This is a modern-English version of Our Vanishing Wild Life: Its Extermination and Preservation, originally written by Hornaday, William T. (William Temple). It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.


OUR VANISHING
WILD LIFE
ITS
EXTERMINATION AND PRESERVATION




BY
WILLIAM T. HORNADAY, Sc.D.
DIRECTOR OF THE NEW YORK ZOOLOGICAL PARK;
AUTHOR OF "THE AMERICAN NATURAL HISTORY";
EX-PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN BISON SOCIETY




WITH MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS




"Hew to the line! Let the chips fall where they will."—Old Exhortation.

"Hew to the line! Let the chips fall where they may."—Old Exhortation.


"Nothing extenuate, nor set down aught in malice."—Othello.

"Don't make excuses, and don't say anything out of spite."—Othello.





NEW YORK
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
1913

Copyright, 1913, by

Copyright, 1913, by

WILLIAM T. HORNADAY

WILLIAM T. HORNADAY

First Publication, Jan, 1913

First Published, Jan 1913





SPECIAL NOTICE

For the benefit of the cause that this book represents, the author freely extends to all periodicals and lecturers the privilege of reproducing any of the maps and illustrations in this volume except the bird portraits, the white-tailed deer and antelope, and the maps and pictures specially copyrighted by other persons, and so recorded. This privilege does not cover reproductions in books, without special permission.

For the sake of the cause this book supports, the author is happy to allow all magazines and speakers to reproduce any of the maps and illustrations in this volume, except for the bird portraits, the white-tailed deer and antelope, and the maps and images that are specifically copyrighted by other individuals, as noted. This permission does not include reproductions in books, which require special authorization.


TO

TO

William Dutcher

William Dutcher

FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT OF THE
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF AUDUBON SOCIETIES, AND
LIFE-LONG CHAMPION OF AMERICAN BIRDS
THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED BY
A SINCERE ADMIRER

FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT OF THE
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF AUDUBON SOCIETIES, AND
LIFE-LONG CHAMPION OF AMERICAN BIRDS
THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED BY
A SINCERE ADMIRER

"I drink to him, he is not here,
Yet I would guard his glory;
A knight without reproach or fear

Should live in song and story."
—Walsh.

I lift my glass to him, even though he’s not here,
I still want to protect his honor;
A knight without blame or fear.

"Should be remembered in songs and stories."
—Walsh.


[Page vii]
FOREWORD

The preservation of animal and plant life, and of the general beauty of Nature, is one of the foremost duties of the men and women of to-day. It is an imperative duty, because it must be performed at once, for otherwise it will be too late. Every possible means of preservation,—sentimental, educational and legislative,—must be employed.

The preservation of animal and plant life, and the overall beauty of Nature, is one of the top responsibilities of people today. It’s an urgent duty that needs to be acted on immediately, or it will be too late. Every possible method of preservation—emotional, educational, and legal—must be utilized.

The present warning issues with no uncertain sound, because this great battle for preservation and conservation cannot be won by gentle tones, nor by appeals to the aesthetic instincts of those who have no sense of beauty, or enjoyment of Nature. It is necessary to sound a loud alarm, to present the facts in very strong language, backed up by irrefutable statistics and by photographs which tell no lies, to establish the law and enforce it if needs be with a bludgeon.

The current warning is clear and direct, because this major fight for preservation and conservation can't be won with soft words or by appealing to the aesthetic senses of those who don't appreciate beauty or nature. We need to raise a loud alarm, present the facts in strong terms, supported by undeniable statistics and photographs that tell the truth, to establish the law and enforce it if necessary with force.

This book is such an alarm call. Its forceful pages remind me of the sounding of the great bells in the watch-towers of the cities of the Middle Ages which called the citizens to arms to protect their homes, their liberties and their happiness. It is undeniable that the welfare and happiness of our own and of all future generations of Americans are at stake in this battle for the preservation of Nature against the selfishness, the ignorance, or the cruelty of her destroyers.

This book is a wake-up call. Its powerful pages remind me of the loud bells in the watchtowers of medieval cities that summoned citizens to defend their homes, freedoms, and happiness. It's clear that the well-being and happiness of our generation and all future generations of Americans are on the line in this fight to protect Nature from the selfishness, ignorance, or cruelty of those who would destroy it.

We no longer destroy great works of art. They are treasured, and regarded as of priceless value; but we have yet to attain the state of civilization where the destruction of a glorious work of Nature, whether it be a cliff, a forest, or a species of mammal or bird, is regarded with equal abhorrence. The whole earth is a poorer place to live in when a colony of exquisite egrets or birds of paradise is destroyed in order that the plumes may decorate the hat of some lady of fashion, and ultimately find their way into the rubbish heap. The people of all the New England States are poorer when the ignorant whites, foreigners, or negroes of our southern states destroy the robins and other song birds of the North for a mess of pottage.

We no longer destroy great works of art. They are valued and seen as priceless; however, we still haven't reached a level of civilization where the destruction of a beautiful part of nature, whether it's a cliff, a forest, or a species of mammal or bird, is viewed with the same disgust. The whole planet is a worse place to live when a colony of stunning egrets or paradise birds is wiped out just so their feathers can decorate some fashionable lady's hat, only to end up in the trash later. Everyone in the New England states suffers when the ignorant whites, foreigners, or Black people from our southern states kill robins and other songbirds from the North for a quick meal.

Travels through Europe, as well as over a large part of the North American continent, have convinced me that nowhere is Nature being destroyed so rapidly as in the United States. Except within our conservation areas, an earthly paradise is being turned into an earthly hades; and it is not savages nor primitive men who are doing this, but men and women who boast of their civilization. Air and water are polluted, rivers and streams serve as sewers and dumping grounds, forests are swept away and fishes are driven from the streams. Many birds are becoming extinct, and certain mammals are on the verge of [Page viii] extermination. Vulgar advertisements hide the landscape, and in all that disfigures the wonderful heritage of the beauty of Nature to-day, we Americans are in the lead.

Travels through Europe and much of North America have shown me that nowhere is nature being destroyed as quickly as in the United States. Outside of our conservation areas, a paradise on earth is being turned into a wasteland; and it’s not primitive people who are doing this, but men and women who take pride in their civilization. Air and water are polluted, rivers and streams are used as sewers and dumping grounds, forests are cleared, and fish are driven from the waters. Many bird species are disappearing, and certain mammals are on the brink of [Page viii] extinction. Crude advertisements clutter the landscape, and in everything that mars the incredible beauty of nature today, we Americans are setting the trend.

Fortunately the tide of destruction is ebbing, and the tide of conservation is coming in. Americans are practical. Like all other northern peoples, they love money and will sacrifice much for it, but they are also full of idealism, as well as of moral and spiritual energy. The influence of the splendid body of Americans and Canadians who have turned their best forces of mind and language into literature and into political power for the conservation movement, is becoming stronger every day. Yet we are far from the point where the momentum of conservation is strong enough to arrest and roll back the tide of destruction; and this is especially true with regard to our fast vanishing animal life.

Fortunately, the wave of destruction is slowing down, and the wave of conservation is gaining ground. Americans are practical. Like all other northern peoples, they love money and will give up a lot for it, but they are also filled with idealism and moral and spiritual energy. The impact of the impressive group of Americans and Canadians who have dedicated their best ideas and words to literature and political power for the conservation movement is growing stronger every day. However, we are still far from having a strong enough momentum in conservation to stop and reverse the wave of destruction, especially when it comes to our rapidly disappearing animal life.

The facts and figures set forth in this volume will astonish all those lovers of Nature and friends of the animal world who are living in a false or imaginary sense of security. The logic of these facts is inexorable. As regards our birds and mammals, the failures of supposed protection in America—under a system of free shooting—are so glaring that we are confident this exposure will lead to sweeping reforms. The author of this work is no amateur in the field of wild-life protection. His ideas concerning methods of reform are drawn from long and successful experience. The states which are still behind in this movement may well give serious heed to his summons, and pass the new laws that are so urgently demanded to save the vanishing remnant.

The facts and figures presented in this book will amaze everyone who loves nature and cares about the animal world and is living in a false sense of security. The logic behind these facts is undeniable. When it comes to our birds and mammals, the failures of the supposed protection in America—under a system of unrestricted hunting—are so obvious that we believe this revelation will lead to significant reforms. The author of this work is not an amateur in wildlife protection. His ideas about reform methods come from extensive and successful experience. The states that are lagging behind in this movement should seriously consider his call to action and pass the new laws that are urgently needed to save the dwindling population.

The New York Zoological Society, which is cooperating with many other organizations in this great movement, sends forth this work in the belief that there is no one who is more ardently devoted to the great cause or rendering more effective service in it than William T. Hornaday. We believe that this is a great book, destined to exert a world-wide influence, to be translated into other languages, and to arouse the defenders and lovers of our vanishing animal life before it is too late.

The New York Zoological Society, working with many other organizations in this important movement, presents this work with the belief that no one is more passionately dedicated to this cause or providing more valuable service than William T. Hornaday. We believe this is a significant book, likely to have a global impact, be translated into other languages, and inspire those who defend and love our endangered wildlife before it's too late.

HENRY FAIRFIELD OSBORN,

HENRY FAIRFIELD OSBORN,

10 December, 1912.

December 10, 1912.

President of the New York Zoological Society

President of the New York Zoological Society


[Page ix]
PREFACE

The writing of this book has taught me many things. Beyond question, we are exterminating our finest species of mammals, birds and fishes according to law!

The writing of this book has taught me many things. Without a doubt, we are wiping out our best species of mammals, birds, and fish according to law!

I am appalled by the mass of evidence proving that throughout the entire United States and Canada, in every state and province, the existing legal system for the preservation of wild life is fatally defective. There is not a single state in our country from which the killable game is not being rapidly and persistently shot to death, legally or illegally, very much more rapidly than it is breeding, with extermination for the most of it close in sight. This statement is not open to argument; for millions of men know that it is literally true. We are living in a fool's paradise.

I am shocked by the overwhelming evidence showing that across the entire United States and Canada, in every state and province, the current legal system for wildlife protection is seriously flawed. There isn’t a single state in our country where the huntable game isn’t being rapidly and continuously killed, both legally and illegally, much faster than it can reproduce, and extinction for many species is looming. This statement is beyond debate; millions of people know it’s true. We are living in a fool’s paradise.

The rage for wild-life slaughter is far more prevalent to-day throughout the world than it was in 1872, when the buffalo butchers paved the prairies of Texas and Colorado with festering carcasses. From one end of our continent to the other, there is a restless, resistless desire to "kill, kill!"

The rage for wildlife slaughter is far more common today around the world than it was in 1872, when the buffalo hunters covered the plains of Texas and Colorado with rotting bodies. From one end of our continent to the other, there is an unending desire to "kill, kill!"

I have been shocked by the accumulation of evidence showing that all over our country and Canada fully nine-tenths of our protective laws have practically been dictated by the killers of the game, and that in all save a very few instances the hunters have been exceedingly careful to provide "open seasons" for slaughter, as long as any game remains to kill!

I have been shocked by the overwhelming evidence showing that across our country and Canada, nearly 90% of our protective laws have essentially been dictated by those who kill game, and that in almost all cases, hunters have been extremely careful to set "open seasons" for slaughter as long as there is any game left to hunt!

And yet, the game of North America does not belong wholly and exclusively to the men who kill! The other ninety-seven per cent of the People have vested rights in it, far exceeding those of the three per cent. Posterity has claims upon it that no honest man can ignore.

And yet, the game of North America isn’t just for the men who hunt! The other ninety-seven percent of the people have rights in it that far exceed those of the three percent. Future generations have claims on it that no honest person can overlook.

I am now going to ask both the true sportsman and the people who do not kill wild things to awake, and do their plain duty in protecting and preserving the game and other wild life which belongs partly to us, but chiefly to those who come after us. Can they be aroused, before it is too late?

I’m now going to ask both real sports enthusiasts and those who don't hunt wild animals to wake up and do their responsibility in protecting and preserving the game and other wildlife that belongs partly to us, but mostly to future generations. Can they be motivated before it’s too late?

The time to discuss tiresome academic theories regarding "bag limits" and different "open seasons" as being sufficient to preserve the game, has gone by! We have reached the point where the alternatives are long closed seasons or a gameless continent; and we must choose one or the other, speedily. A continent without wild life is like a forest with no leaves on the trees.

The time to go over boring academic theories about "bag limits" and various "open seasons" being enough to protect wildlife is over! We've reached a point where the options are long closed seasons or a continent without game; and we need to decide quickly. A continent without wildlife is like a forest without leaves on the trees.

The great increase in the slaughter of song birds for food, by the negroes and poor whites of the South, has become an unbearable scourge to our migratory birds,—the very birds on which farmers north and south depend for protection from the insect hordes,—the very birds that are most near and dear to the people of the North. Song-bird slaughter is growing and spreading, with the decrease of the game birds! It is a matter that requires instant attention and stern repression. At the present moment it seems that the only remedy lies in federal protection for all migratory birds,—because so many states will not do their duty.

The significant rise in the killing of songbirds for food by the Black community and poor white people in the South has become an unbearable threat to our migratory birds—these are the very birds that farmers in both the North and South rely on for protection against insect infestations—the same birds that mean so much to the people in the North. The slaughter of songbirds is increasing and spreading, coinciding with the decline of game birds! This situation demands immediate attention and strict measures. Right now, it seems that the only solution is federal protection for all migratory birds—because so many states refuse to take responsibility.

We are weary of witnessing the greed, selfishness and cruelty of "civilized" man toward the wild creatures of the earth. We are sick of tales of slaughter and pictures of carnage. It is time for a sweeping Reformation; and that is precisely what we now demand.

We are tired of seeing the greed, selfishness, and cruelty of "civilized" humans toward the wild animals on this planet. We're fed up with stories of slaughter and images of bloodshed. It's time for a major change, and that's exactly what we're calling for now.

I have been a sportsman myself; but times have changed, and we must change also. When game was plentiful, I believed that it was right for men and boys to kill a limited amount of it for sport and for the table. But the old basis has been swept away by an Army of Destruction that now is almost beyond all control. We must awake, and arouse to the new situation, face it like men, and adjust our minds to the new conditions. The three million gunners of to-day must no longer expect or demand the same generous hunting privileges that were right for hunters fifty years ago, when game was fifty times as plentiful as it is now and there was only one killer for every fifty now in the field.

I used to be an athlete myself, but times have changed, and we have to change with them. When game was plentiful, I thought it was okay for men and boys to hunt a limited amount for sport and food. But that foundation has been eroded by an overwhelming force of destruction that's nearly uncontrollable. We need to wake up, recognize the new reality, confront it like adults, and adapt our attitudes to fit the new circumstances. Today's three million hunters can’t expect or demand the same generous hunting rights that were appropriate for hunters fifty years ago, when game was fifty times more abundant and there was only one hunter for every fifty in the field.

The fatalistic idea that bag-limit laws can save the game is to-day the curse of all our game birds, mammals and fishes! It is a fraud, a delusion and a snare. That miserable fetish has been worshipped much too long. Our game is being exterminated, everywhere, by blind insistence upon "open seasons," and solemn reliance upon "legal bag-limits." If a majority of the people of America feel that so long as there is any game alive there must be an annual two months or four months open season for its slaughter, then assuredly we soon will have a gameless continent.

The fatalistic belief that bag-limit laws can save wildlife is now the curse of all our game birds, mammals, and fish! It’s a scam, an illusion, and a trap. That sad obsession has been worshipped for far too long. Our wildlife is being wiped out everywhere by a blind insistence on "open seasons" and a serious dependence on "legal bag-limits." If most people in America think that as long as there’s any game left, there should be an annual open season for its slaughter, then we will definitely soon have a continent without game.

The only thing that will save the game is by stopping the killing of it! In establishing and promulgating this principle, the cause of wild-life protection greatly needs three things: money, labor, and publicity. With the first, we can secure the second and third. But can we get it,—and get it in time to save?

The only thing that can save the game is to stop the killing of it! To establish and promote this principle, the cause of wildlife protection really needs three things: money, labor, and publicity. With the first, we can secure the second and third. But can we get it,—and get it in time to save?

This volume is in every sense a contribution to a Cause; and as such it ever will remain. I wish the public to receive it on that basis. So much important material has drifted straight to it from other hands that this unexpected aid seems to the author like a good omen.

This book is definitely a contribution to a cause and will always be seen that way. I want the public to understand it that way. A lot of important material has come directly to it from various sources, and this unexpected support feels like a positive sign to the author.

The manuscript has received the benefit of a close and critical reading and correcting by my comrade on the firing-line and esteemed friend, Mr. Madison Grant, through which the text was greatly improved. But for the splendid encouragement and assistance that I have received from him and [Page xi] from Professor Henry Fairneld Osborn the work involved would have borne down rather heavily.

The manuscript has gone through thorough and critical reading and edits by my comrade on the front lines and valued friend, Mr. Madison Grant, which greatly improved the text. Without the wonderful support and help I've received from him and [Page xi] from Professor Henry Fairfield Osborn, this work would have been quite burdensome.

The four chapters embracing the "New Laws Needed; A Roll-Call of the States," were critically inspected, corrected and brought down to date by Dr. T.S. Palmer, our highest authority on the game laws of the Nation and the States. For this valuable service the author is deeply grateful. Of course the author is alone responsible for all the opinions and conclusions herein recorded, and for all errors that appear outside of quotations.

The four chapters covering the "New Laws Needed; A Roll-Call of the States" were carefully reviewed, updated, and revised by Dr. T.S. Palmer, our top expert on game laws at both the national and state levels. The author is very thankful for this valuable service. However, the author takes full responsibility for all the opinions and conclusions presented here, as well as for any mistakes that are not direct quotes.

I trust that the Reader will kindly excuse and forget all the typographic and clerical errors that may have escaped me in the rush that had to be made against Time.

I hope the reader will kindly overlook and forget any typographic or clerical errors that might have slipped through in the rush against time.

University Heights, New York,

University Heights, NY,

W.T.H.

WTH

December 1, 1912.

December 1, 1912.


[Page xii]
CONTENTS

Part I.—Extermination

Part I.—Elimination

Chapter

Chapter

Page

Page

I.

I.

Former Abundance Of Wild Life

Former Abundance of Wildlife

II.

II.

Extinct Species Of North American Birds

Extinct Species of North American Birds

III.

III.

The Next Candidates For Oblivion

The Next Candidates for Oblivion

IV.

IV.

Extinct And Nearly Extinct Species Of Mammals

Extinct and Nearly Extinct Species of Mammals

V.

V.

The Extermination Of Species, State By State

The Elimination of Species, State by State

VI.

VI.

The Regular Army Of Destruction

The Army of Destruction

VII.

VII.

The Guerrillas Of Destruction

The Destruction Guerrillas

VIII.

VIII.

The Unseen Foes Of Wild Life

The Hidden Threats to Wildlife

IX.

IX.

Destruction Of Wild Life By Diseases

Wildlife Destruction by Diseases

X.

X.

Destruction Of Wild Life By The Elements

Destruction of Wildlife by the Elements

XI.

XI.

Slaughter Of Song-Birds By Italians

Killing of songbirds by Italians

XII.

XII.

Destruction Of Song-Birds By Southern Negroes And Poor Whites

Destruction of Songbirds by Southern Black People and Poor White People

XIII.

XIII.

Extermination Of Birds For Women's Hats

Extermination of Birds for Women's Hats

XIV.

XIV.

The Bird Tragedy On Laysan Island

The Bird Tragedy on Laysan Island

XV.

XV.

Unfair Firearms And Shooting Ethics

Unjust Gun and Shooting Ethics

XVI.

XVI.

The Present And Future Of North American Big Game—I

The Present and Future of North American Big Game—I

XVII.

XVII.

The Present And Future Of North American Big Game—II

The Present and Future of North American Big Game—II

XVIII.

18.

The Present And Future Of African Game

The Present and Future of African Game

XIX.

XIX.

The Present And Future Of Game In Asia

The Present and Future of Gaming in Asia

XX.

XX.

Destruction Of Birds In The Far East. By C. William Beebe

Destruction of Birds in the Far East. By C. William Beebe

XXI.

XXI.

The Savage Viewpoint Of The GunneR

The Savage Viewpoint of the Gunner

Part II.—Preservation

Part II—Preservation

XXII.

XXII.

Our Annual Losses By Insects

Our Yearly Insect Losses

XXIII.

XXIII.

The Economic Value Of Birds

The Economic Value of Birds

XXIV.

XXIV.

Game And Agriculture: Deer As A Food Supply

Game And Agriculture: Deer As A Food Source

[Page xiii]

XXV.

XXV.

Law And Sentiment As Factors In Preservation

Law and Sentiment as Factors in Preservation

XXVI.

XXVI.

The Army Of The Defense

The Defense Army

XXVII.

XXVII.

How To Make A New Game Law

How to Create a New Game Law

XXVIII.

XXVIII.

New Laws Needed: A Roll-Call Of The States—I

New Laws Needed: A List of the States—I

XXIX.

XXIX.

New Laws Needed: A Roll-Call Of The States—II

New Laws Needed: A Roll-Call Of The States—II

XXX.

XXX.

New Laws Needed: A Roll-Call Of The States—III

New Laws Needed: A Roll-Call Of The States—III

XXXI.

XXXI.

New Laws Needed: A Roll-Call Of The States—IV

New Laws Needed: A Roll Call of the States—IV

XXXII.

XXXII.

Need For A Federal Migratory Bird Law, No-Sale-Of-Game Law, And Others

Need for a Federal Migratory Bird Law, No Sale of Game Law, and Others

XXXIII.

XXXIII.

Bringing Back The Vanished Birds And Game

Bringing Back The Vanished Birds And Game

XXXIV.

XXXIV.

Introduced Species That Have Been Beneficial

Introduced Species That Have Been Helpful

XXXV.

XXXV.

Introduced Species That Have Become Pests

Introduced Species That Have Become Pests

XXXVI.

XXXVI.

National And State Game Preserves And Bird Refuges

National and State Game Reserves and Bird Sanctuaries

XXXVII.

XXXVII.

Game Preserves And Game Laws In Canada

Game Preserves and Game Laws in Canada

XXXVIII.

XXXVIII.

Private Game Preserves

Private Game Reserves

XXXIX.

XXXIX.

British Game Preserves In Africa

UK Game Reserves in Africa

XXL.

XXL.

Breeding Game And Fur In Captivity

Breeding Game and Fur in Captivity

XLI.

XLI.

Teaching Wild-Life Protection To The Young

Teaching Wildlife Protection to Young People

XLII.

XLII.

Ethics Of Sportsmanship

Sportsmanship Ethics

XLIII.

XLIII.

The Duty Of American Zoologists To American Wild Life

The Responsibility of American Zoologists to American Wildlife

XLIV.

XLIV.

The Greatest Need Of The Cause; And The Duty Of The Hour

The Urgent Need of the Movement; And the Responsibility of the Moment

ILLUSTRATIONS

IMAGES

[Page xiv]

The Folly of 1857 and the Lesson of 1912

The Mistake of 1857 and the Lesson of 1912

Shall We Leave Any One of Them Open?

Shall we leave any of them open?

Six Recently Exterminated North American Birds

Six Recently Extinct North American Birds

Sacred to the Memory of Exterminated Birds

Sacred to the Memory of Extinct Birds

Whooping Cranes in the Zoological Park

Whooping Cranes in the Zoo

California Condor

California Condor

Primated Grouse, or "Prairie Chicken"

Primated Grouse, or "Prairie Chicken"

Sage Grouse

Sage-Grouse

Snowy Egrets in the McIlhenny Preserve

Snowy Egrets in the McIlhenny Preserve

Wood-Duck

Wood Duck

Gray Squirrel

Gray Squirrel

Skeleton of a Rhytina

Rhytina Skeleton

Burchell's Zebra

Burchell's zebra

Thylacine, or Tasmanian Wolf

Thylacine, or Tasmanian Tiger

West Indian Seal

Caribbean Seal

California Elephant Seal

California Elephant Seal

The Regular Army of Destruction

The Regular Army of Destruction

G.O. Shields

G.O. Shields

Two Gunners of Kansas City

Two Kansas City Gunners

Why the Sandhill Crane is Becoming Extinct

Why the Sandhill Crane is Becoming Extinct

A Market Gunner at Work on Marsh Island

A Market Gunner Working on Marsh Island

Ruffed Grouse

Ruffed Grouse

A Lawful Bag of Ruffed Grouse

A Legal Bag of Ruffed Grouse

Snow Bunting

Snow Bunting

A Hunting Cat and Its Victim

A Hunting Cat and Its Victim

Eastern Red Squirrel

Eastern Red Squirrel

Cooper's Hawk

Cooper's Hawk

Sharp-Shinned Hawk

Sharp-Shinned Hawk

The Cat that Killed Fifty-eight Birds in One Year

The Cat That Killed Fifty-Eight Birds in One Year

An Italian Roccolo on Lake Como

An Italian Roccolo on Lake Como

Dead Song-Birds

Dead Songbirds

The Robin of the North

The Northern Robin

The Mocking-Bird of the South

The Southern Mockingbird

Northern Robins Ready for Southern Slaughter

Northern Robins Prepared for Southern Slaughter

Southern-Negro Method of Combing Out the Wild Life

Southern Black Method of Combing Out the Wild Life

Beautiful and Curious Birds Destroyed for the Feather Trade—I

Beautiful and Curious Birds Destroyed for the Feather Trade—I

Sixteen Hundred Hummingbirds at Two Cents Each

Sixteen Hundred Hummingbirds at Two Cents Each

Beautiful and Curious Birds Destroyed for the Feather Trade—II

Beautiful and Interesting Birds Destroyed for the Feather Trade—II

Beautiful and Curious Birds—III

Beautiful and Curious Birds—III

Fight in England Against the Use of Plumage

Fight in England Against the Use of Feathers

[Page xv]

Young Egrets, Unable to Fly, Starving

Young egrets, unable to fly, starving

Snowy Egret Dead on Her Nest

Snowy Egret Dead on Her Nest

Miscellaneous Bird Skins, Eight Cents Each

Miscellaneous Bird Skins, $0.08 Each

Laysan Albatrosses, Before the Great Slaughter

Laysan Albatrosses, Before the Great Slaughter

Laysan Albatross Rookery, After the Great Slaughter

Laysan Albatross Rookery, After the Great Slaughter

Acres of Gull and Albatross Bones

Acres of gull and albatross bones

Shed Filled with Wings of Slaughtered Birds

Shed Filled with Wings of Slaughtered Birds

Four of the Seven Machine Guns

Four of the Seven Machine Guns

The Champion Game-Slaughter Case

The Champion Game-Slaughter Trial

Slaughtered According to Law

Killed by the law

A Letter that Tells its Own Story

A Letter that Tells its Own Story

The "Sunday Gun"

The "Sunday Gun"

The Prong-Horned Antelope

The Pronghorn Antelope

Hungry Elk in Jackson Hole

Hungry Elk in Jackson Hole

The Wichita National Bison Herd

The Wichita Bison Herd

Pheasant Snares

Pheasant Traps

Pheasant Skins Seized at Rangoon

Pheasant Skins Confiscated in Yangon

Deadfall Traps in Burma

Deadfall Traps in Myanmar

One Morning's Catch of Trout near Spokane

One Morning's Catch of Trout near Spokane

The Cut-Worm

The Cutworm

The Gypsy Moth

The Spongy Moth

Downy Woodpecker

Downy Woodpecker

Baltimore Oriole

Baltimore Oriole

Nighthawk

Nighthawk

Purple Martin

Purple Martin

Bob-White

Bob White

Rose-Breasted Grosbeak

Rose-Breasted Grosbeak

Barn Owl

Barn Owl

Golden-Winged Woodpecker

Golden-Winged Woodpecker

Kildeer Plover

Killdeer Plover

Jacksnipe

Jacksnipe

A Food Supply of White-Tailed Deer

A Food Supply of White-Tailed Deer

White-Tailed Deer

White-tailed deer

Notable Protectors of Wild Life: Madison Grant, Henry Fairfield Osborn, John F. Lacey, and William Dutcher

Notable Wildlife Protectors: Madison Grant, Henry Fairfield Osborn, John F. Lacey, and William Dutcher

Notable Protectors: Forbush, Pearson, Burnham, Napier

Notable Protectors: Forbush, Pearson, Burnham, Napier

Notable Protectors: Phillips, Kalbfus, McIlhenny, Ward

Notable Protectors: Phillips, Kalbfus, McIlhenny, Ward

Band-Tailed Pigeon

Band-Tailed Dove

Six Wild Chipmunks Dine with Mr. Loring

Six Wild Chipmunks Dine with Mr. Loring

Chickadee, Tamed

Chickadee, Domesticated

Chipmunk, Tamed

Tamed Chipmunk

Object Lesson in Bringing Back the Ducks

Object Lesson in Bringing Back the Ducks

Gulls and Terns of Our Coast

Gulls and Terns of Our Coast

Egrets and Herons in Sanctuary on Marsh Island

Egrets and Herons in Sanctuary on Marsh Island

Bird Day at Carrick, Pa

Bird Day in Carrick, PA

Distributing Bird Boxes and Fruit Trees

Distributing Birdhouses and Fruit Trees

[Page xvi]

MAPS

MAPS

The Wilderness of North America

The Wilds of North America

Former and Existing Ranges of the Elk

Former and Current Areas of the Elk

Map Showing the Disappearance of the Lion

Map Showing the Disappearance of the Lion

States and Provinces Requiring Resident Licenses.

States and provinces that require resident licenses.

Eighteen States Prohibit the Sale of Game

Eighteen states ban the sale of game.

Map Used in Campaign for Bayne Law

Map Used in Campaign for Bayne Law

United States National Game Preserves

U.S. National Wildlife Refuges

Bird Reservations on the Gulf Coast and Florida

Bird Reservations on the Gulf Coast and Florida

Marsh Island and Adjacent Preserves

Marsh Island and Nearby Preserves

Most Important Game Preserves of Africa

Most Important Game Reserves of Africa

OUR VANISHING WILD LIFE
PART I. EXTERMINATION
CHAPTER I
THE FORMER ABUNDANCE OF WILD LIFE

"By my labors my vineyard flourished. But Ahab came. Alas! for Naboth."

"My hard work made my vineyard thrive. But then Ahab came. What a pity for Naboth."

In order that the American people may correctly understand and judge the question of the extinction or preservation of our wild life, it is necessary to recall the near past. It is not necessary, however, to go far into the details of history; for a few quick glances at a few high points will be quite sufficient for the purpose in view.

In order for the American people to correctly understand and make judgments about the issue of whether to let our wildlife go extinct or to preserve it, we need to look back at the recent past. However, we don’t need to dive deep into historical details; just a few brief looks at some key moments will be enough for our purpose.

Any man who reads the books which best tell the story of the development of the American colonies of 1712 into the American nation of 1912, and takes due note of the wild-life features of the tale, will say without hesitation that when the American people received this land from the bountiful hand of Nature, it was endowed with a magnificent and all-pervading supply of valuable wild creatures. The pioneers and the early settlers were too busy even to take due note of that fact, or to comment upon it, save in very fragmentary ways.

Any man who reads the books that best explain how the American colonies of 1712 transformed into the American nation of 1912, and pays attention to the wild-life aspects of the story, will say without hesitation that when the American people received this land from the generous hand of Nature, it was filled with an abundant and widespread supply of valuable wildlife. The pioneers and early settlers were too occupied to notice this fact or to mention it, except in very brief ways.

Nevertheless, the wild-life abundance of early American days survived down to so late a period that it touched the lives of millions of people now living. Any man 55 years of age who when a boy had a taste for "hunting,"—for at that time there were no "sportsmen" in America,—will remember the flocks and herds of wild creatures that he saw and which made upon his mind many indelible impressions.

Nevertheless, the abundance of wildlife in early America lasted long enough to impact the lives of millions of people today. Any man who is 55 years old and enjoyed "hunting" as a boy—back when there were no "sportsmen" in America—will remember the flocks and herds of wild animals he saw, which left lasting impressions on him.

"Abundance" is the word with which to describe the original animal life that stocked our country, and all North America, only a short half-century ago. Throughout every state, on every shore-line, in all the millions of fresh water lakes, ponds and rivers, on every mountain range, in every forest, and even on every desert, the wild flocks and herds held sway. It was impossible to go beyond the settled haunts of civilized man and escape them.

"Abundance" is the word to describe the original animal life that populated our country, and all of North America, just a short fifty years ago. In every state, along every shoreline, in all the millions of freshwater lakes, ponds, and rivers, across every mountain range, in every forest, and even in every desert, wild flocks and herds thrived. It was impossible to venture beyond the established areas of civilized society and avoid them.

It was a full century after the complete settlement of New England and the Virginia colonies that the wonderful big-game fauna of the great plains and Rocky Mountains was really discovered; but the bison [Page 2] millions, the antelope millions, the mule deer, the mountain sheep and mountain goat were there, all the time. In the early days, the millions of pinnated grouse and quail of the central states attracted no serious attention from the American people-at-large; but they lived and flourished just the same, far down in the seventies, when the greedy market gunners systematically slaughtered them, and barreled them up for "the market," while the foolish farmers calmly permitted them to do it.

It was a full century after New England and Virginia were fully settled that the incredible big-game wildlife of the great plains and Rocky Mountains was truly discovered; yet the bison, in the millions, the antelope in the millions, the mule deer, the mountain sheep, and the mountain goat had always been there. In the early days, the millions of pinnated grouse and quail in the central states didn’t attract much serious attention from the general American public; however, they lived and thrived anyway, well into the seventies, when greedy market hunters systematically slaughtered them and packaged them up for “the market,” while the naive farmers casually allowed it to happen.

We obtain the best of our history of the former abundance of North American wild life first from the pages of Audubon and Wilson; next, from the records left by such pioneers as Lewis and Clark, and last from the testimony of living men. To all this we can, many of us, add observations of our own.

We get the best insights into the rich history of North American wildlife from the writings of Audubon and Wilson; then, from the accounts of pioneers like Lewis and Clark, and finally, from the insights of people who are still around today. Many of us can also contribute our own observations to this collection.

To me the most striking fact that stands forth in the story of American wild life one hundred years ago is the wide extent and thoroughness of its distribution. Wide as our country is, and marvelous as it is in the diversity of its climates, its soils, its topography, its flora, its riches and its poverty, Nature gave to each square mile and to each acre a generous quota of wild creatures, according to its ability to maintain living things. No pioneer ever pushed so far, or into regions so difficult or so remote, that he did not find awaiting him a host of birds and beasts. Sometimes the pioneer was not a good hunter; usually he was a stupid fisherman; but the "game" was there, nevertheless. The time was when every farm had its quota.

To me, the most striking fact about American wildlife a hundred years ago is how widespread and thorough its distribution was. Our country is vast and incredible in its variety of climates, soils, landscapes, flora, wealth, and poverty. Nature provided each square mile and every acre with a generous share of wild creatures, based on its capacity to support life. No pioneer ventured so far, or into areas so challenging or remote, that they didn’t encounter an abundance of birds and animals. Sometimes the pioneer wasn’t a skilled hunter; often they were not great fishermen; but the wildlife was there, nonetheless. There was a time when every farm had its share of wildlife.

The part that the wild life of America played in the settlement and development of this continent was so far-reaching in extent, and so enormous in potential value, that it fairly staggers the imagination. From the landing of the Pilgrims down to the present hour the wild game has been the mainstay and the resource against starvation of the pathfinder, the settler, the prospector, and at times even the railroad-builder. In view of what the bison millions did for the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, Kansas and Texas, it is only right and square that those states should now do something for the perpetual preservation of the bison species and all other big game that needs help.

The role that wildlife in America played in settling and developing this continent was so extensive and so valuable that it truly takes your breath away. From the arrival of the Pilgrims to today, wild game has been a key source of sustenance for explorers, settlers, prospectors, and even railroad builders at times. Considering what the millions of bison contributed to states like the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, Kansas, and Texas, it’s only fair that those states now do something to ensure the ongoing preservation of the bison and all other big game that need support.

For years and years, the antelope millions of the Montana and Wyoming grass-lands fed the scout and Indian-fighter, freighter, cowboy and surveyor, ranchman and sheep-herder; but thus far I have yet to hear of one Western state that has ever spent one penny directly for the preservation of the antelope! And to-day we are in a hand-to-hand fight in Congress, and in Montana, with the Wool-Growers Association, which maintains in Washington a keen lobbyist to keep aloft the tariff on wool, and prevent Congress from taking 15 square miles of grass lands on Snow Creek, Montana, for a National Antelope Preserve. All that the wool-growers want is the entire earth, all to themselves. Mr. McClure, the Secretary of the Association says:

For years, the millions of antelope in the grasslands of Montana and Wyoming have supported scouts, Indian fighters, freight haulers, cowboys, surveyors, ranchers, and sheep herders; yet I haven't heard of a single Western state that has spent even a penny directly to protect the antelope! Today, we're in a fierce battle in Congress and in Montana with the Wool-Growers Association, which employs a skilled lobbyist in Washington to keep the wool tariff high and to stop Congress from designating 15 square miles of grasslands at Snow Creek, Montana, as a National Antelope Preserve. The wool-growers just want everything for themselves. Mr. McClure, the Secretary of the Association, says:

"The proper place in which to preserve the big game of the West is in city parks, where it can be protected."

"The best place to keep the big game of the West is in city parks, where it can be safe."

To the colonist of the East and pioneer of the West, the white-tailed deer was an ever present help in time of trouble. Without this omnipresent animal, and the supply of good meat that each white flag represented, the commissariat difficulties of the settlers who won the country as far westward as Indiana would have been many times greater than they were. The backwoods Pilgrim's progress was like this:

To the colonist in the East and the pioneer in the West, the white-tailed deer was a constant source of support in tough times. Without this always-present animal and the reliable supply of good meat that each white flag signified, the supply issues faced by the settlers who expanded the country all the way to Indiana would have been much more severe than they actually were. The backwoods Pilgrim's journey was like this:

Trail, deer; cabin, deer; clearing; bear, corn, deer; hogs, deer; cattle, wheat, independence.

Trail, deer; cabin, deer; clearing; bear, corn, deer; hogs, deer; cattle, wheat, independence.

And yet, how many men are there to-day, out of our ninety millions of Americans and pseudo-Americans, who remember with any feeling of gratitude the part played in American history by the white-tailed deer? Very few! How many Americans are there in our land who now preserve that deer for sentimental reasons, and because his forbears were nation-builders? As a matter of fact, are there any?

And yet, how many men today, out of our ninety million Americans and pseudo-Americans, remember with any sense of gratitude the role that the white-tailed deer played in American history? Very few! How many Americans in our country still protect that deer for sentimental reasons, simply because its ancestors helped build the nation? In fact, are there any?

On every eastern pioneer's monument, the white-tailed deer should figure; and on those of the Great West, the bison and the antelope should be cast in enduring bronze, "lest we forget!"

On every eastern pioneer's monument, the white-tailed deer should be included; and on those of the Great West, the bison and the antelope should be made in lasting bronze, "lest we forget!"

The game birds of America played a different part from that of the deer, antelope and bison. In the early days, shotguns were few, and shot was scarce and dear. The wild turkey and goose were the smallest birds on which a rifleman could afford to expend a bullet and a whole charge of powder. It was for this reason that the deer, bear, bison, and elk disappeared from the eastern United States while the game birds yet remained abundant. With the disappearance of the big game came the fat steer, hog and hominy, the wheat-field, fruit orchard and poultry galore.

The game birds of America had a different role than that of deer, antelope, and bison. In the early days, there weren’t many shotguns available, and ammunition was rare and expensive. The wild turkey and goose were the smallest birds that a hunter could justify shooting with a bullet and a full charge of powder. This is why deer, bears, bison, and elk vanished from the eastern United States, while game birds remained plentiful. As the big game disappeared, it was replaced by plump cattle, hogs, corn, wheat fields, fruit orchards, and plenty of poultry.

The game birds of America, as a class and a mass, have not been swept away to ward off starvation or to rescue the perishing. Even back in the sixties and seventies, very, very few men of the North thought of killing prairie chickens, ducks and quail, snipe and woodcock, in order to keep the hunger wolf from the door. The process was too slow and uncertain; and besides, the really-poor man rarely had the gun and ammunition. Instead of attempting to live on birds, he hustled for the staple food products that the soil of his own farm could produce.

The game birds of America, as a group, have not disappeared to prevent starvation or save those in need. Even back in the sixties and seventies, very few men in the North considered hunting prairie chickens, ducks, quail, snipe, and woodcock to fend off hunger. The process was too slow and unreliable; plus, the truly poor rarely had access to guns and ammunition. Instead of trying to survive on birds, they worked hard to gather the staple food products their own farms could produce.

First, last and nearly all the time, the game birds of the United States as a whole, have been sacrificed on the altar of Rank Luxury, to tempt appetites that were tired of fried chicken and other farm delicacies. To-day, even the average poor man hunts birds for the joy of the outing, and the pampered epicures of the hotels and restaurants buy game birds, and eat small portions of them, solely to tempt jaded appetites. If there is such a thing as "class" legislation, it is that which permits a few sordid market-shooters to slaughter the birds of the whole people in order to sell them to a few epicures.

First, last, and almost all the time, game birds in the United States have been sacrificed for the sake of extreme luxury, aiming to satisfy appetites that had grown bored with fried chicken and other farm dishes. Nowadays, even the average person with limited means hunts birds for the enjoyment of being outdoors, while the wealthy food lovers at hotels and restaurants buy game birds and consume small portions just to please their tired taste buds. If there’s such a thing as "class" legislation, it's the kind that allows a few greedy market hunters to kill birds intended for the general public just to sell them to a handful of wealthy diners.

The game of a state belongs to the whole people of the state. The Supreme Court of the United States has so decided. (Geer vs. Connecticut). If it is abundant, it is a valuable asset. The great value of the game birds of America lies not in their meat pounds as they lie upon [Page 4] the table, but in the temptation they annually put before millions of field-weary farmers and desk-weary clerks and merchants to get into their beloved hunting togs, stalk out into the lap of Nature, and say "Begone, dull Care!"

The game in a state belongs to all the people of that state. The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled this way. (Geer vs. Connecticut). When it’s plentiful, it's a valuable resource. The true worth of America's game birds isn't just in the meat served on [Page 4] the table, but in the call they make each year to millions of tired farmers, exhausted office workers, and merchants, inviting them to put on their favorite hunting gear, venture into nature, and say "Goodbye, Stress!"

And the man who has had a fine day in the painted woods, on the bright waters of a duck-haunted bay, or in the golden stubble of September, can fill his day and his soul with six good birds just as well as with sixty. The idea that in order to enjoy a fine day in the open a man must kill a wheel-barrow load of birds, is a mistaken idea; and if obstinately adhered to, it becomes vicious! The Outing in the Open is the thing,—not the blood-stained feathers, nasty viscera and Death in the game-bag. One quail on a fence is worth more to the world than ten in a bag.

And the guy who has had a great day in the beautiful woods, by the clear waters of a bay full of ducks, or in the golden fields of September, can fill his day and his soul with six good birds just as easily as with sixty. The belief that to enjoy a great day outdoors a person needs to kill a truckload of birds is a flawed idea; and if stubbornly clung to, it becomes harmful! What really matters is the experience of being outside—not the bloody feathers, gross guts, and Death in the game bag. One quail on a fence is worth more to the world than ten in a bag.

The farmers of America have, by their own supineness and lack of foresight, permitted the slaughter of a stock of game birds which, had it been properly and wisely conserved, would have furnished a good annual shoot to every farming man and boy of sporting instincts through the past, right down to the present, and far beyond. They have allowed millions of dollars worth of their birds to be coolly snatched away from them by the greedy market-shooters.

The farmers in America, due to their laziness and lack of foresight, have allowed the killing of a population of game birds that, if properly and wisely preserved, could have provided a great hunting experience for every farming man and boy with a sporting interest, from the past to the present and into the future. They have let millions of dollars worth of their birds be casually taken away by greedy market hunters.

There is one state in America, and so far as I know only one, in which there is at this moment an old-time abundance of game-bird life. That is the state of Louisiana. The reason is not so very far to seek. For the birds that do not migrate,—quail, wild turkeys and doves,—the cover is yet abundant. For the migratory game birds of the Mississippi Valley, Louisiana is a grand central depot, with terminal facilities that are unsurpassed. Her reedy shores, her vast marshes, her long coast line and abundance of food furnish what should be not only a haven but a heaven for ducks and geese. After running the gauntlet of guns all the way from Manitoba and Ontario to the Sunk Lands of Arkansas, the shores of the Gulf must seem like heaven itself.

There’s one state in America, and as far as I know, only one, where there’s still a rich variety of game birds. That state is Louisiana. The reason isn’t hard to find. For the non-migratory birds—quail, wild turkeys, and doves—the habitat is still plentiful. For the migratory game birds of the Mississippi Valley, Louisiana serves as a major hub, with unparalleled facilities. Its reedy shores, vast marshes, long coastline, and abundant food create not just a refuge but a paradise for ducks and geese. After navigating the dangers from Manitoba and Ontario to the Sunk Lands of Arkansas, the shores of the Gulf must feel like pure bliss.

The great forests of Louisiana shelter deer, turkeys, and fur-bearing animals galore; and rabbits and squirrels abound.

The vast forests of Louisiana are home to plenty of deer, turkeys, and various fur-bearing animals; plus, there are lots of rabbits and squirrels.

Naturally, this abundance of game has given rise to an extensive industry in shooting for the market. The "big interests" outside the state send their agents into the best game districts, often bringing in their own force of shooters. They comb out the game in enormous quantities, without leaving to the people of Louisiana any decent and fair quid-pro-quo for having despoiled them of their game and shipped a vast annual product outside, to create wealth elsewhere.

Naturally, this abundance of game has led to a huge industry in hunting for profit. The "big interests" from outside the state send their agents into the best hunting areas, often bringing in their own team of shooters. They gather game in massive quantities, leaving the people of Louisiana with little in return for taking their resources and shipping a huge annual haul out, creating wealth elsewhere.

At present, however, we are but incidentally interested in the short-sightedness of the people of the Pelican State. As a state of oldtime abundance in killable game, the killing records that were kept in the year 1909-10 possess for us very great interest. They throw a startling searchlight on the subject of this chapter,—the former abundance of wild life.

At the moment, we're only casually interested in the shortsightedness of the people of the Pelican State. As a place that used to be rich in game, the hunting records from 1909-10 are very fascinating to us. They provide a shocking perspective on the topic of this chapter—the previous abundance of wildlife.

From the records that with great pains and labor were gathered by the State Game Commission, and which were furnished me for use here by [Page 5] President Frank M. Miller, we set forth this remarkable exhibit of old-fashioned abundance in game, A.D. 1909.

From the detailed records that were painstakingly collected by the State Game Commission, and which were provided to me for use here by [Page 5] President Frank M. Miller, we present this impressive showcase of the abundant game from the year 1909.


Official Record Of Game Killed In Louisiana During The Season (12 Months) Of 1909-10
Birds
Wild Ducks, sea and river 3,176,000
Coots 280,740
Geese and Brant 202,210
Snipe, Sandpiper and Plover 606,635
Quail (Bob-White) 1,140,750
Doves 310,660
Wild Turkeys 2,219
---------
    Total number of game birds killed 5,719,214
Mammals
Deer 5,470
Squirrels and Rabbits 690,270
---------
    Total of game mammals 695,740
Fur-bearing mammals 1,971,922
---------
    Total of mammals 2,667,662
---------
    Grand total of birds and mammals 8,386,876

Of the thousands of slaughtered robins, it would seem that no records exist. It is to be understood that the annual slaughter of wild life in Louisiana never before reached such a pitch as now. Without drastic measures, what will be the inevitable result? Does any man suppose that even the wild millions of Louisiana can long withstand such slaughter as that shown by the official figures given above? It is wildly impossible.

Of the thousands of killed robins, it seems that there are no records. It's clear that the annual killing of wildlife in Louisiana has never been as severe as it is now. Without strong action, what will the outcome be? Does anyone think that even the countless wildlife in Louisiana can endure such levels of killing as indicated by the official numbers mentioned above? It's completely unrealistic.

But the darkest hour is just before the dawn. At the session of the Louisiana legislature that was held in the spring of 1912, great improvements were made in the game laws of that state. The most important feature was the suppression of wholesale market hunting, by persons who are not residents of the state. A very limited amount of game may be sold and served as food in public places, but the restrictions placed upon this traffic are so effective that they will vastly reduce the annual slaughter. In other respects, also, the cause of wild life protection gained much; for which great credit is due to Mr. Edward A. McIlhenny.

But the darkest hour is just before the dawn. In the spring of 1912, during the session of the Louisiana legislature, significant improvements were made to the state's game laws. The most important aspect was the ban on large-scale market hunting by non-residents. A very limited amount of game can be sold and served as food in public places, but the regulations around this are so strict that they will greatly decrease the annual kill. In other ways, the cause of wildlife protection also made great strides, for which much credit goes to Mr. Edward A. McIlhenny.

It is the way of Americans to feel that because game is abundant in a given place at a given time, it always will be abundant, and may therefore be slaughtered without limit. That was the case last winter in California during the awful slaughter of band-tailed pigeons, as will be noted elsewhere.

It’s common for Americans to believe that just because wildlife is plentiful in one location at a certain time, it will always remain that way, and can therefore be hunted endlessly. This was evident last winter in California during the terrible killing of band-tailed pigeons, as will be discussed elsewhere.

It is time for all men to be told in the plainest terms that there never has existed, anywhere in historic times, a volume of wild life so great that civilized man could not quickly exterminate it by his methods of [Page 6] destruction. Lift the veil and look at the stories of the bison, the passenger pigeon, the wild ducks and shore birds of the Atlantic coast, and the fur-seal.

It’s time for everyone to be told clearly that there has never been a population of wild animals so large that civilized humans couldn’t quickly wipe it out with their methods of [Page 6] destruction. Take a moment to consider the stories of the bison, the passenger pigeon, the wild ducks, and shorebirds of the Atlantic coast, as well as the fur seal.

SHALL WE LEAVE ANY ONE OF THEM OPEN?

SHOULD WE KEEP ANY OF THEM OPEN?

As reasoning beings, it is our duty to heed the lessons of history, and not rush blindly on until we perpetrate a continent destitute of wild life.

As rational beings, it's our responsibility to pay attention to the lessons of history and not rush headlong into actions that could leave a continent devoid of wildlife.


[Page 7]
CHAPTER II
EXTINCT SPECIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS

For educated, civilized Man to exterminate a valuable wild species of living things is a crime. It is a crime against his own children, and posterity.

For educated, civilized people to wipe out a valuable wild species is a crime. It's a crime against their own children and future generations.

No man has a right, either moral or legal, to destroy or squander an inheritance of his children that he holds for them in trust. And man, the wasteful and greedy spendthrift that he is, has not created even the humblest of the species of birds, mammals and fishes that adorn and enrich this earth. "The earth is THE LORD'S, and the fulness thereof!" With all his wisdom, man has not evolved and placed here so much as a ground-squirrel, a sparrow or a clam. It is true that he has juggled with the wild horse and sheep, the goats and the swine, and produced some hardy breeds that can withstand his abuse without going down before it; but as for species, he has not yet created and placed here even so much as a protozoan.

No one has the moral or legal right to waste or destroy an inheritance meant for their children that they hold in trust. And man, being the wasteful and greedy spender he is, has not created even the simplest kinds of birds, mammals, and fish that beautify and enrich this planet. "The earth is THE LORD'S, and everything in it!" Despite all his knowledge, man has not generated and put here a single ground squirrel, sparrow, or clam. It's true that he has manipulated wild horses, sheep, goats, and pigs to create some tough breeds that can survive his mistreatment, but as for new species, he hasn’t managed to create and introduce even a single protozoan.

The wild things of this earth are not ours, to do with as we please. They have been given to us in trust, and we must account for them to the generations which will come after us and audit our accounts.

The wild things of this earth are not ours to do with as we want. They have been given to us in trust, and we must be accountable to the generations that will come after us and review our stewardship.

But man, the shameless destroyer of Nature's gifts, blithely and persistently exterminates one species after another. Fully ten per cent of the human race consists of people who will lie, steal, throw rubbish in parks, and destroy forests and wild life whenever and wherever they can do so without being stopped by a policemen and a club. These are hard words, but they are absolutely true. From ten per cent (or more) of the human race, the high moral instinct which is honest without compulsion is absent. The things that seemingly decent citizens,—men posing as gentlemen,—will do to wild game when they secure great chances to slaughter, are appalling. I could fill a book of this size with cases in point.

But people, the shameless destroyers of Nature’s gifts, casually and relentlessly wipe out one species after another. Fully ten percent of humanity includes those who will lie, steal, litter in parks, and destroy forests and wildlife whenever they can do it without getting caught by the police. These are harsh words, but they are completely true. From ten percent (or more) of the human race, the strong moral instinct that is honest without being forced is absent. The things that seemingly decent citizens—men pretending to be gentlemen—will do to wildlife when they have the chance to kill are shocking. I could fill a book of this size with examples.

To-day the women of England, Europe and elsewhere are directly promoting the extermination of scores of beautiful species of wild birds by the devilish persistence with which they buy and wear feather ornaments made of their plumage. They are just as mean and cruel as the truck-driver who drives a horse with a sore shoulder and beats him on the street. But they do it! And appeals to them to do otherwise they laugh to scorn, saying, "I will wear what is fashionable, when I please and where I please!" As a famous bird protector of England has just written me, "The women of the smart set are beyond the reach of appeal or protest."

Today, women in England, Europe, and other places are actively driving the extinction of many beautiful species of wild birds by persistently buying and wearing feather accessories made from their feathers. They are just as mean and cruel as a truck driver who pushes a horse with a sore shoulder and beats it in the street. But they do it! And when you appeal to them to change their ways, they laugh it off, saying, "I’ll wear what’s fashionable, when I want and where I want!" As a well-known bird protector in England just wrote to me, "The women of the elite are beyond the reach of appeal or protest."

To-day, the thing that stares me in the face every waking hour, like a grisly spectre with bloody fang and claw, is the extermination of species. To me, that is a horrible thing. It is wholesale murder, no less. It is capital crime, and a black disgrace to the races of civilized mankind. I say "civilized mankind," because savages don't do it!

To me, the thing that confronts me every waking hour, like a gruesome ghost with bloody teeth and claws, is the extermination of species. It's a terrible thing. It's mass murder, no less. It's a serious crime, and a deep shame for the so-called civilized peoples. I say "civilized peoples" because uncivilized ones don’t do it!

There are three kinds of extermination:

There are three types of extermination:

The practical extermination of a species means the destruction of its members to an extent so thorough and widespread that the species disappears from view, and living specimens of it can not be found by seeking for them. In North America this is to-day the status of the whooping crane, upland plover, and several other species. If any individuals are living, they will be met with only by accident.

The practical extermination of a species means the destruction of its members to such a thorough and widespread extent that the species disappears from sight, and living examples cannot be found no matter how hard you search for them. In North America today, this is the situation for the whooping crane, upland plover, and several other species. If any individuals are still alive, they will only be encountered by chance.

The absolute extermination of a species means that not one individual of it remains alive. Judgment to this effect is based upon the lapse of time since the last living specimen was observed or killed. When five years have passed without a living "record" of a wild specimen, it is time to place a species in the class of the totally extinct.

The complete extinction of a species means that no individuals of it are left alive. This conclusion is based on the time that has passed since the last known living specimen was seen or killed. When five years have gone by without a living "record" of a wild specimen, it is time to classify a species as totally extinct.

Extermination in a wild state means that the only living representatives are in captivity or otherwise under protection. This is the case of the heath hen and David's deer, of China. The American bison is saved from being wholly extinct as a wild animal by the remnant of about 300 head in northern Athabasca, and 49 head in the Yellow-stone Park.

Extermination in a wild state means that the only living representatives are in captivity or otherwise under protection. This is the case with the heath hen and David's deer from China. The American bison has been saved from complete extinction as a wild animal by the remaining population of about 300 individuals in northern Athabasca and 49 individuals in Yellowstone Park.

It is a serious thing to exterminate a species of any of the vertebrate animals. There are probably millions of people who do not realize that civilized (!) man is the most persistently and wickedly wasteful of all the predatory animals. The lions, the tigers, the bears, the eagles and hawks, serpents, and the fish-eating fishes, all live by destroying life; but they kill only what they think they can consume. If something is by chance left over, it goes to satisfy the hunger of the humbler creatures of prey. In a state of nature, where wild creatures prey upon wild creatures, such a thing as wanton, wholesale and utterly wasteful slaughter is almost unknown!

It’s a serious matter to wipe out a species of any vertebrate animal. There are probably millions of people who don’t realize that so-called civilized humans are the most consistently and maliciously wasteful of all predatory animals. Lions, tigers, bears, eagles, hawks, snakes, and fish-eating fish all survive by taking lives, but they only kill what they believe they can eat. If there happens to be anything left over, it goes to feed the less fortunate creatures of prey. In a natural environment, where wild animals hunt other wild animals, wanton, large-scale, and completely wasteful slaughter is almost unheard of!

When the wild mink, weasel and skunk suddenly finds himself in the midst of scores of man's confined and helpless domestic fowls, or his caged gulls in a zoological park, an unusual criminal passion to murder for the joy of killing sometimes seizes the wild animal, and great slaughter is the result.

When the wild mink, weasel, and skunk suddenly find themselves surrounded by numerous domestic birds that are trapped and defenseless, or caged gulls in a zoo, an unusual urge to kill for the sheer pleasure of it can sometimes overtake the wild animal, leading to significant slaughter.

From the earliest historic times, it has been the way of savage man, red, black, brown and yellow, to kill as the wild animals do,—only what he can use, or thinks he can use. The Cree Indian impounded small herds of bison, and sometimes killed from 100 to 200 at one time; but it was to make sure of having enough meat and hides, and because he expected to use the product. I think that even the worst enemies of the plains Indians hardly will accuse them of killing large numbers of bison, elk or deer merely for the pleasure of seeing them fall, or taking only their teeth.

From the earliest times in history, it’s been the way of primitive people—whether red, black, brown, or yellow—to hunt like wild animals do—only taking what they can use, or think they can use. The Cree Indian would gather small herds of bison and sometimes kill between 100 and 200 at once, but this was to ensure they had enough meat and hides, as they intended to use the resources. I believe that even the fiercest critics of the plains Indians would hardly accuse them of killing large numbers of bison, elk, or deer just for the thrill of watching them drop, or for taking only their teeth.

Six Recently Exterminated North American Birds
SIX RECENTLY EXTERMINATED NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS:
Great Auk Labrador Duck
Eskimo Curlew Pallas Cormorant
Passenger Pigeon Carolina Parrakee

It has remained for the wolf, the sheep-killing dog and civilized man to make records of wanton slaughter which puts them in a class together, [Page 10] and quite apart from other predatory animals. When a man can kill bison for their tongues alone, bull elk for their "tusks" alone, and shoot a whole colony of hippopotami,—actually damming a river with their bloated and putrid carcasses, all untouched by the knife,—the men who do such things must be classed with the cruel wolf and the criminal dog.

It has fallen to the wolf, the sheep-killing dog, and modern man to create records of senseless slaughter that place them in the same category, [Page 10] and completely separate from other predatory animals. When a man can kill bison just for their tongues, bull elk for their "tusks," and shoot an entire colony of hippopotamuses—actually blocking a river with their bloated and rotting bodies, all untouched by a knife—those who do such things must be seen as on the same level as the ruthless wolf and the evil dog.

It is now desirable that we should pause in our career of destruction long enough to look back upon what we have recently accomplished in the total extinction of species, and also note what we have blocked out for the immediate future. Here let us erect a monument to the dead species of our own times.

It’s time for us to take a break from our path of destruction and reflect on what we have recently achieved in wiping out species, as well as what we have planned for the near future. Let’s build a monument to the species we have lost in our own era.

It is to be doubted whether, up to this hour, any man has made a list of the species of North American birds that have become extinct during the past sixty years. The specialists have no time to spare from their compound differential microscopes, and the bird-killers are too busy with shooting, netting and clubbing to waste any time on such trifles as exterminated species. What does a market-shooter care about birds that can not be killed a second time? As for the farmers, they are so busy raising hogs and prices that their best friends, the birds, get scant attention from them,—until a hen-hawk takes a chicken!

It's questionable whether, up to now, anyone has compiled a list of North American bird species that have gone extinct in the past sixty years. Experts are too preoccupied with their complex microscopes, and those who hunt birds are too focused on shooting, netting, and clubbing to bother with insignificant details like extinct species. What does a market shooter care about birds that can't be hunted again? Meanwhile, farmers are so busy raising pigs and prices that they barely pay attention to their best allies, the birds—until a hawk swoops down and takes a chicken!

Down South, the negroes and poor whites may slaughter robins for food by the ten thousand; but does the northern farmer bother his head about a trifle of that kind? No, indeed. Will he contribute any real money to help put a stop to it? Ask him yourself.

Down South, black people and poor white folks can kill thousands of robins for food, but does the northern farmer concern himself with something like that? Not at all. Will he actually give any real money to help put a stop to it? Ask him yourself.

Let us pause long enough to reckon up some of our expenditures in species, and in millions of individuals. Let us set down here, in cold blood, a list of the species of our own North American birds that have been totally exterminated in our own times. After that we will have something to say about other species that soon will be exterminated; and the second task is much greater than the first.

Let’s take a moment to tally some of our expenses in terms of species and millions of individuals. Let’s compile a straightforward list of the North American bird species that have been completely wiped out in our time. After that, we’ll discuss other species that are soon to be gone, and that second task is much more significant than the first.


ROLL CALL OF THE DEAD SPECIES OF AMERICAN BIRDS

The Great Auk, Plautus impennis, (Linn.), was a sea-going diving bird about the size of a domestic goose, related to the guillemots, murres and puffins. For a bird endowed only with flipper-like wings, and therefore absolutely unable to fly, this species had an astonishing geographic range. It embraced the shores of northern Europe to North Cape, southern Greenland, southern Labrador, and the Atlantic coast of North America as far south as Massachusetts. Some say, "as far south as Massachusetts, the Carolinas and Florida," but that is a large order, and I leave the A.O.U. to prove that if it can. In the life history of this bird, a great tragedy was enacted in 1800 by sailors, on Funk Island, north of Newfoundland, where men were landed by a ship, and spent several months slaughtering great auks and trying out their fat for oil. In this process, the bodies of thousands of auks were burned as fuel, in working up the remains of tens of thousands of others.

The Great Auk Plautus impennis, (Linn.), was a sea-going diving bird about the size of a domestic goose, related to the guillemots, murres, and puffins. Despite having only flipper-like wings and being completely incapable of flying, this species had an impressive geographic range. It covered the shores of northern Europe to North Cape, southern Greenland, southern Labrador, and the Atlantic coast of North America as far south as Massachusetts. Some claim "'as far south as Massachusetts, the Carolinas, and Florida," but that seems exaggerated, and I'll let the A.O.U. determine if that's accurate. A major tragedy in the life of this bird occurred in 1800 when sailors landed on Funk Island, north of Newfoundland, where they spent several months hunting great auks and rendering their fat for oil. During this time, the bodies of thousands of auks were used as fuel while processing the remains of tens of thousands of others.

On Funk Island, a favorite breeding-place, the great auk was exterminated in 1840, and in Iceland in 1844. Many natives ate this bird with relish, and being easily captured, either on land or sea, the commercialism of its day soon obliterated the species. The last living specimen was seen in 1852, and the last dead one was picked up in Trinity Bay, Ireland, in 1853. There are about 80 mounted and unmounted skins in existence, four skeletons, and quite a number of eggs. An egg is worth about $1200 and a good mounted skin at least double that sum.

On Funk Island, a popular breeding ground, the great auk was wiped out in 1840, followed by its extinction in Iceland in 1844. Many locals enjoyed eating this bird, and because it was easy to catch both on land and at sea, the commercial demand of the time quickly led to its demise. The last sighting of a living specimen was in 1852, and the last dead one was found in Trinity Bay, Ireland, in 1853. There are about 80 mounted and unmounted skins still in existence, along with four skeletons and several eggs. An egg is worth around $1200, and a good mounted skin is worth at least double that.

The Labrador Duck, Camptorhynchus labradoricus, (Gmel.).—This handsome sea-duck, of a species related to the eider ducks of arctic waters, became totally extinct about 1875, before the scientific world even knew that its existence was threatened. With this species, the exact and final cause of its extinction is to this day unknown. It is not at all probable, however, that its unfortunate blotting out from our bird fauna was due to natural causes, and when the truth becomes known, it is very probable that the hand of man will be revealed.

The Labrador Duck, Camptorhynchus labradoricus, (Gmel.).—This beautiful sea-duck, related to the eider ducks of Arctic waters, became completely extinct around 1875, before the scientific community even realized its survival was at risk. The exact and definitive reason for its extinction remains unknown to this day. However, it's unlikely that its tragic disappearance from our bird population was caused by natural factors, and when the truth is uncovered, it's highly probable that human activity will be shown to be the culprit.

The Labrador duck bred in Labrador, and once frequented our Atlantic coast as far south as Chesapeake Bay; but it is said that it never was very numerous, at least during the twenty-five years preceding its disappearance. About thirty-five skins and mounted museum specimens are all that remain to prove its former existence, and I think there is not even one skeleton.

The Labrador duck nested in Labrador and used to be seen along our Atlantic coast down to Chesapeake Bay; however, it’s said that it was never very common, at least in the twenty-five years before it vanished. Only about thirty-five skins and mounted museum specimens are left to demonstrate that it once existed, and I don’t believe there’s even one skeleton.

The Pallas Cormorant, Carbo perspicillatus, (Pallas).—In 1741, when the Russian explorer, Commander Bering, discovered the Bering or Commander Islands, in the far-north Pacific, and landed upon them, he also discovered this striking bird species. Its plumage both above and below was a dark metallic green, with blue iridescence on the neck and purple on the shoulders. A pale ring of naked skin around each eye suggested the Latin specific name of this bird. The Pallas cormorant became totally extinct, through causes not positively known, about 1852.

The Pallas's Cormorant, Carbo perspicillatus, (Pallas).—In 1741, when the Russian explorer Commander Bering discovered the Bering or Commander Islands in the far-north Pacific and landed on them, he also found this striking bird species. Its feathers were a dark metallic green both above and below, with blue iridescence on the neck and purple on the shoulders. A pale ring of bare skin around each eye inspired the bird's Latin name. The Pallas cormorant became completely extinct, for reasons that are not clearly understood, around 1852.

The Passenger Pigeon, Ectopistes migratoria, (Linn.).—We place this bird in the totally-extinct class, not only because it is extinct in a wild state, but only one solitary individual, a twenty-year-old female in the Cincinnati Zoological Gardens, now remains alive. One living specimen and a few skins, skeletons and stuffed specimens are all that remain to show for the uncountable millions of pigeons that swarmed over the United States, only yesterday as it were!

The Passenger Pigeon, Martha's passenger pigeon (Linn.).—We categorize this bird as completely extinct, not only because it no longer exists in the wild, but because only one lone individual, a twenty-year-old female at the Cincinnati Zoo, is still alive. Just one living specimen and a few skins, skeletons, and stuffed specimens are all that’s left to represent the countless millions of pigeons that once filled the skies over the United States, it feels like just yesterday!

There is no doubt about where those millions have gone. They went down and out by systematic, wholesale slaughter for the market and the pot, before the shotguns, clubs and nets of the earliest American pot-hunters. Wherever they nested they were slaughtered.

There’s no question about where those millions ended up. They were taken out through systematic, large-scale killing for the market and consumption, thanks to the shotguns, clubs , and nets of the earliest American hunters. Wherever they nested, they were killed.

It is a long and shameful story, but the grisly skeleton of its Michigan chapter can be set forth in a few words. In 1869, from the town of Hartford, Mich., three car loads of dead pigeons were shipped to market each day for forty days, making a total of 11,880,000 birds. It is recorded that another Michigan town marketed 15,840,000 in two years. (See Mr. W.B. Mershon's book, "The Passenger Pigeon.")

It’s a long and shameful story, but the gruesome details of its Michigan chapter can be summarized in a few words. In 1869, from the town of Hartford, Mich., three car loads of dead pigeons were sent to market every day for forty days, totaling 11,880,000 birds. It’s noted that another Michigan town sold 15,840,000 over two years. (See Mr. W.B. Mershon's book, "The Passenger Pigeon.")

Alexander Wilson, the pioneer American ornithologist, was the man who seriously endeavored to estimate by computations the total number of passenger pigeons in one flock that was seen by him. Here is what he has said in his "American Ornithology":

Alexander Wilson, the groundbreaking American ornithologist, was the person who earnestly tried to calculate the total number of passenger pigeons in a single flock that he observed. Here’s what he wrote in his "American Ornithology":

"To form a rough estimate of the daily consumption of one of these immense flocks, let us first attempt to calculate the numbers of that above mentioned, as seen in passing between Frankfort and the Indiana territory. If we suppose this column to have been one mile in breadth (and I believe it to have been much more) and that it moved at the rate of one mile in a minute, four hours, the time it continued passing, would make its whole length two hundred and forty miles. Again, supposing that each square yard of this moving body comprehended three pigeons; the square yards in the whole space multiplied by three would give 2,230,272,000 pigeons! An almost inconceivable multitude, and yet probably far below the actual amount."

"To get a rough idea of the daily consumption of one of these enormous flocks, let's first try to estimate the numbers of the flock mentioned earlier, as seen while moving between Frankfort and the Indiana territory. If we assume this column was one mile wide (and I think it was actually much wider) and that it traveled at a speed of one mile per minute, then in four hours, the time it took to pass, its total length would be two hundred and forty miles. Now, if we assume that each square yard of this flock contained three pigeons, multiplying the total square yards in that area by three would give us 2,230,272,000 pigeons! An almost unimaginable number, and likely still far less than the actual count."


"Happening to go ashore one charming afternoon, to purchase some milk at a house that stood near the river, and while talking with the people within doors, I was suddenly struck with astonishment at a loud rushing roar, succeeded by instant darkness, which, on the first moment, I took for a tornado about to overwhelm the house and every thing around in destruction. The people observing my surprise, coolly said, 'It is only the pigeons!' On running out I beheld a flock, thirty or forty yards in width, sweeping along very low, between the house and the mountain or height that formed the second bank of the river. These continued passing for more than a quarter of an hour, and at length varied their bearing so as to pass over the mountains, behind which they disappeared before the rear came up.

One charming afternoon, I went ashore to buy some milk at a house by the river. While I was chatting with the people inside, I was suddenly shocked by a loud rushing noise followed by instant darkness. At first, I thought a tornado was about to destroy the house and everything around it. The people noticed my surprise and casually said, "It’s just the pigeons!" When I ran outside, I saw a flock, about thirty or forty yards wide, flying really low between the house and the mountain that formed the second bank of the river. They kept coming for over fifteen minutes and eventually changed direction to fly over the mountains, disappearing before the last ones reached us.

"In the Atlantic States, though they never appear in such unparalleled multitudes, they are sometimes very numerous; and great havoc is then made amongst them with the gun, the clap-net, and various other implements of destruction. As soon as it is ascertained in a town that the pigeons are flying numerously in the neighborhood, the gunners rise en masse; the clap-nets are spread out on suitable situations, commonly on an open height in an old buckwheat field, four or five live pigeons, with their eyelids sewed up, [A] are fastened on a movable stick, a small hut of branches is fitted up for the fowler at the distance of forty or fifty yards. By the pulling of a string, the stick on which the pigeons rest is alternately elevated and depressed, which produces a fluttering of their wings, similar to that of birds alighting. This being perceived by the passing flocks, they descend with great rapidity, and finding corn, buckwheat, etc, strewed about, begin to feed, and are instantly, by the pulling of a cord, covered by the net. In this manner ten, twenty, and even thirty dozen have been caught [Page 13] at one sweep. Meantime the air is darkened with large bodies of them moving in various directions; the woods also swarm with them in search of acorns, and the thundering of musquetry is perpetual on all sides from morning to night. Wagon loads of them are poured into market, where they sell from fifty to twenty-five and even twelve cents per dozen; and pigeons become the order of the day at dinner, breakfast and supper, until the very name becomes sickening."

"In the Atlantic States, while they don't show up in such huge numbers all the time, there are times when they are really abundant; and when that happens, a lot of them are taken down with guns, clap-nets, and various other tools for hunting. Once a town figures out that there are lots of pigeons flying around nearby, the hunters all gather together; the clap-nets are set up in good spots, usually on a high open area in an old buckwheat field, with four or five live pigeons, their eyelids sewn shut, [A] attached to a movable stick. A small hideout made of branches is set up around forty or fifty yards away. By pulling a string, the stick with the pigeons is raised and lowered alternately, causing their wings to flutter, which looks like birds landing. When the passing flocks see this, they quickly swoop down, find scattered corn, buckwheat, and other food, and start eating, only to be immediately covered by the net when a cord is pulled. This way, hunters have caught ten, twenty, or even thirty dozen in one go. Meanwhile, the sky is filled with large groups flying in all directions; the woods are packed with them searching for acorns, and the sound of gunfire is constant from morning to night. Truckloads of them flood the market, where they sell for anywhere from fifty to twenty-five and even twelve cents per dozen; pigeons end up being the main dish at lunch, breakfast, and dinner until the very thought of them becomes nauseating."


The range of the passenger pigeon covered nearly the whole United States from the Atlantic coast westward to the Rocky Mountains. A few bold pigeons crossed the Rocky Mountains into Oregon, northern California and Washington, but only as "stragglers," few and far between. The wide range of this bird was worthy of a species that existed in millions, and it was persecuted literally all along the line. The greatest slaughter was in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. In 1848 Massachusetts gravely passed a law protecting the netters of wild pigeons from foreign interference! There was a fine of $10 for damaging nets, or frightening pigeons away from them. This was on the theory that the pigeons were so abundant they could not by any possibility ever become scarce, and that pigeon-slaughter was a legitimate industry.

The range of the passenger pigeon stretched across almost the entire United States, from the Atlantic coast all the way to the Rocky Mountains. A few adventurous pigeons made their way over the Rocky Mountains into Oregon, northern California, and Washington, but they were just "stragglers," few and far between. The vast range of this bird suited a species that numbered in the millions, yet it faced relentless persecution everywhere. The worst slaughter happened in Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. In 1848, Massachusetts seriously enacted a law protecting the netters of wild pigeons from outside interference! There was a $10 fine for damaging nets or scaring pigeons away from them. This was based on the belief that the pigeons were so plentiful they could never possibly become scarce, and that the pigeon-slaughter was a legitimate business.

In 1867, the State of New York found that the wild pigeon needed protection, and enacted a law to that effect. The year 1868 was the last year in which great numbers of passenger pigeons nested in that State. Eaton, in "The Birds of New York," said that "millions of birds occupied the timber along Bell's Run, near Ceres, Alleghany County, on the Pennsylvania line."

In 1867, the State of New York recognized the need to protect the wild pigeon and passed a law for that purpose. The year 1868 was the last time large numbers of passenger pigeons nested in that state. Eaton, in "The Birds of New York," noted that "millions of birds filled the woods along Bell's Run, near Ceres, Alleghany County, on the Pennsylvania line."

In 1870, Massachusetts gave pigeons protection except during an "open season," and in 1878 Pennsylvania elected to protect pigeons on their nesting grounds.

In 1870, Massachusetts provided protection for pigeons except during an "open season," and in 1878, Pennsylvania chose to protect pigeons on their nesting grounds.

The passenger pigeon millions were destroyed so quickly, and so thoroughly en masse, that the American people utterly failed to comprehend it, and for thirty years obstinately refused to believe that the species had been suddenly wiped off the map of North America. There was years of talk about the great flocks having "taken refuge in South America," or in Mexico, and being still in existence. There were surmises about their having all "gone out to sea," and perished on the briny deep.

The passenger pigeon population was wiped out so rapidly and completely en masse that the American public completely failed to grasp the situation, and for thirty years stubbornly refused to believe that the species had been suddenly erased from the map of North America. There were years of speculation about the large flocks having "taken refuge in South America" or Mexico and still being alive. There were also theories that they had all "gone out to sea" and perished in the ocean.

A thousand times, at least, wild pigeons have been "reported" as having been "seen." These rumors have covered nearly every northern state, the whole of the southwest, and California. For years and years we have been patiently writing letters to explain over and over that the band-tailed pigeon of the Pacific coast, and the red-billed pigeon of Arizona and the southwest are neither of them the passenger pigeon, and never can be.

A thousand times, at least, wild pigeons have been "reported" as having been "seen." These rumors have spread across almost every northern state, all of the southwest, and California. For years, we have been patiently writing letters to explain over and over that the band-tailed pigeon of the Pacific coast and the red-billed pigeon of Arizona and the southwest are neither the passenger pigeon nor can they ever be.

There was a long period wherein we believed many of the pigeon reports that came from the states where the birds once were most numerous; but that period has absolutely passed. During the past five years large cash [Page 14] rewards, aggregating about $5000, have been offered for the discovery of one nesting pair of genuine passenger pigeons. Many persons have claimed this reward (of Professor C.F. Hodge, of Clark University, Worcester, Mass.), and many claims have been investigated. The results have disclosed many mourning doves, but not one pigeon. Now we understand that the quest is closed, and hope has been abandoned.

There was a long time when we believed many of the reports about pigeons coming from the states where they used to be most abundant; but that time is definitely over. Over the past five years, large cash [Page 14] rewards totaling around $5000 have been offered for finding one nesting pair of real passenger pigeons. Many people have claimed this reward (from Professor C.F. Hodge of Clark University, Worcester, Mass.), and several claims have been investigated. The results revealed many mourning doves, but not a single pigeon. Now we understand that the search is over, and hope has been given up.

The passenger pigeon is a dead species. The last wild specimen (so we believe) that ever will reach the hands of man, was taken near Detroit, Michigan, on Sept. 14, 1908, and mounted by C. Campion. That is the one definite, positive record of the past ten years.

The passenger pigeon is an extinct species. The last wild specimen (as far as we know) that will ever be collected by humans was captured near Detroit, Michigan, on September 14, 1908, and mounted by C. Campion. That is the only certain, confirmed record from the past ten years.

The fate of this species should be a lasting lesson to the world at large. Any wild bird or mammal species can be exterminated by commercial interests in twenty years time, or less.

The fate of this species should be a lasting lesson to the world. Any wild bird or mammal species can be wiped out by commercial interests in twenty years or even less.

The Eskimo Curlew, —Numenius borealis, (Forst.). This valuable game bird once ranged all along the Atlantic coast of North America, and wherever found it was prized for the table. It preferred the fields and meadows to the shore lines, and was the companion of the plovers of the uplands, especially the golden plover. "About 1872," says Mr. Forbush, "there was a great flight of these birds on Cape Cod and Nantucket. They were everywhere; and enormous numbers were killed. They could be bought of boys at six cents apiece. Two men killed $300 worth of these birds at that time."

The Eskimo Curlew, —Numenius borealis, (Forst.). This important game bird used to be found all along the Atlantic coast of North America, and wherever it appeared, it was highly valued for food. It favored fields and meadows over shorelines and associated with upland plovers, particularly the golden plover. "Around 1872," says Mr. Forbush, "there was a massive influx of these birds on Cape Cod and Nantucket. They were everywhere, and huge numbers were hunted down. They could be purchased from boys for six cents each. Two men made $300 by hunting these birds at that time."

Apparently, that was the beginning of the end of the "dough bird," which was another name for this curlew. In 1908 Mr. G.H. Mackay stated that this bird and the golden plover had decreased 90 per cent in fifty years, and in the last ten years of that period 90 per cent of the remainder had gone. "Now (1908)," says Mr. Forbush, "ornithologists believe that the Eskimo curlew is practically extinct, as only a few specimens have been recorded since the beginning of the twentieth century." The very last record is of two specimens collected at Waco, York County, Nebraska, in March, 1911, and recorded by Mr. August Eiche. Of course, it is possible that other individuals may still survive; but so far as our knowledge extends, the species is absolutely dead.

Apparently, that marked the start of the decline of the "dough bird," which is another name for this curlew. In 1908, Mr. G.H. Mackay reported that this bird and the golden plover had declined by 90 percent over fifty years, and in the last decade of that period, 90 percent of what was left had disappeared. "Now (1908)," says Mr. Forbush, "ornithologists believe that the Eskimo curlew is practically extinct, as only a few specimens have been recorded since the start of the twentieth century." The very last record mentions two specimens collected in Waco, York County, Nebraska, in March 1911, as noted by Mr. August Eiche. Of course, it's possible that other individuals may still exist, but as far as we know, the species is completely extinct.


In the West Indies and the Guadeloupe Islands, five species of macaws and parrakeets have passed out without any serious note of their disappearance on the part of the people of the United States. It is at least time to write brief obituary notices of them.

In the West Indies and the Guadeloupe Islands, five species of macaws and parrots have disappeared without much attention from the people of the United States. It’s time to write short obituaries for them.

We are indebted to the Hon. Walter Rothschild, of Tring, England, for essential facts regarding these species as set forth in his sumptuous work "Extinct Birds".

We owe a big thanks to the Hon. Walter Rothschild, from Tring, England, for important information about these species as detailed in his lavish book "Extinct Birds."

The Cuban Tricolored Macaw, Ara tricolor, (Gm.). In 1875, when the author visited Cuba and the Isle of Pines, he was informed by Professor Poey that he was "about ten years too late" to find this fine species alive. It was exterminated for food purposes, about 1864, and only four specimens are known to be in existence.

The Cuban Tricolor Macaw, Ara tricolor (Gm.). In 1875, when the author visited Cuba and the Isle of Pines, Professor Poey told him he was "about ten years too late" to see this beautiful species alive. It was hunted to extinction for food around 1864, and only four specimens are known to still exist.

Gosse's Macaw, Ara gossei, (Roth.).—This species once inhabited the Island of Jamaica. It was exterminated about 1800, and so far as known not one specimen of it is in existence.

Gosse's Macaw, Ara gossei, (Roth.).—This species used to live on the Island of Jamaica. It was wiped out around 1800, and as far as we know, not a single specimen still exists.

Guadeloupe Macaw, Ara guadeloupensis, (Clark).—All that is known of the life history of this large bird is that once it inhabited the Guadeloupe Islands. The date and history of its disappearance are both unknown, and there is not one specimen of it in existence.

Guadeloupe Macaw Ara guadeloupensis, (Clark).—The only thing known about the life history of this large bird is that it once lived in the Guadeloupe Islands. The date and circumstances of its extinction are unknown, and no specimens of it exist today.

Yellow-Winged Green Parrot, Amazona olivacea, (Gm.).—Of the history of this Guadeloupe species, also, nothing is known, and there appear to be no specimens of it in existence.

Yellow-Winged Green Parrot Amazona olivacea, (Gm.).—There's no information about the history of this Guadeloupe species, and it seems that no specimens of it exist.

Purple Guadeloupe Parrakeet, Anodorhynchus purpurescens, (Rothschild).—This is another dead species, that once lived in the Guadeloupe Islands, and passed away silently and unnoticed at the time, leaving no records of its existence, and no specimens.

Purple Guadeloupe Parakeet, Anodorhynchus purpurescens, (Rothschild).—This is another extinct species that once lived in the Guadeloupe Islands, quietly disappearing without notice at the time, leaving no records of its existence and no specimens.

The Carolina Parrakeet, Conuropsis carolinensis, (Linn.), brings us down to the present moment. To this charming little green-and-yellow bird, we are in the very act of bidding everlasting farewell. Ten specimens remain alive in captivity, six of which are in the Cincinnati Zoological Garden, three are in the Washington Zoological Park and one is in the New York Zoological Park.

The Carolina Parakeet, Carolina parakeet, (Linn.), brings us to the present. We are saying a final goodbye to this lovely little green-and-yellow bird. There are only ten specimens left in captivity: six are at the Cincinnati Zoo, three are at the Washington Zoo, and one is at the New York Zoo.

Regarding wild specimens, it is possible that some yet remain, in some obscure and neglected corner of Florida; but it is extremely doubtful whether the world ever will find any of them alive. Mrs. Minnie Moore Willson, of Kissimee, Fla. reports the species as totally extinct in Florida. Unless we would strain at a gnat, we may just as well enter this species in the dead class; for there is no reason to hope that any more wild specimens ever will be found.

Regarding wild specimens, it’s possible that there are still some left in some hidden and neglected corner of Florida; however, it’s very unlikely that the world will ever find any of them alive. Mrs. Minnie Moore Willson from Kissimmee, Fla. reports that the species is completely extinct in Florida. Unless we want to argue over a trivial point, we might as well classify this species as dead; there’s no reason to believe that any more wild specimens will ever be discovered.

The former range of this species embraced the whole southeastern and central United States. From the Gulf it extended to Albany, N.Y., northern Ohio and Indiana, northern Iowa, Nebraska, central Colorado and eastern Texas, from which it will be seen that once it was widely distributed. It was shot because it was destructive to fruit and for its plumage, and many were trapped alive, to be kept in captivity. I know that one colony, near the mouth of the Sebastian River, east coast of Florida, was exterminated in 1898 by a local hunter, and I regret to say that it was done in the hope of selling the living birds to a New York bird-dealer. By holding bags over the holes in which the birds were nesting, the entire colony, of about 16 birds, was caught.

The former range of this species covered the entire southeastern and central United States. It stretched from the Gulf all the way to Albany, NY, northern Ohio and Indiana, northern Iowa, Nebraska, central Colorado, and eastern Texas, showing that it was once widely distributed. It was hunted because it damaged fruit and for its feathers, and many were trapped alive to be kept in captivity. I know of one colony near the mouth of the Sebastian River on Florida's east coast that was wiped out in 1898 by a local hunter, who unfortunately did it with the hope of selling the live birds to a bird dealer in New York. By covering the holes where the birds were nesting with bags, the entire colony of about 16 birds was caught.

Everywhere else than in Florida, the Carolina parrakeet has long been extinct. In 1904 a flock of 13 birds was seen near Lake Okechobee; but in Florida many calamities can overtake a flock of birds in eight years. The birds in captivity are not breeding, and so far as perpetuation by them is concerned, they are only one remove from mounted museum specimens. This parrakeet is the only member of its order that ranged into the United States during our own times, and with its disappearance the Order Psittaciformes totally disappears from our country.

Everywhere else but Florida, the Carolina parakeet has been extinct for a long time. In 1904, a flock of 13 birds was spotted near Lake Okeechobee, but in Florida, several disasters can affect a flock of birds in just eight years. The birds in captivity aren't breeding, so as far as their survival is concerned, they're hardly more than mounted museum specimens. This parakeet is the only member of its order that lived in the United States during modern times, and with its extinction, the Order Psittaciformes completely vanishes from our country.


[Page 17]
CHAPTER III
THE NEXT CANDIDATES FOR OBLIVION

In the world of human beings, murder is the most serious of all crimes. To take from a man that which no one ever can restore to him, his life, is murder; and its penalty is the most severe of all penalties.

In the world of people, murder is the gravest crime of all. To take away a person's life, something that can never be given back, is murder; and the punishment for it is the harshest of all punishments.

There are circumstances under which the killing of a wild animal may be so wanton, so revolting and so utterly reprehensible that the act may justly be classed as murder. The man who kills a walrus from the deck of a steamer that he knows will not stop; the man who wantonly killed the whole colony of hippopotami that Mr. Dugmore photographed in life; the man who last winter shot bull elk in Wyoming for their two ugly and shapeless teeth, and the man who wantonly shot down a half-tame deer "for fun" near Carmel, Putnam County, New York, in the summer of 1912,—all were guilty of murdering wild animals.

There are situations where killing a wild animal can be so cruel, disgusting, and completely unacceptable that it can be rightfully considered murder. The person who kills a walrus from the deck of a steamer, knowing it won’t stop; the person who carelessly wiped out an entire colony of hippopotamuses that Mr. Dugmore photographed alive; the person who shot bull elk in Wyoming last winter just for their two ugly and misshapen teeth; and the person who casually shot a semi-tame deer "for fun" near Carmel, Putnam County, New York, in the summer of 1912—were all guilty of murdering wild animals.

The murder of a wild animal species consists in taking from it that which man with all his cunning and all his preserves and breeding can not give back to it,—its God-given place in the ranks of Living Things. Where is man's boasted intelligence, or his sense of proportion, that every man does not see the monstrous moral obliquity involved in the destruction of a species!

The killing of a wild animal species means robbing it of what humans, with all their cleverness and efforts in conservation and breeding, cannot restore to it—its rightful place in the world of living beings. Where is the supposed intelligence of mankind, or the awareness of our actions, that everyone doesn't recognize the huge moral wrong in wiping out a species?

If the beautiful Taj Mehal at Agra should be destroyed by vandals, the intelligent portion of humanity would be profoundly shocked, even though the hand of man could at will restore the shrine of sorrowing love. To-day the great Indian rhinoceros, certainly one of the most wonderful four-footed animals still surviving, is actually being exterminated; and even the people of India and England are viewing it with an indifference that is appalling. Of course there are among Englishmen a great many sportsmen and several zoologists who really care; but they do not constitute one-tenth of one per-cent of the men who ought to care!

If the beautiful Taj Mahal in Agra were to be destroyed by vandals, the thoughtful part of humanity would be deeply shocked, even though people could easily rebuild this monument of tragic love. Right now, the magnificent Indian rhinoceros, undoubtedly one of the most incredible animals still alive, is actually facing extinction; and even the people of India and England are observing this with a shocking level of indifference. Of course, there are many sportsmen and some zoologists among the English who genuinely care; but they make up less than one-tenth of one percent of the men who should care!

In the museums, we stand in awe and wonder before the fossil skeleton of the Megatherium, and the savants struggle to unveil its past, while the equally great and marvelous Rhinoceros indicus is being rushed into oblivion. We marvel at the fossil shell of the gigantic turtle called Collosochelys atlas, while the last living representatives of the gigantic land tortoises are being exterminated in the Galapagos Islands and the Sychelles, for their paltry oil and meat; and only one man (Hon. Walter Rothschild) is doing aught to save any of them in their haunts, where they can breed. The dodo of Mauritius was exterminated by swine, whose bipedal descendants have exterminated many other species since that time.

In the museums, we stand in awe before the fossil skeleton of the Megatherium, and the experts struggle to uncover its history, while the equally impressive Rhinoceros indicus is being driven to extinction. We admire the fossil shell of the giant turtle known as Collosochelys atlas, as the last living giant land tortoises are being wiped out in the Galapagos Islands and the Seychelles for their small amounts of oil and meat; and only one man (Hon. Walter Rothschild) is doing anything to save them in their natural habitats, where they can reproduce. The dodo of Mauritius was eliminated by pigs, whose two-legged descendants have led to the extinction of many other species since that time.

A failure to appreciate either the beauty or the value of our living birds, quadrupeds and fishes is the hall-mark of arrested mental development and ignorance. The victim is not always to blame; but in this practical world the cornerstone of legal jurisprudence is the inexorable principle that "ignorance of the law excuses no man."

A failure to recognize the beauty or value of our living birds, four-legged animals, and fish is a sign of stagnant mental growth and ignorance. The person affected is not always at fault; but in this practical world, the foundation of legal principles is the unyielding idea that "ignorance of the law excuses no one."

These pages are addressed to my countrymen, and the world at large, not as a reproach upon the dead Past which is gone beyond recall, but in the faint hope of somewhere and somehow arousing forces that will reform the Present and save the Future. The extermination of wild species that now is proceeding throughout the world, is a dreadful thing. It is not only injurious to the economy of the world, but it is a shame and a disgrace to the civilized portion of the human race.

These pages are directed to my fellow citizens and to the global community, not as a criticism of the irretrievable past, but with the slight hope of igniting some forces that will improve the present and safeguard the future. The ongoing extinction of wildlife species around the world is a terrible situation. It not only harms the global economy but also reflects poorly on the civilized part of humanity.

It is of little avail that I should here enter into a detailed description of each species that now is being railroaded into oblivion. The bookshelves of intelligent men and women are filled with beautiful and adequate books on birds and quadrupeds, wherein the status of each species may be determined, almost without effort. There is time and space only in which to notice the most prominent of the doomed species, and perhaps discuss a few examples by way of illustration. Here is a

It doesn't really help for me to go into a detailed description of each species that's being pushed into extinction. The bookshelves of smart people are filled with great, thorough books on birds and mammals, where you can easily find information about each species. We only have time and space to mention the most notable endangered species and maybe discuss a few examples for illustration. Here is a


Partial List Of North American Birds Threatened With Early Extermination
Whooping Crane Pectoral Sandpiper
Trumpeter Swan Black-Capped Petrel
American Flamingo American Egret
Roseate Spoonbill Snowy Egret
Scarlet Ibis Wood Duck
Long-Billed Curlew Band-Tailed Pigeon
Hudsonian Godwit Heath Hen
Upland Plover Sage Grouse
Red-Breasted Sandpiper Prairie Sharp-Tail
Golden Plover Pinnated Grouse
Dowitcher White-Tailed Kite
Willet

The Whooping Crane. —This splendid bird will almost certainly be the next North American species to be totally exterminated. It is the only new world rival of the numerous large and showy cranes of the old world; for the sandhill crane is not in the same class as the white, black and blue giants of Asia. We will part from our stately Grus americanus with profound sorrow, for on this continent we ne'er shall see his like again.

The Whooping Crane. —This magnificent bird will likely be the next North American species to completely disappear. It’s the only New World counterpart to the many large and striking cranes of the Old World; the sandhill crane doesn't compare to the white, black, and blue giants of Asia. We will bid farewell to our majestic Grus americanus with deep sadness, for we will never see its kind on this continent again.

The well-nigh total disappearance of this species has been brought close home to us by the fact that there are less than half a dozen individuals alive in captivity, while in a wild state the bird is so rare as to be quite unobtainable. For example, for nearly five years an English [Page 19] gentlemen has been offering $1,000 for a pair, and the most enterprising bird collector in America has been quite unable to fill the order. So far as our information extends, the last living specimen captured was taken six or seven years ago. The last wild birds seen and reported were observed by Ernest Thompson Seton, who saw five below Fort McMurray, Saskatchewan, October 16th, 1907, and by John F. Ferry, who saw one at Big Quill Lake, Saskatchewan, in June, 1909.

The almost complete disappearance of this species has hit home for us since there are less than six individuals alive in captivity, and in the wild, the bird is so rare that it’s virtually impossible to find. For instance, for nearly five years, an English gentleman has been offering $1,000 for a pair, yet the most resourceful bird collector in America has been unable to fulfill the request. As far as we know, the last living specimen captured was taken six or seven years ago. The last wild birds spotted and reported were seen by Ernest Thompson Seton, who observed five near Fort McMurray, Saskatchewan, on October 16th, 1907, and by John F. Ferry, who saw one at Big Quill Lake, Saskatchewan, in June 1909.

The range of this species once covered the eastern two-thirds of the continent of North America. It extended from the Atlantic coast to the Rocky Mountains, and from Great Bear Lake to Florida and Texas. Eastward of the Mississippi it has for twenty years been totally extinct, and the last specimens taken alive were found in Kansas and Nebraska.

The range of this species once covered the eastern two-thirds of North America. It stretched from the Atlantic coast to the Rocky Mountains, and from Great Bear Lake down to Florida and Texas. East of the Mississippi, it has been completely extinct for twenty years, and the last live specimens were found in Kansas and Nebraska.

WHOOPING CRANES IN THE ZOOLOGICAL PARK

WHOOPING CRANES IN THE ZOOLOGICAL PARK

Very Soon this Species will Become Totally Extinct.

Very soon, this species will become completely extinct.

The Trumpeter Swan. —Six years ago this species was regarded as so nearly extinct that a doubting ornithological club of Boston refused to believe on hearsay evidence that the New York Zoological Park contained a pair of living birds, and a committee was appointed, to investigate in person, and report. Even at that time, skins were worth all the way from $100 to $150 each; and when swan skins sell at either of those figures it is because there are people who believe that the species either is on the verge of extinction, or has passed it. The pair referred to above [Page 20] was acquired in 1900. Since that time, Dr. Leonard C. Sanford procured in 1910 two living birds from a bird dealer who obtained them on the coast of Virginia. We have done our utmost to induce our pair to breed, but without any further results than nest-building.

