Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 1 

APPENDIX B - 11 

Social and Economic 

 

Economic Resource Output Assumptions 

Recreation Analysis Assumptions 

Two factors were considered in projecting changing demand for recreation, potential demand 

and future population growth. To develop estimates, past change in recreation demand was 

compared to population change over the same period for the area. It was thought that calculating 

a similar change in recreation demand based on projected overall population growth for the area 

would be reasonable. 

Change in recreation demand was from 1984-1997 based on 1997 RIM was based on 5,810,956 

to 6,658,491. 847,535/5,810,856 = .15 or 15%. During the same period population increased 

29%. (See attached pencil calculations, 2/19/01). So for a 29% increase in population, recreation 

increased 15%, or a ratio of 15/29. 

 

From 2000 to 2010 population is projected to increase 22% for the analysis area. Given a ratio 

from 1) above all recreation could be expected to increase 11%. 

15 is to 29 as X is to 22 15/29 = X/22 

 29X = 22x15 

 29X = 330 

 X = 11% = Base change rate for recreation 

This factor was used for determining base increase over the 10 years from 2000-2010 for all 

categories below (except as otherwise noted) as it represents overall growth in demand. Growth 

projections for any individual category could have been estimated from trends in that particular 

category, but it was thought that rise in any particular category might be subject to more 

sampling error, other bias, or other uncertainties than for an overall factor, so the overall factor 

was considered a more reliable growth projection. 

1) Camping, Picnicking, Swimming – Almost no new FS recreation facilities will be 

developed under any alternative. Shoulder seasons at developed will see more use as 

capacity at other times forces larger population to schedule developed activities at times 

when [previously no one used the areas. Project 5.5% or 1⁄2 of Base change rate for 

recreation as rate of recreation increase across all alternatives above current. 1,721,000 

X 1.055 = 1,815,655 

2) Mechanized Travel and Viewing Scenery – Projected gain at 11% or Base change rate 

for recreation as rate of recreation increase across all alternatives above current. 

2,283,000 X 1.11 = 2,534,130 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 2 

3) Hiking, Horseback Riding & Viewing Scenery - Projected gain at 11% or Base change 

rate for recreation as rate of recreation increase across all alternatives above current. 

423,000 X 1.11 = 469,530 

4) Winter Sports – Current projections include winter-dispersed activities, excluding 

Developed Ski Areas. Project 11% base change rate for this recreation category as a rate 

of recreation increase across all alternatives except above current. 161,000 X 1.11= 

179,000. 

5) Resorts, Cabins, & Organization Camps – No new facilities of this type projected. Keep 

same as current across all alternatives. 295,000 

6) Other Recreation Activities – These activities include a lot of categories where 

interpretation is offered. Increases are largely dependent on budget. While demand for 

these kinds of programs is desirable, it is unlikely that we will have much funding to 

increase in these areas, under most alternatives. Some possibility of increase particularly 

in Alternative 2 (general education on Ecosystems) , Alternative 3 (education related to 

travel opportunities and visitor responsibility) and Alternative 6 (Preferred) – What 

should be done with some funding to increase user awareness and responsibility. Project 

5.5% or 1⁄2 of Base change rate for recreation for Alternatives 2, 3, and 6 above current 

level. Keep Alternatives 1, 4, and 5 at current level. 229,000 or 229,000 X 1.055 = 

242,000 

7) Snowmobiles – Decrease in use Alternative 1 by 11% and Alternative 2 by 5.5%. It is 

thought that decrease in available acreage for snowmobiles will not greatly effect 

demand, but would slightly and used a reduction equal to the general growth estimator 

used previously. It is likely many people would continue to use snowmobiles, and simply 

crowd more into available areas. Some use is displaced to other public lands, forests or 

states. Use the same factors as were used for increases in other categories above. Increase 

values in Alternatives 3-6 at Base change rate for recreation. 34,000 X .89 = 30,000, 

34,000 X .945 = 32,000, or 34,000

8) Developed Ski Areas – a projected rate of growth of 4% is used to 2010 for all 

alternatives except Alternative 5. (The projected growth by ski areas of 3.4% to 2007 in 

Affected Environment was increased slightly for the additional 3 years.) For Alternative 

5 increase above current by 6%, given possible expansions and, perhaps more heliski, 

that is allowable. (Growth of use at Snowbasin due to recent expansion is included.) 

1,367,000 or 1,367,000 X 1.04, or 1.06 = 1,422,000 or 1,450,000.

Assumptions for Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife Viewing Economic Analysis 

Assume Fishing will increase 22% (level of population increase) by 2010 across all alternatives. 

This is thought to be a conservative growth estimate, based historic 26% increase. (For detailed 

rationale and data, see Cowley and Williams, 2001, paper on file.) 

 

Assume big game hunting will stay same across all alternatives based on current Utah Division 

of Wildlife Resources control of permits. 

