Laserfiche WebLink
species. Often, because the funds for agencies came entirely from license <br />fees, managers felt committed to serve primarily the hunter and fisherman. <br />Because their funds for operations and personnel were severely limited, <br />agency managers were confronted with a conflict between the historical <br />emphasis on game species and the newly generated public demand that nongame <br />species be included. <br />Pister (1976) pointed out that the majority of the public do not hunt <br />or fish, but bear an interest in fish and wildlife resources that is <br />legitimate and must be recognized. He emphasized that managers must address <br />themselves to management and preservation of species as mandated by the <br />general public, and that the determination of how such programs are financed <br />should be a legislative function. Evenden (1976) also believed that pro- <br />fessionals in wildlife should accept the fact that their responsibilities <br />are to all forms of wildlife, not only to sport or commercial species. <br />Udall (1970) summarized his thoughts in this way: "Today, our need <br />for wildlife resources goes far deeper than the ready provision of food or <br />profit -- we need wild things now as ever-present emblems of the beauty <br />and hope of life itself. In an increasingly ugly, dehumanized world, <br />wildlife in all its myriad forms is part of the geography of hope: its <br />health and presence re-creates our spirits, and gives us daily assurance <br />that nature's life machine is still functioning." <br />All species are considered significant in some ecological, scientific, <br />historical, recreational, educational, or esthetic aspects (U.S. Congress, <br />1973). Myers (1977) emphasized that the strongest argument for preservation <br />and management of any species is that it can and does serve man in agricul- <br />ture, as food, in the preparation of medicine and pharmaceuticals, in indus- <br />try, and in a number of other ways. <br />The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1969) stated that there is little <br />doubt that the American public could get along without most species of wild- <br />life, but it could also get along without automobiles, baseball, and many <br />other things. What is the value or significance to future generations of <br />a species that becomes extinct? The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1969) <br />took the position that "As the numbers of our wildlife grow fewer, their <br />true individual value grows greater, for in the few are concentrated all <br />the worth of one small, but valuable part of our whole world." <br />MAN--HIS OWN WORST ENEMY <br />Man may be considered a threatened species because his self-induced <br />overpopulation and unbridled technology are threatening his environment; man <br />stands at a fork in his environmental road to the future and may move rapidly <br />toward one of two destinations: "Man -- Master of Himself" or "Man -- <br />Extinct Species" (U.S. Department of the Interior, 1968). <br />Man has dominated and will continue to dominate his environment. He <br />has intentionally and unintentionally destroyed or disrupted natural habi- <br />tat that is considered vital for the well-being of fish and wildlife <br />5