Willingness to Pay for Hunting Leases in Alabama

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 21-27

  Hussain, Anwar ^a   Zhang, Daowei ^a   Armstrong, James B ^a  

^a AUBURN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cameron James censored probit; Dichotomous choice contingent valuation; Hunting lease; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

INVESTMENTS; PROBABILITY; PURCHASING; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RESEARCH; STRATEGIC PLANNING;

CAMERON-JAMES CENSORED PROBIT; DICHOTOMOUS CHOICE CONTINGENT VALUATION; HUNTING LEASE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

FORESTRY;

FORESTRY; INVESTMENT; PROBABILITY; PURCHASE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RESEARCH; STRATEGIC ALLIANCES;

EID: 1342329478     PISSN: 01484419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/sjaf/28.1.21     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. ADAMS, R.M., O. BERGLAND, W.N. MUSSER, S.L. JOHNSON, AND L.M. MUSSER. 1989. Use fees and equity issues in public hunting expenditures: The case of ring-necked pheasant in Oregon. Land Econ. 65(4):376-385.
2. ALBERINI, A. 1995. Testing willingness to pay models of discrete choice contingency valuation survey data. Land Econ. 7(1):83-95.
3. ARROW, K., R. SOLOW, P. PORTNEY, E. LEARNER, R. RODNER, AND H. SCHUMAN. 1993. Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed. Reg. 58(10):602-614.
4. BERRENS, R.P., AND R.M. ADAMS. 1998. Applying contingent valuation in the design of fee hunting programs: pheasant hunting in Oregon revisited. Hum. Dimen. Wildl. 3(3): 11-25.
5. BISHOP, R.C., AND T. HEBERLEIN. 1979. Measuring values of extra-market goods: are indirect measures biased? Am. J. Agric. Econ. 61(5):926-930.
6. BOYLE, K.J., B. ROACH, AND D.G. WADDINGTON. 1998. 1996 Net economic values for bass, trout and walleye fishing, deer, elk and moose hunting, and wildlife watching: Addendum to the 1996 national survey of fishing, hunting and wildlife associated recreation. Report 96-2. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Washington, D.C. 20240.
7. CAMERON, T.A., AND M.D. JAMES. 1987. Efficient estimation methods for close-ended contingent valuation surveys. Rev. Econ. Stat. 69(2):269-76.
8. CAMERON, T.A. 1988. A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 15(3):355-379.
9. CLARK, R., AND G. STANKEY. 1979. The recreation opportunity spectrum: A framework for planning, management, and research. USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap. PNW-98.
10. COOPER, J., AND J.B. LOOMIS. 1992. Sensitivity of willingness to pay estimates to bid design in dichotomous choice contingent valuation models. Land Econ. 68(2):211-24.
11. FRIED B.M., R.M. ADAMS, R.P. BERRENS, AND O. BERGLAND. 1995. Willingness to pay for a change in elk hunting quality. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 23(4):680-686.
12. GIGLIOTTI, L.M. 2000. A classification scheme to better understand satisfaction of Black Hills deer hunters: the role of harvest success. Hum. Dimen. Wildl. 5(1):32-51.
13. GOODWIN, B.K., L.A. OFFENBACK, T.T. CABLE, AND P.S. COOK. 1993. Discrete/continuous valuation of private hunting access in Kansas. J. Environ. Manage. 39(1): 1-12.
14. GREENE, W.H. 1993. Econometric analysis. Ed. 2. Macmillan Publishing, New York.
15. HANEMANN, W.M. 1984. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete choice responses. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 66(3):332-341.
16. HAYSLETTE, S.E., J.B. ARMSTRONG, AND R.E. MIRARCHI. 2001. Mourning dove hunting in Alabama: Motivations, satisfactions, and sociocultural influences. Hum. Dimen. Wildl. 6(2):81-95.
17. KANNINEN, B J. 1995. Bias in discrete response contingent valuation. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 28(1):114-125.
18. LIVENGOOD, K.R. 1983. Value of big game from markets for hunting leases: the hedonic approach. Land Econ. 59(3):287-291.
19. LOOMIS, J.B. 1990. Comparative reliability of the dichotomous choice and open-ended contingent valuation techniques. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 18(1):78-85.
20. MACKENZIE, J. 1990. Conjoint analysis of deer hunting. Northeast. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 9(2): 109-117.
21. McCONNELL, K.E. 1990. Models for referendum data: The structure of discrete choice models for contingent valuation. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 18(1):19-34.
22. PARK, T., J.B. LOOMIS, AND M. CREEL. 1991. Confidence intervals for evaluating benefits estimates from dichotomous choice contingent valuation studies. Land Econ. 67(1):64-73.
23. POPE III, C.A., AND J.R. STOLL. 1985. The market value of ingress rights for white-tailed deer hunting in Texas. South. J. Agric. Econ. 17(1):177-182.
24. ROSSI, A.N. 1998. Alabamians' hunting behavior, wildlife-related activities, and wildlife management perceptions. MS Thesis, Auburn Univ., AL.
25. STRIBLING, H.L., J.P. CAULFIELD, B.G. LOCKABY, D.P. THOMPSON, H.E. QUICKE, AND H.A. CLONTS. 1992. Factors influencing willingness to pay for deer hunting in the Alabama piedmont. South. J. Appl. For. 16(3):125-129.
26. U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. 1998. 1996 National survey of fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated recreation. FHW/96-AL. USGPO, Washington, DC.
27. WALLACE, M.S., H.L. STRIBLING, AND H.A. CLONTS. 1991. Effect of hunter expenditure distribution on community economies. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 19(1):7-14.
28. WHITEHEAD, J.C., P.A. GROOTHUIS, AND G.C. BLOOMQUIST. 1993. Testing for non-response and sample selection bias in contingent valuation: analysis of a combination phone and mail survey. Econ. Letters. 41(2):215-220.
29. ZHANG, D., AND J.B. ARMSTRONG. 2002. Causes of declining hunting license sales in Alabama. A Report to the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn Univ., AL.