Market and nonmarket valuation of North Carolina's tundra swans among hunters, wildlife watchers, and the public

Abstract

Wildlife‐related tourism represents an important and growing economic sector for many rural communities and may be inadequately considered during regional planning. Providing robust estimates of wildlife values can help address this challenge. We used both market and nonmarket valuation methods to estimate the value of tundra swans (Cygnus columbianus) in North Carolina, USA, and compared tundra swan values among hunters, wildlife watchers, and general public. Wildlife watchers reported the greatest willingness‐to‐pay (US$35.2/wildlife watcher/yr), followed by hunters (US$30.53/hunter/yr), and residents (US$16.27/resident/yr). We used the Impact Analysis for Planning system software to estimate market values or economic activity associated with tundra swans. Tundra swan hunters spent an average of US$408.34/hunter/year. Depending on assumptions over the substitutability of tundra swan hunting, we estimate that it generates value added of between US$306,155/year and US$920,161/year for the state economy. Wildlife watchers spent an average of US$171.25/wildlife watcher/year. We estimate that this generates value added of between US$14 million/year and US$42.9 million/year for the state economy, again depending on assumptions about whether watching tundra swans would be substituted with other leisure activities in eastern North Carolina or out‐of‐state. Compared with studies of international nature tourism, we found relatively low leakage rates (i.e., loss of economic benefits outside the study region), suggesting that enhancing opportunities for hunting and wildlife‐viewing may be an effective economic development strategy for rural areas in the United States. Presenting both market and nonmarket values provides a more complete picture of the value of wildlife and may facilitate more effective management decisions; therefore, we recommend that both market and nonmarket values be considered to optimize tradeoffs between development and wildlife recreation. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.

Diverse University Students Across the United States Reveal Promising Pathways to Hunter Recruitment and Retention

“…Hunting is a key aspect of North American culture (Reiger 2001, Mahoney and Jackson 2013) that provides economic benefits to rural communities (Frew et al 2018), helps wildlife agencies achieve ecological management goals (Heffelfinger et al 2013), and forms the backbone of the wildlife conservation funding system in North America (Loveridge et al 2006, Serfass et al 2018). Despite these benefits, since the 1980s the number of annual license holders in the United States has decreased by approximately 2 million (U.S.…”

Influence of sanctuary disturbance, weather, and landscape characteristics on waterfowl harvest opportunity in western Tennessee

“…anthropogenic disturbance, autonomous recording units, harvest opportunity, hunting, Mississippi Flyway, sanctuary, wintering waterfowl Hunting generates billions of dollars each year and provides economic benefits to many rural communities and conservation dollars to state and federal governments for habitat conservation (U.S. Department of the Interior [USDOI] 2016, Frew et al 2018); however, hunter numbers are declining across the United States, with estimated decreases of 16% from 2011 to 2016 (USDOI 2016). Consequently, total expenditures by hunters also declined 29%, from $36.3 billion to $25.6 billion between 201129%, from $36.3 billion to $25.6 billion between and 201629%, from $36.3 billion to $25.6 billion between (USDOI 2016.…”

Non‐resident college student hunting license regulations in the United States

“…More than 12 million hunters support 600,000 jobs and contribute $25 billion to the economy annually (U.S. Department of the Interior et al 2018). An outsized portion of this benefit reaches rural areas, where hunting often contributes to community culture (Stedman and Heberlein 2001, Heberlein et al 2002, Frew et al 2018). State wildlife agencies and conservation organizations have, therefore, strong incentives to maintain and grow the hunting population.…”