ArticlePDF Available
COMMENTARY
Rarity, willingness to pay and conservation
M. Festa-Bianchet
Département de Biologie, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada
Correspondence
Marco Festa-Bianchet, Département de Biologie, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada, J1K 2R1
Email: m.festa@Usherbrooke.ca
doi:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2011.00518.x
In standard economic theory, the price of goods, whether
low-fat hamburgers or trophy sheep, is expected to rise
when demand increases or supply diminishes. Standard eco-
nomic theory also assumes that consumers act rationally,
but that is another story. All else being equal, rare things
tend to be dearer than common things and in some cases,
rarity increases value. Conservation biology usually sees
rarity as a problem. Rare species, especially at small popu-
lation size, tend to have higher risk of extinction than
common species. When species become rare because of
human actions, community ecology may be altered and eco-
system services may diminish. For example, if a sport-
hunted species becomes rare, fewer individuals can be
sustainably harvested. If some people have a certain willing-
ness to pay to harvest that species, and prices are set by
markets, the lower supply should lead to an increase in
price. Within this framework, Palazy et al. (2012) seek to
understand whether rarity may lead to an anthropogenic
Allee effect (Courchamp et al., 2006) in the special case of
trophy-hunted species. They find that once other variables
are controlled for, rarity does tend to increase the cost of
trophy hunts, although the effect is rather weak. That result
raises two questions: (1) Is this a problem? and (2) What
motivates people to hunt endangered species?
The relationship between rarity and willingness to pay
for a trophy hunt is not necessarily a problem for conser-
vation. First, let us agree on what we are talking about.
This is not a case of rich people wanting to kill pandas,
Arabian oryx or Sumatran rhinos. It is a case of people
willing to spend more to legally kill a markhor than an ibex,
a grizzly than a black bear or a sable antelope than a wilde-
beest. As long as quotas are ecologically and evolutionarily
sustainable, trophy hunting can be a part of a conservation
strategy for some endangered species, if some of the funds
generated are actually used to protect the species or its
habitat (Leader-Williams, Smith & Walpole, 2001). Herein
lies a problem: many hunts are trumpeted as ‘Conservation
Hunting’ (Freeman & Wenzel, 2006), but few are. Most
trophy hunts of ungulates are sustainable and produce rev-
enues for the guiding industry, but their impact on conser-
vation (if any) is not necessarily positive. One notable
exception is the markhor hunting program in the Torghar
area of Pakistan, a species which, interestingly, is largely
responsible for the positive effect of rarity on price in the
paper by Palazy et al. When the rarity–price relationship
leads to poaching or corruption in the issue of hunting
permits, then we clearly have a real problem, but that is
neither the subject of this discussion nor an issue on which
Palazy et al. provide information. I suggest that a much
more deleterious effect of rarity on conservation may be
found in luxury goods derived from wildlife, such as certain
foods (tuna, shark fins and turtle eggs come to mind) or
status symbols (shatoosh, ivory and horned beetles are
likely candidates).
If quotas are reduced to account for rarity, and price is
determined by supply and demand, rarity should lead to
higher trophy fees. The best way to maximize profit would
be an auction, with permits sold to those with the highest
willingness to pay. Auctions of trophy hunts can be spec-
tacularly successful (Festa-Bianchet, 2003), but are rare.
Trophy fees may have a weak relationship with demand
because governments have a monopoly and may set fees
artificially low. Most profits go to guiding companies, whose
willingness to reinvest in conservation would be an interest-
ing area of research. Palazy et al. (2012) suggest that high
trophy fees are evidence of high demand. As fees increase,
however, fewer trophy hunters can afford them. Many
hunters can spare $7000–10 000 to hunt an Asiatic ibex, but
very few would even consider spending $30 000–50 000 to
hunt an argali. High fees may be also driven by lower
supply. The data used in this paper are weakly related to the
actual cost to the hunter, because government-imposed
trophy fees are typically a fraction of what hunters pay. For
example in Canada, nonresident permits for trophy sheep
are typically a few hundred dollars, but guiding fees are in
the tens of thousands. In much of Europe, fees vary accord-
ing to the size of the horns or antlers of the animal taken.
