cluster makeup. 



Multivariate logit equations were estimated for each of the four 

 clusters as well as for each of the CVM questions. Tables 19-22 

 present the results of these estimations. Table 19 shows the 

 estimated equations for the current conditions CVM question. All 

 included variables in the estimated equations are significant at 

 the 95% level of confidence. Additionally, with the exception of 

 LHUNTER, all have the expected sign. the coefficient on LTRIPS, 

 where included in the models, meets the requirements necessary 

 for consistency with economic theory. The equations for the 

 "double chance of a large buck" models are shown in table 20. 

 All included variables in those models are significant at the 90% 

 level with most significant at the 95% level. With the exception 

 of the dummy variable PURPOSE all show the expected signs. Table 

 21 shows the estimated models for the "good chance of a doe or 

 small buck" CVM question. Fewer variables were significant in 

 these models. The ones that were, with the exception of PURPOSE, 

 showed significance at the 90% level and with the exception again 

 of PURPOSE had the expected signs. The estimated equations for 

 the final CVM question "chance of an extra deer" are shown in 

 Table 22. Again, all variables are significant at the 90% level 

 or higher and all except PURPOSE have the expected signs. 



The bivariate forms of these logit equations were also estimated 

 and net economic values were calculated as the LOGIT-MEANs and 

 MEDIAN statistics (Table 23) . The hunters in different clusters 

 placed very different values on the Montana deer hunting 

 experience. Trophy hunters value their trips the highest with a 

 MEAN-LOGIT value of $ 470.70 for the current trip estimation. On 

 the other end of the spectrum are the Meat hunters who value 

 their current trip at only $ 181.92. The values of the remaining 

 two hunter groups fall between these two figures. 



As was found with the other aggregation schemes, respondents 

 consistently placed a lower value on the improved condition 

 questions than on the current trip question. As was discussed 

 before, this may be indicative of an "elk hunter bias" in the 

 sample responses. 



45 



