NEED FOR A FEDERAL MIGRATORY BIRD LAW, NO-SALE-OF-GAME LAW, AND OTHERS
We are assuming that the American people sincerely desire the adequate
protection and increase of bird life, for reasons that are both
sentimental and commercial. Surely every good citizen dislikes to see
millions of dollar's worth of national wealth foolishly wasted, and he
dislikes to pay any unnecessary increased cost of living. There must be
several millions of Americans who feel that way, and who are disposed to
demand a complete revolution in bird protection.
There are four needs of wild bird life that are fundamental, and that
can not be ignored, any more than a builder can ignore the four
cornerstones of his building. Listed in the order of their importance,
they are as follows:
1.--_The federal protection of all migratory birds._
2.--_The total suppression of the sale of native wild game_.
3.--_The total suppression of spring shooting and of shooting in the
breeding season, and_
4.--_Long close seasons for all species that are about to be "shot
out_."
If the gunners of America wish to have a gameless continent, all they
need do to secure it is to oppose these principles, prevent their
translation into law, and maintain the status quo. If they do this, then
_all our best birds are doomed to swift destruction_. Let no man make a
mistake on that point. The "open seasons" and "bag limits" of the United
States to-day are just as deadly as the 5,000,000 sporting guns now in
use, and the 700,000,000 annual cartridges. It is only the ignorant or
the vicious who will seriously dispute this statement.
THE FEDERAL PROTECTION OF MIGRATORY BIRDS.--The bill now before Congress
for the protection of all migratory birds by the national government is
the most important measure ever placed before that body in behalf of
wild life. A stranger to this proposition will need to pause for thought
in order to grasp its full meaning, and appreciate the magnitude of its
influence.
The urgent necessity for a law of this nature is due to the utter
inadequacy of the laws that prevail throughout some portions of the
United States concerning the slaughter and preservation of birds. Any
law that is not enforced is a poor law. There is not one state in the
Union, nor a single province in Canada, in which the game birds, and
other birds criminally shot as game, are not being killed far faster
than they are breeding, and thereby being exterminated.
Several states are financially unable to employ a force of salaried game
wardens; and wherever that is true, the door to universal slaughter is
wide open. Let him who questions this take Virginia as a case in point.
A loyal Virginian told me only this year that in his state the warden
system is an ineffective farce, and the game is not protected, because
the wardens can not afford to patrol the state for nothing.
This condition prevails in a number of states, north and south,
especially south. It is my belief that throughout nine-tenths of the
South, the negroes and poor whites are slaughtering birds exactly as
they please. It is the _permanent residents_ of the haunts of birds and
game that are exterminating the wild life.
The value of the birds as destroyers of noxious insects, has been set
forth in Chapter XXIII. Their total value is enormous--or it _would_ be
if the birds were alive and here in their normal numbers. To-day there
are about one-tenth as many birds as were alive and working thirty years
ago. During the past thirty years the destruction of our game birds has
been enormous, and the insectivorous birds have greatly decreased.
The damages annually inflicted upon the farm, orchard and garden crops
of this country are very great. When a city is destroyed by earthquake
or fire, and $100,000,000 worth of property is swept away, we are racked
with horror and pity; and the cities of America pour out money like
water to relieve the resultant distress. We are shocked because we can
_see_ the flames, the smoke and the ruins.
And yet, we annually endure with perfect equanimity (_because we can not
see it_?) a loss of nearly $400,000,000 worth of value that is destroyed
by insects. The damage is inflicted silently, insidiously, without any
scare heads or wooden type in the newspapers, and so we pay the price
without protest. We know--when we stop to think of it--that not all this
loss falls upon the producer. We know that every consumer of bread,
cereals, vegetables and fruit _pays his share of this loss_! To-day,
millions of people are groaning under the "increased cost of living."
The bill for the federal protection of all migratory birds is directly
intended to decrease the cost of living, by preventing outrageous waste;
but of all the persons to whom the needs of that bill are presented, how
many will take the time to promote its quick passage by direct appeals
to their members of Congress? We shall see.
