Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 29
~ Wildlife Values in a
<= Changing World
The question of how to use wildlife resources has many biological and
economic facets, and ways of considering it are heavily influenced by
tradition. Assumptions about the benefits of public management pro-
grams vary widely. At one extreme we have dollar-oriented standards
that can become exploitive and shortsighted. At the opposite extreme
are socially important esthetic values not easily measured or expressed.
Some uses of wildlife are intensive and must be subject to control.
Others are casual, nonconsumptive, and productive of mass benefits.
Management in the public interest must be based on an understand-
ing of our long~term predispositions, changing social and environmental
conditions, and the best possible appraisal of expectations for the fu-
ture. This chapter reviews wildlife values as a means of defining realistic
objectives for handling wildlife resources in the modern world.
HUMAN SUBSISTENCE BY GATHERING AND HUNTING
Wild plants and animals were the primordial food supply of mankind.
Although omnivorous feeding permitted man to adapt to a wide range
of habitats, the exploitation of indigenous foods by primitive methods
must have required favorable conditions and relative abundance. Thus,
some environments were habitable only seasonally and some not at all.
Sauer (1947) stated:
29
OCR for page 30
30
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
As far as we know, men always preferred to form communities and were sedentary
as their food supply permitted. We may judge that when skills were minimal the
community usually was small. Except for rich collecting grounds on bays and estu-
aries, half a dozen or at most a dozen families could make full use of the food
supply within convenient foraging distance.
Vicissitudes of the food-gathering life are evident in the account of
Alvar Nunez, survivor of the Narvaez expedition, which met disaster
on the coast of east Texas in 1528. Nunez spent 4 years among Indians
of the coastal region and told of their expedients in living off the land
(Hallenbeck, 1940~. Some tribes moved to river mouths and fed on
oysters 2 to 3 months in early spring. For about a month, blackberries
were the principal dependence. Fish, occasional game animals, and
various roots were eaten. At times, spiders, worms, lizards, salaman-
ders, snakes, "even earth and wood" were the means of survival. Fruits
of every kind were taken as they appeared, and in late summer there
was a general movement to the prickly-pear (tuna) thickets. All tribes
fed on the plentiful fruit and pads of this cactus until pecans ripened
in the bottoms in fall. Beginning with groves near the sea, the nut har-
vest was taken progressively upstream during winter months. In some
areas the beans of mesquite were an important staple.
In marginal habitats, primitive men have been characteristically few
and frequently have lived a hand-t~mouth existence. Among early ex-
plorers of the Great Basin the low estate of the so-called Digger Indians
(several tribes) was well known. They utilized a wide variety of roots,
seeds, and small animals, including grasshoppers" Wissler ( 1940) re-
marked that "they deserve our respect, because they solved the prow
lem of existence in such a forbidding environment, were too busy
feeding themselves to engage in continual war and to conduct long,
involved ceremonies."
When European adventurers came to North America in the 1 500's,
they soon learned that subsisting on the native fauna and flora could
involve primitive skills of a high order. The newcomers were largely
without the implements of their own civilization, and their pioneering
arts were minimal. Too often the supplies from home did not arrive,
and the beneficence of the Indians was uncertain-frequently with
good reason (Loran", 19651. In extensive wanderings through south-
eastern forests, plentifully supplied with game and other indigenous
foods, DeSoto's numerous company drove before it a herd of hogs to
furnish a part of its livelihood.
Graham (1947) noted that the English and Dutch colonists were
OCR for page 31
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
31
commoners who knew little of hunting and fishing and could not take
advantage of food supplies in the woodlands, streams, and coastal
waters surrounding them.
Living off the land was more foreign to them than it is to most urban dwellers of
America today. The time of the pioneer was yet to be, and living in the wilderness
was something Americans had not accomplished.... With the help and example of
the Indians and through perseverance and experience, the settlers did learn in time
to adapt themselves to the new conditions....
In testimony to the white man's capacity for learning, the hardy fur
trappers of the early nineteenth century were more than a match for
the Indian on his own ground. No more resourceful or capable men
ever subsisted in the wilderness than the "mountain men" who ex-
plored the West for beadier and incidentally opened it for settlement.
MAN I N TH E FOOD CHAI N
The most strategic situations for early man undoubtedly were those
where he could live primarily as a carnivore. An abundant game supply
appears almost invariably to have produced the cultural skills required
for its exploitation. The highly developed hunting cultures that were
dependent on the Pleistocene megafauna about 10,000 years ago were
mentioned in Chapter 1. That stone-age men dealt effectively with
every kind of big game, including mammoths and mastodons, is evi-
dent. Martin (1967) attributes the extinction of more than 100 species
of large mammals during about l,OOO years to the predatory activities
of late Paleolithic hunters.
In places and times of abundance, the carnivorous habit supports a
high standard of living. The ability of plains Indians to exploit the
practically unlimited buffalo resource after obtaining horses in the
1700's is an outstanding example in North America (Ewers, 1955; Roe,
19551. However, the plant-animal biomass necessary to support a car-
nivore at the end of a relatively long food chain is necessarily much
greater than the plant biomass from which a well-adapted herbivore
can live. Sauer ( 1947: 25) commented on the change in diet at the
primitive cultural level in these terms:
As in modern agriculture, so in early collecting, a shift from animal to plant food
yielded more calories per unit of surface. As man became more vegetarian in habit,
he could support larger numbers of his kind. Every increase in his skill of reducing
OCR for page 32
32
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
forest area, of harvesting seed, of digging roots, of cooking, of storage, raised the
ceiling of population for him and, in most instances, exerted selective pressure in
favor of the plants most useful to himself.
It probably is a realistic view that men as hunters and food gatherers
were skimming a thin cream off the more productive areas of the
earth's surface. Within the limits of primitive capabilities, they adapted
to certain environments that they were unable to change beneficially.