Assume small game hunting and wildlife viewing to increase at half the rate of human 

population increase, the general assumption used for most recreation. 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 3 

Fishing 

Assumptions: 

1. Statewide it is estimated that 25 percent of all fishing which occurs in Utah on the 

National Forest lands occurs on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 

2. Most people will travel less then 1 hour away from their homes to go fishing 

3. The major population centers in Utah are along the Wasatch Front adjacent to the 

Wasatch-Cache and Uinta National Forests. 

4. Fishing on an acre of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah will generate 

comparable economic impacts as an acre on the Forest in Wyoming. Values for the 

Wyoming portion of the Forest were derived from generating an impact per acre (USDA 

1998) for Utah and then multiplying this by the total acres in both states. Wasatch-Cache 

National Forest acres in Utah are 848,183, Wyoming are 37,762, total 885,845. This 

does not include the Snow Basin Land Exchange increase in acres. 

Values used in analysis - RVDs = 395,341 for Current 

Hunting 

Continues to increase or remain level through this next planning period. The economic impact 

of hunting on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest in 1996 was approximately $14,000,000 with a 

total economic effect of $29,000,000. A total of 459 jobs rely on this activity on the forest to 

support them. Big game hunting on the Wasatch-Cache provides and economic impact of 

$7,900,000 while small game provides an economic impact of $2,400,000. 

Assumptions: 

1. Statewide it is estimated that 1/6 or 17 percent of all big game hunting which occurs in 

Utah on the National Forest lands occurs on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 

2. Statewide it is estimated that 1/6 or 17 percent of all small game hunting which occurs in 

Utah on the National Forest lands occurs on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest 

3. No migratory bird hunting occurs on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest 

4. The major population centers in Utah are along the Wasatch Front adjacent to the 

Wasatch-Cache and Uinta National Forests. 

5. Hunting on an acre of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah will generate 

comparable economic impacts as an acre on the Forest in Wyoming. Values for the 

Wyoming portion of the Forest were derived from generating an impact per acre (USDA 

1998) for Utah and then multiplying this by the total acres in both states. Total WasatchCache National Forest acres in Utah 848,183, Wyoming 37,762, total 885,845. This 

does not include the Snow Basin Land Exchange increase in acres. 

6. Big game hunting has remained constant in the State of Utah since 1996. Big game 

hunting in Wyoming has continued to increase proportionate to the rest of the nation 

since 1996. 

Values used in analysis - Big Game - RVDs = 77,677 for Current 

Values used in analysis - Small Game - RVDs = 45,478 for Current 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 4 

Wildlife Viewing 

Economic impacts of wildlife viewing on National Forest lands totaled $2.1 billion in 1996. 

Wildlife viewing participation and expenditures declined nation wide by 16% and 12%, 

respectively over a five-year period from 1991 to 1996. It is believed that the mild recession of 

the mid 1990’s is to blame for this. The economic impact of wildlife viewing on the WasatchCache National Forest in 1996 was approximately $7,000,000 with a total economic effect of 

$15,000,000. A total of 261 jobs rely on this activity on the forest to support them. 

Assumptions: 

1. Statewide it is estimated that 25 percent of all wildlife viewing in Utah on the National 

Forest lands occurs on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 

2. Most people will travel less then 1 hour away from their homes to do wildlife viewing 

fishing 

3. The major population centers in Utah are along the Wasatch Front adjacent to the 

Wasatch-Cache and Uinta National Forests. 

4. Wildlife viewing on an acre of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah will generate 

comparable economic impacts as an acre on the Forest in Wyoming. Values for the 

Wyoming portion of the Forest were derived from generating an impact per acre (USDA 

1998) for Utah and then multiplying this by the total acres in both states. Total WasatchCache National Forest acres in Utah 848,183, Wyoming 37,762, total 885,845. This does 

not include the Snow Basin Land Exchange increase in acres. 

Values used in analysis - $118.36 per user day and RVDs = 125,887 for Current 

Assumptions for Oil and Gas Economic Analysis 

The number of wells to be drilled could vary based on the reasonably foreseeable development 

scenarios of each alternative. Deliverable oil from each well at an average level is in excess of 

one million barrels of oil per well over a twenty-year period. In this high cost, high risk area, 

exploration ventures are justified only by the potential of a high return on investment which 

results from finding a field like Bridger Lake where average reserves per well exceed onemillion barrels of oil (Kaldenbach, 1990). 

The North Slope of the Uinta Mountains is predominately an oil production effort; natural gas is 

produced as a by-product only (Burkhardt, Intermountain Region Leasable Minerals Specialist, 

personal communication, 2001). Therefore no prediction for production of cubic meters of gas is 

made. 

Conversion factor 1 cubic meter = 6.34 barrels 

Current and No Action Alternatives cubic meters of oil produced = 52000 (Calculated from data 

of average of 1997, 1999, and 2000 production, no 1998 data available. Mary Ann Spindler, 

USFS Intermountain Region.) 

