NEW LAWS NEEDED: A ROLL-CALL OF THE STATES
The principles of wild-life protection and encouragement are now so
firmly established as to leave little room for argument regarding their
value. When they are set forth before the people of any given state, the
only question is of willingness to do the right thing; of duty or a
defiance of duty; of good citizenship or the reign of selfishness. Men
who do not wish to do their duty purposely befog great issues by noisy
talk and tiresome academic discussions of trivial details; and such men
are the curse and scourge of reform movements.
There are a very few persons who foolishly assert that "there are too
many game laws!" It is entirely wrong for any person to make such a
statement, for it tends to promote harmful error. The fact that our laws
are _too lenient_, or are not fully enforced, is no excuse for
denouncing their purposes. We have all along been too timid, too self
indulgent, and too much afraid of hurting the feelings of the game-hogs.
Give me the power to make the game laws of any state or province and I
will guarantee to save the _non-migratory_ wild life of that region. I
will not only make adequate laws, but I will also provide means, men and
penalties by which _they will be enforced_! It is easy and simple, for
men who are not afraid.
I have been at considerable pains to analyze the game laws of each
state, ascertain their shortcomings, and give a list of the faults that
need correction by new legislation. It has required no profound wisdom
to do this, because the principles involved are so plain that any
intelligent schoolboy fifteen years old can master them in one hour. I
have performed this task hopefully, in the belief that in many states
the real issues have not been plainly put before the people. Hereafter
no state shall destroy its wild life through ignorance of the laws that
would preserve it.
Let no man say that "it is too late to save the wild life"; for
excepting the dead-and-gone species, that is not true. Let no man say
that "we can not save the wild life by law"; for that is not true,
either. As long as laws are lax, even law-abiding people will take
advantage of them.
There are millions of men who think it is _right to kill all the game
that the law allows_! There are thousands of women who think it is right
to wear aigrettes as long as the law permits their sale! And yet, if we
are resolute and diligent there is plenty of hope for the future. During
the past three years, to go no farther back, we have seen the whole
state of New York swept clean of the traffic in native wild game by the
Bayne law, and of the traffic in wild birds' plumage on women's hats
through the Dutcher law. To-day, in this state, we find ninety-nine
women out of every one hundred wearing flowers, and laces, and plush and
satin on their hats, instead of the heads, bodies and feathers of wild
birds that were the regular thing until three years ago. The change has
been a powerful commentary on the value of good laws for the protection
of wild life. The Dutcher law has caused the plumage of wild birds
_almost wholly to disappear from the State of New York_!
We shall here point out the plain duty of each state; and then it will
be up to them, individually, to decide whether they can stand the
blood-test or not.
A state or a nation can be ungentlemanly, unfair or mean, just the same
as an individual. No state has a right to maintain shambles for the
slaughter of migratory game or song birds that belong in part to sister
states. _Every state holds its migratory bird life in trust, for the
benefit of the people of the nation at large_. A state is just as
responsible for its treatment of wild life as any individual; and it is
time to open books of account.
It is robbery, as well as murder, for any southern state to slaughter
the robins of the northern states, where no robins may be killed. _No
southern gentleman can permit such doings, after the crime has been
pointed out to him_! In the North, the men who are caught shooting
robins are instantly haled to court, and fined or imprisoned. If we of
the North should kill for food the mockingbirds that visit us, the
people of the South instantly would brand us as monsters of greed and
meanness; and they would be perfectly justified in so doing.
Let us at least be honest in "agreeing upon a state of fact," as the
lawyers say, whether we act sensibly and mercifully or not. Just so long
as there remains in this land of ours a fauna of game birds, and the
gunners of one-half the states are allowed to dictate the laws for the
slaughter of it, just so long will our present protection remain utterly
absurd and criminally inadequate. Look at these absurdities:
New York, New Jersey and many other northern states rigidly prohibit the
late winter and spring shooting of waterfowl and shore birds, and limit
the bag; North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, and other southern
states not only slaughter wild fowl and shore birds all winter and
spring, without limit, but several of them kill certain non-game birds
besides!
