The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1933-01-04

| oSASsS~e
Of the tax question, believe that I dc
know the facts concerning the con.
servation Of wild life and the costs
thereof in North Dakota about as well
as any man in the state. and GER
tainly want to take exception to the
statements made by the gentleman
from Richardton.
I, To begin with, the game and fisl!
! department has never reccived-and
probably never will receive-one RED
cent of tax money. The department Is
operated out Of the revenue derived
from the sale Of licenses and per-
mits and approximately 30 per cent
of this revenue is derived from the
sale Of fishing and hunting licenses
IN other words, the cost is paid by
the hunters and fishermen of this
state and the average taxpayer con-
tributes nothing whatever to that
cost. The legislature most gener-
ously (D allows the SportSmen to
spend $4,000 of their own money
every two years. If and when they
collect that much, the appropriation
being made out Of the game and
fish fund and not out of the general
fund as SO many misinformed per-
sons believe.
Secondly, the gentleman from
Richardton says that the landowner
should be permitted to kill any and
all wild game on his land at any
time and to the exclusion of all other
citizens. That is the system in force
in Europe, where only the very rich
can take game and fish, but this be-
ing the United States, where all men
are supposed to be equal, our laws
attempt, at least, to give the COM
mon people the privilege Of fishing
and hunting also. AS concerns the
landowners right to preference, I
feel that he has none. He bears no
share of the cost Of protecting and
propagating game and fish, as he is
exempted by law from the need OF
procuring license to hunt or fish
on his own land. Neither does the
popular and ancient idea that the
landowner feeds our birds and is
therefore entitled to preference have
any foundation in fact. It may be
of interest to the gentleman from
Richardton to know that If it we're
not for his feathered friends-which
the sportsman's money protects and
propagates-he would not pay taxes
to North Dakota or any other gov
ernmental unit. An unrestricted in
sect population would destroy every
vestige of vegetable life. and his farm
would be as barren as his kitchen
floor. No, that last mentioned idea
does not go we'll with me. Mr.. Farmer
should thank heaven for his feath-
cred friends and be mighty grateful
that the sportsman's money is pro-
tecting them and planting more.
This is true of all birds with the ex-
ception of the few species that are
definitely injurious, and with the ex-
ception of migratory game birds. The
ducks and geese are no particular
economic asset to the farmer, in fact
often eat his crops. but I believe I
know game conditions we'll enough
to say that this very rarely, If ever,
happens to anyone residing at Rich
ardtOn. It is true that some of the
people who hunt or fish are vandals
and often damage the farmers prop
erty or leave his gates open. How
ever. you cannot condemn the great
majority of sportsmen, who are de-
cent and law-abiding citizens, be-
cause of the vandals any more than
you can condemn everyone who en-
tiers a bank because one or two of
them may be a bank bandit. All
things considered, then, it appears
to me that the landowner is get
ting much the better of the deal as
he receives most of the economic
benefit and shoulders very little of
the cost. There is no doubt but that
some plan where the sportsman and
the farmer can get together and work
together towards common end is
highly desirable. But to say that the
landowner is entitled to everything
and the others to nothing appears to
me to be merely another attempt to
Stay the goose that lays the golden
egg: at least in so far as the farmer
is concerned
Finally. the gentleman from Rich
ardton says. Let the federal gov
eminent foot the bill" I ask you
what is the difference between the
federal government and the state
government in so far as the tax
payer is concerned? A lot of people
seem to have some sort of a crazy
idea that the federal government can
do anything it wishes and merely
reach up in the blue air and get the
money to do it with; but you and
and Mr.. Average American foot the
bill in the end, even though the tax
may be indirect and does not hurt
SO much.
Summing everything up, then, ]
would say that Mr.. Land Owner-o1
which I am one-had better leave
the game laws Of our state severely
alone. He would be very foolish tc
do otherwise as he certainly has the
best of the bargain under present
laws, all things considered. And an
other Thoughtful the hunters and
fishermen Of this state want to spend
their own funds to protect anc
propagate our wild life, quit meow.
ing about what it costs you, Mr.
Landowner, because you are getting
most of the economic benefits of the
expenditures and you don't have tt
contribute a penny unless you want
to.
Very truly yours.
M. O. STEEN.
RAPS HEALTH BOARDS
Cfan1o M nolS 30 On %