2 INTRODUCTION 



birds, in his "Wild Fowl of North America," says: "Al- 

 though it is apparent to all save those who will not see, 

 that only a brief period can elapse, if the same conditions 

 continue, before, like the buffalo, our water fowl will 

 mostly disappear, yet little is done to save them from 

 destruction, and the ruthless slaughter goes gaily on." 

 There can be no doubt that laws restricting and even 

 prohibiting sport are necessary in places where no one 

 looks after the game properly. Such laws have delayed, 

 somewhat, the extirpation of the game, but the fact re- 

 mains that many species have not increased in numbers 

 or even held their own in populous regions since the en- 

 actment of the restrictive laws, and no one can claim that 

 such legislation will restore our indigenous wild food 

 birds or keep them abundant in our markets. One reason 

 is that the laws cannot be properly executed. The area 

 to be policed is too big. Mr. L. T. Carleton, of Maine, 

 one of the best State game officers, has well said that the 

 entire State militia would be inadequate to properly pro- 

 tect the game. But even, if it were possible to execute 

 the game laws, there are good reasons why they would 

 not save the wild fowl. In settled regions the nesting 

 and feeding grounds of the ducks have been destroyed, 

 and in the Far North the marshes are now being drained. 

 One of the chief causes for the decrease in the num- 

 bers of our wild ducks is undoubtedly the draining of the 

 marshes and the destruction of their breeding and feed- 

 ing grounds. Nearly all of the desirable ducks which 

 are shot in the United States east of the Rocky Moun- 

 tains are bred in a comparatively small area, which may 

 be described roughly as including parts of Wisconsin, 

 Minnesota and North Dakota and parts of the Canadian 



