GAME AND WILD-FUR PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION 



13 



The modern trapper, like the trapper of bygone days, values fur 

 animals because he can sell their pelts for cash ; getting them is work. 

 The trapper's intangible cost is the work of capturing the animal and 

 preparing the pelts for sale; his tangible costs are much the same as 

 the hunter's. Data from trapper reports show that in Prairie States 

 the average value of fur taken per trapper reporting is less than $1, 

 but it ranges from $25 in States with fair fur-animal habitat to $120 

 in the best muskrat-producing States. 



As the reporting hunters and trappers are known to have a higher 

 average kill than the nonreporters in the same State, the values given 

 here per hunter and per trapper are higher than the average for all 

 hunters and trappers, so the indications are that the average value of 

 meat and fur taken is very small. 



Figure 3. — Cottontail rabbits, a typical farm-land species, are tbe most important 

 and popular game animal in the United States ; however, they can be very 

 destructive in orchards. 



Users of wildlife who neither hunt nor trap place a high intangible 

 value upon it because they enjoy photographing wild creatures, lis- 

 tening to their calls, and watching their behavior (fig. 3). The costs 

 to these users are about the same as the cost to the hunters except for 

 the lack of the license fees. 



Thus the indirect value of game and wild fur to the individual 

 apparently resides in the added business brought to the community and 

 the contribution toward enlivening and enriching the environment. 

 Hunters and tourists attracted to an area by wildlife create a demand 

 for local products and services. The direct value of wildlife to the 

 individual is found in the meat and fur taken, and in his own enjoy- 

 ment of hunting. 



