favor of allowing the Fish and Wildlife Service to utilize this extra fund to the best of their knowledge and ability.

We strongly believe that additional Federal agents are urgently required. At the present time each one of 70 Federal agents supervises about 29,000 duck hunters, which is an impossible job, of course, from a Federal angle.

And right here, with pardons to Senator Robertson, the Chesapeake Bay back area is one of the worst places for violations in the United States, I should like to say, because a lot of those fellows on the Eastern Shore of Maryland shoot all seasons and there is evidence that the State authorities are unable to cope with the situation.

Senator ROBERTSON. Do you mean they shoot out of season?

Mr. MULKERN. Out of season, at nights, and excessive bags. The United States has nothing to do with them. That is the information I have from people over there and that is why Federal agents are urgently required for at least 2 or 3 years.

Senator ROBERTSON. With reference to Eastern Shore, I know conditions over there were bad and I offer what the Virginia commissioner said. "I sent a warden in there and he got shot." I want to point out that the airplanes and commissions sent in there last year with reference to night shooting and irregular duck hunting-Mr. Quinn, won't you bring us up to date on that?

Mr. QUINN. Boys around Norfolk who have raised the greatest howl in recent years about the ineffective enforcement both by the Federal and State agencies haye faced about. I have a letter on my desk today from the leader of the complainants who wrote me this week that the most effective job was done by the Federal and State agencies in the Back Bay and Eastern Shore that had ever been accomplished in this history of the wildlife enforcement program and I think it will continue that way, Mr. Mulkern.

Mr. MULKERN. Thank you, Mr. Quinn. These are very glad tidings. I have nothing further to say.

Senator FERGUSON. Thank you very much.

Is Mr. Michael Hudoba here?

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL HUDOBA, WASHINGTON EDITOR OF SPORTS AFIELD MAGAZINE

Mr. HUDOBA. Mr. Chairman, my name is Michael Hudoba, and I am Washington editor of Sports Afield, the outdoor publication.

I want to thank the committee for granting my request for a few minutes of time to make several observations.

Though you are deeply immersed in the sweeping movement of national problems and affairs with large demands on your time, you have as conservationists turned attention, through the medium of this hearing, to some of the serious problems confronting conservation, fish and wildlife, and the outdoor opportunity.

With all the pressures on our basic resources, such as pollution, erosion, loss of fertility of soil, forest depletion, to some extent the many other deleterious drains on our resources, not only fish and wildlife, but the general welfare of this Nation is vastly concerned.

There is a great need for restoration. In programs of resource use, it is sound to consider all the effects of such programs, and not develop one phase at the expense of waste or destruction of another. It is no

less urgent that fish and wildlife values, which contribute such a large interest to 24,620,000 licensed fishermen and hunters, be integrated within these broad programs of resource use. You have pointed up the fact that this can be done.

You have brought into focus a complete survey of Federal agency activities in their programs that affect fish and wildlife resources, and in so doing have brought out and pointed up during the course of the hearings, needs to strengthen conservation-restoration to help maintain outdoor recreation which is one of the, if not the most, important interests to so many Americans.

I should like to commend the subcommittee on Conservation of Wildlife Resources, and Senator Ferguson, Senator Robertson, and Senator Thye for their deep and understanding interest in the problems that affect the sportsmen of this Nation.

Senator ROBERTSON. Mr. Chairman, we have in the audience this morning a former member of the staff of the Senate Wildlife Committee. He is now with the American Wildlife Institute, Mr. Carl Shoemaker. I would like to ask him if he has anything for the record. If so, I would like to see his recommendations in print.

STATEMENT OF CARL SHOEMAKER, NATIONAL WILDLIFE

FEDERATION

Mr. SHOEMAKER. I have something, not in print, but I would like to give it to the committee.

Senator FERGUSON. We would like to hear it then.

We work

Mr. SHOEMAKER. My name is Carl Shoemaker. I represent the National Wildlife Federation, not the Wildlife Institute. very closely together, naturally.

Senator FERGUSON. I am very sorry.

Mr. SHOEMAKER. I want to direct my remarks to the bill Senator A. Willis Robertson recently introduced. And it is on all fours with the Kersten bill with one exception and that is with the permission of the Secretary of the Interior some of this money raised by the sale of duck stamps may be used in any country which has a treaty with the United States for the preservation of migratory waterfowl.

That, of course, applies only to Canada, Mexico and the United States. Last year I happened to make a trip through Canada, particularly through the prairie provinces.

