Trees grow, we cut them down because of demand for Timber amd sell the logs.

With mountain bkie visits.  This depends on past experience and recommendations.  Past experience and recommendations depends on Scenery number of trees compared to visitor and Adventure number of trees and users.  Park capacity limits the number of users.  

According to the analysis, logging does not reduce tourism income. With the increase of number of bike guide, tourism income will increase as well. Also, in forest industry, timber income is higher than the harvest spending which means the industry always gain profits from logging. Therefore, the main concern is that the logging should be balanced between the Mountain Tourism and the forest industry.

Logging allows the activity in the forest with a negative demand for timber providing an income (with the price variable). The deforestation variable shows us that over time, the forest will run out if the logging keeps going on this way.

Alternatively, mountain biking allows a demand of visitors who want to see the scenary. They increase the regional tourism which is good for the community as it involves other businesses around too. The charges paid by visitors and tourists allow an income for the activity which makes it productive over time and great for TAS.

As we stimulate the model, we can see that it is better to have more visitors and more tourists rather than more logging as it will be better over time.

Trees grow, we cut them down because of demand for Timber amd sell the logs.

With mountain bkie visits.  This depends on past experience and recommendations.  Past experience and recommendations depends on Scenery number of trees compared to visitor and Adventure number of trees and users.  Park capacity limits the number of users.