San Mateo Socioeconomics

Description

San Mateo County is one of nine counties (including Napa, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Francisco, Solano, Alameda, Marin, and Sonoma) that significantly contribute to the economy of the San Francisco Bay Area. Along with Marin County and San Francisco County, it comprises the San Francisco Metropolitan Statistical Area (California Employment Development Department 2003a). Although it is California's third smallest county, San Mateo County was the thirteenth most populous county in 2003 with a population of 717,000 (California Employment Development Department 2002). The Santa Cruz Mountain range divides the county; the western (ocean) side of the county is predominantly rural while the eastern (bay) side is densely populated, part of a contiguous urban area that stretches from San Francisco to San Jose.

Managers planning for salmonid recovery in San Mateo County face unique challenges. Because of the large population and small area, land values are high throughout the county. The densely urbanized east has experienced severe impacts to stream corridors, while the more sparsely populated west section of the county has remained relatively rural. The extremely high property values in the eastern portion of the county coupled with the economic importance of the region make acquisition and restoration of stream corridors expensive. The low percentage of unoccupied housing and the large demand for housing means that unless carefully planned, future land use decisions could negatively impact salmonid recovery (see the Factors Limiting Salmonid Production section for more information). The rural western county is mostly agricultural, but as land values increase, land use may change to include more residential development. Residential development can negatively affect salmonid recovery by increasing pollutants, sedimentation, and impervious surfaces. Additionally, flood control projects can result in channelized streams and complete loss of riparian zones (see the Factors Limiting Salmonid Production section for more information).

Demographics

In 2000 the population of San Mateo County was 707,161. People between the ages 22–39 made up 29.6 percent of the population. Over one third (39 percent) of the residents had a bachelor's degree or higher while 17.5 percent had obtained a high school degree or GED. Over a quarter of the residents (28.8 percent) had obtained an associate's degree or attended some college without obtaining a higher degree (San Mateo Planning and Building Division 2000). Higher education is correlated with greater support of environmental restoration (University of Wisconsin–Madison 2003).

There were 254,219 households in San Mateo County in 2000 with a median income of $70,819, which is significantly higher than the median incomes of most other California counties. The higher income has both a positive and a negative effect on salmonid recovery. Individuals in the area may contribute much-needed funds to restoration efforts, but agencies will have to use funding to purchase easements or property in an area with extremely high land values that are due in part to the inflated incomes in the region. Homeowners occupied 61.4 percent of the total occupied housing units while renters occupied 38.6 percent. Only 2.5 percent of available housing units were unoccupied. The low rate of unoccupied housing implies that more housing may need to be created – with potentially negative effects on salmonid habitat. As rural areas become developed for residential purposes, the change from a few landowners with large holdings to many landowners with small holdings makes coordinating salmonid habitat restoration more complex and costly. The median value of owner-occupied housing units was $469,200 and the median contract rent for rentals was $1,144 per month (San Mateo Planning and Building Division 2000), again suggesting that land purchases to support salmonid recovery will be expensive.

In 2000 there were 73,455 acres of urban land (25.7 percent) supporting 98 percent (697,471) of the population in San Mateo County. Of the 9,690 rural residents, 2.4 percent lived on farms while the remaining 97.6 percent of rural residents lived in non-farm residences (San Mateo Planning and Building Division 2000; Regents of the University of California 2000). The non-farm residences in the rural areas may present a challenge to salmonid recovery, because agricultural land is often converted to low-density residential development. As discussed in the Factors Limiting Salmonid Production section, residential development may increase roads, sedimentation, impervious surfaces, non-point source pollution, and other factors that diminish salmonid populations.

Employment Trends

During the past 50 years, San Mateo County has experienced steady population growth, diminishing agriculture and farming activities, and an increase in light industry. The light industry is predominantly based in the technology field, and its prominence has led to the conversion of agricultural lands to commercial and industrial land. One of the California Department of Fish and Game's recommendations for coho recovery is to decrease any land converted to residential or commercial purposes due to negative effects of such development on salmonid recovery (see the Factors Limiting Salmonid Production section for more information) (CDFG 2003). Unemployment in San Mateo County in 2001 was among the lowest in the state at 2.8 percent. In 2001, the largest industry in the county was service professionals, which accounted for 37.6 percent of employment with 141,000 employees (California Employment Development Department 2002). By 2006, the services industry is expected to grow by 28.8 percent. Retail trade and manufacturing are predicted to be the other two largest growth industries between 1999 and 2006, with expected increases of 9.2 percent and 4.9 percent respectively (California Employment Development Department 2003b).

Information for this table was obtained from the California Employment Development Department 2002.

Resource Industry Trends

Agriculture

Agriculture can have important impacts on salmonid recovery. Agricultural practices can increase sedimentation, channelize streambeds, remove water through water diversions, add to runoff pollution, cause habitat loss, and have other negative impacts on salmonid habitat (for more information, see the Factors Limiting Salmonid Production section). Farming operations can be managed to decrease impact on salmonid habitat. Fencing streams, restoring and preserving riparian buffer zones, using integrated pest management, and other "fish friendly" practices can protect and improve salmonid habitat (for more information, see the Private Lands Management section). Land used for agriculture is decreasing and land used for residential, commercial, and light industrial is increasing.

