Mr. GOTTSCHALK. We have had conversations with the Wisconsin Conservation Department in a series of meetings, and I would have to tell you that we have not concluded finally as to the method that will be employed to try to achieve the 14,000 quota limit.

A number of ways have been suggested, which I can go into, or have Mr. Crissey or Mr. Studhohlme report here to the committee.

I doubt if any of them can be effectively ultilized so that we will come up exactly with 14,000 birds.

Let me tell you that on the last 2 days of shooting at Horicon Marsh last year, the kill in the quota zone exceeded 2,000 birds per day, so that you can see that with a 14,000 bird quota for the State, it is not a simple problem to try to figure out in advance how you are going to stop hunting at this particular time.

This is subject to further discussion with Mr. Voigt, the director of the Wisconsin Conservation Department, and his staff and our staff, and we are trying to work with them in establishing a reasonable approach to this problem.

Mr. DOWNING. Does the State of Wisconsin agree with you on the limit of 14,000?

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. I think the State of Wisconsin would agree on the limit of 14,000 in the quota zone, but not statewide. The State feels that this would inhibit goose shooting throughout the rest of the State, and we recognize that this is a problem.

In other words, if you kill 14,000 birds, which you could do in 7 days at Horicon, it would wipe out goose hunting in the rest of the State. Mr. DOWNING. How about my State and Mr. Lennon's State of North Carolina? What limit do you have down there?

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. You have no quota in North Carolina of the same type that is applied in this Mississippi Valley flock, Mr. Chair

man.

You had a season of 70 days last year, as I recall, and two birds per day, and four in possession, but there is no quota established.

Mr. DOWNING. Thank you very much, sír. You have helped the committee.

Is there additional testimony?

Mr. RACE. May I ask the gentleman a question?

Are you advocating a 70-day goose season for Wisconsin this year? Mr. GOTTSCHALK. The framework season for the Mississippi flyway will be a 70-day season, as I recall. I would have to doublecheck this specifically.

Again, I have to say that this is the season recommended. It is a 70-day season for the flyway as a whole.

Mr. RACE. As I understand in the Horicon Marsh area, hunters go in there. They buy a hunting license, and this is done by lottery. The hunters are not just allowed to go in there at random to hunt. There is a lottery of some kind, where they draw numbers, and so many can go in there each day.

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. That is correct, sir.

Mr. RACE. You said in the last 2 days there was a tremendous kill of some 2,000 a day. Now, did you leave a lot of people in this restricted area to hunt those 2 particular days, to get that many birds?

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. I must explain that on the Horicon Marsh, on the Horicon National Wildlife Refuge and the State areas, there is a

managed or controlled hunt, and it is necessary to have a special permit to get on these areas, but in the quota zone, which is substantially outside and larger than the Horicon National Wildlife Refuge and the State area, there is much hunting that takes place in private cornfields, so that the kill beyond that which was taken in the refuge itself by the men who had by lottery secured a permit to get on the refuge was made up on these adjoining farms.

This is where the bulk of that kill takes place.

Working with the State, we have I think established a reasonably good approach in that area, but the trouble comes in that, if the geese killed over the rest of the State are added to those in the Horicon area, which is a very large number, we are killing a very heavy fraction of the total Mississippi goose flock, and it is just a question of shall we allow this harvest to take place, and put the future of the flock in jeopardy.

Mr. RACE. Do you feel the flock is smaller this year than it was last year?

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. No, sir.

Mr. RACE. With the tremendous kill last year the flock is not smaller?

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. I will have to say that it is slightly larger than it was last year, as I recall the figure that I gave previously, and I think it is correct.

I personally sat in the 2-day meeting of the Canada Goose Committee of the Mississippi Flyway Council, including representatives of the Wisconsin department, Illinois, and Missouri, and the other States, and it was reported that the flock achieved 25,000 birds last year, total. Mr. RACE. Do you have any way, sir, of diverting these flocks and dispersing them so they all will not come in this one congested area? I understand that this is going to be tried this year.

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. Many things have been tried. I cannot be overly optimistic. In the past we have on occasion hazed geese by the use of light airplanes and driven them to other areas, but the problem of getting a Canada goose to change its habits is a real challenge to the technical capability of the people that have tried to do it.

