A Pheasant’s Tradeoffs

Looking at pheasants and salmon, we can again say that economics is everywhere.

Economics is Everywhere

Pheasants

Male golden pheasants are stunning.

But is it worth it?

Described by the NY Times, the male golden pheasant has “cinnamon-colored tail quills” and a “striped hood of orange and black feathers.” Add to that their “forehead crest of yellow plumage,” and you wind up with a gorgeous bird.

The male golden pheasant

The female golden pheasant

Sometimes, though, being gorgeous has a downside.

For these birds, it’s their eyesight. Or, as one scientist explained, “This amazing hairdo cuts out a large portion of their vision.” Compared to their less attractive female sisters, cousins, and mates, their visual blind spot is 137 percent larger. Sort of like a person with long bangs on their forehead, the birds’ plumage reduces their field of vision. When foraging for berries, at the same time, they can’t see a nearby predatory cat or fox.

Crucially, scientists add that the plumage that blocks their vision enhances their attractiveness to females. Consequently, they have more baby birds (before an early death?).

Salmon

Because of four dams, the fish that live in the Klamath River have had to take a detour. Built between 1912 and 1962, the dams and other comparable structures added to California’s and Oregon’s irrigation and hydroelectric capacity. However, they also eliminated the upriver population of salmon, trout, and other similar species. Now though, with the dams’ demolition in 2024, it took only a year for some of the fish to return to the old routes that the dams had blocked.

Our Bottom Line: Tradeoffs

When we slice through all of the complicated layers of economics, we wind up with one basic idea. Defined as sacrifice (not money), cost is the alternative that we did not choose.

Taking the next step, economists explain that it’s tough to escape a cost. Their reason? If we use the economic definition of scarcity that is limited quantities (not shortages), sooner or later, we wind up with a sacrifice. More of one item means less of the other one.

For pheasants, the sacrifice is the vision they tradeoff for the plumage that makes them irresistible to women.

With our salmon, it was the dam that had the choice between more fish or irrigation and hydropower.

Cost reminds us that there is no free lunch.

My sources and more: Having read the NY Times Science story, it reminded me of the salmon. As always, it was a pleasure having two disparate articles converge.