Munitions Board. Two years ago the War Production Board was willing to give us more than the Munitions Board felt they could release so I consider that we have had very good cooperation from them. While I asked for ammunition and made the best case I could, I certainly did not want any supplies granted that would interfere with supplying the armed forces.

Mr. ANGELL. I do not think the hunters would either.

Dr. GABRIELSON. No; neither do I and in making the best case we could we told the Board that we wanted every pound of material we could get without interfering with the essential war program, so they understood us perfectly.

The CHAIRMAN. But they have been up with the small arms program for a year, and the production for this year did not interfere a bit. The difficulty was not with the military authorities at all; it was with the civilian use of copper.

Dr. GABRIELSON. That was true 2 years ago.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Dr. GABRIELSON. There are one or two other things that I would like to bring to the attention of the committee. We have made a very complete report on our wildlife requirement program but there are some things that I would like to emphasize.

The wildlife research program is, of course, the very basis of everything that we do. The studies on the waterfowl population on which we based our regulations, are a part of that program. Much of the wildlife work that is being done by the Soil Conservation Service, the Forest Service, Park Service, Grazing Service, and other public land managing agencies, is based on the research studies of the Fish and Wildlife Service. Unfortunately, the research group is now in the worst shape of any in the Service. It was never a big division and there are 32 men from the wildlife research staff now in the armed forces. The law requires that these men be given their jobs again when they return but the appropriations of this division have been cut so severely-more than they have in any other branch of the Service that providing funds to merely pay the salaries of these. returning servicemen is a major problem. I have met these cuts in appropriations largely by not filling the jobs of the men who went into the armed services. Practically all the men left are those who cannot qualify for military service for physical reasons or because of age. They are extremely valuable men and I cannot afford to lose them and I also need these younger men who are being released from the Army and the Navy, but from the present state of our finances we can hardly take many of them. I am asking for some increases next year so that they can be restored to duty. They are all men who have been trained especially for our work.

Mr. ANGELL. You mean put them back when they are released from the service?

Dr. GABRIELSON. Yes; when they are released from the armed services. Some of them are coming back now. One of them was in the office 2 or 3 days ago, and I do not now know where I am going to find the money to put him back to work, yet under the law I am supposed to put him back. As I said, these men have trained especially for this work; they furnish the basis for the whole wildlife program; and I think it would be a great and costly mistake if, to save a few thousand dollars, we were unable to utilize their talents in a

field where the need is great and for which they are fitted. For example, we are called upon more and more every day to study the probable effects of flood-control, irrigation, and navigation programs. These are just the type of men who can make such studies. The entire national wildlife conservation program is based on the work that such men do and they should certainly be returned to their jobs. Mr. ANGELL. Have you discussed the problem with the Bureau of the Budget?

Dr. GABRIELSON. Yes, sir; only last week.

Mr. ANGELL. What did the Bureau say?

Dr. GABRIELSON. I do not have their decision. They held our hearings last week. I told them the story I am now telling you. It would be one of the most short-sighted things that this Government could do if it did not take these men back who are trained for this work, and who can furnish the factual and scientific basis for the postwar period, when we know that we are going to have a tremendously increased demand for hunting and fishing. Certainly the letters I get from the boys in the service indicate that. I get them from men all over the world asking me how things are coming along. I do not know how they found out so quickly about this year's waterfowl regulations, but I have had letters from men in New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, the Marianas, Europe, India, Iran, and other theaters, inquiring if Í am sure that the regulations are not so liberal that there will be no waterfowl for them to hunt when they come back. They show plainly that they are very much interested and I am quit sure that we are going to have a big problem to meet when peace finally comes. Mr. COLE. Do you answer all of them?

Dr. GABRIELSON. Yes; I answer all of them addressed to me. Mr. ANGELL. It would certainly come with poor grace if the Government refused to take these men back when industry is required to take them back.

Dr. GABRIELSON. I wholeheartedly agree but I have to have some money to put them back. We have met the past cuts by failing to put men in the places of the men who are in the armed services. Now, with these men returning to us, I must ask that funds also be returned A large number of these younger men were Reserve officers and went in early. Many had taken Reserve officers' training courses when they were in college.

to us.

I want to call your attention to one other thing, which I think will interest you. This is the program for controlling the water chestnut on the Potomac River which has very largely destroyed duck food and the fishing grounds for bass. It also has interfered with navigation.

