MBCVB) database, disseminated by the University of South Alabama’s Center for Business and Economic Research (Center for Business & Economic Research, 2013). Although the oil spill occurred on April 20, 2010, MBCVB visitor attendance data are collected on a monthly basis. For purposes of this study, the post-oil spill impact is assumed to be reflected in data from May 2010 forward, while pre-oil spill impact in data from before May 2010.

7. Tourist Attractions Coastal Dauphin Island Sea Lab Fort Gaines
Fort Morgan
Inland – Other
Bellingrath Gardens
Greyhound Park
Museum of Art
USS Alabama
Inland - Downtown
Bragg-Mitchell Mansion
Carnival Museum
Exploreum and IMAX
Fort Conde
Museum of Mobile
Phoenix Fire Museum
Locations identified by # on map in next slide
The 13 tourist attractions studied were initially grouped in two categories, coastal and inland attractions. Three attractions were considered coastal because of their proximity to the Gulf of Mexico, the other 10 considered inland. However, the inland attractions were further subdivided into two groups by location – with six being located in mid- and downtown Mobile and four scattered throughout the rest of the county. Visitor attendance data were collected on the following attractions in the Mobile, Alabama surrounding area: Bellingrath Gardens, Bragg-Mitchell Mansion, Carnival Museum, Dauphin Island Sea Lab, Exploreum and IMAX, Fort Conde, Fort Gaines, Fort Morgan, Greyhound Park, Museum of Art, Museum of Mobile, Phoenix Museum, and USS Alabama. Other measures of tourist activity include city sales tax revenue, city room tax revenue, county room tax revenue, room nights, convention attendees, and motor coach visitors.

8. Mobile County, AL and Area Attractions1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Mobile County, AL and Area Attractions

9. Coast Attractions

10. Inland Attractions - Downtown

11. Inland Attractions - Other

12. Results – 1Y Pre- vs 1Y Post-
% Decreased
% Increased
Fort Gaines – 40.4*
Museum of Mobile – 33.4*
Bragg-Mitchell – 32.5*
Fort Morgan – 22.9
Exploreum – 20.6
Fort Conde – 20.4
DI Sea Lab – 15.7
USS Alabama – 13.0
Phoenix Fire – 8.4
Museum of Art – 0.7
Greyhound Park – 19.7
Bellingrath Gardens – 9.6
Carnival Museum – 6.8
In the year following the oil spill, 10 of the 13 tourist attractions studied recorded lower average monthly attendance levels when compared to the year before the oil spill. According to Appendix B, visitor attendance at Fort Gaines, Museum of Mobile, and Bragg Mitchell Mansion dropped 40, 33, and 33 percent respectively, while attendance at Greyhound Park, Bellingrath Gardens, and Carnival Museum rose 20, 10, and 7 percent respectively. However, none were significant at the 95% confidence level, but three of the 10 mentioned losses were statistically significant at the 90% confidence level.
Note: * denotes significance at 90% confidence level; ** denotes significance at 95% confidence level; and *** denotes significance at 99% confidence level.

13. Results – 1Y Pre- vs 1Y Post-
Coastal Attractions
Pre-Spill
Post-Spill
% Change
P-Value
Dauphin Island Sea Lab
5204
4389
-15.7
.552
Fort Gaines
6416
3826
-40.4
*.100
Fort Morgan
5657
4359
-22.9
.266
Note: * denotes significance at 90% confidence level; ** denotes significance at 95% confidence level; and *** denotes significance at 99% confidence level.

