The resource booklet provides information on Algonquin Provincial Park in Canada. Use the resource booklet and your own studies to answer the following.
Figure 7(b): Fact file on beaver hunting
- By 1900 beavers had been hunted almost to extinction for their pelts (skin and fur).
- The IUCN classify beavers as “least concern” on the Red List.
- There are 19 registered trap lines in Algonquin Provincial Park where beavers may be trapped for their pelts by First Nation (indigenous) people.
- All trappers must have a licence, and may only trap during the hunting season using ethical traps.
- 135 000 beavers are still trapped and killed in Canada each year.
- The price for a beaver pelt was US$19 in 2015, compared to US$500 a pelt in 1940.
- Many landowners trap beavers on their property because of the damage they cause. (Beavers cut timbers and their dams can create floods causing millions of dollars of economic damage.)
With reference to Figure 7(b), calculate the percentage reduction in the price of beaver pelt between 1940 and 2015.
Award
Working/calculation
500− 19 = 481, then 481 500 × 100 ;
(500 − 19)/500 × 100;
500 -- 100 % then 19 ---- 3.8 % followed by 100 - 3.8;
500 -- 100% then 19 ---- 3.8 % followed by 481 ---- 96.2 %;
500 −19 = 481 then 500 -- 100% followed by 481 ---- 96.2 %;
19/500 = 0.038 then 1− 0.038 = 0.962.
Answer
= 96 / 96.2
Identify one reason why the value of beaver pelts has changed over time.
This question requires “Resource Booklet - Nov 2018 SL paper 1”, available under the 'your tests' tab > supplemental materials.
Award
- less demand for beaver pelts/fur / people no longer want to wear fur / change in fashion tastes / fur no longer considered beautiful;
- changing attitudes towards hunting;
alternative materials available, eg synthetics developed; - glut in market (oversupply) from other areas reducing unit price / large number of beavers in 2015 resulted in cheaper pelts.
Do not accept “almost extinct in 1900” since the two comparative dates are 1940 and 2015.
Do not accept “beavers are considered by IUCN as least concern”.
Do not accept only “there has been an increase in numbers”.
