Post on 24-Feb-2016
description
transcript
Recreation Economic Studies of Lake Mead & the Grand Canyon of the Colorado
John DuffieldChris NeherDavid PattersonUniversity of Montana
Lake Mead SymposiumMarch 5-6, 2012Las Vegas, NV
Introduction NPS Objectives Phase II Findings and Data Gaps 2012-2013 Survey Modeling Visitation and Water Levels
Outline
Develop Comprehensive values for NPS resources in the Colorado River Watershed (CRW)
Estimate NPS values as a function of water allocations.
Integrated economic-hydrologic tools for NPS to fully participate in CRW water policy.
Overall Project Objectives
Ecosystem Services
Management- Conservation
- Use & enjoyment
VisitorUse
NonuseValues
EconomicImpact
Benefit-Cost
Linkages between CRW Recreation Resources and the
Economy
Phase I. White paper.Phase II. Review & synthesis existing
studies and data sets, identify data gaps.Phase III. Original research in two areas:
direct use-regional economics, nonuse values.
Phase IV. Integrate economics & hydrology, application to water allocation policies, user friendly model, publications.
Organization of Study
Market and nonmarket values Direct use values
- consumptive (hunting, fishing…)- nonconsumptive (boating, scenic..)
Nonuse values: existence & bequest Two accounting frameworks: social benefit-
cost, regional economics
Types of NPS Resource Values
Colorado River Basin Park Unit Water-based Visitation
Lake Mead NRA74%
Glen Canyon NRA18%
Grand Canyon NP0%
Dinosaur NM0%
Canyonlands NP0%
Curecanti NRA8%
Summary of Existing Literature on Visitor Expenditures and Regional Economic Impacts
Glen Canyon Environmental Studies, began 1982
Bishop et al. 1987 – direct use in Grand Canyon river corridor
Operation of Glen Canyon Dam EIS, began 1989
Welsh et al. 1995 – nonuse values in river corridor
EIS 1995, Record of Decision 1996
Key Previous Research on Water-related CRW NPS Resources
Estimates of Colorado River Unit Direct Recreational Values
Study Description NEV Estimate NEV Estimate(2005 $ per visit)
Bishop et al. (1987)
Study of values of Grand Canyon - float boaters (CVM)
$236-$1,653 per trip depending on river flow
level (1985$)
$430 - $3,000
Hammer (2001)
Study of Grand Canyon – Floaters (TCM)
$134 per trip (private) $314 per trip (commercial)
$157 (private)$368 (comm.)
Martin (1982) Study of Lake Mead - Fishing Values (TCM)
$44.63 to $61.44 per angler day (1978-9$)
$643 - $887
Douglas and Johnson (2004)
Travel Cost study of Lake Powell – Recreationists (TCM)
$70.84 - $159.35 per visit consumer
surplus (1997 $)
$86 - $194
Duffield & Neher (1999)a
Visitor survey of Glen Canyon NRA and Grand Canyon NP Visitors. (CVM)
Glen Canyon NRA - $384 per party trip
Grand Canyon NP - $319 per party trip (1988$)
Glen Canyon $109Grand Canyon
$142
Douglas and Harpman (2004)
Survey of Glen Canyon - improved trip quality scenarios (angler harvest, water quality)
$8.63 to $38.92 per visitb (1997 $)
$11 - $47
Bishop (1997) Relationship Between NEV and Flow Levels on Grand Canyon Float
Visitor Survey-Based Colorado R. Unit Expenditure Data
Park Unit Studies Expenditure Estimates (study year $)
Expenditure Estimates (2005
$ per visit)
Glen Canyon NRA
Douglas and Harpman (1994) $61 - $187 per person (1985) $111 - $340
Douglas and Johnson (2004) $119.77 per person (1997) $146
Duffield and Neher (1998) $202 per party day (1998) $187
Lake Mead NRA
Borden et al. (2003) $59.02 per person day (2003) $174
Martin et al. 1982 $43.00 per angler $122
Grand Canyon NP
MGM2, Visitor Services Project $1,388 per visit (2003) $1,471
Arizona Hospitality Study $1,131 per party (2005) $333
Harpman (1995) $215-$510 per person (1995) $275 - $652
Douglas and Harpman (1994) $517 - $1427 per person (1985) $941 - $2,597
Duffield and Neher (1998) $198 per party day (1998) $197
Hjerpe & Kim (2007) $680-$1,001 per person (2001) $750-$1.104
Available Data for Net Economic Value Analysis: Percent of Water-based Recreation
Insufficient Information
82%
Adequate Information
18%Partial
Information0%
Is Sufficient Information Available Now to Conduct Economic Analysis?
