Distributional patterns of the Brazilian free-tailed bat ...
Subsidies for Mexican free-tailed bat ecosystem...
Transcript of Subsidies for Mexican free-tailed bat ecosystem...
Subsidies for
Mexican free-tailed
bat ecosystem
services
Ruscena Wiederholt
Laura Lopez-Hoffman
Kelsie LaSharr
University of Arizona
School of Natural Resources
& the Environment
USGS Rocky Mountain
Geographic Science Center
Darius Semmens
James Diffendorfer
Kenneth Bagstad
Road map:
Explain subsidy logic
Subsidy calculations
Population dependence
ES valuations
Results & Implications
What’s an
Ecosystem Service
Subsidy?
Migratory species have
complex habitat needs
Population viability
can depend on:
Pagel & Payne 1996; Pimm et al. 1988;
Racey & Entwistle 2003; Fleming & Eby 2003
Migratory species have
complex habitat needs
Population viability
can depend on:
Summer breeding
habitat
Pagel & Payne 1996; Pimm et al. 1988;
Racey & Entwistle 2003; Fleming & Eby 2003
Migratory species have
complex habitat needs
Population viability
can depend on:
Overwintering
habitat
Pagel & Payne 1996; Pimm et al. 1988;
Racey & Entwistle 2003; Fleming & Eby 2003
Some habitat is less
important
Bats provide
ecosystem services
Areas far from critical
habitats for population
viability
Pagel & Payne 1996; Pimm et al. 1988;
Racey & Entwistle 2003; Fleming & Eby 2003
Spatial mismatches can occur
Areas
Contribute most
towards a spp pop
viability
Areas
Most benefits for
humans are provided
Spatial mismatches can occur
Areas
Contribute most
towards a spp pop
viability
Subsidizing delivery
of ecosystem
services
Areas
Most benefits for
humans are provided
In these areas
Spatial subsidy at one location
Vs = Total ecosystem
service value across whole
range
Vsa = Ecosystem service
value received in that
location
Dsa = Support 1 location
contributes to pop. viability
(proportion)
$ = Vs x Dsa - Vsa
Semmens et al. 2010, Ecological Economics
Lopez-Hoffman et al. 2013. Int’l J. Wilderness
Spatial subsidy at one location
+ $
Location is providing
subsidy to other
locations
$ = Vs x Dsa - Vsa
Semmens et al. 2010, Ecological Economics
Lopez-Hoffman et al. 2013. Int’l J. Wilderness
Spatial subsidy at one location
$ = Vs x Dsa - Vsa
Semmens et al. 2010, Ecological Economics
Lopez-Hoffman et al. 2013. Int’l J. Wilderness
- $
Location is receiving a
subsidy from other
locations
+ $
Location is providing a
subsidy to other
locations
US side of borderlands (Texas
& the SW states) is important
for cotton production Ellison et al. 2003
Bat distribution
We calculated subsidies for Mexican
free-tailed bats by determining:
Important areas for pop
viability Dsa
Network modeling
Value of ecosystem
services Vs & Vsa
Pest control in cotton
Ecotourism value
$ = Vs x Dsa - Vsa
Network models
www.wikipedia.com; Urban et al 2009; Taylor & Norris 2010
Node Edge
Cellular
Social
Dsa
Mexican free-tailed bat migratory
network
Dsa
Network models
www.wikipedia.com; Urban et al 2009; Taylor & Norris 2010
Node Edge Roost removal
experiments
Physical site
removed
Individuals
allowed to disperse
to other roosts
Dsa
Southernmost breeding roosts have greatest importance
Dsa
Important roosts
-0.12
-0.1
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
Bra
cken
.Cav
e
Car
lsbad
.Cav
erns
Congre
ss.B
ridge
Cosu
mnes
.Riv
er.P
rese
rve
Cuat
roci
éneg
as.d
e.C
arra
nza
Cuev
a.de.