The Trumpeter Swan. —Six years ago, this species was considered so close to extinction that a skeptical ornithological club in Boston refused to accept, based on hearsay, that the New York Zoological Park housed a pair of living birds. They formed a committee to investigate personally and report back. At that time, swan skins were valued anywhere from $100 to $150 each; when swan skins fetch those prices, it's because people believe the species is either on the brink of extinction or has already gone past it. The pair mentioned above [Page 20] was acquired in 1900. Since then, Dr. Leonard C. Sanford acquired two live birds from a dealer who got them on the Virginia coast in 1910. We have done everything possible to encourage our pair to breed, but so far, we've only had success with nest-building.

The loss of the trumpeter swan (Olor americanus) will not be so great, nor felt so keenly, as the blotting out of the whooping crane. It so closely resembles the whistling swan that only an ornithologist can recognize the difference, a yellow spot on the side of the upper mandible, near its base. The whistling swan yet remains in fair numbers, but it is to be feared that soon it will go as the trumpeter has gone.

The loss of the trumpeter swan (Olor americanus) won't be as significant or deeply felt as the extinction of the whooping crane. It looks so much like the whistling swan that only an ornithologist can spot the difference—a yellow spot on the side of the upper bill, near its base. The whistling swan still exists in decent numbers, but there’s a real concern that it could disappear just like the trumpeter has.

The American Flamingo, Scarlet Ibis And Roseate Spoonbill are three of the most beautiful and curious water-haunting birds of the tropics. Once all three species inhabited portions of the southern United States; but now all three are gone from our star-spangled bird fauna. The brilliant scarlet plumage of the flamingo and ibis, and the exquisite pink rose-color and white of the spoonbill naturally attracted the evil eyes of the "milliner's taxidermists" and other bird-butchers. From Florida these birds quickly vanished. The six great breeding colonies of Flamingoes on Andros Island, Bahamas, have been reduced to two, and from Prof. E.A. Goeldi, of the State Museum Goeldi, Para, Brazil, have come bitter complaints of the slaughter of scarlet ibises in South America by plume-hunters in European pay.

The American Flamingo, Scarlet Ibis, and Roseate Spoonbill are three of the most stunning and interesting water-loving birds of the tropics. Once, all three species lived in parts of the southern United States, but now they are all gone from our diverse bird population. The bright red feathers of the flamingo and ibis, along with the beautiful pink and white of the spoonbill, caught the greedy attention of "milliner's taxidermists" and other bird hunters. These birds quickly disappeared from Florida. The six major breeding colonies of flamingoes on Andros Island, Bahamas, have dwindled to just two, and Prof. E.A. Goeldi from the State Museum Goeldi in Para, Brazil, has shared troubling reports about the killing of scarlet ibises in South America by plume-hunters funded by Europeans.

I know not how other naturalists regard the future of the three species named above, but my opinion is that unless the European feather trade is quickly stopped as to wild plumage, they are absolutely certain to be shot into total oblivion, within a very few years. The plumage of these birds has so much commercial value, for fishermen's flies as well as for women's hats, that the birds will be killed as long as their feathers can be sold and any birds remain alive.

I’m not sure how other naturalists view the future of the three species mentioned above, but I believe that unless the European feather trade for wild plumage is halted immediately, they will definitely be shot into extinction within just a few years. The feathers of these birds have a high commercial value, for both fishermen's flies and women's hats, which means the birds will continue to be killed as long as their feathers can be sold and there are still any birds alive.

Zoologically, the flamingo is the most odd and interesting bird on the American continent except the emperor penguin. Its beak baffles description, its long legs and webbed feet are a joke, its nesting habits are amazing, and its food habits the despair of most zoological-garden keepers. Millions of flamingos inhabit the shores of a number of small lakes in the interior of equatorial East Africa, but that species is not brilliant scarlet all over the neck and head, as is the case with our species.

Zoologically, the flamingo is the most unusual and fascinating bird on the American continent, except for the emperor penguin. Its beak is hard to describe, its long legs and webbed feet are almost comical, its nesting habits are remarkable, and its eating habits are a challenge for most zoo keepers. Millions of flamingos live along the shores of several small lakes in central equatorial East Africa, but that species isn’t the vibrant scarlet that covers the neck and head, like our species.

If the American flamingo, scarlet ibis and roseate spoonbill, one or all of them, are to be saved from total extinction, efforts must be made in each of the countries in which they breed and live. Their preservation is distinctly a burden upon the countries of South America that lie eastward of the Andes, and on Yucatan, Cuba and the Bahamas. The time has come when the Government of the Bahama Islands should sternly forbid the killing of any more flamingos, on any pretext whatever; and if the capture of living specimens for exhibition purposes militates against the welfare of the colonies, they should forbid that also.

If the American flamingo, scarlet ibis, and roseate spoonbill, either individually or collectively, are to be saved from complete extinction, action must be taken in each country where they breed and live. Their preservation is primarily the responsibility of the countries in South America east of the Andes, as well as Yucatan, Cuba, and the Bahamas. It is time for the Government of the Bahamas to strictly prohibit the killing of any more flamingos for any reason; and if capturing live specimens for exhibition negatively impacts the well-being of the colonies, they should prohibit that too.

The Upland Plover, Or "Bartramian Sandpiper." —Apparently this is the next shore-bird species that will follow the Eskimo curlew into [Page 21] oblivion. Four years ago,—a long period for a species that is on the edge of extermination,—Mr. E.H. Forbush [B] wrote of it as follows:

The Upland Plover, also known as the "Bartramian Sandpiper." —It seems this is the next shorebird species that will join the Eskimo curlew in [Page 21] extinction. Four years ago— a long time for a species on the brink of extinction— Mr. E.H. Forbush [B] wrote about it like this:

"The Bartramian Sandpiper, commonly known as the Upland Plover, a bird which formerly bred on grassy hills all over the State and migrated southward along our coasts in great flocks, is in imminent danger of extirpation. A few still breed in Worcester and Berkshire Counties, or Nantucket, so there is still a nucleus which, if protected, may save the species. Five reports from localities where this bird formerly bred give it as nearing extinction, and four as extinct. This is one of the most useful of all birds in grass land, feeding largely on grasshoppers and cutworms. It is one of the finest of all birds for the table. An effort should be made at once to save this useful species."

"The Bartramian Sandpiper, also known as the Upland Plover, is a bird that used to breed on grassy hills across the state and migrated south in large flocks along our coasts. It is now in serious danger of disappearing. A few still breed in Worcester and Berkshire Counties, or Nantucket, so there is a small group that, if protected, could help save the species. Five reports from places where this bird used to breed indicate that it is close to extinction, while four state it is already extinct. This bird is one of the most beneficial for grassland ecosystems, mainly feeding on grasshoppers and cutworms. It is also one of the best birds for the dinner table. We need to take immediate action to save this valuable species."

The Black-Capped Petrel, (Aestrelata hasitata). —This species is already recorded in the A.O.U. "Check list" as extinct; but it appears that this may not as yet be absolutely true. On January 1, 1912, a strange thing happened. A much battered and exhausted black-capped petrel was picked up alive in Central Park, New York, taken to the menagerie, and kept there during the few days that it survived. When it died it was sent to the American Museum; and this may easily prove to be the last living record for that species. In reality, this species might as well be listed with those totally extinct. Formerly it ranged from the Antilles to Ohio and Ontario, and the causes of its blotting out are not yet definitely known.

The Black-Capped Petrel (Aestrelata hasitata). —This species is already listed in the A.O.U. "Check list" as extinct; however, it seems that may not be entirely accurate yet. On January 1, 1912, something unusual happened. A battered and exhausted black-capped petrel was found alive in Central Park, New York, taken to the zoo, and kept there for the few days it survived. After it died, it was sent to the American Museum; this may be the last confirmed sighting of that species. In reality, this species might as well be considered completely extinct. It used to inhabit areas from the Antilles to Ohio and Ontario, and the reasons for its decline are still not clearly understood.

This ocean-going bird once had a wide range overseas in the temperate areas of the North Atlantic. It is recorded from Ulster County, New York, New Hampshire, Kentucky, Ohio, Virginia and Florida. It was about of the size of the common tern.

This ocean-going bird used to have a broad range across the temperate regions of the North Atlantic. It has been spotted in Ulster County, New York, New Hampshire, Kentucky, Ohio, Virginia, and Florida. It was about the size of a common tern.

The California Condor, (Gymnogyps californianus). —I feel that the existence of this species hangs on a very slender thread. This is due to its alarmingly small range, the insignificant number of individuals now living, the openness of the species to attack, and the danger of its extinction by poison. Originally this remarkable bird,—the largest North American bird of prey,—ranged as far northward as the Columbia River, and southward for an unknown distance. Now its range is reduced to seven counties in southern California, although it is said to extend from Monterey Bay to Lower California, and eastward to Arizona.

The California Condor, California condor —I feel that this species is hanging by a thread. This is because of its alarmingly small range, the tiny number of individuals still alive, its vulnerability to threats, and the risk of extinction from poison. Originally, this incredible bird— the largest bird of prey in North America— ranged as far north as the Columbia River and south for an unknown distance. Now, its range is limited to seven counties in Southern California, although it is said to stretch from Monterey Bay to Baja California, and eastward to Arizona.

Regarding the present status and the future of this bird, I have been greatly disturbed in mind. When a unique and zoologically important species becomes reduced in its geographic range to a small section of a single state, it seems to me quite time for alarm. For some time I have counted this bird as one of those threatened with early extermination, and as I think with good reason. In view of the swift calamities that now seem able to fall on species like thunderbolts out of clear skies, and wipe them off the earth even before we know that such a fate is [Page 22] impending, no species of seven-county distribution is safe. Any species that is limited to a few counties of a single state is liable to be wiped out in five years, by poison, or traps, or lack of food.

Regarding the current status and future of this bird, I've been really concerned. When a unique and ecologically significant species gets restricted to a small area in just one state, it feels like a serious warning sign. For a while now, I've considered this bird to be one of those at risk of disappearing soon, and I believe that's a justified concern. Given the rapid disasters that can suddenly impact species, like lightning strikes out of nowhere, and erase them from existence before we even realize it's happening, no species that exists across seven counties can feel secure. Any species limited to just a few counties in one state is at risk of being wiped out in five years due to poison, traps, or food shortages.

CALIFORNIA CONDOR

California Condor

Now Living in the New York Zoological Park

Now Living in the New York Zoo

On order to obtain the best and also the most conservative information regarding this species, I appealed to the Curator of the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, of the University of California. Although written in the mountain wilds, I promptly received the valuable contribution that appears below. As a clear, precise and conservative survey of an important species, it is really a model document.

To get the best and most reliable information about this species, I reached out to the Curator of the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology at the University of California. Even though I was in the remote mountains, I quickly received the valuable contribution that follows. As a clear, precise, and thorough overview of an important species, it truly serves as a model document.


The Status Of The California Condor In 1912

By Joseph Grinnell

By Joseph Grinnell

"To my knowledge, the California Condor has been definitely observed within the past five years in the following California counties: Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Monterey, Kern, and Tulare. In parts of Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Kern counties the species is still fairly common, for a large bird, probably equal in numbers to the golden eagle in those regions that are suited to [Page 23] it. By suitable country I mean cattle-raising, mountainous territory, of which there are still vast areas, and which are not likely to be put to any other use for a very long time, if ever, on account of the lack of water.

"To my knowledge, the California Condor has definitely been seen in the last five years in these California counties: Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Monterey, Kern, and Tulare. In parts of Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, and Kern counties, the species is still fairly common for a large bird, probably on par with the golden eagle in areas that are suitable for [Page 23] it. By suitable areas, I mean cattle-raising mountainous regions, of which there are still vast stretches, unlikely to be repurposed for a very long time, if ever, due to the lack of water."

"While in Kern County last April, I was informed by a reliable man who lives near the Tejon Rancho that he had counted twenty-five condors in a single day, since January 1 of the present year. These were on the Tejon Rancho, which is an enormous cattle range covering parts of the Tehachapi and San Emigdio Mountains.

"While in Kern County last April, I was told by a trustworthy guy who lives near the Tejon Rancho that he counted twenty-five condors in just one day since January 1 of this year. These were on the Tejon Rancho, which is a massive cattle ranch spanning parts of the Tehachapi and San Emigdio Mountains."

"Our present state law provides complete protection for the condor and its eggs; and the State Fish and Game Commission, in granting permits for collectors, always adds the phrase—'except the California condor and its eggs.' I know of two special permits having been issued, but neither of these were used; that is, no 'specimens' have been taken since 1908, as far as I am aware.

"Our current state law fully protects the condor and its eggs, and the State Fish and Game Commission always includes the note—'except the California condor and its eggs'—when issuing permits for collectors. I know of two specific permits that were issued, but neither was utilized; as far as I know, no 'specimens' have been taken since 1908."

"In my travels about the state, I have found that practically everyone knows that the condor is protected. Still, there is always the hunting element who do not hesitate to shoot anything alive and out of the ordinary, and a certain percentage of the condors are doubtless picked off each year by such criminals. It is possible, also, that the mercenary egg-collector continues to take his annual rents, though if this is done it is kept very quiet. It is my impression that the present fatalities from all sources are fully balanced by the natural rate of increase.

"In my travels around the state, I've found that nearly everyone knows the condor is protected. Still, there's always that group of hunters who don’t hesitate to shoot anything unusual. A certain percentage of condors are definitely taken out each year by these individuals. It's also possible that the greedy egg-collector still harvests their annual bounty, although if they do, it's kept very hush-hush. I believe the current deaths from all sources are pretty much balanced by the natural growth rate."

"There is one factor that has militated against the condor more than any other one thing; namely, the restriction in its food source. Its forage range formerly included most of the great valleys adjacent to its mountain retreats. But now the valleys are almost entirely devoted to agriculture, and of course far more thickly settled than formerly.

"There is one factor that has affected the condor more than anything else: the limited availability of food. Its hunting range used to cover most of the large valleys near its mountain habitat. But now, those valleys are almost completely dedicated to farming and are, of course, much more populated than they used to be."

"The mountainous areas where the condor is making its last stand seem to me likely to remain adapted to the bird's existence for many years,—fifty years, if not longer. Of course, this is conditional upon the maintenance and enforcement of the present laws. There is also the enlightenment of public sentiment in regard to the preservation of wild life, which I believe can be depended upon. This is a matter of general education, which is, fortunately, and with no doubt whatever, progressing at a quite perceptible rate.

"The mountainous areas where the condor is making its last stand seem likely to remain suitable for the bird's existence for many years—fifty years, if not longer. Of course, this depends on maintaining and enforcing the current laws. There's also the growing awareness of the public regarding wildlife preservation, which I believe we can rely on. This is an issue of general education, which is, fortunately, and without a doubt, progressing at a noticeable pace."

"Yes; I should say that the condor has a fair chance to survive, in limited numbers.

"Yeah; I would say that the condor has a decent chance to survive, in small numbers."

"Another bird which in my opinion is far nearer extinction than the condor, so far as California is concerned, is the white-tailed kite. This is a perfectly harmless bird, but one which harries over the marshes, where it has been an easy target for the idle duck-hunter. Then, too, its range was limited to the valley bottoms, where human settlement is increasingly close. I know of only two live pairs within the state last year!

"Another bird that I believe is much closer to extinction than the condor, at least in California, is the white-tailed kite. This bird poses no threat, but it hunts over the marshes, making it an easy target for lazy duck hunters. Additionally, its habitat is restricted to the valley floors, where human development is getting closer and closer. I only know of two live pairs in the state from last year!"

"Finally, let me remark that the rate of increase of the California condor is not one whit less than that of the band-tailed pigeon! Yet, [Page 24] there is no protection at all for the latter in this state, even in the nesting season; and thousands were shot last spring, in the unprecedented concentration of the species in the southern coast counties. (See Chambers in The Condor for May, 1912, p. 108.)"

"Finally, let me point out that the growth rate of the California condor is no different from that of the band-tailed pigeon! Yet, [Page 24] there is no protection for the latter in this state, even during nesting season; and thousands were shot last spring, during the unusual concentration of the species in the southern coastal counties. (See Chambers in The Condor for May, 1912, p. 108.)"


The California Condor is one of the only two species of condor now living, and it is the only one found in North America. As a matter of national pride, and a duty to posterity, the people of the United States can far better afford to lose a million dollars from their national treasury than to allow that bird to become extinct. Its preservation for all coming time is distinctly a white man's burden upon the state of California. The laws now in force for the condor's protection are not half adequate! I think there is no law by which the accidental poisoning of those birds, by baits put out for coyotes and foxes, can be stopped. A law to prevent the use of poisoned meat baits anywhere in southern California, should be enacted at the next session of California's legislature. The fine for molesting a condor should be raised to $500, with a long prison-term as an alternative. A competent, interested game warden should be appointed solely for the protection of the condors. It is time to count those birds, keep them under observation, and have an annual report upon their condition.

The California Condor is one of just two condor species left in the world, and it’s the only one found in North America. As a point of national pride and a responsibility to future generations, the people of the United States can afford to lose a million dollars from their national budget far more than they can let this bird go extinct. Protecting it for all time is definitely a responsibility that falls to the state of California. The current laws in place to protect the condor are not nearly enough! I believe there are no laws to prevent these birds from being accidentally poisoned by bait set out for coyotes and foxes. A law to ban the use of poisoned meat baits anywhere in Southern California should be passed at the next session of California's legislature. The fine for disturbing a condor should be increased to $500, with a long prison sentence as an alternative. A qualified, dedicated game warden should be appointed solely for the protection of the condors. It's time to count these birds, monitor them closely, and provide an annual report on their status.

The Heath Hen. —But for the protection that has been provided for it by the ornithologists of Massachusetts, and particularly Dr. George W. Field, William Brewster and John E. Thayer, the heath hen or eastern pinnated grouse would years ago have become totally extinct. New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts began to protect that species entirely too late. It was given five-year close seasons, without avail. Then it was given ten-year close seasons, but it was too late!

The Heath Hen. —If it weren't for the protection provided by the ornithologists of Massachusetts, especially Dr. George W. Field, William Brewster, and John E. Thayer, the heath hen or eastern pinnated grouse would have gone completely extinct years ago. New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts started protecting this species far too late. They were given five-year closed seasons, but that didn't help. Then they were given ten-year closed seasons, but it was too late!

To-day, the species exists only in one locality, the island of Martha's Vineyard, and concerning its present status, Mr. Forbush has recently furnished us the following clear statement:

Today, the species exists only in one location, the island of Martha's Vineyard, and regarding its current status, Mr. Forbush has recently provided us with the following clear statement:

"The heath hens increased for two years after the Massachusetts Fish and Game Commission established a reservation for them, but in 1911 they had not increased. There are probably about two hundred birds extant.

"The heath hen population increased for two years after the Massachusetts Fish and Game Commission created a reservation for them, but by 1911, it hadn’t grown any further. There are probably around two hundred birds left."

"I found a great many marsh hawks on the Island and the Commission did not kill them, believing them to be beneficial. In watching them, I concluded that they were catching the young heath hens. A large number of these hawks have been shot and their stomachs sent to Washington for examination, as I was too busy at the time to examine them. So far as I know, no report of the examination has been made, but Dr. Field himself examined a few of the stomachs and found the remains of the heath hen in some.

"I saw a lot of marsh hawks on the Island, and the Commission didn't kill them because they thought they were beneficial. While watching them, I noticed that they were catching young heath hens. Many of these hawks have been shot, and their stomach contents were sent to Washington for analysis since I was too busy at the time to examine them myself. To my knowledge, no report from the analysis has come out, but Dr. Field looked at a few stomachs and found remains of the heath hen in some."

"The warden now says that during the past two years, the heath hen has not increased, but I can give you no definite evidence of this. I am quite sure they are being killed by natives of the island and that at least one collector supplies birds for museums. We are trying to get evidence of this.

"The warden now claims that over the past two years, the heath hen population hasn't increased, but I can't give you any solid proof of this. I'm pretty sure they’re being hunted by the locals on the island and that at least one collector is providing birds for museums. We are working on gathering evidence for this."

I believe if the heath hen is to be increased in numbers and brought back to this country, we shall have to have more than one warden on the reservation and, eventually, we shall have to establish the bird on the mainland also."

I believe that if we want to boost the heath hen population and bring them back to this country, we need more than one warden on the reservation, and eventually, we will have to establish the birds on the mainland too.

From the "American Natural History"

From the "American Natural History"

PINNATED GROUSE, OR "PRAIRIE CHICKEN"

Pinnated grouse, or "prairie chicken"

The Pinnated Grouse, Sage Grouse And Prairie Sharp-Tail. —In view of the fate of the grouse of the United States, as it has been wrought out thus far in all the more thickly settled areas, and particularly in view of the history of the heath hen, we have no choice but to regard all three of the species named above as absolutely certain to become totally extinct, within a short period of years, unless the conditions surrounding them are immediately and radically changed for the better. Personally, I do not believe that the gunners and game-hogs of Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Idaho, Washington, Oregon and California will permit any one of those species to be saved.

The Pinnated Grouse, Sage Grouse, and Prairie Sharp-Tail. —Given the fate of the grouse in the United States, especially in heavily populated areas and considering the history of the heath hen, we must conclude that all three species mentioned above are destined to become completely extinct within a few years unless their circumstances improve significantly and immediately. Personally, I don't think that the hunters and game enthusiasts in Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and California will allow any of these species to survive.

SAGE GROUSE

Sage Grouse

The First of the Upland Game Birds that will Become Extinct

The First Upland Game Bird That Will Go Extinct

If the present open seasons prevail in the states that I have mentioned above, no power on earth can save those three species of grouse from the fate of the heath hen. To-day their representatives exist only in small shreds and patches, and from fully nineteen-twentieths of their original ranges they are forever gone.

If the current hunting seasons stay in effect in the states I've mentioned, nothing on earth can save those three species of grouse from meeting the same fate as the heath hen. Today, their populations exist only in small remnants, and they are forever lost from more than ninety-five percent of their original ranges.

The sage grouse will be the first species to go. It is the largest, the most conspicuous, the one most easily found, and the biggest mark for the gunner. Those who have seen this bird in its native sage-brush well understand how fatally it is exposed to slaughter.

The sage grouse will be the first species to go. It is the largest, the most noticeable, the easiest to find, and the biggest target for hunters. Those who have seen this bird in its natural sagebrush habitat know all too well how vulnerable it is to being hunted.

Many appeals have been made in behalf of the pinnated grouse; but the open seasons continue. The gunners of the states in which a few remnants still exist are determined to have them, all; and the state legislatures seem disposed to allow the killers to have their way. It may be [Page 26] however, that like New York with the heath hen, they will arouse and virtuously lock the stable door—after the horse has been stolen!

Many requests have been made to protect the pinnated grouse, but hunting seasons are still ongoing. The hunters in states where only a few remain are set on getting them all; and the state legislatures seem willing to let the hunters do as they please. It may be [Page 26] however, that like New York with the heath hen, they will finally take action and try to protect them—only after it's too late!

The Snowy Egret And American Egret, (Egretta candidissima and Herodias egretta). —These unfortunate birds, cursed for all time by the commercially valuable "aigrette" plumes that they bear, have had a very narrow escape from total extinction in the United States, despite all the efforts made to save them. The "plume-hunters" of the millinery trade have been, and still are, determined to have the last feather and the last drop of egret blood. In an effort to stop the slaughter in at least one locality in Florida, Warden Guy Bradley was killed by a plume-hunter, who of course escaped all punishment through the heaven-born "sympathy" of a local jury.

The Snowy Egret and the American Egret, (Egretta candidissima and Herodias egretta). —These unfortunate birds, doomed forever by their commercially valuable "aigrette" feathers, have narrowly avoided total extinction in the United States, despite all efforts to protect them. The "plume-hunters" in the hat-making industry have been, and still are, determined to take the last feather and the last drop of egret blood. In an attempt to stop the massacre in at least one area in Florida, Warden Guy Bradley was killed by a plume-hunter, who, of course, faced no consequences thanks to the misguided "sympathy" of a local jury.

Of the bloody egret slaughter in Florida, not one-tenth of the whole story ever has been told. Millions of adult birds,—all there were,—were killed in the breeding season, when the plumes were ripe for the market; and millions of young birds starved in their nests. It was a common thing for a rookery of several hundred birds to be attacked by the plume-hunters, and in two or three days utterly destroyed. The same bloody work is going on to-day in Venezuela and Brazil; and the stories and "affidavits" stating that the millions of egret plumes being shipped annually from those countries are "shed feathers," "picked up off the ground," are absolute lies. The men who have sworn to those lies are perjurers, and should be punished for their crimes. (See Chapter XIII).

Of the brutal egret massacre in Florida, only a fraction of the entire story has ever been told. Millions of adult birds—every single one that existed—were killed during the breeding season, when the feathers were ready for the market; and millions of young birds starved in their nests. It was common for a colony of several hundred birds to be attacked by plume hunters and completely wiped out within two or three days. The same horrific actions are still happening today in Venezuela and Brazil; and the claims and "affidavits" stating that the millions of egret feathers shipped each year from those countries are "shed feathers," "picked up off the ground," are outright lies. The individuals who have sworn to these lies are committing perjury and should be held accountable for their crimes. (See Chapter XIII).

By 1908, the plume-hunters had so far won the fight for the egrets that Florida had been swept almost as bare of these birds as the Colorado desert.

By 1908, the plume hunters had largely succeeded in the battle for the egrets, leaving Florida nearly as devoid of these birds as the Colorado desert.

Until Mr. E.A. McIlhenny's egret preserve, at Avery Island, Louisiana, became a pronounced success, we had believed that our two egrets soon would become totally extinct in the United States. But Mr. McIlhenny has certainly saved those birds to our fauna. In 1892 he started an egret and heron preserve, close beside his house on Avery Island. By 1900 it was an established success. To-day 20,000 pairs of egrets and herons are living and breeding in that bird refuge, and the two egret species are safe in at least one spot in our own country.

Until Mr. E.A. McIlhenny's egret preserve at Avery Island, Louisiana, became a significant success, we thought our two egret species would soon be completely extinct in the United States. But Mr. McIlhenny has definitely saved those birds for our wildlife. In 1892, he started a preserve for egrets and herons right next to his home on Avery Island. By 1900, it was a proven success. Today, 20,000 pairs of egrets and herons are living and breeding in that bird sanctuary, and the two egret species are safe in at least one location in our country.

Photo by E.A. McIlhenny

Photo by E.A. McIlhenny

SNOWY EGRETS IN THE McILHENNY EGRET PRESERVE

SNOWY EGRETS IN THE McILHENNY EGRET PRESERVE

It is at This Period That the Parent Birds are Killed for Their Plumes, and the Young Starve in the Nest

It is during this time that the parent birds are killed for their feathers, and the young starve in the nest.

Three years ago, I think there were not many bird-lovers in the United States, who believed it possible to prevent the total extinction of both egrets from our fauna. All the known rookeries accessible to plume-hunters had been totally destroyed. Two years ago, the secret discovery of several small, hidden colonies prompted William Dutcher, President of the National Association of Audubon Societies, and Mr. T. Gilbert Pearson, Secretary, to attempt the protection of those colonies. With a fund contributed for the purpose, wardens were hired and duly commissioned. As previously stated, one of those wardens was shot dead in cold blood by a plume hunter. The task of guarding swamp rookeries from the attacks of money-hungry desperadoes to whom the accursed plumes were worth their weight in gold, is a very chancy proceeding. There is now one warden in Florida who says that "before they get my rookery they will first have to get me."

Three years ago, I don't think there were many bird lovers in the United States who believed it was possible to prevent the complete extinction of both egrets from our wildlife. All the known rookeries that were accessible to plume hunters had been completely destroyed. Two years ago, the secret discovery of several small, hidden colonies led William Dutcher, President of the National Association of Audubon Societies, and Mr. T. Gilbert Pearson, Secretary, to try to protect those colonies. With funds raised for this purpose, wardens were hired and officially commissioned. As mentioned earlier, one of those wardens was shot dead in cold blood by a plume hunter. The job of guarding swamp rookeries from the attacks of money-driven criminals, to whom the cursed plumes were worth their weight in gold, is very risky. There's now one warden in Florida who says, "before they get my rookery, they'll have to get me first."

Thus far the protective work of the Audubon Association has been successful. Now there are twenty colonies, which contain all told, about 5,000 egrets and about 120,000 herons and ibises which are guarded by the Audubon wardens. One of the most important is on Bird Island, a mile out in Orange Lake, central Florida, and it is ably defended by Oscar E. Baynard. To-day, the plume hunters who do not dare to raid the guarded rookeries are trying to study out the lines of flight of the birds, to and from their feeding-grounds, and shoot them in transit. Their motto is—"Anything to beat the law, and get the plumes." It is there that the state of Florida should take part in the war.

So far, the protective efforts of the Audubon Association have been successful. Now there are twenty colonies that hold around 5,000 egrets and about 120,000 herons and ibises, all monitored by Audubon wardens. One of the key colonies is on Bird Island, a mile out in Orange Lake, central Florida, and it is effectively defended by Oscar E. Baynard. Today, plume hunters who don’t dare to raid the protected rookeries are trying to track the birds' flight paths to and from their feeding grounds, aiming to shoot them on their way. Their motto is, “Anything to break the law and get the plumes.” This is where the state of Florida needs to get involved in the fight.

The success of this campaign is attested by the fact that last year a number of egrets were seen in eastern Massachusetts—for the first time in many years. And so to-day the question is, can the wardens continue to hold the plume-hunters at bay?

The success of this campaign is shown by the fact that last year a number of egrets were spotted in eastern Massachusetts—for the first time in many years. So today, the question is, can the wardens keep the plume-hunters away?

The Wood Duck (Aix sponsa), by many bird-lovers regarded as the most beautiful of all American birds, is threatened with extinction, in all the states that it still inhabits with the exception of eight. Long ago (1901) the U.S. Biological Survey sounded a general alarm for this species by the issue of a special bulletin regarding its disappearance, and advising its protection by long close seasons. To their everlasting honor, eight states responded, by the enactment of long close-season laws. This, is the

The Wood Duck (Aix sponsa) often considered the most beautiful of all American birds by many bird enthusiasts, is now at risk of extinction in all states where it still lives, except for eight. Back in 1901, the U.S. Biological Survey raised a major alert about this species by publishing a special bulletin about its decline and recommending protection through extended closed seasons. To their lasting credit, eight states acted by passing laws for long closed seasons. This is the


Roll Of Honor
Connecticut New Jersey
Maine New York
Massachusetts Vermont
New Hampshire West Virginia

WOOD DUCK

Wood Duck

Regularly Killed as "Food" in 15 States

Regularly Killed as "Food" in 15 States

And how is it with the other states that number the wood-duck in their avian faunas? I am ashamed to tell; but it is necessary that the truth should be known.

And how about the other states that include the wood-duck in their bird populations? I'm embarrassed to say it, but the truth needs to come out.

Surely we will find that if the other states have not the grace to protect this bird on account of its exquisite beauty they will not penalize it by extra long open seasons.

Surely we will see that if the other states lack the grace to protect this bird because of its stunning beauty, they won’t punish it with unusually long open seasons.

A number of them have taken pains to provide extra long OPEN seasons on this species, usually of five or six months!! And this for a bird so exquisitely beautiful that shooting it for the table is like dining on birds of paradise. Here is a partial list of them:

A number of them have worked hard to create extended OPEN seasons for this species, usually lasting five or six months!! And this is for a bird so incredibly beautiful that hunting it for food is like eating birds of paradise. Here is a partial list of them:


Wood-Duck-Eating States (1912)
Georgia kills and eats the Wood-duck from Sept. 1, to Feb. 1.
Indiana, Iowa and Kansas do so " Sept. 1, to Apr. 15.
Kentucky, (extra long!) does so " Aug. 15, to Apr. 1.
Louisiana (extra long!) " " " Sept. 1, to Mar. 1.
Maryland " " " Nov. 1, to Apr. 1.
Michigan " " " Oct. 15, to Jan. 1.
Nebraska (extra long!) " " " Sept. 1, to Apr. 1.
Ohio " " " Sept. 1, to Jan. 1.
Pennsylvania, (extra long!) " " " Sept. 1, to Apr. 11.
Rhode Island, " " " " " Aug. 15, to Apr. 1.
South Carolina " " " " " Sept. 1, to Mar. 1.
South Dakota " " " " " Sept. 10, to Apr. 10.
Tennessee " " " " " Aug. 1, to Apr. 15.
Virginia " " " Aug. 1, to Jan. 1.
Wisconsin " " " Sept. 1, to Jan. 1.

The above are the states that really possess the wood-duck and that should give it, one and all, a series of five-year close seasons. Now, is not the record something to blush for?

The states mentioned above are the ones that truly have the wood-duck and should all implement a series of five-year closed seasons for it. Isn’t the record something to be ashamed of?

Is there in those fifteen states nothing too beautiful or too good to go into the pot?

Is there in those fifteen states nothing too beautiful or too good to add to the mix?


The Woodcock (Philohela minor), is a bird regarding which my bird-hunting friends and I do not agree. I say that as a species it is steadily disappearing, and presently will become extinct, unless it is accorded better protection. They reply: "Well, I can show you where there are woodcock yet!"

The Woodcock (Philohela minor), is a bird that my hunting buddies and I don’t see eye to eye on. I believe it’s gradually disappearing as a species and will go extinct soon unless it gets more protection. They counter, "Well, I can show you where there are still woodcocks!"

A few months ago a Nova Scotian writer in Forest and Stream came out with the bold prediction that three more years of the usual annual slaughter of woodcock will bring the species to the verge of extinction in that Province.

A few months ago, a writer from Nova Scotia in Forest and Stream made the daring prediction that three more years of the regular annual killing of woodcock will push the species to the brink of extinction in that province.

It is such occurrences as this that bring the end of a species:

It’s events like this that lead to the extinction of a species:

"Last fall [1911, at Norwalk, Conn.] we had a good flight of woodcock, and it is a shame the way they were slaughtered. I know of a number of cases where twenty were killed by one gun in the day, and heard of one case of fifty. This is all wrong, and means the end of the woodcock, if continued. There is no doubt we need a bag limit on woodcock, as much as on quail or partridge." ("Woodcock" in Forest and Stream, Mar. 2, 1912.)

"Last fall [1911, in Norwalk, Conn.], we had a great flight of woodcock, and it’s a shame how many were killed. I know of several instances where one person shot twenty in a single day, and I heard about one case where fifty were taken. This is all wrong and will lead to the extinction of woodcock if it keeps happening. There's no doubt we need a bag limit for woodcock, just like we do for quail or partridge." ("Woodcock" in Forest and Stream, Mar. 2, 1912.)

As far back as 1901, Dr. A.K. Fisher of the Biological Survey predicted that the woodcock and wood-duck would both become extinct unless better protected. As yet, the better protection demanded has not materialized to any great extent.

As early as 1901, Dr. A.K. Fisher of the Biological Survey predicted that both the woodcock and wood-duck would become extinct unless they received better protection. So far, the improved protection he called for hasn't really happened to a significant degree.

Says Mr. Forbush, State Ornithologist of Massachusetts, in his admirable "Special Report," p. 45:

Says Mr. Forbush, State Ornithologist of Massachusetts, in his excellent "Special Report," p. 45:

"The woodcock is decreasing all over its range in the East, and needs the strongest protection. Of thirty-eight Massachusetts reports, thirty-six state that "woodcock are decreasing," "rare" or "extinct," while one states that they are holding their own, and one that they are increasing slightly since the law was passed prohibiting their sale."

"The woodcock is declining throughout its range in the East and requires the strongest protection. Out of thirty-eight reports from Massachusetts, thirty-six indicate that 'woodcock are decreasing,' 'rare,' or 'extinct,' while one says they are stable, and one mentions they are slightly increasing since the law was enacted to prohibit their sale."

Let not any honest American or Canadian sportsman lullaby himself into the belief that the woodcock is safe from extermination. As sure as the world, it is going! The fact that a little pocket here or there contains a few birds does not in the slightest degree disprove the main fact. If the sportsmen of this country desire to save the seed stock of woodcock, they must give it everywhere five or ten-year close seasons, and do it immediately!

Let no honest American or Canadian sportsman convince himself that the woodcock is safe from extinction. It's definitely on the decline! Just because a few birds can be found in some pockets here and there doesn't change the overall reality. If the sportsmen in this country want to preserve the woodcock population, they need to implement five or ten-year hunting restrictions everywhere, and do it right away!

Our Shore Birds In General. —This group of game birds will be the first to be exterminated in North America as a group. Of all our birds, these are the most illy fitted to survive. They are very conspicuous, very unwary, easy to find if alive, and easy to shoot. Never in my life have any shore birds except woodcock and snipe appealed to me as real game. They are too easy to kill, too trivial when killed, and some of them are too rank and fishy on the plate. As game for men I place them on a level with barnyard ducks or orchard turkeys. I would as soon be caught stealing a sheep as to be seen trying to shoot fishy yellow legs or little joke sandpipers for the purpose of feeding upon them. And yet, thousands of full-grown men, some of them six feet high, grow indignant [Page 31] and turn red in the face at the mention of a law to give all the shore-birds of New York a five-year close season.

Shore Birds Overview. —This group of game birds will be the first to be wiped out in North America as a group. Of all our birds, these are the least equipped to survive. They are very noticeable, very trusting, easy to spot if they’re alive, and easy to shoot. Never in my life have any shore birds, except for woodcock and snipe, seemed like real game to me. They are too easy to kill, too insignificant when killed, and some of them taste too strong and fishy. I consider them on the same level as barnyard ducks or farm turkeys when it comes to game for hunters. I would rather be caught stealing a sheep than be seen trying to shoot fishy yellowlegs or little joke sandpipers just to eat them. And yet, thousands of grown men, some of them six feet tall, get angry [Page 31] and turn red in the face at the idea of a law giving all the shorebirds of New York a five-year close season.

But for all that, gentlemen of the gun, there are exactly two alternatives between which you shall choose:

But regardless of that, gunmen, you have exactly two options to choose from:

(1) Either give the woodcock of the eastern United States just ten times the protection that it now has, or (2) bid the species a long farewell. If you elect to slaughter old Philohela minor on the altar of Selfishness, then it will be in order for the millions of people who do not kill birds to say whether that proposal shall be consummated or not.

(1) Either give the woodcock of the eastern United States just ten times the protection it currently has, or (2) say goodbye to the species for good. If you choose to wipe out old Philohela minor for your own benefit, then it’s up to the millions of people who don’t harm birds to decide whether that plan will go through or not.

Read if you please Mr. W.A. McAtee's convincing pamphlet (Biological Survey, No. 79), on "Our Vanishing Shore Birds," reproduced in full in Chapter XXIII. He says: "Throughout the eastern United States, shore birds are fast vanishing. Many of them have been so reduced that extermination seems imminent. So averse to shore birds are present conditions [of slaughter] that the wonder is that any escape. All the shore birds of the United States are in great need of better protection.... Shore birds have been hunted until only a remnant of their once vast numbers are left. Their limited powers of reproduction, coupled with the natural vicissitudes of the breeding period, make their increase slow, and peculiarly expose them to danger of extermination. So great is their economic value that their retention in the game list and their destruction by sportsmen is a serious loss to agriculture."

Read if you please Mr. W.A. McAtee's compelling pamphlet (Biological Survey, No. 79), on "Our Vanishing Shore Birds," reproduced in full in Chapter XXIII. He states: "Across the eastern United States, shore birds are rapidly disappearing. Many species have dwindled to the point that extermination seems imminent. The current conditions [of slaughter] are so hostile to shore birds that it's a wonder any survive. All shore birds in the United States urgently need better protection.... They have been hunted to the point where only a small fraction of their once large populations remain. Their limited ability to reproduce, combined with the natural challenges of the breeding season, means their numbers grow slowly and leave them especially vulnerable to extinction. Their significant economic value makes their inclusion in the game list and their killing by hunters a serious loss to agriculture."

And yet, here in New York state there are many men who think they "know," who indignantly scoff at the idea that our shore birds need a five-year close season to help save them from annihilation. The writer's appeal for this at a recent convention of the New York State Fish, Game and Forest League fell upon deaf ears, and was not even seriously discussed.

And yet, here in New York State, there are many people who think they "know," who scoff at the idea that our shorebirds need a five-year closed season to help save them from extinction. The writer's appeal for this at a recent convention of the New York State Fish, Game and Forest League went unheard and wasn't even taken seriously.

The shore-birds must be saved; and just at present it seems that the only persons who will do it are those who are not sportsmen, and who never kill game! If the sportsmen persist in refusing to act, to them we must appeal.

The shorebirds need to be saved, and right now it appears that the only people willing to do so are those who are not hunters and who never kill animals! If the hunters continue to refuse to take action, we'll have to reach out to them.

Besides the woodcock and snipe, the species that are most seriously threatened with extinction at an early date are the following:

Besides the woodcock and snipe, the species that are most at risk of extinction in the near future are the following:


Species In Great Danger
Willet Catoptrophorus semipalmatus
Dowitcher Macrorhamphus griseus
Knot: Red-Breasted Sandpiper Tryngites subruficollis
Upland Plover Bartramia longicauda
Golden Plover Charadrius dominicus
Pectoral Sandpiper Pisobia maculata

Of these fine species, Mr. Forbush, whose excellent knowledge of the shore birds of the Atlantic coast is well worth the most serious consideration, says that the upland plover, or Bartramian sandpiper, "is [Page 32] in imminent danger of extinction. Five reports from localities where this bird formerly bred give it as nearing extinction, and four as extinct. This is one of the most useful of all birds in grass land, feeding largely on grasshoppers and cutworms.... There is no difference of opinion in regard to the diminution of the shore birds; the reports from all quarters are the same. It is noteworthy that practically all observers agree that, considering all species, these birds have fallen off about 75 per cent within twenty-five to forty years, and that several species are nearly extirpated."

Of these remarkable species, Mr. Forbush, who has a deep understanding of the shorebirds along the Atlantic coast, asserts that the upland plover, or Bartramian sandpiper, "is [Page 32] in serious danger of extinction. Five reports from areas where this bird used to breed indicate it's close to extinction, and four say it's extinct. This bird is one of the most beneficial in grasslands, feeding mainly on grasshoppers and cutworms.... There’s unanimous agreement regarding the decline of shorebirds; the reports from everywhere are consistent. It's significant that nearly all observers concur that, across all species, these birds have decreased by about 75 percent over the last twenty-five to forty years, and several species are almost completely gone."

In 1897 when the Zoological Society published my report on the "Extermination of Our Birds and Mammals," we put down the decrease in the volume of bird life in Massachusetts during the previous fifteen years at twenty-seven per cent. The later and more elaborate investigations of Mr. Forbush have satisfactorily vindicated the accuracy of that estimate.

In 1897, when the Zoological Society released my report on the "Extermination of Our Birds and Mammals," we noted that the population of birds in Massachusetts had decreased by twenty-seven percent over the past fifteen years. The subsequent and more detailed investigations by Mr. Forbush have effectively confirmed the accuracy of that estimate.

There are other North American birds that easily might be added to the list of those now on the road to oblivion; but surely the foregoing citations are sufficient to reveal the present desperate conditions of our bird life in general. Now the question is: What are the great American people going to do about it?

There are other North American birds that could easily be added to the list of those on the brink of extinction; but the examples mentioned above are enough to show the urgent situation of our bird populations overall. Now the question is: What are the American people going to do about it?

THE GRAY SQUIRREL, A FAMILIAR FRIEND WHEN PROTECTED

THE GRAY SQUIRREL, A FAMILIAR FRIEND WHEN SAFE

The Gray Squirrel. —The gray squirrel is in danger of extermination. Although it is our most beautiful and companionable small wild animal, and really unfit for food, Americans have strangely elected to class it [Page 33] as "game," and shoot it to death, to eat! And this in stall-fed America, in the twentieth century! Americans are the only white people in the world who eat squirrels. It would be just as reasonable, and no more barbarous, to kill domestic cats and eat them. Their flesh would taste quite as good as squirrel flesh and some of them would afford quite as good "sport."

The Gray Squirrel. —The gray squirrel is at risk of being wiped out. Although it's our most beautiful and friendly small wild animal and isn’t really suitable for eating, Americans have oddly decided to categorize it [Page 33] as "game" and hunt it down, to eat! And this is happening in a well-fed America, in the twentieth century! Americans are the only white people in the world who eat squirrels. It would be just as logical, and no less cruel, to kill domestic cats and eat them. Their meat would taste just as good as squirrel meat, and some of them would provide just as much "sport."

Every intelligent person knows that in the United States the deadly shot-gun is rapidly exterminating every bird and every small mammal that is classed as "game," and which legally may be killed, even during two months of the twelve. The market gunners slaughter ducks, grouse, shore birds and rabbits as if we were all starving.

Every smart person knows that in the United States, the deadly shotgun is quickly wiping out every bird and small mammal considered "game," which can legally be killed, even during two months out of the year. The market gunners are killing ducks, grouse, shore birds, and rabbits as if we were all starving.

The beautiful gray squirrel has clung to life in a few of our forests and wood-lots, long after most other wild mammals have disappeared; but throughout at least ninety-five per cent, of its original area, it is now extinct. During the past thirty years I have roamed the woods of my state in several widely separated localities,—the Adirondacks, Catskills, Berkshires, western New York and elsewhere, and in all that time I have seen only three wild gray squirrels outside of city parks.

The beautiful gray squirrel has managed to survive in a few of our forests and woodlands, long after most other wild mammals have vanished; however, it is now extinct in at least ninety-five percent of its original range. Over the past thirty years, I've explored the woods of my state in various distant locations—the Adirondacks, Catskills, Berkshires, western New York, and beyond—and during all that time, I've only spotted three wild gray squirrels outside of city parks.

Except over a very small total area, the gray squirrel is already gone from the wild fauna of New York State!

Except for a very small area, the gray squirrel is already gone from the wildlife of New York State!

Do the well-fed people of America wish to have this beautiful animal entirely exterminated? Do they wish the woods to become wholly lifeless? Or, do they desire to bring back some of the wild creatures, and keep them for their children to enjoy?

Do the well-fed people of America want to see this beautiful animal completely wiped out? Do they want the forests to become totally lifeless? Or do they want to bring back some of the wild creatures so their children can enjoy them?

There is no wild mammal that responds to protection more quickly than the gray squirrel. In two years' time, wild specimens that are set free in city parks learn that they are safe from harm and become almost fearless. They take food from the hands of visitors, and climb into their arms. One of the most pleasing sights of the Zoological Park is the enjoyment of visitors, young and old, in "petting" our wild gray squirrels.

There’s no wild animal that reacts to protection faster than the gray squirrel. In just two years, wild ones released in city parks figure out that they’re safe from danger and become nearly fearless. They accept food from visitors' hands and even climb into their arms. One of the most delightful sights at the Zoo is seeing visitors, both young and old, enjoy "petting" our wild gray squirrels.

We ask the Boy Scouts of America to bring back this animal to each state where it belongs, by securing for it from legislatures and governors the perpetual closed seasons that it imperatively needs. It is not much to ask. This can be done by writing to members of the legislatures and requesting a suitable law. Such a request will be both right and reasonable; and three states have already granted it.

We request the Boy Scouts of America to restore this animal to every state where it belongs by getting legislatures and governors to establish permanent closed seasons that it urgently needs. This is not a big ask. It can be achieved by reaching out to lawmakers and asking for an appropriate law. Such a request is both fair and sensible; and three states have already approved it.

The gray squirrel is naturally the children's closest wild-animal friend. Surely every farmer boy would like to have colonies of gray squirrels around him, to keep him company, and furnish him with entertainment. A wood-lot without squirrels and chipmunks is indeed a lifeless place. For $20 anyone can restock any bit of woods with the most companionable and most beautiful tree-dweller that nature has given us.

The gray squirrel is naturally the closest wild-animal friend of children. Every farmer boy would surely love to have groups of gray squirrels around him for company and entertainment. A woodland without squirrels and chipmunks is truly a dull place. For just $20, anyone can repopulate any area of forest with the most sociable and beautiful tree-dweller that nature has provided us.

The question now is, which will you choose—a gray squirrel colony to every farm, or lifeless desolation?

The question now is, which will you choose—a gray squirrel colony on every farm, or empty desolation?

We ask every American to lend a hand to save Silver-Tail.

We urge every American to help save Silver-Tail.


[Page 34]
CHAPTER IV
EXTINCT AND NEARLY EXTINCT SPECIES OF MAMMALS

When we pause and consider the years, the generations and the ages that Nature spends in the production of a high vertebrate species, the preservation of such species from extermination should seriously concern us. As a matter of fact, in modern man's wild chase after wealth and pleasure, it is only one person out of every ten thousand who pauses to regard such causes, unless cornered by some protectionist fanatic, held fast and coerced to listen.

When we take a moment to think about the years, generations, and ages that Nature invests in creating a complex vertebrate species, we should really be worried about protecting such species from extinction. In today's world, as people are caught up in their pursuit of wealth and pleasure, only one in ten thousand actually stops to consider these issues, unless they're pressured by a passionate advocate who makes them listen.

We are not discussing the animals of the Pleistocene, or the Eocene, or any period of the far-distant Past. We are dealing with species that have been ruthlessly, needlessly and wickedly destroyed by man during our own times; species that, had they been given a fair chance, would be alive and well to-day.

We aren't talking about animals from the Pleistocene, Eocene, or any other long-gone era. We're focused on species that have been brutally, unnecessarily, and cruelly wiped out by humans in our own time; species that, if they had been given a fair chance, would be thriving today.

In reckless waste of blood and treasure, the nineteenth century has much for which to answer. Wars and pillage, fires, earthquakes and volcanoes are unhappily unavoidable. Like the poor of holy writ, we have them with us always. But the destruction of animal life is in a totally different category from the accidental calamities of life. It is deliberate, cold-blooded, persistent, and in its final stage, criminal! Worst of all, there is no limit to the devilish persistence of the confirmed destroyer, this side of the total extinction of species. No polar night is too cold, no desert inferno is too hot for the man who pursues wild life for commercial purposes. The rhytina has been exterminated in the far north, the elephant seals on Kerguelen are being exterminated in the far south, and midway, in the desert mountains of Lower California a fine species of mountain sheep is rapidly being shot into oblivion.

In the reckless waste of blood and resources, the nineteenth century has a lot to answer for. Wars, looting, fires, earthquakes, and volcanoes are unfortunately unavoidable. Like the impoverished in holy texts, we have them with us always. However, the destruction of animal life is in a completely different category from the accidental disasters of life. It is intentional, cold-hearted, ongoing, and, in its final stage, criminal! Worst of all, the relentless determination of the confirmed destroyer knows no bounds, except for the complete extinction of species. No polar night is too cold, no desert heat is too intense for the person who hunts wildlife for profit. The rhytina has been wiped out in the far north, the elephant seals on Kerguelen are being wiped out in the far south, and in the desert mountains of Lower California, a rare species of mountain sheep is quickly being shot into oblivion.


Large Mammals Completely Exterminated

The Arizona Elk, (Cervus merriami). —Right at our very door, under our very noses and as it were only yesterday, a well-defined species of American elk has been totally exterminated. Until recently the mountains of Arizona and New Mexico were inhabited by a light-colored elk of smaller size than the Wyoming species, whose antlers possessed on each side only one brow tine instead of two. The exact history of the blotting out of that species has not yet been written, but it seems that its final extinction occurred about 1901. Its extermination was only a routine incident of the devilish general slaughter of American big game that by 1900 had wiped out nearly everything killable over a large portion of the Rocky Mountain region and the Great Plains.

The Arizona Elk, (Cervus merriami). —Right at our doorstep, right under our noses, and as if it were just yesterday, a distinct species of American elk has been completely wiped out. Until recently, the mountains of Arizona and New Mexico were home to a lighter-colored elk that was smaller than the Wyoming species, with antlers featuring only one brow tine on each side instead of two. The exact story behind the disappearance of this species hasn’t been fully told, but it appears that it became extinct around 1901. Its extinction was just a routine part of the horrific overall slaughter of American big game that, by 1900, had virtually eliminated nearly everything that could be hunted across a vast stretch of the Rocky Mountain region and the Great Plains.

The Arizona elk was exterminated before the separate standing of the species had been discovered by naturalists, and before even one skin had been preserved in a museum! In 1902 Mr. E.W. Nelson described the species from two male skulls, all the material of which he knew. Since that time, a third male skull, bearing an excellent pair of antlers, has been discovered by Mr. Ferdinand Kaegebehn, a member of the New York Zoological Society, and presented to our National Collection of Heads and Horns. It came from the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona, in 1884. The species was first exterminated in the central and northern mountains of Arizona, probably twenty years ago, and made its last stand in northwestern New Mexico. Precisely when it became extinct there, its last abiding place, we do not know, but in time the facts may appear.

The Arizona elk was wiped out before the species was recognized as separate by naturalists, and before even one skin had been preserved in a museum! In 1902, Mr. E.W. Nelson described the species based on two male skulls, which were all the material he had. Since then, a third male skull with a great pair of antlers was found by Mr. Ferdinand Kaegebehn, a member of the New York Zoological Society, and donated to our National Collection of Heads and Horns. It was found in the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona, in 1884. The species was first eliminated in the central and northern mountains of Arizona, probably about twenty years ago, and made its last stand in northwestern New Mexico. We don't know exactly when it went extinct there, its final home, but hopefully, the details will be uncovered in time.

The Quagga, (Equus quagga). —Before the days of Livingstone, Gordon-Cumming and Anderson, the grassy plains and half-forested hills of South Africa were inhabited by great herds of a wild equine species that in its markings was a sort of connecting link between the striped zebras and the stripeless wild asses. The quagga resembled a wild ass with a few zebra stripes around its neck, and no stripes elsewhere.

The Quagga, (Equus quagga). —Before the times of Livingstone, Gordon-Cumming, and Anderson, the grassy plains and partially forested hills of South Africa were home to large herds of a wild horse species that had a unique pattern connecting the striped zebras and the solid-colored wild donkeys. The quagga looked like a wild donkey with some zebra stripes around its neck, but no stripes anywhere else.

There is no good reason why a mammal that is not in any one of the families regularly eaten by man should be classed as a game animal. White men, outside of the western border of the continent of Europe, do not eat horses; and by this token there is no reason why a zebra should be shot as a "game" animal, any more than a baboon. A big male baboon is dangerous; a male zebra is not.

There’s no good reason for classifying a mammal that isn’t part of the families people typically eat as a game animal. White people, outside of Western Europe, don’t eat horses; so there’s no reason to shoot a zebra as a "game" animal any more than a baboon. A large male baboon is dangerous; a male zebra is not.

Nevertheless, white men have elected to shoot zebras as game; and under this curse the unfortunate quagga fell to rise no more. The species was shot to a speedy death by sportsmen, and by the British and Dutch farmers of South Africa. It became extinct about 1875, and to-day there are only 18 specimens in all the museums of the world.

Nevertheless, white men chose to hunt zebras for sport; and under this curse, the unfortunate quagga was shot and never rose again. The species was quickly hunted to extinction by sportsmen, as well as British and Dutch farmers in South Africa. It became extinct around 1875, and today, there are only 18 specimens left in all the museums worldwide.

The Blaubok, (Hippotragus leucophaeus). —The first of the African antelopes to become extinct in modern times was a species of large size, closely related to the roan antelope of to-day, and named by the early Dutch settlers of Cape Colony the blaubok, which means "blue-buck." It was snuffed out of existence in the year 1800, so quickly and so thoroughly that, like the Arizona elk, it very nearly escaped the annals of natural history. According to the careful investigations of Mr. Graham Renshaw, there are only eight specimens in existence in all the museums of Europe. In general terms it may be stated that this species has been extinct for about a century.

The Blaubok, (Hippotragus leucophaeus). —The first African antelope to go extinct in modern times was a large species, closely related to today’s roan antelope, and was named by the early Dutch settlers of Cape Colony the blaubok, which means "blue-buck." It vanished in 1800 so quickly and completely that, like the Arizona elk, it almost got overlooked in the record of natural history. According to thorough research by Mr. Graham Renshaw, there are only eight specimens left in all the museums of Europe. Generally speaking, this species has been extinct for about a century.

David's Deer (Elaphurus davidianus). —We enter this species with those that are totally extinct, because this is true of it so far as its wild state is concerned. It is a deer nearly as large as the red deer of Europe, with 3-tined antlers about equal in total length to those of the red deer. Its most striking differential character is its long tail, a feature that among the deer of the world is quite unique.

David's Deer (Roe deer). —We include this species with those that are completely extinct because, in terms of its wild state, this is accurate. It’s a deer nearly as large as the European red deer, with 3-tined antlers that are roughly the same length as those of the red deer. Its most distinctive feature is its long tail, which is quite unique among the deer species worldwide.

Originally this species inhabited "northern Mongolia" (China), but in a wild state it became extinct before its zoological standing became known to the scientific world. The species was called to the attention of zoologists by a Roman Catholic missionary, called Father David, and when finally described it was named in his honor.

Originally, this species lived in "northern Mongolia" (China), but it went extinct in the wild before its classification was recognized by the scientific community. The species was brought to the attention of zoologists by a Roman Catholic missionary named Father David, and when it was finally described, it was named in his honor.

At the outbreak of the Boxer Rebellion, in 1900, there were about 200 specimens living in the imperial park of China, a short distance south of Pekin; but during the rebellion, all of them were killed and eaten, thus totally exterminating the species from Asia.

At the start of the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, there were around 200 specimens living in the imperial park of China, just south of Beijing. However, during the rebellion, all of them were killed and eaten, completely wiping out the species in Asia.

Fortunately, previous to that calamity (in 1894), the Duke of Bedford had by considerable effort and expenditure procured and established in his matchless park surrounding Woburn Abbey, England, a herd of eighteen specimens of this rarest of all deer. That nucleus has thriven and increased, until in 1910 it contained thirty-four head. Owing to the fact that all the living female specimens of this remarkable species are concentrated in one spot, and perfectly liable to be wiped out in one year by riot, war or disease, there is some cause for anxiety. The writer has gone so far as to suggest the desirability of starting a new herd of David's deer, at some point far distant from England, as an insurance measure against the possibility of calamity at Woburn. Excepting two or three specimens in European zoological gardens that have been favored by the Duke of Bedford, there are no living specimens outside of Woburn Park.

Fortunately, before that disaster in 1894, the Duke of Bedford had put in a lot of effort and money to create and establish a herd of eighteen of the rarest deer in his stunning park around Woburn Abbey, England. That original group has thrived and grown, and by 1910, it had reached thirty-four individuals. However, since all the living female specimens of this remarkable species are located in one place, they could easily be wiped out in a single year due to riot, war, or disease, which is a reason for concern. The author has even suggested the idea of starting a new herd of David's deer, far away from England, as a precaution against any potential disaster at Woburn. Other than two or three specimens in European zoos that have been provided by the Duke of Bedford, there are no living specimens outside of Woburn Park.

SKELETON OF A RHYTINA, OR ARCTIC SEA-COW

SKELETON OF A RHYTINA, OR ARCTIC SEA COW

In the United States National Museum

In the United States National Museum

The Rhytina, (Rhytina gigas). —The most northerly Sirenian that (so far as we know) ever inhabited the earth, lived on the Commander Islands in the northern end of Behring Sea, and was exterminated by man, for its oil and its flesh, about 1768. It was first made known to the world by Steller, in 1741, and must have become extinct near the beginning of the nineteenth century.

The Rhytina, (Rhytina gigas). —The northernmost sirenian that we know of, lived on the Commander Islands at the northern end of the Bering Sea, and was driven to extinction by humans for its oil and flesh around 1768. It was first documented by Steller in 1741 and likely became extinct at the beginning of the nineteenth century.

The rhytina belonged to the same mammalian Order as the manatee of Florida and South America, and the dugong of Australia. The largest manatee that Florida has produced, so far as we know, was thirteen feet long. The rhytina attained a length of between thirty and thirty-five feet, and a weight of 6,000 pounds or over. The flesh of this animal, like that of the manatee and dugong, must have been edible, and surely was prized by the hungry sailors and natives of its time. It is not [Page 37] strange that such a species was quickly exterminated by man, in the arctic regions. The wonder is that it ever existed at a latitude so outrageous for a Sirenian, an animal which by all precedents should prefer life in temperate or warm waters.

The rhytina was part of the same mammalian order as the manatee found in Florida and South America, and the dugong found in Australia. The largest manatee recorded in Florida was thirteen feet long. The rhytina could reach lengths of thirty to thirty-five feet, weighing over 6,000 pounds. The flesh of this animal, similar to that of the manatee and dugong, was likely edible and surely valued by the hungry sailors and locals of its time. It’s not [Page 37] surprising that such a species was quickly wiped out by humans in the arctic regions. What’s astonishing is that it ever lived at such a high latitude for a Sirenian, an animal that, by all accounts, should prefer to thrive in temperate or warm waters.

BURCHELL'S ZEBRA, IN THE U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM

BURCHELL'S ZEBRA, IN THE U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM

Now Believed to be Totally Extinct

Now Believed to be Completely Extinct

Burchell's Zebra, (Equus burchelli typicus). —The foundation type of what now is the Burchell group of zebras, consisting of four or five sub-species of the original species of burchelli, is an animal abundantly striped as to its body, neck and head, but with legs that are almost white and free from stripes. The sub-species have legs that are striped about half as much as the mountain zebra and the Grevy species.

Burchell's Zebra, (Equus burchelli typicus). —The main type of what is now known as the Burchell group of zebras, which includes four or five sub-species of the original burchelli, is a zebra that is heavily striped on its body, neck, and head, but has legs that are almost white and without stripes. The sub-species have legs that are striped about half as much as those of the mountain zebra and the Grevy zebra.

While there are Chapman zebras and Grant zebras in plenty, and of Crawshay's not a few, all these are forms that have developed northward of the range of the parent species, the original Equus burchelli. For half a century in South Africa the latter had been harried and driven and shot, and now it is gone, forever. Now, the museum people of the world are hungrily enumerating their mounted specimens, and live ones cannot be procured with money, because there are none! Already it is common talk that "the true Burchell zebra is extinct;" and unfortunately there is no good reason to doubt it. Even if there are a few now living [Page 38] in some remote nook of the Transvaal, or Zululand, or Portuguese East Africa, the chances are as 100 to 1 that they will not be suffered to bring back the species; and so, to Burchell's zebra, the world is to-day saying "Farewell!"

While there are plenty of Chapman zebras and Grant zebras, and a fair number of Crawshay's, all these forms have developed north of the range of the original species, the Equus burchelli. For fifty years in South Africa, the original has been hunted, driven away, and shot, and now it’s gone forever. Now, people in museums around the world are eagerly counting their mounted specimens, and you can’t buy live ones because there aren’t any! It’s already common knowledge that “the true Burchell zebra is extinct,” and unfortunately, there’s no good reason to doubt it. Even if a few are still living [Page 38] in some remote corner of the Transvaal, Zululand, or Portuguese East Africa, the odds are 100 to 1 that they won’t be allowed to repopulate the species; so today, the world is saying "Farewell!" to Burchell's zebra.

THYLACINE OR TASMANIAN WOLF

Thylacine or Tasmanian wolf

Now Being Exterminated by the Sheep Owners of Tasmania

Now Being Exterminated by the Sheep Owners of Tasmania


Species Of Large Mammals Almost Extinct

The Thylacine Or Tasmanian Wolf, (Thylacinus cynocephalus). — Four years ago, when Mr. W.H.D. Le Souef, Director of the Melbourne Zoological Garden (Australia), stood before the cage of the living thylacine in the New York Zoological Park, he first expressed surprise at the sight of the animal, then said:

The Thylacine or Tasmanian Wolf, (Thylacinus cynocephalus). — Four years ago, when Mr. W.H.D. Le Souef, the Director of the Melbourne Zoo in Australia, stood in front of the cage of the live thylacine at the New York Zoo, he was initially taken aback by the sight of the animal, then said:

"I advise you to take excellent care of that specimen; for when it is gone, you never will get another. The species soon will be extinct."

"I recommend that you take great care of that specimen; once it's gone, you won't get another. The species will soon be extinct."

This opinion has been supported, quite independently, by a lady who is the highest authority on the present status of that species, Mrs. Mary G. Roberts, of Hobart, Tasmania. For nearly ten years Mrs. Roberts has been procuring all the living specimens of the thylacine that money could buy, and attempting to breed them at her private zoo. She states that the mountain home of this animal is now occupied by flocks of sheep, and because of the fact that the "Tasmanian wolves" raid the flocks and kill lambs, the sheep-owners and herders are systematically poisoning the thylacines as fast as possible. Inasmuch as the species is limited to [Page 39] Tasmania, Mrs. Roberts and others fear that the sheepmen will totally exterminate the remnant at an early date. This animal is the largest and also the most interesting carnivorous marsupial of Australia, and its untimely end will be a cause for sincere regret.

This view has been independently backed by Mrs. Mary G. Roberts, the leading expert on the current situation of that species, who lives in Hobart, Tasmania. For nearly ten years, Mrs. Roberts has been obtaining all the living specimens of the thylacine she can afford and trying to breed them at her private zoo. She says that the mountain habitat of this animal is now taken over by sheep, and since the "Tasmanian wolves" attack the flocks and kill lambs, sheep owners and herders are systematically poisoning the thylacines as quickly as they can. Because the species is limited to [Page 39] Tasmania, Mrs. Roberts and others are worried that the sheep farmers will completely wipe out the remaining population soon. This animal is the largest and most fascinating carnivorous marsupial in Australia, and its premature extinction will be deeply regretted.

WEST INDIAN SEAL

Caribbean seal

In the New York Aquarium

At the New York Aquarium

The West Indian Seal, (Monachus tropicalis). —For at least fifty years, all the zoologists who ever had heard of this species believed that the oil-hunters had completely exterminated it. In 1885, when the National Museum came into possession of one poorly-mounted skin, from Professor Poey, of Havana, it was regarded as a great prize.

The Caribbean Seal, (Monk seal) —For at least fifty years, all the zoologists who had heard of this species believed that the oil hunters had completely wiped it out. In 1885, when the National Museum acquired a poorly mounted skin from Professor Poey in Havana, it was seen as a significant find.

Most unexpectedly, in 1886 American zoologists were startled by the discovery of a small herd on the Triangle Islands, in the Caribbean Sea, near Yucatan, by Mr. Henry L. Ward, now director of the Milwaukee Public Museum, and Professor Ferrari, of the National Museum of Mexico. They found about twenty specimens, and collected only a sufficient number to establish the true character of the species.

Most unexpectedly, in 1886, American zoologists were shocked by the discovery of a small herd on the Triangle Islands in the Caribbean Sea, near Yucatan, by Mr. Henry L. Ward, who is now the director of the Milwaukee Public Museum, and Professor Ferrari from the National Museum of Mexico. They found about twenty specimens and collected just enough to establish the true nature of the species.

Since that time, four living specimens have been captured, and sent to the New York Aquarium, where they lived for satisfactory periods. The indoor life and atmosphere did not seem to injure the natural vitality of the animals. In fact, I think they were far more lively in the Aquarium than were the sluggish creatures that Mr. Ward saw on the Triangle reefs, and described in his report of the expedition.

Since then, four living specimens have been caught and sent to the New York Aquarium, where they lived for a good amount of time. The indoor environment and atmosphere didn't seem to harm the animals' natural vitality. Actually, I would say they were much livelier in the Aquarium than the sluggish creatures that Mr. Ward observed on the Triangle reefs and described in his expedition report.

It is quite possible that there are yet alive a few specimens of this odd species; but the Damocletian sword of destruction hangs over them suspended by a fine hair, and it is to be expected that in the future [Page 40] some roving sea adventurer will pounce upon the Remnant, and wipe it out of existence for whatever reason may to him seem good.

It’s very possible that there are still a few members of this strange species alive; however, the threat of destruction looms over them like a Damocles sword hanging by a thread. It’s likely that in the future [Page 40] some wandering sea explorer will take advantage of the remaining ones and wipe them out for whatever reason seems good to him.

CALIFORNIA ELEPHANT SEAL

California Seal

Photographed on Guadalupe Island by C.H. Townsend.

Photographed on Guadalupe Island by C.H. Townsend.

The California Elephant Seal, (Mirounga angustirostris). —This remarkable long-snouted species of seal was reluctantly stricken from the fauna of the United States several years ago, and for at least fifteen years it has been regarded as totally extinct. Last year, however (1911), the Albatross scientific expedition, under the control of Director C.H. Townsend of the New York Aquarium, visited Guadalupe Island, 175 miles off the Pacific coast of Lower California and there found about 150 living elephant seals. They took six living specimens, all of which died after a few months in captivity. Ever since that time, first one person and then another comes to the front with a cheerful proposition to go to those islands and "clean up" all the remainder of those wonderful seals. One hunting party could land on Guadalupe, and in one week totally destroy the last remnant of this almost extinct species. To-day the only question is, Who will be mean enough to do it?

The California Elephant Seal, (Mirounga angustirostris). —This amazing long-snouted seal species was sadly removed from the wildlife list of the United States several years ago, and for at least fifteen years, it has been considered completely extinct. However, last year (1911), the Albatross scientific expedition, led by Director C.H. Townsend from the New York Aquarium, visited Guadalupe Island, 175 miles off the Pacific coast of Lower California, and discovered around 150 living elephant seals. They captured six living specimens, but all died after a few months in captivity. Since then, one person after another has come forward with a cheerful plan to travel to those islands and "clean up" the remaining wonderful seals. A single hunting party could land on Guadalupe and wipe out the last remnants of this nearly extinct species in just one week. Today, the only question is, who will be cruel enough to do it?

Fortunately, those seals have no commercial value whatsoever. The little oil they would yield would not pay the wages of cook's mate. The proven impossibility of keeping specimens alive in captivity, even for one year, and the absence of cash value in the skins, even for museum purposes, has left nothing of value in the animals to justify an expedition to kill or to capture them. No zoological garden or park desires any of them, at any price. Adult males attain a length of sixteen feet, and females eleven feet. Formerly this species was abundant in San Christobal Bay, Lower California.

Fortunately, those seals have no commercial value at all. The little oil they produce wouldn't even cover the wages of a cook's assistant. The proven impossibility of keeping specimens alive in captivity for even a year, combined with the lack of cash value in their skins—even for museum purposes—means there's nothing valuable about these animals to justify an expedition to hunt or capture them. No zoo or park wants any of them, no matter the price. Adult males can reach sixteen feet long, while females can grow to eleven feet. This species used to be abundant in San Christobal Bay, Lower California.

At present, Mexico is in no frame of mind to provide real protection to a small colony of seals of no commercial value, 175 miles from her mainland, on an uninhabited island. It is wildly improbable that those seals will be permitted to live. It is a safe prediction that our next news of the elephant seals of Guadalupe will tell of the total extinction of those last 140 survivors of the species.

At the moment, Mexico isn't at a point where it can actually protect a small colony of seals that have no commercial value, located 175 miles from the mainland on an uninhabited island. It's highly unlikely that those seals will be allowed to survive. It's a reasonable assumption that our next update on the elephant seals of Guadalupe will report the complete extinction of the last 140 individuals of the species.

The California Grizzly Bear, (Ursus horribilis californicus). —No one protects grizzly bears, except in the Yellowstone Park and other game preserves. For obvious reasons, it is impossible to say whether any individuals of this huge species now remain alive, or how long it will be until the last one falls before a .405 Winchester engine of extermination. We know that a living specimen can not be procured with money, and we believe that "Old Monarch" now in Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, is the last specimen of his species that ever will be exhibited alive.

The California Grizzly Bear, (California grizzly bear). —No one protects grizzly bears, except in Yellowstone Park and a few other wildlife reserves. For obvious reasons, it's impossible to know if any individuals of this massive species are still alive, or how long it will be until the last one is killed by a .405 Winchester rifle. We know that a living specimen cannot be bought, and we believe that "Old Monarch," currently in Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, is the last individual of his species that will ever be shown alive.

I can think of no reason, save general Californian apathy, why the extinction of this huge and remarkable animal was not prevented by law. The sunset grizzly (on a railroad track) is the advertising emblem of the Golden State, and surely the state should take sufficient interest in the species to prevent its total extermination.

I can't think of any reason, besides general Californian indifference, why the extinction of this huge and amazing animal wasn't stopped by law. The sunset grizzly (on a railroad track) is the advertising symbol of the Golden State, and the state should definitely care enough about the species to prevent its complete extinction.

But it will not. California is hell-bent on exterminating a long list of her wild-life species, and it is very doubtful whether the masses can be reached and aroused in time to stop it. Name some of the species? Certainly; with all the pleasure in life: The band-tailed pigeon, the white-tailed kite, the sharp-tailed grouse, the sage grouse, the mountain sheep, prong-horned antelope, California mule deer, and ducks and geese too numerous to mention.

But it won’t. California is determined to wipe out a long list of its wildlife species, and it seems unlikely that the public can be informed and motivated in time to prevent it. What are some of the species? Absolutely; with all the pleasure in the world: The band-tailed pigeon, the white-tailed kite, the sharp-tailed grouse, the sage grouse, mountain sheep, pronghorn antelope, California mule deer, and ducks and geese too many to name.


[Page 42]
CHAPTER V
THE EXTERMINATION OF SPECIES, STATE BY STATE

Early in 1912 I addressed to about 250 persons throughout the United States, three questions, as follows:

Early in 1912, I posed three questions to about 250 people across the United States, as follows:

  1. What species of birds have become totally extinct in your state?
  2. What species of birds and mammals are threatened with early extinction?
  3. What species of mammals have been exterminated throughout your state?

These queries were addressed to persons whose tastes and observations rendered them especially qualified to furnish the information desired. The interest shown in the inquiry was highly gratifying. The best of the information given is summarized below; but this tabulation also includes much information acquired from other sources. The general summary of the subject will, I am sure, convince all thoughtful persons that the present condition of the best wild life of the nation is indeed very grave. This list is not submitted as representing prolonged research or absolute perfection, but it is sufficient to point forty-eight morals.

These questions were directed at individuals whose preferences and insights made them particularly suited to provide the information needed. The enthusiasm shown for the inquiry was really encouraging. The most valuable information provided is summarized below; however, this list also includes a lot of information obtained from other sources. I am confident that the overall summary of the topic will convince all thoughtful individuals that the current state of the nation’s best wildlife is indeed quite serious. This list is not claimed to represent extensive research or complete accuracy, but it is enough to highlight forty-eight lessons.


Birds And Mammals That Have Been Totally Exterminated In Various States And Provinces
Alabama:

Passenger pigeon, Carolina parrakeet; puma, elk, gray wolf, beaver.

Passenger pigeon, Carolina parakeet; puma, elk, gray wolf, beaver.

Arizona:

Ridgway's quail (Colinus ridgwayi); Arizona elk (Cervus merriami), bison.

Ridgway's quail (Colinus ridgwayi), Arizona elk (Cervus merriami), bison.

Arkansas:

Passenger pigeon, Carolina parrakeet, whooping crane; bison, elk, beaver.

Passenger pigeon, Carolina parakeet, whooping crane; bison, elk, beaver.

California:

No birds totally extinct, but several nearly so; grizzly bear (?), elephant seal.

No birds are completely extinct, but several are nearly so; grizzly bear (?), elephant seal.

Colorado:

Carolina parrakeet, whooping crane; bison.

Carolina parakeet, whooping crane; bison.

Connecticut:

Passenger pigeon, Eskimo curlew, great auk, Labrador duck, upland plover, heath hen, wild turkey; puma, gray wolf, Canada lynx, black bear, elk.

Passenger pigeon, Eskimo curlew, great auk, Labrador duck, upland plover, heath hen, wild turkey; puma, gray wolf, Canada lynx, black bear, elk.

Delaware:

Wild turkey, ruffed grouse, passenger pigeon, heath hen, dickcissel, whooping crane, Carolina parrakeet; white-tailed deer, black bear, gray wolf, beaver, Canada lynx, puma.

Wild turkey, ruffed grouse, passenger pigeon, heath hen, dickcissel, whooping crane, Carolina parakeet; white-tailed deer, black bear, gray wolf, beaver, Canada lynx, puma.

[Page 43]

Florida:

Florida:

Flamingo, roseate spoonbill, scarlet ibis, Carolina parrakeet, passenger pigeon.

Flamingo, roseate spoonbill, scarlet ibis, Carolina parakeet, passenger pigeon.

Georgia:

Passenger pigeon, Carolina parrakeet, whooping crane, trumpeter swan; bison, elk, beaver, gray wolf, puma.—(Last 3, Craig D. Arnold.)

Passenger pigeon, Carolina parakeet, whooping crane, trumpeter swan; bison, elk, beaver, gray wolf, cougar.—(Last 3, Craig D. Arnold.)

Idaho:

Wood duck, long-billed curlew, whooping crane; bison.—(Dr. C.S. Moody.)

Wood duck, long-billed curlew, whooping crane; bison.—(Dr. C.S. Moody.)

Illinois:

Passenger pigeon, whooping crane, Carolina parrakeet, trumpeter swan, snowy egret, Eskimo curlew; bison, elk, white-tailed deer, black bear, puma, Canada lynx.

Passenger pigeon, whooping crane, Carolina parakeet, trumpeter swan, snowy egret, Eskimo curlew; bison, elk, white-tailed deer, black bear, puma, Canada lynx.

Indiana:

Passenger pigeon, whooping crane, northern raven, wild turkey, ivory-billed woodpecker, Carolina parrakeet, trumpeter swan, snowy egret, Eskimo curlew; bison, elk, white-tailed deer, black bear, Canada lynx, beaver, porcupine.—(Amos W. Butler.)

Passenger pigeon, whooping crane, northern raven, wild turkey, ivory-billed woodpecker, Carolina parakeet, trumpeter swan, snowy egret, Eskimo curlew; bison, elk, white-tailed deer, black bear, Canada lynx, beaver, porcupine.—(Amos W. Butler.)

Iowa:

Wild turkey, Eskimo curlew, whooping crane, trumpeter swan, white pelican, passenger pigeon; bison, elk, antelope, white-tailed deer, black bear, puma, Canada lynx, gray wolf, beaver, porcupine.

Wild turkey, Eskimo curlew, whooping crane, trumpeter swan, white pelican, passenger pigeon; bison, elk, antelope, white-tailed deer, black bear, cougar, Canada lynx, gray wolf, beaver, porcupine.

Kansas:

American scaup duck, woodcock, ruffed grouse, wild turkey, pileated woodpecker, parrakeet, white-necked raven, American raven (all Prof. L.L. Dyche); golden plover, Eskimo curlew, Hudsonian curlew, wood-duck (C.H. Smyth and James Howard, Wichita). Bison, elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, gray wolf, beaver (?), otter, lynx (?) (L.L.D.)

American scaup duck, woodcock, ruffed grouse, wild turkey, pileated woodpecker, parakeet, white-necked raven, American raven (all Prof. L.L. Dyche); golden plover, Eskimo curlew, Hudsonian curlew, wood duck (C.H. Smyth and James Howard, Wichita). Bison, elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, gray wolf, beaver (?), otter, lynx (?) (L.L.D.)

(Reports as complete and thorough as these for other localities no doubt would show lists equally long for several other states.—(W.T.H.))

(Reports as comprehensive and detailed as these for other areas would surely reveal similarly long lists for several other states.—(W.T.H.))

Kentucky:

Passenger pigeon, parrakeet; bison, elk, puma, beaver, gray wolf.

Passenger pigeon, parakeet; bison, elk, cougar, beaver, gray wolf.

Louisiana:

Passenger pigeon, Carolina parrakeet, Eskimo curlew, flamingo, scarlet ibis, roseate spoonbill; bison, ocelot.

Passenger pigeon, Carolina parakeet, Eskimo curlew, flamingo, scarlet ibis, roseate spoonbill; bison, ocelot.

Maine:

Great auk, Labrador duck, Eskimo curlew, oystercatcher, wild turkey, heath hen, passenger pigeon; puma, gray wolf, wolverine, caribou.—(All Arthur H. Norton, Portland.)

Great auk, Labrador duck, Eskimo curlew, oystercatcher, wild turkey, heath hen, passenger pigeon; puma, gray wolf, wolverine, caribou.—(All Arthur H. Norton, Portland.)

Maryland:

Sandhill crane, parrakeet, passenger pigeon; bison, elk, beaver, gray wolf, puma, porcupine.

Sandhill crane, parakeet, passenger pigeon; bison, elk, beaver, gray wolf, cougar, porcupine.

Massachusetts

Wild turkey, passenger pigeon, Labrador duck, whooping crane, sandhill crane, black-throated bunting, great auk, Eskimo curlew.—(William Brewster, W.P. Wharton); Canada lynx, gray wolf, black bear, moose, elk.

Wild turkey, passenger pigeon, Labrador duck, whooping crane, sandhill crane, black-throated bunting, great auk, Eskimo curlew. —(William Brewster, W.P. Wharton); Canada lynx, gray wolf, black bear, moose, elk.

Michigan:

Passenger pigeon, wild turkey, sandhill crane, whooping crane, bison, elk, wolverine.

Passenger pigeon, wild turkey, sandhill crane, whooping crane, bison, elk, wolverine.

Minnesota:

Whooping crane, white pelican, trumpeter swan, passenger pigeon, bison, elk, mule deer, antelope.

Whooping crane, white pelican, trumpeter swan, passenger pigeon, bison, elk, mule deer, antelope.

A strange condition exists in Minnesota, as will be seen by reference to the next list of states. A great many species are on the road to speedy extermination; but as yet the number of those that have become totally extinct up to date is small.

A strange situation is happening in Minnesota, as you’ll see in the next list of states. Many species are quickly heading towards extinction; however, so far, the number of those that have completely disappeared is small.

Mississippi

Parrakeet, passenger pigeon; bison. (Data incomplete.)

Parakeet, passenger pigeon, bison. (Data incomplete.)

[Page 44]

Missouri:

Missouri:

Parrakeet, ivory-billed woodpecker, passenger pigeon, whooping crane, pinnated grouse; bison, elk, beaver.

Parakeet, ivory-billed woodpecker, passenger pigeon, whooping crane, pinnated grouse; bison, elk, beaver.

Montana:

Although many Montana birds are on the verge of extinction, the only species that we are sure have totally vanished are the passenger pigeon and whooping crane. Mammals extinct, bison.

Although many birds in Montana are at risk of extinction, the only species we know for sure have completely disappeared are the passenger pigeon and the whooping crane. As for mammals, the bison are extinct.

Nebraska:

Curlew, wild turkey, parrakeet, passenger pigeon, whooping crane, and no doubt all the other species that have disappeared from Kansas. Mammals: bison, antelope, elk, and mule deer.

Curlew, wild turkey, parakeet, passenger pigeon, whooping crane, and probably all the other species that have vanished from Kansas. Mammals: bison, antelope, elk, and mule deer.

Nevada

By a rather odd combination of causes and effects, Nevada retains representatives of nearly all her original outfit of bird and mammal species except the bison and elk; but several of them will shortly become extinct.

By a strange mix of causes and effects, Nevada still has representatives of almost all its original bird and mammal species except for the bison and elk; however, several of them are on the brink of extinction.

New Hampshire:

Wild turkey, heath hen, pigeon, whooping crane, Eskimo curlew, upland plover, Labrador duck; woodland caribou, moose.

Wild turkey, heath hen, pigeon, whooping crane, Eskimo curlew, upland plover, Labrador duck; woodland caribou, moose.

New Jersey:

Heath hen, wild turkey, pigeon, parrakeet, Eskimo curlew, Labrador duck, snowy egret, whooping crane, sandhill crane, trumpeter swan, pileated woodpecker; gray wolf, black bear, beaver, elk, porcupine, puma.

Heath hen, wild turkey, pigeon, parakeet, Eskimo curlew, Labrador duck, snowy egret, whooping crane, sandhill crane, trumpeter swan, pileated woodpecker; gray wolf, black bear, beaver, elk, porcupine, puma.

New Mexico:

Notwithstanding an enormous decrease in the general volume of wild life in New Mexico, comparatively few species have been totally exterminated. The most important are the bison and Arizona elk.

Despite a significant decline in the overall amount of wildlife in New Mexico, relatively few species have been completely wiped out. The most notable ones are the bison and Arizona elk.

NYC

Heath hen, passenger pigeon, wild turkey, great auk, trumpeter swan, Labrador duck, harlequin duck, Eskimo curlew, upland plover, golden plover, whooping crane, sandhill crane, purple martin, pileated woodpecker, moose, caribou, bison, elk, puma, gray wolf, wolverine, marten, fisher, beaver, fox, squirrel, harbor seal.

Heath hen, passenger pigeon, wild turkey, great auk, trumpeter swan, Labrador duck, harlequin duck, Eskimo curlew, upland plover, golden plover, whooping crane, sandhill crane, purple martin, pileated woodpecker, moose, caribou, bison, elk, puma, gray wolf, wolverine, marten, fisher, beaver, fox, squirrel, harbor seal.

North Carolina:

Ivory-billed woodpecker, parrakeet, pigeon, roseate spoonbill, long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus), Eskimo curlew; bison, elk, gray wolf, puma, beaver.—(E.L. Ewbank, T. Gilbert Pearson, H.H. and C.S. Brimley.)

Ivory-billed woodpecker, parakeet, pigeon, roseate spoonbill, long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus), Eskimo curlew; bison, elk, gray wolf, puma, beaver.—(E.L. Ewbank, T. Gilbert Pearson, H.H. and C.S. Brimley.)

North Dakota:

Whooping crane, long-billed curlew, Hudsonian godwit, passenger pigeon; bison, elk, mule deer, mountain sheep.—(W.B. Bell and Alfred Eastgate.)

Whooping crane, long-billed curlew, Hudsonian godwit, passenger pigeon; bison, elk, mule deer, mountain sheep.—(W.B. Bell and Alfred Eastgate.)

Ohio:

Pigeon, wild turkey, pinnated grouse, northern pileated woodpecker, parrakeet; white-tailed deer, bison, elk, black bear, puma, gray wolf, beaver, otter, puma, lynx.

Pigeon, wild turkey, prairie chicken, northern pileated woodpecker, parakeet; white-tailed deer, bison, elk, black bear, cougar, gray wolf, beaver, otter, cougar, lynx.

Oklahoma:

Records for birds insufficient. Mammals: bison, elk, antelope, mule deer, puma, black bear.

Records for birds are lacking. Mammals: bison, elk, antelope, mule deer, puma, black bear.

Oregon:

The only species known to have been wholly exterminated during recent times is the California condor and the bison, both of which were rare stragglers into Oregon; but a number of species are now close to extinction.

The only species that is known to have been completely wiped out in recent times are the California condor and the bison, both of which were rare visitors to Oregon; however, several species are now on the brink of extinction.

Pennsylvania:

Heath hen, pigeon, parrakeet, Labrador duck; bison, elk, moose, puma, [Page 45] gray wolf, Canada lynx, wolverine, beaver.—(Witmer Stone, Dr. C.B. Penrose and Arthur Chapman.)

Heath hen, pigeon, parakeet, Labrador duck; bison, elk, moose, puma, gray wolf, Canada lynx, wolverine, beaver.—(Witmer Stone, Dr. C.B. Penrose, and Arthur Chapman.)

Rhode Island:

Heath hen, passenger pigeon, wild turkey, least tern, eastern willet, Eskimo curlew, marbled godwit, long-billed curlew.—(Harry S. Hathaway); puma, black bear, gray wolf, beaver, otter, wolverine.

Heath hen, passenger pigeon, wild turkey, least tern, eastern willet, Eskimo curlew, marbled godwit, long-billed curlew.—(Harry S. Hathaway); puma, black bear, gray wolf, beaver, otter, wolverine.

South Carolina:

Ivory-billed woodpecker, Carolina parrakeet; bison, elk, puma, gray wolf.—(James H. Rice, Jr.)

Ivory-billed woodpecker, Carolina parakeet; bison, elk, cougar, gray wolf.—(James H. Rice, Jr.)

South Dakota:

Whooping crane, trumpeter swan, pigeon, long-billed curlew; bison, elk, mule deer, mountain sheep.

Whooping crane, trumpeter swan, pigeon, long-billed curlew; bison, elk, mule deer, mountain sheep.

Tennessee:

Records insufficient.

Insufficient records.

Texas:

Wild turkey, passenger pigeon, ivory-billed woodpecker, flamingo, roseate spoonbill, American egret, whooping crane, wood-duck; bison, elk, mountain sheep, antelope, "a small, dark deer that lived 40 years ago." (Capt. M.B. Davis.)

Wild turkey, passenger pigeon, ivory-billed woodpecker, flamingo, roseate spoonbill, American egret, whooping crane, wood-duck; bison, elk, mountain sheep, antelope, "a small, dark deer that lived 40 years ago." (Capt. M.B. Davis.)

Utah:

Records insufficient.

Insufficient records.

Virginia:

Records insufficient.

Insufficient records.

Washington, D.C.:

Very few species have become totally extinct, but a number are on the verge, and will be named in the next state schedule.

Very few species have completely gone extinct, but several are on the brink and will be listed in the next state report.

West Virginia:

Pigeon, parrakeet; bison, elk, beaver, puma, gray wolf.

Pigeon, parakeet; bison, elk, beaver, cougar, gray wolf.

Wisconsin

Whooping crane, passenger pigeon, American egret, wild turkey, Carolina parrakeet; bison, moose, elk, woodland caribou, puma, wolverine.

Whooping crane, passenger pigeon, American egret, wild turkey, Carolina parakeet; bison, moose, elk, woodland caribou, cougar, wolverine.

Wyoming:

Whooping crane, trumpeter swan, wood-duck; mountain goat.

Whooping crane, trumpeter swan, wood duck; mountain goat.


CANADA
Alberta:

Passenger pigeon, whooping crane; bison.

Passenger pigeon, whooping crane; bison.

BC

A. Bryan Williams reports: "Do not know of any birds having become extinct."

A. Bryan Williams reports: "I don't know of any birds that have gone extinct."

Manitoba:

Pigeon; bison, antelope, gray wolf.

Pigeon; bison, antelope, gray wolf.

New Brunswick:

Pigeon.

Pigeon.

Nova Scotia:

Labrador duck, Eskimo curlew, passenger pigeon.

Labrador duck, Eskimo curlew, passenger pigeon.

Ontario:

Wild turkey, pigeon, Eskimo curlew.

Wild turkey, pigeon, curlew.

[Page 46]

Prince Edward Island:

Prince Edward Island:

(Reported by E.T. Carbonell): Eskimo curlew, horned grebe, ring-billed gull, Caspian tern, passenger pigeon, Wilson's petrel, wood-duck, Barrow's golden-eye, whistling swan, American eider, white-fronted goose, purple sandpiper, Canada grouse, long-eared owl, screech owl, black-throated bunting, pine warbler, red-necked grebe, purple martin and catbird; beaver, black fox, silver gray fox, marten and black bear.

(Reported by E.T. Carbonell): Eskimo curlew, horned grebe, ring-billed gull, Caspian tern, passenger pigeon, Wilson's petrel, wood duck, Barrow's goldeneye, whistling swan, American eider, white-fronted goose, purple sandpiper, Canada grouse, long-eared owl, screech owl, black-throated bunting, pine warbler, red-necked grebe, purple martin, and catbird; beaver, black fox, silver-gray fox, marten, and black bear.

Quebec:

Pigeon.

Pigeon.

Saskatchewan:

Pigeon; bison.

Pigeon; buffalo.


Birds And Mammals Threatened With Extinction

The second question submitted in my inquiry produced results even more startling than the first. None of the persons reporting can be regarded as alarmists, but some of the lists of species approaching extinction are appallingly long. To their observations I add other notes and observations of interest at this time.

The second question I asked in my inquiry produced responses that were even more shocking than the first. None of the people reporting can be called alarmists, but some of the lists of species nearing extinction are incredibly lengthy. Along with their observations, I’m adding other notes and interesting observations at this time.

Alabama:

Wood-duck, snowy egret, woodcock. "The worst enemy of wild life is the pot-hunter and game hog. These wholesale slaughterers of game resort to any device and practice, it matters not how murderous, to accomplish the pernicious ends of their nefarious campaign of relentless extermination of fur and feather. They cannot be controlled by local laws, for these after having been tried for several generations have proven consummate failures, for the reason that local authorities will not enforce the provisions of game and bird protective statutes. Experience has demonstrated the fact that no one desires to inform voluntarily on his neighbors, and since breaking the game law is not construed to involve moral turpitude, even to an infinitesimal degree, by many of our citizens, the plunderers of nature's storehouse thus go free, it matters not how great the damage done to the people as a whole."—(John H. Wallace, Jr., Game Commissioner of Alabama.)

Wood duck, snowy egret, woodcock. "The biggest threat to wildlife is the poacher and game hog. These mass slaughterers of animals will use any ruthless methods to achieve their harmful goals of wiping out fur and feathers. They can't be controlled by local laws since, after being tried for several generations, those laws have proven to be complete failures. This is largely because local authorities refuse to enforce the rules meant to protect game and birds. Experience shows that no one wants to report their neighbors voluntarily, and since many people don't see breaking game laws as morally wrong — not even a little bit — nature's plunderers continue to operate freely, regardless of the significant harm done to the community as a whole." —(John H. Wallace, Jr., Game Commissioner of Alabama.)

Alaska:

Thanks to geographic and climatic conditions, the Alaskan game laws and $15,000 with which to enforce them, the status of the wild life of Alaska is fairly satisfactory. I think that at present no species is in danger of extinction in the near future. When it was pointed out to Congress in 1902, by Madison Grant, T.S. Palmer and others that the wild life of Alaska was seriously threatened, Congress immediately enacted the law that was recommended, and now appropriates yearly a fair sum for its enforcement. I regard the Alaskan situation as being, for so vast and difficult a region, reasonably well in hand, even though open to improvement.

Thanks to the geographic and climatic conditions, along with the Alaskan game laws and the $15,000 budget for enforcement, the state of wildlife in Alaska is pretty good. Right now, I believe no species is at risk of extinction in the near future. When Madison Grant, T.S. Palmer, and others pointed out to Congress in 1902 that Alaska's wildlife was in serious danger, Congress quickly passed the recommended law and now allocates a reasonable annual budget for its enforcement. I see the situation in Alaska as being, for such a vast and challenging area, reasonably well managed, even though there's always room for improvement.

There is one fatal defect in our Alaskan game law, in the perpetual and sweeping license to kill, that is bestowed upon "natives" and "prospectors." Under cover of this law, the Indians can slaughter game to any extent they choose; and they are great killers. For example: In 1911 at Sand Point, Kenai Peninsula, Frank E. Kleinchmidt saw 82 caribou tongues in the boat of a native, that had been brought in for sale at 50 cents, while the carcasses were left where they fell, to poison the air of Alaska. Thanks to the game law, and five wardens, the number of big game animals killed last year in Alaska by sportsmen was reasonably small,—just as it should have been.—(W.T.H.)

There is a serious flaw in our Alaskan game law, which grants a constant and broad license to hunt to "natives" and "prospectors." Because of this law, Indigenous people can hunt as much game as they want, and they are skilled at it. For instance, in 1911 at Sand Point, Kenai Peninsula, Frank E. Kleinchmidt saw 82 caribou tongues in the boat of a native, which had been brought in for sale at 50 cents, while the carcasses were left to rot, polluting the air of Alaska. Thanks to the game law and five wardens, the number of big game animals killed last year in Alaska by sportsmen was fairly small—just as it should be.—(W.T.H.)

Arizona:

During an overland trip made by Dr. MacDougal and others in 1907 from Tucson to Sonoyta, on the international boundary, 150 miles and back again, we saw not one antelope or deer.—(W.T.H.)

During a road trip taken by Dr. MacDougal and others in 1907 from Tucson to Sonoyta, on the international border, 150 miles there and back, we didn’t see a single antelope or deer.—(W.T.H.)

[Page 47]

California:

California:

Swan, white heron, bronze ibis. California valley quail are getting very scarce, and unless adequate protection is afforded them shortly, they will be found hereafter only in remote districts. Ducks also are decreasing rapidly.—(H.W. Keller, Los Angeles.)

Swan, white heron, bronze ibis. California valley quail are becoming very rare, and unless they’re given proper protection soon, they will only be found in remote areas from now on. Ducks are also declining quickly.—(H.W. Keller, Los Angeles.)

Sage grouse and Columbian sharp-tailed grouse are so nearly extinct that it may practically be said that they are extinct. Among species likely to be exterminated in the near future are the wood-duck and band-tailed pigeon.—(W.P. Taylor, Berkeley.)

Sage grouse and Columbian sharp-tailed grouse are so close to extinction that it could almost be said they are extinct. Species that are likely to vanish in the near future include the wood duck and band-tailed pigeon.—(W.P. Taylor, Berkeley.)

Colorado:

Sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse; nearly all the shore birds.

Sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse; almost all the shorebirds.

Connecticut:

All the shore birds; quail, purple martin.

All the shorebirds: quail, purple martins.

Delaware:

Wood duck, upland plover, least tern, Wilson tern, roseate tern, black skimmer, oystercatcher, and numerous other littoral species. Pileated woodpeckers, bald eagles and all the ducks are much more rare than formerly. Swan are about gone, geese scarce. The list of ducks, geese and shore-birds, as well as of terns and gulls that are nearing extinction is appalling.—(C.J. Pennock, Wilmington.)

Wood ducks, upland plovers, least terns, Wilson's terns, roseate terns, black skimmers, oystercatchers, and many other coastal species. Pileated woodpeckers, bald eagles, and all kinds of ducks are much rarer than they used to be. Swans are nearly gone, and geese are hard to find. The list of ducks, geese, shorebirds, terns, and gulls that are on the brink of extinction is shocking. —(C.J. Pennock, Wilmington.)

Wood-duck, woodcock, turtle dove and bob-white.—(A.R. Spaid, Wilmington.)

Wood duck, woodcock, turtle dove, and bobwhite.—(A.R. Spaid, Wilmington.)

Florida:

Limpkin, ivory-billed woodpecker, wild turkey (?).

Limpkin, ivory-billed woodpecker, wild turkey (?).

Georgia:

Ruffed grouse, wild turkey.

Ruffed grouse, wild turkey.

Idaho:

Harlequin duck, mountain plover, dusky grouse, Columbian sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse. Elk, goats and grizzly bears are becoming very scarce. Of the smaller animals I have not seen a fisher for years, and marten are hardly to be found. The same is true of other species.—(Dr. Charles S. Moody, Sand Point.)

Harlequin duck, mountain plover, dusky grouse, Columbian sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse. Elk, goats, and grizzly bears are becoming very rare. I haven’t seen a fisher in years, and marten are barely anywhere to be found. The same goes for other species.—(Dr. Charles S. Moody, Sand Point.)

Illinois:

Pinnated grouse, except where rigidly protected. In Vermillion County, by long and persistent protection Harvey J. Sconce has bred back upon his farm about 400 of these birds.

Pinnated grouse, except in areas where they are strictly protected. In Vermillion County, through extensive and ongoing protection, Harvey J. Sconce has successfully bred approximately 400 of these birds on his farm.

Indiana:

Pileated woodpecker, woodcock, ruffed grouse, pigeon hawk, duck hawk.—(Amos W. Butler, Indianapolis.)

Pileated woodpecker, woodcock, ruffed grouse, pigeon hawk, duck hawk.—(Amos W. Butler, Indianapolis.)

In northern and northwestern Indiana, a perpetual close season and rigid protection have enabled the almost-extinct pinnated grouse to breed up to a total number now estimated by Game Commissioner Miles and his wardens at 10,000 birds. This is a gratifying illustration of what can be done in bringing back an almost-vanished species. The good example of Indiana should be followed by every state that still possesses a remnant of prairie-chickens, or other grouse.

In northern and northwestern Indiana, ongoing protection and a permanent closed season have allowed the nearly extinct pinnated grouse to breed, bringing their population to an estimated 10,000 birds, according to Game Commissioner Miles and his team. This is a rewarding example of what can be achieved in reviving a species that was on the brink of disappearing. Other states that still have any remaining prairie chickens or other grouse should follow Indiana's lead.

Iowa:

Pinnated grouse, wood-duck. Notwithstanding an invasion of Jasper County, Iowa, in the winter of 1911-12 by hundreds of pinnated grouse, such as had not been known in 20 years, this gives no ground to hope that the future of the species is worth a moment's purchase. The winter migration came from the Dakotas, and was believed to be due to the extra severe winter, and the scarcity of food. Commenting on this unprecedented occurrence, J.L. Sloanaker in the "Wilson Bulletin" No. 78, says:

Pinnated grouse, wood-duck. Despite an invasion of Jasper County, Iowa, in the winter of 1911-12 by hundreds of pinnated grouse, which hadn’t been seen in 20 years, this gives no reason to believe that the future of the species is promising. The winter migration came from the Dakotas and was thought to be caused by the unusually harsh winter and a lack of food. Commenting on this unusual event, J.L. Sloanaker in the "Wilson Bulletin" No. 78, says:

"In the opinion of many, the formerly abundant prairie chicken is doomed to early extinction. Many will testify to their abundance in those years [in South Dakota, 1902] when the great land movement was taking place. The influx of hungry settlers, [Page 48] together with an occasional bad season, decimated their ranks. They were eaten by the farmers, both in and out of season. Driven from pillar to post, with no friends and insufficient food,—what else then can be expected?"

"In the opinion of many, the once plentiful prairie chicken is headed for early extinction. Many people will recall how abundant they were back in those years [in South Dakota, 1902] when the massive land movement was happening. The arrival of eager settlers, [Page 48] along with some bad seasons, took a heavy toll on their population. They were hunted by farmers, both in and out of season. Forced around with no allies and not enough food—what else can we expect?"

Mr. F.C. Pellett, of Atlantic, Iowa, says: "Unless ways can be devised of rearing these birds in the domestic state, the prairie hen in my opinion is doomed to early extinction."

Mr. F.C. Pellett, of Atlantic, Iowa, says: "Unless we find ways to raise these birds domestically, I believe the prairie hen is headed for early extinction."

The older inhabitants here say that there is not one song-bird in summer where there used to be ten.—(G.H. Nicol, in Outdoor Life March, 1912.)

The older residents here say that there isn’t a single songbird in summer where there used to be ten.—(G.H. Nicol, in Outdoor Life March, 1912.)

Kansas:

To all of those named in my previous list that are not actually extinct, I might add the prairie hen, the lesser prairie hen, as well as the prairie sharp-tailed grouse and the wood-duck. Such water birds as the avocets, godwits, greater yellow-legs, long-billed curlew and Eskimo curlew are becoming very rare. All the water birds that are killed as game birds have been greatly reduced in numbers during the past 25 years. I have not seen a wood-duck in 5 years. The prairie chicken has entirely disappeared from this locality. A few are still seen in the sand hills of western Kansas, and they are still comparatively abundant along the extreme southwestern line, and in northern Oklahoma and the Texas panhandle.—(C.H. Smyth, Wichita.)

To everyone mentioned in my previous list who aren't actually extinct, I want to add the prairie hen, the lesser prairie hen, the prairie sharp-tailed grouse, and the wood duck. Water birds like avocets, godwits, greater yellowlegs, long-billed curlews, and Eskimo curlews are becoming quite rare. The populations of all water birds hunted as game have significantly decreased over the past 25 years. I haven't seen a wood duck in 5 years. The prairie chicken has completely vanished from this area. A few can still be spotted in the sand hills of western Kansas, and they remain relatively abundant along the extreme southwestern border, in northern Oklahoma, and in the Texas panhandle.—(C.H. Smyth, Wichita.)

Yellow-legged plover, golden plover; Hudsonian and Eskimo curlew, prairie chicken.—(James Howard, Wichita.)

Yellow-legged plover, golden plover; Hudsonian and Eskimo curlew, prairie chicken.—(James Howard, Wichita.)

Louisiana:

Ivory-billed woodpecker, butterball, bufflehead. The wood-duck is greatly diminishing every year, and if not completely protected, ten years hence no wood-duck will be found in Louisiana.—(Frank M. Miller, and G.E. Beyer, New Orleans.)

Ivory-billed woodpecker, butterball, bufflehead. The wood duck is declining every year, and if we don’t protect it completely, there will be no wood ducks left in Louisiana in ten years. —(Frank M. Miller, and G.E. Beyer, New Orleans.)

Ivory-billed woodpecker, sandhill crane, whooping crane, pinnated grouse, American and snowy egret where unprotected.—(E.A. McIlhenny, Avery Island.)

Ivory-billed woodpecker, sandhill crane, whooping crane, pinnated grouse, American and snowy egret were unprotected.—(E.A. McIlhenny, Avery Island.)

Maine:

Wood-duck, upland plover, purple martin, house wren, pileated woodpecker, bald eagle, yellow-legs, great blue heron, Canada goose, redhead and canvasback duck.—(John F. Sprague, Dover.)

Wood-duck, upland plover, purple martin, house wren, pileated woodpecker, bald eagle, yellow-legs, great blue heron, Canada goose, redhead, and canvasback duck.—(John F. Sprague, Dover.)

Puffin, Leach's petrel, eider duck, laughing gull, great blue heron, fish-hawk and bald eagle.—(Arthur H. Norton, Portland.)

Puffin, Leach's petrel, eider duck, laughing gull, great blue heron, fish-hawk, and bald eagle.—(Arthur H. Norton, Portland.)

Maryland:

Curlew, pileated woodpecker, summer duck, snowy heron. No record of sandhill crane for the last 35 years. Greater yellow-leg is much scarcer than formerly, also Bartramian sandpiper. The only two birds which show an increase in the past few years are the robin and lesser scaup. General protection of the robin has caused its increase; stopping of spring shooting in the North has probably caused the increase of the latter. As a general proposition I think I can say that all birds are becoming scarcer in this state, as we have laws that do not protect, little enforcement of same, no revenue for bird protection and too little public interest. We are working to change all this, but it comes slowly. The public fails to respond until the birds are 'most gone, and we have a pretty good lot of game still left. The members of the Order Gallinae are only holding their own where privately protected. The members of the Plover Family and what are known locally as shore birds are still plentiful on the shores of Chincoteague and Assateague, and although they do not breed there as formerly, so far as I know there are no species exterminated.—(Talbott Denmead, Baltimore.)

Curlew, pileated woodpecker, summer duck, snowy heron. There hasn't been a sighting of the sandhill crane in the last 35 years. The greater yellow-leg is much rarer than it used to be, and the Bartramian sandpiper is also less common. The only two birds that have shown an increase in recent years are the robin and lesser scaup. Increased protection for robins has led to their rise; the halt of spring hunting in the North has likely contributed to the increase of the latter. Generally speaking, I think I can say that all birds are becoming fewer in this state, as we have laws that don’t provide adequate protection, little enforcement of them, no funding for bird protection, and too little public interest. We're working to change all of this, but progress is slow. The public doesn’t react until the birds are 'almost gone, and we still have a fair number of game birds left. The members of the Order Gallinae are only managing to survive where they are protected privately. The species in the Plover Family and what locals call shorebirds are still abundant on the shores of Chincoteague and Assateague, and even though they don't breed there like they used to, as far as I know, no species have been wiped out.—(Talbott Denmead, Baltimore.)

Massachusetts:

Wood-duck, hooded merganser, blue-winged teal, upland plover; curlew (perhaps already gone); red-tailed hawk (I have not seen one in Middlesex County for several years); great horned owl (almost gone in my county, Middlesex); house wren. The eave swallows and purple martins are fast deserting eastern Massachusetts and the barn swallows steadily diminishing in numbers. The bald eagle should perhaps be included here. I seldom see or hear of it now.—(William Brewster, Cambridge.)

Wood duck, hooded merganser, blue-winged teal, upland plover; curlew (maybe already gone); red-tailed hawk (I haven't seen one in Middlesex County for several years); great horned owl (almost gone in my county, Middlesex); house wren. The eave swallows and purple martins are quickly leaving eastern Massachusetts, and the barn swallows are steadily decreasing in numbers. The bald eagle might also belong on this list. I rarely see or hear about it now.—(William Brewster, Cambridge.)

Upland plover, woodcock, wood-duck (recent complete protection is helping these somewhat), heath hen, piping plover, golden plover, a good many song and [Page 49] insectivorous birds are apparently decreasing rather rapidly; for instance, the eave swallow.—(William P. Wharton, Groton.)

Upland plover, woodcock, wood-duck (recent complete protection is helping these a bit), heath hen, piping plover, golden plover, and quite a few song and insect-eating birds are apparently declining quite quickly; for example, the eave swallow.—(William P. Wharton, Groton.)

Michigan:

Wood-duck, limicolae, woodcock, sandhill crane. The great whooping crane is not a wild bird, but I think it is now practically extinct. Many of our warblers and song birds are now exceedingly rare. Ruffed grouse greatly decreased during the past 10 years.—(W.B. Mershon, Saginaw.)

Wood duck, shorebirds, woodcock, sandhill crane. The great whooping crane isn't a wild bird, but I believe it's now nearly extinct. Many of our warblers and songbirds are incredibly rare now. Ruffed grouse have significantly declined over the past 10 years.—(W.B. Mershon, Saginaw.)

Minnesota:

The sandhill crane has been killed by sportsmen. I have not seen one in three years. Where there were, a few years ago, thousands of blue herons, egrets, wood ducks, redbirds, and Baltimore orioles, all those birds are now almost extinct in this state. They are being killed by Austrians and Italians, who slaughter everything that flies or moves. Robins, too, will be a rarity if more severe penalties are not imposed. I have seized 22 robins, 1 pigeon hawk, 1 crested log-cock, 4 woodpeckers and 1 grosbeak in one camp, at the Lertonia mine, all being prepared for eating. I have also caught them preparing and eating sea gulls, terns, blue heron, egret and even the bittern. I have secured 128 convictions since the first of last September.—(George E. Wood, Game Warden, Hibbing, Minnesota.)

The sandhill crane has been hunted to extinction by sportsmen. I haven't seen one in three years. Where there were thousands of blue herons, egrets, wood ducks, redbirds, and Baltimore orioles just a few years ago, all those birds are now nearly gone in this state. They are being killed by Austrians and Italians, who take down anything that flies or moves. Robins will also become rare if more serious penalties aren't put in place. I've seized 22 robins, 1 pigeon hawk, 1 crested log-cock, 4 woodpeckers, and 1 grosbeak in one camp at the Lertonia mine, all being prepared for eating. I've also caught them getting ready to eat sea gulls, terns, blue herons, egrets, and even bitterns. I have secured 128 convictions since the beginning of last September.—(George E. Wood, Game Warden, Hibbing, Minnesota.)

From Robert Page Lincoln, Minneapolis.—Partridge are waning fast, quail gradually becoming extinct, prairie chickens almost extinct. Duck-shooting is rare. The gray squirrel is fast becoming extinct in Minnesota. Mink are going fast, and fur-bearing animals generally are becoming extinct. The game is passing so very rapidly that it will soon be a thing of the forgotten past. The quail are suffering most. The falling off is amazing, and inconceivable to one who has not looked it up. Duck-shooting is rare, the clubs are idle for want of birds. What ducks come down fly high, being harassed coming down from the north. I consider the southern Minnesota country practically cleaned out.

From Robert Page Lincoln, Minneapolis.—Partridge are disappearing quickly, quail are gradually becoming extinct, and prairie chickens are nearly gone. Duck hunting is uncommon. The gray squirrel is rapidly becoming rare in Minnesota. Mink are disappearing fast, and fur-bearing animals in general are becoming extinct. The game is vanishing so quickly that it will soon be a thing of the past. The quail population is suffering the most. The decline is staggering and hard to believe for anyone who hasn't researched it. Duck hunting is rare, and the clubs are inactive due to the lack of birds. The few ducks that do come down fly high because they are being harassed on their way down from the north. I think the southern Minnesota area is essentially cleared out.

Missouri:

The birds threatened with extermination are the American woodcock, wood-duck, snowy egret, pinnated grouse, wild turkey, ruffed grouse, golden eagle, bald eagle, pileated woodpecker.

The birds at risk of extinction include the American woodcock, wood-duck, snowy egret, pinnated grouse, wild turkey, ruffed grouse, golden eagle, bald eagle, and pileated woodpecker.

Montana:

Blue grouse.—(Henry Avare, Helena.)

Blue grouse. — (Henry Avare, Helena.)

Sage grouse, prairie and Columbian sharp-tailed grouse, trumpeter swan, Canada goose, in fact, most of the water-fowl. The sickle-billed curlew, of which there were many a few years ago, is becoming scarce. There are no more golden or black-bellied plover in these parts.—(Harry P. Stanford, Kalispell.)

Sage grouse, prairie and Columbian sharp-tailed grouse, trumpeter swan, Canada goose, and really, most of the waterfowl. The sickle-billed curlew, which used to be abundant a few years back, is now getting rare. There are no more golden or black-bellied plovers in this area.—(Harry P. Stanford, Kalispell.)

Curlew, Franklin grouse (fool hen) and sage grouse.—W.R. Felton, Miles City.

Curlew, Franklin grouse (fool hen), and sage grouse.—W.R. Felton, Miles City.

Sage grouse.—(L.A. Huffman, Miles City.)

Sage grouse. — (L.A. Huffman, Miles City.)

Ptarmigan, wood-duck, sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, fool hen and plover. All game birds are becoming scarce as the country becomes settled and they are confined to uninhabited regions.—(Prof. M.J. Elrod, Missoula.)

Ptarmigan, wood duck, sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, fool hen, and plover. All game birds are getting rare as the country becomes developed and they are pushed into uninhabited areas.—(Prof. M.J. Elrod, Missoula.)

Nebraska:

Grouse, prairie chicken and quail.—(H.N. Miller, Lincoln.)

Grouse, prairie chicken, and quail.—(H.N. Miller, Lincoln.)

Whistling swan.—(Dr. S.G. Towne, Omaha.)

Whistling swan. —(Dr. S.G. Towne, Omaha.)

New Hampshire:

Wood-duck and upland plover.

Wood duck and upland plover.

NYC:

Quail, woodcock, upland plover, golden plover, black-bellied plover, willet, dowitcher, red-breasted sandpiper, long-billed curlew, wood-duck, purple martin, redheaded woodpecker, mourning dove; gray squirrel, otter.

Quail, woodcock, upland plover, golden plover, black-bellied plover, willet, dowitcher, red-breasted sandpiper, long-billed curlew, wood-duck, purple martin, red-headed woodpecker, mourning dove; gray squirrel, otter.

New Jersey:

Ruffed grouse, teal, canvasback, red-head duck, widgeon, and all species of shore birds, the most noticeable being black-bellied plover, dowitcher, golden plover, killdeer, [Page 50] sickle-bill curlew, upland plover and English snipe; also the mourning dove.—(James M. Stratton and Ernest Napier, Trenton.)

Ruffed grouse, teal, canvasback, redhead duck, widgeon, and all types of shorebirds, with the most prominent being black-bellied plover, dowitcher, golden plover, killdeer, [Page 50] sickle-billed curlew, upland plover, and English snipe; also the mourning dove.—(James M. Stratton and Ernest Napier, Trenton.)

Upland plover, apparently killdeer, egret, wood-duck, woodcock, and probably others.—(B.S. Bowdish, Demarest.)

Upland plover, likely killdeer, egret, wood duck, woodcock, and probably others.—(B.S. Bowdish, Demarest.)

North Carolina:

Forster's tern, oystercatcher, egret and snowy egret.—(T. Gilbert Pearson, Sec. Nat. Asso. Audubon Societies.)

Forster's tern, oystercatcher, egret, and snowy egret.—(T. Gilbert Pearson, Secretary, National Association of Audubon Societies.)

Ruffed grouse rapidly disappearing; bobwhite becoming scarce.—(E.L. Ewbank, Hendersonville.)

Ruffed grouse are quickly disappearing; bobwhite are becoming rare.—(E.L. Ewbank, Hendersonville.)

Perhaps American and snowy egret. If long-billed curlew is not extinct, it seems due to become so. No definite, reliable record of it later than 1885.—(H.H. Brimley, Raleigh.)

Perhaps American and snowy egret. If the long-billed curlew isn't extinct, it looks like it will be soon. There hasn't been a definite, reliable sighting of it since 1885.—(H.H. Brimley, Raleigh.)

North Dakota:

Wood-duck, prairie hen, upland plover, sharp-tailed grouse, canvas-back, pinnated and ruffed grouse, double-crested cormorant, blue heron, long-billed curlew, whooping crane and white pelican.—(W.B. Bell, Agricultural College.)

Wood duck, prairie chicken, upland plover, sharp-tailed grouse, canvasback, pinnated and ruffed grouse, double-crested cormorant, blue heron, long-billed curlew, whooping crane, and white pelican.—(W.B. Bell, Agricultural College.)

Upland plover, marbled godwit, Baird's sparrow, chestnut-collared longspur.—(Alfred Eastgate, Tolna.)

Upland plover, marbled godwit, Baird's sparrow, chestnut-collared longspur.—(Alfred Eastgate, Tolna.)

Ohio

White heron, pileated woodpecker (if not already extinct). White heron reported a number of times last year; occurrences in Sandusky, Huron, Ashtabula and several other counties during 1911. These birds would doubtless rapidly recruit under a proper federal law.—(Paul North, Cleveland.)

White heron, pileated woodpecker (if it isn't already extinct). The white heron was reported several times last year; sightings in Sandusky, Huron, Ashtabula, and several other counties during 1911. These birds would surely thrive under appropriate federal legislation.—(Paul North, Cleveland.)

Turtle dove, quail, red-bird, wren, hummingbird, wild canary [goldfinch] and blue bird.—(Walter C. Staley, Dayton.)

Turtle dove, quail, redbird, wren, hummingbird, wild canary [goldfinch] and bluebird.—(Walter C. Staley, Dayton.)

Oklahoma:

Pinnated grouse.—(J.C. Clark); otter, kit fox, black-footed ferret.—(G.W. Stevens.)

Pinnated grouse.—(J.C. Clark); otter, kit fox, black-footed ferret.—(G.W. Stevens.)

Oregon:

American egret, snowy egret.—(W.L. Finley, Portland.)

American egret, snowy egret.—(W.L. Finley, Portland.)

Pennsylvania:

Virginia partridge and woodcock.—(Arthur Chapman.)

Virginia partridge and woodcock.—(Arthur Chapman.)

Wood-duck, least bittern, phalarope, woodcock, duck hawk and barn swallow.—(Dr. Chas. B. Penrose.)

Wood duck, least bittern, phalarope, woodcock, duck hawk, and barn swallow. — (Dr. Chas. B. Penrose.)

Wild turkey; also various transient and straggling water birds.—(Witmer Stone.)

Wild turkey; also various passing and stray water birds.—(Witmer Stone.)

Rhode Island

Wood-duck, knot, greater yellow-legs, upland plover, golden plover, piping plover, great horned owl.—(Harry S. Hathaway, South Auburn.)

Wood duck, knot, greater yellowlegs, upland plover, golden plover, piping plover, great horned owl.—(Harry S. Hathaway, South Auburn.)

South Carolina:

Wood duck, abundant 6 years ago, now almost gone. Wild turkey (abundant up to 1898); woodcock, upland plover, Hudsonian curlew, Carolina rail, Virginia rail, clapper rail and coot. Black bear verging on extinction, opossum dwindling rapidly.—(James H. Rice Jr., Summerville.)

Wood ducks, once plentiful six years ago, are now nearly extinct. Wild turkeys were abundant until 1898; woodcocks, upland plovers, Hudsonian curlews, Carolina rails, Virginia rails, clapper rails, and coots are also in decline. Black bears are nearing extinction, and opossums are rapidly decreasing.—(James H. Rice Jr., Summerville.)

South Dakota:

Prairie chicken and quail are most likely to become extinct in the near future.—(W.F. Bancroft, Watertown.)

Prairie chickens and quail are likely to go extinct soon.—(W.F. Bancroft, Watertown.)

Texas:

Wild turkey and prairie chickens.—(J.D. Cox, Austin.)

Wild turkey and prairie chickens.—(J.D. Cox, Austin.)

Plover, all species; curlew, cardinal, road-runner, woodcock, wood-duck, canvas-back, cranes, all the herons; wild turkey; quail, all varieties; prairie chicken and Texas guan.—(Capt. M.B. Davis, Waco.)

Plover, all species; curlew, cardinal, roadrunner, woodcock, wood duck, canvasback, cranes, all the herons; wild turkey; quail, all varieties; prairie chicken and Texas guan.—(Capt. M.B. Davis, Waco.)

Curlew, very rare; plover, very rare; antelope. (Answer applies to the Panhandle of Texas.—Chas. Goodnight.)

Curlew, really rare; plover, really rare; antelope. (Answer applies to the Panhandle of Texas.—Chas. Goodnight.)

[Page 51]

Everything [is threatened with extinction] save the dove, which is a migrating bird. Antelope nearly all gone.—(Col. O.C. Guessaz, San Antonio.)

Everything is at risk of disappearing except for the dove, which is a migratory bird. Most antelope are nearly extinct.—(Col. O.C. Guessaz, San Antonio.)

Utah:

Our wild birds are well protected, and there are none that are threatened with extinction. They are increasing.—(Fred. W. Chambers, State Game Warden, Salt Lake City.)

Our wild birds are well protected, and none of them are at risk of extinction. Their numbers are on the rise.—(Fred. W. Chambers, State Game Warden, Salt Lake City.)

Vermont

If all states afforded as good protection as does Vermont, none; but migrating birds like woodcock are now threatened.—(John W. Tilcomb, State Game Warden, Lyndonville.)

If all states provided the same level of protection as Vermont does, there would be none; however, migrating birds like woodcock are currently at risk. —(John W. Tilcomb, State Game Warden, Lyndonville.)

Virginia:

Pheasants (ruffed grouse), wild turkey and other game birds are nearly extinct. A few bears remain, and deer in small numbers in remote sections. In fact, all animals show great reduction in numbers, owing to cutting down forests, and constant gunning.—(L.T. Christian, Richmond.)

Pheasants (ruffed grouse), wild turkeys, and other game birds are almost extinct. There are only a few bears left, and deer are found in small numbers in remote areas. In fact, all animal populations have significantly declined due to deforestation and continuous hunting.—(L.T. Christian, Richmond.)

West Virginia:

Wood-duck, wild turkey, northern raven, dickcissel.—(Rev. Earle A. Brooks, Weston.)

Wood duck, wild turkey, northern raven, dickcissel.—(Rev. Earle A. Brooks, Weston.)

Wild turkeys are very scarce, also ducks. Doves, once numerous, now almost nil. Eagles, except a few in remote fastnesses. Many native song-birds are retreating before the English sparrow.—(William Perry Brown, Glenville.)

Wild turkeys are quite rare now, and so are ducks. Doves, which used to be abundant, are now nearly nonexistent. There are only a few eagles left in remote areas. Many native songbirds are disappearing because of the English sparrow.—(William Perry Brown, Glenville.)

Wood-duck and wild turkey.—(J.A. Viquesney, Belington.)

Wood duck and wild turkey.—(J.A. Viquesney, Belington.)

Wisconsin:

Double-crested cormorant, upland plover, white pelican, long-billed curlew, lesser snow goose, Hudsonian curlew, sandhill crane, golden plover, woodcock, dowitcher and long-billed duck; spruce grouse, knot, prairie sharp-tailed grouse, marbled godwit and bald eagle. All these, formerly abundant, must now be called rare in Wisconsin.—(Prof. George E. Wagner, Madison.)

Double-crested cormorant, upland plover, white pelican, long-billed curlew, lesser snow goose, Hudsonian curlew, sandhill crane, golden plover, woodcock, dowitcher, and long-billed duck; spruce grouse, knot, prairie sharp-tailed grouse, marbled godwit, and bald eagle. All these, once plentiful, are now considered rare in Wisconsin.—(Prof. George E. Wagner, Madison.)

Common tern, knot, American white pelican, Hudsonian godwit, trumpeter swan, long-billed curlew, snowy heron, Hudsonian curlew, American avocet, prairie sharp-tailed grouse, dowitcher, passenger pigeon. Long-billed dowitcher and northern hairy woodpecker.—(Henry L. Ward, Milwaukee Public Museum.)

Common tern, knot, American white pelican, Hudsonian godwit, trumpeter swan, long-billed curlew, snowy heron, Hudsonian curlew, American avocet, prairie sharp-tailed grouse, dowitcher, passenger pigeon. Long-billed dowitcher and northern hairy woodpecker.—(Henry L. Ward, Milwaukee Public Museum.)

Wood-duck, ruddy duck, black mallard, grebe or hell-diver, tern and woodcock.—(Fred. Gerhardt, Madison.)

Wood duck, ruddy duck, black mallard, grebe or hell diver, tern, and woodcock.—(Fred. Gerhardt, Madison.)

Wyoming

Sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse are becoming extinct, both in Wyoming and North Dakota. Sheridan and Johnson Counties (Wyoming) have sage grouse protected until 1915. The miners (mostly foreigners) are out after rabbits at all seasons. To them everything that flies, walks or swims, large enough to be seen, is a "rabbit." They are even worse than the average sheep-herder, as he will seldom kill a bird brooding her young, but to one of those men, a wren or creeper looks like a turkey. Antelope, mountain sheep and grizzly bears are going, fast! The moose season opens in 1915, for a 30 days open season, then close season until 1920.—(Howard Eaton, Wolf.)

Sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse are becoming extinct in both Wyoming and North Dakota. Sheridan and Johnson Counties in Wyoming have sage grouse protected until 1915. The miners, who are mostly immigrants, are hunting rabbits all year round. To them, anything that flies, walks, or swims and is big enough to see is considered a "rabbit." They are even worse than the average sheep herder, who will rarely kill a bird that is nesting. However, for these men, a wren or a creeper looks like a turkey. Antelope, mountain sheep, and grizzly bears are disappearing quickly! The moose season starts in 1915, with a 30-day open season, then it will be closed until 1920.—(Howard Eaton, Wolf.)

Sage grouse, blue grouse, curlew, sandhill crane, porcupine practically extinct; wolverine and pine marten nearly all gone.—(S.N. Leek, Jackson's Hole.)

Sage grouse, blue grouse, curlew, sandhill crane, and porcupines are almost extinct; wolverines and pine martens are almost completely gone.—(S.N. Leek, Jackson's Hole.)


CANADA
Alberta

Swainson's buzzard and sandhill crane are now practically extinct. Elk and antelope will soon be as extinct as the buffalo.—(Arthur G. Wooley-Dod, Calgary.)

Swainson's buzzard and sandhill crane are now nearly extinct. Elk and antelope will soon be as extinct as the buffalo. —(Arthur G. Wooley-Dod, Calgary.)

BC

Wild fowl are in the greatest danger in the southern part of the Province, especially the wood-duck. Otherwise birds are increasing rather than otherwise, especially the [Page 52] small non-game birds. The sea otter is almost extinct.—(A. Bryan Williams, Provincial Game Warden, Vancouver.)

Wild birds are facing the biggest threat in the southern part of the province, especially the wood duck. Otherwise, bird populations are growing rather than declining, particularly the [Page 52] small non-game birds. The sea otter is nearly extinct. —(A. Bryan Williams, Provincial Game Warden, Vancouver.)

Manitoba:

Whooping crane, wood-duck and golden plover. Other species begin to show a marked increase, due to our stringent protective measures. For example, the pinnated grouse and sharp-tailed grouse are more plentiful than in 15 years. Prong-horned antelope and wolf are threatened with extinction.—(J.P. Turner, Winnipeg.)

Whooping crane, wood duck, and golden plover. Other species are starting to see a significant increase thanks to our strict protective measures. For instance, the pinnated grouse and sharp-tailed grouse are more abundant than they have been in the last 15 years. Pronghorn antelope and wolves are at risk of extinction.—(J.P. Turner, Winnipeg.)

The game birds indigenous to this Province are fairly plentiful. Though the prairie chicken was very scarce some few years ago, these birds have become very plentiful again, owing to the strict enforcement of our present "Game Act." The elk are in danger of becoming extinct if they are not stringently guarded. Beaver and otter were almost extinct some few years ago, but are now on the increase, owing to a strict enforcement of the "Game Act."—(Charles Barber, Winnipeg.)

The game birds native to this province are quite abundant. Although prairie chickens were very rare a few years ago, their population has rebounded significantly due to the strict enforcement of our current "Game Act." Elk are at risk of becoming extinct if they are not carefully protected. Beaver and otter were nearly extinct a few years back, but they are now increasing in numbers because of the strict enforcement of the "Game Act." —(Charles Barber, Winnipeg.)

New Brunswick:

Partridge, plover and woodcock. Moose and deer are getting more plentiful every year.—(W.W. Gerard, St. John.)

Partridge, plover, and woodcock. Moose and deer are becoming more common every year.—(W.W. Gerard, St. John.)

Nova Scotia:

The Canada grouse may possibly become extinct in Nova Scotia, unless the protection it now enjoys can save it. The American golden plover, which formerly came in immense flocks, is now very rare. Snowflakes are very much less common than formerly, but I think this is because our winters are now usually much less severe. The caribou is almost extinct on the mainland of Nova Scotia, but is still found in North Cape Breton Island. The wolf has become excessively rare, but as it is found in New Brunswick, it may occur here at any time again. The beaver had been threatened with extinction; but since being protected, it has multiplied, and is now on a fairly safe footing again.—(Curator of Museum, Halifax.)

The Canada grouse could become extinct in Nova Scotia unless the protection it currently has can save it. The American golden plover, which used to arrive in huge flocks, is now very rare. Snowflakes are much less common than they used to be, but I think that’s because our winters are usually much milder now. The caribou is almost extinct on the mainland of Nova Scotia but can still be found on North Cape Breton Island. The wolf has become extremely rare, but since it’s present in New Brunswick, it could appear here again at any time. The beaver was once threatened with extinction, but since being protected, it has increased in number and is now relatively safe again.—(Curator of Museum, Halifax.)

Ontario:

Quail are getting scarce.—(E. Tinsley, Toronto.)

Quail are becoming rare. —(E. Tinsley, Toronto.)

Wood-duck, bob white, woodcock, golden plover, Hudsonian curlew, knot and dowitcher [are threatened with extinction.]—(C.W. Nash, Toronto.)

Wood ducks, bobwhites, woodcocks, golden plovers, Hudsonian curlews, knots, and dowitchers [are threatened with extinction.]—(C.W. Nash, Toronto.)

PEI

The species threatened with extinction are the golden plover, American woodcock, pied-billed grebe, red-throated loon, sooty shearwater, gadwall, ruddy duck, black-crowned night heron, Hudsonian godwit, kildeer, northern pileated woodpecker, chimney swift, yellow-bellied flycatcher, red-winged blackbird, pine finch, magnolia warbler, ruby-crowned kinglet.—(E.T. Carbonell, Charlottetown.)

The species at risk of extinction include the golden plover, American woodcock, pied-billed grebe, red-throated loon, sooty shearwater, gadwall, ruddy duck, black-crowned night heron, Hudsonian godwit, killdeer, northern pileated woodpecker, chimney swift, yellow-bellied flycatcher, red-winged blackbird, pine finch, magnolia warbler, and ruby-crowned kinglet.—(E.T. Carbonell, Charlottetown.)

In closing the notes of this survey, I repeat my assurance that they are not offered on a basis of infallibility. It would require years of work to obtain answers from forty-eight states to the three questions that I have asked that could be offered as absolutely exact. All these reports are submitted on the well-recognized court-testimony basis,—"to the best of our knowledge and belief." Gathered as they have been from persons whose knowledge is good, these opinions are therefore valuable; and they furnish excellent indices of wild-life conditions as they exist in 1912 in the various states and provinces of North America north of Mexico.

In wrapping up the notes from this survey, I want to emphasize that they aren't presented as completely infallible. It would take years of work to get precise answers from forty-eight states to the three questions I've asked that could be considered entirely accurate. All these reports are provided based on the well-recognized standard of court testimony—"to the best of our knowledge and belief." Collected from individuals with reliable knowledge, these opinions are valuable and provide excellent indicators of wildlife conditions as they existed in 1912 across various states and provinces in North America north of Mexico.


[Page 53]
CHAPTER VI
THE REGULAR ARMY OF DESTRUCTION

In order to cure any disease, the surgeon must make of it a correct diagnosis. It is useless to try to prescribe remedies without a thorough understanding of the trouble.

In order to treat any illness, the surgeon must make a correct diagnosis. It's pointless to try to prescribe treatments without a complete understanding of the issue.

That the best and most interesting wild life of America is disappearing at a rapid rate, we all know only too well. That proposition is entirely beyond the domain of argument. The fact that a species or a group of species has made a little gain here and there, or is stationary, does not sensibly diminish the force of the descending blow. The wild-life situation is full of surprises. For example, in 1902 I was astounded by the extent to which bird life had decreased over the 130 miles between Miles City, Montana, and the Missouri River since 1886; for there was no reason to expect anything of the kind. Even the jack rabbits and coyotes had almost totally disappeared.

We all know that the best and most fascinating wildlife in America is disappearing quickly. That fact isn't up for debate. The reality that some species or groups of species have seen a slight increase in numbers or are holding steady does not lessen the impact of this ongoing decline. The situation with wildlife is full of surprises. For instance, in 1902, I was shocked by how much bird life had diminished over the 130 miles between Miles City, Montana, and the Missouri River since 1886; there was no reason to expect such a change. Even the jackrabbits and coyotes had nearly vanished.

The duties of the present hour, that fairly thrust themselves into our faces and will not be put aside, are these:

The responsibilities of the current moment, which demand our attention and can't be ignored, are these:

First,—To save valuable species from extermination!

First,—To protect important species from extinction!

Second,—To preserve a satisfactory representation of our once rich fauna, to hand down to Posterity.

Second,—To maintain a good depiction of our formerly abundant wildlife, to pass it on to future generations.

Third,—To protect the farmer and fruit grower from the enormous losses that the destruction of our insectivorous and rodent-eating birds is now inflicting upon both the producer and consumer.

Third,—To protect farmers and fruit growers from the huge losses that the decline of our insect-eating and rodent-eating birds is currently causing for both producers and consumers.

Fourth,—To protect our forests, by protecting the birds that keep down the myriads of insects that are destructive to trees and shrubs.

Fourth,—To protect our forests by safeguarding the birds that control the countless insects harmful to trees and shrubs.

Fifth,—To preserve to the future sportsmen of America enough game and fish that they may have at least a taste of the legitimate pursuit of game in the open that has made life so interesting to the sportsmen of to-day.

Fifth,—To ensure that future sports enthusiasts in America have enough game and fish so they can experience at least a bit of the legitimate pursuit of hunting and fishing in the great outdoors that has made life so exciting for today's sportsmen.

For any civilized nation to exterminate valuable and interesting species of wild mammals, birds or fishes is more than a disgrace. It is a crime! We have no right, legal, moral or commercial, to exterminate any valuable or interesting species; because none of them belong to us, to exterminate or not, as we please.

For any civilized nation to wipe out valuable and interesting species of wild mammals, birds, or fish is more than just shameful. It’s a crime! We have no legal, moral, or commercial right to eradicate any valuable or interesting species because none of them belong to us to exterminate or not, as we choose.

For the people of any civilized nation to permit the slaughter of the wild birds that protect its crops, its fruits and its forests from the insect hordes, is worse than folly. It is sheer orneryness and idiocy. People who are either so lazy or asinine as to permit the slaughter of their best [Page 54] friends deserve to have their crops destroyed and their forests ravaged. They deserve to pay twenty cents a pound for their cotton when the boll weevil has cut down the normal supply.

For the people of any civilized nation to allow the killing of the wild birds that safeguard its crops, fruits, and forests from the swarms of insects is worse than foolishness. It's pure stubbornness and stupidity. People who are either too lazy or too dense to stop the killing of their best [Page 54] friends deserve to see their crops ruined and their forests destroyed. They deserve to pay twenty cents a pound for their cotton when the boll weevil has diminished the usual supply.

It is very desirable that we should now take an inventory of the forces that have been, and to-day are, active in the destruction of our wild birds, mammals, and game fishes. During the past ten years a sufficient quantity of facts and figures has become available to enable us to secure a reasonably full and accurate view of the whole situation. As we pause on our hill-top, and survey the field of carnage, we find that we are reviewing the Army of Destruction!

It’s important for us to take stock of the forces that have caused, and are still causing, harm to our wild birds, mammals, and game fish. Over the last decade, we’ve gathered enough facts and figures to give us a pretty clear and accurate picture of the entire situation. As we stand on our hilltop and look over the scene of destruction, we realize we are examining the Army of Destruction!

It is indeed a motley array. We see true sportsmen beside ordinary gunners, game-hogs and meat hunters; handsome setter dogs are mixed up with coyotes, cats, foxes and skunks; and well-gowned women and ladies' maids are jostled by half-naked "poor-white" and black-negro "plume hunters."

It’s definitely a mixed group. We see real sports enthusiasts alongside everyday hunters, game hogs, and meat hunters; beautiful setter dogs are mixed in with coyotes, cats, foxes, and skunks; and well-dressed women and their maids are pushed around by barely clothed “poor whites” and black “plume hunters.”

Verily, the destruction of wild life makes strange companions.

Truly, the destruction of wildlife creates unusual allies.

Let us briefly review the several army corps that together make up the army of the destroyers. Space in this volume forbids an extended notice of each. Unfortunately it is impossible to segregate some of these classes, and number each one, for they merge together too closely for that; but we can at least describe the several classes that form the great mass of destroyers.

Let’s take a quick look at the different army corps that collectively make up the army of destroyers. This volume doesn't allow for a detailed discussion of each one. Unfortunately, it's hard to separate these groups and assign them numbers, as they blend together too much for that; however, we can at least outline the various classes that constitute the large group of destroyers.

The Gentlemen Sportsmen. —These men are the very bone and sinew of wild life preservation. These are the men who have red blood in their veins, who annually hear the red gods calling, who love the earth, the mountains, the woods, the waters and the sky. These are the men to whom "the bag" is a matter of small importance, and to whom "the bag-limit" has only academic interest; because in nine cases out of ten they do not care to kill all that the law allows. The tenth and exceptional time is when the bag limit is "one." A gentleman sportsman is a man who protects game, stops shooting when he has "enough"—without reference to the legal bag-limit, and whenever a species is threatened with extinction, he conscientiously refrains from shooting it.

The Gentlemen Sportsmen. —These men are the backbone of wildlife conservation. They are the ones who have passion in their veins, who every year hear the call of the wild, who cherish the earth, the mountains, the forests, the waters, and the sky. For them, "the bag" is not a big deal, and "the bag-limit" is only a theoretical concept; because most of the time, they don’t feel the need to take as many as the law allows. The rare exception is when the bag limit is "one." A gentleman sportsman is someone who protects wildlife, stops hunting when he has "enough"—regardless of the legal limits, and whenever a species is at risk of extinction, he deliberately chooses not to hunt it.

The true sportsmen of the world are the men who once were keen in the stubble or on the trail, but who have been halted by the general slaughter and the awful decrease of game. Many of them, long before a hair has turned gray, have hung up their guns forever, and turned to the camera. These are the men who are willing to hand out checks, or to leave their mirth and their employment and go to the firing line at their state capitols, to lock horns with the bull-headed killers of wild life who recognize no check or limit save the law.

The true sportsmen of the world are the guys who used to be passionate about hunting in the fields or on the trails, but have stopped because of the widespread killing and the dramatic decline in wildlife. Many of them, long before they get any gray hair, have put away their guns for good and picked up cameras instead. These are the men who are willing to write checks, or leave their fun and jobs to head to their state capitols, where they challenge the stubborn killers of wildlife who ignore any check or limit except for the law.

These are the men who have done the most to put upon our statute books the laws that thus far have saved some of our American game from total annihilation, and who (so we firmly believe) will be chiefly instrumental in tightening the lines of protection around the remnant. These are the men who are making and stocking game preserves, public and private, great and small.

These are the men who have done the most to establish the laws that have so far saved some of our American wildlife from complete extinction, and who (as we strongly believe) will play a key role in strengthening the protection around what’s left. These are the men who are creating and managing game preserves, both public and private, large and small.

Drawn by Dan Beard

Illustrated by Dan Beard

THE REGULAR ARMY OF DESTRUCTION, WAITING FOR THE FIRST OF OCTOBER

THE REGULAR ARMY OF DESTRUCTION, WAITING FOR OCTOBER 1ST

Each Year 2,642,274 Well-Armed Men Take the Field Against the Remnant of Wild Birds and Mammals In the United States

Each year, 2,642,274 armed men go out to battle the remaining wild birds and mammals in the United States.

If you wish to know some of these men, I will tell you where to find a goodly number of them; and when you find them, you will also find that they are men you would enjoy camping with! Look in the membership lists of the Boone and Crockett Club, Camp-Fire Club of America, the Lewis and Clark Club of Pittsburgh, the New York State League, the Shikar Club of London, the Society for the Preservation of the Wild Fauna of the British Empire, the Massachusetts Fish and Game Protective Association, the Springfield (Mass.) Sportsmen's Association, the Camp-Fire Clubs of Detroit and Chicago, and the North American Fish and Game Protective Association.

If you want to get to know some of these guys, I'll tell you where to find a good number of them; and when you do, you'll see they are people you'd enjoy camping with! Check out the membership lists of the Boone and Crockett Club, Camp-Fire Club of America, the Lewis and Clark Club of Pittsburgh, the New York State League, the Shikar Club of London, the Society for the Preservation of the Wild Fauna of the British Empire, the Massachusetts Fish and Game Protective Association, the Springfield (Mass.) Sportsmen's Association, the Camp-Fire Clubs of Detroit and Chicago, and the North American Fish and Game Protective Association.

There are other bodies of sportsmen that I would like to name, were space available, but to set down here a complete list is quite impossible.

There are other groups of athletes that I would like to mention if there was enough space, but it's simply impossible to provide a full list here.

The best and the most of the game-protective laws now in force in the United States and Canada were brought into existence through the initiative and efforts of the real sportsmen of those two nations. But for their activity, exerted on the right side, the settled portion of North America would to-day be an utterly gameless land! Even though the sportsmen have taken their toll of the wilds, they have made the laws that have saved a remnant of the game until 1912.

The best and most effective game protection laws currently in place in the United States and Canada were created thanks to the initiatives and efforts of true sports enthusiasts from both countries. Without their advocacy for the right causes, the settled areas of North America would today be completely devoid of game! Even though the sportsmen have taken their share from the wilderness, they have established the laws that preserved a portion of the game up until 1912.

For all that, however, every man who still shoots game is a soldier in the Army of Destruction! There is no blinking that fact. Such men do not stand on the summit with the men who now protect the game and do not shoot at all! The millions of men who do not shoot, and who also do nothing to protect or preserve wild life, do not count! In this warfare they are merely ciphers in front of the real figures.

For all that, however, every man who still hunts game is a soldier in the Army of Destruction! There’s no denying that fact. These men do not stand on the same level as those who now protect the game and don’t shoot at all! The millions of men who don’t hunt, and who also do nothing to protect or preserve wildlife, don’t matter! In this battle, they are just numbers in front of the real figures.

The Gunners, Who Kill To The Limit. —Out of the enormous mass of men who annually take up arms against the remnant of wild life, and are called "sportsmen," I believe that only one out of every 500 conscientiously stops shooting when game becomes scarce, and extinction is impending. All of the others feel that it is right and proper to kill all the game that they can kill up to the legal bag limit. It is the reasoning of Shylock:

The Gunners, Who Push Their Limits. —Out of the huge number of people who take up arms against the remaining wildlife each year, and are called "sportsmen", I believe that only one in every 500 actually stops shooting when the game is dwindling and extinction is near. The rest feel it's acceptable to kill as much game as they can up to the legal bag limit. It's the same reasoning as Shylock:

"Justice demands it, and the law doth give it!"

"Justice requires it, and the law provides it!"

Especially is this true of the men who pay their one dollar per year for a resident hunting license, and feel that in doing so they have done a great Big Thing!

Especially is this true for the men who pay their one dollar per year for a resident hunting license and feel that by doing so, they have accomplished something really significant!

This is a very deadly frame of mind. Ethically it is entirely wrong; and at least two million men and boys who shoot American game must be shown that it is wrong! This is the spirit of Extermination, clothed in the robes of Law and Justice.

This is a really dangerous mindset. Morally, it is completely wrong; and at least two million men and boys who hunt American game need to be shown that it is wrong! This is the spirit of Extermination, dressed up as Law and Justice.

Whenever and wherever game birds are so scarce that a good shot who hunts hard during a day in the fields finds only three or four birds, he should stop shooting at once, and devote his mind and energies to the problem of bringing back the game! It is strange that conditions do not make this duty clear to every conscientious citizen.

Whenever and wherever game birds are so scarce that a skilled hunter who works hard for a day in the fields only finds three or four birds, he should stop shooting immediately and focus his thoughts and efforts on solving the issue of replenishing the game! It’s odd that the situation doesn't make this responsibility obvious to every responsible citizen.

The Shylock spirit which prompts a man to kill all that "the law allows" is a terrible scourge to the wild life of America, and to the world at [Page 57] large. It is the spirit of extermination according to law. Even the killing of game for the market is not so great a scourge as this; for this spirit searches out the game in every nook and cranny of the world, and spares not. In effect it says: "If the law is defective, it is right for me to take every advantage of it! I do not need to have any conscience in the matter outside the letter of the law."

The Shylock mentality that drives a person to kill everything "the law allows" is a terrible threat to the wildlife of America and the world at [Page 57] large. It's the mindset of extermination under the guise of legality. Even the hunting of game for profit isn't as devastating as this attitude; it seeks out animals in every corner of the world and doesn't hold back. Essentially, it says: "If the law has flaws, it's fair for me to exploit them! I don’t need to have any moral qualms beyond the letter of the law."

The extent to which this amazing spirit prevails is positively awful. You will find it among pseudo game-protectors to a paralyzing extent! It is the great gunner's paradox, and it pervades this country from corner to corner. No: there is no use in trying to "educate" the mass of the hunters of America out of it, as a means of saving the game; for positively it can not be done! Do not waste time in trying it. If you rely upon it, you will be doing a great wrong to wild life, and promoting extermination. The only remedy is sweeping laws, for long close seasons, for a great many species. Forget the paltry dollar-a-year license money. The license fees never represent more than a tenth part of the value of the game that is killed under licenses.

The extent to which this amazing attitude exists is incredibly concerning. You’ll find it among so-called game protectors to a paralyzing degree! This is the great gunner's paradox, and it spreads throughout the country from one end to the other. No, there's no point in trying to “educate” the majority of hunters in America out of it to save the game, because it simply can’t be done! Don't waste your time trying. If you depend on that approach, you will be doing a great disservice to wildlife and encouraging extermination. The only solution is strong laws, long closed seasons, for many species. Forget the trivial dollar-a-year license fees. The licensing income never amounts to more than a tenth of the value of the game that is hunted under those licenses.

The savage desire to kill "all that the law allows" often is manifested in men in whom we naturally expect to find a very different spirit. By way of illumination, I offer three cases out of the many that I could state.

The brutal urge to kill "everything the law permits" often shows up in men where we typically expect to see a completely different attitude. To shed light on this, I present three examples from the many I could provide.

Case No. 1. The Duck Breeder. —A gentleman of my acquaintance has spent several years and much money in breeding wild ducks. From my relations with him, I had acquired the belief that he was a great lover of ducks, and at least wished all species well. One whizzing cold day in winter he called upon me, and stated that he had been duck-hunting; which surprised me. He added, "I have just spent two days on Great South Bay, and I made a great killing. In the two days I got ninety-four ducks!"

Case #1. The Duck Farmer. —A guy I know has dedicated several years and a lot of money to breeding wild ducks. From my interactions with him, I thought he really loved ducks and wanted the best for all kinds. One freezing cold winter day, he came to see me and mentioned that he had gone duck hunting, which took me by surprise. He continued, "I just spent two days on Great South Bay, and I had an amazing hunt. In those two days, I got ninety-four ducks!"

I said, "How could you do it,—caring for wild ducks as you do?"

I said, "How can you do it—taking care of wild ducks like you do?"

"Well, I had hunted ducks twice before on Great South Bay and didn't have very good luck; but this time the cold weather drove the ducks in, and I got square with them!"

"Well, I had gone duck hunting twice before on Great South Bay and didn’t have much luck; but this time the cold weather brought in the ducks, and I got even with them!"

Case No. 2. The Ornithologist. —A short time ago the news was published in Forest and Stream, that a well-known ornithologist had distinguished himself in one of the mid-western states by the skill he had displayed in bagging thirty-four ducks in one day, greatly to the envy of the natives; and if this shoe fits any American naturalist, he is welcome to put it on and wear it.

Case No. 2. The Birdwatcher. — A little while ago, it was reported in Forest and Stream that a famous ornithologist made headlines in one of the mid-western states by expertly hunting thirty-four ducks in a single day, much to the jealousy of the locals; and if this applies to any American naturalist, they’re welcome to embrace it.

Case No. 3. The Sportsman. —A friend of mine in the South is the owner of a game preserve in which wild ducks are at times very numerous. Once upon a time he was visited by a northern sportsmen who takes a deep and abiding interest in the preservation of game. The sportsman was invited to go out duck-shooting; ducks being then in season there. He said:

Case #3. The Athlete. —A friend of mine in the South owns a game preserve that sometimes has a lot of wild ducks. One time, a northern sportsman, who cares a lot about preserving game, came to visit him. The sportsman was invited to go duck-hunting since it was duck season at the time. He said:

G. O. SHIELDS

G. O. Shields

A notable defender of Wild Life

A leading advocate for wildlife

"Yes, I will go; and I want you to put me in a place where I can kill a hundred ducks in a day! I never have done that yet, and I would like to do it, once!"

"Yeah, I'm in; and I want you to put me somewhere I can kill a hundred ducks in a day! I've never done that before, and I'd really like to try it, just once!"

"All right," said my friend, "I can put you in such a place; and if you can shoot well enough, you can kill a hundred ducks in a day."

"Okay," my friend said, "I can set you up at a spot where, if you can shoot well, you could bag a hundred ducks in a day."

The effort was made in all earnestness. There was much shooting, but few were the ducks that fell before it. In concluding this story my friend remarked in a tone of disgust:

The effort was made with complete seriousness. There was a lot of shooting, but very few ducks actually landed before it. To wrap up this story, my friend said with a tone of disgust:

"All the game-preserving sportsmen that come to me are just like that! They want to kill all they can kill!"

"All the hunters who come to me are just like that! They want to kill everything they can kill!"

There is a blood-test by which to separate the conscientious sportsmen from the mere gunners. Here it is:

There’s a blood test to distinguish the serious athletes from the casual hunters. Here it is:

A sportsman stops shooting when game becomes scarce; and he does not object to long-close-season laws; but

A sportsman stops hunting when game is hard to find; and he doesn’t mind rules about extended closed seasons; but

A gunner believes in killing "all that the law allows;" and he objects to long close seasons!

A gunner believes in killing "everything that's legal;" and he dislikes long closed seasons !

I warrant that whenever and wherever this test is applied it will separate the sheep from the goats. It applies in all America, all Asia and Africa, and in Greenland, with equal force.

I guarantee that wherever and whenever this test is used, it will clearly distinguish the good from the bad. It holds true in all of America, all of Asia and Africa, and in Greenland, with the same effectiveness.

The Game-Hog. —This term was coined by G.O. Shields, in 1897, when he was editor and owner of Recreation Magazine, and it has come into general use. It has been recognized by a judge on the bench as being an appropriate term to apply to all men who selfishly slaughter wild game beyond the limits of decency. Although it is a harsh term, and was mercilessly used by Mr. Shields in his fierce war on the men who slaughtered game for "sport," it has jarred at least a hundred thousand men into their first realization of the fact that to-day there is a difference between decency and indecency in the pursuit of game. The use of the term has done very great good; but, strange to say, it has made for Mr. Shields a great many enemies outside the ranks of the game-hogs themselves! From this one might fairly suppose that there is such a thing as a sympathetic game-hog!

The Game Thief. —This term was created by G.O. Shields in 1897 when he was the editor and owner of Recreation Magazine, and it has since become widely used. A judge has even recognized it as a fitting term for men who selfishly hunt wild game beyond what is considered decent. While it’s a harsh term, it was relentlessly used by Mr. Shields in his strong campaign against those who kill game for "sport." It has awakened at least a hundred thousand men to the reality that today, there is a distinction between decency and indecency in hunting. The use of this term has done a lot of good; however, strangely, it has also created many enemies for Mr. Shields outside the ranks of the game-hogs themselves! From this, one might reasonably conclude that there is such a thing as a sympathetic game-hog!

One thing at least is certain. During a period of about six years, while his war with the game-hogs was on, from Maine to California, Mr. Shields's name became a genuine terror to excessive killers of game; and it is reasonably certain that his war saved a great number of game birds from the slaughter that otherwise would have overtaken them!

One thing is definitely clear. During a span of around six years, while he was battling against overzealous hunters from Maine to California, Mr. Shields's name became a real nightmare for those who excessively killed game; and it's pretty sure that his efforts saved a lot of game birds from the mass killing that would have happened otherwise!

The number of armed men and boys who annually take the field in the United States in the pursuit of birds and quadrupeds, is enormous. [Page 59] People who do not shoot have no conception of it; and neither do they comprehend the mechanical perfection and fearful deadliness of the weapons used. This feature of the situation can hardly be realized until some aspect of it is actually seen.

The number of armed men and boys who head out annually in the United States to hunt birds and animals is huge. [Page 59] People who don’t hunt can’t really understand it; they also don’t grasp the impressive accuracy and dangerous power of the weapons used. This aspect of the situation can hardly be appreciated until it's witnessed firsthand.

I have been at some pains to collect the latest figures showing the number of hunting licenses issued in 1911, but the total is incomplete. In some states the figures are not obtainable, and in some states there are no hunters' license laws. The figures of hunting licenses issued in 1911 that I have obtained from official sources are set forth below.

I’ve worked hard to gather the most recent data on the number of hunting licenses issued in 1911, but the total isn’t complete. In some states, the numbers aren’t available, and in others, there aren’t any hunting license laws. The figures for hunting licenses issued in 1911 that I’ve collected from official sources are listed below.

The United States Army Of Destruction
Hunting Licenses issued in 1911
Alabama 5,090 Montana 59,291
California 138,689 Nebraska 39,402
Colorado 41,058 New Hampshire 33,542
Connecticut 19,635 New Jersey 61,920
Idaho 50,342 New Mexico 7,000
Illinois 192,244 New York 150,222
Indiana 54,813 Rhode Island 6,541
Iowa 91,000 South Dakota 31,054
Kansas 44,069 Utah 27,800
Louisiana 76,000 Vermont 31,762
Maine 2,552 Washington, about 40,000
Massachusetts 45,039 Wisconsin 138,457
Michigan 22,323 Wyoming 9,721
Missouri 66,662 _______
Total number of regularly licensed gunners 1,486,228

The average for the twenty-seven states that issued licenses as shown above is 55,046 for each state.

The average for the twenty-seven states that issued licenses, as shown above, is 55,046 for each state.

Now, the twenty-one states issuing no licenses, or not reporting, produced in 1911 fully as many gunners per capita as did the other twenty-seven states. Computed fairly on existing averages they must have turned out a total of 1,155,966 gunners, making for all the United States 2,642,194 armed men and boys warring upon the remnant of game in 1911. We are not counting the large number of lawless hunters who never take out licenses. Now, is Mr. Beard's picture a truthful presentation, or not?

Now, the twenty-one states that issued no licenses or didn't report produced in 1911 about the same number of gunners per capita as the other twenty-seven states. By fairly calculating based on existing averages, they must have produced a total of 1,155,966 gunners, which brings the total for all of the United States to 2,642,194 armed men and boys attacking the remaining game in 1911. We're not counting the many unlicensed hunters who don’t get permits. So, is Mr. Beard's portrayal accurate or not?

New York with only deer, ruffed grouse, shore-birds, ducks and a very few woodcock to shoot annually puts into the field 150,222 armed men. In 1909 they killed about 9,000 deer!

New York has only deer, ruffed grouse, shorebirds, ducks, and a very few woodcock to hunt each year, yet it sends 150,222 armed men into the field. In 1909, they killed about 9,000 deer!

New Jersey, spending $30,000 in 1912 in efforts to restock her covers with game, and with a population of 2,537,167, sent out in 1911 a total army of 61,920 well-armed gunners. How can any of her game survive?

New Jersey spent $30,000 in 1912 trying to replenish its game populations, and with a population of 2,537,167, it sent out a total of 61,920 well-armed hunters in 1911. How can any of its game survive?

New Hampshire, with only 430,572 population, has 33,542 licensed hunters,—equal to thirty-three regiments of full strength!

New Hampshire, with a population of just 430,572, has 33,542 licensed hunters—equal to thirty-three fully-staffed regiments!

Vermont, with 355,956 people, sends out annually an army of 31,762 men who hunt according to law; and in 1910 they killed 3,649 deer.

Vermont, with a population of 355,956, sends out an annual army of 31,762 people who hunt legally; and in 1910, they harvested 3,649 deer.

Utah, with only 373,351 population, had 27,800 men in the field after her very small remnant of game! How can any wild thing of Utah escape?

Utah, with only 373,351 people, had 27,800 men in the field hunting its very few remaining game! How can any wild creature in Utah get away?

Montana, population 376,053, had in 1911 an army of 59,291 well-armed men, warring chiefly upon the big game, and swiftly exterminating it.

Montana, with a population of 376,053, had an army of 59,291 well-armed men in 1911, primarily hunting big game and quickly driving it to extinction.

How long can any of the big game stand before the army of two and one-half million well-armed men, eager and keen to kill, and out to get an equivalent for their annual expenditure in guns, ammunition and other expenses?

How long can any of the big game survive against an army of two and a half million well-armed men, eager and ready to kill, seeking to justify their yearly spending on guns, ammunition, and other costs?

In addition to the hunters themselves, they are assisted by thousands of expert guides, thousands of horses, thousands of dogs, hundreds of automobiles and hundreds of thousands of tents. Each big-game hunter has an experienced guide who knows the haunts and habits of the game, the best feeding grounds, the best trails, and everything else that will aid the hunter in taking the game at a disadvantage and destroying it. The big-game rifles are of the highest power, the longest range, the greatest accuracy and the best repeating mechanism that modern inventive genius can produce. It is said that in Wyoming the Maxim silencer is now being used. England has produced a weapon of a new type, called "the scatter rifle," which is intended for use on ducks. The best binoculars are used in searching out the game, and horses carry the hunters and guides as near as possible to the game. For bears, baits are freely used, and in the pursuit of pumas, dogs are employed to the limit of the available supply.

In addition to the hunters themselves, they are supported by thousands of expert guides, thousands of horses, thousands of dogs, hundreds of cars, and hundreds of thousands of tents. Each big-game hunter has an experienced guide who knows the favorite spots and habits of the game, the best feeding areas, the best trails, and everything else that will help the hunter gain the upper hand and succeed. The big-game rifles are of the highest power, longest range, greatest accuracy, and the best repeating mechanisms that modern technology can create. It’s said that in Wyoming, the Maxim silencer is now being used. England has developed a new type of weapon called "the scatter rifle," designed for duck hunting. The best binoculars are used for spotting the game, and horses carry the hunters and guides as close as possible to it. For bears, baits are widely used, and in the chase of pumas, dogs are used to the fullest extent of the supply available.

The deadliness of the automobile in hunting already is so apparent that North Dakota has wisely and justly forbidden their use by law, (1911). The swift machine enables city gunmen to penetrate game regions they could not reach with horses, and hunt through from four to six localities per day, instead of one only, as formerly. The use of automobiles in hunting should be everywhere prohibited.

The danger of using cars for hunting is already so clear that North Dakota has rightly made it illegal, (1911). The fast vehicle allows urban hunters to access game areas they couldn't reach on horseback and to hunt in four to six locations per day, instead of just one like before. The use of cars for hunting should be banned everywhere.

Every appliance and assistance that money can buy, the modern sportsman secures to help him against the game. The game is beset during its breeding season by various wild enemies,—foxes, cats, wolves, pumas, lynxes, eagles, and many other predatory species. The only help that it receives is in the form of an annual close season—which thus far has saved in America only a few local moose, white-tailed deer and a few game birds, from steady and sure extermination.

Every tool and support that money can buy, the modern athlete gets to help him compete. The game faces various wild predators during their breeding season—foxes, cats, wolves, pumas, lynxes, eagles, and many other hunting species. The only protection they have is an annual closed season—which so far has saved in America only a few local moose, white-tailed deer, and a few game birds from ongoing and certain extinction.

The bag limits on which vast reliance is placed to preserve the wild game, are a fraud, a delusion and a snare! The few local exceptions only prove the generality of the rule. In every state, without one single exception, the bag limits are far too high, and the laws are of deadly liberality. In many states, the bag limit laws on birds are an absolute dead letter. Fancy the 125 wardens of New York enforcing the bag-limit laws on 150,000 gunners! It is this horrible condition that is enabling the licensed army of destruction to get in its deadly work on the game, all over the world. In America, the over-liberality of the laws are to blame for two-thirds of the carnival of slaughter, and the successful evasions of the law are responsible for the other third.

The bag limits that are heavily relied upon to protect wild game are a sham, an illusion, and a trap! A few local exceptions only highlight how true this is overall. In every state, without a single exception, the bag limits are way too high, and the laws are excessively lenient. In many states, the bag limit laws for birds are completely ignored. Imagine the 125 wardens in New York trying to enforce the bag-limit laws on 150,000 hunters! This horrible situation is allowing the licensed army of destruction to wreak havoc on game everywhere. In America, the overly lenient laws are responsible for two-thirds of the slaughter, and the successful ways people find to dodge the law account for the other third.

TWO GUNNERS OF KANSAS CITY

TWO GUNNERS FROM KANSAS CITY

Who Believe in Killing all That the Law Allows. They are not so Much to Blame as the System That Permits Such Slaughter. (Note the Pump Guns)

Who Believe in Killing Everything That the Law Allows. They are not as Much to Blame as the System That Allows Such Slaughter. (Note the Pump Guns)

WHY THE SANDHILL CRANE IS BECOMING EXTINCT

WHY THE SANDHILL CRANE IS BECOMING EXTINCT

Nineteen of Them Killed as "Game" by Three Gunners. Note the Machine Gun.

Nineteen of them were killed as "game" by three gunners. Check out the machine gun.

The only remedy for the present extermination of game according to law that so rapidly and so furiously is proceeding all over the United States, Canada, Alaska, and Africa, is ten-year close seasons on all the species threatened with extinction, and immensely reduced open seasons and bag limits on all the others.

The only solution for the current rapid and intense extermination of wildlife happening across the United States, Canada, Alaska, and Africa is to implement ten-year closed seasons on all species at risk of extinction, along with significantly reduced open seasons and bag limits on all other species.

Will the people who still have wild game take heed now, and clamp down the brakes, hard and fast before it is too late, or will they have their game exterminated?

Will the people who still have wild game pay attention now and put a stop to it quickly before it's too late, or will they let their game get wiped out?

Shall we have five-year close seasons, or close seasons of 500 years? We must take our choice.

Shall we have five-year breaks, or breaks of 500 years? We have to make our choice.

Shall we hand down to our children a gameless continent, with all the shame that such a calamity will entail?

Shall we pass on to our children a continent without games, along with all the embarrassment that such a disaster will bring?

We have got to answer these questions like men, or they will soon be answered for us by the extermination of the wild life. For twenty-five years we have been smarting under the disgrace of the extermination of our bison millions. Let us not repeat the dose through the destruction of other species.

We have got to answer these questions like adults, or they will soon be addressed for us by the extinction of wildlife. For twenty-five years, we've been dealing with the shame of losing our bison population. Let's not go down that path again with the destruction of other species.


[Page 63]
CHAPTER VII
THE GUERRILLAS OF DESTRUCTION

We have now to deal with The Guerrillas Of Destruction.

We now need to address The Destruction Guerrillas.

In warfare, a guerrilla, or bushwhacker, is an armed man who recognizes none of the rules of civilized warfare, and very often has no commander. In France he is called a "franc-tireur," or free-shooter. The guerrilla goes out to live on the country, to skulk, to war on the weak, and never attack save from ambush, or when the odds clearly are on his side. His military status is barely one remove from that of the spy.

In warfare, a guerrilla, or bushwhacker, is an armed person who ignores all the rules of civilized combat and often operates without a leader. In France, they are referred to as a "franc-tireur," or free-shooter. The guerrilla survives off the land, avoids direct confrontation, preys on the vulnerable, and only attacks when they have a clear advantage or when ambushing their target. Their military standing is just a step above that of a spy.

The meat-shooters who harry the game and other wild life in order to use it as a staple food supply; the Italians, negroes and others who shoot song-birds as food; the plume-hunters and the hide-and-tusk hunters all over the world are the guerrillas of the Army of Destruction. Let us consider some of these grand divisions in detail.

The hunters who constantly pursue game and other wildlife for a steady food supply; the Italians, African Americans, and others who hunt songbirds for food; the plume-hunters and those who hunt for hides and tusks all over the world are the guerrillas of the Army of Destruction. Let's look at some of these main groups in detail.

Here is an inexorable law of Nature, to which there are no exceptions:

Here is an unbreakable law of Nature, with no exceptions:

No wild species of bird, mammal, reptile or fish can withstand exploitation for commercial purposes.

No wild species of bird, mammal, reptile, or fish can survive exploitation for commercial purposes.

The men who pursue wild creatures for the money or other value there is in them, never give up. They work at slaughter when other men are enjoying life, or are asleep. If they are persistent, no species on which they fix the Evil Eye escapes extermination at their hands.

The men who hunt wild animals for money or other benefits never back down. They work on killing while others are enjoying life or sleeping. If they stay determined, no species they target escapes destruction at their hands.

Does anyone question this statement? If so let him turn backward and look at the lists of dead and dying species.

Does anyone disagree with this statement? If so, let them turn back and look at the lists of dead and dying species.

The Division Of Meat-Shooters contains all men who sordidly shoot for the frying-pan,—to save bacon and beef at the expense of the public, or for the markets. There are a few wilderness regions so remote and so difficult of access that the transportation of meat into them is a matter of much difficulty and expense. There are a very few men in North America who are justified in "living off the country," for short periods. The genuine prospectors always have been counted in this class; but all miners who are fully located, all lumbermen and railway-builders certainly are not in the prospector's class. They are abundantly able to maintain continuous lines of communication for the transit of beef and mutton.

The Meat-Shooters Division includes all the guys who crudely hunt for food — to save bacon and beef at the public's expense or for the markets. There are a few remote wilderness areas that are so hard to reach that transporting meat to them is really tough and costly. Only a handful of people in North America can be justified in "living off the land," for short periods. Genuine prospectors have always been included in this group; however, all miners who have established their claims, as well as lumbermen and railway builders, definitely don’t fall into the prospector category. They can easily maintain continuous routes for transporting beef and mutton.

Of all the meat-shooters, the market-gunners who prey on wild fowl and ground game birds for the big-city markets are the most deadly to wild life. Enough geese, ducks, brant, quail, ruffed grouse, prairie chickens, heath hens and wild pigeons have been butchered by gunners and netters for "the market" to have stocked the whole world. No section [Page 64] containing a good supply of game has escaped. In the United States the great slaughtering-grounds have been Cape Cod; Great South Bay, New York; Currituck Sound, North Carolina; Marsh Island, Louisiana; the southwest corner of Louisiana; the Sunk Lands of Arkansas; the lake regions of Minnesota; the prairies of the whole middle West; Great Salt Lake; the Klamath Lake region (Oregon) and southern California.

Of all the hunters, the market-gunners who target wild birds and ground game for big-city markets are the biggest threat to wildlife. Enough geese, ducks, brant, quail, ruffed grouse, prairie chickens, heath hens, and wild pigeons have been killed by gunners and netters for “the market” to fill the entire world. No area [Page 64] with a good supply of game has been spared. In the United States, the major killing grounds have been Cape Cod; Great South Bay, New York; Currituck Sound, North Carolina; Marsh Island, Louisiana; the southwest corner of Louisiana; the Sunk Lands of Arkansas; the lake regions of Minnesota; the prairies of the entire Midwest; Great Salt Lake; the Klamath Lake region (Oregon), and southern California.

A MARKET GUNNER AT WORK ON MARSH ISLAND

A MARKET GUNNER WORKING ON MARSH ISLAND

Killing Mallards for the New Orleans Market. The Purchase of This Island by Mrs. Russell Sage has now Converted it Into a Bird Sanctuary

Killing mallards for the New Orleans market. Mrs. Russell Sage’s purchase of this island has now turned it into a bird sanctuary.

The output of this systematic bird slaughter has supplied the greedy game markets of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, Chicago, New Orleans, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle. The history of this industry, its methods, its carnage, its profits and its losses would make a volume, but we can not enter upon it here. Beyond reasonable doubt, this awful traffic in dead game is responsible for at least three-fourths of the slaughter that has reduced our game birds to a mere remnant of their former abundance. There is no influence so deadly to wild life as that of the market gunner who works six days a week, from sunrise until sunset, hunting down and killing every game bird that he can reach with a choke-bore gun.

The output of this systematic bird slaughter has fueled the greedy game markets of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, Chicago, New Orleans, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle. The history of this industry—its methods, its carnage, its profits, and its losses—could fill a book, but we can't go into that here. Without a doubt, this terrible trade in dead game is responsible for at least three-fourths of the killing that has left our game birds as a mere shadow of their former numbers. There’s no influence more deadly to wildlife than that of the market hunter who works six days a week, from sunrise to sunset, pursuing and killing every game bird he can target with a choke-bore gun.

During the past five years, several of the once-great killing grounds have been so thoroughly "shot out" that they have ceased to hold their former rank. This is the case with the Minnesota Lakes, the Sunk Lands of Arkansas, the Klamath Lakes of Oregon, and I think it is also true of southern California. The Klamath Lakes have been taken over by the Government as a bird refuge. Currituck Sound, at the northeastern corner of North Carolina, has been so bottled up by the Bayne law of New York [Page 65] State that Currituck's greatest market has been cut off. Last year only one-half the usual number of ducks and geese were killed; and already many "professional" duck and brant shooters have abandoned the business because the commission merchants no longer will buy dead birds.

Over the past five years, several once-prominent hunting grounds have been so thoroughly "shot out" that they no longer hold their previous status. This includes the Minnesota Lakes, the Sunk Lands of Arkansas, the Klamath Lakes of Oregon, and I believe it's also true for Southern California. The Klamath Lakes have been designated as a bird refuge by the government. Currituck Sound, located in the northeastern corner of North Carolina, has been so restricted by the Bayne law of New York [Page 65] State that Currituck's main market has been eliminated. Last year, only half the usual number of ducks and geese were harvested; and many "professional" duck and brant hunters have already left the industry since the commission merchants are no longer buying dead birds.

RUFFED GROUSE

Ruffed grouse

A Common Victim of Illegal Slaughter

A Common Victim of Illegal Slaughter

Very many enormous bags of game have been made in a day by market gunners: but rarely have they published any of their records. The greatest kill of which I ever have heard occurred under the auspices of the Glenn County Club, in southern California, on February 5, 1906. Two men, armed with automatic shot-guns, fired five shots apiece, and got ten geese out of one flock. In one hour they killed two hundred and eighteen geese, and their bag for the day was four hundred and fifty geese! The shooter who wrote the story for publication (on February 12, at Willows, Glenn County, California) said: "It being warm weather, the birds had to be shipped at once in order to keep them from spoiling." A photograph was made of the "one hour's slaughter" of two hundred and eighteen geese, and it was published in a western magazine with "C.H.B.'s" story, nearly all of which will be found in Chapter XV.

Very many huge bags of game have been made in a day by market gunners, but they rarely share any of their records. The largest kill I've ever heard of happened under the Glenn County Club in southern California on February 5, 1906. Two men, equipped with automatic shotguns, fired five shots each and took down ten geese from one flock. In just one hour, they shot two hundred and eighteen geese, and their total for the day was four hundred and fifty geese! The shooter who wrote the story for publication (on February 12, at Willows, Glenn County, California) said, "Because it was warm outside, the birds had to be shipped right away to prevent spoilage." A photo was taken of the "one hour's slaughter" of two hundred and eighteen geese and it was published in a western magazine along with "C.H.B.'s" story, most of which can be found in Chapter XV.

The reasons why market shooting is so deadly destructive to wild life are not obscure.

The reasons why market hunting is so deadly destructive to wildlife are clear.

The true sportsman hunts during a very few days only each year. The market gunners shoot early and late, six days a week, month after month. When game is abundant, the price is low, and a great quantity must be killed in order to make it pay well. When game is scarce, the market prices are high, and the shooter makes the utmost exertions to find the last of the game in order to secure the "big money."

The real sportsman only hunts for a few days each year. Market hunters shoot early and late, six days a week, month after month. When there’s plenty of game, prices drop, and a lot needs to be killed to make a decent profit. When game is hard to find, prices soar, and the hunter goes all out to track down the last bits of game to cash in on the big money.

When game is protected by law, thousands of people with money desire it for their tables, just the same, and are willing to pay fabulous prices for what they want, when they want it. Many a dealer is quite willing to run the risk of fines, because fines don't really hurt; they are only annoying. The dealer wishes to make the big profit, and retain his customers; "and besides," he reasons, "if I don't supply him some one else will; so what is the difference?"

When hunting is protected by law, thousands of wealthy people want it for their tables and are ready to pay crazy amounts for what they want, whenever they want it. Many dealers are more than willing to take the risk of fines, since fines are just a hassle; they don't really matter. The dealer wants to make a huge profit and keep his customers; "and anyway," he thinks, "if I don't provide it, someone else will; so what's the difference?"

When game is scarce, prices high and the consumer's money ready, there are a hundred tricks to which shooters and dealers willingly resort to ship and receive unlawful game without detection. It takes the very [Page 66] best kind of game wardens,—genuine detectives, in fact,—to ferret out these cunning illegal practices, and catch lawbreakers "with the goods on them," so that they can be punished. Mind you, convictions can not be secured at both ends of the line save by the most extraordinary good fortune, and usually the shooter and shipper escape, even when the dealer is apprehended and fined.

When game is hard to find, prices are high, and consumers have cash, there are a ton of tricks that hunters and dealers use to transport and receive illegal game without getting caught. It takes the very best kind of game wardens—genuine detectives, really—to uncover these clever illegal activities and catch lawbreakers "red-handed," so they can be punished. Keep in mind, securing convictions at both ends of the line usually requires an incredible stroke of luck, and typically the hunter and shipper get away, even when the dealer is caught and fined.

From "Rod and Gun in Canada"

From "Rod and Gun in Canada"

A PERFECTLY LAWFUL BAG OF 58 RUFFED GROUSE FOR TWO MEN

A COMPLETELY LEGAL BAG OF 58 RUFFED GROUSE FOR TWO MEN

Here are some of the methods that have been practiced in the past in getting illegal game into the New York market:

Here are some of the methods that have been used in the past to smuggle illegal game into the New York market:

Ruffed grouse and quail have both been shipped in butter firkins, marked "butter"; and latterly, butter has actually been packed solidly on top of the birds.

Ruffed grouse and quail have both been shipped in butter containers labeled "butter"; and recently, butter has actually been packed tightly on top of the birds.

Ruffed grouse and quail very often have been shipped in egg crates, marked "eggs." They have been shipped in trunks and suit cases,—a very [Page 67] common method for illegal game birds, all over the United States. In Oklahoma when a man refuses to open his trunk for a game warden, the warden joyously gets out his brace and bitt, and bores an inch hole into the lower story of the trunk. If dead birds are there, the tell-tale auger quickly reveals them.

Ruffed grouse and quail are often shipped in egg crates labeled "eggs." They've been transported in trunks and suitcases—a very common method for smuggling illegal game birds across the United States. In Oklahoma, when a person refuses to open their trunk for a game warden, the warden happily pulls out his drill and bores a one-inch hole into the bottom of the trunk. If there are dead birds inside, the drill quickly exposes them.

Three years ago, I was told that certain milk-wagons on Long Island made daily collections of dead ducks intended for the New York market, and the drivers kindly shipped them by express from the end of the route.

Three years ago, I was informed that some milk trucks on Long Island collected dead ducks daily for the New York market, and the drivers would kindly send them by express from the end of their route.

Once upon a time, a New York man gave notice that on a certain date he would be in a certain town in St. Lawrence County, New York, with a palace horse-car, "to buy horses." Car and man appeared there as advertised. Very ostentatiously, he bought one horse, and had it taken aboard the car before the gaze of the admiring populace. At night, when the A.P. had gone to bed, many men appeared, and into the horseless end of that car, they loaded thousands of ruffed grouse. The game warden who described the incident to me said: "That man pulled out for New York with one horse and half a car load of ruffed grouse!"

Once upon a time, a guy from New York announced that on a specific date, he would be in a certain town in St. Lawrence County, New York, with a fancy horse-drawn car, "to buy horses." Both the car and the man showed up as promised. He dramatically bought one horse and had it loaded onto the car in front of the impressed crowd. Later that night, after the local newspaper had gone to sleep, a bunch of guys showed up and loaded thousands of ruffed grouse into the empty end of the car. The game warden who told me about this said, "That guy left for New York with one horse and half a car load of ruffed grouse!"

Whenever a good market exists for the sale of game, as sure as the world that market will be supplied. Twenty-six states forbid by law the sale of their own "protected" game, but twenty of them do not expressly prohibit the sale of game stolen from neighboring states! That is a very, very weak point in the laws of all those states. A child can see how it works. Take Pittsburgh as a case in point.

Whenever there’s a good market for selling game, you can bet that market will be filled. Twenty-six states legally prohibit the sale of their own "protected" game, but twenty of them don’t specifically ban the sale of game stolen from neighboring states! That’s a really, really weak point in the laws of all those states. A child can understand how it works. Take Pittsburgh as an example.

In the winter and spring of 1912 the State Game Commission of Pennsylvania found that quail and ruffed grouse were being sold in Pittsburgh, in large quantities. The state laws were well enforced, and it was believed that the birds were not being killed in Pennsylvania. Some other state was being robbed!

In the winter and spring of 1912, the Pennsylvania Game Commission discovered that quail and ruffed grouse were being sold in large quantities in Pittsburgh. The state laws were being enforced effectively, and it was suspected that the birds were not being hunted in Pennsylvania. Another state was being robbed!

The Game Commission went to work, and in a very short time certain game-dealers of Pittsburgh were arrested. At first they tried to bluff their way out of their difficulty, and even went as far as to bring charges against the game-warden whom the Commission had instructed to buy some of their illegal game, and pay for it. But the net of the law tightened upon them so quickly and so tightly that they threw up their hands and begged for mercy.

The Game Commission got to work, and before long, some game dealers in Pittsburgh were arrested. Initially, they attempted to talk their way out of the situation and even went so far as to file charges against the game warden who the Commission had told to purchase some of their illegal game and pay for it. However, the law closed in on them so quickly and forcefully that they gave up and pleaded for mercy.

SNOW BUNTING

Snow Bunting

A Great "Game Bird"! Of These, 8,058 Were Found in 1902 in one New York Cold-Storage Warehouse

A Great "Game Bird"! Of these, 8,058 were found in a New York cold-storage warehouse in 1902.

It was found that those Pittsburgh game-dealers were selling quail and grouse that had been stolen in thousands, from the state of Kentucky! Between the state game laws, working in lovely harmony with the Lacey federal law that prohibits the shipment of game illegally killed or sold, the whole bad business was laid bare, and signed confessions were promptly obtained from the shippers in Kentucky.

It was discovered that those Pittsburgh game dealers were selling quail and grouse that had been stolen in the thousands from the state of Kentucky! Thanks to the state game laws, which worked perfectly with the Lacey federal law that bans the shipment of illegally killed or sold game, the whole shady operation was exposed, and signed confessions were quickly obtained from the shippers in Kentucky.

At that very time, a good bill for the better protection of her game was before the Kentucky legislature; and a certain member was vigorously opposing it, as he had successfully done in previous years. He was told that the state was being robbed, but refused to believe it. Then a signed confession was laid before him, bearing the name of the man who was instigating his opposition,—his friend,—who confessed that he had [Page 68] illegally bought and shipped to Pittsburgh over 5,000 birds. The objector literally threw up his hands, and said, "I have been wrong! Let the bill go through!" And it went.

At that moment, a solid bill aimed at improving the protection of her game was up for discussion in the Kentucky legislature; and a certain member was actively pushing back against it, just as he had successfully done in previous years. He was told that the state was being taken advantage of, but he refused to believe it. Then a signed confession was presented to him, featuring the name of the person who was encouraging his opposition—his friend—who admitted that he had [Page 68] illegally purchased and shipped over 5,000 birds to Pittsburgh. The objector literally threw his hands up and said, "I have been wrong! Let the bill go through!" And it passed.

Before the passage of the Bayne law, New York City was a "fence" for the sale of grouse illegally killed in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and I know not how many other states. The Bayne law stopped all that business, abruptly and forever; and if the ruffed grouse, quail and ducks of the Eastern States are offered for sale in Chicago, Cincinnati, Baltimore and Washington, the people of New York and Massachusetts can at least be assured that they are not to blame. Those two states now maintain no "fences" for the sale of game that has been stolen from other states. They have both set their houses in order, and set two examples for forty other states to follow.

Before the Bayne law was passed, New York City was a hotspot for the illegal sale of grouse killed in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and who knows how many other states. The Bayne law put an end to all that, quickly and permanently; and if ruffed grouse, quail, and ducks from the Eastern States are being sold in Chicago, Cincinnati, Baltimore, and Washington, the people of New York and Massachusetts can at least be confident that they aren't responsible. Those two states no longer have any "fences" for selling game that's been stolen from other states. They've both cleaned up their act and set an example for forty other states to follow.

The remedy for all this miserable game-stealing, law-breaking business is simple and easily obtained. Let each state of the United States and each province and Canada enact a Bayne law, absolutely prohibiting the sale of all wild native game, and the thing is done! But nothing short of that will be really effective. It will not do at all to let state laws rest with merely forbidding the sale of game "protected by the State;" for that law is full of loop-holes. It does much good service, yes; but what earthly objection can there be in any state to the enactment of a law that is sweepingly effective, and which can not be evaded, save through the criminal connivance of officers of the law?

The solution to all this miserable game-stealing and law-breaking is straightforward and easy to implement. Each state in the United States and each province in Canada should pass a Bayne law that completely bans the sale of all wild native game, and that will solve the problem! But anything less than that won't be truly effective. It's not enough for state laws to just prohibit the sale of game "protected by the State," because that law has too many loopholes. It does provide some benefit, sure; but what legitimate reason could there be in any state against enforcing a law that is thoroughly effective and can't be avoided, except through the corrupt cooperation of law enforcement officials?

By way of illustration, to show what the sale of wild game means to the remnant of our game, and the wicked slaughter of non-game birds to which it leads, consider these figures:

By way of illustration, to show what selling wild game means for the remaining population of our game, and the cruel killing of non-game birds that results from it, consider these figures:

Dead Birds Found In One Cold Storage House In New York In 1902
Snow Buntings 8,058 Grouse 7,560
Sandpipers 7,607 Quail 4,385
Plover 5,218 Ducks 1,756
Snipe 7,003 Bobolinks 288
Yellow-legs 788 Woodcock 96

The fines for this lot, if imposed, would have amounted to $1,168,315.

The fines for this lot, if applied, would have totaled $1,168,315.

Shortly after that seizure American quail became so scarce that in effect they totally disappeared from the banquet tables of New York. I can not recall having been served with one since 1903, but the little Egyptian quail can be legally imported and sold when officially tagged.

Shortly after that seizure, American quail became so rare that they basically disappeared from the banquet tables of New York. I can’t remember having been served one since 1903, but the little Egyptian quail can be legally imported and sold when officially tagged.

Few persons away from the firing line realize the far-reaching effects of the sale of wild game. Here are a few flashes from the searchlight:

Few people outside the frontlines understand the significant effects of selling wild game. Here are a few insights from the spotlight:

At Hangkow, China, Mr. C. William Beebe found that during his visit in 1911, over 46,000 pheasants of various species were shipped from that port on one cold-storage steamer to the London market. And this when English pheasants were selling in the Covent Garden market at from two to three shillings each, for fresh birds!

At Hangkow, China, Mr. C. William Beebe discovered that during his visit in 1911, more than 46,000 pheasants of different species were sent from that port on one cold-storage ship to the London market. And this was happening while English pheasants were being sold in the Covent Garden market for two to three shillings each for fresh birds!

In 1910, 1,200 ptarmigan from Norway, bound for the Chicago market, passed through the port of New York,—not by any means the first or the last shipment of the kind. The epicures of Chicago are being permitted to comb the game out of Norway.

In 1910, 1,200 ptarmigan from Norway, headed to the Chicago market, passed through the port of New York—not the first or the last shipment of this kind. The food lovers in Chicago are getting to enjoy game from Norway.

In 1910, 70,000 dozen Egyptian quail were shipped to Europe from Alexandria, Egypt. Just why that species has not already been exterminated, is a zoological mystery; but extermination surely will come some day, and I think it will be in the near future.

In 1910, 70,000 dozen Egyptian quail were shipped to Europe from Alexandria, Egypt. It's a zoological mystery why that species hasn't been wiped out yet; however, extinction will definitely happen someday, and I believe it will be in the near future.

The coast of China has been raked and scraped for wild ducks to ship to New York,—prior to the passage of the Bayne law! I have forgotten the figures that once were given me, but they were an astonishing number of thousands for the year.

The coast of China has been swept clean for wild ducks to send to New York—before the Bayne law was enacted! I can’t remember the exact figures I was told, but they were an incredible number in the thousands for the year.

The Division of Negroes and Poor Whites who kill song and other birds indiscriminately will be found in a separate chapter.

The section on Black people and poor white individuals who kill songbirds and other birds without discrimination will be in a separate chapter.

The Division Of "Resident" Game-Butchers. —This refers to the men who live in the haunts of big game, where wardens are the most of the time totally absent, and where bucks, does and fawns of hoofed big game may be killed in season and out of season, with impunity. It includes guides, ranchmen, sheep-herders, cowboys, miners, lumbermen and floaters generally. In times past, certain taxidermists of Montana promoted the slaughter of wild bison in the Yellowstone Park, and it was a pair of rascally taxidermists who killed, or caused to be killed in Lost Park, in 1897, the very last bison of Colorado.

The Division of "Resident" Game Experts. —This refers to the people who live in areas with large game, where game wardens are mostly absent, and where bucks, does, and fawns of hoofed big game can be hunted during and outside of the season without consequences. It includes guides, ranchers, sheep herders, cowboys, miners, lumberjacks, and floaters in general. In the past, certain taxidermists in Montana encouraged the killing of wild bison in Yellowstone Park, and it was a couple of unscrupulous taxidermists who killed, or arranged to have killed in Lost Park, in 1897, the very last bison of Colorado.

It seems to be natural for the minds of men who live in America in the haunts of big game to drift into the idea that the wild game around them is all theirs. Very few of them recognize the fact that every other man, woman and child in a given state or province has vested rights in its wild game. It is natural for a frontiersman to feel that because he is in the wilds he has a God-given right to live off the country; but to-day that idea is totally wrong! If some way can not be found to curb that all-pervading propensity among our frontiersmen, then we may as well bid all our open-field big game a long farewell; for the deadly "residents" surely will exterminate it, outside the game preserves. The "residents" are, in my opinion, about ten times more destructive than the sportsmen. A sportsman in quest of large game is in the field only from ten to thirty [Page 70] days; all his movements are known, and all his trophies are seen and counted. His killing is limited by law, and upon him the law is actually enforced. Often a resident hunts the whole twelve months of the year,—for food, for amusement, and for trophies to sell. Rarely does a game warden reach his cabin; because the wardens are few, the distances great and the frontier cabins are widely scattered.

It seems natural for people living in America near big game to think that the wild animals around them belong to them. Very few realize that every man, woman, and child in a given state or province has rights to that wildlife. It's common for someone living on the frontier to feel that being in the wilderness gives them a right to live off the land; but today that idea is completely wrong! If we can’t find a way to control that widespread tendency among our frontiersmen, then we might as well say goodbye to all our open-field big game; because the "residents" will definitely drive it to extinction outside the game preserves. In my opinion, the "residents" are about ten times more destructive than the sportsmen. A sportsman in search of large game is out in the field for only ten to thirty [Page 70] days; all of his activities are known, and all his trophies are seen and counted. His hunting is limited by law, and those laws are actually enforced on him. Meanwhile, a resident may hunt all year round—for food, for fun, and for trophies to sell. It’s rare for a game warden to reach a resident's cabin; there are few wardens, the distances are vast, and frontier cabins are spaced far apart.

Mr. Carl Pickhardt told me of a guide in Newfoundland who had a shed in the woods hanging full of bodies of caribou, and who admitted to him that while the law allowed him five caribou each year, he killed each year about twenty-five.

Mr. Carl Pickhardt told me about a guide in Newfoundland who had a shed in the woods filled with caribou carcasses, and who admitted to him that although the law permitted him to hunt five caribou each year, he actually killed around twenty-five each year.

Mr. J.M. Phillips knows of a mountain in British Columbia, once well stocked with goats, on which the goats have been completely exterminated by one man who lives within easy striking distance of them, and who finds goat meat to his liking.

Mr. J.M. Phillips is aware of a mountain in British Columbia that was once full of goats, but now all the goats have been wiped out by a single man who lives nearby and enjoys eating goat meat.

I have been reliably informed that in 1911, at Haha Lake, near Grande Bay, Saguenay District, P.Q., one family of six persons killed thirty-four woodland caribou and six moose. This meant the waste of about 14,000 pounds of good meat, and the death of several female animals.

I have been reliably informed that in 1911, at Haha Lake, near Grande Bay, Saguenay District, P.Q., one family of six people killed thirty-four woodland caribou and six moose. This resulted in the waste of around 14,000 pounds of good meat and the death of several female animals.

In 1886 I knew a man named Owens who lived on the head of Sunday Creek, Montana, who told me that in 1884-5 he killed thirty-five mule deer for himself and family. The family ate as much as possible, the dogs ate all they could, and in the spring the remainder spoiled. Now there is not a deer, an antelope, or a sage grouse within fifty miles of that lifeless waste.

In 1886, I met a guy named Owens who lived at the head of Sunday Creek in Montana. He told me that between 1884 and 1885, he killed thirty-five mule deer for himself and his family. They ate as much as they could, the dogs got their share, and by spring, the leftovers went bad. Now, there's not a single deer, antelope, or sage grouse within fifty miles of that barren land.

Here is a Montana object lesson on the frame of mind of the "resident" hunter, copied from Outdoor Life Magazine (Denver) for February, 1912. It is from a letter to the Editor, written by C.B. Davis.

Here is a Montana example of the mindset of the "local" hunter, taken from Outdoor Life Magazine (Denver) for February 1912. It is from a letter to the Editor, written by C.B. Davis.

November 27, 28, 29, and 30, 1911, will remain a red letter day with a half thousand men for years to come. These half thousand men gathered along the border of the Yellowstone National Park, near Gardiner, Montana, at a point known as Buffalo Flats, to exterminate elk. The snow had driven the elk down to the foothills, and Buffalo Flats is on the border of the park and outside the park. The elk entered this little valley for food. Like hungry wolves, shooters, not hunters, gathered along the border waiting to catch an elk off the "reservation" and kill it.

November 27, 28, 29, and 30, 1911, will be memorable for the five hundred men who were there for years to come. These five hundred men gathered along the edge of Yellowstone National Park, near Gardiner, Montana, at a place known as Buffalo Flats, to wipe out elk. The snow had pushed the elk down to the foothills, and Buffalo Flats is on the park's border and outside it. The elk came into this small valley searching for food. Like hungry wolves, shooters—not hunters—gathered along the border, waiting to take an elk off the "reservation" and kill it.

On November 27th about 1500 elk crossed the line, and the slaughter began. I have not the data of the number killed this day, but it was hundreds.

On November 27th, around 1500 elk crossed the boundary, and the killing started. I don’t have the exact number of those killed that day, but it was in the hundreds.

On the 28th, twenty-two stepped over and were promptly executed. Like Custer's band, not one escaped. On the evening of the 28th, 600 were sighted just over the line, and the army of 125 brave men entrenched themselves for the battle which was expected to open next morning. Before daylight of the 29th the battle began. The elk were over the line, feeding on Buffalo Flats. One hundred and twenty-five men poured bullets into this band of 600 elk till the ground was red with blood and strewn with carcasses, and in their madness they shot each other. One man was shot through the ear,—a close call; another received a bullet through his coat sleeve, and another was shot through the bowels and can't live.

On the 28th, twenty-two crossed over and were quickly executed. Like Custer's group, not one escaped. That evening, 600 were spotted just over the line, and the army of 125 brave men set up defenses for the battle that was expected to start the next morning. Before dawn on the 29th, the battle began. The elk were over the line, grazing on Buffalo Flats. One hundred and twenty-five men fired bullets into this group of 600 elk until the ground was soaked with blood and littered with carcasses, and in their frenzy, they shot each other. One man was shot through the ear—a near miss; another had a bullet go through his coat sleeve, and another was shot in the abdomen and won't survive.

