 |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
Use this link to request more information about Feasibility Studies.
Contact us about doing
a similar study for you by calling Ted Eubanks
at 512-450-0313 or e-mail.
|
Feasibility Study Using a World Class Birding Facility for Economic Conservation and Development in Texas' Lower Rio Grande Valley
Ted Lee Eubanks
Among the more contentious debates that have dominated wildlife conservation in the past decade has been the attempt to place economic value on wildlife-related recreation. Although hunting and fishing have been recognized as economic generators by the various game and fish agencies for decades (primarily because of Pittman-Roberston and Wallop-Breaux), only in the past few years have activities such as birding, wildlife photography, and residential wildlife activities become recognized as important industries. Most importantly, the economic values placed by the public upon these wildlife resources have the potential to become tools for conservation. Most wildlife professionals are well aware of the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife- Associated Recreation published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service every five years (the most recent from 1996), and the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment published by the University of Georgia in 1996. Yet neither of these excellent surveys allows individual managers and conservationists to apply this economic rationale at a local (micro) level. In order to argue the case for economic-based conservation at the community level, site-specific studies are required. Since few wildlife managers have a background in economics or survey methodology, these important surveys are often left undone.
For the past decade my firm (Fermata Inc.) has conducted a number of such surveys, and we would like to share the results of one such study with you. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is considering constructing a nature interpretive center (focused upon birds) in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (LRGV). The Department has asked our firm to develop a series of justifications and economic feasibility studies for this project. In many ways, this case is identical to those faced by various state game and parks commissions on a daily basis. So how does one argue for economic-based conservation? To begin with, we have developed a biological profile of the LRGV. Most agencies would begin with a similar justification (and most would stop after that profile had been completed). To be blunt, the LRGV is the most biologically diverse region in the United States. The four counties of the LRGV have 485 species of birds (many with ranges are limited to the LRGV), over 300 species of butterflies (including over 70 that have only been recorded in the United States in the LRGV), and dozens upon dozens of unique reptiles, amphibians, plants, and mammals. In the face of such diversity, over 95% of the native habitat has been lost or altered. Conservation can be justified in the LRGV on the basis of biology alone. However, the LRGV is also among the most socio-economically depressed regions of the United States. The unemployment rate varies from 15% to 25% (in Starr County), the per capita income is half the national average (and one-third the national average in Starr County), and the majority of children in the LRGV live in poverty. One cannot approach the conservation needs of the LRGV without also addressing the economic realities of the resident population. In the LRGV, economics and conservation are inextricably intertwined. Nature tourism offers the LRGV an opportunity to both restore natural habitats and create critically needed jobs. Forget sustainable development in the LRGV; the only possible solution is restorative development. Through studies that our firm has conducted in the LRGV, we know that avid birders traveling to Santa Ana NWR stay for 5.8 days and 4.4 nights, and average $384.33 per person per trip. When considered on an annual basis, wildlife watchers (specifically birders) visiting Santa Ana NWR contribute $36.5 million to the LRGV economy. These direct expenditures multiply into a Total Gross Output (TGO) of $87.9 million. When combined with the new dollars coming from Laguna Atascosa NWR and the Audubon Sabal Palm Sanctuary, this TGO expands to over $100 million per year specifically related to wildlife watching in the LRGV. In our opinion, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Our studies have suggested that these refuges largely attract the most avid recreationists. What is needed is for the LRGV communities to begin to attract the more casual recreationists, those interested in birds, butterflies, bats, historical sites, good food, and a nice bed-and-breakfast. The impact can be significant. If the per person trip expense remains the same as found in our previous studies, for each additional 10,000 visitors the following economic benefits will accrue to the LRGV:
Gifford Pinchot once stated: "Conservation means the greatest good for the greatest number for the longest time." Conservation in the next century will be driven by social, political, and cultural concerns, far more than simple biological arguments. Economics is the lingua franca of the world in which we live, and economic-based conservation is an important means of communicating important conservation messages that heretofore have been largely ignored by the general public. Through nature tourism and recreation, conservation is provided a means of paying for itself. No threat to anyone's status quo is embedded in these conclusions, only potential and opportunity.
Request
more information on this topic
|
||||||||||||||||||
