AMERICAN GAME BIRDS 



153 



accomplished in recent years are inclined 

 to despair. 



Meantime, after a century of experi- 

 ment by the States, the depletion of our 

 game birds continues, and the end of sev- 

 eral species is in plain view. It must be 

 evident to all that, so far as the conser- 

 vation of wild life is concerned. State 

 control has proved a failure. Not a 

 single State has succeeded in adequately 

 protecting its own resident game, to say 

 nothing of the game that migrates 

 through it. 



FEDE;RAL MipRATORY BIRD LAW 



It is the belief of many that what the 

 States have failed to do for the conser- 

 vation of our bird life can be accom- 

 plished by the Federal government, and 

 they further believe that the act approved 

 March 4. 19 13, commonly known as the 

 Federal iMigratory Bird Law, marks a 

 long step in advance in game protection. 

 By this act the migratory game and in- 

 sectivorous birds which do not remain 

 permanently within the borders of any 

 one State or Territory are declared to be 

 within the custody and under the protec- 

 tion of the Government of the United 

 States. 



This act, be it noted, provides protec- 

 tion only for game and insectivorous 

 birds that migrate ; hence many of our 

 finest game birds, like the bob-white, val- 

 ley quail, mountain quail, ruffed grouse, 

 prairie hen. sage hen. blue grouse, wild 

 turkey, and others, being non-migratory, 

 have been left in charge of the several 

 States in which they reside. Here we 

 may leave them, trusting that, notwith- 

 standing past failures, the measures 

 enacted for their benefit will stay the fate 

 with which most of them are threatened. 



Migratory birds are on a very differ- 

 ent basis from others. Such of the 

 ducks, geese, and shorebirds as still breed 

 within our limits, including Alaska, mi- 

 grate early to more southerly localities, 

 where they winter. Some of them, in 

 fact, especially the shorebirds, pass be- 

 yond our borders and winter south of 

 the tropics. But by far the great ma- 

 jority breed in foreign territory far to 

 the northward of our possessions, and 

 we have no claim on them save as they 



tarry on their journey for a time along 

 our coasts or on our lakes and rivers or 

 winter in the Southern States. 



It seems eminently fitting that these 

 migrants, as they traverse our territory, 

 feeding in one State today, in another 

 State tomorrow\ should be under Fed- 

 eral control, subject to such regulations 

 as seem likely to preserve the species. 

 The law giving Federal protection has, 

 after a year's trial, met with general ap- 

 proval. ^Moreover, although its constitu- 

 tionality has been questioned, its main 

 purposes have been indorsed by the great 

 majority of sportsmen, though among 

 them are many who dissent from certain 

 regulations because they abridge the 

 privileges enjoyed under State law. 



In this connection it may not be out of 

 place to direct the attention of sportsmen, 

 many of whom seem to have somewhat 

 misconstrued the purpose of the Federal 

 law, to the fact that the intent of the law 

 was not primarily to increase shooters' 

 privileges by lengthening the open season 

 and "enabling them to kill larger bags of 

 game, but to preserve game birds in gen- 

 eral, more particularly the ones threat- 

 ened with extinction. 



If the accomplishment of this laudable 

 end curtails to some extent the present 

 privileges of sportsmen, they should not 

 complain, since the ultimate result of the 

 law, if it be enforced, will be largely to 

 increase the number of our game birds. 

 Should it then somewhat curtail the privi- 

 leges of the present generation of sports- 

 men, it will at least insure to future gen- 

 erations the perpetuity of our game birds. 



Here it may be pointed out that if the 

 present Migratory Bird Law. now before 

 the United States Supreme Court, should 

 fail to meet the test of legal requirements 

 and be pronounced invalid, bird conser- 

 vationists need not be discouraged, since 

 two courses are o])en : first, so to amend 

 the law that it will stand every legal test ; 

 second, to obtain a constitutional amend- 

 ment which will effect the desired end. 



Amendments to our Constitution are 

 proverbially difficult to secure, but who 

 can doubt that with the widespread in- 

 terest in bird life of the i)resent genera- 

 tion of -Kmericans such an amendment 

 can be obtained in due time. 



