Table 1 Evolution of State Wildlife Management, 1700–2000
YearGame Laws AdoptedSpecialized Wildlife Law Enforcement PositionAgency OrganizationResident LicensesNonresident LicensesFunding
17003 (25% of colonies)Local authorities responsible for enforcement of game lawsState laws with weak local enforcement00None
175010 (76.9% of colonies)Local authorities (MA creates local deer wardens in 1739)System changes little until after 185000None
180013 (81.3% of states)Local authorities00None
185018 (58.15% of states)Primarily local authorities (2 more states create local wardens: NH fish wardens 1809, ME moose wardens 1852)00None (some wardens kept fines) (Warren 1997)
190048 (98% of states and territories)31 states (63% of total) develop warden positions at local or state level (compensation varies across states between salaries and piece rate)State legislatures oversee appointed state wardens who are responsible for local wardens5 (10%); MI and ND were the first in 18959 (18.4%); NJ was the first in 1873Limited (states allocated meager funds from general budget as they began to collect license fees)
195050 (100% of states and territories)50 (100%) have game wardensState legislatures control commissions who oversee agencies headed by paid administrator44 (89.8%)50 (100%)Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937 forces states to give full license fee to wildlife agencies
200050 (100% of states)State commissions are largely independent policy-making bodies that oversee bureaucratic agencies50 (100%)50 (100%)Modern agencies funded by license fees, federal monies, tax checkoffs, dedicated taxes, and other special programs
  • Source:Tober (1981); Lueck and Parker (2022).