The Audubon Societies 



149 



A bill r.-i, 



iiUrochui-d l'hc;is;ints, was chainpioiu-d 

 hy Senator Tn-adway, and was finally 

 passed in a new draft (Senate, No. 330), 

 which gives land owners engaged in prop- 

 agating Pheasants the right to shoot a 

 limited number of birds on their own prem- 

 ises. This rcieived the ICxecutive's ap- 

 proval May I. 



Two bills to require and provide for tlie 

 registration of hunters were introduced. 

 These bills were rather hastily drawn, and 

 contained some unnecessary provisions. 

 Representatives of the Commissioners on 

 Fisheries and Game, the Patrons of Hus- 

 bandry, the State Board of Agriculture, 

 the Massachusetts Fish and Game Pro- 

 tective .Association, and the National 

 Association of .Autlubon Societies, met 

 with some interested members of the 

 House and agreed upon a re-draft com- 

 bining the best features of the two bills. 

 This bill (House, No. 1,386), which had 

 the active support of the Massachusetts 

 Audubon Society, was reported after a 

 favorable hearing by the legislative com- 

 mittee on fisheries and game, passed both 

 Houses and was signed by the Governor 

 on May 2. The bill passed the House of 

 Representatives by a large majority, largely 

 owing to the good work of Representative 

 Leslie K. Morse, of Haverhill; but it was 

 so strenuously opposed in the Senate hy 

 Senator Treadway and others that the 

 most earnest efforts of the friends of the 

 bill were required to secure its passage. 

 The opposition came largely from the 

 western part of the state. Senators .Ab- 

 bott, Stevens, and Jenney were among the 

 strong friends of this bill. 



House, No. 507, a bill intended to [jro- 

 hibit all killing of shore birds and wild 

 fowl from January i to September i, was 

 introduced by Representative Gates, of 

 Westboro, and was supported by the 

 Massachusetts Audubon Society. No 

 bill for the protection of birds has excited 

 so much interest as this. The hearing 

 was the largest held before the legislative 

 committee on fisheries and game, and 

 many people appeared in favor of the bill 

 who could not be heard. .Among those 



who spoke in its favor were many sports- 

 men and bird protectionists, including 

 .\Ir. L)ut( her, President of the National 

 Association, and Honorable Herbert Par- 

 ker, former Attorney-General of Massa- 

 chusetts. But a strong opposition devel- 

 oped, coming mainly from market men. 

 Brant shooters and Duck shooters, and 

 as the majority of the members of the 

 legislative committee on fisheries and 

 game were residents of cities and towns 

 on or near the shore, the influence exerted 

 by gunners and market-men on these 

 members prevented favorable action on 

 the bill and the committee reported refer- 

 ence to the next Legislature. A fight 

 against this report may be made in the 

 Senate. The end is not yet. 



The most important legislation secured 

 thus far this year, is the bill for the regis- 

 tration of hunters, which provides money 

 for the enforcement of the game laws and 

 bird laws, and makes possible the en- 

 forcement of the license laws against 

 non-resident and alien hunters. 



Rhode Island. — ^Much time was spent 

 by your agent in Rhode Island in the 

 attempt to induce various organizations 

 and individuals to support legislation for 

 the protection of birds. .AH interested 

 agreed that a bill for the registration or 

 licensing of hunters was the greatest im- 

 mediate need, for the state appropriates 

 only a few hundred dollars for the enforce- 

 ment of the game and bird laws. In con- 

 sequence, the enforcement of the law is 

 lax. A bill (Senate, No. 60), was introduced 

 by the Senate committee on the Judiciary 

 after a large and favorable hearing, but 

 it was laid on the table in the Senate. 

 It appears that a majority of the Senators 

 preferred, instead, a bill for a close season 

 of one year on upland game birds. It was 

 argued that it would be more effective 

 protection to stop all inland shooting for 

 one year than to restrict and regulate 

 shooting by registration and license. It 

 was also argued that, should a close season 

 be established, there would be little reve- 

 nue from hunting licenses, because there 

 could be no legal shooting of upland game. 



