Economic Impact of Tropical Soda Apple on Cattle Production in Florida

by

Tajudeen T. SalaudeenFlorida A&M University

Michael Thomas, Ph.D.Florida A&M University

David Harding, Ph.D. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

Research funded by: U.S.D.A. – Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Presented to:SERA 30 and CNREP

2ND National Forum on Socioeconomic Research in Coastal SystemsMay 20-23, 2007, New Orleans

Introduction

Tropical Soda Apple (TSA), (Solanum viarum)• TSA is an invasive non-native weed of pastures

and natural areas in Florida• Originally from South America, first observed in

1988• Quickly covers entire pastures• Displaces native plants• Spread through cattle and wildlife fecal material,

hay and sod

TSA Plant

TSA Infested Pasture

Occurrence of TSA in Florida Occurrence of TSA in Florida

UF/IFAS

Introduction Cont’d

Objectives of the Study• The goal of the study is to document the

economic impact and extent of TSA disruption on Florida cattle production

• More specifically:– To develop a survey instrument to sample cattle

producers and document the effects of TSA on cattle production in Florida

– To estimate the present and potential direct, indirect and induced economic effects of TSA control on cattle production in Florida

Introduction Cont’d

• Economic losses from TSA can be categorized in several ways

1. Lost producer surplus (PS) to cattle producers– Lost revenue from reduced cattle production– Cost of increased weed management– The lost PS can result in secondary economic

impacts– IMPLAN model provides estimates for the direct,

indirect, and induced effects

Introduction Cont’d

2. Lost consumer surplus to those who consume beef

3. Lost value to consumers of wild-area services effected by TSA (hunting,bird watching etc)

Materials and Methods

• To measure lost producer surplus to cattle producers:– Survey sent to 3,500 members of Florida

Cattlemen’s Association (FCA)

• Results of the survey were used to determine the economic impact using the economic input and output model IMPLAN.

Results and Discussion

• Survey Response rate is about 30%

• Regional analysis– Region 1 ( north Florida)– Region 2 (central Florida)– Region 3 ( south Florida)

Results Cont’d

Table 1

Descriptive statistics on weed and weed

management

Category North Central South

Top two Common weed in pasture

TSA

Smut

grass

TSA

Smut

grass

TSA

Smut grass

Familiarity with TSA

(%)

84 97 98

Having TSA 40 83 88

TSA as a problem 24 65 70

Rate of infestation.

3.6% 12% 9%

Results Cont’d

Table 2

Management response to TSA infestation by region

Category North Central South

Proportion that control

35% 75% 76%

Proportion that reduce

2.4% 6.1% 7.4%

Proportion that take out pasture 3.6% 6% 3.7%Control methods

Chem.

Mowing

Chem.

Mowing

Chem.

Mowing

Cost of control/

acre

$25 $19 $18

Where:

Ii = TSA infestation rate for region i.

Ai = acres in commercial pasture for region i.

Pi = % of ranchers controlling TSA in region i.

Ci = average TSA control cost for region i in $. (For region i, i = 1, 3: north, central and south)

The regional cost of control (RCi) can be estimated as:

CiPiAiIiRCi ***

Table 3:Estimated average regional cost of TSA control

Regions

(acres)

Infest.

Rate (%)

Prop.that

control (%).

Cost of control

($)

Regional cost of control ($)

North(1,212,615) 0.0367 0.409 24.82 386,597

Central(3,849,003) 0.1216 0.75 18.68 6,557,223

South(1,002,726) 0.0919 0.76 16.79 1,175,877

Table 4: 95% Bounds on TSA Control Costs

Bound North Central South

Lower ($) 110,191 4,590,708 144,494

Upper ($) 776,077 8,741,105 2,731,604

Average ($) 386,597 6,557,223 1,175,877

Table 5: Estimated impacts by region (Lower Bound)

Output North Central South

Direct ($) 105,001 4,374,474 137,688

Indirect ($) 53,275 1,303,927 1,712

Induced ($) 13,723 489,620 663

Total ($) 171,999 6,168,021 140,063

Multipliers 1.63 1.41 1.02

Table 6: Estimated impacts by region (Upper Bound)

Output North Central South

Direct ($) 739,522 8,329,376 2,602,938

Indirect ($) 375,219 2,401,830 32,362

Induced ($) 96,650 915,511 12,529

Total ($) 1,211,391 11,646,717 2,647,829

Multipliers 1.63 1.40 1.02

Table 7: Estimated average impacts by region

Output North Central South

Direct ($) 368,387 6,248,361 1,120,490

Indirect ($) 186,913 1,862,488 37,845

Induced ($) 48,145 699,358 14,558

Total ($) 603,445 8,810,207 1,172,893

Multipliers 1.64 1.41 1.05

Summary and Conclusion

• TSA is ranked as the most common pasture weed

• TSA level of infestation is higher in south and central Florida

• Largest economic impact is in south Florida

• Statewide economic impacts range from $6.5 million to $16 million annually

Summary and Conclusion Cont’d

• This result is just a part of the total economic impact

• TSA control adds to the cost of production leading to economic inefficiency.

• Beef prices may increase

• Cattle producers with limited pastureland will feel the effect more

• Unknown effect on wild-land services

Summary and Conclusion Cont’d

Future Studies

• Focus more on smaller producers

• Impacts on wildland dependent activity could be undertaken

• Determine differences in cost control methods

• Benefit Cost Analysis to evaluate bio-control efforts

Conclusion Cont’d

Limitations of the study

• Sample response limited because FCA data prevented repeated sampling

• Accuracy of the economic analysis depends upon reliability of secondary data

THANKS

AND

ENJOY THE REST OF YOUR DAY