The economic benefits of wilderness: Theory and Practice

Denver University Law Review

Volumn 76, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 465-518

  Morton, Pete ^a  

^a Wilderness Society Washington DC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0004327383     PISSN: 08839409     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (288)

1. HENRY DAVID THOREAU, Walking, in THE PORTABLE THOREAU 592, 609 (Carl Bode ed., 1947).
2. T. H. Watkins, The Worth of the Earth, AUDUBON, Sept. 19, 1997, at 128, 128 (quoting Conservation Biologist David Ehrenfeld).
3. Pub. L. No. 88-577, 78 Stat. 890 (codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. §§ 1131-1136 (1994)).
4. Wilderness Act § 4(b), 16 U.S.C. § 1133(b).
5. See B.L. Driver et al. Wilderness Benefits: A State-of-Knowledge Review, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PROCEEDINGS - NATIONAL WILDERNESS RESEARCH CONFERENCE: ISSUES, STATE-OF-KNOWLEDGE, FUTURE DIRECTIONS 294, 296 (Robert C. Lucas ed., 1987). See generally HOLMES ROLSTON, III, PHILOSOPHY GONE WILD: ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS 73-142 (1989) (discussing the various values of nature); P. Reed, Perspectives on Beginning Research in Nonrecreational Values of National Forest Wilderness (1989) (paper presented at Society of American Foresters Annual Convention, Spokane, Wash.).
6. See B.L. Driver et al. Wilderness Benefits: A State-of-Knowledge Review, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PROCEEDINGS - NATIONAL WILDERNESS RESEARCH CONFERENCE: ISSUES, STATE-OF-KNOWLEDGE, FUTURE DIRECTIONS 294, 296 (Robert C. Lucas ed., 1987). See generally HOLMES ROLSTON, III, PHILOSOPHY GONE WILD: ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS 73-142 (1989) (discussing the various values of nature); P. Reed, Perspectives on Beginning Research in Nonrecreational Values of National Forest Wilderness (1989) (paper presented at Society of American Foresters Annual Convention, Spokane, Wash.).
7. See B.L. Driver et al. Wilderness Benefits: A State-of-Knowledge Review, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PROCEEDINGS - NATIONAL WILDERNESS RESEARCH CONFERENCE: ISSUES, STATE-OF-KNOWLEDGE, FUTURE DIRECTIONS 294, 296 (Robert C. Lucas ed., 1987). See generally HOLMES ROLSTON, III, PHILOSOPHY GONE WILD: ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS 73-142 (1989) (discussing the various values of nature); P. Reed, Perspectives on Beginning Research in Nonrecreational Values of National Forest Wilderness (1989) (paper presented at Society of American Foresters Annual Convention, Spokane, Wash.).
8. The Wilderness Act did not direct the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to consider wilderness benefits in the administration of its land. See H. Michael Anderson & Aliki Moncrief, America's Unprotected Wilderness, 76 DENV. U. L. REV. 413, 425 (1999). In general, the BLM has been slow to internalize wilderness benefits into land and resource management decisions.
9. JOAN ROBINSON, Marx, Marshall and Keynes, in 2 COLLECTED ECONOMIC PAPERS 1, 17 (1960).
10. Capital is typically defined in business terms as accumulated goods devoted to the production of other goods. The concept of capital can also be applied to wildland ecosystems, where natural capital produces ecological goods and services essential to human survival. The natural capital in wildland ecosystems includes the soil organic matter and nutrient cycles, climate, topography, and the plant and animal species that together form the productive basis of wild ecosystems.
11. A market may be defined as the place, time, persons, and circumstances involved in the exchange of a good or a service for a price. See WILLIAM A. DUERR, FUNDAMENTALS OF FORESTRY ECONOMICS 279 (1960).
12. Cf. JOHN LOOMIS, INTEGRATED PUBLIC LANDS MANAGEMENT 70 (1993); RICHARD A. MUSGRAVE & PEGGY B. MUSGRAVE, PUBLIC FINANCE IN THEORY AND PRACTICE 54-74 (3d ed. 1980); John C. Bergstrom, An Introduction to Nonmarket Valuation As a Tool for Assessing Public Policy, in THE GEORGIA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION, UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA, SPECIAL PUBLICATION 59, 1-3 (1989); Paul A. Samuelson, The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure, in 36 THE REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS 387, 388-89 (1954).
13. Cf. JOHN LOOMIS, INTEGRATED PUBLIC LANDS MANAGEMENT 70 (1993); RICHARD A. MUSGRAVE & PEGGY B. MUSGRAVE, PUBLIC FINANCE IN THEORY AND PRACTICE 54-74 (3d ed. 1980); John C. Bergstrom, An Introduction to Nonmarket Valuation As a Tool for Assessing Public Policy, in THE GEORGIA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION, UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA, SPECIAL PUBLICATION 59, 1-3 (1989); Paul A. Samuelson, The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure, in 36 THE REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS 387, 388-89 (1954).
14. Cf. JOHN LOOMIS, INTEGRATED PUBLIC LANDS MANAGEMENT 70 (1993); RICHARD A. MUSGRAVE & PEGGY B. MUSGRAVE, PUBLIC FINANCE IN THEORY AND PRACTICE 54-74 (3d ed. 1980); John C. Bergstrom, An Introduction to Nonmarket Valuation As a Tool for Assessing Public Policy, in THE GEORGIA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION, UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA, SPECIAL PUBLICATION 59, 1-3 (1989); Paul A. Samuelson, The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure, in 36 THE REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS 387, 388-89 (1954).
15. Cf. JOHN LOOMIS, INTEGRATED PUBLIC LANDS MANAGEMENT 70 (1993); RICHARD A. MUSGRAVE & PEGGY B. MUSGRAVE, PUBLIC FINANCE IN THEORY AND PRACTICE 54-74 (3d ed. 1980); John C. Bergstrom, An Introduction to Nonmarket Valuation As a Tool for Assessing Public Policy, in THE GEORGIA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION, UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA, SPECIAL PUBLICATION 59, 1-3 (1989); Paul A. Samuelson, The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure, in 36 THE REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS 387, 388-89 (1954).
16. A market failure occurs when market forces do not maximize net social benefits by equating marginal social benefits with marginal social costs. See JAMES R. KAHN, THE ECONOMIC APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES 14 (1995). For wilderness, market failure exists because markets fail to provide the socially optimal level of wildland resources.
17. The core landscape in a network of wildlands includes designated wilderness, semi-primitive, nonmotorized areas, and roadless areas on public land managed by the Forest Service and the BLM, as well as the national parks and national monuments. Supplementing federally managed lands are the thousands of acres of forests, parks, and open space under state, county, or community jurisdiction. In addition, private lands - including land designated as a nature reserve, managed by a land trust, subject to a conservation easement, or simply undeveloped - play a critical role in a nationwide network of wildlands.
18. Public goods are distinguished from private goods because they are nonrival and nonexcludable in consumption. Public goods are nonrival because one person's consumption does not diminish the amount of the good available for others to consume. Nonexcludability means that while one person consumes the good, others cannot be excluded from also consuming the good. The most common example of a public good is national defense. The passive use values of wilderness are examples of pure public goods. Everyone can consume the existence of the Bob Marshall Wilderness Area, for example, without generating congestion. See John Loomis & Richard Walsh, Future Economic Values of Wilderness, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PROCEEDINGS: THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS 82 (C. Payne et al. eds., 1992) [hereinafter FOREST SERV., THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS].
19. See PETER H. PEARSE, INTRODUCTION TO FORESTRY ECONOMICS 66 (1990).
20. See G.L. Peterson, Ethical Dilemmas in Economics, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., 1990 SOUTHEASTERN RECREATION RESEARCH CONFERENCE 84 (Daniel Hope ed., 1991).
21. See Loomis & Walsh, supra note 13, at 81.
22. See PEARSE, supra note 14, at 66. Without public interest intervention (e.g., government regulation) private industry has no incentive to consider the broader perspective provided by an economic analysis.
23. At this price the area under the demand curve and above the supply curve (i.e., social welfare) is maximized. Theoretically, if all economic assumptions are met (e.g., the markets are perfectly competitive, perfect information is available to all parties, and spillover costs and benefits (externalities) are internalized), the resulting allocation of resources will be socially optimal. The "social" referred to here concerns only economic efficiency and assumes that the existing distribution of wealth is fair and equitable. See E-mail from George Peterson, Project Leader for the Identification and Valuation of Wildland Benefits Research Unit, U.S. Dep't of Agric., Forest Serv. Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colo. to Pete Morton, The Wilderness Society (1998) (on file with author) [hereinafter Peterson Communication]. The quantitative measure used by economists to estimate the social well-being is termed social economic welfare. Social economic welfare measures the net economic benefits received by both producers and consumers as a result of exchanging goods and services in a competitive market structure. Quantitatively, social economic welfare equals the sum of consumer and producer surplus.
