Contingent Valuation Estimates 



The upland game bird hunter survey asked hunters to provide information on several areas of 

 either their "first" or "last" hunting trip. Two cx)ntingent valuation dichotomous choice 

 questions were asked. The first question asked hunters to value their "first" or "last" trip and 

 was worded: 



Suppose that everything about this "first" hunt was the same except your trip costs had 

 been Sxxxxx more, would you still have made the trip? 



A simple yes or no is the only response a hunter can give, very much like the choice he would 

 have in a real market situation. The dollar amount ($xxxx) was varied randomly across surveys 

 and was one of ten predetermined amounts ranging from $5.00 to $1500.00. 



In addition to the current trip question, a CVM question was asked that presented hunters with 

 hypothetical changes in their trip. They were then asked to value this hypothetical situation. 

 This question is presented below: 



Imagine that everything about your "first" trip was the same, except that you saw twice 

 as many birds and your trip costs to visit this site increased by Sxxxxx . would you still 

 have made the trip? 



This question provides insights into bird hunters willingness to pay for improved hunting 

 opportunities. The bid levels presented hunters in this question were the same as for the current 

 trip question. 



Protest Responses and Outliers 



There are two types of respondents that answer the contingent valuation questions that should 

 be scrutinized. The first group is those hunters who said they would pay the stated bid amount 

 but would not be able to given their income. Willingness to pay and the ability to pay are both 

 necessary for economic demand analysis. Ability to pay was determined by first calculating the 

 percentage of their income which respondents were willing to spend on upland game bird 

 hunting. This was done in the following manner: 



Percent = (Expenditures -f- Bid Amount) * Trips 

 Income 



All respondents with a percent greater than 1 were excluded since this group obviously lacked 

 the ability to pay. 



The second group of respondents that should be excluded from the analysis are those who 



15 



