Quantifying recreation use values from removing dams and restoring free-flowing rivers: A contingent behavior travel cost demand model for the Lower Snake River

Water Resources Research

Volumn 38, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 2-1-2-8

  Loomis, John ^a  

^a Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

Author keywords

Contingent visitation behavior; River recreation; Travel cost method

Indexed keywords

DAMS; DATA ACQUISITION; RECREATION CENTERS; RIVERS; SURVEYS;

RIVER RECREATION;

WATER RESOURCES;

DAM; RECREATIONAL MANAGEMENT; RIVER FLOW; TOURISM ECONOMICS; TRAVEL DEMAND;

SNAKE RIVER; UNITED STATES; WASHINGTON;

SERPENTES;

EID: 0036592318     PISSN: 00431397     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2000wr000136     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Bockstael, N., I. Strand, and M. Hanemann, Time and the recreation demand model, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 69, 293-302, 1987.
2. Callaway, J., S. Ragland, S. Keefe, T. Cameron, and W. D. Shaw, Columbia River System Operation Review: Recreation Impacts, Environmental Impact Statement 0170, Dep. of Energy, Washington, D. C., 1995.
3. Cameron, T., W. Shaw, S. Ragland, J. Callaway, and S. Keefe, Using actual and contingent behavior data with differing levels of time aggregation to model recreation demand, J. Agric. Resour. Econ., 21(1), 130-149, 1996.
4. Cesario, F., Value of time in recreation benefit studies, Land Econ., 52(1), 32-41, 1976.
5. Champ, P., R. Bishop, T. Brown, and D. McCollum, Using donation mechanisms to value nonuse benefits from public goods, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 33(2), 151-162, 1997.
6. Creel, M., and J. Loomis, Theoretical and empirical advantages of truncated count data estimators for analysis of deer hunting in California, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 72(2), 434-441, 1990.
7. Eiswerth, M., J. Englin, E. Fadali, and W. Shaw, The value of water levels in water-based recreation: A pooled revealed preference/contingent behavior model, Water Resour. Res., 36(4), 1079-1086, 2000.
8. Englin, J., and T. Cameron, Augmenting travel costs models with contingent behavior data, Environ. Resour. Econ., 7, 133-147, 1996.
9. Huszar, E., W. Shaw, J. Englin, and N. Netusil, Recreational damages from reservoir storage level changes, Water Resour. Res., 35(11), 3489-3494, 1999.
10. Larson, D., Joint recreation choices and the implied value of time, Land Econ., 69(3), 270-286, 1993.
11. Loomis, J., An investigation into the reliability of intended visitation behavior, Environ. Resour. Econ., 3, 183-191, 1993.
12. Loomis, J., and R. Walsh, Recreation Economic Decisions: Comparing Benefits and Costs, 2nd Ed., Venture, State College, Pa., 1997.
13. Marmorek, D., C. Peters, and I. Parnell (Eds.), PATH Final Report for Fiscal Year 1998, ESSA Technologies Ltd., Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 1998.
14. McKean, J., Outdoor Recreation Use and Value on Lower Snake River Reservoirs, Agricultural Enterprises Inc., Masonville, Colo., 1998.
15. McKean, J., Willingness to Pay and Expenditures for General Outdoor Recreation in the Snake River Basin in Central Idaho, Normandeau Assoc., Drumore, Pa., 1999.
16. McKean, J., D. Johnson, and R. Walsh, Valuing time in travel cost demand analysis, Land Econ., 71, 96-105, 1995.
17. National Park Service, Elwna River Ecosystem Restoration Implementation, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Olympic Natl. Park, Port Angeles, Wash., Nov. 1996.
18. Shaw, D., and P. Feather, Possibilities for including the opportunity cost of time in recreation demand systems, Land Econ., 75(4), 592-602, 1999.
19. Smith, K., Welfare effects, omitted variables, and the extent of the market, Land Econ., 69(2), 121-122, 1993.
20. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Lower Snake River Juvenile Salmon Migration, Draft Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement, Walla Walla District, Walla Walla, Wash., Dec. 1999.
21. U.S. Water Resources Council, Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related Land Resources Implementation Studies, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., Washington, D. C., 10 March 1983.
22. Ward, F., Economics of water allocation to instream uses in a fully appropriated river basin, Water Resour. Res., 23(3), 381-392, 1987.
23. Ward, F., R. Cole, R. Deitner, and K. Green-Hammond, Limiting environmental program contradictions: A demand system application to fishery management, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 79(3), 803-813, 1997.
24. Whitehead, J., T. Haab, and J.-C. Huang, Measuring recreation benefits of quality improvements with revealed and stated behavior data, Resour. Energy Econ., 22, 339-354, 2000.