Wild about wildlife: leveraging park visitor support to fund conservation
Every year, millions of people visit national parks hoping to see iconic wildlife like bears, elk, and bison. Conserving wildlife, and the landscapes they depend on, is a priority for park managers, but conservation projects can be costly. In this study, researchers asked: would park visitors contribute funds to conservation projects if it meant they were more likely to view wildlife?
Healthy wildlife populations require the conservation of habitat in and around protected areas, which can be costly. One potential way to fund such conservation would be through increasing visitor fees at national parks. The problem is, increases in visitor fees are expected to decrease visitation, especially for low-income visitors. Meanwhile, however, the failure to maintain the quality of visitors’ experiences (for example, by failing to conserve wildlife species that visitors love to see in the wild) could also reduce visitation in the long run. Park managers thus face the difficult task of balancing visitors’ want to view wildlife with their readiness to pay for it.
National park visitors weigh in
In a new study, researchers surveyed 991 visitors to Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks to explore park visitors’ wildlife-viewing behavior and interests. The survey included questions on the number of trips visitors take, how important they find wildlife viewing, and which animals they most want to see, along with questions asking visitors how they would expect changes in wildlife populations to affect their future park visitation. The researchers estimated what visitors currently spend on trips to the two national parks and gauged visitor support for three conservation fundraising mechanisms within parks: a mandatory fee, a voluntary donation fund, and a tax on goods and services sold within parks.
Wildlife viewing generates significant recreational value
The researchers estimated that the net economic value generated from trips to the two national parks is \$753 million per year. About 77% of participants stated that viewing wildlife was a primary reason for their national park trip, meaning that of the total net economic value, \$581 million can be attributed to wildlife viewing. Large carnivores, particularly grizzly bears, were especially important to some groups of wildlife viewers, who were willing to pay almost 50% more to visit parks.
Wildlife declines could have a large effect on park visitation
Almost half of all respondents reported that they would take fewer trips to the national parks if there were fewer wildlife to view, potentially reducing total park visitation by 16%. One fewer trip per year for half of all wildlife-viewing visitors could mean 1.1 million fewer annual visitors and a potential loss of \$3.9 million over three years for the two parks.
Visitors support conservation fees
Most surveyed visitors supported conservation fundraising through a mandatory fee, voluntary fund, or wildlife conservation fee on park goods and services, regardless of their income levels. The researchers estimated that the implementation of a small fee would have little effect on park revenue and overall visitation, while raising considerable funds for conservation. For example, a \$5 conservation fee could raise almost \$3 million dollars for wildlife conservation, while only reducing visitation by about 1% per year.
A potential win-win for conservation
This research highlights an opportunity to balance the quality of national park visitor experiences with sustainable funding for landscape-scale conservation. Conservation beneficiaries—park visitors—are willing to contribute toward biodiversity protection at ecologically meaningful scales. Implementing even modest conservation fees could generate substantial funding that would benefit visitor experiences and wildlife populations, all while having minimal effects on visitation rates and park revenues.
Related Research
Research economists at the U.S. Geological Survey specialize in estimating the economic benefits generated by public lands, including national parks. In related work, researchers quantified the economic value generated by bear sightings in Yellowstone National Park. They provide estimates both for the value per individual bear sighting and the aggregate value from all bear sightings over the course of a year. They also calculated how much a single bear contributes to viewing value every season. Learn more through the links below.
How much is that grizzly in the window?
Publication: Valuing wildlife sightings at the species-wide and individual animal levels
Related
Economics of Outdoor Recreation
Wildlife Economics
Related
Economics of Outdoor Recreation