Alternative 1: 2 wells = 2-millon barrels = 315,000/20 years = cubic meters + Current. 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 5 

Or 16,000 + 52,000 = 68,000 

Alternative 2: 2 wells = 2-millon barrels = 315,000/20 = cubic meters + Current. 

Or 16,000 + 52,000 = 68,000 

Alternative 3: 9 wells = 9-millon barrels = 1,420,000/20 cubic meters + Current. 

Or 71,000 + 52,000 = 123,000 

Alternative 4: suspension continues; no decision made. Current production assumed. 

Or 52,000 

Alternative 5: 12 wells = 12-millon barrels = 1,893,000/20 cubic meters + Current. 

Or 95,000 + 52,000 = 147,000 

Alternative 6: 9 wells = 9-millon barrels = 1,420,000/20 + Current. 

Or 71,000 + 52,000 = 123,000 

Alternative 7: 10 wells = 10-millon barrels = 1,577,000/20 + Current. 

Or 81,000 + 52,000 = 133,000 

Therefore, for each of the above alternative values, 52,000 is added to develop total value in 

CUBIC METERS for an alternative. Cubic meter estimates for each alternative have a factor of 

20 in the calculation, which is used to annualize the estimated 1,000,000-barrel production per 

well. 

Assumptions for Grazing 

For the current levels of use an average of AUMs for 10 years (1990 to 1999) authorized (actual 

use, not permitted use) was used, rounded to the nearest 1,000. This value was based on the 

historic use table and provided in the affected environment section. AUM projections were 

based on changes in the amount of suitable range1 by alternative. These changes are based on 

capable acres within allotments minus: 

1. Developed recreation sites within those allotments; 

2. Uplands and/or riparian acres not meeting forest plan objectives; 

3. Vacant allotments closed; and 

4. Allotments voluntarily closed. 

Each alternative has a different combination of these criteria. 

Alternatives 1 and 2 would close existing vacant allotments and, therefore, outputs would be 

similar to the current situation. In addition, in Alternative 2 the acres of watersheds within 

allotments that have at least 210 acres of riparian areas either verified or estimated as not 

meeting forest plan objectives that also had TES fish populations (aquatic habitat for TES fish) 

 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 6 

were removed from suitable acres. This included portions of the Woodruff, Logan Canyon, 

North Rich, West Fork, Smiths Fork, Gilbert Creek, Blacks Fork, Middle Fork, and Walker 

Allotments. All other alternatives would allow for the restocking of one or more of the vacant 

allotments, allowing for the potential to increase grazing levels on the forest. This potential 

increase would require additional site-specific analysis priori to stocking and is unlikely in the 

planning period because the forest would likely devote its limited range planning resources to 

allotments currently open and stocked. Therefore, AUM projects do not include an increase for 

stocking these allotments, but indicate a lowest possible level. The values used in IMPLAN 

modeling are shown in Table B11-1 below. 

For modeling purposes, it was assumed that changes to Forest Service revenues for each 

alternative are proportional to changes of AUMs by alternative. 

 

Table B11 - 1. Estimated livestock outputs based on the forest-wide 10-year average, maximum, 

and minimum actual authorized AUMs (rounded to the nearest 1,000). 

Alternative Multiplier x 

Current Year Sheep AUMs 

Cattle 

AUMs 

Total 

AUMs 

 10 year maximum 31,000 39,000 70,000 

Current 10 year minimum 14,000 16,000 30,000 

10 year average 25,000 34,000 59,000 

1.00 Maximum 31,000 39,000 70,000 

Alternative 1 1.00 Minimum 14,000 16,000 30,000 

1.00 Average 25,000 34,000 59,000 

0.91 Maximum 28,000 35,000 63,000 

Alternative 2 0.90 Minimum 13,000 14,000 27,000 

0.90 Average 23,000 31,000 54,000 

1.08 Maximum 33,000 42,000 75,000 

Alternatives 3, 4 & 5 1.12 Minimum 16,000 18,000 34,000 

1.10 Average 28,000 37,000 65,000 

1.04 Maximum 26,000 35,000 61,000 

Alternative 6 1.04 Minimum 29,000 37,000 66,000 

1.04 Average 13,000 15,000 28,000 

1.00 Maximum 25,000 34,000 59,000 

Alternative 7 1.04 Minimum 26,000 35,000 61,000 

1.02 Average 26,000 35,000 61,000 1

 Table RN-4 in the FEIS shows the relationship among all alternatives and factors used in determining suitable 

range. 

Social and Economic Analysis Assumptions and Information 

The Economic Setting 

Information related to economics is readily available from many sources. State governments for 

Wyoming and Utah provide websites with information on state, county and local income, 

employment, and agricultural statistics. These websites and published information were 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 7 

investigated to develop information on the economic setting. (See References.) As with the 

social setting, the intent for economics was to provide a focused description of the economic 

context that was relevant to the Wasatch-Cache National Forest and this forest planning effort 

and its needs. Noting the contribution which national forest related activities make to the overall 

economy was important. 

