My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9391
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9391
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:35 PM
Creation date
5/17/2009 11:15:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9391
Author
Watts, G., W. R. Noonan, H. R. Maddux and D. S. Brookshire.
Title
The Endangered Species Act and Critical Habitat Designation
USFW Year
1997.
USFW - Doc Type
An Integrated Biological and Economic Approach.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />levels, and land may not be developed for housing so that habitat for plant species is <br />preserved. However, by not harvesting trees or building houses, recreational uses may be <br />enhanced and setting aside minimum stream flows in one area may imply that more water is <br />available for development elsewhere. Assessing the economic impacts of designating critical <br />habitat thus requires a general equilibrium analysis to fully capture the range of potential <br />activities created by the designation as well as the range of activities that are eliminated or <br />reduced. In short, the reallocation will yield economic impacts that are benefits as well as <br />costs . <br /> <br />This paper reports the methodology and results from a study that measured the economic <br />impacts of designating critical habitat for four endangered fishes along a 2,200 mile stretch of <br />the Colon.do River and its major tributaries. A second case study covering two fishes and 160 <br />miles of the Virgin River in Nevada and Utah is also discussed. The two case studies analyze <br />the impacts of critical habitat designation on two regions greatly differing in size. For the <br />Colorado study, designation affects all seven states in the Colorado river basin: Arizona, <br />California, Colorado. Nevada, New Mexico. Utah and Wyoming. The critical habitat analyzed in <br />the Virgin study covers a river flowing through three counties in Arizona, Nevada, and Utah. In <br />both cases, the study region was determined on the basis of habitat needs and direct economic <br />impacts. <br /> <br />Two study regions differ considerably in the sizes of their economies. The output of the region <br />in the Colorado study is approximately $1.3 trillion annually, compared to $28 billion for the <br />Virgin study region. The Colorado study region constitutes a diversified economy that has <br />experienced growth above the national average during the last several decades. The region of the <br />Virgin study is currently one of the fastest growing areas in the United States, with continued <br />high population growth rates projected for the time horizon of the study. The time horizons of <br />the studies coincide with the time span of the proposed recovery plans for the species: 1995 to <br />2020 in the Colorado study, and 1995 to 2040 in the Virgin study. The major characteristics of <br />the two studies are summarized in Table 1. <br /> <br />,I <br /> <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.