IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uerser/307686.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Coyote Control: A Simulation of Evaluation of Alternative Strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Gum, Russell L.
  • Arthur, Louise M.
  • Magleby, Richard S.

Abstract

Current and alternative coyote control strategies in the Western United States are evaluated via a computerized simulation model which predicts the economic and socio-environmental impacts of each strategy. A gradual decrease in lamb losses and an increase in net economic benefits are predicted if the 1974 level of coyote control, $7 million, is increased to $20 million. Socio-environmental benefits did not change significantly under that simulation. Beyond the $20 million level of expenditures, net economic benefits are predicted to decline slightly and socio-environmental benefits decline rapidly. At expenditures below 1974 levels, both economic and socio-environmental benefits decline substantially. Changes in mixes of control methods are discovered which permit both economic and socio-environmental benefits to increase. These alternatives include increased use of the M-44 and aerial gunning and decreased use of traps.

Suggested Citation

  • Gum, Russell L. & Arthur, Louise M. & Magleby, Richard S., 1978. "Coyote Control: A Simulation of Evaluation of Alternative Strategies," Agricultural Economic Reports 307686, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:uerser:307686
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.307686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/307686/files/aer408.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.307686?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gee, C. Kerry & Magleby, Richard S. & Bailey, Warren R. & Gum, Russell L. & Arthur, Louise M., 1977. "Sheep and Lamb Losses to Predators and Other Causes in the Western United States," Agricultural Economic Reports 307647, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Arthur, Louise M., 1978. "Factors Affecting Coyote Predation of Sheep and Lambs: A Statistical Analysis," Economics Statistics and Cooperative Services (ESCS) Reports 329215, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gum, Russell L. & Martin, William E., 1979. "Economic And Socio-Environmental Evaluation Of Predator Control Alternatives," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 4(1), pages 1-12, July.
    2. Louise Arthur, 1978. "Quantifying socio-environmental impacts of predator control policies," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 235-244, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gum, Russell L. & Martin, William E., 1979. "Economic And Socio-Environmental Evaluation Of Predator Control Alternatives," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 4(1), pages 1-12, July.
    2. Harrison, Virden L., 1980. "Sheep Production: Intensive Systems, Innovative Techniques Boost Yields," Agricultural Economic Reports 307881, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:uerser:307686. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ersgvus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.