24. The supply curve is also referred to as the marginal cost curve.
25. Producer surplus can be viewed as the economic benefit earned by producers in excess of a "normal" profit margin.
26. To help understand these concepts consider the following example. A wilderness outfitter estimates the minimum price she would be willing to accept for a wilderness hunting trip is $50 - which covers the costs of a permit, labor, overhead, plus a profit margin. However, because it is prime hunting season, she asks and receives $80 for the trip - earning $30 in producer benefit (surplus). The wilderness hunter paid the $80 fee but was actually willing to pay $100. As such, he enjoys an untaxed consumer benefit (surplus) of $20 for which he did not have to pay. Although this was for a single transaction, the theoretical concept holds for market-wide transactions.
27. Cf. RICHARD E. JUST ET AL., APPLIED WELFARE ECONOMICS AND PUBLIC POLICY 69-83 (1982); PAUL A. SAMUELSON, ECONOMICS 449-62 (9th ed. 1973).
28. Cf. RICHARD E. JUST ET AL., APPLIED WELFARE ECONOMICS AND PUBLIC POLICY 69-83 (1982); PAUL A. SAMUELSON, ECONOMICS 449-62 (9th ed. 1973).
29. See John R. Stoll et al., A Framework for Identifying Economic Benefits and Beneficiaries of Outdoor Recreation, 7 POL'Y STUD. REV. 445, 445-48 (1987).
30. See PEARSE, supra note 14, at 67.
31. The consumer surplus referred to here is the "net value to the consumer." This should not be confused with "net value to society." In order to derive the net economic value to society, net supply costs must be accounted for. While price paid by the consumer is zero, the supply cost to society may not be zero. See Peterson Communication, supra note 18.
32. See John B. Loomis, Shifting and Broadening the Economic Paradigm Toward Natural Resources, in A NEW CENTURY FOR NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 221, 225 (Richard L. Knight & Sarah F. Bates eds., 1995).
33. The annual joint production of goods and services can be thought of as the interest earned through maintenance and investment in the natural capital. The rate of harvest should be one that does not lower the productive capability of the remaining natural capital (i.e., harvest interest, not capital).
34. See PEARSE, supra note 14, at 93-96.
35. The new version of FORPLAN, called SPECTRUM, provides a graphical user interface that makes it easier for inexperienced planners to run the model.
36. Cf. J. EDWARD DE STEIGUER ET AL., FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN TIMBER STUDY 1-2 (1989); PEARSE, supra note 14, at 217.
37. While the FORPLAN models run by national forest planners are much more complex than illustrated here, the basic concept is the same.
38. RODERICK NASH, WILDERNESS AND THE AMERICAN MIND 23-24 (3d ed. 1982).
39. Poll after poll show strong public support for wilderness on public land managed by the Forest Service and the BLM. See Gregory H. Aplet, On the Nature of Wildness: Exploring What Wilderness Really Protects, 76 DENY. U. L. REV. 347, 348 & n.6 (1999).
40. See Garrett Hardin, Wilderness, A Probe into "Cultural Carrying Capacity," 10 POPULATION & ENV'T 5-13 (1987).
41. See generally RAYMOND B. COWLES, DESERT JOURNAL: A NATURALIST REFLECTS ON ARID CALIFORNIA (1977).
42. See Peter A. Morton & Jeffrey T. Olson, Forging the Link Between Natural Forest Systems, Environmental Quality and Community Development, in THE GEORGE WRIGHT SOCIETY, 7TH CONFERENCE ON RESEARCH & RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN PARKS AND ON PUBLIC LANDS 245, 245-46 (1992).
43. Cf. A.J. Hansen et al., Conserving Biodiversity in Managed Forests: Lessons from Natural Forests, 41 BIOSCIENCE 382, 386 (1991).
44. See Michael A. Toman & P. Mark S. Ashton, Sustainable Forest Ecosystems and Management: A Review Article, 42 FOREST SCI. 366, 375-76 (1996).
45. See generally ROLSTON, supra note 5 (considering the philosophy of nature); John V. Krutilla, Conservation Reconsidered, 57 AM. ECON. REV. 777, 777-86 (1967) (suggesting a basis for decision making in the conservation context); Michael McClosky, Evolving Perspectives on Wilderness Values: Putting Wilderness Values in Order, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PREPARING TO MANAGE WILDERNESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: PROCEEDINGS OF THE CONFERENCE 13 (P.C. Reed comp., 1990) (proposing a taxonomy of wilderness values); Richard G. Walsh & John B. Loomis, The Non-Traditional Public Valuation (Option, Bequest, Existence) of Wilderness, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., GTR SE-51, WILDERNESS BENCHMARK 1988: PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS COLLOQUIUM 181 (Helen R. Freilich ed., 1989) (discussing the hypothesis that society is willing to pay for the preservation of unique environments).
46. See generally ROLSTON, supra note 5 (considering the philosophy of nature); John V. Krutilla, Conservation Reconsidered, 57 AM. ECON. REV. 777, 777-86 (1967) (suggesting a basis for decision making in the conservation context); Michael McClosky, Evolving Perspectives on Wilderness Values: Putting Wilderness Values in Order, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PREPARING TO MANAGE WILDERNESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: PROCEEDINGS OF THE CONFERENCE 13 (P.C. Reed comp., 1990) (proposing a taxonomy of wilderness values); Richard G. Walsh & John B. Loomis, The Non-Traditional Public Valuation (Option, Bequest, Existence) of Wilderness, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., GTR SE-51, WILDERNESS BENCHMARK 1988: PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS COLLOQUIUM 181 (Helen R. Freilich ed., 1989) (discussing the hypothesis that society is willing to pay for the preservation of unique environments).
47. See generally ROLSTON, supra note 5 (considering the philosophy of nature); John V. Krutilla, Conservation Reconsidered, 57 AM. ECON. REV. 777, 777-86 (1967) (suggesting a basis for decision making in the conservation context); Michael McClosky, Evolving Perspectives on Wilderness Values: Putting Wilderness Values in Order, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PREPARING TO MANAGE WILDERNESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: PROCEEDINGS OF THE CONFERENCE 13 (P.C. Reed comp., 1990) (proposing a taxonomy of wilderness values); Richard G. Walsh & John B. Loomis, The Non-Traditional Public Valuation (Option, Bequest, Existence) of Wilderness, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., GTR SE-51, WILDERNESS BENCHMARK 1988: PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS COLLOQUIUM 181 (Helen R. Freilich ed., 1989) (discussing the hypothesis that society is willing to pay for the preservation of unique environments).
48. Cf. Loomis & Walsh, supra note 13, at 81. See generally Alan Randall, The Total Value Dilemma, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., TOWARD THE MEASUREMENT OF TOTAL ECONOMIC VALUE 2, 3-6 (1987) (discussing the CVM as they relate to the concept of total value); Alan Randall & John R. Stoll, Existence Value in a Total Valuation Framework, in MANAGING AIR QUALITY AND SCENIC RESOURCES AT NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDERNESS AREAS 265, 265-273 (Robert D. Rowe & Lauraine G. Chestnut eds., 1983) (discussing the components of total value).
49. Cf. Loomis & Walsh, supra note 13, at 81. See generally Alan Randall, The Total Value Dilemma, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., TOWARD THE MEASUREMENT OF TOTAL ECONOMIC VALUE 2, 3-6 (1987) (discussing the CVM as they relate to the concept of total value); Alan Randall & John R. Stoll, Existence Value in a Total Valuation Framework, in MANAGING AIR QUALITY AND SCENIC RESOURCES AT NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDERNESS AREAS 265, 265-273 (Robert D. Rowe & Lauraine G. Chestnut eds., 1983) (discussing the components of total value).
50. See Loomis & Walsh, supra note 13, at 81-82.
51. While the focus of this article is on the demand side benefits of wildlands, the supply side costs of wildlands should not be forgotten. The demand for wildlands involves long- and short-run supply costs. In the long-run, the decision to set aside wildlands may involve opportunity costs to society by foregoing alternative development and production of man-made capital. In the short-run, there may be management costs and/or depreciation of natural capital due to human disturbance by on-site recreation.
52. Thomas Michael Power, The Economics of Wildland Preservation: The View from the Local Economy, in FOREST SERV., THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS, supra note 13, at 175, 175.
53. See John R. Stoll, Methods for Measuring the Net Contribution of Recreation to National Economic Development, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS at Values-19, 19 (1986).
54. See generally George L. Peterson & Thomas C. Brown, The Economic Benefits of Outdoor Recreation, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS, supra note 44, at Values-11, 11-15 (describing how economics offers a framework for measuring benefits derived from outdoor recreation).
55. See Beverly L. Driver, Quantification of Outdoor Recrealionalists' Preferences, in RESEARCH, CAMPING AND ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 165, 165-82 (Betty van der Smissen ed., 1976); Beverly L. Driver & Perry J. Brown, Probable Personal Benefits of Outdoor Recreation, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS, supra note 44, at Values-63, 64-66; Patrick C. West, Social Benefits of Outdoor Recreation: Sociological Perspectives and Implications for Planning and Policy, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS, supra note 44, at Values-93, 93-95; see also G.E. Haas et al., Measuring Wilderness Recreation Experiences, in PROCEEDINGS OF THE WILDERNESS PSYCHOLOGY GROUP ANNUAL CONFERENCE 20, 20-37 (L.K. Cannon ed., 1980) (discussing other social benefits resulting from a variety of wildland recreation activities).
