Zion

As a general rule, I will not enter Zion.  But, today, VSO had sort of an idea of a place we could go.  We got up and out of the valley, into a canyon that is not necessarily on the tourist track.  It was a pretty nice little eight mile round-tripper.  Here she is on the way down.

After the Epilogue

As my reader knows, I spent some time earlier in the year analyzing a bunch of trash data collected from the ditches around Parowan.  One of the topics I addressed during that analysis was something I termed the Buzz Price.  On that particular topic, I reached the conclusion that the best buzz price available in southern Utah was found in a shampoo bottle full of rotgut hard liquor.  In other words, bottom shelf vodka provides the best bang for your buck.  I know that at least one commenter feels that I need to move on, and stop being distracted by alcohol related trash.  But, I feel compelled to relate that I took my researches to Beaver, Utah—the next town north of Parowan.  I visited the liquor agency there and had a chat with the owner.  (She is always friendly, and probably sees me a little too often.)  I asked her to name her biggest seller.  Without even a split second of hesitation she said, "Cheap vodka."  I am not kidding.  I asked her, "You mean the stuff on the bottom shelf in the plastic shampoo bottle?"  "Yeah, I sell more than 30 cases per month."  I almost fell on the floor.  Cases?!  In Beaver, Utah?!  "Yeah," she said, "most people buy it by the case."

Another Technology Passes Us By

We were somewhere on the north side of Mt. Terrill yesterday.  We were doing some off-trail training on the snow machines.  I've putted around on snow mobiles a fair number of times before.  But, like most outdoor sports, the technology and the terrain have been pushed to the limits, leaving me to appear incompetent in front of my peers.  In fact, one of my colleagues tried to teach me to steer the machine by leaning the track from side to side.  He insisted that I should not need to use the skis for turning, but should be able to do it by leaning.  I'm sure he is correct—and the proof is in the picture—but I couldn't master it.  Needless to say, I flunked the training.

Epilogue

I'm going to begin this post with a recap.  We started this series with a description of a data collection project that we conducted on the outskirts of Parowan.  Specifically, we counted aluminum cans dumped in the ditch along 1.5 mile segments of two area roads.  Along with those data, we recorded the availability and pricing of mass-market suitcase beer in Parowan.  Putting those two bits of information together eventually lead us to a consideration of the economics of drinking behavior, which lead us further to consider why some of the behavior seems irrational, at least from a cost and calorie standpoint.  This post is going to be a speculation on irrational behavior.  Nothing in this post has been proven.  This is conjecture.

Before we begin, let us list our assumptions.  These assumptions have been generated by our consideration of the data.  Nonetheless, we do not consider them "proved."  In other words, we think they are justified, but we are aware that our sampling design, including  the lack of a control as well as missing information about, among other things, traffic volume, leaves us without proof.

*The presence of 899 aluminum cans along three miles of road that we surveyed in the Parowan Valley is an extraordinary amount of trash, especially when we consider that Rural Ways has collected several hundred cans for recycling along both segments in the past two years.  Put simply, our first assumption is that the amount of can trash is more than normal, more than what we should expect.  (Granted, we have not sampled in Kentucky or Tennessee, so we could be wrong—and those who have ever lived in or visited those two states will know what I mean.)

*The cans that we counted were from drinks purchased locally.  Specifically, there are two places to buy suitcase beer in Parowan.  And we believe that most, if not all, of the beer can trash is being generated by purchases at these two locations.

*Drinkers of mass-market suitcase beer, despite its low alcohol content in Utah, are drinking it for the effect.  That is, we do not believe that buyers of 18 can suitcases of Natty Light are drinking it for the excellent flavor.  We believe that most of our beer drinkers and beer can tossers are engaged in the pursuit of buzz.

Given these assumptions, and the rest of the data we have presented, the question remains, what is going on?  Our best guess is that these data demonstrate that there are some closet drinkers in the area.  In other words, someone is buying, drinking, and tossing beer cans so as not to get caught consuming alcohol.  This is drinking that is designed to be hidden from someone.  Well.  Like.  From whom?  The easiest answer is parents.  I mean, what high school senior has not spent an evening sneaking around with the gang trying to drink a six-pack undetected?  (Please do not let my daughter read this post.)  Part of the Parowan area can trash is undoubtedly underage drinking.  But does that explain it all?  Again, without a control, it is tough to say, but we think there is more trash than a couple of wild high-schoolers can be dumping—especially because this is a small town where everybody knows everybody and it is not legal for high-schoolers to buy it.  Dare we say it?  We think that the position of the church regarding the consumption of alcohol may be pushing otherwise legal drinking underground.  There.  In this case, the "church" is the LDS church.  (Full disclosure:  Nearly all of our neighbors and friends are LDS.  We have a lot of respect for the LDS community and believe that LDS people make the best friends and neighbors in the world.  So, this is by no means an attack on anything LDS.)  If someone with a Mormon affiliation of some kind, either through blood or marriage, is interested in having a little drink on the side, how is he or she going to do it?  He can't go to the liquor agency—it sits directly in the middle of town between the city office and the bank.  He is going to stop at the TA to buy gasoline—nothing wrong with that—and quickly slip a suitcase of the Beast into his truck.  He is going to drive a lonely country road with the window down, chugging half the suitcase and tossing all the evidence out the window.  He is going to stop at the end of the road and put the remaining six cans in his work cooler, at the bottom under the Mountain Dew.  He is going to chew a bunch of gum for the rest of his commute.  He is going to arrive home for dinner, where some member of the domestic community would not appreciate the consumption of alcohol, with a bit of a buzz.  He is going to say little, do a few chores, and fall asleep early.