In the course of a long period in post-Pleistocene times, the harvest
of certain wild food plants by the Indians became controlled hus-
bandry and eventually developed into a specialized and highly success-
ful agriculture (Carrier, 1923: 1091. As mentioned previously, at the
time of white settlement on the east coast, it was the adoption of both
native methods and native plant resources that made existence possible
for Europeans in the New World. The hill culture of corn and other
crops was peculiar to this continent and became the foundation for
many American agronomic practices. The extent of our modern depen-
dence on this aboriginal foundation was described by Edwards (1940:
1 741:
. . . the economic plants domesticated by the American Indian and taken over by
the white man constitute, according to a reliable estimate, approximately four-
sevenths of the present total agricultural production of the United States, mea-
sured in farm values.... the most important are maize or corn, cotton (the New
World species, Gossypium barbadense Linn.), peanuts, pumpkins, squashes, beans,
potatoes, sweetpotatoes, tobacco, and tomatoes.
In the not-too-distant past, all mankind was dependent on the wild
fauna and flora. The relationship was elemental and total. By convert-
ing wild species into forms specialized to artificial conditions that only
man can maintain, we have mass-produced and stabilized the food sup-
ply, thus broadening the resource base upon which human populations
can expand.
More particularly, it is evident that men can be most abundant if
they are willing to restrict their diet and live primarily on such grains
as wheat or rice. When people feed plant products to livestock and eat
the animals, they go back to a longer food chain and thus cannot pro-
vide for maximum numbers. The possibility of supporting an over-
population of human beings on a diet compounded directly of algae-
the primary green-cell producers on which much of the earth's life
depends-has long been of interest to theoreticians, but the idea has
few practical implications.
OCR for page 33
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
COMMERCE AND ATTITUDES
33
In Chapter 1 we noted that commercial incentives provided by the fur
trade were the immediate lure that took men into the American hinter-
lands. By adopting Indian gathering and hunting methods, the fron-
tiersman was able to extract some of his livelihood from the primitive
environment. Then, through a new system of agriculture, he gained the
first effective control over his New World resources. As the original
scenery disappeared and cropping took over large areas, there were cor-
responding economic, social, and political gains.
Thus, in large measure, "progress" was bought through the toilsome
erasure of aboriginal conditions-a process that came to be looked
upon as the natural course of events. Deeply ingrained in the American
character is an attitude that all resources should be developed for their
highest production of consumer goods. Areas not so treated are re-
garded as "idle," their existence being in some degree a reflection on
the industry of potential entrepreneurs. Inherent wilderness values and
even the most patent beauties of nature have been held in slight regard
by the settlers and developers of land. Edwards (1940: 172) character-
ized the outlook of the colonial farmer, observing that:
His was a struggle to procure the basic necessities. To be sure, he usually did gain
some comforts over and above a rudimentary existence, but he lacked the time or
the stimulus to develop an interest in the aesthetic or the philosophical. There is
no indication of his having an appreciation even of the glorious settings which
nature had provided as the scene of his activities.
It is understandable if few people (other than an occasional Thoreau)
felt regrets over the disappearance of tall grass, large trees, and certain
animal life. That these commodities did disappear was mere evidence
that theft had been "used"-in the context of the biblical injunction
that man should multiply and subdue the earth. Complacency over this
situation was abetted by the undeniable fact that, often enough,
nothing at all could be done about it.
Originally the commercialization of any product of the land was
taken for granted as routine business. The regulation of wildlife uses
has become effective gradually since colonial times. As human numbers
expanded to alter the environment and as competition for wild land
resources built up, the social implications of individual freedom in such
matters became evident.
Hardin ( 1968) has likened the situation of our natural resources to
that of a commons used as a community pasture. The individual owner
OCR for page 34
34
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
of livestock can show a clear and measurable profit each time he adds
an animal to his herd and takes a greater share of the common re-
source. When grazing pressure gets too high and degrades the pasturage,
it affects him immediately only to a limited extent, because the cost of
shortage is shared by all the owners. Thus, there is no future in the free
use of a commons.
Ways to Extinction
Almost without exception in modern times, wherever wildlife was
readily available for uncontrolled use, the growth of human population
and exploitation of wildlife for profit created an unsupportable de-
mand. The history of many extinctions and jeopardized species in re-
cent centuries attests to this fact, although two other conditions were
likely to be involved, either singly or in combination. Such species
were sometimes specialized in ways that made them vulnerable, or
they were adapted to primitive habitats that were fated for destruction.
The passenger pigeon (Chapter l ~ provides a classic example of all
three factors at work, the clue to its original success being its extreme
gregariousness (Griscom, 19469. Schorger (1955) concluded that a pair
normally reared but one young per year, yet the survival rate permitted
a prehistoric buildup to inconceivable abundance. Evidently the great
flocks shifted about so far and so often that natural enemies could not
increase effectively. In addition, frequent movements to fresh ranges
may have been beneficial in terms of disease epidemiology.
The huge flights made it necessary to find each year, somewhere in
the East, extensive forests bearing thousands of tons of mast, as well as
abundant berry crops for late-summer feeding in the North. When
nesting concentrations came under ever-increasing human exploitation
for the market, and eastern woodlands were broken up for farming, the
annual regime of the pigeons was destroyed. The bird was behaviorally
dependent on overflowing numbers. It throve under social conditions
that few, if any, other species could have tolerated. Passenger pigeons
were not able to live and breed a pair at a time, like the mourning dove.
With the disappearance of the great flocks in the 1880's, this species
steadily declined to extinction.
The wiping out of the plains bison in the 1 870's and 1 880's has
been abundantly documented(Branch, 1929;Roe, l951;Allen, 1962~.
The buffalo bands required an extensive range over which they could
move freely, taking forage that would be renewed by adequate inter-
vals of rest. The need for space was critical, and after the white man
came, there never was any question of the ultimate fate of the buffalo.