We had a similar problem in California, as Mr. Reinecke may remember, some 20 years ago, when we had a vast population of ducks and geese, which were preying very heavily on the rice farms, and a large hazing program was developed. We had I don't know how many planes, we had firecrackers, and all sorts of devices for scaring them, and finally came to the conclusion that the only way to work out that problem was to supply supplementary forage for the birds.

Working with California, there have been created a number of areas along the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, which have reduced the depredation problem. There are also fewer birds, but we are providing feed that they formerly got off the farms.

Mr. RACE. They are still getting it off the farms. I inspected those areas last year, and they were cleaned out. In one there was 100 acres of corn, and it was stripped. There was not a kernel of corn on one stalk.

Do you think the Government should supplement these farmers for their losses in that area?

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. I do not believe that is a practical approach to the problem, sir. I do think we have an obligation to try to relieve

them of this damage by trying to get more of these birds out of there, and reduce the depredations in that way, if you see what I mean.

Mr. RACE. The State of Wisconsin has passed a bill to pay some of the farmers for the losses. I understand it is a very small appropriation, and it does not meet half of the demand there is for losses that have occurred in that particular area.

I personally think that, this being a Federal and Government haven over there for wildlife, the Government should go along with the State of Wisconsin and pay these farmers for their losses.

These losses are an act of God, but, if the Government would not be protecting our wildlife over there, the birds would not be destroying their crops.

I am considering in the near future introducing some legislation to help these farmers if that occurs again this year.

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. We are doing our best to alleviate the problem by reducing the size of the flock. We are on the horns of a dilemma, because this is almost as unpopular as the result of the depredations.

Mr. RACE. I understand that. I understand you are not raising feed for them, and expect to disperse them that way, by not raising enough food for the wildlife.

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. This is one of the techniques, sir.

Mr. RACE. I thank you.

Mr. PELLY. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. DOWNING. Mr. Pelly.

Mr. PELLY. Last year the great problem that was discussed was the mallard. I think we ought to be brought up to date on the results of the program to increase the mallard population. We have not come to that yet.

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. We would be very glad to report.

The 1965 breeding population, which we reported last year, Mr. Pelly, was 5,850,000. With the production which we had this year, and then, without getting into a lot of the numerical figures, subtracting from that the anticipated kill both in Canada and in the United States, and the mortality that otherwise occurs, produced a fall flight of approximately 1412 million birds.

Then subtracting from that the U.S. harvest, and the Canadian kill, et cetera, and other mortality, we find that we wound up this spring with a 1966 breeding population of 7,560,000 birds.

Mr. PELLY. What did you say you started with?

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. 5,850,000.

Mr. PELLY. That is a great percentage increase?

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. Percentagewise I think the figure was 29 percent. As you recall, we were shooting for 10 percent. We are gratified that it jumped more than we expected, because of weather conditions, and I think to some extent the fact that we had more breeders back on the breeding grounds this past spring, as a result of reducing the kill last year.

Mr. PELLY. Were the measures that were taken to reduce the kill the reduction in the bag limit and the number of days that hunting was allowed? Did that actually reduce the kill that you anticipated for mallards?

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. There was a reduction in the kill in all of the fly

way with the exception of the Pacific flyway. The Pacific flyway is unique in its reactions in waterfowl management.

Mr. PELLY. I know what you say, because I am from the Pacific flyway.

Mr. GOTTSCHALK. Yes, sir.

I don't mean by that peculiar. Unique perhaps would be a better word.

Mr. DOWNING. Counsel, do you have any questions at this time?
Mr. EVERETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Gottschalk, would you please supply data showing how you arrived at the 1966 breeding population for North American mallards? We would also like to have recommendations of the four flyway waterfowl councils and the 1966-67 waterfowl regulation frameworks. In addition, please supply the committee with a statement on the discrepancy between the forecasted 1965 mallard production rates of 1.3 immatures per adult and the post season analysis indicating a 1.6 ratio. Mr. GOTTSCHALK. We will be happy to submit this material for the record.

(The following material was subsequently supplied for the record:) 1965-66 population plot for North American mallards

A. 1965 breeding population__.

1965 May aerial surveys corrected for birds not recorded by aerial crews.

(=) percent summer mortality.

