Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Economic amenity values of wildlife: Six case studies in Pennsylvania

  • Research
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The travel clost method (TCM) and contingent valuation method (CVM) were used to evaluate the economic value of six different ecotourism activities involving observation of wildlife in Pennsylvania. The six activities were: catch-and-release trout fishing; catch-and-release trout fishing with fly-fishing equipment; viewing waterfowl; watching elk; observing migration flights of raptors; and seeing live wildlife in an environmental education setting. TCM results provided significant statistical relationships between level of use and travel costs for the two types of trout fishing activities. CVM provided estimates of consumer surplus for the other four sites. The consumers' surplus value (1988 dollars) of all six activities to participants amounted to a total of more than $1.28 million annually—twice the total out-of-pocket expenditures of approximately $640,000 spent to visit the sites. The economic amenity values of the six activities compare favorably with similarly derived values in other studies for hunting, fishing, hiking, and backpacking in dispersed recreation environments and wilderness areas in western states.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature cited

  • Alward, G. S., H. G. Davis, K. A. Despotakis, and E. M. Lofting. 1985. Regional non-survey input-output analysis with IMPLAN. 26 P. Paper presented at Southern Regional Service Association Conference, Washington, DC.

  • Binkley, C. S., and R. O. Mendelsohn. 1987. Recreation user fees—an economic analysis.Journal of Forestry 85(5):31–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R. 1988. The net economic value of deer hunting in Montana. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, Montana, 32 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookshire, D. S., M. Thayer, W. Schulze, and R. C. d'Arge. 1982. Valuing public goods: A comparison of survey and hedonic approaches.American Economic Review 72(1):165–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G., and M. Plummer. 1979. Appendix A.5, Recreation valuation. An economic analysis of non timber uses of forestland in the Pacific Northwest. Forest Policy Project, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, 50 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, W., D. M. Larson, R. S. Johnston, and R. J. Wahle. 1976. Improved economic evaluation of commercially and sport caught salmon and steelhead of the Columbia River. Special Report 463, Oregon State University, Corvallis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, W., C. Sorhus, and K. Gibbs. 1980. Estimated expenditures by sport anglers and net economic values of salmon and steelhead for specified fisheries in the Pacific Northwest. Departent of Economics, Oregon State University, Corvallis, 88 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crutchfield, J. A., and K. Schelle. 1979. An economic analysis of Washington ocean recreational salmon fishing with particular emphasis on role played by the charter vessel industry. Department of Economics, University of Washington, Seattle. 78 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Decker, D. J., and G. R. Goff. 1987. Valuing wildlife: Economic and social perspectives. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, 424 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubos, R. 1968. So human an animal. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 267 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffield, J. 1988. The net economic value of elk hunting in Montana. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, Montana, 78 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffield, J., J. Loomis, and R. Brooks. 1987. The net economic value of fishing in Montana. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, Montana, 59 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, D. 1970. An economic analysis of Project Number F18R15 Idaho sport fisheries. Idaho Cooperative fisheries unit, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho, 60 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, R. 1988. And then there were trout.Wisconsin Natural Resources 12(2):4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krutilla, J. V. 1967. Conservation reconsidered.American Economic Review 57:777–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J. B. 1979. Estimation of recreation benefits from Grand Gulch primitive area. Moah District Office, US Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Moah, Utah, 9 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J. B. 1980. Monetizing equity-efficiency trade-offs in rationing wilderness use. Western Energy and Land Use Team, US Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Collins, Colorado, 19 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J., and J. Cooper. 1988. The net economic value of antelope hunting in Montana. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, Montana, 26 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, S. B. and G. Brown. 1970. Economic evaluation of the 1967 sport salmon fisheries of Washington. Technical Report Number 2. Washington Department of Fisheries, Olympia, Washington, 19 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, K. E., and I. Strand. 1981. Measuring the cost of time in recreation demand analyses: An application to sportfishing.American Journal of Agricultural Economics 63(1):153–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moser, D. A., and C. M. Dunning. 1986. National economic development procedures manual—recreation. Volume II, A guide for using the contingent value methodology in recreation studies. US Army Corps of Engineers. IWR Report 86-R5.

  • Natural Resources and Environmental Steering Committee on Wildlife and Fish Access Prices. 1987. Estimating prices for access to opportunities for hunting, fishing, and viewing wildlife on public and private lands (final report). US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, 26 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pappas, J. L. and M. Hirschey. 1985. Fundamentals of managerial economics 2 ed. Dryden Press, New York, 286 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. 1986. Report and recommendations to the President of the United States. Superintendent of Documents, Washington, DC, 210 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, D. H., J. Loomis, and G. L. Peterson. 1984. The travel cost model: Concepts and applications. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, General Technical Report RM-109, 10 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, W., R. d'Arge, and D. Brookshire. 1981. Valuing environmental commodities: Some recent experiments.Land Economics 52(2):151–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, E. and R. Brush. 1977. How to measure preferences for photographs of natural landscapes.Landscape Planning 4:237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, E., and G. Siehl. 1990. Enhancing rural economies through amenity resources. Proceedings of a national polity symposium. The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, 196 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, E., and M. Q. Wang. 1989. Economic amenity values of fish and wildlife resources: six case studies in Pennsylvania. Final Report for USDA Forest Service Cooperation Agreement No. 23-195, 121 pp.

  • Smith, K., and R. Kopp. 1980. Spatial limits of the travel cost recreational demand model.Land Economics 56(1):64–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. L. J. 1989. Tourism analysis: A handbook. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 312 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snedecor, G. W., and W. Cochran. 1987. Statistical methods, 7th ed. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, 507 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorg, C. F., and J. B. Loomis. 1984. Empirical estimates of amenity forest values: A comparative review. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, General Technical Report, RM-107, 23 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA Forest Service. 1986. Final environmental impact statement—1985–2030 resources planning act program. FS-403, Washington, DC, 129 pp.

  • US Water Resources Council. 1979. Procedures for evaluation of natural economic development (NED) benefits and costs in water resources planning.Federal Register 44(242):72, 950-65.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Water Resources Council. 1983. Economic and environmental principles and guidelines for water and related land resources. Washington, DC, March 10, 1983.

  • Walsh, R., and L. Gilliam. 1982. Benefits of wilderness expansion with excess demand for Indian Parks.Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 7:1–12.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, R. G., R. A. Gillman, and J. B. Loomis. 1981. Wilderness resource economics: Recreation use and preservation values. American Wilderness Alliance, Denver, Colorado, 107 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, R. G., J. B. Loomis and R. S. Gillman, 1984. Valuing option, existence and bequest demand for wilderness.Land Economics 60:14–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, R. G., L. D. Sanders, and J. B. Loomis. 1985. Wild and scenic rivers economics: recreation use and preservation values. American Wilderness Alliance, Denver, Colorado, 141 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, R. G., D. A. Harpman, J. G. Hof, K. H. John, and J. R. McKean. 1988. Long-run forecasts of participation in fishing, hunting, and nonconsumptive wildlife recreation. Outdoor recreation benchmark 1988: proceedings of the national outdoor recreation forum. Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, North Carolina, pp. 187–202.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental Management and Tourism, Penn State University, 203 Henderson Building South, 16802, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA

    Elwood L. Shafer, Robert Carline, Richard W. Guldin & H. Ken Cordell

Authors
  1. Elwood L. Shafer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert Carline
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Richard W. Guldin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. H. Ken Cordell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shafer, E.L., Carline, R., Guldin, R.W. et al. Economic amenity values of wildlife: Six case studies in Pennsylvania. Environmental Management 17, 669–682 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02393728

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02393728

Key words

Search

Navigation