6.2 Levels of Activities 



The comparisons among areas along the Ashuelot River were limited to the 

 rural, recreational, and intensive residential sectors because the urban and in- 

 dustrial sectors do not occur in more than one area each. 



The optimum levels of selected activities by area are summarized in Table 6.1 

 for the objective of maximized net benefits and Table 6.2 for minimized public 

 and private costs. In general, the activities run according to the resource con- 

 straints in the various areas, with no great surprises. It is interesting to note that 

 the "no treatment" waste-water activities were more prevalent in the southern 

 (downstream) area of the basin. 



In the recreation sector, the consistent choice was between no treatment and 

 public treatment of waste water. Individual septic tank treatment was not chosen 

 in any situation, presumably because of the higher cost per household of this 

 method. 



The recreation cottage choices did not vary from area to area in any recog- 

 nizable pattern, except that in the central and southern areas relatively more 

 shore cottages were found than in the northern area for the relative lengths of 

 shoreline. This fact may be due to the influence of Webster State Park, located 

 in the northern area, which was constrained to have no shore cottages. 



Differences between areas, but for the same objective maximized, were pri- 

 marily due to differences in resources available and to the BOD-assimilative 

 capacity of the river in the area. In general, more waste-water treatment and 

 more effective waste-water treatment were required with the increased economic 

 activity in the central and southern areas. This fact was more obvious when 

 maximizing net benefits (REVOWAT) than when minimizing public and private 

 cost (SOCCOST). Between areas, the incidence of cost shifted among economic 

 units for both within objective optimized and between objectives. Rural house- 

 hold, intensive residential, and dairy farms were primarily affected. For farms, 

 both the number of farms and farming practices were involved. 



6.3 Shadow Price on BOD by Area 



One indicator of the cost difference between areas appears in implied or 

 shadow price on BOD. For the high river-flow level, BOD receives no shadow 

 price in any area. In the northern area BOD is imputed no shadow price for 

 median flow and 15 cents per pound for low-river flow (see Table 6.3). Com- 

 pared to the central and southern areas, this represents a sizeable divergence. 

 The central area receives a $0.56 per pound shadow price at median-river flow, 

 and BOD discharge into the river at low flow exceeds assimilative capacity at 

 C-classification. In the southern area, the pattern differs even more. When maxi- 

 mizing net benefits (REVOWAT), the shadow price on a pound of BOD increases 

 from $0.56 per pound at median flow to $7.08 per pound at low flow. But when 

 pubhc and private costs (SOCCOST) are minimized, the shadow price increases 

 from $0,107 per pound at median flow to $0.56 per pound at low flow. 



6.4 Summary 



The objectives optimized influenced economic activity in each area in a 

 manner similar to their influence in the basin. Minimizing public and private 

 cost and maximizing environmental quality (minimized coliform bacteria count 



43 