14. Results – 1Y Pre- vs 1Y Post-
Inland Attractions
Pre-Spill
Post-Spill
% Change
P-Value
Mid- & Downtown Mobile
Bragg Mitchell Mansion
1382
933
-32.5
*.061
Carnival Museum
1358
1451
6.8
.808
Exploreum and IMAX
16629
13204
-20.6
.240
Fort Conde
3607
2871
-20.4
.134
Museum of Mobile
3052
2031
-33.4
*.056
Phoenix Fire Museum
499
457
-8.4
.761
Other Inland Attractions
Bellingrath Gardens
9921
10870
9.6
.895
Greyhound Park
21516
17270
19.7
.317
Museum of Art
5269
5234
-0.7
.966
USS Alabama
20206
17575
-13.0
.454

15. Results – 2Y Pre- vs 2Y Post-
% Decreased
% Increased
Bragg-Mitchell – 28.9**
Fort Conde – 27.6***
Exploreum – 22.4*
Fort Gaines – 19.7
Museum of Mobile – 18.8
Phoenix Fire – 18.8
Greyhound Park – 15.3
Fort Morgan – 12.8
Museum of Art – 12.4
DI Sea Lab – 4.7
USS Alabama – 1.8
Carnival Museum – 12.4
Bellingrath Gardens – 7.1
Appendix C compares visitor attendance in the two years immediately following the oil spill with the two years immediately preceding it. Eleven of the 13 attractions recorded lower average monthly visitor attendance in the two years following the oil spill when compared to the same period before. Leading the decline in visitors were Bragg Mitchell Mansion, Fort Conde, and Exploreum & IMAX with decreases of 29, 28, and 22 percent, respectively. Each of these attractions showed a statistically significant decline in visitor attendance at the 95% confidence level. Carnival Museum and Bellingrath Gardens recorded only 12 and 7 percent increases, respectively, but neither was significant.
Note: * denotes significance at 90% confidence level; ** denotes significance at 95% confidence level; and *** denotes significance at 99% confidence level.

16. Results – 2Y Pre- vs 2Y Post-
Coastal Attractions
Pre-Spill
Post-Spill
% Change
P-Value
Dauphin Island Sea Lab
5495
5239
-4.7
.803
Fort Gaines
5604
4500
-19.7
.217
Fort Morgan
5779
5042
-12.8
.405
Note: * denotes significance at 90% confidence level; ** denotes significance at 95% confidence level; and *** denotes significance at 99% confidence level.

17. Results – 2Y Pre- vs 2Y Post-
Inland Attractions
Pre-Spill
Post-Spill
% Change
P-Value
Mid- & Downtown Mobile
Bragg Mitchell Mansion
1293
919
-28.9
**.016
Carnival Museum
1354
1522
12.4
.545
Exploreum and IMAX
15212
11802
-22.4
*.060
Fort Conde
3617
2617
-27.6
***.004
Museum of Mobile
2896
2350
-18.8
.135
Phoenix Fire Museum
497
403
.283
Other Inland Attractions
Bellingrath Gardens
10508
11254
7.1
.892
Greyhound Park
19661
16645
-15.3
.210
Museum of Art
5351
4690
-12.4
.203
USS Alabama
19515
19164
-1.8
.893

18. Results – 1st Y Pre- vs 2nd Y Post-
% Decreased
% Increased
Exploreum – 37.5**
Bragg-Mitchell – 34.6**
Fort Conde – 34.5**
Phoenix – 29.9
Greyhound Park – 25.5
Museum of Art – 21.3
Fort Gaines – 19.4
Museum of Mobile – 12.5
Bellingrath Gardens – 17.3
Carnival Museum – 17.3
DI Sea Lab – 17.0
USS Alabama – 2.7
Fort Morgan – 1.2
Appendix D examines if the effects of the oil spill on visitor attendance were longer-term by comparing attendance the second year after the oil spill with the year immediately preceding it. The second-year effect on visitor attendance showed the largest and most significant declines for some attractions. Eight of the 13 attractions declined in visitors. The Exploreum & IMAX recorded a 38 percent decline, while Bragg Mitchell Mansion and Fort Conde recorded a 35 and 35 percent decline. All three declines were significant at the 95% confidence level. Other attractions like the Bellingrath Gardens, Carnival Museum, and Dauphin Island Sea Lab experienced increases of 17 percent by the second year after the disaster.
Note: * denotes significance at 90% confidence level; ** denotes significance at 95% confidence level; and *** denotes significance at 99% confidence level.