The waterfowl situation was being covered at that time very carefully by United States observers, by American and Canadian officials and by Ducks Unlimited. Much good work has been done in Canada by Ducks Unlimited and much more needs to be done on the breeding grounds.

I want to make one comment with reference to Mexico. Mexico is not as bad as it has been painted from time to time. Most of the violations in Mexico you can charge up to the sportsmen of the United States.

In all of Mexico the great mass of the people do not have firearms. They are not allowed to possess them. They don't have arms and they don't have ammunition. The very few of them that do have arms have obtained them very surreptitiously.

The great bulk of the violations that go on over there are done by American sportsmen. I happened last year to make a trip along the

border of Mexico and crossed over at many of the spots where you could cross the boundary.

I did have fine quail, pheasants, ducks, deer, all kinds of wildlife served at the tables in the restaurants on the Mexican side. I asked the proprietors, "Where do you get this?" "The Americano," he would reply as a rule

The United States sportsman can bring over the border only a certain percentage of his kill according to our own regulations. Therefore, he sells the remainder to the restaurant keeper. Now, that goes on continuously along the border. I don't know the exact figures but I suspect the total kill of waterfowl in Mexico is less than a million. I have been told it was only 500,000 birds, which is in great contrast with what is killed in this country.

Senator FERGUSON. Do you think there is a way to cure that if it is being done by American citizens who go under a nonresident license? Mr. SHOEMAKER. Yes; I think it can be corrected over there by the Mexican authorities if they care to do it. You have to educate the Mexican authorities, too, at the same time.

Senator FERGUSON. Americans enter into it.

Mr. SHOEMAKER. Americans enter into it and that is why we entered into the treaty. We want more liberal observation of the treaty. Senator FERGUSON. If we give them money out of the duck-stamp increase, are you of the opinion that we can do something?

Mr. SHOEMAKER. I certainly am. I am wholeheartily in support of this measure. I am not in favor necessarily of giving money to Mexico outright. It will have to be done by some regulation set up by the Wildlife Service in cooperation with Mexican officials. I am in favor of some such arrangement and am hopeful that it will have an excellent result on the situation. I favor increasing the cost of the duck stamp to $3 or $5 as a matter of fact.

Some years ago I advocated a $3 duck stamp but I can't understand the sportsman's attitude at all. One dollar is all he is paying today for the duck stamp. He will go duck hunting and he will pay $5 or $6 for a bottle of liquor to take into the blind with him, and he will holler about the extra dollar for the duck stamp.

Senator ROBERTSON. That should go on the record. In other words, the stamp on the bottle costs more than the duck stamp.

Mr. SHOEMAKER. Yes; more than the duck stamp. Understand, I am not condemning the other shooters. I have done it myself. Mr. QUINN. That fellow leaves his whisky stamp in the blind but brings his duck stamp back with him.

Mr. SHOEMAKER. I want to add my wholehearted support to the suggestion made by Mr. Quinn in reference to these research services. I think that is one item in the wildlife appropriation this year that ought to have excellent support and a handsome increase.

Senator FERGUSON. I should like to have a letter from you in reference to that service in detail explaining it.

Mr. SHOEMAKER. I will do that; thank you.

Senator FERGUSON. I realize it is just about closing time, but is Mr. Clawson here?

Mr. CLAWSON. Yes.

Senator FERGUSON. We will put your report in the record, Mr. Clawson.

(The report submitted by Mr. Clawson follows:)

INTERESTS OF BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT IN WILDLIFE CONSERVATION The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for resource management on federally owned lands in the United States and Alaska which are not included in national forests, national parks and monuments, Indian reservations, and other withdrawals.

In the Western States there are now 58 grazing districts, with a net acreage of approximately 132,000,000 acres of unreserved public lands, and about 10,000,000 acres of lands administered by agreement or lease. Outside of grazing districts there are some 37,000,000 acres of public lands subject to lease under section 15 of the Taylor Grazing Act. In Alaska there is an estimated 265,000,000 acres of vacant public lands. The Bureau of Land Management program is directed toward the management of all the resources, including wildlife, on the lands under its jursidiction.

The Bureau supports the following game-management policies of the Department of the Interior:

1. Vigorous enforcement of all game laws within the respective grazing districts. (Field employees have been made eligible by Executive order to accept, without compensation, appointments as deputy game and fire wardens in the several public domain States.)

2. Practical means for redistribution of big game in the so-called critical big-game areas to prevent starvation as a result of excess concentration.