56. See Beverly L. Driver, Quantification of Outdoor Recrealionalists' Preferences, in RESEARCH, CAMPING AND ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 165, 165-82 (Betty van der Smissen ed., 1976); Beverly L. Driver & Perry J. Brown, Probable Personal Benefits of Outdoor Recreation, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS, supra note 44, at Values-63, 64-66; Patrick C. West, Social Benefits of Outdoor Recreation: Sociological Perspectives and Implications for Planning and Policy, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS, supra note 44, at Values-93, 93-95; see also G.E. Haas et al., Measuring Wilderness Recreation Experiences, in PROCEEDINGS OF THE WILDERNESS PSYCHOLOGY GROUP ANNUAL CONFERENCE 20, 20-37 (L.K. Cannon ed., 1980) (discussing other social benefits resulting from a variety of wildland recreation activities).
57. See Beverly L. Driver, Quantification of Outdoor Recrealionalists' Preferences, in RESEARCH, CAMPING AND ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 165, 165-82 (Betty van der Smissen ed., 1976); Beverly L. Driver & Perry J. Brown, Probable Personal Benefits of Outdoor Recreation, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS, supra note 44, at Values-63, 64-66; Patrick C. West, Social Benefits of Outdoor Recreation: Sociological Perspectives and Implications for Planning and Policy, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS, supra note 44, at Values-93, 93-95; see also G.E. Haas et al., Measuring Wilderness Recreation Experiences, in PROCEEDINGS OF THE WILDERNESS PSYCHOLOGY GROUP ANNUAL CONFERENCE 20, 20-37 (L.K. Cannon ed., 1980) (discussing other social benefits resulting from a variety of wildland recreation activities).
58. See Beverly L. Driver, Quantification of Outdoor Recrealionalists' Preferences, in RESEARCH, CAMPING AND ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 165, 165-82 (Betty van der Smissen ed., 1976); Beverly L. Driver & Perry J. Brown, Probable Personal Benefits of Outdoor Recreation, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS, supra note 44, at Values-63, 64-66; Patrick C. West, Social Benefits of Outdoor Recreation: Sociological Perspectives and Implications for Planning and Policy, in A LITERATURE REVIEW: THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON AMERICAN OUTDOORS, supra note 44, at Values-93, 93-95; see also G.E. Haas et al., Measuring Wilderness Recreation Experiences, in PROCEEDINGS OF THE WILDERNESS PSYCHOLOGY GROUP ANNUAL CONFERENCE 20, 20-37 (L.K. Cannon ed., 1980) (discussing other social benefits resulting from a variety of wildland recreation activities).
59. Driver & Brown, supra note 46, at 65.
60. See Robert E. Manning, Social Research in Wilderness: Man in Nature, in WILDERNESS BENCHMARK 1988: PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS COLLOQUIUM, supra note 39, at 120, 121.
61. Driver, supra note 46, at 165; Driver & Brown, supra note 46, at 65; Haas et al., supra note 46, at 30.
62. See CINDY F. SORG & JOHN B. LOOMIS, FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., GTR RM-107, EMPIRICAL ESTIMATES OF AMENITY FOREST VALUES: A COMPARATIVE REVIEW 19-20 (1984).
63. See Richard G. Walsh et al., Review of Outdoor Recreation Economic Demand Studies with Nonmarket Benefit Estimates, 1968-1988, in COLORADO WATER RESOURCES RES. INST., TECH. REPT. 54 at 23, 23 (1988).
64. The preference domains (numbered) are the reasons for recreating. Associated scales (lettered) are also in order of value. The information contained within this table is adapted from Driver & Brown, supra note 46, at 64-66.
65. Cf. McCloskey, supra note 39, at 13, 15, 18.
66. See Lynn Levitt, Therapeutic Value of Wilderness, in WILDERNESS BENCHMARK 1988: PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS COLLOQUIUM, supra note 39, at 156, 158.
67. See Daniel R. Williams et al., The Role of Wilderness in Human Development, in WILDERNESS BENCHMARK 1988: PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS COLLOQUIUM, supra note 39, at 169, 169.
68. See Beverly L. Driver, Item Pool for Scales Designed to Quantify the Psychological Outcomes Desired and Expected from Recreation Participation, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., ROCKY MOUNTAIN FOREST AND RANGE EXPERIMENT STATION 38 (1977).
69. NASH, supra note 32, at 5 (quoting the Wilderness Act of 1964 § 2(c), 16 U.S.C. § 1132(c) (1994)).
70. Cf. Michael McCloskey, Understanding the Demand for More Wilderness, in WILDERNESS BENCHMARK 1988: PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS COLLOQUIUM, supra note 39, at 38, 39-41 (discussing the reasons behind the demand for wilderness protection).
71. Roderick Nash, The Cultural Significance of the American Wilderness, in WILDERNESS AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE 66, 72 (Maxine E. McCloskey & James P. Gilligan eds., 1969).
72. Cf. Ronald J. Glass & Robert M. Muth, Commodity Benefits from Wilderness: Salmon in Southeast Alaska, in FOREST SERV., THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS, supra note 13, at 141, 141.
73. See McCloskey, supra note 39, at 18.
74. Cf. James H. Johnson, The Secret Harvest, AM. FORESTS, Mar.-Apr. 1992, at 28, 28-29.
75. Pricing methods for nontimber resources harvested on the national forests also need to be evaluated and formalized. In the southern Appalachians, the Forest Service has sold Pink Lady's slippers, a wild orchid that is difficult to propagate, for $.25 per plant, a price that is well below replacement costs. See Peter A. Morton, Charting a New Course: National Forests in the Southern Appalachians, THE WILDERNESS SOC'Y 65, 65 (1994) [hereinafter Morton, Charting a New Course].
76. In recognition of this, section 802 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA), Pub. L. No. 96-487, § 802, 94 Stat. 2371, 2422 (codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. § 3112 (1994)), allows subsistence uses to continue, even in designated wilderness.
77. See JOHN A. KRUSE & ROBERT M. MUTH, SUBSISTENCE USE OF RENEWABLE RESOURCES BY RURAL SOUTHEAST ALASKA RESIDENTS 18 (1990).
78. See generally ROBERT M. MUTH & RONALD J. GLASS, WILDERNESS AND SUBSISTENCE-USE OPPORTUNITIES: BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS (1989).
79. Employment and income multipliers measure the total indirect and induced effects of export employment and income on a regional economy. For each dollar injected into the local economy, three or four dollars may be earned by local residents as the export dollars are cycled through local businesses. See THOMAS MICHAEL POWER, LOST LANDSCAPES AND FAILED ECONOMIES: THE SEARCH FOR A VALUE OF PLACE 7 (1996). The more self-sufficient a community is, the larger the multiplier because export dollars stay in town longer by circulating through a diversity of local businesses. Although job and income multipliers for recreation jobs may be lower than timber multipliers, the large number of direct recreation jobs compensate for the lower multipliers.
80. Cf. id. at 159-62 (discussing the multiple economic benefits of natural forests); Morton, supra note 63, at 65. See generally Raymond Rasker, A New Look at Old Vistas: The Economic Role of Environmental Quality in Western Public Lands, 65 U. COLO. L. REV. 369 (1994) (exploring different options for looking at the role of public lands).
81. E. Whitelaw & E.G. Niemi, Migration, Economic Growth, and the Quality of Life, in PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTY-THIRD ANNUAL PACIFIC NORTHWEST REGIONAL ECONOMIC CONFERENCE 35, 36 (1989).
82. See Ray Rasker, Dynamic Economy Versus Static Policy in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, in FOREST SERV., THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS, supra note 13, at 201, 205.
83. The 227 counties containing wilderness have experienced more rapid growth than other counties, and the presence of wilderness was an important reason why 60% of migrants moved to the wilderness county, and why 45% of the long-term residents stay. See Gundars Rudzitis & Harley E. Johansen, How Important Is Wilderness? Results from a United States Survey, 15 ENVTL. MGMT. 227, 231 (1991).
84. See Jerry D. Johnson & Raymond Rasker, The Role of Economic and Quality of Life Values in Rural Business Location, 11 J. RURAL STUD. 405, 406, 412-14 (1995); Susan Kask & Peter A. Morton, Quality of Life and Natural Resource Amenities in Business Location and Retention Decisions 11, 13 (1998) (unpublished manuscript on file with author).
85. See Jerry D. Johnson & Raymond Rasker, The Role of Economic and Quality of Life Values in Rural Business Location, 11 J. RURAL STUD. 405, 406, 412-14 (1995); Susan Kask & Peter A. Morton, Quality of Life and Natural Resource Amenities in Business Location and Retention Decisions 11, 13 (1998) (unpublished manuscript on file with author).
86. See Jill M. Decker & John L. Crompton, Business Location Decisions: The Relative Importance of Quality of Life and Recreation, Park, and Cultural Opportunities, 8 J. PARK & RECREATION ADMIN. 26, 27, 37-38 (1990).
