Land and Water Conservation Fund suffers 33% cut despite Trust for Public Land Study showing every $1 invested returned $4 in economic value

http://www.tpl.org/news/press-releases/2011-press-releases/conservation-funding-slashed.html 
Congress approved the Fiscal Year 2011 federal budget in April, significantly cutting funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the country’s premiere federal program for protecting lands for all Americans. Supported by offshore oil and gas leasing revenues – not taxpayers’ dollars – the LWCF ensures all Americans have access to local community parks and playgrounds and the vast expanses of federal public lands.
...
In the final budget agreement, LWCF is funded at $301 million, a 33% cut from the FY10 enacted level. Programs that ensure protection of working forests and ranches, threatened and endangered species habitat, access for sportsmen and recreationists, and our national parks, wildlife refuges, forests and other public lands are all impacted by these cuts.

“This 33 percent reduction from FY 10 enacted levels is not only a disproportionate cut to a very successful program but means that LWCF funds have been diverted from their intended and authorized purposes,” said Will Rogers, President of The Trust for Public Land. “If we are serious about creating jobs and getting the economy back on track, conservation spending on LWCF is not only a wise, but an essential investment that reaps immediate and tangible benefits in our communities across the tourism, service and outdoor recreation sectors.”
...
The outdoor industry is one of America’s fastest growing sectors. In addition to contributing more than $730 billion to the American economy each year, it generates $88 billion in annual state and federal tax revenue. More than 6.5 million American jobs are supported by the active outdoor recreation economy.

The reduced funding levels for LWCF contained in this final budget agreement means that a host of willing-seller, critically needed and locally driven land conservation and outdoor recreation projects, will not get done this year. Some will be lost forever, as willing-seller landowners cannot be expected to wait for Congress to act.

Created by Congress in 1965, LWCF was a bipartisan commitment to safeguard natural areas, water resources and our cultural heritage, and to provide recreation opportunities to all Americans. National parks like Rocky Mountain and the Great Smoky Mountains, as well as national wildlife refuges, national forests, Civil War battlefields, cultural and historic sites, rivers and lakes, working ranches and forests, community parks, trails, and ball fields in every one of our 50 states are permanently protected for Americans to enjoy thanks to federal funds from LWCF.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund Coalition is an informal partnership working together to support full and dedicated funding for LWCF. The coalition includes hundreds of local, state and national business, recreation, private landowner and conservation organizations across the country.
...
On November 15, 2010 The Trust for Public Land released an analysis of the return on the investment of LWCF dollars for federal land acquisition by the Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service, and National Park Service for a sample of sixteen federal units that received LWCF funding between 1998 and 2009. TPL analyzed the past (i.e., 1998 to 2009) and likely future (i.e., over the next ten years) economic returns generated from LWCF spending on the sample federal units and found that every $1 invested returns $4 in economic value over this time period from natural resource goods and services alone. In addition to providing natural goods and services, these federal lands are key to local recreation and tourism industries. TPL found that approximately 10.6 million people visit these sixteen federal units each year and spend $511 million in the surrounding local communities. (See http://www.tpl.org/publications/books-reports/return-on-investment-from-the.html)

Trust For Public Land www.TPL.org
Press Releases dated April 15, 2011 and November 15, 2010

'Million-Dollar' Sharks An Economic Driver for Palau - Shark Tourism Worth US$18M Annually for Pacific Island Nation

http://www.pewenvironment.org/news-room/press-releases/million-dollar-sharks-an-economic-driver-for-palau-85899359234
A single reef shark can contribute almost US$2 million in its lifetime to the economy of Palau, according to a new study by the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) and the University of Western Australia. The analysis quantified the economic benefits of the shark-diving industry to the Pacific island nation and found that its value far exceeded that of shark fishing.

“Sharks can literally be a ‘million-dollar’ species and a significant economic driver,” said Mark Meekan, principal research scientist at AIMS. “Because of their low rates of reproduction and late maturity, shark populations have been driven into a global decline due to fishing. Yet our study shows that these animals can contribute far more as a tourism resource than as a catch target.”

Findings from the study, which looked at the reef sharks observed at Palau’s major dive sites, include:

• The estimated annual value to the tourism industry of an individual reef shark that frequents these sites was US$179,000, or US$1.9 million over its lifetime;
• Shark diving brings approximately US$18 million annually to the Palauan economy, approximately eight percent of the country's gross domestic product;
• The annual income in salaries paid by the shark-diving industry was an estimated US$1.2 million; and
• The annual tax income to Palau generated by shark diving was approximately 14 percent of the country's business tax revenue.