The good that would be accomplished, annually, by the enactment of a law
for the federal protection of all migratory birds is beyond computation;
but it is my belief that within a very few years the increase in bird
life would prevent what is now an annual loss of $250,000,000. It is
beyond the power of man to protect his crops and fruit and trees as the
bird millions would protect them--if they were here as they were in
1870. The migratory bird bill is of vast importance because it would
throw the strong arm of federal protection around 610 species of birds.
The power of Uncle Sam is respected and feared in many places where the
power of the state is ignored.
The list of migratory birds includes most of the perching birds; all the
shore birds (_great_ destroyers of bad insects); all the swifts and
swallows; the goat-suckers (whippoorwill and nighthawk); some of the
woodpeckers; most of the rails; pigeons and doves; many of the hawks;
some of the cranes and herons and all the geese, ducks and swans.
A movement for the federal protection of migratory game birds was
proposed to Congress by George Shiras, 3rd, who as a member of the House
in the 58th Congress introduced a bill to secure that end. An excellent
brief on that subject by Mr. Shiras appeared in the printed hearing on
the McLean bill, held on March 6, 1912, page 18. Omitting the bills
introduced in the 59th, 60th and 61st sessions, mention need be made
only of the measures under consideration in the present Congress. One of
these is a bill introduced by Representative J.W. Weeks, of
Massachusetts, and another is the bill of Representative D.R. Anthony,
Jr., of Kansas, of the same purport.
Finally, on April 24, 1912, an adequate and entirely reasonable bill was
introduced in the Senate by Senator George P. McLean, of Connecticut, as
No. 6497 (Calendar No. 606). This bill provides federal protection for
_all_ migratory birds, and embraces all save a very few of the species
that are specially destructive to noxious insects. The bill provides
national protection to the farmer's and fruit-grower's best friends. It
is entitled to the enthusiastic support of 90,000,000 of people, native
and alien. Every producer of farm products and every consumer of them
owes it to himself to write at once to his member of Congress and ask
him (1) to urge the speedy consideration of the bill for the federal
protection of all migratory birds, (2) to vote for it, and (3) to work
for it until it is passed. It matters not which one of the three bills
described finally becomes a law. Will the American people act rationally
about this matter, and protect their own interests?
SUPPRESS THE SALE OF ALL NATIVE WILD GAME.--The deadly effect of the
commercial slaughter of game and its sale for food is now becoming well
understood by the American people. One by one the various state
legislatures have been putting up the bars against the exportation or
sale of any "game protected by the state." The U.S. Department of
Agriculture says, through Henry Oldys, that "free marketing of wild game
leads swiftly to extermination;" and it is literally true.
Up to March, 1911, it appears that several states prohibited the sale of
game, sixteen states permitted the sale of all unprotected game, and in
eight more there was partial prohibition. Unfortunately, however, many
of these states permitted the sale of _imported_ game. Now, since it
happened to be a fact that the vast majority of the states prohibit the
_export_ of their game, as well as the sale of it, a very large quantity
of such game as quail, ruffed grouse, snipe, woodcock and shore birds
was illegally shot for the market, exported in defiance both of state
laws and the federal Lacey Act, and sold to the detriment of the states
that produced it. In other words, in the laws of each state that merely
sought to protect _their own_ game, regardless of the game of
neighboring states, there was not merely a loop-hole, but there was a
gap wide enough to drive through with a coach and four. The ruffed
grouse of Massachusetts and Connecticut often were butchered to make
Gotham holidays in joyous contempt of the laws at both ends of the line.
As a natural result the game of the Atlantic coast was disappearing at a
frightful rate.
[Illustration: EIGHTEEN STATES ENTIRELY PROHIBIT THE SALE OF GAME WHY DO
THE OTHERS LAG BEHIND?]
