Sept., 1915 
COMMUNICATIONS 
209 
wisher as myself, a little counsel regarding 
a difficult task, as well as a friendly plea on 
behalf of a long-suffering and somewhat 
neglected race, viz., the scientific collectors. 
I shall not presume to speak of all collect- 
ors, either. The collector of birds, the “skin- 
man”, has legitimate aims and as good a 
license as any; but he is quite able to 
speak for himself. All I know is that a 
dead bird sings no songs and lays no eggs; 
whereas a hen deprived of her egg presently 
lays another and cackles as merrily as be- 
fore. I belong to that humble class which 
finds in the collecting of birds’ nests and 
eggs a solace and inspiration elsewhere de- 
nied; and I suppose I may speak for the 
oological fraternity with some degree of 
confidence. 
In exercising the authority conferred upon 
you by Section 637e of our political code, 
you will wish to adjudicate fairly between 
the paramount interests of conservation and 
the desires of the collector. You will, 
doubtless, wish to deal frankly and liberally 
with the scientist in order that he may feel 
encouraged in his pursuit of knowledge, in- 
stead of finding himself an object of suspi- 
cion, hindered and repressed. Lastly, you 
will wish to be impartial in all your deal- 
ings, and to place all collectors upon an 
equal footing, as is becoming in a democ- 
racy. 
To treat these matters in reverse order, 
and to speak of equal dealing first: The lan- 
guage of Section 637e gives you great dis- 
cretion as to what constitutes proper cre- 
dentials; but it is manifest that a standard 
once adopted should apply impartially to 
all applicants. It would be as unlawful as 
it would be unfair, for Instance, to permit 
one applicant to collect without limit, while 
another of the same age, but possessed of 
less funds, or “influence”, or supposed 
prominence, should be restricted to “two 
sets each of non-game birds”. While the lan- 
guage of the statute is permissive in saying 
that “certificates may be granted”, it is ex- 
ceedingly doubtful whether any court would 
uphold you in denying a certificate to any 
“properly accredited person” while you 
were issuing such to others. If, however, 
it should seem, for economic reasons, desir- 
able to restrict the total number of licenses 
(a situation which is quite unlikely to arise 
with the present trend of events), it would 
be fair to impose restrictions upon younger 
and presumably less serious collectors, upon 
stated terms of equality for that age. It 
would be no essential hardship, for in- 
stance, to require a hoy of twelve to confine 
himself to a single set of eggs of each spe- 
cies per season. By the time he is eighteen 
he will either have dropped his boyish fad, 
or else have demonstrated his fitness to col- 
lect without limit other than that imposed 
by the general condition of all licenses. 
Similarly, and with all due respect, it 
seems to me that the Commision has no 
right, either moral or legal, to restrict the 
collection of the eggs of game birds within 
limits narrower than that of the total lawful 
kill of a sportsman for a season. I do not 
shoot Valley Quail myself, but is my lawful 
claim upon the quail population any less 
than that of my sportsman brother who 
shoots his little twenty per diem? See, that 
gives him a possible 610 in one season, does 
it not? Well, I take a couple of sets of 
twelve eggs each for my annual portion 
(raise ’em on my own place too). Upon 
what moral grounds shall I be reproved and 
my brother commended? Moreover (and 
this is important), eggs are replaceable the 
some season; birds are not. 
This is a tender subject for discussion, I 
know; but I am sure that our sportsman 
friends, those who practically have both the 
enactment and enforcement of all game 
laws in their hands, will want to be fair with 
us. Sport in the open begets a spirit of 
fairness, does it not? 
Truth to tell, science needs especial en- 
couragement at this time. By “science” I 
do not, of course, mean egg-collecting as a 
fad, as a mere instance of the working of 
the acquisitive instinct; but I mean that 
knowledge and power, and that love of the 
truth, which comes of first-hand contact 
with nature out-of-doors, and of attentive 
familiarity with her objects indoors. The 
aspirations and operations of zoological 
science have suffered not a little, of late, 
from repression, from sentimental jeal- 
ousies, and from the constrictions of official 
red tape. This has begotten a contemptuous 
disregard of law on the part of those who 
have known better days, and an avoidance 
of this entire field of effort on the part of 
the younger generation. Both of these re- 
sults are deplorable; and it may be your 
happy task, by your fairmindedness and 
sympathy and by your prompt consideration 
of all applications, to bring about a better 
understanding between lawfully constituted 
authority and scientific initiative. There is 
sad lack of such understanding today. Not 
half of the oological collecting now being- 
done in America is done under license; and 
the knowledge of this fact on the part of 
the conscientious element among collectors 
themselves, together with a knowledge of 
the red-tape and picayune surveillance exer- 
cised over the most conscientious, has em- 
bittered the whole situation. As an example 