Mr. ANGELL. That is that heavy growth out here in the Potomac? Dr. GABRIELSON. Yes; out in the river. Eight thousand acres of water chestnut have been mowed this year by the Army engineers. Our biologists have been working with them and we think we have gone a long ways toward controlling it.

Mr. ANGELL. Does it grow right back like grass when you mow it? Dr. GABRIELSON. It is an annual, and it now has been mowed 2 years in succession. This operation has to be followed up by some hand work to get the scattered plants that cannot be cut with the mower. If this work is followed through I think that we can finally get rid of this pest.

་

I believe the balance of the program is fully outlined in my prepared statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions? If not, Doctor, we want to thank you for your very fine report and again commend you for the work you are doing and the plans you are making to have something for these boys now overseas to come back to.

Mr. COLE. How is it working out, Doctor, having your office located in Chicago?

Dr. GABRIELSON. It is increasing the cost of operation and certainly cutting our efficiency.

Mr. COLE. To what extent is it increasing the cost?

Dr. GABRIELSON. To a very considerable extent. For example, there is a heavy item of travel back and forth between here and Chicago. Every time I go out there either this committee or some other calls me back or I am called back by the Secretary and, in addition, there is also constant necessary travel back and forth of division chiefs and other administrative officers.

Mr. COLE. On the other hand your duties require you to travel further to the westward than Chicago?

Dr. GABRIELSON. During the war period I have been commuting pretty much between here and Chicago.

Mr. COLE. Between Washington and Chicago?

Dr. GABRIELSON. Yes; and there is also a heavy cost of telegraph and telephone communication, and certainly a lack of efficiency. We formerly were proud of the fact that when a Congressman called us and wanted some information we could get it for him within 24 hours, but we cannot do it any more.

I do not care where we are, but certainly we should be where the policy-making officials of our own department and other departments are located. I find it very inconvenient to be separated by a thousand miles from the Secretary's office. It is equally inconvenient and inefficient to be separated from the many other Government agencies with whom we have constant dealings.

Mr. ANGELL. What percentage of your time do you spend here in Washington?

Dr. GABRIELSON. I am spending probably 75 percent of my time here because of the fishery coordination work.

Mr. ANGELL. What about the other top men on your staff?

Dr. GABRIELSON. One assistant director stays in Chicago most of the time, and one spends most of his time here.

Mr. ANGELL. Do you have an office here?

Dr. GABRIELSON. We have only a small liaison office here. There is also the fishery coordination office which is purely a war staff and will be dispersed as soon as the necessity for it is over.

The CHAIRMAN. Before the committee recesses we might have just a word from Mr. Frederick C. Lincoln, who is in charge of migratory bird investigations of the Fish and Wildlife Service. Mr. Lincoln, would you like to supplement briefly what Dr. Gabrielson has said about the migratory bird situation?

STATEMENT OF FREDERICK C. LINCOLN, IN CHARGE OF MIGRATORY BIRD INVESTIGATIONS, DIVISION OF WILDLIFE RESEARCH, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Mr. LINCOLN. Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, my statement can be brief, because after listening to Dr. Gabrielson I take some pride in that I have been able to see that our director is so well informed on the migratory game birds.

I have here a recently issued report of our investigations on migratory birds during the past year, and since it has been customary for this committee to include this report in its hearings, I will submit this for your consideration.

The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to have you do so. (The report referred to is as follows:)

STATUS OF MIGRATORY GAME BIRDS: 1943-44

Prepared in the Section of Migratory Bird Investigations Division of Wildlife Research, Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Department of the Interior

INTRODUCTION

The story of the conservation and restoration of the migratory game birds of North America, unfolded during the past decade, should convince the most skeptical that it is possible "to eat your cake and have it too," especially when the "cake" is a living, reproducing thing like a bird population. From an all-time low in the early thirties the waterfowl have increased almost to the full carrying capacity of the environment in the early forties. In recent, wartime years, fewer hunters, and a shortage of ammunition and of transportation facilities, hindered the taking of a normal harvest and permitted local overpopulations to develop, which have at times, severely damaged agricultural crops and made control operations necessary.

Such troublesome concentrations bring problems to administrative officers, but to sportsmen, on both the home and the battle fronts, the abundance of ducks and geese brings dreams of relaxation and pleasure in the field during the peaceful days to come.