All the northern states protect the robin, for the good that it does;
but in North Carolina, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana and some other
southern states, thousands of robins are shot for food. Minnesota has
stopped spring shooting; but her sister state on the south, Iowa,
obstinately refuses to do so.
THE UNITED STATES AT LARGE.--There are two great measures that should be
carried into effect by the governing body of the United States. One is
the enactment of a law providing federal protection for all migratory
birds; and Canada and Mexico should be induced to join with the United
States _in an international treaty to that effect_.
The other necessary measure is the passage of a joint resolution of
Congress _declaring every national forest and forest reserve also a game
preserve and general sanctuary for wild life_, in which there shall be
no hunting or killing of wild creatures of any kind save predatory
animals.
The tendency of the times,--and the universal slaughter of wild life on
this continent,--point straight as an arrow flies in that direction.
Soon or late, we have GOT to come to it! If Congress does not take the
initiatory steps, _the People will_! Such a consummation is necessary;
it is justified by common sense and the inexorable logic of the
situation, and when done it will be right.
The time was when the friends of wild life did not dare speak of this
subject in Washington save in whispers. That was in the days when the
Appalachian Park bill could not be passed, and when there were angry
mutterings and even curses leveled against Gifford Pinchot and the
Forestry Bureau because so many national forests were being set aside.
That was in the days when a few western sheep-men thought that they
owned the whole Rocky Mountains without having bought them. To-day, the
American people have grown accustomed to the idea of having the
resources of the public domain saved and conserved for the benefit of
the millions rather than lavished upon a favored few. To-day it is
perfectly safe to talk about making every national forest a first class
wild-life sanctuary, and it is up to the People to request Congress to
take that action, at once.
The Weeks bill, the Anthony bill, and the McLean bill now before
Congress to provide federal protection for migratory birds are
practically identical. All three are good bills; and it matters not
which one finally becomes a law. Whichever is put forward finally for
passage should provide federal protection for _all_ migratory birds that
ever enter the United States, Alaska, or Porto Rico. Why favor the duck
and leave the robin to its fate, or vice versa? It will be just as easy
to do this task by wholes as by halves. The time to hesitate, to feel
timid, or to be afraid of the other fellow has gone by. To-day the
millions of honest and serious-minded Americans are ready to back the
most thorough and most drastic policy, because that has become the most
necessary and the best policy. Furthermore, it is the only policy worthy
of serious consideration.
Some of our states have done rather well in wild-life
protection,--considering the absurdity of our national policy as a
whole; others have done indifferently, and some have been and still are
very remiss. Here is where we intend to hew to the line, and without
fear or favor set forth the standing of each state according to its
merits or its lack of merits. In a life-or-death matter such as now
confronts us regarding the wild life of our country, it is time to speak
plainly.
In the following call of the States, the glaring deficiencies in state
game laws will be set forth in detail, in order that the sore spots may
be exposed to the view of the doctors. Conditions will be represented
_as they exist at the end of the summer of 1912_, and it is to be hoped
that these faults soon may be corrected.
* * * * *
A ROLL-CALL OF THE STATES
ALABAMA:
It is a satisfaction to be able to open this list with the name of a
state that is entitled to a medal of honor for game protection. In this
particular field of progress and enlightenment, the state of Alabama is
the pioneer state of the South. New York now occupies a similar position
in the North; but New York is an older state, and stronger in her
general love of nature. The attainment of advanced protection in any
southern state is a very different matter from what it is in the North.
Five years ago Alabama set her house in order. The slaughter of song and
insectivorous birds has been so far stopped as any Southern state can
stop it unaided by the federal government, and those birds are
recognized and treated as the farmers' best friends. The absurd system
of attempted protection through county laws has been abandoned. The sale
of game has been stopped, and since that stoppage, quail have increased.
