* 
77 6 
county where obtained or its export from such 
county for sale; required county commissioners 
to fix an eight months’ close season for deer 
uniform in the southern half of the State; and, 
for the first time, placed a limit on the number 
of turkeys and partridges that might be killed 
in a day by each hunter.f It also prohibited 
hunting on posted lands and gave five years’ 
absolute protection to imported pheasants which 
had been recently introduced into the State. 
Despite these excellent laws, game and birds 
continued to be killed at all seasons and without 
limit, as ordinary officers of the law either coun¬ 
tenanced the violations or were too busy with 
other duties to prevent them. Hence in 1897 
an act was passed to authorize the appointment 
of a game warden in each county with power 
to arrest offenders. The term of office was 
four years and the salary fixed by the county 
commissioners. The scheme of appointment 
was somewhat changed in 1899 by requiring the 
application of 50 registered voters for a warden 
in any county desiring such officer and reduc¬ 
ing the term to two years. The law was further 
modified in 1905 by making the appointment 
dependent upon the application of_ 75 free¬ 
holders, requiring each warden to give a $500 
bond, and fixing a maximum salary of $60 a 
month. It will be observed, however, that the 
selection of a warden in any county was still 
entirely optional. In 1903 Hillsborough county 
was allowed an additional warden, and the Gov¬ 
ernor was authorized to appoint two wardens 
for Lafayette county. 
Although some restrictions on nonresidents 
had been in force since 1855. the modern hunt¬ 
ing license was not adopted until 1899, when 
every nonresident wishing to shoot deer, part¬ 
ridges, or wild turkeys was required to take out 
a license in the county where he proposed to 
hunt. The fee was placed at $10 and the pro¬ 
ceeds devoted to the payment of county wardens. 
In 1905 the hunting license provision was so 
amended as to apply to aliens as well as non¬ 
residents and was broadened in such a way as 
to require them to procure licenses to hunt any 
game. During the session of 1899 the first act 
for the protection of ducks was passed, making 
a close season from April 1 to Oct. x, and the 
number of deer each hunter was allowed to kill 
was limited to five a year. This latter restric¬ 
tion would have expired by limitation in five 
years, but was extended in 1903 to Jan. 1, 1908. 
Important as were these various provisions 
for the protection of game, they did not keep 
pace with legislation for protection of non¬ 
game birds. Despite the three laws already 
mentioned, the ruthless slaughter of herons, 
egrets and other plume birds had continued 
unabated for years until the ranks of these 
birds, once so numerous, had been reduced to 
the verge of extermination. For years other 
non-game birds had been shot, trapped, and 
persecuted, greatly to the detriment of the agri¬ 
cultural interests of the State, which suffered 
through the destruction of these efficient checks 
on the increase of injurious insects and weeds. 
Finally, in 1901, the State adopted a law similar 
to those which had been in force for some years 
in a few of the older and more conservative 
States protecting practically all birds other than 
game. Though long delayed, this act marked 
a turning point in bird protection. Immediately 
following its passage, special protection, which 
had been impossible under previous laws, was 
extended to the only known nesting colony of 
pelicans on the east coast, and shortly after¬ 
ward Pelican Island, in Indian River, on which 
the colony was located, was made a Federal 
reservation. Two similar reservations were sub¬ 
sequently established by executive order near the 
mouth of Tampa Bay. 
Although laws for the protection of game 
have existed in Florida for eighty years, yet in 
all this time not a single case involving any 
question in connection with them has reached 
the Supreme Court. Such a condition is un¬ 
paralleled elsewhere in the United States except 
in Delaware, Arizona and New Mexico. Few 
if any, cases have even reached the circuit 
fThe limit of four turkeys and twenty-five partridges 
per day was reduced in 1905 to two and twenty respec¬ 
tively. 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
courts, but this is due mainly to the fact that 
offenses of this character, except in a few coun¬ 
ties where there is a county court or a criminal 
court of record, are exclusively within the 
jurisdiction of justices of the peace or county 
judges and cannot reach the circuit,court except 
upon appeal by the defendant. In fact, in com¬ 
parison with the record in other States, prose¬ 
cutions under the game laws have been very in¬ 
frequent in any of the courts. One case of 
special interest deserves mention in this connec¬ 
tion because the first of the kind in the State. 
This was a conviction obtained at Tampa in 1904 
in the United States district court for the south¬ 
ern district of the State and was based upoq 
the killing and subsequent shipment from 
Florida of certain non-game birds in violation 
of the act of 1901 and the Lacey Act. 
Florida is second to no State in the Union 
in its laws protecting non-game birds; but its 
laws for the protection of game, though much 
improved in late years, are still not sufficiently 
comprehensive to meet present needs. Several 
valuable game birds, such as doves, woodcock, 
snipe, plover, sandpipers, rail, and shorebirds, 
THE ARMORY OF AN ENGLISH PUNT GUNNER OF THE 
OLD SCHOOL. 
have no protection either in the form of close 
seasons, bag limits, or restrictions on sale or 
export. There are no laws forbidding the de¬ 
struction of nests and eggs of partridges, turkeys, 
or other game birds and none to prohibit trap¬ 
ping or netting these birds. No prohibition 
exists of the export of ducks or other wildfowl. 
