Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 6 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
For years we have been asked why some migratory game bird cases were taken to federal courts while others went to state courts. Because we had no firm policy, there was no justifiable reason for such actions. More than a year ago game wardens west of 1-95 were instructed to take all migratory game bird cases to state courts. This has never been questioned and it has caused no problems. The decision was made this year to expand the policy statewide.
Attempts have been made in the press to link this action with the Frank Everest case. There is absolutely no connection. This case was initiated by federal personnel and they requested our assistance. Since the case was handled by federal people it was taken to'federal court, which conforms with our existing policy. 1
To further clarify this policy, most federal violations are also state violations. Under our policy these will be brought to state courts. This results in less court time for our wardens, meaning more time in the field; and any fines assessed will return to the State Literary Fund and not the federal government. Some cases, such as waterfowl stamp, Black Bass Act, and Lacey Act violations, are purely federal in nature
and will be brou^it to federal court.
R.H. CRpSS.JR.
ExecutiveiDirector
85.5%