Consu
elo
Cuev
a.del
.Tig
re
Cuev
a.L
a.B
oca
Dav
is.C
ave
Dev
il's
.Sin
k.H
ole
Eag
le.C
reek
.Cav
e
Eck
ert.Ja
mes
.Riv
er.C
ave
Fer
n.C
ave
Fri
o.C
ave
Mav
iri
McN
eil.B
ridge
Mer
rihew
.Cav
e
Ney
.Cav
e
Ori
ent.M
ine
Pre
sa.d
e.A
mis
tad
Rea
d.C
ave
Stu
art.B
at.C
ave
Vic
ker
y.C
ave
Wau
gh.B
ridge
Yolo
.Bypas
s.B
ridge
Dev
iati
on
fro
m b
ase
lin
e su
mm
er
pop
ula
tion
siz
e
Roosts excluded (one at time)
Wiederholt, López-Hoffman et al, in review at PlosOne
Dsa
Important roosts are in Texas & Northern Mexico
-0.12
-0.1
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
Bra
cken
.Cav
e
Car
lsbad
.Cav
erns
Congre
ss.B
ridge
Cosu
mnes
.Riv
er.P
rese
rve
Cuat
roci
éneg
as.d
e.C
arra
nza
Cuev
a.de.
Consu
elo
Cuev
a.del
.Tig
re
Cuev
a.L
a.B
oca
Dav
is.C
ave
Dev
il's
.Sin
k.H
ole
Eag
le.C
reek
.Cav
e
Eck
ert.Ja
mes
.Riv
er.C
ave
Fer
n.C
ave
Fri
o.C
ave
Mav
iri
McN
eil.B
ridge
Mer
rihew
.Cav
e
Ney
.Cav
e
Ori
ent.M
ine
Pre
sa.d
e.A
mis
tad
Rea
d.C
ave
Stu
art.B
at.C
ave
Vic
ker
y.C
ave
Wau
gh.B
ridge
Yolo
.Bypas
s.B
ridge
Dev
iati
on
fro
m b
ase
lin
e su
mm
er
pop
ula
tion
siz
e
Roosts excluded (one at time)
Wiederholt, López-Hoffman et al, in review at PlosOne
Dsa
-0.12
-0.1
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
Bra
cken
.Cav
e
Car
lsbad
.Cav
erns
Congre
ss.B
ridge
Cosu
mnes
.Riv
er.P
rese
rve
Cuat
roci
éneg
as.d
e.C
arra
nza
Cuev
a.de.
Consu
elo
Cuev
a.del
.Tig
re
Cuev
a.L
a.B
oca
Dav
is.C
ave
Dev
il's
.Sin
k.H
ole
Eag
le.C
reek
.Cav
e
Eck
ert.Ja
mes
.Riv
er.C
ave
Fer
n.C
ave
Fri
o.C
ave
Mav
iri
McN
eil.B
ridge
Mer
rihew
.Cav
e
Ney
.Cav
e
Ori
ent.M
ine
Pre
sa.d
e.A
mis
tad
Rea
d.C
ave
Stu
art.B
at.C
ave
Vic
ker
y.C
ave
Wau
gh.B
ridge
Yolo
.Bypas
s.B
ridge
Dev
iati
on
fro
m b
ase
lin
e su
mm
er
pop
ula
tion
siz
e
Roosts excluded (one at time)
Wiederholt, López-Hoffman et al, in review at PlosOne
Dsa = standardized to sum to 1
We calculated subsidies for Mexican
free-tailed bats by determining:
Important areas for pop
viability
Network modeling
Value of ecosystem
services Vs & Vsa
Pest control in cotton
Ecotourism value
$ = Vs x Dsa - Vsa
Pest control value of bats
SW US – cotton growing regions with bats
All cotton types
Pima & Upland
Bt (transgenic)
& conventional
Vs
Pest control value
of bats
Value provided by:
Avoided crop damage
Crops damaged
without bats
eating bollworms
Avoided pesticide use
Lower social &
private costs
Vs
Pest control value in a
specific location
Bat roosts
Roost size & locations
50 km foraging radius
Cotton
County-level data on
cotton acreage over time
Used soil maps U.S.
