LAND FOR WILD LIFE AND RECREATION 219 



there, and a later season for the southern part of the state when 

 the ducks come down there. 



The Biological Survey believes that the division of the season 

 within the various states would be bad for ducks and com" 

 plicate the problems of enforcement. Hunters would go to the 

 area where the season opened first, kill the limit, then move to 

 the area where the season opens later and get a second limit. 



The point of the controversy is that the Survey is primarily 

 interested in perpetuating waterfowl, while the hunters, as a 

 Congressman put it, "... have no objection to the laws we 

 have at the present time [regulating shooting], provided we can 

 in some way have some opportunity to kill a few ducks once in 

 a while." 18 



INTERNATIONAL REGULATION OF WILD LIFE 



The management of waterfowl illustrates another point in 

 the problem of wild4ife control. They are a kind of interna' 

 tional wild life. These birds migrate from the north to the 

 south and back again during the year. Many of them spend 

 the summer in Canada and the winter in Mexico, and much 

 of the time between in the United States. To protect these 

 birds from being destroyed, two Migratory Bird Treaties were 

 adopted. These are agreements between the United States, 

 Canada, and Mexico guaranteeing that while these migratory 

 birds are within the borders of these three nations, they will 

 not be destroyed. In the United States the administration of 

 this law is up to the Biological Survey. This is an interesting 

 exercise of the treaty "making power of Congress. It was doubt" 

 ful whether Congress had the constitutional right to interfere 

 directly with the police powers of the states. The Constitu" 

 tion, however, makes treaties a part of the supreme law of the 

 land; and it was under this power, with the later approval of 



I8 ibia., p. is. 



