This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright Author's personal copy Journal of Environmental Management 90 (2009) 1751–1760 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Environmental Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman Mountain substitutability and peak load pricing of high alpine peaks as a management tool to reduce environmental damage: A contingent valuation study John B. Loomis*, Catherine M. Keske Dept. of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University, B310 Clark Building, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1172, USA article info abstract Article history: High alpine peaks throughout the world are under increasing environmental pressure from hikers, Received 16 November 2007 trekkers, and climbers. Colorado’s ‘‘Fourteeners’’, peaks with summits above 14,000 feet are no excep- Received in revised form tion. Most of these peaks have no entrance fees, and reach ecological and social carrying capacity on 29 October 2008 weekends. This paper illustrates how a series of dichotomous choice contingent valuation questions can Accepted 22 November 2008 be used to evaluate substitutability between different alpine peaks and quantify the price responsiveness Available online 27 December 2008 to an entrance fee. Using this approach, we find that peak load pricing would decrease use of popular Fourteeners in Colorado by 22%. This reduction is due almost entirely to substitution, rather than income Keywords: Contingent valuation effects. There is also price inelastic demand, as 60% of the hikers find no substitution for their specific Substitution effects Fourteener at the varying cost increases posed in the survey. The no substitute group has a mean net Fourteeners benefit of $294 per hiker, per trip, considerably higher than visitor net benefits in most recreational use Recreation economics studies. Willingness to pay Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Pricing 1. Introduction and purpose USDA Forest Service and affiliate groups allow us to estimate that a minimum of 100,000 people from within the state and all across Alpine peaks on nearly every continent are being increasingly the country specifically seek recreation at Colorado Fourteeners impacted by hikers, trekkers and climbers. From South American each year (Colorado Fourteeners Initiative, 2007; Frazier, 2006; peaks such as Machu Picchu in Peru and Patagonia in Chile to the Kedrowski, 2006). Fourteener recreation activities include day Himalayas in Asia to the mountains in Europe (Hanley et al., 2003), hiking, camping, off road vehicle trails, wildlife viewing and weekly tours of visitors hike the trails and camp en route. While photography opportunities. However, one of the most popular ‘‘hardening’’ trails and campsites is one possible response to the activities is ‘‘peak bagging’’, when the hiker attempts to summit impacts, limiting use is another management tool that does not one, or all of the 54 Fourteeners. Despite continuing issues relating result in a loss in natural values. In a global economy with increasing to environmental management of these peaks on public lands, emphasis on eco-tourism, pricing is one way to shift use from over- there are no estimates of the economic value or price responsive- used areas and time periods to other areas and times (Chase et al., ness of Fourteener hikers to fees. 1998). This paper illustrates an approach for estimating the price Outside of Colorado, the states of Alaska, California, and Wash- responsiveness of different types of visitors to peak load fees. ington have one or more 14,000 foot peaks, but the majority of the Our study site is Colorado’s Rocky Mountains, which have 54 Fourteeners are in Colorado.1 Due to the popularity with both in-state peaks that are over 14,000 feet (nearly 3 km) above sea level. These and out-of-state residents, ecologists often state that the Fourteeners peaks are referred to as ‘‘Fourteeners’’ both individually and are being ‘‘loved to death’’ (Kedrowski, 2006; USDA Forest Service, collectively. While exact numbers for recreational visitor use can be challenging to obtain (English et al., 2002), data collected by the 1 California and Washington have twelve and two Fourteeners, respectively. Alaska has twenty-one official peaks over 14,000 feet and the twelve highest peaks * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 970 491 2485; fax: þ1 970 491 2067. exceed 15,000 feet. There is some debate as to the ‘‘official’’ criteria for determining E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J.B. Loomis), catkeske@lamar. Fourteeners, so we have utilized generally accepted measures (Wikipedia, 2007; colostate.edu (C.M. Keske). Roach, 2005). 