We are trying to persuade farmers and hunters not to kill wolves, lynxes, bears, otters, and beavers. But we need a financially based argument that these mammals are beneficial for the ecosystem and save money if we keep them alive. Is there any literature that estimates how much money will one wolf/lynx/bear/otter(/beaver save per year?
This is a great question, however its difficult to give a direct $ value as that will change from place to place and depends on human perceptions on animals. I add a few links that can help you however, as these are just some that found value in predators is at least more than the cost of killing them.
Article Dead or Alive? Comparing the costs and benefits of lethal an...
Article Predator control should not be a shot in the dark
Article Carnivore conservation needs evidence-based livestock protection
I hope these will assist you.
Jeannine
Perhaps if you cannot find exact financial values of the ecosystem services these animals provide then it might be possible to instead provide the cost in damages that it might create by not having them. For example including some sort of financial values that pray animals, for example deer, boar, rodents or similar, might cause as damages to crops etc., these numbers might be easier to locate.
That is an approach that I was thinking too, but I was not able to find any review study that summarizes this (which is weird since the financial losses are relatively large).
A new paper is about to be published next week on this topic in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) PNAS June 1, 2021 118 (22) e2023251118, which will have free public access
Jennifer L. Raynor, Corbett A. Grainger, and Dominic P. Parker (2021) Wolves make roadways safer, generating large economic returns to predator conservation https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023251118
This paper has an extensive bibliography that addresses the topic of your question. Many of the papers it cites are available as free reprints.
A popular summation is available at https://www.sciencenews.org/article/gray-wolves-scare-deer-roads-reduce-car-collisions, which contains a link to the PNAS paper. This should help your search.
It is not that the financial is the only reason, but we are trying to estimate the financial cost of the animal for the ecosystem, so we can advocate its protection even in front of people who are used to compare financial costs.
Perhaps this one might be of interest: https://www.belgianjournalofzoology.eu/BJZ/article/view/97
It is a very simplistic representation I must admit, but it can be used for decision making of hunting activities etc.
Is it usefull to try calculate the financial value of one individual animal especially for animals that are social like wolfs for instance? Maybe the value lies in the interactions intra specific or inter specific interactions within an ecosystem?
You probably heard of it already read this book on the subject:
Helm D., 2015 Natural capital. Valuing the planet. Yale University Press.
I agree with Kewan Mertens .
Accepting to monetize living organisms is equivalent to supporting the capitalist model, which is at the origin of the destruction of many ecosystems and species.
In my opinion, we should not play this game and work more on scientific arguments (limitations of rodent populations, limitations of the spread of certain diseases).
Some interesting books or articles for this debate:
Jiguet, F. (2020). The Fox and the Crow. A need to update pest control strategies. Biological conservation, 248, 108693.
Hofmeester, T. R., Jansen, P. A., Wijnen, H. J., Coipan, E. C., Fonville, M., Prins, H. H., & van Wieren, S. E. (2017). Cascading effects of predator activity on tick-borne disease risk. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 284(1859), 20170453.
Maris, V., 2014. Nature for sale. The limits of ecosystem services. Quae, Versailles. (in French)
- Badges
- Science topic