Regional Socioeconomic Impact of the Devils Lake Fishery

Community/Rural/Urban Development, Resource /Energy Economics and Policy,

AN ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF WETLAND MITIGATION IN NORTHWEST MINNESOTA

The economic efficiency of wetland mitigation in Minnesota's Red River Valley was examined using the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method on ten wetland case studies to rate the functions of impacted and replacement wetlands. Secondary sources were used to assign dollar values to wetland functions of impacted and replacement wetlands. Mitigation costs for projects ranged from $279 to$4,171 per acre. Estimated annual social values ranged from $207 to$1,027 per acre for impacted wetlands and from $268 to$927 per acre for replacement wetlands. Social values of replacement wetlands exceeded the social value of impacted wetlands in seven cases. Values of replacement wetlands were 1.8 to 4 times greater than the values of impacted wetlands due to 2-to-1 replacement ratios. When society gains benefits from mitigation, public cost-sharing may be appropriate. In one case the value of the impacted wetlands was higher than the value of the replacement wetland. There were insufficient data to evaluate two cases. Results are only indicators of efficiency, since not all social costs and benefits of the impact-mitigation activity are addressed by legislation. These results suggest wetland mitigation policy in Minnesota needs to be reevaluated if efficient use of society's resources is a legislative goal.Wetland(s), mitigation, economics, values, Minnesota, Red River, Wetland Conservation Act, Minnesota Routine Assessment Method, restoration, Land Economics/Use,

AN INQUIRY INTO THE RELATIONSHIP OF WETLAND REGULATIONS AND PROPERTY VALUES IN MINNESOTA

Ownership in property can be thought of as ownership of the rights to the "incomes" associated with different uses of the property. Each potential use has a separate economic value, which can be ranked if put into money terms. The property's market value is usually held to be the highest income on that ranking. Wetland protection regulations might shift the ownership of some of these rights from private to public entities or restrict the exercise of some rights. This can result in a reduction of the property's market value, if the regulation precludes access to the income from the highest ranking use. A regulation can never increase the economic value of a property from the owner's perspective. Whether or not a reduction in property value is considered "fair" is a question usually left to the courts. If it is determined that a regulation has resulted in a "taking" of property, compensation must be paid. The appropriate level of compensation is the difference between estimated pre- and post-regulation market values. The task of the analyst is to estimate those two values, after first determining if the two uses are feasible given other physical, financial, and legal conditions. Because property prices are not determined until there is a transaction, all such valuations are necessarily estimates based on the professional judgments of the analyst. There are not easy ways to determine these values short of costly individual appraisals or extensive market studies. Wetland regulations in Minnesota do result in reduced values for some property owners--as do all land use regulations. Demonstrating that values went down on regulated properties has policy import, however, only if: (1) the examples are so egregious that the Legislature decides to change the enabling legislation to adjust the distribution of the law's benefits and costs; or (2) the sum of measured property losses exceeds any estimate of total benefits, in which case the Legislature might decide to change the law as not in the broader public interest. Should further property value analyses be conducted? Only if the Legislature is very clear about why it wants to do the study. If the concern is one of fairness, then the distribution of a regulation's costs should be examined by using parcel-by-parcel appraisals or by a careful calculation of the economic benefits and costs among different classes of people, classes of property, or regions of the state. If, on the other hand, the concern is that the aggregate costs of the regulation may exceed its total benefits, then broader economic valuation studies are called for. We are not prepared to recommend either approach at this time, because the Legislature has not yet declared what the problem really is.Land Economics/Use,

Electric-Field-Driven Molecular Recognition Reactions of Guanine with 1,2-Dipalmitoyl- sn- glycero-3-cytidine Monolayers Deposited on Gold Electrodes

Monolayers of 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-cytidine were incubated with guanine in a 0.1 M NaF electrolyte at the surface of a Langmuir trough and transferred to gold (111) electrodes using the Langmuir–Schaefer technique. Chronocoulometry and photon polarization modulation infrared reflection absorption spectroscopy were employed to investigate the influence of the static electric field on the orientation and conformation of the cytidine nucleolipid molecules on the metal surface in the presence of guanine and to monitor the molecular recognition of guanine with the cytosine moiety. When the monolayer is exposed to guanine solutions, the cytosine moiety binds to the guanine residue in either a Watson–Crick complex at positively charged electrode surfaces or a noncomplexed state at negative surface charges. The positive electrostatic field causes the cytosine moiety and the cytosine–guanine complex to adopt a nearly parallel orientation with respect to the plane of the monolayer with a measured tilt angle of ∼10°. The parallel orientation is stabilized by the interactions between the permanent dipole of the cytosine moiety or the Watson–Crick complex and the static electric field. At negative charge densities, the tilt of the cytosine moiety increases by ∼15–20°, destabilizing the complex. Our results demonstrate that the static electric field has an influence on the molecular recognition reactions between nucleoside base pairs at the metal–solution interface and can be controlled by altering the surface charge at the metal

