EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 



Purpose of the Study 



The main objective of this study was to estimate the net economic 

 value for deer hunting in Montana. Net economic value is the 

 amount of money a person would be willing to pay over and above 

 what they actually must pay in order to purchase or experience 

 something. In this study that "something" is defined as a deer 

 hunting trip. In addition to estimating the value of the most 

 recent trip taken by hunters, this study also estimated the net 

 economic value of several hypothetical deer hunting trips. This 

 valuation of hypothetical trips was accomplished by asking 

 hunters how much more money they would be willing to pay if (for 

 example) their chances of bagging a large buck were to double. 

 In all, one value for actual trips taken and 3 values for 

 hypothetically improved trips were estimated in this study. 



Data Sources 



The questionnaire used in this study was administered by the 

 Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks after the end of 

 the 1988 general hunting season. The population targeted by the 

 questionnaire was those people who had purchased a 1988 deer 

 hunting tag or big-game combination license. Hunters first 

 received the questionnaire booklet (see Appendix A) and cover 

 letter along with a stamped, addressed return envelope. One week 

 later a postcard reminder was sent to those hunters not yet 

 responding. Finally, a second copy of the questionnaire was sent 

 to nonrespondents. 



An initial sample of 5000 questionnaires was mailed to hunters. 

 Residents received 4325 (86.5%) of the surveys and nonresidents 

 675 (13.5%). This division closely mirrors the actual 

 percentages of resident and nonresident hunters. Of the 5000 

 mailed questionnaires 44 were undeliverable and 3328 were 

 completed and returned for a response rate of 66.5%. 



Descriptive Statistics 



Hunters were broken down two separate ways for the analysis of 

 the data; the total sample was divided into residents and 

 nonresidents and the total sample was divided into hunters who 

 hired guides and those who did not. Comparisons of the 

 characteristics of these four groups showed significant 

 differences. Not surprisingly, nonresidents spent significantly 

 more for their hunting trips than did residents. Nonresidents 