The Model 

Economic effects to local counties were estimated using an economic input-output model 

developed with IMPLAN Professional 2.0 (IMPLAN). IMPLAN is a software package for 

personal computers that uses the latest national input-output tables from the Bureau of Economic 

Analysis, secondary economic data at the county level from a variety of public sources, and 

proprietary procedures to develop an input-output model for the analysis area. The process and 

software were originally developed by the USDA-Forest Service and are now the property of the 

Minnesota IMPLAN Group (MIG, Inc.). The IMPLAN model was developed using 1999 data, 

the most recent data available at the time of model development. 

IMPLAN is the accepted software that the Forest Service employs for forest plan economic 

analysis. Input to the IMPLAN program is organized in standardized Microsoft Excel 

spreadsheets, which have been prepared for agency-wide use by a team of Forest Service 

economists (FEAST Spreadsheets, Niccolucci, 12/14/2000). The Quicksilver TMprogram was 

used for the required present net value analysis. Technical assistance and advice in using these 

programs and in the development of models and the scope of the analysis was provided by 

personnel from Forest Service Regional Offices in Ogden and Denver, and by the Forest 

Service’s Inventory and Monitoring Institute in Fort Collins, Colorado. 

Forest Service economists determined that the urban and suburban areas along the Wasatch Front 

and adjacent to the Wasatch-Cache National Forest had a large economy not necessarily related 

to Forest outputs, so economic impacts generated by forest planning alternatives would be small 

when shown within the context of that large economy. Also, large western areas of Tooele and 

Box Elder Counties that are far from the Wasatch-Cache Forest were considered generally 

beyond the influence of decisions made on the Forest. Consequently, these areas could be 

eliminated from impact analysis. Using Zip Code boundaries a model was created to separate 

urban/suburban areas from rural areas. By excluding areas beyond influence of the Forest and 

urban areas, the potential impacts of Forest management could be highlighted in rural areas 

surrounding the Forest. 

The Wasatch Cache National Forest model represents the areas most likely to be economically 

impacted by changes in Forest management. The area is not a functioning economy as many of 

the goods and services residents require are not available inside the model area, but the smaller 

model allows direct impacts to the area to be analyzed without the larger metro areas along the 

Wasatch Front from ‘washing-out’ results. The U.S. Postal Service’s website (www.usps.gov) 

was queried to get Zip Codes for the town listed below which are included in the analysis. 

Counties included in Wasatch Cache National Forest IMPLAN model are displayed in the 

following table (B11 – 1). 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 8 

Table B11 - 1. Counties included in the Wasatch Cache IMPLAN models 

Model Area 

County State 

Box Elder Utah 

Cache Utah 

Salt Lake Utah 

Summit Utah 

Tooele Utah 

Weber Utah 

Morgan Utah 

Rich Utah 

Uinta Wyoming 

In general, urban and suburban areas along the Wasatch Front from the south Salt Lake County 

line north to the north Weber County line are excluded from the analysis. The unique Zip Code 

areas of Alta and Snowbird were an exception and included for analysis. Zip Code areas were 

chosen to approximate urban and suburban areas for Logan, Tooele, and Brigham City, which 

are excluded from economic impact analysis. 

Evanston was included in the analysis. While this city met criteria for urban for which cities of 

similar size were excluded from impact analysis, Evanston’s local economy was thought to be 

somewhat different with heavier dependence on resource extraction and National Forest related 

industries: oil and gas, grazing, timber, agriculture, and as a staging area or portal for recreation 

to the Uintas. 

List of Zip Codes included in impact analysis. 

1. Remaining Box Elder County Zip Codes (Bear River City (84301), Collinston (84306), 

Corinne (84307), Fielding (84311), Garland (84312), Tremonton (84337), Willard 

(84340) 

2. Much of remaining Cache County – including Cache Junction (84304), Clarkston 

(84305), Cornish (84308), Hyrum (84319), Lewiston (84320), Mendon (84325), Newton 

(84327), Paradise (84328), Richmond (84333), Smithfield (84335), Trenton (84338), and 

Wellsville (84339) 

3. All Morgan County is considered rural. 

4. All Rich County is considered rural. 

5. Remaining Tooele County Zip Codes – including Dugway (84022), Grantsville (84029), 

Rush Valley (84069), Stockton (84071) 

6. Salt Lake County (Snowbird and Alta (84092) Brighton and Solitude (84121) 

7. Remaining Summit County Zip Codes – including Coalville (84017), Henefer (84033), 

Kamas (84036), Oakley (84055), Peoa (84061) 

8. All Uinta County, WY Zip Codes. 

9. East side Weber County Zip Codes (Eden (84310), Huntsville (84317) 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 9 

All dollar values reported in the economic section were converted to real 2000 dollars using 

Gross Domestic Product inflation adjustment factors prepared and released on 02/19/1999 by the 

U.S.D.A. Forest Service Washington Office Program Development and Budget staff and posted 

on the Forest Service Inventory and Monitoring Institute intranet web site. This allows 

consistent comparison of current values with past and future values. 