OCR for page 35
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
Yet it was the guns of the hide hunters that cleared the grassland be-
fore it was converted to farms and ranches.
In this case, failure of the government to control the killing was
well-considered policy. The self-supporting traffic in skins and other
products provided the means of removing both the bison and the In-
dian who depended on it from land being allocated to other uses. In
little more than a decade a population of wild buffalo numbering in
the millions was eliminated. The simple fact of availability evidently
attracted a continuous increase in hunters and guaranteed the result.
In the face of a specialized enemy, factors of density dependence did
not operate to save a few buffalo, as they might have in the case of a
smaller animal in a more protective habitat.
35
Only in the far north of Canada, in Wood Buffalo National Park, do
major numbers of buffalo survive today in the presence of their natural
predator, the wolf (Fuller, 19621. Even there, conditions are altered by
a heavy incidence of introduced disease. Both of these points have rele-
vance to all our efforts to preserve endangered wildlife. It is inevitably
true that no wild species can be preserved effectively outside a biotic
community in which it can occupy its natural niche and perform its
biological functions. Thus, the buffalo in fenced pastures, immune to
the selectivity of natural mortality, will inevitably undergo an artifi-
cially redirected speciation. The animal of the future will not be what
it was under primitive conditions. One might paraphrase by saying that
if the bison is to remain a bison, it must live with the wolf.
Both habitat conditions and unregulated shooting have been im-
portant in deciding the status of our grassland grouse (see U.S. Bureau
of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1 966a). The various prairie chickens
illustrate the trends. The heath hen was a species whose demise probe
ably can be ascribed primarily to the gun, and especially to market
hunting. This bird was dependent for survival on frequently burned
barrens along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Virginia (Gross, 19281.
The sandy soils of its habitat were of little value for agriculture,
although the area occupied may well have been attenuated by
settlements.
Despite this, it is likely that enough of the mainland habitat re-
mained well into this century, and possibly to the present, to support
small populations if the birds had not been wiped out to supply the
game markets of a century ago. It is true that the species was fully pro-
tected from shooting on the island of Martha's Vineyard, and its final
disappearance from that area probably can be ascribed to successional
changes in vegetation too effectively protected from fire.
In Texas the Attwater prairie chicken, although now protected from
OCR for page 36
36
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
hunting, has been reduced in numbers to the danger point by the pro-
gressive conversion of its grassland habitat to cropland. The greater and
lesser prairie chickens are being similarly affected by the disappearance
of native vegetation.
On the central prairies and plains, grassland birds were heavily
hunted in the late 1800's, but they withstood the toll because of the
vastness of their range. In spring, the slaughter featured eskimo curlews
that migrated in leisurely fashion northward from the Texas coast,
where they arrived after a flight from Argentina (Forbush, 1912;
Swenk, 19161. This species was especially vulnerable to shooting, and
large numbers were taken on the prairies for both sport and the
market.
The arctic nesting ground of the eskimo curlew was largely undis-
turbed, and in late summer there was a general movement of old and
young southeastward to the Maritime Provinces, where great flocks fed
on the abundant berry crops of coastal muskegs. There the birds fat-
tened and provided seemingly unlimited hunting to gunners from all
over the world. The fall migration was over water to the coast of
Brazil, thence to the pampas of Argentina, where the wintering popu-
lation was harried by more hunting.
Three shooting seasons a year steadily reduced this species from a
population numbered in millions to its present status of extreme rarity,
or possible extinction-this in spite of an isolated and relatively secure
nesting range. The fact that protection would have required an inter-
national effort may have helped to discourage any attempt to salvage
the bird.
It was a lethal trait of the curlews that they would circle and hover
over birds that had been shot, thus exposing the survivors to another
volley. Similar tactics contributed to the decimation of flocks of the
Carolina parakeet. This North American parrot nested in deep swamps,
but it was attracted to dooryards by domestic fruits, which it damaged.
Confirming the effects of shooting, the extinction of this bird in the
early 1 900's largely antedated the cutting of extensive bottomland for-
ests. In fact, another species found in such habitat, the ivory-billed
woodpecker, has barely managed to escape total destruction. Both of
these wilderness dwellers were obviously ill-adapted to survive the
buildup of human populations (Greenway, 1958), although protection
from direct killing and the reservation of some high-quality range
probably could have preserved small populations.
Of all North American birds, the California condor has the slowest
rate of increase, maturing at about 6 years and producing only ogle
OCR for page 37
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
37
young in 2 years (Koford, 19531. Its numbers have declined to about
40, and with the growth of human population in the Los Angeles area,
the outlook is not favorable. Losses from even occasional shooting are
not readily replaced, and the extensive wild areas required by the spe-
cies for breeding and feeding are undergoing progressive attrition. Con-
dors seem especially vulnerable to human disturbance of any kind, and
the necessary degree of protection has not been achieved (McMillan,
19681. This, the largest bird of flight on the continent, must be re-
garded as a spectacular showpiece of the primitive that is likely to be
swamped by the rising tide of human activity in the only region where
it might be preserved.
The trumpeter swan (Banko, 1960) and whooping crane (Allen,
1952) were large, conspicuous, and edible. The skins of the former
were an early article of commerce. These birds were obvious targets for
unbridled gunnery on the grasslands and northward. In the contiguous
48 states they disappeared wherever the land was settled, a result made
permanent by the progressive drainage of large nesting marshes. Both
species have survived by virtue of fairly effective recent protection
against hunting and the existence of remote undisturbed units of
nesting environment. The swan has been re-established in scattered
breeding sites from Yellowstone Park and South Dakota to Alaska and
is reasonably secure in its present status of 4,000 to 5,000 birds. The
crane, numbering less than 50, is in greater danger, especially on mi-
grations between the small Gulf Coast wintering area (Aransas National
Wildlife Refuge) and the breeding marshes in the Northwest Territories.
