| OCR Text |
Show The schools, for the most part, have missed their conservation opportunity just as completely. As a former director of the Fish and Wildlife Service has pointed out, 62 the history books of the West tell of the great wealth derived from the early fur trade and the enormous fortunes established by the cattle kings, but fail to mention that sheer wastefulness brought an end to that era; and, more importantly, that even today good conservation practices eventually could restore that wealth to many of the lands and waters of the West. At the education level of the universities seldom is the enormous wastage of water pollution, soil loss, and general land mismanagement really driven home. At present relatively few university graduates are aware of the existence of a national soil erosion problem. Yet it is from this class of educated persons that many of the principal ideas for future development of our country will come. In the field of fundamental conservation education, the work of the Soil Conservation Service has been exceptional, in part no doubt because this agency was especially created for the purpose, whereas the education program of the Fish and Wildlife Service63 and other agencies have had to be incidental to other primary responsibilities. Probably this circumstance points to the major defect in our entire conservation- education set- up. Though it is basic to the future prosperity of the Nation, now that frontiers are dwindling and population- saturation is approaching, conservation education, for the most part, has been merely an unorganized labor of love, and not the primary responsibility of any definite agency. To quote from the Secretary of the U. S. Senate Special Committee on Conservation of Wildlife Resources: I believe, therefore, that the greatest conservation problem that confronts us today is that of conserving our soil. And this can only be accomplished by fundamental understanding brought about by education, both in the school and the political arena. 64 Wildlife research.- Comprehensive research on habitat requirements and methods of increasing wildlife was commenced on a small scale more than 62 Gabrielson, 1945a, p. 206. 63 Gabrielson, 1945a, p. 208. 64 Shoemaker, 1945, p. 359. 30 years ago. In 1911, the Committee of Inquiry on Grouse Disease, in England, published results of an exhaustive study of the red grouse that was a remarkable forerunner of modern wildlife management investigations. Studies of the food habits of many birds as they affected agriculture, including methods of encouraging beneficial species and controlling injurious kinds, was undertaken in the United States by the Bureau of Biological Survey ( now the Fish and Wildlife Service) at an even earlier date, and carried on over many years, but the concept of wildlife management had not been developed in America at that time. The viewpoint that wildlife is a direct product of the land, to be increased by restoring the appropriate environment and growing conditions, and, where desired, to be harvested ( hunted) according to a definite plan, with a definite financial return like any other crop, was first emphasized in this country during the early 1930' s by the pioneer work of Leopold ( 1931a, b; 1933) and Stoddard ( 1932). Such a tangible and " practical" concept had Nation- wide appeal and was used to enlist the active support of sportmen's groups, various commercial interests, and many persons of political importance who had been beyond the reach of most previous conservation efforts. The new game management idea stimulated the investment of an unprecedented volume of public and private funds in wildlife restoration for recreation purposes. In 1935, the American Wildlife Institute aided in establishing nine Regional Wildlife Research Units centered at State universities that had agreed upon a cooperative research program with the Bureau of Biological Survey ( now Fish and Wildlife Service) and the respective fish and game departments. By 1944, publications covering the findings numbered more than 500, with many more expected. 65 In 1937, Congress passed the Pittman- Robertson Act, which uses some of the Federal excise tax funds derived from the sale of sporting arms and ammunition to aid the States in the improvement of depleted wildlife ranges, and for scientific research on problems of wildlife depletion and restoration. The States are required to meet Federal allocations of funds with contributions in the ratio of 1 to 3. Only a part of the total tax receipts has been uti- 65 Gabrielson, 1945b, p. 28. 71 |