My informer told me he participated in the slaughter, and while he would not take fifty dollars for what he saw, and the experience he went through, yet he would not go through it again for $1,000. When my informer got back to Gardiner that day there were four sleigh loads of elk, each load containing from twenty to thirty-five elk, besides thirty-two mules and horses carrying one to two each. This [Page 71] was only a part of the slaughter. Hundreds more were carried to other points; and this was only one day's work.

My source told me he was involved in the slaughter, and while he wouldn’t take fifty dollars for what he witnessed and the experience he had, he also wouldn’t do it again for $1,000. When my source returned to Gardiner that day, there were four sleigh loads of elk, with each load carrying between twenty and thirty-five elk, plus thirty-two mules and horses each carrying one or two. This [Page 71] was just part of the slaughter. Hundreds more were taken to other locations; and this was only one day’s work.

Hundreds of wounded elk wandered back into the park to die, and others died outside the park. The station at Livingston, Montana, for a week looked like a packing house. Carcasses were piled up on the trucks and depot platform. The baggage cars were loaded with elk going to points east and west of Livingston.

Hundreds of injured elk wandered back into the park to die, while others passed away outside the park. The station in Livingston, Montana, looked like a slaughterhouse for a week. Carcasses were stacked on the trucks and the depot platform. The baggage cars were filled with elk headed to destinations east and west of Livingston.

Maybe this is all right. Maybe the government can't stop the elk from crossing the line. Maybe the elk were helped over; but it strikes me there is something wrong somewhere.

Maybe this is okay. Maybe the government can’t prevent the elk from crossing the line. Maybe the elk were assisted over; but it seems to me that something isn’t right somewhere.

The Division Of Hired Laborers. —The scourge of lumber-camps in big-game territory, the mining camps and the railroad-builders is a long story, and if told in detail it would make several chapters. Their awful destructiveness is well known. It is a common thing for "the boss" to hire a hunter to kill big game to supply the hungry outfit, and save beef and pork.

The Division of Workers. —The problem of laborers in lumber camps, mining camps, and among railroad builders is a long story, and telling it in detail would take several chapters. Their significant destructiveness is widely recognized. It's common for "the boss" to hire a hunter to kill big game to feed the crew and save on beef and pork.

The abuses arising from this source easily could be checked, and finally suppressed. A ten-line law would do the business,—forbidding any person employed in any camp of sheep men, cattle men, lumbermen, miners, railway laborers or excavators to own or use a rifle in hunting wild game; and forbidding any employer of labor to feed those laborers, or permit them to be fed, on the flesh of wild game mammals or birds. "Camp" laborers are not "pioneers;" not by a long shot! They are soldiers of Commerce, and makers of money.

The issues coming from this situation could easily be controlled and ultimately eliminated. A simple ten-line law would solve the problem—banning anyone working in camps for sheep herders, cattle ranchers, loggers, miners, railroad workers, or excavators from owning or using a rifle for hunting wild animals; and prohibiting any employer from feeding those workers, or allowing them to be fed, with the meat of wild game mammals or birds. "Camp" workers are not "pioneers;" not by a long shot! They are workers of Commerce, and they're all about making money.

A Mountain Sheep Case In Colorado. —The state of Colorado sincerely desires to protect and perpetuate its slender remnant of mountain sheep, but as usual the Lawless Miscreant is abroad to thwart the efforts of the guardians of the game. Every state that strives to protect its big game has such doings as this to contend with:

A Mountain Sheep Case in Colorado. —The state of Colorado genuinely wants to protect and sustain its small population of mountain sheep, but as always, the Lawless Miscreant is out there to undermine the efforts of those who safeguard wildlife. Every state that tries to protect its big game faces similar challenges:

In the winter of 1911-12, a resident poacher brought into Grant, Colorado, a lot of mountain sheep meat for sale; and he actually sold it to residents of that town! The price was six cents per pound. A lot of it was purchased by the railway station-agent. I have no doubt that the same man who did that job, which was made possible only by the co-operation of the citizens of Grant, will try the same poaching-and-selling game next winter, unless the State Game Commissioner is able to bring him to book.

In the winter of 1911-12, a local poacher brought a bunch of mountain sheep meat into Grant, Colorado, for sale; and he even sold it to people in that town! The price was six cents per pound. A lot of it was bought by the railway station agent. I’m pretty sure that the same guy who did that, which was only possible thanks to the support of the citizens of Grant, will try the same poaching-and-selling scheme next winter unless the State Game Commissioner can hold him accountable.

A Wyoming Case In Point. —As a fair sample of what game wardens, and the general public, are sometimes compelled to endure through the improper decisions of judges, I will cite this case:

A Wyoming Case Study. —As a clear example of what game wardens and the public sometimes have to deal with due to poor decisions made by judges, I will mention this case:

In the Shoshone Mountains of northern Wyoming, about fifty miles or so from the town of Cody, in the winter of 1911-12 a man was engaged in trapping coyotes. It was currently reported that he had been "driven out of Montana and Idaho." He had scores of traps. He baited his traps with the flesh of deer, elk calves and grouse, all illegally killed and illegally used for that purpose. A man of my acquaintance saw some of this game meat actually used as described.

In the Shoshone Mountains of northern Wyoming, about fifty miles from the town of Cody, during the winter of 1911-12, a man was trapping coyotes. It was reported that he had been "driven out of Montana and Idaho." He had numerous traps, which he baited with the meat of deer, elk calves, and grouse, all of which were illegally killed and used for that purpose. A friend of mine witnessed some of this game meat being used as described.

The man was a notorious character, and cruel in the extreme. Finally a [Page 72] game warden caught him red-handed, arrested him, and took him to Cody for trial. It happened that the judge on the bench had once trapped with him, and therefore "he set the game-killer free, while the game-warden was roasted."

The man was a well-known troublemaker, and extremely ruthless. Eventually, a [Page 72] game warden caught him in the act, arrested him, and brought him to Cody for trial. It so happened that the judge presiding had once hunted with him, and as a result, "he let the game-killer go, while the game warden was put on the spot."

That wolf-trapper once took into the mountains a horse, to kill and use as bear-bait. The animal was blind in one eye, and because it would not graze precisely where the wolfer desired it to remain, he deliberately destroyed the sight of its good eye, and left it for days, without the ability to find water.

That wolf trapper once brought a horse into the mountains to kill and use as bear bait. The horse was blind in one eye, and because it wouldn't graze exactly where the trapper wanted it to stay, he intentionally blinded its good eye and left it for days without any way to find water.

Think of the fate of any wild animal that unkind Fate places at the mercy of such a man!

Think about the fate of any wild animal that unkind Fate leaves at the mercy of a man like that!


[Page 73]
CHAPTER VIII
UNSEEN FOES OF WILD LIFE

Quite unintentionally on his part, Man, the arch destroyer and the most predatory and merciless of all animal species except the wolves, has rendered a great service to all the birds that live or nest upon the ground. His relentless pursuit and destruction of the savage-tempered, strong-jawed fur-bearing animals is in part the salvation of the ground birds of to-day and yesterday. If the teeth and claws had been permitted to multiply unchecked down to the present time, with man's warfare on the upland game proceeding as it has done, scores upon scores of species long ere this would have been exterminated.

Without meaning to, man, the ultimate destroyer and the most aggressive and ruthless of all animal species except wolves, has unknowingly helped all the birds that live or nest on the ground. His relentless hunt and destruction of strong, fur-bearing animals has, in part, saved ground birds both now and in the past. If the predators had been allowed to multiply without control until today, and with man’s ongoing efforts against upland game, many species would have already gone extinct.

But the slaughter of the millions of North American foxes, wolves, weasels, skunks, and mink has so overwhelmingly reduced the four-footed enemies of the birds that the balance of wild Nature has been preserved. As a rule, the few predatory wild animals that remain are not slaughtering the birds to a serious extent; and for this we may well be thankful.

But the killing of millions of North American foxes, wolves, weasels, skunks, and minks has greatly diminished the four-legged enemies of the birds, helping to maintain the balance of wild Nature. Generally, the few predatory wild animals that are left aren't significantly harming the bird population, and for this, we can be quite grateful.

The Domestic Cat. —In such thickly settled communities as our northern states, from the Atlantic coast to the sandhills of Kansas and Nebraska, the domestic cat is probably the greatest four-footed scourge of bird life. Thousands of persons who never have seen a hunting cat in action will doubt this statement, but the proof of its truthfulness is only too painfully abundant.

The House Cat. —In densely populated areas like our northern states, from the Atlantic coast to the sandhills of Kansas and Nebraska, the domestic cat is likely the biggest threat to bird populations. Many people who have never witnessed a hunting cat in action may question this claim, but the evidence supporting its accuracy is unfortunately overwhelming.

Unhappily it is the way of the hunting cat to stalk unseen, and to kill the very birds that are most friendly with man, and most helpful to him in his farming and fruit-growing business. The quail is about the only game bird that the cat affects seriously, and to it the cat is very destructive. It is the robin, catbird, thrush, bluebird, dove, woodpecker, chickadee, phoebe, tanager and other birds of the lawn, the garden and orchard that afford good hunting for sly and savage old Thomas.

Unfortunately, it's the nature of the hunting cat to quietly stalk its prey and kill the very birds that are most friendly to humans and beneficial for farming and fruit growing. The quail is about the only game bird that the cat seriously targets, and it can be quite destructive to them. It's the robin, catbird, thrush, bluebird, dove, woodpecker, chickadee, phoebe, tanager, and other birds found in lawns, gardens, and orchards that provide good hunting for the sly and fierce old Thomas.

When I was a boy in my 'teens, I had a lasting series of object lessons on the cat as a predatory animal. Our "Betty" was the most ambitious and successful domestic-cat hunter of wild mammals of which I ever have heard. To her, rats and mice were mere child's-play, and after a time their pursuit offered such tame sport that she sought fresh fields for her prowess. Then she brought in young rabbits, chipmunks and thirteen-lined spermophiles, and once she came in, quite exhausted, half dragging and half carrying a big, fat pocket gopher. With her it seemed to be a point of honor that she should bring in her game and display it. Little did we realize then that in course of time the wild birds would [Page 74] become so scarce that their slaughter by house cats would demand legislative action in the states.

When I was a teenager, I learned a lot about cats as hunters. Our cat "Betty" was the most ambitious and successful hunter of wild animals I've ever heard of. For her, catching rats and mice was just child's play, and after a while, it became so easy that she looked for bigger challenges. Then she started bringing home young rabbits, chipmunks, and thirteen-lined ground squirrels, and once she came home completely worn out, half-dragging and half-carrying a big, fat pocket gopher. It seemed important to her to show off her catches. Little did we know back then that eventually wild birds would become so scarce that house cats' hunting would require laws to protect them.

In considering the hunting cat, let us call in a credible witness of the effects of domestic cats on the bob white. The following is an eye-witness report, by Ernest B. Beardsley, in Outdoor Life for April, 1912. The locality was Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas.

In discussing the hunting cat, let's bring in a reliable source about how domestic cats impact the bobwhite. Here’s a firsthand account from Ernest B. Beardsley in Outdoor Life from April 1912. The location mentioned is Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas.

In the meantime, old Queen was having a high old time up ahead, some hundred feet by then, running up the bank and back down in the draw. We had hardly caught up when up goes Mr. Savage's gun and he gives both barrels. I had seen nothing up to date, but I didn't have long to wait, for by the time I got up to him and the dog, they were both in the high grass and had a great, big, common gray maltese house-cat; and Queen had a half-eaten quail that Mr. Cat was busy with when disturbed.

In the meantime, old Queen was having a blast up ahead, about a hundred feet away, running up the bank and back down into the draw. We had just caught up when Mr. Savage fired his gun, letting off both barrels. I hadn’t seen anything so far, but it didn’t take long, because by the time I reached him and the dog, they were both in the tall grass and had a huge, common gray Maltese house cat; and Queen had a half-eaten quail that Mr. Cat was working on when he got disturbed.

Well, we followed the draw across the field and got nine of a covey of sixteen that had been ahead of Mr. Cat; and about four o'clock that evening we killed another white-and-gray cat. While driving home that night, Mr. Savage told me that he had killed fifty or more in three or four years. They will get in a draw full of tumble-grass, on a cold day when quail don't like to fly, and stay right with them; and even after feeding on two or three, they will lie and watch, and when the covey moves, they move. When eating time comes around they are at it again, and to a covey of young birds they are sure death to the whole covey.

Well, we tracked the drawn line across the field and got nine out of a group of sixteen that had been in front of Mr. Cat; and around four o'clock that evening we took down another white-and-gray cat. On the drive home that night, Mr. Savage mentioned that he had killed fifty or more in three or four years. They will hunker down in a patch of tumbleweed on a chilly day when quail prefer not to fly, and stick right with them; even after feasting on two or three, they will lie in wait, and when the group moves, they follow. When it’s time to eat, they’re at it again, and for a group of young birds, they’re basically a death sentence for the entire flock.

Well, Will told me never to overlook a house-cat that I found as far as a quarter of a mile from a farm or ranch, for if they have not already turned wild, they are learning how easy it is to hunt and live on game, and are almost as bad. We found Mr. Black-and-White Hunter had eaten two quail just before we killed him that evening. I would rather not write what Mr. Savage said when we found the remains of a partly-eaten bird.

Well, Will told me never to underestimate a house cat that I found as far as a quarter of a mile from a farm or ranch, because if they haven't already gone wild, they're learning how easy it is to hunt and survive on game, and they're almost as dangerous. We discovered that Mr. Black-and-White Hunter had eaten two quail just before we took him out that evening. I'd prefer not to write what Mr. Savage said when we found the remains of a partially-eaten bird.

My advice is, don't let tame cats get away when found out hunting; for the chances are they have not seen a home in months, and maybe years,—and say! but they do get big and bad. When you meet one, give it to him good, and don't let your dog run up to him until he is out for keeps. I learned afterwards that was how Will knew it was a cat. Queen had learned to back off and call for help on cats some years before.

My advice is, don’t let tame cats escape when you find them hunting; chances are they haven’t seen a home in months, maybe even years—and wow, do they get big and aggressive. When you encounter one, deal with it harshly, and keep your dog away from it until it’s completely gone. I found out later that’s how Will recognized it as a cat. Queen had learned to back off and call for help with cats years before.

In the New York Zoological Park, we have had troubles of our own with marauding cats. They establish themselves in a day, and quickly learn where to seek easy game and good cover. In the daytime they lie close in the thick brush, exactly as tigers do in India, but if not molested for a period of days, they become bold and attack game in open view. One bird-killing cat was so shy of man that it was only after two weeks of hard hunting (mornings and evenings) that it was killed.

In the New York Zoo, we’ve had our own issues with roaming cats. They settle in quickly and learn where to find easy prey and good hiding spots. During the day, they stay hidden in the dense brush, just like tigers do in India. However, if they aren’t disturbed for a few days, they become more daring and hunt openly. One bird-killing cat was so frightened of humans that it took two weeks of intense searching (mornings and evenings) before it was finally caught.

We have seen cats catch and kill gray squirrels, chipmunks, robins and thrushes, and have found the feathers of slaughtered quail. Once we had gray rabbits breeding in the park, and their number reached between eighty and ninety. For a time they fearlessly hopped about in sight from our windows, and they were of great interest to visitors and to all of us. Then the cats began upon them; and in one year there was not a rabbit to be seen, save at rare intervals. At the same time the chipmunks of the park were almost exterminated.

We have watched cats catch and kill gray squirrels, chipmunks, robins, and thrushes, and we've found the feathers of dead quail. At one point, we had gray rabbits breeding in the park, and their numbers reached between eighty and ninety. For a while, they hopped around fearlessly in view of our windows, and they were a big attraction for visitors and for us. Then the cats went after them, and in just one year, there was hardly a rabbit to be seen, except on rare occasions. At the same time, the chipmunks in the park were nearly wiped out.

That was the last straw, and we began a vigorous war upon those wild and predatory cats. The cats came off second best. We killed every cat that was found hunting in the park, and we certainly got some that were big [Page 75] and bad. We eliminated that pest, and we are keeping it eliminated. And with what result?

That was the last straw, and we started a serious campaign against those wild and predatory cats. The cats didn't stand a chance. We killed every cat we found hunting in the park, and we definitely got some that were big [Page 75] and tough. We got rid of that pest, and we’re keeping it gone. And what was the outcome?

In 1911 a covey of eleven quail came and settled in our grounds, and have remained there. Twenty times at least during the past eight months (winter and spring) I have seen the flock on the granite ledge not more than forty feet from the rear window of my office. Last spring when I left the Administration Building at six o'clock, after the visitors had gone, I found two half-grown rabbits calmly roosting on the door-mat. The rabbits are slowly coming back, and the chipmunks are visibly increasing in number. The gray squirrels now chase over the walks without fear of any living thing, and our ducklings and young guineas and peacocks are safe once more.

In 1911, a group of eleven quail arrived and settled on our property, and they've stayed ever since. At least twenty times over the past eight months (during winter and spring), I’ve spotted the flock on the granite ledge, no more than forty feet from the back window of my office. Last spring, when I left the Administration Building at six o'clock after the visitors had left, I found two half-grown rabbits casually resting on the doormat. The rabbits are gradually coming back, and the chipmunks are noticeably increasing in number. The gray squirrels now run across the paths without fear of anything, and our ducklings, young guineas, and peacocks are safe once again.

That cats destroy annually in the United States several millions of very valuable birds, seems fairly beyond question. I believe that in settled regions they are worse than weasels, foxes, skunks and mink combined; because there are about one hundred times as many of them, and those that hunt are not afraid to hunt in the daytime. Of course I am not saying that all cats hunt wild game; but in the country I believe that fully one-half of them do.

It's pretty clear that cats kill several millions of valuable birds every year in the United States. I think that in developed areas, they are worse than weasels, foxes, skunks, and mink combined; because there are about a hundred times more of them, and those that do hunt aren't afraid to do it during the day. Of course, I'm not claiming that all cats hunt wildlife; but in rural areas, I believe that about half of them do.

I am personally acquainted with a cat in Indiana, on the farm of relatives, which is notorious for its hunting propensities, and its remarkable ability in capturing game. Even the lady who is joint owner of the cat feels very badly about its destructiveness, and has said, over and over again, that it ought to be killed; but the cat is such a family pet that no one in the family has the heart to destroy it, and as yet no stranger has come forward to play the part of executioner. The lady in question assured me that to her certain knowledge that particular cat would watch a nestful of young robins week after week until they had grown up to such a size that they were almost ready to fly; then he would kill them and devour them. Old "Tommy" was too wise to kill the robins when they were unduly small.

I know a cat in Indiana, on a relative's farm, that's famous for its hunting skills and its impressive talent for catching prey. Even the woman who co-owns the cat feels really bad about how destructive it is and has repeated many times that it should be put down; but the cat is such a beloved family pet that no one in the family has the heart to do it, and so far, no outsider has stepped up to act as its executioner. The lady told me that she’s certain this particular cat would watch a nest of young robins for weeks until they grew big enough to almost fly; then he would kill and eat them. Old "Tommy" was too clever to kill the robins when they were too tiny.

In a great book entitled Useful Birds and Their Protection, by E. H. Forbush, State Ornithologist of Massachusetts, and published by the Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture in 1905, there appears, on page 362, many interesting facts on this subject. For example:

In a great book titled Useful Birds and Their Protection, by E. H. Forbush, the State Ornithologist of Massachusetts, published by the Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture in 1905, there are many interesting facts on this topic on page 362. For example:

Mr. William Brewster tells of an acquaintance in Maine, who said that his cat killed about fifty birds a year. Mr. A.C. Dike wrote [to Mr. Forbush] of a cat owned by a family, and well cared for. They watched it through one season, and found that it killed fifty-eight birds, including the young in five nests.

Mr. William Brewster shares a story about someone in Maine who mentioned that their cat killed around fifty birds each year. Mr. A.C. Dike wrote to Mr. Forbush about a cat belonging to a household that was well taken care of. They observed the cat for one season and discovered that it killed fifty-eight birds, including the young ones from five nests.

Nearly a hundred correspondents, scattered through all the counties of the state, report the cat as one of the greatest enemies of birds. The reports that have come in of the torturing and killing of birds by cats are absolutely sickening. The number of birds killed by them in this state is appalling.

Nearly a hundred correspondents, spread across all the counties of the state, report that cats are one of the biggest threats to birds. The reports of cats torturing and killing birds are truly disturbing. The number of birds they kill in this state is shocking.

Some cat lovers believe that each cat kills on the average not more than ten birds a year; but I have learned of two instances where more than that number were killed in a single day, and another where seven were killed. If we assume, however, that the average cat on the farm kills but ten birds per year, and that there is one cat to each farm in Massachusetts, we have, in round numbers, seventy thousand cats, killing seven hundred thousand birds annually.

Some cat lovers think that each cat typically kills no more than ten birds a year; however, I’ve heard of two cases where more than that were killed in just one day, and another where seven were killed. But if we assume that the average cat on a farm kills only ten birds a year, and there’s one cat per farm in Massachusetts, we have roughly seventy thousand cats, killing seven hundred thousand birds every year.

A HUNTING CAT AND ITS VICTIM

A HUNTING CAT AND ITS VICTIM

This Cat had fed so bountifully on the Rabbits and Squirrels of the Zoological Park, that it ate only the Brain of this Gray Rabbit

This cat had eaten so well on the rabbits and squirrels of the zoo that it only consumed the brain of this gray rabbit.

In Mr. Forbush's book there is an illustration of the cat which killed fifty-eight birds in one year, and the animal was photographed with a dead robin in its mouth. The portrait is reproduced in this chapter.

In Mr. Forbush's book, there's a picture of the cat that killed fifty-eight birds in one year, and it was photographed with a dead robin in its mouth. The image is shown in this chapter.

Last year, a strong effort was made in Massachusetts to enact a law requiring cats to be licensed. On account of the amount of work necessary in passing the no-sale-of-game bill, that measure was not pressed, and so it did not become a law; but another year it will undoubtedly be passed, for it is a good bill, and extremely necessary at this time. Such a law is needed in every state!

Last year, there was a significant push in Massachusetts to create a law that would require cats to be licensed. Due to the amount of effort involved in getting the no-sale-of-game bill passed, that proposal wasn't prioritized, and it ultimately didn't become law; however, it will definitely be passed another year because it’s a good bill and very much needed right now. Such a law is needed in every state!

There is a mark by which you may instantly and infallibly know the worst of the wild cats—by their presence away from home, hunting in the open. Kill all such, wherever found. The harmless cats are domestic in their tastes, and stay close to the family fireside and the kitchen. Being properly fed, they have no temptation to become hunters. There are cats and cats, just as there are men and men: some tolerable, many utterly intolerable. No sweeping sentiment for all cats should be allowed to stand in the way of the abatement of the hunting-cat nuisances.

There’s a clear way to instantly and reliably identify the worst of the wild cats—by their presence away from home, hunting in the open. Eliminate all of them, no matter where you find them. The harmless cats prefer being around people and stick close to the family fireplace and kitchen. When they’re properly fed, they have no urge to hunt. There are different kinds of cats, just like there are different kinds of people: some are tolerable, while many are truly intolerable. No broad sentiment for all cats should prevent us from eliminating the problems caused by hunting cats.

Of all men, the farmer cannot afford the luxury of their existence! It is too expensive. With him it is a matter of dollars, and cash out of pocket for every hunting cat that he tolerates in his neighborhood. There are two places in which to strike the hunting cats: in the open, and in the state legislature.

Of all men, the farmer can't afford the luxury of their existence! It's too costly. For him, it's about dollars and cash on hand for every stray cat he puts up with in his area. There are two ways to deal with the stray cats: out in the open, and through the state legislature.

While this chapter was in the hands of the compositors, the hunting cat and gray rabbit shown in the accompanying illustration were brought in by a keeper.

While this chapter was with the typesetters, the hunting cat and gray rabbit shown in the accompanying illustration were brought in by a keeper.

Dogs As Destroyers Of Birds. —I have received many letters from protectors of wild life informing me that the destruction of ground-nesting [Page 77] birds, and especially of upland game birds, by roaming dogs, has in some localities become a great curse to bird life. Complaints of this kind have come from New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania and elsewhere. Usually the culprits are hunting dogs—setters, pointers and hounds.

Dogs as Bird Destroyers. —I've received a lot of letters from wildlife advocates telling me that the destruction of ground-nesting [Page 77] birds, especially upland game birds, by wandering dogs has become a major problem for bird life in some areas. Complaints like this have come from New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, and other places. Usually, the offenders are hunting dogs—setters, pointers, and hounds.

Now, surely it is not necessary to set forth here any argument on this subject. It is not open to argument, or academic treatment of any kind. The cold fact is:

Now, it's definitely unnecessary to present any arguments on this topic. It's not up for debate or academic discussion at all. The simple truth is:

In the breeding season of birds, and while the young birds are incapable of quick and strong flight, all dogs, of every description, should be restrained from free hunting; and all dogs found hunting in the woods during the season referred to should be arrested, and their owners should be fined twenty dollars for each offense. Incidentally, one-half the fine should go to the citizen who arrests the dog. The method of restraining hunting dogs should devolve upon dog owners; and the law need only prohibit or punish the act.

During the bird breeding season, when young birds can’t fly well or quickly, all types of dogs should be kept from free hunting. Any dog found hunting in the woods during this time should be seized, and their owners will be fined twenty dollars for each offense. Half of that fine will go to the person who catches the dog. Dog owners should be responsible for keeping their hunting dogs restrained, while the law should only prohibit or penalize the act itself.

Beyond a doubt, in states that still possess quail and ruffed grouse, free hunting by hunting dogs leads to great destruction of nests and broods during the breeding season.

Undoubtedly, in states that still have quail and ruffed grouse, hunting with dogs causes significant destruction of nests and broods during the breeding season.

Telegraph And Telephone Wires. —Mr. Daniel C. Beard has strongly called my attention to the slaughter of birds by telegraph wires that has come under his personal observation. His country home, at Redding, Connecticut, is near the main line of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railway, along which a line of very large poles carries a great number of wires. The wires are so numerous that they form a barrier through which it is difficult for any bird to fly and come out alive and unhurt.

Telecom Wires. —Mr. Daniel C. Beard has brought my attention to the killing of birds by telegraph wires that he has personally witnessed. His home in Redding, Connecticut, is close to the main line of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railway, where a line of tall poles holds many wires. The sheer number of wires creates a barrier that makes it hard for any bird to fly through without getting hurt or dying.

Mr. Beard says that among the birds killed or crippled by flying against those wires near Redding he has seen the following species: olive-backed thrush, white-throated sparrow and other sparrows, oriole, blue jay, rail, ruffed grouse, and woodcock. It is a common practice for employees of the railway, and others living along the line, to follow the line and pick up on one excursion enough birds for a pot-pie.

Mr. Beard mentions that among the birds killed or injured by flying into those wires near Redding, he has observed the following species: olive-backed thrush, white-throated sparrow and various sparrows, oriole, blue jay, rail, ruffed grouse, and woodcock. It's common for railway employees and others living nearby to walk along the line and gather enough birds in one outing for a pot pie.

Beyond question, the telegraph and telephone wires of the United States annually exact a heavy toll in bird life, and claim countless thousands of victims. They may well be set down as one of the unseen forces destructive to birds.

Without a doubt, the telegraph and telephone wires in the United States take a significant toll on bird life each year, claiming countless thousands of victims. They can certainly be considered one of the hidden dangers that harm birds.

Naturally, we ask, what can be done about it?

Naturally, we wonder, what can we do about it?

I am told that in Scotland such slaughter is prevented by the attachment of small tags or discs to the telephone wires, at intervals of a few rods, sufficiently near that they attract the attention of flying birds, and reveal the line of an obstruction. This system should be adopted in all regions where the conditions are such that birds kill themselves against telegraph wires, and an excellent place to begin would be along the line of the N.Y., N.H. & H. Railway.

I’ve heard that in Scotland, they prevent such deaths by attaching small tags or discs to the telephone wires, spaced a few yards apart, close enough to catch the attention of flying birds and signal that there’s an obstruction. This method should be implemented in all areas where birds are colliding with telegraph wires, and a great place to start would be along the N.Y., N.H. & H. Railway.

Wild Animals. —Beyond question, it is both desirable and necessary that any excess of wild animals that prey upon our grouse, quail, pheasants, [Page 78] woodcock, snipe, mallard duck, shore birds and other species that nest on the ground, should be killed. Since we must choose between the two, the birds have it! Weasels and foxes and skunks are interesting, and they do much to promote the hilarity of life in rural districts, but they do not destroy insects, and are of comparatively little value as destroyers of the noxious rodents that prey upon farm crops. While a few persons may dispute the second half of this proposition, the burden of proof that my view is wrong will rest upon them; and having spent eighteen years "on the farm," I think I am right. If there is any positive evidence tending to prove that the small carnivores that we class as "vermin" are industrious and persistent destroyers of noxious rodents—pocket gophers, moles, field-mice and rats—or that they do not kill wild birds numerously, now is the time to produce it, because the tide of public sentiment is strongly setting against the weasels, mink, foxes and skunks. (Once upon a time, a shrewd young man in the Zoological Park discovered a weasel hiding behind a stone while devouring a sparrow that it had just caught and killed. He stalked it successfully, seized it in his bare hand, and, even though bitten, made good the capture.)

Wildlife. —It is definitely both desirable and necessary that any excess of wild animals that prey on our grouse, quail, pheasants, [Page 78] woodcock, snipe, mallard ducks, shorebirds, and other species that nest on the ground should be removed. Since we have to choose between the two, the birds win! Weasels, foxes, and skunks are fascinating and add to the liveliness of rural life, but they don’t control insects and are relatively ineffective at getting rid of the harmful rodents that damage crops. While some may argue against this view, the responsibility to prove me wrong is on them; having spent eighteen years "on the farm," I believe I am correct. If there’s any solid evidence showing that the small carnivores we label as "vermin" effectively hunt down harmful rodents—like pocket gophers, moles, field mice, and rats—or that they don’t significantly kill wild birds, now’s the time to share it, because public opinion is increasingly turning against weasels, minks, foxes, and skunks. (Once, a clever young man at the Zoological Park spotted a weasel hiding behind a stone while eating a sparrow it had just caught and killed. He skillfully approached it, captured it with his bare hand, and despite being bitten, successfully secured the weasel.)

The State of Pennsylvania is extensively wooded, with forests and with brush which affords excellent home quarters and breeding grounds for mammalian "vermin." The small predatory mammals are so seriously destructive to ruffed grouse and other ground birds that the State Game Commission is greatly concerned. When the hunter's license law is enacted, as it very surely will be at the next session of the legislature (1913), a portion of the $70,000 that it will produce each year will be used by the commission in paying bounties on the destruction of the surplus of vermin. Through the pursuit of vermin, any farmer can easily win enough bounties to more than pay the cost of his annual hunting license (one dollar), and the farmers' boys will find a new interest in life.

The State of Pennsylvania is heavily forested, with woods and brush that provide great habitats and breeding grounds for mammalian pests. The small predatory mammals pose a serious threat to ruffed grouse and other ground birds, which has raised significant concern for the State Game Commission. Once the hunter's license law is passed, which is expected to happen at the next legislative session (1913), a portion of the $70,000 it generates each year will be allocated by the commission for bounties on the removal of excess pests. By hunting these pests, any farmer can easily earn enough in bounties to cover the cost of their annual hunting license (one dollar), and the farmers' sons will discover a new excitement in life.

THE EASTERN RED SQUIRREL

Eastern Red Squirrel

A Great Destroyer of Birds

A Major Bird Destroyer

In some portions of the Rocky Mountain region, the assaults of the large predatory mammals and birds on the young of the big-game species occasionally demand special treatment. In the Yellowstone Park the pumas multiplied to such an extent and killed so many young elk that their number had to be systematically reduced. To that end "Buffalo" Jones was sent out by the Government to find and destroy the intolerable surplus of pumas. In the course of his campaign he killed about forty, much to the benefit of the elk herds. Around the entrance to the den of a big old male puma, Mr. Jones found the skulls and other remains of nine elk calves that "the old Tom" had killed and carried there.

In some parts of the Rocky Mountain region, the attacks from large predatory animals and birds on the young of big-game species sometimes require special measures. In Yellowstone Park, the number of pumas increased so much that they killed a significant number of young elk, leading to a need for their population to be reduced. To address this, "Buffalo" Jones was sent out by the government to find and eliminate the excess pumas. During his efforts, he killed about forty, which greatly benefited the elk herds. Near the entrance to a cave of a big old male puma, Mr. Jones discovered the skulls and other remains of nine elk calves that "the old Tom" had killed and brought there.

Pumas and lynxes attack and kill mountain sheep; and the golden eagle is very partial to mountain sheep lambs and mountain goat kids. It will not answer to permit birds of that bold and predatory species to become too numerous in mountains inhabited by goats and sheep; and the fewer the mountain lions the better, for they, like the lynx and eagle, have nothing to live upon save the game.

Pumas and lynxes hunt and kill mountain sheep, while the golden eagle has a particular preference for mountain sheep lambs and mountain goat kids. It's not advisable to let such bold and predatory birds become too numerous in the mountains where goats and sheep live; and the fewer mountain lions there are, the better, because they, like the lynx and eagle, have nothing to eat except for game.

The wolves and coyotes have learned to seek the ranges of cattle, horses and sheep, where they still do immense damage, chiefly in killing young stock. In spite of the great sums that have been paid out by western states in bounties for the destruction of wolves, in many, many places the gray wolf still persists, and can not be exterminated. To the stockmen of the west the wolf question is a serious matter. The stockmen of Montana say that a government expert once told them how to get rid of the gray wolves. His instructions were: "Locate the dens, and kill the young in the dens, soon after they are born!" "All very easy to say, but a trifle difficult to do!" said my informant; and the ranchman seem to think they are yet a long way from a solution of the wolf question.

The wolves and coyotes have figured out how to find cattle, horses, and sheep, where they still cause significant damage, mainly by killing young animals. Despite the large amounts of money that western states have paid in bounties to eliminate wolves, in many areas the gray wolf still survives and cannot be wiped out. For ranchers in the west, the wolf issue is a serious concern. Ranchers in Montana say that a government expert once advised them on how to get rid of gray wolves. His instructions were: "Find the dens and kill the young ones soon after they are born!" "Sounds easy to say, but a bit tricky to do!" my source remarked, and the ranchers seem to believe they are still far from solving the wolf problem.

During the past year the destruction of noxious predatory animals in the national forest reserves has seriously occupied the attention of the United States Bureau of Forestry. By the foresters of that bureau the following animals were destroyed in fifteen western states:

During the past year, the elimination of harmful predatory animals in national forest reserves has greatly captured the attention of the United States Bureau of Forestry. The foresters from that bureau destroyed the following animals in fifteen western states:

213 Bears 6,487 Coyotes
88 Mountain Lions 870 Wild-Cats
172 Gray Wolves 72 Lynxes
69 Wolf Pups -----
7,971
In 1910 the total was 9,103.

The Red Squirrel. —Once in a great while, conditions change in subtle ways, wild creatures unexpectedly increase in number, and a community awakens to the fact that some wild species has become a public nuisance. In a small city park, even gray squirrels may breed and become so fearfully numerous that, in their restless quest for food, they may ravage the nests of the wild birds, kill and devour the young, and become a pest. In the Zoological Park, in 1903, we found that the red squirrels had increased to such a horde that they were driving out all our nesting wild birds, driving out the gray squirrels, and making themselves intolerably obnoxious. We shot sixty of them, and brought the total down to a reasonable number. Wherever he is or whatever his [Page 80] numerical strength, the red squirrel is a bad citizen, and, while we do not by any means favor his extermination, he should resolutely be kept within bounds by the rifle.

The Red Squirrel. —Every so often, conditions change in subtle ways, and wild animals suddenly start to overpopulate, leading a community to realize that a certain species has become a public nuisance. In a small city park, even gray squirrels can breed to the point where they become so abundant that, in their relentless search for food, they may destroy the nests of wild birds, kill their young, and become a real problem. At the Zoological Park in 1903, we discovered that red squirrels had multiplied to such an extent that they were driving away all our nesting wild birds and pushing out the gray squirrels, making themselves insufferable. We shot sixty of them, lowering their numbers to a manageable level. No matter where he is or how many of them there are, the red squirrel is a poor neighbor, and while we definitely don't support wiping them out entirely, they should definitely be kept in check with a rifle.

When a crow nested in our woods, near the Beaver Pond, we were greatly pleased; but with the feeding of the first brood, the crows began to carry off ducklings from the wild-fowl pond. After one crow had been seen to seize and carry away five young ducks in one forenoon, we decided that the constitutional limit had been reached, for we did not propose that all our young mallards should be swept into the awful vortex of that crow nest. We took those young crows and reared them by hand; but the old one had acquired a bad habit, and she persisted in carrying off young ducks until we had to end her existence with a gun. It was a painful operation, but there was no other way.

When a crow built its nest in our woods by the Beaver Pond, we were really excited. But as soon as it started feeding its first brood, the crows began snatching ducklings from the wild-fowl pond. After witnessing one crow grab and take away five young ducks in just one morning, we figured enough was enough, because we didn’t want all our young mallards to be dragged into that crow’s nest. We took in those young crows and raised them ourselves; however, the adult crow had developed a bad habit and kept stealing young ducks until we had to end her life with a gun. It was a tough decision, but there was no other option.

Bird-Destroying Birds. —There are several species of birds that may at once be put under sentence of death for their destructiveness of useful birds, without any extenuating circumstances worth mentioning. Four of these are Cooper's Hawk, the Sharp-Shinned Hawk, Pigeon Hawk and Duck Hawk. Fortunately these species are not so numerous that we need lose any sleep over them. Indeed, I think that today it would be a mighty good collector who could find one specimen in seven days' hunting. Like all other species, these, too, are being shot out of our bird fauna.

Birds that kill other birds. —There are several types of birds that can be condemned for their destructive impact on useful birds, without any significant reasons for leniency. Four of these are Cooper's Hawk, the Sharp-Shinned Hawk, Pigeon Hawk, and Duck Hawk. Fortunately, these species aren’t so common that we need to worry about them. In fact, I believe that nowadays, it would be quite a skilled collector who could spot even one specimen in a week of hunting. Like all other species, these too are being eliminated from our bird population.

Several species of bird-eating birds are trembling in the balance, and under grave suspicion. Some of them are the Great Horned Owl, Screech Owl, Butcher Bird or Great Northern Shrike. The only circumstance that saves these birds from instant condemnation is the delightful amount of rats, mice, moles, gophers and noxious insects that they annually consume. In view of the awful destructiveness of the accursed bubonic-plague-carrying rat, we are impelled to think long before placing in our killing list even the great horned owl, who really does [Page 81] levy a heavy tax on our upland game birds. As to the butcher bird, we feel that we ought to kill him, but in view of his record on wild mice and rats, we hesitate, and finally decline.

Several species of bird-eating birds are in a precarious situation and under serious scrutiny. Some of these include the Great Horned Owl, Screech Owl, Butcher Bird, or Great Northern Shrike. The only thing keeping these birds from immediate condemnation is the significant number of rats, mice, moles, gophers, and harmful insects they consume each year. Considering the terrible destructiveness of the dreaded bubonic-plague-carrying rat, we are compelled to think carefully before adding even the great horned owl, which does really [Page 81] impose a heavy toll on our upland game birds, to our kill list. As for the butcher bird, we believe he should be killed, but given his record with wild mice and rats, we hesitate and ultimately decide against it.

COOPER'S HAWK

Cooper's Hawk

A Species to be Destroyed

A Species to be Saved

SHARP-SHINNED HAWK

Sharp-shinned Hawk

A Species to be Destroyed

A Species to Be Eradicated

Snakes. —Mr. Thomas M. Upp, a close and long observer of wild things wishes it distinctly understood that while the common black-snakes and racers are practically harmless to birds, the Pilot Black-Snake,—long, thick and truculent,—is a great scourge to nesting birds. It seems to be deserving of death. Mr. Upp speaks from personal knowledge, and his condemnation of the species referred to is quite sweeping. At the same time Mr. Raymond L. Ditmars points out the fact that this serpent feeds during 6 months of the year on mice, and in doing so renders good service. In the South it is called the "Mouse Snake."

Snakes. —Mr. Thomas M. Upp, a keen and longtime observer of wildlife, wants it to be clearly understood that while common black snakes and racers are mostly harmless to birds, the Pilot Black-Snake—which is long, thick, and aggressive—poses a serious threat to nesting birds. He believes it should be killed. Mr. Upp speaks from personal experience, and his condemnation of this species is strong. At the same time, Mr. Raymond L. Ditmars points out that this snake feeds on mice for six months out of the year, which is beneficial. In the South, it’s called the "Mouse Snake."

Photo by A.C. Dyke

Photo by A.C. Dyke

THE CAT THAT KILLED 58 BIRDS IN ONE YEAR

THE CAT THAT KILLED 58 BIRDS IN ONE YEAR

From Mr. Forbush's Book

From Mr. Forbush's Book


[Page 82]
CHAPTER IX
THE DESTRUCTION OF WILD LIFE BY DISEASES

Every cause that has the effect of reducing the total of wild-life population is now a matter of importance to mankind. The violent and universal disturbance of the balance of Nature that already has taken place throughout the temperate and frigid zone offers not only food for thought, but it calls for vigorous action.

Every cause that reduces the overall wildlife population is now important to humanity. The widespread and drastic disruption of Nature’s balance that has already occurred across temperate and cold regions not only gives us something to think about, but it also demands urgent action.

There are vast sections in the populous centres of western civilization where the destruction of species, even to the point of extermination, is fairly inevitable. It is the way of Christian man to destroy all wild life that comes within the sphere of influence of his iron heel. With the exception of the big game, this destruction is largely a temperamental result, peculiar to the highest civilization. In India where the same fields have been plowed for wheat and dahl and raggi for at least 2,000 years, the Indian antelope, or "black buck," the saras crane and the adjutant stalk through the crops, and the nilgai and gazelle inhabit the eroded ravines in an agricultural land that averages 1,200 people to the square mile!

There are large areas in the crowded centers of Western civilization where the destruction of species, even leading to extinction, seems almost certain. It's in the nature of Christian man to wipe out any wildlife that comes under the weight of his control. Except for big game, this destruction is mainly a temperamental result unique to advanced civilizations. In India, where the same fields have been farmed for wheat, dahl, and raggi for at least 2,000 years, the Indian antelope, or "black buck," the saras crane, and the adjutant can still be seen roaming the crops, while the nilgai and gazelle occupy the eroded ravines in a land with an agricultural density of about 1,200 people per square mile!

We have seen that even in farming country, where mud villages are as thick as farm houses in Nebraska, wild animals and even hoofed game can live and hold their own through hundreds of years of close association with man. The explanation is that the Hindus regard wild animals as creatures entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and they are not anxious to shoot every wild animal that shows its head. In the United States, nearly every game-inhabited community is animated by a feeling that every wild animal must necessarily be killed as soon as seen; and this sentiment often leads to disgraceful things. For instance, in some parts of New England a deer straying into a town is at once beset by the hue and cry, and it is chased and assaulted until it is dead, by violent and disgraceful means. New York State, however, seems to have outgrown that spirit. During the past ten years, at least a dozen deer in distress have been rescued from the Hudson River, or in inland towns, or in barnyards in the suburbs of Yonkers and New York, and carefully cared for until "the zoo people" could be communicated with. Last winter about 13 exhausted grebes and one loon were picked up, cared for and finally shipped with tender care to the Zoological Park. One distressed dovekie was picked up, but failed to survive.

We’ve seen that even in rural areas, where mud villages are as common as farmhouses in Nebraska, wild animals and even hoofed game can thrive alongside humans for hundreds of years. The reason is that Hindus believe wild animals have the right to life, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness, and they aren’t eager to shoot every wild animal that appears. In the United States, almost every community with wildlife operates under the idea that any wild animal must be killed as soon as it’s seen, which often leads to disgraceful actions. For example, in some parts of New England, if a deer wanders into a town, it’s immediately chased by a mob until it’s killed through violent and shameful methods. However, New York State seems to have moved past that mentality. In the past ten years, at least a dozen distressed deer have been rescued from the Hudson River, inland towns, or barnyards in the suburbs of Yonkers and New York, and carefully looked after until they could be connected with the zoo staff. Last winter, about 13 tired grebes and one loon were picked up, cared for, and eventually sent with great care to the Zoological Park. One rescued dovekie was picked up but did not survive.

The sentiment for the conservation of wild life has changed the mental attitude of very many people. The old Chinese-Malay spirit which cries [Page 83] "Kill! Kill!" and at once runs amuck among suddenly discovered wild animals, is slowly being replaced by a more humane and intelligent sentiment. This is one of the hopeful and encouraging signs of the times.

The attitude towards wildlife conservation has shifted the mindset of many people. The old Chinese-Malay spirit that screams [Page 83] "Kill! Kill!" and then goes wild when encountering suddenly spotted wild animals is gradually being replaced by a more compassionate and thoughtful perspective. This is one of the hopeful and encouraging signs of our time.

The destruction of wild animals by natural causes is an interesting subject, even though painful. We need to know how much destruction is wrought by influences wholly beyond the control of man, and a few cases must be cited.

The destruction of wild animals due to natural causes is a fascinating topic, even if it's upsetting. We need to understand how much destruction is caused by factors completely beyond human control, and a few cases should be mentioned.

Rinderpest In Africa. —Probably the greatest slaughter ever wrought upon wild animals by diseases during historic times, was by rinderpest, a cattle plague which afflicted Africa in the last decade of the previous century. Originally, the disease reached Africa by way of Egypt, and came as an importation from Europe. From Egypt it steadily traveled southward, reaching Somaliland in 1889. In 1896 it reached the Zambesi River and entered Rhodesia. From thence it went on southward almost to the Cape. Not only did it sweep away ninety percent of the native cattle but it also destroyed more than seventy-five per cent of the buffalos, antelopes and other hoofed game of Rhodesia. It was feared that many species would be completely exterminated, but happily that fear was not realized. The buffalo and antelope herds were fifteen years in breeding up again to a reasonable number, but thanks to the respite from hunters which they enjoyed for several years, finally they did recover. Throughout British East Africa the supply of big game in 1905 was very great, but since that time it has been very greatly diminished by shooting.

Rinderpest in Africa. —Probably the greatest slaughter of wild animals by diseases in recorded history was due to rinderpest, a cattle plague that struck Africa in the last decade of the previous century. The disease originally reached Africa through Egypt as an import from Europe. From Egypt, it moved southward, reaching Somaliland in 1889. By 1896, it had reached the Zambezi River and entered Rhodesia. It continued southward almost to the Cape. Not only did it wipe out ninety percent of the native cattle, but it also devastated more than seventy-five percent of the buffalo, antelope, and other hoofed game in Rhodesia. There were fears that many species would be completely wiped out, but thankfully, that fear didn’t come true. The buffalo and antelope populations took fifteen years to rebuild to a reasonable level, but thanks to a break from hunting for several years, they eventually recovered. By 1905, the supply of big game in British East Africa was very abundant, but since then, it has significantly decreased due to shooting.

Caribou Disease. —From time to time reports have come from the Province of Quebec, and I think from Maine and New Brunswick also, of many caribou having died of disease. The nature of that disease has remained a mystery, because it seems that no pathologist ever has had an opportunity to investigate it. Fortunately, however, the alleged disease never has been sufficiently wide-spread or continuous to make appreciable inroads on the total number of caribou, and apparently the trouble has been local.

Caribou disease. —Every now and then, there have been reports from Quebec, and I believe from Maine and New Brunswick as well, about many caribou dying from a disease. The specifics of that disease have remained unclear since no pathologist has had the chance to investigate it. Fortunately, this supposed disease has never been widespread or persistent enough to significantly impact the overall population of caribou, and it seems to be a local issue.

Scab In Mountain Sheep. —"Scab" is a contagious and persistent skin disease that affects sheep, and is destructive when not controlled. Fifteen years ago it prevailed in some portions of the west. In Colorado it has several times been reported that many bighorn mountain sheep were killed by "scab," which was contracted on wild mountain pastures that had been gone over by domestic sheep carrying that disease. From the reports current at that time, we inferred that about 200 mountain sheep had been affected. It was feared that the disease would spread through the wild flocks and become general, but this did not occur. It seems that the remnant flocks had become so isolated from one another that the isolation of the affected flocks saved the others.

Scabies in Mountain Sheep. —"Scab" is a contagious and long-lasting skin disease that affects sheep, and it can be very harmful if not managed. Fifteen years ago, it was common in some parts of the west. In Colorado, there have been multiple reports of many bighorn mountain sheep dying from "scab," which they got from wild mountain pastures previously grazed by domestic sheep carrying the disease. Based on the reports from that time, we estimated that around 200 mountain sheep were affected. There were concerns that the disease would spread among the wild flocks and become widespread, but that didn’t happen. It appears that the remaining flocks had become so separated from each other that the isolation of the infected flocks protected the others.

Lumpy-Jaw In Antelope And Sheep. —It is a lamentable fact that some, at least, of the United States herds of prong-horned antelope are afflicted with a very deadly chronic infective disease known as actinomycosis, or [Page 84] lumpy-jaw. It has been brought into the Zoological Park five times, by specimens shipped from Colorado, Texas, Wyoming and Montana. I think our first cases came to us in 1902.

Lumpy Jaw in Antelope and Sheep. —It is a sad fact that some herds of prong-horned antelope in the United States have a very serious chronic infectious disease known as actinomycosis, or lumpy-jaw. It has been brought into the Zoological Park five times, through specimens shipped from Colorado, Texas, Wyoming, and Montana. I believe our first cases arrived in 1902.

In its early stage this disease is so subtle and slow that it is months in developing; and this feature renders it all the more deadly, through the spread of infection long before the ailment can be discovered.

In its early stage, this disease is so subtle and slow that it takes months to develop; and this aspect makes it even more deadly, allowing the infection to spread long before the illness can be detected.

One of our antelope arrivals, apparently in perfect health when received, was on general principles kept isolated in rigid quarantine for two months. At the expiration of that period, no disease of any kind having become manifest, the animal was placed on exhibition, with two others that had been in the Park for more than a year, in perfect health.

One of our antelope arrivals, seemingly in perfect health when it arrived, was kept in strict quarantine for two months as a precaution. After that time, since no signs of illness had appeared, the animal was put on display alongside two others that had been in the Park for over a year, also in perfect health.

In one more week the late arrival developed a swelling on its jaw, drooled at the corner of the mouth, and became feverish,—sure symptoms of the dread disease. At once it was removed and isolated, but in about 10 days it died. The other two antelopes were promptly attacked, and eventually died.

In just one more week, the late arrival had swelling on its jaw, drooled from the corner of its mouth, and became feverish—clear signs of the dreaded disease. Immediately, it was taken away and isolated, but within about 10 days, it died. The other two antelopes were quickly affected and eventually died as well.

The course of the disease is very intense, and thus far it has proven incurable in our wild animals. We have lost about 10 antelopes from it, and one deer, usually, in each case, within ten days or two weeks from the discovery of the first outward sign,—the well known swelling on the jaw. One case that was detected immediately upon arrival was very persistently treated by Dr. Blair, and the animal actually survived for four months, but finally it succumbed. From first to last not a single case was cured.

The disease progresses rapidly, and so far it has been incurable in our wild animals. We’ve lost about 10 antelopes to it, and usually one deer in each case, typically within ten days or two weeks after noticing the first visible sign—the well-known swelling on the jaw. One case that was identified right upon arrival was treated consistently by Dr. Blair, and the animal actually survived for four months, but ultimately it didn’t make it. In the end, not a single case was cured.

In 1912, the future of the prong-horned antelope in real captivity seems hopeless. We have decided not to bring any more specimens to our institution, partly because all available candidates seem reasonably certain to be affected with lumpy-jaw, and partly because we are unwilling to run further risks of having other hoofed animals inoculated by them. Today we are anxiously wondering whether the jaw disease of the prong-horn is destined to exterminate the species. Such a catastrophe is much to be feared. This is probably one of the reasons why the antelope is steadily disappearing, despite protection.

In 1912, the future of the pronghorn antelope in captivity looks bleak. We've decided not to bring in any more specimens to our facility, partly because all the available candidates are likely to have lumpy jaw, and partly because we don't want to risk infecting other hoofed animals. Right now, we're worried that the jaw disease affecting the pronghorn could lead to the species' extinction. This is a serious concern. This is likely one of the reasons why the antelope is gradually disappearing, even with protection in place.

In 1906 we discovered the existence of actinomycosis among the black mountain sheep of northern British Columbia. Two specimens out of six were badly affected, the bones of the jaws being greatly enlarged, and perforated by deep pits. The black sheep of the Stickine and Iskoot regions are so seldom seen by white men, save when a sportsman kills his allotment of three specimens, we really do not know anything about the extent to which actinomycosis prevails in those herds, or how deadly are its effects. One thing seems quite certain, from the appearance of the diseased skulls found by the writer in the taxidermic laboratory of Frederick Sauter, in New York. The enormous swelling of the diseased jaw bones clearly indicates a disease that in some cases affects its victim throughout many months. Such a condition as we found in those sheep could not have been reached in a few days after the disease became [Page 85] apparent. Now, in our antelopes, the collapse and death of the victim usually occurred in about 10 days from the time that the first swelling was observed: which means a very virulent disease, and rapid progress at the climax. The jaw of one of our antelopes, which was figured in Dr. Blair's paper in the Eleventh Annual Report of the New York Zoological Society (1906) shows only a very slight lesion, in comparison with those of the mountain sheep.

In 1906, we found actinomycosis in the black mountain sheep of northern British Columbia. Out of six specimens, two were severely affected, with their jaw bones significantly enlarged and pitted with deep holes. The black sheep in the Stickine and Iskoot regions are rarely seen by white men, except when a hunter takes his limit of three specimens, so we really don't know how widespread actinomycosis is in those herds or how deadly it can be. One thing is clear from the diseased skulls I saw in the taxidermy lab of Frederick Sauter in New York. The significant swelling of the affected jaw bones suggests that this disease can linger in a victim for months. The condition we observed in those sheep couldn't have developed just a few days after the disease became apparent. In our antelopes, however, collapse and death usually occurred about 10 days after the first swelling was noticed, indicating a very aggressive disease that progresses quickly. The jaw of one of our antelopes, which was illustrated in Dr. Blair's paper in the Eleventh Annual Report of the New York Zoological Society (1906), shows only a very slight lesion compared to those of the mountain sheep.

The conclusion is that among the sheep, this disease does not carry off its victims in any short period like 10 days. The animal must survive for some months after it becomes apparent. At least two parties of American sportsmen have shot rams afflicted with this disease, but I have no reports of any sheep having been found dead from this cause.

The conclusion is that among the sheep, this disease doesn’t take its victims quickly like in 10 days. The animal has to survive for a few months after it becomes noticeable. At least two groups of American hunters have shot rams affected by this disease, but I have no reports of any sheep being found dead from it.

This disease is well known among domestic cattle, but so far as we are aware it never before has been found among wild animals. The black sheep herds wherein it was found in British Columbia are absolutely isolated from domestic cattle and all their influences, and therefore it seems quite certain that the disease developed among the sheep spontaneously,—a remarkable episode, to say the least. Whether it will exterminate the black mountain sheep species, and in time spread to the white sheep of the northwest, is of course a matter of conjecture; but there is nothing in the world to prevent a calamity of that kind. The white sheep of Yukon Territory range southward until in the Sheslay Mountains they touch the sphere of influence of the black sheep, where the disease could easily be transmitted. It would be a good thing if there existed between the two species a sheepless zone about 200 miles wide.

This disease is well known in domestic cattle, but as far as we know, it has never been found in wild animals before. The black sheep herds where it was discovered in British Columbia are completely isolated from domestic cattle and their influences, so it seems certain that the disease developed among the sheep on its own—a remarkable occurrence, to say the least. Whether it will wipe out the black mountain sheep species and eventually spread to the white sheep in the northwest is, of course, up for speculation; but nothing stands in the way of such a disaster happening. The white sheep in Yukon Territory move south until they reach the Sheslay Mountains, where they come into contact with the black sheep, allowing the disease to be easily transmitted. It would be beneficial if there were a 200-mile-wide zone without sheep between the two species.

I greatly fear that actinomycosis is destined to play an important part in the final extinction that seems to be the impending fate of the beautiful and valuable prong-horned antelope. In view of our hard experiences, extending through ten years (1902-1912), I think this fear is justified. All persons who live in country still inhabited by antelope are urged to watch for this disease. If any antelopes are found dead, see if the lower jaw is badly swollen and discharging pus. If it is, bury the body quickly, burn the ground over, and advise the writer regarding the case.

I really worry that actinomycosis is likely to play a significant role in the eventual extinction that seems to be the looming fate of the beautiful and valuable pronghorn antelope. Given our tough experiences over the past ten years (1902-1912), I think this concern is justified. I urge everyone living in areas still home to antelope to be on the lookout for this disease. If any antelopes are found dead, check to see if the lower jaw is severely swollen and discharging pus. If it is, quickly bury the body, burn the area around it, and inform me about the situation.

The Rabbit Plague. —One of the strangest freaks of Nature of which we know as effecting the wholesale destruction of wild animals by disease is the rabbit plague. In the northern wilderness, and particularly central Canada, where rabbits exist in great numbers and supply the wants of a large carnivorous population, this plague is well known, and among trappers and woodsmen is a common topic of conversation. The best treatment of the subject is to be found in Ernest T. Seton's "Life Histories of Northern Animals", Vol. I, p. 640 et seq. From this I quote:

The Rabbit Infestation. —One of the strangest occurrences in nature that leads to the widespread destruction of wild animals by disease is the rabbit plague. In the northern wilderness, especially central Canada, where rabbits are abundant and support a large population of meat-eating animals, this plague is well recognized, and it’s a common topic of discussion among trappers and woodsmen. The most comprehensive treatment of the subject is in Ernest T. Seton's "Life Histories of Northern Animals", Vol. I, p. 640 et seq. From this, I quote:

"Invariably the year of greatest numbers [of rabbits] is followed by a year of plague, which sweeps them away, leaving few or no rabbits in the land. The denser the rabbit population, the more drastically is it [Page 86] ravaged by the plague. They are wiped out in a single spring by epidemic diseases usually characterized by swellings of the throat, sores under the armpits and groins, and by diarrhea."

"Invariably, the year with the highest rabbit population is followed by a year of disease that decimates them, leaving few or no rabbits behind. The denser the rabbit population, the more severely it is [Page 86] affected by the disease. They are eliminated in a single spring due to epidemic illnesses typically marked by swollen throats, sores in the armpits and groin, and diarrhea."

"The year 1885 was for the country around Carberry 'a rabbit year,' the greatest ever known in that country. The number of rabbits was incredible. W.R. Hine killed 75 in two hours, and estimated that he could have killed 500 in a day. The farmers were stricken with fear that the rabbit pest of Australia was to be repeated in Manitoba. But the years 1886-7 changed all that. The rabbits died until their bodies dotted the country in thousands. The plague seemed to kill all the members of the vast host of 1885."

"The year 1885 was a 'rabbit year' for the area around Carberry, the biggest one ever seen there. The number of rabbits was unbelievable. W.R. Hine shot 75 in just two hours and estimated he could have killed 500 in a single day. The farmers were terrified that the rabbit infestation in Australia might happen in Manitoba too. But the years 1886-87 changed everything. The rabbits died off until their bodies were scattered across the countryside by the thousands. The plague seemed to wipe out all the rabbits from the huge population of 1885."

The strangest item of Mr. Seton's story is yet to be told. In 1890 Mr. Seton stocked his park at Cos Cob, Conn., with hares and rabbits from several widely separated localities. In 1903, the plague came and swept them all away. Mr. Seton sent specimens to the Zoological Park for examination by the Park veterinary surgeon, Dr. W. Reid Blair. They were found to be infested by great numbers of a dangerous bloodsucking parasite known as Strongylus strigosus, which produces death by anemia and emaciation. There were hundreds of those parasites in each animal. I assisted in the examination, and was shown by Dr. Blair, under the microscope, that Strongylus puts forth eggs literally by hundreds of thousands!

The strangest part of Mr. Seton's story is yet to be revealed. In 1890, Mr. Seton filled his park in Cos Cob, Conn., with hares and rabbits from different far-off places. In 1903, a plague hit and wiped them all out. Mr. Seton sent samples to the Zoological Park to be examined by the Park's veterinary surgeon, Dr. W. Reid Blair. They found that the animals were infested with huge numbers of a dangerous bloodsucking parasite known as Strongylus strigosus, which causes death through anemia and weight loss. Each animal had hundreds of these parasites. I helped with the examination, and Dr. Blair showed me under the microscope that Strongylus lays eggs by the hundreds of thousands!

The life history of that parasite is not well known, but it may easily develop that the cycle of its maximum destructiveness is seven years, and therefore it may be accountable for the seven-year plague among the hares and rabbits of the northern United States and Canada.

The life history of that parasite isn't well understood, but it’s likely that its most destructive cycle lasts seven years, which could explain the seven-year plague affecting the hares and rabbits in the northern United States and Canada.

Possibly Strongylus strigosus is all that stands between Canada and a pest of rabbits like that of Australia. Just why this parasite is inoperative in Australia, or why it has not been introduced there to lessen the rabbit evil, we do not know. Mr. Seton declares that the rabbits of his park were "subject to all the ills of the flesh, except possibly writer's paralysis and housemaid's knee."

Possibly Strongylus strigosus is all that stands between Canada and a rabbit pest problem like the one in Australia. We're not sure why this parasite doesn't work in Australia or why it hasn't been brought there to help reduce the rabbit issue. Mr. Seton claims that the rabbits in his park were "subject to all the ills of the flesh, except possibly writer's paralysis and housemaid's knee."

Parasitic Infection Of Wild Ducks. —The diseases of wild game, especially waterfowl, grouse and quail, have caused heavy losses in America as well as in European countries, and scientists have been carefully investigating the cause and the general nature of the maladies, as well as probable methods of prevention and cure. Mr. Geo. Atkinson, a well-known practical naturalist of Portage la Prairie, Manitoba, writes as follows to a local paper on this subject, which I find quoted in the National Sportsman:

Parasitic Infection in Wild Ducks. —The diseases affecting wild game, particularly waterfowl, grouse, and quail, have led to significant losses in both America and European countries. Scientists have been closely examining the causes and characteristics of these illnesses, as well as possible prevention and treatment methods. Mr. Geo. Atkinson, a well-known practical naturalist from Portage la Prairie, Manitoba, writes the following to a local paper on this topic, which I found quoted in the National Sportsman:

The question which has developed these important proportions during the past year is that of the extent of the parasitic infection of our wild ducks and other game, and the possibilities of the extended transmission of these parasites to domestic stock, or even humanity, by eating.

The question that has become significant over the past year is about the level of parasitic infection in our wild ducks and other game, and the potential for these parasites to spread to domestic animals, or even humans, through consumption.

The parasites in question are contained in small elliptical cases found underlying the surface muscles of the breast, and in advanced cases extending deeper into the flesh and the muscular tissues of the legs and wings. They are not noticeable in the ordinary process of plucking the bird for the table, and are not found internally, so [Page 87] that the only method of discovering their presence is by slitting the skin of the breast and paring it back a few inches when the worm-like sacs will be seen buried in the flesh.

The parasites being referred to are housed in small, oval cases located just beneath the surface muscles of the breast, and in more severe cases, they penetrate deeper into the flesh and muscles of the legs and wings. They aren't noticeable during the usual process of preparing the bird for cooking, and they aren't found internally, so [Page 87] that the only way to detect them is by cutting the skin of the breast and pulling it back a few inches, revealing the worm-like sacs embedded in the flesh.

These parasites have come to my notice periodically during the process of skinning birds for mounting during the past number of years, but it was only when they appeared in unusual numbers last fall that I made inquiries of the biological bureaus of Washington and Ottawa for information of their life history and the possibilities of their transmission to other hosts.

These parasites have caught my attention from time to time while I’ve been skinning birds for mounting over the past few years, but it wasn’t until they showed up in large numbers last fall that I reached out to the biological offices in Washington and Ottawa for information about their life cycle and the chances of them spreading to other hosts.

Replies from these sources surprised me with the information that very little was known of the life history of any of the Sarcosporidia, of which group this was a species. Nothing was known of the method of infection or the transference from host to host or species to species, and both departments asked for specimens for examination.

Replies from these sources surprised me with the information that very little was known about the life cycle of any of the Sarcosporidia, of which this was a species. Nothing was known about how the infection spread or how it transferred from host to host or species to species, and both departments requested specimens for examination.

Authorities are a unit in opinion that the question is one of great importance to game conservation, and although opinions of the dangers from eating differ somewhat, a record is given of a hog fed upon affected flesh developing parasites in the muscles in six weeks' time, while a case of a man's death from dropsy was found to be the result of development of these parasites in the valves of the heart.

Authorities agree that this issue is very important for game conservation. While there are some differing opinions on the risks of eating affected meat, there is a documented case of a hog that was fed contaminated flesh developing parasites in its muscles within six weeks. Additionally, there was a case where a man's death from dropsy was linked to the growth of these parasites in his heart valves.

The ability of these low forms of life to withstand extremes of heat makes it necessary for more than ordinary cooking to be assured of killing them, and since their presence is unnoted in the ordinary course of dressing the birds for the table, there is little doubt that very considerable numbers of these parasites are consumed at our tables every season, with results at present unknown to us.

The ability of these simple life forms to survive extreme heat means that regular cooking isn't enough to ensure they are killed. Since we typically don’t notice them while preparing birds for dinner, it's likely that a significant number of these parasites are consumed at our meals each season, with effects that remain unknown to us.

The species I have found most particularly infected have been mallards, shovellers, teal, gadwall and pintails, and the birds, outwardly in the best condition, have frequently been found loaded with sacs of these parasites and only the turning back of the breast skin can disclose their presence.

The species I’ve found to be most heavily infected are mallards, shovellers, teal, gadwall, and pintails. These birds, despite appearing to be in great shape on the outside, often have sacs of these parasites inside them, which can only be revealed by peeling back the breast skin.

The greatest slaughter of wild ducks by disease occurred on Great Salt Lake, Utah. Until the "duck disease" (intestinal coccidiosis) broke out there, in the summer of 1910, the annual market slaughter of ducks at the mouth of Bear River had been enormous. When at Salt Lake City in 1888 I made an effort to arouse the sportsmen whom I met to the necessity of a reform, but my exhortations fell on deaf ears. Naturally, the sweeping away of the remaining ducks by disease would suggest a heaven-sent judgment upon the slaughterers were it not for the fact that the last state of the unfortunate ducks is if anything worse than the first.

The largest die-off of wild ducks due to disease happened at Great Salt Lake in Utah. Before the "duck disease" (intestinal coccidiosis) broke out there in the summer of 1910, the annual market slaughter of ducks at the mouth of Bear River had been huge. When I was in Salt Lake City in 1888, I tried to get the sportsmen I met to see the need for reform, but my pleas went unheard. Naturally, the massive reduction of the remaining ducks due to disease might seem like a divine punishment for the slaughterers; however, it’s clear that the final fate of the unfortunate ducks is, if anything, worse than their initial state.

On Oct. 17, 1911, the annual report of the chief of the Biological Survey contained the following information on this subject:

On October 17, 1911, the annual report from the head of the Biological Survey included the following information on this topic:

Epidemic Among Wild Ducks on Great Salt Lake.—Following a long dry season, which favored the rearing of a large number of wild ducks, but materially reduced the area of the feeding ponds, resulting in great overcrowding, a severe epidemic broke out about August 1, 1910, among the wild ducks about Great Salt Lake, Utah. Dead ducks could be counted by thousands along the shores and the disease raged unabated until late fall. Shooting clubs found it necessary to declare a closed season. Some of the dead ducks were forwarded to the Biological Survey and were turned over for examination to the Bureau of Animal Industry, by the experts of which the disease was diagnosed as intestinal coccidiosis.

Epidemic Among Wild Ducks on Great Salt Lake.—After a long dry season, which allowed a large number of wild ducks to breed but significantly reduced the size of the feeding ponds, causing overcrowding, a severe epidemic broke out around August 1, 1910, among the wild ducks near Great Salt Lake, Utah. Dead ducks could be counted by the thousands along the shores, and the disease spread unchecked until late fall. Shooting clubs found it necessary to declare a closed season. Some of the dead ducks were sent to the Biological Survey and were handed over for examination to the Bureau of Animal Industry, where experts diagnosed the disease as intestinal coccidiosis.

Various plans of relieving the situation were tried. The irrigation ditches were closed, thus providing the sloughs and ponds with fresh water, and lime was sprinkled on the mud flats and duck trails. Great improvement followed this treatment, and experiments proved that ducks provided with abundant fresh water and clean food began to recover immediately. These methods promised success, but later it was proposed that the marshes be drained and exposed to the sun's rays—a course which cannot be recommended. That coccidia are not always killed by exposure to the sun is shown by their survival on the sites of old chicken yards. An added disadvantage of the plan is that draining and drying the marshes would have a bad effect on the natural duck food, and upon the birds themselves.

Various plans to alleviate the situation were tried. The irrigation ditches were closed, which provided the sloughs and ponds with fresh water, and lime was spread on the mud flats and duck trails. This treatment led to significant improvement, and experiments showed that ducks given plenty of fresh water and clean food began to recover right away. These methods seemed promising, but later a proposal was made to drain the marshes and expose them to sunlight—a decision that cannot be supported. The fact that coccidia are not always killed by sun exposure is evident from their survival in old chicken yard sites. An additional downside of this plan is that draining and drying the marshes would harm the natural duck food and the birds themselves.


[Page 88]
CHAPTER X
DESTRUCTION OF WILD LIFE BY THE ELEMENTS

It is a fixed condition of Nature that whenever and wherever a wild species exists in a state of nature, free from the trammels and limitations that contact with man always imposes, the species is fitted to survive all ordinary climatic influences. Freedom of action, and the exercise of several options in the line of individual maintenance under stress, is essential to the welfare of every wild species.

It’s a basic fact of nature that whenever and wherever a wild species exists in its natural environment, untouched by the constraints and limitations that contact with humans brings, the species is equipped to endure all typical climate challenges. The ability to act freely and explore various options for individual survival under pressure is crucial for the well-being of every wild species.

A prong-horned antelope herd that is free can drift before a blizzard, can keep from freezing by the exercise, and eventually come to shelter. Let that same herd drift against a barbed-wire fence five miles long, and its whole scheme of self-preservation is upset. The herd perishes then and there.

A herd of pronghorn antelope that is free can move around during a blizzard, stay warm through activity, and eventually find shelter. But if that same herd gets caught against a five-mile-long barbed-wire fence, their entire survival strategy falls apart. The herd dies right then and there.

Cut out the undergrowth of a given section, drain the swamps and mow down all the weeds and tall grass, and the next particularly hard winter starves and freezes the quail.

Cut out the underbrush in a particular area, drain the swamps, and mow down all the weeds and tall grass, and the next really harsh winter will starve and freeze the quail.

Naturally the cutting of forests, clearing of brush and drainage of marshes is more or less calamitous to all the species of birds that inhabit such places and find there winter food and shelter. Red-winged blackbirds and real estate booms can not inhabit the same swamps contemporaneously. Before the relentless march of civilization, the wild Indian, the bison and many of the wild birds must inevitably disappear. We cannot change conditions that are as inexorable as death itself. The wild life must either adjust itself to the conditions that civilized man imposes upon it, or perish. I say "civilized man," for the reason that the primitive races of man are not deadly exterminators of species, as we are. I know of not one species of wild life that has been exterminated by savage man without the aid of his civilized peers.

Naturally, cutting down forests, clearing brush, and draining marshes are pretty disastrous for all the bird species that live in those areas and rely on them for winter food and shelter. Red-winged blackbirds and real estate booms can't coexist in the same swamps at the same time. Long before the relentless advance of civilization, the wild Native American, the bison, and many wild birds were bound to disappear. We can't change conditions that are as unstoppable as death itself. Wildlife must either adapt to the conditions that civilized humans impose on it or face extinction. I say "civilized humans" because primitive human cultures aren’t the ones that drive species to extinction like we do. I’m not aware of any wild species that has been wiped out by primitive humans without the involvement of civilized people.

As civilization marches ever onward, over the prairies, into the bad lands and the forests, over the mountains and even into the farthest corner of Death Valley, the desert of deserts, the struggle of the wild birds, mammals and fishes is daily and hourly intensified. Man must help them to maintain themselves, or accept a lifeless continent. The best help consists in letting the wild creatures throughly alone, so that they can help themselves; but quail often need to be fed in critical periods. The best food is wheat screenings placed under little tents of straw, bringing food and shelter together.

As civilization keeps moving forward, spreading over the plains, into the badlands and forests, over mountains and even into the remotest part of Death Valley, the challenges faced by wild birds, mammals, and fish increase every day and every hour. Humans must assist them in surviving, or else we will end up with a lifeless continent. The most effective help is often just leaving these wild creatures completely alone so they can take care of themselves; however, quail often need food during critical times. The best food is screenings of wheat placed under small straw tents, providing both food and shelter.

In the well settled portions of the United States, such species as quail, ruffed grouse, wild turkey, pinnated grouse and sage grouse hang [Page 89] to life by slender threads. A winter of exceptionally deep snows, much sleet, and a late spring always causes grave anxiety among the state game wardens. In Pennsylvania a very earnest movement is in progress to educate and persuade farmers to feed the quail in winter, and much good is being done in that direction.

In the well-established areas of the United States, species like quail, ruffed grouse, wild turkey, prairie chicken, and sage grouse are hanging on by a thread. A winter with exceptionally deep snow, heavy sleet, and a late spring always raises serious concerns among state game wardens. In Pennsylvania, there is a strong effort underway to educate and encourage farmers to feed quail in the winter, and a lot of good progress is being made in that area.

Mr. Erasmus Wilson, of the Pittsburgh Gazette-Times is the apostle of that movement.

Mr. Erasmus Wilson, of the Pittsburgh Gazette-Times, is the champion of that movement.

Quail should be fed every winter, in every northern state. The methods to be pursued will be mentioned elsewhere.

Quail should be fed every winter in all northern states. The methods to be used will be discussed elsewhere.

By way of illustration, here is a sample game report, from Las Animas, Colorado, Feb. 22, 1912:

By way of illustration, here is a sample game report from Las Animas, Colorado, Feb. 22, 1912:

"After the most severe winter weather experienced for twenty years we are able to compute approximately our loss of feathered life. It is seventy-five per cent of the quail throughout the irrigated district, and about twenty per cent of meadow-larks. In the rough cedar-covered sections south of the Arkansas River, the loss among the quail was much lighter. The ground sparrows suffered severely, while the English sparrow seems to have come through in good shape. Many cotton-tail rabbits starved to death, while the deep, light snow of January made them easy prey for hawks and coyotes." (F.T. Webber).

"After the harshest winter weather we’ve had in twenty years, we can estimate our loss of bird life. It’s about seventy-five percent of the quail in the irrigated areas, and around twenty percent of meadowlarks. In the rugged, cedar-covered regions south of the Arkansas River, quail losses were much lower. Ground sparrows were hit hard, while the English sparrow seems to have come through okay. Many cotton-tail rabbits starved, and the deep, light snow in January made them easy targets for hawks and coyotes." (F.T. Webber).

It would be possible to record many instances similar to the above, but why multiply them? And now behold the cruel corollary:

It would be possible to record many similar instances to the one above, but why should we keep listing them? And now, here’s the harsh consequence:

At least twenty-five times during the past two years I have heard and read arguments by sportsmen against my proposal for a 5-year close season for quail, taking the ground that "The sportsmen are not wholly to blame for the scarcity of quail. It is the cold winters that kill them off!"

At least twenty-five times in the last two years, I've heard and read arguments from hunters against my suggestion for a 5-year break on quail hunting, claiming that "Hunters aren’t entirely at fault for the decline in quail numbers. It’s the harsh winters that wipe them out!"

So then, because the fierce winters murder the bob white, wholesale, they should not have a chance to recover themselves! Could human beings possibly assume a more absurd attitude?

So then, because the harsh winters kill the bobwhite in large numbers, they shouldn't have a chance to recover ! Could people be any more ridiculous?

Yes, it is coldly and incontestably true, that even after such winter slaughter as Mr. Webber has reported above, the very next season will find the quail hunter joyously taking the field, his face beaming with health and good living, to hunt down and shoot to death as many as possible of the pitiful 25 per cent remnant that managed to survive the pitiless winter. How many quail hunters, think you, ever stayed their hands because of "a hard winter on the quail?" I warrant not one out of every hundred! How many states in this Union ever put on a close season because of a hard winter? I'll warrant that not one ever did; and I think there is only one state whose game commissioners have the power to act in that way without recourse to the legislature. This situation is intolerable.

Yes, it's coldly and undeniably true that even after the severe winter slaughter that Mr. Webber reported above, the very next season will see quail hunters happily heading out, their faces shining with health and good living, ready to hunt down and shoot as many of the unfortunate 25 percent that survived the harsh winter as possible. How many quail hunters do you think ever put down their guns because of "a tough winter for the quail?" I bet not one out of every hundred! How many states in this country have ever implemented a closed season because of a tough winter? I bet none ever did; and I believe only one state has game commissioners with the authority to act that way without needing approval from the legislature. This situation is unacceptable.

Thanks to the splendid codified game laws enacted in New York state in 1912, our Conservation Commission can declare a close season in any locality, for any length of time, when the state of the game demands an emergency measure. This act is as follows; and it is a model law, which every other state should speedily enact:

Thanks to the excellent game laws established in New York state in 1912, our Conservation Commission can announce a temporary closure in any area, for any duration, when the game's condition requires urgent action. This law is as follows; and it is a model law that every other state should quickly adopt:


THE NEW YORK CLOSE-SEASON LAW.

THE NEW YORK OFF-SEASON LAW.

152. Petition for additional protection; notice of hearings; power to grant additional protection; notice of prohibition or regulation; penalties.

152. Request for extra protection; notification of hearings; authority to provide additional protection; notification of restrictions or regulations; penalties.

1. Petition for additional protection. Any citizen of the state may file with the commission a petition in writing requesting it to give any species of fish, other than migratory food fish of the sea, or game protected by law, additional or other protection than that afforded by the provisions of this article. Such petition shall state the grounds upon which such protection is considered necessary, and shall be signed by the petitioner with his address.

1. Request for extra protection. Any state resident can submit a written request to the commission asking for additional protection for any species of fish, except for migratory ocean food fish or legally protected game. This request should outline the reasons why this extra protection is deemed necessary and must be signed by the requester along with their address.

2. Notice of hearings. The commission shall hold a public hearing in the locality or county to be affected upon the allegations of such petition within twenty days from the filing thereof. At least ten days prior to such hearing notice thereof, stating the time and place at which such hearing shall be held, shall be advertised in a newspaper published in the county to be affected by such additional or other protection. Such notice shall state the name and the address of the petitioner, together with a brief statement of the grounds upon which such application is made, and a copy thereof shall be mailed to the petitioner at the address given in such petition at least ten days before such hearing.

2. Notice of hearings. The commission will hold a public hearing in the local area or county that will be affected by the claims in the petition within twenty days of it being filed. At least ten days before this hearing, a notice will be published in a newspaper located in the county that will be affected by the proposed additional or other protection. This notice will include the name and address of the petitioner, along with a brief description of the reasons for the application. A copy of the notice will also be mailed to the petitioner at the address provided in the petition at least ten days before the hearing.

3. Power to grant additional protection. If upon such hearing the commission shall determine that such species of fish or game, by reason of disease, danger of extermination, or from any other cause or reason, requires such additional or other protection, in any locality or throughout the state, the commission shall have power to prohibit or regulate, during the open season therefor, the taking of such species of fish or game. Such prohibition or regulation may be made general throughout the state or confined to a particular part or district thereof.

3. Authority to provide extra protection. If after this hearing the commission finds that a certain species of fish or game, due to disease, the risk of extinction, or any other reason, needs extra protection in a specific area or across the state, the commission has the authority to restrict or regulate the catching of that species during its open season. This restriction or regulation can apply statewide or be limited to a specific area or district.

4. Notice of prohibition or regulation. Any order made by the commission under the provisions of this section shall be signed by it, and entered in its minute book. At least thirty days before such prohibition or regulation shall take effect, copies of the same shall be filed in the office of the clerk issuing hunting and trapping licenses for the district to which the prohibition or regulation applies. It shall be the duty of said clerks to issue a copy of said prohibition or regulation to each person to whom a hunting or trapping license is issued by them; to mail a copy of such prohibition or regulation to each holder of a hunting and trapping license theretofore issued by them and at that time in effect, and to post a copy thereof in a conspicuous place in their office. At least thirty days before such prohibition or regulation shall take effect the commission shall cause a notice thereof to be advertised in a newspaper published in the county wherein such prohibition or regulation shall take effect.

4. Notice of prohibition or regulation. Any order made by the commission under this section must be signed by the commission and recorded in its minute book. At least thirty days before the prohibition or regulation goes into effect, copies must be filed in the office of the clerk responsible for issuing hunting and trapping licenses for the relevant district. It is the clerk's responsibility to provide a copy of the prohibition or regulation to each person who receives a hunting or trapping license from them, mail a copy to every holder of a hunting and trapping license previously issued and still valid, and post a copy in a visible location in their office. At least thirty days before the prohibition or regulation takes effect, the commission must ensure a notice is published in a newspaper that is distributed in the county where the prohibition or regulation will be enforced.

5. Penalties. Any person violating the provisions of such prohibition, rule or regulation shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not to exceed one hundred dollars, or shall be imprisoned for not more than thirty days, or both, for each offense, in addition to the penalties hereinafter provided for taking fish, birds or quadrupeds in the close season.

5. Penalties. Anyone who breaks the rules or regulations will be committing a misdemeanor and, if convicted, could face a fine of up to one hundred dollars, or be imprisoned for no more than thirty days, or both, for each offense. This is in addition to any penalties outlined for catching fish, birds, or mammals during the closed season.


I want all sensible, honest sportsmen to stop citing the killing of game birds by severe winters as a reason why long close seasons are not necessary, and why automatic guns "don't matter." And I want sportsmen to consider their duty, and not go out hunting any game species that has been slaughtered by a hard winter, until it has had at least five years in which to recover. Any other course is cruel, selfish, and shortsighted; and a word to the humane should be sufficient.

I want all reasonable, honest sportspeople to stop using the harsh winters that kill game birds as a reason to say that long closed seasons aren’t needed, and that automatic guns "don't matter." I also want them to think about their responsibility and not hunt any game species that has been heavily affected by a tough winter until it has had at least five years to recover. Any other approach is cruel, selfish, and short-sighted; and a simple reminder to those who care about kindness should be enough.

The worst exhibitions ever made of the wolfish instinct to slay that springs eternal in some human (!) breasts are those brought about through the distress or errors of wild animals. By way of illustration, consider the slaughter of half-starved elk that took place in the edge of Idaho in the winter of 1909 and 1910, when about seven hundred elk [Page 91] that were driven out of the Yellowstone Park at its northwestern corner by the deep snow, fled into Idaho in the hope of finding food. The inhabitants met the starving herds with repeating rifles, and as the unfortunate animals struggled westward through the snow and storm, they were slaughtered without mercy. Bulls and cows, old and young, all of the seven hundred, went down; and Stoney Indians could not have acted any worse than did those "settlers."

The worst displays of the wolf-like urge to kill that exists in some humans are the ones caused by the suffering or mistakes of wild animals. For example, think about the killing of starving elk that happened on the outskirts of Idaho during the winter of 1909 and 1910, when about seven hundred elk [Page 91] were driven out of Yellowstone Park at its northwestern corner by heavy snow and fled into Idaho in search of food. The locals met the starving herds with repeating rifles, and as the poor animals struggled westward through the snow and storm, they were killed without mercy. Bulls and cows, old and young, all seven hundred of them were taken down; and the Stoney Indians could not have acted any worse than those "settlers."

On another occasion, it is recorded that the prong-horned antelope herd of the Mammoth Hot Springs wandered across the line into Gardiner, and quickly met a savage attack of gunners with rifles. A number of those rare and valuable animals were killed, and others fled back into the Park with broken legs dangling in the air.

On another occasion, it was noted that the pronghorn antelope herd from Mammoth Hot Springs crossed into Gardiner and quickly faced a brutal attack from hunters with rifles. Several of these rare and valuable animals were killed, while others ran back into the Park with broken legs hanging in the air.

In the interest of public decency, and for the protection of the reputation of American citizenship, one of two things should be done. The northern boundary of the Park should be extended northward beyond Gardiner, or else the deathtrap should be moved elsewhere. The case of the town of Gardiner is referred to the legislature of Montana for treatment.

In the interest of public decency and to protect the reputation of American citizenship, we should do one of two things. Either extend the northern boundary of the Park northward beyond Gardiner, or move the danger zone elsewhere. The issue regarding the town of Gardiner is sent to the Montana legislature for further action.

Beyond question, the highest sentiments of humanity are those that are stirred by the misfortunes of killable game. During the past thirty years, I have noticed some interesting manifestations of the increased sympathy for wild creatures that steadily is growing in a large section of the public mind. Thirty years ago, the appearance of a deer or moose in the streets of any eastern village nearly always was in itself a signal for a grand chase of the unfortunate creature, and its speedy slaughter. Today, in the eastern states, the general feeling is quite different. The appearance of a deer in the Hudson River itself, or a moose in a Maine village is a signal, not for a wild chase and cruel slaughter, but for a general effort to save the animal from being hurt, or killed. I know this through ocular proof, at least half a dozen lost and bewildered deer having been carefully driven into yards, or barns, and humanely kept and cared for until they could be shipped to us. Several have been caught while swimming in the Hudson, bewildered and panic-stricken. The latest capture occurred in New York City itself.

Without a doubt, the strongest feelings of humanity are those stirred by the misfortunes of game animals. Over the past thirty years, I’ve noticed some interesting signs of the growing sympathy for wild creatures in a large part of the public. Thirty years ago, if a deer or moose showed up in the streets of any eastern town, it typically led to a big chase and the quick killing of the poor animal. Today, in the eastern states, the overall attitude is quite different. If a deer appears in the Hudson River or a moose in a Maine town, it’s not a call for a wild chase and brutal killing, but rather a collective effort to rescue the animal from harm or death. I’ve seen this firsthand; at least six lost and confused deer have been gently guided into yards or barns and cared for until they could be relocated. Several have been caught while swimming in the Hudson, panicked and disoriented. The most recent capture took place right in New York City.

A puma that escaped (about 1902) from the Zoological Park, instead of being shot was captured by sensible people in the hamlet of Bronxdale, alive and unhurt, and safely returned to us.

A puma that escaped (around 1902) from the Zoological Park was captured alive and unharmed by sensible people in the hamlet of Bronxdale instead of being shot, and it was safely returned to us.

In some portions of the east, though not all, the day of the hue and cry over "a wild animal in town" seems to be about over. On Long Island some humane persons found an injured turkey vulture, and took it in and cared for it,—only to be persecuted by ill-advised game wardens, because they had a forbidden wild bird "in their possession!" There are times when it is the highest (moral) duty of a game warden to follow the advice of Private Mulvaney to the "orficer boy," and "Shut yer oye to the rigulations, sorr!"

In some parts of the East, although not everywhere, the days of the panic over "a wild animal in town" seem to be coming to an end. On Long Island, some compassionate people found an injured turkey vulture and took it in to care for it—only to face trouble from misguided game wardens for having a prohibited wild bird "in their possession!" There are moments when it's the highest (moral) duty of a game warden to heed Private Mulvaney's advice to the "officer boy," and "Shut your eye to the regulations, sir!"

Such occurrences as these are becoming more and more common. The desire of "the great silent majority" is to SAVE the wild creatures; and it [Page 92] is in response to that sentiment that thousands of people are today in the field against the Army of Destruction.

Such events are happening more frequently. The desire of "the great silent majority" is to SAVE the wild creatures; and it [Page 92] is in response to that feeling that thousands of people are currently in the field against the Army of Destruction.

It is the duty of every sportsman to assist in promoting the passage of a law like our New York law which empowers the State Game Commission to throw extra protection around any species that has been slaughtered too much by snow or by firearms, by closing the open season as long as may be necessary. Can there be in all America even one thinking, reasoning being who can not see the justice and also the imperative necessity of this measure? It seems impossible.

It’s the responsibility of every athlete to help push for a law like our New York law, which gives the State Game Commission the authority to provide extra protection for any species that has been overhunted, either by snow or by guns, by closing the open season for as long as needed. Is there even one thoughtful, rational person in all of America who can’t recognize the fairness and urgent need for this measure? It seems unlikely.

Give the game the benefit of every doubt! If it becomes too thick, your gun can quickly thin it out; but if it is once exterminated, it will be impossible to bring it back. Be wise; and take thought for the morrow. Remember the heath hen.

Give the game the benefit of every doubt! If it becomes too dense, your gun can easily thin it out; but if it's completely wiped out, it will be impossible to bring it back. Be smart; and think about the future. Remember the heath hen.

Slaughter Of Bluebirds. —In the late winter and early spring of 1896 the wave of bluebirds was caught on its northward migration by a period of unseasonably cold and fearfully tempestuous weather, involving much icy-cold rain and sleet. Now, there is no other climatic condition that is so hard for a wild bird or mammal to withstand as rain at the freezing point, and a mantle of ice or frozen snow over all supplies of food.

Bluebird Massacre. —In the late winter and early spring of 1896, a group of bluebirds was caught during their northward migration by a stretch of unusually cold and terrifyingly stormy weather, which involved a lot of icy rain and sleet. There’s no other weather condition that is as tough for a wild bird or mammal to endure as rain at freezing temperatures, combined with a layer of ice or frozen snow covering all available food sources.

The bluebirds perished by thousands. The loss occurred practically all along their east-and-west line of migration, from Arkansas to the Atlantic Coast. In places the species seemed almost exterminated; and it was several years ere it recovered to a point even faintly approximating its original population. I am quite certain that the species never has recovered more than 50 per cent of the number that existed previous to the calamity.

The bluebirds died by the thousands. The loss happened almost everywhere along their migration route from Arkansas to the Atlantic Coast. In some areas, the species seemed nearly wiped out; and it took several years for it to bounce back to even a fraction of its original population. I'm pretty sure that the species has never recovered more than 50 percent of the numbers it had before the disaster.

Duck Cholera In The Bronx River. —In 1911, some unknown but new and particularly deadly element, probably introduced in sewage, contaminated the waters of Bronx River where it flows through New York City, with results very fatal in the Zoological Park. The large flock of mallard ducks, Canada geese, and snow geese on Lake Agassiz was completely wiped out. In all about 125 waterfowl died in rapid succession, from causes commonly classed under the popular name of "duck cholera." The disease was carried to other bodies of water in the Park that were fed from other sources, but made no headway elsewhere than on lakes fed by the polluted Bronx River.

Duck Cholera in the Bronx River. —In 1911, some unknown but newly introduced and particularly deadly element, likely coming from sewage, contaminated the waters of the Bronx River as it passes through New York City, resulting in very high fatalities at the Zoological Park. The large group of mallard ducks, Canada geese, and snow geese on Lake Agassiz was completely decimated. In total, about 125 waterfowl died in quick succession, due to causes commonly referred to as "duck cholera." The disease spread to other bodies of water in the Park that were fed from different sources, but it didn't take hold anywhere else except in the lakes fed by the polluted Bronx River.

Fortunately the work of the Bronx River Parkway Commission soon will terminate the present very unsanitary condition of that stream.

Fortunately, the Bronx River Parkway Commission will soon put an end to the current very unsanitary condition of that stream.

Wild Ducks In Distress. —In the winter of 1911-12, many flocks of wild ducks decided to winter in the North. Many persons believe that this was largely due to the prevention of late winter and spring shooting; which seems reasonable. Unfortunately the winter referred to proved exceptionally severe and formed vast sheets of thick ice over the feeding-grounds where the ducks had expected to obtain their food. On Cayuga, Seneca and other lakes in central New York, and on the island of Martha's Vineyard, the flocks of ducks suffered very severely, and many [Page 93] perished of hunger and cold. But for the laws prohibiting late winter shooting undoubtedly all of them would have been shot and eaten, regardless of their distress.

Wild Ducks in Trouble. —In the winter of 1911-12, many flocks of wild ducks chose to spend the winter in the North. Many people believe this was mainly because late winter and spring hunting was restricted, which makes sense. Unfortunately, that winter turned out to be extremely harsh, creating large areas of thick ice over the feeding grounds where the ducks expected to find food. On Cayuga, Seneca, and other lakes in central New York, as well as on Martha's Vineyard, the flocks of ducks suffered greatly, and many [Page 93] died from hunger and cold. Without the laws banning late winter hunting, it's certain that all of them would have been shot and eaten, no matter how much they were suffering.

Game wardens and humane citizens made numerous efforts to feed the starving flocks, and many ducks were saved in that way. An illustrated article on the distressed ducks of Keuka Lake, by C. William Beebe and Verdi Burtch, appeared in the Zoological Society Bulletin for May, 1912. Fortunately there is every reason to believe that such occurrences will be rare.

Game wardens and caring citizens worked hard to feed the starving ducks, and many were saved because of their efforts. An illustrated article about the troubled ducks of Keuka Lake, written by C. William Beebe and Verdi Burtch, was published in the Zoological Society Bulletin for May 1912. Thankfully, we have every reason to believe that events like this will be uncommon.

Wild Swans Swept Over Niagara Falls. —During the past ten years, several winter tragedies to birds have occurred on a large scale at Niagara Falls. Whole flocks of whistling swans of from 20 up to 70 individuals alighting in the Niagara River above the rapids have permitted themselves to float down into the rapids, and be swept over the Falls, en masse. On each occasion, the great majority of the birds were drowned, or killed on the rocks. Of the very few that survived, few if any were able to rise and fly out of the gorge below the Falls to safety. It is my impression that about 200 swans recently have perished in this strange way.

Wild swans flew over Niagara Falls. —In the last ten years, several bird tragedies have happened on a large scale at Niagara Falls during the winter. Entire flocks of whistling swans, ranging from 20 to 70 individuals, have landed in the Niagara River above the rapids and allowed themselves to drift down into the rapids, getting swept over the Falls in groups. Each time, the vast majority of the birds drowned or were killed on the rocks. Of the very few that made it, hardly any were able to rise and fly out of the gorge below the Falls to safety. I believe that about 200 swans have recently died in this unusual way.


[Page 94]
CHAPTER XI
SLAUGHTER OF SONG-BIRDS BY ITALIANS

In these days of wild-life slaughter, we hear much of death and destruction. Before our eyes there continually arise photographs of hanging masses of waterfowl, grouse, pheasants, deer and fish, usually supported in true heraldic fashion by the men who slew them and the implements of slaughter. The world has become somewhat hardened to these things, because the victims are classed as game; and in the destruction of game, one game-bag more or less "Will not count in the news of the battle."

In today's world of wildlife killing, we hear a lot about death and destruction. We constantly see photos of piles of waterfowl, grouse, pheasants, deer, and fish, often posed proudly by the hunters and their weapons. People have become somewhat desensitized to this because the victims are considered game; and when it comes to killing game, one more game bag "won't make a difference in the news of the battle."

The slaughter of song, insectivorous and all other birds by Italians and other aliens from southern Europe has become a scourge to the bird life of this country. The devilish work of the negroes and poor whites of the South will be considered in the next chapter. In Italy, linnets and sparrows are "game"; and so is everything else that wears feathers! Italy is a continuous slaughtering-ground for the migratory birds of Europe, and as such it is an international nuisance and a pest. The way passerine birds are killed and eaten in that country is a disgrace to the government of Italy, and a standing reproach to the throne. Even kings and parliaments have no right in moral or international law to permit year after year the wholesale slaughter of birds of passage of species that no civilized man has a right to kill.

The killing of songbirds, insect-eating birds, and all other types of birds by Italians and other immigrants from southern Europe has become a huge problem for the bird population in this country. The harmful actions of the Black and poor white communities in the South will be discussed in the next chapter. In Italy, linnets and sparrows are considered "game," and so is everything else with feathers! Italy serves as a constant killing ground for migratory birds from Europe, making it an international nuisance. The way passerine birds are hunted and consumed in that country reflects poorly on the Italian government and is a disgrace to its monarchy. Even kings and parliaments have no moral or international legal authority to allow the annual mass killing of migratory birds, particularly species that no civilized person should be allowed to kill.