Like the condor, this impressive bird must be regarded as a rare show-
piece for which a special dispensation in land and protection is neces
. .~ . . .
sary ~ it Is to survive.
Some of the foregoing examples clearly indicate the role of public
demand in the absence of harvest regulations. An available resource at-
tracts exploitation to the point where competition for the harvest may
eliminate the last of a population. It became evident in the first decade
of this century that both the sea otter and the northern fur seal were
in this position. An international agreement in 191 1 gave protection to
both species and was the means of reversing the downward trend and
restoring their populations to productivity. In the absence of such mea-
sures, the southern fur seals disappeared from most of their former
ranges.
Studies of rare and vanishing wildlife now are going forward in the
Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife with a view to salvaging the
remnant populations of specialized wilderness creatures needing emer
OCR for page 38
38
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
gency measures (U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1 966a;
Linduska, 19671. The Secretary of the Interior recognizes 78 species of
endangered birds, mammals, reptiles, and fish, and many of them could
disappear in the onrush of development and intensified use of land and
water. In a measure, old trends are still with us. There seem to be no
local economic incentives for the preservation of the Texas coastal
prairie chicken and the Attwater prairie chicken. Continued poisoning
of rodents on remaining grasslands could destroy the last remaining
black-footed ferrets. Nominally protected alligators are supporting a
vigorous poaching industry because there is a legal market for the hides
of crocodilians. Despite many unfavorable trends, it may be said, how-
ever, that for the first time in history there is systematic governmental
attention and concern for vanishing species. A reasonable effort of this
kind in the past could have avoided costly errors.
Jeopardy of the M igrants
The development of international conventions for protecting migratory
birds was one of the major management successes in the history of
wildlife on this continent. Waterfowl, in particular, were historically
popular as game and in great demand on the markets. Canvasbacks and
other prized ducks were long featured on the menus of resort hotels,
and professional hunters enjoyed profitable fall and spring shooting on
such famous grounds as Currituck Sound, Maryland's Eastern Shore,
the Erie marshes, the St. Clair flats, and the Kankakee marsh.
Waterfowl are particularly vulnerable because of their repeated re-
concentration on water areas as they run the gauntlet of gunnery from
Canada southward to wintering grounds in southern states or Latin
America. Early in this century many devices were used to attract and
slaughter birds during seasonal migrations. Live decoys and baiting
were in common use, and professional market hunters in the United
States and Mexico decimated whole flocks with punt guns and bat-
teries (see Day, 1959~. So well established were these practices, and
the ways of life that depended on them, that more than a quarter of a
century after passage of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, fed-
eral enforcement officers were still faced with flagrant lawlessness in
certain famous shooting areas.
There has been a growing recognition that waterfowl are endan-
gered by the decline of wetland habitat, and large segments of the
continental population are reduced drastically during periodic
OCR for page 39
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
droughts. Hunting is the one mortality factor that can be managed in
some degree on a year-to-year basis. The history of regulations has
been one of steadily increasing restrictions and growing attention to
the special needs of individual species. Management is complicated by
the inability of hunters to identify birds either in the field or in the
hand, and also by the fact that wetlands have diminished for hunters
just as they have for ducks.
39
Many hazards attend today's waterfowl resource. Without strenuous
efforts by both the states and the federal government to curb the ex-
cesses of earlier times, many more species of wildfowl might well be
destroyed or reduced to rarity.
Wild Commodities Today
With lessons of the past in mind, we have put restraints on commer-
cialization of wild creatures. The free-and-easy attitudes of early times
have given way to a rigorous control over taking and selling most spe-
cies. We still have legal markets for a few wildlife products, including a
highly discriminatory and regulated commercial fishery in which the
aim of study and management is sustained yield. In fact, it is highly
probable that productivity in this field can be expanded with further
research on oceanic resources. Landings of fish and other aquatic life
in 1965 were 4 8 billion pounds, with an initialvalue of $445.7 million
(Lyres, 19653. At the federal level the industry is served by the Bureau
of Commercial Fisheries, and state agencies control their own internal
problems.
Fish resources readily available to the general public are usually
cropped for sport fishing purposes. Where a choice exists, the modern
appraisal is likely to assume that a recreational fish harvest produces
more benefits than a purely commercial enterprise. Dollar income to
someone is involved in both (discussed later in this chapter in con-
nection with the national survey of sport fishing and hunting).
Wild fur represents another kind of wildlife crop that has been on
the market since prehistoric times. In 1967, a year of low prices, the
annual summary of the U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
( 1968) indicated a minimum raw fur value of more than $12 million.
The most important single species is muskrat, of which the annual
catch is 4 to 5 million pelts. The fur industry is not large, and it evi-
dently is in long-term decline in the face of continued development of
competing synthetic products.
OCR for page 44
44
Land Use and Widlife Resources
considerable overlap. There were only 10 percent as many hunters in
the 9-1 1 age group as there were fishermen.
The above figures and many more on the total fishing and hunting
effort by the public are contributing to a greatly improved understand-
ing of these outdoor activities. It is evident, for example, that major
participation in both cases is by people in small cities and in rural
areas, bespeaking the increasing isolation from the natural scene of the
residents of large metropolitan districts. Since people tend to be un-
concerned about things they do not understand, valid questions are
raised about the degree of sophistication in outdoor affairs that can be
expected of an increasingly urbanized society. There are substantial in-
dications of the relative growth of nonconsumptive uses of wildlife.
For example, in the 3 years following the 1965 survey, the sale of
hunting licenses remained about the same, whereas membership in the
National Audubon Society more than doubled. Figures obtained by
the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation in connection with the 1965 census
indicated that there are 8 million birdwatchers and 3 million wildlife
photographers in the nation. In 1967, there were 140 million visitors
to areas in the national park system-nearly a threefold increase since
1 950.
