Comparison of Results to Previous Studies 



The results of this study can be compared to several other 

 Montana big game hunting studies. Since questions remain as to 

 whether this study was successful in isolating only deer hunters 

 in its sampling process, comparisons will be made with previous 

 elk hunting studies as well as those for deer hunting. 



Brooks (1988) undertook a travel cost model analysis of Montana 

 deer hunting (see Dwyer, Kelly and Bowes (1977) for a discussion 

 of travel cost methodology) . His study was based on a sample of 

 1,031 Montana deer hunting license holders and used a reported 

 cost of 37 cents per mile in the calculation of net economic 

 values. Brooks found a per trip value for Montana deer hunting 

 of $ 108.00, and a per day value of $ 54.94. 



Also in 1988 Duffield undertook another TCM study of Montana elk 

 hunting as a companion to Brooks' deer study. Duffield 's study 

 was based on a sample of 553 hunters whose main purpose was elk 

 hunting. This study, which utilized a reported cost of 42.2 

 cents per mile found that the average Montana elk hunting trip 

 has a net economic value of $ 184.56 per trip or $ 65.58 per day. 



Loomis, Cooper, and Allen (1988) studied Montana elk hunting 

 using both open ended CVM and dichotomous choice CVM methodology. 

 Using a sample size of 5,000 Montana elk hunting license holders 

 they found a per trip mean net economic value of $ 262.31 for the 

 dichotomous choice question, $ 93.61 for the open ended CVM 

 question and $ 72.27 for the median of the dichotomous choice 

 responses. These values translate into per day values of $ 39.90 

 for the mean logit, $14.24 for the mean open ended CVM and $ 

 10.99 for the median logit. Loomis et al . used an upper 

 integration limit of $ 1100 for the calculation of their mean 

 logit values. 



Loomis, Creel and Cooper (1989) conducted a study of the economic 

 value of deer hunting in California using a dichotomous choice 

 CVM methodology and found a statewide average net economic value 

 of $ 191.45 per trip, or $68.73 per day. 



Table 17 shows a comparison of the current studies results with 

 those of the studies mentioned above. Each studies values are 

 reported in the study years dollars so com.parison across studies 

 must be made with care. A comparison of the per day values of 

 Table 17 show that the current study values are comparable to the 

 results of other deer hunting valuation studies. The per day 

 comparison is more appropriate given the difference in days per 

 trip across studies as discussed previously. This lends a degree 

 of validation to the magnitudes of the values reported here. It 

 should be noted that the benefit estimates for the contingent 



37 