There are some tales of slaughter from which every properly-balanced Christian mind is bound to recoil with horror. One such tale has recently been given to us in the pages of the Avicultural Magazine, of London, for January, 1912, by Mr. Hubert D. Astley, F.Z.S., whose word no man will dispute. In condensing it, let us call it

There are some stories of violence that any well-balanced Christian mind is sure to find horrifying. One such story was recently shared in the January 1912 issue of the Avicultural Magazine from London, by Mr. Hubert D. Astley, F.Z.S., whose credibility is unquestionable. To summarize it, let’s call it

The Italian Slaughter Of The Innocents

This story does not concern game birds of any kind. Quite the contrary. That it should be published in America, a land now rapidly filling up with Italians, is a painful necessity in order that the people of America may be enabled accurately to measure the fatherland traditions and the fixed mental attitude of Italians generally toward our song birds. I shall now hold a mirror up to Italian nature. If the image is either hideous or grotesque, the fault will not be mine. I specially commend the picture to the notice of American game wardens and judges on the bench.

This story isn't about any type of game birds. On the contrary. The fact that it should be published in America, a country that is quickly becoming home to many Italians, is a painful necessity so that Americans can accurately understand the traditions from their homeland and the general mindset of Italians towards our songbirds. Now, I will reflect the nature of Italians. If the reflection turns out to be ugly or bizarre, that’s not my fault. I particularly urge American game wardens and judges to pay attention to this depiction.

The American reader must be reminded that the Italian peninsula reaches out a long arm of land into the Mediterranean Sea for several hundred miles toward the sunny Barbary coast of North Africa. This great southward highway has been chosen by the birds of central Europe as their favorite migration route. Especially is this true of the small song-birds with weak wings and a minimum of power for long-sustained flight. Naturally, they follow the peninsula down to the Italian Land's End before they launch forth to dare the passage of the Mediterranean.

The American reader should remember that the Italian peninsula stretches out a long way into the Mediterranean Sea for several hundred miles toward the sunny Barbary coast of North Africa. This major southward route has been picked by the birds of central Europe as their preferred migration path. This is particularly true for the small songbirds with weak wings and limited power for long flights. Naturally, they follow the peninsula down to the Italian Land's End before they set out to brave the crossing of the Mediterranean.

AN ITALIAN ROCCOLO, ON LAKE COMO

AN ITALIAN ROCCOLO, ON LAKE COMO

A Death-Trap for Song-Birds. From the Avicultural Magazine

A Death-Trap for Songbirds. From the Avicultural Magazine

Italy is the narrow end of a great continental funnel, into the wide northern end of which Germany, Austria, France and Switzerland annually pour their volume of migratory bird life. And what is the result? For answer let us take the testimony of two reliable witnesses, and file it for use on the day when Tony Macchewin, gun in hand and pockets bulging with cartridges, goes afield in our country and opens fire on our birds.

Italy is the narrow end of a great continental funnel, where Germany, Austria, France, and Switzerland send their migrating birds every year. And what’s the outcome? To answer that, let’s gather the testimony of two trustworthy witnesses and keep it for when Tony Macchewin, with a gun in hand and pockets full of cartridges, goes out into the countryside and starts shooting at our birds.

The linnet is one of the sweet singers of Europe. It is a small, delicately formed, weak-winged little bird, about the size of our phoebe-bird. It weighs only a trifle more than a girl's love-letter. Where it breeds and rears its young, in Germany for example, a true sportsman would no more think of shooting a linnet than he would of killing and eating his daughter's dearest canary.

The linnet is one of the lovely songbirds of Europe. It’s a small, delicately built, weak-winged bird, about the size of our phoebe bird. It weighs just a bit more than a girl's love letter. In places like Germany, where it raises its young, a true sportsman would never think of shooting a linnet any more than he would consider killing and eating his daughter’s favorite canary.

To the migrating bird, the approach to northern Italy, either going or returning, is not through a land of plenty. The sheltering forests have mostly been swept away, and safe shelters for small birds are very rare. In the open, there are owls and hawks; and the only refuge from either is the thick-leafed grove, into which linnets and pipits can dive at the approach of danger and quickly hide.

To the migrating bird, reaching northern Italy, whether heading there or coming back, isn't through a land of abundance. Most of the protective forests have been cut down, and safe spots for small birds are hard to find. In the open, there are owls and hawks, and the only place to escape from them is the dense grove, where linnets and pipits can quickly dive in to hide when danger approaches.

A linnet from the North after days of dangerous travel finally reached Lake Como, southward bound. The country was much too open for safety, and its first impulse was to look about for safe shelter. The low bushes that sparsely covered the steep hillsides were too thin for refuge in times of sudden danger.

A linnet from the North, after days of risky travel, finally arrived at Lake Como, heading south. The area was way too open to be safe, and its first instinct was to search for a secure place to hide. The low bushes that barely covered the steep hillsides weren’t thick enough to provide protection in times of sudden danger.

Ah! Upon a hilltop is a little grove of trees, green and inviting. In the grove a bird is calling, calling, insistently. The trees are very small; but they seem to stand thickly together, and their foliage should afford a haven from both hawk and gunner. To it joyously flits the tired linnet. As it perches aloft upon a convenient whip-like wand, it notices for the first time a queer, square brick tower of small dimensions, rising in the center of a court-yard surrounded by trees. The tower is like an old and dingy turret that has been shorn from a castle, and set on the hilltop without apparent reason. It is two stories in height, with one window, dingy and uninviting. A door opens into its base.

Ah! On a hilltop, there's a little grove of trees, green and inviting. In the grove, a bird is calling, calling, insistently. The trees are quite small, but they seem to cluster closely together, and their leaves should provide a refuge from both hawks and hunters. Joyfully, the tired linnet flits in. As it perches on a convenient, whip-like branch, it notices for the first time a strange, square brick tower of modest size, rising in the center of a courtyard surrounded by trees. The tower looks like an old, dingy turret that has been cut from a castle and placed on the hilltop for no clear reason. It stands two stories high, with one grimy, uninviting window. A door opens at its base.

Several birds that seem very near, but are invisible, frequently call and chirp, as if seeking answering calls and companionship. Surely the grove must be a safe place for birds, or they would not be here.

Several birds that seem very close, but are unseen, often call and chirp, as if they are looking for responses and companionship. Surely the grove must be a safe spot for birds, or they wouldn't be here.

Hark! A whirring, whistling sound fills the air, like the air tone of a flying hawk's wings. A hawk! A hawk!

Listen! A whirring, whistling sound fills the air, like the tone of a flying hawk's wings. A hawk! A hawk!

Down plunges the scared linnet, blindly, frantically, into the space sheltered by the grove!

Down plunges the frightened linnet, blindly, frantically, into the space sheltered by the grove!

Horrors! What is this?

OMG! What is this?

Threads! Invisible, interlacing threads; tangled and full of pockets, treacherously spanning the open space. It is a fowler's net! The linnet is entangled. It flutters frantically but helplessly, and hangs there, caught. Its alarm cry is frantically answered by the two strange, invisible bird voices that come from the top of the tower!

Threads! Invisible, interwoven threads; tangled and full of pockets, dangerously stretching across the open space. It's a fowler's net! The linnet is trapped. It flutters wildly but helplessly, stuck there, captured. Its panicked cries are frantically echoed by the two strange, unseen bird voices coming from the top of the tower!

The grove and the tower are A ROCCOLO! A huge, permanent, merciless, deadly trap, for the wholesale capture of songbirds! The tower is the hiding place of the fowler, and the calling birds are decoy birds whose eyes have been totally blinded by red-hot wires in order that they will call more frantically than birds with eyes would do. The whistling wings that seemed a hawk were a sham, made by a racquet thrown through the air by the fowler, through a slot in his tower. He keeps by him many such racquets.

The grove and the tower are A ROCCOLO! A huge, permanent, merciless, deadly trap for the mass capture of songbirds! The tower is where the bird catcher hides, and the calling birds are decoys that have had their eyes completely blinded by red-hot wires so they will call more desperately than birds with sight. The whistling wings that looked like a hawk were a trick, made by a racquet thrown through the air by the bird catcher, through a slot in his tower. He keeps several of these racquets on hand.

The door of the tower opens, and out comes the fowler. He is lowbrowed, swarthy, ill kept, and wears rings in his ears. A soiled hand seizes the struggling linnet, and drags it violently from the threads that entangled it. A sharp-pointed twig is thrust straight through the head of the helpless victim at the eyes, and after one wild, fluttering agony—it is dead.

The tower door swings open, and the birdcatcher steps out. He looks rough, dark-skinned, unkempt, and has earrings in his ears. A dirty hand grabs the wriggling linnet and pulls it hard from the threads that ensnared it. A sharp twig is pushed straight through the head of the defenseless bird at the eyes, and after a moment of frantic struggle—it becomes lifeless.

The fowler sighs contentedly, re-enters his dirty and foul-smelling tower, tosses the feathered atom upon the pile of dead birds that lies upon the dirty floor in a dirty corner,—and is ready for the next one.

The birdcatcher sighs happily, goes back into his grimy and stinky tower, throws the feathered creature onto the heap of dead birds on the filthy floor in a grimy corner—and is set for the next one.

Ask him, as did Mr. Astley, and he will tell you frankly that there are about 150 dead birds in the pile,—starlings, sparrows, linnets, greenfinches, chaffinches, goldfinches, hawfinches, redstarts, blackcaps, robins, song thrushes, blackbirds, blue and coal tits, fieldfares and redwings. He will tell you also, that there are seven other roccolos within sight and twelve within easy walking distance. He will tell you, as he did Mr. Astley, that during that week he had taken about 500 birds, and that that number was a fair average for each of the 12 other roccolos.

Ask him, just like Mr. Astley did, and he'll honestly tell you that there are about 150 dead birds in the pile—starlings, sparrows, linnets, greenfinches, chaffinches, goldfinches, hawfinches, redstarts, blackcaps, robins, song thrushes, blackbirds, blue and coal tits, fieldfares, and redwings. He'll also mention that there are seven other roccolos in sight and twelve within easy walking distance. He'll tell you, just like he told Mr. Astley, that during that week he had caught about 500 birds, and that number is a fair average for each of the 12 other roccolos.

This means the destruction of about 5,000 songbirds per week in that neighborhood alone! Another keeper of a roccolo told Mr. Astley that during the previous autumn he took about 10,000 birds at his small and comparatively insignificant roccolo.

This means the destruction of around 5,000 songbirds each week in that neighborhood alone! Another roccolo keeper told Mr. Astley that the previous autumn he caught about 10,000 birds at his small and relatively minor roccolo.

And above that awful roccolo of slaughtered innocents rose a wooden cross, in memory of Christ, the Merciful, the Compassionate!

And above that terrible place of slaughtered innocents rose a wooden cross, in memory of Christ, the Merciful, the Compassionate!

Around the interior of the entwined sapling tops that formed the fatal bower of death there hung a semicircle of tiny cages containing live decoys,—chaffinches, hawfinches, titmice and several other species. "The older and staider ones call repeatedly," says Mr. Astley, "and the chaffinches break into song. It is the only song to be heard in Italy at the time of the autum migration."

Around the inside of the intertwined sapling tops that made the deadly shelter, there was a semicircle of small cages holding live decoys—chaffinches, hawfinches, titmice, and several other species. "The older and steadier ones call out repeatedly," Mr. Astley says, "and the chaffinches burst into song. It’s the only song you can hear in Italy during the autumn migration."

And the King of Italy, the Queen of Italy, the Parliament of Italy and His Holiness the Pope permit these things, year in and year out. It is now said, however, that through the efforts of a recently organized [Page 98] bird-lovers' society in Italy, the blinding of decoy birds for roccolos is to be stopped.

And the King of Italy, the Queen of Italy, the Parliament of Italy and His Holiness the Pope allow these things to happen every year. However, it is now being reported that thanks to the efforts of a newly formed [Page 98] bird-lovers' society in Italy, the practice of blinding decoy birds for roccolos will come to an end.

In Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, the protection of these birds during their breeding season must be very effective, for otherwise the supply for the Italian slaughter of the Innocents would long ago have fallen to nothing.

In Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, the protection of these birds during their breeding season must be really effective, because otherwise, the supply for the Italian slaughter of the Innocents would have run out a long time ago.

The Germans love birds, and all wild life. I wonder how they like the Italian roccolo. I wonder how France regards it; and whether the nations of Europe north of Italy will endure this situation forever.

The Germans love birds and all wildlife. I wonder how they feel about the Italian roccolo. I wonder how France sees it; and whether the countries of Europe north of Italy will put up with this situation forever.

To the American and English reader, comment on the practices recorded above is quite unnecessary, except the observation that they betoken a callousness of feeling and a depth of cruelty and destructiveness to which, so far as known, no savages ever yet have sunk. As an exhibit of the groveling pusillanimity of the human soul, the roccolo of northern Italy reveals minus qualities which can not be expressed either in words or in figures.

To the American and British reader, commenting on the practices mentioned above is pretty unnecessary, except to point out that they show a shocking lack of empathy and a level of cruelty and destructiveness that, as far as we know, no savages have ever reached. The roccolo of northern Italy, as an example of the pathetic cowardice of the human soul, shows qualities that can't be described or measured in words or numbers.

And what is the final exhibit of the gallant knight of the roccolo, the feudal lord of the modern castle and its retainers?

And what is the final display of the brave knight of the roccolo, the feudal lord of the modern castle and its followers?

The answer is given by Dr. Louis B. Bishop, in an article on "Birds in the Markets of Southern Europe."

The answer is provided by Dr. Louis B. Bishop in an article titled "Birds in the Markets of Southern Europe."

In Venice, which was visited in October and November, during the fall migration, he found on sale in the markets, as food, thousands of songbirds.

In Venice, which he visited in October and November during the fall migration, he found thousands of songbirds for sale in the markets as food.

"Birds were there in profusion, from ducks to kites, in the early morning, hung in great bunches above the stalls, but by 9 A.M. most of them had been sold. Ducks and shorebirds occurred in some numbers, but the vast majority were small sparrows, larks and thrushes. These were there during my visit by the thousands, if not ten thousands. To the market they were brought in large sacks, strung in fours on twigs which had been passed through the eyes and then tied. Most of these small birds had been trapped, and on skinning them I often could find no injury except at their eyes. [C] One of these sacks which I examined on November 3, contained hundreds of birds, largely siskins, skylarks and bramblings. As a rule the small birds that were not sold in the early morning were skinned or picked, and their tiny bodies packed in regular order, breasts up, in shadow tin boxes, and exposed for sale."

"Birds were everywhere, from ducks to kites, in the early morning, hanging in big bunches above the stalls, but by 9 A.M. most of them had been sold. Ducks and shorebirds were there in some numbers, but the vast majority were small sparrows, larks, and thrushes. During my visit, there were thousands of them, if not tens of thousands. They were brought to the market in large sacks, strung in groups of four on twigs that had been shoved through their eyes and then tied. Most of these small birds had been trapped, and when I skinned them, I often found no injuries except around their eyes. [C] One of the sacks I looked at on November 3 contained hundreds of birds, mostly siskins, skylarks, and bramblings. Usually, the small birds that weren’t sold in the early morning were skinned or plucked, and their tiny bodies packed neatly, breasts up, in shadowy tin boxes, and put out for sale."

"During these visits to the Venetian markets, I identified 60 species, and procured specimens of most. As nearly as I can remember, small birds cost from two to five cents apiece. For example I paid $2.15 on Nov. 8, for

"During these visits to the Venetian markets, I identified 60 species and bought specimens of most. As far as I can remember, small birds cost between two and five cents each. For instance, I paid $2.15 on Nov. 8 for"

1 Woodcock, 1 Skylark,
1 Jay, 1 Greenfinch,
2 Starlings, 1 Bullfinch,
2 Spotted Crakes, 1 Redpoll.
1 Song Thrush, 3 Linnets,
1 Gold-Crest, 2 Goldfinches, [Page 99]
1 Long-Tailed Titmouse, 6 Siskins,
1 Great Titmouse, 3 Reed Buntings,
1 Pipit, 3 Bramblings,
1 Redstart, —and 5 Chaffinches.

"On November 10, I paid $3.25 for

"On November 10, I paid $3.25 for"

2 Coots, 1 European Curlew,
1 Water Rail, 2 Kingfishers,
1 Spotted Crake, 2 Greenfinches,
1 Sparrow Hawk, 2 Wrens,
2 Woodcock, 2 Great Titmouse,
1 Common Redshank, 2 Blue Titmouse,
1 Dusky Redshank, 1 Redbreast, and
2 Dunlins."

Of course there were various species of upland game birds, shore-birds and waterfowl,—everything, in fact, that could be found and killed. In addition to the passerine birds listed above. Dr. Bishop noted the following, all in Venice alone:

Of course, there were different kinds of upland game birds, shorebirds, and waterfowl—pretty much everything that could be found and hunted. Besides the songbirds mentioned earlier, Dr. Bishop noted the following, all in Venice alone:

Skylark ("in great numbers"),
Crested Lark, Crossbill,
Calandra, House Sparrow,
Tree Sparrow, Stonechat,
Hawfinch, Coal,
Yellow-Hammer, Goldcrest,
Blackbird, Rock Pipit,
Fieldfare, White Wagtail,
Song Thrush, Redwing.

"In Florence," says Dr. Bishop, "I visited the central market on November 26, 28, 29, 30, December 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, and found birds even more plentiful than in Venice." Besides a variety of game birds, he found quantities of the species mentioned above, seen in Venice, and also the following:

"In Florence," Dr. Bishop says, "I visited the central market on November 26, 28, 29, 30, December 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, and found birds even more abundant than in Venice." In addition to a variety of game birds, he found plenty of the species mentioned earlier, seen in Venice, and also the following:

Green Sandpiper, Brown Creeper,
Dotterel, Nuthatch,
Magpie, Black-Cap Warbler,
Corn Bunting, Black-Headed Warbler,
Migratory Quail, Fantail Warbler,
Green Woodpecker, Missel Thrush,
Spotted Woodpecker, Ring Ouzel,
Wood Lark, Rock Sparrow, and
Gray Wagtail.

"Here, too [at Florence] we saw often, bunches and baskets of small birds, chiefly redbreasts, hawked through the streets.... Every Sunday that we went into the country we met numbers of Italians out shooting, and their bags seemed to consist wholly of small birds.

"Here, too [at Florence] we often saw bunches and baskets of small birds, mainly robins, sold in the streets.... Every Sunday that we went to the countryside, we encountered many Italians out hunting, and their catch seemed to be entirely made up of small birds."

"At Genoa, San Remo, Monte Carlo and Nice, between December 13 and 29, I did not visit the central markets, if such exist, but saw frequently bunches of small birds hanging outside stores.... A gentleman who spent the fall on an automobile trip through the west of FRANCE from Brittany to the Pyrenees, tells me he noticed these bunches of small birds on sale in every town he visited.

"While in Genoa, San Remo, Monte Carlo, and Nice, between December 13 and 29, I didn’t check out the central markets, if they even have any, but I often saw small birds hanging outside shops.... A guy who spent the fall driving around the west of France, from Brittany to the Pyrenees, told me that he noticed these small birds for sale in every town he went to."

"That killing song-birds for food," continues Dr. Bishop, "is not confined to the poor Italians I learned on October 27, when one of the most prominent and wealthy Italian ornithologists—a delightful man—told me he had shot 180 skylarks and pipits the day before, and that his family liked them far better than other game. Our prejudice against selling game does not exist in Europe, and this same ornithologist told me he often shot 200 ducks in a day at his shooting-box, sending to the market what he could not use himself. On November 1, 1910, he shot 82 ducks, and on November 8, 103, chiefly widgeon and teal."

"Dr. Bishop continues, 'Killing songbirds for food isn't just something the poor Italians do.' I learned this on October 27 when one of the most prominent and wealthy Italian ornithologists—a charming guy—told me he shot 180 skylarks and pipits the day before, and that his family preferred them to other game. Our bias against selling game doesn't exist in Europe, and this same ornithologist mentioned he often shot 200 ducks in a single day at his shooting lodge, selling whatever he couldn't use himself. On November 1, 1910, he shot 82 ducks, and on November 8, 103, mostly widgeon and teal."

An "ornithologist" indeed! A "sportsman" also, is he not? He belongs with his brother "ornithologists" of the roccolos, who net their "game" with the aid of blind birds! Brave men, gallant "sportsmen," are these men of Italy,—and western France also if the tale is true!

An "ornithologist," really! A "sportsman" too, right? He’s just like his fellow "ornithologists" who catch their "game" using blind birds! These are brave men, daring "sportsmen," those guys from Italy—and western France too, if the story is accurate!

If the people of Europe can stand the wholesale, systematic slaughter of their song and insectivorous birds, we can! If they are too mean-spirited to rise up, make a row about it, and stop it, then let them pay the price; but, by the Eternal, Antonio shall not come to this country with the song-bird tastes of the roccolo and indulge them here!

If the people of Europe can tolerate the massive, organized killing of their songbirds and insect-eating birds, we can! If they're too stingy to stand up, make a fuss about it, and put a stop to it, then they can deal with the consequences; but, by God, Antonio will not come to this country with the songbird preferences of the roccolo and enjoy them here!

The above facts have been cited, not at all for the benefit of Europe, but for our own good. The American People are now confronted by the Italian and Austrian and Hungarian laborer and saloon-keeper and mechanic, and all Americans should have an exact measure of the sentiments of southern Europe toward our wild life generally, especially the birds that we do not shoot at all, and therefore are easy to kill.

The facts mentioned above are brought up, not for Europe's benefit, but for our own. The American people are now facing Italian, Austrian, and Hungarian workers, bar owners, and mechanics, and all Americans should have a clear understanding of how southern Europe feels about our wild life in general, especially the birds we don’t hunt at all, and therefore are easy to kill.

When a warden or a citizen arrests an alien for killing any of our non-game birds, show the judge these records of how they do things in Italy, and ask for the extreme penalty.

When a warden or a citizen arrests a foreigner for killing any of our non-game birds, present the judge with these records of how it's handled in Italy, and request the maximum penalty.

I have taken pains to publish the above facts from eye-witnesses in order that every game commissioner, game warden and state legislator who reads these pages may know exactly what he is "up against" in the alien population of our country from southern Europe. For unnumbered generations, the people of Italy have been taught to believe that it is perfectly right to shoot and devour every song-bird that flies. The Venetian is no respecter of species; and when an Italian "ornithologist" (!) can go out and murder 180 linnets and pipits in one day for the pot, it is time for Americans to think hard.

I’ve worked hard to share the facts from eyewitnesses so that every game commissioner, game warden, and state legislator reading this will clearly understand what they’re dealing with regarding the immigrant population from southern Europe. For countless generations, people in Italy have been taught that it is perfectly okay to shoot and eat every songbird that flies. The Venetian doesn't discriminate between species; and when an Italian "ornithologist" (!) can go out and kill 180 linnets and pipits in a single day for food, it’s time for Americans to seriously reconsider.

We sincerely hope that it will not require blows and kicks and fines to remove from Antonio's head the idea that America is not Italy, and that the slaughter of song birds "don't go" in this country. I strongly recommend to every state the enactment of a law that will do these things:

We genuinely hope that it won't take physical force, harassment, or fines to change Antonio's perception that America is not Italy, and that killing songbirds is not acceptable here. I highly urge every state to pass a law that will accomplish these goals:

  1. —Prohibit the owning, carrying or use of firearms by aliens, and
  2. —Prohibit the use of firearms in hunting by any naturalized alien from southern Europe until after a 10-years' residence in America.

From reports that have come to me at first hand regarding Italians in the East, Hungarians in Pennsylvania and Austrians in Minnesota, it seems absolutely certain that all members of the lower classes of southern Europe are a dangerous menace to our wild life.

From firsthand reports I've received about Italians in the East, Hungarians in Pennsylvania, and Austrians in Minnesota, it's clear that all members of the lower classes from southern Europe pose a real threat to our wildlife.

On account of the now-accursed land-of-liberty idea, every foreigner who sails past the statue on Bedloe's Island and lands on our liberty-ridden shore, is firmly convinced that now, at last, he can do as he pleases! And as one of his first ways in which to show his newly-acquired personal liberty and independence in the Land of Easy Marks, he buys a gun and goes out to shoot "free game!"

Because of the now-ruined idea of the land of liberty, every foreigner who sails past the statue on Bedloe's Island and lands on our freedom-filled shores is completely convinced that at last he can do whatever he wants! One of the first ways he shows off his new personal freedom and independence in the Land of Easy Marks is by buying a gun and heading out to shoot "free game!"

If we, as a people, are so indolent and so somnolent that Antonio gets away with all our wild birds, then do we deserve to be robbed.

If we, as a society, are so lazy and so sleepy that Antonio can take all our wild birds without consequence, then we deserve to be robbed.

Italians are pouring into America in a steady stream. They are strong, prolific, persistent and of tireless energy. New York City now contains 340,000 of them. They work while the native Americans sleep. Wherever they settle, their tendency is to root out the native American and take his place and his income. Toward wild life the Italian laborer is a human mongoose. Give him power to act, and he will quickly exterminate every wild thing that wears feathers or hair. To our songbirds he is literally a "pestilence that walketh at noonday".

Italians are coming to America in large numbers. They're strong, hardworking, determined, and full of energy. New York City now has 340,000 of them. They work while the locals sleep. Wherever they settle, they tend to push out the local residents and take over their roles and earnings. To wildlife, the Italian laborer acts like a human mongoose. Give him the chance, and he'll swiftly wipe out every wild creature with feathers or fur. To our songbirds, he’s truly a “pestilence that walketh at noonday.”

As we have shown, the Italian is a born pot-hunter, and he has grown up in the fixed belief that killing song-birds for food is right! To him all is game that goes into the bag. The moment he sets foot in the open, he provides himself with a shot-gun, and he looks about for things to kill. It is "a free country;" therefore, he may kill anything he can find, cook it and eat it. If anybody attempts to check him,—sapristi! beware his gun! He cheerfully invades your fields, and even your lawn; and he shoots robins, bluebirds, thrushes, catbirds, grosbeaks, tanagers, orioles, woodpeckers, quail, snipe, ducks, crows, and herons.

As we've shown, the Italian is a natural hunter, and he's grown up believing that killing songbirds for food is perfectly fine! To him, anything that goes into his bag is considered fair game. The moment he steps outside, he grabs a shotgun and starts looking for things to shoot. It's "a free country," so he thinks he can kill anything he finds, cook it, and eat it. If anyone tries to stop him—watch out for his gun! He happily trespasses on your fields and even your lawn; he shoots robins, bluebirds, thrushes, catbirds, grosbeaks, tanagers, orioles, woodpeckers, quail, snipe, ducks, crows, and herons.

Down in Virginia, near Charlottesville, an Italian who was working on a new railroad once killed a turkey buzzard; and he selfishly cooked it and ate it, all alone. A pot-hunting compatriot of his heard of it, and reproached him for having-dined on game in camera. In the quarrel that ensued, one of the "sportsmen" stabbed the other to death.

Down in Virginia, near Charlottesville, an Italian working on a new railroad once killed a turkey vulture; and he selfishly cooked it and ate it all by himself. A fellow hunter heard about it and criticized him for having dined on game in secret. During the argument that followed, one of the "sportsmen" stabbed the other to death.

When the New York Zoological Society began work on its Park in 1899, the northern half of the Borough of the Bronx was a regular daily hunting-ground for the slaughter of song-birds, and all other birds that could be found. Every Sunday it was "bangetty!" "bang!" from Pelham Bay to Van Cortlandt. The police force paid not the slightest attention to these open, flagrant, shameless violations of the city ordinances and the state bird laws. In those days I never but once heard of a policeman on his own initiative arresting a birdshooter, even on Sunday; but whenever meddlesome special wardens from the Zoological Park have pointedly called upon the local police force for help, it has always been given with cheerful alacrity. In the fall of 1912 an appeal to the Police Commissioner resulted in a general order to stop all hunting and shooting in the Borough of the Bronx, and a reform is now on.

When the New York Zoological Society started developing its park in 1899, the northern half of the Bronx was a daily hunting ground for killing songbirds and any other birds that were around. Every Sunday, there were gunshots echoing from Pelham Bay to Van Cortlandt. The police paid no attention to these blatant violations of city rules and state bird laws. Back then, I only heard of a policeman arresting a bird shooter on his own once, not even on a Sunday; but whenever the meddlesome special wardens from the Zoological Park asked the local police for help, it was always given with eager willingness. In the fall of 1912, an appeal to the Police Commissioner led to a citywide order to halt all hunting and shooting in the Bronx, marking the start of reform.

The war on the bird-killers in New York City began in 1900. It seemed that if the Zoological Society did not take up the matter, the slaughter would continue indefinitely. The white man's burden was taken up; and [Page 102] the story of the war is rather illuminating. Mr. G.O. Shields, President of the League of American Sportsmen, quickly became interested in the matter, and entered actively into the campaign. For months unnumbered, he spent every Sunday patroling the woods and thickets of northern New York and Westchester county, usually accompanied by John J. Rose and Rudolph Bell of the Zoological Park force, for whom appointments as deputy game wardens had been secured from the State.

The fight against bird-killers in New York City started in 1900. It looked like if the Zoological Society didn't step in, the killing would go on forever. The white man's burden was taken on; and [Page 102] the story of this battle is quite revealing. Mr. G.O. Shields, the President of the League of American Sportsmen, quickly got involved and actively participated in the campaign. For countless months, he spent every Sunday patrolling the woods and brush of northern New York and Westchester County, usually joined by John J. Rose and Rudolph Bell from the Zoological Park team, who had been appointed as deputy game wardens by the State.

The adventures of that redoubtable trio of man-hunters would make an interesting chapter. They were shot at by poachers, but more frequently they shot at the other fellows. Just why it was that no one was killed, no one seems to know. Many Italians and several Americans were arrested while hunting, haled to court, prosecuted and fined. Finally, a reign of terror set in; and that was the beginning of the end. It became known that those three men could not be stopped by threats, and that they always got their man—unless he got into a human rabbit-warren of the Italian boarding-house species. That was the only escape that was possible.

The adventures of that formidable trio of man-hunters would make for an interesting chapter. They were shot at by poachers, but more often, they shot at the others. No one really knows why no one was killed. Many Italians and several Americans were arrested while hunting, taken to court, prosecuted, and fined. Eventually, a reign of terror set in, marking the beginning of the end. It became clear that those three men could not be deterred by threats and that they always caught their target—unless he slipped into one of those human rabbit-warrens known as Italian boarding houses. That was the only possible escape.

The largest haul of dead birds was 43 robins, orioles, thrushes and woodpeckers, captured along with the five Italians who committed the indiscretion of sitting down in the woods to divide their dead birds. We saved all the birds in alcohol, and showed them in court. The judge fined two of the Italians $50 each, and the other three were sent to the penitentiary for two months each.

The biggest collection of dead birds was 43 robins, orioles, thrushes, and woodpeckers, caught along with the five Italians who made the mistake of sitting in the woods to split up their dead birds. We preserved all the birds in alcohol and presented them in court. The judge fined two of the Italians $50 each, and the other three were sentenced to two months in prison.

Even yet, however, at long intervals an occasional son of sunny Italy tries his luck at Sunday bird shooting; but if anyone yells at him to "Halt!" he throws away his gun and stampedes through the brush like a frightened deer. The birds of upper New York are now fairly secure; but it has taken ten years of fighting to bring it about.

Even so, every now and then, a guy from sunny Italy tries his hand at Sunday bird shooting; but if anyone shouts "Stop!" he drops his gun and bolts through the bushes like a scared deer. The birds in upstate New York are now pretty safe, but it took ten years of effort to get to this point.

Throughout New York State, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and even Minnesota, wherever there are large settlements of Italians and Hungarians, the reports are the same. They swarm through the country every Sunday, and shoot every wild thing they see. Wherever there are large construction works,—railroads, canals or aqueducts,—look for bird slaughter, and you are sure to find it. The exception to this rule, so far as I know, is along the line of the new Catskill aqueduct, coming to New York City. The contractors have elected not to permit bird slaughter, and the rule has been made that any man who goes out hunting will instantly be discharged. That is the best rule that ever was made for the protection of birds and game against gang-working aliens.

Throughout New York State, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and even Minnesota, wherever there are big communities of Italians and Hungarians, the reports are consistent. They flood the countryside every Sunday and shoot any wildlife they see. When there are large construction projects—like railroads, canals, or aqueducts—look out for bird slaughter, and you're bound to find it. The only exception I know of is along the route of the new Catskill aqueduct coming into New York City. The contractors have decided not to allow bird hunting, and they've established a rule that anyone caught hunting will be fired immediately. That's the best rule ever made for protecting birds and wildlife from groups of hunters.

Let every state and province in America look out sharply for the bird-killing foreigner; for sooner or later, he will surely attack your wild life. The Italians are spreading, spreading, spreading. If you are without them to-day, to-morrow they will be around you. Meet them at the threshold with drastic laws, throughly enforced; for no half way measures will answer.

Let every state and province in America be on high alert for the foreigner who kills birds; sooner or later, he will definitely threaten your wildlife. The Italians are expanding, expanding, expanding. If they’re not in your area today, they’ll be nearby tomorrow. Confront them right at the door with strict laws that are fully enforced; no half measures will suffice.

Pennsylvania has had the worst experience of alien slaughterers of any state, thus far. Six of her game wardens have been killed, and eight or ten have been wounded, by shooting! Finally her legislature arose in wrath, and passed a law prohibiting the ownership or possession of guns of any kind by aliens. The law gives the right of domiciliary search, and it surely is enforced. Of course the foreign population "kicked" against the law, but the People's steam roller went over them just the same. In New York, we require from an alien a license costing $20, and it has saved a million (perhaps) of our birds; but the Pennsylvania law is the best. It may be taken as a model for every state and province in America. Its text is as follows:

Pennsylvania has faced the worst incidents of alien violence of any state so far. Six of its game wardens have been killed, and eight to ten have been injured from shootings! Eventually, the legislature responded in anger and passed a law banning aliens from owning or possessing any kind of guns. The law allows for home searches, and it’s definitely enforced. Naturally, the foreign population protested against the law, but the public's determination pushed through regardless. In New York, we require aliens to have a license costing $20, which has likely saved a million of our birds; however, the Pennsylvania law is the most effective. It should be considered a model for every state and province in America. Its text is as follows:

Section I. Be it enacted, &c., That from and after the passage of this act, it shall be unlawful for any unnaturalized foreign-born resident to hunt for or capture or kill, in this Commonwealth, any wild bird or animal, either game or otherwise, of any description, excepting in defense of person or property; and to that end it shall be unlawful for any unnaturalized foreign-born resident, within this Commonwealth, to either own or be possessed of a shotgun or rifle of any make. Each and every person violating any provision of this section shall, upon conviction thereof, be sentenced to pay a penalty of twenty-five dollars for each offense, or undergo imprisonment in the common jail of the county for the period of one day for each dollar of penalty imposed. Provided, That in addition to the before-named penalty, all guns of the before-mentioned kinds found in possession or under control of an unnaturalized foreign-born resident shall, upon conviction of such person, or upon his signing a declaration of guilt as prescribed by this act, be declared forfeited to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and shall be sold by the Board of Game Commissioners as hereinafter directed.

Section I. Be it enacted, etc., that from the date this law is passed, it will be illegal for any foreign-born resident who isn’t naturalized to hunt, capture, or kill any wild bird or animal, whether game or not, within this Commonwealth, except in defense of themselves or their property. To support this, it will also be illegal for any foreign-born resident who isn’t naturalized to own or possess a shotgun or rifle of any kind in this Commonwealth. Anyone who violates any part of this section will, upon conviction, be fined twenty-five dollars for each offense or serve one day in the county jail for each dollar of the fine issued. Additionally, any guns of the types mentioned that are found in the possession or control of a foreign-born resident who isn’t naturalized will, upon that person’s conviction or signing a declaration of guilt as specified by this act, be forfeited to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and will be sold by the Board of Game Commissioners as described later on.

Section 2. For the purpose of this act, any unnaturalized foreign-born person who shall reside or live within the boundaries of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for ten consecutive days shall be considered a resident and shall be liable to the penalties imposed for violation of the provisions of this act.

Section 2. For the purpose of this act, any foreign-born person who has not become a citizen and who lives within the boundaries of Pennsylvania for ten consecutive days will be considered a resident and will be subject to the penalties for violating the provisions of this act.

Section 3. That the possession of a shotgun or rifle at any place outside of a building, within this Commonwealth, by an unnaturalized foreign-born resident, shall be conclusive proof of a violation of the provisions of section one of this act, and shall render any person convicted thereof liable to the penalty as fixed by said section.

Section 3. The possession of a shotgun or rifle in any location outside of a building, within this Commonwealth, by a foreign-born resident who has not been naturalized will be considered clear evidence of a violation of the rules outlined in section one of this act, and anyone convicted of this will face the penalties established by that section.

Section 4. That the presence of a shotgun or rifle in a room or house, or building or tent, or camp of any description, within this Commonwealth, occupied by or controlled by an unnaturalized foreign-born resident shall be prima facie evidence that such gun is owned or controlled by the person occupying or controlling the property in which such gun is found, and shall render such person liable to the penalty imposed by section one of this act.

Section 4. The presence of a shotgun or rifle in any room, house, building, tent, or camp within this Commonwealth, occupied or controlled by a foreign-born resident who is not a naturalized citizen, will serve as clear evidence that the firearm is owned or controlled by the person occupying or managing the property where the firearm is located. This will make that person liable to the penalties outlined in section one of this act.

Other sections provide for the full enforcement of this law.

Other sections ensure the complete enforcement of this law.

It is now high time, and an imperative public necessity, that every state should act in this matter, before its bird life is suddenly attacked, and serious inroads made upon it. Do it NOW! The enemy is headed your way. Don't wait for him to strike the first blow!

It’s about time, and it’s a crucial public necessity, for every state to take action on this issue before its bird population is suddenly threatened and seriously impacted. Do it NOW! The enemy is coming for you. Don’t wait for him to make the first move!

Duty of the Italian Press and Clergy.—Now what is the best remedy for the troubles that will arise for Italians in America because of wrong principles established in Italy? It is not in the law, the police, the court and the punishment. It is in educating the Italian into a knowledge of the duties of the good citizen! The Italian press and clergy can do this; and no one else can do it so easily, so quickly and so well!

Duty of the Italian Press and Clergy.—So, what’s the best solution for the issues Italians in America will face due to the flawed principles that originated in Italy? It’s not found in laws, police, courts, or punishment. It’s in educating Italians about the responsibilities of being a good citizen! The Italian press and clergy can make this happen; and no one else can do it as easily, quickly, and effectively!

Those two powerful forces should enter seriously upon this task. In every other respect, the naturalized Italian tries to become a good [Page 104] citizen, and adjust himself to the laws and the customs of his new country. Why should he not do this in regard to bird life? It is not too much to ask, nor is it too much to exact. Does the Italian workman, or store-keeper who makes his living by honest toil enjoy breaking our bird laws, enjoy irritating and injuring those with whom he has come to live? Does he enjoy being watched, and searched, and chased, and arrested,—all for a few small birds that he does not need for food? He earns good wages; he has plenty of good food; and he must be educated into protecting our birds instead of destroying them. The Italian newspapers and clergy have a serious duty to perform in this matter, and we hope they will diligently discharge it.

Those two powerful forces should seriously take on this task. In every other way, the naturalized Italian tries to become a good [Page 104] citizen and adapt to the laws and customs of his new country. Why shouldn't he do the same when it comes to bird life? It's not too much to ask, nor is it too much to require. Does the Italian worker or storekeeper who earns his living through honest work enjoy breaking our bird laws, enjoy annoying and harming those he has come to live with? Does he enjoy being watched, searched, chased, and arrested—all for a few small birds that he does not need for food? He earns good wages, has plenty of good food, and should be educated to protect our birds instead of destroying them. The Italian newspapers and clergy have a serious responsibility in this matter, and we hope they will take it on diligently.

DEAD SONG-BIRDS

Dead songbirds

These jars contain the dead bodies of 43 valuable insectivorous birds that were taken from two Italians in October, 1905, in the suburbs of New York City, by game wardens of the New York Zoological Society.

These jars hold the bodies of 43 valuable insect-eating birds that were seized from two Italians in October 1905, in the suburbs of New York City, by game wardens from the New York Zoological Society.


[Page 105]
CHAPTER XII
DESTRUCTION OF SONG BIRDS BY SOUTHERN NEGROES AND POOR WHITES

Before going farther, there is one point that I wish to make quite clear.

Before going any further, there’s one point I want to make very clear.

Whenever the people of a particular race make a specialty of some particular type of wrong-doing, anyone who pointedly rebukes the faulty members of that race is immediately accused of "race prejudice." On account of the facts I am now setting forth about the doings of Italian and negro bird-killers, I expect to be accused along that line. If I am, I shall strenuously deny the charge. The facts speak for themselves. Zoologically, however, I am strongly prejudiced against the people of any race, creed, club, state or nation who make a specialty of any particularly offensive type of bird or wild animal slaughter; and I do not care who knows it.

Whenever a group of people from a specific race is known for a certain type of wrongdoing, anyone who directly criticizes the wrongdoers in that group is quickly labeled as having “race prejudice.” Based on the facts I’m about to present regarding the actions of Italian and Black bird-killers, I anticipate being accused of this. If that happens, I’ll firmly deny it. The facts are clear. However, I have a strong bias against any group of people, regardless of race, religion, organization, state, or nation, who specialize in a particularly offensive form of killing birds or wild animals; and I don’t care who knows it.

The time was, and I remember it very well, when even the poorest gunner scorned to kill birds that were not considered "game." In days lang syne, many a zoological collector has been jeered because the specimens he had killed for preservation were not "game."

The time was, and I remember it clearly, when even the poorest shooter looked down on killing birds that weren't seen as "game." In days gone by, many a zoological collector was mocked because the specimens they had killed for preservation weren’t considered "game."

But times have changed. In the wearing of furs, we have bumped down steps both high and steep. In 1880 American women wore sealskin, marten, otter, beaver and mink. To-day nothing that wears hair is too humble to be skinned and worn. To-day "they are wearing" skins of muskrats, foxes, rabbits, skunks, domestic cats, squirrels, and even rats. And see how the taste for game,—of some sections of our population,—also has gone down.

But times have changed. When it comes to wearing furs, we’ve gone from high fashion to casual choices. In 1880, American women wore sealskin, marten, otter, beaver, and mink. Today, nothing that has fur is too ordinary to be skinned and worn. Nowadays, people are wearing skins of muskrats, foxes, rabbits, skunks, domestic cats, squirrels, and even rats. And just look at how the taste for game—among some groups of our population—has also declined.

In the North, the Italians are fighting for the privilege of eating everything that wears feathers; but we allow no birds to be shot for food save game birds and cranes. In the South, the negroes and poor whites are killing song-birds, woodpeckers and doves for food; and in several states some of it is done under the authority of the laws. Look at these awful lists:

In the North, Italians are pushing for the right to eat any bird with feathers; meanwhile, we only allow the hunting of game birds and cranes for food. In the South, Black people and poor white people are hunting songbirds, woodpeckers, and doves for meals; and in some states, this is even happening legally. Check out these terrible lists:


IN THESE STATES, ROBINS ARE LEGALLY SHOT AND EATEN:
Louisiana North Carolina Tennessee Texas
Mississippi South Carolina Maryland Florida
IN THESE STATES, BLACKBIRDS ARE LEGALLY SHOT AND EATEN:
Louisiana Pennsylvania Tennessee
District of Columbia South Carolina
CRANES ARE SHOT AND EATEN IN THESE STATES:
Colorado North Dakota Nevada Oklahoma Nebraska

In Mississippi, the cedar bird is legally shot and eaten!

In Mississippi, the cedar bird can legally be hunted and eaten!

In North Carolina, the meadow lark is shot and eaten.

In North Carolina, people hunt and eat the meadowlark.

IN THE FOLLOWING STATES, DOVES ARE CONSIDERED "GAME," AND ARE SHOT IN AN "OPEN SEASON:"
Alabama Georgia Minnesota Ohio
Arkansas Idaho Mississippi Oregon
California Illinois Missouri Pennsylvania
Connecticut Kentucky Nebraska South Carolina
Delaware Louisiana New Mexico Tennessee
Dist. of Columbia Maryland North Carolina Texas
Utah Virginia

The killing of doves represents a great and widespread decline in the ethics of sportsmanship. In the twenty-six States named, a great many men who call themselves sportsmen indulge in the cheap and ignoble pastime of potting weak and confiding doves. It is on a par with the "sport" of hunting English sparrows in a city street. Of course this is, to a certain extent, a matter of taste; but there is at least one club of sportsmen into which no dove-killer can enter, provided his standard of ethics is known in advance.

The killing of doves shows a significant and widespread decline in sportsmanship ethics. In the twenty-six states mentioned, many men who consider themselves sportsmen engage in the cheap and shameful activity of shooting defenseless doves. It's comparable to the "sport" of hunting English sparrows on a city street. While this is somewhat subjective, there is at least one sportsman's club that won't allow any dove-killer to join if their ethical standards are known beforehand.

With the killing of robins, larks, blackbirds and cedar birds for food, the case is quite different. No white man calling himself a sportsman ever indulges in such low pastimes as the killing of such birds for food. That burden of disgrace rests upon the negroes and poor whites of the South; but at the same time, it is a shame that respectable white men sitting in state legislatures should deliberately enact laws permitting such disgraceful practices, or permit such disgraceful and ungentlemanly laws to remain in force!

With the killing of robins, larks, blackbirds, and cedar waxwings for food, the situation is quite different. No white man who considers himself a sportsman would engage in such low activities as killing those birds for food. That shame falls on the Black people and poor white people in the South; however, it is also disgraceful that respectable white men in state legislatures would intentionally create laws permitting such dishonorable practices or allow such unseemly and ungentlemanly laws to stay in place!

Here is a case by way of illustration, copied very recently from the Atlanta Journal:

Here’s an example for illustration, taken just recently from the Atlanta Journal:

Editor Journal:—I located a robin roost up the Trinity River, six miles from Dallas, and prevailed on six Dallas sportsmen to go with me on a torch-light bird hunt. This style of hunting was, of course, new to the Texans, but they finally consented to go, and I had the pleasure of showing them how it was done.

Editor Journal:—I found a robin roost along the Trinity River, six miles from Dallas, and convinced six Dallas sportsmen to join me for a night bird hunt with flashlights. This method of hunting was, of course, unfamiliar to the Texans, but they eventually agreed to join, and I enjoyed showing them how it was done.

Equipped with torch lights and shot guns, we proceeded. After reaching the hunting grounds the sport began in reality, and continued for two hours and ten minutes, with a total slaughter of 10,157 birds, an average of 1,451 birds killed by each man.

Equipped with flashlights and shotguns, we moved forward. Once we reached the hunting grounds, the real fun began, lasting for two hours and ten minutes, with a total of 10,157 birds taken down, averaging 1,451 birds killed by each person.

But the Texans give me credit for killing at least 2,000 of the entire number. I was called 'the king of bird hunters' by the sportsmen of Dallas, Texas, and have been invited to command-in-chief the next party of hunters which go from Dallas to the Indian Territory in search of large game.—F.L. CROW, Dallas, Texas, former Atlantan.

But the Texans give me credit for killing at least 2,000 of the total. The sportsmen of Dallas, Texas, called me 'the king of bird hunters' and have invited me to lead the next group of hunters going from Dallas to the Indian Territory in search of big game.—F.L. CROW, Dallas, Texas, former Atlantan.

Dallas, Texas, papers and Oklahoma papers, please copy!

Dallas, Texas, newspapers and Oklahoma newspapers, please take note!

THE ROBIN OF THE NORTH

Northeast Robin

Our best-beloved Song Bird, now being legally shot as "game" in the South. In the North there is now only one robin for every ten formerly there.

Our favorite Song Bird is now being legally hunted as "game" in the South. In the North, there's now only one robin for every ten that used to be there.

As a further illustration of the spirit manifested in the South toward robins, I quote the following story from Dr. P.P. Claxton, of the University of Tennessee, as related in Audubon Educational Leaflet No. 46, by Mr. T. Gilbert Pearson:—

As a further illustration of the attitude in the South towards robins, I quote the following story from Dr. P.P. Claxton of the University of Tennessee, as shared in Audubon Educational Leaflet No. 46 by Mr. T. Gilbert Pearson:—

"The roost to which I refer," says Professor Claxton, "was situated in what is locally known as a 'cedar glade,' near Porestville, Bedford Co., Tennessee. This is a great cedar country, and robins used to come in immense numbers during the winter months, to feed on the berries.

"The roost I'm talking about," Professor Claxton says, "was located in a place that people here call a 'cedar glade,' near Porestville, Bedford County, Tennessee. This area has a lot of cedars, and robins used to come in huge numbers during the winter to eat the berries."

"The spot which the roost occupied was not unlike numerous others that might have been selected. The trees grew to a height of from five to thirty feet, and for a mile square were literally loaded at night with robins. Hunting them while they roosted was a favorite sport. A man would climb a cedar tree with a torch, while his companions with poles and clubs would disturb the sleeping birds on the adjacent trees. Blinded by the light, the suddenly awakened birds flew to the torch-bearer; who, as he seized each bird would quickly pull off its head, and drop it into a sack suspended from his shoulders.

The spot where the roost was located was pretty much like many other places that could have been chosen. The trees stood between five to thirty feet tall, and for a mile around, they were literally packed with robins at night. Hunting them while they roosted was a popular activity. One guy would climb a cedar tree with a torch, while his friends with poles and clubs would disturb the sleeping birds in the nearby trees. Blinded by the light, the startled birds would fly toward the person with the torch, who, as he caught each bird would quickly pull off its head, and drop it into a sack hanging from his shoulders.

THE MOCKING-BIRD OF THE SOUTH

The Southern Mockingbird

This sweet singer of the South is NOT being shot in the North for food! No northern lawmaker ever will permit such barbarity.

This sweet singer from the South is NOT being hunted in the North for food! No northern politician would ever allow such barbarism.

"The capture of three of four hundred birds was an ordinary night's work. Men and boys would come in wagons from all the adjoining counties and camp near the roost for the purpose of killing robins. Many times, [Page 108] 100 or more hunters with torches and clubs would be at work in a single night. For three years this tremendous slaughter continued in winter,—and then the survivors deserted the roost."

"The capture of three out of four hundred birds was a typical night's work. Men and boys would arrive in trucks from all the surrounding counties and set up camp near the roost to hunt robins. Many times, [Page 108] 100 or more hunters with flashlights and bats would be active in a single night. For three years this massive slaughter went on during the winter—and then the remaining birds left the roost."

No: these people were not Apache Indians, led by a Geronimo who knew no mercy, no compassion. We imagine that they were mostly poor white trash, of Tennessee. One small hamlet sent to market annually enough dead robins to return $500 at five cents per dozen; which means 120,000 birds!

No: these people were not Apache Indians, led by a Geronimo who showed no mercy, no compassion. We think they were mostly poor white folks from Tennessee. One small town sent to market each year enough dead robins to earn $500 at five cents per dozen; that’s 120,000 birds!

Last winter Mr. Edward A. McIlhenny of Avery Island, La. (south of New Iberia) informed me that every winter, during the two weeks that the holly berries are ripe thousands of robins come to his vicinity to feed upon them. "Then every negro man and boy who can raise a gun is after them. About 10,000 robins are slaughtered each day while they remain. Their dead bodies are sold in New Iberia at 10 cents each." The accompanying illustrations taken by Mr. McIlhenny shows 195 robins on one tree, and explains how such great slaughter is possible.

Last winter, Mr. Edward A. McIlhenny from Avery Island, Louisiana (just south of New Iberia) told me that every winter, during the two weeks when the holly berries are ripe, thousands of robins come to his area to eat them. "Then every man and boy who can handle a gun goes after them. About 10,000 robins are killed each day while they’re around. Their dead bodies are sold in New Iberia for 10 cents each." The pictures taken by Mr. McIlhenny show 195 robins on one tree and explain how such a massive slaughter is possible.

NORTHERN ROBINS READY FOR SOUTHERN SLAUGHTER

NORTHERN ROBINS PREPARE FOR SOUTHERN SLAUGHTER

195 Birds at Avery Island, La. in January 1912, Photographed Daring the Annual Slaughter, by E.A. McIlhenny

195 Birds at Avery Island, La. in January 1912, Photographed During the Annual Slaughter, by E.A. McIlhenny

An officer of the Louisiana Audubon Society states that a conservative [Page 109] estimate of the number of robins annually killed in Louisiana for food purposes when they are usually plentiful, is a quarter of a million!

An officer of the Louisiana Audubon Society says that a conservative [Page 109] estimate of the number of robins killed each year in Louisiana for food, when they are usually abundant, is around a quarter of a million!

The food of the robin is as follows:

The robin's food is as follows:

Insects, 40 per cent; wild fruit, 43 per cent; cultivated fruit, 8 per cent, miscellaneous vegetable food, 5 per cent.

Insects, 40%; wild fruit, 43%; cultivated fruit, 8%; miscellaneous vegetable food, 5%.

Special Work Of The Southern Negroes. —In 1912 a female colored servant who recently had arrived from country life in Virginia chanced to remark to me at our country home in the middle of August: "I wish I could find some birds' nests!"

Special Contributions of Southern Black People. —In 1912, a Black female servant who had just come from rural Virginia mentioned to me at our country home in mid-August: "I wish I could find some birds' nests!"

"What for?" I asked, rather puzzled.

"What for?" I asked, feeling pretty confused.

"Why, to get the aigs and eat 'em!" she responded with a bright smile and flashing teeth.

"Why, to get the eggs and eat 'em!" she replied with a bright smile and shiny teeth.

"Do you eat the eggs of wild birds?"

"Do you eat the eggs of wild birds?"

"Yes indeed! It's fine to get a pattridge nest! From them we nearly always git a whole dozen of aigs at once,—back where I live, in Virginia."

"Absolutely! It's great to find a partridge nest! We usually get a whole dozen eggs all at once—back where I live, in Virginia."

"Do the colored people of Virginia make a practice of hunting for the eggs of wild birds, and eating them?"

"Do the people of color in Virginia have a habit of hunting wild bird eggs and eating them?"

"Yes, indeed we do. In the spring and summer, when the birds are around, we used to get out every Sunday, and hunt all day. Some days we'd come back with a whole bucket full of aigs; and then we'd set up half the night, cookin' and eatin' 'em. They was awful good!"

"Yes, we definitely did. In the spring and summer, when the birds were around, we used to go out every Sunday and hunt all day. Some days we'd come back with a whole bucket full of eggs; and then we'd stay up half the night cooking and eating them. They were really good!"

Her face fairly beamed at the memory of it.

Her face lit up at the memory of it.

A few days later, this story of the doings of Virginia negroes was fully corroborated by a colored man who came from another section of that state. Three months later, after special inquiries made at my request, a gentleman of Richmond obtained further corroboration, from negroes. He was himself much surprised by the state of fact that was revealed to him.

A few days later, this story about the actions of Virginia Black people was fully confirmed by a Black man who came from another part of that state. Three months later, after special inquiries I requested, a man from Richmond got further confirmation from Black individuals. He was quite surprised by the situation that was revealed to him.

In the North, the economic value of our song birds and other destroyers of insects and weed seeds is understood by a majority of the people, and as far as possible those birds are protected from all human enemies. But in the South, a new division of the Army of Destruction has risen into deadly prominence.

In the North, most people recognize the economic importance of our songbirds and other creatures that control insects and weed seeds, and we do our best to protect those birds from all human threats. However, in the South, a new division of the Army of Destruction has come into alarming prominence.

In Recreation Magazine for May, 1909, Mr. Charles Askins published a most startling and illuminating article, entitled "The South's Problem in Game Protection." It brought together in concrete form and with eye-witness reliability the impressions that for months previous had been gaining ground in the North. In order to give the testimony of a man who has seen what he describes, I shall now give numerous quotations from Mr. Askins' article, which certainly bears the stamp of truthfulness, without any "race prejudice" whatever. It is a calm, judicial, unemotional analysis of a very bad situation: and I particularly commend it alike to the farmers of the North and all the true sportsmen of the South.

In Recreation Magazine for May 1909, Mr. Charles Askins published a surprising and insightful article titled "The South's Problem in Game Protection." It presented clear evidence and firsthand accounts of the concerns that had been escalating in the North for months. To provide the testimony of someone who has experienced what he describes, I will now share several quotes from Mr. Askins' article, which undoubtedly reflects honesty and has no "racial bias" whatsoever. It offers a calm, objective, and unemotional analysis of a very serious issue, and I particularly recommend it to the farmers of the North and all true sports enthusiasts in the South.

In his opening paragraphs Mr. Askins describes game and hunting conditions in the South as they were down to twenty years ago, when the negroes were too poor to own guns, and shooting was not for them.

In his opening paragraphs, Mr. Askins describes game and hunting conditions in the South as they were up until twenty years ago, when Black people were too poor to own guns, and shooting was not something they participated in.


SPECIAL WORK OF THE SOUTHERN NEGROES.

SPECIAL WORK OF THE SOUTHERN NEGROES.

It is all different now, says Mr. Askins, and the old days will only come back with the water that has gone down the stream. The master is with his fathers or he is whiling away his last days on the courthouse steps of the town. Perhaps a chimney or two remain of what was once the "big house" on the hill; possibly it is still standing, but as forlorn and lifeless as a dead tree. The muscadine grapes still grow in the swale and the persimmons in the pasture field, but neither 'possum nor 'coon is left to eat them. The last deer vanished years ago, the rabbits died in their baby coats and the quail were killed in June. Old "Uncle Ike" has gone across the "Great River" with his master, and his grandson glances at you askance, nods sullenly, whistles to his half breed bird dog, shoulders his three dollar gun and leaves you. He is typical of the change and has caused it, this grandson of dear old Uncle Ike.

It's all different now, Mr. Askins says, and the old days will only return with the water that has flowed down the stream. The master is with his ancestors, or he’s spending his last days on the courthouse steps of the town. Maybe a chimney or two is all that’s left of what used to be the "big house" on the hill; it might still be standing, but just as empty and lifeless as a dead tree. The muscadine grapes continue to grow in the low area, and the persimmons are still in the pasture, but there’s no 'possum or 'coon left to eat them. The last deer disappeared years ago, the rabbits died in their baby fur, and the quail were hunted down in June. Old "Uncle Ike" has crossed the "Great River" with his master, and his grandson looks at you sideways, nods sullenly, whistles for his mixed-breed bird dog, shoulders his three-dollar gun, and walks away. He represents the change and has brought it about, this grandson of dear old Uncle Ike.

In the same way the white man is telling the black to abide upon the plantation raising cotton and corn, and further than this nothing will be required of him. He can cheat a white man or a black, steal in a petty way anything that comes handy, live in marriage or out of it to please himself, kill another negro if he likes, and lastly shoot every wild thing that can be eaten, if only he raises the cotton and the corn. But the white sportsmen of the South have never willingly granted the shooting privilege in its entirety, and hence this story. They have told him to trap the rabbits, pot the robins, slaughter the doves, kill the song birds, but to spare the white sportsman's game, the aristocratic little bobwhite quail.

In the same way, the white man tells the black man to stay on the plantation and raise cotton and corn, and beyond that, nothing more will be expected of him. He can trick both white and black people, steal small things whenever he can, live in or out of marriage as he likes, kill another black man if he wants, and finally shoot any wild animal that can be eaten, as long as he grows the cotton and corn. However, the white sportsmen of the South have never fully allowed him to hunt as he pleases, and that's why this story exists. They've instructed him to trap rabbits, catch robins, kill doves, and shoot songbirds, but to protect the white sportsman's game, the fancy little bobwhite quail.

In the beginning not so much damage to southern game interests could be accomplished by our colored man and brother, however decided his inclinations. He had no money, no ammunition and no gun. His weapons were an ax, a club, a trap, and a hound dog; possibly he might own an old war musket bored out for shot. Such an outfit was not adapted to quail shooting and especially to wing shooting, with which knowledge Dixie's sportsmen were content. Let the negro ramble about with his hound dog and his war musket; he couldn't possibly kill the quail. And so Uncle Ike's grandson loafed and pottered about in the fields with his ax and his hound dogs, not doing so much harm to the quail but acquiring knowledge of the habits of the birds and skill as a still-hunting pot-hunter that would serve him well later on. The negro belongs to a primitive race of people and all such races have keener eyes than white men whose fathers have pored over lines of black and white. He learned to see the rabbit in its form, the squirrels in the leafy trees, and the quails huddled in the grass. The least shade of gray in the shadow of the creek bank he distinguished at once as a rabbit, a glinting flash from a tree top he knew instantly as being caused by the slight movement of a hidden squirrel, and the quiver of a single stem of sedge grass told him of a bevy of birds hiding in the depths. The pot-hunting negro has all the skill of the Indian, has more industry in his loafing, and kills without pity and without restraint. This grandson of Uncle Ike was growing sulky, too, with the knowledge that the white man was bribing him with half a loaf to raise cotton and corn when he might as well exact it all. And this he shortly did, as we shall see.

In the beginning, our colored man and brother didn't do much damage to southern game interests, no matter how strong his inclinations were. He had no money, no ammunition, and no gun. His tools were an ax, a club, a trap, and a hound dog; he might have had an old war musket modified for shot. This set-up wasn't suitable for quail shooting, especially the kind of wing shooting that Dixie’s sportsmen preferred. Let him wander around with his hound dog and his war musket; he couldn't possibly kill the quail. So, Uncle Ike's grandson spent his time lounging and messing around in the fields with his ax and hound dogs, not doing much harm to the quail but learning about the birds' habits and gaining skills as a still-hunting pot-hunter that would benefit him later. The black man belongs to a primitive race, and all such races tend to have sharper eyes than white men, whose ancestors studied lines of text. He learned to spot the rabbit in its form, the squirrels in the leafy trees, and the quail hiding in the grass. He could immediately recognize the slightest gray shade in the shadow of the creek bank as a rabbit, a glint from a tree top as the movement of a hidden squirrel, and the quiver of a single stem of sedge grass signaled a group of birds hiding nearby. The pot-hunting black man had all the skill of an Indian, showed more diligence in his idleness, and killed without mercy or hesitation. This grandson of Uncle Ike was also growing resentful, knowing the white man was cheating him with half a deal to grow cotton and corn when he could easily demand the full payout. And soon, he did, as we will see.

The time came when cotton went up to sixteen cents a pound and single breech-loading guns went down to five dollars apiece. The negro had money now, and the merchants—these men who had said let the nigger alone so long as he raises cotton and corn—sold him the guns, a gun for every black idler, man and boy, in all the South. Then shortly a wail went up from the sportsmen, "The niggers are killing our quail." They not only were killing them, but most of the birds were already dead. On the grounds of the Southern Field Club where sixty bevies were raised by the dogs in one day, within two years but three bevies could be found in a day by the hardest kind of hunting; and this story was repeated all over the South. Now the negro began to raise bird dogs in place of hounds, and he carried his new gun to church if services happened to be held on a week day. Finally the negro had grown up and had compassed his ambition: he could shoot partridges flying just the same as a white man, was a white man except for a trifling difference in color; and he could kill more birds, too, three times as many. It was merely a change from the old order to the new in which a dark-skinned "sportsman" had taken the place in plantation life of the dear old "Colonel" of loved memory. The negro had exacted his price for raising cotton and corn.

The time came when cotton rose to sixteen cents a pound and single breech-loading guns dropped to five dollars each. Black individuals had money now, and the merchants—those who had previously said to leave the Black community alone as long as they produced cotton and corn—sold them the guns, one for every Black idler, man and boy, in the entire South. Soon, a complaint arose from the hunters, "The Black people are killing our quail." They not only were killing them, but most of the birds were already dead. At the Southern Field Club, where dogs raised sixty coveys in one day, in just two years only three coveys could be found in a day of intense hunting; and this trend was repeated all over the South. Now, Black individuals began raising bird dogs instead of hounds, and they took their new guns to church if services happened to be held on a weekday. Eventually, Black men grew up and achieved their ambitions: they could shoot partridges on the fly just like white men, were almost indistinguishable from white men except for a slight difference in color; and they could kill more birds, three times as many as before. It was simply a shift from the old order to the new where a dark-skinned "sportsman" took the place of the beloved old "Colonel" in plantation life. The Black community had demanded their due for producing cotton and corn.

Reproduced from Recreation Magazine. By permission of the Outdoor World.

Reproduced from Recreation Magazine. Used with permission from the Outdoor World.

THE SOUTHERN-NEGRO METHOD OF COMBING OUT THE WILD LIFE

THE SOUTHERN BLACK METHOD OF COMBING OUT THE WILD LIFE

"Our colored sportsman is gregarious at all times, but especially so in the matter of recreation. He may slouch about alone, and pot a bevy or two of quail when in actual need of something to eat, or when he has a sale for the birds, but when it comes to shooting for fun he wants to be with the 'gang'."—Charles Askins.

"Our colorful athlete is sociable all the time, but especially when it comes to recreation. He might lounge around by himself and shoot a few quail when he really needs something to eat, or when he has a buyer for the birds, but when it’s about hunting for fun, he prefers being with the 'crew'."—Charles Askins.

Our colored sportsman is gregarious at all times, but especially so in the matter of recreation. He may slouch about alone and pot a bevy or two of quail when in actual need of something to eat, or when he has a sale for the birds, but when it comes to shooting for fun he wants to be with the "gang." I have seen the darkies at Christmas time collect fifty in a drove with every man his dog, and spread out over the fields. Such a glorious time as he has then! A single cottontail will draw a half-dozen shots and perhaps a couple of young bucks will pour loads into a bunny after he is dead out of pure deviltry and high spirits. I once witnessed the accidental killing of a young negro on this kind of a foray. His companions loaded him into a wagon, stuck a cigar in his mouth, and tried to pour whiskey down him every time they took a drink themselves as they rode back to town. This army of black hunters and their dogs cross field after field, combing the country with fine teeth that leave neither wild animal nor bird life behind.

Our colorful sportsman is sociable all the time, but especially when it comes to recreation. He might wander around alone and shoot a couple of quail when he really needs to eat, or if he has a sale lined up for the birds, but when it’s about shooting for fun, he prefers to be with his friends. I've seen the guys at Christmas gather a group of fifty with each man bringing his dog, spreading out across the fields. They have such an amazing time then! A single cottontail can attract half a dozen shots, and a couple of young hunters might even fire off rounds at a bunny after it's already dead just for fun and excitement. I once saw an accidental shooting of a young Black man during one of these outings. His friends loaded him into a wagon, stuck a cigar in his mouth, and tried to pour whiskey down his throat every time they took a drink as they headed back to town. This crowd of Black hunters and their dogs moves across field after field, searching the countryside thoroughly, leaving no wild animals or birds behind.

There comes a time toward the spring of the year after the quail season is over when the average rural darky is "between hay and grass." The merchants on whom he has depended for supplies make it a practice to refuse credit between January first and crop time. The black has spent his cotton money, his sweet potato pile has vanished, the sorghum barrel is empty, he has eaten the last of his winter's pork, and all that remains is a bit of meal and the meat his gun can secure. He is hunting in grim earnest now, using all the cunning and skill acquired by years of practice. He eats woodpeckers, jaybirds, hawks and skunks, drawing the line only at crows and buzzards. At this season of the year I have carried chicken hawks up to the cabins for the sake of watching the delight of the piccaninnies who with glowing eyes would declare, "Them's mos' as good as chicken." What happens to the robins, doves, larks, red birds, mocking birds and all songsters in this hungry season needs hardly to be stated.

There comes a time in early spring after the quail season ends when the average rural person is "stuck in limbo." The merchants they rely on for supplies usually refuse to extend credit from January until planting season. The person has spent their cotton money, their stash of sweet potatoes is gone, the sorghum barrel is empty, they've eaten the last of their winter pork, and all that's left is a little meal and whatever meat they can hunt. They're hunting seriously now, using all the skills they've developed over the years. They eat woodpeckers, jays, hawks, and even skunks, only avoiding crows and vultures. During this time, I’ve brought chicken hawks to the cabins just to see the excitement of the kids, who would eagerly say, "Those are almost as good as chicken." It's easy to imagine what happens to the robins, doves, larks, cardinals, mockingbirds, and all the songbirds during this hungry time.

It is also a time between hay and grass for the rabbits and the quail. The corn fields are bare and the weed seeds are exhausted. A spring cold spell pinches, they lose their vitality, become thin and quite lack their ordinary wariness. Then the figure-four trap springs up in the hedgerow and the sedge while the work of decimation goes more rapidly along. The rabbits can no longer escape the half-starved dogs, the thinning cover fails to hide the quail and the song birds betray themselves by singing of the coming spring.

It’s also that in-between time for the rabbits and quail, caught between hay and grass. The cornfields are empty, and all the weed seeds are used up. A chilly spell in spring takes its toll; they lose their energy, get skinny, and really lose their usual caution. Then the figure-four trap goes off in the hedgerow and the sedge while the killing continues at a faster pace. The rabbits can’t escape the half-starving dogs anymore, the thinning cover doesn’t hide the quail, and the songbirds give themselves away by singing about the approaching spring.

With the growing scarcity of the game now comes the season of sedge and field burning. This is done ostensibly to prepare the land for spring plowing, but really to destroy the last refuge of the quail and rabbits so that they can be bagged with certainty. All the negroes of a neighborhood collect for one of these burnings, all their dogs, and of course all the boys from six years old up. They surround the field and set it on fire in many places, leaving small openings for the game to dash out among the motley assembly. I have seen quail fly out of the burning grass with flaming particles still attached to them. They alight on the burnt ground too bewildered to fly again and the boys and dogs pick them up. Crazed rabbits try the gauntlet amidst the barking curs, shouting negroes and popping guns, but death is sure and quick. The few quail that may escape have no refuge from the hawks and nothing to eat, so every battue of this kind marks the absolute end of the birds in one vicinity; and the next day the darkies repeat the performance elsewhere.

With the increasing scarcity of game comes the season of marsh and field burning. This is supposedly done to prepare the land for spring planting, but really it’s to destroy the last haven for quail and rabbits so that they can be captured more easily. All the workers in the area come together for one of these burnings, bringing their dogs and, of course, all the boys from age six and up. They surround the field and start fires in various spots, leaving small gaps for the game to escape among the chaotic crowd. I’ve seen quail fly out of the burning grass with flaming bits still stuck to them. They land on the charred ground too confused to fly again and the boys and dogs grab them. Frantic rabbits attempt to navigate the chaos among the barking dogs, shouting workers, and gunfire, but their death is swift and certain. The few quail that manage to escape find no protection from the hawks and nothing to eat, so each killing spree signifies the definite end of the birds in that area; and the next day the workers just do it all over again somewhere else.

At this season of the year, the first of May, the blacks are putting in some of their one hundred working days while the single breech-loader rusts in the chimney corner. Surely the few birds that have escaped the foray of the "gang," lived through the hungry days, and survived their burned homes can now call "Bob White" and mate in peace. But school is out and the summer sun is putting new life into [Page 113] the bare feet of the half-grown boys, and the halfbreed bird dogs are busier than they were even in winter. The young rabbits are killed before they get out of the nest, and the quail eggs must be hidden rarely well that escape both the eyes of the boys and the noses of the dogs. After all it is not surprising that but three bevies remained of the sixty. Doubtless they would not, except that nature is very kind to her own in the sunny South.

At this time of year, on the first of May, the locals are putting in some of their one hundred working days while the single-shot shotgun collects dust in the corner. Surely the few birds that survived the "gang's" hunt, made it through the tough days, and endured their burned homes can now call out "Bob White" and mate in peace. But school is out, and the summer sun is energizing the bare feet of the young boys, while the mixed-breed bird dogs are busier than they even were in the winter. The young rabbits are taken out before they can leave the nest, and the quail eggs must be hidden really well to escape both the boys' eyes and the dogs' noses. After all, it's not surprising that only three groups remain out of the sixty. They likely wouldn’t have survived if nature wasn’t so good to her own in the sunny South.

Not every white man in the South is a sportsman or even a shooter; many are purely business men who have said let the "nigger" do as he likes so long as he raises cotton and buys our goods. But Dixie has her full share of true men of the out-of-doors and they have sworn in downright Southern fashion that this thing has got to end. Nevertheless their problem is deep and puzzling. In Alabama they made an effort and a beginning. They asked for a law requiring every man to obtain written permission before entering the lands of another to hunt and shoot; they asked for a resident license law taxing every gun not less than five dollars a year; for a shortened season, a bag limit, and a complete system of State wardens. Unfortunately, a lot of white farmers were in the same range as the blacks, and being hit, too, they raised a great outcry. The result was that the Alabama sportsmen got everything they asked for except the foundation of the structure they were trying to build, the high resident license or gun tax which alone could have shut out three dollar guns and saved the remnant of the game. Under the new law the sale of game was forbidden, neither could it be shipped out of the State alive or dead; the ever popular non-resident license was provided for; the season was shortened and the bag limited; the office of State game warden was created with deputies to be paid from fines; hunting upon the lands of another without written permission became a misdemeanor; and then the whole thing was nullified by reducing the resident license to nothing where a man shot upon his own land, one dollar in his own county, and two dollars outside of it. In its practical workings the new law amounts to this: A few northern gunners have paid the non-resident license fee, and enough resident licenses have been taken out by the city sportsmen to make up the handsome salary of the State warden. The negro still hunts upon his own land or upon the land of the man who wants corn and cotton raised, with perfect indifference to the whole thing. Who was to enforce the law against him? Not the one disgusted deputy with three big counties to patrol who depended for his salary upon the fines collected from the negroes. It would take one man to every three miles square to protect the game in the South.

Not every white man in the South is a sportsman or even a hunter; many are just businessmen who think it's fine for the "nigger" to do as he pleases as long as he grows cotton and buys our stuff. But the South has its fair share of real outdoor enthusiasts, and they’ve vowed, in true Southern style, that this situation needs to change. However, their problem is complicated and confusing. In Alabama, they made a start. They pushed for a law requiring every person to get written permission before entering someone else’s land to hunt and shoot; they proposed a resident license law that would charge every gun owner at least five dollars a year; they wanted a shorter hunting season, a bag limit, and a comprehensive system of State wardens. Unfortunately, many white farmers were in the same situation as the blacks, and since they were affected too, they raised a huge outcry. Consequently, the Alabama sportsmen got everything they requested except for the core element of what they were trying to create, the hefty resident license or gun tax that could have eliminated cheap three-dollar guns and preserved the remaining game. Under the new law, selling game was banned; it could neither be shipped out of state alive nor dead; a popular non-resident license was introduced; the season was shortened, and the bag was limited; the position of State game warden was established with deputies to be funded by fines; hunting on another person's land without written permission became a misdemeanor; and then everything was undermined by reducing the resident license to nothing if a person shot on their own land, one dollar in their own county, and two dollars outside of it. In practical terms, the new law means this: A few northern hunters have paid for the non-resident license fee, and enough city sportsmen have taken out resident licenses to cover the generous salary of the State warden. The black man continues to hunt on his own land or on the land of the man who wants corn and cotton grown, completely indifferent to the whole situation. Who was going to enforce the law against him? Not the frustrated deputy with three large counties to patrol who relied on collecting fines from the black population for his pay. It would take one person for every three square miles to properly protect the game in the South.

The one effective way of dealing with the situation in Alabama was to have legislated three dollar guns out of existence with a five dollar tax, adding to this nearly a like amount on dogs. Hardly a sportsman in the South will disagree with this conclusion. But sportsmen never had a majority vote either in the South or in the North, and the South's grave problem is yet unsolved.

The only effective way to handle the situation in Alabama was to legislate three-dollar guns out of existence with a five-dollar tax, along with an additional similar amount on dogs. Hardly any sportsman in the South would disagree with this conclusion. However, sportsmen never had a majority vote in either the South or the North, and the South's serious problem remains unsolved.

I do not favor depriving the black man of his natural human right to hunt and shoot. If he is the owner of land, or if he leases or rents it, or if he does not, he should have exactly the same privilege of hunting that the white man has. That is not the question now, however, but how to restrict him to legal shooting, to make him amenable to the law that governs the white man, to deprive him of the absolute license he now enjoys to kill throughout the year without mercy, without discrimination, without restraint. If only for selfish reasons, we of the North should reach to southern sportsmen a helping hand, for by and by the last of our migratory song birds will go down into Dixie and never return.

I don't support taking away a Black person's natural human right to hunt and shoot. Whether he owns land, rents it, or doesn’t have any, he should have the same hunting privileges as a white man. But that’s not the main issue right now; it’s about how to limit his hunting to what’s legal, ensuring he follows the same laws that white hunters do, and taking away the unrestricted freedom he currently has to kill without limit, mercy, or discrimination throughout the year. Even from a selfish perspective, we in the North should lend a hand to Southern hunters, because soon enough, the last of our migratory songbirds will head to the South and never come back.


Mr. Askins has fairly stated a profoundly disturbing case. The remedy must contain at least three ingredients. The sportsmen of the South must stop the unjustifiable slaughter of their non-migratory game birds. As a matter of comity between states, the gentlemen of the South must pass laws to stop the killing of northern song-birds and all crop-protecting birds, for food. Finally, all men, North and South, East and West, must unite in the work that is necessary to secure the immediate enactment by Congress of a law for the federal protection of all migratory birds.

Mr. Askins has clearly described a deeply troubling situation. The solution needs to include at least three key elements. The hunters in the South must put an end to the unnecessary killing of their non-migratory game birds. As a matter of respect between states, the men in the South should implement laws to prevent the killing of northern songbirds and all birds that protect crops for food. Lastly, everyone—North, South, East, and West—must come together to ensure that Congress promptly passes a law for the federal protection of all migratory birds.


[Page 114]
CHAPTER XIII
EXTERMINATION OF BIRDS FOR WOMEN'S HATS [D]

It is high time for the whole civilized world to know that many of the most beautiful and remarkable birds of the world are now being exterminated to furnish millinery ornaments for women's wear. The mass of new information that we have recently secured on this traffic from the headquarters of the feather trade is appalling. Previously, I had not dreamed that conditions are half as bad as they are.

It’s about time the entire civilized world recognizes that many of the most beautiful and remarkable birds are currently being exterminated to create fashionable accessories for women. The shocking amount of new information we've recently gathered from the feather trade's main offices is horrifying. I never imagined that the situation was anywhere near this bad.

It is entirely fitting that on this subject New York should send a message to London. New York is almost a Spotless Town in plume-free millinery, and London and Paris are the worst places in the world. We have cleaned house. With but extremely slight exceptions, the blood of the slaughtered innocents is no longer upon our skirts, and on the subject of plumage millinery we have a right to be just as Pharisaical as we choose.

It makes perfect sense that New York should send a message to London about this. New York is nearly a pristine city with its feather-free hats, while London and Paris are the worst places for it. We’ve done our part to clean up. With very few exceptions, the blood of the innocent victims is no longer on our hands, and when it comes to feathered hats, we have every right to be as righteous as we want.

Here in New York (and also in New Jersey) no man may sell, own for sale or offer for sale the plumage of any wild American bird other than a game bird. More than that, the plumage of no foreign bird belonging to any bird family represented in the fauna of North America can be sold here! There are only a few kinds of improper "millinery" feathers that it is possible to sell here under the law. Thanks to the long and arduous campaign of the National Association of Audubon Societies, founded and for ten years directed by gallant William Dutcher, you now see on the streets of New York very, very little wild-bird plumage save that from game birds.

Here in New York (and also in New Jersey), no one is allowed to sell, own for sale, or offer for sale the feathers of any wild American bird except for game birds. Additionally, the feathers of any foreign bird from any bird family present in North America's wildlife cannot be sold here! There are only a few types of inappropriate "millinery" feathers that can be sold legally. Thanks to the long and challenging efforts of the National Association of Audubon Societies, started and led for ten years by the brave William Dutcher, you now see very little wild-bird plumage in the streets of New York, except for that from game birds.

It is true that a few servant girls are now wearing the cast-off aigrettes of their mistresses; but they are only as one in a thousand. At Atlantic City there is said to be a fine display of servant-girl and ladies-maid aigrettes. In New York and New Jersey, in Pennsylvania for everything save the sale of heron and egret plumes (a privilege obtained by a bunko game), in Massachusetts, and in many other of our States, the wild-birds'-plumage millinery business is dead. Two years ago, when the New York legislature refused to repeal the Dutcher law, the Millinery Association asserted, and brought a cloud of witnesses to Albany to prove, that the enforcement of the law would throw thousands of operatives out of employment.

It's true that a few maids are now wearing the discarded aigrettes of their bosses; but they're just one in a thousand. At Atlantic City, there's said to be a great display of aigrettes for maidservants and ladies' maids. In New York and New Jersey, in Pennsylvania except for the sale of heron and egret feathers (a privilege obtained through a scam), in Massachusetts, and in many other states, the business of wild bird feather millinery is dead. Two years ago, when the New York legislature turned down the repeal of the Dutcher law, the Millinery Association claimed, and brought many witnesses to Albany to back them up, that enforcing the law would put thousands of workers out of jobs.

BEAUTIFUL AND CURIOUS BIRDS NOW BEING DESTROYED FOR THE FEATHER TRADE—(I)

BEAUTIFUL AND CURIOUS BIRDS NOW BEING DESTROYED FOR THE FEATHER TRADE—(I)

Belted Kingfisher Greater Bird of Paradise
Victoria Crowned Pigeon Common Tern
Superb Calliste Cock of the Rock

The law is in effect; and the aigrette business is dead in this state. Have any operatives starved, or been thrown out of employment? We have heard of none. They are now at work making very pretty hat ornaments of silk and ribbons, and gauze and lace; and "They are wearing them."

The law is in effect, and the aigrette business is gone in this state. Have any workers gone hungry or lost their jobs? We haven't heard of any. They’re now busy creating beautiful hat accessories using silk, ribbons, gauze, and lace; and "they are wearing them."

1600 HUMMINGBIRD SKINS AT 2 CENTS EACH!

1600 HUMMINGBIRD SKINS FOR 2 CENTS EACH!

Part of Lot Purchased by the Zoological Society at the Regular Quarterly London Millinery Feather Sale, August, 1912.

Part of a lot bought by the Zoological Society at the regular quarterly London Millinery Feather Sale in August 1912.

But even while these words are being written, there is one large fly in the ointment. The store-window of E. &. S. Meyers, 688 Broadway, New York, contains about six hundred plumes and skins of birds of paradise for sale for millinery purposes. No wonder the great bird of paradise is now almost extinct! Their sale here is possible because the Dutcher law protects from the feather dealers only the birds that belong to avian families represented in the United States. With fiendish cunning and enterprise, the shameless feather dealers are ferreting out the birds whose skins and plumes may legally be imported into this country [Page 117] and sold; but we will meet that with a law that will protect all foreign birds, so far as we are concerned. Now it is time for the universal enactment of a law which will prohibit the sale and use as ornaments of the plumage, feathers or skins of any wild bird that is not a legitimate game bird.

But even as these words are being written, there’s one big problem. The store window of E. & S. Meyers, 688 Broadway, New York, has about six hundred plumes and skins of birds of paradise for sale for millinery purposes. No wonder the great bird of paradise is almost extinct! Their sale here is possible because the Dutcher law only protects the birds from feather dealers that belong to avian families found in the United States. With a wicked cleverness and determination, the shameless feather dealers are hunting down the birds whose skins and plumes can be legally imported into this country [Page 117] and sold; but we will counter that with a law that will protect all foreign birds, as far as we are concerned. Now is the time for the universal implementation of a law that will ban the sale and use as ornaments of the plumage, feathers, or skins of any wild bird that is not a legitimate game bird.

London is now the head of the giant octopus of the "feather trade" that has reached out its deadly tentacles into the most remote wildernesses of the earth, and steadily is drawing in the "skins" and "plumes" and "quills" of the most beautiful and most interesting unprotected birds of the world. The extent of this cold-blooded industry, supported by vain and hard-hearted women, will presently be shown in detail. Paris is the great manufacturing center of feather trimming and ornaments, and the French people obstinately refuse to protect the birds from extermination, because their slaughter affords employment to a certain numbers of French factory operatives.

London is now the center of the massive "feather trade" that has extended its deadly reach into the most distant wildernesses of the earth, steadily pulling in the "skins," "plumes," and "quills" of the most beautiful and fascinating unprotected birds in the world. The extent of this ruthless industry, backed by vain and heartless women, will soon be detailed. Paris is the major hub for feather trimming and ornaments, and the French people stubbornly refuse to protect the birds from extinction because their slaughter provides jobs for a certain number of French factory workers.

All over the world where they have real estate possessions, the men of England know how to protect game from extermination. The English are good at protecting game—when they decide to set about it.

All around the world where they own property, English men know how to safeguard wildlife from extinction. The English are skilled at protecting wildlife—when they actually choose to do it.

Why should London be the Mecca of the feather-killers of the world?

Why should London be the hotspot for bird hunters worldwide?

It is easily explained:

It's easy to explain:

(1) London has the greatest feather market in the world; (2) the feather industry "wants the money"; and (3) the London feather industry is willing to spend money in fighting to retain its strangle-hold on the unprotected birds of the world.

(1) London has the largest feather market in the world; (2) the feather industry "needs the cash"; and (3) the London feather industry is ready to spend money to maintain its grip on the unprotected birds around the globe.

Let us run through a small portion of the mass of fresh evidence before us. It will be easier for the friends of birds to read these details here than to procure them at first hand, as we have done.

Let’s go over a small part of the new evidence we have. It will be easier for bird lovers to read these details here than to gather them firsthand, like we have.

The first thing that strikes one is the fact that the feather-hunters are scattered all over the world where bird life is plentiful and there are no laws to hinder their work. I commend to every friend of birds this list of the species whose plumage is to-day being bought and sold in large quantities every year in London. To the birds of the world this list is of deadly import, for it spells extermination.

The first thing that stands out is that the feather-hunters are spread all over the world where bird life is abundant and there are no laws to stop them. I recommend this list of bird species to all bird lovers, as their plumage is being bought and sold in large quantities every year in London. This list is critical for the birds of the world, as it signifies extermination.

The reader will notice that it is the way of the millinery octopus to reach out to the uttermost ends of the earth, and take everything that it can use. From the trackless jungles of New Guinea, round the world both ways to the snow-capped peaks of the Andes, no unprotected bird is safe. The humming-birds of Brazil, the egrets of the world at large, the rare birds of paradise, the toucan, the eagle, the condor and the emu, all are being exterminated to swell the annual profits of the millinery trade. The case is far more serious than the world at large knows, or even suspects. But for the profits, the birds would be safe; and no unprotected wild species can long escape the hounds of Commerce.

The reader will notice that the millinery octopus reaches out to the farthest corners of the earth, taking everything it can use. From the uncharted jungles of New Guinea, around the world both ways to the snow-covered peaks of the Andes, no defenseless bird is safe. The hummingbirds of Brazil, the egrets from everywhere, the rare birds of paradise, the toucan, the eagle, the condor, and the emu are all being exterminated to boost the annual profits of the millinery trade. The situation is far more serious than the world at large knows or even suspects. If it weren't for the profits, the birds would be safe; and no unprotected wild species can long escape the hounds of Commerce.

But behold the list of rare, curious and beautiful birds that are today in grave peril:

But check out the list of rare, interesting, and beautiful birds that are currently in serious danger:

BEAUTIFUL AND CURIOUS BIRDS NOW BEING DESTROYED FOR THE FEATHER TRADE—(II)

BEAUTIFUL AND CURIOUS BIRDS NOW BEING DESTROYED FOR THE FEATHER TRADE—(II)

Lyre Bird Resplendent Trogan
White Ibis Silver Pheasant
Golden Eagle Toco Toucan

List Of Birds Now Being Exterminated For The London And Continental Feather Markets:
Species. Locality.
American Egret Venezuela, S. America, Mexico, etc.
Snowy Egret Venezuela, S. America, Mexico, etc.
Scarlet Ibis Tropical South America.
"Green" Ibis Species not recognizable by its trade name.
Herons, generally All unprotected regions.
Marabou Stork Africa.
Pelicans, all species All unprotected regions.
Bustard Southern Asia, Africa.
Greater Bird of Paradise New Guinea; Aru Islands.
Lesser Bird of Paradise New Guinea.
Red Bird of Paradise Islands of Waigiou and Batanta.
Twelve-Wired Bird of Paradise New Guinea, Salwatti.
Black Bird of Paradise Northern New Guinea.
Rifle Bird of Paradise New Guinea generally.
Jobi Bird of Paradise Island of Jobi.
King Bird of Paradise New Guinea.
Magnificent Bird of Paradise New Guinea.
Impeyan Pheasant Nepal and India.
Tragopan Pheasant Nepal and India.
Argus Pheasant Malay Peninsula, Borneo.
Silver Pheasant Burma and China.
Golden Pheasant China.
Jungle Cock East Indies and Burma.
Peacock East Indies and India.
Condor South America.
Vultures, generally Where not protected.
Eagles, generally All unprotected regions.
Hawks, generally All unprotected regions.
Crowned Pigeon, two species New Guinea.
"Choncas" Locality unknown.
Pitta East Indies.
Magpie Europe.
Touracou, or Plantain-Eater Africa.
Velvet Birds Locality uncertain.
"Grives" Locality uncertain.
Mannikin South America.
Green Parrot (now protected) India.
"Dominos" (Sooty Tern) Tropical Coasts and Islands.
Garnet Tanager South America.
Grebe All unprotected regions.
Green Merle Locality uncertain.
"Horphang" Locality uncertain.
Rhea South America. [Page 120]
"Sixplet" Locality uncertain.
Starling Europe.
Tetras Locality not determined.
Emerald-Breasted Hummingbird West Indies, Cent, and S. America.
Blue-Throated Hummingbird West Indies, Cent, and S. America.
Amethyst Hummingbird West Indies, Cent, and S. America.
Resplendent Trogon, several species Central America.
Cock-of-the-Rock South America.
Macaw South America.
Toucan South America.
Emu Australia.
Sun-Bird East Indies.
Owl All unprotected regions.
Kingfisher All unprotected regions.
Jabiru Stork South America.
Albatross All unprotected regions.
Tern, all species All unprotected regions.
Gull, all species All unprotected regions.

In order to throw a spot-light on the most recent transactions in the London wild-birds'-plumage market, and to furnish a clear idea of what is to-day going on in London, Paris, Berlin and Amsterdam, I will set out in some detail the report of an agent whom I engaged to ascertain the London dealings in the plumage of wild birds that were killed especially to furnish that plumage. As one item, let us take the sales in London in February, May and October, 1911, because they bring the subject well down to date. My agent's explanatory note is as follows:

To shine a light on the latest transactions in the London wild bird plumage market and to provide a clear picture of what's happening today in London, Paris, Berlin, and Amsterdam, I will present in detail the report from an agent I hired to investigate the London sales of plumage from wild birds that were specifically killed for this purpose. Let's consider the sales in London during February, May, and October of 1911, as they give us a recent snapshot of the situation. Here’s my agent's explanatory note:

"These three sales represent six months. Very nearly double this quantity is sold by these four firms in a year. We must also take into consideration that all the feathers are not brought to the London market, and that very large shipments are also made direct to the raw-feather dealers and manufacturers of Paris and Berlin, and that Amsterdam also gets large quantities from the West Indies. For your purpose, I report upon three sales, at different periods of the year 1911, and as those sales do not vary much, you will be able to judge the consumption of birds in a year."

"These three sales cover six months. Almost double this amount is sold by these four companies in a year. We also need to keep in mind that not all the feathers are sent to the London market, and that very large shipments are also made directly to raw-feather dealers and manufacturers in Paris and Berlin, and that Amsterdam also receives large quantities from the West Indies. For your needs, I’m reporting on three sales at different times in 1911, and since those sales don’t vary much, you’ll be able to gauge the yearly consumption of birds."

The "aigrettes" of the feather trade come from egrets, and, being very light, it requires the death of several birds to yield one ounce. In many catalogues, the word "albatross" stands for the jabiru, a nearly-exterminated species of giant stork, inhabiting South America. "Rhea" often stands for vulture plumage.

The "aigrettes" in the feather trade come from egrets, and since they are very light, it takes the death of several birds to produce just one ounce. In many catalogs, the term "albatross" refers to the jabiru, which is a nearly extinct species of giant stork found in South America. "Rhea" often represents vulture feathers.

If the feather dealers had deliberately attempted to form an educational list of the most beautiful and the most interesting birds of the world, they could hardly have done better than they have done in the above list. If it were in my power to show the reader a colored plate of each species now being exterminated by the feather trade, he would be startled by the exhibit. That the very choicest birds of the whole avian world should be thus blotted out at the behest of vain and heartless women is a shame, a disgrace and world-wide loss.

If the feather dealers had intentionally tried to create an educational list of the most beautiful and interesting birds in the world, they couldn’t have done a better job than what’s in the list above. If I could show the reader a colored image of each species currently being wiped out by the feather trade, it would be shocking. It’s a shame, a disgrace, and a global loss that the most exquisite birds in the entire avian world are being eliminated at the request of vain and unfeeling women.


LONDON FEATHER SALE OF FEBRUARY, 1911
Sold by Hale & Sons Sold by Dalton & Young
Aigrettes 3,069 ounces Aigrettes 1,606 ounces
Herons 960   " Herons 250   "
Birds of Paradise 1,920 skins Paradise 4,330 bodies
Sold by Figgis & Co. Sold by Lewis & Peat
Aigrettes 421 ounces Aigrettes 1,250 ounces
Herons 103   " Paradise 362 skins
Paradise 414 skins Eagles 384   "
Eagles 2,600   " Trogons 206   "
Condors 1,580   " Hummingbirds 24,800   "
Bustards 2,400   "
LONDON FEATHER SALE OF MAY, 1911
Sold by Hale & Sons Sold by Dalton & Young
Aigrettes 1,390 ounces Aigrettes 2,921 ounces
Herons 178   " Herons 254   "
Paradise 1,686 skins Paradise 5,303 skins
Red Ibis 868   " Golden Pheasants 1,000   "
Junglecocks 1,550   "
Parrots 1,700   "
Herons 500   "
Sold by Figgis & Co. Sold by Lewis & Peat
Aigrettes 201 ounces Aigrettes 590 ounces
Herons 248   " Herons 190   "
Paradise 546 skins Paradise 60 skins
Falcons, Hawks 1,500   " Trogons 348   "
Hummingbirds 6,250   "
LONDON FEATHER SALE OF OCTOBER, 1911
Sold by Hale & Sons Sold by Dalton & Young
Aigrettes 1,020 ounces Aigrettes 5,879 ounces
Paradise 2,209 skins Heron 1,608   "
Hummingbirds 10,040   " Paradise 2,850 skins
Bustard 28,000 quills Condors 1,500   "
Eagles 1,900   "
Sold by Figgis & Co. Sold by Lewis & Peat
Aigrettes 1,501 ounces Aigrettes 1,680 ounces
Herons 140   " Herons 400   "
Paradise 318 skins Birds of Paradise 700 skins

If I am correctly informed, the London feather trade admits that it requires six egrets to yield one "ounce" of aigrette plumes. This being the case, the 21,528 ounces sold as above stand for 129,168 egrets killed for nine months' supply of egret plumes, for London alone.

If I'm correct, the London feather trade acknowledges that it takes six egrets to produce one "ounce" of aigrette plumes. Given that, the 21,528 ounces sold as mentioned represent 129,168 egrets killed for a nine-month supply of egret plumes, just for London.

The total number of bird corpses auctioned during these three sales is as follows:

The total number of bird bodies sold at auction during these three sales is as follows:

Aigrettes, 21,528 ounces = 129,168 Egrets.
Herons, 2,683   " = 13,598 Herons.
20,698 Birds of Paradise.
41,090 Hummingbirds.
9,464 Eagles, Condors, etc.
9,472 Other Birds.
-------
Total number of birds 223,490

It is to be remembered that the sales listed above cover the transactions of four firms only, and do not in any manner take into account the direct importations from Paris, Berlin and Amsterdam of manufacturers and other dealers. The defenders of the feather trade are at great pains to assure the world that in the monthly, bi-monthly and quarterly sales, feathers often appear in the market twice in the same year; and this statement is made for them in order to be absolutely fair. Recent examinations of the plume catalogues for an entire year, marked with the price paid for each item, reveals very few which are blank, indicating no sale! The subtractions of the duplicated items would alter the result only very slightly.