Markets for Gear and Services
The recent fishing and hunting surveys have shown clearly that these
activities are supporting a substantial annual business turnover in goods
and services. Expenditures in all categories for the 1965 census aggre-
gated more than $4 billion for the 33 million "serious" anglers and
hunters involved (U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1966b).
The mean expenditure-by sport fishermen per recreation-day was
$5.60 and by hunters, $6.03.
As a major part of the fiscal support of management programs, the
states collected $138 million in fishing and hunting license fees in
1965. Sportsmen paid $28 million in federal excise taxes on equipment
and supplies. These funds reached the state programs through the Fed-
eral Aid to Fish and Wildlife Restoration Programs of the Bureau of
Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.
Before the collection of such information, it was not possible to
estimate accurately how much fishing and hunting were contributing
to the large business base of outdoor recreation and the "tourist" in-
dustry. Since this is now measurable, it is frequently cited in justifica-
tion for properly maintaining and managing the renewable wildlife
resources involved. It should be pointed out, however, that overem
OCR for page 45
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
45
phasis on dollar values could lead to underestimating elusive but much
greater social values. The problems of cities are in large degree pro-
duced by the overconcentration of people. The role that outdoor re-
laxation will play in countering undesirable density effects is not clear
at present, but in the interest of erring on the "safe" side, it must be
assumed to be large.
How much value fish and game have to an individual landowner is
likely to depend on the kind of land he has, whether the farm is also a
family home, and the degree of sophistication of the proprietor as an
outdoorsman. As a scenic amenity, wildlife in general can be important
nearly anywhere, but fishing and hunting are marketable only where
high quality in one form or another can be demonstrated.
Artificially stocked fishponds and game preserves are increasingly
popular near large cities, and various incidental services (e.g., guides
and dogs) are usually provided along with fishing or hunting privileges.
Frequently the "results" of this kind of fishing or hunting are guaran-
teed in one way or another.
I ncentives an d R ea I ities
Dependence for sport on wild stocks of fish or game is a different
matter. Some areas are productive enough to enable an owner to
charge for access to his property and obtain an adequate return for
his effort. But the yield of "average" fishing waters or game lands is
not high in comparison with yields of other crops. Referring to this
situation in the introduction to a government publication (Miller and
Powell, 1942), W. L. McAtee made an evaluation that is as good today
as it was when it was written:
The aggregate of wildlife on agricultural lands of the United States is large and its
estimated value is very impressive. Hence enthusiasts have suggested that returns
from wildlife management may be an important source of revenue to farmers.
Locally, worthwhile revenue may be obtained, but the country is vast, and the
values, however large, when spread over the whole, become very thin. Hunters are
so numerous that the game harvest of a State distributed among them could sup-
ply each with only a fraction of a single specimen of some of the species most
sought. If the return to the hunter is small, then that to the farmer cannot be
great. Again, high-class agricultural land can hardly be devoted to such a distinctly
low-income crop as wildlife. Only inferior lands can be used and their productivity
of wildlife as of other crops is low.
Miller and Powell (op. cit.) recognized the need for substantial land-
owner incentives if wildlife is to be managed on private lands. They
OCR for page 46
46
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
noted, however, that the effectiveness of available incentives is likely
to depend greatly on the views of the individual.
Administrative officials, the public, the farmers, and the sportsmen must be taught
to realize that the recreational, social, and esthetic values of wildlife greatly exceed
its economic value; and that wildlife is a natural resource that all have a right to
enjoy. The rifts of individuals must be respected and protected even if this re-
stricts public utilization of wildlife. The user must become willing to pay an in-
creased amount and the farmer must be willing to accept a large part of the return
for his efforts on behalf of wildlife in the form of such mtan~bles as recreational,
esthetic, and social enjoyment.
On this basis it is assumed that the appreciation and use of wildlife
values will require an educational effort applied to both the public and
the landowner, and that the returns in public benefits are worth the ef-
fort. It may also be inferred that the demand for free public hunting
will continue, at least in "low-pressure" areas, but as a minimum con-
dition its perpetuation will require the effective protection of land-
owner rights.
If these conditions apply to a large part of our private wildlife-
producing lands, another situation also needs to be recognized. Certain
critically important and highly productive wildlife habitats exist on
private land. Wetlands that produce waterfowl on the northern prairies
are in this category. The preservation and improvement of such areas
for ducks will require "incentives" of a special kind, including outright
public acquisition.
For the waterfowl hunter it is another fact of life that, because of
growing competition, the price of high-quality shooting marshes is
likely to continue to increase. This applies also to other choice game
lands and (under some conditions) to fishing waters. It is evident that
the economic situation changes greatly from areas where wildlife is a
secondary product to those where it is the primary motive in owning a
property.
MEASURING ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL VALUES
It is inherent in the relationship of man to his resource base that all
environmental benefits (uses) represent positive "values" regardless of
units of measurement or applicable modes of expression. Dollar values
are common economic terminology for commodities and may be in-
volved in any kind of experience, useful or otherwise. However, they
OCR for page 47
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
47
are not a universally satisfactory common denominator. Environmental
conditions have biological and social impacts that often cannot be re-
liably described because of presently unmanageable complexities-they
are widely variable, they tend to synergize, and, relative to human
numbers, the effects are density dependent.
Thus, the value of a recreational asset or experience might be high
or low, depending on the extent to which it mitigates a social need
that, in itself, may be an elusive condition to measure. These technical
difficulties seem to defy generalization and lead to the expression of
values in terms such as "esthetic" and "spiritual," which have a subjec-
tive usefulness. The ecologist is accustomed to dealing in trends and in-
fluences that, for the moment, must be accepted with a large probable
error. However, it is inevitable that biological variables will be increas-
ingly quantified, including resource values as they apply to man. An
economist accepts the situation in these terms (Machlup, 19651:
We shall have to distinguish between pecuniary and non-pecun~ary advantages and
disadvantages, and between judgments that rest on statistical records and others
that are purely subjective evaluations without any supporting numerical data. But
the point to note is that economic evaluation is not confined to the items for
which price data are available. It comprises all pros and cons of the plan or ac-
tivity under examination.
