Senator ROBERTSON. Did you serve on the advisory committee of the Biological Survey?

Mr. QUINN. I was a member of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act Advisory Board for a period of 14 years, 6 years of which I had the honor to serve with the distinguished junior Senator from Virginia. Senator ROBERTSON. So you have had a wide experience in this conservation game.

Mr. QUINN. Rather a wide experience. I appear for the executive committee of the International Association of Game, Fish, and Conservation Commissioners concerning the Senate bill that is before us, S. 2482. The primary purpose of this bill is to provide additional revenues for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in order that it might do a better job in improving the migratory wild fowl situation in this country.

The hunting pressure has been increasing at a rapid rate in recent years, while the waterfowl population has been on the decline. I do not believe that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, with all the cooperation that the State game departments can give, can arrest the general decline in our waterfowl with the present amount of revenue derived from the $1 migratory bird hunting stamp.

The price of wheat and other foods during recent years, and for the years of the foreseeable future, has encouraged and will continue to supply the farmer with sufficient incentive to reclaim potentially arable lands to grow food crops. This means that suitable breeding and nesting areas have been, and will continue to be, taken out of use for waterfowl. It will be impossible, under present circumstances, reasonably to expect that, with the continued withdrawal of breeding grounds to be devoted to other uses, anything but a further decline in waterfowl population will be the inevitable result.

The United States' representatives on the executive committee of the International Association of Game, Fish, and Conservation Commissioners, of which I am a member, have gone on record unanimously as favoring the increase in the cost of the migratory bird hunting stamp from $1 to $2.

If the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act of March 16, 1934, as amended, is further amended, as provided in the Robertson bill, to raise the cost of the stamp, it will affect only those who pursue the sport of wild waterfowl shooting.

Speaking for, and on behalf of, the International Association of Game, Fish, and Conservation Commissioners, the following recommendations are made:

1. Increase the cost of thie migratory bird hunting stamp from $1 to $2 as provided in S. 2842.

2. Require that not more than 25 percent of the total revenue derived from the sale of migratory bird hunting stamps be used for enforcement of migratory bird hunting laws and regulations based thereunder.

3. When the Fish and Wildlife Service is convinced that no harm will result to the wildfowl refuge program, up to 25 percent of the areas so acquired for that purpose may safely be utilized for management purposes and for regulated hunting, in cooperation with the States in which such refuges are situated.

Since wildfowl populations depend so largely on suitable and adequate breeding and nesting areas, I believe that this is the most important phase in any waterfowl program and should be encouraged

by increasing the revenue for the purpose of expanding the program. Next to the acquisition and proper management of refuge areas, I am convinced that one of the weakest links in the program of wild waterfowl administration is the wholly inadequate enforcement of the laws and regulations applicable to migratory birds.

Personally, after a great many years of experience and observation, I believe that about 25 percent of the revenues spent for wildlife administration should be devoted to enforcement. I should like to see provision made whereby a minimum of 25 percent of the total revenue derived from the sale of the migratory bird hunting stamp would be devoted to the enforcement program. The hunting pressure has become so great and the birds so few that unfortunately there are too many gunners who are willing to run any risk and adopt any method to get what they seem to think is their share of birds, regardless of the overwhelming numbers who want to abide by the rules of the game.

In further extending my remarks, I may say that the lack of unanimity among those of us who make recommendations to legislative committees is due to our lack of experience in legislative matters-the compromises that have to be made to get the heart of your program through a legislative body. I say it is that lack of experience which brings about a variety of recommendations.

To my way of thinking, instead of a half-million dollars being spent annually for the enforcement of our migratory waterfowl laws and regulations, I have estimated, and I think that is conservative, approximately $1,000,000 should be allocated for the enforcement of the rules and regulations governing the sport of the wild-fowlers.

I concur in the recommendation with reference to the assistance or proposed assistance to be given Canada. I am not prepared to comment upon whether or not any revenues should be sent from this country to the Republic of Mexico.

I have visited that country, and I have observed some of the things that have gone on down there; and the reports that we get from there, as Mr. Buckingham indicated, are rather deplorable.