0301-4797/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.024 Author's personal copy 1752 J.B. Loomis, C.M. Keske / Journal of Environmental Management 90 (2009) 1751–1760 2007; Evans, 2007). That is, this collection of peaks is being used in effect. If the income effect is small, then this would reduce the excess of their ecological carrying capacity to regenerate tundra concern that entrance fees as a rationing device would price out vegetation to hold soils in place (Manning, 2002). In a systematic study low-income users and those that could not afford access at the new that documents environmental damage on Fourteeners, Kedrowski prices. We also investigate the hypothesis that there will be (2006) also found that popular Fourteeners have wider trails to considerably higher value, measured in willingness to pay for peak accommodate high hiker volume, and more switchbacks were needed access, to hikers who have strong preferences for and therefore toreducedamageduetosoilerosion.Theecologicaldamagealso limited substitutes for their current Fourteener. presents temporal considerations, as damage to alpine tundra envi- We believe the findings from our study can be generalized to ronments often requires decades to regenerate (Summer, 1980, 1986; include other high alpine peaks, since Fourteener terrain is similar to McQuaid-Cook, 1978). Similar problems have been noted in climbing most alpine peaks in the continental U.S. that are above tree line and areas of the United Kingdom (Hanley et al., 2003). that consist of predominately talus slopes. Some of the Fourteeners Re-routing trails and trail maintenance is an expensive activity for have trails, like Mount Whitney in California, the highest Fourteener the USDA Forest Service and they are often forced to rely upon affiliate in the continental U.S. Other Colorado Fourteeners and Thirteeners non-profit organizations like the Colorado Fourteeners Initiative to require more technical climbing skills, and are reflective of more implement their management plans. Due to the limited funds available challenging peaks found in the Sierras in California, and 13,000 foot to manage these popular peaks, specific ecological research reports on peaks such as the Grand Tetons and Gannet Peak in Wyoming. Colorado Fourteeners have been confined to internal USDA Forest Service Reports, conference proceedings, and trail maintenance 1.1. Entrance fee effects: substitution or income effects? projects conducted by non-profit organizations. However, there are clearly positive ecological costs of each hiker on these popular peaks. Peak load pricing has often been advocated by economists as Forty-four of Colorado’s 54 Fourteeners are publicly owned and ten are a means to shift use both spatially from high use areas to low use either partly or entirely privately owned. Five of the peaks with some areas, and from high use time periods to low use time periods privateownershipareeitherclosedoroperateonafeeforaccessbasis. (Rosenthal et al., 1984; Harris and Driver, 1987; see Puttakammer, Discussions with USDA Forest Service Leadville District and the non- 2001 for an annotated bibliography of recreation fee studies). profit organizations suggest that there has been an increasing demand Economists know implicitly that along a downward sloping for high altitude mountain recreation during the past decade. It has also demand curve ‘‘low valuing’’ users will be the first to drop out of the been suggested that this demand is due to a popular and readily market. This is an important principle that explains peak load available peak bagging ‘‘list’’ that makes it easy for visitors to learn pricing, where only those with the highest values are willing to pay information about the trails. Non-profit organizations have speculated a premium. Peak load pricing occurs when price increases either at that some recreationists would choose to climb a Thirteener if infor- the peak use areas, or peak time periods. Opponents of fee increases mation were readily available about this class of peaks, and that the present an equity argument, and claiming that most of the reduc- substitutability between these high alpine peaks may be a matter of tion in use is from low-income visitors who are ‘‘priced out’’ by high communication and education. These organizations have also provided fees. Past research on campground pricing only found a small feedback to the authors that insights into peak substitutability may income effect when fees were raised at popular waterfront camp- assist them with promoting alternative recreational areas and mini- sites (Bamford et al., 1988). Similarly, Chase et al. (1998) also found mize environmental damage on popular Fourteener trails. only a small income effect for increased entrance fees at national At low levels of use, the publicly owned peaks are non-rivalrous parks in Costa Rica.