19. Results – 1stY Pre- vs 2ndY Post-
Coastal Attractions
Pre-Spill
Post-Spill
% Change
P-Value
Dauphin Island Sea Lab
5204
6089
17.0
.575
Fort Gaines
6416
5173
-19.4
.425
Fort Morgan
5657
5725
1.2
.963
Note: * denotes significance at 90% confidence level; ** denotes significance at 95% confidence level; and *** denotes significance at 99% confidence level.

20. Results – 1stY Pre- vs 2ndY Post-
Inland Attractions
Pre-Spill
Post-Spill
% Change
P-Value
Mid- & Downtown Mobile
Bragg Mitchell Mansion
1382
904
-34.6
**.046
Carnival Museum
1358
1594
17.3
.593
Exploreum and IMAX
16629
10400
-37.5
**.030
Fort Conde
3607
2363
-34.5
**.017
Museum of Mobile
3052
2669
-12.5
.461
Phoenix Fire Museum
499
350
-29.9
.210
Other Inland Attractions
Bellingrath Gardens
9921
11639
.827
Greyhound Park
21516
16020
-25.5
.200
Museum of Art
5269
4146
-21.3
.176
USS Alabama
20206
20752
2.7
.897

21. Tax Revenues
City Sales Tax
Room Tax
Up 25% in 1st & 2nd year post-spill over 1st year pre-spill
City room tax up 28% in 1st year and 15% in 2nd year post-spill over 1st year pre-spill
Although the focus of the study is visitor attendance at local tourist attractions, other measures of tourist activity provided insight. Appendix E provides the average monthly revenue for city sales tax, city room tax, and county room tax for the study period. All three tax revenue sources showed significant increases in the 1-year and 2-year pre- and post-spill comparisons. City sales tax revenues, which increased approximately 25 percent in both time frames, were significant at the 99% confidence-level. City room tax revenue showed a significant increase of 28 percent in the year after the spill and 15 percent in the two year post-spill period. However, there were no significant differences in tax revenues in all three categories between the year preceding the spill and the second year following it.
Tax revenues indicate a significant increase in visitors to Mobile area.

22. Tax Revenues Revenue Pre-Spill Post-Spill % Change P-Value
1-Year vs 1-Year
City Sales Tax
$9,565,830
$11,972,846
25.2
***.001
City Room Tax
257,886
343,057
33.0
***.008
County Room Tax
168,421
215,604
28.0
**.023
2-Year vs 2-Year
$9,011,922
$11,269,606
25.1
***.000
270,545
311,473
15.1
**.029
174,048
196,793
13.1
*.053
1st Year vs 2nd Year
$10,566,367
10.5
.217
279,889
8.5
.268
181,733
7.9
.333

23. Tourist Activities by Type
Business Traveler
Leisure Traveler
Room Nights
Up 60% 1st year
Up 24% 2nd year
Basis:1st year pre-spill
Convention Attendees
Up 9.6% 1st year
Down 9.5% 2nd year
Motor Coach Visitors
Down 22% 1st year
Down 19% 2nd year
Basis:1st year pre-spill
As seen in Appendix F, room nights increased over all three time frames, 60 percent in the one-year comparison, 48 percent in the two-year comparison, and 24 percent in the year preceding-second year following comparison. Visits by convention attendees were mixed. Convention attendee visits increased 10 percent in the year following the spill and by 18 percent in the two years following the spill. However, convention attendance fell 10 percent in the second year following the spill compared with the year preceding it. Motor coach (tour bus) visitors, on the other hand, were down 19 – 22 percent over all three time frames. None of the comparisons were statistically significant.