87. According to Birch, "[t]he successful, innovation-based company will, in general, settle in an environment that bright, creative people find attractive." DAVID L. BIRCH, JOB CREATION IN AMERICA: HOW OUR SMALLEST COMPANIES PUT THE MOST PEOPLE TO WORK 9 (1987). And, in order to retain a quality workforce, firms must provide a setting with a high "quality of life." Id. A network of wildlands can help firms with that goal by sustaining a high quality of life in adjacent communities. See generally Rasker, supra note 68 (discussing the evolving role of public lands in the economy of the western United States); Raymond Rasker, A New Home on the Range: Economic Realities in the Columbia River Basin 15, 22-23 (1995) (unpublished manuscript on file with author).
88. According to Birch, "[t]he successful, innovation-based company will, in general, settle in an environment that bright, creative people find attractive." DAVID L. BIRCH, JOB CREATION IN AMERICA: HOW OUR SMALLEST COMPANIES PUT THE MOST PEOPLE TO WORK 9 (1987). And, in order to retain a quality workforce, firms must provide a setting with a high "quality of life." Id. A network of wildlands can help firms with that goal by sustaining a high quality of life in adjacent communities. See generally Rasker, supra note 68 (discussing the evolving role of public lands in the economy of the western United States); Raymond Rasker, A New Home on the Range: Economic Realities in the Columbia River Basin 15, 22-23 (1995) (unpublished manuscript on file with author).
89. See Timothy P. Duane, Exodus to Exurbia: The Threat of Population Growth in Rural "Buffer Zone" Regions to the Conservation of Biological Diversity 11-12 (paper presented to the Soc'y of Conservation Biology, June 12, 1993).
90. See CHARLES F. LONGINO, RETIREMENT MIGRATION IN AMERICA 13 (R. Alan Fox ed., 1995).
91. See P.B. Siegel & F.O. Leuthold, Economic & Fiscal Impacts of a Retirement/Recreation Community: A Study of Tellico Village, Tennessee, 25 J. OF AGRIC. & APPLIED ECON. 134, 134-47 (1993).
92. See LONGINO, supra note 76, at 83-84.
93. See id.
94. See Robert D. Plotnick, Small Community Economic Development: Can Income Transfers Help?, in A NORTHWEST READER: OPTIONS FOR RURAL COMMUNITIES 55, 57-58 (1989).
95. George H. Stankey, Scientific Issues in the Definition of Wilderness, in PROCEEDINGS - NATIONAL WILDERNESS RESEARCH CONFERENCE: ISSUES, STATE-OF-KNOWLEDGE, FUTURE DIRECTIONS, supra note 5, at 47, 51.
96. See Sarah E. Greene & Jerry F. Franklin, The State of Ecological Research in Forest Service Wilderness, in WILDERNESS BENCHMARK 1988: PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS COLLOQUIUM 113, supra note 39, at 113, 113.
97. NASH, supra note 32, at 23.
98. See McCloskey, supra note 39, at 17.
99. Cf. John C. Hendee & M.H. Brown, How Wilderness Experience Programs Work for Personal Growth, Therapy and Education: An Explanatory Model, in THE HIGHEST USE OF WILDERNESS: PROCEEDINGS OF A SPECIAL PLENARY SESSION AT THE 4TH WORLD WILDERNESS CONGRESS 5 (John C. Hendee ed., 1987); Edwin E. Krumpe, Managing Wilderness for Education and Human Development: A Bane or a Blessing?, in PREPARING TO MANAGE WILDERNESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: PROCEEDINGS OF THE CONFERENCE, supra note 39, at 83, 85. Improving right brain functions can stimulate flexibility in the human thought process. Flexibility is considered an important trait for workers to succeed in the labor marketplace.
100. Cf. John C. Hendee & M.H. Brown, How Wilderness Experience Programs Work for Personal Growth, Therapy and Education: An Explanatory Model, in THE HIGHEST USE OF WILDERNESS: PROCEEDINGS OF A SPECIAL PLENARY SESSION AT THE 4TH WORLD WILDERNESS CONGRESS 5 (John C. Hendee ed., 1987); Edwin E. Krumpe, Managing Wilderness for Education and Human Development: A Bane or a Blessing?, in PREPARING TO MANAGE WILDERNESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: PROCEEDINGS OF THE CONFERENCE, supra note 39, at 83, 85. Improving right brain functions can stimulate flexibility in the human thought process. Flexibility is considered an important trait for workers to succeed in the labor marketplace.
101. See MERRILL R. KAUFMANN ET AL., FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., GTR RM-246, AN ECOLOGICAL BASIS FOR ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT 7 (1994).
102. See ALDO LEOPOLD, A SAND COUNTY ALMANAC WITH ESSAYS ON CONSERVATION FROM ROUND RIVER 258, 274 (1966).
103. See Gregory H. Aplet, Ecosystem Management White Paper, THE WILDERNESS SOC'Y (1996).
104. See McCloskey, supra note 39, at 16.
105. See Patrick Reed et al., Management Principles for a 1990's Wilderness Revolution, in MANAGING AMERICA'S ENDURING WILDERNESS RESOURCE: PROCEEDING OF A CONFERENCE 250, 253 (David W. Lime ed., 1989).
106. Prescott-Allen and Prescott-Allen conducted a detailed analysis of the contribution wild species of plants and animals made to the American economy and concluded that 4.5% of the gross domestic product was attributable to wild species. See CHRISTINE PRESCOTT-ALLEN & ROBERT PRESCOTT-ALLEN, THE FIRST RESOURCE: WILD SPECIES IN THE NORTH AMERICAN ECONOMY 408 (1986).
107. See id. at 100-48 (discussing the types and amounts of natural ingredients in medicine).
108. See Peter A. Morton et al., Sustaining Biological Resources on the Southern Appalachian National Forests, in PROCEEDINGS: 1994 SOUTHERN FOREST ECONOMICS WORKSHOP, D.B. WARNELL SCHOOL OF FOREST RESOURCES, UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA 344, 345-46 (1994).
109. See generally MARGERY L. OLDFIELD, THE VALUE OF CONSERVING GENETIC RESOURCES (1984) (discussing the advantage of genetic diversity in several areas of resource development, including food production, tree resources, and natural sources for industrial oils and waxes).
110. Pacific yew is a tree species with low value for wood products that was traditionally burned in slash piles. Taxol, a natural substance extracted from the bark, is an effective drug for treating ovarian cancer. This illustrates the need to manage forest ecosystems for all species, not just the species currently valuable as commercial wood products.
111. See Alan Randall, An Economic Perspective of the Value of Biological Diversity, in CONTRACT PAPERS, PART E: VALUATION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 5, 14-15 (1986).
112. Mark Leslie Shaffer, Beyond the Endangered Species Act: Conservation in the 21st Century, in THE WILDERNESS SOC'Y 6 (1992).
113. See Walsh & Loomis, supra note 39, at 185.
114. See id.
115. See id.
116. Cf. Randall, supra note 96, at 31.
117. See generally EUGENE P. ODUM, ECOLOGY AND OUR ENDANGERED LIFE-SUPPORT SYSTEMS (2d ed. 1993) (discussing the principles of modern ecology).
118. See JEFFREY A. MCNEELY ET AL., CONSERVING THE WORLD'S BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 17-22 (1990).
119. Cf. Robert Costanza et al., The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital, 387 NATURE 253, 253 (1997) (discussing data gathered to estimate the value of many ecosystem services).
120. Costanza estimated the economic benefits of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital average $33 trillion per year. In contrast, global gross national product totals equal $18 trillion per year. See id. at 253.
121. Organic Act of June 4, 1897, ch. 2, 30 Stat. 11, 34 (codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. §§ 473-482, 551 (1994)).
122. 16 U.S.C. § 475.
123. Cf. ODUM, supra note 102, at 31.
124. Cf. M. MCMANUS ET AL., FOREST SERV., U.S. DEPT. OF AGRIC., GYPSY MOTH, FOREST INSECT AND DISEASE LEAFLET 162 (1989), available at 〈http://willow.ncfes.umn.edu/fidl-gypsy/gypsy.htm〉 (visited Dec. 8, 1999); H. Smith, Wildlife and Gypsy Moth, WILDLIFE SOC'Y BULL. 13, 166-74 (1985). Although a non-native species, the many predators of gypsy moths that include wasps, flies, beetles, ants, many species of spider, several birds such as chickadees, blue jays, nuthatches, and towhees, and fifteen or more species of common woodland mammals such as white-footed mice, shrews, chipmunks, squirrels and raccoons provide a case in point.
125. Cf. M. MCMANUS ET AL., FOREST SERV., U.S. DEPT. OF AGRIC., GYPSY MOTH, FOREST INSECT AND DISEASE LEAFLET 162 (1989), available at 〈http://willow.ncfes.umn.edu/fidl-gypsy/gypsy.htm〉 (visited Dec. 8, 1999); H. Smith, Wildlife and Gypsy Moth, WILDLIFE SOC'Y BULL. 13, 166-74 (1985). Although a non-native species, the many predators of gypsy moths that include wasps, flies, beetles, ants, many species of spider, several birds such as chickadees, blue jays, nuthatches, and towhees, and fifteen or more species of common woodland mammals such as white-footed mice, shrews, chipmunks, squirrels and raccoons provide a case in point.