B. 1965 production ratio (immatures per adult in the prehunting season fall population)--

Wing collection data adjusted for relative vulnerability between adults and immatures from 1965 preseason banding data (adults were as likely to be taken as immatures during the 1965 season in the United States).

C. 1965 fall flight..

5, 850,000

5, 557, 500

1.6

14, 449, 500

Same as "D" times 1.333 to include crippling loss as 25 percent of the total.

F. Canadian kill:

Adults
Immatures

Total

Weighted distribution of recoveries from 1965 preseason banding applied to "E"-15 percent of adults and 34 percent of immatures were killed in Canada.

G. Total hunting kill in Canada and the United States"E" plus "F."

H. Other mortality.

Additional losses indicated to obtain "I" from "C" minus "G"-in this case it was 18 percent of the fall flight ("C"). I. 1966 breeding population----

1966 May aerial surveys corrected for birds not recorded by aerial crews.

214, 000 988, 000

1, 202, 000

4,332, 000

2,557, 500

7, 560, 000

ATLANTIC WATERFOWL COUNCIL, AUGUST 2-3, 1966

RESOLUTION

Whereas shooting hours for upland game in many states within the Atlantic Waterfowl Flyway have traditionally begun at one-half hour before sunrise, and Whereas attempts by the states to change their shooting hours simply for the purpose of coinciding with the waterfowl shooting hours have been markedly unsuccessful, and

Whereas the existing conflict in shooting hours for upland game and waterfowl has a marked effect on the morale of waterfowl hunters, reduces waterfowl hunting opportunity, and promotes a disregard for existing laws governing the hunting of waterfowl, and

Whereas the states exerting all possible enforcement and education effort are unable to adequately cope with the situation, and

Whereas the Atlantic Waterfowl Council, recognizing these problems, has repeatedly requested the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife to revise the waterfowl hunting regulations so as to permit shooting one-half hour before sunrise, and

Whereas the Bureau has consistently rejected this proposal without reasonable justification and without valid data as to any detrimental impact of an earlier opening hour on our waterfowl population.

Now therefore be it again resolved that the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife in its regulations for 1966-67 revise the waterfowl shooting hours to allow shooting to begin one-half hour before sunrise, prevailing time.

RESOLUTION

The objective of securing more equitable distribution of waterfowl hunting opportunity has been almost universally accepted and expressed. It is so stated in the Atlantic Flyway Management Plan and in the more recent Statement of Needs. Achievement of this goal is affected by numerous variables, both manmade and biological, including distribution of the birds, the people, actual and potential habitat, and the regulations. Biological studies are yielding results pertinent to this goal and we should also welcome experimental modifications of the regulations in a study of their effects upon hunting opportunity.

Whereas, the status of the scaup population seems to be in a very healthy condition (Atlantic Flyway 1966 "inventory" at about the 10-year average level but with "hundreds of thousands" of scaup and scoters not counted off the coast), and

Whereas, the breeding grounds of the scaup, especially of the greater, seem to be in good condition and highly productive, and

Whereas, the mortality suffered by these birds from hunting has been comparatively lower than for most species, and

Whereas, optimum hunting opportunity on scaup has not been provided under present regulations in large parts of the Flyway, and

Whereas, it is believed that greater opportunity in hunting these birds, at some discretion of the various states is justified.

Now, be it resolved, that the Atlantic Waterfowl Council recommends that the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, in its regulations for 1966-67, allow the states of the Atlantic Flyway the opportunity of a greater scaup harvest with the option of either (1) a bonus daily bag or (2) additional hunting days for "scaup-only" beyond the regular season, based on the following considerations: 1. States may select either a bonus daily bag for scaup within their regular season or additional scaup-only days after the regular season within the dates of the framework.

2. Portions of such states should be closed to this special scaup season, if in the opinion of the state and the Bureau any other species of waterfowl would be endangered.

3. Selection of a split season would not militate against the selection of additional scaup days, and there would be no penalty on the number of additional scaup-only days.

4. In the case of either a straight or split season, the additional scaup-only days would begin immediately after the close of the straight season or of either portion of the split. (This is to prevent any additional opening-day effects.)

69-049-66- -9