Quick index . . . hunting and fishing . . . non-game species . . . Europe in contrast
Two personalities . . . Geroge Bird Grinnell (and Custer's Last Stand!) . . . T. Gilbert Pearson (and murder for plumes!)

 

Hunting and fishing: how we arrived at governmental regulation

unregulated hunting and fishing by commercial and sports hunters and fishermen had seriously depleted wildlife in US by 1890-1910 -- species such as deer and beaver were on verge of extinction in many states -- most major cities had game markets

attempts to manage game populations began early -- first closed season on deer Massachusetts 1694, hunting closed for three years 1718 -- first law prohibiting market hunting of waterfowl Arkansas 1875 -- first law imposing bag limits on gamebirds Iowa 1878 -- eight states close hunting of Wood Ducks 1901 (Matthiessen 303-304)

early game laws of 1800's supported mostly by sports hunters --early resentment against sports hunters who were regarded as wealthy elite -- George Bird Grinnell (owner/editor of Forest and Stream 1880-1915), himself one of the wealthy elite, nevertheless advocated advantages of game laws for everyone, especially those of modest means -- Grinnell emphasized importance of enforcement of numerous existing game laws -- advocated a tax on hunters to pay local game wardens -- realized that people do not report infractions of hunting laws because of retaliation by friends or relatives of poachers

George Bird Grinnell came from a wealthy New York family -- attended Lucy Audubon's school in upper Manhattan 1857 -- Lucy was John James Audubon's wife and economic mainstay -- JJA died in 1851 author of famous illustrated books on North American birds and mammals but with little in the bank to show for it -- JJA was an early herald of America's decreasing wildlife -- his wife Lucy transmitted this concern to GBG

Grinnell obtained undergraduate degree and then continued for doctoral degree at Yale under Marsh 1874 -- Marsh was an early explorer for fossil dinosaurs in the American west -- Grinnell was invited to join General Custer's expedition to Bighorn Mountains in 1874 as a scientist but stayed at Yale -- he thus avoided massacre at Custer's Last Stand at Little Big Horn River! (Graham 1990)

in late 1800's sportsmen like Grinnell focused on commercial hunting and fishing as greatest threat to game

Lacey Act 1900 prohibited interstate shipment of game taken in violation of state laws -- sportsmen instrumental in lobbying for passage -- also first federal regulation over importation of foreign birds (Matthiessen 172) -- further advance in governmental regulation of hunting was difficult to achieve (see Who owns wildlife?) but eventually Migratory Bird Treaty Act 1918 stopped commercial hunting of birds

 

Who pays for regulation?

aside from question of who regulates hunting, there is the question of who pays for enforcement of laws and for research on wildlife (necessary for any rational decisions about managing wildlife) . . .

Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act ("Duck Stamp Act") 1934 -- response to declining duck populations during great drought of early 1930's -- federal hunting stamp became major source of funds for federal wildlife programs

Pittman-Robertson Act 1937 -- 10% tax on sales of sporting firearms and ammunition -- financed wildlife restoration projects -- some of funds allocated to states for research on wildlife biology conducted at state universities -- idea proposed as early as 1880 by Grinnell in Forest and Stream (Reiger 1975: 236)

Dingell-Johnson Act 1952 -- tax on fishing tackle to support federal research and restoration of sport fish

thus state and federal governments obtained authority to manage game species and sources of funds to pay for enforcement, research, and management -- commercial hunting of birds and mammals no longer occurs -- wildlife biology is well established as a field of study in American universities

commercial fishing also now managed by state and federal governments -- but most commercial fisheries in trouble nonetheless

 

Non-game species: non-governmental organizations and governmental regulation

game species were not the only ones in trouble by 1900 -- during second half of 1800's feathers became fashionable for women's clothes (especially hats) -- commercial hunters killed birds with white or colorful feathers (especially fancy plumes) at their nesting colonies

eggs were collected commercially for sale in markets -- colonial seabirds wiped out (gulls, pelicans, cormorants)

boys spent their time playing hunter -- by finding and collecting birds' nests and eggs (see reminiscences by Kemp Plummer Battle, famous president of UNC, of his childhood in 1800's Chapel Hill!)

most farmers (indeed most people) regarded all predators as economic liabilities -- hawks, owls, mammalian predators shot on sight, trapped, poisoned

American Orntihologists' Union (AOU) formed in New York 1883 by professional ornithologists (Coues, Allen, Brewster) -- one of oldest professional scientific societies in US -- AOU soon had a Committee on Protection of North American Birds -- Grinnell instrumental in its formation

this Committee proposed a Model Law 1886 for state wildlife legislation to protect both game and nongame species -- NY and PA legislatures immediately adopted Model Law but soon amended it so it had little effect -- by 1900 only five states had passed Model Laws (Matthiessen 172) -- NC passed a similar law 1902 (see below)

Grinnell announced formation of an "Audubon Society" in Forest and Stream 1886 -- to promote protection of wild birds and their eggs -- recall his connection with the Audubon family (see above) -- 50K members by 1888 -- so many that Grinnell had to disband the organization 1889 to focus on Forest and Stream (Reiger 1975)

nevertheless a trend had started . . .

