W. H. DRURY 



birds). 



c. To understand the effects of the pres- 

 ence of predators (whether introduced or na- 

 tive) on breeding colonies in order to assess 

 the importance of removing the predators or 

 preventing their access to breeding grounds. 



The Relation of the Products 



of Biological Research to 



Programs for Conservation of 



Marine Bird Resources 



Although peaceful coexistence of wildlife 

 populations and economic development are 

 here assumed to be practical, some new social 

 institutions are needed to control damaging 

 activities of people during economic develop- 

 ment. Human activities and industrial prod- 

 ucts which damage wildlife or their habitat 

 must be identified, as must the space and re- 

 sources which wildlife require for survival and 

 health. 



1. What seabird cliffs, islands, lagoons, wet- 

 lands, river mouths, and other habitat fea- 

 tures are of first importance for breeding or 

 for maintaining the populations? Some small 

 areas of habitat are critical for the survival of 

 some species during periods of stress. Those 

 habitats need official recognition. Steps are 

 needed to ensure that the habitats are 

 maintained. 



2. What physical expressions of economic 

 development are of little, modest, or serious 

 impact on wildlife and its habitat? These ac- 

 tivities and constructions include harbors, 

 storage sites, transshipment facilities, roads, 

 pipelines, summer camps, and suburban or 

 vacation developments. 



3. What kinds of human activities will dis- 

 turb, damage, or change the behavior or ac- 

 cessibility of wildlife? Many activities of one 

 group of people have secondary effects which 

 affect the enjoyment of resources for other 

 groups. These include 



a. gill netting for salmon, which may kill 

 large numbers of murres and diving ducks; 



b. release of predators on seabird nesting 

 islands, which may kill adults or inhibit their 

 feeding their young; 



c. free running of pets (such as dogs and 

 cats) over wetlands or wildlife habitat, be- 



cause pets are predators and harass the wild- 

 life which may be feeding; 



d. flights of aircraft, especially heli- 

 copters, near or over seabird cliffs because 

 such flights may cause serious damage to 

 eggs and young; 



e. hunting, because the game becomes 

 timid and flees from those who might enjoy 

 watching wildlife; 



f. snow machines, because their presence 

 is disagreeable to many and they provide easy 

 access by which disturbing activities may 

 reach into areas where wildlife would other- 

 wise be undisturbed. 



4. What limitations or alterations are 

 needed in the existing legal institutions, such 

 as the Marine Mammals Protection Act, the 

 instruments implementing native land claims, 

 the process of Alaska State lands withdrawal, 

 the conditions for leasing State and Federal 

 lands for development of mineral resources, 

 and traditional rights of private property? All 

 of these legal institutions are relevant to 

 problems of wildlife survival and restoration, 

 and within most of these institutions there 

 exist conflicts between rights and benefits of 

 special political interests and the husbanding 

 of renewable common property resources. 



Experience in Europe and in New England 

 suggests that if reasonable limitations are set 

 on human activities and that if adequate 

 money charge is made against those who 

 profit by economic development to defray full 

 social costs, wildlife can continue to do well. 

 In most cases where damage has occurred it is 

 because those who administer the public insti- 

 tutions have failed to include consideration of 

 the common property resources. 



References 



Ainley, D. G., and T. J. Lewis. 1974. The history of 

 Farallon Island marine bird populations. Condor 

 76(4):432-446. 



Ames, P. L., and G. S. Mersereau. 1964. Some fac- 

 tors in the decline of the osprey in Connecticut. 

 Auk81(2):173-185. 



Andrewartha, H. G., and L. C. Birch. 1954. The dis- 

 tribution and abundance of animals. Univ. Chi- 

 cago Press, Chicago, 111. 782 pp. 



Ashmole, N. P. 1963. The regulation of numbers of 

 tropical oceanic birds. Ibis 103b:458-473. 



Bailey, E. P., and G. H. Davenport. 1972. Die-off of 

 common murres on the Alaska Peninsula and 

 Unimak Island. Condor 74(2):215-219. 