126. See John Y. Takekawa & Edward O. Garton, How Much Is an Evening Grosbeak Worth?, 82 J. FORESTRY 426, 426-27 (1984).
127. See id.
128. See David Pimentel et al., Economic and Environmental Benefits of Biodiversity, 47 BIOSCIENCE 747, 748 (1997).
129. See Morton et al., supra note 93, at 349.
130. The Kyoto Protocol on climate change (signed by 163 countries in December 1997) established target reductions for net emissions of greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide and methane. In order to meet emission targets, the federal government may auction emission allowances that can be traded in the marketplace. See Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (visited Mar. 8, 1999) 〈http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1997/global.warming/stories/treaty/〉.
131. Norway, for example, recently paid $2 million to Costa Rica as part of a joint implementation agreement to sequester 200,000 tons of carbon from Costa Rican forests.
132. Timberland in the Rocky Mountains contains 4060 million metric tons of carbon. See R. A. Birdsey et al., Carbon Changes in U.S. Forests, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PRODUCTIVITY OF AMERICA'S FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE 56, 67 (Linda A. Joyce ed., 1995). The Interior Columbia Basin Assessment estimated the value of carbon sequestered at $65 per ton. See Richard W. Haynes & Amy L. Home, Economic Assessment of the Basin, in 4 AN ASSESSMENT OF ECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS IN THE INTERIOR COLUMBIA BASIN AND PORTIONS OF THE KLAMATH AND GREAT BASINS 1715 (Thomas M. Quigley & Sylvia J. Arbelbide eds., 1997) [hereinafter COLUMBIA BASIN ASSESSMENT]. This would suggest that carbon stored in Rocky Mountain timberland has substantial economic value.
133. Timberland in the Rocky Mountains contains 4060 million metric tons of carbon. See R. A. Birdsey et al., Carbon Changes in U.S. Forests, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PRODUCTIVITY OF AMERICA'S FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE 56, 67 (Linda A. Joyce ed., 1995). The Interior Columbia Basin Assessment estimated the value of carbon sequestered at $65 per ton. See Richard W. Haynes & Amy L. Home, Economic Assessment of the Basin, in 4 AN ASSESSMENT OF ECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS IN THE INTERIOR COLUMBIA BASIN AND PORTIONS OF THE KLAMATH AND GREAT BASINS 1715 (Thomas M. Quigley & Sylvia J. Arbelbide eds., 1997) [hereinafter COLUMBIA BASIN ASSESSMENT]. This would suggest that carbon stored in Rocky Mountain timberland has substantial economic value.
134. Cf. David P. Turner et al., A Carbon Budget for Forest of the Conterminous United States, ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, May 1995, at 421, 429-33.
135. See generally Gregory H. Aplet et al., Patterns of Community Dynamics in Colorado Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Forests, 69 ECOLOGY 312 (1989) (discussing the importance of the role of disturbance in spruce-fir forest dynamics).
136. See Peter A. Morton et al., Linking Soil Nutrient Recapitalization and Sustainable Forestry: A Modeling Approach (1999) (unpublished manuscript on file with author).
137. See J.N. Walker & J.A. DeShazer, Sequestration and Reduction, AGRIC. ENGINEERING, Sept. 1992, at 17, 17; cf. Paul Schroeder, Can Intensive Management Increase Carbon Storage in Forests?, 15 ENV'T MGMT. 475, 475 (1991).
138. See J.N. Walker & J.A. DeShazer, Sequestration and Reduction, AGRIC. ENGINEERING, Sept. 1992, at 17, 17; cf. Paul Schroeder, Can Intensive Management Increase Carbon Storage in Forests?, 15 ENV'T MGMT. 475, 475 (1991).
139. See R.A. Birdsey et al., Carbon Changes in U.S. Forests, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., PRODUCTIVITY OF AMERICA'S FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE 56, 61 (Linda A. Joyce ed., 1995).
140. See Morton & Olson, supra note 36, at 247.
141. See Walsh & Loomis, supra note 39, at 182.
142. See MARION CLAWSON & JACK L. KNETSCH, ECONOMICS OF OUTDOOR RECREATION, 33-36 (1966).
143. See id.
144. See id. at 33.
145. See id. at 34-35.
146. Burton A. Weisbrod, Collective-Consumption Services of Individual-Consumption Goods, 78 Q. J. ECON. 471, 472 (1964).
147. See id.
148. See JOHN V. KRUTILLA & ANTHONY C. FISHER, THE ECONOMICS OF NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS: STUDIES IN THE VALUATION OF COMMODITY AND AMENITY RESOURCES 15 (1985).
149. See Krutilla, supra note 39, at 780-81, 785.
150. See Richard G. Walsh et al., Valuing Option, Existence, and Bequest Demands for Wilderness, 60 LAND ECON. 14, 16-28 (1984).
151. See id. at 25.
152. See Walsh & Loomis, supra note 39, at 181, 183.
153. See A. Gilbert et al., Valuation of Eastern Wilderness: Extramarket Measures of Public Support, in FOREST SERV., THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS, supra note 13, at 57, 61-62.
154. See id. at 61.
155. See id. at 57, 61.
156. See Richard G. Walsh et al., Regional Household Preference for Ecosystem Restoration and Sustained Yield Management of Wilderness and Other Natural Areas, in BENEFITS AND COSTS TRANSFER IN NATURAL RESOURCE PLANNING 42, 42 (J. Bergstrom ed., 1996).
157. See id.
158. Wilderness Act of 1964 § 2(a), 16 U.S.C. § 1131(a) (1994). This quotation is an example of a policy statement (and enactment) of a long-run value at the institutional level, not necessarily based on a quantified economic efficiency analysis. Economic efficiency analysis strives to maximize benefits, but says nothing about the fairness or equity of how the benefits are distributed. Informed public policy decisions often ignore economic efficiency in favor of equity considerations and due process of law. See Peterson Communication, supra note 18.
159. Stephen F. McCool & Robert C. Lucas, Managing Resources and People in Wilderness: Accomplishments and Challenges, in MANAGING AMERICA'S ENDURING WILDERNESS RESOURCE: PROCEEDINGS OF A CONFERENCE, supra note 90, at 67.
160. Pub. L. No. 86-517, 74 Stat. 215 (1960) (codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. §§ 528-531 (1994)).
161. MUSYA § 4(b), 16 U.S.C. § 531(b).
162. See MUSYA § 1, 16 U.S.C. § 528; CHARLES F. WILKINSON & H. MICHAEL ANDERSON, LAND AND RESOURCE PLANNING IN THE NATIONAL FORESTS 29-30 (1987).
163. See OFFICE OF TECH. ASSESSMENT, U.S. CONG. OTA-F-505, FOREST SERVICE PLANNING: ACCOMMODATING USES, PRODUCING OUTPUTS, AND SUSTAINING ECOSYSTEMS 38 (1992) [hereinafter ACCOMMODATING USES].
164. Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-378, 88 Stat. 476 (codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. §§ 1600-1687 (1994)).
165. The RPA Assessment is produced every ten years and examines resource supply and demand, as well as trends in resource conditions. See RPA § 2(a); 16 U.S.C. § 1601(a). The RPA Program is published every five years and establishes a direction for Forest Service management based on trends and opportunities identified in the RPA Assessment. See RPA § 3, 16 U.S.C. § 1602. The Presidential Statement of Policy guides the annual budget requests, and the Annual Report assesses Forest Service accomplishments and progress in implementing the RPA Program. See RPA § 7(a), (c), 16 U.S.C. § 1606(a), (c); see also ACCOMMODATING USES, supra note 145 (providing a comprehensive discussion and analysis of Forest Service planning).
166. See ACCOMMODATING USES, supra note 145, at 9.
167. Pub. L. No. 94-588, 90 Stat. 2949 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 16 U.S.C.). The NFMA was an amendment to the RPA and although primarily a procedural law, NFMA did establish standards and guidelines for planning and resource protection. Cf. NFMA § 6, 16 U.S.C. § 1604; see also ACCOMMODATING USES, supra note 145, at 3. The NFMA also directs the Forest Service to prepare long-term (i.e., 50 years) forest management plans for each national forest, to be revised at least every 15 years. See NFMA § 6, 16 U.S.C. § 1604. The NFMA also requires the Forest Service to conduct an economic analysis of forest management alternatives. See NFMA § 2, 16 U.S.C. § 1600.
168. See NFMA § 6, 16 U.S.C. § 1604.
169. Cf. LOOMIS, supra note 10, at 43; CINDY SORG SwANSON & JOHN B. LOOMIS, FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T OF AGRIC., PNW-GTR 361, ROLE OF NONMARKET ECONOMIC VALUES IN BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC FOREST MANAGEMENT 1 (1996).
170. National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning, 47 Fed. Reg. 43,026-52 (1982).
171. See LOOMIS, supra note 10, at 128-31. From a taxpayer's perspective, consumer surplus generated by a network of wildlands can be viewed as "untaxed" benefits provided by government management of the public estate.
172. Net present value, an economic tool for evaluating forest management alternatives, is calculated by subtracting the discounted management costs from the discounted management benefits. The practice of discounting (the opposite of compounding) is required to compare costs and benefits that occur at different points in time over the 50 year planning period.
