Invasive species pose a threat to the livelihoods of many people living on rangelands of the western United States. Invasive species impact many ecosystem goods and services of the areas they invade and represent one of the largest causes of habitat degradation. On private ranches, economic analyses often find that conservation practices, such as invasive species control, are not economically viable, in contrast to what is found at the landscape scale. In northeast Wyoming, ventenata [Ventenata dubia (Leers) Coss.] is a relatively new invader in the Great Plains ecoregion that threatens forage production on ranches. Our objective was to explore the economic costs of V. dubia for two options available to a ranch operation: purchasing extra hay to offset losses in forage and controlling V. dubia with herbicide. Using a partial budget analysis, we compare these two options in three invasion scenarios using a range of forage utilization rates and discount rates. Controlling V. dubia with herbicide was a cheaper option compared with purchasing additional hay in many cases. In fact, at 50% utilization, it is cheaper to control V. dubia in all of our scenarios at all discount rates given our assumptions. For lower grazing utilization rates, it becomes cheaper to purchase hay in some cases other than in our worst-case invasion scenario. In these cases, coordination among ranchers is needed to effectively control V. dubia. There are many ranch-specific differences that may make a different option more feasible, and we did not explore options of reducing herd sizes. However, our results suggest that controlling V. dubia can be an economically viable option under certain circumstances. Additional assistance in the form of a cost-share program, and facilitation of coordination is needed to overcome the difficulties of private management of invasive species.

Various global-scale proposals exist to reduce the loss of biological diversity. These include the Half-Earth and Whole-Earth visions that respectively seek to set aside half the planet for wildlife conservation or to diversify conservation practices fundamentally and change the economic systems that determine environmental harm. Here we assess these visions in the specific context of Bornean orangutans Pongo pygmaeus and their conservation. Using an expert-led process we explored three scenarios over a 10-year time frame: continuation of Current Conditions, a Half-Earth approach and a Whole-Earth approach. In addition, we examined a 100-year population recovery scenario assuming 0% offtake of Bornean orangutans. Current Conditions were predicted to result in a population c. 73% of its current size by 2032. Half-Earth was judged comparatively easy to achieve and predicted to result in an orangutan population of c. 87% of its current size by 2032. Whole-Earth was anticipated to lead to greater forest loss and ape killing, resulting in a prediction of c. 44% of the current orangutan population for 2032. Finally, under the recovery scenario, populations could be c. 148% of their current size by 2122. Although we acknowledge uncertainties in all of these predictions, we conclude that the Half-Earth and Whole-Earth visions operate along different timelines, with the implementation of Whole-Earth requiring too much time to benefit orangutans. None of the theorized proposals provided a complete solution, so drawing elements from each will be required. We provide recommendations for equitable outcomes.