This simulation shows how plant, deer and wolf populations impact each other in a deciduous forest ecosystem.

This model shows the changing happened in forest industry and mountain tourism in Derby Tasmania. Logging will degrade mountain tourism while benefit the forestry industry. Simulation borrowed from the Easter Island simulation.

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale.

We incorporate logistic growth into the moose dynamics, and we replace the death flow of the moose with a kill rate modeled from the kill rate data found on the Isle Royale website.

I start with these parameters:
Wolf Death Rate = 0.15
Wolf Birth Rate = 0.0187963
Moose Birth Rate = 0.4
Carrying Capacity = 2000
Initial Moose: 563
Initial Wolves: 20

I used RK-4 with step-size 0.1, from 1959 for 60 years.

The moose birth flow is logistic, MBR*M*(1-M/K)
Moose death flow is Kill Rate (in Moose/Year)
Wolf birth flow is WBR*Kill Rate (in Wolves/Year)
Wolf death flow is WDR*W

This is a basic model for use with our lab section.  The full BIDE options.

C

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale.

Experiment with adjusting the initial number of moose and wolves on the island.

Westley, F. R., O. Tjornbo, L. Schultz, P. Olsson, C. Folke, B. Crona and Ö. Bodin. 2013. A theory of transformative agency in linked social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 18(3): 27. link

Overview

This model simulates logging and mountain biking competition in Derby, Tasmania. The Simulation is referenced to simulate Derby mountain biking with logging.

 

Model Work

The tourism industry is represented on the model's left side, and the logging industry is on the right side. Interactions between these two industries generate tax revenues. Logging and tourism have different growth rates regarding people working/consuming. The initial values of these two industries in the model are not fixed but increase yearly due to inflation or economic growth.

 

Detail Insights

From the perspective of tourism, as the number of tourists keeps growing, the number of people who choose to ride in Derby City also gradually increases. And the people who ride rate the ride. The negative feedback feeds back into the cycling population. Similarly, positive cycling reviews lead to more customer visits. And all the customers will create a revenue through tourism, and a certain proportion of the income will become tourism tax.

From a logging perspective, it is very similar to the tourism industry. As the number of people working in the industry is forecast to increase, the industry's overall size is predicted to grow. And as the industry's size continues to rise, the taxes on the logging industry will also continue to rise. Since logging is an industry, the tax contribution will be more significant than the tourism excise tax.

 

This model assumption is illustrated below:

1. The amount of tax reflects the level of industrial development.

2. The goal of reducing carbon emissions lets us always pay attention to the environmental damage caused by the logging industry.

3. The government's regulatory goal is to increase overall income while ensuring the environment.

4. Logging will lead to environmental damage, which will decrease the number of tourists.

 

This model is based on tourism tax revenue versus logging tax revenue. Tourism tax revenue is more incredible than logging tax revenue, indicating a better environment. As a result of government policy, the logging industry will be heavily developed in the short term. Growth in the logging industry will increase by 40%. A growth rate of 0.8 and 0.6 of the original is obtained when logging taxes are 2 and 4 times higher than tourism taxes.

 

Furthermore, tourism tax and logging tax also act on the positive rate, which is the probability that customers give a positive evaluation. The over-development of the logging industry will lead to the destruction of environmental resources and further affect the tourism industry. The logging tax will also affect the tourism Ride Rate, which is the probability that all tourism customers will choose Derby city.

 

This model more accurately reflects logging and tourism's natural growth and ties the two industries together environmentally. Two ways of development are evident in the two industries. Compared to tourism, logging shows an upward spiral influenced by government policies. Government attitudes also affect tourism revenue, but more by the logging industry. 

Model of mixed-conifer forest biodiversity response to fire and selected treatments

Westley, F. R., O. Tjornbo, L. Schultz, P. Olsson, C. Folke, B. Crona and Ö. Bodin. 2013. A theory of transformative agency in linked social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 18(3): 27. link

The dynamics of the food population as a function of growth and consumption. Notation matches the Appendix of Marten Scheffer's 2009 Book Critical Transitions in Nature and Society p332-4 http://bit.ly/yrd3GN

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale.

Experiment with adjusting the initial number of moose and wolves on the island.

A model situmalte the relationship between moutain bikes and logging industry in Derby, Tasmania, It explains more when the number of visitors increases or decreses. 