It’s important to remember that the sales mentioned above only account for transactions from four companies and do not include any direct imports from Paris, Berlin, and Amsterdam by manufacturers and other sellers. Supporters of the feather trade go to great lengths to assure everyone that feathers often show up in the market multiple times a year during monthly, bi-monthly, and quarterly sales; this is noted here to be completely fair. Recent reviews of the plume catalogs for an entire year, showing the price paid for each item, reveal very few listings that have no sales at all! Removing the duplicated items would only have a minimal impact on the results.

The full extent of England's annual consumption of the plumage of wild birds slaughtered especially for the trade never has been determined. I doubt whether it is possible to ascertain it. The information that we have is so fragmentary that in all probability it reflects only a small portion of the whole truth, but for all that, it is sufficient to prove the case of the Defenders of the Birds vs. the London Chamber of Commerce.

The total amount of wild bird feathers that England uses each year, sourced from birds killed primarily for this industry, has never been accurately measured. I’m not sure it can be. The data we have is so incomplete that it likely only shows a small part of the bigger picture, but even so, it’s enough to support the argument of the Defenders of the Birds vs. the London Chamber of Commerce.


IMPORTS OF FEATHERS AND DOWN (ORNAMENTAL) FOR THE YEAR 1910
Pounds.            Value.
Venezuela 8,398 $191,058
Brazil 787 5,999
Japan 2,284 3,830
China 6,329 16,308
Tripoli 345 900
Egypt 21,047 89,486
Java, Sumatra, and Borneo 15,703 186,504
Cape of Good Hope 709,406 [E] 9,747,146
British India 18,359 22,137
Hong-Kong 310 3,090
British West Indies 30 97
Other British Colonies 10,438 21,938

The above does not take into account the feathers from game birds received in England from France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Belgium and the Netherlands.

The above doesn't consider the feathers from game birds received in England from France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Belgium, and the Netherlands.

As a final side-light on the quantity of egret and heron plumes offered and sold in London during the twelve months ending in April, 1912, we offer the following exhibit:

As a final note on the number of egret and heron feathers available and sold in London during the twelve months ending in April 1912, we present the following exhibit:


"OSPREY" FEATHERS (EGRET AND HERON PLUMES) SOLD IN LONDON DURING THE YEAR ENDING APRIL. 1912
Offered Sold.
Venezuelan, long and medium 11,617 ounces 7,072 ounces
Venezuelan, mixed Heron 4,043   " 2,539   "
Brazilian 3,335   " 1,810   "
Chinese 641   " 576   "
-------------- --------------
19,636 ounces 11,997 ounces
Birds of Paradise, plumes (2 plumes = 1 bird) 29,385 24,579

BEAUTIFUL AND CURIOUS BIRDS NOW BEING DESTROYED FOR THE FEATHER TRADE—(III)

BEAUTIFUL AND CURIOUS BIRDS NOW BEING WIPED OUT FOR THE FEATHER TRADE—(III)

Griffon Vulture Condor
Herring Gull Emeu
Jabiru Indian Adjutant

Under the head of "Hummingbirds Not Wanted," Mr. Downham is at great pains to convey [F] the distinct impression that to-day hummingbirds are scorned by the feather trade, and the demand for them is dead. I believed him—until my agent turned in the following statement:

Under the section titled "Hummingbirds Not Wanted," Mr. Downham goes to great lengths to make it clear that nowadays, hummingbirds are looked down upon by the feather trade, and there’s no demand for them anymore. I believed him—until my agent submitted the following statement:

Hummingbirds sold by Lewis & Peat, London, February, 1911 24,800
Hummingbirds sold by Lewis & Peat, London, May, 1911 6,250
Hummingbirds sold by Hale & Sons, London, October, 1911 10,040
-------
  Total 41,090

It is useless for anyone to assert that these birds were merely "offered," and not actually sold, as Mr. Downham so laboriously explains is the regular course with hummingbird skins; for that will deceive no intelligent person. The statement published above comes to me direct, from an absolutely competent and reliable source.

It’s pointless for anyone to claim that these birds were just "offered" and not actually sold, as Mr. Downham tries so hard to explain is the usual practice with hummingbird skins; that won’t fool any smart person. The statement above comes directly from a completely trustworthy and reliable source.

Undoubtedly the friends of birds, and likewise their enemies, will be interested in the prices at which the skins of the most beautiful birds of the world are sold in London, prior to their annihilation by the feather industry. I submit the following exhibit, copied from the circular of Messrs. Lewis & Peat. It is at least of academic interest.

Without a doubt, both bird lovers and their adversaries will be curious about the prices of the most beautiful bird skins being sold in London before they are wiped out by the feather industry. I present the following information, taken from the brochure of Messrs. Lewis & Peat. It is at least of academic interest.


PRICES OF RARE AND BEAUTIFUL BIRD SKINS IN LONDON
Condor skins $3.50 to $5.75
Condor wing feathers, each .05
Impeyan Pheasant .66 " 2.50
Argus Pheasant 3.60 " 3.85
Tragopan Pheasant 2.70
Silver Pheasant 3.50
Golden Pheasant .34 " .46
Greater Bird of Paradise:
  Light Plumes: Medium to giants 10.32 " 21.00
Medium to long, worn 7.20 " 13.80
Slight def. and plucked    2.40 " 6.72
  Dark Plumes: Medium to good long 7.20 " 24.60
12-Wired Bird of Paradise 1.44 " 1.80
Rubra Bird of Paradise 2.50
Rifle Bird of Paradise 1.14 " 1.38
King Bird of Paradise 2.40
"Green" Bird of Paradise .38 " .44
East Indian Kingfisher .06 " .07
East Indian Parrots .03
Peacock Necks, gold and blue .24 " .66
Peacock Necks, blue and green .36
Scarlet Ibis .14 " .24
Toucan breasts .22 " .26
Red Tanagers .09
Orange Oriels .05
Indian Crows' breasts .13
Indian Jays .04
Amethyst Hummingbirds .01½
Hummingbird, various 3/16 of .01 " .02
Hummingbird, others 1/32 of .01 " .01
Egret ("Osprey") skins 1.08 " 2.78 [Page 125]
Egret ("Osprey") skins, long 2.40
Vulture feathers, per pound .36 " 4.56
Eagle, wing feathers, bundles of 100 .09
Hawk, wing feathers, bundles of 100 .12
Mandarin Ducks, per skin .15
Pheasant tail feathers, per pound 1.80
Crown Pigeon heads, Victoria 1.68 " 2.50
Crown Pigeon heads, Coronatus .84 " 1.20
Emu skins 4.56 " 4.80
Cassowary plumes, per ounce 3.48
Swan skins .72 " .74
Kingfisher skins .07 " .09
African Golden Cuckoo 1.68

Many thoughts are suggested by these London lists of bird slaughter and loot.

Many ideas come to mind from these London lists of bird killings and theft.

It will be noticed that the breast of the grebe has almost wholly disappeared from the feather market and from women's hats. The reason is that there are no longer enough birds of that group to hold a place in the London market! Few indeed are the Americans who know that from 1900 to 1908 the lake region of southern Oregon was the scene of the slaughter of uncountable thousands of those birds, which continued until the grebes were almost exterminated.

It’s noticeable that the feathers of the grebe have almost completely vanished from the feather market and from women’s hats. The reason is that there aren’t enough of those birds left to maintain a presence in the London market! Very few Americans realize that from 1900 to 1908, the lake region of southern Oregon was the site of the mass killing of countless thousands of these birds, which went on until the grebes were nearly wiped out.

When the wonderful lyre-bird of Australia had been almost exterminated for its tail feathers, its open slaughter was stopped by law, and a heavy fine was imposed on exportation, amounting, I have been told, to $250 for each offense. My latest news of the lyre-bird was of the surreptitious exportation of 200 skins to the London feather market.

When the amazing lyre-bird of Australia was nearly wiped out for its tail feathers, a law was put in place to stop its hunting, and a hefty fine of $250 was imposed for exporting it. I recently heard that 200 skins were secretly shipped to the London feather market.

In India, the smuggling outward of the skins of protected birds is constantly going on. Occasionally an exporter is caught and fined; but that does not stop the traffic.

In India, the illegal smuggling of protected bird skins is ongoing. Sometimes an exporter gets caught and fined, but that doesn't put an end to the trade.

Bird-lovers must now bid farewell forever to all the birds of paradise. Nothing but the legal closing of the world's markets against their plumes and skins can save any of them. They never were numerous; nor does any species range over a wide area. They are strictly insular, and the island homes of some of them are very small. Take the great bird of paradise (Paradisea apoda) as an illustration. On Oct. 2, 1912, at Indianapolis, Indiana, a city near the center of the United States, in three show-windows within 100 feet of the headquarters of the Fourth National Conservation Congress, I counted 11 stuffed heads and 11 complete sets of plumes of this bird, displayed for sale. The prices ranged from $30 to $47.50 each! And while I looked, a large lady approached, pointed her finger at the remains of a greater bird of paradise, and with grim determination, said to her shopping companion: "There! I want one o' them, an' I'm agoin' to have it, too!"

Bird lovers now have to say goodbye forever to all the birds of paradise. The only thing that can protect them is a complete ban on their feathers and skins in markets around the world. They were never abundant, and no species has a wide distribution. They are strictly island-specific, with some of their homes being very small. Take the great bird of paradise (Paradisea apoda) as an example. On October 2, 1912, in Indianapolis, Indiana, a city near the center of the United States, I saw 11 stuffed heads and 11 complete sets of this bird's feathers for sale in three display windows within 100 feet of the Fourth National Conservation Congress headquarters. The prices ranged from $30 to $47.50 each! While I was observing, a large woman approached, pointed at the remains of a greater bird of paradise, and determinedly said to her shopping friend: "There! I want one of those, and I'm going to have it, too!"

Says Mr. James Buckland in "Pros and Cons of the Plumage Bill":

Says Mr. James Buckland in "Pros and Cons of the Plumage Bill":

"Mr. Goodfellow has returned within the last few weeks from a second expedition to new Guinea.... One can now walk, he states, miles and miles through the former haunts of these birds [of paradise] without [Page 126] seeing or hearing even the commonest species. When I reflect on this sacrilege, I am lost in wonder at the apathy of the British public."

"Mr. Goodfellow has recently returned from a second trip to New Guinea. He says that you can now walk for miles through the former areas where these birds of paradise lived without seeing or hearing even the most common species. When I think about this tragedy, I’m amazed by the indifference of the British public."

Mr. Carl Hagenbeck wrote me only three months ago that "the condors of the Andes are all being exterminated for their feathers, and these birds are now very difficult to obtain."

Mr. Carl Hagenbeck wrote to me just three months ago that "the condors of the Andes are all being wiped out for their feathers, and these birds are now really hard to find."

The egret and heron plumes, known under the trade name of "osprey, etc., feathers," form by far the most important item in each feather sale. There are fifteen grades! They are sold by the ounce, and the prices range all the way from twenty-eight cents per ounce for "mixed heron" to two hundred and twenty-five shillings ($45.60) per ounce for the best Brazilian "short selected," on February 7, 1912! Is it any wonder that in Philadelphia the prices of finished aigrettes, ready to be worn, runs from $20 to $125!

The egret and heron feathers, known in the trade as "osprey, etc., feathers," are by far the most significant item in each feather sale. There are fifteen grades! They are sold by the ounce, and the prices range from twenty-eight cents per ounce for "mixed heron" to two hundred and twenty-five shillings ($45.60) per ounce for the best Brazilian "short selected," as of February 7, 1912! Is it any surprise that in Philadelphia, the prices of finished aigrettes, ready to wear, range from $20 to $125!

The plumes that run up into the big figures are the "short selected" coming from the following localities, and quoted at the prices set down here in shillings and pence. Count the shilling at twenty-four cents, United States money.

The plumes that extend into the large figures are the "short selected" coming from the following places, and listed at the prices shown here in shillings and pence. Consider the shilling at twenty-four cents in U.S. currency.

PRICES OF "SHORT SELECTED" EGRET AND HERON PLUMES, IN LONDON ON FEBRUARY 7, 1912
(Lewis & Peat's List)
East Indies per ounce, 117/6 to 207/6 = $49.80 max.
Rangoon " " 150/0 " 192/6 = 46.20 "
China " " 130/0 " 245/0 = 58.80 "
Brazil " " 200/0 " 225/0 = 54.00 "
Venezuela " " 165/0 " 222/6 = 53.40 "

The total offering of these "short selected" plumes in December 1911, was 689 ounces, and in February, 1912, it was 230 ounces.

The total offering of these "short selected" plumes in December 1911 was 689 ounces, and in February 2012, it was 230 ounces.

Now with these enormous prices prevailing, is it any wonder that the egrets and herons are being relentlessly pursued to the uttermost ends of the earth? I think that any man who really knows the habits of egrets and herons, and the total impossibility of any quantity of their shed feathers being picked up in a marketable state, must know in his heart that if the London and continental feather markets keep open a few years longer, every species that furnishes "short selected" plumes will be utterly exterminated from off the face of the earth.

Now that these enormous prices are so high, is it any surprise that egrets and herons are being chased to the furthest corners of the earth? I believe that anyone who truly understands the habits of egrets and herons, and the complete impossibility of collecting any of their shed feathers in a sellable condition, must realize deep down that if the London and European feather markets stay open for a few more years, every species that provides "short selected" plumes will be completely wiped out.

Let the English people make no mistake about this, nor be fooled by any fairy tales of the feather trade about Venezuelan "garceros," and vast quantities of valuable plumes picked off the bushes and out of the mud. Those carefully concocted egret-farm stories make lovely reading, but the reader who examines the evidence will soon decide the extent of their truthfulness. I think that they contain not even ten per cent of truth; and I shall not rest until the stories of Leon Laglaize and Mayeul Grisol have been put to the test in the regions where they originated.

Let the English people not be mistaken or misled by any fairy tales about Venezuelan "garceros" and large amounts of valuable feathers collected from bushes and mud. Those carefully crafted egret-farm stories make for great reading, but anyone who looks into the facts will quickly figure out how much of it is true. I believe that they contain less than ten percent truth, and I won't stop until the claims made by Leon Laglaize and Mayeul Grisol are tested in the areas where they started.

A few plumes may be picked out of the jungle, yes; but as for any commercial quantity, it is at present beyond belief. Besides, we have direct, eye-witness testimony to the contrary.

A few plumes might be found in the jungle, sure; but when it comes to any commercial quantity, that's hard to believe right now. Plus, we have direct, eye-witness accounts that prove otherwise.

It must not be inferred that the friends of birds in England have been idle or silent in the presence of the London feather trade. On the contrary, the Royal Society for the Protection of Wild Birds and Mr. James Buckland have so strongly attacked the feather industry that the London Chamber of Commerce has felt called upon to come to its rescue. Mr. Buckland, on his own individual account, has done yeoman service to the cause, and his devotion to the birds, and his tireless energy, are both almost beyond the reach of praise in words. At the last moment before going to press I learn that the birds'-plumage bill has achieved the triumph of a "first reading" in Parliament, which looks as if success is at last in sight. The powerful pamphlet that he has written, published and circulated at his own expense, entitled "Pros and Cons of the Plumage Bill," is a splendid effort. What a pity it is that more individuals are not similarly inspired to make independent effort in the protection cause! But, strange to say, few indeed are the men who have either the nerve or the ability to "go it alone."

It shouldn’t be assumed that bird advocates in England have been inactive or quiet about the London feather trade. On the contrary, the Royal Society for the Protection of Wild Birds and Mr. James Buckland have vigorously criticized the feather industry to the point where the London Chamber of Commerce has felt it necessary to defend it. Mr. Buckland, on his own initiative, has contributed significantly to the cause, and his dedication to the birds and relentless energy are truly commendable. Just before going to press, I learned that the birds'-plumage bill has successfully achieved a "first reading" in Parliament, suggesting that success may finally be on the horizon. The impactful pamphlet he has written, published, and distributed at his own expense, titled "Pros and Cons of the Plumage Bill," is an outstanding effort. It’s unfortunate that more people aren’t similarly inspired to take independent action for the protection cause! Yet, oddly enough, very few men have the courage or ability to "go it alone."

On the introduction in Parliament of the bill to save the birds from the feather trade, it was opposed (through the efforts of the Chamber of Commerce), on the ground that if any bill against the sale of plumes should pass, and plumes could not be sold, the London business in wild-bird skins and feathers "would immediately be transferred to the continent!"

On the introduction of the bill in Parliament to protect birds from the feather trade, it faced opposition (led by the Chamber of Commerce), claiming that if a bill banning the sale of plumes passed and plumes couldn’t be sold, the London market for wild-bird skins and feathers "would immediately move to the continent!"

In the face of that devastating and altogether horrible prospect, and because the London feather dealers "need the money," the bill was at first defeated—to the great joy of the Chamber of Commerce and Mr. Downham; but the cause of birds will win in the end, because it is Right.

In the face of that devastating and truly terrible prospect, and because the London feather dealers "need the money," the bill was initially defeated—much to the delight of the Chamber of Commerce and Mr. Downham; but the cause of birds will eventually prevail, because it is the right thing to do.

The feather dealers have been shrewdly active in the defense of their trade, and the methods they have employed for influencing public opinion have quite outshone those put forth by their brethren in America. I have before me a copy of a booklet bearing the name of Mr. C.F. Downham as the author, and the London Chamber of Commerce has loaned its good name as publisher. Altogether it is a very shrewd piece of work, even though its arguments in justification of bird slaughter for the feather market are too absurd and weak for serious consideration.

The feather dealers have been cleverly active in protecting their business, and the tactics they’ve used to sway public opinion have far surpassed those used by their counterparts in America. I have a copy of a booklet authored by Mr. C.F. Downham, with the support of the London Chamber of Commerce as the publisher. Overall, it’s a pretty clever piece of work, even though its arguments defending bird killing for the feather market are too ridiculous and weak to be taken seriously.

The chief burden of the defender of bird slaughter for millinery purposes is on account of the destruction of egrets and herons, but particularly the former. To offset as far as possible the absolutely true charge that egrets bear their best plumes in their breeding season, when the helpless young are in the nest and the parent birds must be killed to obtain the plumes, the feather trade has obtained from three Frenchmen—Leon Laglaize, Mayeul Grisol, and F. Geay—a beautiful and plausible story to the effect that in Venezuela the enormous output of egret plumes has been obtained by picking up, off the bushes and out of the water and mud, the shed feathers of those birds! According to the story, Venezuela is full of egret farms, called "garceros,"—where the birds breed and moult under strict supervision, and kindly drop their feathers in such places that it is possible to find them, and to pick [Page 128] them up, in a high state of preservation! And we are asked to believe that it is these very Venezuelan picked-up feathers that command in London the high price of $44 per ounce.

The main argument for those who defend the hunting of birds for the millinery industry focuses on the killing of egrets and herons, especially the egrets. To counter the undeniable fact that egrets have their most beautiful feathers during their breeding season, when their defenseless chicks are in the nest and the parent birds must be killed to collect these feathers, the feather trade has created a convincing tale thanks to three Frenchmen—Leon Laglaize, Mayeul Grisol, and F. Geay. According to their story, the vast supply of egret feathers from Venezuela comes from collecting the feathers that the birds have shed from bushes and out of water and mud! The narrative claims that Venezuela is filled with egret farms known as "garceros," where the birds breed and molt under careful supervision, and conveniently drop their feathers in places where they can be found and picked [Page 128] up in excellent condition! And we are expected to believe that these exactly harvested feathers from Venezuela sell in London for a staggering price of $44 per ounce.

THE FIGHT IN ENGLAND AGAINST THE USE OF WILD BIRD'S PLUMAGE IN THE MILLINERY TRADE

THE FIGHT IN ENGLAND AGAINST THE USE OF WILD BIRD FEATHERS IN THE HAT MAKING TRADE

Sandwich-men Employed by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, that Patroled London Streets in July, 1911.

Sandwich-board men hired by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, who patrolled the streets of London in July 1911.

Mr. Laglaize is especially exploited by Mr. Downham, as a French traveler of high standing, and well known in the zoological museums of France; but, sad to say, when Prof. Henry Fairfield Osborn cabled to the Museum of Natural History in Paris, inquiring about Mr. Laglaize, the cable flashed back the one sad word; "Inconnu!" (Unknown!)

Mr. Laglaize is especially taken advantage of by Mr. Downham, as a respected French traveler, well-known in the zoological museums of France; but, unfortunately, when Prof. Henry Fairfield Osborn sent a cable to the Museum of Natural History in Paris asking about Mr. Laglaize, the response came back with the one sad word: "Inconnu!" (Unknown!)

I think it entirely possible that enough shed feathers have been picked up in the reeking swamps of Venezuela, on the upper tributaries of the Orinoco, to afford an excuse for the beautiful story of Mr. Laglaize. Any shrewd individual with money, and the influence that money secures, could put up just such a "plant" as I firmly believe has been put up by some one in Venezuela. I will guarantee that I could accomplish such a job in Venezuela or Brazil, in four months' time, at an expense not exceeding one thousand dollars.

I think it’s entirely possible that enough discarded feathers have been gathered in the foul swamps of Venezuela, along the upper streams of the Orinoco, to provide an excuse for the fascinating story of Mr. Laglaize. Any clever person with money, and the influence that comes with it, could easily set up such a "scam" as I strongly believe has been orchestrated by someone in Venezuela. I can guarantee that I could pull off such a scheme in Venezuela or Brazil, in four months, for no more than one thousand dollars.

That the great supply of immaculately perfect egret plumes that annually come out of Venezuela could by any possibility be picked up in the [Page 129] swamps where they were shed and dropped by the egrets, is entirely preposterous and incredible. The whole proportion is denounced by several men of standing and experience, none of whom are "inconnu."

The idea that the large amount of flawless egret feathers that come from Venezuela every year could possibly be gathered in the [Page 129] swamps where they fell from the egrets is completely ridiculous and unbelievable. This viewpoint is supported by several reputable and experienced individuals, none of whom are "unknown."

As a sweeping refutation of the fantastic statements regarding "garceros," published by Mr. Downham as coming from Messrs. Laglaize, Grisol and Geay, I offer the written testimony of an American gentleman who at this moment owns and maintains within a few yards of his residence a large preserve of snowy egrets and herons, the former representing the species which furnishes egret plumes exactly similar to those shipped from Venezuela and Brazil. If the testimony of Mr. McIlhenny is not sufficient to stamp the statements of the three Frenchmen quoted by Mr. Downham as absolute and thoroughly misleading falsehoods, then there is no such thing in this world as evidence. I suggest a perusal of the statements of the three Frenchmen who are quoted with such confidence by Mr. Downham and published by the Hon. Chamber of Commerce at London, and then a careful reading of the following letter:

As a strong rebuttal to the incredible claims about "garceros," published by Mr. Downham and attributed to Messrs. Laglaize, Grisol, and Geay, I present the written testimony of an American man who currently owns and maintains a large preserve of snowy egrets and herons just a few yards from his home. The egrets are the same type that provide the plumes shipped from Venezuela and Brazil. If Mr. McIlhenny's testimony isn't enough to prove that the statements from the three Frenchmen quoted by Mr. Downham are outright and completely misleading lies, then there’s no such thing as evidence in this world. I recommend reviewing the statements from the three Frenchmen confidently cited by Mr. Downham and published by the Hon. Chamber of Commerce in London, followed by a careful reading of the following letter:


Avery Island, La., June 17, 1912.

Dear Mr. Hornaday:—

Dear Mr. Hornaday:

I have before me your letter of June 8th, asking for information as to whether or no egrets shed their plumes at their nesting places in sufficient quantities to enable them to be gathered commercially. I most emphatically wish to state that it is impossible to gather at the nesting places of these birds any quantity of their plumes. I have nesting within 50 yards of where I am now sitting dictating this letter not less than 20,000 pairs of the various species of herons and egrets, and there are fully 2,500 pairs of snowy herons nesting within my preserve.

I received your letter from June 8th inquiring whether egrets shed their feathers at their nesting sites in sufficient amounts for commercial collection. I must be clear that it is not possible to collect a significant number of their feathers at these sites. Right now, within 50 yards of where I’m sitting and writing this letter, there are at least 20,000 pairs of various species of herons and egrets, including around 2,500 pairs of snowy herons nesting in my preserve.

During the nesting season, which covers the months of April, May and June, I am through this heronry in a small canoe almost every day, and often twice a day. I have had these herons under my close inspection for the past 17 years, and I have not in any one season picked up or seen more than half a dozen discarded plumes. Such plumes as I have picked up, I have kept on my desk, and given to the people who were interested. I remember that last year I picked up four plumes of the snowy heron that were in one bunch. I think these must have been plucked out by the birds fighting.

During the nesting season, which lasts from April to June, I paddle through this heronry in a small canoe almost every day, often twice a day. I've been closely observing these herons for the last 17 years, and I've never found or seen more than half a dozen discarded feathers in any season. The feathers I've collected are on my desk and given to people who are interested. I remember that last year, I found four snowy heron feathers all together; I think they must have been pulled out during fights among the birds.

This year I have found only one plume so far. I enclose it herewith. You will notice that it is one of the shorter plumes, and is badly worn at the end, as have been all the plumes which I have picked up in my heronry.

This year, I've only found one feather so far, which I’m including here. You'll see that it's one of the shorter feathers and is quite worn at the tip, just like all the feathers I've gathered from my heronry.

I am positive that it is not possible for natural shed plumes to be gathered commercially. I have a number of times talked with plume hunters from Venezuela and other South American countries, and I have never heard of any egret feathers being gathered by their being picked up after the birds have shed them.

I am convinced that collecting naturally shed plumes for commercial purposes is not feasible. I've spoken several times with plume hunters from Venezuela and other South American countries, and I've never heard of any egret feathers being collected after the birds have shed them.

I have heard of a number of heronries in South America that are protected by the land owners for the purpose of gathering a yearly crop of egret plumes, but this crop is gathered always by shooting a certain percentage of the birds. This shooting is done by experts with 22-calibre rifles, and does not materially disturb the nesting colony. I have known of two men who have been engaged in killing the birds on large estates in South America, who were paid regular salaries for their services as egret hunters.

I’ve heard about several heronries in South America where landowners protect the birds to harvest egret feathers each year, but this always involves shooting a certain percentage of the birds. Skilled shooters use .22 caliber rifles, and this doesn’t significantly disrupt the nesting colony. I know of two men who were hired to hunt the birds on large estates in South America and received regular salaries for their work as egret hunters.

Very truly yours,

Very truly yours,

E.A. McIlhenny.

E.A. McIlhenny.


I am more than willing to set the above against the fairy tale of Mr. Laglaize.

I’m more than happy to compare the above with the story of Mr. Laglaize.

Here is the testimony of A.H. Meyer, an ex-plume-hunter, who for nine [Page 130] years worked in Venezuela. His sworn testimony was laid before the Legislature of the State of New York, in 1911, when the New York Milliners' Association was frantically endeavoring to secure the repeal of the splendid Dutcher law. This witness was produced by the National Association of Audubon Societies.

Here is the testimony of A.H. Meyer, a former plume hunter, who spent nine [Page 130] years working in Venezuela. His sworn testimony was presented to the Legislature of the State of New York in 1911, when the New York Milliners' Association was desperately trying to get the impressive Dutcher law repealed. This witness was put forward by the National Association of Audubon Societies.

"My attention has been called to the fact that certain commercial interests in this city are circulating stories in the newspapers and elsewhere to the effect that the aigrettes used in the millinery trade come chiefly from Venezuela, where they are gathered from the ground in the large garceros, or breeding-colonies, of white herons.

"My attention has been drawn to the fact that some business interests in this city are spreading stories in newspapers and other places claiming that the aigrettes used in the hat-making trade mainly come from Venezuela, where they are collected from the ground in the large garceros, or breeding colonies, of white herons."

"I wish to state that I have personally engaged in the work of collecting the plumes of these birds in Venezuela. This was my business for the years 1896 to 1905, inclusive. I am thoroughly conversant with the methods employed in gathering egret and snowy heron plumes in Venezuela, and I wish to give the following statement regarding the practices employed in procuring these feathers:

"I want to say that I personally worked on collecting the feathers of these birds in Venezuela. This was my job from 1896 to 1905. I am very familiar with the methods used to gather egret and snowy heron feathers in Venezuela, and I want to share the following statement about the practices used to obtain these feathers:"

"The birds gather in large colonies to rear their young. They have the plumes only during the mating and nesting season. After the period when they are employed in caring for their young, it is found that the plumes are virtually of no commercial value, because of the worn and frayed condition to which they have been reduced. It is the custom in Venezuela to shoot the birds while the young are in the nests. A few feathers of the large white heron (American egret), known as the Garza blanca, can be picked up of a morning about their breeding places, but these are of small value and are known as "dead feathers." They are worth locally not over three dollars an ounce; while the feathers taken from the bird, known as "live feathers," are worth fifteen dollars an ounce.

"The birds come together in large groups to raise their young. They only have the colorful feathers during the mating and nesting season. After they finish caring for their young, the feathers are nearly worthless because they are worn and frayed. In Venezuela, it's common to shoot the birds while their chicks are still in the nests. You can find a few feathers from the large white heron (American egret), called the Garza blanca, in the morning near their breeding spots, but these are not very valuable and are referred to as "dead feathers." Locally, they are worth no more than three dollars an ounce, while the feathers taken from the live birds, known as "live feathers," are worth fifteen dollars an ounce."

"My work led me into every part of Venezuela and Colombia where these birds are to be found, and I have never yet found or heard of any garceros that were guarded for the purpose of simply gathering the feathers from the ground. No such condition exists in Venezuela. The story is absolutely without foundation, in my opinion, and has simply been put forward for commercial purposes.

"My work took me to every part of Venezuela and Colombia where these birds are found, and I've never seen or heard of any garceros that were protected just to collect feathers from the ground. No such situation exists in Venezuela. In my opinion, this story is completely unfounded and has been promoted purely for commercial reasons."

"The natives of the country, who do virtually all of the hunting for feathers, are not provident in their nature, and their practices are of a most cruel and brutal nature. I have seen them frequently pull the plumes from wounded birds, leaving the crippled birds to die of starvation, unable to respond to the cries of their young in the nests above, which were calling for food. I have known these people to tie and prop up wounded egrets on the marsh where they would attract the attention of other birds flying by. These decoys they keep in this position until they die of their wounds, or from the attacks of insects. I have seen the terrible red ants of that country actually eating out the eyes of these wounded, helpless birds that were tied up by the plume-hunters. I could write you many pages of the horrors practiced in gathering aigrette feathers in Venezuela by the natives for the millinery trade of Paris and New York.

"The locals in the area, who do almost all the hunting for feathers, are not very considerate by nature, and their methods are extremely cruel and brutal. I've often seen them strip feathers from injured birds, leaving the helpless creatures to starve, unable to respond to the cries of their chicks in the nests above, who are begging for food. I've known these people to tie and prop up injured egrets in the marsh so they can attract the attention of other birds flying by. They keep these decoys in this position until they either die from their injuries or are attacked by insects. I've witnessed the horrific red ants in that region actually eating the eyes of these wounded, defenseless birds tied up by the plume-hunters. I could write you many pages about the horrors inflicted on the gathering of aigrette feathers in Venezuela by the locals for the hat trade in Paris and New York."

"To illustrate the comparatively small number of dead feathers which are collected, I will mention that in one year I and my associates shipped to New York eighty pounds of the plumes of the large heron and twelve pounds of the little recurved plumes of the snowy heron. In this whole lot there were not over five pounds of plumes that had been gathered from the ground—and these were of little value. The plume-birds have been nearly exterminated in the United States and Mexico, and the same condition of affairs will soon exist in tropical America. This extermination will come about because of the fact that the young are left to starve in the nest when the old birds are killed, any other statement made by interested parties to the contrary notwithstanding.

"To show how few dead feathers are actually collected, I'll note that in one year, my team and I shipped eighty pounds of large heron feathers and twelve pounds of the small recurved feathers of the snowy heron to New York. Out of this entire amount, there were barely five pounds of feathers collected from the ground—and those were mostly worthless. The plume-birds are nearly extinct in the United States and Mexico, and soon the same situation will arise in tropical America. This extinction will happen because the young birds are left to starve in the nest when the adult birds are killed, regardless of what claims interested parties might make to the contrary."

"I am so incensed at the ridiculously absurd and misleading stories that are being published on this question that I want to give you this letter, and, before delivering it to you, shall take oath to its truthfulness."

"I am so angry about the completely absurd and misleading stories being published on this issue that I want to give you this letter, and before handing it to you, I will swear to its truth."

Here is the testimony of Mr. Caspar Whitney, of New York, formerly editor of Outing Magazine and Outdoor America:

Here is the testimony of Mr. Caspar Whitney, of New York, formerly editor of Outing Magazine and Outdoor America:

"During extended travel throughout South America, from 1903 to 1907, inclusive, I journeyed, on three separate occasions, by canoe (1904-1907), on the Lower Orinoco and Apure rivers and their tributaries. This is the region, so far as Venezuela is concerned, in which is the greatest slaughter of white herons for their plumage, or more specifically for the marital plumes, which are carried only in the mating and breeding season, and are known in the millinery trade as 'aigrettes.'

"During my long travels across South America from 1903 to 1907, I made three separate trips by canoe (1904-1907) along the Lower Orinoco and Apure rivers and their tributaries. In Venezuela, this is the area where the highest number of white herons are killed for their feathers, specifically for the breeding plumage that they have only during the mating season, which is referred to in the hat-making industry as 'aigrettes.'”

"There is literally no room for question. The snowy herons are killed exactly as I describe. It is the custom of all those who hunt for the millinery trade, and is recognized by the natives as the usual method."

"There’s absolutely no room for doubt. The snowy herons are killed exactly as I described. This is the practice of everyone who hunts for the hat-making industry, and the locals see it as the standard method."

Here is the testimony of Mr. Julian A. Dimock, of Peekamose, N.Y., the famous outdoor photographer, and illustrator of "Florida Enchantments":

Here is the testimony of Mr. Julian A. Dimock, of Peekamose, N.Y., the well-known outdoor photographer and illustrator of "Florida Enchantments":

"I know a goodly number of the plume-hunters of Florida. I have camped with them, and talked to them. I have heard their tales, and even full accounts of the 'shooting-up' of an egret rookery. Never has a man in Florida suggested to me that plumes could be obtained without killing the birds. I have known the wardens, and have visited rookeries after they had been 'shot-up,' and the evidence all pointed to the everlasting use of the gun. It is certainly not true that the plumes can be obtained without killing the birds bearing them.

"I know a good number of the plume-hunters in Florida. I’ve camped with them and talked to them. I’ve heard their stories, including detailed accounts of the 'shooting-up' of an egret rookery. No one in Florida has ever suggested to me that plumes could be collected without killing the birds. I’ve known the wardens and visited rookeries after they had been 'shot-up,' and the evidence clearly pointed to the ongoing use of guns. It is definitely not true that plumes can be obtained without killing the birds that have them.

"Nineteen years ago, I visited the Cuthbert Rookery with one of the men who discovered the birds nesting in that lake. He and his partner had sold the plumes gathered there for more than a thousand dollars. He showed me how they hid in the bushes and shot the birds. He even gave me a chance to watch him kill two or three birds.

"Nineteen years ago, I went to the Cuthbert Rookery with one of the guys who found the birds nesting in that lake. He and his partner had sold the feathers they collected there for over a thousand dollars. He showed me how they would hide in the bushes and shoot the birds. He even let me watch him take down two or three birds."

"I know personally the man chiefly responsible for the slaughter of the birds at Alligator Bay. He laughed at the idea of getting plumes without killing the birds! I well know the man who shot the birds up Rogers River, and even saw some of the empty shells left on the ground by him.

"I personally know the guy who is mainly responsible for the killing of the birds at Alligator Bay. He thought it was ridiculous to think he could get feathers without killing the birds! I also know the man who shot the birds along Rogers River, and I even saw some of the empty shells he left on the ground."

YOUNG EGRETS, UNABLE TO FLY, STARVING

YOUNG EGRETS, UNABLE TO FLY, STARVING

The Parent Birds had Been Killed by Plume Hunters

The parent birds had been killed by feather hunters.

SNOWY EGRET, DEAD ON HER NEST

SNOWY EGRET, DEAD ON HER NEST

Wounded in the Feeding-Grounds, and Came Home to Die. Photographed in a Florida Rookery Protected by the National Association of Audubon Societies

Wounded in the Feeding Grounds, and Came Home to Die. Photographed in a Florida Rookery Protected by the National Association of Audubon Societies

I have camped with Seminoles, whites, blacks, outlaws, and those within the pale, connected with plume-hunting, and all tell the same story: The birds are shot to get the plumes. The evidence of my own eyes, and the action of the birds themselves, convinces me that there is not a shadow of doubt concerning this point."

I have camped with Seminoles, whites, blacks, outlaws, and those on the fringes, all involved in plume-hunting, and they all tell the same story: The birds are shot to get the plumes. What I’ve seen with my own eyes and the behavior of the birds make it clear to me that there’s no doubt about this.

This sworn testimony from Mr. T.J. Ashe, of Key West, Florida, is very direct and to the point:

This sworn testimony from Mr. T.J. Ashe, of Key West, Florida, is very straightforward and clear:

"I have seen many moulted and dropped feathers from wild plumed birds. I have never seen a moulted or dropped feather that was fit for anything. It is the exception when a plumed bird drops feathers of any value while in flight. Whatever feathers are so dropped are those that are frayed, worn out, and forced out by the process of moulting. The moulting season is not during the hatching season, but is after the hatching season. The shedding, or moulting, takes place once a year; and during this moulting season the feathers, after having the hard usage of the year from wind, rain and other causes, when dropped are of absolutely no commercial value."

"I've seen a lot of feathers that wild birds have molted or dropped. I've never come across a molted or dropped feather that was good for anything. It's rare for a bird to drop valuable feathers while flying. The feathers that do get dropped are usually frayed, worn out, and pushed out during the molting process. The molting season happens after the hatching season, not during it. Shedding, or molting, occurs once a year; and during this molting season, the feathers, after taking a beating from wind, rain, and other factors throughout the year, are completely worthless."

Mr. Arthur T. Wayne, of Mount Pleasant, S.C., relates in sworn testimony his experience in attempting to secure egret plumes without killing the birds:

Mr. Arthur T. Wayne, from Mount Pleasant, S.C., shares in sworn testimony his experience trying to obtain egret feathers without harming the birds:

"It is utterly impossible to get fifty egret plumes from any colony of breeding birds without shooting the birds. Last spring, I went twice a week to a breeding colony of American and snowy egrets, from early in April until June 8. Despite the fact that I covered miles of territory in a boat, I picked up but two American egret plumes (which I now have); but not a single snowy egret plume did I see, nor did my companion, who accompanied me on every trip.

"It’s completely impossible to collect fifty egret plumes from any breeding colony without shooting the birds. Last spring, I visited a colony of American and snowy egrets twice a week, from early April until June 8. Even though I covered miles in a boat, I only found two American egret plumes (which I still have); I didn’t see a single snowy egret plume, and neither did my companion, who joined me on every trip."

"I saw an American egret plume on the water, and left it, purposely, to see whether it would sink or not. Upon visiting the place a few days afterwards, the plume was not in evidence, undoubtedly having sunk. The plumes are chiefly shed in the air while the birds are going to or coming from their breeding grounds. If that millinery plume law is repealed, the fate of the American and snowy egrets is sealed, for the few birds that remain will be shot to the very last one."

"I saw an American egret plume floating on the water and decided to leave it there to see if it would sink. When I checked back a few days later, the plume was definitely gone, having most likely sunk. The plumes mainly fall off while the birds are flying to or from their breeding areas. If that law against using plumes for fashion is repealed, the future of the American and snowy egrets is doomed, because the few birds that are left will be hunted down to the very last one."

Any man who ever has been in an egret rookery (and I have) knows that the above testimony is true! The French story of the beautiful and smoothly-running egret farms in Venezuela is preposterous, save for a mere shadow of truth. I do not say that no egret plumes could be picked up, but I do assert that the total quantity obtainable in one year in that way would be utterly trivial.

Any man who has ever been to an egret rookery (and I have) knows that the above statement is true! The French tale of the gorgeous and efficiently operating egret farms in Venezuela is ridiculous, except for a tiny bit of truth. I'm not saying that no egret plumes could be collected, but I do claim that the total amount you could get in one year that way would be completely insignificant.

No; the "ospreys" of the British feather market come from slaughtered egrets and herons, killed in the breeding season. Let the British public and the British Parliament make no mistake about that. If they wish the trade to continue, let it be based on the impregnable ground that the merchants want the money, and not on a fantastic dream that is too silly to deceive even a child that knows birds.

No; the "ospreys" in the British feather market come from slaughtered egrets and herons, killed in the breeding season. The British public and Parliament shouldn’t be misled about that. If they want the trade to keep going, it should be for the solid reason that the merchants want the profit, not based on some unrealistic fantasy that’s too ridiculous to fool even a child who knows about birds.

The use or disuse of wild birds' plumage as millinery ornaments is another of those wild-life subjects regarding which there is no room for argument. To assert that the feather-dealers want the business for the money it brings them is not argument! We have seen many a steam roller go over Truth, and Right, and Justice, by main strength and red-hot power; but Truth and Right refuse to stay flat down. There is on this earth not one wild-animal species—mammal, bird or reptile—that can long withstand exploitation for commercial purposes. Even the whales of the deep sea, the walrus of the arctic regions, the condors of the Andes and alligators of the Everglade morasses are no exception to the universal rule.

The use or non-use of wild birds' feathers as fashion accessories is one of those wildlife issues that is beyond debate. Saying that feather sellers are only in it for the money doesn’t count as an argument! We have seen many powerful forces crush Truth, Justice, and Right, but those principles refuse to be silenced. There isn't a single wild animal species—whether mammal, bird, or reptile—that can survive exploitation for profit in the long run. Even the deep-sea whales, the Arctic walrus, the Andean condors, and the alligators of the Everglades fall victim to this universal rule.

In Mr. Downham's book there is much fallacious reasoning, and many conclusions that are not borne out by the facts. For example, he says that no species of bird of paradise has been diminished in number by slaughter for the feather trade; that Florida still contains a supply of egrets; that the decrease in bird life should be charged to the spread of cities, towns and farms, and not to the trade; that the trade was "in no way responsible" for the slaughter of three hundred thousand gulls and albatrosses on Laysan Island!

In Mr. Downham's book, there's a lot of faulty reasoning and many conclusions that don't match the facts. For example, he claims that no species of bird of paradise has been reduced in number due to the feather trade; that Florida still has a supply of egrets; that the decline in bird populations should be attributed to the expansion of cities, towns, and farms, not the trade; and that the trade was "in no way responsible" for the killing of three hundred thousand gulls and albatrosses on Laysan Island!

I have space to notice one other important erroneous conclusion that Mr. Downham publishes in his book, on page 105. He says:

I want to point out one more important mistake that Mr. Downham makes in his book, on page 105. He says:

"The destruction of birds in foreign countries is something that no trade can direct or control."

"The destruction of birds in other countries is something that no trade can manage or control."

This is an amazing declaration; and absolutely contrary to experience. Let me prove what I say by a fresh and incontestable illustration:

This is an incredible statement, completely opposite to what we've seen. Let me back up my point with a clear and undeniable example:

Prior to April, 1911, when Governor Dix signed the Bayne law against the sale of wild native game in the State of New York, Currituck County, N.C., was a vast slaughter-pen for wild fowl. No power or persuasion had availed to induce the people of North Carolina to check, or regulate, or in any manner mitigate that slaughter of geese, ducks and swans. It was estimated that two hundred thousand wild fowl were annually slaughtered there.

Before April 1911, when Governor Dix signed the Bayne law banning the sale of wild native game in New York, Currituck County, NC, was a large killing ground for wild birds. No amount of power or persuasion could convince the people of North Carolina to stop, regulate, or in any way reduce the killing of geese, ducks, and swans. It was estimated that around two hundred thousand wild birds were killed there every year.

We who advocated the Bayne law said: "Close the New York markets against Currituck birds, and you will stop a great deal of the slaughter."

We who supported the Bayne law said: "Shut down the New York markets to Currituck birds, and you'll reduce a lot of the killing."

We cleaned our Augean stable. The greatest game market in America was absolutely closed.

We cleaned our Augean stable. The biggest game market in America was completely shut down.

Last winter (1911) the annual killing of wild fowl was fully fifty per cent less than during previous years. In one small town, twenty professional duck shooters went entirely out of business—because they couldn't sell their ducks! The dealers refused to buy them. The result was exactly what we predicted it would be; and this year, it is reported over and over that ducks are more plentiful in New England than they have been in twenty years previously! The result is wonderful, because so quick.

Last winter (1911), the yearly hunting of wild birds dropped by about fifty percent compared to previous years. In one small town, twenty professional duck hunters went completely out of business—because they couldn't sell their ducks! The dealers wouldn’t buy them. The outcome was just what we expected; and this year, it’s been reported repeatedly that ducks are more abundant in New England than they have been in the past twenty years! The result is amazing because it happened so fast.

Beyond all question, the feather merchants of London, Paris and Berlin absolutely control the bird-killers of Venezuela, China, New Guinea. Mexico and South America. Let the word go forth that "the trade" is no longer permitted to buy and sell egret and heron plumes, skins of birds of paradise and condor feathers, and presto! the killing industry falls dead the next moment.

Without a doubt, the feather merchants of London, Paris, and Berlin completely control the bird killers in Venezuela, China, New Guinea, Mexico, and South America. Once it’s announced that "the trade" can no longer buy and sell egret and heron plumes, the skins of birds of paradise, and condor feathers, suddenly the killing industry stops immediately.

MISCELLANEOUS BIRD SKINS, 8 CENTS EACH

MISCELLANEOUS BIRD SKINS, 8 CENTS EACH

Purchased by the New York Zoological Society from the Quarterly Sale in London, August, 1912

Purchased by the New York Zoological Society from the Quarterly Sale in London, August 1912

Yes, indeed, members of the British Parliament: it is easily within your power to wipe out at a single stroke fully one-half of the bird slaughter for fancy feathers. It can be done just as we wiped out one-half the annual duck slaughter in wickedly-wasteful North Carolina!

Yes, indeed, members of the British Parliament: it is totally within your power to eliminate half of the bird killing for fancy feathers in one go. It can be done just like we reduced the annual duck slaughter by half in the incredibly wasteful North Carolina!

The feather trade absolutely does control the killing situation! Now, will the people of England clean house by controlling the feather trade? If a hundred species of the most beautiful birds of the world must be exterminated for the feather trade, let the odium rest elsewhere than on the people of England.

The feather trade definitely does control the killing situation! Now, will the people of England take action by regulating the feather trade? If a hundred species of the most beautiful birds in the world have to be wiped out for the feather trade, then let the blame lie elsewhere besides the people of England.

The bird-lovers of America may rest assured that the bird-lovers of England—a mighty host—are neither careless nor indifferent regarding the wild-birds' plumage business. On the contrary, several bills have been brought before Parliament intended to regulate or prohibit the traffic, and a measure of vast importance to the birds of the world is now before the House of Commons. It is backed by Mr. Percy Alden, M.P., by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, by the Selbourne Society, and by Mr. James Buckland—a host in himself. For years past that splendidly-equipped and well-managed Royal Society has waged [Page 136] ceaseless warfare for the birds. Its activity has been tremendous, and its membership list contains many of the finest names in England. The address of the Honorary Secretary, Frank E. Lemon, Esq., is 23 Queen Anne's Gate, London, S.W.

The bird lovers in America can be assured that the bird lovers in England—a significant group—are neither careless nor indifferent when it comes to the wild birds' plumage trade. On the contrary, several bills have been introduced in Parliament aimed at regulating or banning this trade, and a measure of great importance for birds worldwide is currently before the House of Commons. It has the support of Mr. Percy Alden, M.P., the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, the Selbourne Society, and Mr. James Buckland—a notable figure in his own right. For many years, that well-equipped and well-organized Royal Society has been engaged in relentless efforts for the birds. Its activity has been impressive, and its membership list includes many of the most respected names in England. The address of the Honorary Secretary, Frank E. Lemon, Esq., is 23 Queen Anne's Gate, London, S.W.

Naturally, these influences are opposed by the Textile Trade Section of the London Chamber of Commerce, and their only argument consists of the plea that if London doesn't get the money out of the feather trade, the Continent will get it! A reasonable, logical, magnificent and convincing excuse for wholesale bird slaughter, truly!

Naturally, these influences are countered by the Textile Trade Section of the London Chamber of Commerce, and their only argument is that if London doesn't profit from the feather trade, the Continent will! A reasonable, logical, magnificent, and convincing excuse for mass bird slaughter, indeed!

Mr. Buckland has been informed from the Continent that the people of France, Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium are waiting and watching to see what England is going to do with the question, "To slaughter, or not to slaughter?" For England has no monopoly of the birds' plumage trade, not by any means. Says Mr. Buckland ("Pros and Cons of the Plumage Bill," page 17):

Mr. Buckland has received word from the Continent that the people of France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Belgium are watching closely to see what England plans to do about the issue, "To slaughter or not to slaughter?" England doesn’t have a monopoly on the bird plumage trade, not at all. Mr. Buckland states ("Pros and Cons of the Plumage Bill," page 17):

"As regards the vast majority of fancy feathers used in millinery, the Continent receives its own supplies. The feathers of the hundreds of thousands of albatrosses which are killed in the North Pacific all go to Paris. Of the untold thousands of 'magpies,' owls, and other species which come from Peru, not one skin or feather crosses the Channel. The white herons of the Upper Senegal and the Niger are being rapidly exterminated at the instigation of the feather merchants, but not one of the plumes reaches London. Paris receives direct a large supply of aigrettes from South America and elsewhere. … The millions of swallows and other migratory birds which are killed annually as they pass through Italy, France and Spain on their way north, supply the millinery trade of Europe with an incredible quantity of wings and other plumage, but none of it is distributed from London. … London, as a distributing center, has no monopoly of the trade in raw feathers."

"As for the vast majority of decorative feathers used in hats, the Continent has its own sources. The feathers from the hundreds of thousands of albatrosses that are hunted in the North Pacific all go to Paris. Of the countless magpies, owls, and other species coming from Peru, not a single skin or feather makes it across the Channel. The white herons of the Upper Senegal and the Niger are quickly disappearing due to the demand from feather merchants, but none of their plumes reach London. Paris receives a significant supply of aigrettes from South America and beyond. … The millions of swallows and other migratory birds killed each year as they travel through Italy, France, and Spain on their way north supply the European millinery market with an astonishing amount of wings and other feathers, but none of it is sent from London. … London, as a distribution hub, does not dominate the raw feather trade."

Mr. Buckland's green-covered pamphlet is a powerful document, and both his facts and his conclusions seem to be unassailable. The author's address is Royal Colonial Institute, Northumberland Ave., London, W.C.

Mr. Buckland's green-covered pamphlet is a compelling document, and both his facts and his conclusions appear to be rock solid. The author's address is Royal Colonial Institute, Northumberland Ave., London, W.C.

The duty of the civilized nations of Europe is perfectly plain. The savage and bloody business in feathers torn from wild birds should be stopped, completely and forever. If the commons will not arise and reform the odious business out of existence, then the kings and queens and presidents should do their plain duty. In the suppression of a world crime like this it is clearly a case of noblesse oblige!

The responsibility of the civilized nations of Europe is clear. The brutal and violent practice of taking feathers from wild birds needs to end, completely and permanently. If the public won't rise up and eliminate this terrible practice, then the leaders—kings, queens, and presidents—should fulfill their responsibility. In addressing a global crime like this, it’s definitely a case of noblesse oblige!


[Page 137]
CHAPTER XIV
THE BIRD TRAGEDY ON LAYSAN ISLAND

This chapter is a curtain-dropper to the preceding chapter. As a clearly-cut, concrete case, the reader will find it unique and unsurpassed. It should be of lively interest to every American because the tragedy occurred on American territory.

This chapter serves as a conclusion to the previous one. As a clear and specific case, the reader will find it one-of-a-kind and unmatched. It should be of great interest to every American because the tragedy took place on American soil.

In the far-away North Pacific Ocean, about seven hundred miles from Honolulu west-b'-north, lies the small island of Laysan. It is level, sandy, poorly planted by nature, and barren of all things likely to enlist the attention of predatory man. To the harassed birds of mid-ocean, it seemed like a secure haven, and for ages past it has been inhabited only by them. There several species of sea birds, large and small, have found homes and breeding places. Until 1909, the inhabitants consisted of the Laysan albatross, black-footed albatross, sooty tern, gray-backed tern, noddy tern, Hawaiian tern, white tern, Bonin petrel, two shearwaters, the red-tailed tropic bird, two boobies and the man-of-war bird.

In the distant North Pacific Ocean, about seven hundred miles northwest of Honolulu, lies the small island of Laysan. It is flat, sandy, poorly vegetated, and lacking anything that would attract predatory humans. To the stressed birds of the open ocean, it appeared to be a safe refuge, and for ages, only they have lived there. Several species of sea birds, both large and small, have made it their home and breeding ground. Until 1909, the residents included the Laysan albatross, black-footed albatross, sooty tern, gray-backed tern, noddy tern, Hawaiian tern, white tern, Bonin petrel, two shearwaters, the red-tailed tropic bird, two boobies, and the man-of-war bird.

Laysan Island is two miles long by one and one-half miles broad, and at times it has been literally covered with birds. Its bird life was first brought prominently to notice in 1891, by Henry Palmer, the agent of Hon. Walter Rothschild, and in 1902 and 1903 Walter K. Fisher and W.A. Bryan made further observations.

Laysan Island is two miles long and one and a half miles wide, and at times it has been completely covered with birds. Its bird life was first highlighted in 1891 by Henry Palmer, the representative of Hon. Walter Rothschild, and in 1902 and 1903, Walter K. Fisher and W.A. Bryan made additional observations.

Ever since 1891 the bird life on Laysan has been regarded as one of the wonders of the bird world. One of the photographs taken prior to 1909 shows a vast plain, apparently a square mile in area, covered and crowded with Laysan albatrosses. They stand there on the level sand, serene, bulky and immaculate. Thousands of birds appear in one view—a very remarkable sight.

Ever since 1891, the bird life on Laysan has been considered one of the marvels of the bird world. One of the photographs taken before 1909 shows a massive plain, about a square mile in size, filled with Laysan albatrosses. They stand there on the flat sand, calm, hefty, and pristine. Thousands of birds can be seen in a single view—a truly remarkable sight.

Naturally man, the ever-greedy, began to cast about for ways by which to convert some product of that feathered host into money. At first guano and eggs were collected. A tramway was laid down and small box-cars were introduced, in which the collected material was piled and pushed down to the packing place.

Naturally, humans, always greedy, started searching for ways to turn something from that flock of birds into cash. At first, they collected guano and eggs. A tramway was built, and small boxcars were brought in to transport the collected materials down to the packing area.

For several years this went on, and the birds themselves were not molested. At last, however, a tentacle of the feather-trade octopus reached out to Laysan. In an evil moment in the spring of 1909, a predatory individual of Honolulu and elsewhere, named Max Schlemmer, decided that the wings of those albatross, gulls and terns should be torn off and sent to Japan, whence they would undoubtedly be shipped to Paris, the special market for the wings of sea-birds slaughtered in the North Pacific.

For several years, this continued, and the birds themselves were undisturbed. However, a branch of the feather trade reached Laysan. In a terrible moment in the spring of 1909, a ruthless person from Honolulu and other places, named Max Schlemmer, decided to rip the wings off those albatrosses, gulls, and terns and send them to Japan, where they would surely be shipped to Paris, the main market for the wings of sea birds killed in the North Pacific.

By the Courtesy of Hon. Walter Rothschild

By the courtesy of Hon. Walter Rothschild

LAYSAN ALBATROSSES, BEFORE THE GREAT SLAUGHTER

LAYSAN ALBATROSS, BEFORE THE GREAT SLAUGHTER

LAYSAN ALBATROSS ROOKERY, AFTER THE GREAT SLAUGHTER

LAYSAN ALBATROSS ROOKERY, AFTER THE GREAT SLAUGHTER

The Same Ground as Shown in the Preceding Picture, Photographed in 1911 by Prof. Homer R. Dill

The Same Ground as Shown in the Previous Image, Taken in 1911 by Prof. Homer R. Dill

Schlemmer the Slaughterer bought a cheap vessel, hired twenty-three phlegmatic and cold-blooded Japanese laborers, and organized a raid on Laysan. With the utmost secrecy he sailed from Honolulu, landed his bird-killers upon the sea-bird wonderland, and turned them loose upon the birds.

Schlemmer the Slaughterer bought an inexpensive boat, hired twenty-three calm and unemotional Japanese workers, and planned an operation on Laysan. With complete secrecy, he set sail from Honolulu, landed his bird-killers on the sea-bird paradise, and released them to hunt the birds.

For several months they slaughtered diligently and without mercy. Apparently it was the ambition of Schlemmer to kill every bird on the island.

For several months, they killed tirelessly and without mercy. It seemed that Schlemmer's goal was to eliminate every bird on the island.

By the time the bird-butchers had accumulated between three and four car-loads of wings, and the carnage was half finished, William A. Bryan, Professor of Zoology in the College of Honolulu, heard of it and promptly wired the United States Government.

By the time the bird butchers had gathered about three to four carloads of wings, and the slaughter was halfway done, William A. Bryan, a Zoology professor at the College of Honolulu, heard about it and quickly sent a telegram to the United States Government.

Without the loss of a moment the Secretary of the Navy despatched the revenue cutter Thetis to the shambles of Laysan. When Captain Jacobs arrived he found that in round numbers about three hundred thousand birds had been destroyed, and all that remained of them were several acres of bones and dead bodies, and about three carloads of wings, feathers and skins. It was evident that Schlemmer's intention was to kill all the birds on the island, and only the timely arrival of the Thetis frustrated that bloody plan.

Without wasting any time, the Secretary of the Navy sent the revenue cutter Thetis to the site of the slaughter in Laysan. When Captain Jacobs arrived, he discovered that roughly three hundred thousand birds had been killed, leaving behind several acres covered in bones and carcasses, as well as about three carloads of wings, feathers, and skins. It was clear that Schlemmer's goal was to wipe out all the birds on the island, and it was only the timely arrival of the Thetis that thwarted that brutal plan.

The twenty-three Japanese poachers were arrested and taken to Honolulu for trial, and the Thetis also brought away all the stolen wings and plumage with the exception of one shedful of wings that had to be left [Page 140] behind on account of lack of carrying space. That old shed, with one end torn out, and supposed to contain nearly fifty thousand pairs of wings, was photographed by Prof. Dill in 1911, as shown herewith.

The twenty-three Japanese poachers were arrested and taken to Honolulu for trial, and the Thetis also collected all the stolen wings and plumage except for one batch of wings that had to be left [Page 140] behind due to limited carrying capacity. That old shed, with one end ripped out, which was supposed to hold nearly fifty thousand pairs of wings, was photographed by Prof. Dill in 1911, as shown here.

ACRES OF GULL AND ALBATROSS BONES

ACRES OF GULL AND ALBATROSS BONES

Photographed on Laysan Island by H.R. Dill, 1911

Photographed on Laysan Island by H.R. Dill, 1911

Three hundred thousand albatrosses, gulls, terns and other birds were butchered to make a Schlemmer holiday! Had the arrival of the Thetis been delayed, it is reasonably certain that every bird on Laysan would have been killed to satisfy the wolfish rapacity of one money-grubbing white man.

Three hundred thousand albatrosses, gulls, terns, and other birds were slaughtered to create a Schlemmer holiday! If the arrival of the Thetis had been delayed, it's likely that every bird on Laysan would have been wiped out to feed the greedy appetite of one money-hungry white man.

In 1911, the Iowa State University despatched to Laysan a scientific expedition in charge of Prof. Homer R. Dill. The party landed on the island on April 24 and remained until June 5, and the report of Professor Dill (U.S. Department of Agriculture) is consumedly interesting to the friends of birds. Here is what he has said regarding the evidences of bird-slaughter:

In 1911, Iowa State University sent a scientific expedition to Laysan, led by Prof. Homer R. Dill. The team arrived on the island on April 24 and stayed until June 5, and Professor Dill's report (U.S. Department of Agriculture) is extremely interesting to bird enthusiasts. Here’s what he had to say about the evidence of bird slaughter:

"Our first impression of Laysan was that the poachers had stripped the place of bird life. An area of over 300 acres on each side of the buildings was apparently abandoned. Only the shearwaters moaning in their burrows, the little wingless rail skulking from one grass tussock to another, and the saucy finch remained. It is an excellent example of what Prof. Nutting calls the survival of the inconspicuous.

"When we first saw Laysan, it looked like the poachers had wiped out the bird population. Over 300 acres on both sides of the buildings seemed empty. Only the shearwaters murmuring in their burrows, the small wingless rail darting between tufts of grass, and the bold finch remained. It’s a perfect example of what Prof. Nutting calls the survival of the inconspicuous."

"Here on every side are bones bleaching in the sun, showing where the poachers had piled the bodies of the birds as they stripped them of wings and feathers. In the old open guano shed were seen the remains of hundreds and possibly thousands of wings which were placed there but never cured for shipping, as the marauders were interrupted in their work.

"All around, bones are drying in the sun, showing where the poachers piled up the birds after taking their wings and feathers. In the old open guano shed, there are remnants of hundreds, possibly thousands, of wings that were stored there but never shipped out because the thieves were caught red-handed."

SHED FILLED WITH WINGS OF SLAUGHTERED BIRDS ON LAYSAN ISLAND

SHED FILLED WITH WINGS OF SLAUGHTERED BIRDS ON LAYSAN ISLAND

"An old cistern back of one of the buildings tells a story of cruelty that surpasses anything else done by these heartless, sanguinary pirates, not excepting the practice of cutting wings from living birds and leaving them to die of hemorrhage. In this dry cistern the living birds were kept by hundreds to slowly starve to death. In this way the fatty tissue lying next to the skin was used up, and the skin was left quite free from grease, so that it required little or no cleaning during preparation.

"An old cistern behind one of the buildings reveals a story of cruelty that surpasses anything else done by these heartless, bloody pirates, including cutting the wings off living birds and leaving them to bleed to death. In this dry cistern, hundreds of living birds were kept to slowly starve to death. This way, the fatty tissue next to the skin was used up, leaving the skin almost grease-free, so it required little or no cleaning during preparation."

"Many other revolting sights, such as the remains of young birds that had been left to starve, and birds with broken legs and deformed beaks were to be seen. Killing clubs, nets and other implements used by these marauders were lying all about. Hundreds of boxes to be used in shipping the bird skins were packed in an old building. It was very evident they intended to carry on their slaughter as long as the birds lasted.

"Many other upsetting sights were present, like the remains of young birds abandoned to starve and birds with broken legs and deformed beaks. Killing clubs, nets, and other tools used by these attackers were scattered everywhere. Hundreds of boxes meant for shipping bird skins were packed inside an old building. It was clear they intended to continue their killing as long as there were birds left."

"Not only did they kill and skin the larger species but they caught and caged the finch, honey eater, and miller bird. Cages and material for making them were found."—(Report of an Expedition to Laysan Island in 1911. By Homer R. Dill, page 12.)

"Not only did they kill and skin the larger animals, but they also caught and caged finches, honey eaters, and miller birds. They discovered cages and materials to make them."—(Report of an Expedition to Laysan Island in 1911. By Homer R. Dill, page 12.)

The report of Professor Bryan contains the following pertinent paragraphs:

The report from Professor Bryan includes these relevant paragraphs:

"This wholesale killing has had an appalling effect on the colony.... It is conservative to say that fully one-half the number of birds of both [Page 142] species of albatross that were so abundant everywhere in 1903 have been killed. The colonies that remain are in a sadly decimated condition. … Over a large part of the island, in some sections a hundred acres in a place, that ten years ago were thickly inhabited by albatrosses not a single bird remains, while heaps of the slain lie as mute testimony of the awful slaughter of these beautiful, harmless, and without doubt beneficial inhabitants of the high seas.

"This large-scale killing has had a shocking effect on the colony.... It's safe to say that about half of the albatrosses from both [Page 142] species, which were so abundant everywhere in 1903, have been killed. The remaining colonies are sadly diminished. … In many parts of the island, in some areas covering a hundred acres or more, there isn’t a single bird left where albatrosses once thrived just ten years ago, while piles of the dead lie silently as proof of the terrible slaughter of these beautiful, harmless, and undoubtedly beneficial residents of the open ocean."

"While the main activity of the plume-hunters was directed against the albatrosses, they were by no means averse to killing anything in the bird line that came in their way. … Fortunately, serious as were the depredations of the poachers, their operations were interrupted before any of the species had been completely exterminated."

"While the main focus of the plume hunters was on albatrosses, they didn’t hesitate to kill any birds they came across. … Thankfully, despite the significant harm caused by the poachers, their activities were stopped before any species were completely driven to extinction."

But the work of the Evil Genius of Laysan did not stop with the slaughter of three hundred thousand birds. Mr. Schlemmer introduced rabbits and guinea-pigs; and these rapidly multiplying rodents now are threatening to consume every plant on the island. If the plants disappear, many of the insects will go with them; and this will mean the disappearance of the small insectivorous birds.

But the actions of the Evil Genius of Laysan didn’t end with the killing of three hundred thousand birds. Mr. Schlemmer brought in rabbits and guinea pigs, and these quickly multiplying rodents are now on the verge of destroying every plant on the island. If the plants vanish, many of the insects will follow; and that means the small insect-eating birds will disappear too.

In February, 1909, President Roosevelt issued an executive order creating the Hawaiian Islands Reservation for Birds. In this are included Laysan and twelve other islands and reefs, some of which are inhabited by birds that are well worth preserving. By this act, we may feel that for the future the birds of Laysan and neighboring islets are secure from further attacks by the bloody-handed agents of the vain women who still insist upon wearing the wings and feathers of wild birds.

In February 1909, President Roosevelt signed an executive order creating the Hawaiian Islands Reservation for Birds. This area includes Laysan and twelve other islands and reefs, some of which are home to birds that are definitely worth protecting. With this action, we can be assured that the birds of Laysan and nearby islets are safe from further harm by those ruthless individuals who still insist on wearing the wings and feathers of wild birds.


[Page 143]
CHAPTER XV
UNFAIR FIREARMS, AND SHOOTING ETHICS

For considerably more than a century, the States of the American Union have enacted game-protective laws based on the principle that the wild game belongs to the People, and the people's senators, representatives and legislators generally may therefore enact laws for its protection, prescribing the manner in which it may and may not be taken and possessed. The soundness of this principle has been fully confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Geer vs. Connecticut, on March 2, 1896.

For well over a century, the states in the American Union have passed laws to protect wildlife based on the idea that wild game belongs to the public. Therefore, the elected senators, representatives, and legislators usually have the authority to create laws for its protection, outlining how it can and cannot be hunted and owned. This principle has been thoroughly upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Geer vs. Connecticut, on March 2, 1896.

The tendency of predatory man to kill and capture wild game of all kinds by wholesale methods is as old as the human race. The days of the club, the stone axe, the bow and arrow and the flint-lock gun were contemporaneous with the days of great abundance of game. Now that the advent of breech-loaders, repeaters, automatics and fixed ammunition has rendered game scarce in all localities save a very few, the thoughtful man is driven to consider measures for the checking of destruction and the suppression of wholesale slaughter.

The tendency of humans to hunt and capture wild animals by mass methods is as old as humanity itself. The era of clubs, stone axes, bows and arrows, and flintlock guns coincided with times of great abundance of game. Now that the introduction of breech-loaders, repeating firearms, automatics, and fixed ammunition has made game rare in almost all areas except a few, thoughtful individuals are compelled to consider measures to curb destruction and prevent mass slaughter.

First of all, the deadly floating batteries and sail-boats were prohibited. To-day a punt gun is justly regarded as a relic of barbarism, and any man who uses one places himself beyond the pale of decent sportsmanship, or even of modern pot-hunting. Strange to say, although the unwritten code of ethics of English sportsmen is very strict, the English to this day permit wild-fowl hunting with guns of huge calibre, some of which are more like shot-cannons than shot-guns. And they say, "Well, there are still wild duck on our coast!"

First of all, the dangerous floating batteries and sailboats were banned. Today, a punt gun is rightly seen as a leftover from a barbaric time, and anyone who uses one puts themselves outside the realm of decent sportsmanship, or even of modern hunting. Interestingly, although the unwritten code of ethics among English sportsmen is very strict, the English still allow wildfowl hunting with extremely large-caliber guns, some of which are more like shot-cannons than shotguns. And they say, "Well, there are still wild ducks on our coast!"

Beyond question, it is now high time for the English people to take up the shot-gun question, and consider what to-day is fair and unfair in the killing of waterfowl. The supply of British ducks and geese can not forever withstand the market gunners and their shot-cannons. Has not the British wild-fowl supply greatly decreased during the past fifteen years? I strongly suspect that a careful investigation would reveal the fact that it has diminished. The Society for the Preservation of the Fauna of the Empire should look into the matter, and obtain a series of reports on the condition of the waterfowl to-day as compared with what it was twenty years ago.

Without a doubt, it's definitely time for the English people to address the shotgun issue and think about what is fair and unfair when it comes to hunting waterfowl. The population of British ducks and geese can’t keep up with the market hunters and their shotguns forever. Hasn’t the supply of British wildfowl significantly dropped over the last fifteen years? I strongly suspect that a thorough investigation would show that it has indeed decreased. The Society for the Preservation of the Fauna of the Empire should look into this and gather a series of reports on the current state of waterfowl compared to what it was twenty years ago.

In the United States we have eliminated the swivel guns, the punt guns and the very-big-bore guns. Among the real sportsmen the tendency is steadily toward shot-guns of small calibre, especially under 12-gauge. But, outside the ranks of sportsmen, we are now face to face with two [Page 144] automatic and five "pump" shotguns of deadly efficiency. Of these, more than one hundred thousand are being made and sold annually by the five companies that produce them. Recently the annual output has been carefully estimated from known facts to be about as follows:

In the United States, we've gotten rid of swivel guns, punt guns, and the really big bore guns. Among true sports enthusiasts, there's a clear trend toward smaller caliber shotguns, especially those under 12-gauge. However, beyond the sports community, we now have two [Page 144] automatic shotguns and five "pump" shotguns that are incredibly effective. More than one hundred thousand of these are produced and sold each year by the five companies that make them. Recently, the annual output has been closely estimated based on known data to be about as follows:

Winchester Arms Co., New Haven, Conn.
  (1 Automatic and 1 Pump-gun) 50,000 guns.
Remington Arms Co., Ilion, N.Y.
  (1 Automatic and 1 Pump-gun) 25,000 "
Marlin Fire Arms Co., New Haven, Conn. 1 Pump-gun 12,000 "
Stevens Arms Co., Chicopee Falls, Mass. 1 Pump-gun 10,000 "
Union Fire Arms Co., 1 Pump-gun 5,000 "
------------
103,000 guns

FOUR OF THE SEVEN MACHINE GUNS

FOUR OF THE SEVEN MACHINE GUNS

The Ethics Of Shooting And Shot-Guns. —Are the American people willing that their wild birds shall be shot by machinery?

The Ethics of Shooting and Shotguns. —Are the American people okay with their wild birds being shot by machines?

In the ethics of sportsmanship, the anglers of America are miles ahead of the men who handle the rifle and shot-gun in the hunting field. Will the hunters ever catch up?

In the ethics of sportsmanship, American anglers are far ahead of the guys who use rifles and shotguns in the hunting field. Will the hunters ever catch up?

The anglers have steadily diminished the weight of the rod and the size of the line; and they have prohibited the use of gang hooks and nets. In this respect the initiative of the Tuna Club of Santa Catalina is worthy of the highest admiration. Even though the leaping tuna, the jewfish and the sword-fish are big and powerful, the club has elected to raise the standard of sportsmanship by making captures more difficult than ever before. A higher degree of skill, and nerve and judgment, is required in the angler who would make good on a big fish; and, incidentally, the fish has about double "the show" that it had fifteen years ago.

The anglers have consistently reduced the weight of the rod and the size of the line, and they have banned the use of gang hooks and nets. In this regard, the Tuna Club of Santa Catalina deserves the highest praise. Even though the leaping tuna, jewfish, and swordfish are large and powerful, the club has chosen to elevate the standard of sportsmanship by making catches harder than ever. A greater level of skill, nerve, and judgment is necessary for an angler to successfully land a big fish; and, on top of that, the fish has about twice “the show” it had fifteen years ago.

That is Sportsmanship!

That's sportsmanship!

But how is it with the men who handle the shot-gun?

But what's the deal with the guys who handle the shotgun?

By them, the Tuna Club's high-class principle has been exactly reversed! In the making of fishing-rods, commercialism plays small part; but in about forty cases out of every fifty the making of guns is solely a matter of dollars and profits.

By them, the Tuna Club's elite principle has been completely turned upside down! When it comes to making fishing rods, commercialism is hardly a factor; however, in about forty out of every fifty instances, making guns is purely about money and profits.

Excepting the condemnation of automatic and pump guns, I think that few clubs of sportsmen have laid down laws designed to make shooting more difficult, and to give the game more of a show to escape. Thousands of gentlemen sportsmen have their own separate unwritten codes of honor, but so far as I know, few of them have been written out and adopted as binding rules of action. I know that among expert wing shots it is an unwritten law that quail and grouse must not be shot on the ground, nor ducks on the water. But, among the three million gunners who annually shoot in the United States how many, think you, are there who in actual practice observe any sentimental principles when in the presence of killable game? I should say about one man and boy out of every five hundred.

Except for the ban on automatic and pump-action guns, I think very few sports clubs have established rules to make shooting more challenging and give the game a better chance to escape. Thousands of sportsmen have their own unwritten codes of honor, but as far as I know, few have been formally documented and adopted as mandatory rules. I understand that among expert wing shooters, there’s an unwritten rule that quail and grouse shouldn’t be shot while on the ground, nor should ducks be shot while on the water. But out of the three million hunters who shoot in the United States each year, how many do you think actually follow any sentimental principles when faced with game they can kill? I’d estimate about one man and boy out of every five hundred.

Up to this time, the great mass of men who handle guns have left it to the gunmakers to make their codes of ethics, and hand them out with the loaded cartridges, all ready for use.

Up until now, most of the people who handle guns have relied on the gunmakers to create their ethical guidelines and provide them along with the loaded cartridges, all set for use.

For fifty years the makers of shot-guns and rifles have taxed their ingenuity and resources to make killing easier, especially for "amateur" sportsmen,—and take still greater advantages of the game! Look at this scale of progression:

For fifty years, the manufacturers of shotguns and rifles have pushed their creativity and resources to make hunting easier, especially for "casual" sportsmen,—and to take even more advantage of the game! Check out this progression scale:

Fifty Years' Increase In The Deadliness Of Firearms.
KIND OF GUN. ESTIMATED DEGREE OF DEADLINESS.
Single-shot muzzle loader xx 10
Single-shot breech-loader xxxxxx 30
Double-barrel breech-loader xxxxxxxxxx 50
Choke-bore breech-loader xxxxxxxxxxxx 60
Repeating rifle xxxxxxxxxxxx 60
Repeating rifle, with silencer xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 70
"Pump" shot-gun (6 shots) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 90
Automatic or autoloading" shot-guns, 5 shots xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 100

The Output of 1911. —At a recent hearing before a committee of the House of Representatives at Washington, a representative of the gun-making industry reported that in the year 1911 ten American manufacturing concerns turned out the following:

The Output of 1911. —At a recent hearing before a committee of the House of Representatives in Washington, a representative from the gun manufacturing industry reported that in 1911, ten American manufacturers produced the following:

391,875 shot-guns,
666,643 rifles, and
580,042 revolvers.

There are 66 factories producing firearms and ammunition, employing $39,377,000 of invested capital and 15,000 employees.

There are 66 factories that make guns and ammunition, with an investment of $39,377,000 and a workforce of 15,000 employees.

The sole and dominant thought of many gunmakers is to make the very deadliest guns that human skill can invent, sell them as fast as [Page 146] possible, and declare dividends on their stock. The Remington, Winchester, Marlin, Stevens and Union Companies are engaged in a mad race to see who can turn out the deadliest guns, and the most of them. On the market to-day there are five pump-guns, that fire six shots each, in about six seconds, without removal from the shoulder, by the quick sliding of a sleeve under the barrel, that ejects the empty shell and inserts a loaded one. There are two automatics that fire five shots each in five seconds or less, by five pulls on the trigger! The autoloading gun is reloaded and cocked again wholly by its own recoil. Now, if these are not machine guns, what are they?

The main focus of many gun manufacturers is to create the deadliest guns possible, sell them as quickly as they can, and pay out dividends to their shareholders. Companies like Remington, Winchester, Marlin, Stevens, and Union are in a frantic competition to produce the most lethal and numerous firearms. Currently on the market, there are five pump-action shotguns that can fire six shots each in about six seconds, all while remaining shouldered, thanks to a quick sliding sleeve under the barrel that ejects the empty shell and loads a new one. There are also two automatic guns that can shoot five times in five seconds or less, with just five trigger pulls! The autoloading gun reloads and cocks itself entirely through its own recoil. Now, if these aren't machine guns, then what are they?

In view of the great scarcity of feathered game, and the number of deadly machine guns already on the market, the production of the last and deadliest automatic gun (by the Winchester Arms Company), already in great demand, is a crime against wild life, no less.

In light of the severe shortage of birds for hunting and the many lethal machine guns available, producing the latest and most dangerous automatic gun (by the Winchester Arms Company), which is already highly sought after, is a serious offense against wildlife.

Every human action is a matter of taste and individual honor.

Every human action reflects personal preference and individual integrity.

It is natural for the duck-butchers of Currituck to love the automatic shot-guns as they do, because they kill the most ducks per flock. With two of them in his boat, holding ten shots, one expert duck-killer can,—and sometimes actually does, so it is said,—get every duck out of a flock, up to seven or eight.

It’s only natural for the duck butchers of Currituck to love automatic shotguns as much as they do, since they take down the most ducks per flock. With two of these guns in his boat, each holding ten shots, one skilled duck hunter can—and sometimes actually does, as the story goes—get every single duck out of a flock, up to seven or eight.

It is natural for an awkward and blundering wing-shot to love the deadliest gun, in order that he may make as good a bag as an expert shot can make with a double-barreled gun. It is natural for the hunter who does not care a rap about the extermination of species to love the gun that will enable him to kill up to the bag limit, every time he takes the field. It is natural for men who don't think, or who think in circles, to say "so long as I observe the lawful bag limit, what difference does it make what kind of a gun I use?"

It’s only natural for a clumsy shooter to favor the most lethal gun, hoping to bag as many birds as an expert can with a double-barreled gun. It makes sense for a hunter who couldn’t care less about wiping out species to love the gun that lets him reach the bag limit every time he goes out. It’s typical for people who don’t think critically, or who think in circles, to say, “As long as I stick to the legal bag limit, does it really matter what kind of gun I use?”

It is natural for the Remington, and Winchester, and Marlin gun-makers to say, as they do, "Enforce the laws! Shorten the open seasons! Reduce the bag limit, and then it won't matter what guns are used! But,—DON'T touch autoloading guns! Don't hamper Inventive Genius!"

It’s typical for the Remington, Winchester, and Marlin gun manufacturers to say, as they do, “Enforce the laws! Shorten the open seasons! Lower the bag limit, and then it won’t matter what guns are used! But—DON’T touch autoloading guns! Don’t stifle Inventive Genius!”

Is it not high time for American sportsmen to cease taking their moral principles and their codes of ethics from the gun-makers?

Isn't it about time for American athletes to stop getting their moral values and ethics from gun manufacturers?

Here is a question that I would like to put before every hunter of game in America:

Here’s a question I want to ask every game hunter in America:

In view of the alarming scarcity of game, in view of the impending extermination of species by legal hunting, can any high-minded sportsman, can any good citizen either sell a machine shot-gun or use one in hunting?

Given the concerning shortage of game and the looming extinction of species due to legal hunting, can any principled sportsman or any good citizen justify selling or using a machine shotgun for hunting?

A gentleman is incapable of taking an unfair advantage of any wild creature; therefore a gentleman cannot use punt guns for ducks, dynamite for game fish, or automatic or pump guns in bird-shooting. The machine guns and "silencers" are grossly unfair, and like gang-hooks, nets and [Page 147] dynamite for trout and bass, their use in hunting must everywhere be prohibited by law. Times have changed, and the lines for protection must be more tightly drawn.

A gentleman cannot take unfair advantage of any wild animal; therefore, a gentleman shouldn't use punt guns for ducks, dynamite for game fish, or automatic or pump guns for bird hunting. Machine guns and "silencers" are extremely unfair, and like gang hooks, nets, and [Page 147] dynamite for trout and bass, their use in hunting should be banned everywhere by law. Times have changed, and the rules for protection need to be stricter.

THE CHAMPION GAME SLAUGHTER CASE

THE CHAMPION GAME MURDER CASE

One Hour's Slaughter (218 Geese) With Two Automatic Shot-Guns

One Hour's Slaughter (218 Geese) With Two Automatic Shotguns

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Judge Orlady) has decided that the Pennsylvania law against the use of automatic guns in hunting is entirely constitutional, because every state has a right to say how its game may and may not be killed.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Judge Orlady) has ruled that the Pennsylvania law prohibiting the use of automatic guns for hunting is completely constitutional, as each state has the authority to determine how its game can and cannot be hunted.

It is up to the American People to say now whether their wild life shall be slaughtered by machinery, or not.

It’s up to the American people to decide now whether their wildlife will be killed by machines or not.

If they are willing that it should be, then let us be consistent and say—away with all "conservation!" The game conservators can endure a gameless and birdless continent quite as well as the average citizen can.

If they want it to happen, then let's be consistent and say—forget all about "conservation!" The game conservators can handle a continent without game or birds just as well as the average person can.

How They Work. —There are a few apologists for the automatic and pump guns who cheerfully say, "So long as the bag limit is observed what difference does it make how the birds are killed?"

How They Operate. —There are some defenders of automatic and pump shotguns who happily say, "As long as the bag limit is followed, what difference does it make how the birds are taken?"

It is strange that a conscientious man should ask such a question, when the answer is apparent.

It’s odd that a thoughtful person would ask such a question when the answer is clear.

We reply, "The difference is that an automatic or pump gun will kill fully twice as many waterfowl as a double-barrel, if not more; and it is highly undesirable that every gunner should get the bag limit of [Page 148] birds, or any number near it! The birds can not stand it. Moreover, the best states for ducks and geese have no bag limits on those birds! To-day, on Currituck Sound, for example, the market hunters are killing all the waterfowl they can sell. On Marsh Island, Louisiana, one man has killed 369 ducks in one day, and another market gunner killed 430 in one day.

We respond, "The difference is that an automatic or pump shotgun can kill at least twice as many waterfowl as a double-barrel, if not more; and it's really undesirable for every hunter to hit the bag limit of [Page 148] birds, or any number close to it! The birds can't handle it. Plus, the best states for ducks and geese don't have bag limits for those birds! Today, for instance, in Currituck Sound, market hunters are taking as many waterfowl as they can sell. On Marsh Island, Louisiana, one person killed 369 ducks in a single day, while another market hunter killed 430 in one day."

The automatic and the "pump" shot-guns are the favorite weapons of the game-hog who makes a specialty of geese and ducks. It is no uncommon thing for a gunner who shoots a machine gun to get, with one gun, as high as eight birds out of one flock. A man who has himself done this has told me so.

The automatic and "pump" shotguns are the go-to weapons for the game-hog who specializes in hunting geese and ducks. It's not unusual for a shooter using a machine gun to take down as many as eight birds from one flock with a single gun. Someone who has done this himself mentioned it to me.

The Champion Game-Slaughter Case. —Here is a story from California that is no fairy tale. It was published, most innocently, in a western magazine, with the illustration that appears herewith, and in which please notice the automatic shot-gun:

The Champion Game-Slaying Case. —Here’s a true story from California that’s no fairy tale. It was published, quite innocently, in a western magazine, along with the illustration included here, so please take note of the automatic shotgun:

"February 5th, I and a friend were at one of the Glenn County Club's camps. … Neither of us having ever had the pleasure of shooting over live decoys, we were anxious, and could hardly wait for the sport to commence. On arriving at the scene we noticed holes which had been dug in the ground, just large enough for a man to crawl into. These holes were used for hiding places, and were deep enough so the sportsmen would be entirely out of sight of the game. The birds are so wild that to move a finger will frighten them. …

"On February 5th, a friend and I were at one of the Glenn County Club's camps. Neither of us had ever had the chance to shoot over live decoys, so we were excited and could hardly wait for the action to start. When we got there, we noticed holes that had been dug in the ground, just big enough for a person to crawl into. These holes served as hiding spots and were deep enough for hunters to be completely out of sight from the game. The birds are so skittish that even moving a finger would scare them away."

"The decoys are wild geese which had been crippled and tamed for this purpose. They are placed inside of silk net fences which are located on each side of the holes dug for hiding places. These nets are the color of the ground and it is impossible for the wild geese flying overhead to detect the difference.

"The decoys are wild geese that have been injured and trained for this purpose. They are placed inside silk net fences on each side of the holes dug for hiding spots. These nets match the color of the ground, making it impossible for the wild geese flying above to see the difference."

"After we had investigated everything the expert caller and owner of the outfit exclaimed: 'Into your holes!'

"After we checked everything, the expert caller and owner of the outfit exclaimed, 'Into your holes!'"

"We noticed in the distance a flock of geese coming. Our caller in a few seconds had their attention, and they headed towards our decoys. Soon they were directly over us, but out of easy range of our guns. We were anxious to shoot, but in obedience to our boss had to keep still, and soon noticed that the birds were soaring around and in a short time were within fifteen or twenty feet of us. At that moment we heard the command, 'Punch 'em!' and the bombardment that followed was beyond imagining. We had fired five shots apiece and found we had bagged ten geese from this one flock.

"We spotted a flock of geese in the distance. Our caller quickly caught their attention, and they started flying towards our decoys. Soon they were directly above us, but just out of easy shooting range. We were eager to shoot, but following our boss's orders, we had to stay quiet. Before long, we noticed the birds circling around and they were soon within fifteen or twenty feet of us. At that moment, we heard the command, 'Punch 'em!' and the chaos that followed was incredible. We had fired five shots each and ended up bagging ten geese from this one flock.

"At the end of one hour's shooting we had 218 birds to our credit and were out of ammunition.

"At the end of an hour of shooting, we had 218 birds to our name and ran out of ammunition."

"On finding that no more shells were in our pits we took our dead geese to the camp and returned with a new supply of ammunition. We remained in the pits during the entire day. When the sun had gone behind the mountains we summed up our kill and it amounted to 450 geese!

"After realizing we were out of shells in our pits, we brought our dead geese back to camp and came back with a fresh supply of ammo. We stayed in the pits all day long. When the sun set behind the mountains, we tallied our catch and it came to 450 geese!

"The picture shown with this article gives a view of the first hour's shoot. A photograph would have been taken of the remainder of the shoot, but it being warm weather the birds had to be shipped at once in order to keep them from spoiling.

"The picture shown with this article gives a view of the first hour's shoot. A photograph would have been taken of the rest of the shoot, but since it was warm weather, the birds had to be shipped right away to keep them from spoiling."

SLAUGHTERED ACCORDING TO LAW

SLAUGHTERED AS PER THE LAW

A Result of a Faulty System. Such Pictures as this are Very Common in Sportsmen's Magazines. Note the Automatic Gun

A Result of a Faulty System. Images like this are very common in sports magazines. Check out the automatic gun.

"Supper was then eaten, after which we were driven back to Willows; both agreeing that it was one of the greatest days of sport we ever had, and wishing that we might, through the courtesy of the Glenn County Goose Club, have another such day. C.H.B."

"Supper was then eaten, after which we were driven back to Willows; both of us agreed that it was one of the best days of fun we ever had, and we hoped that, thanks to the Glenn County Goose Club, we could have another day like it. C.H.B."

Another picture was published in a Canadian magazine, illustrating a story from which I quote:

Another picture was published in a Canadian magazine, showing a story from which I quote:

"I fixed the decoys, hid my boat and took my position in the blind. My man started his work with a will and hustled the ducks out of every cove, inlet or piece of marsh for two miles around. I had barely time to slip the cartridges into my guns—one a double and the other a five shot automatic—when I saw a brace of birds coming toward me. They sailed in over my decoys. I rose to the occasion, and the leader up-ended and tumbled in among the decoys. The other bird, unable to stop quick enough, came directly over me. He closed his wings and struck the ground in the rear of the blind.

"I set up the decoys, hid my boat, and took my spot in the blind. My guy started working hard and pushed the ducks out of every cove, inlet, or patch of marsh for two miles around. I barely had time to load the cartridges into my guns—one a double and the other a five-shot automatic—when I spotted a pair of birds heading my way. They glided in over my decoys. I seized the moment, and the leader flipped and crashed down among the decoys. The other bird, unable to stop in time, flew right over me. It folded its wings and landed behind the blind."

"More and more followed. Sometimes they came singly, and then in twos [Page 150] and threes. I kept busy and attended to each bird as quickly as possible. Whenever there was a lull in the flight I went out in the boat and picked up the dead, leaving the wounded to take chances with any gunner lucky enough to catch them in open and smooth water. A bird handy in the air is worth two wounded ones in the water. Twice I took six dead birds out of the water for seven shots, and both guns empty.

"More and more kept coming. Sometimes they arrived one at a time, and then in pairs and groups of three. I stayed busy and took care of each bird as fast as I could. Whenever there was a break in the action, I went out in the boat to collect the dead ones, letting the injured ones take their chances with any hunters fortunate enough to spot them in open and calm water. A bird soaring in the air is worth two injured ones in the water. Twice I retrieved six dead birds from the water after taking seven shots, with both guns empty.

"The ball thus opened, the birds commenced to move in all directions. Until the morning's flight was over I was kept busy pumping lead, first with the 10, then with the automatic, reloading, picking up the dead, etc."

"The ball opened, and the birds started to move in all directions. I kept busy pumping lead until the morning's flight was done, first with the 10, then with the automatic, reloading, picking up the dead, and so on."

And the reader will observe that the harmless, innocent, inoffensive automatic shot gun, that "don't matter if you enforce the bag limit," figures prominently in both stories and both photographs.

And the reader will notice that the harmless, innocent, and non-threatening automatic shotgun, that "doesn't matter if you enforce the bag limit," plays a major role in both stories and both photographs.

A Story of Two Pump Guns and Geese: —It comes from Aberdeen, S.D. (Sand Lake), in the spring of 1911. Mr. J.J. Humphrey tells it, in Outdoor Life magazine for July, 1911.

A Tale of Two Shotguns and Geese: —It comes from Aberdeen, S.D. (Sand Lake), in the spring of 1911. Mr. J.J. Humphrey shares it in Outdoor Life magazine for July, 1911.

"Smith and I were about a hundred yards from them [the flock of Canada geese], when Murphy scared them. They rose in a dense mass and came directly between Smith and me. We were about gunshot distance apart, and they were not over thirty feet in the air when we opened up on them with our pump guns and No. 5 shot. When the smoke cleared away and we had rounded up the cripples we found we had twenty-one geese. I have heard of bigger killings out in this country, but never positively knew of them."

"Smith and I were about a hundred yards from the flock of Canada geese when Murphy startled them. They took off as a thick group and flew right between Smith and me. We were close enough to shoot, and they were only about thirty feet in the air when we opened fire with our pump shotguns and No. 5 shot. Once the smoke cleared and we collected the injured ones, we counted twenty-one geese. I've heard of bigger hauls out here, but I never knew for sure about them."

So then: those two gunners averaged 10-1/2 wild geese per pump gun out of one flock! And yet there are wise and reflective sportsmen who say, "What difference does the kind of gun make so long as you live up to the law?"

So then: those two gunners averaged 10.5 wild geese per pump gun out of one flock! And yet there are thoughtful and contemplative sports enthusiasts who say, "What does it matter what type of gun you use as long as you follow the law?"

I think that the pump and automatic guns make about 75 per-cent of difference, against the game; that is all!

I believe that the pump and automatic guns make about 75 percent of the difference against the game; that's it!

The number of shot-guns now in use in the United States is almost beyond belief. About six years ago a gentleman interested in the manufacture of such weapons informed me, and his statement has never been disputed, that every year about 500,000 new shot-guns were sold in the United States. The number of shot cartridges annually produced by our four great cartridge companies has been reliably estimated as follows:

The number of shotguns currently in use in the United States is almost unbelievable. About six years ago, a guy involved in the production of these weapons told me, and nobody has ever challenged his claim, that every year around 500,000 new shotguns are sold in the United States. The number of shot cartridges produced each year by our four major cartridge companies has been reliably estimated as follows:

Winchester Arms Co 300,000,000
Union Metallic Cartridge Co 250,000,000
Peters Cartridge Co 150,000,000
Western Cartridge Co 75,000,000
_____________
775,000,000

We must stop all the holes in the barrel, or eventually lose all the water. No group of bird-slaughterers is entitled to immunity. We will not "limit the bag, and enforce the laws," while we permit the makers and users of autoloading and pump guns to kill at will, as they demand.

We need to fix all the leaks in the barrel, or we'll eventually lose all the water. No group of bird hunters should be exempt from accountability. We won’t "restrict the catch and enforce the laws" while allowing those who make and use automatic and pump-action shotguns to shoot freely, as they demand.


A Letter That Tells Its Own Story

A Letter That Tells Its Own Story


Yes; we will "limit the bag" and "enforce the laws;" but the machine guns and the alien shooters shall be eliminated at the same time! Each state has the power to regulate, absolutely, down to the smallest detail, the manner in which the game of The People shall be taken or not taken; and such laws are absolutely constitutional. If we can legislate punt guns and dynamite out of use, the machine guns and silencers can be treated similarly.

Yes; we will "limit the bag" and "enforce the laws;" but the machine guns and the foreign shooters will be taken out at the same time! Each state has the authority to regulate, completely, down to the tiniest detail, how the game of The People should be hunted or not hunted; and those laws are completely constitutional. If we can make laws to ban punt guns and dynamite, we can handle machine guns and silencers the same way.

No immunity for wild-life exterminators.

No immunity for wildlife exterminators.

The following unprejudiced testimony from a New York business man who is a sportsman, with a fine game preserve of his own, should be of general interest. It was written to G.O. Shields, March 21, 1906.

The following unbiased testimony from a New York businessman who is also an avid sportsman, with an excellent game preserve of his own, should be of general interest. It was written to G.O. Shields on March 21, 1906.

Dear Sir:

Dear Sir:

Regarding the use of the automatic shot-gun, would say that I am a member of two southern ducking clubs where these guns are used very extensively. I have seen a flock of ducks come into a blind where one, two, or even three of these guns were in use, and have seen as many as eleven shots poured into a single flock.

About the automatic shotgun, I’m a member of two southern duck clubs where these guns are commonly used. I’ve seen a group of ducks come into a blind while one, two, or even three of these guns were being fired, and I’ve seen as many as eleven shots taken at one flock.

We have considerable poaching on one of these clubs, the territory being so extensive that it is impossible to prevent it. We own 60,000 acres, and these poachers, I am told, nearly all use the automatic guns. They frequently kill six or eight ducks out of one flock—first taking a raking shot on the water, and then getting in the balance of the magazine before the flock is out of range. In fact, some of them carry two guns, and are able to discharge a part of the second magazine into the same flock.

There’s a lot of poaching happening at one of these clubs, and the area is so large that we can’t control it. We own 60,000 acres, and I’ve been informed that almost all the poachers use automatic guns. They often take down six or eight ducks from a single flock—first firing a sweeping shot at the water, and then unloading the rest of the magazine before the flock flies out of range. Some even bring two guns and can shoot part of the second magazine into the same flock.

As I told you the other evening, I am not so much against the gun when in the hands of gentlemen and real sportsmen, but, on account of its terrible possibilities for market hunters, I believe that the only safe way is to abolish it entirely, and that the better class should be willing to give up this weapon as being the only means of putting a stop to this willful game slaughter.

As I mentioned the other night, I don’t have a problem with guns when they’re in the hands of gentlemen and true sports enthusiasts. But due to their significant potential for abuse by market hunters, I think the only safe option is to eliminate them entirely. The better class should be willing to give up this weapon, as it’s the only way to put a stop to this intentional game slaughter.

Very truly yours,

Very truly yours,

Arthur Robinson.

Arthur Robinson.


