A survey of visitors' reactions on two naturalists' trust nature reserves in Yorkshire, England

A Survey of Visitors' Reactions on Two Naturalists' Trust Nature Reserves in Yorkshire, England MICHAEL B. USHER, PH.D. (Edinburgh), ANN E. TAYLOR & DEBORAH DARLINGTON Department o f Biology, University of York, Heslington, York, England

many nature reserves that they do not just preserve the fauna and flora, but that they have a function A survey o f visitors to Strensall Common and Bridestones also of providing educational and recreational facilinature reserves in Yorkshire, England, was carried out ties. Surveys near two Yorkshire Naturalists' Trust during the autumn o f 1968. Strensall Common is situated nature reserves and on the Aberlady Bay Local Nature about six miles (9-6 km) north o f York, and Bridestones Reserve in East Lothian (Usher, 1967) have shown within Allerston Forest on the North York Moors. that the majority of the visitors use the nature reserves Visitors to Strensall Common had travelled an average for recreation in the widest sense, and that only a distance o f 8 miles (13 km) whereas those to Bridestones had travelled 23 miles (37 km) on average. The commonest minority are following biological pursuits. Since the passing of two recent acts, The Countryprimary reason for visiting a reserve was recreation, and only about 15 per cent o f visitors came primarily for reasons o f side (Scotland) Act 1967 and The Countryside Act 'natural history'. The two main features o f land suitable for 1968, increased attention has been focused upon recreation are shown to be (1) scenery and (2) the sense o f making the countryside accessible to the general space, peace, or quietness. As the latter feature is also public. The amount of open country available for required by land for conservation, the methods o f integrating recreation or conservation in Britain is very limited, recreation and conservation are discussed. A considerable and it is decreasing owing to the spread of industry demand for information was found, and one person in six at and of urban areas, as well as to the employment of Bridestones requested a nature trail. Economic analyses show intense forms of agriculture and forestry. Thus, if that there is a considerable free conservational benefit, which areas of outstanding interest for their natural history is a measure o f the value o f the reserve, estimated by travel costs, to the users. It is recommended that County Naturalists' are to be preserved, methods of integrating the Trusts exploit their position o f managing a utility that is in recreational and conservational usage of the areas inelastic supply, and it is thought that these early observations will have to be worked out. It is to explore the usage could provide useful ideas for wider studies on nature reserve of two nature reserves in Yorkshire that the present management elsewhere. study was begun. The aim was to find the visitors' reaction to the reserves, and to determine what they feel is required for their recreational enjoyment of the area. The integration of the recreational usage of Reviewing the trends in recreational research during Yorkshire Naturalists' Trust reserves--their primary the period 1964--68, Greaves (1968) states 'In a time of use by the public at the present time--with the confinancial stringency, there is little room for trial and servation aims of the Trust, will be considered. The surveys were carried out in the late summer and error in recreation planning. It is essential that research offers a reliable basis of qualitative and autumn of 1968--between August and November at quantitative information on the changing nature of Bridestones, and during October and November at demand, the adequacy of supply, and the ways in which Strensall Common. It is thus stressed that the results these two aspects of recreation can be manipulated by cannot reflect the intensity of public usage of the management to secure a more effectiveuse of available reserves during the whole year, but rather during the land and water resources'. The work of the County autumnal period. Also, the surveys only involved Naturalists' Trusts includes provision for conservation questioning people who were actually using the area, planning on a local scale, though in the limited space and no attempt was made either to interview people available in a country such as the United Kingdom of living in the catchment areas of the reserves, or to conGreat Britain and Northern Ireland, multiple forms tact members of the Yorkshire Naturalists' Trust who of land-use have to be considered. It is a feature of might occasionally visit the areas. 285 ABSTRACT

Biological Conservation, Vol. 2, No. 4, July 1970--~ Elsevier Publishing Company Ltd, England--Printed in Great Britain

286

Biological Conservation DETAILS OF THE RESERVES A N D SURVEYS

Strensall Common Strensall Common is situated about six miles (9.6 km) north of York, in the Vale of York (Fig. 1), and it covers an area of approximately three square miles (777 ha). On the west of the Common, 54 acres (22 ha) have been leased by the Yorkshire Naturalists' Trust as a nature reserve. The Common lies in a very shallow depression in glacial clays which has subsequently been filled with lacustrine sands. The vegetation is composed of a mosaic of dry heaths, dominated "1¸¸ ~

/

J

~-.t

~.l~

+

......

