Hunting
Lake State Examples - Other Examples         
Back to Table of Contents                                                                                                   

Lake States Examples:

Brown, T. L. and N. A. Connelly. 1994. "Predicting Demand for Big Game and Small Game Hunting License: The New York Experience." Wildlife Society Bulletin 22:172-178.

The paper presents of the results of a study using ordinary least squares regression to model big game and small game license sales. A relatively limited and inexpensive database that included license sales, license cost, demographic variables and available resources data for New York for 1962-1991 was used in the modeling process. The independent variables used in the analysis included: 1) license cost and ability to pay (e.g. income); 2) size of the general population to which hunters belong; 3) degree of urbanization; 4) access to the resource; and 5) supply of games species and perceived probability of harvest success. Time series regression analysis of license sales offers a seldom-used opportunity for state wildlife agencies to improve their understanding of the demand for small and big game hunting at the state level.

Lindeborg, K. H. 1973. Evaluation of Regional Multipurpose Economic Benefits Resulting from a Water and Related Land Development. Research Technical Completion Report Project C-2195-IDA. Moscow, ID: Water Resources Research Institute, University of Idaho.

  • This study evaluates the economic impacts of water resources on seven major uses: irrigation, recreation, power, municipal and industrial use, flood control, water quality and fish and wildlife. To estimate the economic impact of recreation (pheasant hunting only) a simple demand model was constructed based on the concept of marginal utility. Three factors were considered: travel distance to recreation site, irrigated cropland as the sites of recreation and hunter success. The model predicted a small increase in total economic impact, but there were regional disparities. The author pointed out the results lacked reliability due to the data used, but indicated that the general approach had good value if better data were used and the analysis expanded to include other recreation activities.
  • Michalson, E. L. 1973. Recreational and Sociological Characteristics of Hunters and an Estimate of the Demand for Hunting in the Sawtooth Area of Idaho. Scenic Rivers Study Report No. 7. Moscow, ID: Water Resources Research Institute, University of Idaho.

    This study surveyed hunters in the Sawtooth Area of Idaho. A linear regression demand model was constructed based on the variables of: miles traveled, cost per visitor day, education level, annual income and number of trips made by hunters in 1971. The model was used to calculate a demand curve and then estimate willingness to pay and total net value of the hunting resource in the Sawtooth Area.

    Other Examples:

    United States Department of the Interior. 1993. 1991 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation - Wisconsin. U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Services.

    The Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior had the U.S. Bureau of the Census to conduct a two-phased survey for a national count of fishermen and hunters and non-consumptive users of wildlife. This report represented the Wisconsin sample. In the first phase, households were sampled by phone to determine who had partook in wildlife activities. From this information, the second phase was conducted which consisted of interviews with subsamples of fishermen, hunters, and others. This report provided detailed information such as trip-related expenditures, expenditures for wildlife-associated recreation, and residential and non-residential participants.

    United States Department of the Interior. 1988. 1985 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation. U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Services.

    The Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior had the U.S. Bureau of the Census to conduct a two-phased survey for a national count of fishermen and hunters and non-consumptive users of wildlife. In the first phase, households were sampled by phone to determine who had partook in wildlife activities. From this information, the second phase was conducted which consisted of interviews with subsamples of fishermen, hunters, and others. This report provided detailed information from this census.

    Back to Table of Contents