Integrated Recreation U

Net Economic Value U

versGC_

GCMRC Socioeco

December 

Phoenix
Support for this Eff

• Bureau of Reclamation• National Park Service• University of Denver
Purpose

The goal of this effort was to dan integrated tool for the calcurecreation use and net economat Lake Powell, Glen/Grand Cand Lake Meade.
Focus

• The utility framework described 

focuses on recreation use value e
Control Variables

• There are two variables under 

management control:

– Release (Q) and elevation– Fluctuations in release.
Net Economic Use V

• The net economic value (NEV) 

recreation depends on both the recreation use and the (nonmarof that use.

• Our focus is on those activities 

are directly affected by reservoriver operations.
NEV Lakes Powell and 

• Powell

– Douglas and Harpman (2004)

– Douglas and Johnson (2004)

– Duffield, Neher and Patterson (20

• Meade

– Martin (1980)

– Duffield, Neher and Patterson (20
NEV of Rec

in Glen Ca

• Angling in Glen Canyon.

– Richards and Wood (1985).– Bishop et al (1987).

• Day-use rafting in Glen 

Canyon.

– Bishop et al (1987).
NEV of Recreation in Gran

• Commercial white water boating

– Bishop et al (1987)– Hammer (2001)

• Private white water boating.

– Bishop et al (1987)

• Boating below Diamond Creek.

– Estimates based on Bishop et al 

(1987) for EIS’s
Technical Basis

• The Lake Powell and Lake Mead

utilize monthly visitation relationdeveloped by Duffield, Neher an

(2007) and NEV data from the li

• The river model utilizes the relat

estimated by Bishop et al (1987)
Detailed Methods Ma

Location/Reach Activity Recreation Use

(trips)[1]

Econ($/tri

Glen Canyon Day Use Rafting Use is either 

unaffected by changes in flow or is held constant. 

Econovaries fluctuestimBisho

Angling

Grand Canyon Private WW boating

Commercial WW boating

Below Diamond Creek

Private WW boating Econo

varies fluctuassumpropoet al (

HRR 1-day WW boatingHRR overnight WW boatingHRR day use rafting

Lake Powell General recreation Recreation use 

varies with lake elevation. It is estimated using Duffield, Neherand Patterson (2007)

Litera

Lake Mead General recreation

[1] A trip is one individual recreating at the site. The duration of a trip is varia
What’s the Point?

• The utility described here does n

contribute anything new to our stknowledge.

• This utility builds upon work by 

Welsh (circa 1987) and automateand complex series of calculation

• For example, the NEV of WW b

described by the equation which 
Commercial Boating N

WTP Q Q 

D

= + − + 

∫ [ exp( . . . 

1 1908169 0 311528 0 004682 

2 

0

Where: WTP=NEV in 1985$ per trip

Q=flow in cfsX=bid or price in $

And where D is defined as:

D Q 

=

[ln( ) ( . . −− + . 

.

99 1908169 0311528 0 004

0 003676

For constant flows (fluctuations 

≤10,000 cfs)
Observation

• Manipulation of this and other es

NEV relationships requires numetechniques (and fortitude).

• This is repetitive, time-consumin

complicated and tedious.

• The sheer effort required has freq

precluded policy analysis use.
The Software Framew

• A lake NEV model and a river N

were developed for use during th

EIS process.
What the Utility Doe

• The software applications compu

for each activity and site by monRiverWare hydrology data set (1

×101 years × 101 traces).

• NEV’s are escalated and discoun

• The moments (mean, median, 90

etc) of the resulting NEV distributhen extracted and reported.
Example Summary O

GCRECFULL SUMMARY-- NET ECONOMIC VALUE OF ANGLING VERbase case = gc_na_outflowtest.txt run daalt. case = gc_alt_outflowtest.txt run tirecreation use = gc2007rec.txt erate (%) = 2.2000 drate Mean Annual Value ---------------------------------Change case ($) = 2834630.0Base case ($) = 2839081.4---------------------------------Difference ($) = -4451.4 (-0.16%)90% Exceedence Annual Value ---------------------------------Change case ($) = 2475426.1Base case ($) = 2494990.3---------------------------------Difference ($) = -19564.2 (-0.78%)10% Exceedence Annual Value ---------------------------------Change case ($) = 3222790.6Base case ($) = 3228192.6---------------------------------Difference ($) = -5402.0 (-0.17%)
The Punch Line

• The integrated framework allows 

rapidly calculate the NEV of recrany given management alternativ

• We can compare the results with 

other resources to assess relative 
Anticipated Updat

• When the NPS recreation econom

described previously are completnew information will be incorporthe software utilities described ea

• To reiterate, this will facilitate co

and rapid impact assessment.
Questions and Discus
Have a Great Day

David Harpman: dharpman@usbr.g

(303) 445-2733
• This slide is intentionally blank
NEV by Flow (1)

NEV by Activity (Constant Flows)

0

200400600800

100012001400160018002000

0 10000 20000 30000 

Flow (Q)

2007$

du_rafting gc_angling comm_wwboat 
NEV by Flow (2)

NEV by Activity (Fluctuating Flows)

0

200400600800

10001200

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 

Flow (Q)

2007$

du_rafting gc_angling comm_wwboat