The trapping and export of game have ceased, and wild turkeys and
woodcock are now increasing. It is unlawful to kill or capture non-game
birds. Bag limits have been imposed, but _the bag limit laws are all too
liberal, and should be reduced_. A hunter's license law is in force, and
the department of game and fish is self-supporting. Night hunting is
prohibited, and female deer may not be killed. A comprehensive warden
system has been provided. As yet, however, Alabama
Permits the shooting of waterfowl to March 15, which is too late, by
one and one-half months.
The use of automatic and pump guns in hunting should be suppressed.
There should be a limit of two deer per year, and killing should be
restricted to deer with horns not less than three inches long.
The story of game protection in Alabama began in 1907. Prior to that
time, the slaughter of wild life was very great. It is known that
enormous numbers of quail were annually killed by negro farm hands, who
hunted at least three days each week, regardless of work to be done. The
slaughter of quail, wild ducks, woodcock, doves, robins and snipe was
described as "nauseating."
The change that has been wrought since 1907 is chiefly due to the
efforts of one man. Alabama owes her standing to-day to the admirable
qualities of John H. Wallace, Jr., her Game and Fish Commissioner,
author of the State's policy in wild-life conservation. His
broad-mindedness, his judgment and his success make him a living object
lesson of the power of one determined man in the conservation of wild
life.
Commissioner Wallace is an ardent supporter of the Weeks and Anthony
bills for federal protection, and as a lawyer of the South, he believes
there is "no constitutional inhibition against federal legislation for
the protection of birds of passage."
ALASKA:
The sale of game must be absolutely prohibited, forever.
The slaughter of big game by Indians, miners and prospectors should
now be limited, and strictly regulated by law, on rational lines.
The slaughter of walrus for ivory and hides, both in the Alaskan and
Russian waters of Bering Sea, should be totally prohibited for ten
years.
The game-warden service should be quadrupled in number of wardens,
and in general effectiveness.
The game-warden service should be supplied with two sea-going
vessels, independent for patrol work.
The bag limit on hoofed game is 50 per cent too large.
To accomplish these ends, Congress should annually appropriate
$50,000 for the protection of wild life in Alaska. The present
amount, $15,000, is very inadequate, and the great wild-life
interests at stake amply justify the larger amount.
It is now time for Alaska to make substantial advances in the protection
of her wild life. It is no longer right nor just for Indians, miners and
prospectors to be permitted by law to kill all the big game they please,
whenever they please. The indolent and often extortionate Indians of
Alaska,--who now demand "big money" for every service they perform,--are
not so valuable as citizens that they should be permitted to feed
riotously upon _moose, and cow moose at that_, until that species is
exterminated. Miners and prospectors are valuable citizens, but that is
no reason why they should forever be allowed to live upon wild game, any
more than that hungry prospectors in our Rocky Mountains should be
allowed to kill cattle.
Alaska and its resources do not belong to the very few people from "the
States" who have gone there to make their fortunes and get out again as
quickly as possible. The quicker the public mind north of Wrangel is
disabused of that idea, the better. Its game belongs to the people of
this nation of ninety-odd millions, and it is a safe prediction that the
ninety millions will not continue to be willing that the miners,
prospectors and Indians shall continue to live on moose meat and caribou
tongues in order to save bacon and beef.
Mr. Frank E. Kleinschmidt said to me that at Sand Point, Alaska, he saw
eighty-two caribou tongues brought in by an Indian, and sold at fifty
cents each, while (according to all accounts) most of the bodies of the
slaughtered animals became a loss.
Governor Clark has recommended in his annual report for 1911 that the
protection now enjoyed by the giant brown bear _(Ursus middendorffi_) on
Kadiak Island be removed, for the benefit of settlers _and their stock_!
It goes without saying that no one proposes that predatory wild animals
shall be permitted to retard the development of any wild country that is
required by civilized man. All we ask in this matter is that, as in the
case of the once-proposed slaughter of sea-lions on the Pacific Coast,
_the necessity of the proposed slaughter shall be fully and adequately
proven before the killing begins_! It is fair to insist that the
sea-lion episode shall not be repeated on Kadiak Island.
