84 



do not have a strong man in charge, the sergeants will run the 

 Army every time. And sergeants are great at what they do, but 

 they are not meant to set policy. 



The Chairman. Well, again, I happen to agree. I am not picking 

 on this administration; I do think this administration is probably 

 as bad as any of them. But there has been sort of a change in the 

 role of Fish and Wildlife Service. We have a lot of people within 

 the Fish and Wildlife Service who try to discourage hunting. I 

 mean, there is no doubt in my mind now. The President makes a 

 big pronouncement; why did he have to make that pronouncement? 

 He had to make it because it was being more evident that there 

 is a group within the Fish and Wildlife Service who believe that 

 hunting and possibly even fishing are no longer compatible with 

 the refuge areas which they have supervision over, let alone the 

 migratory birds. But that is just a side comment. 



Mr. Reiger. One thought troubles me. I do not know any Federal 

 agents who are members of local sportsmen's clubs. There may be, 

 but I doubt it. Another thing that bothers me is to know, at least 

 in my generation, many people working in the Fish and Wildlife 

 Service who have given up migratory bird hunting, because they 

 are so afraid of the laws themselves. And that is a very sad com- 

 ment that people within the agency, even hunters within the agen- 

 cy, no longer want to participate, because they're afraid of being 

 apprehended under this amorphous law. 



The Chairman. In your experiences with these baiting violations, 

 do either one of you see a trend about those who were prosecuted? 

 On the whole of the different cases, were they prominent people or 

 people of recognition, or is it just the average Joe being caught on 

 this baited field problem? 



Mr. Reiger. Well, over the years, I have received letters from 

 butchers, bakers, candlestick makers as well as doctors, lawyers, 

 and Indian chiefs. These letters of despair have covered the social 

 spectrum. They also mention this business of an intimidation letter 

 that goes with the citation. I have been aware of this letter for a 

 number of years now and have written about it in Field and 

 Streams. It is very hard for someone receiving such a letter to feel 

 very confident about going to question a judgment against him 

 when he is looking at a loss of hunting privileges, perhaps time in 

 jail, and a very sizable fine as his option. 



The Chairman. Mr. Boynton, in your experience, is the enforce- 

 ment of the baiting regulations uniform? 



Mr. Boynton. No, it is not. There is a division within the courts 

 of the United States. The Beauchamp case that was referred to, the 

 Kentucky case here today, it cites the case of the United States v. 

 Brandt as the basis of their decision. That decision is in conflict 

 with all other jurisdictions. There is a case in Delaware that is in 

 conflict with all jurisdictions; there is another case in the Fifth Cir- 

 cuit, the Delahoussaye case. And then, indeed, also in the First Cir- 

 cuit in Puerto Rico, they had a baiting case. In that case, by the 

 way, the hunters were 2,500 feet from the bait. 



The Chairman. What were they baiting in Puerto Rico? 



Mr. Boynton. Doves. 



The Chairman. Doves? 



Mr. Boynton. Doves, whitewing. 