P

r"

'

Ol_

o

lilll

,,i,,

1o ,0

~

J

Fig. 1. A map of Yorkshire showing the location of Strensall Common and Bridestones nature reserves. The locations of the cities and towns mentioned in the text are shown, and the approximate extent of Allerston Forest is indicated.

by the Heather, Calluna vulgaris, and wet heaths, dominated by rushes, reeds, and Sphagnum moss. Over considerable portions of the area there are birch scrub growths (predominantly Betula pendula) of varying ages and small groups of Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris) trees. The Ministry of Defence use a large area of the Common for military training and as a shooting range, whilst to the south of the Common there are a golf course and an area overgrown with brambles (Rubus spp.) that is used extensively during the blackberry season. The recreational users of the area can be divided into three categories. Firstly, there are the local inhabitants who use the Common for daily walks and for exercising their dogs. Secondly, there are the weekend visitors from urban areas, and these formed the bulk of the interviewees. Thirdly, the area is used by riding schools, whose main interest is in keeping the trails open. The conservational aspects of the Common are based on this being one of the few remaining lowland heaths in the Vale of York.

Associated with this heathland habitat is one of the northernmost localities of the Marsh Gentian, Gentiana pneumonanthe, in Great Britain, as well as a number of uncommon species of animals--particularly the Dark-bordered Beauty moth, Epione vespertaria, which in the British Isles is probably only found in this one locality. The main object of the survey was to assess the balance between the recreational and conservational value of the Common. This involved knowing the present intensity of use of the Common as well as the likely demand in the future, and, for each visitor, the distance travelled and the time and money spent in visiting the area, the reasons for the visit, the recreational or biological pursuits, and the level of enjoyment. It was thought that a major problem would be to persuade visitors to answer a questionnaire at all, and therefore an introductory chat and the initial questions were designed to make the interviewee feel at ease. The questionnaire was kept as short as possible, so that visitors could have time to answer all the points. The main difficulty proved to be the location of the sample, as the Common was a difficult area on which to find interviewees. The interviewer patrolled a stretch of road, about half-amile (0-8 km) in extent, from which paths into the nature reserve and the more densely wooded areas of the Common originated. The populations of cardwellers and walkers were thus represented in the sample, and one person from each of the groups encountered was questioned. Bridestones The Bridestones nature reserve is situated within Allerston Forest, on the North York Moors, about six miles (9.6 km) north of Thornton le Dale (Fig. 1). The area covers 625 acres (253 ha), and is leased by the Yorkshire Naturalists' Trust as a nature reserve. The reserve is drained by two becks which flow through deep ghylls towards the southern reserve boundary, exposing Jurassic oolite rocks. The outcrops of the harder Passage Beds, known as 'The Bridestones', have weathered into fantastic shapes. The geological formations contribute to both the recreational and conservational aspects of the reserve, as the stones cannot be approached directly by car but only after walking over heather moorland. Recreational demands on the area are both for walking over the moorlands and in the forested valleys, and for pleasure driving. To facilitate the latter, many of the Forestry Commission's private roads are 'surfaced' and open to the general public. Besides the geological interest of the reserve, the area demonstrates a characteristic upland pasture, dominated by Heather and Bracken (Pteridium aquilinum), with in one place