The big game of Alaska can not long endure against a "limit" of two
moose, three mountain sheep, three caribou and six deer per year, per
man. At that rate the moose and sheep soon will disappear. The limit
should be one moose, two sheep, two caribou and four deer,--unless we
are willing to dedicate the Alaskan big game to Commercialism. No
sportsman needs a larger bag than the revised schedule; and
commercialists should not be allowed to kill big game anywhere, at any
time.
Let us bear in mind the fact that Alaska is being throughly "opened up"
to the Man with a Gun. Here is the latest evidence, from the new
circular of an outfitter:
"I will have plenty of good horses, and good, competent and courteous
guides; also other camp attendants if desired. My intention is to
establish permanently at that point, as I believe it is the gateway to
the finest _and about the last_ of the great game countries of North
America."
The road is open; the pack-train is ready; the guides are waiting. Go on
and slay the Remnant!
ARIZONA:
The band-tailed pigeons and all non-game birds should immediately be
given protection; and a salaried warden system should be established
under a Commissioner whose term is not less than four years.
The use of automatic and pump guns, in hunting, should be
prohibited.
Spring shooting should be prohibited.
Arizona has good reason to be proud of her up-to-date position in the
ranks of the best game-protecting states. No other state or territory of
her age ever has made so good a showing of protective laws. The
enactment of laws to cover the points mentioned above would leave little
to be desired in Arizona. That state has a bird fauna well worth
protecting, and game wardens are extremely necessary.
ARKANSAS:
The enforcement of game laws should be placed in charge of a
salaried commissioner.
Spring shooting of wildfowl should be stopped at once.
A reasonable close season should be provided for water fowl, and
swans should be protected throughout the year.
A bag-limit law should be enacted.
A force of game wardens, salaried and unsalaried, should at once be
created.
The killing of female deer and the hounding of deer, should be
stopped.
No buck deer should be shot, unless horns three inches long are seen
before firing.
A hunter's license law is necessary; and the fees should go to the
support of the game protection department.
The local exemptions in favor of market hunters in Mississippi
county should be repealed.
It appears that in Arkansas the laws for the protection and increase of
wild life are by no means up to the mark. At this moment, Arkansas is
next to Florida, the rearmost of all our states in wild-life protection.
Awake, Arkansas! Consider the peril that threatens your fauna. The Sunk
Lands, in your northeastern corner along the St. Francis River, are the
greatest wild-fowl refuge anywhere in the Mississippi Valley between the
Gulf Coast of Louisiana and the breeding-grounds of Minnesota. A duty to
the nation devolves upon you, to protect the migratory waterfowl that
visit your great bird refuge from the automatic and pump guns of the
pothunters who shoot for northern markets, and kill all that they can
kill. _Protect those Sunken Lands_! Confer a boon on all the people of
the Mississippi Valley by making that region a bird refuge in fact as
well as in name.
Heretofore, you have permitted hired market gunners from outside your
borders to slaughter the wild-fowl of your Sunk Lands literally by
millions, and ship them to northern markets, with very little benefit to
your people. It is time for that slaughter to cease. Don't maintain a
duck and goose shambles in Mississippi County, year after year, as North
Carolina does! Do unto other states as you would have other states do
unto you. _Do not_ be afraid to pass nine good laws in one act. Clear
your record in the Family of States, and save your fauna before it is
too late. It is not fair for you to permit the slaughter of the
insectivorous birds that are like the blood of life to the farmer and
fruit grower.
CALIFORNIA:
The sale of all wild game should be forever prohibited.
The use of automatic and pump shotguns, in hunting, should be
prohibited.
The killing of pigeons and doves as "game" and "food" should be
stopped.
The sage grouse and every other species of bird threatened with
extinction should be given ten year close seasons.
The mule deer (if any remain) and the Columbian black-tailed deer in
the southern counties should be accorded a ten-year close season.
A large state game preserve should be created immediately, on or
near Mount Shasta and abundantly stocked with nucleus herds of
antelope, black-tailed deer, bison and elk.
