42 



CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME. 



FAIR PLAY. 



(A page of criticisms and answers.) 



MISDIRECTED PURPOSES OF GAME 

 CONSERVATION. 



Editor The Chronicle — Sir : I have been 

 reading- with a great deal of interest cei'- 

 tain editorials appearing in the several 

 daily papers relative to the action of the 

 California Fish and Game Commission 

 and the operation of the laws governing 

 them in the discharging of their duties. I 

 have been an ardent sportsman in the past 

 and still hold a marked interest in both 

 fishing and hunting. I commend the inten- 

 tion of the laws that are for the preserva- 

 tion of both fish and game. However, in 

 the last few years things have come to 

 such a pass that the liberty of the indi- 

 vidual has materially lessened until the 

 favored few derive all the benefits from 

 the present laws. Most of my fishing 

 and hunting have been done in the moun- 

 tain counties of Siskiyou, Trinity and 

 Shasta, particularly in Siskiyou, and I 

 believe I know the needs and desires of 

 the people in the last named county per- 

 taining to fish and game. In this article 

 I wish to bring before the public the con- 

 ditions under which the law operates and 

 the injustice of its operation. Until the 

 last session of the legislature the open 

 season for trout with hook and line was 

 from May 1 until December 31. Satis- 

 factory to all the fair-minded fishermen. 

 Without the consent or wishes of the 

 people, the law was changed to April 1 to 

 November 1. By that method they have 

 deprived the fishermen of two months' 

 fishing. The steelhead trout does not 

 begin to run in any numbers in the 

 Shasta River until November 1, and this 

 year the run was almost absent on 

 account of the low water and lack of 

 rain. The big run does not come until 

 after the first big rain. Shasta River 

 has always been a wonderful stream for 

 steelhead during the months of Novem- 

 ber and December, and many people and 

 especially the poor people use this par- 

 ticular fish for food, depending in part 

 upon it for their food supply during the 

 winter months. This year they are 

 deprived by law and the activities of the 

 Fish and Game Commission from secur- 

 ing even a portion of their usual supply. 



None of these fish are used for commer- 

 cial purposes. No one makes a business 

 of shipping or selling, and none is wasted. 

 It seems to the majority of the fishermen 

 and the people in general a very unjust 

 discrimination, particularly when they 

 allow fishing with hook and line in all 

 the coast streams. During a time as at 

 the present when food conser^\iticn is 

 such a vital issue, it seems as though 

 some means might be obtained to correct 

 this state of affairs whereby those desir- 

 ing to take fish for personal use would 

 be allowed to do so to a limited degree 

 during the present season when they could 

 be taken at their best. These fish begin 

 to spawn in the early spring and when 

 the legal time for taking them is at hand 

 they are of no value as food. I brought 

 this matter up with one of the members 

 of the commission a day or two ago, but 

 was informed that the law would bo 

 enforced to the letter and all persons 

 caught with trout in their possession 

 would be severely dealt with. It will be 

 a favor to the people in this particular 

 district if you will publish this letter, 

 showing the attitude of the Fish and 

 Game Commission. Some method should 

 be devised to correct such an unfair and 

 unpopular law. N. A. Hawkins. 



Yreka, November 12, 1917. 



— S. F. Chronicle, Nov. 27, 1917. 



AN ANSWER. 



November 23, 1917. 

 Mr. N. a. Hawkins, Yreka, Cal. 



Dear Nort : After our friendly chat 

 several days ago regarding fishing condi- 

 tions in Shasta and Siskiyou counties, I 

 was very much surprised and rather hurt 

 to read in the San Francisco Chronicle 

 your letter criticising the work of the 

 commission, and making statements re- 

 garding the fishing laws, w'hich, coming 

 from you, were a great surprise to me. 



Before writing such an article you 

 should have looked up not only the 

 present laws, but the past. 



First: You claim that the favored few 

 derive all the benefits from the present 

 laws. Such a statement is absurd. Y'ou 

 have been an ardent fisherman for years 