Usher : Visitors' Reactions to Two Yorkshire Nature Reserves

287

a stand of Sessile Oak (Quereus petraea) and its drivers, whereas less than one-third of those interviewed near the nature reserve were pleasure driving. associated shrubs and herbs. One aim of the survey was to compare the opinions Mutch also found only 4.2 per cent of visitors to be of visitors to a nature reserve within a recreational primarily interested in natural history in the widest area with the opinions of visitors to the area as a sense, although at Bridestones the proportion had whole. The whole area had been surveyed in the risen to 16 per cent. As rather different populations of summer of 1964, with the results published by Mutch visitors were sampled in these two cases, their reactions (1968). A second aim was to evaluate the conserva- to the countryside might be expected to differ. The visitors to Bridestones often suggested more tional and recreational value of the nature reserve, than one reason for their visit. When we consider and to investigate the possible integration of these people with two or more reasons, we find there are into a system of multiple land-use. The questionnaire was thus based on the survey used by Mutch (1968), some groups of reasons that are habitually expressed except that less attention was paid to the forestry together. Thus, there were associations between people aspects of the area, and more to the wildlife aspects. who had expressed natural history as a reason together Of the sample of 121 groups interviewed, only 6 people with either photography or driving, but there was no were members of the Yorkshire Naturalists' Trust, such association between natural history and either though 73 (60 per cent) knew that the Trust managed walking or picnicking. The link between natural the land as a nature reserve, while 76 per cent knew history and driving can be explained by the number of people who expressed driving as their principal that the land was owned by the National Trust. reason, but who found that when they stopped they liked to see birds or flowers. Visitors were asked if they would like to see improveRESULTS OF T H E SURVEYS ments. Mutch's (1968) survey design was applied to The results are based on a survey of 47 groups of the visitors at Bridestones and they were shown cards people (comprising 125 individuals) on Strensall with the suggestions arranged in random order. Common, and of 121 groups (comprising 345 indi- Also at Bridestones two sets of questions were asked to evaluate the structural improvements and the viduals) at the Bridestones. access improvements, whereas at Strensall C o m m o n the interviewee had more freedom to express an TABLE I The Principal Reason for Visiting a Reserve Expressed opinion, and the general phrasing of the question as Percentages of the Total Number of Interviewees. necessitated the data on access and structure being put The Figures in Parentheses given under Bridestones together. The results are given in Table II. It is obvious that at Strensall Common a large proportion of visitors Relate to the Survey of Mutch (1968) were satisfied, whilst at Bridestones the majority felt that improvements were required. This is probably Activity Strensall Common Bridestones associated with the distance travelled to reach the Natural History 15 16 (4"2) Walking 43 32 (19.2) area. On Strensall Common the greatest request was for Pleasure Driving 36 29 (54-5) Photography -8 (4.9) less army usage, but this view was expressed by only Picnicking 4 13 (13.1) 15 per cent of the interviewees. If all users of the Other 2 2 (4.1) C o m m o n had been questioned, the percentage might have increased, as the Army do not use the area of the One of the first objects was to determine the reason nature reserve, though sounds from their activities for a visit to be made to the reserve. The details of the can be heard in it. The request for paths is not consistent answers are given in Table I, where it will be seen that with affording a degree of protection for conservational only approximately one person in every six had come interests on an area of only 54 acres, though it is a to visit the natural history amenities of the area. These method of making the bulk of the C o m m o n more latter included bird watching, wild flowers, and nature attractive as a recreational area. The request for walks. The recreational use of the areas is clearly the drainage, expressed by I I per cent of the interviewees, most important reason for visiting the reserve, as the is obviously in ignorance of the habitat, as drainage choices of walking, pleasure driving, and picnicking, would eliminate many of the interesting biological can all be included in such recreational use. Our communities. At Bridestones there was a considerable demand for sample from Bridestones differed markedly from that from the wider area of Allerston Forest (Mutch, 1968), structural facilities, though parking places obviously as over half of Mutch's sample were primarily pleasure present no problem. The survey was carried out at a

288

Biological Conservation

51 15 13 11 8 2

to pay up to one shilling, 11 per cent to pay up to two shillings, and 1 per cent to pay up to five shillings. There is thus a demand for information about the reserve, and it should be a feature of the management policy to satisfy this demand. The sample at the Bridestones contrasts with that of the whole of Allerston Forest, for which Mutch (1968) found that 29.9 per cent of interviewees requested more, better, or wider, roads, and 9.0 per cent wanted more parking places as their primary requests. Better roads in the present study accounted for only 3 per cent of primary requests. Mutch also found that the provision of information, by signposted footpaths and maps of the forest, were the greatest primary request, being expressed by 52.5 per cent of the interviewees.

