Managing a Migratory Species That Is Both a Value and a Pest

Skonhoft, Anders; Olaussen, Jon Olaf

doi:10.3368/le.81.1.34

Cited by 40 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Article 2 in the Malawi principles), strong emphasis should also be put on cooperation between local managers. This could both increase the overall profit of mobile ecological resources, as well as reduce the asymmetry in the costs and benefits between stakeholders (Skonhoft & Olaussen 2005). The approach taken here enabled us to combine a sound biological model with formal bioeconomic analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the meat value corrected for browsing damage, for stable populations (e.g. Skonhoft & Olaussen 2005). This harvesting scheme is also explored here, and it is straightforward to show that it coincides with the steady-state of the dynamic problem of maximising present-value profit for a zero discount rate (see e.g.…”

Section: The Bioeconomic Modelmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Indeed, very few studies have been successful in quantifying the actual economic loss caused by moose browsing (Reimoser et al 1999). Acknowledging that the actual picture is very complex, we assume here that the damage cost is related to the moose density during winter, without explicitly taking discounting due to the possible time lag between browsing and the occurrence of damage into account (see also Skonhoft & Olaussen 2005). …”

Section: Empirical Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Role of Ecological and Economic Factors in the Management of a Spatially Structured Moose Alces alces Population

Nilsen¹,

Skonhoft²,

Mysterud³

et al. 2009

Wildlife Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a bioeconomic model for moose Alces alces management in Norway, where two sub‐populations of moose are subject to different site‐specific mortality rates caused by the spatial distribution of territorial wolf Canis lupus packs, and are coupled by the seasonal migration of moose. The costs and benefits of moose are asymmetrically distributed in space, since they congregate in the wolf territory during winter where most browsing damage occurs. Using a class‐structured matrix population model as the basis for bioeconomic analysis, we investigated how the optimal moose management differed between a unified (i.e. maximising overall profit) and a non‐unified (i.e. profit maximised at the level of individual landowners) management scheme. Within the unified management scheme, the combined marginal costs and benefits decide the optimal off‐take rate, and the relative hunting value and damage costs decide the relative allocation of the harvest between the two sub‐populations. In the non‐unified management scheme, harvesting takes place up to the point where the private marginal hunting value equals the private marginal browsing cost, while the relative hunting value and damage costs do not influence the optimal management. As the browsing damage that occurs inside the wolf territory is not taken into account in the costs of the area outside the territory within the non‐unified solution, optimal moose population size will be higher for the outer area than under the unified solution. This results in an overall economic loss, which increases with increasing migration rates. Whenever the boundaries of political or management units do not follow those of ecological processes, ignoring the spatial resolution of the ecological process will result in sub‐optimal management of a renewable resource.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Bioeconomic Modelmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Empirical Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Ecological and Economic Factors in the Management of a Spatially Structured Moose Alces alces Population

Nilsen¹,

Skonhoft²,

Mysterud³

et al. 2009

Wildlife Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The dispersal, or movement, may take place cyclically over the year, and the famous wildebeest migration in the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem is an example of such pattern (Sinclair and Arcese 1995). Among others, reindeer migration and moose dispersal are typically seasonal as well (e.g., Skonhoft and Olaussen 2005). I proceed to look at a simple model with dispersal of this type, where the ecological conditions are such that a fixed fraction of the conservation area subpopulation temporarily migrates out while there is no migration of the other subpopulation.…”

Section: Density-independent Dispersalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic modeling approaches for wildlife and species conservation

Skonhoft

2007

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents modeling approaches for wildlife and species conservation with a special emphasis on large mammals in a developing country setting. In such countries there are frequently conflicts over land use and species conservation, and institutions for managing conflicts are often weak or even lacking. In addition, most of the world species and biodiversity are found in developing countries. Two main issues are discussed. First, we study a situation where the wildlife is valuable, but is considered a pest by the local people living close to the wildlife. Second, we consider models with a discrepancy between management geography and biological geography, and where the species flows between a conservation area with no harvesting and a neighboring area with harvesting and possible habitat degradation. AcknowledgmentsThanks to Claire Armstrong and Anne B. Johannesen for fruitful collaborations during the last few years. Parts of this collaboration are materialized in this paper. I am responsible for any mistakes that may remain.2

show abstract

“…Indeed, several of the non-spatial papers on IAS and a literature review article discuss the need for examination of the effect of heterogeneity and spatial linkages on policy choice and effectiveness (Kaiser and Roumasset 2002;Leung et al 2002;Olson 2006). Some noteworthy exceptions to the non-spatial approach include papers that emphasize agricultural pest damages over distance, barrier zones, species migration, spatial coordination, and wildlife disease (Hof 1998;Sharov and Liebhold 1998a,b;Sharov 2004;Horan et al 2005;Skonhoft and Olaussen 2005;Carter et al 2006;Wainger and King 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial Management of Invasive Species: Pathways and Policy Options

Sanchirico

Albers

Fischer

et al. 2009

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In addressing the problem of invasive species, decision makers have a variety of options, each targeting different aspects as it evolves over time and space. We develop a 2-region bioeconomic model that includes several transmission pathways that spread the invader. Within each region, inspections, removal efforts, and sustainable land management practices, including habitat restoration and less damaging production activities, are available to the regulator. We investigate the implications of different transmission pathways and second-best policies on the control patterns and invasive populations. Second-best settings where certain controls are not available to the regulator result in large distortions on the optimal use of the land. Overall, we find that non-linear interactions between regions, pathways, and controls are significant determinants of the optimal management of invasive species.

show abstract

Managing a Migratory Species That Is Both a Value and a Pest

Abstract: Johannesen, Jan Tore Solstad and one anonymous reviewers for critical and constructive comments on earlier drafts.We are also indebted to The European Commission for funding through the BIOECON project.

Cited by 40 publications

References 7 publications

The Role of Ecological and Economic Factors in the Management of a Spatially Structured Moose Alces alces Population

The Role of Ecological and Economic Factors in the Management of a Spatially Structured Moose Alces alces Population

Economic modeling approaches for wildlife and species conservation

Spatial Management of Invasive Species: Pathways and Policy Options

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About