Forest and Stream, August 29, 1903
The Awakening of Virginia.
Natural resources -- Conservation - GameSea -- Market hunting
Editor Forest and Stream:
The Legislature of Virginia, during its last session in effect re-enacted its game laws. This legislation is a great step forward, and will doubtless be highly commended by all those interested in preventing the useless slaughter of game. The object of game protection, primarily, is to preserve game from extinction, to increase the supply necessary for food and incidentally to provide sport with rod and gun.
Virginia has desirable game fields; deer abound in her mountains, wild turkeys and partridges in her woods and fields, shore birds and wild fowl in her tide water, and there is plenty of sport for the fisherman. Rightly cared for, this should be a source of wealth to the State.
Protection will increase the supply of game for the markets of the State, increase the number of men employed in the care of game and otherwise by sportsmen, entice non-residents to come within the State and expend their money in the employment of guides and the establishment of preserves and the propagation of game. The influx of non-residents is to be encouraged, as their private expenditure is great and the cost to the State of protection can be greatly reduced by exacting a license fee from every such non-resident. In return the non-resident should be treated liberally, and should be allowed to take his game with him provided it is for private use only, and under no circumstances for sale. The amount so taken can be controlled by limiting the number to be taken out of the State. Perhaps it would be fairer to limit the number of birds to the gun for each day, and then allow the non-resident, who has paid a license fee, and perhaps, in addition, has maintained a preserve at great expense, to carry with him his game, provided the same shall not be sold or offered for sale.
Notwithstanding all natural advantages above alluded to, the game laws of Virginia have been heretofore extremely lax, and the value these resources might be made to the State seems to have been largely overlooked until the last session of the Legislature, when a bill for the better protection of game was passed.
The principal features of the bill, briefly stated, are substantially as follows: It prohibits the shooting of wild fowl by night and the use of sneak boats and artificial islands, but the law does not prohibit the use of batteries, and every sportsman knows that batteries will eventually drive out the game from any given locality. The law makes a close season for wild turkeys, pheasants or grouse, quail or partridges, and woodcock east of the Blue Ridge Mountains, between Feb. 1 and Nov. 1, and west of the Blue Ridge Mountains between Dec. 31 and Nov. 1; makes a close season for deer from Jan 1 to Oct. 1, and a close season for wild water fowl from April 1 to Oct. 15; but allows the shooting of summer ducks after Aug. 1. The close season for shore birds is from Jan. 1 to July 20, and the law permits the shooting of robins from the 15th day of February to April 1.
It is also unlawful to shoot any game later than half an hour after sunset or earlier than half an hour before sunrise, or to shoot or hunt on Sunday.
The law also provides for the appointment of game wardens, but the number of these wardens is limited and there is no provision for their increase, nor for the appointment of an extra warden upon the petition of those willing to pay the salary of a warden. A license fee of $10 is exacted from all non-residents, which license continues in force for six months. The money received for licenses is used to pay the game wardens.
The exportation of game from the State is prohibited, except any citizen of the State may, during the open season, ship as a gift and not for market or sale, one deer and not exceeding three wild turkeys, six pheasants, twelve wild water fowl, eighteen partridges or quail, provided such game shall be shipped exposed to public view, and shall be plainly labeled with the name and address of the donor and of the donee.
The law then provides, "Any person authorized to hunt under the laws of this State may, during the season, take with him out of the State either in his personal possession or as his baggage, on the same conveyance with him, not in a closed package, but exposed to public view, not exceeding thirty wild water fowl, fifty quail or partridges, ten pheasants or grouse, three wild turkeys, one deer, or plovers, snipe, sandpipers, willets, tattlers or curlew, not exceeding twenty-five of each, or not exceeding one hundred in the aggregate, when lawfully killed or captured by himself, provided the same be plainly labeled or tagged with the name and address of such person."
The law also protects wild birds other than game birds, their nests and eggs.
The final clause of the bill reads as follows: "Provided that nothing in this act shall be construed as repealing a special act approved March 8, 1902, restricting the shooting of wild water fowl in Back Bay and its tributaries in the county of Princess Anne."
This exception was undoubtedly intended to preserve the rest days in that county, but unfortunately, the exception is so broad it practically leaves that county without any protection as to its wild fowl, as the Act of March 8, 1902, not only does not prohibit the use of batteries, but directly provides that nothing in the act shall be construed to prohibit the shooting of a duck known as a "peler" or "blue peter," and this nullifies the rest day, as these pelers are shot from sailboats on rest days as well as every other day, and in those waters where such shooting is carried on the duck shooting has been completely ruined. The effect of the shooting of blue peters was referred to in a communication entitled "A Disgrace to Virginia," which appeared in your valued paper of Dec. 13, 1902.
The law contains one provision which cannot be passed by without comment. It provides the Board of Supervisors of any county shall have the power to shorten the open season in their said county and may permit the shipment of wild water fowl from said county or out of the State. This is most pernicious. It virtually destroys the State law and authorizes a county law, which may differ in every county of the State, therefore making as many different game laws as there are counties in the State.
This experiment of giving the supervisors the power to enact laws, has been tried in several States, and in all has ended most disastrously, and in effect as if there were no law. If a charge was made of a violation in one county, it was always shown that the act happened in an adjacent county, and convictions were impossible. A game law is, and should be, a State measure, and not a matter of mere local legislation.
Taking it all in all, certainly the people of Virginia are to be congratulated on the passage of the bill. The lovers of game throughout the country will rejoice, and doubtless the sportsmen of Virginia, now that they have taken up the matter, will watch the operation of the law and procure additional legislation to remedy any defects in the law as it now stands. It is most respectfully suggested that the Legislature be requested to protect wild water fowl by prohibiting battery shooting and making the law apply to "pelers" or "blue peters." The open season, too, is too long, and in the writer's opinion the season should not open until Nov. 10, and certainly no shooting of wild fowl should be permitted after March 1.
Let a word be said in behalf of the summer or wood duck. This duck is almost extinct, and its killing should be prohibited for certainly a term of years, and if this be not possible, the open season should be the same as for other duck. Many of the young birds are but half grown in August, and to open the season the first of August is but to permit the complete annihilation of the species.
Cannot the potent voice of FOREST AND STREAM be raised to urge the reforms mentioned?
XPER.
NEW YORK, Aug. 17.