Improvement

Primary percentage

Overall percentage

The Features of the Two Reserves which the Interviewees most Liked, Expressed as Percentages

Structural None & Don't know Picnic sites Toilets Wet-weather shelters Information centre Shop/tearoom

29 26 21 15 7 2

36 20 17 13 10 4

Access Signposts Nature trails None & Don't know Maps Parking Better roads Camping sites Public transport Cycle paths

43 18 14 11 4 3 3 3 1

29 19 16 20 4 3 3 4 2

TABLE 11

The Improvements in Facilities and Access that Visitors to the Reserves would Like to See. The Strensall Data and Primary Bridestones Data were Obtained by Giving the Interviewee just One Choice, whereas the Overall Bridestones Data are Based on up to Three Choices Strensall Common Improvement

Percentage

None Lessen army usage Improve roads and paths Drainage Toilets and Litterbins Don't know Bridestones

T A B L E III

time before the implementation of the Countryside Act 1968, which gives the Forestry Commission more powers for providing these facilities. It is to be hoped that these findings, which are similar to Mutch's (1968) conclusions, will lead to the provision of facilities in Allerston Forest. It is not the role of a County Naturalists' Trust to provide these facilities, as such Trusts are usually entirely supported by private donations and subsciptions. However, of importance to the management of nature reserves is the demand of visitors for information. The primary request of more than half of the interviewees was for signposting or for maps on display. Signposts were the most popular primary request, though when two or three requests were made, maps were frequently given as the second most important. The demand for nature trails shows that about one person in six felt that this was of prime importance, and, when asked how much they would pay for a booklet, 8 per cent would be willing

Scenery Openness Quietness Fresh air Geological features Other Don't know

Strensall Common

Bridestones

34 25 32 7 0 2

48 -33 4 4 5 6

It is of interest to see, linked with these requests for improvements, which features of the reserves are liked most and least. Thus the interviewees were asked what feature of their visit had most impressed them, and a summary of the answers is given in Table III. This Table is an attempt to categorize the opinions expressed by the interviewees, and it indicates that two intangible factors are important. Firstly, there is the aesthetic quality of the area, which is expressed in the 'scenery' category (including the 'openness' category of Strensall Common, as a flat expanse of C o m m o n with scattered birch trees has an aesthetic quality of space). Secondly, there is the complex factor of 'being away from it all', which is reflected in such replies as 'quietness', 'peacefulness', 'openness', and 'fresh air'. At Strensall C o m m o n the interviewees were asked what they considered to be the most undesirable feature of the reserve. The results are given in Table IV. The use of the C o m m o n by the Ministry of Defence is criticized, but the majority of the interviewees were wholly satisfied with the area. Twelve per cent did find that unavoidable features were undesirable, and these included the wetness of the ground, weather, and flying and biting insects. In these reactions to the most desirable and the least desirable features, there are some points which relate

289

Usher: Visitors' Reactions to Two Yorkshire Nature Reserves T A B L E IV

The

Undesirable Features of Strensall Common, Expressed as a Percentage o f Interviewees

The Army Wetness or flies Litter Traffic No undesirable feature

28 12 12 5 43

to nature reserve management. A suitable wildlife conservation area will usually be remote from the pressures of exploitation of the habitat, and this is one of the two factors which reflect a suitable recreational area. This is demonstrated by interviewees whose expressed desirable features included peace or the openness of the area, and by the dislike of traffic, litter, and military usage which encroaches on the sense of seclusion. It is thus obvious that conservation and recreation will compete for such secluded areas unless a policy of multiple land-use is adopted. TABLE V