Economic Environment 

The description of the economic environment examines the contribution that forest related 

industries make to industry output and employment within the analysis area. Specific IMPLAN 

sectors were selected as a proxy, or representation of the forest resource-related industries of 

interest in Forest planning. The following table (B11 – 2) illustrates the sectors selected are 

displayed in the following table, grouped by the forest resource-related industries they represent. 

Table B11 - 2. Sector Aggregation Used Separate Forest Related Industries 

Sector Forest Resource-Related Industry 

Recreation and Tourism Support 

454 Eating And Drinking 

463 Hotel And Lodging 

488 Amusement and Recreation Services 

Wood Products 

133 Logging Camps And Logging Operations 

134 Sawmills And Planning Mills 

Mining 

38 Crude Oil 

Grazing 

004 Ranch feed cattle 

005 Range feed cattle 

006 Sheep and goat grazing 

As explained above, the Recreation-Tourism Support industry information is not a separate 

sector, but a combination of businesses that play a part in recreation and tourism activity around 

the Forest. Because these businesses also serve individuals not engaging in recreation and 

tourism, it is important to note that a portion of each business serves other local or business 

needs not directly related to recreation and tourism. The split between local and tourism related 

activity was not estimated, this should be considered when reviewing the analysis. 

The results of the contribution analysis are only a proxy of employment related to Wasatch 

Cache National Forest resources. Results would differ if other sectors were included as forest 

resource-related. In the analysis presented, a consistent and conservative approach was taken to 

illustrate the relative importance of the Wasatch Cache National Forest activity within the 

analysis area. 

Economic impact analysis describes what happens when a change in final sales (e.g. exports and 

consumer purchases) occurs for goods and services in the model area. Changes in final sales are 

the result of multiplying units of production (e.g., hundred cubic feet of timber harvest or 

recreation visitor days (RVDs) of recreation use) multiplied by sales per unit. Economic impacts 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 10 

were estimated using the best available production and sales data. The source of each are listed 

below. 

Economic Impact Analysis 

Impacts to local economies are measured in two ways: employment and labor income. 

Employment is expressed in jobs. A job can be seasonal or year-round, full-time or part-time. 

The number of jobs is computed by averaging monthly employment data from state sources over 

one year. The income measure used was labor income expressed in 2000 dollars. Labor income 

includes both employee compensation (pay plus benefits) and proprietors’ income (e.g. profits by 

self-employed). 

The analysis area model was used to determine the employment and income consequences 

throughout the economy of one-million-dollar changes for each kind of impact. The results are 

called response coefficients. Because input-output models are linear, multipliers or response 

coefficients need only be calculated once per model and then applied to the direct change in 

output. Spreadsheets were used to calculate total effects by multiplying the response coefficients 

by estimated levels of dollar activity. A customized Excel workbook called FEAST (Forest 

Economic Analysis Spreadsheet Tool) was developed and used for this purpose. Details of 

FEAST may be examined in the project record. Specifications for developing response 

coefficients and levels of dollar activity are stated below. 

Recreation and Tourism 

Expenditure Data 

Visitors to the National Forests in Idaho often engage in a variety of activities during a trip. Six 

recreation categories were considered for the FEIS to compare between alternatives. 

Expenditure data was obtained from Public Area Recreation Visitor Surveys (PARVS) 

conducted from 1985 through 1987 and combined with data from approximately 5,100 customer 

surveys conducted on 55 Forest Service Ranger Districts from 1988 to 1996. These recreation 

expenditure profiles were incorporated into the models for the categories. 

Recreation use numbers were based on 1997 RIM numbers and adjusted through discussions and 

consensus among the Recreation Specialists from the Ranger Districts and Supervisor's office. 

The Forest recreation specialists estimated the percentage of use from outside the model area, 

non-resident use, for the six categories of recreation use. 

The PARVS expenditure profiles were adjusted to use Regional Purchase Coefficients (RPCs) to 

estimate the amount of local spending in both rural and urban models. PARVS resident data 

reflects expenditures by persons within a 50-mile radius of the analysis area. Non-resident data 

reflects expenditures by persons traveling to the analysis area from more than 50 miles away. 

All PARVS expenditure profiles were normalized to allow for response coefficients calculations. 

For specific expenditure information, please refer to the FEAST and IMPLAN outputs available 

in the planning record. 

The unit of measure used to estimate recreation use was Recreation Visitor Days (RVD). One 

RVD is equal to 12 hours of a given activity for one person. However, most people do not 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 11 

participate in one recreation activity for a full twelve-hour day. Since the PARVS expenditure 

data is expressed in dollars per person per day/visit, it was necessary to convert the RVD data 

into the equivalent number of visits in order to more accurately estimate visitor expenditures. 