If these views are correct, it follows that a proper judgment of values
or a choice among resource allocations must rest on a broader expertise
than that of market economics. It must recognize the social and be-
havioral needs of man-parameters not adequately represented, for ex-
ample, in the gross national product. On public lands a major part of
the recreation privilege is commonly furnished free, and Pearse (1968)
observed that this social value accrues entirely to the user. Even those
who do not participate have an opportunity to do so. On the other
hand, the easily measured dollar income from recreation belongs to the
purveyors of permits, goods, and services.
The applicability of such logic may be seen in the results of a recent
survey of big game hunting in British Columbia (Bowden and Pearse,
19681. In 1966, out of a total of 1 17,000 big game hunters in the prov-
ince, 6,500 were nonresidents, principally from the United States. The
nonresidents spent S3.7 million in British Columbia, of which the
major items were $2.2 million for guide services, $348 thousand for
licenses and fees, and $386 thousand for food, liquor, and lodging.
These figures have obvious usefulness to the government, the tourist
industry, and others concerned with serving the public. However, for
OCR for page 48
48
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
truly evaluating the almost unique combination of big game species
now available in British Columbia, a host of intangibles must be con-
sidered. The big game resource paid a 1-year dividend of 115,000
animals, most of which were taken by residents interested in meat and
the remainder primarily by nonresidents interested in trophies. Many
other people both inside and outside Canada can hunt big game in
British Columbia, and an even greater number can enjoy seeing the ani-
mals in their native setting whenever they wish. There are few stan-
dards against which the last two values can be appraised, but the values
unquestionably are increasing as human numbers increase.
Krutilla (1967) made a point that is almost universally applicable to
unique natural features of our environment, including geologic forms,
threatened biotypes, or rare ecosystems. For the indefinite future, it
will be essential to keep open the scientific option of studying their
natural processes or utilizing for unforeseen purposes the species thus
preserved.
Traditional Assumptions
Our review of historic trends provided ample evidence that in North
America we have not been much concerned with nonmarketable ame
nities or with our environment as such. In the early period of occupa-
tion and population buildup, there was a vast fund of natural wealth
to be disposed of, and if the human habitat suffered, there were always
fresh scenes to turn to. In truth, the attitudes born of our early condi-
tions not only persist in the minds of people but also are effective in
legal forms that continue to dominate important aspects of resource
use. So much of our public management concerns water, and water is
so universally tied into the wildlife interest, that one may turn to the
complexity of water issues to illustrate many kinds of problems.
The example cited in Chapter 1 relative to the totality of traditional
economic thinking on drainage laws (Haik, 1957) illustrates this situa-
tion. It is generally true that in the United States we have never
stopped reclaiming the native environment for irrigation and drainage
projects and for other purposes. In the large nationally subsidized un-
dertakings of this kind, we most clearly threaten wildlife and scenic re-
sources whose usefulness we have only begun to appraise in the modern
context. On a grand scale we appear to be following old assumptions
that open space is wasteland and that making such areas "productive"
is inherently good, irrespective of developmental costs or the usefulness
of what is being produced.
OCR for page 49
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
49
In this connection, Krutilla ( 1966, 1968) examined cost and benefit
criteria and reviewed recent evaluations of various national water de-
velopment and land reclamation projects (see Ulrich, 1953; Renshaw,
1957; Ekstein, 1958; Hufschmidt et al., 1961; White, 1961; Ruttan,
1965; Breathitt, 1967; National Advisory Commission on Food and
Fiber, 1967; Udall, 1 967), including types concerned with hydroelec-
tr~c power, common storage, and low-flow augmentation. He (1968)
concluded that:
Large water resource developments . . . have been justified spuriously by grossly
overestimated benefits to accompany parallel understatement of costs; the real
value of the actual output in many cases will fail to cover real costs by a wide
margin (as in the case of the Bridge and Marble Canyon projects) and they should
not be built in any event whether or not there would be damage to wildlife habitat
or scenic values.
The author noted, however, that "most of such developmental ac-
tivities, as for example large multiple-purpose water resource projects,
with finite useful lives, result in a permanent and irreversible injury to
the natural environment." Elsewhere (1967) he mentioned that the
cost of not changing rare natural environments may be relatively small,
and that "with the continued advance in technology, more substitutes
for conventional natural resources will be found."
Quantity versus Quality
Servicing the demand for continuous economic growth has been inte-
gral to many public programs, and it undoubtedly abets the drive to
expand agriculture and industry into new areas. It is a widely held view
that any enterprise contributes to "prowess" and human well-being if
it stimulates population growth and a greater volume of business. Such
assumptions have critical longrange implications when applied to
making decisions between alternative recreational uses. This is well il-
lustrated by Krutilla's ( 1968) discussion of multipurpose reservoirs that
may be constructed at the expense of choice scenic canyons, white-
water streams, and the valley ranges of big game herds (see also Chap-
ter 31. He mentioned the characteristic attitudes of sponsors and con-
struction agencies and noted that
. . . unlike the generous imputations of value from land and water resource devel-
opment, the estimate of the value of preserving the natural environment tends to
be systematically depressed. This is a result of the failure to reflect adequately the
qualitatively different outdoor recreation experiences in evaluating comparative
OCR for page 50
50
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
benefits and costs. One practice has been to consider the number of individuals
who would participate in outdoor recreation in an area with and without the
prospective water impoundment. By the very nature of things, this biases the valu-
ation of recreation benefits to the flat water (reservoir) activities as these tend to
be more gregarious in character (picnicking, swimming, etc.~. However, the value
of a day of swimming may be very much less than a day of quality trout or salmon
fishing, or a day of hunting big game which may be dependent upon the prospec-
tive reservoir bottom for wintering range, etc. This would follow because of the
relative abundance of alternatives available for indulging the former, and thus the
low value one would place on an additional opportunity if alternatives were readily
available; and the relative scarcity and thus high value placed on preserving the
latter because of the increasing rareness of opportunities available and the absence
of close substitutes. Accordingly, proposed impoundments which rely for their
justification on the provision of water-based recreation, in appreciable part, should
be subjected to critical economic and ecological examination so that what may be
rare and valuable is not traded for what is commonplace or in surplus, and of low
or negligible value at the margin.