Cultural, political and administrative differences between
countries make it very difficult to compare the costs of
trophy hunts for different species. The method used by
Palazy et al. is an acceptable first approximation, but a more
detailed economic analysis of the amounts that trophy
Animal Conservation. Print ISSN 1367-9430
12 Animal Conservation 15 (2012) 12–13 © 2012 The Author. Animal Conservation © 2012 The Zoological Society of London
hunters spend according to rarity and other factors is
warranted.
Perhaps the most important question for conservation is
the motivation of trophy hunters. We may seek to discour-
age this activity if it was detrimental to conservation, simi-
larly to efforts to reduce overexploitation of several marine
species, or species used in luxury markets, by publicizing the
conservation consequences of overharvest and the availabil-
ity of alternative products. In the battle for public opinion
to affect consumer choices, trophy hunting is a powerful
tool: most people hate it, much more than they may dislike
other forms of hunting. A picture of an overweight middle-
aged white guy sitting on a bloody dead bear will attract a
lot more attention, emotion and donations than yet another
report on fish overharvest or on habitat destruction. On the
other hand, to include trophy hunting as part of a conser-
vation strategy (Leader-Williams et al., 2001), we may want
to know why anyone would willingly part with a small
fortune to kill a goat. Marketing may have a stronger effect
than rarity on the cost of a hunt. Many conservationists are
aware that hunting within pristine habitat, seeing wildlife
and contributing to conservation can be powerful motiva-
tors for many hunters. Others may want to exploit the
picture of the bloodied bear, as effectively done by animal
rights groups. So far, commercial interests, rather than con-
servationists, have most effectively used marketing to
extract money from hunters. Emphasis on the competitive,
‘mine is bigger than yours’ aspect of trophy hunting has
spawned the offer of ‘products’ such as artificially fed
animals with large ‘trophies’, hybrid oddities marketed as
novelty items and canned ‘hunts’ of semi-captive animals
(Knox, 2011). Search ‘Texas dall’ on Google to see some
successful marketing. Negative consequences for conserva-
tion include the introduction of exotics, genetic pollution,
disease transmission and predator extirpation. These prac-
tices also reinforce the negative perception of hunters by
much of the public, and make it harder to use trophy
hunting as a conservation tool. It is difficult and controver-
sial to support killing animals to promote conservation
(Lindsey et al., 2006). The paper by Palazy et al. underlines
the need to clarify what ‘conservation hunting’ really means.
It cannot simply mean ‘sustainable’; it must involve meas-
urable and transparent benefits to conservation.
Acknowledgments
I thank Wendy King and Rich Harris for comments. My
research on wildlife evolutionary ecology and conservation
is supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering
Research Council of Canada.
References
Courchamp, F., Angulo, E., Rivalan, P., Hall, R.J.,
Signoret, L., Bull, L. & Meinard, Y. (2006). Rarity value
and species extinction: the anthropogenic Allee effect.
PLoS Biol. 4, 1–6.
Festa-Bianchet, M. (2003). Exploitative wildlife manage-
ment as a selective pressure for the life-history evolution
of large mammals. In Animal behavior and wildlife conser-
vation: 191–207. Festa-Bianchet, M. & Apollonio, M.
(Eds). Washington: Island Press.
Freeman, M.M.R. & Wenzel, G.W. (2006). The nature and
significance of polar bear conservation hunting in the
Canadian Arctic. Arctic 59, 21–30.
Knox, W.M. (2011). The antler religion. Wildl. Soc. Bull.
35, 45–48.
Leader-Williams, N., Smith, R.J. & Walpole, M.J. (2001).
Elephant hunting and conservation. Science 293, 2203.
Lindsey, P.A., Alexander, R., Frank, L.G., Mathieson, A.
& Romanach, S.S. (2006). Potential of trophy hunting to
create incentives for wildlife conservation in Africa where
alternative wildlife-based land uses may not be viable.
Anim. Conserv. 9, 283–291.
Palazy, L., Bonenfant, C., Gaillard, J.M. & Courchamp, F.
(2012). Rarity, trophy hunting and ungulates. Anim.
Conserv. 15, 4–11.