173. See ACCOMMODATING USES, supra note 145, at 135.
174. The willingness to pay values can be used as coefficients in the FORPLAN model.
175. See generally SORG & LOOMIS, supra note 50 (detailing the results of their meta-analysis).
176. See John H. Duffield, RPA Values for Recreation: Theory and Practice, 10 PUB. LAND L. REV. 105, 112 (1989).
177. See id. at 115.
178. Id. at 128.
179. Id. at 120. In defense of the downward adjustment, a Forest Service economist stated that the principal reason for adjusting the values was the inability to represent a collectable price or user fee in a competitive market. See id. at 117.
180. SAMUELSON, supra note 22, at 449.
181. See Peter A. Morton, Review of Stumpage Prices and Recreation, in THE DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE NANTAHALA AND PISGAH NATIONAL FORESTS 6, 6-7, 18-22 (1992) [hereinafter Morton, Review of Stumpage Prices]; Peter A. Morton, Review of the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Management Plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests 18 (1994) (a report prepared for The Wilderness Society et al.) [hereinafter Morton, Review of the Final Environmental Impact Statement] (on file with author).
182. See Peter A. Morton, Review of Stumpage Prices and Recreation, in THE DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE NANTAHALA AND PISGAH NATIONAL FORESTS 6, 6-7, 18-22 (1992) [hereinafter Morton, Review of Stumpage Prices]; Peter A. Morton, Review of the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Management Plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests 18 (1994) (a report prepared for The Wilderness Society et al.) [hereinafter Morton, Review of the Final Environmental Impact Statement] (on file with author).
183. See Morton, Review of Stumpage Prices, supra note 163, at 18-19; see also
184. Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., THE SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN ASSESSMENT 18 (1996).
185. See generally DANIEL W. MCCOLLUM ET AL., FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., THE NET ECONOMIC VALUE OF RECREATION ON THE NATIONAL FORESTS: TWELVE TYPES OF PRIMARY ACTIVITY TRIPS ACROSS NINE FOREST SERVICE REGIONS (analyzing use values based on travel cost statistics); Peter H. Pearse & Thomas P. Holmes, Accounting for Nonmarket Benefits in Southern Forest Management, 17 S.J. APPLIED FORESTRY 84 (1993).
186. See generally DANIEL W. MCCOLLUM ET AL., FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., THE NET ECONOMIC VALUE OF RECREATION ON THE NATIONAL FORESTS: TWELVE TYPES OF PRIMARY ACTIVITY TRIPS ACROSS NINE FOREST SERVICE REGIONS (analyzing use values based on travel cost statistics); Peter H. Pearse & Thomas P. Holmes, Accounting for Nonmarket Benefits in Southern Forest Management, 17 S.J. APPLIED FORESTRY 84 (1993).
187. See Richard W. Haynes & Amy L. Home, Economic Assessment of the Basin, in 4 COLUMBIA BASIN ASSESSMENT, supra note 116, at 1715.
188. Id.
189. See M.R. Botkin & H.A. Devine, Outdoor Recreation Allocation in a FORPLAN Model, J. FORESTRY, Oct. 1989, at 31, 31-37.
190. Id. at 37.
191. The decision to harvest timber is driven by the timber targets (resource goals) selected in the planning process required by the 1974 RPA and the 1976 NFMA. However, the resource goals do not always reflect the productive capability of individual national forests. See MICHAEL D. BOWES & JOHN V. KRUTILLA, MULTIPLE-USE MANAGEMENT: THE ECONOMICS OF PUBLIC FORESTLANDS 120 (1989). Timber targets not only force a significant amount of land into timber production that will require a public subsidy to bring the wood to market. Timber targets also impact wildland resource allocation by significantly influencing the FORPLAN model. When congressionally assigned timber targets drive the allocation of public resources on the national forests, the ability of the agency to maximize net public benefits is doubtful.
192. When confronted with both the high timber target assigned and the increased value for semiprimitive recreation, the Chattahoochee FORPLAN model reacted in a strange way. As semi-primitive recreation values were increased, volume of old growth harvested in semi-primitive areas increased. In other words, as the benefits of wild recreation increased, the naturalness, the acres of old-growth, and the degree of solitude in the wild decreased!
193. See Botkin & Devine, supra note 169, at 37.
194. See U.S. GEN. ACCT. OFF., GAO/RCED-91-115, FOREST SERVICE: DIFFICULT CHOICES FACE THE FUTURE OF THE RECREATION PROGRAM 3 (1991).
195. See Peter A. Morton, Sustaining Recreation Resources on the Southern Appalachian National Forests, J. OF PARK & RECREATION ADMIN., Winter 1997, at 61, 62 (1997) [hereinafter Morton, Sustaining Recreation].
196. See id. The asymmetrical budget shortfalls could be a result of Forest Service managers acting as budget maximizers and responding to the managerial budget incentives tied to logging and "getting the cut out." O' TOOLE, supra note 196, at 56. The asymmetrical budget shortfalls could also be a result of the agency inadvertently emphasizing a financial analysis when evaluating management alternatives. Or, the asymmetrical shortfalls could be a result of conscious policy decisions made by agency officials that revenue produced by umber was more important to national welfare than benefits produced by recreation. See Peterson Communication, supra note 18.
197. See THOMAS HARVEY & STEPHEN HENLEY, AMERICAN HIKING SOC'Y, THE STATUS OF TRAILS IN NATIONAL FORESTS, NATIONAL PARKS, AND BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AREAS (1989).
198. See Morton, Sustaining Recreation, supra note 175, at 63.
199. See John B. Loomis, Economic Efficiency Analysis, Bureaucrats, and Budgets: A Test of Hypotheses, 12 W. J. AGRIC. ECON. 27, 29 (1987) [hereinafter Loomis, Economic Efficiency]; John B. Loomis, Importance of Joint Benefits of Wilderness in Calculating Wilderness Recreation Benefits, in FOREST SERV., THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS, supra note 13, at 17 [hereinafter Loomis, Joint Benefits].
200. See John B. Loomis, Economic Efficiency Analysis, Bureaucrats, and Budgets: A Test of Hypotheses, 12 W. J. AGRIC. ECON. 27, 29 (1987) [hereinafter Loomis, Economic Efficiency]; John B. Loomis, Importance of Joint Benefits of Wilderness in Calculating Wilderness Recreation Benefits, in FOREST SERV., THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS, supra note 13, at 17 [hereinafter Loomis, Joint Benefits].
201. The agency also tends to analyze hunting and fishing independently of recreation when it comes to estimating recreation carrying capacity. As a result, visitation to wilderness areas (use density - RVDs/acre/year) is underestimated in forest planning. See Morton, Charting a New Course, supra note 63, at 65. The impact of hunting season, for example, on wilderness carrying capacity may be significant but ignored. Hunting and fishing occur in wilderness areas and should be analyzed with other forms of wildland recreation, since they most certainly impact each other.
202. See Linda L. Langner, Use of Wilderness Values in Forest Service Policy and Planning, in FOREST SERV., THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS, supra note 13, at 239, 341-42.
203. See Loomis, Economic Efficiency, supra note 179, at 29.
204. The density of wilderness use (visits per acre per year) can be estimated by dividing annual wilderness use by total wilderness acres. In this case, current wilderness density on the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests was 2.4 RVDs per acre per year, whereas planners on another southern Appalachian national forest estimated a wilderness carrying capacity of only 0.487 RVDs per acre per year. See Morton, Review of the Final Environmental Impact Statement, supra note 163.
205. See Botkin & Devine, supra note 169, at 33-34.
206. See FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., GEORGE WASHINGTON NATIONAL FOREST: DRAFT REVISED LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN (1992).
207. See Peter A. Morton, Analysis of the Supply and Demand for Wilderness Recreation, in THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE GEORGE WASHINGTON NATIONAL FOREST (1993) (a report prepared for The Wilderness Society et al.).
208. FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE NANTAHALA AND PISGAH NATIONAL FORESTS (1992).
209. Semi-primitive nonmotorized areas represent a land classification category of the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS). ROS categories range from urban to primitive environments, and are used by planners to categorize the recreation settings occurring on public land.
210. Cf. Morton, Review of Stumpage Prices, supra note 163.
211. FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE NANTAHALA AND PISGAH NATIONAL FORESTS (1994).
212. Stumpage price refers to the value of standing timber in a forest.
213. The land brought into the suitable timber base as a result of overestimating stumpage prices is typically the marginal land for timber production. Bringing marginal land into timber production should be a concern for managers and is a questionable investment of taxpayer money.
214. See generally DE STEIGUER ET AL., supra note 30 (detailing the results of the Southern Appalachian Timber Study).
215. Id. at 41.
216. A regression equation attempts to establish a functional relationship by using independent variables to predict the value of a dependent variable. In this case, timber sale characteristics such as volume for each species and contract length (independent variables) were used to estimate future stumpage prices (the dependent variable).
217. Using data from a generally declining market to forecast prices in an increasing market is problematic as lumber price elasticities estimated during a declining market probably do not apply in a rising market. The fact that stumpage prices fell at a faster rate than lumber prices in a declining market does not guarantee that stumpage prices will increase at a faster rate than lumber prices in a rising market - especially over a 50 year period.
