Stein, Samuel, authorBayham, Jude, advisorKroll, Stephan, committee memberCoats, Jennifer, committee member2019-09-102019-09-102019https://hdl.handle.net/10217/197454The assessment of model choice is important in the valuation of ecosystem services because of the implications it has on policy decision making and public perception of natural resources. Values derived from the Contingent Valuation Method and the Travel Cost Method were compared using the South Platte River as a case study. Two surveys were distributed in order to find willingness to pay for increased fishery quality. In the Contingent Valuation model, individuals were asked if they were willing to pay an increased fishing license fee in order to improve fishery quality. The median willingness to pay for increased fishery quality amounted to $77.07 per individual. In the Travel Cost model, individuals were surveyed at fisheries of varying quality along the South Platte River, using their cost of travel, fishing-trip-specific purchases, and the fisheries' quality measure to determine willingness to pay for increased fishery quality. In this model the annual willingness to pay for an increase in quality from quality 1 to quality 2 is $83, while the willingness to pay for an increase in quality from quality 2 to quality 3 is $153. Finally, the willingness to pay for an increase in quality from quality 3 to quality 4 is $481, while the willingness to pay for an increase in quality from quality 4 to quality 5 is $2639. Both models showed that, even at their lower bound, gross willingness to pay exceeded the cost to restore ecosystem services and improve fishery quality.born digitalmasters thesesengCopyright and other restrictions may apply. User is responsible for compliance with all applicable laws. For information about copyright law, please see https://libguides.colostate.edu/copyright.natural resource economicscontingent valuation modeltravel cost modelText