HOW GENTLEMEN SPORTSMEN REGARD AUTOMATIC AND PUMP GUNS

HOW GENTLEMEN SPORTSMEN VIEW AUTOMATIC AND PUMP GUNS

Each one of the following organizations, chiefly clubs of gentlemen sportsmen, have adopted strong resolutions condemning the use of automatic guns in hunting, and either requesting or recommending the enactment of laws against their use:

Each one of the following organizations, mostly groups of male sports enthusiasts, has passed strong resolutions condemning the use of automatic guns in hunting and either requesting or suggesting the creation of laws against their use:

New York Zoological Society Henry Fairfield Osborn, President
The Camp-Fire Club of America Daniel C. Beard, President
Boone and Crockett Club W. Austin Wadsworth, President
New York State Fish, Game and Forest League 81 Clubs and Associations
New York Association for the Protection of Fish and Game Alfred Wagstaff, President
Lewis and Clark Club John M. Phillips, President
League of American Sportsmen G.O. Shields, President
Wild Life Protective Association W.T. Hornaday, President
WHERE AUTOMATIC GUNS ARE BARRED OUT BY LAW
PENNSYLVANIA, 1907 BRITISH COLUMBIA, 1911
NEW JERSEY, 1912 ONTARIO, 1907
SASKATCHEWAN, 1906 MANITOBA, 1909
NEW BRUNSWICK, 190 ALBERTA, 1907
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND, 1906
SPORTSMEN'S CLUBS WHEREIN THEY ARE BARRED BY CODES OF ETHICS AND RULES
Adirondack League Club, New York Tobico Hunting Club, Kawkawlin, Mich.
Blooming Grove Park Hunting and Fishing Club, Penn. Turtle Lake Club, Turtle Lake, Mich.
Greenwing Gun Club, Ottawa, Ill. Au Sable Forest Farm Club, Mich.
Western Ducking Club, Detroit, Minn. Wallace Ducking Club, Wild Fowl Bay, Mich.
Bolsa Chica Club, Los Angeles, Cal. Lomita Club, Los Angeles, Cal.
Westminster Club, Los Angeles, Cal. Golden West Club, Los Angeles, Cal.
Los Patos Club, Los Arigeles, Cal. Recreation Club, Los Angeles, Cal.
Pocahontas Club, Va.

A MODEL BILL TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF AUTOMATIC AND REPEATING SHOT GUNS IN HUNTING

A MODEL BILL TO BAN THE USE OF AUTOMATIC AND REPEATING SHOTGUNS IN HUNTING

Section 1. It shall be unlawful to use in hunting or shooting birds or animals of any kind, any automatic or repeating shot gun or pump gun, or any shot-gun holding more than two cartridges at one time, or that may be fired more than twice without removal from the shoulder for reloading.

Section 1. It’s illegal to use any automatic or semi-automatic shotgun, pump-action gun, or any shotgun that holds more than two shells at a time, or that can be fired more than twice without being taken off the shoulder to reload, for hunting or shooting birds or animals of any kind.

Section 2. Violation of any provision of this act shall be punished by a fine of not less than twenty-five nor more than one hundred dollars for each offence; and the carrying, or possession in the woods, or in any field, or upon any water of any gun or other weapon the use of which is prohibited, as aforesaid, shall be prima facie evidence of the violation of this act.

Section 2. Violating any part of this law will result in a fine of at least twenty-five dollars and up to one hundred dollars for each offense; furthermore, carrying or possessing any prohibited gun or weapon in the woods, fields, or on any body of water will serve as clear evidence of breaking this law.


The English 3-barrel "Scatter Rifle," for Ducks. —All gunners who find machine guns good enough for them will be delighted by the news that an Englishman whose identity is concealed under the initials "F.M.M." has invented and manufactured a 3-barreled rifle specially intended to kill ducks that are beyond the reach of a choke-bore shotgun. The weapon discharges all three barrels simultaneously. In the London Field, of Dec. 9, 1911, it is described by a writer who also thoughtfully conceals his identity under a nom-de-plume. After a trial of 48 shots, the writer declares that "the 3-barreled is a really practicable weapon," and that with it one could bag wild-fowl that were quite out of reach of any shot-gun. Just why a Gatling gun or a Maxim should not be employed for the same purpose, the writer fails to state. The use of either would be quite as sportsmanlike, and as fair to the game. There are great possibilities in ducking mortars, also.

The English 3-barrel "Scatter Rifle" for duck hunting. —All hunters who think machine guns are fine will be excited to hear that an Englishman, who remains anonymous under the initials "F.M.M.," has created a 3-barreled rifle specifically designed to take down ducks that are too far for a choke-bore shotgun. The weapon fires all three barrels at once. In the London Field, from Dec. 9, 1911, a writer, who also keeps their identity hidden under a pseudonym, describes it. After testing it with 48 shots, the writer claims that "the 3-barreled is a genuinely practical weapon," capable of bagging wildfowl that would be impossible to hit with any shotgun. The writer doesn’t explain why a Gatling gun or a Maxim shouldn’t be used for the same purpose. Using either would be just as sportsmanlike and fair to the game. There are also significant possibilities in ducking mortars.

The "Sunday Gun." —A new weapon of peculiar form and great deadliness to song birds, has recently come into use. Because of the manner of its use, it is known as the "Sunday gun." It is specially adapted to concealment on the person. A man could go through a reception with one of these deadly weapons absolutely concealed under his dress coat! It is a weapon with two barrels, rifle and shot; and it enables the user to kill anything from a humming-bird up to a deer. What the shot-barrel can not kill, the rifle will. It is not a gun that any sportsman would own, save as a curiosity, or for target use.

The "Sunday Gun." —A new type of weapon that is uniquely designed and highly effective against songbirds has recently been introduced. Because of how it’s used, it’s called the "Sunday gun." It’s designed to be easily hidden on a person. Someone could attend a gathering with one of these lethal weapons completely concealed under their dress coat! It features two barrels, one for rifles and one for shot, allowing the user to take down anything from a hummingbird to a deer. Whatever the shot barrel can’t hit, the rifle can. This isn’t a gun any sportsman would want to own, except perhaps as a novelty or for target practice.

The State Ornithologist of Massachusetts, Mr. E.H. Forbush, informs me that already the "Sunday gun" has become a scourge to the bird life of that state. Thousands of them are used by men and boys who live in [Page 154] cities and towns, and are able to get into the country only on Sundays. They conceal them under their coats, on Sunday mornings, go out into the country, and spend the day in shooting small birds and mammals. The dead birds are concealed in various pockets, the Sunday gun goes under the coat, and at nightfall the guerrilla rides back to the city with an innocent smile on his face, as if he had spent a day in harmless enjoyment of the beauties of nature.

The State Ornithologist of Massachusetts, Mr. E.H. Forbush, tells me that the "Sunday gun" has become a serious threat to the bird population in that state. Thousands are used by men and boys from [Page 154] cities and towns, who can only escape to the countryside on Sundays. They hide the guns under their coats on Sunday mornings, head out to the country, and spend the day shooting small birds and mammals. The dead birds are stuffed into various pockets, the Sunday gun stays under the coat, and by nightfall, the hunter returns to the city with an innocent smile, as if he had spent the day appreciating the beauty of nature.

The "Sunday gun" is on sale everywhere, and it is said to be in use both by American and Italian killers of song-birds. It weighs only two pounds, eight ounces, and its cost is so trifling that any guerrilla who wishes one can easily find the money for its purchase. There are in the United States at least a million men and boys quite mean enough to use this weapon on song-birds, swallows, woodpeckers, nuthatches, rabbits and squirrels, and like other criminals, hide both weapon and loot in their clothing. So long as this gun is in circulation, no small bird is safe, at any season, near any city or town.

The "Sunday gun" is for sale everywhere, and it's said to be used by both American and Italian songbird hunters. It weighs just two pounds, eight ounces, and costs so little that any guerrilla who wants one can easily come up with the cash. There are at least a million men and boys in the United States who are ruthless enough to use this weapon on songbirds, swallows, woodpeckers, nuthatches, rabbits, and squirrels, and like other criminals, they hide both the weapon and their catch in their clothes. As long as this gun is available, no small bird is safe at any time of year near any city or town.

Now, what are the People going to do about it?

Now, what are the people going to do about it?

My recommendation is that each state enact a law in the following terms:

My suggestion is that each state pass a law with the following wording:

Be it enacted, etc.—That from and after the passage of this act it shall be unlawful for any person to use in hunting, or to carry concealed on the person, any shotgun, or rifle, or combination of shotgun and rifle, with a barrel or barrels less than twenty-eight inches in length, or with a skeleton stock fixed on a hinge.

Be it enacted, etc.—That starting from the passage of this act, it will be illegal for anyone to use in hunting, or to carry hidden on their person, any shotgun or rifle, or a combination of both, with a barrel or barrels shorter than twenty-eight inches, or with a skeleton stock attached on a hinge.

The carrying of any rifle or shotgun concealed on the person shall constitute a felony.

Carrying any rifle or shotgun hidden on your person is a felony.

The penalties for hunting with any gun specially adapted to concealment should be not less than $50 fine or two months imprisonment at hard labor, and the carrying of such weapons concealed should be $100 or four months at hard labor.

The fines for hunting with any gun modified for concealment should be no less than a $50 fine or two months in jail with hard labor, and carrying such concealed weapons should be a $100 fine or four months in jail with hard labor.

Incidentally, we wonder what will be the next devilish device for the destruction of wild life that American inventive genius will produce.

Incidentally, we wonder what the next harmful gadget for destroying wildlife that American creativity will come up with will be.

THE "SUNDAY GUN!"

THE "SUNDAY GUN!"

A Deadly Combination of Concealable Rifle-and-Shot-Gun.

A deadly combination of a hidden rifle and shotgun.


THE WILDERNESS OF NORTH AMERICA (SHADED) AND THE ARCTIC PRAIRIES, WELL STOCKED WITH BIG GAME

THE WILDERNESS OF NORTH AMERICA (SHADED) AND THE ARCTIC PRAIRIES, PLENTY FULL OF BIG GAME


[Page 156]
CHAPTER XVI
THE PRESENT AND FUTURE OF NORTH AMERICAN BIG GAME

The subject of this chapter opens up a vast field of facts and conclusions, quite broad enough to fill a whole volume. In the space at our disposal here it is possible to offer only a summary of the subject, without attempting to prove our statements by the production of detailed evidence.

The topic of this chapter covers a wide range of facts and conclusions, enough to fill an entire book. In the limited space we have here, we can only provide a summary of the subject, without trying to support our claims with detailed evidence.

To say that all over the world, the large land mammals are being destroyed more rapidly than they are breeding, would not be literally true, for the reason that there are yet many areas that are almost untouched by the destroying hand of civilized man. It is true, however, that all the unspoiled areas rapidly are growing fewer and smaller. It is also true that in all the regions of the earth that are easily penetrable by civilized man, the wild life is being killed faster than it breeds, and of necessity it is disappearing. This is why the British are now so urgently bestirring themselves to create game preserves in all the countries that they own.

To say that around the world, large land mammals are being wiped out faster than they can reproduce wouldn't be completely accurate, because there are still many areas that remain nearly untouched by civilized humans. However, it is true that these untouched areas are quickly becoming fewer and smaller. It's also a fact that in all regions of the world that are easily accessible to civilized people, wildlife is being killed off faster than it can breed, and as a result, it is disappearing. This is why the British are now urgently working to establish game reserves in all the countries they occupy.

It is one of the inexorable laws of Nature, to which I know of not one exception, that large hoofed animals which live on open plains, on open mountains, or in regions that are thinly forested, always are easily found and easily exterminated. All such animals have a weak hold on life. This is because it is so difficult for them to hide, and so very easy for man to creep up within the killing range of modern, high-power, long-range rifles. Is it not pitiful to think of animals like the caribou, moose, white sheep and bear trying to survive on the naked ridges and bald mountains of Yukon Territory and Alaska! With a modern rifle, the greatest duffer on earth can creep up within killing distance of any of the big game of the North.

It’s one of the unavoidable laws of nature, and I know of no exceptions, that large hoofed animals living on open plains, in open mountains, or in areas with sparse forests are always easy to find and easy to eliminate. All these animals have a fragile grip on life. This is because they struggle to hide, while it’s very simple for humans to sneak close enough to take a shot with modern, high-power, long-range rifles. Isn’t it tragic to think about animals like caribou, moose, white sheep, and bears trying to survive on the bare ridges and treeless mountains of Yukon Territory and Alaska? With a modern rifle, even the most inexperienced hunter can get within shooting range of any of the big game in the North.

The gray wolf is practically the only large animal that is able to hide successfully and survive in the treeless regions of the North; but his room is always preferable to his company, because he, too, is a destroyer of big game.

The gray wolf is pretty much the only large animal that can successfully hide and survive in the treeless areas of the North; however, being alone is always better than being with him, since he’s also a hunter of big game.

I am tempted to try to map out roughly what are to-day the unopened and undestroyed wild haunts of big game in North America. In doing this, however, I warn the reader not to be deceived into thinking that because game still exists in those regions, those areas therefore constitute a permanent preserve and safe breeding-ground for large mammals. That is very, very far from being the case. The further "opening up " of the [Page 157] wilderness areas, as I shall call them for convenience, can and surely will quickly wipe out their big game; for throughout nine-tenths of those areas it holds to life by very slender threads.

I’m tempted to roughly outline the untouched and undamaged wild areas for big game in North America today. However, I want to caution the reader not to be misled into thinking that just because game still exists in those regions, those areas serve as a permanent refuge and safe breeding ground for large mammals. That couldn't be further from the truth. The further "development" of the [Page 157] wilderness areas, as I’ll refer to them for convenience, can and definitely will quickly eliminate their big game; because throughout ninety percent of those areas, it survives on very thin threads.

To-day the unopened and undestroyed wilderness areas of North America, wherein large mammals still live in a normal wild state, are in general as follows:

To date, the untouched and undamaged wilderness regions of North America, where large mammals still thrive in their natural habitat, are generally as follows:

The Arctic Barren Grounds , or Arctic Prairies, north of the limit of trees, embracing the Barren Grounds of northern Canada, the great arctic archipelago, Ellesmere, Melville and Grant Lands and Greenland. This region is the home of the musk-ox and three species of arctic caribou.

The Arctic Tundra, or Arctic Prairies, located north of the tree line, include the Barren Grounds of northern Canada, the vast Arctic archipelago, Ellesmere, Melville, Grant Lands, and Greenland. This area is home to the musk ox and three species of Arctic caribou.

The Alaska-Yukon Region , inhabited by the moose, white mountain sheep, mountain goat, four species of caribou, and half a dozen species of Alaska brown, grizzly and black bears.

The Alaska-Yukon Area, home to moose, Dall sheep, mountain goats, four types of caribou, and several species of Alaska brown, grizzly, and black bears.

Northern Ontario, Quebec, Labrador And Newfoundland , inhabited by moose, woodland caribou, white-tailed deer and black bear.

Northern Ontario, Quebec, Labrador, and Newfoundland, home to moose, woodland caribou, white-tailed deer, and black bears.

British Columbia , inhabited by a magnificent big-game fauna embracing the moose, elk, caribou of two species, white sheep, black sheep, big-horn sheep, mule deer, white-tailed deer, mountain goat, grizzly, black and inland white bears.

BC, home to an amazing range of big-game animals, including moose, elk, two species of caribou, white sheep, black sheep, big-horn sheep, mule deer, white-tailed deer, mountain goats, grizzly bears, black bears, and inland white bears.

The Sierra Madre Of Mexico , containing jaguar, puma, grizzly and black bears, mule deer, white-tailed deer, antelope, mountain sheep and peccaries.

The Sierra Madre in Mexico, home to jaguars, pumas, grizzly bears, black bears, mule deer, white-tailed deer, antelope, mountain sheep, and peccaries.

I have necessarily omitted all those regions of the United States and Canada that still contain a remnant of big game, but have been literally "shot to pieces" by gunners.

I have intentionally left out all those areas of the United States and Canada that still have some big game but have been literally "shot to pieces" by hunters.

In the United States and southern Canada there are about fifteen localities which contain a supply of big game sufficient that a conscientious sportsman might therein hunt and kill one head per year with a clear conscience. All others should be closed for five years! Here is the list of availables; and regarding it there will be about as many opinions as there are big-game sportsmen:

In the United States and southern Canada, there are around fifteen places where there's enough big game for a responsible hunter to hunt and harvest one animal per year without feeling guilty. All others should be closed for five years! Here’s the list of available locations; and there will be just as many opinions about it as there are big-game hunters:


HUNTING GROUNDS IN AND NEAR THE UNITED STATES AND SOUTHERN CANADA WHEREIN IT IS RIGHT TO HUNT BIG GAME

HUNTING GROUNDS IN AND NEAR THE UNITED STATES AND SOUTHERN CANADA WHERE IT IS PERMITTED TO HUNT BIG GAME

The Maine Woods : Well stocked with white-tailed deer.

The Maine Woods : Abundant with white-tailed deer.

New Brunswick : Well stocked with moose; a few caribou, deer and black bear.

New Brunswick : Abundant with moose; a few caribou, deer, and black bears.

White Mountains Of New Hampshire And Vermont : For deer.

White Mountains of New Hampshire and Vermont : For deer.

The Adirondacks, New York : Well stocked with white-tailed deer, only.

The Adirondacks, NY : Well stocked only with white-tailed deer.

Pennsylvania Mountains : Contain many deer and black bears, and soon will contain more.

Pennsylvania Mountains : Home to many deer and black bears, and will soon have even more.

Northern Minnesota : Deer and moose.

Northern Minnesota: Deer and moose.

Northern Michigan And Wisconsin : White-tailed deer.

Northern Michigan and Wisconsin : White-tailed deer.

Northwestern Wyoming : Thousands of elk in fall and winter; a few deer, grizzly and black bears, but no sheep that it would be right to kill.

Northwest Wyoming : Thousands of elk in the fall and winter; a few deer, grizzly and black bears, but no sheep that it would be ethically right to hunt.

Western And Southwestern Montana : Elk in season, mule and white-tail deer; no sheep that it would be right to kill.

Western and Southwestern Montana : Elk are in season, along with mule and white-tailed deer; there are no sheep that should be hunted.

Northwestern Montana : Mule and white-tailed deer, only. No sheep, bear, moose, elk or antelope to kill!

Northwest Montana : Only mule and white-tailed deer. No sheep, bear, moose, elk, or antelope to hunt!

Wyoming, East Of Yellowstone Park : A few elk, by migration from the Park; a few deer, and bear of two species.

Wyoming, east of Yellowstone Park : A few elk, migrating from the Park; some deer, and two types of bears.

Northern Woods Of Ontario And Quebec : Moose; deer.

Northern Woods of Ontario and Quebec: Moose; deer.

Southern British Columbia : Goat, a few sheep and deer; grizzly bear. Moose, caribou and elk should not be killed.

Southern BC : Goats, some sheep, and deer; grizzly bears. Moose, caribou, and elk should not be hunted.

Northern British Columbia : Six fine species of big game.

Northern BC : Six great species of big game.

Northwestern Alberta : Grizzly bear, big-horn and mountain goat.

Northwest Alberta : Grizzly bear, bighorn sheep, and mountain goat.


Under existing conditions I regard the above-named hunting grounds as nearly all in which it is right or fair for big-game hunting now to be permitted, even on a strict basis. Nearly all others should immediately be closed, for large game, for ten years.

Under current conditions, I see the above-mentioned hunting areas as almost all where big-game hunting should still be allowed, even under strict rules. Almost all other areas should be closed to large game hunting for the next ten years.

Of course such a proceeding, if carried into effect, would provoke loud protests from sportsmen, gunners, game-hogs, pot-hunters and others; but I only wish to high heaven that we had the power to carry such a program as that into effect! Then we would see some game in ten years; and our grand-children would thank us for some real big-game protection at a critical period.

Of course, if this plan were put into action, it would spark strong protests from hunters, shooters, poachers, and others; but I really wish we had the ability to implement a program like that! Then we would actually see some wildlife in ten years; and our grandchildren would be grateful to us for providing genuine big-game protection during a crucial time.

Except in the few localities above-mentioned, I regard the big-game situation in the United States and southern Canada as particularly desperate. Unless there is an immediate and complete revolution in this country from an era of slaughter to an era of preservation, as sure as the sun rises on the morrow, outside of the hard and fast game preserves, and places like Maine and the Adirondacks, this generation of Americans and near-Americans will live to see our country swept clean of big game!

Except for the few areas mentioned above, I see the big-game situation in the United States and southern Canada as quite dire. Unless there is an immediate and total shift in this country from a time of killing to a time of preservation, as surely as the sun rises tomorrow, outside of the strict game preserves and places like Maine and the Adirondacks, this generation of Americans and those nearby will witness our country wiped out of big game!

Two years ago, I did not believe this; but I do now. It is impossible to exaggerate the wide extent or the seriousness of this situation. In a country where any and every individual can rise and bluster, "I'm-just-as-good-as-you-are," and bellow for his "rights" as a "tax-payer," there is no stopping the millions who kill whenever there is an open season. And to many Americans, no right is dearer than the right to kill the game which by even the commonest law of equity belongs, not to the shooter exclusively, but partly to two thousand other persons who don't shoot at all!

Two years ago, I didn’t believe this, but now I do. It’s impossible to overstate how widespread and serious this situation is. In a country where anyone can stand up and shout, "I'm just as good as you are," and demand their "rights" as a "taxpayer," there’s no stopping the millions who hunt whenever they have the chance. For many Americans, no right is more precious than the right to kill game that, by the most basic principles of fairness, doesn’t belong solely to the person shooting, but is also shared with two thousand other people who don’t hunt at all!

Unless we come to an "About, face!" in quick time, all our big game outside the preserves is doomed to sure and quick extermination. This is not an individual opinion, merely: it is a fact; and a hundred thousand men know it to be such.

Unless we make a quick "About-face!", all our big game outside the protected areas is headed for certain and rapid extinction. This isn't just one person's opinion; it's a fact; and a hundred thousand men are aware of it.

Last winter (1911-12), because the deer of Montana were driven by cold and hunger out of the mountains and far down into the ranchmen's [Page 159] valleys, eleven thousand of them were ruthlessly slaughtered. State Game Warden Avare says that often heads of families took out as many licenses as there were persons in the family, and the whole quota was killed. Such people deserve to go deerless into the future; but we can not allow them to rob innocent people.

Last winter (1911-12), because the deer in Montana were pushed by the cold and hunger out of the mountains and deep into the ranchers' [Page 159] valleys, eleven thousand of them were brutally hunted down. State Game Warden Avare says that often heads of families bought as many licenses as there were people in the family, and they killed the entire quota. Such people deserve to face a future without deer; but we can't let them take advantage of innocent people.


OUR SPECIES OF BIG GAME

OUR TYPE OF BIG GAME

The Prong-Horned Antelope , unique and wonderful, will be one of the first species of North American big game to become totally extinct. We may see this come to pass within twenty years. They can not be bred in protection, save in very large fenced ranges. They are delicate, capricious, and easily upset. They die literally "at the drop of a hat." They are quite subject to actinomycosis (lumpy-jaw), which in wild animals is incurable.

The Pronghorn Antelope, unique and amazing, is likely to be one of the first North American big game species to go completely extinct. We could see this happen within twenty years. They can’t be bred in captivity, except in very large fenced areas. They are fragile, temperamental, and easily stressed. They can literally die "at the drop of a hat." They are highly susceptible to actinomycosis (lumpy-jaw), which is incurable in wild animals.

Already all the states that possess wild antelope, except Nevada, have passed laws giving that species long close seasons; which is highly creditable to the states that have done their duty. Nevada must get in line at the next session of her legislature!

Already all the states that have wild antelope, except Nevada, have passed laws providing long closed seasons for that species; which is commendable for the states that have fulfilled their responsibility. Nevada needs to get on board at the next session of its legislature!

In 1908, Dr. T.S. Palmer published in his annual report of "Progress in Game Protection" the following in regard to the prong-horned antelope:

In 1908, Dr. T.S. Palmer published in his annual report of "Progress in Game Protection" the following about the prong-horned antelope:

"Antelope are still found in diminished numbers in fourteen western states. A considerable number were killed during the year in Montana, where the species seems to have suffered more than elsewhere since the season was opened in 1907.

"Antelope are still found in smaller numbers in fourteen western states. A significant number were killed last year in Montana, where the species seems to have faced more challenges than in other areas since the season began in 1907."

"A striking illustration of the decrease of the antelope is afforded by Colorado. In 1898 the State Warden estimated that there were 25,000 in the state, whereas in 1908 the Game Commissioner places the number at only 2,000. The total number of antelope now in the United States probably does not exceed 17,000, distributed approximately as follows:

"A striking example of the decline of the antelope can be seen in Colorado. In 1898, the State Warden estimated there were 25,000 in the state, while in 1908, the Game Commissioner reported the number had dropped to just 2,000. The total number of antelope currently in the United States is likely below 17,000, distributed roughly as follows:"

Colorado 2,000 Yellowstone Park 2,000
Idaho 200 Other States 2,000
Montana 4,000 ------
New Mexico 1,300 Saskatchewan 2,000
Oregon 1,500 ------
Wyoming 4,000 19,000

To-day (1912), Dr. Palmer says the total number of antelope is less than it was in 1908, and in spite of protection the number is steadily diminishing. This is indeed serious news. The existing bands, already small, are steadily growing smaller. The antelope are killed lawlessly, and the crimes of such slaughter are, in nearly every instance, successfully concealed.

Today (1912), Dr. Palmer states that the total number of antelope is lower than it was in 1908, and despite efforts to protect them, the number continues to decline. This is truly concerning news. The current herds, which are already small, are getting smaller. Antelope are being killed illegally, and the perpetrators of these crimes almost always manage to cover their tracks.

Previously, we have based strong hopes for the preservation of the antelope species on the herd in the Yellowstone Park, but those animals are vanishing fearfully fast. In 1906, Dr. Palmer reported that "About fifteen hundred antelope came down to the feeding grounds near the haystacks in the vicinity of Gardiner." In 1908 the Yellowstone Park [Page 160] was credited with two thousand head. To-day, the number alive, by actual count, is only five hundred head; and this after twenty-five years of protection! Where have the others gone? This shows, alas! that perpetual close seasons can not always bring back the vanished thousands of game!

Previously, we had high hopes for the preservation of the antelope species based on the herd in Yellowstone Park, but those animals are disappearing alarmingly fast. In 1906, Dr. Palmer reported that "About fifteen hundred antelope came down to the feeding grounds near the haystacks in the vicinity of Gardiner." In 1908, the Yellowstone Park [Page 160] was noted to have two thousand head. Today, the actual count shows only five hundred head alive; and this is after twenty-five years of protection! Where have the others gone? This sadly demonstrates that permanent protective seasons can not always bring back the thousands of game that have disappeared!

PRONG-HORNED ANTELOPE

Pronghorn Antelope

Here is a reliable report (June 29, 1912) regarding the prong-horned antelope in Lower California, from E.W. Nelson: "Antelope formerly ranged over nearly the entire length of Lower California, but are now gone from a large part of their ancient range, and their steadily decreasing numbers indicate their early extinction throughout the peninsula."

Here is a reliable report (June 29, 1912) regarding the prong-horned antelope in Lower California, from E.W. Nelson: "Antelope used to be found all over Lower California, but they have now disappeared from a significant portion of their original territory, and their steadily declining numbers suggest they will soon be extinct across the peninsula."

In captivity the antelope is exasperatingly delicate and short-lived. It has about as much stamina as a pet monkey. As an exhibition animal in zoological gardens and parks it is a failure; for it always looks faded, spiritless and dead, like a stuffed animal ready to be thrown into the discard. Zoologists can not save the prong-horn species save at long range, in preserves so huge that the sensitive little beast will not even suspect that it is confined.

In captivity, the antelope is frustratingly fragile and doesn’t live long. It has about as much energy as a pet monkey. As an exhibition animal in zoos and parks, it’s a flop; it always appears dull, lifeless, and worn out, like a stuffed toy that’s ready to be thrown away. Zoologists can only save the prong-horn species from a distance, in preserves so vast that the sensitive little creature won’t even realize it’s confined.

Two serious attempts have been made to transplant and acclimatize the [Page 161] antelope—in the Wichita National Bison Range, in Oklahoma, and in the Montana Bison Range, at Ravalli. In 1911 the Boone and Crockett Club provided a fund which defrayed the expenses of shipping from the Yellowstone Park a small nucleus herd to each of those ranges. Eight were sent to the Wichita Range, of which five arrived alive. Of the seven sent to the Montana Range, four arrived alive and were duly set free. While it seems a pity to take specimens from the Yellowstone Park herd, the disagreeable fact is that there is no other source on which to draw for breeding stock.

Two serious attempts have been made to transplant and acclimatize the [Page 161] antelope—in the Wichita National Bison Range in Oklahoma and in the Montana Bison Range at Ravalli. In 1911, the Boone and Crockett Club provided a fund that covered the expenses of shipping a small initial herd from Yellowstone Park to each of those ranges. Eight were sent to the Wichita Range, and five arrived alive. Of the seven sent to the Montana Range, four arrived alive and were released. While it seems unfortunate to take specimens from the Yellowstone Park herd, the unpleasant truth is that there are no other sources available for breeding stock.

The Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan, in Canada, still permit the hunting and killing of antelope; which is wholly and entirely wrong.

The provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan in Canada still allow the hunting and killing of antelope, which is completely and totally wrong.

The Big-Horn Sheep. —Of North American big game, the big-horn of the Rockies will be, after the antelope, the next species to become extinct outside of protected areas. In the United States that event is fast approaching. It is far nearer than even the big-game sportsmen realize. There are to-day only two localities in the four states that still think they have killable sheep, in which it is worth while to go sheep-hunting. One is in Montana, and the other is in Wyoming. In the United States a really big, creditable ram may now be regarded as an impossibility. There are now perhaps half a dozen guides who can find killable sheep in our country, but the game is nearly always young rams, under five years of age.

The Bighorn Sheep. —Among North American big game, the bighorn sheep of the Rockies will, after the antelope, be the next species to go extinct outside protected areas. In the United States, that moment is approaching quickly. It's much closer than even big-game hunters realize. Right now, there are only two places in the four states where people still think it's worth going sheep-hunting for viable sheep. One is in Montana, and the other is in Wyoming. In the U.S., a truly large, respectable ram can now be considered virtually impossible. There are maybe half a dozen guides who can locate viable sheep in our country, but the game is almost always young rams, under five years old.

That Wyoming, Montana, Idaho and Washington still continue to permit sheep slaughter is outrageous. Their answer is that "The sportsmen won't stand for stopping it altogether." I will add:—and the great mass of people are too criminally indifferent to take a hand in the matter, and do their duty regardless of the men of blood.

That Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, and Washington still allow sheep slaughter is outrageous. Their response is that "The sportsmen won't accept stopping it completely." I’ll add:—and the vast majority of people are too criminally indifferent to get involved and do their duty despite the bloodshed.

The seed stock of big-horn sheep now alive in the United States aggregates a pitifully small number. After twenty-five years of unbroken protection in Colorado, Dillon Wallace estimates, after an investigation on the ground, that the state possesses perhaps thirty-five hundred head. He credits Montana and Wyoming with five hundred each—which I think is far too liberal a number. I do not believe that either of those states contains more than one hundred unprotected sheep, at the very utmost limit. If there are more, where are they?

The current population of big-horn sheep in the United States is sadly small. After twenty-five years of consistent protection in Colorado, Dillon Wallace estimates, based on his on-site investigation, that the state has around thirty-five hundred sheep. He gives Montana and Wyoming credit for five hundred each—which I think is way too generous. I don't believe either of those states has more than one hundred unprotected sheep, at best. If there are more, where are they?

In the Yellowstone Park there are 210 head, safe and sound, and slowly increasing. I can not understand why they have not increased more rapidly than they have. In Glacier Park, now under permanent protection, three guides on Lake McDonald, in 1910, estimated the number of sheep at seven hundred. Idaho has in her rugged Bitter Root and Clearwater Mountains and elsewhere, a remnant of possibly two hundred sheep, and Washington has only what chemists call "a trace." It has recently been discovered that California still contains a few sheep, and in southwestern Nevada there are a few more.

In Yellowstone Park, there are 210 sheep, safe and sound, and slowly increasing. I can’t understand why they haven’t grown in number more quickly. In Glacier Park, which is now permanently protected, three guides on Lake McDonald estimated the number of sheep at seven hundred in 1910. Idaho has a small population of about two hundred sheep in its rugged Bitter Root and Clearwater Mountains and other areas, while Washington has only what scientists refer to as “a trace.” It has recently been found that California still has a few sheep, and there are a few more in southwestern Nevada.

In Utah, the big-horn species is probably quite extinct. In Arizona, there are a few very small bands, very widely scattered. They are in the Santa Catalina Mountains, the Grand Canyon country, the Gila Range, and [Page 162] the Quitovaquita Mountains, near Sonoyta. But who can protect from slaughter those Arizona sheep? Absolutely no one! They are too few and too widely scattered for the game wardens to keep in touch with them. The "prospectors" have them entirely at their mercy, and the world well knows what prospectors' "mercy" to edible big game looks like on the ground. It leads straight to the frying-pan, the coyotes and the vultures.

In Utah, the big-horn species is likely completely extinct. In Arizona, there are a few very small groups, spread out over a large area. They can be found in the Santa Catalina Mountains, the Grand Canyon region, the Gila Range, and the Quitovaquita Mountains, near Sonoyta. But who can protect those Arizona sheep from being hunted down? Absolutely no one! They are too few and too widely scattered for the game wardens to keep track of them. The "prospectors" have them completely at their mercy, and everyone knows what "mercy" looks like from prospectors when it comes to edible big game. It leads straight to the frying pan, the coyotes, and the vultures.

The Lower California peninsula contains about five hundred mountain sheep, without the slightest protection save low, desert mountains, heat and thirst. But that is no real protection whatever. Those sheep are too fine to be butchered the way they have been, and now are being butchered. In 1908 I strongly called the attention of the Mexican Government to the situation; and the Departmento de Fomento secured the issue of an executive order forbidding the hunting of any big game in Lower California without the written authority of the government. I am sure, however, that owing to the political and military upheaval it never stopped the slaughter of sheep. In such easy mountains as those of Lower California, it is a simple matter to exterminate quickly all the mountain sheep that they possess. The time for President Madero and his cabinet to inaugurate serious protective measures has fully arrived.

The Lower California peninsula is home to about five hundred mountain sheep, with no real protection aside from low desert mountains, heat, and thirst. But that doesn’t offer any real safety. Those sheep are too valuable to be killed off like this, and they’re still being slaughtered. In 1908, I urged the Mexican Government to pay attention to this issue, and the Departmento de Fomento managed to get an executive order that banned the hunting of any big game in Lower California without the government’s written permission. However, I’m sure that due to the political and military turmoil, this didn’t stop the killing of sheep. In such accessible terrain as those in Lower California, it’s easy to wipe out all the mountain sheep they have. It’s time for President Madero and his cabinet to take serious protective action.

Both British Columbia and Alberta have even yet fine herds of big-horn, and we can count three large game preserves in which they are protected. They are Goat Mountain Park (East Kootenay district, between the Elk and Bull Rivers); the Rocky Mountains Park, near Banff, and Waterton Lakes Park, in the southwestern corner of Alberta.

Both British Columbia and Alberta still have great populations of big-horn sheep, and we can identify three large game preserves where they are protected. These are Goat Mountain Park (in the East Kootenay district, between the Elk and Bull Rivers); Rocky Mountains Park, near Banff; and Waterton Lakes Park, located in the southwestern corner of Alberta.

In view of the number of men who desire to hunt them, the bag limit on big-horn rams in British Columbia and Alberta still is too liberal, by half. One ram per year for one man is quite enough; quite as much so as one moose is the limit everywhere. To-day "a big, old ram" is regarded by sportsmen as a much more desirable and creditable trophy than a moose; because moose-killing is easy, and the bagging of an old mountain ram in real mountains requires five times as much effort and skill.

Given the number of men who want to hunt them, the bag limit on big-horn rams in British Columbia and Alberta is still too generous, by half. One ram per year for one person is more than enough; just like one moose is the limit everywhere. Today, "a big, old ram" is seen by hunters as a much more desirable and impressive trophy than a moose because hunting moose is easy, while bagging an old mountain ram in real mountains takes five times as much effort and skill.

The splendid high and rugged mountains of British Columbia and Alberta form an ideal home for the big-horn (and mountain goat), and it would be an international calamity for that region to be denuded of its splendid big game. With resolute intent and judicial treatment that region can remain a rich and valuable hunting ground for five hundred years to come. Under falsely "liberal" laws, it can be shot into a state of complete desolation within ten years, or even less.

The majestic high and rugged mountains of British Columbia and Alberta are perfect homes for big-horn sheep and mountain goats. It would be a global disaster for that area to lose its incredible big game. With determined efforts and proper management, this region can stay a valuable hunting ground for the next five hundred years. However, under misguided "liberal" laws, it could be completely depleted in ten years or even sooner.

Other Mountain Sheep. —In northern British Columbia, north of Iskoot Lake, there lies a tremendous region, extending to the Arctic Ocean, and comprehending the whole area between the Rocky Mountain continental divide and the waters of the Pacific. Over the southern end of this great wilderness ranges the black mountain sheep, and throughout the remainder, with many sheepless intervals, is scattered the white mountain sheep.

Other Mountain Goats. —In northern British Columbia, north of Iskoot Lake, there is a vast area that stretches to the Arctic Ocean, covering all the land between the Rocky Mountain continental divide and the Pacific waters. At the southern edge of this great wilderness roams the black mountain sheep, while the white mountain sheep are spread throughout the rest of the region, interspersed with many areas without sheep.

Owing to the immensity of this wilderness, the well-nigh total lack of railroads and also of navigable waters, excepting the Yukon, it will not be thoroughly "opened up" for a quarter of a century. The few resolute and pneumonia-proof sportsmen who can wade into the country, pulling boats through icy-cold mountain streams, are not going to devastate those millions of mountains of their big game. The few head of game which sportsmen can and will take out of the great northwestern wilderness during the next twenty-five years will hardly be missed from the grand total, even though a few easily-accessible localities are shot out. It is the deadly resident trappers, hunters and prospectors who must be feared! And again,—who can control them? Can any wilderness government on earth make it possible? Therefore, in time, even the great wilderness will be denuded of big game. This is absolutely fixed and certain; for within much less than another century, every square rod of it will have been gone over by prospectors, lumbermen, trappers and skin-hunters, and raked again and again with fine-toothed combs. A railway line to Dawson, the Copper River and Cook Inlet is to-day merely the next thing to expect, after Canada's present railway program has been wrought out.

Because of the vastness of this wilderness and the almost complete absence of railroads and navigable waters, except for the Yukon, it won't be fully "opened up" for another twenty-five years. The few determined and tough adventurers who can trek into the area, dragging boats through icy mountain streams, aren't likely to wipe out the millions of big game in those mountains. The limited number of animals that sportsmen might take from the great northwestern wilderness over the next twenty-five years will hardly impact the overall population, even if some easily accessible areas get depleted. It's the relentless local trappers, hunters, and prospectors that we should worry about! And again—who can manage them? Is there any wilderness government out there that can make that happen? Therefore, in time, even the great wilderness will be stripped of big game. This is absolutely certain; within much less than another century, every inch of it will have been explored by prospectors, loggers, trappers, and fur hunters, and combed over multiple times. A railway line to Dawson, the Copper River, and Cook Inlet is now just about the next thing to expect, after Canada's current railway plans are fulfilled.

Yes, indeed! In time the wilderness will be opened up, and the big game will all be shot out, save from the protected areas.

Yes, definitely! Eventually, the wilderness will be opened up, and all the big game will be shot out, except in the protected areas.

The Mountain Goat. —Even yet, this species is not wholly extinct in the United States. It survives in Glacier Park, Montana, and the number estimated in that region by three guide friends is too astoundingly large to mention.

The Mountain Goat. —Even now, this species isn’t completely extinct in the United States. It still exists in Glacier Park, Montana, and the number estimated in that area by three guide friends is too astonishingly large to share.

This animal is much more easily killed than the big-horn. Its white coat renders it fatally conspicuous at long range during the best hunting season; it is almost devoid of fear, and it takes altogether too many chances on man. Thanks to the rage for sheep horns, the average sportsman's view-point regarding wild life ranks a goat head about six contours below "old ram" heads, in desirability. Furthermore, most guides regard the flesh of the goat as almost unfit for use as food, and far inferior to that of the big-horn. These reasons, taken together, render the goats much less persecuted by the sportsmen, ranchmen and prospectors who enter the home of the two species. It was because of this indifference toward goats that in 1905 Mr. John M. Phillips and his party saw 243 goats in thirty days in Goat Mountain Park, and only fourteen sheep.

This animal is way easier to hunt than the big-horn. Its white coat makes it really easy to spot from a distance during the prime hunting season; it’s almost fearless and takes way too many risks around humans. Because everyone is obsessed with sheep horns, most sportsmen see goat heads as way less desirable compared to "old ram" heads. Plus, most guides think goat meat is pretty much inedible and not nearly as good as big-horn meat. All these factors mean that goats are hunted a lot less by the sportsmen, ranchers, and prospectors who come into the territory of both species. In fact, because people didn’t care much about goats, in 1905 Mr. John M. Phillips and his group spotted 243 goats in thirty days in Goat Mountain Park, but only fourteen sheep.

Unless the preferences of western sportsmen and gunners change very considerably, the coast mountains of the great northwestern wilderness will remain stocked with wild mountain goats until long after the last big-horn has been shot to death. Fortunately, the skin of the mountain goat has no commercial value. I think it was in 1887 that I purchased, in Denver, 150 nicely tanned skins of our wild white goat at fifty cents each! They were wanted for the first exhibit ever made to illustrate the extermination of American large mammals, and they were shown at the Louisville Exposition. It must have cost the price of those skins to tan them; and I was pleased to know that some one lost money on the venture.

Unless the preferences of western sportsmen and hunters change significantly, the coast mountains of the great northwestern wilderness will continue to be home to wild mountain goats long after the last bighorn has been shot. Luckily, the skin of the mountain goat has no commercial value. I think back in 1887, I bought 150 nicely tanned skins of our wild white goat for fifty cents each in Denver! They were needed for the first exhibit ever created to illustrate the extinction of large American mammals, and they were displayed at the Louisville Exposition. It must have cost about the same amount to tan those skins; and I was glad to know that someone lost money on the whole thing.

MAP OF THE FORMER AND EXISTING RANGES OF THE AMERICAN ELK

MAP OF THE FORMER AND EXISTING RANGES OF THE AMERICAN ELK

From "Life History of Northern Animals," Copyright 1909 by E.T. Seton

From "Life History of Northern Animals," Copyright 1909 by E.T. Seton

At present the mountain goat extends from north-western Montana to the head of Cook Inlet, but it is not found in the interior or in the Yukon valley. Whenever man decides that the species has lived long enough, he can quickly and easily exterminate it. It is one of the most picturesque and interesting wild animals on this continent, and there is not the slightest excuse for shooting it, save as a specimen of natural history. Like the antelope, it is so unique as a natural curiosity that it deserves to be taken out of the ranks of animals that are regularly pursued as game.

At present, the mountain goat ranges from northwestern Montana to the head of Cook Inlet, but it isn't found in the interior or the Yukon Valley. Whenever people decide that the species has lived long enough, they can quickly and easily wipe it out. It is one of the most picturesque and interesting wild animals on this continent, and there is absolutely no justification for shooting it, except as a specimen for natural history. Like the antelope, it is so unique as a natural curiosity that it deserves to be removed from the list of animals that are regularly hunted for sport.

The Elk. —The story of the progressive extermination of the American elk, or wapiti, covers practically the same territory as the tragedy of the American bison—one-third of the mainland of North America. The former range of the elk covered absolutely the garden ground of our continent, omitting the arid region. Its boundary extended from central Massachusetts to northern Georgia, southern Illinois, northern Texas and central New Mexico, central Arizona, the whole Rocky Mountain region up to the Peace River, and Manitoba. It skipped the arid country west of the Rockies, but it embraced practically the whole Pacific slope from central California to the north end of Vancouver Island. Mr. Seton [Page 165] roughly calculated the former range of canadensis at two and a half million square miles, and adds: "We are safe, therefore, in believing that in those days there may have been ten million head."

The Elk. —The story of the gradual extinction of the American elk, or wapiti, is almost the same as the tragedy of the American bison—covering about one-third of the mainland of North America. The elk used to roam the prime areas of our continent, excluding only the dry regions. Its range stretched from central Massachusetts to northern Georgia, southern Illinois, northern Texas, and central New Mexico, through central Arizona, all of the Rocky Mountain region up to the Peace River, and Manitoba. It avoided the dry lands west of the Rockies, but included almost the entire Pacific slope from central California to the northern tip of Vancouver Island. Mr. Seton [Page 165] estimated the former range of canadensis at two and a half million square miles, and adds: "We can safely assume that in those days there may have been ten million head."

The range of the elk covered a magnificent domain. The map prepared by Mr. Ernest T. Seton, after twenty years of research, is the last word on the subject. It appears on page 43, Vol. I, of his great work, "Life Histories of Northern Animals," and I have the permission of author and publisher to reproduce it here, as an object lesson in wild-animal extermination. Mr. Seton recognizes (for convenience, only?) four forms of American elk, two of which, C. nannodes and occidentalis, still exist on the Pacific Coast. The fourth, Cervus merriami, was undoubtedly a valid species. It lived in Arizona and New Mexico, but became totally extinct near the beginning of the present century.

The range of the elk covered an impressive area. The map created by Mr. Ernest T. Seton, after twenty years of research, is the definitive work on the topic. It can be found on page 43, Vol. I, of his significant book, "Life Histories of Northern Animals," and I have received permission from both the author and publisher to share it here as an example of wild-animal extinction. Mr. Seton identifies (perhaps just for convenience?) four types of American elk, two of which, C. nannodes and occidentalis, are still present on the Pacific Coast. The fourth, Cervus merriami, was definitely a valid species. It lived in Arizona and New Mexico but became completely extinct at the start of this century.

In 1909 Mr. Seton published in the work referred to above a remarkably close estimate of the number of elk then alive in North America. Recently, a rough count—the first ever made—of the elk in and around the Yellowstone Park, revealed the real number of that largest contingent. By taking those results, and Mr. Seton's figures for elk outside the United States, we obtain the following very close approximation of the wild elk alive in North America in 1912:

In 1909, Mr. Seton published an impressively accurate estimate of the number of elk living in North America at that time. Recently, a rough count—the first ever conducted—of the elk in and around Yellowstone Park revealed the actual number of that largest group. By combining those results with Mr. Seton's figures for elk outside the United States, we get the following very close approximation of the wild elk alive in North America in 1912:


Locality Number Authority
Yellowstone Park and vicinity 47,000 U.S. Biological Survey.
Idaho (permanently), 600
Washington 1,200 Game Warden Chris. Morgenroth.
Oregon 500
California 400
New York, Adirondacks 400 State Conservation Commission.
Minnesota 50 E.T. Seton.
Vancouver Island 2,000 E.T. Seton.
British Columbia (S.-E.) 200 E.T. Seton.
Alberta 1,000 E.T. Seton.
Saskatchewan 500 E.T. Seton
In various Parks and Zoos 1,000 E.T. Seton.
------
Total, for all America. 54,850

In 1905, a herd of twenty of the so-called dwarf elk of the San Joaquin Valley, California, were taken to the Sequoia National Park, and placed in a fenced range that had been established for it on the Kaweah River.

In 1905, a herd of twenty of the so-called dwarf elk from the San Joaquin Valley, California, were taken to Sequoia National Park and put in a fenced area that had been set up for them along the Kaweah River.

The extermination of the wapiti began with the settlement of the American colonies. Naturally, the largest animals were the ones most eagerly sought by the meat-hungry pioneers, and the elk and bison were the first game species to disappear. The colonists believed in the survival of the fittest, and we are glad that they did. The one thing that a hungry pioneer cannot withstand is—temptation—in a form that embraces five hundred pounds of succulent flesh. And let it not be supposed that in the eastern states there were only a few elk. The Pennsylvania salt licks were crowded with them, and the early writers describe them as existing in "immense bands" and "great numbers."

The extermination of the elk began when the American colonies were settled. Naturally, the biggest animals were the ones most eagerly hunted by the pioneers looking for meat, and the elk and bison were the first game species to vanish. The colonists believed in survival of the fittest, and we’re glad they did. The one thing a hungry pioneer can't resist is—temptation—in the form of five hundred pounds of tender meat. And don’t think that there were only a few elk in the eastern states. The salt licks in Pennsylvania were packed with them, and early writers described them as existing in "huge herds" and "great numbers."

Of course it is impossible for wild animals of great size to exist in countries that are covered with farms, villages and people. Under such conditions the wild and the tame cannot harmonize. It is a fact, however, that elk could exist and thrive in every national forest and national park in our country, and also on uncountable hundreds of thousands of rough, wild, timbered hills and mountains such as exist in probably twenty-five different states. There is no reason, except man's short-sighted greed and foolishness, why there are not to-day one hundred thousand elk living in the Allegheny Mountains, furnishing each year fifty thousand three-year-old males as free food for the people.

Of course, it’s impossible for large wild animals to live in areas filled with farms, villages, and people. In such environments, the wild and the tame can’t coexist. However, the fact remains that elk could thrive in every national forest and national park in our country, as well as in countless rugged, wooded hills and mountains found in probably twenty-five different states. The only reason there aren’t currently one hundred thousand elk in the Allegheny Mountains, providing fifty thousand three-year-old males each year as free food for the people, is man's shortsighted greed and foolishness.

The trouble is,—the greedy habitants could not be induced to kill only the three-year-old-males, in the fall, and let the cows, calves and breeding bulls alone! By sensible management the Rocky Mountains, the Sierra Nevadas and the Coast Range would support enough wild elk to feed a million people. But we Americans seem utterly incapable of maintaining anywhere from decade to decade a large and really valuable supply of wild game. Outside the Yellowstone Park and northwestern Wyoming, the American elk exists only in small bands—mere remnants and samples of the millions we could and should have.

The problem is—the greedy residents couldn't be convinced to only hunt the three-year-old males in the fall and leave the cows, calves, and breeding bulls alone! With proper management, the Rocky Mountains, the Sierra Nevadas, and the Coast Range could sustain enough wild elk to feed a million people. But we Americans seem completely unable to keep a large and truly valuable supply of wild game from one decade to the next. Outside Yellowstone Park and northwestern Wyoming, the American elk exists only in small groups—just a few remnants and samples of the millions we could and should have.

If they could be protected, and the surplus presently killed according to some rational, working system, then every national forest in the United States should be stocked with elk! In view of the awful cost of beef (to-day 10-1/2 cents per pound in Chicago on the hoof!), it is high time that we should consider the raising of game on the public domain on such lines that it would form a valuable food supply without diminishing the value of the forests.

If they could be protected, and the excess currently killed under some reasonable, efficient system, then every national forest in the United States should be populated with elk! Given the terrible cost of beef (currently 10.5 cents per pound in Chicago on the hoof!), it’s high time we considered raising game on public land in a way that would create a valuable food source without hurting the value of the forests.

Just now (1912) the American people are sorely puzzled by a remarkable elk problem that each winter is presented for solution in the Jackson Hole country, Wyoming. Driven southward by the deep snows of winter, the elk thousands that in summer graze and grow fat in the Yellowstone Park march down into Jackson Hole, to find in those valleys less snow and more food. Now, it happens that the best and most of the former winter grazing grounds of the elk are covered by fenced ranches! As a result, the elk that strive to winter there, about fifteen thousand head, are each winter threatened with starvation; and during three or four winters of recent date, an aggregate of several thousand calves, weak yearlings and weakened cows perished of hunger. The winters of 1908, 1909 and 1910 were progressively more and more severe; and 1911 saw about 2500 deaths, (S.N. Leek).

Right now (1912), the American people are really confused by a remarkable elk problem that comes up every winter in the Jackson Hole area of Wyoming. As the heavy winter snows drive them south, thousands of elk that graze and fatten up in Yellowstone Park in the summer migrate down into Jackson Hole, where they find less snow and more food in the valleys. However, the best and most of their previous winter grazing areas are now covered by fenced ranches! As a result, the elk trying to winter there—about fifteen thousand of them—are threatened with starvation each winter; during the past three or four winters, several thousand calves, weak yearlings, and malnourished cows have died of hunger. The winters of 1908, 1909, and 1910 were increasingly severe, and in 1911, about 2,500 elk died (S.N. Leek).

In 1909-10, the State of Wyoming spent $7,000 for hay, and fed it to the starving elk. In 1911, Wyoming spent $5,000 more, and appealed to Congress for help. Thanks to the efforts of Senator Lodge and others, Congress instantly responded with a splendid emergency appropriation of $20,000, partly for the purpose of feeding the elk, and also to meet the cost of transporting elsewhere as many of the elk as it might seem best to move. The starving of the elk ceased with 1911.

In 1909-10, the State of Wyoming spent $7,000 on hay to feed the starving elk. In 1911, Wyoming spent an additional $5,000 and reached out to Congress for assistance. Thanks to the efforts of Senator Lodge and others, Congress quickly responded with a generous emergency appropriation of $20,000, partly to feed the elk and also to cover the costs of transporting as many elk as necessary to safer locations. The starvation of the elk came to an end in 1911.

Outdoor Life magazine (Denver, Colo.) for August, 1912, contains an [Page 167] excellent article by Dr. W.B. Shore, entitled, "Trapping and Shipping Elk." I wish I could reprint it entire, for the solid information that it contains. It gives a clear and comprehensive account of last spring's operations by the Government and by the state of Montana in capturing and shipping elk from the Yellowstone Park herd, for the double purpose of diminishing the elk surplus in the Park and stocking vacant ranges elsewhere.

Outdoor Life magazine (Denver, Colo.) for August, 1912, contains an [Page 167] excellent article by Dr. W.B. Shore, entitled, "Trapping and Shipping Elk." I wish I could reprint it entirely for the valuable information that it provides. It gives a clear and comprehensive account of last spring's efforts by the Government and the state of Montana in capturing and shipping elk from the Yellowstone Park herd, aiming to reduce the elk surplus in the Park and to populate empty ranges elsewhere.

The operations were conducted on the same basis as the shipping of cattle—the corral, the chute, the open car, and the car-load in bulk. Dr. Shore states that the undertaking was really no more difficult than the shipping of range cattle; but the presence of a considerable proportion of young and tender calves, such as are never handled with beef cattle, led to 8.8 per cent of deaths in transit. The deaths and the percentage are nothing at which to be surprised, when it is remembered, that the animals had just come through a hard winter, and their natural vitality was at the lowest point of the year.

The operations were carried out in the same way as shipping cattle—the pen, the chute, the open car, and bulk shipments. Dr. Shore says that the task was really no more complicated than shipping range cattle; however, the presence of a significant number of young and delicate calves, who are never transported with beef cattle, resulted in 8.8 percent of deaths during transit. The number of deaths and the percentage shouldn't be surprising, considering that the animals had just endured a tough winter, and their natural vitality was at its lowest point of the year.

The following is a condensed summary of the results of the work:

The following is a brief summary of the work's results:


Destination Number of Elk Hours on Road Killed or Died in Car Died After Unloading
1 Car. Startup, Washington 60: calves, yearlings and two-year olds 94 11 7
1 " Hamilton, Montana 43: cows & calves 30 4 1
1 " Thompson Falls, Montana 40 2 0
1 " Stephensville, Montana 36 1 1
1 " Deer Lodge, Montana 40 24 2 0
1 " Hamilton, Montana 40 0 0
1 " Mt. Vernon, Washington 46 4 days; unloaded & fed twice 7 0
--- --- ---
305 27 9
The total deaths in transit and after, of 36 elk out of 305, amounted to 11.4 per cent.
All those shipped to Montana points were shipped by the state of Montana.

In order to provide adequate winter grazing grounds for the Yellowstone-Wyoming elk, it seems imperative that the national government should expend between $30,000 and $40,000 in buying back from ranchmen certain areas in the Jackson valley, particularly a tract known as "the swamp," and others on the surrounding foothills where the herds annually go to graze in winter, A measure to render this possible was presented to Congress in the winter of 1912, and without opposition an appropriation of $45,000 was made.

To ensure there are enough winter grazing areas for the Yellowstone-Wyoming elk, it's crucial for the federal government to spend between $30,000 and $40,000 to buy back specific land from ranchers in the Jackson Valley, especially an area called "the swamp," as well as other spots on the nearby foothills where the herds go to graze each winter. A proposal to make this happen was brought to Congress in the winter of 1912, and it passed without any opposition, resulting in an appropriation of $45,000.

The splendid photographs of the elk herds that recently have been made [Page 168] by S.N. Leek, of Jackson Hole, clearly reveal the fact that the herds now consist chiefly of cows, calves, yearlings and young bulls with small antlers. In one photograph showing about twenty-five hundred elk, there are not visible even half a dozen pairs of antlers that belong to adult bulls. There should be a hundred! This condition means that the best bulls, with the finest heads, are constantly being selected and killed by sportsmen and others who want their heads; and the young, immature bulls are left to do the breeding that alone will sustain the species.

The amazing photos of the elk herds that were recently taken [Page 168] by S.N. Leek, from Jackson Hole, clearly show that the herds mainly consist of cows, calves, yearlings, and young bulls with small antlers. In one photo featuring about twenty-five hundred elk, there are hardly even six pairs of antlers belonging to adult bulls. There should be at least a hundred! This situation indicates that the best bulls, with the biggest antlers, are consistently being hunted and killed by hunters and others who want their trophies; meanwhile, the young, immature bulls are left to breed, which is essential for keeping the species alive.

HUNGRY ELK IN JACKSON HOLE, WYOMING

HUNGRY ELK IN JACKSON HOLE, WYOMING

Part of a Herd of About 2,500 Head, being fed on hay, in the Winter of 1910-11

Part of a herd of about 2,500 animals, being fed hay, in the winter of 1910-11

Note the Absence of Adult Bulls. Copyright, 1911, by S.N. Leek

Note the Absence of Adult Bulls. Copyright, 1911, by S.N. Leek

It is a well-known principle in stock-breeding that sires should be fully adult, of maximum strength, and in the prime of life. No stockbreeder in his senses ever thinks of breeding from a youthful, immature sire. The result would be weak offspring not up to the standard.

It’s a widely recognized principle in animal breeding that male breeders should be fully matured, at their peak strength, and in their prime. No sensible breeder thinks about breeding from a young, immature male. The outcome would be weak offspring that don’t meet the quality standards.

This inexorable law of inheritance and transmission is just as much a law for the elk, moose and deer of North America as it is for domestic cattle and horses. If the present conditions in the Wyoming elk herds continue to prevail for several generations, as sure as time goes on we shall see a marked deterioration in the size and antlers of the elk.

This unchangeable rule of inheritance and transmission applies to the elk, moose, and deer of North America just as it does to domestic cattle and horses. If the current conditions in the Wyoming elk herds continue for several generations, we will definitely see a significant decline in the size and antlers of the elk over time.

If the foundation principles of stock-breeding are correct, then it is impossible to maintain any large-mammal species at its zenith of size, strength and virility by continuous breeding of the young and immature males. By some sportsmen it is believed that through long-continued killing of the finest and largest males, the red deer of Europe have been growing smaller; but on that point I am not prepared to offer evidence.

If the basic principles of breeding livestock are right, then it's impossible to keep any large animal species at its peak size, strength, and virility by constantly breeding young and immature males. Some hunters believe that by repeatedly hunting the biggest and best males, the red deer in Europe have been getting smaller; but I’m not ready to provide evidence on that.

In regard to the in-breeding of the elk herds in large open parks and preserves throughout North America, there are positively no ill effects to fear. Wild animals that are closely confined generation after generation are bound to deteriorate physically; but with healthy wild animals living in large open ranges, feeding and breeding naturally, the in-breeding that occurs produces no deterioration.

In terms of the inbreeding of elk herds in large open parks and preserves across North America, there are definitely no negative effects to worry about. Wild animals that are closely confined for many generations are likely to become physically weaker; however, with healthy wild animals living in spacious open areas, feeding and breeding naturally, the inbreeding that happens does not lead to any decline.

In the twin certainties of over-population, and deterioration from excessive killing of the good sires, we have to face two new problems of very decided importance. Nothing short of very radical measures will provide a remedy. For the immediate future, I can offer a solution. While it seems almost impossible deliberately to kill females, I think that the present is a very exceptional case, and one that compels us to apply the painful remedy that I now propose.

In the undeniable issues of overpopulation and the decline due to the excessive slaughter of quality males, we are confronted with two significant new problems. Only drastic measures will provide a solution. For now, I can suggest a course of action. While it seems almost unthinkable to intentionally kill females, I believe this situation is quite unique and necessitates the painful solution that I am about to propose.

Premises:

Properties :

  1. —There are at present too many breeding cows in the Yellowstone herds.
  2. —There are far too few good breeding bulls.

Conclusion:—For five years, entirely prohibit the killing of adult male elk, and kill only females, and young males. This would gradually diminish the number of calves born each year, by about 2,500, and by the end of five years it would reduce the number, and the annual birth, of females to a figure sufficiently limited that the herds could be maintained on existing ranges.

Conclusion:—For five years, completely ban the killing of adult male elk, and only allow the killing of females and young males. This would gradually decrease the number of calves born each year by about 2,500, and by the end of five years, it would lower the number, and the annual birth, of females to a level that would allow the herds to be sustained within the current ranges.

Corollary.—At the end of five years, stop killing females, and kill only young males. This plan would permit a large number of bull elk to mature; and then the largest and strongest animals would do the breeding,—just as Nature always intends shall be done.

Corollary.—After five years, stop killing females and only target young males. This approach would allow many bull elk to reach maturity, and then the strongest and largest animals would breed—just as Nature always intends.


South America

South America

Of all the big-game regions of the earth, South America is the poorest. Of hoofed game she possesses only a dozen species that are worth the attention of sportsmen; and like all other animal life in that land of little game, they are desperately hard to find. In South America you must work your heart out in order to get either game or specimens that will be worth showing.

Of all the big-game areas in the world, South America has the least to offer. It has only about a dozen species of hoofed animals that interest sportsmen, and like all other wildlife in this place with few game options, they're really difficult to find. In South America, you have to put in a lot of effort just to get any game or specimens that are worth showcasing.

At present, we need not worry about the marsh deer, the pampas deer, the guemal, or the venado, nor the tapir, jaguar, ocelot and bears. All these species are abundantly able to take care of themselves; and to find and kill any one of them is a man's task. In Patagonia the natives do wastefully slaughter the guanacos; and there are times also when great numbers of guanacos come down in winter to certain mountain lakes, presumably in search of food, and perish by hundreds through starvation. (H. Hesketh Prichard.)

Right now, we don't need to worry about the marsh deer, pampas deer, guemal, or venado, nor the tapir, jaguar, ocelot, and bears. All these species can take care of themselves just fine; finding and hunting any of them is a man's job. In Patagonia, the locals do unnecessarily hunt guanacos to excess; and there are times in winter when large groups of guanacos come down to certain mountain lakes, likely searching for food, and hundreds end up dying from starvation. (H. Hesketh Prichard.)


Mexico

Mexico

About ten years more will see the extinction of the mountain sheep of Lower California,—in the wake of the recently exterminated Mexican [Page 170] sheep of the Santa Maria Lakes region. In 1908, I solemnly warned the government of President Diaz, and at that time the Mexican government expressed much concern.

About ten more years will lead to the extinction of the mountain sheep of Lower California, following the recently extinct Mexican [Page 170] sheep from the Santa Maria Lakes area. In 1908, I seriously warned President Diaz's government, and at that time the Mexican government showed significant concern.

It is a great pity that just now political conditions are completely estopping wild-life protection in Mexico; but it is true. If the code of proposed laws that I drew up (by request) in 1908 and submitted to Minister Molina were adopted, it would have a good effect on the fauna of Mexico.

It’s really unfortunate that right now political issues are completely blocking wildlife protection in Mexico; but it’s the reality. If the set of proposed laws I put together (at request) in 1908 and gave to Minister Molina were approved, it would positively impact the wildlife in Mexico.

In Mexico there is little hoofed game to kill,—deer of the white-tail groups, seven or eight species; the desert mule deer; the brocket; the prong-horned antelope, the mountain sheep and the peccary. The deer will not so easily be exterminated, but the antelope and sheep will be utterly destroyed. They will be the first to go; and I think they can not by any possibility last longer than ten years. Is it not too bad that Mexico should permit her finest species of hoofed and horned game to be obliterated before she awakens to the desirability of conservation! The Mexicans could protect their small stock of big game if they would; but in Lower California they are leasing huge tracts of land to cattle companies, and they permit the lessees to kill all the wild game they please on their leased lands, even with the aid of dogs. This is a vicious and fatal system, and contrary to all the laws of nations.

In Mexico, there aren't many hoofed animals left to hunt—white-tailed deer groups, seven or eight species; desert mule deer; brocket; pronghorn antelope; mountain sheep; and peccaries. The deer are less likely to be wiped out, but the antelope and sheep will be completely gone. They'll be the first to disappear, and I don't think they can last more than ten years at most. Isn't it a shame that Mexico allows its finest hoofed and horned animals to be wiped out before realizing the importance of conservation? The people of Mexico could protect their limited big game if they wanted to; however, in Lower California, they are leasing large areas of land to cattle companies and allowing the lessees to hunt all the wild game they want on their leased land, even using dogs. This is a harmful and destructive practice that goes against all international laws.


[Page 171]
CHAPTER XVII
PRESENT AND FUTURE OF NORTH AMERICAN BIG GAME
(Concluded)

The White-Tailed Deer. —Five hundred years hence, when the greed and rapacity of "civilized" man has completed the loot and ruin of the continent of North America, the white-tailed deer will be the last species of our big game to be exterminated. Its mental traits, its size, its color and its habits all combine to render it the most persistent of our large animals, and the best fitted to survive. It neither bawls nor bugles to attract its enemies, it can not be called to a sportsman, like the moose, and it sticks to its timber with rare and commendable closeness. When it sees a strange living thing walking erect, it does not stop to stare and catch soft-nosed bullets, but dashes away in quest of solitude.

White-Tailed Deer. —Five hundred years from now, when the greed and exploitation of "civilized" people have fully ravaged and destroyed the landscape of North America, the white-tailed deer will be the last species of our large game to disappear. Its intelligence, size, color, and behavior all make it the most tenacious of our large animals, and the best equipped to endure. It doesn't call out or make loud sounds to attract predators, it can't be easily lured by hunters like the moose, and it stays close to its forest habitat with remarkable and admirable stealth. When it sees an unfamiliar upright creature, it doesn't linger to investigate and get hit by bullets, but quickly runs away in search of solitude.

The worst shooting that I ever did or saw done at game was at running white-tailed deer, in the Montana river bottoms.

The worst shooting I ever did or saw during a game was at running white-tailed deer in the river bottoms of Montana.

For the reasons given, the white-tail exists and persists in a hundred United States localities from which all other big game save the black bear have been exterminated. For example, in our Adirondacks the moose were exterminated years and years ago, but the beloved wilderness called the "North Woods" still is populated by about 20,000 deer, and about 8,000 are killed annually. The deer of Maine are sufficiently numerous that in 1909 a total of 15,879 were killed. With some assistance from the thin sprinkling of moose and caribou, the deer of Maine annually draw into that state, for permanent dedication, a huge sum of money, variously estimated at from $1,000,000 to $2,000,000. In spite of heavy slaughter, and vigorous attempts at extermination by over-shooting, the deer of northern Michigan obstinately refuse to be wiped out.

For the reasons mentioned, the white-tailed deer thrives and continues to exist in many places across the United States, where all other large game, except for the black bear, have been wiped out. For instance, in our Adirondacks, the moose were eliminated many years ago, but the cherished wilderness known as the "North Woods" still has around 20,000 deer, with about 8,000 being hunted each year. In Maine, the deer population is so ample that in 1909, a total of 15,879 were killed. Along with a few moose and caribou, the deer in Maine bring in a significant amount of money each year, estimated to be between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000. Despite heavy hunting and strong efforts to eradicate them through overhunting, the deer of northern Michigan stubbornly refuse to disappear.

There is, however, a large group of states in which this species has been exterminated. The states comprising it are Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, and adjacent portions of seven other states.

There is, however, a large group of states where this species has been wiped out. The states included are Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, and parts of seven other nearby states.

As if to shame the people of Iowa, a curious deer episode is recorded. In 1885, W.B. Cuppy, of Avoca, Iowa, purchased five deer, and placed them in a paddock on his 600-acre farm. By 1900 they had increased to 32 head; and then one night some one kindly opened the gate of their enclosure, and gave them the freedom of the city. Mr. Cuppy made no effort to capture them, possibly because they decided to annex his farm as their habitat. When a neighbor led them with a bait of corn to their owner's door, he declined to impound them, on the ground that it was unnecessary.

As if to shame the people of Iowa, a strange deer incident is noted. In 1885, W.B. Cuppy, from Avoca, Iowa, bought five deer and put them in a paddock on his 600-acre farm. By 1900, their numbers had grown to 32; then one night, someone kindly opened the gate to their enclosure, letting them roam free. Mr. Cuppy made no attempt to catch them, perhaps because they decided to make his farm their home. When a neighbor lured them with corn to their owner's doorstep, he chose not to capture them, arguing it wasn’t necessary.

By 1912, those deer had increased to 400, and the portion of this story that no one will believe is this: they spread all through the suburbs and hinterland farms of Avoca, and the people not only failed to assassinate all of them and eat them, but they actually killed only a few, protected the rest, and made pets of many! Queer people, those men and boys of Avoca. Nearly everywhere else in the world that I know, that history would have been ended differently. Here in the East, 90 per cent of our people are like the Avocans, but the other 10 per cent think only of slaying and eating, sans mercy, sans decency, sans law. Now the State of Iowa has taken hold, to capture some of those deer, and set them free in other portions of the state.

By 1912, the deer population had grown to 400, and the part of this story that no one will believe is this: they spread all throughout the suburbs and rural farms of Avoca, and the people didn’t just try to hunt them down and eat them; they actually killed only a few, protected the rest, and even made pets out of many! Strange folks, those men and boys of Avoca. In almost everywhere else I know, that story would have ended differently. Here in the East, 90 percent of our people are like the folks in Avoca, but the other 10 percent only think about killing and eating, without mercy, dignity, or regard for the law. Now the State of Iowa has stepped in to capture some of those deer and relocate them to other parts of the state.

Elsewhere I shall note the quick and thorough success with which the white-tailed deer has been brought back in Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and southern New York.

Elsewhere, I will mention the rapid and effective recovery of the white-tailed deer population in Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and southern New York.

No state having waste lands covered with brush or timber need be without the ubiquitous white-tailed deer. Give them a semblance of a fair show, and they will live and breed with surprising fecundity and persistence. If you start a park herd with ten does, soon you will have more deer than you will know how to dispose of, unless you market them under a Bayne law, duly tagged by the state. In close confinement this species fares rather poorly. In large preserves it does well, but during the rutting season the bucks are to be dreaded; and those that develop aggressive traits should be shot and marketed. This is the only way in which the deer parks of England are kept safe for unarmed people.

No state with vacant land covered in brush or trees should be without the common white-tailed deer. Give them a fair chance, and they will thrive and breed surprisingly well. If you start a park herd with ten females, you'll quickly have more deer than you know what to do with, unless you sell them under a Bayne law, properly tagged by the state. In close quarters, this species doesn't do well. In large preserves, it thrives, but during the mating season, the males can be dangerous; those that show aggressive behavior should be culled and sold. This is the only way to keep the deer parks in England safe for people without weapons.

Dr. T.S. Palmer has taken much pains to ascertain the number of deer killed in the eastern United States. His records, as published in May, 1910, are as follows:

Dr. T.S. Palmer has worked hard to determine how many deer were killed in the eastern United States. His records, published in May 1910, are as follows:


State 1908 1909 1910
Maine 15,000 15,879 15,000
New Hampshire (a) (a) (a)
Vermont 2,700 4,736 3,649
New York 6,000 9,000 9,000
New Jersey (a) 120
Pennsylvania 500 500 800
Michigan 9,076 6,641 13,347
Wisconsin 11,000 6,000 6,000
Minnesota 6,000 6,000 3,147
West Virginia 107 51 49
Maryland 16 13 6
Virginia 207 210 224
North Carolina (a) (a) (a)
South Carolina 1,000 (a) (a)
Georgia (a) 367 369
Florida 2,209 2,021 1,526
Alabama 152 148 132
Mississippi 411 458 500
Louisiana 5,500 5,470 5,000
Massachusetts 1,281
------ ------ ------
Total 59,878 57,494 60,150
(a) No statistics available.

At this date deer hunting is not permitted at any time in Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska and Kansas,—where there are no wild deer; nor in Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, Tennessee or Kentucky. The long [Page 173] close seasons in Massachusetts, Connecticut and southern New York have caused a great migration of deer into those once-depopulated regions,—in fact, right down to tide-water.

At this time, deer hunting is not allowed anywhere in Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, and Kansas—where there are no wild deer; nor in Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, Tennessee, or Kentucky. The long [Page 173] closed seasons in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and southern New York have led to a significant migration of deer into those previously empty areas—even all the way to the coast.

The Mule Deer. —This will be the first member of the Deer Family to become extinct in North America outside of the protected portions of its haunts. Its fatal preference for open ground and its habit of pausing to stare at the hunter have been, and to the end will be, its undoing. Possibly there are now two of these deer in the United States and British Columbia for every 98 that existed forty years ago, but no more. It is a deer of the bad lands and foothills, and its curiosity is fatal.

The Mule Deer. —This will be the first member of the Deer Family to go extinct in North America outside of the protected areas where it lives. Its deadly preference for open spaces and the tendency to stop and stare at hunters have been, and will ultimately be, its downfall. There might now be only two of these deer in the United States and British Columbia for every 98 that were around forty years ago, but no more. It's a deer of the rough terrain and foothills, and its curiosity is deadly.

The number of sportsmen who have hunted and killed this fine animal in its own wild and picturesque bad-lands is indeed quite small. It has been four-fifths exterminated by the resident hunter and ranchman, and to-day is found in the Rocky Mountain region most sparingly. Ten years ago it seemed right to hunt the so-called Rocky Mountain "black-tail" in northwestern Montana, because so many deer were there it did not seem to spell extermination. Now, conditions have changed. Since last winter's great slaughter in northwestern Montana, of 11,000 hungry deer, the species has been so reduced that it is no longer right to kill mule deer anywhere in our country, and a universal close season for five years is the duty of every state which contains that species.

The number of sportspeople who have hunted and killed this amazing animal in its own wild and beautiful badlands is actually quite small. It has been mostly wiped out by local hunters and ranchers, and now it is found very rarely in the Rocky Mountain region. Ten years ago, it seemed okay to hunt the so-called Rocky Mountain "black-tail" in northwestern Montana, because there were so many deer that it didn’t seem like it would lead to extinction. Now, things have changed. After last winter's massive slaughter of 11,000 starving deer in northwestern Montana, the species has been so depleted that it’s no longer acceptable to hunt mule deer anywhere in our country, and a nationwide ban on hunting for five years is something every state that has this species should enforce.

The Real Black-Tailed Deer, of the Pacific coast, (Odocoileus columbianus) is, to most sportsmen of the Rocky Mountains and the East actually less known than the okapi! Not one out of every hundred of them can recognize a mounted head of it at sight. It is a small, delicately-formed, delicately-antlered understudy of the big mule deer, and now painfully limited in its distribution. It is the deer of California and western Oregon, and it has been so ruthlessly slaughtered that today it is going fast. As conditions stand to-day, and without a radical change on the part of the people of the Pacific coast, this very interesting species is bound to disappear. It will not be persistent, like the white-tailed deer, but in the heavy forests, it will last much longer than the mule deer.

The Actual Black-Tailed Deer, of the Pacific coast, (Odocoileus columbianus) is actually less known to most hunters from the Rocky Mountains and the East than the okapi! Not one in a hundred can identify a mounted head of it at first glance. It’s a small, delicately-formed, and delicately-antlered counterpart to the big mule deer, and its distribution is now painfully limited. It is the deer of California and western Oregon, and it has been so mercilessly hunted that it’s quickly disappearing. As things stand today, unless there's a significant change in the attitudes of the people on the Pacific coast, this fascinating species is likely to vanish. It won’t be as resilient as the white-tailed deer, but it will endure much longer than the mule deer in the dense forests.

My information regarding this deer is like the stock of specimens of it in museum collections,—meager and unsatisfactory. We need to know in detail how that species is faring to-day, and what its prospects are for the immediate future. In 1900, I saw great piles of skins from it in the fur houses of Seattle, and the sight gave me much concern.

My knowledge about this deer is like the limited specimens found in museum collections—lacking and unsatisfactory. We need to understand in detail how that species is doing today and what its chances are for the near future. In 1900, I saw huge stacks of skins from it in the fur shops of Seattle, and it worried me a lot.

The Caribou, Generally. —I think it is not very difficult to forecast the future of the Genus Rangifer in North America, from the logic of the conditions of to-day. Thanks to the splendid mass of information that has been accumulated regarding this group, we are able to draw certain conclusions. I think that the caribou of the Canadian Barren Grounds and northeastern Alaska will survive in great numbers for at least another century; that the caribou herds of Newfoundland will last nearly as long, and that in fifty years or less all the caribou of the great northwestern wilderness will be swept away.

The Caribou Overview. —I believe it’s not too hard to predict the future of the Genus Rangifer in North America based on the current conditions. Thanks to the extensive information that has been gathered about this group, we can draw some conclusions. I think that the caribou in the Canadian Barren Grounds and northeastern Alaska will still be around in large numbers for at least another century; that the caribou herds in Newfoundland will last nearly as long, and that in fifty years or less, all the caribou in the vast northwestern wilderness will be gone.

The reasons for these conclusions are by no means obscure, or farfetched.

The reasons for these conclusions are definitely not unclear or unrealistic.

In the first place, the barren-ground caribou are to-day enormously numerous,—undoubtedly running up into millions. It can not be possible that they are being killed faster than they are breeding; and so they must be increasing. Their food supply is unlimited. They are protected by two redoubtable champions,—Jack Frost and the Mosquito. Their country never will contain a great human population. The natives are so few in number, and so lazy, that even though they should become supplied with modern firearms, it is unlikely that they ever will make a serious impression on the caribou millions. The only thing to fear for the barren-ground caribou throngs is disease,—a factor that is beyond human prediction.

In the first place, the barren-ground caribou are incredibly numerous today—definitely numbering in the millions. It’s hard to believe they are being killed off faster than they can breed; they must be increasing. Their food supply is endless. They are protected by two formidable forces—Jack Frost and the Mosquito. Their territory will never support a large human population. The native people are so few and so laid-back that even if they were given modern firearms, it’s unlikely they would make a significant dent in the caribou population. The only real threat to the massive herds of barren-ground caribou is disease—a factor that humans can't predict.

It is reasonably certain that the Barren Grounds never will be netted by railways,—unless gold is discovered over a wide area. The fierce cold and hunger, and the billions of mosquitoes of the Barren Grounds will protect the caribou from the wholesale slaughter that "civilized" man joyously would inflict—if he had the chance.

It’s pretty clear that the Barren Grounds will likely never be connected by railways—unless gold is found over a large area. The extreme cold, hunger, and countless mosquitoes in the Barren Grounds will shield the caribou from the mass slaughter that "civilized" humans would eagerly carry out—if they had the opportunity.

The caribou thousands of Newfoundland are fairly accessible to sportsmen and pot-hunters, but at the same time the colonial government can protect them from extermination if it will. Already much has been done to check the reckless and wicked slaughter that once prevailed. A bag limit of three bull caribou per annum has been fixed, which is enforced as to non-residents and sportsmen, but in a way that is much too "American" it is often ignored by residents in touch with the game. For instance, the guide of a New York gentleman whom I know admitted to my friend that each year he killed "about 25" caribou for himself and his family of four other persons. He explained thus: "When the inspector comes around, I show him two caribou hanging in my woodshed, but back in the woods I have a little shack where I keep the others until I want them."

The caribou in Newfoundland are quite easy for hunters and sportfishers to access, but the colonial government could protect them from extinction if it chose to. Significant efforts have already been made to reduce the careless and cruel hunting that used to happen. A limit of three bull caribou per year has been set, which is enforced for non-residents and sportsmen, but residents who are familiar with the wildlife often ignore it in a way that feels very "American." For example, a guide for a gentleman from New York that I know confessed to my friend that he kills "about 25" caribou every year for himself and his family of four. He explained it like this: "When the inspector comes by, I show him two caribou hanging in my woodshed, but back in the woods, I have a small cabin where I keep the others until I need them."

The real sportsmen of the world never will make the slightest perceptible impression on the caribou of Newfoundland. For one thing, the hunting is much too tame to be interesting. If the caribou of that Island ever are exterminated, it will be strictly by the people of Newfoundland, themselves. If the government will tighten its grip on the herds, they need never be exterminated.

The true athletes of the world will never make the slightest noticeable impact on the caribou of Newfoundland. For one thing, the hunting is far too easy to be appealing. If the caribou on that island are ever wiped out, it will be entirely by the people of Newfoundland themselves. If the government tightens its control over the herds, they will never need to be eliminated.

The caribou of New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario are few and widely scattered. Unless carefully conserved, they are not likely to last long; for their country is annually penetrated in every direction by armed men, white and red. There is no means by which it can be proven, but from the number of armed men in those regions I feel sure that the typical woodland caribou species is being shot faster than it is breeding. The sportsmen and naturalists of Canada and New Brunswick would render good service by making a close and careful investigation of that question.

The caribou in New Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario are few in number and spread out. Unless they are protected, they probably won’t survive much longer since their habitat is invaded every year by armed men, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous. While there’s no way to prove it, I believe the typical woodland caribou is being hunted faster than it can reproduce, considering the number of armed people in those areas. Sportsmen and naturalists in Canada and New Brunswick would do well to thoroughly investigate this issue.

The caribou of the northwestern wilderness are in a situation peculiarly their own. They inhabit a region of naked mountains and thin forests, [Page 175] wherein they are conspicuous, easily stalked and easily killed. Nowhere do they exist in large herds of thousands, or even of many hundreds. They live in small bands of from ten to twenty head, and even those are far apart. The region in which they live is certain to be thoroughly opened up by railways, and exploited. Fifty years from now we will find every portion of the now-wild Northwest fairly accessible by rail. The building of the railways will be to the caribou—and to other big game—the day of doom. In that wild, rough region, no power on earth,—save that which might be able to deprive all the inhabitants and all visitors of firearms,—can possibly save the game outside of a few preserves that are diligently patroled.

The caribou in the northwestern wilderness are in a situation unique to them. They live in a region of bare mountains and thin forests, [Page 175] where they stand out, making them easy to stalk and hunt. They don’t exist in large herds of thousands, or even hundreds. Instead, they form small groups of about ten to twenty, and even those are spaced far apart. The area they call home is bound to be fully developed by railways and commercial activities. Fifty years from now, we will see that every part of the currently wild Northwest will be pretty much accessible by train. The construction of these railways will signal the end for the caribou—and for other large game. In that wild, rugged area, no power on earth—except for one that could strip all inhabitants and visitors of firearms—can possibly protect the game outside a few preserves that are carefully monitored.

The big game of the northwest region, in which I include the interior of Alaska, will go! It is only a question of time. Already the building of the city of Fairbanks, and the exploitation of the mining districts surrounding it, have led to such harassment and slaughter of the migrating caribou that the great herd which formerly traversed the Tanana country once a year has completely changed its migration route, and now keeps much farther north. The "crossing" of the Yukon near Eagle City has been abandoned. A hundred years hence, the northwestern wilderness will be dotted with towns and criss-crossed with railways; but the big game of it will be gone, except in the preserves that are yet to be made. This will particularly involve the caribou, moose, and mountain sheep of all species, which will be the first to go. The mountain goat and the forest bears will hold out longer than their more exposed neighbors of the treeless mountains.

The big game in the northwest region, including the interior of Alaska, will go! It's just a matter of time. The growth of Fairbanks and the development of the surrounding mining areas have already caused so much disruption and killing of the migrating caribou that the large herd that used to travel through the Tanana region once a year has completely changed its migration path and now stays much farther north. The "crossing" of the Yukon near Eagle City has been abandoned. In a hundred years, the northwestern wilderness will have towns and railways everywhere; but the big game will be gone, except for the preserves that still need to be established. This especially affects the caribou, moose, and mountain sheep of all types, which will be the first to disappear. The mountain goat and forest bears will last longer than their more exposed neighbors in the treeless mountains.

The Moose. —In the United States the moose is found in five states,—Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Wyoming and Idaho. There are 550 in the Yellowstone Park. In Maine and Minnesota only may moose be hunted and killed. In the season of 1909, 184 moose were killed in Maine,—a large number, considering the small moose population of that state. In northern Minnesota, we now possess a great national moose preserve of 909,743 acres; and in 1908 Mr. Fullerton, after a personal inspection in which he saw 189 moose in nine days, estimated the total moose population of the present day at 10,000 head. This is a moose preserve worth while.

The Moose. —In the United States, moose are found in five states: Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho. There are 550 in Yellowstone Park. Moose can only be hunted and killed in Maine and Minnesota. During the 1909 season, 184 moose were killed in Maine—a significant number given the state's small moose population. In northern Minnesota, we now have a large national moose preserve covering 909,743 acres; in 1908, Mr. Fullerton, after personally inspecting the area and seeing 189 moose in nine days, estimated the current moose population to be around 10,000. This is a moose preserve that is truly valuable.

Outside of protected areas, the moose is the animal that is most easily exterminated. Its trail is easily followed, and its habits are thoroughly known, down to three decimal places. As a hunter's reward it is Great. Strange to say, New Brunswick has found that the moose is an animal that it is possible, and even easy, to protect. The death of a moose is an event that is not easily concealed! Wherever it is thoroughly understood that the moose law will be enforced, the would-be poacher pauses to consider the net results to him of a jail sentence.

Outside protected areas, the moose is the animal that's easiest to wipe out. Its tracks are easy to follow, and its habits are well known, down to three decimal places. For hunters, it’s a big prize. Interestingly, New Brunswick has realized that the moose is an animal it can, and even quite easily does, protect. The death of a moose is not something that goes unnoticed! Where it’s clear that the moose law will be enforced, potential poachers think twice about the consequences of a jail sentence.

In New Brunswick we have seen two strange things happen, during our own times. We have seen the moose migrate into, and permanently occupy, an extensive area that previously was destitute of that species. At the [Page 176] same time, we have seen a reasonable number of bull moose killed by sportsmen without disturbing in the least the general equanimity of the general moose population! And at this moment, the moose population of New Brunswick is almost incredible. Every moose hunter who goes there sees from 20 to 40 moose, and two of my friends last year saw, "in round numbers, about 100!" Up to date the size of adult antlers seem to be maintaining a high standard.

In New Brunswick, we've witnessed two unusual things happen in our time. We've seen moose migrate into and permanently settle in a large area that used to have none of that species. At the [Page 176] same time, a significant number of bull moose have been hunted by sportsmen without upsetting the overall calm of the moose population! Right now, the moose population in New Brunswick is almost unbelievable. Every moose hunter who goes there spots between 20 to 40 moose, and two of my friends last year saw, "in rough numbers, about 100!" So far, the size of adult antlers seems to be staying at a high level.

In summer, the photographing of moose in the rivers, lakes and ponds of Maine and New Brunswick amounts to an industry. I am uneasy about the constant picking off of the largest and best breeding bulls of the Mirimachi country, lest it finally reduce the size and antlers of the moose of that region; but only the future can tell us just how that prospect stands to-day.

In summer, taking photos of moose in the rivers, lakes, and ponds of Maine and New Brunswick has become a big business. I worry about the ongoing removal of the largest and best breeding bulls in the Mirimachi area, as it might eventually lower the size and antlers of the moose there; only time will reveal how that situation looks today.

In Alaska, our ever thoughtful and forehanded Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture has by legal proclamation at one stroke converted the whole of the Kenai Peninsula into a magnificent moose preserve. This will save Alces gigas, the giant moose of Alaska, from extermination; and New Brunswick and the Minnesota preserve will save Alces americanus. But in the northwest, we can positively depend upon it that eventually, wherever the moose may legally be hunted and killed by any Tom, Dick or Harry who can afford a twenty-dollar rifle and a license, the moose surely will disappear.

In Alaska, our thoughtful and proactive Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture has, through legal proclamation, transformed the entire Kenai Peninsula into a stunning moose preserve. This will protect Alces gigas, the giant moose of Alaska, from extinction, while New Brunswick and the Minnesota preserve will safeguard Alces americanus. However, in the northwest, we can be sure that eventually, wherever the moose can legally be hunted and killed by anyone who can afford a twenty-dollar rifle and a license, the moose will definitely disappear.

The moose laws of Alaska are strict—toward sportsmen, only! The miners, "prospectors" and Indians may kill as many as they please, "for food purposes." This opens the door to a great amount of unfair slaughter. Any coffee-cooler can put a pan and pick into his hunting outfit, go out after moose, and call himself a "prospector."

The moose laws in Alaska are tough—only for hunters! Miners, "prospectors," and Native Americans can hunt as many as they want, "for food purposes." This creates a lot of opportunities for unfair killing. Anyone can grab a pan and a pick and head out to hunt moose, and label themselves a "prospector."

I grant that the real prospector, who is looking for ores and minerals with an intelligent eye, and knows what he is doing, should have special privileges on game, to keep him from starving. The settled miner, however, is in a different class. No miner should ask the privilege of living on wild game, any more than should the farmer, the steamboat man, the railway laborer, or the soldier in an army post. The Indian should have no game advantages whatever over a white man. He does not own the game of a region, any more than he owns its minerals or its water-power. He should obey the general game laws, just the same as white men. In Africa, as far as possible, the white population wisely prohibits the natives from owning or using firearms, and a good idea it is, too. I am glad there is one continent on which the "I'm-just-as-good-as-you-are" nightmare does not curse the whole land.

I agree that the real prospector, who is searching for ores and minerals with a knowledgeable eye and knows what he’s doing, should have special rights regarding game to avoid starvation. However, the established miner is in a different category. No miner should expect the right to rely on wild game for survival, just like farmers, steamboat workers, railway laborers, or soldiers stationed at military posts shouldn't. The Indian shouldn't have any advantages related to hunting over a white man. He doesn't own the wildlife in a region any more than he owns its minerals or water resources. He should follow the general game laws just like white people do. In Africa, as much as possible, the white population wisely restricts the natives from owning or using firearms, and that's a smart move. I'm glad there's at least one continent where the "I'm-just-as-good-as-you-are" nightmare doesn’t plague the entire land.

The Musk-Ox. —Now that the north pole has been safely discovered, and the south pole has become the storm-center of polar exploration, the harried musk-ox herds of the farthest north are having a rest. I think that most American sportsmen have learned that as a sporting proposition there is about as much fun and glory in harrying a musk-ox herd with dogs, and picking off the members of it at "parade rest," as there is in shooting range cattle in a round-up. The habits of the animal positively [Page 177] eliminate the real essence of sport,—difficulty and danger. When a musk-ox band is chased by dogs, or by wolves, the full-grown members of it, bulls and cows alike, instantly form a close circle around the calves, facing outward shoulder to shoulder, and stand at bay. Without the aid of a gunner and a rifle, such a formation is invincible! Mr. Paul Rainey's moving pictures tell a wonderful story of animal intelligence, bravery and devotion to the parental instinct.

The Musk Ox. —Now that the North Pole has been successfully discovered and the South Pole has become the hub of polar exploration, the beleaguered musk-ox herds in the far north are getting a break. I believe most American sportsmen have realized that chasing a musk-ox herd with dogs and taking out members as they stand “at parade rest” is about as thrilling and glorious as shooting cattle at a roundup. The animal's behavior completely [Page 177] removes the true essence of sport—challenge and risk. When a musk-ox herd is pursued by dogs or wolves, the adults, both bulls and cows, quickly form a tight circle around the calves, facing outward, and stand their ground. Without a shooter and a rifle, this formation is unbeatable! Mr. Paul Rainey's moving pictures share an incredible story of animal intelligence, courage, and dedication to parental instinct.

For some reason, the musk-ox herds do not seem to have perceptibly increased since man first encountered them. The number alive to-day appears to be no greater than it was fifty years ago; and this leads to the conclusion that the present delicate balance could easily be disturbed the wrong way. Fortunately, it seems reasonably certain that the Indians of the Canadian Barren Grounds, the Eskimo of the far north, and the stray explorers all live outside the haunts of the species, and come in touch only with the edge of the musk-ox population as a whole. This leads us to hope and believe that, through the difficulties involved in reaching them, the main bodies of musk-ox of both species are safe from extermination.

For some reason, the musk-ox herds don't seem to have noticeably increased since humans first encountered them. The current population appears to be about the same as it was fifty years ago, leading to the conclusion that this delicate balance could easily tip in the wrong direction. Fortunately, it seems fairly certain that the Indigenous people of the Canadian Barren Grounds, the Eskimos of the far north, and the occasional explorers all live outside the main habitats of the species and only interact with the fringes of the musk-ox population. This gives us hope and confidence that, despite the challenges of reaching them, the main groups of musk-ox from both species are safe from extinction.

At the same time, the time has come for Canada, the United States and Denmark to join in formulating a stiff law for the prevention of wholesale slaughter of musk-ox for sport. It should be rendered impossible for another sportsman to kill twenty-three head in one day, as once occurred. Give the sportsman a bag of three bulls, and no more. To this, no true sportsman will object, and the objections of game-hogs only serve to confirm the justice of the thing they oppose.

At the same time, it's time for Canada, the United States, and Denmark to work together to create strong laws to prevent the mass killing of musk-ox for sport. We need to ensure that no one can hunt twenty-three animals in a single day, as has happened before. Limit hunters to a bag limit of three bulls, and nothing more. No real sportsman will argue against this, and the complaints from those who hunt excessively only prove the fairness of what they oppose.

The Grizzly Bear. —To many persons it may seem strange that anyone should feel disposed to accord protection to such fierce predatory animals as grizzly bears, lions and tigers. But the spirit of fair play springs eternal in some human breasts. The sportsmen of the world do not stick at using long-range, high-power repeating rifles on big game, but they draw the line this side of traps, poisons and extermination. The sportsmen of India once thought,—for about a year and a day,—that it was permissible to kill troublesome and expensive tigers by poison. Mr. G.P. Sanderson tried it, and when his strychnine operations promptly developed three bloated and disgusting tiger carcasses, even his native followers revolted at the principle. That was the alpha and omega of Sanderson's poisoning activities.

The Grizzly Bear. —It might seem odd to some that anyone would want to protect fierce predators like grizzly bears, lions, and tigers. However, the spirit of fair play continues to thrive in some people. While sportsmen around the world don’t hesitate to use powerful, long-range rifles on big game, they draw the line at traps, poisons, and total extermination. Sportsmen in India once believed—if only for a short time—that it was okay to kill troublesome and costly tigers with poison. Mr. G.P. Sanderson gave it a try, and when his use of strychnine resulted in three bloated and revolting tiger carcasses, even his local followers protested the idea. That marked the end of Sanderson's poisoning efforts.

I am quite sure that if the extermination of the tiger from the whole of India were possible, and the to-be or not-to-be were put to a vote of the sportsmen of India, the answer would be a thundering "No!" Says Major J. Stevenson-Hamilton in his "Animal Life in Africa:" "It is impossible to contemplate the use against the lion of any other weapon than the rifle."

I’m pretty sure that if it were possible to wipe out tigers across all of India, and the sportsmen of India were asked to vote on it, the answer would be a resounding "No!" Major J. Stevenson-Hamilton says in his book "Animal Life in Africa": "You can’t really think about using any weapon against the lion other than a rifle."

The real sportsmen and naturalists of America are decidedly opposed to the extermination of the grizzly bear. They feel that the wilds of North America are wide enough for the accommodation of many grizzlies, without crowding the proletariat. A Rocky Mountain without a grizzly upon it, or [Page 178] at least a bear of some kind, is only half a mountain,—commonplace and tame. Put one two-year-old grizzly cub upon it, and presto! every cubic yard of its local atmosphere reeks with romantic uncertainty and fearsome thrills.

The true sportsmen and nature lovers in America strongly oppose the elimination of the grizzly bear. They believe that the wilderness of North America is vast enough to support many grizzlies without crowding out the working class. A Rocky Mountain without a grizzly on it, or [Page 178] at least some kind of bear, is only half a mountain—ordinary and dull. Add one two-year-old grizzly cub, and suddenly, every cubic yard of its local atmosphere is filled with adventure and excitement.

