38 State Papers and Addresses

to lay the whole matter before such a body of intelligent, impartial men as
comprised Dr. Bowman's Commission, with the hope that out of the welter of
conflicting ideas and suggestions, some plan might be evolved that would not
only be desirable in itself, but that would reconcile the many conflicting view-
points, and ideas.

This Commission, as you know, in its report concerning the problems of
Conservation dealt with principles and a proposed administrative structure. But
it is the members of the Legislature and I who must find the ways and means
of giving effect to those principles and decide on the successive steps that
must be or can be taken to do so.

A Bill embodying these recommendations of the Bowman Commission was
prepared and submitted to the Legislature while other measures sponsored by
the Outdoor Life Association and other groups were, also, offered embodying
their respective ideas of the character of legislation needed. It soon became
apparent to me and to the leaders and members of the two legislative branches
that it would be impossible to secure the passage of a bill embodying all of
the recommendations of the Bowman Commission.

Knowing from experience how attempts to put through constructive con-
servation in past Legislatures had bogged down because of opposition from
one group or another, I came to the conclusion that to save the whole idea of
Conservation for this session, it was necessary to forsake this highly desirable
measure, which had little chance for passage, and to substitute a measure
that would embody the essentials of the discarded bill, but that would eliminate
such features as would likely prevent its passage.

I thereupon called into consultation many persons from throughout the
State who by experience were familiar with the many problems of Conserva-
tion and I, also, conferred with officials of the United States Bureau of Fish-
eries and others having scientific knowledge of the problem. As a result of
these consultations, I suggested a compromise plan and it is now pending in
the Legislature. The program is entirely consistent with my previous state-
ments about Conservation and my campaign pledges on the subject, as is
indicated by my letter of April 193& which I have quoted.

The steps in the conservation program which I propose are as follows:

It establishes two separate departments, namely, one devoted to the com-
mercial fisheries and the other to inland fisheries and upland game, each with
a separate head. The establishment of these two separate Commissions is in
keeping with action in many other states in dealing with their conservation
problems. Among the states having separate commissions or departments for
the handling of commercial and non-commercial fisheries are Maine, Con-
necticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Virginia and South Carolina. Not
only have these separate commissions been in existence in other States but the
results which they have obtained have been so satisfactory that they would
not consider returning to the antiquated system we now have in Maryland and
under which our sea-food industry has been so unsatisfactorily handled.

Even the Federal Government's conservation activities are separated. Fish-
eries are under the Department of Commerce, Game and Wild Life are under
the Department of Agriculture, National Parks are under the Department of
Interior. Yet the work of these agencies is none the less effective by reason
of the separation and where their activities overlap there is close cooperation.