Laserfiche WebLink
<br />fund. If a majority of households vote in favor, the fund would maintain CHUs for the nine <br /> <br /> <br />Threatened and Endangered fish species to avoid extinction. This would be accomplished <br /> <br /> <br />through water releases from Federal dams timed to benefit fish and the purchase of water <br /> <br /> <br />rights to maintain instream flows. The survey stated that within the next 15 years, three fish <br /> <br /> <br />species would increase in population to the point they would no longer be listed as a <br /> <br /> <br />Threatened Species. <br /> <br />However, if a majority of households in the U.S. voted not to approve the fund, then the <br />CHUs shown on the enclosed map would be eliminated. That would mean water diversion <br />activities and maximum power production would occur, reducing the amount of habitat for <br />these nine fish species. Respondents were told that biologists estimate that if this occurred it <br />is very likely that four of the nine fish species will be come extinct in 15 years. <br /> <br />This infonnation was followed by the question fonnat used to elicit the respondent's dollar <br />amount of WTP. Each household was asked how they would vote, considering the cost to <br />their household. This referendum fonnat is recommended by the "blue ribbon panel" on <br />CVM (Arrow et al. 1993). The exact wording on the questionnaire was: <br />Suppose a proposal to establish a Four Corners Region Threatened and <br />Endangered Fish Trust Fund was on the ballot in the next nationwide election. <br />How would you vote on this proposal? Remember, l1y law, thefunds could only <br />be used to improve habitat for fish. If the Four Corners Region Threatened and <br />Endangered Fish Trust Fund was the only issue on the next ballot and it would <br /> <br />16 <br />