No. 60. IN SENATE, MARCH 31, 1881. REPORTS OF STATE FISH AND GAME PROTECTORS MADE IN RESPONSE TO RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE. REPORT OF J. S. COLLETT. To the Honorable the Senate: In response to a resolution passed by your honorable body on the 15th instant, in reference to the game and fish protectors, their duties and expenses, and calling for detailed information in respect thereto, I beg to present the following statement: I was appointed to the office of game and fish protector by His Excellency the Governor on July 1st, and your resolution, therefore, calls for information concerning my acts and duties during the eight months I have held the position. There were eight appointments made by Governor Cornell under the act passed by the Legislature of 1880, and who resided in different parts of the State. It occured to me, after prospecting about the country, that conflict and confusion might be averted by a meeting of the various appointees, and a proper arrangement of territory. I therefore took the liberty of calling a meeting of the eight gentlemen, or rather proposing a meeting to them for September 15th. They all responded favorably, and a meeting was therefore held at the American Hotel, Albany, on the afternoon of the date named. After protracted consultation it was deemed prudent to preserve as much secrecy as possible in ferreting out offenders, and for that reason the proposition to assign exact territory to any one officer was overruled, on the ground that a constable for a certain district would soon become known and his usefulness thereby impaired. With this general sentiment, however, I differed. With this understanding I resumed my labors. I have visited the markets of New York city, and interested the [Sen, Doc. No. 60.] 1 local authorities in the restriction of the sale of game out of season. I have visited frequently the suspicious neighborhood of the Susquehanna and Schoharie valleys, and may be pardoned for saying that while offenses against the game laws of the State were frequent in that locality, they are now reasonably trifling if they exist at all. Permit me to say further, that in searching for offenders I have not always been successful. They are shrewd, active, lawless men, and it requires time to run them to the ground. This particular district is now virtually clear of unlawful fishing, while my frequent visits to suspected neighborhoods has had, I think, a restraining influence. As prevention is often better than cure, this, I may assume, will readily be taken into consideration by your honorable body. Herewith please find a brief journal of my plainly apparent work, with an accurate bill of expenses incurred. Statement. Instituted proceedings through the district attorney of Otsego county, against the following persons for violation of chapter 534, section 23: John Davis, Peter Hilsinger, and William Hilsinger, of the town of Oneonta, which are now pending. On October 15th I destroyed one large fish-wier in the Susquehanna, three miles above Oneonta; also another on the Charlotte creek, four miles from where it empties into the Susquehanna. On the 13th of November I found two others at Wells' Bridge; I succeeded in destroying one, but as the river was very high I notified the party upon whose premises it was that they must not allow it to remain, and I found it had disappeared when I next visited the location. On the 25th I visited New York city, and reported glaring violations of the game laws there in the markets to the local authorities, who gave the matter their attention. In regard to suggestions which your honorable body requires, permit me to say that the game laws are in many respects faulty and confusing, and especially demand amendment and improvement in relation to the increase of fish in the numerous streams of the State. Let me give an instance. The law demands that no refuse or deleterious substance or liquid be emptied into any of the creeks, brooks or rivers from any mill or factory. This is very well, but subsequent to this section it is said, "unless the stream furnishes the motive power of the industry." This may not be the exact phraseology, but it is the drift of its meaning. As nearly all mills, factories, etc., located on the side of running waters gain their motive power therefrom, it will be readily observed that the one important section of the law is a dead letter. During a visit to Oak Orchard creek, near Medina, in an official capacity, I found the waters almost white, caused by the dumping of the refuse into the stream from mills thereon. It was poison for the fish, and the creek which at one time, I am informed, was prolific of the finest of the finny tribe, was then well nigh barren. Í attempted a reform, but was met at the outset by the law which made me powerless. I have no doubt there are many streams in the State the fish of which are being poisoned at an alarming rate in the manner I suggest. I am exceeding glad, therefore, of the opportunity to present this important fact to your honorable body, and have no doubt you will readily see the necessity of properly ameuding the game law. All of which is respectfully submitted. REPORT OF JOHN H. JESSUP. To the Senate of the State of New York: In pursuance of resolution passed by your honorable body March 15, 1881, of which a copy has been served on me, I, John H. Jessup, one of the fish and game protectors appointed for the State of New York, do respectfully report that the whole amount of money received by me for expenses, etc., during the time I have held said office, from March 1, 1881, to August 4, 1881, is $114.81. The dates and places of such expenditure by me are as follows: |