Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1898-04-20
Correspondents.
The Game Laws of Maine.
AUGUSTA, Me, April IA. 1885

| for the purpose OF making them more ell
fective for the preservation Of the same.
The thought naturally is, when violations
OF the law are called to ones attention,
that the remedy lies in enacting more
stringent laws. 1t is my intention in this
communication to call public attention to
} the condition of things regarding the vio-
lation of game laws, the reason therefor,
and suggest a possible remedy or what
may lead up to better condition oil
things.
In the first place, claim that the laws
affecting our fish and game are better en-
forced than is the case with most other
laws upon our statute books, and that
public opinion is improving in sustain
ing an enforcement OF law and improving
our fish and game preserves. But l also
admit that there is need Of better pro-
lection Of our fish and game (gsme es-
pecially), and a better appreciation OF its
care.
While public sentiment is improving
and the State at large appreciates more
and more each year the great advantages
derived from these resources, there will
be for many years more or less violation
of law.
How to meet the demands in the direc-
ton OF best preserving our game re-
sources is the one living question that
calls for the best judgment OF every per-
son who would see the state receive the
greatest benefit from them. What is best
for the State at large, not what is best for
this or that section or interest, should be
| the problem to be solved. To that end
let me make the following suggestions:
First as l have said to many persons,
! the State receives its greatest benefits
from its fish resources, very much greater
than from its game. From its fishing
privileges come thousands Of tourists W no
spend many months at our inland resorts,
by lake and ponds, annually leaving large
sums OF money. This feature OF the
States visiting business may be increased
many fold by the increase OF our best fish
i'll waters now stocked and by stocking
many waters well adapted for their breed
ing. In this direction 1 would turn the
attention OF those desiring to make tie
most Of these privileges for the State.
Let the fish and game business be sep
arated. Let the appropriation for the
preservation and culture OF fish be at least
5000, which sum would show in ten
years remarkable results in fishing re-
sorts and consequent increase in visiting
tourists and their families Its benefits
would be felt in almost every hamlet in
Maine, i'll one way or another. The tax
upon a valuation OF - 900 for this amount
weuld be about 20 cents, and do not be-
lieve that the taxpayers of the State
would raise the least objection to it.
1t is the big game and Its care which
has led up to the most criticism and
which creates the most discomfort. DO
not understand that | would advise the
abandonment OF the care OF our large
game, or less attention to its protection
and preservation. On the other hand the |
method suggested OF dealing with it,
would, to my mind, lead up to the best
possible results.
| assume that our fishing interests are |
general; also that our game interests are |
mainly sectional. To be more definite,
those whose business it is to care for the |
sportsman, hotels, guides, steamboats,
upon inland waters, and those carrying |
them by rail, or transporting their ex-
press, receive largely the benefits derived |
from our large game. These interests are |
mostly in one part OF the State, or rather |
a large part OF the State only indirectly |
and remotely receives any profit from the |
preservation OF large game. Therefore it
island must be sectional in its benefits.
do not wish to be understood as say
ing that it is not OF sufficient moment
and Its benefits general enough to de-
mand the care OF the whole State, il that
was the only and best way to preserve it.
But feel that there is better way, fairer
and more just.
= Having appropriated f25, 600 for fish and
fish culture, would compel every nom
resident person who desired ITO hunt
moose, caribou or deer, to pay. annually
20 for hat privilege, and each resident OF
the State, q for the same right. l have
always opposed license flee upon nom
residents, and would now, il it did not
apply in some measure to the resident.
Laws to be accepted must be Just and
fair. To tax the nom resident alone is not
resident as much as the non resident
would not be just or fair, because he is
paying his proportion OF the appropria-
ton for the care OF fish. The non-resi-
dent, who would feel injured by being
alone taxed would see that there was in
this no attempt to take unfair advantage
OF him; and the resident, it would seem,
ought to be willing to pay something for
the preservation of kind OF game which
he desired to hunt.
1t was stated in the report of the fish
and game commissioners that some 1000
sportsmen from out of the State came
here to hunt large game last season.
Suppose 5000 should come, land see no
reason to reduce the number) tax OF five
dollars would give us $4,000, and II 5000
IN the State hunted large game, we would