In situ PM-IRRAS Studies of a Floating Bilayer Lipid Membrane at Au(111) Electrode Surface

应用电化学原位偏振红外反射光谱法研究了构建于金（111）电极表面的浮动磷脂双层膜。金电极表面先自组装一层巯基葡萄糖单层来增加表面的亲水性，浮动磷脂双层膜通过LB-LS技术构建在巯基葡萄糖单层上.双层膜由双肉豆蔻磷脂酰胆碱（DMPC），胆固醇和神经节苷脂GM1构成.GM1分子中的糖链可以物理吸附在巯基葡萄糖表面，在双层膜和基底间形成一个富含水的隔层.红外光谱表明浮动双层膜中的DMPC分子比传统的支撑双层膜中的DMPC分子有更强的水合作用，证实了双层膜和基底间水层的存在.该浮动双层膜更接近于实际的生物膜体系，并且在金电极表面有宽的电位区间，非常适合于进一步的离子通道蛋白质研究.In situ Polarization modulation infrared reflection absorption spectroscopy (PM-IRRAS) was used to study the structure of a DMPC + cholesterol + GM1 floating bilayer lipid membrane (fBLM) at a Au(111) surface. 1-thio-beta-D-glucose (beta-Tg) was self-assembled onto the Au electrode to increase the overall hydrophilicity of the surface. The fBLM was deposited on the beta-Tg self-assembled monolayer (SAM) using a combination of Langmuir-Blodgett/Langmuir-Schaefer (LB/LS) techniques. The carbohydrate headgroups of the GM1 molecules were physically adsorbed to the beta-Tg SAM forming a water rich cushion between the fBLM and the modified gold substrate. The PM-IRRAS spectra indicate that the DMPC molecules within the fBLM are more hydrated than previous studies involving supported bilayer lipid membranes (sBLM) where the membrane is directly adsorbed onto the surface. The tilt angle of the DMPC acyl chains in the fBLM is smaller than that of the sBLM composed of similar components. The results from this work confirmed that the fBLM is stable over a wide range of electrode potentials and that a water rich region is present between the bilayer and gold electrode surface. The addition of this water region more closely mimics the natural environment of a biological membrane making the fBLM a desirable candidate for future in situ studies involving transmembrane proteins.This work was supported by Discovery grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. J.L. acknowledges support from the Canada Research Chairs (CRC) program.This work was supported by Discovery grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. J.L. acknowledges support from the Canada Research Chairs (CRC) program.作者联系地址：圭尔夫大学化学系，加拿大 安大略省 N1G 2W1, 圭尔夫Author's Address: Department of Chemistry, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1, Canada通讯作者E-mail：[email protected]

CHARACTERISTICS, EXPENDITURES, AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF RESIDENT AND NONRESIDENT HUNTERS AND ANGLERS IN NORTH DAKOTA, 1996-97, SEASON AND TRENDS

Wildlife-related recreation is an important source of economic activity in North Dakota. Using primary, survey-based data, the expenditures and economic impacts of hunters and anglers were summarized for the 1996 hunting/fishing seasons. Total resident and nonresident expenditures (including cost of licenses and additional nonresident expenditures not related to hunting/angling) came to $594 million. Almost$144 million of total expenditures was spent in rural areas by nonresidents and urban residents. Resident and nonresident hunters and anglers generated $1.6 billion in total business activity,$250 million in retail trade sales, $393 million in personal income, and supported over 21,000 jobs. These results suggest that North Dakota's resident and nonresident hunters and anglers are a vital part of the state's economy

AN ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF WETLAND MITIGATION IN NORTHWEST MINNESOTA

The economic efficiency of wetland mitigation in Minnesota's Red River Valley was examined using the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method on ten wetland case studies to rate the functions of impacted and replacement wetlands. Secondary sources were used to assign dollar values to wetland functions of impacted and replacement wetlands. Mitigation costs for projects ranged from $279 to$4,171 per acre. Estimated annual social values ranged from $207 to$1,027 per acre for impacted wetlands and from $268 to$927 per acre for replacement wetlands. Social values of replacement wetlands exceeded the social value of impacted wetlands in seven cases. Values of replacement wetlands were 1.8 to 4 times greater than the values of impacted wetlands due to 2-to-1 replacement ratios. When society gains benefits from mitigation, public cost-sharing may be appropriate. In one case the value of the impacted wetlands was higher than the value of the replacement wetland. There were insufficient data to evaluate two cases. Results are only indicators of efficiency, since not all social costs and benefits of the impact-mitigation activity are addressed by legislation. These results suggest wetland mitigation policy in Minnesota needs to be reevaluated if efficient use of society's resources is a legislative goal

