6 TA E® AsUSD UB OFNe 2B U Shei eee 
Echo Park dam. These dams would back up the waters in the exceedingly 
beautiful canyons of the Dinosaur Monument and destroy much of their 
scenic value. 
This scheme was prompted by local groups interested in private profit. 
The proposal was opposed by the National Park Service and by conserva- 
tionists all over the country, who pointed out that water for power pur- 
poses and irrigation could be obtained by alternative plans which would 
not involve invasion of the Dinosaur National Monument. It was also noted 
that approval of the proposal would set a dangerous precedent for other 
schemes involving the invasion of national parks and monuments. 
The day after this unfortunate decision by Secretary Chapman, Senator 
Thomas of Utah introduced a bill in the Senate to authorize construction 
of those dams at an estimated cost of $207,000,000.00. The project would 
undoubtedly cost more than this. Congressman Walter K. Granger also in- 
troduced a bill in the House for the same purpose. No action was taken in 
that session, but the scheme will be pushed when there is opportunity. 
Letters should be sent to President Truman opposing such legislation. 
ft Et fl 
Waterfowl population. Director Albert M. Day of the Fish and Wild- 
life Service reported during the past summer on the waterfowl population 
situation. Although the inventory of the previous winter indicated an up- 
swing in wintering populations of ducks and geese, this assumption was 
found in subsequent months to be wrong. The number of young birds was 
not as great as was expected. In addition, more ducks and geese were killed 
in the fall of 1949 than in the preceding year. 
The January 1950 inventory showed a considerable decline in both the 
Mississippi river and Pacific flyways. When the results were announced, 
various groups of hunters, including Ducks Unlimited, challenged the 
winter inventory. Many hunters desire as large a bag as can be obtained 
and a long open season. They are not properly concerned about future 
waterfowl populations. Some of them claim to be conservationists, but they 
often give little more than lip service to real conservation. . 
The following quotations are taken from “Conservation News” for 
August Ist, pp. 8-9. These are part of a condensation of Director Day’s 
report: 
; _ State departments are banding together in Flyway Committees to correlate 
their information, and the Fish and Wildlife Service is supplying regional co- 
ordination as rapidly as the need develops and funds become available, in 
order that all of the information may be translated into management prac- 
tices. More air planes, boats and automobiles are at the disposal of the tech- 
niclans now. A vast amount uf data from all of these public sources, as well 
as such information as can be supplied by Ducks Unlimited, gozs into the 
grist mill each year. 
Yet the best regulations that can possibly be made are still of minor im- 
portance when we contemplate the over-all needs of waterfowl management. 
Waterfowl habitat has progressively disappeared as our modern civilization 
has placed more and more demands on our lands and our waters, and there 
is no slackening in the pace of this destruction. 
The States, with Pittman-Robertson funds, have accelerated waterfowl 
marsh restoration more than ever before in the history of the conservation 
movement. The Fish and Wildlife Service is spending every nickel it can get 
to acquire, restore and develop areas for the birds. Yet on all sides the de- 
mand for more intensive uses of lands and waters is complicating the over- 
all picture to the point where it sometimes looks as though we are losing 
ground more rapidly than we are gaining it. 
