Monday, February 17, 2025
31 °
Mostly Cloudy

Balancing the ATV books

Posted

To the Editor;
The Penn State study, “Economic impact of All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) on local economies: a literature review,” available online March 1, 2024, in the Journal “Review of Economic Assessment” states:
“The findings indicate that existing studies have assessed the economic impact of ATVs solely based on gross expenditures, lacking comprehensive inclusion of the costs associated with ATV damages to the environment, society, and human health.”
The studies claiming substantial benefits to the local economies associated with ATVs have only looked at the plus side (often using different terms that are equivalent to gross expenditures) and ignored the minus side of the ledger.
In order to understand if there is any benefit to local economies, it is necessary to balance the books to see if the pluses outweigh the minuses. Every business does this, but the Penn State study indicates that no studies of ATV economic effects on local economies so far have done so. This means that the study paid for and executed by WATVA, in addition to other flaws, cannot make any conclusion about economic benefits to the state of Wisconsin, and certainly not to Vilas County or any town in Vilas County. The same flaw applies to the study from the Wisconsin Office of Outdoor Recreation and every other study that the Penn State researchers could find on the subject.
Incidentally, the Penn State study lists other and more specific costs associated with ATVs:
“Environmental impacts include damage to soil and vegetation on the landscape, air pollution from vehicle emissions, harm to water quality, trail surfaces, and wildlife, as well as noise pollution (Fonseca et al., 2005; Bissix and Medicraft, 2008; Khorsandi et al., 2023). ATVs can create conflicts with other recreational activities such as hiking and cross country skiing (Bissix and Medicraft, 2008). ATV related deaths and injuries are the most serious concern among stakeholders and users (Doud et al., 2017).”
Perhaps the most disreputable reason for only quantifying the economic benefits, and none of the costs of ATV riding, is that those who pay for the studies (like WATVA) only want to report a positive image of ATVing. However, it is also true that it is sometimes difficult to place a dollar value on losses, like silent sports tourists driven away; loss in residential real estate value near ATV routes/trails; water pollution; deaths; etc. In a few instances, costs are mentioned without estimating the dollar value of those costs. Whatever the reason(s) for omitting it, cost data are essential to providing a true picture of the potential economic effects of ATVs on local economies. As the Penn State study concludes:
“This study advocates for the need for a more comprehensive consideration of both benefits and costs in the economic impact of ATVs to assist ATV business managers, policymakers, and researchers in making informed decisions and planning future programs.”

Steve Halverson
Boulder Junction

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here