December 1, 1946 
Midwest Wildlife Conference 
0DMTUPES OF A CONSERVATION COMMISSIOMR 
Aldo Leopold 
After helping to set up several Commissions and serving on one, I have 
come to two conclusions. 
The first is that a good Commission can prevent the conservation program

from falling below the general level of popular ethics and intelligence.

The second is that no Commission can raise its program much above that 
level, except in matters to which the public is indifferent. Where the public

has feelings, traditions, or prejudices, a Commission mast drag its public

along behind it like a balky mule, but with this difference: the public,
unlike 
the mule, kicks both fore and aft. 
An issue may be so clear in outline, so inevitable in logic, so imperative

in need, and so universal in importance as to command immediate support from

any reasonable person. Yet that collective person, the public, may take a

decade to see the argument, and another to acquiesce in an effective program.

The Migratory Bird Law was such an issue. A handful of national leaders 
had to drag the mule from 1993, when the first state prohibited spring shooting,

until 1916, when the federal law was finally anchored to the Canadian Treaty,

a total span of 23 years. 
One hears much nowadays about public relations experts who know how to 
talk gently to the mule; to beguile him into speedier thinking. If there
be 
even one such, I invite him to move to Wisconsin. We will turn our pockets

inside out, and give him our shirt besides. 
This public we are talking about consists of three groups' Group 1 is 
the largest; it is indifferent to conservation questions.  Group 2 is the
smallest;