M. Festa-Bianchet Rarity, willingness to pay and conservation
Animal Conservation 15 (2012) 12–13 © 2012 The Author. Animal Conservation © 2012 The Zoological Society of London 13
... Animals with exceptionally large horns or antlers adorn the glossy covers of popular magazines and advertisements (Messner 2011), reflecting a culture of hornography where the acquisition of trophy animals has become, for some, a powerful motivation (Damm 2008, Knox 2011, Messner 2011, Heffelfinger 2016, Simon 2016. In some instances, recreational hunters pay large sums of money to increase the opportunity to harvest a large specimen, whether through the hiring of an outfitter or guide, or through the purchase of a highly coveted permit (Erickson 1988, Whitfield 2003, Festa-Bianchet and Lee 2009, Festa-Bianchet 2012b, Palazy et al. 2012. Funds generated through the sale or auction of special opportunity permits have been a boon for wildlife conservation across much of the world (Lindsey et al. 2007, Becker et al. 2013. ...
... Mountain sheep may well represent the only large ungulates in North America that are managed almost exclusively as trophy species throughout their ranges. Nonetheless, side-effects of marketing associated with the sales of fund-raising tags (e.g., further emphasis on trophy harvest and the appearance of commercialization of wildlife) have been a source of controversy (Damm 2008, Festa-Bianchet 2012b, Simon 2016, Heffelfinger 2017. ...
Article
Full-text available
Horns, antlers, and other horn-like structures are products of sexual selection, confer reproductive advantages, and are heritable and honest indicators of individual quality. In addition to serving key biological functions, horns and antlers garner societal interest that, when combined with the powerful motivation to acquire trophy animals, likely has spawned a growing hornographic culture fixated on males with exceptional horn-like structures. The concern that harvest of large, fast-growing males may cause evolutionary change to the very trait being sought has been the source of controversy in the popular and scientific literature over the past 2 decades. Mountain sheep (i.e., bighorn and thinhorn; Ovis spp.), possibly the only large ungulates in North America managed almost exclusively as trophy species throughout their ranges, embody this controversy, which has led to polarizing views among scientists and stakeholders as to how mountain sheep should be managed. Our goal in this commentary was to discuss the relative contributions of the key ecological and intrinsic factors that influence horn growth, how those factors might interact with harvest strategies, and identify what determinants of horn size are most amenable to management and most effective in achieving desired outcomes. Despite repeated results demonstrating that age or nutrition frequently override genetic contributions to size of horns, attention has been given to the role of genetics and its relationship to harvest of mountain sheep. Given the hyperbole surrounding trophy management and big horns, we suggest the importance of females in the management of mountain sheep has been largely forgotten. Maternal condition can instigate life-long effects on size and growth of males (via maternal effects), and abundance of females, in turn, affects nutritional limitation within populations through density-dependent feedbacks. If production of males with large horns is an objective, we contend that management programs should, integrate monitoring of nutritional status of populations, and where evidence indicates nutritional limitation through density dependence, seek to regulate abundance and per capita nutrition via harvest of females. We propose that extrinsic regulation (i.e., removal by harvest or translocation) is the most effective way to manage per capita availability of forage resources and, thus, nutritional limitation on growth of males. Not only can female harvest improve growth in body size and horns of males through enhanced nutrition of growing males and their mothers, such management also 1) may yield a nutritional buffer against environmental stochasticity and erratic population fluctuations, 2) be employed in areas where other management alternatives such as habitat manipulation may not be feasible, 3) may reduce frequency or magnitude of epizootic die-offs, and 4) will increase hunter opportunity and involvement in management. Ultimately, we call for greater recognition of the pervasive role of the ewe, and other female ungulates, in the production of trophy males, and that accordingly, females be better integrated into harvest and management programs. © 2017 The Wildlife Society.
... Fleischer and Tsur 2003;Ghermandi and Nunes 2013;Guerra et al. 2018). The idea is a general one, but specific analysis should be carried for different species since the rarer the species, the higher is its conservation value (Festa-Bianchet 2012;Jacobsen et al. 2012). Anna and Saputra (2017) found the annual value of whale shark tourism in a national park in Indonesia to be IDR 142.35 billion per year, or ILS 36.89 million (using tourist data from 2015). ...