A suitable preserve in the southern part of the state should be set
aside for the dwarf elk.
As game laws are generally regarded, California has on her books a
series that look rather good to the eye, but which are capable of
considerable improvement. All along the line, the birds and quadrupeds
of the Golden State are vanishing! Under that heading, a vigorous
chapter could be written; but space forbids its development here. Just
fancy laws that permit gunning and hunting with dogs, from August until
January--one-half the entire year! Think of the nesting birds that are
disturbed or killed by dogs and gunners after other birds!
California's wild ducks and geese have been slaughtered to an extent
almost beyond belief. The splendid sage grouse and the sharp-tailed
grouse are greatly reduced in numbers. Of her hundreds of thousands of
antelope, once the cheapest game in the market, scarcely "a trace"
remains. Her mountain sheep and mule deer are almost extinct. Her
grizzly bears are gone!
The most terrible slaughter ever recorded for automatic guns occurred
in Glenn County, Cal., on Feb. 5, 1906, when two men (whose story was
published in _Outdoor Life_, xvii, p. 371, April, 1906), killed 450
geese in one day, and actually bagged 218 of them in _one hour_!
Every person who has paid attention to game protection on the Pacific
coast well knows that during the past eight years or more, the work of
game protection in California has been in a state of frequent turmoil.
At times the lack of harmony between the State Fish and Game Commission
and the sportsmen of the state has been damaging to the interests of
wild life, and deplorable. In the case of Warden Welch, in Santa Cruz
County, pernicious politics came near robbing the state of a splendid
warden, but the courts finally overthrew the overthrowers of Mr. Welch,
and reinstated him.
The fish and game commissioners of any state should be broad-minded,
non-partisan, strictly honest and sincere. So long as they possess these
qualities, they deserve and should have the earnest and aggressive
support of all sportsmen and all lovers of wild life. The remnant of
wild life is entitled to a square deal, and harmony in the camp of its
friends. Fortunately California has an excellent force of salaried game
wardens (82 in all) and 577 volunteer wardens serving without salary.
COLORADO:
The State of Colorado should instantly stop the sale of native wild
game to be used as food.
It should stop all late winter and spring shooting of native wild
birds.
It should give the sage grouse, pinnated grouse and all shore birds
a ten year close season, remove the dove from the list of game
birds, and give it a permanent close season.
It should remove the crane and the swan from the list of game birds.
In twenty-five short years we have seen in Colorado a waste of wild life
and the destruction of a living inheritance that has few parallels in
history. Possibly the people of Colorado are satisfied with the
residuum; but some outsiders regard all Rocky Mountain shambles with a
feeling of horror.
A brief quarter-century ago, Colorado was a zoological park of grand
scenery and big game. The scenery remains, but of the great wild herds,
only samples are left, and of some species not even that.
The last bison of Colorado were exterminated in Lost Park by scoundrels
calling themselves "taxidermists," in 1897. Of the 200,000 mule deer
that inhabited Routt County and other portions of Colorado, not enough
now remain to make deer hunting interesting. A perpetual close season
was put on mountain sheep just in time to save a dozen small flocks as
seed stock. Those flocks have been permitted to live, and they have bred
until now there are perhaps 3,500 sheep in the state. Of elk, only a
remnant is left, now protected for fifteen years.
The grizzly bear is so thoroughly gone that one is seen only by a rare
accident; but black bears and pumas are sufficiently numerous to afford
fair sport, provided the hunter has a fine outfit of dogs, horses and
guides. Of prong-horned antelope, several bands remain, but it is
reported that they are steadily diminishing. The herds and herders of
domestic sheep are blamed for the decrease, and I have no doubt they
deserve it. The sheep and their champions are the implacable enemies of
all wild game, and before them the game vanishes, everywhere.
The lawmakers of Colorado have tried hard to provide adequate statutes
for the protection of the wild life of the state. In fact, I think that
no state has put forth greater or more elaborate efforts in that
direction. For example, in 1899, under the leadership of Judge D.C.