The assumptions used for the conversion of RVDs to visits are detailed in the following table 

(B11 – 3): 

Table B11 – 3. RVD Conversion Factors—Recreation 

Activity Category Average Duration of 

Activity per Visit 

RVD Conversion 

Factor 

Camping, picnicking, swimming 3.63 hours 2.7 

Mechanized travel and viewing 2.63 hours 3.4 

Hiking, horseback riding and water sports 4.17 hours 3.2 

Winter sports 4.40 hours 3.0 

Resorts, cabins, organization camps 10.07 hours 1.2 

Other recreation 3.00 hours 3.0 

Source: USDA Forest Service, 1981.

The ‘Camping, Picnicking, & Swimming’ category includes all camping and picnicking 

activities. ‘Mechanized Travel & Viewing’ includes all biking, snow machines, OHV use, 

driving for pleasure and scenic viewing activity. ‘Hiking, Horseback Riding & Water Travel’ 

includes all hiking, water sports, motor boating, mountain climbing, and horseback riding 

occurring on the Forest. The ‘Winter Sports’ category includes cross-country and downhill 

skiing and snow play. ‘Resorts, cabins, and organization camps’ includes all special use permits 

for lodges and large group overnight use. Snowmobiling information was based on a survey of 

expenditures and visits completed by Utah State Department of Recreation and Tourism 

(McCoy, et. al., 2000). Downhill skiing information for expenditures and trips are based on the 

1999-2000 Utah Skier Survey, (Wikstrom, 2000), as well as professional knowledge about 

downhill ski use. All other types of recreation are included in the ‘Other recreation’ category. 

Use of the Model 

One million dollars of expenditures for the categories of recreation discussed above were input 

into the IMPLAN models. The results were then incorporated into the FEAST workbook where 

they were multiplied by total expenditures for each category. Only non-local recreation 

expenditures (tourism export) use was considered in the impact analysis. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Expenditure Data 

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) periodically conducts a national survey to obtain, 

among other information, data on recreation expenditures for hunting, fishing, and other wildliferelated recreation. This information is available by state. The Forest Service Inventory and 

Monitoring Institute organized these expenditures profiles for use in IMPLAN. Expenditures 

were collected on a “per trip” basis, but converted to a person-day basis for use in IMPLAN. 

Expenditure profiles for resident expenditures in Idaho were used for estimating impacts from 

wildlife-related recreation. 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 12 

The USFWS expenditure profiles were adjusted to use RPCs to reflect local spending in both the 

rural and comprehensive models. As with the recreation expenditure profiles, resident data 

reflects expenditures by persons within a 50-mile radius of the analysis area and non-residents 

are from outside the 50-mile radius. All USFWS expenditure profiles were normalized to allow 

for response coefficients calculations. 

Use data for general hunting, general fishing and non-consumptive wildlife use are based on 

1997 RIM numbers and adjusted through discussion and consensus among the Recreation 

Specialists from the Ranger Districts and Supervisor's office, as well as calculations based on 

1996 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, (USDI-USDC, 

1996). The Forest recreation specialists estimated the percentage of use from outside the model 

area, non-resident use, for the six categories of recreation use. 

To use the USFWS per visit expenditure profiles, the use units had to be converted into visits. 

The conversion factors used are highlighted in table B11 - 4. 

Table B11 - 4. RVD Conversion Factors—Wildlife and Fish 

Activity Category Average Duration of 

Activity per Day 

RVD Conversion 

Factor 

General hunting 7.1 hours 1.69 

General fishing 4.3 hours 2.79 

Non consumptive wildlife 3.0 hours 4.00 

Source: U.S.D.A Forest Service, 1981. 

Use of the Model 

One million dollars of expenditures for the three categories of fish and wildlife discussed above 

were input into the IMPLAN models. The results were then incorporated into the FEAST 

workbook where they were multiplied by total expenditures for each category. Only non-local 

recreation expenditures (tourism export) use is considered in the impact analysis. 

Grazing 

Expenditure Data 

Marketing and inventory data was obtained from 1999 Utah Agricultural Statistics and Utah 

Department of Agriculture and Food Annual Report (Gneiting, et, al., 1999) and USDA’s 

website for agricultural statistics (www.nass.usda.gov/wy/internet/cnty data). The State’s total 

marketing income for cattle and sheep was divided by the total inventories for the same in order 

to develop an estimated value per animal and then a value per Animal Unit Month (AUM). An 

AUM is the amount of forage needed to sustain one cow or approximately three sheep for one 

month. Forest grazing use was estimated based on the number of AUMs currently permitted. 

Through the FEAST workbook, this data was multiplied by the value determined above to 

calculate the value of the grazing that occurs on the Forest. 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 13 

Use of the Model 

One million dollars of exports were input into the IMPLAN models through the range fed cattle 

and sheep, lambs, and goat sectors to determine “response coefficients.” These response 

coefficients were then applied to the value of the livestock grazed on the National Forest to 

estimate the total economic impact. Details of distribution estimates are available in FEAST, 

which is located in the project record. 

