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.