Hornaday's Protest

"I am discouraged, gloomy and pessimistic," said Dr. William T. Hornaday last week. It was not what he said nor the way he said it, but the reasons which he gave for his feelings that made the Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture sputter with indignation.

Dr. Hornaday has himself been in Government employ. In 1874, he began to serve Henry A. Ward of Rochester, as a naturalist. A couple of years later, he went around the world gathering rare specimens of animal life. When he got back, he founded the Society of American Taxidermists. After eight years of this sort of apprenticeship, he became Chief Taxidermist of the National Museum in Washington. He has hunted for Science in India, the Malay Archipelago and South America. In Montana, he has collected buffaloes for the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. A decade or so ago he became prominent in the game conservation movement and advanced a plan for establishing game sanctuaries throughout the country--not a few large ones, but many medium sized ones--on land not well suited for other purposes, sanctuaries where wild life could multiply under complete protection and spread over the surrounding country. Of late he has been Director of the Bronx Zoological Garden of New York City, has raised it to a high rank among roos.

So, all in all, he is a man of prominence whose word is heeded among naturalists..

"I am discouraged, gloomy and pessimistic because the birds are on the ragged edge of oblivion. I am trying to adjust my mind to a result that seems quite inevitable. The bird-defenders hold few good cards and all the high trumps seem to be held by the bird destroyers. For years I have noted the awful annual increase in bird slaughter and for years I have dreaded the arrival of the day when the small circle of men who control game protection matters in Washington would decide that no more reductions should be made in the killing privileges of sportsmen and game hogs.

"That day has arrived."

He charged that John B. Burnham, President of the American Game Protective and Propagation Association, had influenced the Department of Agriculture to refuse reductions in hunting privileges "widely demanded in the interest of the preservation of game." He argued that most of the income of the Game Protective Association comes from arms and munitions manufacturers, who had influenced Mr. Burnham, head of an advisory committee to the Government, to object to reduction of the bag limit and the length of the open season. He declared that he (Hornaday) and other members of the advisory committee were but "distinguished rubber stamps," while Burnham maneuvered the Department of Agriculture as he saw fit. "I regard Mr. Burnham's influence over Dr. E. W. Nelson and other high officers of the Biological Survey on game-shooting privileges as completely paramount. I believe that that association's influence is to blame for the fact that now the Biological Survey and the Secretary of Agriculture have flatly refused all appeals to reduce the bag limits and open seasons on migratory game, and have passed the buck to the states to do as they please about it. Ever since 1918, the Secretary of Agriculture has held idle in his hands the power specially placed there by Congress to reduce the nation's bag limits and open seasons on migratory game, to offset the awful annual increase in hunters, guns and killing. The only bag-limit change any Secretary has made during the last eight years (1918 to 1925) has been to raise the bag limit on the poor little sora rail from 25 per day to 50 per day! Can you beat that record for sheer evasion of duty and lost opportunities?"

Of course Mr. Burnham and Dr. Nelson did not remain silent. Said Mr. Burnham:

"The whole idea of this conservation movement originated with the late H. S. Leonard of the Winchester Repeating Arms Company. He convinced the other ammunition makers that if they did not take the lead in game preservation, there would in a few years be no game, and their business would be ruined. He was influenced first by business considerations, and second by the fact that he believed in sport, and that the welfare of the country required game preservation for sportsmen of the future.

"The association is generally recognized to have played a great part, not only in the campaign for the Migratory Bird Treaty and enabling legislation, but in other measures to insure a continuing supply of game--in better enforcement of the game laws, in game breeding, in declaring closed seasons when necessary and cultivating the right attitude of sportsmen and others toward the law.

"Dr. Hornaday has extremely drastic ideas on the subject of game protection. Our policy is to favor shooting to such an extent as will not cut down the game supply, but will permit a yearly increase. In the case of ducks, Mr. Nelson has shown conclusively that they are not being reduced by the present amount of shooting.*

"I have had great difficulty in convincing them [the gun and munitions manufacturers] that Dr. Hornaday is wrong and that the drastic limitations on shooting which he favors are uncalled for."

Said Mr. Nelson:

"There is no need for further reduction of the bag limits. We have in our files thousands of letters from all parts of the country, answers to inquiries we sent out last year, showing that instead of the bird and game life dying out there was more game last year than had been seen in years.

"As for Burnham's being able unduly to influence the department, that is silly. He is but one of the committee of 22, among whom are 12 state game wardens, and, as a matter of fact, all his official dealings with this bureau are handled through the Secretary of Agriculture himself.

"Dr. Hornaday has made impudent demands and veiled threats upon this bureau for the last year, and declared that if his instructions were not carried out--and, of course, it is impossible for a Federal bureau to obey the dictates of an outsider--he would see that there were uncomfortable consequences."

*Notably 25 wild ducks and 8 wild geese a day per hunter.