Migratory Birds Convention Act

By the end of the 19th century North Americans knew about the extinction of the great auk, passenger pigeon, and Labrador duck. They were concerned by the dramatic decline of populations of trumpeter swan, whooping crane, and wood duck, and the rapid disappearance of the Eskimo curlew. Farmers saw a surprising decline in numbers of songbirds, caused by hunting and the loss of habitat as swamps and marshes were filled in. Women activists from the Audubon Society criticized the use of plumage on women's hats, which were advertised in the 1902 Eaton's catalogue. State and provincial officials found themselves powerless to protect birds who left their jurisdiction on the great spring and fall migration flyways.

By 1913 the debate in the United States inspired officials in Ottawa. They knew the federal government had no constitutional jurisdiction over birds, but it did have the power to make treaties. Dominion biologist Maxwell Graham calculated the tremendous cost to agriculture of crops lost to insects, because of the loss of insectivorous songbirds. Supported by this evidence and Canada's Commission on Conservation, Dominion Parks Commissioner James Harkin met with provincial and US counterparts to draft a treaty to protect migratory birds. It received final assent in 1917. Entomologist Gordon Hewitt claimed it protected a thousand species. However, problems emerged as the dates in the treaty denied spring hunting in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. Relations between Ottawa and the Maritimes remained cool and these provinces left enforcement to Ottawa. British Columbia and then other provinces did match their legislation to meet the treaty's terms. Forgotten, or perhaps deliberately ignored, Aboriginal bird-hunters found their traditional seasonal activity had been made illegal. The treaty was upheld against early constitutional challenges in both nations as a necessary extension of federal powers for the common good.