In 1911, the no-sale-of-game law of New York was born out of sheer
desperation. The Army of Destruction went up to Albany well-organized,
well provided with money and attorneys, with three senators in the
Senate and two assemblymen in the lower house, to wage merciless warfare
on the whole wild-life cause. The market gunners and game dealers not
only proposed to repeal the law against spring shooting but also to
defeat all legislation that might be attempted to restrict the sale of
game, or impose bag limits on wild fowl. The Milliners' Association
proposed to wipe off the books the Dutcher law against the use of the
plumage of wild birds in millinery, and an assemblyman was committed to
that cause as its special champion.
Then it was that all the friends of wild life in the Empire State
resolved upon a death grapple with the Destroyers, and a fight to an
absolute finish. The Bayne bill, entirely prohibiting the sale of all
native wild game throughout the state of New York, was drafted and
thrown into the ring, and the struggle began. At first the
no-sale-of-game bill looked like sheer madness, but no sooner was it
fairly launched than supporters came flocking in from every side. All
the organizations of sportsmen and friends of wild life combined in one
mighty army, the strength of which was irresistible. The real sportsmen
of the state quickly realized that the no-sale bill was _directly in the
interest of legitimate sport_. The great mass of people who love wild
life, and never kill, were quick to comprehend the far-reaching
importance of the measure, and they supported it, with money and
enthusiasm.
The members of the legislature received thousands of letters from their
constituents, asking them to support the Bayne-Blauvelt bill. They did
so. On its passage through the two houses, only _one_ vote was recorded
against it! Incidentally, every move attempted by the Army of
Destruction was defeated and in the final summing up the defeat amounted
to an utter rout.
In 1912, after a tremendous struggle, the legislature of Massachusetts
passed a counterpart of the Bayne law, and took her place in the front
rank of states. That was a great fight. The market-gunners of Cape Cod,
the game dealers and other interests entered the struggle with men in
the lower house of the legislature specially elected to look after their
interests. Just as in New York in 1911, they proposed to repeal the
existing laws against spring shooting and throw the markets wide open to
the sale of game. From first to last, through three long and stormy
months, the Destroyers fought with a degree of determination and
persistence worthy of a better cause. They contested with the Defenders
every inch of ground. In New York, the Destroyers were overwhelmed by
the tidal wave of Defenders, but in Massachusetts it was a prolonged
hand-to-hand fight on the ramparts. _Five times_ was a bill to repeal
the spring-shooting law introduced and defeated!
Even after the bill had passed both houses by good majorities, the
Governor declared that he could not sign it. And then there poured into
the Executive offices such a flood of callers, letters, telegrams and
telephone calls that he became convinced that the People desired the
law; so he signed the bill in deference to the wishes of the majority.
The principle that the sale of game is wrong, and fatal to the existence
of a supply of game, is as fixed and unassailable as the Rocky
Mountains. Its universal acceptance is only a question of intelligence
and common honesty. The open states owe it to themselves and each other
to enact both the spirit and the letter of the Bayne law, _and do it
quickly_, before it is too late to profit by it! Let them remember the
heath hen,--amply protected when entirely too late to save it from
extinction!
It is fairly beyond question that the killing of wild game for the
market, and its sale in the "open season" _and out of it_, is
responsible for the disappearance of at least fifty per cent of our
stock of American feathered game. It is the market-gunner, the game-hog
who shoots "for sport" and sells his game, and the game dealer, who have
swept away the wild ducks, the ruffed grouse, the quail and the prairie
chickens that thirty years ago were abundant on their natural ranges.
The foolish farmers of the middle West permitted the market-hunters of
Chicago and the East to slaughter their own legitimate game by the
barrel and the car-load, and ship it "East," to market. To-day the
waters of Currituck Sound are a wholesale slaughter-place for migratory
wild fowl with which to supply the markets of Baltimore, Washington and
Philadelphia. Furthermore, the market gunners of Currituck are robbing
the people of 16 states of tens of thousands of wild-fowl that
legitimately belong to them, during the annual autumn flight. The
accompanying map shows how it is done.