This leaflet contains a brief account of the results of the migratory game bird investigations conducted by the Fish and Wildlife Service from the January inventory of 1943 through that of 1944.

PART 1. MIGRATORY WATERFOWL

SPRING MIGRATION

According to the migratory game bird inventory conducted in January 1943, there were about 119,600,000 ducks, geese, and coots on the North American Continent. Migratory studies were somewhat hampered because many former observers are now in the armed forces or engaged in war industries. Nevertheless, enough reports on the 1943 spring movement were received to make possible a reasonably satisfactory comparative analysis, particularly when supplemented by the special reports of the flyway biologists and other Service field personnel.

Of 205 observers, 116 reported an increase in the numbers of waterfowl in general over those of the preceding spring, 56 could see no change, and 33 believed there was a decrease. On an analysis by species, the pintail showed the largest gain, there being 115 reports of increase, 70 of no change, and only 20 of decrease. Because the migratory-bird regulations for 1944-45 permit the inclusion of one wood duck in the daily bag and the possession limits, that species is being closely watched. The 1943 spring reports indicated little change in its status.

Both the canvasback and the redhead ducks registered small gains, but the ruddy duck showed a "leveling off" tendency as to numbers. Strangely enough the populations of all species of geese were somewhat reduced, although in most cases the figures were only slightly below those of 1942, and reports of reductions were largely offset by those of "no change."

""

The Mississippi flyway biologist, who during the winter had been working in the lower Mississippi valley and along the Gulf coast, followed the birds on their northward flight as far as western Minnesota. His report on the status of the different species in that flyway was as follows:

Snow goose-- ·

White-fronted goose.
Canada goose----

Attention is called to the "large decrease" reported for the pintail. This decrease was noted by other observers in the Mississippi flyway, but in the Central and Pacific flyways, the pintail was the most abundant species and showed the greatest increase over the preceding inventory.

Canada.

BREEDING-GROUND SURVEYS

For the seventh consecutive year a survey was made of the waterfowl breeding grounds in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island. Of these three Provinces, New Brunswick probably produces more ducks than the other two, the Portobello Creek section being the most important breeding ground. This and other good breeding areas in the three Provinces were closely observed. Climatic conditions were more favorable to waterfowl than in 1942, and large numbers of young were raised. Black ducks were most abundant and were found throughout the region. Ring-necked ducks were increasing steadily, however, and had become almost as numerous as the black ducks. Both the greenwinged and the blue-winged teals were common, and goldeneyes, wood ducks, and pintails were plentiful. The pintail is steadily increasing in numbers in New Brunswick, but definite breeding records are still lacking in the other two Provinces. Canada geese are believed to nest in one or two areas but they have not been found in numbers during the nesting season.

Investigations were made on the marshes bordering James Bay. Although believed to be an important breeding ground for Canada geese, little was known of the waterfowl population of the region. During the course of a 6-weeks' study much valuable information was obtained. In the marshes along the south coast it was found that the numbers of breeding ducks were not as great as those on the prairies of western Canada. The breeding population was estimated at 6,000 ducks, of which 56 percent were black ducks, 19 percent were pintails, 11 percent were green-winged teals, 7 percent were baldpates, 2 percent were mallards, and the remaining 5 percent included American and red-breasted mergansers, ringnecked ducks, and American goldeneyes.

Seven broods of black ducks averaged 7 young each, and two broods of greenwinged teals averaged 9 each. The Canadian Government has established two refuges totaling about 160 square miles in that area. The taking of waterfowl in the James Bay region is strictly regulated, and the kill by natives is not excessive.

Much important information on waterfowl conditions in Manitoba and Saskatchewan was contained in reports of the chief Dominion migratory bird officer of the Prairie Provinces furnished the Fish and Wildlife Service by the national parks bureau, at Ottawa, and in accounts of the Service's biologist detailed to that region. In the great Netley Marches in Manitoba high water washed out the early nests, and a later flood thwarted attempts at nesting. In the Delta marshes, however, where no adverse conditions prevailed, there was a good hatch of redheads, canvasbacks, blue-winged teals, lesser scaups, and shovelers. Also offsetting the losses on the Netley Marshes were gains in the Whitewater Marsh, Oak Lake, and the entire pothole county of the southern and western parts of the Province, where increases in numbers were recorded for all species of waterfowl except the ruddy duck, bufflehead, and redhead. In the Saskatchewan