administration of my treaty ao* are favorably disposed toward bird 
protection* 
Olrcumtmoes in Argentina are scaewhst different* the provail- 
1% ideas taacj^-j older a»« in scientific circle® vmva decidedly pessimistic 
with toward to matters relating to game or insectivorous bird protection* 
2heae aon had seen great changes sad aestruation in the native f&am and 
hold gXootqy views of the future* Shey bo 2i coed that tbs if sOverni»HS& 
would not consider odiously any attempt at international protoot ion of 
birds* 
forager roea wore interested in the idea but in the main *jsM 
.t 
education of the people w a nsooss&ry a oli-dmry to any attest to 
establish a bird protective treaty* Jof\;ar.L.tiv©ly few considered that 
such a stop would bo raoaapanied by succooe at the present tlm* 1 found 
too general public utterly indifferent to toe protection or birds* 
In Paraguay ther# mm i*»aOti catty no sentirasnt in either official 
or private cirolaa with refer ©mo to bird protection* 
She attitude in Chile in such natters was largely IndUffermt 
though laws providing a closed season for hunting have bees established* 
do 
After duo oonaidoration Xjaot believe that protective treaties 
betveon this govemmat m& Atgontlna* Paraguay or Chile would hove 
definite value in giving protection to o® migrant birds* Shis conclusion 
is based m the follow! ng fact# j 
1* fh*® 1# no definite scheme at present in these countries tor 
too hand,ling of gone protective matters* (Sana laws have bom passed bat 
their administration has own loft to the police* as yet there have been 
no game d@pmtmmt@ 9 aithi* national or provincial established* 
2* there is need for preli-duary education of the people along 
the lime of gone and insectivorous bird conservation* 3ucs lass have 