The Frequency with which Interviewees Visit the Two Reserves Strensall Common Frequency of visits per year

Bridestones

Percentage

Frequency of visits per year

Percentage

First visit

13

First visit

13

1

20

1

6

2-26 27-52 53 and over

24 27 16

2 34 5 and over

12 36 33

In order to determine the intensity of use of the reserves, the interviewees were asked how often they visited the area, and the relation between their visits and the season of the year. The data for frequency of visiting is given in Table V. There is a difference between the usage of the two areas as over one hundred and ten thousand people live within eight miles (13 km) of Strensall Common, whilst only about seven thousand people live within this distance of the Bridestones. The average distance travelled to Strensall C o m m o n was approximately 8 miles whereas the distance was 23 miles (37 km) for Bridestones. The interviewees at Strensall C o m m o n showed that they visited the reserve nearly three times more frequently during the summer than during the winter (they made 905 summer visits as opposed to an estimated 395 winter visits). Using the data for the regular visitors, 48 per cent in both summer and winter were using the C o m m o n

for walking, whereas 14 per cent in summer and 19 per cent in winter were there for nature study or collecting. There is thus a seasonal change in the intensity of usage of a reserve, but little seasonal change in the principal reasons for visiting the reserve. On both reserves the survey showed that the level of recruitment, the first visits made to the reserve, was 13 per cent, and thus approximately one person in every eight who were interviewed had not previously visited the reserve. A final object of the survey was to determine the economic aspects of recreation and conservation. The method of analysis was that of Trice & Wood (1958). Three zones from which visitors to Strensall C o m m o n originated were determined, and the average travel cost from each zone to the reserve was determined on the basis of the interviewees' estimate of their costs. The nearest zone consists of the village of Strensall and other villages north of York and within about four to five miles (6.4 to 8 km) of the reserve. Fifty-eight visitors came from this zone, and their average travel cost was negligible. The second zone consists of York and the villages to the south and east of the city. Fifty visitors came from this zone at an estimated travel cost of 10d each. Finally the third zone, termed the market zone, represents an estimate of the maximum travel cost that a visitor is prepared to incur. This zone included six groups of visitors who had travelled from Bradford, Sheffield, Selby, Ripon, Boston Spa, and Tadcaster. The estimated travel cost was 3s 7d per person. The location of the cities and towns in these three zones can be seen in Fig. 1. This cost is then assumed to set the market value for the recreational opportunities afforded by Strensall Common. Visitors from nearer zones would receive a free recreational value equal to the cost of travel from the market zone minus the cost of travel from their own zone. The free recreational benefit would then be {(a

-

b+)c,}

i

where a is the average travel cost from the market zone, b i is the average travel cost from the ith zone, ci is the number of visitors from the ith zone, and the summation is over all zones. This summation thus represents the free recreational benefit to all the visitors (Eci) who visited the reserve during the period of the survey. By multiplying the summation by a suitable factor, the benefit can be expressed on a daily or yearly basis, while by dividing by the number of visitors, an average benefit per person per visit can be calculated. For the data of Strensall C o m m o n quoted above, the free recreational benefit is £17 5s 4d, which, as

Biological Conservation

290

the survey was carried out on three Sundays, represents a free recreational benefit per Sunday of approximately £5 15s 0d. This has been calculated from data collected during the autumn period, but as a seasonal pattern of intensity of usage has been demonstrated, it is possibly a relatively good approximation to the average annual figure. Since 15 per cent of visitors were naturalists or interested in natural history (Table I), this figure represents an annual free conservational benefit of £5 15s 0d x 1 5 ~ x 104 - £ 9 0 per annum which is estimated from the replies of those people visiting the reserve at weekends. Trice & Wood's method of analysis was also applied to the Bridestones. The market zone in this case was represented by groups who had come from Huddersfield, Sheffield, Doncaster, Leeds, and Hull (see Fig. 1). The travel cost from the market zone was estimated as 32s 6d per person. The data on estimates of travel costs give a free recreational benefit of £420. As the survey was carried out on eleven days (one Saturday and ten Sundays), this sum represents a free recreational benefit of approximately £38 per day. The survey at Bridestones was conducted during the second half of August, during September and October, and on the first Sunday in November. Thus the data are likely to show a rather more intense daily usage of the reserve than the average annual usage, and so a factor of 60 will be applied to convert a daily figure to an annual figure. Thus, the annual free conservational benefit, with 16 per cent of visitors being primarily interested in natural history, is £38 x 1 6 ~ x 60 - £365 per annum measured by weekend visiting.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

