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