The Portland daily press., 1896-05-06
GAME AND FISH PRESERVATION.
Need of Uniformity OF Protective Laws
(Gaston Fay in Atlantic Monthly >,

(Gaston Fay in Atlantic Monthly. \
The space accorded in the stabute.
books TO laws for the protection of game
and fish ia out of all prop ortion to thei,
effectiveness or necessity. If these laws
were intended to he taken seriously.
groups of States with the same climatic
conditions could combine and enact a
simple and uniform code, jointly applic.
able, particularly as relates to the oper
and close SEASONS. AS it is now. sact
State frames its flsh and game laws
| without regard one to the other. Not
only this, but many counties of the same
State arc provided with special enact.
ments, conflicting with th general gam
and fish laws, and in force only within
their own boundaries. An illustration of
| this is found in the State of New York,
where the close season on wild ducks and
geese commences on March /, except on
Long Island, where it goes into effect
on May /. AS Brooklyn is on Long Is
land, wild ducks and geese may be sold
in its markets until the lauer date, where
as in the city of New York the same
March !. This fine distinction Is repre-
sented by the line of a narrow river. The
game laws are loaded with just such pet
ty and confusing Determinations, which,
| II enforced, would entail endless trouble
and litigation. AT a recent SESSION of
the Legislature of Wisconsin an attempt
was made to put into effect the theory Of
uniform game and fish law for contigu-
Gus States. A law was passed for the
protection of certain species of game,
which, however, was not to be valid Nn-
til the governor of Wisconsin had issued
proclamation to the effect that the
States of Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan and
| Illinois had passed law in conformity
with tho provisions OF that of Wisconsin.
This attempt at concert Of action was q
| complete failure.
To secure the protection Of game, moth
ing is more imperatively needed than a
uniform measure which will afford rea-
s0nable Immunity to wild fowl that
| make their homo in the United States
during the autumn, winter and spring
| The assertion that any alarming decrease
| in the number of wild fowl that frequent
| our waters is in process OF accomplish
ment has often been denied. This mega
| tion is based on the fact that localities
where they were formerly abundant have
after years of desertion, witnessed their
return in large numbers. This is false
assumption, as wild fowl, other CON-
ditions being equal, always congregate
where food is the more available, Their
absence is due to the lack of it. Ii they
return it is at the expense of some othe r
locality, where the aquatic plants and
crustaoea upon which they feed are for
the time being, scarce An illustration
of this Is found ON some of the bays of
the south side of Long Island, where broad
bill ducks were more plentiful during the
autumn of 1898 than had been known for
| 80 years previous This was owing to such
an ample supply Of food that no amount
of shooting could drive the ducks away
| In the autumn of 1894 the same fowl were
exceptionally absent from those waters
They came, but did not stay. The nu-
triment which was in great plenty dur
| ing the previous autumn was no longer
there to tempt them. Some years ago,
when the wild celery beds of the Susque-
hanna river were covered with sand,
brought down by unusual freshets in
that stream, canvas back ducks almost
totally deserted the locality. Those that
formerly tarrted there during the season
resorted to other waters where they found
suita BILE food, and where they had not
been seen for many years previous. With
| the reouperation of the wild celery beds
| in the Susquehanna the canvasbaok
ducks returned to the flats in the usual
| numbers. This shifting hatft Of wild
| fowl creates false impression as to their
| numerical increase. That they are rap
| idly on the decrease is apparent to those
who understand the dang ers which en-
viron them.