Africa Wild

Asking people their willingness to pay to for a sighting of a certain species might be an increasingly popular method for valuing biodiversity, but is prone to potential biases, showing responses to be expressions of what people would like to have happen rather than true valuations and hence the method’s
credibility suffers (Look at the comments here and elsewhere )

Are there ethical concerns?
How can one place a price in ZAR on something as priceless as a wild animal? A valid question. Decisions are made constantly about developments that may affect biodiversity and so tradeoffs are being made, either explicitly or implicitly. For instance, if it is decided to build tourism infrastructure and so reduce the habitat availability for a suite of species, the value of what tourists pay (and the jobs created etc.) is seen as greater than the value of the potential loss of biodiversity. The trade-off between the monetary value of tourism products and the non-monetary value of the biodiversity has been made. Decisions involving trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and the value people gain from activities that utilise natural resources are difficult but a fact of life.

What happens if one writes R 0,- for the price they would pay for a sighting?

Filled in the questionaire as well to be able to see all the questions,
but never sent it off as - like most here - I have my doubts about the
value and intention of it...

That's what I wrote! 0,- all the way down

Me too

SANParks has posted a response about the survey on determining the non-consumptive value of specific species sighting
Link

Prof. M. Saayman who has developed the questionnaire has also posted
Link

In my opinion they are trying to save goats and cabbage once again. The explanations do not sound convincing to me. I do not remember having seen one word on self driving in the survey . Sanparks is making a survey for a "private reserve" on something that they themselves have no intention doing ?? But do me a favour.....!!!!

How is this to be understood " contractual park owner in another National Park" ?

Many of us can't see that...

You have been naughty

I have read the Sanparks response and the professor's story. May I gave my humble uneducated opinion.
-I hope the data they get from this sample is just for " nice to know " because the scientific value from a statistic point is zero and zulch!!!
-I'am glad That I not paying their salaries because this is nonsense from a-z.
-If this is the standard that in future advice or data is given, collected or whatever.....God bless Africa

Lastly I hope that Sanparks one day will see it's clients as a management tool, inform them, use them as a asset to management and not treat them as mushrooms.....
It's sad, sad so very sad.

Edited by forum moderators for unacceptable language.

If you want to be guaranteed a sighting of the Big 5, go to a zoo!!