3. Controlled hunting so that surplus wildlife may be soon removed in areas where the demand for forage exceeds the safe margin of supply.

4. Control of predatory animals.

5. Cooperation with all Federal and State agencies having activities relating to wildlife and land management within the respective States.

6. Development and replacement of all necessary natural watering places to be used by domestic stock and big-game animals jointly where practicable and the development of protected watering places as nesting places for upland game birds. The Bureau cooperates with State agencies and other Federal agencies in game counts which are being made in order that game-management plans may be developed in public-land areas on a sound and lasting basis. The Bureau also assists in studying range conditions so that there may be a redistribution of big game when range conditions indicate that such action is necessary. Joint management plans have been made to transplant game stock from congested areas to suitable sparsely populated areas, and in many cases the actual transplanting work has been accomplished. The principal objective of the Bureau of Land Management in wildlife conservation is to insure a balanced game population on the public lands under its jurisdiction.

In the administration of grazing districts the Bureau program is directed toward a democratic method of public land resource management. Advisory boards, authorized in the Taylor Grazing Act, are composed of representatives from the livestock industry who consider public land resource management problems and make recommendations to the Bureau. Provision has been made for wildlife interest representation on the advisory boards and the Bureau encourages the wildlife representatives to actively participate in all advisory board functions. An example of consideration given to wildlife is specific provision for the reservation of forage for big game. At the present time about 6 percent of the estimated grazing capacity of grazing district lands is available for big game.

Big game in certain areas in the West would be practically without forage during some parts of the year if it were not for grazing district lands. For that reason wildlife interests, as well as stock men, should be interested in a sound resource management program on the public domain. We have found that under properly regulated use of the range there is only minor competition between livestock and game animals, but when an area is overgrazed there is severe competition. It is in these areas and during these periods of heavy use that the stockmen and the wildlife interests should make a special effort to work together in determining practical means to obtain sound management of the areas.

Specific responsibility for the national wildlife resources is vested in the Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior. The Bureau of Land Management depends upon that agency for recommendations and technical advice on wildlife management, and the Bureau endeavors to cooperate in every way possible to obtain sound management. There is no appropriation made to

the Bureau specifically for wildlife although the Bureau activities which aid wildlife conservation are an integral part of its over-all program for public land resource management.

Senator FERGUSON. Now, state any high spots you would like to discuss.

STATEMENT OF MARION CLAWSON, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Mr. CLAWSON. My name is Marion Clawson. I am Director of the Bureau of Land Management in the Department of the Interior. Supplemental to the report submitted on December 2, 1946, to the Select Committee on Conservation of Wildlife Resources, House of Representatives, the following is a report of activities of the Bureau of Land Management with data for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1947: Cooperation has been continued to the limit of available personnel between the various grazing district and regional officials of the Bureau with other Federal and State agencies interested in wildlife management and local organizations. Supplemental field agreements have been made with the Fish and Wildlife Service in the Montana-Wyoming region to correlate construction of livestock water reservoirs to assure efficient distribution of water on the Federal range for both livestock and wildlife.

The district graziers, together with representatives of other agencies, have worked with various State game commission officials in obtaining census data, investigating problem areas, and formulating game-management plans, and establishing areas and limits of harvest. Jointmanagement plans have been made to transplant game stock from the congested areas to suitable sparsely populated areas, and in many areas the actual transplanting work has been accomplished. ·

The principal objective in wildlife management in grazing districts is to insure a balanced game population. A specific reservation of grazing capacity is made for wildlife. The relationship among field representatives of the Bureau, livestockmen, and wildlife interests has proven that the management of Federal grazing land may well provide adequate forage resources for a substantial game population in addition to the stabilization of livestock operations.

The stockmen in general have been willing to assist in practical game-management planning for sustained wildlife population.

The wildlife representatives on the various grazing district advisory boards have contributed materially in the formulation of area and district game management plans. Through the advisory boards, the district graziers are cognizant of the relationship between livestock and wildlife. With the intimate knowledge of local conditions expressed by the stockmen, and through observations made in connection with field work, the graziers are able to determine the needs of overpopulated areas where control is needed and of sparsely populated areas that can support additional game.

In Wyoming grazing districts 4 and 5, meetings sponsored by the Bureau in early 1947 resulted in comprehensive management plans for elk transplanted to winter range from high mountainous areas where the snow is so deep that heavy death loss has occurred. Similar plans for transplanting mountain sheep and elk in other parts of