180 



D. R. CLINE, C. WENTWORTH, AND T. W. BARRY 



to Florida and Alaska to California, are busy 

 scheduling boat or airplane excursions to 

 marine-bird viewing areas off their shores. 

 The Alaska and Washington State ferry sys- 

 tems have for years been providing passen- 

 gers opportunity to enjoy seabirds of the 

 North Pacific coast. Audubon chapters in San 

 Diego, Los Angeles, Monterey, Seattle, An- 

 chorage, and other cities sponsor annual ex- 

 cursions to seabird colonies. 



In 1975 a charter airline service in Anchor- 

 age, Alaska, booked 530 people in 51 tours to 

 fly to the Pribilof Islands in the Bering Sea to 

 view the outstanding seabird and fur seal 

 colonies there. Included in the bookings were 

 three National Audubon Society Interna- 

 tional Ecology Workshops, the Massachu- 

 setts Audubon Society, the National Wildlife 

 Federation, and Canadian Nature Federation. 

 Participants paid from $1,500 to $2,000 for 

 these tour packages to Alaska. At $300 to 

 $380 per person, depending on the length of 

 the excursion, the air charter service grossed 

 about $160,000 from these tours (Reeve Aleu- 

 tian Airways, personal communication). 



Fairweather Outings, a small cruise busi- 

 ness based in Sitka, Alaska, takes people on 

 wilderness excursions in the west Chichagof- 

 Glacier Bay area of the southeastern part of 

 the State. The seabird rookeries are one of the 

 principal attractions for the 90 people taking 

 these trips each year. Over one-third of the 

 clientele has been from outside Alaska; thus 

 their dollars are new dollars to the State's 

 economy. Fairweather Outings grossed about 

 $11,000 in 1974 (Charles Johnstone, personal 

 communication). 



These examples illustrate how seabirds, 

 both directly and indirectly, help small 

 coastal businessmen earn a living. It is also 

 important to recognize that the multiplier ef- 

 fects generated by the expenditures in all of 

 the above examples ripple through the re- 

 gional and State economies. 



Despite the great social and economic sig- 

 nificance of such activities along our coasts, 

 apparently no attempt is being made to deter- 

 mine the number of people involved in such 

 pursuits and how much they are spending. A 

 study of the phenomenon would undoubtedly 

 produce startling results. 



The Wildlife Management Institute (1975) 

 revealed that the national estimated value of 



manufacturers' shipments in 1972 was $157 

 million for camping equipment, $5 million for 

 binoculars, and $19.9 million for bird feed. 

 Sales of wild bird feed have been increasing 5 

 to 10% per year recently. These are all eco- 

 nomic indicators of recreation trends of which 

 enjoyment of marine birds is a part. 



A major use of photographic equipment and 

 related products and services is in the natural 

 and scenic areas of the nation. Manufacturers' 

 shipments of photographic equipment, and 

 photofinishing, were valued at $2.3 billion in 

 1972. A 5% excise tax on these items would 

 have generated nearly $118 million (Wildlife 

 Management Institute 1975). 



Since inadequate funding plagues most non- 

 game management initiatives, the Wildlife 

 Management Institute (1975) recommended 

 that Congress authorize a matching grant-in- 

 aid program to benefit nongame fish and wild- 

 life. Funds would be obtained from new manu- 

 facturers' excise taxes on designated outdoor 

 recreational equipment to initially yield at 

 least $40 million annually. 



The Executive Committee of the Interna- 

 tional Association of Game, Fish and Conser- 

 vation Commissioners and the Council of the 

 Wildlife Society have already endorsed model 

 legislation for a State program for nongame 

 wildlife conservation (Madson and Kozicky 

 1972). We urge that these proposals be given 

 serious consideration in terms of future fund- 

 ing of marine bird conservation programs in 

 North America. 



It is encouraging to note that several 

 States, including Washington, Oregon, and 

 California, have recently initiated nongame 

 wildlife programs that have resulted in sub- 

 stantial benefits to their citizens. The Cali- 

 fornia legislature, for example, enacted a law 

 in 1974 to provide a means for individuals and 

 organizations to donate funds for supporting 

 nongame species management. The California 

 Department of Fish and Game has increased 

 its nongame staff and appointed a citizen 

 Nongame Advisory Committee to help de- 

 velop and implement nongame programs. 



Because most species of marine birds are 

 not hunted by sportsmen in North America, 

 this increased emphasis on nongame species 

 may eventually benefit research and manage- 

 ment programs for seabirds substantially. 



