We compare four methods of linking a site choice Random Utility Model to a seasonal trip model. The four approaches are those proposed by Morey et al. 1993, Hausman et al. 1995, Parsons and Kealy 1995, and Feather et al. 1995. We estimate the alternative models using a common data set and calculate a change in welfare for two policy scenarios across the models. We find that there is little practical difference between the approaches of Morey et al. and Hausman et al. They are nearly the same mathematically, and the welfare estimates in our empirical example are quite close. The approaches of Parsons and Kealy and Feather et al. generated welfare estimates that were substantially different from the previous two approaches as well as from each other. They also generated results that reveal the inconsistencies between their site choice and season trip models.