Wildlife reserves, populations and hunting outcome with smart wildlife

TY - ABST

T1 - Wildlife reserves, populations and hunting outcome with smart wildlife

AU - Jensen, Frank

AU - Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl

AU - Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark

PY - 2014/8

Y1 - 2014/8

N2 - We consider a hunting area and a wildlife reserve and answer the question: How does clever migration decision affect the social optimal and the private optimal hunting levels and population stocks? We analyze this in a model allowing for two-way migration between hunting and reserve areas, where the populations' migration decisions depend on both hunting pressure and relative population densities. In the social optimum a pure stress effect on the behavior of smart wildlife exists. This implies that the population level in the wildlife reserve tends to increase and the population level in the hunting area and hunting levels tend to decrease. On the other hand, the effect on stock tends to reduce the population in the wildlife reserve and increase the population in the hunting area and thereby also increase hunting. In the case of the private optimum, open-access is assumed and we find that the same qualitative results arise when comparing a situation with and without stress effects, but of course at a higher level of hunting. We also show that when net social benefits of hunting dominate the net social benefits of populations, wildlife reserves are optimally placed in areas of low carrying capacity and vice versa.

AB - We consider a hunting area and a wildlife reserve and answer the question: How does clever migration decision affect the social optimal and the private optimal hunting levels and population stocks? We analyze this in a model allowing for two-way migration between hunting and reserve areas, where the populations' migration decisions depend on both hunting pressure and relative population densities. In the social optimum a pure stress effect on the behavior of smart wildlife exists. This implies that the population level in the wildlife reserve tends to increase and the population level in the hunting area and hunting levels tend to decrease. On the other hand, the effect on stock tends to reduce the population in the wildlife reserve and increase the population in the hunting area and thereby also increase hunting. In the case of the private optimum, open-access is assumed and we find that the same qualitative results arise when comparing a situation with and without stress effects, but of course at a higher level of hunting. We also show that when net social benefits of hunting dominate the net social benefits of populations, wildlife reserves are optimally placed in areas of low carrying capacity and vice versa.

M3 - Conference abstract in journal

SN - 0355-032X

VL - 45

SP - 58

JO - Scandinavian Forest Economics

JF - Scandinavian Forest Economics

T2 - Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics

Y2 - 21 May 2014 through 24 May 2014

ER -