In mediating among competing interests for resource use, public
agencies often cater to the side most numerously represented, irrespec-
tive of the intensity of feeling involved. Thus, small groups of sophis-
ticated outdoorsmen could be overwhelmed by a superficial interest of
the many who might, for example, like to see development money
spent in a local area.
If such cases come up for decision one at a time, all the small, spe-
cialized, and rare recreational features are likely to be eliminated. Thus,
diversity in the human habitat and the options of the future will be
lost.
The extent and quality of the service rendered by outdoor environ-
ments and assets (fish, game) frequently depend on the way they are
used. Seining fish obviously would be a less rewarding way to use the
crop than hook-and-line angling; yet seining is useful for prescribed
purposes. Hunting deer with the bow and arrow provides more man-
hours of sport per deer than gun hunting; yet shooting with rifle or
shotgun is the usual way to obtain mass public benefits from a game
resource. The management agencies attempt to provide many options
and spread activities as widely as possible.
Doing things "the hard way" by methods requiring particular moti-
vation, effort, and skill is widely regarded as one means of improving
the quality of outdoor experiences. Thus, hiking or packing into wild
country is likely to be more rewarding for many people than driving to
the scenic destination in a car. Widespread highway development prob-
ably assures the possibilities for mass movement of citizens into many
OCR for page 51
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
51
desirable areas. But in the interest of preserving diverse opportunities
and a sampling of country with minimum disturbance, it may be as-
sumed also that it is not desirable to build roads for public access into
all parts of our remaining wild areas.
In an evaluation of the wildlife resources of the Tennessee Valley,
Emerson (1968) stated that the enjoyment of wildlife is inversely pro-
portional to the artificiality of the situation. He expressed a viewpoint
that probably has been neglected in many public programs but which
will inevitably need to be a part of realistic planning:
Quality experiences are those that increase man's perception of his environment
and his relationship to it. At the same time they are satisfying, enjoyable, and non-
destructive of the resources upon which they depend. To maintain quality, only
limited numbers of people can be accommodated for observing wildlife in wilder-
ness areas, waterfowl hunting, and other such uses.
It is commonly assumed that outdoor areas used by many people
must offer all conveniences and that travel must be highly mechanized.
In some situations, however, this is not true, and more people may, in
fact, be served by keeping things simple. This was aptly illustrated by
Brooks (1961) in discussing the recent buildup of visitation in the
national parks:
The space available in the national parks is not big enough for all who want to use
it. But the size of the park is directly related to the manner in which you see it. If
ou are in a canoe traveling at three miles an hour, the lake on which you are pad-
dling is ten times as long and ten times as broad as it is to the man in a speed boat
going thirty. An hour's paddle will take you as far away as an hour in a speed
boat-if there are no speed boats. In other words, more people can use the same
space with the same results. Every road that replaces a foot path, every outboard
that replaces a canoe paddle, shrinks the area of the park.
~ iving Standard and Environment
The validity of the American expectation of continued population
growth, unlimited resource development, and economic expansion in
every part of the country is being seriously questioned. Persistence of
such an expectation could have disastrous effects on the human en-
vironment and on living standards. In the face of many pressures, it is
essential that public agencies apply professional expertise in identi-
fying the most vulnerable of our resources and in taking steps to pro-
tect them. Wildlife is clearly one of these resources, since it is not
immediately competitive in the context of traditional business enter
OCR for page 52
52
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
prise, and there is no established socioeconomic mechanism that can
assure its continued usefulness in our culture.
Usefulness, in a highly discriminating sense, without degradation
will need to be the objective in managing wildlife and other aspects of
our out-of-doors for this and future generations. In the following chap
ters, policies and methods are discussed that should be helpful in ac
complishing this objective.
REFERENCES
Allen, D. L. 1962. Our wildlife legacy. Funk and Wagnalls Co., New York. 422 p.
Allen, R. P. 1952. The whooping crane. Nat. Audubon Soc. Rep. 3. 220 p.
Banko, W. E. 1960. Trumpeter swan, its history, habits, and population in United
States. U.S. Burl Sport Fish. and Wildl., N. Amer. Fauna. 63. 214 p.
Bowden, G., and P. H. Pearse. 1968. Non-resident big game hunting and the
guiding industry in British Columbia: an economic survey. Brit. Columbia Dep.
Recr. & Conserv. Fish and Wildl. Br., Study Rep. 2. 72 p.
Branch, E. D. 1929. The hunting of the buffalo. D. Appleton ~ Co., New York.
240p.
Breathitt, E. T. 1967. The people left behind. President's National Advisory
Commission on Rural Poverty. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C.
Brooks, P. 1961. The pressure of numbers. Atlantic Monthly 207(2):54-56.
Carrier, L. 1923. The beginnings of agriculture in America. McGraw-Hill Book
Co., New York. 323 p.
Day, A. M. 1959. North American waterfowl. Stackpole, Harrisburg, Pa. 363 p.