I feel we should indicate to the Mexican Government that if they will clean house and give some attention to a better enforcement program in that country--and I believe they have only seven game wardens in the entire Republic, or did last year-we could spend some money there, and it would be well worth while, if we can get some understanding from them that they will earnestly and conscientiously see that that money is spent in the proper protection of the birds.

Senator ROBERTSON. Mr. Quinn, in that connection, if we tell our friends in Mexico that we are willing to spend some money down there, in addition to the millions of dollars spent by the State departments in making our own citizens law abiding, plus several millions. of dollars spent by the Federal Government, what would be the proper approach in asking them to be more law abiding?

Mr. QUINN. Obedience to law is largely a matter of education. Senator ROBERTSON. That is largely true and if we approach them from the standpoint, that all of us want to cooperate to be better citizens, we might get some cooperation.

Mr. QUINN. I think the greatest draw-back in Mexico is this gang of game hogs that go down from the United States and slaughter birds every year.

Senator ROBERTSON. And the natives see them do it.

Mr. QUINN. The natives see these fellows go down and get their birds and they say, "We will get ours."

Senator ROBERTSON. We frequently hear it said, "You can't legislate game on the hoof," and we want statutes made to produce more game birds.

Mr. QUINN. There are three fundamental factors in wildlife population. You must have food 365 days a year, you must have adequate cover for their protection, and you must have adequate nesting sites for our birds whether they be upland birds or waterfowl.

Senator ROBERTSON. Is there an opportunity for these members of the Outdoors Writers Association to do a little educational work in the articles they send to magazines and newspapers of everybody being a better citizen?

Mr. QUINN. It is the finest organization ever set up in this country for the dissemination of the facts that need to be in the minds of the public and I think they are beginning to do a swell job.

Senator ROBERTSON. Thank you very much.

Mr. QUINN. There is just one other comment I have to make. The chairman of this subcommittee is also a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I believe.

Senator FERGUSON. That is correct.

Mr. QUINN. Just one thing to divert your attention from_the Robertson bill. Last year-and I have not consulted with Al Day on this to know what steps have been taken-but last year there was a decrease in the appropriation for our wildlife research units set up at some of our land-grant colleges and as a result most of the land-grant college research units east of the Mississippi were closed. We happen to be one of the victims down in the Old Dominion. Our unit was closed but our commission has come to the rescue and we have gone down into our pockets and put up an undue amount to maintain that research station.

I want to say just a word with reference to these wildlife research stations. It is there that not only the Fish and Wildlife Service but all the fish and game departments of all the States of the Union have to look to for scientifically trained men who will go out in the field, dig up the facts, and put them on the administrator's desk.

When you close those units, you cut us off from one of the finest channels for collecting facts that are indispensable in the prosecution of a successful wildlife program.

I want earnestly to suggest to the Appropriations Committee this year that it give consideration to the approval of more money for these research units.

Senator ROBERTSON. I am glad to hear you make that appeal. I want to say in defense of the Appropriations Committee that we had to increase our funds to find new ways of killing people. We had to increase our appropriation to get bigger and better atomic bombs and research on biological warfare to kill people with, and you think we ought not to neglect this research?

Mr. QUINN. Yes; when these boys come back from World War III let them have something they can shoot at that won't shoot back at them.

Senator FERGUSON. Have you asked to appear before the Appropriations Committee?

Mr. QUINN. No, sir; I have not.

Senator FERGUSON. I wish you would request that so that you will appear.

Mr. QUINN. I will do that, thank you.

Senator FERGUSON. Mr. Harry E. Johnson?

STATEMENT OF HARRY E. JOHNSON, DIVISION OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES, STATE OF OHIO

Mr. JOHNSON. I represent the commissioner of the Division of Conservation and Natural Resources of the State of Ohio. We didn't prepare a written statement due to the fact that I was in Washington on other matters and my commissioner asked me to appear here.

We are in favor of S. 2482. We have a system in our State whereby we hold public hearings. These public hearings constitute all the counties' sportsmen's organizations. Each county appoints a sportsmen's representative and twice a year or oftener they attend a public hearing at Columbus and our conservation commission abides to a great extent by their recommendations as far as public policy is concerned regarding fish and game.