Beaman of Denver, Colorado initiated the "more game movement," by
enacting a very elaborate law providing for the establishment of private
game preserves and farms for the breeding of game under state license,
and the tagging and sale of preserve-bred game under state supervision.
[Illustration: BAND-TAILED PIGEON
Often Mistaken for the Passenger Pigeon. The rapid Slaughter
of this Species has Alarmed the Ornithologists of California,
who now fear its Extinction]
The history of game destruction in Colorado is a repetition of the old,
old story,--plenty of laws, but a hundred times too many hunters,
killing the game both according to law and contrary to it, and doing it
five times as fast as the game could breed. That combination can safely
be warranted to wipe out the wild life of any country in the world, and
accomplish it right swiftly.
As a big-game country, Colorado is distinctly out of the running. Her
people are too lawless, and her frontiersmen are, in the main, far too
selfish to look upon plenteous game without going after it. Some of
these days, a new call of the wild will arise in Colorado, demanding an
open season on mountain sheep. Those who demand it will say, "What harm
will it do to kill a few surplus bucks? It will improve the breed, and
make the herds increase faster!"
By all means, have an "open season" on the Colorado big-horn and the
British Columbia elk. It will "do them good." The excitement of ram
slaughter will be good for the females, will it not? Of course, they
will breed faster after that,--with all the big rams dead. Any "surplus"
wild life is a public nuisance, and should promptly be shot to pieces.
In Colorado there is some desire that Estes Park should be acquired as a
national park, and maintained by the government; but the strong reasons
for this have not yet appeared. As yet we have not heard any reason why
the State of Colorado should not herself take it and make of it a state
park and game preserve. If done, it could be offered as a partial
atonement for her wastefulness in throwing away her inheritance of grand
game.
Colorado has work to do in the preservation of her remnant of bird life.
In several respects she is behind the times. The present is no time to
hesitate, or to ask the gunners what _they_ wish to have done about new
laws for the saving of the remnant of game. The dictates of common sense
are plain, and inexorable. Let the lawmakers do their whole duty by the
remnant of wild life, whether the game killers like it or not.
_The Curse of Domestic Sheep Upon Game and Cattle_.--Much has been said
in print and out of print regarding the extent to which domestic sheep
have destroyed the cattle ranges and incidentally many game ranges of
the West; but the half hath not been told. The American people as a
whole do not realize that the domestic sheep has driven the domestic
steer from the free grass of the wild West, with the same speed and
thoroughness with which the buffalo-hunters of the 70's and 80's swept
away the bison. I have seen hundreds of thousands of acres of what once
were beautiful and fertile cattle-grazing lands in Montana, that has
been left by grazing sheep herds looking precisely as if the ground had
been shaven with razors and then sandpapered. The sheep have driven out
the cattle, and the price of beef has gone up accordingly. Neither
cattle, horses nor wild game can find food on ground that has been
grazed over by sheep.
The following is the testimony of a reliable eye witness, Mr. Dillon
Wallace, and the full text appears in his book, "_Saddle and Camp in the
Rockies_," (page 169):--
Domestic sheep and sheep herders are the greatest enemies of the
antelope, as well as of other game animals and birds in the regions
where herders take their flocks. The ranges over which domestic
sheep pasture are denuded of forage and stripped of all growth, and
antelope will not remain upon a range where sheep have been.
Thus the sheep, sweeping clean all before them and leaving the
ranges over which they pass unproductive, for several succeeding
seasons, of pasturage for either wild or domestic animals, together
with the destructive shepherds, are the worst enemies at present of
Utah's wild game, particularly of antelope, sage hens, and grouse.
In Iron county, which has already become an extensive sheep region,
settlers tell us that before the advent of sheep, grass grew so
luxuriously that a yearling calf lying in it could not be seen. Not
only has the grass here been eaten, but the roots tramped out and
killed by the hoofs of thousands upon thousands of sheep, and now
wide areas, where not long since grass was so plentiful, are as bare
and desolate as sand-piles.
* * * * *