It is a feature of the Strensall C o m m o n and Bridestones nature reserves that the majority of visitors are seeking a recreational area rather than being concerned with natural history. Only 15 and 16 per cent of visitors to Strensall Common and Bridestones, respectively, came into the category of visitors whose prime interest was natural history or conservation. Usher (1967) similarly found that only 23 per cent of visitors to a nature reserve sixteen miles (26 kin) from Edinburgh were primarily concerned with natural history. It seems that the majority of nature reserves can expect to be used for recreation, and hence a scheme of management that integrates conservation and recreation should result in protection being

afforded to the plant and animal communities which are being conserved. Of primary importance is the size of the reserve. Very small reserves are unlikely to be of sufficient recreational importance for there to be any complicated recreational planning. As the size of the reserve increases, so the recreational potential of the area also increases--particularly if the reserve is in the proximity of an urban area or if it is scenically outstanding. There appears to be a critical size where the recreational activities are not dissipated over a sufficiently wide area, and so protection of the biological communities may suffer. For example, the requests for paths and drainage at Strensall Common, a reserve of 54 acres, were not consistent with conservation of the habitat, but provision of signposted paths at Bridestones would be perfectly acceptable for conservation on a reserve of 625 acres. Similarly, at Aberlady Bay (Usher, 1967) it was acceptable to plan paths and a trail for ponies on a reserve of over 1,400 acres (567 ha). On the evidence of these surveys, reserves of perhaps less than 15-20 acres (6-8 ha) will be used only occasionally for recreation, while reserves of over perhaps 50-100 acres (20-40ha) will be sufficiently large for the provision of recreational facilities not to have an adverse effect on the habitats being conserved. Management plans for nature reserves should concentrate on the integration of these two forms of land-use. The provision of information about the reserve leads to a greater understanding and sympathy for conservation on the part of the recreational user. At Aberlady Bay more than 70 per cent of interviewees welcomed the idea of a small informative leaflet or booklet, and no one disagreed with the idea. At Bridestones 18 per cent of visitors primarily requested a nature trail. By providing information about the natural history and conservation of the Bridestones, the Yorkshire Naturalists' Trust would certainly advertise its objects and gain sympathy for its work of conservation. The Trust could certainly charge for a leaflet or booklet about the trail, as 20 per cent of all users of the reserve were in agreement with a charge being made. It seems that a charge of 2s. would be most acceptable, as this was suggested by 11 per cent of all reserve users who also favoured a charge being made. The economic analyses show that there is a considerable free recreational benefit derived from the reserves. If the conservation aspect of the reserve usage is considered, the figures of £90 and £365 per annum for Strensall C o m m o n and Bridestones, respectively, are only rough estimates, but they show that considerable satisfaction is derived from nature conservation in Yorkshire. As the Yorkshire

Usher: Visitors' Reactions to Two Yorkshire Nature Reserves

Naturalists' Trust has twenty-eight nature reserves, it implies that the free conservational benefit derived from them per year is considerable, and probably indicates that the activities of the Trust could be expanded. Mutch (1968) showed that the supply o f recreational land was in inelastic supply. It is considered that the land used for nature conservation will similarly be in inelastic supply. With a 13 per cent recruitment rate o f new users o f the nature reserves, the demand for usage of recreational and conservational land is likely to increase steeply in the coming years. The C o u n t y Naturalists' Trusts that are establishing and managing nature reserves in Britain should consider this, and should be able to gain more o f the financial rewards o f possessing and managing a utility that is in inelastic supply. Finally it seems that such local and limited studies should be expanded into far wider fields and spheres, but that already they provide some useful pointers for elsewhere in Britain and probably other lands.