218. The regression equations included statistically insignificant variables and suffered specification problems because relevant independent variables were omitted from the regressions. By assuming that stumpage prices would increase at a faster rate than lumber prices, planners projected higher stumpage prices than most purchasers would be willing to pay. For example, after 50 years, stumpage costs for low-valued species equaled 90% of the lumber price, leaving purchasers only a 10% margin to cover transportation and conversion costs, let alone a decent profit. See Morton, Review of Stumpage Prices, supra note 162, at 6.
219. Data reflected in Figure 7 is taken from the DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE NANTAHALA AND PISGAH NATIONAL FORESTS, supra note 187.
220. Econometrics is the study of the application of statistical methods to the analysis of economic data.
221. See Morton, Review of the Final Environmental Impact Statement, supra note 163. The stumpage price projections used in the FEIS were adjusted downward from the projections included in the DEIS.
222. See Marion Clawson, Forests in the Long Sweep of American History, 204 SCIENCE 1168, 1172 (1979).
223. See RANDAL O'TOOLE, REFORMING THE FOREST SERVICE 56 (1988).
224. Perry Hagenstein, Forests, in NATURAL RESOURCES FOR THE 21ST CENTURY 78, 93 (R. Neil Sampson & Dwight Hair eds., 1990).
225. Aldo Leopold, Why the Wilderness Society?, 1 LIVING WILDERNESS 1,1 (1935).
226. The use of the word "ignore" implies neglect, or a refusal to take notice of wildland benefits on the part of agency decision makers. This may or may not be the case. Failure of policy decisions to be sensitive to consumer surplus may not reflect a deliberate choice by the Forest Service to ignore consumer surplus - policy decisions often contradict the economic facts. For example, policy decisions often sacrifice economic efficiency in order to achieve social equity objectives. Did the Forest Service ignore wildland values because of fallacious logic, ignorance of the fact, or did agency officials adequately consider the values in question and then consciously decide on other policy directions that make it appear as if wildland values were ignored? The results presented here provide some insight to these questions. Duffield's commentary on agency administrators "determined to reduce the values assigned to recreation" would suggest that fallacious logic was used by agency officials to adjust RPA values. See Duffield, supra note 158, at 112. Deceptive logic could also have contributed to the timber bias in the FORPLAN model examined by Botkin and Devine. See Botkin & Devine, supra note 169, at 33-34. The other problems cited about the FORPLAN model are more likely a result of policy decisions that considered wildland values but chose to not allow them to determine choice after having considered them. To more fully investigate answers to these questions, see generally MICHAEL FROME, THE FOREST SERVICE (1984); PAUL W. HIRT, A CONSPIRACY OF OPTIMISM: MANAGEMENT OF THE NATIONAL FORESTS SINCE WORLD WAR II (1996); O'TOOLE, supra note 202.
227. The use of the word "ignore" implies neglect, or a refusal to take notice of wildland benefits on the part of agency decision makers. This may or may not be the case. Failure of policy decisions to be sensitive to consumer surplus may not reflect a deliberate choice by the Forest Service to ignore consumer surplus - policy decisions often contradict the economic facts. For example, policy decisions often sacrifice economic efficiency in order to achieve social equity objectives. Did the Forest Service ignore wildland values because of fallacious logic, ignorance of the fact, or did agency officials adequately consider the values in question and then consciously decide on other policy directions that make it appear as if wildland values were ignored? The results presented here provide some insight to these questions. Duffield's commentary on agency administrators "determined to reduce the values assigned to recreation" would suggest that fallacious logic was used by agency officials to adjust RPA values. See Duffield, supra note 158, at 112. Deceptive logic could also have contributed to the timber bias in the FORPLAN model examined by Botkin and Devine. See Botkin & Devine, supra note 169, at 33-34. The other problems cited about the FORPLAN model are more likely a result of policy decisions that considered wildland values but chose to not allow them to determine choice after having considered them. To more fully investigate answers to these questions, see generally MICHAEL FROME, THE FOREST SERVICE (1984); PAUL W. HIRT, A CONSPIRACY OF OPTIMISM: MANAGEMENT OF THE NATIONAL FORESTS SINCE WORLD WAR II (1996); O'TOOLE, supra note 202.
228. John W. Duffield, Total Valuation of Wildlife and Fishery Resources: Applications in the Northern Rockies, in FOREST SERV., THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF WILDERNESS supra note 13, at 97.
229. See Loomis & Walsh, supra note 13, at 81.
230. Cf. Loomis, supra note 26, at 229.
231. Loomis & Walsh, supra note 13, at 81.
232. See Langner, supra note 181, at 240.
233. See ACCOMMODATING USES, supra note 145, at 38.
234. TSPIRS is the Forest Service's annual effort to provide an accurate accounting of the benefits and costs of national forest management.
235. See Walsh et al., supra note 51, at 1-5.
236. Cf. Peterson, supra note 15, at 87. At a recent meeting attended by the author, a Forest Service economist noted that "you can't buy a beer with consumer surplus." That sentiment succinctly sums up the criticism of nonmarket benefits. Even this criticism is misplaced, however, since by definition consumer surplus is money you would have paid but did not have to pay. See E-mail from John Loomis, Professor of Economics, Colo. St. Univ., to Pete Morton, The Wilderness Society (Oct. 1998) (on file with author) [hereinafter Loomis Communication]. As such, consumer surplus can be viewed as income retained in your wallet and available to buy beer.
237. See generally JUST ET AL., supra note 22, at 68-84; SAMUELSON, supra note 22, at 456-57.
238. See Haynes & Horne, supra note 68.
239. See Randall, supra note 96, at 20-23.
240. See G.D. Davis, Ecosystem Representation As a Criterion for World Wilderness Designation, WILD WINGS FOUND, (1987); Robert G. Bailey, Description of the Ecoregions of the United States, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., MISC. PUB. 1391 (1980).
241. See G.D. Davis, Ecosystem Representation As a Criterion for World Wilderness Designation, WILD WINGS FOUND, (1987); Robert G. Bailey, Description of the Ecoregions of the United States, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., MISC. PUB. 1391 (1980).
242. Given the underrepresentation of ecosystem types, expanding the wildland network to include additional habitats and communities will have high economic value at the margin.
243. See Aplet, supra note 88.
244. See generally Reed F. Noss, Indicators for Monitoring Biodiversity: A Hierarchical Approach, 4 CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 355 (1990).
245. Cf. Bruce Alyward, Appropriating the Value of Wildlife and Wildlands, in ECONOMICS FOR THE WILDS: WILDLIFE, DIVERSITY AND DEVELOPMENT 34, 56-61 (Timothy M. Swanson & Edward B. Barbier eds., 1992).
246. Pub. L. No. 93-378, 88 Stat. 477 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 16 U.S.C.).
247. NFMA § 6, 16 U.S.C. § 1604.
248. See generally Morton et al., supra note 93.
249. See H. Ken Cordell et al., An Analysis of the Outdoor Recreation and Wilderness Situation in the United States: 1989-2040, in FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., TECHNICAL DOCUMENT SUPPORTING THE 1990 RPA ASSESSMENT 99 (1990).
250. Forest Service recreation visitation data have been criticized as being unreliable and lacking the spatial resolution required to monitor and disperse recreation use. See Robert C. Lucas & Stephen F. McCool, Trends in Wilderness Recreation Use: Causes and Implications, 14 WESTERN WILDLANDS 15, 15-21 (1988). The Forest Service maintains recreation visitation information in the Recreation Information Management System (RIM). Morton examined RIM data and found wild fluctuations in annual visitation reported for several wilderness areas in the southern Appalachian. See Morton, Review of Stumpage Prices, supra note 163. For example, wilderness use on the Cheoah Ranger District ranged from 45,000 RVDs in 1987, to zero RVDs in 1988, to 49,000 RVDs in 1989, and back to zero in 1990 and 1991. The drop in wilderness visitation was a result of poor data collection not lack of demand. The accuracy of RIM data is very questionable. In order to accurately value the recreation benefits jointly produced by wilderness better visitation data are needed. See Loomis, Joint Benefits, supra note 175, at 23. The need for better visitation data also applies to the BLM. Cf. Loomis Communication, supra note 214. Research increasingly suggests that recreation is not a benign activity. See WILDLIFE AND RECREATIONISTS: COEXISTENCE THROUGH MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 340-344 (Richard L. Knight & Kevin J. Gutzwiller eds., 1995). As such, improving the temporal accuracy and spatial resolution of recreation data collection and monitoring is a prerequisite for adaptively managing a sustainable recreation program. See Morton, Sustaining Recreation, supra note 176, at 71. Recreation data collection and monitoring programs also create additional employment opportunities for local residents.