Is any of the foregoing true?  Honestly, we don't know.  But, we think it might partially account for the high volume of can trash around Parowan.  Do we care?  In other words, do we have a moral problem with people maybe drinking a little beer on the down low?  Absolutely not.  About the only criticism that we might have at the end of this whole experiment is that we don't like trash, and this particular behavior creates a lot of trash.

Buzz Price

Vendor	Item	Per Can Cost	Buzz Price	Annual
Maverik	18 Can Natty Light or Equivalent	$ 0.56	$ 2.80	$ 1,022.00
Maverik	12 Can Natty Light or Equivalent	$ 0.58	$ 2.90	$ 1,058.50
Maverik	30 Can Natty Light or Equivalent	$ 0.60	$ 3.00	$ 1,095.00
Maverik	12 Can Beast	$ 0.62	$ 3.10	$ 1,131.50
TA	12 Can Beast	$ 0.67	$ 3.35	$ 1,222.75
Maverik	30 Can Budweiser or Equivalent	$ 0.67	$ 3.35	$ 1,222.75
Maverik	18 Can Budweiser or Equivalent	$ 0.72	$ 3.60	$ 1,314.00
Maverik	12 Can Budweiser or Equivalent	$ 0.75	$ 3.75	$ 1,368.75
TA	12 Can Keystone Light	$ 0.86	$ 4.30	$ 1,569.50
TA	12 Can Coors Light	$ 1.13	$ 5.65	$ 2,062.25
TA	12 Can Budweiser or Equivalent	$ 1.16	$ 5.80	$ 2,117.00

In the past few posts we've presented a fair amount of data from our trash collection experiments in the Parowan Valley.  At this point, we are prepared to hazard a couple of tentative conclusions.  As we mentioned in the prologue these conclusions may reveal things about personal behavior.  We realize that our reader may disagree or disapprove.  At the risk of alienating our already tiny audience, we are going to go ahead and highlight two points.  The first, what we call the Buzz Price, will be discussed here.  The second, which is our speculation about the reasons for beer can tossing, will come in a subsequent post.

Without further comment, let's jump right in to an interesting topic.  Why do people drink alcoholic beverages?  Clearly, there are numerous reasons, including taste, status, peer pressure, etc.  But, the number one reason has got to be the effect.  Can anyone seriously disagree?  People drink alcohol for the buzz.  If that is true, which we think it is, why is so much 3.2% beer consumed in Utah?  If you want a buzz, there is more buzz per mouthful in a glass of wine or a shot of whiskey.  Thinking about this question lead us to come up with a measure of buzz per buck—the buzz price.  Is it cost effective to look for buzz in 3.2% beer?  If not, why not?

We start with a couple assumptions.  First, the average person will be buzzed from three drinks.  While we understand that to get a large person really hopped up might take six or eight, we're going to stick with three.  This is partly due to a lot of personal experience, but also because it seems to be the standard for bartenders and regulators.  Three drinks is generally understood to equal 1.8 ounces of alcohol (.6 ounces per drink).  In Utah, where convenience store beer cannot contain more than 3.2% alcohol, it takes five drinks, or five cans of beer to reach 1.8 ounces of alcohol.  (The number is actually 4.7 cans, but we rounded up.)  We're not going to show all our math, but you can quickly see that it becomes a straightforward calculation.  Convenience store beer buzz prices are ranked above.  (Natty Light equivalents are Keystone Light, Busch Light, and Busch.  The annual cost is for 365 daily buzzes.)

To get your buzz on for under three dollars a day seems like a pretty good deal.  But there might be a couple of other things to consider.  First, what is the cost of your other options?  And, second, what does it do to your waist line?  The answer to the first question is that you can do better elsewhere.  You can, in fact, drink wine—not plonk—for about the price of Natty Light and for far less than Budweiser.  I don't mind the red wines sold in the BOTA box—malbec, zinfandel, shiraz.  Like I say, they're not for real wine people probably, but they are at least one cut better than plonk.  (For plonk, you could certainly pay less.)  But let's stop fooling around.  If you want the best buzz price you should be looking at hard liquor in a shampoo bottle.  Go to the state liquor agency.  Go to the back.  Go to the bottom shelf.  And take the plastic bottle.  The label doesn't matter.  Whatever is in it will make you gag.  (Or so I have heard.)  But you will be paying something less than a dollar for your buzz.  So, what about the answer to the second question?  How many wasted calories are being consumed in pursuit of the buzz.  I suspect that my reader may have guessed the outcome.  Light beer is something of an improvement, but you're clearly going to minimize the beer gut if you switch to vodka.

Vendor	Item	Buzz Price	Annual	Buzz Calories
Liquor Store	Plastic Bottle of Popov Vodka	$           0.91	$                332.15	291
Maverik	18 Can Natty Light or Equivalent	$           2.80	$            1,022.00	475
Liquor Store	4 Bottle BOTA Box of Wine	$           2.82	$            1,029.41	366
TA	12 Can Budweiser or Equivalent	$           5.80	$            2,117.00	725

 

If you can spend less and consume fewer wasted calories by drinking wine or spirits, why would you drink convenience store beer?  Maybe beer drinkers truly prefer beer?  I mean, I can understand that.  I am very fond of brown ale.  A Newcastle or a Moose Drool will keep me coming back (up to three times).  But we're talking about tasteless, over-carbonated, ah, stuff.  Is anyone really drinking it because they like it?  OK.  I'll admit rotgut liquor is hard to like, too.  Or so I've heard.  Be we suspect that there might be something else going on, and will post about it shortly.