Ashland County tourism office outlines new brand and GEM grant plan to boost visitor spending

Mary (name given in meeting packet) and marketing consultant Teresa Smith of Pilch and Barnett presented Ashland County’s 2025 tourism report during the county board meeting, describing a new county brand and use of a $39,500 GEM (grant) award from the Wisconsin Department of Tourism to increase visitor spending.

The presentation said direct visitor spending in Ashland County was roughly $42 million and total economic impact, after indirect and employee spending multipliers, was about $65 million. Mary and Pilch and Barnett said the county’s marketing work aims to encourage multi-night stays and to spread visitor activity beyond the city of Ashland, promoting assets from Madeline Island in the north to Butternut in the south.

The consultants said the year‑one GEM grant (25% match required) funded research, a new brand and strategic planning with multiple community partners, including chambers and local business groups. Pilch and Barnett described brand work that emphasizes countywide access to Lake Superior, federal forests, ATV/UTV trails, waterfalls and Copper Falls State Park. Examples shown to the board included a logo mark and an “attractions badge” concept for the website and collateral.

Officials said they plan to reprint an “auto tour” brochure that highlights scenic paved roads for motorcycles and cars; that printed piece would be used as in‑kind match for grant requirements. The presenters described planned website work—flowcharts and content that would feature scenic drives, itineraries, four‑season recreation, accessibility information (including disabled access), EV charging locations and community events—to help visitors move among communities throughout the county.

Speakers noted the county applied for a second year of the GEM grant with similar funding requests (the packet referenced another $39,500 request) and described match levels rising across years (the packet shows 25% the first year, a county match plan described as $50,000 for year two and a higher match percentage in year three). The presenters said match may include non‑cash items such as partner marketing and printed materials.

During public comment and board questions, residents and supervisors raised related topics: whether the county budget devotes sufficient funds to parks and recreation; interest in including EV charging locations in tourism materials; ideas for arts and music events to broaden visitor appeal; and a suggestion to emphasize “microtourism” opportunities for local residents. Mary and the consultant said accessibility features (including disabled‑access information) will be prioritized on the new site and that the county will solicit community assets to populate itineraries.

The presenters listed numerous participating partners in the strategic process, including local chambers, the Ashland County Snowmobile Club Alliance, town governments and business groups. They said the county will start collecting digital assets from communities if the grant is awarded and proceed with website development.

Board members and the consultant repeatedly emphasized that the marketing work’s goal is to spread visitor economic benefits throughout the county rather than concentrating them solely in the city of Ashland.

The presentation concluded with an opportunity for board members to ask questions; none of the board took a formal vote on the presentation itself.