Massachusetts Audubon Society formed 1896, other states followed by 1898 (mostly northeast but also Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, California)

Audubon societies crusaded against commercial exploitation of birds -- use of feathers on women's hats and clothing created an enormous market for plumes of herons, terns, and other birds -- plume hunters wiped out nesting colonies of egrets in the South

National Association of Audubon Societies established 1905 -- first president William Dutcher initiated system of sanctuaries with wardens to protect seabird colonies in Maine -- first director (soon became president when Dutcher retired) T. Gilbert Pearson expanded this system throughout the South  

T. Gilbert Pearson attended Guilford College on scholarship, taught at Greensboro (also worked in Chapel Hill) -- founded NC Audubon Society in March 1902 in Greensboro (Graham 1990 wrongly says Chapel Hill!) -- after speaking to 200 people about the value of birds, he enrolled 148 as paying members -- convinced NC legislature to pass the Model Law (1903) with an important addition -- wardens selected by NC Audubon Society to enforce the law -- paid for by fee on nonresident hunting licences -- much opposition when wardens began arresting poachers

one plume hunter from eastern NC told Pearson: "Pore folks have as good a right to live as city people. The good Lord put us here and the Good Book says, 'Man shall have dominion over all creatures'. They're our'n to use" -- Pearson himself came from a poor rural background in northern Florida

early Audubon society wardens had a fight on their hands . . .

but by 1908 National Audubon Society had wardens or field agents as far away as Oregon

at this point the question of the ownership of wildlife and the authority of the federal government to regulate use of wildlife became crucial . . .

George Shiras introduced first bill protecting interstate migratory game birds 1904 -- considered unconstituional extension of federal authority by some people -- states not willing to transfer jurisdiction over wildlife to feds -- nevertheless Pearson suggested extending coverage to all migratory birds -- sportsmen (even Grinnell) at first opposed this extension -- finally . . .

Migratory Bird Bill (Weeks-McLean Act) 1913 passed with much opposition, President Taft signed the bill (a rider on an agricultural appropriations bill) without noticing it, later stated he would have vetoed it if he had paid more attention!

Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds (between Canada and US) 1916 bolstered support for protection of migratory birds -- similar Convention between Mexico and US 1936 -- emphasized value of birds for agriculture and for sport and commerce -- regulated "taking" of birds, nests, and eggs of most species

Migratory Bird Treaty Act 1918 implemented the 1916 Convention -- at first opposed by some hunters who objected to limitations on open seasons -- interprets "taking" as hunting and killing (in recent decades court cases have also interpreted taking to include killing by pollutants) -- for more on the importance of this precedent see [Who owns wildlife?]

Endangered Species Act 1973 was the next great advance in protection of wildlife this century -- see Radical legislation!

thus for most of this century nearly all birds in North America have been protected from unregulated hunting

most reptiles and amphibians are still subject to unregulated commercial "hunting" -- mostly for the vast pet trade

 

Conservation in Europe: some contrasts

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds formed in England 1889 -- inspired by opposition to commerical hunting, disappearance of the Passenger Pigeon in America, and early Audubon Societies in American -- now largest conservation organization in the world

European Convention for the Protection of Birds Useful to Agriculture 1902 -- UK, Russia, Netherlands, Norway, Italy did not sign -- Geramny, Austria, France, Spain, Portugal did sign -- in following decades UK and Germany passed strong wildlife laws -- France, Italy, Spain had virtually none -- escape clauses made treaty almost meaningless

International Convention for the Protection of Birds 1950 likewise had no consistent effect on protection of birds in Europe as a whole -- countries continued to differ widely in protection

Birds Directive of European Economic Community 1979 binding on all member states -- European protection finally became a reality -- but each nation responsible for local enforcement -- in 1980's Italian and French market hunters sounded like the man who talked to Pearson in NC in early 1900's! -- but their day is finally over!

 

What are the lessons from this history?

notice the interplay of nongovernmental organizations, local (state) and federal governments, and international treaties . . .

  • international treaties were crucial to the advance of conservation in the United States -- but had almost no effect in Europe -- why??

  • local governments (state or, in Europe, even national) never alone managed to regulate their own citizens' exploitation of wildlife and wildlife habitats . . .

  • . . . at least not in open or market economies -- small groups with stable populations and nearly closed economies are a different matter -- conditions for avoiding TOC are more easily met!

  • on the other hand, higher governments (federal or, in Europe, the EC) never succeeded without strong local nongovernmental support

    it is not easy to avoid a Tragedy of the Commons!

    References

    Graham, F., Jr. 1971. Man's dominion -- the story of conservation in America. Evans, New York.

    Graham, F., Jr. 1990. The Audubon ark. Knopf, New York.

    Hays, S. P. 1959. Conservation and the gospel of efficiency--the progressive conservation movement, 1890-1920. Harvard Univ. Press.

    Matthiessen, P. 1959. Wildlife in America. Viking.

    Pearson, T. G. 1937. Adventures in Bird Protection. Appleton-Century, New York.

    Reiger, J. F. 1975. American sportsmen and the origins of conservation. Winchester Press [published by an ammunition manufacturer but this volume contains lots of interesting information!].

    Trefethen, J. B. 1961. Crusade for wildlife -- highlights in conservation progress. Stackpole.