64 PROBLEMS IN WILD LIFE CONSERVATION 



allow their own citizens the right to take certain species of 

 wild game and fish to the exclusion of citizens from other 

 state, which, but for the doctrine of state ownership, would 

 be contrary to the " privileges and immunities clause " of 

 the United States constitution. 38 



No Change in the Law Since the Geer Case: Later 

 decisions of the United States Supreme Court have not 

 reversed the Geer Case. The decision in Patsone v. Penn- 

 sylvania 37 can best be interpreted keeping in mind the 

 ownership theory, although Justice Holmes who wrote the 

 decision avoids direct mention of it. Likewise in Missouri 

 v. Holland. Mr. Justice Holmes only mentions the theory 

 to point out that its action is limited to regulation between 

 the state and the individual rather than the state and the 

 national government. 



However in LaCoste v. Department of Conservation 89 

 Justice Butler makes the ownership theory one of the major 

 grounds for the decision. These references taken together 

 with the numerous state supreme court decisions leaves no 

 doubt that the ownership theory is still considered valid al- 

 though with the broadening of the interpretation of the 

 police powers of the state there is not as much need for it as 

 formerly. 



Limitations Imposed by the Commerce Clause upon State 

 Control: There remains for consideration the limitations 

 imposed upon state control by the United States constitu- 

 tion. One of the most important sections of that document 

 is the commerce clause, which states that, " The Congress 

 shall have power ... to regulate commerce with foreign 



36 Art. iv, sec. I. 

 " 232 U. S. 138 (1914). 

 38 252 U. S. 416 (1919). 

 89 263 U. S. 545 (1920). 



