The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-09-26


however. any misunderstanding that may
have existed between the bureau and the
Acknowledgement seems to have been
smoothed over, as the members OF the
bureau while extending every civility to
the representatives of the press, are eX-
tremely chaIy of making any statement
about the matter, and state that they do
not desire to be drawn into any contro-
yersles that may occur between members
of other State departments.
Another opinion rendered by the At
torney General that has created consider
able dissatisfaction among sportsmen
throughout the State and has given cause
for considerable discussion is that rendered
on the fish and game law, which is as
follows:
Hon. j. n. Morrison, Fish Commissioner, SdeTd-
Hento-DEAR SIR: In reply to your favor OF July
10, asking whether or not the Board OF Super-
vlsors have power 10 extend the closed season
for deer beyond the limits prescribed by the
game law of 1895, refer you to my letter OF
June IL, 1895, to the California Fish Commits
sion, i'll which state that section IL of article
Xl OF the constitution confers upon the Board
OF Supervisors the power to enact any laws in
regard to the regulation of fish and game
AS the ordinance extending the closed season
would not be in conflict with the general law,
1t is my opinion that the Board of Supervisors
have power to enact such ordinances.
However, any attempt on the part OF
Board OF Supervisors to extend the open season
would be in direct conflict with the fish and
game law OF the State, and would therefore be
invalid. Respectfully,
w. f. FITZGERALD, Attorney-General.
California Fish Commission, IS Flood building,
San FrdnciSco-DEAR SIRs: In reply to your
favor OF the 23d ult., relative to the disposition
to be made by your deputies of nets seized
when being Illegally used, and OF fish found in
such nets or seized during the close season, it
is my opinion that there is no authority
vested in your deputies to seize such
nets; that their duties in the premises
end when they have removed the
nets; that they are not authorized under the
law TO store them or dispose of them in any
manner, and they should simply be removed
from the water and left upon the bank. tSee
case of Jeck VS.. Anderson, 81 CAL, 251.l 1 am
also OF opinion that there is no authority under
the law for your deputies TO dispose of fish
seized in or out of season. Their duties ex-
tend only for the prevention of illegally taking
and disposing of such fish, and that when they
have performed these duties their Jurisdiction
is at an end. Respectfully,
W. F. FITZGERALD, Attorney-General.
In an opinion rendered later the Attor.
ney-General states the deputies have a
right to hold for evidence such nets as
they may find in the waters used in viela-
ton of the law and such fish as they can
hold for evidence, and that when taken
the same should be delivered to the near
est Justice of the Peace.
At the time when this new game act was
introduced in the Assent bly, it was plainly
stated by one of its advocates that the bill
had been introduced for the purpose of pro-
viding law that would be universal
throughout the State and would prove an
effectual safeguard to sportsmen. As I'M
der the provisions of the old law, which
gave Supervisors the power to enact special
ordinances on the matter, hunter had to
60 with map Of the country and sur
veyor to tell what county he was shooting
in, consequently to make the matter more
binding every clause was headed as fol-
lows: Every person who in the State of
California; etc., and then proceeds to
provide close season for various kinds of
game and fish, leaving at least three
months in which game could be
ldheu luIOuSIlcUI tHc Otdtct Uut tue ue-
cision rendered by the Attorney
in which he declares that county Boards of
Supervisors are empowered to shorten the
period of the open season, annuls the pur-
pose for which the act was created and
leaves the sportsmen as liable to prosecu-
ton through ignorance of county boundary
lines as ever.
Many legal lights, when interviewed
upon the subject, claim that the shorten
ing of the open season is as direct conflict
with the provisions of the act as the length
ening of the season would be, and several
persons have declared willingness to go
into some county where the open season
has been curtailed, Kill game in direct in
fringement of the county ordinance and
test this matter in the courts. The first
opinion rendered by Attorney General
Fitzgerald in the capture of nets engaged
in illegally catching fish, which stated that
said nets should be left by the deputies of
the Fish Commission upon the river bank,
was deemed extremely illogical and raised
a Juror OF indignant protest, and the ques.
ton of evidence being raised the second
opinion was given. stating that such fish
and net could be retained as evidence, and
must be deposited with the nearest Justice
of the Peace.