24. Tourist Activities Activity Pre-Spill Post-Spill % Change P-Value
1-Year vs 1-Year
Room Nights
4655
7461
60.3
.203
Convention Attendees
4915
5386
9.6
.729
Motor Coach Visitors
2153
1675
-22.2
.404
2-Year vs 2-Year
4458
6626
48.6
.116
4175
4917
17.8
.430
2198
1708
-22.3
.226
1st Year Pre vs 2nd Year Post
5791
24.4
.520
4448
-9.5
.764
1740
-19.2
.470

25. Discussion Gulf Oil Spill = 19x Exxon Valdez Coastal Tourism
Duration
Findings
Gulf Oil Spill = 19x Exxon Valdez
Expected duration of impact on tourism months
Current study analysis up to 24 months
Coastal Tourism
Inland Tourism
Recovery Effort Impact
Change in Visitor Type
Change in Visitor Patterns
At 19 times greater than the Exxon Valdez spill, the Deepwater Horizon-BP Oil spill was expected to impact tourism for 15 to 28 months. For three downtown Mobile area attractions, the impact on visitor attendance could still be seen up to 24 months later. Nevertheless, 10 of the 13 attractions studied declined in visitors the year following the oil spill, while 11 were lower in the two years following. The most significant declines for some attractions were in the second year after the oil spill.

26. Coastal Tourism
Assumption
Findings
In 1st year, only 1 of 3 had significant decline.
By 2nd year, 2 of 3 coastal attractions had more visitors than year before spill.
DI Sea Lab up 17%
Fort Morgan up 1.2%
All 3 coastal attractions increased in visitors in 2nd year post-spill compared to 1st year post-spill.
Would be hardest impacted and last to recover because of long term impact of oil-spill on the beaches.
Another assumption is that coast tourism would be the last to recover because of the long-term effects from the oil spill on coastal beaches. However, the results again showed otherwise. Visitors to two of the three coastal attractions, Dauphin Island Sea Lab and Fort Morgan, had exceeded pre-spill levels by the second year. Furthermore, the visitor trend for coastal attractions was up. All three coastal attractions increased visitors in the second year following the spill compared to the first year after the spill.
On the other hand, inland attractions recovered last and slower than those along the coast. Unlike the coastal attractions which all gained visitors in the second year, of the four inland attractions that had significant declines after the spill, three had larger declines in the second year. Visitors to downtown Mobile attractions were trending down by the second year.

27. Inland Tourism Would be impacted less than coastal tourism
Assumption
Findings
Would be impacted less than coastal tourism
Initial claims by inland businesses denied by BP but paid for those along coast.
News agencies reported on losses to coastal tourism, ignoring inland impact.
Four of 10 inland attractions had significant declines.
3 had significant declines across all time frames.
Attendance at 6 of 10 inland attractions was worst in 2nd year post-spill over 1st year post-spill.
None of coastal attractions experienced significant declines, except Fort Gaines in 1st year.
In the initial months following the oil spill, the underlying assumption was that inland tourism would not be hit as hard as tourism along the coastal beaches. News reports concentrated on coastal attractions, implying that non-coastal tourist destination would fare better because of their distance from the shore line. Although this sounded reasonable, the results presented here show otherwise. Throughout the study’s three time frames none of the three coastal attractions experienced significant declines, except Fort Gaines on Dauphin Island and only in the first year. However, four of the 10 inland attractions experienced significant declines, with all four attractions located in mid- and downtown Mobile. Three of the four downtown attractions experienced significant visitor attendance declines in all three studied time frames with the largest declines coming in the second year post-spill compared to first year pre-spill levels.

28. 1Y vs 2Y Post-Spill - Inland
Inland Attractions
1Y Post-Spill
2Y Post-Spill
% Change
Mid- & Downtown Mobile
Bragg Mitchell Mansion
933
904
-3.1
Carnival Museum
1451
1594
Exploreum and IMAX
13204
10400
-21.2
Fort Conde
2871
2363
-17.7
Museum of Mobile
2031
2669
Phoenix Fire Museum
457
350
-23.4
Other Inland Attractions
Bellingrath Gardens
10870
11639
Greyhound Park
17270
16020
-7.2
Museum of Art
5234
4146
-20.8
USS Alabama
17575
20752

29. Inland Tourism Inland attractions were slower to recover.
Assumption
Findings
Would recover first because farther from affected beaches.
Inland attractions were slower to recover.
Of the 4 inland attractions with significant declines after the oil spill, 3 had larger declines in the second year.