Globally, up to 73 million sharks are killed every year primarily for their fins, which are used in the Asian delicacy shark fin soup. The Pacific Island States have been among the first to recognize the danger of this unsustainable rate of consumption. In 2009, Palau President Johnson Toribiong declared Palauan waters to be a shark sanctuary in his address to the United Nations General Assembly. Since then, the U.S. state of Hawaii, the territories of Guam and the Northern Marianas, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands all banned the possession, sale or distribution of shark fins.

“Shark tourism can be a viable economic engine,” said Matt Rand, director of Global Shark Conservation for the Pew Environment Group, which commissioned the research. “Overfishing of sharks can have disastrous effects on ocean ecosystems, but this study provides a compelling case that can convince more countries to embrace these animals for their benefit to the ocean and their value to a country’s financial well-being.”
Pew Environment Group www.PewEnvironment.org
Press Release dated March 2, 2011

75% of world's coral reefs under threat, new analysis finds - United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) - 'Reefs at Risk Revisited' report presents

http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=659&ArticleID=6914

An analysis released February 23, 2011 finds that 75 percent of the world's coral reefs are currently threatened by local and global pressures. For the first time, the analysis includes threats from climate change, including warming seas and rising ocean acidification. The report shows that local pressures - such as overfishing, coastal development and pollution - pose the most immediate and direct risks, threatening more than 60 percent of coral reefs today.

'Reefs at Risk Revisited,' the most detailed assessment of threats to coral reefs ever undertaken, is being released by the World Resources Institute, along with the Nature Conservancy, the WorldFish Center, the International Coral Reef Action Network, Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network, and the UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Center, along with a network of more than 25 organizations. Launches also took place in Australia, Caribbean, Indonesia, Malaysia, the United Kingdom, the United States and other locations around the world.

'This report serves as a wake-up call for policy-makers, business leaders, ocean managers, and others about the urgent need for greater protection for coral reefs,' said Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator. 'As the report makes clear, local and global threats, including climate change, are already having significant impacts on coral reefs, putting the future of these beautiful and valuable ecosystems at risk.'

Local pressures - especially overfishing and destructive fishing - are causing many reefs to be degraded. Global pressures are leading to coral bleaching from rising sea temperatures and increasing ocean acidification from carbon dioxide pollution. According to the new analysis, if left unchecked, more than 90 percent of reefs will be threatened by 2030 and nearly all reefs will be at risk by 2050.

'Coral reefs are valuable resources for millions of people worldwide. Despite the dire situation for many reefs, there is reason for hope,' said Lauretta Burke, senior associate at the World Resources Institute (WRI) and a lead author of the report. 'Reefs are resilient, and by reducing the local pressures we can buy time as we find global solutions to preserve reefs for future generations.'

The report includes multiple recommendations to better protect and manage reefs, including through marine protected areas. The analysis shows that more than one-quarter of reefs are already encompassed in a range of parks and reserves, more than any other marine habitat. However, only six percent of reefs are in protected areas that are effectively managed.

'Well managed marine protected areas are one of the best tools to safeguard reefs,' said Mark Spalding, senior marine scientist at the Nature Conservancy and also a lead author of the report. 'At their core, reefs are about people as well as nature: ensuring stable food supplies, promoting recovery from coral bleaching, and acting as a magnet for tourist dollars. We need to apply the knowledge we have to shore up existing protected areas, as well as to designate new sites where threats are highest, such as the populous hearts of the Caribbean, Southeast Asia, East Africa and the Middle East,' he added.

Reefs offer multiple benefits to people and the economy - providing food, sustaining livelihoods, supporting tourism, protecting coasts, and even helping to prevent disease. According the report, more than 275 million people live in the direct vicinity (30 km/18 miles) of coral reefs. In more than 100 countries and territories, coral reefs protect 150,000 km (over 93,000 miles) of shorelines, helping defend coastal communities and infrastructure against storms and erosion.

For the first time, the report identifies the 27 nations most socially and economically vulnerable to coral reef degradation and loss. Among these, the nine most vulnerable countries are: Haiti, Grenada, Philippines, Comoros, Vanuatu, Tanzania, Kiribati, Fiji, and Indonesia.