Such conditions endanger the game supply of 
the State inasmuch as the door is left open 
to unrestricted market hunting either for local 
consumption or for shipment to northern cities. 
If existing laws were strictly enforced, much 
could be done for the preservation of the game, 
but such a result is difficult to attain with the 
present administrative machinery. The county 
warden system still prevails and is optional with 
each individual county. As a result less than 
half of the counties are provided with game 
wardens. 
In the protection of non-game birds the State 
fortunately has the benefit of other agencies 
besides its warden service. The Florida Audu¬ 
bon Society, with headquarters at Maitland, in 
Orange county, which was organized some years 
ago for the purpose of disseminating informa¬ 
tion about birds and securing the co-operation 
of the children of the State in their protection, 
has published and distributed much literature 
on the subject and has interested many children 
in the study of birds. In the co-ooeration with 
some of the county school boards it has se¬ 
cured the inclusion of nature study in the cur¬ 
riculum of the public schools. The National 
Association of Audubon Societies, an incor¬ 
[May 18, 1907. 
porated association for the preservation of wi 
birds and animals, with headquarters in Ne 
York city, has exerted a conspicuous influent 
on the protection of birds and game in Florid 
It was largely responsible for the establishme: 
of the three bird reserves now maintained 1 
the Federal Government in the State and c 
operates with the Department of Agricultu 
in maintaining the warden service on these r 
serves. It co-operated with the game warden < 
Monroe county for several years, furnishing 
launch for patrolling the coast, and paid him 
salary for his services in protecting plume bird 
It has supplied many circulars and other publ 
cations for the use of the Florida Audubon S 
ciety and has furnished citizens of the State wi 
much valuable information relative to birds at 
game. 
The Federal Government, as already state 
maintains three bird reservations in Florid 
one on Pelican Island, in Indian River, Breva: 
county, and two near the mouth of Tampa Ba 
on Passage Key and Indian Key. These rese 
vations, which are small, low, sandy, or mudc 
islands, worthless for agriculture, are the r 
sorts of certain interesting and beautiful S' 
birds. They have been set aside by the Pres 
dent of the United States and placed in charge 
the United States Department of Agricultu 
under orders dated, respectively, March 13, 19c 
Oct. 10, 1905 and Feb. 10, 1906. In 1906 Co 
gress passed a law prohibiting trespass upc 
them, as well as upon similar reserves elsewhe 
in the United States. 
Game laws, like other statutes, are not auti 
matic. They are not enforced unless it is mat 
the duty of some officer to enforce them. Pri< 
to 1897 Florida intrusted the enforcement of ti 
game laws to constables, sheriffs, and simil 
peace officers, and the results were no mo 
satisfactory than they have been in other State 
During the last ten years provision has bet 
made for the appointment of county warden 
but this system has likewise proved unsati 
factory because the appointment is mat 
optional with each county and requires in eat 
case the application of at least 75 freeholder 
and for the further reason, as experience h; 
shown, that there never is unity of action b 
tween county wardens unless there is a gener 
officer to direct and control them. Only seve: 
teen counties at present avail themselves of th 
privilege. The need of a State officer to supe 
vise and co-ordinate the efforts of the coun 
wardens is thus referred to in the report of tl 
Commissioner of Agriculture of Florida ft 
1905-6, page 34: 
“There should be a State game warden, wl 
shall have the power to appoint deputy wardei 
in each county and have entire control of ther 
Such a bill as is here indicated was introduce 
in the legislature of 1903; but like other thins 
that were capable of accomplishing somethin 
it was not popular. But it was a good bill ai 
would bear resurrecting and merit careful coi 
sideration.” 
The principal objection usually made to esta' 
lishing such an office is expense, but in th 
case no serious difficulty need be apprehendt 
because the receipts from nonresident license 
since the passage of the law in 1899, already pr< 
vided a fund of several thousand dollars. St- 
tistics for the first five seasons are not avai 
able, but in 1904-5 the receipts were $4,620; 
1905-6, $6,070; and in 1906-7, $6,380. 
Some of the counties which have tl 
largest returns have appointed no warden 
and other counties which have wardens issue 
few, if any, licenses. In those counties whei 
there is no warden the money is placed in tl 
fine and forfeiture fund and used for the pa; 
ment of costs of criminal prosecutions, 
county wardens were appointed more generall 
and if their work were under the supervision ( 
a State commissioner, undoubtedly the licem 
receipts could be materially increased, and ; 
the same time the game laws would be moi 
generally enforced. 
All the game laws of the United States an 
Canada, revised to date and now in force , at 
given in the Game Laws in Brief. See adv. 