[Illustration: MAP USED IN THE CAMPAIGN FOR THE BAYNE LAW
This map shows how the sale of ducks killed on the Carrituck Sound
robs the people of 16 states, for the benefit of a few.
STOP THE SALE OF GAME!
(Signed W.T. Hornaday, March 6, 1911.)]
To-day, the cash rewards of the market-hunter who can reach a large city
with his product are dangerously great. Observe the following
_wholesale_ prices that prevailed in New York city in 1910, just prior
to the passage of the Bayne law. They were compiled and published by
Henry Oldys, of the Biological Survey.
Grouse, domestic per pair $3.00
Grouse, foreign " " $1.25 to 1.75
Partridge, domestic " " 3.50 " 4.00
Woodcock, domestic " " 1.50 " 2.00
Golden plover per dozen 2.50 " 3.50
English snipe " " 2.00 " 3.00
Canvasback duck per pair 2.25 " 3.00
Redhead duck " " 1.50 " 2.50
Mallard duck " " " 1.25
Bluewing teal " " .75 " 1.00
Greenwing teal " " .75 " .90
Broadbill duck " " .50 " .75
Rail, No. 1 per dozen " 1.00
Rail, No. 2 " " " .60
Venison, whole deer per pound .22 " .25
Venison, saddle " " .30 " .35
All our feathered game is rapidly slipping away from us. _Are we going
to save anything from the wreck_? Will we so weakly manage the game
situation that later on there will be no legitimate bird-shooting for
our younger sons, and our grandsons?
All laws that permit the killing of game for the market, and the sale of
it afterward, are class legislation of the worst sort. They permit a
hundred men selfishly to slaughter for their own pockets the game that
rightfully belongs to a hundred thousand men and boys who shoot for the
legitimate recreation that such field sports afford. Will any of the
sportsmen of America "stand for" this until the game is _all_ gone?
The people who pay big prices for game in the hotels and restaurants of
our big cities are not men who _need_ that game as food. Far from it.
They can obtain scores of fine meat dishes without destroying the wild
flocks. In civilized countries wild game is no longer necessary as
"food," to satisfy hunger, and ward off starvation. In the United States
the day of the hungry Indian-fighting pioneer has gone by and there is
an abundance of food everywhere.
The time to temporize and feel timid over the game situation has gone
by. The situation is desperate; and nothing but strong and vigorous
measures will avail anything worth while. The sale of all wild game
should be stopped, everywhere and at all seasons, throughout all North
America, and throughout the world. To-day this particular curse is being
felt even in India.
It is the duty of every true sportsman, every farmer who owns a gun, and
every lover of wild life, to enter into the campaign for the passage of
bills absolutely prohibiting all traffic in wild game no matter what its
origin. Of course the market hunters, the game-hogs and the game dealers
will bitterly oppose them, and hire a lobby to attempt to defeat them.
But the fight for no-sale-of-game is now on, and it must not stop short
of complete victory.
* * * * *
REASONS WHY THE SALE OF WILD GAME SHOULD CEASE EVERYWHERE
1.--Because fully 95 per cent of our legitimate stock of feathered
game has already been destroyed.
2.--Because if market-gunning and the sale of game continue ten
years longer, all our feathered game will be swept away.
3.--Because when the sale of game was permitted one dealer was able
to sell 1,000,000 _game birds per year in New York City_, so he
himself said.
4.--Because it is a fixed fact that every wild species of mammal,
bird or reptile that is pursued for money-making purposes eventually
is wiped out of existence. Even the whales of the sea are no
exception.
5.--Because at least 50 per cent of the decrease in our feathered
game is due to market-gunning, and the sale of game. Look at the
prairie chicken of the Mississippi Valley, and the ruffed grouse of
New England.
6.--Because the laws that permit the commercial slaughter of wild
birds for the benefit of less than five per cent of the inhabitants
of any state are directly against the interest of the 95 per cent of
other people, to _whom that game partly belongs_.
7.--Because game killed "for sale" is not intended to satisfy
"hunger." The people who eat game in large cities do not know what
hunger is, save by hearsay. Purchased game is used chiefly in
over-feeding; and as a rule it does far more harm than good.
