Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T23:10:40.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Ranchland Attributes on Recreational Hunting in Florida: A Hedonic Price Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Ram K. Shrestha  and
Janaki R.R. Alavalapati
Ram K. Shrestha
Affiliation:
School of Forest Resources and Conservation, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Janaki R.R. Alavalapati
Affiliation:
School of Forest Resources and Conservation, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recreational hunting has been an attractive enterprise for some ranchers who are interested in supplementing their income from cattle. Ranchland attributes—such as parcel size, tree cover, and proximity to urban centers—are expected to influence hunters' preferences and, thus, hunting lease payments. We estimated the effects of these attributes on hunting revenues using a hedonic model. The results reveal that trees and vegetation cover on ranchlands have a positive impact on hunting revenues, indicating opportunities for silvopasture practices. Those ranchers in Florida who maintain about 22% trees and other vegetation cover receive $16.15 per acre per year from hunting leases, but doubling the cover would generate only an additional $3.20 per acre per year.

Keywords

hedonic modelhunting leaseland attributessilvopastureQ23Q24Q26Q51Q57
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , December 2004 , pp. 763 - 772
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adamowicz, W., Louviere, J., and Williams, M.. “Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 24(1994):271–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alavalapati, J.R.R. and Nair, P.K.R.. “Socioeconomic and Institutional Perspectives of Agro-forestry.” World Forests, Society and Environment: Markets and Policies. Palo, M. and Uusivuori, J., eds., pp. 52–62. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.Google Scholar
Baen, J.S. “The Growing Importance and Value Implications of Recreational Hunting Leases to Agricultural Land Investors.” Journal of Real Estate Research 14(1997):399–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bastian, CT., McLeod, D.M., Germino, M.J., Reiners, WA., and Blasko, B.J.. “Environmental Amenities and Agricultural Land Values: A Hedonic Model Using Geographic Information Systems Data.” Ecological Economics 40(2002):337–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benson, D.E. “Wildlife and Recreation Management on Private Lands in the United States.” Wildlife Society Bulletin 29(2001):359–71.Google Scholar
Brownstone, D., and De Vany, A.. “Zoning, Returns to Scale, and the Value of Undeveloped Land.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 73(1991):699–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clason, T.R., and Sharrow, S.H.. “Silvopasture Practices.” North American Agroforestry: An Integrated Science and Practice. Garrett, H.E., Rietveld, W.J., and Fisher, R.E, eds., pp. 119–48. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy, Inc., 2002.Google Scholar
Colwell, RE, and Sirmans, C.F.. “Area, Time, Centrality and the Value of Urban Land.” Land Economics 54(1978):514–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cordeil, H.K., McDonald, B.L., Teasley, R.J., Bergstrom, J.C, Martin, J., Bason, J., and Lee-worthy, V.R.. “Outdoor Recreation Participation Trends.” Outdoor Recreation in American Life: A National Assessment of Demand and Supply Trend. Cordell, U.K., Betz, C.J., Bowker, J.M., English, D.B.K., Mou, S.H., Bergstrom, J.C., Teasley, R.J., Tarrant, M.A., and Loomis, J.B., eds. Champaign, IL: Sagamore Publishing, 1999.Google Scholar
Faux, J., and Perry, G.M.. “Estimating Irrigation Water Value Using Hedonic Price Analysis: A Case Study in Malheur County, Oregon.” Land Economics 75(1999):440–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Florida Agricultural Statistics Service. Beef Cattle and Calf Inventory by County: Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry Summary. Tallahassee: Florida Agricultural Statistics Service, 2002.Google Scholar
Florida Cattlemen's Association. Water Quality Best Management Practices for Cow/Calf Operations in Florida. Kissimmee: Florida Cattlemen's Association, 1999.Google Scholar
Freeman, A.M. III. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 2003.Google Scholar
Greene, WH.Limdep Version 7.0. Plainview, NY: Econometric Software, Inc., 2002.Google Scholar
