Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T04:02:28.217Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Reservoir Aquatic Plant Management on Recreational Expenditures and Regional Economic Activity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

John C. Bergstrom ,
R. Jeff Teasley ,
H. Ken Cordell ,
Ray Souter  and
Donald B. K. English
John C. Bergstrom
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia
R. Jeff Teasley
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia
H. Ken Cordell
Affiliation:
U.S. Forest Service
Ray Souter
Affiliation:
U.S. Forest Service
Donald B. K. English
Affiliation:
U.S. Forest Service
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Exotic aquatic plant management is a major concern for public reservoir management in many regions of the United States. A study was conducted to measure the effects of alternative aquatic plant management strategies on recreational expenditures and regional economic activity. The study area was Lake Guntersville, Alabama, and the local economy surrounding the lake. Lake Guntersville is one of the largest reservoirs in the Tennessee Valley Authority system. Results suggested that relatively moderate levels of aquatic plant control are associated with the highest levels of recreation-related economic effects on the economy surrounding Lake Guntersville.

Keywords

aquatic plantsinput-output analysispublic reservoir managementrecreational expendituresregional economic activity
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , December 1996 , pp. 409 - 422
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alward, G.S., Davis, H.G., Despotakis, K.A., and Lofting, E.M.. “Regional Non-Survey Input-Output Analysis with IMPLAN.” Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Southern Regional Science Association, Washington DC, 1985.Google Scholar
Bergstrom, J.C., Cordell, H.K., Teasley, R.J., Souter, R., Messonnier, M.L., Betz, C.J., Smith, M.M., and Barber, L.R.. “Aquatic Plant Coverage and Outdoor Recreation at Lake Guntersville, Alabama: A Study of User Preferences, Economic Values, and Economic Impacts.” Pub. No. TVA/RG/WM-94005, final report submitted to the joint TVA/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Guntersville Aquatic Plant Management Project, Muscle Shoals AL, December 1993.Google Scholar
Bockstael, N.E., Strand, I.V. Jr., McConnell, K.E., and Arsanjani, E.. “Sample Selection Bias in the Estimation of Recreation Demand Functions: An Application to Sportfishing.” Land Econ. 66,1(1990):40–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillman, D.A.Mail and Telephone Surveys. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1978.Google Scholar
English, D.B.K. and Bergstrom, J.C.. “The Conceptual Links Between Recreation Site Development and Regional Economic Impacts.” J. Regional Sci. 34,4(1994):599–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, J.J., Adamowicz, W.L., and Graham-To-masi, T.. “The Travel Cost Model of Recreation Demand: Theoretical and Empirical Issues.” Leisure Sciences 12(1990):119–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, P.A Guide to Econometrics, 3rd ed. Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Loomis, J.B. “An Investigation into the Reliability of Intended Visitation Behavior.” Environ, and Resour. Econ. 3(1993):25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, R.E., and Blair, P.D.. Input-Output Analysis: Foundations and Extensions. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1985.Google Scholar
Palmer, C, and Siverts, E.. IMPLAN Analysis Guide. Land Management Planning Systems Section, USDA/Forest Service, Ft. Collins CO, 1985.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G.W., and Cochran, W.G.. Statistical Methods, 6th ed. Ames IA: The Iowa State University Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Souter, R., and Bowker, J.M.. “A Note on Nonlin-earity Bias and Dichotomous Choice CVM: Implications for Aggregate Benefits Estimation.” J. Agr. and Resour. Econ. Rev. 25,1 (April 1996): forthcoming.Google Scholar
Teasley, R.J., Bergstrom, J.C., and Cordell, H.K.. “Estimating Revenue-Capture Potential Associated with Public Area Recreation.” J. Agr. and Resour. Econ. 19,1(1994):89–101.Google Scholar
Walsh, R.G.Recreation Economic Decisions: Comparing Benefits and Costs. State College PA: Venture Publishing, Inc., 1986.Google Scholar
Walsh, R.G., Johnson, D.M., and McKean, J.R.. “Review of Outdoor Recreation Economic Demand Studies with Nonmarket Benefit Estimates, 1978-1988.” Tech. Rep. No. 54, Colorado Water Resources Research Institute, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, 1988.Google Scholar
Ward, F.A. “Economics of Water Allocation to In-stream Uses in a Fully Appropriated River Basin: Evidence from a New Mexico Wild River.” Water Resour. Res. 23,2(1987):381–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, F.A., and Loomis, J.B.. “The Travel Cost Demand Model as an Environmental Policy Assessment Tool: A Review of Literature.” West. J. Agr. Econ. 11,2(1986):164–78.Google Scholar
Watson, A.E., and Brachter, L.. “Public Area Recreation Visitor Study: Phase III Reporting.” Final report to Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Athens GA, 1987.Google Scholar