Article
In the last few winters, shark communities have been aggregating near the Israeli Mediterranean coast, at a specific point, near Hadera power station. This unusual phenomenon has fascinated residents, visitors, kayakers, divers, and swimmers. We analyse the effects of this intense human interest on the sharks, using contingent behaviour, in Hadera and in Ashkelon, where sharks are present and there is available infrastructure for their observation. We also report on changes in shark behaviour due to change in tourism intensity. We find a change of about ILS 4.1 million annually for both sites but a larger individual consumer surplus in Hadera, where sharks are currently observable. Touristic intensity crosses the threshold level by about 12% and making the socio-equilibrium sustainable for both humans and sharks would have a social cost of ILS 0.157 million. This paper, which is based on the assessment of conservation values to marine and coastal tourists, raises a need for spatial planning in order to protect this endangered species.
Article
Full-text available
The world of travel and tourism have perhaps changed forever as a result of COVID-19; considered the worst global pandemic to affect the world, post World War II. The spread of the Coronavirus diseases was considerably attributed to the travel and tourism industry, and with the attempt to curb the spread of the virus, the industry experienced calamitous effects and suffered staggering financial losses. The same accounts for wildlife tourism (Southern Africa’s largest product) – bringing the hunting and ecotourism sector of South Africa to a complete standstill. The pandemic accompanied concerning and devastating effects, not only from a financial point of view, but also in terms of the conservation of these sectors within the industry. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis using the data obtained from the members of Wildlife Ranching South Africa (WRSA) to quantify the actual and potential financial losses in the private wildlife industry due to cancellations of hunters and ecotourists, live game sales and finally, game meat sales in the industry. From the results, the estimated financial impact of COVID-19 on the private wildlife industry is R6.694 billion (ZAR). The study made the following three contributions: Firstly, it determined the economic impact of COVID-19 on the private wildlife industry. Secondly, it provides the industry with a tangible document that can be used in securing funding and assistance from government and other non-profit organisations. Thirdly, it shows the importance of this industry to the South African economy and employment, although only applicable to private-owned reserves
Article
In the last few winters, shark communities have been aggregating near the Israeli Mediterranean coast, at a specific point, near the Hadera power station. This unusual phenomenon has fascinated residents, visitors, kayakers, divers, and swimmers. We analyze the effects of this intense human interest on the sharks, using contingent behavior, in Hadera and in Ashkelon, where sharks are present and there is available infrastructure for their observation. We also report on changes in shark behaviour due to changes in tourism intensity. We find a change of about ILS 4.1 million annually for both sites but a larger individual consumer surplus in Hadera, where sharks are currently observable. Touristic intensity crosses the threshold level by about 12% and making the socio-equilibrium sustainable for both humans and sharks would have a social cost of ILS 0.157 million. This paper, which is based on the assessment of conservation values to marine and coastal tourists, raises a need for spatial planning in order to protect this endangered species.
Technical Report
Full-text available
Citation: Furstenburg, D. 2016. The Bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus pygargus) Report. Technical Scientific Report GWLD1018P, Geo Wild Consult Pty Ltd. South Africa. 76 pp, www.geowild.co.za
Article
Full-text available
Awareness of the importance of the wildlife trade and human perception in animal conservation is growing. Recent studies carried out on a continental and world scale have analysed the associations between trophy score, rarity and prices. As a large range of ungulates are legally hunted throughout the world and numerous ungulate taxa are threatened, the relationship between rarity and trophy prices has been studied in several species. This article briefly reviews verifiable data on species and trophy prices and compares findings with data used in recent articles. The findings show that several elements of intra-specific data were inadequately addressed and that the trophy prices considered were not necessarily representative of real trophy prices. Furthermore, the body mass used for numerous taxa did not fit current knowledge of species, and several subspecies and rarity indexes that were considered disagreed with recognized subspecies or with the real conservation status of taxa. Thus, caution should be taken when considering some reported results. To improve our understanding of the associations between wildlife trade and wildlife conservation, further studies should take into account reliable specific data, such as that from government agencies, rather than publicity data.
Article
The size and shape of a trophy constitute major determinants of its value. We postulate that the rarity of a species, whatever its causes, also plays a major role in determining its value among hunters. We investigated a role for an Anthropogenic Allee effect in trophy hunting, where human attraction to rarity could lead to an over-exploitative chain reaction that could eventually drive the targeted species to extinction. We performed an inter-specific analysis of trophy prices of 202 ungulate taxa and quantified to what extent morphological characteristics and their rarity accounted for the observed variation in their price. We found that once location and body mass were accounted for, trophies of rare species attain higher prices than those of more common species. By driving trophy price increase, this rarity effect may encourage the exploitation of rare species regardless of their availability, with potentially profound consequences for populations.
