THE HOAK BILL. 49 



REMAKES. 



The accompanying law is calculated to protect our birds as effectually as any legis- 

 lation can, and it is desirable if possible to obtain its passage as it stands.' 



It is, however, a well-known fact that in many of our States the act would not 

 receive favorable consideration unless modified in several particulars. 



* * * It is very desirable that this act be adopted in as nearly the present form 

 as possible, and since revision by persons unfamiliar with bird protection is liable 

 to seriously affect the force of the law, we offer the following suggestions regarding 

 revision when it is unavoidable: 



(1st) Game birds. — In many States doves are universally classed as game birds, 

 and where the game laws cover their protection during a closed season they may be 

 so classed in section 1 if necessary. 



Reed birds and blackbirds may have to be treated in the same way in several 

 States. Robins, flickers, and meadowlarks, however, should not be permitted to be 

 classed as game. 



(2d) Cage birds. — There is nothing in the law to prevent the keeping of foreign 

 cage birds as canaries, etc. 



To keep native birds alive for study, etc., a certificate must be secured as per section 5. 

 This is necessary to prevent the traffic in live birds. 



(3d) Other birds which may have to be excluded from protection — 



Hawks and owls. — The prejudice against these birds is very strong, while the argu- 

 ments in their favor are well known and conclusive. They should be protected if 

 possible. If nothing better can be done, effect a compromise by excluding Cooper's 

 hawk, goshawk, sharp-shinned hawk, and great horned owl, and protect the rest. 



Crows may have to be denied protection; there is about as much evidence for as 

 against them, however. 



Shrikes, herons, gulls, and terns should by all means be protected. 



(4th) Where it is absolutely necessary to exclude any birds from protection they 

 may be added to section 7, so as not to alter the main text. 



(5th) On no account omit sections 4, 5, and 6, as is done in some of the present laws. 



With the restrictions placed upon, holders of certificates there is no danger of 

 improper persons obtaining them. A small number of birds are required for scienti- 

 fic purposes, and provision should be made for obtaining them as much as for shoot- 

 ing game birds. The fee should be abolished, if possible, and should on no account 

 be more than $1. The age limit should, moreover, not be raised above fifteen years. 



FEDERAL LEGISLATION. 



During the last three years several bills for the preservation of 

 birds have been considered by Congress. The most important 

 of these are the 'Hoar bill,' the 'Teller bill,' and the 'Lacey bill,' 

 all of which were introduced in the Fifty -fifth Congress, but failed 

 to pass, and were reintroduced at the first session of the Fifty -sixth 

 Congress. The Hoar bill was intended to restrict the traffic in birds 

 and feathers, while the others were directed mainly toward the pro- 

 tection of game. 



THE HOAK BILL. 



The Hoar bill ' for the protection of song birds,' was first introduced in 

 the Senate by Hon. George F. Hoar, of Massachusetts, March 14, 1898, 1 



1 Cong. Record, XXXI, pt. 3, p. 2757. 

 22186— No. 12 4 



