| Affiliation: | 1.Department of Botany,University of Hawaii at Manoa,Honolulu,USA;2.Universite de Parakou,Parakou,Benin;3.National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis,University of Tennessee,Knoxville,USA;4.Department of Mathematical Sciences and Computational Science Program,Middle Tennessee State University,Murfreesboro,USA;5.Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology,University of Kansas,Lawrence,USA |
| Abstract: | Harvesting wild plants for non-timber forest products (NTFPs) can be ecologically sustainable–without long-term consequences to the dynamics of targeted and associated species–but it may not be economically satisfying because it fails to provide enough revenues for local people over time. In several cases, the same species can be harvested for NTFP and also logged for timber. Three decades of studies on the sustainability of NTFP harvest for local people’s livelihood have failed to successfully integrate these socio-economic and ecological factors. We apply optimal control theory to investigate optimal strategies for the combinations of non-lethal (e.g., NTFP) and lethal (e.g., timber) harvest that minimize the cost of harvesting while maximizing the benefits (revenue) that accrue to harvesters and the conservation value of harvested ecosystems. Optimal harvesting strategies include starting with non-lethal NTFP harvest and postponing lethal timber harvesting to begin after a few years. We clearly demonstrate that slow growth species have lower optimal harvesting rates, objective functional values and profits than fast growth species. However, contrary to expectation, the effect of species lifespan on optimal harvesting rates was weak suggesting that life history is a better indicator of species resilience to harvest than lifespan. Overall, lethal or nonlethal harvest rates must be <40 % to ensure optimality. This optimal rate is lower than commonly reported sustainable harvest rates for non-timber forest products. |
