Imagine that a study is being launched to estimate the money value on the Yosemite National Park (please use Google to learn more about this park). The gate (entrance fee) as of 2017 is \(\$ 175\) per car. This fee is valid for unlimited entries to the park for two days. There were 4 million visitors to Yosemite and, assuming four people in a car, this amounts to 1 million cars.

a) Suppose someone suggested valuing the Yosemite on the basis of the entrance fee. According to the data given above, the park will generate a total fee of \(\$ 175\) million per year. The perpetuity value of this sum of money at 5 percent annual interest will be \(\$ 3. 5\) billion. Do you think this is a good assessment of the value of Yosemite? Why or why not?

b) Suppose someone argued for an alternative way of assessing Yosemite and recommended the valuation of this park using the travel-cost method. You are told that the average traveling cost per person who visited Yosemite during 2017 was \(\$ 1,000\) and as stated above there were a total of 4 million visitors during this particular year. Thus, according to this approach, the total annual value of Yosemite will be \(\$ 4\) billion. The perpetuity value of this annual receipt at a 5 percent annual interest rate will be \(\$ 80\) billion. This value will be 22. 85 times more than the estimate given using the entrance fee. What actually does the value of \(\$ 80\) billion represent? (Hint: think in terms of use-versus non-use value.) Do you think this new estimate adequately represents the value of Yosemite National Park? Why or why not?

c) Why do you think society will get a more realistic estimate by using a well-constructed contingent valuation method to arrive at the dollar value of the Yosemite National Park? Explain.

d) Someone proclaimed that, regardless of the methods used, attempting to put money value on Yosemite National Park is simply unthinkable. The Yosemite is a priceless national treasure and as such it is incommensurable-it cannot be measured or priced. What would be your position to this kind of argument? Explain.