Transcript Recreational Impacts of Coastal Restoration Projects

Recreational Impacts of
Coastal Restoration Projects
CNREP Presentation
Joseph Berlin
May 28, 2010
Recreational Impacts were Estimated
for Three Projects

White Ditch Sediment Diversion

Atchafalaya Conveyance Freshwater
Diversion

MRGO Ecosystem Restoration
White Ditch Sediment Diversion




East Bank of
Plaquemines Parish
One Feature
Four Alternatives by
size
Smallest Study Area
Atchafalaya Conveyance Freshwater
Diversion



Northern Lafourche
Parish
Several Features
Features combined
into Seven Alternatives
MRGO Ecosystem Restoration



Plaquemines, St.
Bernard, and Orleans
Parishes; Hancock
County
Many Features
Features Combined
into Multiple
Alternatives
Six Steps to Corps Planning Process






Identify Problems and Opportunities
Inventory and Forecast Conditions
Formulate Alternative Plans
Evaluate Alternative Plans – Current
Phase
Compare Alternative Plans
Select a Plan
Stages of a Federal Project








Reconnaissance Study
Feasibility Study
Preconstruction Engineering and Design
Construction
Operation and Maintenance
Feasibility Study Includes Alternative Selection
Incidental Recreation Benefits are included in
Feasibility Study Documents
Incidental Recreation Benefits do not affect
Alternative Selection
Three Approved Procedures to Measure
Economic Benefits of Recreation

Travel Cost Method


Requires Detailed Data for Travel Expenses /
Travel Distances
Contingent Valuation

Requires Surveys of Recreational Users for
Willingness to Pay
Three Approved Procedures to Measure
Economic Benefits of Recreation

Unit Day Values



Based Upon Specified Criteria to Determine Value
of Recreation Day
General Recreation - $3.54 to $10.63 per day
Specialized Recreation - $14.40 to $42.09
Estimation of Unit Day Value



Hunting and Fishing
can be either
Generalized or
Specialized Recreation
Number of Possible
Activities Impacts
Values
Must Account for Net
Value Transfer from
One Area to Another
Criteria for Estimating Unit Day
Values

Recreation Experience





Number of Activities
Availability of
Opportunity
Carrying Capacity
Accessibility
Environmental

Esthetics
Data Sources Used To Estimate the
Value of User Days



Freshwater Discharges from the Davis Pond
and Caernarvon Diversions
Salinity Measurements
LaDWF Creel Surveys




Target Species – Fish Sought
Fish Caught – Number and Size
Perception
Waterfowl

Aerial Survey by Cross Section
Creel Fishing Surveys


Intercept Survey
Performed by LaDWF
Species Sought

Several Species
Dominate




Speckled Trout and Red
Drum (Saltwater)
Largemouth Bass
(Freshwater)
Species Caught Number and Size
Perception of Trip
Data Sources Used To Estimate the
Number of User Days


Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor
Recreation Plan (SCORP)
Department of Wildlife and Fisheries License
Data



Hunting and Fishing Licenses
Boat Registration
DWF Registry of Boat Launches (Location
and Size)
Process of Estimating Benefits


A Focus Group was Held for Each Project to Obtain
Expert Opinions
Various Interest Groups Participated in Focus
Groups





Sportsmen
Conservation Groups
Government Agencies
Major Landowners
Project Details were presented to the Focus Group


Restoration Measures were Explained
Alternatives were not Available
Focus Group Findings


There are Many Potential Impacts on
Recreational Fishing
Recreational Users are not Flexible about
Activities



Hunting and Fishing Remain the Primary
Recreation Activities
Little expectation of changing Target Fish Species
Hunting and Wildlife Watching are Seasonal
Activities
Specific Conclusions From Focus
Groups



Oyster Reefs are
Important to
Recreational Fishing
Floating Marsh is
Important to Waterfowl
Hunting
Floodgate Operation is
Important to Marina
Operators
Coastal Restoration Issues
Impacting Recreation Benefits

Freshwater Diversions Impact Recreational
Fishing


Freshwater and Saltwater Species Coexist in the
Same Areas
Waterfowl Hunting is Highly Variable between
Years

Waterfowl are Impacted by Turbidity, not Salinity
Difficulties in Estimating Impacts

Wildlife Watching is Difficult to Measure




Seasonal Migrating Birds
Number of Users in Study Area is Difficult to
Determine
Users can Shift Between Areas
Most Areas in Coastal Louisiana have
Proposed Restoration Projects
Recreation Benefits Model
Atchafalaya Conveyance Results



Alt 1 – Utilize Flow Management to Maximize
Benefits of Existing Flow
Alt 2 - Increase Atchafalaya Inflows and
Utilize Flow Management
Alt 3 – Grand Bayou Pump and Utilize Flow
Management
Recreation Benefits Model
Atchafalaya Conveyance Results



Alt 4 – Increase Atchafalaya Inflows, Grand
Bayou Pump and Utilize Flow Management
Alt 5 - Increase Atchafalaya Inflows, and
Utilize Grand Bayou Dredging
Alt 6 – Houma Navigation Lock Management
Recreation Benefits Model
Atchafalaya Conveyance
Preliminary Results
Without
Project
Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative
1
2
3
4
5
6
Net present
Value
$0
$2,077,000
Annualized
$0
$102,505 $138,137 $78,371
$2,799,000
$1,588,000
$1,505,000
$252,000
$190,000
$74,275
$12,437
$9,377
Recreation Benefits Model
White Ditch Results




Alt 1 – 5,000 c.f.s. Diversion
Alt 2 – 10,000 c.f.s. Diversion
Alt 3 – 15,000 c.f.s. Diversion
Alt 4 – 35,000 c.f.s. Diversion
Recreation Benefits Model
White Ditch
Preliminary Results
Without
Project
Alternative
1
Alternative
2
Alternative
3
Alternative
4
Net present $0
Value
$1,206,000
$1,278,000
$1,421,000
$853,000
Annualized
$57,284
$60,704
$67,496
$40,517
$0
Recreation Benefits Model
Conclusion




Provides a Consistent Method of Measuring
Impacts
Uses Standardized Values for Recreation
Days
Annualizes Benefits over Project Period
Based Upon National Economic
Development (NED) Procedures

Increase in User Welfare