Using ESV for Planning, Policy, and Management of DE s Tidal Wetlands

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Using ESV for Planning, Policy, and Management of DE s Tidal Wetlands"

Esther Rodgers
5 years ago
Views:

1 Using ESV for Planning, Policy, and Management of DE s Tidal Wetlands Amanda Santoni NOAA Coastal Management Fellow Delaware Coastal Programs amanda.santoni@state.de.us Amanda Santoni Environmental Scientist III Delaware Coastal Programs

2 Ecosystem Service Project Goals Do DE residents want to preserve tidal wetlands, and how much are they WTP? Which ecosystem services are priorities and what is the WTP for each? Obtain statistics on recreational use. Use these values to leverage funding for wetlands protection and management. Use priorities to help inform better management of existing wetlands.

3 Contingent Choice Valuation Multiple ecosystem services Use & nonuse values Great for policy implications Allows for DE residents to voice how much they would actually pay

4 Attributes Attribute Acres (# of Acres) No Action Loss of 400 acres ( 400) Levels 200,0,+200, +400 Cost ($/household/year) $0 $5, $15, $30, $50, $100, $200 Ecological Condition Score 55 out of ,60, 65, 70 Water Quality Score Coastal Protection (For # of houses/businesses) 50 out of 100 Loss of protection for 40 houses/businesses ( 40) 50,60,70 40, no change, +40 Public Access Management Responsibility No New No Change in ownership and management New, No New Government buys land, Government obtains easement, non profit buys land, non profit obtains easement, no change

8 Results: Recreation

9 Results: Recreation 1. Walking/Hiking 2. Fishing/Shellfish Harvesting 3. Swimming

10 Results: Recreation 1. Other 2. Other Wildlife Viewing 3. Birdwatching

11 Estimated Recreational Expenditures Estimates per year for tidal wetlands Fishing: $38 million Wildlife viewing: $15 million Hunting: $9 million *Accounted for inflation using CPI inflation calculator from US Bureau of Labor Statistics (2015$) **These values should not be summed

12 Prior Knowledge

13 Results: Choice Experiment Attributes Per household/year Perunit/year Acres Lose 200 $33.5 $0.17(per acre) Acres no change 92.9* 0.23*(per acre) Acres Gain (per acre) Acres Gain (per acre) Wildlife Condition 60% 14.4* 2.88*(per percentage) Wildlife Condition 65% (per percentage) Wildlife Condition 70% (per percentage) Water Quality 60% (per percentage) Water Quality 70% (per percentage) Coastal Protection No Change (per structure) Coastal Protection Gain 40 structures (per structure) New Access 5.1* Government buys land 1.73* Government obtains easement 6.92* Nonprofit buys land 3.45* Nonprofit obtains easement Acres Value Related to Lose 400 Wildlife Condition Related to 55% Water Quality Related to 50% Coastal Protection Related to Lose 40

14 Results: Choice Experiment Attributes Per household/year Perunit/year Acres Lose 200 $33.5 $0.17(per acre) Acres no change 92.9* 0.23*(per acre) Acres Gain (per acre) Acres Gain (per acre) Wildlife Condition 60% 14.4* 2.88*(per percentage) Wildlife Condition 65% (per percentage) Wildlife Condition 70% (per percentage) Water Quality 60% (per percentage) Water Quality 70% (per percentage) Coastal Protection No Change (per structure) Coastal Protection Gain 40 structures (per structure) New Access 5.1* Government buys land 1.73* Government obtains easement 6.92* Nonprofit buys land 3.45* Nonprofit obtains easement Acres Value Related to Lose 400 Wildlife Condition Related to 55% Water Quality Related to 50% Coastal Protection Related to Lose 40

15 Results: Choice Experiment Attributes Per household/year Perunit/year Acres Lose 200 $33.5 $0.17(per acre) Acres no change 92.9* 0.23*(per acre) Acres Gain (per acre) Acres Gain (per acre) Wildlife Condition 60% 14.4* 2.88*(per percentage) Wildlife Condition 65% (per percentage) Wildlife Condition 70% (per percentage) Water Quality 60% (per percentage) Water Quality 70% (per percentage) Coastal Protection No Change (per structure) Coastal Protection Gain 40 structures (per structure) New Access 5.1* Government buys land 1.73* Government obtains easement 6.92* Nonprofit buys land 3.45* Nonprofit obtains easement Acres Value Related to Lose 400 Wildlife Condition Related to 55% Water Quality Related to 50% Coastal Protection Related to Lose 40

