Evening Republican, Volume 18, Number 72, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 25 March 1914 — THE FIRST GAME WARDEN OF the U.S.A. [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

THE FIRST GAME WARDEN OF the U.S.A.

ri HE position V chief United T States game warden of the United States has just been created by President Wilson. My jurisdiction extends over tj’ every state, and I shall devote my best efforts to save our birds and wild game from extinction. The preservation of what remains of the fast-vanishing wild life of this country is a question of great importance. It should be of vital interest to every citizen in both city and country’. I shall co-operate with the various state game wardens, but I propose to make personal visits to every state to familiarize myself with existing conditions and to see that the laws are enforced. The new federal taw’ will, I believe, save the wild duck and goose. These splendid birds have been slaughtered by the thousands each spring and autumn during the last twenty years. Not all the laws on the statute books .can avail to prevent the extermination of our game birds, unless public sentiment upholds them and those of us charged with the enforcement of the laws are true to our trusts. [ Fortunately, the spirit of conservation is abroad in the land. The mental attitude of the nation on this subject is changing for the better. Commercialism in game is becoming a thing of the past. Sport and not spoil, pleasure not profit, is the keynote Of the hour. We stand on the threshold of a brighter and better day. The breaking dawn promises a full-risen sun, whose beams shall dissipate the vapors and mists that becloud state ganre protection. The strong arm of the federal government, whose little finger “is more potent in effect than the entire body of any state, is embodied in the federal migratory bird law. We, therefore, have promise that the future will not be without the songs of birds to gladden the hearts of man or without game to tempt him to the healthgiving fields to breathe the air that drives from the brain the cobwebs of care and toil. The great destroyer of gaipe is the market hunter. He is an expert, generally a fine shot and indefatigable worker. He spares nothing that commands a market and is restrained by no law limiting the bag. After giving the subject much thought, I have come to the, conclusion that there is but one way to be rid of the market hunter, and that is to absolutely prohibit the sale of game. Only when you eliminate the incentive for his shooting will he quit the business. • “ I know many will say, and with some force, that as the game belongs to all the people in common, to stop its sale is to deprive them of any right to enjoy it, While this is in part true, yet you must face the fact that unless you do stop the sale of game you swill soon have no game at all. The true view is that game is for sport

and pleasure, not for the market. Its benefit to our people is the inducement offered for open-air exercise. Such healthful recreation is worth much to the morals and general welfare of our people and its value cannot be measured in dollars and cents. State protection of our migratory birds, even under the most favorable conditions has not generally proved a success. All true sportsmen who have any thought for the future will agree that spring shooting of wild fowl should cease. When the question, however, has been put up to the legislature in some states, the invariable answer is: "The birds with us are merely temporary sojourners. Our neighbor states permit such shooting; why deprive ourselves of the privilege?” And the neighbor states reply substantially the same. As to administration, the old idea of having sheriffs and constables enforce the game laws has in all ad : vanced communities been abandoned. Elective officers make inefficient game wardens. They may vigorously prosecute non-residents, but those upon whose votes they depend for re-elec-tion often violate the law with impunity and yet go “scot free.” Hence the warden system has come into general vogue, and even this is often subject to the criticism of favoritism toward neighbors and friends. Nothing is mere fatal to law fenforcement than to destroy respect for the law, and favoritism is in this respect a potent factor. A paid warden service is essential in order that the wardens may be sent into sections other than those of their immediate residence. Ample fundscan be raised for such purpose by the resident shooters’ license of one dollar made mandatory upon all who shoot upon the lands of another. Shooters generally pay this fee che.erfully. but it is both discouraging and unfair to have part of the large sums thus raised for game protection turned into the state treasury and diverted to public roads or schools. There is something in the AngloSaxon blood that inspires the love, of field sports. It is not the mere desire to kill that animates the true sportsman. Killing, how’ever, is a necessary incident to the success of all shoooting trips. I do not mean indiscriminate killing—a wanton slaughter of game that falls to the province of the “game hog” and market hunter —but killing game within reasonable limits and for a proper purpose. The birds of the air and the game of the woods are all for man’s use. It is a maudlin sentimentality that declares that wild animals and birds should not be killed. As well apply such a sentiment to the barnyard. It is only where killing is likely to exterminate a species that it should be prohibited. Of course I speak of animals and birds that are classed as "game.” Song and certain insectivorous birds should at all times be protected. The federal migratory bird law is our bridge to the promised land of real game protection, but successful passage of that bridge will depend upon careful footsteps. It is axiomatic that a law not supported by public sentiment is a dead letter. If the federal migratory bird law is to prove the salvation of the

game of the country, and I believe it will, we must insure its popularity. This law will be applauded or condemned, according to how it is administered. It can be made so obnoxious to the state authorities and the people as to insure its repeal. Then, indeed, would our second condition be worse than our first. Let us bear in mind that this is a new movement, a great departure in gdme protection; that many are jealous of what they term “state rights" and bitterly resent interference by the federal government with what they deem local affairs. It is difficult for some men to realize how others can hold an opinion different from theirs. It seems so patent and so plain to the game-protection enthusiast that he is right. States are jealous of their reserved rights, particularly in the South, and in a measure as far-reaching as this law public sentiment should be cultivated, not offended, for even an act of charity can be made offensive by the manner of its exercise. That the law meets the long-felt want of uniformity in the protection of our. migratory birds must be admitted by all who have given the subject serious thought. . This is an age of progress, of new thought and advanced ideas. The federal migratory bird law is the most progressive measure in game protection ever enacted in this country.

Government protection is effective and strong, and men who would openly defy a local game warden will think twice before they oppose the authority vested in a federal official. The game commissioner should work in conjunction with the biological survey, and his duties should be to visit the different states, there consult with the respective wardens and commissioners having charge of the enforcement of the state laws; study carefully local conditions, and select, under the direction of the secretary of agriculture, efficient men who will be called upon to’ enforce the law. For such a purpose the present appropriation will suffice.

“But what of the future?” is the natural query. Well, to meet the expenses of an organization thus formed we should have a federal shooting license of one dollar, payable by all those who shoot migratory birds. Such a license will, in my opinion, be not only popular, but provide ample revenue, and will, in time, cause many states to abandon their non-resident shooters’ license, particularly when 50 per cent, of the amount collected is to be returned to the states in proportion to their respective contributions, conditioned, however, that it shall be used exclusively tor game protection.

Making an estimate on the amounts collected from resident Shooters in a number of the states, I think it conservative to state that this fund would amount to little short of a million dollars per annum. With half of this amount at its disposal, the department of agriculture need not call upon congress for any appropriation for game protection. With such a sum, a system of protection could soon be perfected that would insure our migratory birds from wanton slaughter in all the years to come. With rare exception, every sportsman of the country would advocate this tax and urge his representatives in congress to enact the law.

I have been interested in the preservation of birds and beasts for many years. I have been game warden of Tennessee several times, and this position hate afforded me a good opportunity to discover the needs for the proper protection of our game. I believe, with the aid of congress, the office of United States game warden will be able to perform a great service to the country.