The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-05-08
OUR GAME LAWS.
Importance Of the Preservation of
Game and Fish.


The space accorded in the statute books
to laws for the protection of game and fish
is out OF all proportion TO their effective
ness or necessity. If these laws were in
tended to be taken seriously groups Of
States with the same climatic conditions
could combine and enact simple and uni
form code. Jointly applicable, particularly as
relates to the open and close seasons. AS it
is now. each State frames its fish and game
laws without regard one TO the other Not
only this, but many counties of the same
State are provided with special enactments,
conflicting with the general game 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
il goes into effect on May l. AS Brooklyn
be sold in its markets until the later date,
whereas in the city of New York the same
birds cannot be offered for sale after March
the line of a narrow river. The game laws
are loaded with just such petty and confus-
ing determinations, which, If enforced,
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 contiguous States. A law was
of game. which. however. was not to be
valid until the Governor of Wisconsin had
issued proclamat ton to the effect that the
States of Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan and
Illinois had passed law in conformity with
the provisions of that of Wisconsin This
attempt at concert of action was a COM
plete failure
To secure the protection OF game. nothing
is more imperatively needed than uniform
measure which will afford reasonable inn
munity TO wild fowl that make their home
in the United States during the autumn
winter and spring. The assertion that any
alarming decrease in>the number or fowl
complishment has been often denied. This
negation is based on the fact that localities
where they were formerly abundant have.
after years Of apparent desertion, Witnessed
their return in large numbers. This is a
false assumption as wild fowl. other condsi-
lions being equal, always congregate where
food is the more available Their absence
at the expense of some other locality, where
he aquatic plants and crustaceae upon
which they feed are. for the time being.
scarce. An illustration OF this is found on
some of the bays on the south side OF Long
island. where broad-Ofll ducks were more
plentiful during the autumn OF 1893 than had
been known for thirty years previous. This
Tas 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
nutriment which was in great plenty during
the previous autumn was no longer there "a
tempt them. some years ago. when the wild
celery beds of the Susquehanna river were
covered With sand. brought down by unusual
freshets I'm that stream, canvas-back ducks
almost totally deserted the locality. Those
that formerly tarried there during the sea
son resorted 10 other waters where they
found suitable food. and where they had not
been sseen for many years previous With
the recuperl ton OF the wild-celery beds in
the Susquehanna the canvas-back ducks re-
turned to the flats In the usual numbers.
This shifting habit of wild fowl creates a
false IMPRESSION rs TO their numerical in
crease is srparent to those who understand
the dangers which environ them.