Article
Full-text available
The history and current status of polar bear (Ursus maritimus) conservation hunting in the Canadian Arctic, where trophy hunts by non-local hunters have steadily increased in number over the past three decades, have been influenced by local and international factors. Although polar bear hides taken in the subsistence hunt have commercial value, revenues from non-resident trophy hunting provide a much greater economic return to the Inuit. Research suggests that these greater cash returns and the increased local interest by Native hunters in outfitting and guiding do not threaten community cultural values, which continue to emphasize subsistence and the conservation of local wildlife resources. These outcomes suggest that community-based polar bear trophy hunts provide an example of a successful conservation-hunting program that contributes to wildlife management and sustainable economic and community development in the Canadian Arctic.
Article
Full-text available
A study of African elephants by Karen McComb and colleagues revealed that matriarchs are repositories of social knowledge for family groups (Reports, “Matriarchs as repositories of social knowledge in African elephants,” 20 Apr., p. [491][1]). Therefore, the authors suggest that the removal of
Article
Full-text available
Standard economic theory predicts that exploitation alone is unlikely to result in species extinction because of the escalating costs of finding the last individuals of a declining species. We argue that the human predisposition to place exaggerated value on rarity fuels disproportionate exploitation of rare species, rendering them even rarer and thus more desirable, ultimately leading them into an extinction vortex. Here we present a simple mathematical model and various empirical examples to show how the value attributed to rarity in some human activities could precipitate the extinction of rare species-a concept that we term the anthropogenic Allee effect. The alarming finding that human perception of rarity can precipitate species extinction has serious implications for the conservation of species that are rare or that may become so, be they charismatic and emblematic or simply likely to become fashionable for certain activities.
Article
Intensive deer management characterized by high fences and supplemental feeding and, in some instances, selective breeding programs, has increased dramatically across North America (NA) over the past several decades. This new management philosophy is not, however, without controversy. At several levels intensive deer management is incompatible with the NA Model of Wildlife Conservation including the fact that it promotes the privatization of wildlife and creates markets that sell public wildlife resources. Lastly, deer “hunting” under the intensive deer-management model violates the fundamental concept of fair chase, which is a cornerstone principle of hunting in NA. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.
Article
The size and shape of a trophy constitute major determinants of its value. We postulate that the rarity of a species, whatever its causes, also plays a major role in determining its value among hunters. We investigated a role for an Anthropogenic Allee effect in trophy hunting, where human attraction to rarity could lead to an over-exploitative chain reaction that could eventually drive the targeted species to extinction. We performed an inter-specific analysis of trophy prices of 202 ungulate taxa and quantified to what extent morphological characteristics and their rarity accounted for the observed variation in their price. We found that once location and body mass were accounted for, trophies of rare species attain higher prices than those of more common species. By driving trophy price increase, this rarity effect may encourage the exploitation of rare species regardless of their availability, with potentially profound consequences for populations.
Article
There is a lack of consensus among conservationists as to whether trophy hunting represents a legitimate conservation tool in Africa. Hunting advocates stress that trophy hunting can create incentives for conservation where ecotourism is not possible. We assessed the hunting preferences of hunting clients who have hunted or plan to hunt in Africa (n=150), and the perception among African hunting operators (n=127) of client preferences at two US hunting conventions to determine whether this assertion is justified. Clients are most interested in hunting in well-known East and southern African hunting destinations, but some trophy species attract hunters to remote and unstable countries that might not otherwise derive revenues from hunting. Clients are willing to hunt in areas lacking high densities of wildlife or attractive scenery, and where people and livestock occur, stressing the potential for trophy hunting to generate revenues where ecotourism may not be viable. Hunting clients are more averse to hunting under conditions whereby conservation objectives are compromised than operators realize, suggesting that client preferences could potentially drive positive change in the hunting industry, to the benefit of conservation. However, the preferences and attitudes of some clients likely form the basis of some of the problems currently associated with the hunting industry in Africa, stressing the need for an effective regulatory framework.