In 1997 in San Mateo County, the market value of agricultural products sold was $138,669,000, a 39 percent increase from 1992. Crop sales accounted for 99 percent of the market while livestock sales accounted for 1 percent of the market. The average value of products sold per farm increased 74 percent, from $331,427 in 1992 to $577,787 in 1997 (USDA 1999) due to fewer farms in the county. In 1999, San Mateo County ranked 30th in the State (of 58 counties) for total value of agricultural production, and it maintained that ranking in 2000 with $194,131,000 in agricultural products (Regents of the University of California 2004). Agricultural land is more conducive to salmonid recovery than alternative land uses, such as residential and commercial development, so land in agriculture also provides economic benefits – the money saved from more extensive and complex restoration – if managed to support salmonid recovery (see the Value of Recovery Planning section for more information).

Timber

Timber harvest can affect salmonid recovery. However, timber harvest practices can be modified to support salmonid restoration. Timber harvest practices can increase sedimentation, remove riparian habitat, increase landslide frequency, decrease large wood in streams, and cause other negative impacts on salmonid habitat (see the Factors Limiting Salmonid Production section for more information). Riparian buffer zones, selective harvest, sediment monitoring programs, and other management activities can be used to improve or maintain habitat (see the Private Lands Management section). Timber production in San Mateo County contributes less to the regional economy than does timber harvest in Northern California, but timberlands can provide an important location for salmonid recovery efforts. Additionally, land preserved for timber harvest and managed to support salmonid recovery can provide important ecosystem services (see the Value of Recovery Planning section).

In 1996 7,170,000 board feet of timber with a net value of $3,686,995 was produced in San Mateo County. All of the timber was produced by private entities (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2003). In 2001, timber production in San Mateo had declined by 42.1 percent from 1996 levels; only 4,151,000 board feet were produced (Regents of the University of California 2004).

Resource Extraction

Resource extraction can negatively impact salmonid habitat. Effects can include increased sedimentation, road construction, pollution, and habitat loss. By preserving or restoring riparian buffers, properly installing roads, and instituting pollution prevention measures, resource extraction activities can be managed to minimize their impact on salmonid habitat. Such management activities impart economic value to a region by protecting ecosystem services such as water purification (see the Value of Recovery Planning section for more information).

In San Mateo County in 2000, 116 establishments extracting naturally occurring mineral solids generated $5,448,000. Of those monies, $4,697,000 (86 percent) was generated by 103 oil and gas production establishments and $751,000 (14 percent) was generated by 13 establishments engaged in non-fuel mineral production and support activities for mining (US Census Bureau 2003). In California in 2000, the value of all non-fuel mineral production was $3,302,400,000 (Regents of the University of California 2004). The relatively small income generated in 2000 in San Mateo County given the high value of statewide production indicates that non-fuel mining does not comprise a large part of San Mateo County's economy.

Tourism

Tourism can have both positive and negative effects on salmonid recovery. Ecotourism and other nature-based tourism can provide economic incentive to preserve and restore riparian habitat; however, infrastructure required to support visitors can result in increased sedimentation, habitat loss, roads, pollution, water diversions, and other activities that negatively impact salmonid habitat. The economic benefits of passive use nature-based tourism go beyond income generated to include the monetary value of the ecosystem services provided by intact salmonid habitat (see the Value of Recovery Planning section for more information).

In the four main counties bordering the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Luis Obispo), tourism-generated income totaled about $9.9 billion in 1992. The number of tourists and the amount of income generated by tourism generally increased in the past ten years (Weinstein 2001). Tourism ranks with high technology as the two major industries in the county (ANG Newspapers 2003). In San Mateo County in October 2003, however, average occupancy of motel and hotel rooms was down 2 percent from October 2002 with 57.6 percent of motel and hotel rooms occupied. Hotel and motel room revenue in October 2003 was $240,141,437, an 8.6 percent decrease from October 2002 (Smith Travel Research 2003).

References

ANG Newspapers. 2003. Almanac 2003: San Mateo County [Web site] [cited January 11, 2004]. View on-line source.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2003. "Recovery Strategy for California Coho Salmon." Report to the California Fish and Game Commission. Public Review Draft. Species Recovery Plan Report 2003-1, 786 pp. View on-line document.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2003. Updated California Forest Statistic Abstract [Web page] [cited December 12, 2003]. View on-line source.

California Employment Development Department. 2002. County Snapshots, San Mateo County 2002 [Web page] [cited December 12, 2003]. View on-line source.

California Employment Development Department. 2003a. County Snapshots, San Francisco MSA 2003 [Web page] [cited December 12, 2003].

California Employment Development Department. 2003b. Industry Employment Projections San Mateo County [Web page] [cited December 10, 2003]. View on-line source.

San Mateo County Planning and Building Division. 2000. San Mateo County Statistics [Web page] [cited December 11, 2003]. View on-line source.

Regents of the University of California. 2004. Counting California [Web page] [cited December 6, 2003]. View on-line source.

Smith Travel Research. 2003. Standard Historical Trends, San Mateo County California. Created for San Mateo County Convention and Visitors Bureau [Excel file].

US Census Bureau. 2003. Nonemployer Statistics, 2000 Mining San Mateo County [Web page] [cited December 9, 2003]. View on-line source.

US Department of Agriculture. 1999a. "1997 Census of Agriculture, County Profile: San Mateo, California." View on-line document.

University of Wisconsin-Madison. 2003. "Environmental Economics." Agricultural and Applied Economics Department. View on-line document.

Weinstein, A. 2001. Socioeconomic Uses. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Site Characterization [Web page] [cited December 6, 2003]. View on-line source.

Back to top