The State Duck Stamp Story
Somewhere in California in the early autumn of 1971, a duck hunter walked into a sporting
goods store and laid a dollar bill on the counter. In return, he received a black, white, and
green stamp depicting two pintails rising from a cattail marsh. As the sportsman affixed the
stamp to his hunting license, he could not have known he was making history. Surely he was
unaware that he held the first state waterfowl-art stamp ever sold, or that millions of
other sportsmen and conservationists would follow in his footsteps.
From that humble beginning 24 years ago, state wildlife art stamps have come to play
a highly visible role in the seemingly different worlds of wildlife conservation and art.
First Iowa, then Massachusetts, then a flood of states followed California's lead.
Today, all 50 states (Hawaii issued their first stamp this year)have their own waterfowl stamps.
In addition, at least half of the states offer one or more other issues. New Jersey offers
trout, duck, woodcock, and pheasant/quail hunting stamps. Maryland sells a duck stamp,
2 fish stamps, and a non-game wildlife stamp. A North Dakota stamp highlights furbearers.
Each, year, state wildlife stamps, along with specially issued prints of the same artwork,
raise millions of dollars for conservation. Meanwhile, hundreds of artists have launched their
professional careers after winning a state stamp contest or two. However, it is unlikely
that any of this would be happening were it not for the federal duck stamp program.
In 1934, political cartoonist and conservationist J.N. "Ding" Darling persuaded the
federal government to issue an annual stamp that all waterfowl hunters would be required to
purchase. The goal: to raise funds for waterfowl management. Thus far, that federal
duck stamp program has collected over $326 million, money that has been used to
preserve 4 million acres of habitat for ducks and geese.
Art for the federal stamp is selected in an annual contest. But since the early 1970's,
interest in the competition, its winner, and in animal art in general has "skyrocketed."
"Wildlife art is now the most collected type of art in the country, and the federal duck stamp
contest is the genre's Super Bowl," says Bill Webster (owner of Wild Wings Gallery in Minnesota.
The huge market that exists for prints of the federal duck stamp typically generates $1 million
or more for the winning artist. "State governments and artists have been acutely aware
of the money the federal program brings in," says Bubba Wood, owner of Collectors Covey Gallery
in Texas. Money, in fact, is the main motive for the states' pell-mell rush into the wildlife
art business. "In a time of tight budgets and federal cutbacks, additional revenue from a
stamp and print program looks mighty good to state conservation departments," says Eugene
Deems, marketing director for Maryland's Forest, Park, and Wildlife Service.
The bottom line can be impressive. Since its inception, California's annual waterfowl
stamp has netted more than $7 million. The Texas duck stamp and print program--
the most lucrative waterfowl stamp in the nation--earns nearly $1 million dollars each year.
For many states, this is a welcome windfall for wildlife. For example, the entire annual
budget of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission is about $20 million. However,
waterfowl conservation projects would normally receive hust a small part of that sum. However,
income from the state's duck stamp and print program is about $250,000 per year, and every cent
is spent on wetlands projects.
Details of stamp designs vary. Some states commission an artist to create a painting; others
conduct contests, which may be open only to state residents. Some states rule on everything
from brushstrokes to advertising copy; others give artists and print publishers free reign.
Although a state's stamp and print feature the same work of wildlife art, each is usually
handled as a separate operation. Generally, a state agency directs the creation and marketing
of stamps, most which sell for $3 to $5. Art collectors and non-hunting conservationists
buy some stamps, but most are purchased by hunters, fishermen, and trappers who are required
to possess them. (Some states--including Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, and New York--
still do not require waterfowl hunters to purchase state stamps. Wildlife managers say they
would welcome the revenue from a mandatory stamp, but state legislatures have been reluctant
to impose a new fee on hunters.)
Meanwhile, with most programs, the winning artist or publisher handles production and
marketing of prints that feature the bird or animal on that year's stamp. The prints generally
measure about 6 inches by 9 inches and sell for about $140. A first-of-state print (the
first ever issued by a particular state) invariably outsells all those that come later. Alaska's
first-of-state waterfowl print of emperor geese sold 17,350 copies, the state record for
print sales.
Prints sales figures are of no small interest to state governments, which usually receive
a royalty from each item sold. "Prints are where the money is," says Sid Baynes, North
Carolina's duck stamp contract administrator. And if the state is going to create and
legitimize the program by having the stamp, it ought to get a fair share of the profit
from print sales."
Some states--Michigan, for example--use stamp and print revenues for general conservation
purposes, including staff salaries. Others, like Idaho, earmark the money specifically
for wildlife efforts such as habitat acquisition. A few states even send a portion of their
stamp and print revenue to Canada.
"About 70 percent of New York's waterfowl originate in Canada, so we feel a responsibility
to fund habitat work there," explains Nancy Imhof, a fish and wildlife marketing specialist
with New York's Department of Environmental Conservation. In Canada, New York funds have helped
stabilize water levels in New Brunswic's Rockland Marsh and have helped build dikes and nesting
islandsin the Balmoral Marsh in Ontario.
In addition to providing money for wildlife, state stamp and print programs have been a
boom for artists. Twenty-six states now conduct annual waterfowl stamp contests. Painters of
fish, pheasant, and other species enter still other state competitions.
"Winning a state contest can open a lot of doors," says Dave Samuelson, who placed first
in Montana's 1988 duck stamp competition. Even before stamps and prints of Samuelson's winning
painting of mallards went on sale, the artist had been contacted by a prestigious East Coast
gallery , had received several new commissions, and was scheduled for a promotional tour.
