18 



VII. VALUE OF WILDLIFE 



Federal legislation recognizes the value of fish and wildlife. These 

 values in the past often have been appraised by such terms as invaluable or 

 priceless because many intangible aesthetic considerations are involved. How- 

 ever, in 1955, the Fish and Wildlife Service arranged for a survey to be made 

 of expenditures by hunters and fishermen. In that year, expenditures for this 

 sport were about $3 billion and there were about 25,000,000 licensed sportsmen 

 [63]. Since then, the number of licensed sportsmen has increased by more than 

 a third and the price index has gone up. Therefore, $4 billion probably are 

 now being expended annually in sport fishing and hunting. On the Bureau's 

 wildlife refuges, 605^ of the use is by people not engaged in these sports 

 (U. S. Dept. of the Interior, News Release P. M. 53743, April 22, 1959). 

 While figures serve as an index to the value of fish and wildlife, they do not 

 reflect the aesthetic appeal of living natural resources to the general public. 



VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SAFEGUARDING WILDLIFE VALUES 

 DURING PEST CONTROL 



The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife recognizes that control of 

 certain pests is essential for the preservation of public health and the pro- 

 tection of valuable crops or commodities, but it also recognizes that many 

 commonly used pesticides are toxic to fish, birds, and other wild creatures. 

 To minimize these hazards, the Bureau has recommended close adherence to cer- 

 tain fundamental principles [ll], [l3], [2l], [42], [45]. 



It should be clear from the initial presentation in this report that any 

 applications in excess of those listed for DDT in Table 6 will produce wildlife 

 loss in the various classes of animals as indicated. Table 10 gives a comperi- 

 son of relative toxicities of other compounds with DDT = 1. With the aid of 

 these two tables it should be possible to predict in advance the degree of 

 direct effects on wildlife which will take place with any given application. 

 By keeping the amount below the amounts listed in Table 6, or the relative 

 equivalent, serious mortality can be avoided. 



The following suggestions are in addition to this primary consideration. 



(1) Chemical treatment should be used only when entomological research 

 has proved it to be necessary. 



(2) Before pesticides are used, the effects on different kinds of animals 

 and on animals living in different habitats should be known and carefully 

 considered. 



(3) Only minimum quantities of chemicals necessary to achieve adequate 

 control of pests should be applied. 



(4) Pesticides should not be applied to areas that are any larger than is 

 necessary and the chemicals that are used should be the ones whose effects are 

 no more long-lasting than necessary. 