30. Recovery Effort Impact
Assumption
Findings
Local businesses would benefit from economic impact of recovery efforts
Local areas may have benefited on macro level
Not focus of study
Not true of all businesses on microeconomic level
Some tourism attractions lost revenue while others gained.
Appears dependent on nature of traveler’s visit, business or leisure.
Another assumption was that recovery efforts would help local businesses recover lost tourism dollars. In other words, an influx of recovery personnel into the local area would translate into increased tourism revenue. While this may be true on a macro level, it was beyond the scope of this study. However, on a microeconomics level the study found that some Mobile area tourist attractions lost revenue, even while other tourist-related activities such as room nights and convention attendees increased. Therefore, not all tourism-related entities benefited equally, since not all visitors are the same. Visitor behavioral patterns appear to be affected by the nature of the traveler’s visit, whether for business or leisure.

31. Change in Type Visitor Influx of recovery effort visitors.
In 1st year post-spill
City Sales Tax Rev up 25%
City Room Tax Rev up 33%
County Room Tax Rev up 28%
Room nights up 60%
Convention attendees up 10%
Motor Coach visitors down 22%
Change in type vistior after oil spill
From leisure/family to business
Entertainment attractions up
Educational / Family-oriented attractions down
The type of traveler to the Mobile area changed after the oil spill. Leisure and family-oriented travelers stayed away while business travelers and convention attendees filled the hotel rooms. Attractions like Greyhound Park, a dog racing track, saw a 19 percent increase in attendance in the first year as business travelers sought entertainment. However, business travelers stayed away from educational, family-oriented attractions like the Museum of Mobile, Exploreum and IMAX, and Fort Conde. These attractions were all within walking distance from downtown Mobile hotels but suffered greatly from a lack of attendance. Business visitors appeared to seek tourism activities that are entertainment-related rather than educational. For example, attractions like Bragg-Mitchell Mansion which appeals to older, leisure-oriented travelers, and the Exploreum, which appeals to family-oriented visitors with children, held less interest for business travelers focused on the oil spill recovery.

32. Change in Visitor Activities
Business-oriented Attractions Up
Greyhound Park up 20% 1st Year
Leisure/Family-oriented Attractions Down
Exploreum down 40%
Museum of Mobile down 33%
Bragg-Mitchell Mansion down 33%
Fort Conde down 20%
As mentioned earlier, downtown Mobile attractions experienced worse declines in the second year following the spill. This second year effect on visitor attendance can be explained by the changing nature of visitors to Mobile. Following the oil spill business travelers flooded into the city in response to recovery efforts, while leisure or pleasure travelers shied away. In the year following the spill, city sales tax revenues were up 25 percent, city room tax revenues up 33 percent, room nights up 60 percent, and convention attendees up 10 percent. However, by the second year after the spill, the pace of oil-spill related business travelers was slowing. City sales taxes were up only 11 percent compared to pre-spill levels, city room tax revenues up 8.5 percent, room nights up 24 percent, and convention attendees down 10 percent. But while business travelers were pulling out of Mobile in the second year, leisure travelers had not yet replaced them. A proxy for the leisure traveler is motor coach visitors to Mobile. The first year after the spill motor coach visitors declined 22 percent, but remained 19 percent below pre-spill levels in the second year even though business travelers were departing. It appears business travelers were somewhat buoying visitor attendance at downtown attractions during the first year, despite their first year declines. However, by the second year, the absence of business travelers and lack of returning leisure travelers seriously affected mid- and downtown Mobile attractions. Attractions like the Exploreum, Bragg-Mitchell and Fort Conde were down 34 – 37 percent.

33. Summary Inland tourism hit harder and slower to recover.
Coastal tourism less impacted than inland and recovered first.
Changes in type of visitor and visitor activities appear to have affected visitor attendance at Mobile area tourist attractions.
In conclusion, coastal tourist attractions were less impacted than expected and recovered first, while inland tourist attractions, especially those in the downtown Mobile area, were hit harder and took longer to recover from the oil spill. The changes in type of visitor and resulting visitor patterns appear to have affected visitor attendance at Mobile area attractions.