"I also raised my prices 25 or 30 percent," says Samuelson.
More than one weekend artist has parlayed a first place finish into a career. But the
competition is keen. Minnesota typically receives 200 or more entries for each year's duck
stamp contest. "In the early years, we got a lot of childlike paintings--cute, fluffy ducklings
with pink bills," says Karen Kelley, coordinator of that state's stamp contests. "Now, the
quality is extemely good."
Submitting a painting can be a taxing enterprise. Artist John House of Evansville, Minnesota,
decided to enter his state's 1987 waterfowl stamp contest. But even after weeks at his easel
and a final 40-hour marathon painting session (which found him falling asleep with a brush in
his hand), House's portrait of ring-necked ducks remained unfinished hours before the deadline.
With his wife driving him, House painted furiously throughout a three-hour, high-speed ride to
St. Paul. Five minutes before the deadline, he rushed into contest headquarters, apologized for his
disheveled appearance and handed his canvas to an official. The artist then used the waning seconds
to add highlights to his painting. "The pressure was excruciating," says House, who still did not win.
Surprisingly, many artists--even those who enter contests--maintain that paintings done for state
stamps are rarely memorable. "Stamp art isn't fine art," says Guy Cohleach, a respected wildlife
painter and the creator of Kansas' first-of-state 1987 waterfowl stamp. "Most people who buy
stamps art want hair, feathers, and lots of detail," he says. "They want renderings, not great art."
Minnesota artist Dan Smith, whose paintings have graced eight state stamps, agrees: "There are
exceptions, but most stamp art is commercial design, not true art."
Those sentiments may arise from the constrictions placed on stamp artists. Because of the small
size of stamps, composition must be simple, with an abundance of color and contrast. The wildlife
must appear large and have a pose that flatters. The background must suggest the countryside one
might see in the state issuing the stamp, but it also has to appeal to buyers nationwide. "Often,"
says Dave Samuelson, "there's not much left for the artist's imagination."
Nevertheless, state stamp programs have attracted prominent wildlife artists such as Ken Carlson,
Jack Cowan, and Robert Bateman. But these luminaries usually paint on commission. State contests are
arenas for the up-and-coming.
"A big name--such as Bateman--can make a huge difference is sales," says David Boshart, owner of
National Wildlife Galleries in Ft. Myers, Florida. For example, the print version of Canada's 1985
first-of-country stamp by Bateman sold 50,000 copies, several times the number of the most successful
state-sponsored prints. When it was announced that Bateman and well-known Iowa artist Maynard Reece would paint
two of Washington's waterfowl stamps, it instantly increased the value of that state's previous offerings.
For collectors, some state stamps and prints have proved to be excellent investments. The first California
stamp, which sold for $1 in 1971, now fetches about $400. Iowa's 1972 print and stamp--a mallard scene by
Maynard Reece and the first state issue done in full color--originally sold as a pair for $61. Today, the
same package goes for about $7,200!
But it does not necessarily follow that artists are getting rich. In 1974, Maryland artist John Taylor
painted his state's first duck stamp--a pair of mallards in the snow. On his own, he published 500 prints,
which he believed would sell briskly at the waterfowl festival held each year in Easton, Maryland. To Taylor's
dismay, however, there was virtually no interest in the prints. Anxious to recoup some of his expenses,
he sold all his remaining prints to art dealers for $25 to $30 a piece. Today, those same prints are valued
at $3,200 each. "I sure wish I'd stuck a few under my bed in 1974," laments Taylor.
Most wildlife art experts, however, caution against buying stamps or prints solely as investments. Large
markups when purchased, big discounts when sold, and changing tastes of collectors all affect investment value.
"You'd better buy prints you enjoy looking at," warns Dallas art dealer Bubba Wood, "because you may own them
for the rest of your life."
Despite that uncertain investment potential, new stamp programs abound. A host of private conservation
groups (including National Wildlife Federation affiliates in Louisiana, Arkansas, Michigan, Wisconsin, and
other states) raise funds by issuing their own stamps and prints. And a new National Park stamp program
got underway over seven years ago.
Meanwhile, state stamp programs develop new twists. New Mexico now requires hunters, fishermen, and
trappers to buy special stamps if they intend to pursue their sport in either of two areas of the state
managed by the U.S. Forest Service adn the Bureau of Land Management. The New Mexico stamp revenues--more
than $200,000 so far--will be spent to plant wildlife food crops, improve streams, transplant turkeys, and
conduct other wildlife projects within the areas generating the funds. "This program will let us accomplish
in 15 years all the wildlife work the Forest Service had planned for these areas over the next 50 years,"
says Bruce Morrison, assistant chief of game management for New Mexico's Department of Game and Fish.
Maryland's Wildlife Conservation Stamp is another spinoff, one of the few state programs designed
specifically to raise funds for non-game species. The Maryland stamps and prints have featured northern
orioles, bluebirds, and herons. The money generated aids such endangered species as bald eagles.
The question arises: Where is the wildlife stampede headed? Certainly, states
that require sportsmen to purchase stamps are unlikely to abandon the newfound funds. In fact, all of
the states will likely continue in the parade. For the moment, collectors expect more, not less,
stamp art.
 Back to "State Duck Stamps" |
 Up to "Home Page" |
Article by Gary Turbak from the January 1989 issue of National Wildlife Magazine