Park Unit Produce Regional Economic Impacts for Water-based Visitation?
Estimate Marginal Impacts of Water level on Regional Economics?
Produce Direct Use Total Value Estimates for Water-based Visitation?
Estimate Marginal Impacts of Water level on NEV?
Estimated Passive Use Values?
Glen Canyon NRA Lake Powell
YES YES YES PARTIAL NO
Colo. River (Glen-Lee’s) DATED DATED DATED DATED NO
Lake Mead NRA Lake Mead
NO NO NO NO NO
Lake Mojave YES YES NO NO NO
Curecanti NRA NO NO NO NO NO
Grand Canyon NP Grand Canyon Float
DATED DATED DATED / UNCERTAIN
PARTIAL/ DATED
DATED
Dinosaur NM Yampa & Green River
NO NO NO NO NO
Canyonlands NP Cataract Canyon
NO NO NO NO NO
Population to be Surveyed
Survey Question Valuation Methods
Proposed Sample Size (contacts)
Grand Canyon Whitewater Boaters
CV, Conjoint 1,800
Anglers (Lee’s to GC Dam) CV, Conjoint 400Anglers (Badger to Lee’s) CV, Conjoint 70Lake Mead CV, Conjoint. RUM 1,000Lake Powell CV, Conjoint, RUM 1,000Passive Household Survey CV, Conjoint 3,750
Planned Colorado River Survey
Additional Analysis Using Existing Data
Lake Mead Elevation: Interim Surplus Criteria Alternatives. (Source, Wheeler et al. 2002)
8,000
,000
10,00
0,000
12,00
0,000
14,00
0,000
16,00
0,000
18,00
0,000
20,00
0,000
22,00
0,000
24,00
0,000
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
Lake Powell Plot of Seasonal Visitation by
Average Season Water Volume
Average Seasonal Lake Powell Water Volume
Tota
l Sea
sona
l Rec
reat
iona
l Vis
itat
ion
Winter Months
Fall and Spring Months
Summer Months
Dependent variable: Monthly visitation Explanatory variables: Month indicator
variables, average lake volume, interaction terms for summer and shoulder season months and volume VOLUME 0.00104 t=2.50 SHOULDER * VOLUME 0.00364 t=5.90 SUMMER * VOLUME0.00859 t=13.03 R-Square 0.987 N=132
Lake Powell Visitation-Water Volume Model: 1996-2006
Plot of Wahweap Marina Annual Receipts and Average Lake Powell Levels.
30000000
35000000
40000000
45000000
50000000
55000000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Annual Data 1995-2005
Wah
wea
p M
arin
a R
ecei
pts
5000000
7000000
9000000
11000000
13000000
15000000
17000000
19000000
21000000
23000000
Ave
rage
Lak
e P
owel
l Vol
ume
Wahweap Lake Powell
Lake Mead Visitation-Volume Model: Monthly Data, 1996-2011
Multiple R
0.815
R Square
0.664 Adjusted R Square
0.659
Observations 192
Coefficient
s Standard Error t Stat P-value
Intercept 266,814 22,293 11.97 0.00000
Volume 0.00918 0.00116 7.90 0.00000
Summer 245,764 14,572 16.87 0.00000
Shoulder 168,055 13,376 12.56 0.00000
Plot of Lake Mead Annual Visitation (Observed v. Predicted)
and Lake Volume