Linking Intended Visitation To Regional Economic Impact Models of Bison And Elk Management

Abstract

This article links intended National Park visitation estimates to regional economic models to calculate the employment impacts of alternative bison and elk management strategies. The survey described alternative National Elk Refuge (NER) management actions and the effects on elk and bison populations at the NER and adjacent Grand Teton National Park (GTNP). Park visitors were then asked if they would change their number of visits with each potential management action. Results indicate there would be a 10% decrease in visitation if bison populations were reduced from 600 to 400 animals and elk populations were reduced in GTNP and the NER. The related decrease in jobs in Teton counties of Wyoming and Idaho is estimated at 5.5%. Adopting a “no active management” option of never feeding elk and bison on the NER yields about one-third the current bison population (200 bison) and about half the elk population. Visitors surveyed about this management option would take about 20% fewer trips, resulting in an 11.3% decrease in employment. Linking intended visitation surveys and regional economic models represents a useful tool for natural resource planners who must present the consequences of potential actions in Environmental Impact Statements and plans to the public and decision makers prior to any action being implemented.

Keywords:

• bison
• contingent behavior
• contingent visitation
• elk
• National Park
• National Wildlife Refuge

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Don DeLong and Dan Huff, USFWS and Robert Schiller, NPS for guidance on the design of this project. Roger Coupal and Tex Taylor, University of Wyoming and Susan Winter, USDA Forest Service provided valuable suggestions on the regional economic impact analysis. Assistance in conducting the on-site interviews by Michelle Good is greatly appreciated. Laura Taylor, Nathan Preuss, Sara Peters, Brian Hoag, Heather Lambert, and Michelle Burns assisted in the mailings and data entry. The authors also thank Peter Newman and Dana Hoag of Colorado State University and Jonathan Taylor of U.S. Geological Survey for suggestions on an earlier draft of this article. An anonymous reviewer and the Co-Editor (Vaske) provided numerous comments for improving the clarity of the exposition. None of these individuals are responsible for what follows, which is the sole responsibility of the authors.