206 PROBLEMS IN WILD LIFE CONSERVATION 



Hand in hand with a program of education should go a 

 movement for reform of the law-enforcement machinery, 

 both Federal and State. These reforms in the administra- 

 tion of justice are not in the most part peculiarly applicable 

 to game-law enforcement but are reforms needed from the 

 viewpoint of all law enforcement. 



Care in Drafting Conservation Laws: In addition, care 

 must be taken in the drafting of game and fish laws not to 

 get ahead of public opinion and to keep the laws scientifi- 

 cally sound. However enthusiastic conservation groups may 

 be, or however justified in believing that wild life can be 

 saved only by radically reduced bag limits and shorter open 

 seasons, care should be taken not to drive ahead of public 

 opinion. The difficulty of enforcing limits which the aver- 

 age hunter feels unjustified will lose even the support of 

 individuals who normally are opposed to waste of wild life 

 resources. 1 



Care should also be taken that the laws relating to open 

 and closed seasons and bag limits be based upon the best 

 scientific information available. Too often state legisla- 

 tures in drafting the laws, act upon hasty conclusions based 

 as much upon guesswork as anything else. The legislative 

 process is such that facts are not always available to the 

 legislators, which is another argument in favor of delegat- 

 ing to the administrative authorities the power to fix open 

 and closed seasons and bag limits. 



Sphere of Federal Game Laws: The protection of wild 

 life in most of its forms in the United States comes chiefly 

 within the sphere of the states. The regulatory activities 

 of the Federal government are limited to conservation of 



1 See interesting paper on this subject by Griswold, B. Howell, " Sump- 

 tuary Laws and Wildfowl Conservation," Proceedings, International 

 Association of Game, Fish, and Conservation Commissions (1932), p. 29. 