AN INQUIRY INTO THE RELATIONSHIP OF WETLAND REGULATIONS AND PROPERTY VALUES IN MINNESOTA

Ownership in property can be thought of as ownership of the rights to the "incomes" associated with different uses of the property. Each potential use has a separate economic value, which can be ranked if put into money terms. The property's market value is usually held to be the highest income on that ranking. Wetland protection regulations might shift the ownership of some of these rights from private to public entities or restrict the exercise of some rights. This can result in a reduction of the property's market value, if the regulation precludes access to the income from the highest ranking use. A regulation can never increase the economic value of a property from the owner's perspective. Whether or not a reduction in property value is considered "fair" is a question usually left to the courts. If it is determined that a regulation has resulted in a "taking" of property, compensation must be paid. The appropriate level of compensation is the difference between estimated pre- and post-regulation market values. The task of the analyst is to estimate those two values, after first determining if the two uses are feasible given other physical, financial, and legal conditions. Because property prices are not determined until there is a transaction, all such valuations are necessarily estimates based on the professional judgments of the analyst. There are not easy ways to determine these values short of costly individual appraisals or extensive market studies. Wetland regulations in Minnesota do result in reduced values for some property owners--as do all land use regulations. Demonstrating that values went down on regulated properties has policy import, however, only if: (1) the examples are so egregious that the Legislature decides to change the enabling legislation to adjust the distribution of the law's benefits and costs; or (2) the sum of measured property losses exceeds any estimate of total benefits, in which case the Legislature might decide to change the law as not in the broader public interest. Should further property value analyses be conducted? Only if the Legislature is very clear about why it wants to do the study. If the concern is one of fairness, then the distribution of a regulation's costs should be examined by using parcel-by-parcel appraisals or by a careful calculation of the economic benefits and costs among different classes of people, classes of property, or regions of the state. If, on the other hand, the concern is that the aggregate costs of the regulation may exceed its total benefits, then broader economic valuation studies are called for. We are not prepared to recommend either approach at this time, because the Legislature has not yet declared what the problem really is

AN INQUIRY INTO THE RELATIONSHIP OF WETLAND REGULATIONS AND PROPERTY VALUES IN MINNESOTA

Ownership in property can be thought of as ownership of the rights to the "incomes" associated with different uses of the property. Each potential use has a separate economic value, which can be ranked if put into money terms. The property's market value is usually held to be the highest income on that ranking. Wetland protection regulations might shift the ownership of some of these rights from private to public entities or restrict the exercise of some rights. This can result in a reduction of the property's market value, if the regulation precludes access to the income from the highest ranking use. A regulation can never increase the economic value of a property from the owner's perspective. Whether or not a reduction in property value is considered "fair" is a question usually left to the courts. If it is determined that a regulation has resulted in a "taking" of property, compensation must be paid. The appropriate level of compensation is the difference between estimated pre- and post-regulation market values. The task of the analyst is to estimate those two values, after first determining if the two uses are feasible given other physical, financial, and legal conditions. Because property prices are not determined until there is a transaction, all such valuations are necessarily estimates based on the professional judgments of the analyst. There are not easy ways to determine these values short of costly individual appraisals or extensive market studies. Wetland regulations in Minnesota do result in reduced values for some property owners--as do all land use regulations. Demonstrating that values went down on regulated properties has policy import, however, only if: (1) the examples are so egregious that the Legislature decides to change the enabling legislation to adjust the distribution of the law's benefits and costs; or (2) the sum of measured property losses exceeds any estimate of total benefits, in which case the Legislature might decide to change the law as not in the broader public interest. Should further property value analyses be conducted? Only if the Legislature is very clear about why it wants to do the study. If the concern is one of fairness, then the distribution of a regulation's costs should be examined by using parcel-by-parcel appraisals or by a careful calculation of the economic benefits and costs among different classes of people, classes of property, or regions of the state. If, on the other hand, the concern is that the aggregate costs of the regulation may exceed its total benefits, then broader economic valuation studies are called for. We are not prepared to recommend either approach at this time, because the Legislature has not yet declared what the problem really is.