General Soil Maps
(STATSGO data) to
determine suitable cotton
growing areas
Types of cotton planted
Vsa
Subsidy calculation
Country State Vs $ cotton Vs ecotourism $ Vs $ total Ds Subsidy
U.S. Arizona $6,448 - - - -
U.S. California $61,190 - - - -
U.S. Colorado $0 - - - -
U.S. New Mexico $29,912 - - - -
U.S. Oklahoma $554,239 - - - -
U.S. Texas $12,547,284 - - - -
Mexico Coahuila - - - - -
Mexico Nuevo Leon - - - - -
Mexico Sinaloa - - - - -
Mexico Sonora - - - - -
Mexico Tamaulipas - - - - -
Mexico Chiapas - - - - -
Mexico Hildago - - - - - Mexico
Mich. & Jal. - - - - -
Mexico Queretaro - - - - -
Totals $ 13,199,076 - - 1.00 0.00
Vsa
Subsidy calculation
Country State Vs $ cotton Vs ecotourism $ Vs $ total Ds Subsidy
U.S. Arizona $6,448 - - - -
U.S. California $61,190 - - - -
U.S. Colorado $0 - - - -
U.S. New Mexico $29,912 - - - -
U.S. Oklahoma $554,239 - - - -
U.S. Texas $12,547,284 - - - -
Mexico Coahuila - - - - -
Mexico Nuevo Leon - - - - -
Mexico Sinaloa - - - - -
Mexico Sonora - - - - -
Mexico Tamaulipas - - - - -
Mexico Chiapas - - - - -
Mexico Hildago - - - - - Mexico
Mich. & Jal. - - - - -
Mexico Queretaro - - - - -
Totals $ 13,199,076 - - 1.00 0.00
Vsa
Little
cotton
grown
in
Mexico
Bat ecotourism values
Site State Annual
visits
Campbell St Bridge AZ 300
Cosumnes River Preserve CA 80
Yolo Bypass Bridge CA 1,500
Orient Mine CO 1,800
Carlsbad Caverns NM 54,775
Merrihew Cave OK 1,000
Bamberger Ranch TX 250
Bracken Cave TX 4,000
Clarity Tunnel TX 240
Congress Avenue Bridge TX 138,600
Devil's Sink Hole TX 2,500
Eckert James River Cave TX 1,350
Frio Cave TX 2,785
Old Tunnel TX 12,665
Stuart Bat Cave TX 524
Waugh bridge TX 20,000 Bagstad & Wiederholt,In Review Vsa
Bat ecotourism values
Site State Annual
visits
Campbell St Bridge AZ 300
Cosumnes River Preserve CA 80
Yolo Bypass Bridge CA 1,500
Orient Mine CO 1,800
Carlsbad Caverns NM 54,775
Merrihew Cave OK 1,000
Bamberger Ranch TX 250
Bracken Cave TX 4,000
Clarity Tunnel TX 240
Congress Avenue Bridge TX 138,600
Devil's Sink Hole TX 2,500
Eckert James River Cave TX 1,350
Frio Cave TX 2,785
Old Tunnel TX 12,665
Stuart Bat Cave TX 524
Waugh bridge TX 20,000 Bagstad & Wiederholt,In Review Vsa
Consumer surplus
=
Willingness to Pay
–
Actual Expenditures
Bat ecotourism values
Site State Annual
visits Consumer
surplus
Campbell St Bridge AZ 300 3,644
Cosumnes River Preserve CA 80 2,931
Yolo Bypass Bridge CA 1,500 54,960
Orient Mine CO 1,800 82,782
Carlsbad Caverns NM 54,775 3,488,072
Merrihew Cave OK 1,000 29,590
Bamberger Ranch TX 250 6,395
Bracken Cave TX 4,000 102,320
Clarity Tunnel TX 240 12,278
Congress Avenue Bridge TX 138,600 1,772,694