This $2 duck stamp bill has been discussed in these public hearings and it has been the consensus in all these hearings that they are in favor of it. In other words, I think we have a pretty good cross section of the opinion of duck hunters of Ohio.

Senator FERGUSON. In other words, the man who pays is in accord with it.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes. These representatives from each county are elected by the sportsmen of the individual county. In other words, they hold sportsmen's meetings in these respective counties and they elect their representative locally, an individual of their group who is not dominated by our division in any way, to go down to Columbus, Ohio, and attend the public hearing.

So I think we do have in Ohio a very good cross section of the hunter's honest opinion and that has been favorable.

Senator ROBERTSON. I would like you to take back to the sportsmen of Ohio that they have a friend in the Senate in Mr. Bricker. He fished with me last year and he will fish with me next year and we plan to go up to the west coast after we finish a little business to be attended to on November 2 to see if they have as many ducks up there as they should have with the reduced bag limit.

Mr. JOHNSON. We are fully aware of Senator Bricker's interest. We feel that Senator Bricker was very active in promoting sportsmen's legislation in Ohio and the sportsmen hold him dear to their hearts in that connection.

We feel in Ohio, and I have also talked to Mr. Day, that the basic problem of this waterfowl situation is the restoration of the proper habitat to raise ducks. It takes more money to do any job like that than when the $1 act was adopted.

Senator FERGUSON. There is no doubt about it, it takes more than even the $2.

Senator ROBERTSON. As far as money is concerned, what was adequate 10 years ago will not be adequate today.

Mr. JOHNSON. We do feel in Ohio, while our service has done a fine job, we do feel we are handicapped. We feel we should be in the same category as Virginia. In other words, our research extension

79156-48-19

service was abolished due to lack of funds. We hope that will be restored.

Senator FERGUSON. Would you mind writing me a detailed letter on that so I can submit it to the appropriations committee? Mr. JOHNSON. I will be glad to do so. We are in favor of Senator Robertson's provisions concerning Mexico and Canada with certain restrictions.

I don't know if those restrictions can be put in print as far as Mexico is concerned. It is hard to put in black and white all the provisions that are required of a law. We feel that the Wildlife Service is capable of administering any funds if Mexico is voted an appropriation.

I have hunted in Mexico and I know when you have a little money hanging on the line you may be able to bargain with them and change conditions. If we do appropriate money we can improve conditions as Mr. Quinn said on the subject of education.

Senator ROBERTSON. On the subject of these research stations, are you able to inform the committee what percentage of the money does the Federal Government put up in these research stations?

Mr. JOHNSON. In Ohio we have always granted to the University of Ohio their request in the way of supplemental funds in addition to the Federal funds granted in the appropriation. They have set up their budget and the division of conservation commissioners have always granted that amount of money. It has never been set as a percentage but we have always tried to analyze their program in connection with the Federal appropriation and we try to meet that program.

it.

As it is now, we have to meet all the costs. We have had to curtail We have continued some work. We have retained one man on the pay roll because we thought he was too valuable to lose. We did have to curtail even under those conditions.

Senator FERGUSON. We appreciate your appearance and the expression of your opinions here this morning.

Is Mr. Frank Mulkern here?

STATEMENT OF FRANK MULKERN, IZAAK WALTon league

Mr. MULKERN. My name is Frank J. Mulkern. I represent the Izaak Walton League of America. I should like to say, gentlemen, that the Izaak Walton League has a membership of approximately 75,000 scattered throughout most of the States.

It is the belief of the Izaak Walton League, in the discussion of your Senate bill 2482, that the judgment and wisdom of the Fish and Wildlife Service should be relied on because they have access to information from every section and every State. That is the attitude of the Izaak Walton League in reference to the Service.

Now, the record of this Government agency in terms of our waterfowl population of 125,000,000 was liberal. It helped to bring about this result. Now times are bad. Less than half this number of ducks and geese inhabit this continent. Let the Fish and Wildlife Service help our Americans in trying to increase the number of these birds.

In reference to the duck stamp bill introduced by Senator Robertson and, I believe, Representative Kersten in the House, we are in