8.--Because the greatest value to be derived from any game bird is
in seeing it, and photographing it, and enjoying its living company
in its native haunts. Who will love the forests when they become
destitute of wild life, and desolate?
9.--Because stopping the sale of game _will help bring back the game
birds to us, in a few years_.
10.--Because the pace that New York and Massachusetts have set in
this matter will render it easier to procure the passage of Bayne
laws in other states.
11.--Because those who legitimately desire game for their tables can
be supplied from the game farms and preserves that now are coming
into existence.
When New York's far-reaching Bayne bill became a law, the following dead
birds lay in cold storage in New York City:
Wild duck 98,156
Plover 48,780
Quail 14,227
Grouse 21,202
Snipe 7,825
Woodcock 767
Rail 419
-------
191,376
They represented the last slaughterings of American game for New York.
To-day the remaining plague-spots are Chicago, Philadelphia, San
Francisco, Baltimore, Washington and New Orleans; but in New Orleans the
brakes have at last (1912) been applied, and the market slaughter that
formerly prevailed in that state has at least been checked.
As an instance of persistent market shooting on the greatest ducking
waters of the eastern United States, I offer this report from a
trustworthy agent sent to Currituck Sound, North Carolina, in March,
1911.
I beg to submit the following information relative to the number of
wild ducks and geese shipped from this market and killed in the
waters of Back Bay and the upper or north end of Currituck Sound,
from October 20th to March 1st, inclusive.
Approximately there were killed and shipped in the territory above
named, 130,000 to 135,000 wild ducks and between 1400 and 1500 wild
geese. From Currituck Sound and its tributaries there were shipped
approximately 200,000 wild ducks.
You will see from the above figures that each year the market
shooter exacts a tremendous toll from the wild water fowl in these
waters, and it is only a question of a short time when the wild duck
will be exterminated, unless we can stop the ruthless slaughter. The
last few years I have noted a great decrease in the number of wild
ducks; some of the species are practically extinct. I have secured
the above information from a most reliable source, and the figures
given approximately cannot be questioned.
The effect of the passage of the Bayne law, closing the greatest
American market against the sale of game was an immediate decrease of
fully fifty per cent in the number of ducks and geese slaughtered on
Currituck Sound. The dealers refused to buy the birds, and one-half the
killers were compelled to hang up their guns and go to work. The
duck-slaughterers felt very much enraged by the passage of the law, and
at first were inclined to blame the northern members of Currituck
ducking clubs for the passage of the measure; but as a matter of fact,
not one of the persons blamed took any part whatever in the campaign for
the new law.
THE UNFAIRNESS OF SPRING SHOOTING.--The shooting of game birds in late
winter and spring is to be mentioned only to be condemned. It is grossly
unfair to the birds, outrageous in principle, and most unsportsmanlike,
no matter whether the law permits it or not. Why it is that any state
like Iowa, for example, can go on killing game in spring is more than I
can understand. I have endeavored to find a reason for it, in Iowa, but
the only real reason is:--"The boys want the birds!"
I think we have at last reached the point where it may truthfully be
said that now no gentleman shoots birds in spring. If the plea is made
that "if we don't shoot ducks in the spring we can't shoot them at all!"
then the answer is--if you can't shoot game like high-minded,
red-blooded sportsman, _don't shoot it at all_! A gentleman can not
afford to barter his standing and his own self-respect for a few ducks
shot in the spring when the birds are going north to lay their eggs. And
the man who insists on shooting in spring may just as well go right on
and do various other things that are beyond the pale, such as shoot
quail on the ground, shoot does and fawns, and fish for trout with gang
hooks.
There are no longer two sides to what once was the spring shooting
question. Even among savages, the breeding period of the wild creatures
is under taboo. Then if ever may the beasts and birds cry "King's
excuse!" It has been positively stated in print that high-class fox
hounds have been known to refuse to chase a pregnant fox, even when in
full view.
* * * * *