Matrix’s Outdoor Recreation and Marine Investment Banking Group
William O’Flaherty, Managing Director  |  Matt Oldhouser, CPA, Vice President
Jason Keyser, CFA, Senior Analyst  |  Hayden N. Daniel, Analyst  | Bing Song Lin, Analyst

Click here for print friendly PDF version

Overview 

Introduction
While in the midst of summer, most U.S. national parks will see their highest visitation driven by immaculate weather, school vacations, and peak travel. There were 330 million recorded visits to national parks, waterways, byways, trails and outdoor spaces in 2024 – a record besting the prior high water mark set in 2016. Still, the 2025 travel season will appear different to many visitors as meaningful workforce cuts and spending freezes are impacting the environments on these public lands. Moreover, looming is a fiscal year 2026 (FY2026) budget proposal that includes sweeping reductions to the National Park Service (NPS). Estimates note that these reductions could lower the operating budget by $1.2 billion (38%). The result could impact the experiences many enjoy on our public lands in the immediate term.

These cuts to the national parks come during a time when many would argue federal spending in support of outdoor recreation was already lower than needed. A recent report commissioned by the Outdoor Recreation Roundtable, showed that federal outdoor recreation spending increased only 22% over the past two decades as opposed to a broader federal budget increase of 76% over that same time period.

Remarkably, their studies found that outdoor recreation’s contribution to the GDP at the time was 13.5 times greater than what the federal budget allocated to the marketplace. The imbalance was  quite significant, and that was before the most recent proposed cuts.

In this market update, we take a closer look at what has changed, and could change, with funding allocable to the NPS. We identify how advocacy groups are reacting to these changes and the opportunity for reduced impacts. We zero in on the specific impact to select hard goods and the businesses that manufacture, distribute, and sell these products within the outdoor recreation market.  And finally, we provide recommendations for positioning your business in the face of this environment, with an eye to remaining optimistic and recognizing that disruption often creates opportunity.

As we look ahead, we view the impact to tourists and park visitors to likely be greater than what is felt by the business community. The prevalence of venue alternatives, matched with the comparatively low cost of switching destinations, should help to buoy the broader marketplace. Overall, despite the lower budget allocations to federal parks, activities such as fishing, camping, hunting, and others should remain fairly stable.

Policy Background: What has changed
In early 2025, the Trump administration, working with the newly established Department of Government Efficiency, enacted sweeping workforce reductions across the NPS. Since January, approximately 2,500 permanent staff, about 13% of the total workforce, have been cut. This included more than 1,000 direct layoffs, over 700 voluntary early retirements or resignations, and the cancellation of more than 2,000 seasonal job offers.

These actions came just before the critical spring and summer seasons, limiting park capacity during months when national parks typically see their highest amount of foot traffic and greatest need for maintenance and attention to visitor services.

On February 26, 2025, a federal spending freeze compounded these staffing reductions by placing a near-total halt on basic park expenditures. The freeze restricted routine purchases like maintenance supplies, trail signage, and cleaning materials by cutting government purchasing-card limits to just $1 per transaction and requiring higher amounts to be individually approved by a limited set of administrators. This reduction has hamstrung day-to-day park operations, delaying everything from bathroom cleaning and waste disposal to trail repairs and campsite maintenance. As peak camping, hunting, and fishing seasons approached, parks nationwide began experiencing backlogs in essential services, impacting the quality of visitor experiences.

These administrative actions have disrupted several park functions during peak season, limiting the NPS’s ability to maintain trails, keep facilities sanitary, guide visitors, and manage wildlife populations responsibly. The result has been a noticeable change in service quality and park accessibility, with visitors facing closed restrooms, overgrown trails, uncollected trash, and reduced ranger presence.

Industry stakeholders, from outdoor gear retailers to tour operators, are already reporting lost revenue tied to these operational shortfalls, signaling wider economic impacts on communities that rely on national parks as tourism and recreation hubs.