Timber 

Expenditure Data 

Logging, sawmills and fuel wood where identified as the majority of uses for Wasatch Cache 

National Forest System stumpage. Employment in the lumber and wood products industry was 

estimated through the IMPLAN model. Details of distribution estimates are available in FEAST, 

which is located in the project record. 

Timber volumes and revenues for the current situation were based on the average harvest 

volumes and stumpage revenues for 1998, 1999 and 2000. Volume estimates for each of the 

alternatives were developed based on vegetation modeling and historic management levels on the 

forest during the last planning period. 

Use of the Model 

One million dollars of stumpage exports were modeled through each timber-processing sector to 

determine a “response coefficient.” Timber volume from the National Forests was multiplied by 

historical stumpage prices and multiplied by the response coefficient for to obtain the total 

economic impact for presentation in the FEIS. This process was repeated for each alternative. 

Oil and Gas 

Expenditure Data 

Oil and gas production where identified as of uses of the Wasatch Cache National Forest System. 

Employment in the oil and gas industry was estimated through the IMPLAN model. Details of 

distribution estimates are available in FEAST, which is located in the project record. Volumes in 

cubic meters and revenues for the current situation and each alternative were based on continued 

and future drilling as outlined earlier in this appendix. 

Use of the Model 

One million dollars of crude oil exports were modeled through the processing sector to determine 

a “response coefficient.” The oil and gas out value for each alternative was then multiplied by 

the response coefficient to determine total economic impact for each related sector. All results 

were then summed for presentation in the FEIS. This process was repeated for each alternative. 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 14 

Federal Expenditures & Employment 

Expenditure Data 

The Forest applied budget constraints to every alternative. This budget constraint was used to 

estimate total Forest expenditures, some of which had local economic effects. Total Forest 

obligations by budget object code were obtained for actual expenditures in 1999 from the 

National Finance Center. All dollars were adjusted to 2000. This data was used to estimate how 

the budget would be spent between programs. Details regarding the expenditures may be found 

in the project record. Forest Service employment was estimated by Forest staff based on current 

organizational charts and projections of future staffing levels based on expected workloads and 

budgets. 

Use of the Model 

To obtain an estimate of total impacts from Forest Service spending, salary and non-salary 

portions of the impact were handled separately. Non-salary expenditures were determined by 

using the budget object code information noted above. This profile was input into the IMPLAN 

models for non-salary expenditures for one million dollar expenditure, and the results multiplied 

by total Forest non-salary expenditures. Sales to the Federal Government are treated in the same 

manner as exports, money coming from outside the model area. 

Salary impacts result from Forest employees spending a portion of their salaries locally. 

IMPLAN includes a profile of personal consumption expenditures for several income categories; 

the average compensation for an employee on the Uinta National Forests fell in the category of 

$40,000-$49,999. Across the U.S., Americans typically spend about 67% of their total salary 

plus benefits. Therefore, total Forest Service salaries were multiplied by 0.67 before being 

multiplied by the one million dollar response coefficient. 

Revenue Sharing -- 25% Fund Payments 

Expenditure Data 

Historically, Federal law has required that 25 percent of current or historical revenues be 

returned to the States and Counties within which the revenues were received. These payments 

may be used for a variety of purposes, including schools and roads. The Secure Rural Schools 

and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 provides a new formula for computing annual 

payments is based on averaging a state’s three highest payments between 1986 through 1999 to 

arrive at a compensation allotment or “full payment amount.” All counties except Rich County 

choose stable payments, for the purposes of this analysis it was assumed that these revenues 

would be returned to the local impact area, and that a split of 50 percent for schools and 50 

percent for roads would represent how local governments spend these revenues. A profile of 

expenditures for each of these purposes was derived from the model itself. Details regarding the 

expenditures may be found in the project record. 

Use of the Model 

The national expenditure profile for state/local government education (schools) and local model 

estimates for road construction (roads) are provided within IMPLAN. One million dollars of 

each profile was used to obtain an estimate a response coefficient for these Forest Service 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 15 

payments to impact area counties. The results were then incorporated into the FEAST where they 

were multiplied by total expenditures. Sales to local government are treated in the same manner 

as exports. 

Output Levels 

Output levels are specified in the FEAST Excel workbook, located in the project record and are 

highlighted in each resource section of this FEIS. 

Financial and Economic Efficiency Analysis 

Net Public Benefits 

Net public benefits are the "overall long-term value, to the nation, of all outputs and positive 

effects (benefits) less all associated Forest inputs and negative effects (costs) whether they can be 

quantitatively valued or not" (36 CFR 219.3). Net public benefits represent the sum of the net 

value of priced outputs plus the net value of non-priced outputs. 

Financial efficiency is defined as how well the dollars invested in each alternative produce 

revenues to the agency. Economic efficiency is defined as how well the dollars invested in each 

alternative produce benefits to society. Present Net Value (PNV) is used as an indicator of 

financial and economic efficiency. 