'The people at greatest risk are those who depend heavily on threatened reefs, and who have limited capacity to adapt to the loss of the valuable resources and services reefs provide,' said Allison Perry, project scientist at the WorldFish Center and a lead author. 'For highly vulnerable nations - including many island nations - there is a pressing need for development efforts to reduce dependence on reefs and build adaptive capacity, in addition to protecting reefs from threats.'

The report is an update of 'Reefs at Risk,' released by WRI in 1998, which served as an important resource for policymakers to understand and address the threats of reefs. The new report uses the latest data and satellite information to map coral reefs - including a reef map with a resolution 64 times higher than the original report.

'Through new technology and improved data, this study provides valuable tools and information for decision makers from national leaders to local marine managers,' said Katie Reytar, research associate at WRI and a lead author. 'In order to maximize the benefits of these tools, we need policymakers to commit to greater action to address the growing threats to coral reefs.'
...
Improvement in the collection and treatment of wastewater from coastal settlements benefits both reefs and people through improved water quality and reduced risk of bacterial infections, algal blooms, and toxic fish. Estimates show that for every US$1 invested in sanitation, the net benefit is US$3 to US$34 in economic, environmental, and social improvement for the nearby community.
...
Both the live reef food fish—that is, fish captured to sell live in markets and restaurants—and the ornamental species trades are high-value industries. The ornamental species trade takes in an estimated $200 million to $330 million per year globally, with the majority of exports leaving Southeast Asian countries and entering the United States and Europe. The overall value of the industry has remained stable within the past decade, though trade statistics are incomplete. The live reef food fish trade is concentrated mainly in Southeast Asia, with the majority of fish exported from the Philippines and Indonesia and imported through Hong Kong to  China. Over time, the trade has expanded its reach, drawing exports from the Indian Ocean and Pacific islands, reflecting depleted stocks in Southeast Asia, rising demand, improvements in transport, and the high value of traded fish. The estimated value of the live reef food fish trade was $810 million in 2002. A live reef food fish sells for approximately four to eight times more than a comparable dead fish, and can fetch up to $180 per kilogram for sought-after species like Napoleon wrasse or barramundi cod, making it a very lucrative industry for fishers and traders alike.
...
Despite this, the reefs are an important resource. Tourism on the Great Barrier Reef is a critical part of the region’s economy, generating US$5.2 billion in 2006.
...
Live reef fish imported for food in Hong Kong in 2008 were reportedly worth an average of nearly US$10/kg, while humphead wrasse, the most valuable species, were worth more than US$50/kg.
...
Estimating the economic value of coral reef-associated tourism typically focuses on its contributions to the economy, through tourist expenditures, adjusted for the operating costs of providing the service. A recent summary of 29 published studies on reef-associated tourism found a very wide range in values, from about US$2/ha/yr to US$1 million/ha/yr. However, most values fall within the narrower range of US$50/ ha/yr to US$1,000/ha/yr. The wide variation of values is strongly related to differences in the accessibility of places, with very low tourism values in remote locations that have limited tourism development and very high values in areas that have intensive tourism. For these reasons, it is not possible to undertake simple extrapolations of specific studies to entire reef tracts where demand and access may be very different.
...
Although many economic valuation studies have focused on estimating the benefits of coral reef ecosystem services, some studies have also focused on changes in value—that is, what an economy stands to lose if a reef is degraded. For example, the 2004 Reefs at Risk in the Caribbean study estimated that, by 2015, the projected degradation of Caribbean reefs from human activities such as overfishing and pollution could result in annual losses of US$95 million to US$140 million in net revenues from coral reef-associated fisheries, and US$100 million to US$300 million in reduced tourism revenue. In addition, degradation of reefs could lead to annual losses of US$140 million to US$420 million from reduced coastal protection within the next 50 years. Other studies estimate that Australia’s economy could lose US$2.2 billion to US$5.3 billion over the next 19 years due to global climate change degrading the Great Barrier Reef, while Indonesia could lose US$1.9 billion over 20 years due to overfishing.
...
There are numerous examples of economic analyses successfully informing policy. For example, in the United States, the states of Hawaii and Florida adopted legislation setting amounts for monetary penalties per square meter of damaged coral reef, based on calculations from valuation studies. The Belize government used an economic valuation study of its coral reefs as the premise to sue for damages after the container ship Westerhaven ran aground on its reef in January 2009, resulting in the Belizean Supreme Court ruling that the ship’s owners must pay the government US$6 million in damages. Finally, Bonaire National Marine Park, one of the world’s few self-financed marine parks, used economic valuation to determine appropriate user fees.
...
Sample Values: Annual Net Benefits from Coral Reef-related Goods and Services (US$, 2010)