Meanwhile, Congress has been advancing legislation that deepens these funding constraints. The House’s fiscal year 2025 (FY2025) Department of the Interior/Environmental Protection Agency Appropriations Bill includes a $210 million cut to the NPS budget, about 6% below previous funding levels. This measure targets several priorities, cutting $22 million from maintenance accounts and $20 million from historic preservation initiatives.  Advocacy groups have responded with concerns that these cuts threaten the safety of visitors, the integrity of historic sites, and the long-term health of park ecosystems, potentially leading to irreversible damage.

Most significantly, President Trump’s FY2026 budget proposal, unveiled on April 28, 2025, outlines a $1.2 billion reduction, nearly 37.0% of the NPS budget. The proposal calls for deep cuts to operations ($900 million), grants ($77 million), construction projects ($73 million), and historic preservation programs ($158 million).

Source: Center for American Progress

Beyond funding reductions, it also suggests transferring oversight of many smaller national park units to state governments. This would effectively shift federal stewardship responsibilities away from Washington, D.C., and onto state agencies that may lack the resources or expertise to maintain these properties at current standards.

Taken together, these administrative and legislative moves signal a strategic realignment of federal park management priorities. By cutting staffing and funding while floating proposals to transfer park sites to the states, the administration aims to reduce both federal oversight and costs. However, these measures, in many cases, carry profound implications for industries dependent on healthy, accessible public lands, including outdoor recreation, hospitality, hunting, fishing, and local businesses near park gateways, raising questions about future visitor experiences, economic stability, and conservation outcomes.

The administration has communicated that cuts are necessary because NPS budgets have “ballooned well beyond what is needed.” They suggest the cuts will bring spending to a “more appropriate level” with “minimal impacts” to the parks and visitor experiences. Perhaps most importantly, they believe that streamlining staffing and transferring some properties to state management will ensure the “long-term health and sustainment” of the NPS.

Industry and Public Response
Not surprisingly, public sentiment from advocates for outdoor activities and national parks have highlighted the negative implications of the changes to funding. These organizations have and remain vocal champions for America’s public lands.

These groups have raised alarms over the immediate and long-term consequences of cutting park budgets, pointing out how reductions to staffing, maintenance, and visitor services threaten not only iconic landscapes, but also the outdoor recreation economy as a whole. By issuing statements, conducting economic impact analyses, and organizing coalitions, these organizations have worked to highlight how park closures, deteriorating facilities, and diminished visitor experiences harm businesses and communities dependent on recreation-based tourism.

Many of these organizations make the argument that the economic ripple effects of park funding reductions go well beyond park boundaries, affecting rural communities, small businesses, and even state tax revenue. The Outdoor Recreation Roundtable cites the 2013 federal government shutdown as a relevant proxy for the damage the cuts can do. In less than three weeks, studies show the impact of the shutdown created a 15.0-20.0% drop in visitation and caused $414 million in lost economic activity.

The Outdoor Industry Association’s economic models paint an even bleaker picture. They note that a 5-10% reduction in park visitation during peak season could ripple into a $5-10 billion annual impact to related markets like lodging, food, travel, gear sales, and guiding.

Camping
As one of the most popular activities enjoyed by visitors to NPS lands, campers will certainly be affected by these federal budget cuts. Visitors may be deterred from NPS lands due to deteriorated trail and campground maintenance caused by staff shrinkage and spending caps.

Operational cuts are leading to fewer staffed restrooms, reduced sanitary services, and fire protection, particularly impacting remote or backcountry campsites. Arches National Park, for instance, halted permits for the Fiery Furnace hike owing to staffing safety concerns. It is likely that campers will not be deterred altogether and will shift the location of their trips due to the strong alternatives available on private lands.

Source: 2022 RVIA Campground Market Analysis

A study by the RV Industry Association found that the vast majority of private campgrounds offer extensive camping infrastructure. These amenities create an inviting atmosphere for campers willing to pursue alternative locations.

Moreover, lifestyle trends are impacting product demand in a way that we feel will offset negative impacts around the parks. Millennials and GenZers are driving growing interest in “near-home” camping, backyard adventures, and overlanding. Needless to say, these adventures require the same tents, stoves, coolers, and packs as park trips.

