Do economic values and expenditures for viewing waterfowl in the U.S. differ among species?

John Loomis; Michelle Haefele; James Dubovsky; Aaron M. Lien; Wayne E. Thogmartin; James E. Diffendorfer; Dale D. Humburg; Brady J. Mattsson; Kenneth J. Bagstad; Darius J. Semmens; Laura Lopez-Hoffman; Robert Merideth

doi:10.1080/10871209.2018.1496371

USGS · 70206268

Do economic values and expenditures for viewing waterfowl in the U.S. differ among species?

John Loomis·Michelle Haefele·James Dubovsky·Aaron M. Lien·Wayne E. Thogmartin·James E. Diffendorfer·Dale D. Humburg·Brady J. Mattsson·Kenneth J. Bagstad·Darius J. Semmens·Laura Lopez-Hoffman·Robert Merideth

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Many economic studies value birdwatching in general and often do not account for potential differences in viewers’ benefits from observing different species. But, how different are economic values of viewing various bird species? To answer that question, we surveyed Ducks Unlimited (DU) members using an online questionnaire to estimate trip expenditures and consumer surplus per trip for viewing pintail ducks, waterfowl in general, and other species of waterfowl. Expenditures per trip were USD $ 231, $ 199, and $ 182, respectively. Consumer surpluses per trip, estimated using the contingent valuation method, were $ 28, $ 32, and $ 29, respectively. Neither expenditures nor consumer surplus were statistically different among species for DU members who are adept at species differentiation. Our results suggest that it may be reasonable to use a general economic value for waterfowl viewing when formulating management alternatives for a variety of waterfowl.

Explore related subjects

Human Dimensions of Wildlife Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

John Loomis, Michelle Haefele, James Dubovsky, Aaron M. Lien, Wayne E. Thogmartin, James E. Diffendorfer, Dale D. Humburg, Brady J. Mattsson, Kenneth J. Bagstad, Darius J. Semmens, Laura Lopez-Hoffman, Robert Merideth. 2018-07-17. Do economic values and expenditures for viewing waterfowl in the U.S. differ among species?. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2018.1496371

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Engaging adult R3 outdoor educational program design to strengthen participation in hunting and fishing

Declining participation in hunting and fishing has been slowed by women who are learning numerous outdoor skills through recruitment, retention, and reactivation [R3] programs. R3 programs are hosted by state agencies, non-governmental organizations, and businesses that take a variety of approaches to develop participant skills and confidence. To understand how R3 program design influences hunting and fishing participation, we conducted 11 focus group interviews with 72 participants at women’s R3 programs to identify program design components that women appreciate when learning to hunt and fish. Well-designed programs offered customized educational approaches to align with participants’ needs, created a supportive environment to foster a sense of belonging, and streamlined participation through event logistics. Programs that incorporated these design components promoted skill development, boosted self-confidence, and helped participants build a supportive network to independently hunt and fish. Program leaders can apply these findings to bolster participation in hunting and fishing.

Human Dimensions of Wildlife↗

USGS2026

Chronic wasting disease (CWD) knowledge, risk perception, and management acceptance are influenced by media engagement and trust among deer hunters in Massachusetts

Prior to wildlife disease emergence, public outreach campaigns can improve disease-related knowledge and increase the likelihood that stakeholders accept potential management actions. One wildlife disease of particular interest is chronic wasting disease (CWD), which is spreading across the United States but has not been detected in Massachusetts. We conducted a survey of deer hunters ( n = 7,419) in Massachusetts to: (1) explore media channel usage and source trust, and (2) assess the relationship among CWD knowledge, risk perception, management acceptability, and state wildlife agency trust. We found that channel usage and source trust varied by socio-demographic factors. We also found that engagement with popular channels and trust in accurate sources were positively correlated with CWD knowledge. CWD risk perception mediated the relationship between knowledge and management acceptance, and trust was positively associated with management acceptance. Collectively, our results indicate a mixed-media campaign by state wildlife agencies could improve CWD management acceptance.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2024

Valuing wildlife sightings at the species-wide and individual animal levels: An approach and application to bear viewing in Yellowstone National Park

Wildlife viewing is a popular recreation activity in parks and protected areas around the world, yet information on the nonmarket value that visitors derive from viewing specific species, and how that value is affected by small-scale population changes, is lacking. We devised an approach to fill the gap. First, we applied the travel cost method to obtain the value of a wildlife viewing trip. Next, we estimated a value per animal sighting, which we aggregated by the number of visitors who experienced and valued a sighting. Finally, we incorporated the probability of viewing an animal to determine an individual animal’s contribution to sighting value, which varies by species type, visibility, and seasonality. We examined bear viewing in Yellowstone National Park. For grizzly and black bears, respectively, per-sighting values are $16 and $14, aggregate annual sighting values are $6.9 and $9.7 million, and annual per-bear viewing values are $46,000 and $15,000.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