One way to comprehend the value of Wyoming’s elk, deer and pronghorn is to relate it to the state’s permanent mineral trust fund.
The corpus of that account, which sits at over $13 billion, is fed by severance taxes on oil, gas and mineral extraction and its investment income funds an impressive share of Wyoming’s government.
“For wildlife, it’s very similar,” said Jake Hochard, a Knobloch associate professor and natural resource economist with the University of Wyoming’s Haub School of Environment and Natural Resources. “The corpus is that [wildlife] biomass on the landscape. And the return is that we’re able to hunt every year, and we maintain and responsibly manage that value for the future.”
While the mineral trust fund is financial wealth that creates a financial return, the state’s ungulates are a form of “natural wealth” that create return in “ecosystem services,” Hochard said.
The collective value of that natural wealth for Wyoming’s three most common ungulate species — elk, mule deer and pronghorn — isn’t trivial. Together, the hundreds of thousands of wild ungulates dwelling across the Equality State’s 62 million acres are worth nearly $6 billion, according to the UW professor. That’s about the same overall market value as some well-known national businesses, like footwear and clothing companies Crocs and Abercrombie & Fitch.
Hochard stresses that his research is different from the more common type of economic impact studies that have been conducted, for example, on Wyoming’s hunting and fishing, and broader outdoor recreation industry. While those industries generate billions annually, the associated studies overlook the costs, which is a factor Hochard’s natural wealth estimate takes into account.
“Wildlife is managed,” Hochard said. “Game and Fish has a budget. That’s not free. Ungulates are hit by vehicles. We’re not just looking at revenue generated or economic impact.”
The $6 billion estimate accounts for overall value added to society and factors in those costs, now and in the years to come. He likened the state’s ungulate populations to a bridge used by vehicles. Both are valuable now, but they also generate value streams for decades into the future.
“So, if we invest in a migration corridor today,” Hochard said, “that’s going to create some additional value every year going forward.”
Hochard’s database of valuations for the state’s big three ungulate species is detailed enough that it produces estimates down to the herd level. And it also tracks how values change along with ungulate populations and other factors over time.
Wyoming’s mule deer and pronghorn numbers, for example, have fallen significantly in recent decades. Elk, though, are the most valuable species and wapiti populations have fared much better — they’re even at nuisance levels in some areas. As a result, overall ungulate values are growing.
“We’re seeing that the appreciation of value is pretty steady across the state,” Hochard said.
According to the most recent estimate, Wyoming’s elk are valued at $3.9 billion, mule deer at $1.2 billion and pronghorn at $916 million. So far, values have held up better than populations. Over a recent span that mule deer populations struggled and fell by more than half, values declined by only 6%.
In some cases, steady population declines aren’t abrupt enough to halt appreciation. The historically significant Jackson Elk Herd is one example: Over a recent roughly two-decade period, the crown jewel herd fell in population by 32%, but the value of the herd as an asset grew by 25%, from $104 million to $131 million.
Hochard plans to introduce his valuations on Wyoming elk, mule deer and pronghorn to a broad audience at the National Assembly of Sportsmen’s Caucuses conference in Oklahoma City this December. If a peer-review process goes smoothly, he’ll also make a portal of his valuation data public around that time.
Much sooner, Hochard is sharing his research with the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission. He’s scheduled to present at 3 p.m. Monday at the commission’s meeting in Evanston. Readers can tune in remotely via Zoom.
Hopefully the financial figures will prompt more research and action for the CWD problem
40,000 dollars per elk?
Hmmmm, if Mr. Hochards estimates were accepted by Govt. Officials what will an elk tag cost.
Out of curiosity, I did my own valuation. Average pounds of meat from an elk say 200 for example (a little high) times 100,000 ish elk in Wyoming times let’s say 15 dollars per pound. 300 million.
Using Mr. Hochards math elk meat should be priced at 195 dollars a pound.
Putting a dollar amount on this only leads to very bad places, “The Kings deer”
And now imagine what that value might be if Buffalo were allowed to roam our state also!
Then read again the close analysis of the monetary value of agriculture, the industry that prevents the roaming. –> https://wyofile.com/the-wyoming-agriculture-industrys-outsized-influence-and-consumption/
Some easy conclusions here.
Sorry, anyone that puts a dollar value on this, is sick in the head.
So, I guess they could now be used as collateral?
Go back to North Carolina Hochard.
I generally have issues with assigning dollar values to natural resources such as wildlife, which are better valued using qualitative assessments. ( Individual animals are tricky to consign , when you really need to consider populations instead ) Not everything should come with a price tag. Or even a bar code.
Having said that , Wyoming judges have long had a table of restitution values for trophy and non-trophy taken wantonly or illegally. They can force convicted miscreants to repay the State for the value of those specific animals lost to poaching or other illegal kills. A Grizzly bear can be valued as high as $ 50,000. Trophy Elk $15,000 , trophy Deer $10,000, full curl Bighorn Sheep rams in their prime have been pegged as high as $35,000 and trophy Moose in the same range by bench discretion. I vaguely recall an early Grey Wolf pirate having to pay $ 10,000 for his wanton take of a protected species near Meeteetse way back in 1996ish. Even the lowly Cottontail rabbit can be assessed at $200.00 restitution by the Court. I do wish the judiciary would assess closer to the maximum $$$ in wanton wildlife recriminations. Back in the day , sentences for poaching were ridiculously low slaps on the wrist. I presume because poaching was a way of life and those appearing before judges were friends of the court, and game wardens didn’t even have guns and badges till 1974. Thankfully, since the ESA was enacted in the early 70’s we have matured our economic appreciation of wild animals along as the ecological values necessarily rise to real world expectations. As they should. That saying ” he knows the price of everything and the value of nothing” is applicable.
P.S. – Where are you from, Chad, in case we have to ask you to go back where you came from ? Your analyses are always so flawed.
Dewey, this monetary knife cuts both ways. I made the example in the comments on the mollies pack story.
Using hochards and wyofiles numbers, wolves kill 464 MILLION dollars worth of elk each year in the GYE.
Cody, Wilson, Pinedale and Evanston is where I’m from amongst many other places in my lifetime. And what a coincidence, I think the same of your flawed analyses.
great info and needed,elk need security cover and non motorized habitat on public land.
roadless rule and travel management are important.
Barasso and Hageman are you listening??