AN EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE ESTIMATES OF DEMAND FOR AND BENEFITS FROM OREGON SALMON SPORT FISHING (TRAVEL COST METHOD, OUTDOOR RECREATION, CONSUMER SURPLUS)

The main objective of this study was to estimate the demand for and net economic benefits from Oregon salmon sport fishing. The travel cost method was used as the primary technique for demand analysis. Several empirical estimates of consumer surplus per trip and per fish were obtained from different estimation methods.;Higher estimates of net economic benefits also resulted from the use of unadjusted individual observations (UIO) for fitting the recreational demand function because this approach does not account for the declining participation rates for the more distant zones. Therefore, it is recommended that the individual observations be adjusted to a per capita basis, or that the probability of participation be linked to the UIO estimates of demand.;A quality variable was incorporated into regional and hedonic travel cost models. Average and marginal values of the primary site and substitutes sites thus were directly derived from the demand equations.;Estimates of total and average consumer surpluses computed from the traditional travel cost model were changed very little with the addition of the substitute and quality variables in the more completely specified regional travel cost models. This finding indicates that the traditional travel cost model may be basically robust. However, additional research on other recreational activities is needed to see if estimates of total consumer surplus from the traditional travel cost model always remain relatively stable when quality and substitute variables are included in a regional travel cost type of specification.;The differences in net economic benefits among different versions of the travel cost method were assessed. Empirical results indicated that the individual observation approaches produced higher consumer surplus estimates than the zone average approach when reported travel costs were used. These higher estimates of net economic benefits are believed to be due in part to the bias caused by travel cost measurement error. This bias was dealt with by using the instrumental variable approach.;Unfortunately, the numerical estimates of value per trip and per fish from the hedonic and regional travel cost models were rather somewhat questionable for this study. It appears that the more complex regional and hedonic travel cost models require more and better quality data. (Abstract shortened with permission of author.)...