Hunting
Unlike fishing or camping, which are generally allowed on any NPS land unless specifically closed by park-specific regulations, hunting is allowed in parks only where it is explicitly mandated or permitted as a discretionary activity by existing laws or the park’s enabling legislation.

Out of the approximate 51 million acres of NPS land open to hunting, 43 million acres reside in Alaska alone and just 8 million acres are within the contiguous states. For this reason, the hunting sector is likely to be unscathed by federal budget cuts as most hunting already transpires on private or non-NPS managed lands.

However, reductions in staffing and maintenance on adjacent Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and state lands could undermine hunting access, patrolling, and habitat conservation and still lead to decreased overall participation.

Fishing
Fishing, as one of the most heavily practiced activities on NPS lands, is likely to see an impact from this legislation. Federal waters managed by NPS are vital to both guided and recreational fishing businesses. Fishermen, like hunters, should expect reduced access to typical spots due to staff and maintenance reductions. Fishermen will also have to contend with significant permit delays and delayed/reduced fish stocking. The broader impact for fishing businesses is still unclear as fewer alternative locations exist for the activity compared to camping; it remains to be seen how resilient this community will be while enjoying their favorite pastime on federal bodies of water in these budget-constrained conditions.

Still, the cultural momentum of the fishing marketplace is as strong as any enthusiast industry.

Those individuals who fish regularly and have it engrained in their identities are unlikely to be dissuaded from pursuing alternatives. It is the casual anglers who we suspect will defer trips and purchases due to the changes at the parks.

Recommendations & Outlook
While the impacts to the outdoor recreation marketplace as a result of the cuts to the NPS are significant, there is certainly room for optimism in the discussion. To begin, the ORM market is vast and extends well beyond the U.S. national parks and the NPS. In fact, we estimate that only 13% of total U.S. campsites are managed within the NPS. Several other federal agencies are responsible for other federal campsites, including the USFS, BLM, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, there are many more private campgrounds managed by organizations such as KOA, Sun Outdoors, Thousand Trails, and other independent operators. Additionally, there are numerous state and municipal parks and forests.

The figures above aren’t intended to minimize the impacts of the budget and resource cuts, rather to illustrate the vastness of the market and opportunity for stakeholders to shift operations to meet demand elsewhere. The next step for operators is to identify where those opportunities exist.

As we suggested in our most recent market update that focused on tariffs and their impact on organizations, the first step for a management team is to quantify their exposure. As we illustrated above, while there could be some downstream impacts to other areas in ORM, the constraints imposed by the new federal limitations are somewhat isolated. And despite the friction caused by existing and potential cost cutting, the economies surrounding these federal parks won’t be entirely impacted.

Still, we turn our attention to where experiences will most logically be impacted and, in our opinion, those will predominantly surround services.

Source: Outdoor Foundation 2023 Special Report on Fishing

 

Less employees likely translates to lowered maintenance and reduced availability of experts such as rangers, together impacting the experience many regular park visitors are accustomed to. Certainly, that could create a deferral of visits to these specific locations while those areas remain below historical standards, but for families or individuals inclined to spend time outdoors, it likely shifts the destination, not the activity.

We do see a meaningful opportunity for private services to rise in these environments – particularly around premium offerings, such as private guides and elevated camping options. We believe there is also an opportunity for companies to invest in education and self-guided tools to help bridge federally-funded service deficiencies. Where budget cuts reduce programs to attract novice campers, hunters, and anglers, companies can fill the gap with how-to content, virtual workshops, and gear guides to empower new users and turn them into confident customers. Brands that affiliate themselves with these types of offerings will likely be favorably positioned to weather the storm.

Lastly, we encourage organizations to take this opportunity to reassess their total addressable marketplace and pursue underrepresented areas where new customers may exist. Highlight your product’s broad utility and multiple uses. Coolers, tents, stoves, and apparel work equally well for backyard gatherings and road trips as they do in national parks. To the extent a product or service is meaningfully dependent on federal parks, taking this opportunity to decouple those relationships and reposition your business in the marketplace will create long-term value.