251. Forest Service recreation visitation data have been criticized as being unreliable and lacking the spatial resolution required to monitor and disperse recreation use. See Robert C. Lucas & Stephen F. McCool, Trends in Wilderness Recreation Use: Causes and Implications, 14 WESTERN WILDLANDS 15, 15-21 (1988). The Forest Service maintains recreation visitation information in the Recreation Information Management System (RIM). Morton examined RIM data and found wild fluctuations in annual visitation reported for several wilderness areas in the southern Appalachian. See Morton, Review of Stumpage Prices, supra note 163. For example, wilderness use on the Cheoah Ranger District ranged from 45,000 RVDs in 1987, to zero RVDs in 1988, to 49,000 RVDs in 1989, and back to zero in 1990 and 1991. The drop in wilderness visitation was a result of poor data collection not lack of demand. The accuracy of RIM data is very questionable. In order to accurately value the recreation benefits jointly produced by wilderness better visitation data are needed. See Loomis, Joint Benefits, supra note 175, at 23. The need for better visitation data also applies to the BLM. Cf. Loomis Communication, supra note 214. Research increasingly suggests that recreation is not a benign activity. See WILDLIFE AND RECREATIONISTS: COEXISTENCE THROUGH MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 340-344 (Richard L. Knight & Kevin J. Gutzwiller eds., 1995). As such, improving the temporal accuracy and spatial resolution of recreation data collection and monitoring is a prerequisite for adaptively managing a sustainable recreation program. See Morton, Sustaining Recreation, supra note 176, at 71. Recreation data collection and monitoring programs also create additional employment opportunities for local residents.
252. See Alan Ewert & Steve Hollenhorst, Testing the Adventure Model: Empirical Support for a Model of Risk Recreation Participation, 21 J. LEISURE RES. 124, 125 (1989).
253. Cf. Manning, supra note 48, at 121.
254. See HOBSON BRYAN, CONFLICT IN THE GREAT OUTDOORS: TOWARD UNDERSTANDING AND MANAGING FOR DIVERSE SPORTSMEN PREFERENCES 59-86 (1979).
255. Alan Ewert, Risk Creation Poses New Management Problems, 8 PARK SCI. 1, 7 (1987).
256. See generally B. Wright et al., Industrial and Nonindustrial Resources (1988) (paper prepared for the Benchmark 1988: A National Outdoor Recreation and Wilderness Forum).
257. See generally William F. Hyde & David H. Newman, Forest Economics and Policy Analysis: An Overview (1991) (World Bank Discussion Paper) (on file with author).
258. Market failures occur when (1) competition is not perfectly competitive; (2) information is imperfect; (3) public goods are involved; or (4) when external costs or benefits (unintended consequences) are not considered in market transactions.
259. Cf. Alan Randall, The Problem of Market Failure, 23 NAT. RESOURCES. J. 131, 131-48 (1983).
260. See Daniel W. McCollum et al., A Manager's Guide to the Valuation of NonMarket Resources: What Do You Really Want to Know?, in VALUING WILDLIFE RESOURCES IN ALASKA 25, 27 (George L. Peterson et al. eds., 1992).
261. See JOHN A. DIXON & PAUL B. SHERMAN, ECONOMICS OF PROTECTED AREAS: A NEW LOOK AT BENEFITS AND COSTS 193-200 (1990).
262. FREDERICK W. CUBBAGE ET AL., FOREST RESOURCE POLICY 71 (1993).
263. PEARSE, supra note 14, at 38.
264. Cf. id. Three key factors led society to advocate retention over the public estate: (1) concern of the abuses and fraud associated with land disposal programs (i.e., government failure); (2) desire to preserve unique scenic and geologic wonders (nonmarket justifications); and (3) perhaps most importantly, public outrage at the shortsighted destructive influence of human activity on the land (responding to market forces) and the potential for resource shortages (i.e., timber famine). Cf. LOOMIS, supra note 10, at 24-25.
265. See KRUTILLA & FISHER, supra note 130, at 85-86.
266. See id.
267. Cf., e.g., V. KERRY SMITH, TECHNICAL CHANGE, RELATIVE PRICES, AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE EVALUATION (1974); Krutilla, supra note 39, at 777-86.
268. Research by Loomis and Walsh indicates that passive-use benefits will likely increase in the future. See Loomis & Walsh, supra note 39, at. 181. Passive-use forest benefits are positively related to income, education, and whether the household is retired or not. Socio-economic trends indicate income, education, and retirees have increased in counties adjacent to public lands and are expected to continue to increase in the future. See Morton, Charting a New Course, supra note 63, at 65.
269. S.V. Ciriacy-Wantrup, RESOURCE CONSERVATION: ECONOMICS AND POLICIES 251-67 (1952).
270. Cf., e.g., Richard C. Bishop, Endangered Species and Uncertainty: The Economics of a Safe Minimum Standard, 60 AM. J. AGRIC. ECON. 10, 10-18 (1978); Randall, supra note 96, at 30-33; Michael A. Toman, Defining Economics of Sustainable Forestry: General Concepts, in DEFINING SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY 261, 274-77 (Gregory H. Aplet et al. eds., 1993); Toman & Ashton, supra note 38, at 376 .
271. Cf., e.g., Richard C. Bishop, Endangered Species and Uncertainty: The Economics of a Safe Minimum Standard, 60 AM. J. AGRIC. ECON. 10, 10-18 (1978); Randall, supra note 96, at 30-33; Michael A. Toman, Defining Economics of Sustainable Forestry: General Concepts, in DEFINING SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY 261, 274-77 (Gregory H. Aplet et al. eds., 1993); Toman & Ashton, supra note 38, at 376 .
272. See Bishop, supra note 246, at 10-11, 16-18.
273. Alan Randall, Human Preferences, Economics and the Preservation of Species, in THE PRESERVATION OF SPECIES: THE VALUE OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 98 (1986).
274. See Ciriacy-Wantrup, supra note 245, at 262.
275. See Toman & Ashton, supra note 38, at 371.
276. See Morton, Charting a New Course, supra note 63.
277. See, e.g., Norman Myers, Biodiversity and the Precautionary Principle, 22 AMBIO 74, 74 (1993) (noting a "super-premium" on applying the principle).
278. Pursuant to the NFMA, the Forest Service adopted a three-stage screening process to determine the suitable timber base (land available for logging) on each national forest. The first screen withdraws land that is physically unsuitable for timber production. The second screen analyzes the financial returns from timber production but does not withdraw any land. The third screen uses FORPLAN to identify land needed to accomplish the agency's timber production goals and other objectives (i.e., the suitable timber base).
279. See Morton et al., supra note 93, at 352.
280. The southern Appalachian national forests are steeper, less accessible, and have logging costs that are $150-$200 more per acre than private lands in the region. See Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere, supra note 165. These findings are significant as they reject the argument put forth by many that Forest Service umber sale administrative and environmental compliance costs are entirely to blame for the national forest timber sold below costs. Although significant, these findings are not new. See generally WILLIAM A. DUERR, THE ECONOMIC PROBLEMS OF FORESTRY IN THE APPALACHIAN REGION (1949) (providing a detailed study of the forestry problems of the Appalachian region).
281. The lost timber revenues can be estimated from Forest Service planning documents. On the 625,000 acre Cherokee National Forest, only 35,553 acres (5.7%) are estimated to generate positive returns from timber production; of the 1,025,000 acres on the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests, planners estimate that 281,500 acres (27.4%) would produce positive returns from timber production. See DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE NANTAHALA AND PISGAH NATIONAL FORESTS, supra note 187. Farther north, planners estimated that 272,465 acres (26%) of the 1,055,525 acres on the George Washington National Forest have positive returns from timber production. FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., INCORPORATION OF NFMA REQUIREMENTS (1993) (process paper for the revision of the George Washington National Forest). The financial returns from timber production on these national forests were estimated with the most efficient harvesting methods (typically clearcutting) and without road building costs. If other harvesting methods were used and/or road costs included, the proportion of each forest generating a positive financial return from timber production would be even lower.
282. The lost timber revenues can be estimated from Forest Service planning documents. On the 625,000 acre Cherokee National Forest, only 35,553 acres (5.7%) are estimated to generate positive returns from timber production; of the 1,025,000 acres on the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests, planners estimate that 281,500 acres (27.4%) would produce positive returns from timber production. See DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE NANTAHALA AND PISGAH NATIONAL FORESTS, supra note 187. Farther north, planners estimated that 272,465 acres (26%) of the 1,055,525 acres on the George Washington National Forest have positive returns from timber production. FOREST SERV., U.S. DEP'T AGRIC., INCORPORATION OF NFMA REQUIREMENTS (1993) (process paper for the revision of the George Washington National Forest). The financial returns from timber production on these national forests were estimated with the most efficient harvesting methods (typically clearcutting) and without road building costs. If other harvesting methods were used and/or road costs included, the proportion of each forest generating a positive financial return from timber production would be even lower.
283. See Morton, Charting a New Course, supra note 63, at 65.
284. ELLIOTT A. NORSE ET AL., THE WILDERNESS SOC'Y, CONSERVING BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY IN OUR NATIONAL FORESTS 9 (1986).
285. See BOWES & KRUTILLA, supra note 171, at 3-5.
286. 16 U.S.C. § 531(a) (1994); see 16 U.S.C. § 1604(e) (1994) (requiring the NFMA's definition of "multiple use" and "sustained yield" to comply with the MUSYA definitions); cf. Paul J. Culhane & H. Paul Friesema, Land Use Planning for the Public Lands, 19 NAT. RESOURCES J. 43, 43-74 (1979).
287. Adopting a SMS approach should not, however, prevent the Forest Service from actively funding the nonmarket valuation research necessary to fully account for the economic benefits and costs of national forest management.
288. Paul R. Ehrlich & Gretchen C. Daily, Population Extinction and Saving Biodiversity, 22 AMBIO 64, 67 (1993).