Guynn, D.C, and Busch, FA.. “Hunting Leases for Income and Access Control.” Forest Farmer 46(1987):60–62.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. “Supplemental Sources of Income for Southern Timberland Owners.” Journal of Forestry 93(1995):22–24.Google Scholar
Jones, W.D., Munn, I.A., Grado, S.C., and Jones, J.C.. “Fee Hunting: An Income Source for Mississippi's Non-Industrial, Private Landowners.” Bulletin F0164. Mississippi State, MS: Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University, 2001.Google Scholar
Kurtz, WB. “Economics and Policy of Agroforestry.” North American Agroforestry: An Integrated Science and Practice. Garrett, H.E., Rietveld, WJ., and Fisher, R.E, eds., pp. 321–60. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy, Inc., 2000.Google Scholar
Lansford, N.H. Jr., and Jones, L.L.. “Marginal Price of Lake Recreation and Aesthetics: A Hedonic Approach.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 27(1995):212–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livengood, K.R. “Value of Big Game from Markets for Hunting Leases: The Hedonic Approach.” Land Economics 59(1983):287–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loomis, J.B., Rameker, V., and Seidl, A.. “A Hedonic Model of Public Market Transactions for Open Space Protection.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 47,1(2004):83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messonier, M.L., and Luzar, E.J.. “A Hedonic Analysis of Private Hunting Land Attributes Using an Alternative Functional Form.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 22,2(1990):129–35.Google Scholar
Milon, J.W., Gressel, J., and Mulkey, D.. “Hedonic Amenity Valuation and Functional Form Specification.” Land Economics 60(1984):378–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, J.L., and Humphrey, S.R.. “Conservation Value of Private Lands for Crested Caracaras in Florida.” Conservation Biology 15(2001):675–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullin, J.M. “Upland Gamebird Preserves: The Opportunity for an Alternative Enterprise.” Forest Farmers 53(1994):9–11.Google Scholar
Poor, P.J., Boyle, K.J., Taylor, L.O., and Bouchard, R.. “Objective Versus Subjective Measures of Water Clarity in Hedonic Property Value Models.” Land Economics 77(2001):482–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pope, C.A., and Stoll, J.R.. “The Market Value of Ingress Rights for White-tailed Deer Hunting in Texas.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 17,1(1985):177–82.Google Scholar
Reynolds, J.E. “Agricultural Land Values Increase as Citrus Land Values Decrease:2002 Survey Results.” Florida Food and Resource Economics No. 150. Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, 2002.Google Scholar
Reynolds, J.E., and Regalado, A.. “The Effects of Wetlands and Other Factors on Rural Land Values.” Appraisal Journal 70(2000):182–91.Google Scholar
Rosen, S. “Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Perfect Competition.” Journal of Political Economy 82(1974):34–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberger, R.S., and Loomis, J.B.. “The Value of Ranch Open Space to Tourists: Combined Observed and Contingent Behavior Data.” Growth and Change 30(1999):366–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salant, P., and Dillman, D.. How to Conduct Your Own Survey. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1994.Google Scholar
Stribling, H.L. “Hunting Leases.” Forest Farmer 53(1994):6–8.Google Scholar
Swisher, M.E., Mullahey, J., DeBusk, W., Main, M., Shriar, A.J., Tanner, G.W., Selph, J., Hogue, P., and Bohlen, P.. The Ecological Economics of Florida's Ranches. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Extension, 2000.Google Scholar
Thurow, A.P., Conner, J.R., Thurow, T.L., and Garriga, M.D.. “A Preliminary Analysis of Texas Ranchers' Willingness to Participate in a Brush Control Cost-sharing Program to Improve Off-site Water Yield.” Ecological Economics 37(2001):139–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. “Farm Bill 2002: Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program Fact Sheet.” Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2003.Google Scholar
Wade, M.A., Minton, T., and Delargy, L.. “Pasture Improvement Practices Utilized by Florida Cattlemen.” Florida Scientist 64(2001):4–5.Google Scholar
Willig, R.D. “Incremental Consumer's Surplus and Hedonic Price Adjustment.” Journal of Economic Theory 17(1978):227–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar