7846 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

24 potential use values (option values) were beyond the scope of this research. However, the task force did discuss these other components of public benefits. The economic research to measure these values is evolving and taking on growing importance in the formulation of environmental policy. (See for example, Desvousges, et al., Mitchell and Carson, and NOAA.) The reliability and validity of these measures is shown to be enhanced by application to a particular policy so that people can respond to a survey referendum in an incentive-compatible fashion. Because there was no specific policy choice for respondents to "vote on" in this case, and given that this was a baseline study, emphasis was placed on use value for this research. Furthermore, as a baseline study the methodology employed here does not utilize some of the more sophisticated recreational survey fonnats, in part due to concern about demands placed on respondents and to pursue a representative profile. Due to the intensity of questionnaire formats which measure "experiences" and relate to "Benefits.Based Management (BBM)", they are typically implemented through a screening process where potential respondents can self-select themselves for participation. Again given the emphasis on establishing a baseline for recreation, portions of the upper end of the informational hierarchy, such as BBM, were deemed to be beyond the scope of this study. Within the limits of this study, an effort was made to collect the most comprehensive information possible, including the demand for activities and settings, and user satisfaction. The resulting survey design is discussed below in section V and the questionnaire is shown in Appendix B. Sampling Design As mentioned above, the sample was comprised of four sub- samples. This design was deemed to be most appropriate and cost-effective for gathering the highest quality data available gi ven the constraints of the research project. The sub-samples enabled the collection of data that would be both comparable and distinguishable between locals, visitors, property owners who use the river and property owners who do not. A. Interviews Of River Users Interviews of river users encountered on the river were deemed essential for the research objectives. To establish a representative baseline of river uses, this approach would yield the most reliable and comprehensive results. In the absence of information regarding the proportions of uses by property owners versus non-owners, uses on the water versus uses from the river bank, bridges, etc. and the relative importance of public accesses versus private or undeveloped accesses, on-the-water interviews served as the foundation of the sampling design. As mentioned above the various segments of the river were broken down into 15 stretches. (See Appendix A.) The stretches were delineated based on logical terminus points, such as darns, lakes, public accesses, etc. to the degree possible, along with considerations for the amount of water that interviewers could cover during an interviewing day. For the most part, these stretches were from 20 to 30 miles long. When water conditions allowed, the interviewers covered a stretch by motoring slowly upstream to maximize the chance of intercepting river users who were stationary or travelling downstream. The sampling plan for detennining which stretches would be covered on which days was based on information on patterns and timing of use provided by experts (agency staff, etc.) combined with general information on water use patterns by day of the week, week and month. This information was used to construct an a priori probability distribution regarding where and when the heaviest use would Occur during the four peak months, June through September. Advice from experts was used exclusively to set the sampling plan during the shoulder months of May, October and November. While this was an imperfect method, random sampling from this a priori probability distribution enabled the construction of a sampling plan which would be roughly proportional to the patterns of use. That is to say, the likelihood of being sampled increased with the expected level of use by stretch, day of the week, week, and month. As seen in Appendix A, the busiest stretches were sa1l1pled proportionally more often and weekends were sampled more than weekdays. Daily logs were kept by interviewers to determine if use patterns reflected the a priori expectations. Extenuating circumstances such as variation in the weather, etc. were also recorded. American River Management Society