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale. It was "cloned" from a model that InsightMaker provides to its users, at
https://insightmaker.com/insight/2068/Isle-Royale-Predator-Prey-Interactions
Thanks Scott Fortmann-Roe.

I've created a Mathematica file that replicates the model, at
http://www.nku.edu/~longa/classes/2018spring/mat375/mathematica/Moose-n-Wolf-InsightMaker.nb

It allows one to experiment with adjusting the initial number of moose and wolves on the island.

I used steepest descent in Mathematica to optimize the parameters, with my objective data being the ratio of wolves to moose. You can try my (admittedly) kludgy code, at
http://www.nku.edu/~longa/classes/2018spring/mat375/mathematica/Moose-n-Wolf-InsightMaker-BestFit.nb

{WolfBirthRateFactorStart,
WolfDeathRateStart,
MooseBirthRateStart,
MooseDeathRateFactorStart,
moStart,
woStart} =
{0.000267409,
0.239821,
0.269755,
0.0113679,
591,
23.};

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale.

We incorporate logistic growth into the moose dynamics, and we replace the death flow of the moose with a kill rate modeled from the kill rate data found on the Isle Royale website.

I start with these parameters:
Wolf Death Rate = 0.15
Wolf Birth Rate = 0.0187963
Moose Birth Rate = 0.4
Carrying Capacity = 2000
Initial Moose: 563
Initial Wolves: 20

I used RK-4 with step-size 0.1, from 1959 for 60 years.

The moose birth flow is logistic, MBR*M*(1-M/K)
Moose death flow is Kill Rate (in Moose/Year)
Wolf birth flow is WBR*Kill Rate (in Wolves/Year)
Wolf death flow is WDR*W

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale.

Experiment with adjusting the initial number of moose and wolves on the island.

Implications of spraying pesticides to control insects. This is an early version of this model.

Modeling forest succession in a northeast deciduous forest.

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale.

We incorporate logistic growth into the moose dynamics, and we replace the death flow of the moose with a kill rate modeled from the kill rate data found on the Isle Royale website.

I start with these parameters:
Wolf Death Rate = 0.15
Wolf Birth Rate = 0.0187963
Moose Birth Rate = 0.4
Carrying Capacity = 2000
Initial Moose: 563
Initial Wolves: 20

I used RK-4 with step-size 0.1, from 1959 for 60 years.

The moose birth flow is logistic, MBR*M*(1-M/K)
Moose death flow is Kill Rate (in Moose/Year)
Wolf birth flow is WBR*Kill Rate (in Wolves/Year)
Wolf death flow is WDR*W

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale. It was "cloned" from a model that InsightMaker provides to its users, at
https://insightmaker.com/insight/2068/Isle-Royale-Predator-Prey-Interactions
Thanks Scott Fortmann-Roe.

I've created a Mathematica file that replicates the model, at
http://www.nku.edu/~longa/classes/2018spring/mat375/mathematica/Moose-n-Wolf-InsightMaker.nb

It allows one to experiment with adjusting the initial number of moose and wolves on the island.

I used steepest descent in Mathematica to optimize the parameters, with my objective data being the ratio of wolves to moose. You can try my (admittedly) kludgy code, at
http://www.nku.edu/~longa/classes/2018spring/mat375/mathematica/Moose-n-Wolf-InsightMaker-BestFit.nb

{WolfBirthRateFactorStart,
WolfDeathRateStart,
MooseBirthRateStart,
MooseDeathRateFactorStart,
moStart,
woStart} =
{0.000267409,
0.239821,
0.269755,
0.0113679,
591,
23.};

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale.

Experiment with adjusting the moose birth-rate to simulate Over-shoot followed by environmental recovery

This model illustrates predator prey interactions using real-life data of wolf and moose populations on the Isle Royale.

We incorporate logistic growth into the moose dynamics, and we replace the death flow of the moose with a kill rate modeled from the kill rate data found on the Isle Royale website.

I start with these parameters:
Wolf Death Rate = 0.15
Wolf Birth Rate = 0.0187963
Moose Birth Rate = 0.4
Carrying Capacity = 2000
Initial Moose: 563
Initial Wolves: 20

I used RK-4 with step-size 0.1, from 1959 for 60 years.

The moose birth flow is logistic, MBR*M*(1-M/K)
Moose death flow is Kill Rate (in Moose/Year)
Wolf birth flow is WBR*Kill Rate (in Wolves/Year)
Wolf death flow is WDR*W