The Laeey Act, an Early US Attempt at International Cooperation in Wildlife Conservation Citizens of the United States have sometimes been accused of over-exploiting the world's wildlife resources to meet their insatiable desire for furs, exotic pets and fish, and laboratory animals. North America is admittedly a major market for wildlife products, but the exploitation of wildlife for personal or public purposes is far more widespread. The drain upon dwindling wildlife populations and their habitats, caused by increasing numbers of people, has concerned conservationists in the United States, as well as those abroad, for many years. For thirty-five years it has been unlawful to import into the United States mammals or birds that have been illegally taken in, or illegally exported from, the country in which they originated. In practice, the law has been difficult to enforce and not entirely effective. Additional legislation to aid other countries in the protection of their wildlife resources was believed to be necessary, and to this end the US Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969 was introduced and became law on 5 December 1969. The Act instructs the Secretary of the Interior to develop a list of species which are in danger of world-wide extinction. Importation of listed species will be prohibited or rigidly controlled. Many popular writers have viewed the proposed legislation as a major step toward curtailing the US trade in exotic wildlife, but the very fact that a species nears extinction indicates that its numbers are probably so low that it is unlikely to be a major trade item. The portions of the law dealing with endangered species are more likely to aid the survival of remnant populations of species such as Orang-utans or rare antelopes which might attract the attention of unscrupulous collectors. It can have little effect on the trade, for example in skins of spotted cats, so long as there are viable popula-

291

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank the Yorkshire Naturalists' Trust for allowing the surveys to be carried out on their reserves, and we would also like to thank the m a n y officers o f the Trust who have given practical help in various ways. References GREAVES, J. (1968). National parks and access to the countryside and coast: trends in research, 1964-1968. Paper prepared for the Town Planning Institute Calendar of Planning Research (3rd edition). Duplicated by the Countryside Commission, ii q- 7 pp. MUTCH, W. E. S. (1968). Public Recreation in National Forests: a Factual Study. HM Stationery Office, Forestry Commission Booklet No. 21,100 pp., illustr. TRICE, A. H. & WOOD, S. E. (1958). Measurement of recreation benefits. Land Economics, 34, 195-207. USHER, M. B. (1967). Aberlady Bay Local Nature Reserve: Description and Management Plan. East Lothian County Council Planning Department, vi q- 67 pp., 5 maps, illustr.

tions in countries whose authorities make no effort to assure that skins etc. exported have been taken legally. All living wildlife, including fish, amphibians, and reptiles, imported into the United States, must be declared at the port of entry. A relatively unpublicized section of the law strengthens and expands the Lacey Act which has long had the potential for controlling the importation of mammals and birds. This law, together with the Tariff Act of 1930, the Department of Agriculture, and the Public Health Service quarantine regulations, controls the importation of mammals, birds, and some species of fish, into the United States. The regulations are enforced by officers of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife of the Department of the Interior, and of other federal agencies. Several national conservation goals were achieved when the Lacey Act was passed in 1900. Conservationists were worried about problems created by introduced wildlife-such as the European Starling, which was imported by bird-lovers in the nineteenth century, became acclimatized and developed into one of our major pests. The Lacey Act gave the government the power to exclude potentially injurious wildlife. The killing of game as a business, and the slaughter of egrets for their plumage, were suppressed by prohibitions against the interstate trade in wildlife taken or transported contrary to State law. The original Lacey Act regulated only the traffic in mammals and birds; the amendments included in the new law close loopholes, which for example have hitherto permitted unrestricted traffic in the skins of possibly endangered crocodilians, by covering virtually all forms of animal life. Out-of-date penalties have been increased, and enforcement should be easier than heretofore. In 1935 the Lacey Act was amended to exclude from the United States all wildlife and wildlife products that had