Using cost‐effectiveness analysis to compare density‐estimation methods for large‐scale wildlife management

Density estimates for animal populations often inform conservation and management decisions. Many methods to estimate density exist but deciding between competing alternatives traditionally has depended upon assessing multiple factors (e.g., precision, total cost, area sampled) independently in an ad hoc manner. Cost-effectiveness analysis is a tool that economists use decide objectively alternatives. We extend cost-effectiveness simultaneously integrate precision per-area cost of sampling when selecting techniques used both after single application method across several applications capital equipment. Our extension allows weighting may vary with the objectives constraints decision makers. apply our case study which population white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) was estimated 3 large units Indiana, USA, using distance-sampling methods: fecal-pellet, camera-trap, aerial sampling. The unweighted effectiveness color infrared sensors usually superior each always differing landscapes. Pellet most effective agriculturally-dominated unit. Although camera increased popularity, poorer than other 2 methods, even allowing potential future innovations streamline data processing. can be useful among monitoring importance. same principles related any ecological addition estimation.