Recreation Economic Studies of Lake Mead & the Grand Canyon of the Colorado John Duffield Chris Neher David Patterson University of Montana Lake Mead Symposium March 5-6, 2012 Las Vegas, NV Outline Introduction NPS Objectives Phase II Findings and Data Gaps 2012-2013 Survey Modeling Visitation and Water Levels Overall Project Objectives 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. Linkages between CRW Recreation Resources and the Economy Ecosystem Services Management - Conservation - Use & enjoyment Visitor Use Nonuse Values Economic Impact BenefitCost Organization of Study Phase I. White paper. Phase II. Review & synthesis existing studies and data sets, identify data gaps. Phase III. Original research in two areas: direct useregional economics, nonuse values. Phase IV. Integrate economics & hydrology, application to water allocation policies, user friendly model, publications. Types of NPS Resource Values 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 Colorado River Basin Park Unit Waterbased Visitation Lake Mead NRA 74% Canyonlands NP 0% Grand Canyon NP 0% Glen Canyon NRA 18% Dinosaur NM 0% Curecanti NRA 8% Summary of Existing Literature on Visitor Expenditures and Regional Economic Impacts Key Previous Research on Water-related CRW NPS Resources 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 Estimates of Colorado River Unit Direct Recreational Values Study Description Bishop et al. (1987) Study of values of Grand Canyon - float boaters (CVM) Hammer (2001) NEV Estimate NEV Estimate (2005 $ per visit) $236-$1,653 per trip depending on river flow level (1985$) $430 - $3,000 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 $109 Grand 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 Glen Canyon NRA Douglas and Harpman (1994) $61 - $187 per person (1985) Douglas and Johnson (2004) $119.77 per person (1997) $146 Duffield and Neher (1998) $202 per party day (1998) $187 Borden et al. (2003) $59.02 per person day (2003) $174 Martin et al. 1982 $43.00 per angler $122 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) Douglas and Harpman (1994) $517 - $1427 per person (1985) Duffield and Neher (1998) $198 per party day (1998) Hjerpe & Kim (2007) $680-$1,001 per person (2001) Lake Mead NRA Grand Canyon NP Expenditure Estimates (study year $) Expenditure Estimates (2005 $ per visit) $111 - $340 $275 - $652 $941 - $2,597 $197 $750-$1.104 Available Data for Net Economic Value Analysis: Percent of Water-based Recreation Adequate Information 18% Partial Information 0% Insufficient Information 82% Is Sufficient Information Available Now to Conduct Economic Analysis? 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? YES YES YES PARTIAL NO 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 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 Park Unit Glen Canyon NRA Lake Powell Colo. River (Glen-Lee’s) Grand Canyon NP Grand Canyon Float Produce Regional Economic Impacts for Water-based Visitation? Planned Colorado River Survey 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 400 Anglers (Badger to Lee’s) CV, Conjoint 70 Lake Mead CV, Conjoint. RUM 1,000 Lake Powell CV, Conjoint, RUM 1,000 Passive Household Survey CV, Conjoint 3,750 Additional Analysis Using Existing Data Lake Mead Elevation: Interim Surplus Criteria Alternatives. (Source, Wheeler et al. 2002) Lake Powell Plot of Seasonal Visitation by Average Season Water Volume Total Seasonal Recreational Visitation 1,400,000 1,200,000 Summer Months 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 Fall and Spring Months 400,000 200,000 Winter Months 0 Average Seasonal Lake Powell Water Volume Lake Powell Visitation-Water Volume Model: 1996-2006 Dependent variable: Monthly visitation Explanatory variables: Month indicator variables, average lake volume, interaction terms for summer and shoulder season months and volume VOLUME SHOULDER * VOLUME SUMMER * VOLUME R-Square N=132 0.00104 0.00364 0.00859 0.987 t=2.50 t=5.90 t=13.03 Plot of Wahweap Marina Annual Receipts and Average Lake Powell Levels. 55000000 23000000 21000000 19000000 17000000 45000000 15000000 13000000 40000000 Wahweap Lake Powell 11000000 9000000 35000000 7000000 30000000 5000000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Annual Data 1995-2005 8 9 10 11 Average Lake Powell Volume Wahweap Marina Receipts 50000000 Lake Mead Visitation-Volume Model: Monthly Data, 1996-2011 Multiple R 0.815 R Square 0.664 Adjusted R Square 0.659 Observations 192 Coefficients 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
© Copyright 2026 Paperzz