Improving the Yellowstone

Experience
Separation of Wildlife and Tourism Transportation Infrastructure

Presented by: Naveed Khan

 The Problem
- In 2018 there were over 4 million visitors to Yellowstone National Park (The Guardian
2018)

- This Influx of tourists in the park has increased the number of disruptive
behaviors by humans.
- This Includes broken thermal features, interactions with protected wildlife,
bison gorings, and the most common disruption “Animal Jams” (The Guardian 2018)
- An Animal Jam happens when park visitors see, really any animal, on or near
the road.
- They stop their car and leave the vehicle to capture photos.
- This or the wildlife, such as herds of bison, are crossing the road
- These stops cause traffic pileups that account for more than 2/3s of the reported
negative experiences in Yellowstone (Yellowstone Park 2017)

Photo Credit: Chris Hunt 2018

Mitigating Interactions with
Wildlife on Roads
Hiring organization: Yellowstone National Park Service

Policy Question: What is the best way to reduce animal jams on main access
roads to and from the park.

Main Goal: To reduce the number of animal jams while increasing the
average visitor’s experience.

Selection of Infrastructure/Policy Changes to Achieve Goal:

- Imposing fines
- Stopped vehicles that cause congestion would be fined an amount
posted via signage along highly commuted roads
- Fencing Along Roads where Jams are Common
- Completely block off roads to divert wildlife away from access roads
- Wildlife Bridges
- Combination of bridges and fencing along highly commuted
roads that permits separation and free wildlife movement

Photo Credit: My Yellowstone 2019

Economic Analysis, Step 1: Cost
• Determine the cost of each infrastructure/policy change:
• Hiring enforcement figures to impose fines and implement fine system
• Consulting construction firms to determine the cost of construction of either
fencing or bridges
• Consulting Biologists to determine areas of high-densities of wildlife

• Determine Qualitative costs of Infrastructure/Policy Changes:

• Separation of wildlife from natural roaming habitats
• Visitor experience may be impacted by the lack of wildlife they see when
entering the park
• Construction of bridges may disturb habitats of animals settled near roadways
• Infrastructure changes may take the “naturalness” away from the park
• Separation of humans and wildlife may also take away value of the park
Economic Analysis, Step 2: Location
• Collect data of the park to determine the high traffic areas where
congestion is common.
• From this data we would find where these high traffic areas overlap with the
high-density populations of wildlife.
• Once the following datum is collected the analysis to implement what action
and where can be determined.
• The point of analyzing what and where:
• We obviously want to avoid areas where animals cross the road often but there
is little to no traffic.
• The same is true with areas where wildlife crossings are not common but
vehicles are.
• By avoiding these two areas of non-contest we can minimize the overall cost of
implementing the mix of systems.
Economic Analysis, Step 3: Action
• Define the effectiveness of each infrastructure/policy change
• Consulting the traffic congestion data provided by the National Park Service
we can measure the effectiveness of each action via Benefits Transfer.

• Imposing Fines:
• Determine if security enforcement of roads is feasible to enforce the imposition
of fines for motorists who begin the issue of congestion.
• Fencing Along Roads where Congestion is Common:
• Determine if the fencing along long stretches of road is cost effective and in
addition does not interfere with the flow of wildlife from one area of the park
to another.
• Wildlife Bridges:
• If density of wildlife is high in some areas fencing may interfere with
ecosystem, bridging areas across roads may be necessary.
 Economic Analysis, Evaluation:
1. Decision Variables that will affect the effectiveness of implementation:
• Cost of enforcement – Patrol officers and fine system
• Cost of Construction – Both the fencing and the Bridges will have cons. Costs
• Effectiveness of Placement Locations – Areas where high traffic and high-density
2. Forecasting the Outcome from the mix of decisions made by officials by Providing
model:
• The Model would focus on the overall outcome of the decisions
• These outcomes would be:
• The change in the amount of traffic jams caused by wildlife
• The overall experience of access by tourists and if the number of negative experiences was decreased
from the original 2/3s of the complaints

Overall the goals of the model are to analyze if:

[Action(s)] [Cost of Action(s)] [Change in Congestion] [Change in Tourism Experience]

 Thank You
For:
Econ-4400-01

Presided by: Dr. Jo Albers Presented by: Naveed Khan

 Citations
1. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/24/yellowstone-national-park-visitors-wildlife-safety

2. https://www.hatchmag.com/articles/yellowstone-gridlock-expected-worsen-park-not-ready-curb/7714705

3. https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/management/index.htm

4. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/congestion-management.htm

5. https://www.yellowstonepark.com/things-to-do/yellowstone-bears-a-roadside-attraction-causing-bear-jams