GAME AND WILD-FUR PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION 51 



without question, will be expensive. On private lands this cost is 

 now borne by the land operator. The problem varies among the 

 States and within the State, but the use of public lands to relieve hunt- 

 ing pressure on private lands offers possibilities wherever such area? 

 are available. 



Prevalence and Distribution 



Programs for farm-game management are most prevalent in the 

 better agricultural districts of the United States, the cooperative type 

 appearing with greater frequency where land holdings are relatively 

 small and land values comparatively high. The frequency of their 

 occurrence varies with the hunting pressure. The more successful co- 

 operative enterprises are commonly located near centers of population. 



Privately owned and controlled management areas are usually on 

 lands of low value where the individual holdings are of considerable 

 extent. They may be relatively small in area and number but some 

 types or combination of types of management areas occur in all States. 

 In no case, however, do they occupy any considerable part of a State. 



Success 



Judgment as to the success or failure of undertakings of this kind 

 is largely a matter of individual opinion. A certain program may be 

 considered by an individual or group as being entirely successful be- 

 cause it accomplishes the principal objective in mind. On the other 

 hand, this same project may be considered a complete failure by another 

 person or association with different motives. For example, farmers 

 who want to control trespass may consider the program successful if 

 they succeed in controlling it, whereas the sportsman who formerly 

 hunted this area, unrestricted, and now finds he can no longer do it, or 

 who had expected a considerable increase in the game which did not 

 materialize, may consider the program a failure. The degree of success 

 may perhaps best be appraised by the length of time a project continues 

 to operate essentially in its original form. 



Although a number of projects have succeeded temporarily and 

 locally, most apparently lacked the elements necessary for perma- 

 nency or general adoption. The programs that have been more suc- 

 cessful in increasing game have been restrictive in nature, and the 

 increased production has been accomplished at costs prohibitive to 

 public enterprises. Where sufficient restriction on hunting is exer- 

 cised, the difficulties in producing an adequate supply of game and 

 wild fur are minimized. 



The production of game and wild fur is still an incidental enterprise 

 as associated with agriculture. The rental fees paid to private owners 

 seldom cover the cost of management and would have to be increased 

 if the projects are to be put on a self-sustaining basis. Public lands 

 only occasionally are managed for game production and hunting be- 

 cause of insufficient funds and technical supervision. 



Plans initiated primarily to maintain public hunting on private 

 property have seldom been successful for any considerable time. Any 

 such program includes several individual landowners and farmers, 

 some of whom become dissatisfied because of insufficient returns or 

 inadequate protection with respect to trespass, so they withdraw from 

 the association. This is particularly true when the organization is not 