Source: 2022 RVIA Campground Market Analysis 

Final Observations
Seemingly all of these conversations around the headwinds felt by outdoor recreation stakeholders tend to come back to how it impacts the value of business and interest for investment from outside parties. We remain optimistic that disruption creates opportunity for the best operators in a marketplace.

We expect the impact on tourists and park visitors to be more detrimental than what we anticipate the business impacts of the budget cuts to be. While we acknowledge the logical and expected frustration that a diminishment in services will provide federal park-goers, the relatively low cost of switching for these travelers and abundance of alternative locations should help to keep the broader marketplace afloat. We view hard goods for activities such as fishing, camping, and hunting as relatively stable despite the budget uncertainty for the parks.

There is the potential for the initial proposed budget costs to get scaled back as the deadline draws closer. Support for outdoor activity has proven to be a bipartisan issue that has immense benefits for legislators’ constituents. Most recently this was illustrated in The EXPLORE Act, signed into law in January 2025 and passed unanimously by both chambers. It provided enhanced access for hunters, anglers, climbers, bikers, veterans, and youth on federal public lands and modernized facilities (including broadband, campground upgrades, digital passes, and better visitor data systems) among other reforms. More recently, the Voluntary Public Access Improvement Act proposed the reauthorization and enhancement of grants to incentivize private landowners to open land for hunting, fishing, hiking, and other wildlife-based recreation.

All of this is to say that there are numerous data points to support a functional outdoor recreation marketplace and that, when paired with the incentive to provide these services to constituents, law makers are hopefully likely to judiciously review the global impact of park budget cuts.

 

State of CHF Market – Key Industry Data

Camping, Hunting, and Fishing Key Macroeconomic Indicators

Sources: Federal Reserve Economic Data; Outdoor Industry Association Report

Operational Indicators and Measurements

Key Operational Metrics such as Outdoor Participation and
Hunting/Fishing License Purchases are Healthy across the Industry

Sources: Outdoor Industry Association; Stacker; Counsel Hunting and Shooting Data

CHF Market Data & Updates

Market Valuation & Performance

Despite Trade War Uncertainty, Valuations Remain High and Analyst Sentiment Remains Strong,
Poised to Take Advantage of Anticipated Growth in the Market

Based on Capital IQ data as of July 8, 2025; see below for additional detail on companies included in each category; composite analyst sentiment excludes company outliers that would materially impact market takeaways

Camping, Hunting, & Fishing Public Trading Group

Based on Capital IQ as of July 8, 2025; 1. EV/EBITDA and P/E multiples above 30.0x and below 0.0x considered not meaningful (“NM”)

 

Key Recent Transactions / Deal Spotlight

Acquisition Spotlight: Platinum Equity Acquires GSM Outdoors

Sources: Capital IQ; various industry publications

 

Camping, Hunting, and Fishing Select Recent Transactions

Strategic and Financial Buyers Continue to Illustrate Interest in Large Growing Brands

Sources: CapitalIQ; various industry publications

 

What We’re Reading

What We’re Reading – Influences on the Outdoor Recreation Industry

 

 

Appendix A: Outdoor Recreation & Marine Public Trading Analysis

Outdoor Recreation & Marine Public Comparable Universe

Based on Capital IQ as of July 8, 2025; 1. EV/EBITDA and P/E multiples above 30.0x and below 0.0x considered not meaningful (“NM”)

Based on Capital IQ as of July 8, 2025; 1. EV/EBITDA and P/E multiples above 30.0x and below 0.0x considered not meaningful (“NM”)

 

 

Disclaimer

The contents of this publication are presented for informational purposes only by Matrix Capital Markets Group, Inc. and MCMG Capital Advisors, Inc. (“Matrix”), and nothing contained herein is an offer to sell or a solicitation to purchase any of the securities discussed. While Matrix believes the information presented in this publication is accurate, this publication is provided “AS IS” and without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, the implied warranty of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non‐infringement. Matrix assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in this presentation or other documents which may be contained in, referenced, or linked to this publication. Any recipient of this publication is expressly responsible to seek out its own professional advice with respect to the information contained herein.