Extent of Study                    Tourism                              Fisheries              Shoreline Protection

Global a                                $11.5 billion                         $6.8 billion                  $10.7 billion
Caribbean (Regional) b          $2.7 billion                         $395 million      $944 million to $2.8 billion
Philippines & Indonesia c       $258 million                           $2.2 billion                $782 million
Belize (National) d         $143.1 mill.-$186.5 mill.**   $13.8 mill.-$14.8 mill.** $127.2 to $190.8 mill.
Guam (National) e                $100.3 million**                     $4.2 million**             $8.9 million
Hawaii (Subnational) f           $371.3 million                         $3.0 million              Not evaluated
* All estimates have been converted to US$ 2010.
** Estimates of the value of coral reef-associated fisheries and tourism for Belize and Guam are gross values, while all other numbers in the table are net benefits, which take costs into account.
a. Cesar, H., L. Burke, and L. Pet-Soede.2003. The Economics of Worldwide Coral Reef Degradation. Zeist, Netherlands: Cesar Environmental Economics Consulting (CEEC).
b. Burke, L., and J. Maidens. 2004. Reefs at Risk in the Caribbean. Washington, DC: World Resource Institute.
c. Burke, L., E. Selig, and M. Spalding.2002. Reefs at Risk in Southeast Asia. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
d. Cooper, E., L. Burke, and N. Bood. 2008. Coastal Capital: Belize The Economic contribution of Belize’s coral reefs and mangroves. Washington, DC: World Resource Institute.
e. H aider, W. et al. 2007. The economic value of Guam’s coral reefs. Mangilao, Guam: University of Guam Marine Laboratory.
f. Cesar, H. 2002. The biodiversity benefits of coral reef ecosystems: Values and markets. Paris: OECD.

Find out more at: www.wri.org/reefs, online resources, including maps, data, regional fact sheets, videos, and more.  The full report is available free of charge at http://www.wri.org/publication/reefs-at-risk-revisited

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Press Release dated February 23, 2011

Choice Experiments in Environmental Impact Assessment: The Case of the Toro 3 Hydroelectric Project and the Recreo Verde Tourist Center in Costa Rica

http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/EfD-DP-11-04.pdf

Abstract: Choice experiments, a stated preference valuation method, are proposed as a tool to assign monetary values to environmental externalities during the ex-ante stages of environmental impact assessment. This case study looks at the impacts of the Costa Rican Institute of Electricity’s Toro 3 hydroelectric project and its affects on the Recreo Verde tourism center in San Carlos, Costa Rica. Compared to other valuation methods (e.g., travel cost and contingent valuation), choice experiments can create hypothetical but realistic scenarios for consumers and generate restoration alternatives for the affected good. Although they have limitations that must be taken into account in environmental impact assessments, incorporating economic parameters—especially resource constraints and tradeoffs—can substantially enrich the assessment process.
...
Mean Willingness-To-Pay (MWTP) for huts with improved aesthetics and electricity was US$ 0.81. (The exchange rate at the time of the study was CRC 470 colones = US$ 1). Respondents were also willing to pay an additional $2.20 if the access road to Recreo Verde was paved. The reduction in water flow implied a reduction in welfare equal to $3.17. However, improvements to the pools (more ornamental plants, for example), were valued at $2.81. Improvements to the road, pools, and huts thus constituted a likely compensation for the reduction in water flow.

The willingness to pay estimates can be compared in magnitude and can be added together. For example, the loss of $3.17 due to decreased river flow can be approximately compensated by improving the road and huts ($2.20 + $0.81, respectively), or by improving the pools ($2.81). Making all three improvements would overcompensate the owners for the impact of Toro 3 on the tourist center. In summary, the choice experiment revealed the compensation measure or combination of measures that would return Recreo Verde visitors to a welfare state similar to the one before the change in the river level.
...
by Dora Carías Vega and Francisco Alpízar
Resources For the Future (RFF) www.RFF.org
RFF Discussion Paper EfD 11-04; May, 2011
Keywords: Land Use, Ecosystem Management