The table B11 – 5 below highlights each activity included in the analysis, the unit of measure, 

and the economic and financial benefit of each. The economic benefit is an estimated market 

clearing price (what the resource would be priced at if available in the private sector) and 

consumer surplus (the estimated value a person has for a resource above the price actually paid). 

In this way, the PNV economic analysis attempts to account for the values people hold for forest 

resources, even though they may not have to pay for them. The financial value is a measure of 

the revenues actually received by the Forest Service for resource extraction, access, or use. As 

displayed in the following table, recreation activities tend to have low, or no revenues collected 

by the Forest Service while both grazing and wood products have associated fees. Although with 

the recreation fee program and increasing management of recreation sites by concessionaries, the 

revenues collected by the recreation program is likely to increase in the future. Costs associated 

with the PNV analysis are taken from the budget estimates for full implementation of each 

alternative. 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 16 

Table B11 - 5. Economic Benefits And Financial Revenue Values In 2000 Dollars 

Activity Unit Economic Benefit Financial Value 

Camping, picnicking, swimming RVD 13.60 0.03

Mechanized travel and viewing RVD 16.85 0

Hiking, horseback riding & water sports RVD 25.44 0

Winter sports RVD 101.32 0

Other recreation RVD 77.74 0.01

Mt. Biking RVD 77.74 0

Snowmobile use RVD 77.74 0

Off highway vehicles RVD 77.74 0

General hunting RVD 94.90 0

General fishing RVD 126.53 0

Non consumptive wildlife RVD 129.21 0

Grazing sheep AUM 10.09 1.10

Grazing cattle AUM 10.09 1.35

Sawtimber CCF 1,631.00 147.01

Aspen CCF 194.00 50.00

Fuelwood CCF 24.00 0.50

Source: RPA, Uinta National Forest, Quick Silver, 2001. 

Information on Social Setting 

Several methods were investigated for developing information for this section of the FEIS. 

Much of the information was developed in April and May 2000, through data gathering in 

meetings with county planners and ranger district personnel meeting with Forest Plan 

interdisciplinary team members. Questions were used to stimulate discussions for the 

development of information on pertinent trends and characteristics of the communities and 

economy that surround the Wasatch-Cache. These questions were taken from “Methods for 

Development of Human Geographic Boundaries” (Kent and Preister, 1999), and from the 

principles and procedures outlined in Forest Service Handbook 1909.17, Social Impact Analysis

(7/88). In addition to information gathered in these interactive sessions, a variety of state and 

county websites, census data, and published information were used to develop the affected 

environment for social setting. (See References.) 

 

The intent of the information gathering was to provide a focused description of social context 

within which decisions for the forest plan would be made. 

The Wasatch-Cache appreciates the attention and input provided from the following individuals: 

Box Elder County – Garth Day; Cache County – Mark Teuscher; Davis County – Barry Burton; 

Morgan County – Amanda Bowen and Kent Smith; Rich County – Al Harrison, Norm Weston, 

and Kim Wilson; Salt Lake County – Cal Schneller and Tom Roach; Summit County – Senta 

Beyer; Tooele County – Nicole Cline and Tom Cluff; Weber County – Kevin Hamilton; Uinta 

County, Wyoming – Ken Klinker, and members of the Uinta County Resource Planning 

Committee. 
Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest B11 - 17 

Social Effects Analysis 

Three Criteria were selected for considering social effects of the alternatives. 

Potential effects related Issue 4 

This issue was developed to deal economic and social values. The effects of alternatives on 

several kinds of uses (livestock grazing, timber harvest, oil and gas leasing, and ski areas, and 

recreation), as portions of the economy, and use interactions have been described previously. 

Aspects of those these uses which have a social effect lifestyles people involved in livestock 

grazing, timber harvest, oil and gas work and recreation will be addresses in this section. A 

narrative discussion of the affects of alternatives is provided for these user groups. We recognize 

that the public has a broad range of values and interests in how national forest lands are 

managed, and that this section is difficult to write to meet each individual’s or group’s 

expectations or concerns. What are provided are a few general observations on the probable 

effects of the alternatives to relatively intangible social values described in Issue 4. 

Potential effects related concerns of individual counties 

A narrative is provided which describes effects to concerns raised by individual counties that 

were voiced during information gathering for this analysis. Affects to American Indians in the 

vicinity are also discussed. 

Cumulative Effects 

A discussion of cumulative effects is provided that gives an interpretation of the longer-term 

general effects of population changes, demographic shifts, increasing diversity, and social issues 

related to this forest plan decisions. 

Qualitative narrative descriptions of effects are inferred, in part, based on knowledge of the array 

of management prescription categories across alternatives and considered opinions of the public, 

Forest Service contacts and personnel from other agencies, and county and state officials 

consulted during information gathering. Other key data that were available for examination and 

interpretation included 1) acreages available in ROS by category, 2) proposed Wilderness acres, 

3) acres of suitable range, 4) projected timber outputs, 5) projected oil and gas outputs, and the 

data and trends suggested in the affected environment section as well as professional knowledge.