Montana nonresident tourism spending increased to $5.6 billion last year 23%

By Micah Drew24%

7/31/2026, 1:25:54 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Biased Writer Voice, and Confirmation Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 21.1% saturation with 146 hits. Analysis detected 965 faulty-reasoning hits from 691 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 31% and a BS Rank of 23% (20,338 of 26,294 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 77.30% of the article peer group.

A packed parking lot at Logan Pass in Glacier National Park. 
(NPS/Jacob W. 
Frank) 
A near-record number of out-of-state visitors spent roughly $5.6 billion while traveling to and through Montana in 2025, money powering one of the state’s strongest economic sectors through tourism-oriented businesses. 
That’s according to the latest report on annual nonresident visitation to Montana conducted by the University of Montana’s Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research, released last month. 
The quarterly nonresident research has been ongoing since 2009 and involves surveyors conducting more than 21,000 annual surveys at airports, rest areas and gas stations across the state. 
In 2025, roughly 13.2 million visitors  about 500,000 fewer than 2024 , which was a record  spent around 12% more during their travels through the state compared to 2024, increasing the impact to the state’s economy to record levels. 
The $5.6 billion out-of-state travelers spent in Montana directly supported $4.1 billion in local economic activity through purchases of gasoline, groceries and retail, use of services such as lodging, outfitters and guides, and costs of license and entrance fees. 
An additional $3.1 billion of indirect impacts to economic activity  such as from purchases made by travel-related businesses and employees  drove a total of more than $7.1 billion into the state’s economy. 
Visitor spending directly supported an estimated 52,610 jobs, according to ITRR data, comprising roughly 1-in-11 Montana workers. 
That’s a significant jump from last year, when data estimated only around 38,240 Montanans worked directly in the tourism sector. 
The Institute estimates the tourism industry makes up around 18% of jobs in Montana  outpacing healthcare (15%), government (13%), agriculture (4%) and mining, oil and gas (1.2%). 
Visitors also generated more than $360 million in state and local taxes, which is estimated to have reduced the average tax burden on Montana households by $740, another increase from last year. 
The 4% decrease in visitation from 2024 still ranks as the second-highest visitation for the state on record. 
The visitation figures track with recent data released by the National Park Service showing that Yellowstone National Park saw the second highest number of visitors on record in 2025, while Glacier National Park notched its third busiest year. 
The two parks are listed as top attractions by visitors, serve as anchors for the state’s outdoor economy, and are crucial to local communities. 
Both parks are also near record visitation so far in 2026 . 
Beyond visiting the state’s two national parks, public lands in general, and the state’s scenic beauty, is listed as an overall draw for tourists, with a majority of travelers using public lands to hike, sightsee and look for wildlife. 
Results from the ITRR continue to track with data from the U.S. 
Bureau of Economic Analysis that show Montana’s outdoor recreation sector makes up 5% of the state’s economy , the third highest contribution of any state. 
Nonresident visitor spending, not adjusted for inflation. 
Graphic by ITRR 
Here are some highlights from the 2025 visitor spending data. 
Estimated total nonresident visitors in 2025, the second highest ever. 
Overall nonresident traveler spending in Montana during 2025. 
Amount tourists spent on gasoline and diesel statewide, the top expenditure category. 
Amount spent in bars and restaurants by out-of-state visitors last year 
Amount nonresidents spent specifically on “Made in Montana” products 
Expenditures related to lodging, comprising hotels (12%), short term rentals (7%) and campgrounds and RV Parks (1%). 
Average length of stay in Montana. 
Tourists stay longest in the summer, an average of 6.21 nights. 
Percentage of tourists who visit the state from July-September. 
The fewest visitors, 11%, travel between January and March. 
Visitors who came to Montana solely for vacation. 23% of visitors were just passing through, 19% visited friends and family and 11% were here on business. 
One percent of visitors came just to shop. 
Visitors from Canada heading south of the border  a third fewer than in 2024 due to tariffs and inflation 
Estimated number of tourists who arrived from either Idaho, Washington or North Dakota 
Estimated number of tourists who arrived via plane, a nearly 6% jump from 2024. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.3%Micah Drew: 3.0%Daily Montanan: 2.0%Confirmation Bias12.3%This article: 1.4%Micah Drew: 0.9%Daily Montanan: 0.2%Anchoring Bias1.4%This article: 7.7%Micah Drew: 2.8%Daily Montanan: 2.7%Availability Heuristic7.7%This article: 9.7%Micah Drew: 1.6%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Representativeness Heuristic9.7%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.5%Micah Drew: 0.3%Daily Montanan: 0.6%Overconfidence Bias2.5%This article: 1.3%Micah Drew: 4.2%Daily Montanan: 3.0%Framing Effect1.3%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.6%Micah Drew: 1.2%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Status Quo Bias2.6%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.0%Micah Drew: 8.5%Daily Montanan: 1.9%Optimism Bias9.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.4%Daily Montanan: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 1.7%Daily Montanan: 6.7%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 7.8%Micah Drew: 0.9%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Halo Effect7.8%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 10.6%Micah Drew: 1.3%Daily Montanan: 0.9%Recency Bias10.6%This article: 1.4%Micah Drew: 0.2%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Primacy Effect1.4%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 1.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.0%Micah Drew: 2.4%Daily Montanan: 1.5%Appeal to Authority11.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.6%Micah Drew: 1.4%Daily Montanan: 2.7%Hasty Generalization5.6%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.4%Daily Montanan: 3.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 17.5%Micah Drew: 2.5%Daily Montanan: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)17.5%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.4%Daily Montanan: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 21.1%Micah Drew: 2.8%Daily Montanan: 1.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)21.1%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.6%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.3%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 13.5%Micah Drew: 1.6%Daily Montanan: 1.6%Biased Writer Voice13.5%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Micah Drew: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.6%Micah Drew: 0.6%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.6%

691 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers20%attributed speech555writer words
Selected voice

Institute estimates

100%flagged-word coverage
28 attributed words21% of attributed speech79% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Biased Writer Voice-16.8 ptsWriter: 16.8%Institute estimates: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.8 ptsWriter: 5.8%Institute estimates: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.