The researchers compared the expected costs and conservation benefits of closing down fishing areas that suffer from other causes of population decline, such as rats eating eggs, chicks and adult birds on the island. Their analysis showed that closing the fishery around Lord Howe Island would cost about $3 million U.S. and increase the growth rate of the shearwater population by about 6 percent. But killing the rats would cost only about $500,000, yet yield a 32 percent increase in shearwater population growth.

In other words, killing the rats would increase the shearwater population per dollar invested 23 times more than closing the fishery.

The researchers say that levies, with higher fees imposed for more endangered species, would make users who earn a profit from common-pool resources pay for the impacts they have on the system. At the same time, they argue, if levy money were given to conservationists to address other threats to seabird or turtle populations, then these conservationists would in turn be made more accountable for producing and quantifying results.

"This idea moves away from strictly charity models of doing conservation [where money is donated to conservationists], to a noncharity model [where those involved are held accountable]," said Donlan.

While compensatory mitigation may not work for all seabirds or threatened species, there remain many species that face multiple threats and could benefit significantly from this approach, he said.

'"/>

Contact: Blaine Friedlander
bpf2@cornell.edu
607-254-8093
Cornell University News Service
18-Jul-2007