16 Results: Choice Experiment Attributes Per household/year Perunit/year Acres Lose 200 $33.5 $0.17(per acre) Acres no change 92.9* 0.23*(per acre) Acres Gain (per acre) Acres Gain (per acre) Wildlife Condition 60% 14.4* 2.88*(per percentage) Wildlife Condition 65% (per percentage) Wildlife Condition 70% (per percentage) Water Quality 60% (per percentage) Water Quality 70% (per percentage) Coastal Protection No Change (per structure) Coastal Protection Gain 40 structures (per structure) New Access 5.1* Government buys land 1.73* Government obtains easement 6.92* Nonprofit buys land 3.45* Nonprofit obtains easement Acres Value Related to Lose 400 Wildlife Condition Related to 55% Water Quality Related to 50% Coastal Protection Related to Lose 40 * Computed based on insignificant (α=0.1) parameter estimates

17 Scenarios 339,046 households in DE WTP/household/year Aggregate/year Small Gain Lose 200 acres; wildlife 60% $47.9 $16 million

18 Scenarios 339,046 households in DE WTP/household/year Aggregate/year Small Gain Lose 200 acres; wildlife 60% No From Today Acres no change; wildlife/water 60% $47.9 $16 million $172.2 $58 million

19 Scenarios 339,046 households in DE WTP/household/year Aggregate/year Small Gain Lose 200 acres; wildlife 60% No From Today Acres no change; wildlife/water 60% $47.9 $16 million $172.2 $58 million $180.3 $61 million $188.0 $63 million $248.9 $84 million Medium Gain #1 Acres no change; wildlife 65%; water 60%; coastal protection lose 0 structures Medium Gain #2 Gain 200 Acres; wildlife 65%; water 60%; coastal protection lose 0 structures Large Gain Gain 400 Acres; wildlife 70%; water 70%; coastal protection Gain 40 structures; new access

20 Results: Choice Experiment Attributelevel Coefficient tstatistics pvalue 7.11E Acres * ln(age) Acres * Education * 0.03 Acres * Income (in $1000) 1.64E Acres * New Castle County Acres * Sussex County Acres * ln(distance to wetland (in kilometers)) Acres * Recreation Coastal Protection * Close to wetland (<1 kilometer) New Access * Recreation * E * * Cost * Income(in $1000) # of observations 8,220 (548 individuals) Log Pseudolikelihood Pseudo R Income, age, and proximity to wetlands did not have a significant effect on # acres selected. Significant effect on # Acres for those who recreate, or have higher education levels and those from Sussex county.

21 Results: Validity

22 Policy Recommendations? Workshops to determine recommendations Allocate funding $$ for open space? $$ for a new approach? Ownership and management State/local/federal government Nonprofit Ensure that state policies take into account the importance of these habitats Migration corridors Open space acquisition ranking

Scarborough, Bonnie Arvay, Carl Yetter Delaware Coastal Programs,

University, Worcester MA Pete Wiley, Chris Ellis NOAA Ian Yue NOAA

State University Elizabeth Schuster The Nature Conservancy UMCES IAN

23 Thank You! NOAA Office For Coastal Management Tridec Technologies Bob Scarborough, Bonnie Arvay, Carl Yetter Delaware Coastal Programs, DNREC George Parsons University of Delaware Rob Johnston Clark University, Worcester MA Pete Wiley, Chris Ellis NOAA Ian Yue NOAA Coastal Management Fellow, Connecticut Max NeilsenPincus Portland State University Elizabeth Schuster The Nature Conservancy UMCES IAN Image Library Symbols Courtesy of the Integration and Application Network, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (ian.umces.edu/symbols/)

24 Questions? Amanda Santoni Environmental Scientist

25 Demographics Demographic Gender a (%) Female Male Other/Prefer not to answer a Age (%) Household Income b ($) Mean Median Education C (%) Some High School High School Degree Some College Bachelor s Degree Masters, Professional or Doctoral Degree County of Residence d (%) Kent New Castle Sussex Survey Sample Delaware Demographics 55% 44% 1% 52% 48% n/a 7% 14% 15% 23% 20% 21% 13.% 16% 17% 19% 16% 19% $60,000 $79,999 $60,000 $79,999 $78,559 $60,321 2% 12% 20% 32% 38% 23% 27% 18% 16% 12% 21% 49% 30% 18% 60% 22%

27 Process Public Workshops Pilot Studies Existing Expert Consultations Data Survey Distribution Data Analysis Experimental Design Report & Outreach

28 Tidal Wetlands in Delaware 25% of Delaware is wetland ~87,000 acres tidal (~320,000 total)

Tidal Wetlands in Delaware Loss of 580 acres estuarine vegetated wetlands 19922007 (Tiner et al,

29 Tidal Wetlands in Delaware Loss of 580 acres estuarine vegetated wetlands (Tiner et al, 2011). 92% decrease brackish marsh, 14% increase estuarine open water under 69 cm SLR (NWF, 2008).

Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Acquisition Selection for the Colorado Wildlife Habitat Protection Program

Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Acquisition Selection for the Colorado Wildlife Habitat Protection Program Colorado Parks and Wildlife Acquisition Selection for the Colorado Wildlife Habitat Protection Program State Wildlife Action Plan and CPW s Strategic Plan: *Conserve wildlife and habitat to ensure healthy