Edwards, E. E. 1940. American agriculture-the first 300 years, p. 171-276. In
Farmers in a changing world. The yearbook of agriculture 1940. U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Ekstein, O. 1958. Water resource development. In The economics of project
evaluation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Emerson, F. B., Jr. 1968. Tennessee Valley wildlife: an outlook for the year
2000. Tennessee Valley Authority, Div. of Forest. Dev. 27 p.
Ewers, J. C. 1955. The horse in Blackfoot Indian culture. Smithsonian Inst., Burl
Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 159. 374 p.
Forbush, E. H. 1912. Game birds, wild-fowl and shore birds. Massachusetts State
Board of Agriculture. 622 p.
Fuller, A. W. 1962. The biology and management of the bison of Wood Buffalo
National Park. Can. Wildl. Serv. Manage. Bu11. 1~16):1-52.
Graham, E. lI. 1947. The land and wildlife. Oxford University Press, New York.
232 p.
Greenway, J. C., Jr. 1958. Extinct and vanishing birds of the world. Amer. Comm.
Intern. Wildl. Protection Spec. Publ. 13. 518 p.
Griscom, L. 1946. The passing of the passenger pigeon. Amer. Scholar 15:212-216.
OCR for page 53
Wildlife Values in a Changing World
53
Gross, A. O. 1928. The heath hen. Boston Soc. Natur. Hist. Memoirs 6~4):491-
588.
Haik, R. A. 1957. Water, habitat, and wildlife. Conserv. Volunteer 20:1-5.
Hallenbeck, C. 1940. Alvar Nunez, Cabeza de Vaca. The journey and route of the
first European to cross the continent of North America, 153~1536. Arthur H.
Clark Co., Glendale, Calif. 326 p.
Har din, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162: 1243-1248.
Hufschmidt, M. M., J. V. Krutilla, and J. Marglin. 1961. Standards and criteria for
formulating and evaluating federal resource development. Report of the Panel
of Consultants to the U.S. Bureau of the Budget.
Koford, C. B. 1953. The California condor. Nat. Audubon Soc. Res. Rep. 4. 154 p.
Krutilla, J. V. 1966. Is public intervention in water resources development con-
ducive to economic efficiency? Reprint No.56, Jan. Natur. Resour. I.
6:60-75. Resources for the Future, Inc., Washington, D.C.
Krutilla, J. V. 1967. Conservation reconsidered. Amer. Econ. Rev. 57(4~:777-786.
Krutilla, J. V. 1968. Balancing extractive industries with wildlife habitat. 33rd N.
Amer. Wildl. ~ Natur. Resour. Conf. Trans., p. 1 19-129.
Linduska, J. P. 1967. Endangered species-the federal program. Western Ass. State
Game & Fish Comm., 47th Annul Conf., p. 40-48.
Lorant, S. (ed.~. 1965. The new world; the first pictures of America. Duell,
Sloan & Pearce, New York. 292 p.
Lyles, C. H. 1965. Fishery statistics of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildl.
Serv. Statist. Dig. 59. 756 p.
Machlup, F.1965. Comments: economic and non-economic values, p. 1 55. In
R. Dorfman (ed.), Measuring benefits of government investments. The
Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
Martin, P. S. 1967. Pleistocene overkill. Natur. Hist. 76~10):32-38.
McMillan, I. 1968. Man and the California condor. E. P. Dutton & Co., New York.
191 p.
Miller, J. P., and B. P. Powell. 1942. Game and wild-fur production and utilization
on agricultural land. U.S. Dep. Agr. Circ. 636.58 p.
National Advisory Commission on Food and Fiber. 1967. Food and fiber for the
future. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.361 p.
Pearse, P. H.1968. A new approach to the evaluation of non-priced recreational
resources. Land Econ. 44~1~: 87-99.
Renshaw, E. F. 1957. Toward responsible government: an economic appraisal of
federal investment in water resource programs. Idyia Press, Chicago.
Rockefeller, L. S. et al. 1962. Outdoor recreation for America. Outdoor Recr.
Rev. Comm. 246 p.
Roe, F. G. 1951. The North American buffalo. University of Toronto Press,
Ontario, Canada. 95 7 p.
Roe, F. G. 1955. The Indian and the horse. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
434 p.
Ruttan, V. 1965. The economic demand for irrigated acreage. Johns Hopkins Press,
Baltimore.
Sauer, C. O. 1947. Early relations of man to plants. Geogr. Rev. 37~1~: 1-25.
Schorger, A. W. 1955. The passenger pigeon: its natural history and extinction.
University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. 424 p.
OCR for page 54
54
Land Use and W ildlife Resources
Swenk, M. H. 1916. The Eskimo curlew and its disappearance, p. 325-340. In
Smithsonian Inst. Annul Rep. 1915.
Udall, S. L. 1967. Policy recommendations of the Department of the Interior on
reservoir storage and release for flow regulation for water quality control on
federal and federally supported projects. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, D.C.
Ulrich, R. 1953. Relative costs and benefits of land reclamation in the humid
Southeast and the semi-arid West. J. Farm Econ. 35~1~:62-73.
U.S. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. 1967. A report on recreation land price es-
calation. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 33 p.
U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. 1 966a. Rare and endangered fish and
wildlife of the United States. U.S. Dep. Interior Resource Publ. 34.
U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. 1 966b. National survey of fishing and
hunting, 1965. U.S. Dep. Interior Resource Publ. 27.
U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. 1968. Fur catch in the United States,
1967. U.S. Dep. Interior Wildl. Leafl. 482.
Wharton, W. P., et al. 1928. Recreation resources of federal lands. Joint Commit-
tee on Recreational Survey of Federal Lands, American Forestry Association
and National Parks Association. National Conference on Outdoor Recreation
Washington, D.C. 141 p.
White, G. F. (ed.~. 1961. Univ. Chicago, Dep. Geogr. Res. Paper 70. 228 p.
Wissler, C. 1940. Indians of the United States: Four centuries of their culture.
Doubleday & Company, Garden City, N.Y. 319 p.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
wildlife resources
