GAME AND WILD-FUR PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION 7 



Under present conditions, the sale of hunting and trapping privi- 

 leges tends to vary inversely to the density of human populations 

 (fig. 1). The number of licenses shown to each thousand inhabitants 

 decreases as the density of human population increases. This seem- 

 ingly paradoxical situation might be explained if the density of 

 population beyond a point inhibits and restricts the sporting use of 

 wildlife; or if the supply of game becomes so limited and the sport 

 of hunting becomes so inferior that the sporting demand eventually 

 drops. Perhaps the number of other available pastimes that multiply 

 with the increased population density influences the proportionate 

 demand. Or if the density of population corresponds closely with 

 the occupations of the people, this may reflect the type of recreational 

 pastimes in which they engage. 



Another way of estimating the hunting pressure in comparison 

 with human populations is indicated in figure 2. This chart indi- 

 cates that hunting pressure tends to be proportionate to the density 

 of population. States having comparable population densities some- 

 times differ in hunting pressure and they usually differ widely in the 

 occupations of the people. 



Degree of demand for wildlife is often influenced by social dictates. 

 A species may be used in one part of the country but ignored in 

 another, for varied reasons. Some game animals are looked upon as 

 having superior sporting qualities, whereas others are considered to 

 lack essential elements. Requirements of raw furs are determined 

 to a great extent by fashion. 



After an evaluation of all available factors relative to demands for 

 game and wild fur it is reasonable to conclude that there is a greater 

 demand for game and wild fur today than in the past, and that 

 whether judged on the basis of unit areas or of human demand, game 

 and wild fur appear to be less abundant than formerly. 



Habitat 



The type of landownership, public or private, determines to a con- 

 siderable degree both the use and the intensity of the use to which 

 land is put. This influences the type and condition of existing wild- 

 life habitat. 



Under the form of government prevalent among the Indians, all 

 the land was tribal property and little use was made of it except for 

 wildlife. Whenever habitat conditions permitted, game was pro- 

 duced to the maximum carrying capacity of the land, the only limi- 

 tations being those intrinsic in nature — and the Indians. Since the 

 principal use of the land was the production of wild animals, and 

 the pursuit of game interfered with no individual right nor with 

 any other desired use of the land, it is assumed that, all members of 

 a tribe had free access to the game on tribal lands. 



White men brought the system of private ownership and intensive 

 use of the land, which progressed with settlement. Lands passed 

 from public to private ownership by grant, homestead, sale, and 

 other means, until today the Federal, State, and municipal Govern- 

 ments own or control not more than 30 percent of the total land area 

 of the United States. Much of this is devoted to uses that inhibit 

 or prevent the production of wildlife, and, on much of it, hunting 

 cannot be permitted. 