Devil's Sink Hole TX 2,500 127,900
Eckert James River Cave TX 1,350 69,066
Frio Cave TX 2,785 142,481
Old Tunnel TX 12,665 323,971
Stuart Bat Cave TX 524 26,808
Waugh bridge TX 20,000 255,800 Bagstad & Wiederholt,In Review Vsa
Benefits transfer
toolkit
Values for wildlife
recreation, spp,
habitats
http://dare.colostate.edu/
tools/benefittransfer.aspx
Subsidy calculation Country State Vs $ cotton Vs ecotourism $ Vs $ total Ds Subsidy
U.S. Arizona $6,448 $3,644 $10,093
U.S. California $61,190 $57,891 $119,081
U.S. Colorado $0 $82,782 $82,782
U.S. New Mexico $29,912 $3,488,072 $3,517,985
U.S. Oklahoma $554,239 $29,590 $583,830
U.S. Texas $12,547,284 $2,839,713 $ 15,386,997
Mexico Coahuila - - -
Mexico Nuevo Leon - - -
Mexico Sinaloa - - -
Mexico Sonora - - -
Mexico Tamaulipas - - -
Mexico Chiapas - - -
Mexico Hildago - - - Mexico
Mich. & Jal. - - -
Mexico Queretaro - - -
Totals $ 13,199,076 $6,501,692 $ 19,700,768 1.00 0.00
Vsa
We calculated subsidies for Mexican
free-tailed bats by determining:
Important areas for pop
viability
Network modeling
Value of ecosystem
services Vs & Vsa
Pest control in cotton
Ecotourism value
$ = Vs x Dsa - Vsa
Subsidy calculation
Country State Vs $ total Ds Subsidy
U.S. Arizona $10,093 0.00605 $109,044
U.S. California $119,081 0.00628 $4,578
U.S. Colorado $82,782 0.00201 -$43,260
U.S. New Mexico $3,517,985 0.00688 -$3,382,401
U.S. Oklahoma $583,830 0.03407 $87,463
U.S. Texas $15,386,997 0.29267 -$9,621,083
Mexico Coahuila - 0.03799 $748,496
Mexico Nuevo Leon - 0.04982 $981,474
Mexico Sinaloa - 0.00201 $39,526
Mexico Sonora - 0.04185 $824,382
Mexico Tamaulipas - 0.02037 $401,397
Mexico Chiapas - 0.09002 $1,773,473
Mexico Hildago - 0.08999 $1,772,850 Mexico Mich. & Jal. - 0.18755 $3,694,895
Mexico Queretaro - 0.13244 $2,609,166
Totals $ 19,700,768 1.00 0.00
Summary Bats provide $19.7
million /yr
Spatial mismatches
create subsidy
situations
TX & NM receive
the subsidy
Habitat in
southern Mexico
provides the
subsidy
Policy
implications
Main threat to bats: Habitat destruction
Conservation complex for cross-border spp
Subsidies can structure cross-border Payments for E.S.
Foundation for Migratory Bat Conservation Treaty
Conclusions Areas where
people receive
the most
benefits
≠
Habitat areas
that are most
important for
conservation
Acknowledgments
Laura Ellison
Rodrigo Medellín
Gary McCracken
Amy Russell
Paul Cryan
Chris Sansone
Jon Cline
Josh Goldstein
Carrie Presnall
Andy Honaman
NSF award (DEB-1118975)
to L. Lopez-Hoffman
Animal Migration and Spatial
Subsidies: Establishing a
Framework for Conservation
Markets working group at the
USGS John Wesley Powell
Center for Analysis and
Synthesis