A few persons have done considerable talking and writing about the damage to stock inflicted by bears, but I think there is little justification for such charges. Certainly, there is not one-tenth enough real damage done by bears to justify their extermination. At the present time, we hear that the farmers (!) of Kadiak Island, Alaska, are being seriously harassed and damaged by the big Kadiak bear,—an animal so rare and shy that it is very difficult for a sportsman to kill one! I think the charges against the bears,—if the Kadiak Islanders ever really have made any,—need to be proven, by the production of real evidence.

A few people have talked and written a lot about the harm caused to livestock by bears, but I think there's little reason to support those claims. There definitely isn't anywhere near enough actual damage done by bears to justify their extermination. Right now, we hear that the farmers on Kodiak Island, Alaska, are being seriously troubled and harmed by the large Kodiak bear—an animal so rare and elusive that it's really tough for a hunter to bag one! I believe the accusations against bears—if the Kodiak residents have ever actually made any—need to be backed up by real evidence.

In the United States, outside of our game preserves, I know of not one locality in which grizzly bears are sufficiently numerous to justify a sportsman in going out to hunt them. The California grizzly, once represented by "Monarch" in Golden Gate Park, is almost, if not wholly, extinct. In Montana, outside of Glacier Park it is useless to apply for wild grizzlies. In the Bitter Root Mountains and Clearwater Mountains of Idaho, there are grizzlies, but they hide so effectually under the snow-bent willows on the "slides" that it is almost impossible to get a shot. Northwestern Wyoming still contains a few grizzlies, but there are so many square miles of mountains around each animal it is now almost useless to go hunting for them. British Columbia, western Alberta and the coast mountains at least as far as Skaguay, and Yukon Territory generally, all contain grizzlies, and the sportsman who goes out for sheep, caribou and moose is reasonably certain to see half a dozen bears and kill at least one or two. In those countries, the grizzly species will hold forth long after all killable grizzlies have vanished from the United States.

In the United States, outside of our game preserves, I don’t know of any place where grizzly bears are common enough to make it worth a sportsman's time to hunt them. The California grizzly, once symbolized by "Monarch" in Golden Gate Park, is nearly, if not completely, extinct. In Montana, away from Glacier Park, there's no point in looking for wild grizzlies. In the Bitterroot and Clearwater Mountains of Idaho, there are grizzlies, but they are so well-hidden under the snow-covered willows on the "slides" that getting a shot is nearly impossible. Northwestern Wyoming still has a few grizzlies, but there’s so much mountainous terrain around each one that hunting them has become almost futile. British Columbia, western Alberta, and the coastal mountains at least up to Skaguay, along with most of Yukon Territory, all have grizzlies, and a sportsman hunting for sheep, caribou, and moose is likely to see several bears and probably take down one or two. In those areas, the grizzly species will continue to thrive long after all huntable grizzlies have disappeared from the United States.

I think that it is now time for California, Montana, Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Wyoming to give grizzly bears protection of some sort. Possibly the situation in those states calls for a five-year close season. Even British Columbia should now place a bag limit on this species. This has seemed clear to me ever since two of my friends killed (in the spring of 1912) six grizzlies in one week! But Provincial Game Warden A. Bryan Williams says that at present it would be impossible to impose a bag limit of one per year on the grizzlies of British Columbia; and Mr. Williams is a sincere game-protector.

I believe it's time for California, Montana, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Wyoming to provide some kind of protection for grizzly bears. It might be necessary for those states to implement a five-year moratorium on hunting them. Even British Columbia should consider establishing a bag limit for this species. I've felt this way ever since two of my friends killed six grizzlies in just one week back in the spring of 1912! However, Provincial Game Warden A. Bryan Williams states that currently, it would be impractical to enforce a bag limit of one per year for grizzly bears in British Columbia, and Mr. Williams genuinely cares about wildlife protection.

The Brown Bears Of Alaska. —These magnificent monsters present a perplexing problem, which I am inclined to believe can be satisfactorily solved by the Biological Survey only in short periods, say of three or four years each. Naturally, the skin hunters of Alaska ardently desire the skins of those bears, for the money they represent. That side of the bear problem does not in the least appeal to the ninety odd millions of people who live this side of Alaska. The skins of the Alaskan brown bears have little value save as curiosities, nailed upon the wall, where they can not be stepped upon and injured. The hunting of those bears, however, is a business for men; and it is partly for that reason they [Page 179] should be preserved. A bear-hunt on the Alaska Peninsula, Admiralty or Montagu Islands, is an event of a lifetime, and with a bag limit of one brown bear, the species would be quite safe from extermination.

Alaska's Brown Bears. —These impressive animals present a complicated problem, which I believe can only be effectively addressed by the Biological Survey over short periods, like three or four years at a time. Naturally, the skin hunters in Alaska are very eager for the bears' skins due to the money they can bring in. However, that aspect of the bear issue doesn’t resonate at all with the nearly ninety million people living this side of Alaska. The skins of Alaskan brown bears have little worth except as curiosities, displayed on a wall where they can't be stepped on and damaged. The hunting of these bears, though, is a pursuit for men, and that's part of why they [Page 179] should be preserved. A bear hunt on the Alaska Peninsula, Admiralty, or Montagu Islands is a once-in-a-lifetime experience, and with a limit of one brown bear, the species would be quite safe from extinction.

THE WICHITA NATIONAL BISON HERD

Wichita National Bison Herd

Presented by the New York Zoological Society

Presented by the New York Zoological Society

In Alaska there is some dissatisfaction over the protection accorded the big brown bears; but those rules are right as far as they go! A governor of Alaska once said to me: "The preservation of the game of Alaska should be left to the people of Alaska. It is their game; and they will preserve it all right!"

In Alaska, some people are unhappy with the protection given to the big brown bears, but those regulations are fine as far as they go! A governor of Alaska once told me: "The conservation of Alaska's wildlife should be left to the people of Alaska. It's their wildlife, and they will take care of it!"

The answer? Not by a long shot!

Not even close!

Only three things were wrong with the ex-governor's view:

Only three things were wrong with the ex-governor's perspective:

1.—The game of Alaska does not belong to the people who live in Alaska—with the intent to get out to-morrow! It belongs to the 93,000,000 people of the Nation.

1.—The game of Alaska does not belong to the people who live in Alaska—with plans to leave tomorrow! It belongs to the 93,000,000 people of the Nation.

2.—The preservation of the Alaskan fauna on the public domain should not be left unreservedly to the people of Alaska, because

2.—The preservation of Alaska's wildlife on public land shouldn't be solely left to the people of Alaska, because

3.—As sure as shooting, they will not preserve it!

3.—They're definitely not preserving it!

Congress is right in appropriating $15,000 for game protection in Alaska. It is very necessary that the regulations for conserving the wild life should be fixed by the Secretary of Agriculture, with the advice of the Biological Survey.

Congress is correct in allocating $15,000 for wildlife protection in Alaska. It's essential that the rules for conserving wildlife be established by the Secretary of Agriculture, with input from the Biological Survey.

The Black Bear is an interesting citizen. He harms nobody nor anything; he affords good sport; he objects to being exterminated, and wherever in [Page 180] North America he is threatened with extermination, he should at once be given protection! A black bear in the wilds is harmless. In captivity, posed as a household "pet," he is decidedly dangerous, and had best be given the middle of the road. In big forests he is a grand stayer, and will not be exterminated from the fauna of the United States until Washington is wrecked by anarchists.

The Black Bear is a fascinating creature. He doesn’t harm anyone or anything; he offers great opportunities for sport; he doesn’t want to be wiped out, and wherever in [Page 180] North America he faces threats of extermination, he should immediately receive protection! A black bear in the wild is harmless. However, when kept as a household "pet," he can be quite dangerous and is best left in the wild. In large forests, he thrives and won't disappear from the wildlife of the United States until Washington is destroyed by anarchists.

The American Bison. —I regard the American bison species as now reasonably secure against extermination. This is due to the fact that it breeds persistently and successfully in captivity, and to the great efforts that have been put forth by the United States Government, the Canadian Government, the American Bison Society, the New York Zoological Society, and several private individuals.

The American Buffalo. —I believe that the American bison is now fairly safe from extinction. This is because it continues to breed reliably and successfully in captivity, as well as the significant efforts made by the United States government, the Canadian government, the American Bison Society, the New York Zoological Society, and several private individuals.

The species reached its lowest ebb in 1889, when there were only 256 head in captivity and 835 running wild. The increase has been as follows:

The species hit its lowest point in 1889, with only 256 individuals in captivity and 835 living freely. The increase has been as follows:

1888—W.T. Hornaday's census 1,300
1902—S.P. Langley's census 1,394
1905—Frank Baker's census 1,697
1908—W.T. Hornaday's census 2,047
1910—W.P. Wharton's census (in North America) 2,108
1912—W.P. Wharton's census (in North America) 2,907

To-day, nearly one-half of the living bison are in very large governmental parks, perpetually established and breeding rapidly, as follows:

To date, almost half of the living bison are in very large government parks, where they are permanently established and breeding quickly, as follows:


In The United States
Yellowstone Park fenced herd, founded by Congress 125
Montana National Bison Range, founded by The American Bison Society 69
Wichita Bison Range, founded by The New York Zoological Society 39
Wind Cave Bison Range, S. Dakota, founded by Am. Bison Society To be stocked
Niobrara (Neb.) National Bison Range, now in process of creation To be stocked
In Canada
Buffalo Park, Wainwright, Alberta 1,052
Elk Island Park, Alberta 53
Rocky Mountains Park, Banff, Alberta 27
-----
  Total National and Provincial Preserves 1,365

Of wild bison there are only three groups: 49 head in the Yellowstone National Park, about 75 Pablo "outlaws" around the Montana Bison Range, and between 300 and 400 head in northern Athabasca, southwest of Fort Resolution, existing in small and widely scattered bands.

Of wild bison, there are only three groups: 49 in Yellowstone National Park, about 75 Pablo "outlaws" around the Montana Bison Range, and between 300 and 400 in northern Athabasca, southwest of Fort Resolution, living in small and widely scattered bands.

The efforts of man to atone for the great bison slaughter by preserving the species from extinction have been crowned with success. Two governments and two thousand individuals have shared this task,—solely for sentimental reasons. In these facts we find reason to hope and believe that other efforts now being made to save other species from annihilation will be equally successful.

The efforts of people to make up for the massive bison slaughter by saving the species from extinction have been successful. Two governments and two thousand individuals have taken on this task—entirely for sentimental reasons. In these facts, we find hope and belief that other initiatives currently underway to save other species from extinction will also be successful.


[Page 181]
CHAPTER XVIII
THE PRESENT AND FUTURE OF AFRICAN GAME

Thanks to the diligence with which sportsmen and field naturalists have recorded their observations in the haunts of big game, it is not at all difficult to forecast the immediate future of the big game of the world. We may safely assume that all lands well suited to agriculture, mining and grazing will become populated by rifle-bearing men, with the usual result to the wild mammals and birds. At the same time, the game of the open mountains everywhere is thinly distributed and easily exterminated. On the other hand, the unconquerable forest jungles of certain portions of the tropics will hold their own, and shelter their four-footed inhabitants for centuries to come.

Thanks to the hard work of sports enthusiasts and wildlife observers documenting their findings in the habitats of large animals, it's quite easy to predict the immediate future of big game around the world. We can confidently assume that all areas suitable for farming, mining, and grazing will be inhabited by people with rifles, which usually spells trouble for wild mammals and birds. Meanwhile, the game in open mountain regions is sparsely populated and can be wiped out easily. Conversely, the impenetrable forest jungles in certain tropical areas will continue to thrive and provide refuge for their animal residents for generations to come.

On the open mountains of the world and on the grazing lands most big game is now being killed much faster than it breeds. This is due to the attacks of five times too many hunters, open seasons that are too long, and bag limits that are far too liberal. As an example, consider Africa Viewed in any way it may be taken, the bag limit in British East Africa is appallingly high. Notice this astounding array of wild creatures that each hunter may kill under a license costing only $250!

On the vast mountains and grazing lands around the world, most big game is now being hunted much faster than it can reproduce. This is because there are five times as many hunters, hunting seasons that are too long, and bag limits that are way too generous. For example, in Africa, the bag limit in British East Africa is shockingly high. Just look at this incredible list of wild animals that each hunter can kill under a license that costs only $250!

2 Buffalo 3 Gnu
2 Rhinoceros 12 Grant Gazelle
2 Hippopotamus 4 Waller's Gazelle
1 Eland 10 Harvey's Duiker
2 Grevy Zebra 10 Isaac's Duiker
20 Common Zebra 10 Blue Duiker
2 Fringe-eared Oryx 10 Kirk's Dik-dik
4 Beisa Antelope 10 Guenther's Dik-dik
4 Waterbuck 10 Hinde's Dik-dik
1 Sable Antelope 10 Cavendish Dik-dik
1 Roan Antelope 10 Abyssinian Oribi
1 Greater Kudu 10 Haggard's Oribi
4 Lesser Kudu 10 Kenya Oribi
10 Topi 10 Suni
20 Coke Hartebeest 10 Klipspringer
2 Neumann Hartebeest 10 Ward's Reedbuck
4 Jackson Hartebeest 10 Chanler's Reedbuck
6 Hunter's Antelope 10 Thompson Gazelle
4 Thomas Kob 10 Peters Gazelle
2 Bongo 10 Soemmerring Gazelle
4 Pallah 10 Bushbuck
2 Sitatunga 10 Haywood Bushbuck

The grand total is a possible 300 large hoofed and horned animals representing 44 species! Add to this all the lions, leopards, [Page 182] cheetahs, cape hunting dogs and hyaenas that the hunter can kill, and it will be enough to stock a zoological garden!

The grand total is up to 300 large hoofed and horned animals representing 44 species! Plus, consider all the lions, leopards, [Page 182] cheetahs, cape hunting dogs, and hyenas that the hunter can take down, and that would be enough to fill a zoo!

Quite a number of these species, like the sable antelope, kudu, Hunter's antelope, bongo and sitatunga are already rare, and therefore they are all the more eagerly sought.

Quite a few of these species, like the sable antelope, kudu, Hunter's antelope, bongo, and sitatunga, are already rare, so they are even more highly sought after.

Into the fine grass-lands of British East Africa, suitable for crops and stock grazing, settlers are steadily going. Each one is armed, and at once becomes a killer of big game. And all the time the visiting sportsmen are increasing in number, going farther from the Uganda Railway, and persistently seeking out the rarest and finest of the game. The buffalo has recovered from the slaughter by rinderpest only in time to meet the onset of oversea sportsmen.

Into the lush grasslands of British East Africa, ideal for farming and livestock grazing, settlers are gradually arriving. Each one is armed and immediately turns into a hunter of big game. Meanwhile, the number of visiting sportsmen is growing, traveling farther from the Uganda Railway, and actively searching for the rarest and most impressive game. The buffalo has bounced back from the rinderpest outbreak just in time to face the influx of overseas sportsmen.

Mr. Arthur Jordan has seen much of the big game of British East Africa, and its killing. Him I asked to tell me how long, in his opinion, the big game of that territory will last outside of the game preserves, as it is now being killed. He said, "Oh, it will last a long time. I think it will last fifteen years!"

Mr. Arthur Jordan has experienced a lot of the big game in British East Africa, including its hunting. I asked him how long he thinks the big game in that area will survive outside of the game preserves with the current level of hunting. He said, "Oh, it will last a long time. I think it will last fifteen years!"

Fifteen years! And this for the richest big-game fauna of any one spot in the whole world, which Nature has been several million years in developing and placing there!

Fifteen years! And this for the richest big-game wildlife in any single location in the entire world, which Nature has been several million years in developing and placing there!

At present the marvelous herds of big game of British East Africa and Uganda constitute the grandest zoological spectacle that the world ever has seen in historic times. For such an area, the number of species is incredible, and until they are seen, the thronging masses of individuals are beyond conception. It is easy to say "a herd of 3,000 zebras;" but no mere words can give an adequate impression of the actual army of stripes and bars, and hoofs thundering in review over a grassy plain.

Right now, the amazing herds of big game in British East Africa and Uganda are the most impressive wildlife spectacle the world has seen in modern history. For such a region, the variety of species is astonishing, and you can’t truly understand the sheer number of individuals until you see them. It’s one thing to say "a herd of 3,000 zebras," but no words can really capture the sight of that actual army of stripes and hooves thundering across a grassy plain.

But the settlers say, "The zebras must go! They break through our best wire fences, ruin our crops, despoil us of the fruits of long and toilsome efforts, and much expenditure. We simply can not live in a country inhabited by herds of wild zebras." And really, their contention is well founded. When it is necessary to choose between wild animals and peaceful agriculture for millions of men, the animals must give way.

But the settlers say, "The zebras have to go! They break through our best wire fences, destroy our crops, and take away the results of our hard work and investment. We just can't live in a place filled with wild zebra herds." And honestly, their argument is valid. When it comes down to choosing between wild animals and peaceful farming for millions of people, the animals have to be sacrificed.

In those portions of the great East African plateau region that are suited to modern agriculture, stretching from Buluwayo to northern Uganda, the wild herds are doomed to be crowded out by the farmer and the fruit-grower. This is the inevitable result of civilization and progress in wild lands. Marauding battalions of zebras, bellicose rhinoceroses and murderous buffaloes do not fit in with ranches and crops, and children going to school. Except in the great game preserves, the swamps and the dense jungles it is certain that the big game of the whole of eastern Africa is foredoomed to disappear,—the largest and most valuable species first.

In the parts of the East African plateau that are suitable for modern farming, stretching from Bulawayo to northern Uganda, wild herds are bound to be pushed out by farmers and fruit growers. This is the unavoidable result of civilization and progress in wild areas. Roaming groups of zebras, aggressive rhinos, and dangerous buffaloes don't mix well with ranches, crops, and kids heading to school. Except in the large game reserves, swamps, and dense jungles, it's clear that the big game across eastern Africa is destined to vanish—starting with the largest and most valuable species.

Five hundred years from now, when North America is worn out, and wasted to a skeleton of what it now is, the great plateau region of East Africa [Page 183] between Cape Town and Lake Rudolph will be a mighty empire, teeming with white population. Giraffes and rhinoceroses now are trampling over the sites of the cities and universities of the future. Then the herds of grand game that now make Africa a sportsman's wonderland will exist only in closed territory, in books, and in memory.

Five hundred years from now, when North America is depleted and reduced to a shadow of its former self, the vast plateau region of East Africa [Page 183] between Cape Town and Lake Rudolph will become a powerful empire, filled with a large white population. Giraffes and rhinos will be roaming over the locations of future cities and universities. The magnificent wildlife that currently makes Africa a paradise for hunters will only be found in protected areas, in literature, and in memories.

MAP SHOWING THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THE LION

MAP SHOWING THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THE LION

Incidentally, it is also an Index of the Disappearance of African Big Game Generally. From an Article in the Review of Reviews, for August, 1912, by Cyrus C. Adams, and Based Largely upon the Exhaustive Studies of Dr. C.M. Engel, of Copenhagen.

Incidentally, it's also an Index of the Disappearance of African Big Game Overall. From an article in the Review of Reviews, for August, 1912, by Cyrus C. Adams, and largely based on the extensive studies of Dr. C.M. Engel, of Copenhagen.

From what has befallen in South Africa, we can easily and correctly forecast the future of the big game of British East Africa and Uganda. Less than fifty years ago, Cape Colony, Natal, Zululand, and every [Page 184] country up to the Zambesi was teeming with herds of big wild animals, just as the northern provinces now are. As late as 1890, when Rhodesia was taken over by the Chartered Company, and the capital city of Salisbury was staked out, an American boy in the Pioneer Corps, now Honorable William Harvey Brown, of Salisbury, wrote thus of the Gwibi Flats, near Salisbury:

From what has happened in South Africa, we can easily and accurately predict the future of the big game in British East Africa and Uganda. Less than fifty years ago, Cape Colony, Natal, Zululand, and every [Page 184] country up to the Zambezi was filled with herds of big wild animals, just like the northern provinces are now. As recently as 1890, when Rhodesia was taken over by the Chartered Company and the capital city of Salisbury was established, an American boy in the Pioneer Corps, now Honorable William Harvey Brown, of Salisbury, wrote about the Gwibi Flats, near Salisbury:

"That evening I beheld on those flats a sight which probably will never again be seen there to the end of the world. The variety deploying before me was almost incredible! There, within the range of my vision were groups of roan, sable and tsessebi antelopes, Burchell zebras, [now totally extinct!] elands, reedbucks, steinbucks and ostriches. It was like Africa in the days of Livingstone. As I sat on my horse, viewing with amazement this wonderful panorama of wild life, I was startled by a herd that came galloping around a small hill just behind me."—("On the South African Frontier," p. 114.)

"That evening, I saw something on those plains that will probably never be seen there again. The variety before me was almost unbelievable! Within my sight were groups of roan, sable, and tsessebe antelopes, Burchell zebras, [now totally extinct!] elands, reedbucks, steinbucks, and ostriches. It was like Africa during Livingstone's time. As I sat on my horse, amazed by this incredible scene of wildlife, I was startled by a herd that came galloping around a small hill just behind me."—("On the South African Frontier," p. 114.)

That was in 1890. And how is it to-day?

That was in 1890. And how is it today?

Salisbury is a modern city, endorsed by two lines of railway. The Gwibi Flats are farms. There is some big game yet, in Rhodesia south of the Zambesi, but to find it you must go at least a week's journey from the capital, to the remote corners that have not yet been converted into farms or mining settlements. North of the Zambesi, Rhodesia yet contains plenty of big game. The Victoria Falls station is a popular starting point for hunting expeditions headed northeast and northwest. In the northwest the game is yet quite in a state of nature. Unfortunately the Barotse natives of that region can procure from the Portuguese traders all the firearms and ammunition that they can pay for, and by treaty they retain their hunting rights. The final result will be—extermination of the game.

Salisbury is a modern city, connected by two rail lines. The Gwibi Flats are farmland. There’s still some big game in Rhodesia south of the Zambezi, but to find it, you have to travel at least a week from the capital to the remote areas that haven’t been turned into farms or mining sites. North of the Zambezi, Rhodesia still has plenty of big game. The Victoria Falls station is a popular starting point for hunting trips to the northeast and northwest. In the northwest, the game is still quite wild. Unfortunately, the Barotse natives in that area can get firearms and ammunition from Portuguese traders as long as they can afford them, and they have retained their hunting rights by treaty. The final outcome will be the extinction of the game.

Elsewhere throughout Rhodesia the natives are not permitted to have guns and gunpowder,—a very wise regulation. In Alaska our Indians are privileged to kill game all the year round, and they have modern firearms with which to do it.

Elsewhere in Rhodesia, the locals are not allowed to have guns and gunpowder—this is a very smart rule. In Alaska, our Native Americans are allowed to hunt game all year round, and they have modern firearms for that purpose.

And how is it with the game of that day?

And how is the game going today?

The true Burchell's zebra is now regarded as extinct! In Cape Colony and Natal, that once teemed with big game in the old-fashioned African way, they are counting the individual wild animals that remain! Also, they are making game preserves, literally everywhere.

The real Burchell's zebra is now considered extinct! In Cape Colony and Natal, which used to be filled with large animals in the traditional African style, they are counting the individual wild animals that are left! They're also creating game preserves all over the place.

Now that the best remaining game districts of Africa are rapidly coming under British control, it is a satisfaction to observe that the governing bodies and executive officers are alive to the necessity of preserving the big game from actual extinction. Excepting German East Africa, from Uganda to Cape Colony the game preserves form an almost continuous chain. It is quite impossible to enumerate all of them; but the two in British East Africa are of enormous size, and are well stocked with game. South Africa contains a great many smaller preserves and a few specimen herds of big game, but that is about all. Except in a few localities the hunting of big game in that region is done forever.

Now that the best remaining game areas in Africa are quickly coming under British control, it's satisfying to see that the governing bodies and executive officers recognize the need to protect big game from extinction. With the exception of German East Africa, there’s an almost continuous chain of game preserves from Uganda to Cape Colony. It's impossible to list them all, but the two in British East Africa are massive and well-stocked with wildlife. South Africa has many smaller reserves and a few herds of big game, but that's about it. Aside from a few places, big game hunting in that region is a thing of the past.

The Western Districts Game and Trout Protective Association of South Africa recently, (1911), has made careful counts and estimates of the number of individual game animals remaining in Cape Colony, with the following result:

The Western Districts Game and Trout Protective Association of South Africa recently, (1911), has made careful counts and estimates of the number of individual game animals remaining in Cape Colony, with the following result:


Big Game In The Cape Province

Big Game in the Cape Province

From information kindly placed at the disposal of the Association by the Government, it was found that the following varieties of big game are still found in the Province. The numbers, however, are only approximate:

From information generously provided to the Association by the Government, it was discovered that the following types of big game can still be found in the Province. However, the numbers are only rough estimates:

Blesbok: About 400 in Steynsburg, and 35 in Queen's Town divisions.

Blesbok: Approximately 400 in Steynsburg and 35 in Queen's Town divisions.

Bontebok: About 30 in Bredasdorp and 45 in Swellendam divisions.

Bontebok: About 30 in Bredasdorp and 45 in Swellendam divisions.

Buffalo: About 340 in Uitenhage, 120 in Alexandria, and 75 in Bathurst divisions.

Buffalo: Around 340 in Uitenhage, 120 in Alexandria, and 75 in Bathurst divisions.

Elephants: About 130 in Alexandria, 160 in Uitenhage, 40 in Bathurst, and 20 in Knysna divisions.

Elephants: About 130 in Alexandria, 160 in Uitenhage, 40 in Bathurst, and 20 in Knysna divisions.

Gemsbok: About 2,450 in Namaqualand, 4,500 in Vryburg, 4,000 in Gordonia, and 670 in the Kenhardt, Mafeking and Barkly West divisions.

Gemsbok: About 2,450 in Namaqualand, 4,500 in Vryburg, 4,000 in Gordonia, and 670 in the Kenhardt, Mafeking, and Barkly West divisions.

Koodoo: About 10,000, found chiefly in the divisions of Albany, Barkly West, Fort Beaufort, Hay, Herbert, Jansenville, Kuruman, Ladismith, Mafeking, Mossel Bay, Oudtshoorn, Riversdale, Steytlerville, Uitenhage, Victoria East and Vryburg.

Koodoo: About 10,000, mainly found in the areas of Albany, Barkly West, Fort Beaufort, Hay, Herbert, Jansenville, Kuruman, Ladismith, Mafeking, Mossel Bay, Oudtshoorn, Riversdale, Steytlerville, Uitenhage, Victoria East, and Vryburg.

Oribi: About 120, in the divisions of Albany and Alexandria.

Oribi: About 120, in the areas of Albany and Alexandria.

Rietbok: About 170, in the Komgha division.

Rietbok: About 170, in the Komgha division.

Zebra: About 560, most of which are to be found in the divisions of Cradock, George and Oudtshoorn. A few are to be found in the divisions of Uniondale and Uitenhage.

Zebra: Around 560, with most located in the areas of Cradock, George, and Oudtshoorn. A few can also be found in the regions of Uniondale and Uitenhage.

Springbok: Being migratory, it is difficult to estimate their number. In some years they are compelled by drought to invade the Province in large numbers. They are then seen as far south as Calvinia and Fraserburg. Large numbers are, however, fenced in on private estates in various parts of the Province.

Springbok: Since they migrate, it's hard to count how many there are. In some years, they are forced by drought to move into the Province in huge numbers. They can even be spotted as far south as Calvinia and Fraserburg. However, many are kept on private estates in different areas of the Province.

Klipspringers: About 11,200, in the following divisions, viz.: Namaqualand, 6,559; Kuruman, 2,100; Steytlerville, 1,530; Oudtshoorn, 275; Hay, 250; Ladismith, 220; Graaff-Reinet, 119; Kenhardt, 66; and Cradock, 56.

Klipspringers: Approximately 11,200 in the following areas: Namaqualand, 6,559; Kuruman, 2,100; Steytlerville, 1,530; Oudtshoorn, 275; Hay, 250; Ladismith, 220; Graaff-Reinet, 119; Kenhardt, 66; and Cradock, 56.

Hartebeest: About 9,700, principally in the divisions of Vryburg, Gordonia, Kuruman, Mafeking, Kimberley, Hay and Beaufort West.

Hartebeest: About 9,700, mainly in the areas of Vryburg, Gordonia, Kuruman, Mafeking, Kimberley, Hay, and Beaufort West.

Wildebeest: About 3,450 in Vryburg, 80 each in Gordonia and Kuruman, 65 in Mafeking, 20 in Queen's Town, and a few in the Bredasdorp divisions.

Wildebeest: About 3,450 in Vryburg, 80 each in Gordonia and Kuruman, 65 in Mafeking, 20 in Queen's Town, and a few in the Bredasdorp divisions.

Eland: About 12 in the Graaff-Reinet division, privately bred.

Eland: About 12 in the Graaff-Reinet area, raised on private farms.

The above showing of the pitifully small numbers of the specimens that constitute the remnant of the big-game of the Cape suggest just one thing:—a universal close season throughout Cape Colony, and no hunting whatever for ten years. And yet, what do we see?

The display of the shockingly small number of specimens that make up the remaining big-game of the Cape suggests only one thing: a complete hunting ban across Cape Colony, with no hunting allowed for ten years. And yet, what do we see?

The Report from which the above census was taken contains half a column of solid matter, in small type, giving a list of the open seasons all over Cape Colony, during which killing may be done! So it seems that the spirit of slaughter is the same in Africa that it is in America,—kill, as long as there is anything alive to kill!

The report from which the above census was taken includes half a column of detailed information, in small print, detailing the open seasons across Cape Colony when hunting is allowed! It appears that the desire to hunt is just as strong in Africa as it is in America—kill, as long as there’s anything alive to hunt!

This list is of startling interest, because it shows how closely the small remnants of big game are now marked down in South Africa.

This list is really impressive because it shows just how few big game animals are left in South Africa.

In view of the success with which Englishmen protect their game when [Page 186] once they have made up their minds to do so, it is fair to expect that the herds now under protection, as listed above, will save their respective species from extinction. It is alarming, however, to note the wide territory covered by the deadly "open seasons," and to wonder when the bars really will be put up.

In light of how effectively Englishmen safeguard their game when [Page 186] decide to do so, it's reasonable to expect that the herds currently under protection, as mentioned above, will prevent their species from going extinct. However, it's concerning to see the vast areas affected by the dangerous "open seasons," and to question when the real protections will be implemented.

To-day, Mashonaland is a very-much-settled colony. The Cape to Cairo railway and trains de luxe long ago attained the Palls of the Zambesi, and now the Curator of the Salisbury Museum will have to search diligently in far off Nyassaland, and beyond the Zambesi River, to find enough specimens to fill his cases with representatives of the vanished Rhodesian fauna. Once (1892) the white rhinoceros was found in northern Rhodesia; but never again. In Salisbury, elands and zebras are nearly as great a curiosity as they are in St. Louis.

Today, Mashonaland is a well-established colony. The Cape to Cairo railway and luxury trains reached the Falls of the Zambezi long ago, so now the Curator of the Salisbury Museum will have to search diligently in distant Nyassaland and beyond the Zambezi River to find enough specimens to fill his cases with representatives of the extinct Rhodesian wildlife. Once (in 1892), the white rhinoceros was found in northern Rhodesia, but not since. In Salisbury, elands and zebras are nearly as much of a novelty as they are in St. Louis.

But for the discovery of white rhinoceroses in the Lado district, on the western bank of the Nile below Gondokoro, we would now be saying that Rhinoceros simus is within about ten specimens of total extinction.

But for the discovery of white rhinoceroses in the Lado district, on the western bank of the Nile below Gondokoro, we would now be saying that Rhinoceros simus is within about ten specimens of total extinction.

From South Africa, as far up as Salisbury, in central Rhodesia, at least 99 per cent of the big game has disappeared before the white man's rifle. Let him who doubts this scan the census of wild animals still living in Cape Colony.

From South Africa, as far north as Salisbury in central Rhodesia, at least 99 percent of the big game has vanished due to the white man's rifle. Let anyone who doubts this look at the census of wild animals still surviving in Cape Colony.

From all the other regions of Africa that are easily accessible to gunners, the animal life is vigorously being shot out, and no man in his senses will now say that the big game is breeding faster than it is being killed. The reverse is painfully true. Mr. Carl Akeley, in his quest for a really large male elephant for the American Museum found and looked over a thousand males without finding one that was really fine and typical. All the photographs of elephant herds that were taken by Kermit Roosevelt and Akeley show a striking absence of adult males and of females with long tusks. There are only young males, and young females with small, short tusks. The answer is—the white ivory hunters have killed nearly all the elephants bearing good ivory.

From all the other areas of Africa that are easy to access for hunters, the wildlife is getting shot down rapidly, and no sensible person would claim that big game is reproducing faster than it's being hunted. The opposite is unfortunately true. Mr. Carl Akeley, in his search for a really large male elephant for the American Museum, examined a thousand males without finding one that was truly impressive and typical. All the pictures of elephant herds taken by Kermit Roosevelt and Akeley show a notable absence of adult males and females with long tusks. There are only young males and young females with small, short tusks. The reason is that the white ivory hunters have killed off nearly all the elephants with good ivory.

The slaughter of big game is going on furiously in British East Africa because the Uganda Railway opens up the entire territory to hunters. Anyone, man or woman, who can raise $5,000 in cash can go there and make a huge "bag" of big game. With a license costing only $250 he can kill enough big game to sink a ship.

The big game hunting is happening intensely in British East Africa now that the Uganda Railway has made the whole area accessible to hunters. Anyone, regardless of gender, who can come up with $5,000 in cash can head there and take home a massive haul of big game. With a license that only costs $250, one can hunt enough big game to fill a ship.

The bag limit in British East Africa is ruinously extravagant. If the government desires the extermination of the game, such a bag limit surely will promote that end. It is awful to think that for a petty sum any man may buy the right to kill 300 head of hoofed and horned animals, of 44 species, not counting the carnivorous animals that also may be killed. That bag limit should immediately be reduced 75 per cent!

The bag limit in British East Africa is excessively high. If the government really wants to get rid of the wildlife, this limit will definitely help achieve that. It's shocking to think that for a small fee, anyone can buy the right to kill 300 hoofed and horned animals from 44 species, not even including the carnivorous animals that can also be hunted. That bag limit should be reduced immediately by 75%!

As matters stand to-day in British East Africa, the big game of the country, outside the three preserves, is absolutely certain to disappear, in about one-fourth of the time that it took South Africa to accomplish the same result. The reasons are obvious:—superior accessibility, more deadly rifles, expert professional guides, and a widespread craze for killing big game. With care and economy, British [Page 187] East Africa should furnish good hunting for two centuries, but as things are going on to-day, twenty years will see a tremendous change for the worse, and a disappearance of game that will literally astonish the natives.

As things stand today in British East Africa, the large wildlife in the country, outside of the three protected areas, is definitely going to disappear in about a quarter of the time it took for South Africa to reach the same outcome. The reasons are clear: easier access, more powerful rifles, skilled professional guides, and a widespread obsession with hunting big game. With care and sensible management, British [Page 187] East Africa could provide excellent hunting for two centuries, but as things are progressing now, in twenty years there will be a significant decline, and the loss of wildlife will genuinely shock the locals.

German East Africa and Uganda will not exterminate their quotas of big game quite so soon. The absence of railways is a great factor in game-existence. The Congo Free State contains game and sporting possibilities—on the unexplored uplands between the rivers,—that are as yet totally unknown to sportsmen at large. We are accustomed to thinking of the whole basin of the Congo as a vast, gloomy and impenetrable forest.

German East Africa and Uganda won't run out of their big game quotas anytime soon. The lack of railways plays a significant role in the presence of wildlife. The Congo Free State has game and sporting opportunities—on the unexplored highlands between the rivers—that are still completely unknown to most sports enthusiasts. We tend to imagine the entire Congo basin as a large, dark, and inaccessible forest.

There is to-day in Africa a vast reserve supply of grand game. It inhabits regions that are either unknown, or most difficult to penetrate. As a species in point, consider the okapi. Only the boldest and most persistent explorers ever have set foot in its tangled and miasmatic haunts. It may be twenty years before a living specimen can be brought out. The gorilla and the chimpanzee are so well protected by the density of their jungles that they never can be exterminated—until the natives are permitted to have all the firearms that they desire! When that day arrives, it is "good-night" to all the wild life that is large enough to eat or to wear.

There is today in Africa a vast reserve of big game. It lives in areas that are either unknown or really hard to access. Take the okapi, for example. Only the bravest and most determined explorers have ever set foot in its dense and swampy habitats. It could take twenty years before a living specimen is captured. The gorilla and the chimpanzee are so well protected by the thickness of their jungles that they can never be wiped out—unless the locals are allowed to have all the firearms they want! When that day comes, it's "good night" to all the wildlife that's big enough to eat or wear.

The quagga and the blaubok became extinct before the world learned that their existence was threatened! The giant eland, the sable antelope, the greater kudu, the bontebok, blessbok, the mountain and Burchell zebras, all the giraffes save that of Nigeria, the big waterbucks, the nyala, the sitatunga, the bongo, and the gerenuk—all will go in the same way, everywhere outside the game preserves. The buffalo, zebra and rhinoceros are especially marked for destruction, as annoyances to colonists. You who read of the killing of these species to-day will read of their total disappearance to-morrow. So long as the hunting of them is permitted, their ultimate disappearance is fixed and certain. It is not the way of rifle-shooting English colonists to permit herds of big game to run about merely to be looked at.

The quagga and the blaubok went extinct before the world even realized their existence was at risk! The giant eland, the sable antelope, the greater kudu, the bontebok, blessbok, both mountain and Burchell zebras, all giraffe species except for the ones in Nigeria, the large waterbucks, the nyala, the sitatunga, the bongo, and the gerenuk—all will face the same fate, everywhere outside of game reserves. The buffalo, zebra, and rhinoceros are especially targeted for elimination, seen as nuisances to colonists. You who read about the killing of these species today will read about their complete disappearance tomorrow. As long as hunting them is allowed, their eventual extinction is guaranteed. It’s not in the nature of rifle-toting English colonists to let herds of big game roam around just for viewing.

Naturally, the open plains of Africa, and the thin forests of the plateau regions, will be the first to lose their big game. In the gloomy fastnesses of the great equatorial forests, and other really dense forests wherever found, the elephants, the Derby eland, the bongo, the okapi, the buffaloes (of three species), the bush-pigs, the bushbucks and the forest-loving antelopes generally will live, for possibly one hundred years,—or until the natives secure plenty of modern firearms and ammunition. Whenever and wherever savages become supplied with rifles, then it is time to measure each big-game animal for its coffin.

Naturally, the open plains of Africa and the sparse forests of the plateau regions will be the first to lose their big game. In the shadowy depths of the vast equatorial forests and other really dense forests found anywhere, the elephants, Derby eland, bongo, okapi, and the three species of buffalo, along with bush-pigs, bushbucks, and generally forest-loving antelopes, will survive for possibly a hundred years—or until locals get their hands on plenty of modern firearms and ammunition. Whenever and wherever people gain access to rifles, it's time to measure each big-game animal for its coffin.

The elephants of the great equatorial forest westward of the lake region will survive long after the last eastern elephant has bitten the dust. The pygmy elephant of the lower Congo region (Elephas pumilio) will be the last African elephant species to disappear—because it inhabits dense miasmatic jungles, its tusks are of the smallest size, and it has the least commercial value.

The elephants in the vast equatorial forest west of the lake area will last long after the last eastern elephant has perished. The pygmy elephant of the lower Congo region (Elephas pumilio) will be the final African elephant species to vanish—since it lives in thick, swampy jungles, its tusks are the smallest, and it holds the least commercial value.


[Page 188]
CHAPTER XIX
THE PRESENT AND FUTURE OF THE GAME OF ASIA

After a successful survival of man's influence through two thousand years, at last the big game of India has made a good start on the road to vanishment. Up to 1870 it had held its own with a tenacity that was astonishing. In 1877, I found the Ganges—Jumna dooab, the Animallai Hills, the Wynaad Forest and Ceylon literally teeming with herds of game. The Animallais in particular were a hunter's paradise. In each day of hunting, large game of some kind was a certainty. The Nilgiri Hills had been quite well shot out, but in view of the very small area and open, golf-links character of the whole top of that wonderful sky plateau, that was no cause for wonderment.

After surviving human impact for two thousand years, the big game of India is finally starting to disappear. Until 1870, it had managed to hold on with surprising resilience. In 1877, I found the Ganges-Jumna dooab, the Animallai Hills, the Wynaad Forest, and Ceylon absolutely filled with herds of game. The Animallais, in particular, were a hunter's dream. Every day of hunting guaranteed the chance of encountering large game. The Nilgiri Hills had been pretty much depleted of game, but given the very small size and open, golf-course-like nature of the entire top of that incredible plateau, it wasn’t really surprising.

In those days no native shikaree owned and operated a gun,—or at the most very, very few of them did. If a rogue elephant, a man-eating tiger or a nasty leopard became a public nuisance, it was a case for a sahib to come and doctor it with a .577 double-barreled express rifle, worth $150 or more; and the sahibs had shooting galore.

In those days, no local hunter owned or operated a gun—only a very, very few did. If a rogue elephant, a man-eating tiger, or a troublesome leopard became a public nuisance, it was up to a British officer to deal with it using a .577 double-barreled express rifle, which cost $150 or more; and the officers had plenty of opportunities to shoot.

I think that no such great wild-life sights as those of the plateau regions of Africa ever were seen in southern Asia. Conditions there are different, and usually the game is widely scattered. The sambar deer and muntjac of the dense forests, the axis of the bamboo glades, the thameng deer of the Burmese jungles, the sladang, or gaur, of the awful Malay tangle, and the big cats and canines will last long and well. The ibexes, markhors, tahr and all the wild sheep eventually will be shot out by sportsmen who are "sheep crazy." The sheep and goats of Asia will disappear soon after the plains animals of Africa, because no big game that lives in the open can much longer endure the modern, inexpensive long-range rifles of deadly accuracy and limitless repetition of fire.

I believe that the incredible wildlife sights found in the plateau regions of Africa have never been seen in southern Asia. The conditions there are different, and usually, the animals are spread out. The sambar deer and muntjac in the dense forests, the axis in the bamboo glades, the thameng deer in the Burmese jungles, the sladang or gaur in the dense Malay tangle, and the big cats and canines will endure for a long time. However, the ibexes, markhors, tahr, and all the wild sheep will eventually be hunted to extinction by sports enthusiasts who are "sheep crazy." The sheep and goats of Asia will vanish shortly after the plains animals of Africa, because no large game that lives in the open can survive much longer against modern, affordable long-range rifles that are dead-on accurate and can fire repeatedly without limit.

Eventually, I fear that by some unlucky turn of Fortune's wheel all the native hunters of Asia will obtain rifles; and when they do, we soon will see the end of the big game.

Eventually, I worry that through some unfortunate twist of Fate, all the native hunters in Asia will get rifles; and when that happens, we’ll soon witness the extinction of the big game.

Even to-day we find that the primitive conditions of 1877 have been greatly changed. In the first place, about every native shikaree (hunter) owns a rifle, at a cost of about $25; and many other natives possess guns, and assume to hunt with them. The logical conclusion of this is more hunting and less game. The development of the country has reduced the cover for game. New roads and railways have made the game districts easily accessible, and real sportsmen are now three or four times as numerous as they were in 1877.

Even today, we see that the basic conditions of 1877 have changed a lot. First of all, pretty much every local hunter owns a rifle, costing around $25, and many other locals have guns and claim to hunt with them. The result of this is more hunting and fewer animals. The progress in the area has shrunk the habitat for wildlife. New roads and railways have made hunting areas easily reachable, and genuine sportsmen are now three to four times more common than they were in 1877.

At Toonacadavoo, in the Animallai Hills where thirty-five years ago [Page 189] there modestly nestled on the ridge beside the river only Forest Ranger Theobold's bungalow, built of mud and covered with grass thatch and bamboo rats, there is now a regular hill station lighted by electricity, a modern sanatorium high up on the bluff, a club, golf links, and other modern improvements. In my day there were exactly four guns on the Animallais. Now there are probably one hundred; and it is easy to guess how much big game remains on the Delectable Mountains in comparison with the golden days of 1877. I should say that there is now only one game animal for every twenty-five that were there in my day.

At Toonacadavoo, in the Animallai Hills where thirty-five years ago there modestly nestled on the ridge beside the river only Forest Ranger Theobold's bungalow, made of mud and covered with grass thatch and bamboo rats, there is now a proper hill station with electricity, a modern sanatorium high up on the bluff, a club, golf links, and other contemporary amenities. Back in my day, there were exactly four guns on the Animallais. Now there are probably one hundred, and it's easy to see how much big game is left on the Delectable Mountains compared to the golden days of 1877. I'd estimate that there is now only one game animal for every twenty-five that were around in my time.

I am told that it is like that all over India. Beyond question, the gun-sellers and gun-users have been busy there, as everywhere else. The game of India is on the toboggan slide, and the old days of abundance have gone forever.

I’ve heard that it’s like that all over India. No doubt, the gun dealers and gun users have been active there, just like everywhere else. The wildlife in India is on the decline, and the days of plenty are gone for good.

The first fact that strikes us in the face is the impending fate of the great Indian rhinoceros, an animal as wonderful as the Titanothere or the Megatherium. It is like a gift handed down to us straight out of the Pleistocene age, a million years back. The British paleontologists to-day marvel at Elephas ganesa, and by great labor dig his bones out of the Sewalik rocks, but what one of them all has yet made a move to save Rhinoceros indicus from the quick extermination that soon will be his portion unless he is accorded perpetual and real protection from the assaults of man?

The first thing that stands out is the looming fate of the great Indian rhinoceros, an animal as amazing as the Titanothere or the Megatherium. It feels like a treasure handed down to us straight from the Pleistocene era, a million years ago. Today, British paleontologists are fascinated by Elephas ganesa and work hard to unearth its bones from the Sewalik rocks, but how many of them have made any effort to save Rhinoceros indicus from the inevitable extinction that awaits unless it receives lasting and genuine protection from human threats?

Let the mammalogists of the world face this fact. The available cover of the Indian rhinoceros is alarmingly decreasing, throughout Assam and Bengal where the behemoth of the jungle has a right to live. It is believed that the few remaining rhinos are being shot much faster then they are breeding; and what will be the effect of this upon an animal that requires fourteen years to reach full maturity? To-day, the most wonderful hoofed mammal of all Asia is booked for extermination, and unless very radical measures for its preservation are at once carried into effect, it is probable that twenty years more will see the last Indian rhino go down to rise no more. One remedy would be a good, ample rhinoceros preserve; and another, the most absolute and permanent protection for the species, all along the line. Half-way measures will not suffice. It is time to ring in a general alarm.

Let the mammalogists of the world acknowledge this reality. The habitat of the Indian rhinoceros is alarmingly shrinking, especially in Assam and Bengal, where this giant of the jungle deserves to thrive. It’s believed that the few remaining rhinos are being hunted much faster than they can breed; and what will this mean for an animal that takes fourteen years to reach maturity? Right now, the most incredible hoofed mammal in all of Asia is on the brink of extinction, and unless we implement very drastic measures for its protection immediately, it’s likely that in twenty years, the last Indian rhino will be gone forever. One solution could be to establish a large, dedicated rhinoceros preserve; another would be to ensure complete and permanent protection for the species at every level. Partial measures will not be enough. It’s time to raise a general alarm.

During the past eighteen years, only three specimens of that species have come out of India for the zoological gardens and parks of the world, and I think there are only five in captivity, all told.

During the last eighteen years, only three specimens of that species have been sent out of India to zoological gardens and parks around the world, and I believe there are only five in total in captivity.

We are told that in India now the natives are permitted to have about all the firearms they can pay for. Naturally, in a country containing over 300,000,000 people this is a deadly thing. Of course there are shooting regulations, many of them; but their enforcement is so imperfect that it is said that the natives are attacking the big game on all sides, with deadly effect. I fear it is utterly impossible for the Indian government to put enough wardens into the field to watch the doings of the grand army of native poachers.

We hear that in India, the locals are now allowed to own as many firearms as they can afford. Naturally, in a country with over 300 million people, this poses a serious risk. There are shooting regulations, but they aren't enforced well, which leads to reports of locals hunting big game everywhere, with deadly results. I’m afraid it’s completely impossible for the Indian government to deploy enough wardens to oversee the activities of the large number of local poachers.

Fortunately, the Indian native,—unlike the western frontiersman,—does not contend that he owns the big game, or that "all men are born free and equal." At the same time, he means to have his full share of it, to eat, and to sell in various forms for cash. Even in India, the sale-of-game dragon has reared its head, and is to-day in need of being scotched with an iron hand.

Fortunately, the Indian native—unlike the western frontiersman—does not claim that he owns the big game or that "all men are born free and equal." At the same time, he intends to get his fair share of it, to eat and to sell in various forms for cash. Even in India, the issue of game sales has emerged and needs to be addressed decisively.

When I received direct from a friend in the native state of Kashmir a long printed circular setting forth the hunting laws and game-protective measures of that very interesting principality, it gave me a shock. It was disquieting to be thus assured that the big game of Kashmir has disappeared to such an extent that strong protective measures are necessary. It was as if the Chief Eskimo of Etah had issued a strong proclamation for the saving of the musk-ox.

When I got a long printed circular straight from a friend in Kashmir outlining the hunting laws and game protection measures of that fascinating region, I was taken aback. It was unsettling to be told that the big game in Kashmir has dwindled so much that strict protection measures are needed. It felt like the Chief Eskimo of Etah had issued a serious announcement to save the musk-ox.

In Kashmir, the destruction of game has become so serious that a Game Preservation Department has been created, with the official staff that such an organization requires. The game laws are printed annually, and any variations from them may be made only by the authority of the Maharajah himself. Up to date, eight game preserves have been created, having a total area of about thee hundred square miles. In addition to these, there are twelve small preserves, each having an area of from twenty-five to fifty square miles. By their locations, these seem to provide for all the species of big game that are found in Kashmir,—the ibex, two forms of markhor, the tahr. Himalayan bighorn sheep, burrhel and goral.

In Kashmir, the decline of wildlife has become so serious that a Game Preservation Department has been established, complete with the necessary official staff. The game laws are published every year, and any changes to them can only be made by the Maharajah himself. So far, eight game preserves have been created, covering a total area of about three hundred square miles. In addition to these, there are twelve smaller preserves, each ranging from twenty-five to fifty square miles. Their locations seem to cater to all the big game species found in Kashmir, including the ibex, two types of markhor, the tahr, Himalayan bighorn sheep, burrhel, and goral.

In our country we have several states that are very large, very diversified in surface, and still inhabited by large game. Has any one of those states created a series of game preserves even half way comparable with those of Kashmir? I think not. Montana has made a beginning with two preserves,—Snow Creek and the Pryor Mountains,—but beside the splendid series of Kashmir they are not worthy of serious mention.

In our country, we have several states that are really big, very varied in landscape, and still home to a lot of wildlife. Has any of those states created a series of game reserves that even come close to what they have in Kashmir? I don’t think so. Montana has started with two reserves—Snow Creek and the Pryor Mountains—but compared to the impressive reserves in Kashmir, they don't stand out much.

And then following closely in the wake of that document came a lengthy article in the "Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London," by E.C. Stebbing, in which a correspondent of the Indian Field clearly sets forth the fact that the big game of the Himalayas now is menaced by a peril new to our consideration, but of a most deadly character. Hear him:

And then shortly after that document, a long article appeared in the "Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London," written by E.C. Stebbing, where a correspondent from the Indian Field clearly outlines that the large wildlife in the Himalayas is now threatened by a danger that is new to us but extremely serious. Listen to him:

"In this inventory (of game destroyers in India), the Gurkha soldier does not find a place, for he belongs to a class which he amply fills by himself with his small but very important personality. He deserves separate notice. From the banks of the Sarda on the frontier of Nepal, to the banks of the Indus, the battalions of these gallant little men are scattered in cantonments all along the outer spurs of the Himalayan range. In seven or eight of these locations there are at least 14,000 of these disciplined warriors, who, in the absence of opportunities for spilling human blood legitimately, are given a free hand for slaughtering wild animals, along five-hundred miles of the best hunting grounds of Upper India."

"In this inventory of game destroyers in India, the Gurkha soldier is not mentioned, as he represents a category unto himself with his small but significant personality. He deserves special recognition. From the banks of the Sarda on the Nepal border to the Indus River, battalions of these brave little men are spread across military posts all along the outer foothills of the Himalayan range. In seven or eight of these locations, there are at least 14,000 of these disciplined fighters, who, in the absence of legitimate opportunities to shed human blood, are given free rein to hunt wild animals across five hundred miles of the prime hunting grounds of Upper India."

Now, since those facts must be true as reported, do they not in themselves constitute a severe arraignment of the Indian government? Why should that state of game slaughter endure, when a single executive order to the C.O. of each post would effectually stop it?

Now, since those facts must be true as reported, don’t they in themselves represent a serious indictment of the Indian government? Why should that level of game slaughter continue when a single executive order to the C.O. of each post could effectively put a stop to it?

In the making of game preserves, or "sanctuaries" as they are called out there, the Government of India has shown rare and commendable diligence. The total number is too great for enumeration here. The native state of Mysore has seven, and the Nilgiri Hills have sanctuaries aggregating about 100,000 acres in area. In the Wynaad Forest, my old hunting-grounds at Mudumallay have been closed to bison shooting, because of the alarming decrease of bison (gaur) through shooting and disease. The Kundah Forest Reserve has been made a partial game preserve, but the door might as well have been left wide open as so widely ajar.

In creating game preserves, or "sanctuaries" as they’re called, the Government of India has demonstrated exceptional effort. There are too many to list here. The native state of Mysore has seven, and the Nilgiri Hills have sanctuaries covering about 100,000 acres. In the Wynaad Forest, my old hunting spot at Mudumallay has been closed to bison hunting due to the alarming decline in the bison (gaur) population from hunting and disease. The Kundah Forest Reserve has been designated as a partial game preserve, but it might as well be completely open given how loosely it’s regulated.

In eastern Bengal and Assam, several game preserves have been created. On the whole, by the diligence and thoroughness with which sanctuaries, as they are termed, have been created quite generally throughout India, it is quite evident that the government and the sportsmen of India have become thoroughly alarmed by the great decrease of the game, and the danger of the extermination of species. In the past India has been the finest and best-stocked hunting-ground of all Asia, quite beyond compare, and the destruction of her once-splendid fauna of big game would be a zoological calamity.

In eastern Bengal and Assam, several wildlife reserves have been established. Overall, the effort and commitment put into creating these sanctuaries throughout India clearly show that the government and sports enthusiasts are genuinely concerned about the significant decline in game and the risk of species becoming extinct. Historically, India has been the greatest and most abundant hunting ground in all of Asia, unmatched in comparison, and the loss of its once magnificent big game wildlife would be a tragic event for zoology.

Tibet.—As yet, Tibet offers free hunting, without legal let or hindrance, to every sportsman who can climb up to her lofty, wind-swept and whizzing-cold plateau. The man who hunts the Ovis poli, superb creature though it be, pays in full for his trophies. The ibex of the south help out the compensatory damages, but even with that, the list of species available in southern Tibet is painfully small. The Mitchell takin can be reached from China, via Chungking, after a long, hard journey, over Consul Mason Mitchell's trail; but the takin is about the only large hoofed game available.

Tibet.—Currently, Tibet allows free hunting, without any legal restrictions, for any sportsman who can make it to its high, windy, and freezing plateau. The person who hunts the Ovis poli, a magnificent creature, pays a steep price for their trophies. The ibex found in the south help to offset some of the costs, but even with that, the number of species available in southern Tibet is unfortunately limited. The Mitchell takin can be accessed from China, through Chungking, after a long and challenging journey along Consul Mason Mitchell's route; however, the takin is pretty much the only large hoofed game that can be hunted.

The Altai Mountains, of western China, contain the magnificent Siberian argali, the grandfather of all sheep species, whose horns must be seen to be believed. Through a quest for that species the Russian military authorities played upon Mr. George L. Harrison and his comrade a very grim and unsportsmanlike joke. At the frontier military post, on the Russo-Chinese border, the two Americans were courteously halted, hospitably entertained, and prevented from going into the argali-infested mountains that loomed up before them only a few miles away! The Russian officers said:

The Altai Mountains, in western China, are home to the impressive Siberian argali, the ancestor of all sheep species, known for its unbelievable horns. In their search for this species, the Russian military authorities played a cruel and unathletic prank on Mr. George L. Harrison and his friend. At the military outpost on the Russo-Chinese border, the two Americans were politely stopped, warmly welcomed, and kept from entering the argali-filled mountains that were just a few miles ahead of them! The Russian officers said:

"Sheep? Why, if you really want sheep, we will send out some of our brave soldiers to shoot some for you; but there is no need for you to take the trouble to go after them!"

"Sheep? If you really want sheep, we can send out some of our brave soldiers to hunt some for you; but there’s no need for you to go after them!"

After Mr. Harrison and his comrade had spent $5,000, and traveled half way around the world for those sheep, that is in brief the story of how [Page 192] the cup of Tantalus was given them by the Russians, actually at their goal! As spoil-sports, those Russian officers were the champions of the world.

After Mr. Harrison and his buddy had spent $5,000 and traveled halfway around the world for those sheep, that’s the gist of how [Page 192] the cup of Tantalus was handed to them by the Russians, right at their goal! As party poopers, those Russian officers were the best in the world.

Seven hundred miles southeastward of the Altai Mountains of western China, guarded by the dangerous hostility of savage native tribes, there exists and awaits the scientific explorer, according to report, an undiscovered wild horse. The Bicolored Wild Horse is black and white, and joy awaits the zoologist or sportsman who sees it first. Evidently it will not soon be exterminated by modern rifles.

Seven hundred miles southeast of the Altai Mountains in western China, protected by the fierce hostility of wild native tribes, there is reportedly an undiscovered wild horse just waiting for a scientific explorer. The Bicolored Wild Horse is black and white, and whoever spots it first will find joy. Clearly, it won't be wiped out anytime soon by modern rifles.

The Impenetrable Forests.—Although the mountains of central Asia will in time be cleared of their big game,—when by hook and by crook the natives secure plenty of modern firearms,—there are places in the Far East that we know will contain big game forever and a day. Take the Malay Peninsula, Borneo and Sumatra as examples.

The Impenetrable Forests.—Although the mountains of central Asia will eventually lose their big game—once the locals get their hands on enough modern firearms—there are regions in the Far East that we know will always have big game. Consider the Malay Peninsula, Borneo, and Sumatra as examples.

Mr. C. William Beebe, who recently has visited the Far East, has described how the state of Selangor, between Malacca and Penang, has taken on many airs of improvement since 1878, and sections of Sarawak Territory are being cut down and burned for the growing of rubber. Despite this I am trying to think that those developments menace the total volume of the wild life of those regions but little. I wonder if those tangled, illimitable, ever-renewing jungles yet know that their faces have been scratched. White men never will exterminate the big game of the really dense jungles of the eastern tropics; but with enough axes, snares, guns and cartridges the natives may be able to accomplish it!

Mr. C. William Beebe, who recently visited the Far East, has described how the state of Selangor, located between Malacca and Penang, has seen significant improvements since 1878, and parts of Sarawak Territory are being cleared and burned for rubber cultivation. Despite this, I’m trying to believe that these developments pose little threat to the overall wildlife in those areas. I wonder if those tangled, endless, constantly renewing jungles even realize that they’ve been disturbed. White people will never wipe out the large game in the truly dense jungles of the eastern tropics; but with enough axes, traps, guns, and ammunition, the locals might be able to do it!

In Malayana there are some jungles so dense, so tangled with lianas and so thorny with Livistonias and rattan that nothing larger than a cat can make way through them. There are thousands of square miles so boggy, so swampy, so dark, gloomy and mosquito-ridden that all men fear them and avoid them, and in them rubber culture must be impossible. In those silent places the gaur, the rhino, the Malay sambar, the clouded leopard and the orang-utan surely are measurably safe from the game-bags and market gunners of the shooting world. It is good to think that there is an equatorial belt of jungle clear around the world, in Central and South America as well as in the old World, in which there will be little extermination in our day, except of birds for the feather market. But the open plains, open mountains, and open forests of Asia and Australasia are in different case. Eventually they will be "shot out."

In Malayana, there are jungles so thick and tangled with vines and prickly plants like Livistonias and rattan that nothing bigger than a cat can get through. There are thousands of square miles that are so marshy, swampy, dark, gloomy, and full of mosquitoes that everyone fears them and steers clear. It's impossible to cultivate rubber there. In those quiet places, the gaur, rhino, Malay sambar, clouded leopard, and orangutan are likely safe from hunters and market poachers. It's comforting to think that there is a belt of tropical jungle circling the globe, in Central and South America as well as in the Old World, where little extermination will occur in our time, except for birds targeted for the feather trade. However, the open plains, mountains, and forests of Asia and Australasia are in a different situation. Eventually, they will be "shot out."

China, all save Yunnan and western Mongolia, is now horribly barren of wild life. Can it ever be brought back? We think it can not. The millions of population are too many; and except in the great forest tracts, the spread of modern firearms will make an end of the game. Already the pheasants are being swept out of China for the London market, and extinction is staring several species in the face. On the whole, the pheasants of the Old World are being hit hard by the rubber-planting craze. Mr. Beebe declares that owing to the inrush of aggressive capital, the haunts of many species of pheasants are being denuded of all their natural cover, and some mountain species that are limited to small areas are practically certain to be exterminated at an early date.

China, except for Yunnan and western Mongolia, is now severely lacking in wildlife. Can it ever be restored? We believe it can't. The population is too large, and aside from the vast forest areas, the availability of modern firearms will lead to the extinction of the game. Pheasants are already being exported from China for the London market, and several species are facing extinction. Overall, the pheasants of the Old World are being significantly affected by the rubber-planting boom. Mr. Beebe states that due to the influx of aggressive investment, the habitats of many pheasant species are losing all their natural cover, and some mountain species that are confined to small areas are almost certain to be wiped out soon.

Destruction Of Animals For Fur. —In the far North, only the interior of Kamchatka seems to be safe from the iron heel of the skin-hunter. A glance at the list of furs sold in London last year reveals one or two things that are disquieting. The total catch of furs for the year 1911 is enormous,—considering the great scarcity of wild life on two continents. Incidentally it must be remembered that every trapper carries a gun, and in studying the fur list one needs no help in trying to imagine the havoc wrought with firearms on the edible wild life of the regions that contributed all that fur. I have been told by trappers that as a class, trappers are great killers of game.

Killing Animals for Fur. —In the far North, only the interior of Kamchatka seems to be safe from the relentless skin-hunters. A look at the list of furs sold in London last year reveals a couple of unsettling facts. The total number of furs collected in 1911 is massive—especially considering the severe decline of wildlife across two continents. It's also important to note that every trapper carries a gun, and when reviewing the fur list, one can easily imagine the destruction caused by firearms on the edible wildlife in the areas that provided all that fur. I’ve heard from trappers that, as a group, trappers are significant hunters of game.

In order that the reader may know by means of definite figures the extent to which the world is being raked and combed for fur-bearing animals, we append below a statement copied from the Fur News Magazine for November, 1912, of the sales of the largest London fur house during the past two years.

In order for the reader to understand, using specific numbers, the extent to which the world is being searched for fur-bearing animals, we include below a statement taken from the Fur News Magazine for November, 1912, detailing the sales of the largest fur store in London over the last two years.

With varying emotions we call attention to the wombat of Australia, 3,841; grebe, 51,261, and house cat, 92,407. Very nearly all the totals of Lampson & Co. for each species are much lower for the sales of 1912 than for those of 1911. Is this fact significant of a steady decline?

With mixed feelings, we highlight the wombat of Australia, 3,841; grebe, 51,261, and house cat, 92,407. Almost all the totals from Lampson & Co. for each species are much lower for the sales of 1912 compared to those of 1911. Does this indicate a steady decline?


Furs Sold By C.M. Lampson & Co., London
Totals for 1911, Skins Totals for 1912, Skins
Raccoon 354,057 215,626
Musquash (Muskrat) 3,382,401 2,937,150
Musquash, Black 78,363 60,000
Skunk 1,310,185 979,612
Cat, Civet 329,180 229,155
Opossum, American 1,011,824 948,189
Mink 183,574 100,951
Marten 29,881 26,895
Fox, Red 58,900 40,300
Fox, Cross 1,294 1,569
Fox, Silver 761 590
Fox, Grey 43,909 32,471
Fox, Kit 30,278 35,222
Fox, White 16,709 13,341
Fox, Blue 3,137 1,778
Otter 17,399 13,899
Sea Otter 328 202
Cat, Wild, etc 38,870 29,740
Cat, House 92,407 65,641
Lynx 2,424 5,144
Fisher 1,918 656
Badger 16,338 15,325
Beaver 21,137 17,036
Bear 16,851 13,377
Wolf 65,893 74,535
Wolverine 1,530 1,172
Hair Seal, Dry 6,455 5,378
Grebe 51,261 19,571
Fur Seal, Dry 897 1,453
Sable, Russian 10,285 8,972
[Page 194]
Kolinsky 138,921 120,933
Marten, Baum 1,853 1,481
Marten, Stone 7,504 6,331
Fitch 26,731 20,400
Ermine 328,840 248,295
Squirrel 976,395 707,710
Saca, etc. 40,982 13,599
Chinchilla, Real 6,282 11,457
Chinchilla, Bastard 7,533 8,145
Marten, Japanese 26,005 3,294
Sable, Japanese 1,429 52
Fox, Japanese 60,831 13,725
Badger, Japanese 183 2,949
Opossum, Australian 1,613,799 1,782,364
Wallaby, Australian 1,003,820 540,608
Kangaroo, Australian 21,648 16,193
Wombat, Australian 3,841 1,703
Fox, Red, Australian 60,435 40,724

[Page 195]
CHAPTER XX
THE DESTRUCTION OF BIRDS IN THE FAR EAST [G]
By C. William Beebe
Curator of Birds, New York Zoological Park

In chapter XIII, treating of the "Extermination of Birds for Women's Hats," Dr. Hornaday has dealt fully with the feather and plumage traffic after it enters the brokers' hands, and has proved conclusively that the plumes of egrets are gathered from the freshly killed birds. We may trace the course of the plumes and feathers backward through the tightly-packed bales and boxes in the holds of the vessels to the ports of the savage lands whence they were shipped; then to the skilful, dark hands of Mexican peon, Venezuelan Indian, African negro or Asiatic Chinaman or Malay, who stripped the skin from the flesh; and finally to the jungle or mountain side or terai where the bird gave up its life to blowpipe, cross-bow, blunderbuss or carefully set snare.

In chapter XIII, addressing the "Killing of Birds for Women's Hats," Dr. Hornaday thoroughly explores the trade of feathers and plumes once they reach the brokers, demonstrating that the plumes of egrets come from freshly killed birds. We can trace the journey of the plumes and feathers back through the tightly-packed bales and boxes in the holds of the ships to the ports of the wild regions from which they were shipped; then to the skilled hands of Mexican laborers, Venezuelan natives, African workers, or Asian laborers who removed the skin from the flesh; and finally to the jungle, mountains, or plains where the birds lost their lives to blowpipes, crossbows, guns, or carefully set traps.

In various trips to Mexico, Venezuela and other countries in the tropics of the New World I have seen many such scenes, but not until I had completed a seventeen months' expedition in search of pheasants, through some twenty wild countries of Asia and the East Indies, did I realize the havoc which is being wrought week by week everywhere on the globe. While we were absent even these few months from the great centers of civilization, tremendous advances had been made in air-ships and the thousand and one other modern phases of human development, but evolution in the world of Nature as we observed it was only destructive—a world-wide katabolism—a retrogression often discernible from month to month. We could scarcely repeat the trip and make the same observations upon pheasants, so rapidly is this group of birds approaching extinction.

In various trips to Mexico, Venezuela, and other tropical countries in the New World, I saw many similar scenes, but it wasn't until I finished a seventeen-month expedition searching for pheasants through around twenty wild countries in Asia and the East Indies that I truly understood the destruction happening everywhere in the world week by week. While we were away for just these few months from the major centers of civilization, there had been tremendous advancements in airships and countless other modern aspects of human development. However, the changes we observed in nature were only destructive—a worldwide breakdown—a gradual decline that was often noticeable from month to month. We could hardly repeat the trip and make the same observations about pheasants, as this group of birds is rapidly heading toward extinction.

The causes of this destruction of wild life are many and diverse, and resemble one another only in that they all emanate from mankind. To the casual traveller the shooting and trapping of birds for millinery purposes at first seems to hold an insignificant place among the causes. But this is only because in many of the larger ports, the protective laws are more or less operative and the occupation of the plume hunter [Page 196] is carried on in secret ways. But it is as far-reaching and insidious as any; and when we add to the actual number of birds slain, the compound interest of eggs grown cold, of young birds perishing slowly from hunger, of the thousands upon thousands of birds which fall wounded or dead among the thick tropical jungle foliage and are lost, the total is one of ghastly proportions.

The reasons behind the destruction of wildlife are many and varied, but they all originate from human actions. To the casual traveler, the hunting and trapping of birds for fashion accessories might seem minor among the causes. However, this impression is misleading, as in many major ports, protective laws are somewhat effective and the job of the plume hunter [Page 196] is often done in secrecy. Nonetheless, the impact is just as extensive and harmful; when we consider not only the number of birds killed but also the cascading effects of cold eggs, young birds starving slowly, and the thousands of birds that fall wounded or dead in the dense tropical jungle that go missing, the overall toll is horrifying.

Not to weaken my argument with too many general statements, let me take at once some concrete cases. First, that of the Himalayan pheasants and game-birds. In a recent interesting article by E.P. Stebbing [H] the past, present and hoped-for future of game birds and animals in India is reviewed. Unfortunately, however, most of the finest creatures in Asia live beyond the border of the British sphere of influence, and though within sight, are absolutely beyond reach of civilized law. The heart of the Himalayas,—the haunts of some of the most beautiful birds in the world, the tragopans, the blood and impeyan pheasants—lies within the limits of Nepal, a little country which time and time again has bade defiance to British attacks, and still maintains its independence. From its northern border Mt. Everest looks down from its most exalted of all earthly summits and sees valley after valley depleted of first one bird and then another. I have seen and lived with Nepalese shepherds who have nothing to do month after month but watch their flocks. In the lofty solitudes time hangs heavy on their hands, and with true oriental patience they weave loop after loop of yak-hair snares, and then set them, not in dozens or scores, but in hundreds and thousands up and down the valleys.

Not to weaken my argument with too many broad statements, let me jump right into some specific examples. First, the Himalayan pheasants and game birds. In a recent fascinating article by E.P. Stebbing [H] the past, present, and hoped-for future of game birds and animals in India is discussed. Unfortunately, most of the finest creatures in Asia live outside the reach of British influence, and even though they are visible, they are completely beyond the grip of civilized law. The heart of the Himalayas—the natural habitats of some of the most stunning birds in the world, like tragopans, blood pheasants, and impeyan pheasants—lies within Nepal, a small country that has repeatedly resisted British incursions and continues to uphold its independence. From its northern border, Mt. Everest gazes down from its highest earthly peak, observing valley after valley stripped of one bird after another. I have lived and spent time with Nepalese shepherds who have nothing to do for months but tend their flocks. In those high, remote areas, time weighs heavily, and with true oriental patience, they weave loop after loop of yak-hair snares, setting them not in dozens or hundreds, but in thousands throughout the valleys.

In one locality seven great valleys had been completely cleared of pheasants, only a single pair of tragopans remaining; and from one of these little brown men I took two hundred nooses which had been prepared for these lone survivors. In these cases, the birds were either cooked and eaten at once, or sold to some passing shepherd or lama for a few annas. But in other parts of this unknown land systematic collecting of skins goes on, for bale after bale of impeyan and red argus (tragopan) pheasant skins goes down to the Calcutta wharves, where its infamous contents, though known, are safe from seizure under the Nepal Raja's seal! Thus it is that the London feather sales still list these among the most splendid of all living birds. And shame upon shame, when we read of 80 impeyan skins "dull," or "slightly defective," we know that these are female birds. Then, if ever, we realize that the time of the bird and the beast is passing, the acme of evolution for these wonderful beings is reached, and at most we can preserve only a small fragment of them.

In one area, seven large valleys had been completely cleared of pheasants, leaving only a single pair of tragopans. From one of these little brown birds, I collected two hundred nooses that had been set for these remaining survivors. In these cases, the birds were either cooked and eaten immediately or sold to passing shepherds or lamas for a few coins. However, in other parts of this unknown land, there's a systematic collection of skins happening, as bale after bale of impeyan and red argus (tragopan) pheasant skins is sent to the Calcutta docks, where the notorious contents, though known, are protected from being seized due to the Nepal Raja's seal! Because of this, London feather dealers still list these among the most magnificent of all living birds. And it's shameful that when we read about 80 impeyan skins being marked as "dull" or "slightly defective," we know they are female birds. At that moment, we truly understand that the era of the bird and the beast is coming to an end; the peak of evolution for these incredible creatures has been reached, and at most, we can only preserve a small part of them.

PHEASANT SNARES

Pheasant traps

Made of Yak Hair, Taken from a Shepherd in Nepal by Mr. Beebe

Made from yak hair, sourced from a shepherd in Nepal by Mr. Beebe

To the millinery hunter, what the egret is to America, and the bird of paradise to New Guinea, the impeyan pheasant is to India—the most coveted of all plumages. There is a great tendency to blame the native hunter for the decrease of this and other pheasants, and from what I have personally seen in many parts of the Himalayas there is no question [Page 197] that the Garwhalese and Nepalese hill-men have wrought havoc among the birds. But these men are by no means the sole cause. As long ago as 1879 we read that "The great demand for the brilliant skins of the moonal that has existed for many years has led to their almost total extermination in some parts of the hills, as the native shikaris shoot and snare for the pot as well as for skins, and kill as many females as males. On the other hand, though for nearly thirty years my friend Mr. Wilson has yearly sent home from 1,000 to 1,500 skins of this species and the tragopan, there are still in the woods whence they were obtained as many as, if not more than, when he first entered them, simply because he has rigidly preserved females and nests, and (as amongst English pheasants) one cock suffices for several hens."

To the millinery collector, what the egret represents for America and the bird of paradise for New Guinea, the impeyan pheasant is for India—the most sought-after of all feathers. There’s a strong tendency to blame the local hunters for the decline of this and other pheasants, and from what I've personally witnessed in various parts of the Himalayas, there's no doubt [Page 197] that the Garwhalese and Nepalese hill people have caused serious damage to the bird population. However, these men are not the only reason for this decline. As far back as 1879, we noted that "The high demand for the striking skins of the moonal that has been around for many years has led to their almost complete extermination in some areas of the hills, as the local shikaris hunt and trap for food as well as for skins, killing just as many females as males. On the flip side, even though my friend Mr. Wilson has consistently sent back between 1,000 to 1,500 skins of this species and the tragopan each year for nearly thirty years, there are still as many, if not more, in the forests from which they were taken than when he first entered them, simply because he has strictly protected females and their nests, and (like with English pheasants) one male is enough for several females."

Ignoring the uncertainty of the last statement, it is rather absurd to think of a single man "preserving" females and nests in the Himalayas from 1850 to 1880, when the British Government, despite most efficient laws and worthy efforts is unable to protect the birds of these wild regions to-day. The statement that after thirty to forty-five thousand cock impeyans were shot or snared, as many or more than the original quota remained, could only emanate from the mind of a professional feather-hunter, and Hume should not be blamed for more than the mere repetition of such figures. Let it be said to the credit of Wilson, the slaughterer of something near forty-five thousand impeyans, that he was a careful observer of the birds' habits, and has given us an excellent account, somewhat coloured by natives, but on the whole, the best we have had in the past. But it is not pleasant to read of his waiting until "twenty or thirty have got up and alighted in the surrounding trees, and have then walked up to the different trees and fired at those I wished to procure without alarming the rest, only those very close to the one fired at being disturbed at each report."

Ignoring the uncertainty of the last statement, it's rather absurd to think of one man "preserving" females and nests in the Himalayas from 1850 to 1880, especially when the British Government, despite having efficient laws and commendable efforts, is unable to protect the birds in these wild regions today. The claim that after thirty to forty-five thousand cock impeyans were shot or trapped, as many or even more than the original amount remained, could only come from the mind of a professional feather-hunter, and Hume shouldn't be blamed for just repeating such figures. It should be noted that Wilson, who killed around forty-five thousand impeyans, was a careful observer of the birds' habits and provided us with an excellent account, although somewhat influenced by local perspectives, but overall, the best we had in the past. However, it’s not pleasant to read about him waiting until "twenty or thirty have gotten up and landed in the nearby trees, and then walking up to the different trees and shooting at those I wanted to collect without alarming the others, only those very close to the one shot at being disturbed by each report."

Hume's opinion that in 1879 there were scores of places where one might secure from ten to eighteen birds in a day, is certainly not true to-day. Indeed, as early as 1858 we read that "This splendid bird, once so abundant on the Western Himalayas is now far from being so, in consequence of the numbers killed by sportsmen on account of its beauty. Whole tracts of mountain forest once frequented by the moonal are now [Page 198] almost without a single specimen." The same author goes on naively to tell the reader that "Among the most pleasant reminiscences of bygone days is a period of eleven days, spent by the author and a friend on the Choor Mountain near Simia, when among other trophies were numbered sixty-eight moonal pheasants, etc."

Hume's claim that in 1879 there were numerous spots where one could easily catch between ten to eighteen birds in a day is definitely not true today. In fact, as early as 1858, it was noted that "This magnificent bird, once plentiful in the Western Himalayas, is now far from it, due to the large number killed by hunters because of its beauty. Entire stretches of mountain forest that were once home to the moonal are now [Page 198] almost free of a single specimen." The same author naively continues to share that "Among the most enjoyable memories of the past is an eleven-day period spent by the author and a friend on Choor Mountain near Simia, during which they collected, among other trophies, sixty-eight moonal pheasants, etc."

SILVER PHEASANT SKINS SEIZED AT RANGOON, BRITISH BURMA

SILVER PHEASANT SKINS SEIZED IN RANGOON, BRITISH BURMA

About 600 Skins out of Several Thousand Confiscated in the Custom House, on their way to the London Feather Market. Photographed by Mr. Beebe

About 600 skins out of several thousand confiscated at the Custom House, on their way to the London Feather Market. Photographed by Mr. Beebe

For some unaccountable reason there is, or was for many years, a very prevalent idea that the enormous number of skins which have poured into the London market were from birds bred in the vicinity of Calcutta. When we remember the intense heat of that low-lying city, and learn from the records of the Calcutta Zoological Garden that impeyans and tragopans are even shorter-lived than in Europe, the absurdity of the idea is apparent. In spite of numberless inquiries throughout India, I failed to learn of a single captive young bird ever hatched and reared even in the high, cool, hill-stations. The commercial value of an impeyan skin has varied from five dollars to twenty dollars, according to the number received annually. In 1876 an estimate placed the monthly average of impeyans received in London at from two to eight hundred.

For some unknown reason, there has been, or has been for many years, a widely held belief that the huge number of bird skins entering the London market came from birds bred near Calcutta. Considering the intense heat of that low-lying city and learning from the records of the Calcutta Zoological Garden that impeyans and tragopans live even shorter lives than they do in Europe, the ridiculousness of this idea becomes clear. Despite numerous inquiries throughout India, I couldn't find a single captive young bird that had ever been hatched and raised, even in the high, cool hill stations. The commercial value of an impeyan skin has ranged from five to twenty dollars, depending on the number received each year. In 1876, an estimate suggested that the monthly average of impeyans received in London was between two and eight hundred.

In such a case as Nepal, direct protective laws are of no avail. All humane arguments are useless, but if the markets at the other end can be closed, the slaughter will cease instantly and automatically.

In a situation like Nepal, direct protective laws don’t help at all. All humane arguments fall flat, but if the markets on the other end can be shut down, the slaughter will stop immediately and automatically.

DEADFALL TRAPS IN BURMA

Deadfall traps in Myanmar

A Long Series set Across a Valley, by the Kachins of the Burma-Chinese Border. A Wholesale Method of Wild-life Slaughter, Photographed by C. William Beebe, 1910

A Long Series set Across a Valley, by the Kachins of the Burma-Chinese Border. A Large-Scale Method of Wildlife Slaughter, Photographed by C. William Beebe, 1910

As a contrast to the millinery hunter of fifty years ago it is refreshing to find that at last sincere efforts are being made in British possessions to stop this traffic. I happened to be at Rangoon when six large bales of pheasant skins were seized by the Custom officials. A Chinaman had brought them from Yunnan via Bhamo, and was preparing to ship them as ducks' feathers. Two of the bales were opened for my inspection. The first contained about five hundred Lady Amherst pheasant skins, falling to pieces and lacking heads and legs. The second held over four hundred silver pheasants, in almost perfect condition. The chief collector had put the absolutely prohibitive fine of £200 on them, and was waiting for the expiration of the legal number of days before burning the entire lot. They must have represented years of work in decimating the pheasant fauna of western China.

As a contrast to the hat hunters of fifty years ago, it’s encouraging to see that sincere efforts are finally being made in British territories to stop this trade. I happened to be in Rangoon when customs officials seized six large bales of pheasant skins. A Chinese man had brought them from Yunnan through Bhamo and was preparing to ship them as duck feathers. Two of the bales were opened for me to inspect. The first contained about five hundred Lady Amherst pheasant skins, which were falling apart and missing heads and legs. The second had over four hundred silver pheasants, almost in perfect condition. The chief collector had imposed a hefty fine of £200 on them and was waiting for the legal waiting period to end before burning the whole lot. They must have represented years of work in decimating the pheasant population of western China.

Far up in the wilderness of northern Burma, and over the Yunnan border, we often came upon some of the most ingenious examples of native trapping, a system which we found repeated in the Malay States, Borneo, China and other parts of the Far East. A low bamboo fence is built directly across a steep valley or series of valleys, about half way from the summit to the lower end, and about every fifteen feet a narrow opening is left, over which a heavy log is suspended. Any creature attempting to make its way through, treads upon several small sticks and [Page 200] by so doing springs the trap and the dead-fall claims a victim. When a country is systematically strung with traps such as these, sooner or later all but a pitiful remnant of the smaller mammals, birds and reptiles are certain to be wiped out. Morning after morning I have visited such a runway and found dead along its path, what must have been all the walking, running or crawling creatures which the night before had sought the water at the bottom; pheasants, cobras, mouse-deer, rodents, civets, and members of many other groups. In some countries nooses instead of dead-falls guard the openings, but the result is equally deadly.

Far up in the wilderness of northern Burma, and just over the Yunnan border, we often stumbled upon some of the most clever examples of native trapping, a method we found again in the Malay States, Borneo, China, and other areas of the Far East. A low bamboo fence is built directly across a steep valley or series of valleys, about halfway from the top to the bottom, and every fifteen feet or so, a narrow opening is left, over which a heavy log is suspended. Any animal trying to get through steps on several small sticks and, by doing so, triggers the trap, causing the dead-fall to take a victim. When a region is systematically lined with traps like these, eventually all but a small remnant of the smaller mammals, birds, and reptiles are bound to be wiped out. Morning after morning, I visited such a pathway and found dead along its route what must have been all the creatures that had walked, run, or crawled to seek water at the bottom the night before—pheasants, cobras, mouse-deer, rodents, civets, and many others. In some places, nooses instead of dead-falls guard the openings, but the outcome is just as deadly.

I have described this method of trapping because of its future importance in the destruction of wild life in the Far East. The Chinaman in all his many millions is undergoing a remarkably swift and radical evolution both of character and dress. In many ways, if only from the viewpoint of the patient, thrifty store-keeper he is a most powerful factor in the East, and is becoming more so. In many cases he imitates the white nations by cutting off his queue and altering his dress. In some mysterious correlated way his diet seems simultaneously affected, and while for untold generations rice and fish has satisfied all his gastronomic desires, a new craving, that for meat, has come to him. The result is apparent in many parts of the East. The Chinaman is willing and able to pay for meat, and the native finds a new market for the creatures about him. Again and again when I wished a few specimens of some certain pheasant I had but to hail passing canoes and bid a few annas or "cash" or "ringits" higher than the prospective Chinese purchaser would give, and the pheasants were mine.

I’ve explained this trapping method because of its future significance in reducing wildlife in the Far East. The Chinese population, in all its millions, is experiencing a rapid and significant shift in both character and fashion. From the perspective of the patient, thrifty storekeeper, he is a strong force in the East and is becoming even more influential. In many cases, he copies Western nations by cutting off his queue and changing his clothing. In a strange way, his diet seems to be changing as well; while rice and fish have satisfied his culinary needs for generations, he now has a new desire for meat. This is evident in many parts of the East. The Chinese are willing and able to pay for meat, creating a new market for local wildlife. Time and again, when I wanted to acquire a few specimens of a particular pheasant, I just had to stop passing canoes and offer a few more annas or "cash" or "ringits" than the prospective Chinese buyer would offer, and the pheasants were mine.

In the catalogues of the brokers' sales of feathers we read of many thousands of the wonderful ocellated wing feathers of the argus pheasant, but no less horrible is the sight of a canoe crammed with the bedraggled bodies of these magnificent birds on their way to some Chinese hamlet where they will be sold for a pittance, the flesh eaten to the last tendon and the feathers given to the children and puppies to play with. The newly-aroused appetite of the Mongolian will soon be an important factor in the extermination of animals and birds, few species being exempt, for the Chinaman lives up to his reputation and is not squeamish as to the nature of his meat.

In the brokers' sales catalogs of feathers, we read about thousands of the amazing ocellated wing feathers of the argus pheasant, but it's just as disturbing to see a canoe packed with the tattered bodies of these beautiful birds on their way to some Chinese village where they’ll be sold for next to nothing, the meat consumed completely and the feathers given to kids and puppies to play with. The emerging appetite of the Mongolian will soon become a significant factor in the extinction of animals and birds, with few species being safe, because the Chinese stick to their reputation and aren't picky about what they eat.

Before we leave the subject of Chinamen let us consider another recent factor in the destruction of wild life which is at present widely operative in China itself. This is the cold storage warehouse, of which six or eight enormous ones have gone up in different parts of the East. To speak in detail only of the one at Hankow, six hundred miles up the Yangtze, we found it to be the largest structure in the city. Surrounded by a high wall, with each entrance and exit guarded by armed Sikhs, it seemed like the feudal castle of some medieval baron. Why such secrecy is necessary I could not learn, as there are no laws against its business. But so carefully guarded is its premises that until a short time ago even the British consul-general of Hankow had not been allowed to enter. He, however, at last refused to sign the papers for any more [Page 201] outgoing shipments until he should be allowed to see what was going on within the warehouse. I hoped to be able to look over some of the frozen pheasants for interesting scientific material, but of course was not allowed to do so.

Before we move on from the topic of Chinese people, let’s discuss another recent factor contributing to the decline of wildlife that is currently widespread in China. This is the cold storage warehouse, with six or eight large ones having been built in various parts of the East. Focusing specifically on the one in Hankow, six hundred miles up the Yangtze, we discovered it was the largest building in the city. Surrounded by a tall wall, with each entrance and exit guarded by armed Sikhs, it resembled the feudal castle of some medieval lord. I couldn’t find out why such secrecy was necessary since there are no laws against its operations. However, the premises are so carefully protected that until recently, even the British consul-general of Hankow hadn’t been allowed to enter. Eventually, he refused to authorize any more [Page 201] outgoing shipments until he was permitted to see what was happening inside the warehouse. I hoped to check out some of the frozen pheasants for interesting scientific material, but of course, I wasn’t allowed to do that.

Although here in the heart of China, outside changes are not felt so strongly and the newly-acquired meat diet of the border and emigrant Chinese is hardly apparent, these warehouses have opened up a new source of revenue, which has met with instant response. Thousands and tens of thousands of wild shot or trapped pheasants and other birds are now brought to these establishments by the natives from far and near. The birds are frozen, and twice a year shipped on specially refrigerated P. and O. steamships to England and the continent of Europe where they seem to find a ready sale. Pigs and chickens also figure in the shipments. Now the pheasants have for centuries existed in enormous numbers in the endless ricefields of China, without doing any damage to the crops. In fact they could not be present in such numbers without being an important factor in keeping down insect and other enemies of the grain. When their numbers are decimated as they are being at present, there must eventually result a serious upsetting of the balance of nature. Let us hope that in some way this may be avoided, and that the present famine deaths of thirty thousand or more in some provinces will not be increased many fold.

Although here in the heart of China, changes from the outside world aren't felt as strongly and the newly adopted meat diet of the border and emigrant Chinese isn't really noticeable, these warehouses have opened a new source of income that has seen quick success. Thousands upon thousands of wild-shot or trapped pheasants and other birds are now brought to these facilities by locals from all around. The birds are frozen and shipped twice a year on specially refrigerated P. and O. steamships to England and mainland Europe, where they seem to sell easily. Pigs and chickens are also part of the shipments. For centuries, pheasants have existed in huge numbers in China's endless rice fields without harming the crops. In fact, they couldn't be so numerous without playing a key role in controlling insects and other threats to the grain. When their populations are drastically reduced, as is happening now, it could seriously disrupt the balance of nature. Let's hope that somehow this can be avoided and that the current famine, which has already claimed thirty thousand or more lives in some provinces, doesn’t increase significantly.

When I started on this search for pheasants I was repeatedly told by old explorers in the east that my task would be very different from theirs of thirty years ago; that I would find steamers, railroads and automobiles where formerly were only canoes and jungle. I indeed found this as reported, but while my task was different it was made no easier. Formerly, to be sure, one had from the start to paddle slowly or push along the trails made by natives or game animals. But then the wild life was encountered at once, while I found it always far from the end of the steamer's route or the railroad's terminal, and still to be reached only by the most primitive modes of travel.

When I began my search for pheasants, experienced explorers in the east kept telling me that my journey would be very different from theirs thirty years ago; that I would encounter steamers, railroads, and cars instead of just canoes and jungle. I did find what they described, but even though my task was different, it wasn’t any easier. Sure, back then you had to either paddle slowly from the start or follow trails made by locals or wildlife. But with that, you immediately encountered wildlife, while I found it always far from the end of the steamer’s route or the railroad’s station, and still accessible only by the most basic means of travel.

I cite this to give point to my next great cause of destruction; the burning and clearing of vast stretches of country for the planting of rubber trees. The East seems rubber mad, and whether the enormous output which will result from the millions of trees set out month after month will be profitable, I cannot say. I can think only of the vanishing of the entire fauna and flora of many districts which I have seen as a direct result of this commercial activity. One leaves Port Swettenham on the west coast of Selangor, and for the hour's run to Kuala Lumpur sees hardly anything but vast radiating lines of spindling rubber trees, all underbrush cleared, all native growths vanished. From Kuala Lumpur to Kuala Kubu at the very foot of the mountain backbone of the Malay Peninsula, the same holds true. And where some area appears not under cultivation, the climbing fern and a coarse, useless "lalang" grass covers every inch of ground. One can hardly imagine a more complete [Page 202] blotting out of the native fauna and flora of any one limited region. And ever-extending roads for the increasing motor cars are widening the cleared zone, mile after mile to the north and south.

I mention this to highlight my next major cause for concern: the burning and clearing of large areas of land to plant rubber trees. The East seems obsessed with rubber, and I can't say whether the massive output from the millions of trees planted month after month will be profitable. What I can think about is the disappearing of the entire fauna and flora of many regions I've observed as a direct result of this business. When you leave Port Swettenham on the west coast of Selangor, the hour-long journey to Kuala Lumpur reveals almost nothing but vast rows of skinny rubber trees, with all the underbrush cleared and all native plants gone. The same is true between Kuala Lumpur and Kuala Kubu at the foot of the Malay Peninsula's mountain backbone. Where some areas aren't cultivated, the ground is completely covered by climbing ferns and coarse, useless "lalang" grass. It's hard to imagine a more thorough [Page 202] destruction of the native fauna and flora in any specific area. Meanwhile, ever-expanding roads for the increasing number of cars are widening the cleared area, mile after mile to the north and south.

In this region, as we pushed on over the mountains into the wilderness of Pahang, we saw little of the actual destruction of the primeval native growth, but elsewhere it became a common sight. Once, for many days we studied the wonderful life of a jungle which stretched up to our very camp. Troops of rollicking wa-was or gibbons frequented the forest; squirrels, tupaias, birds and insects in myriads were everywhere during the day. Great fruit-bats, flying lemurs, owls and other nocturnal creatures made the evenings and nights full of interest.

In this area, as we made our way over the mountains into the wilderness of Pahang, we noticed little of the actual destruction of the ancient native growth, but elsewhere it was a common sight. For many days, we studied the amazing life of a jungle that reached right up to our camp. Groups of playful wa-was or gibbons filled the forest; squirrels, tupaias, birds, and countless insects were all around during the day. Huge fruit bats, flying lemurs, owls, and other nighttime animals made the evenings and nights exciting.

And then, one day without warning came the sound of an ax, and another and another. From that moment the songs, cries, chirps and roars of the jungle were seldom heard from our camp. Every day saw new phalanxes of splendid primeval trees fallen, or half suspended in their rigging of lianas. The leaves withered, the flower petals fell and we heard no more the crackling of bamboos in the wind. Then the pitiful survivors of the destruction were brought to us; now a baby flying lemur, flung from its hole by the falling of some tree; young tupaias, nestling birds; a few out of the thousands of creatures from insects to mammals which were slain so that a Chinaman or Malay might eke a few dollars, four or five years hence, from a grove of rubber trees. I do not say it is wrong. Man has won out, and might is right, as since the dawn of creation; but to the onlooker, to the lover of nature and the animal world it is a terrible, a hopeless thing.

And then, one day out of the blue, we heard the sound of an ax, and then another, and another. From that moment on, the songs, cries, chirps, and roars of the jungle were rarely heard from our camp. Every day, more magnificent ancient trees fell or hung precariously in their web of vines. The leaves dried up, the flower petals dropped, and we no longer heard the rustling of bamboo in the wind. Then, the unfortunate survivors of the destruction were brought to us: a baby flying lemur, thrown from its home by a falling tree; young tupaias, nestling birds; a few out of the thousands of creatures, from insects to mammals, that were killed so a Chinaman or Malay could scrape together a few dollars, four or five years later, from a grove of rubber trees. I’m not saying it’s wrong. Humanity has triumphed, and might makes right, as it has since the dawn of time; but to an observer, to someone who loves nature and the animal world, it feels like a terrible and hopeless situation.

One cannot at present leave the tourist line of travel in the East without at once encountering evidence of the wholesale direct slaughter of wild life, or its no less certain extermination by the elimination of the haunts and the food plants of the various beasts and birds.

One cannot currently stray from the main tourist routes in the East without immediately encountering clear signs of the large-scale killing of wildlife, or its equally definite destruction through the removal of habitats and food sources for various animals and birds.


[Page 203]
CHAPTER XXI
THE SAVAGE VIEW-POINT OF THE GUNNER

The mental attitude of the men who shoot constitutes a deadly factor in the destruction of wild life and the extermination of species. Fully ninety-five per cent of the sportsmen, gunners and other men and boys who kill game, all over the world and in all nations, regard game birds and mammals only as things to be killed and eaten, and not as creatures worth preserving for their beauty or their interest to mankind. This is precisely the viewpoint of the cave-man and the savage, and it has come down from the Man-with-a-Club to the Man-with-a-Gun absolutely unchanged save for one thing: the latter sometimes is prompted to save to-day in order to slaughter to-morrow.

The mindset of hunters plays a significant role in the decline of wildlife and the extinction of species. About ninety-five percent of hunters, shooters, and others who kill game, globally and in every country, see game birds and mammals merely as things to be killed and eaten, not as living beings deserving of preservation for their beauty or significance to humanity. This mindset is identical to that of early humans and savages, and it has been passed down from the Man-with-a-Club to the Man-with-a-Gun without change, except for one thing: the latter sometimes feels motivated to conserve today in order to hunt tomorrow.

The above statement of an existing fact may seem harsh; and some persons may be startled by it; but it is based on an acquaintance with thousands of men who shoot all kinds of game, all over the world. My critics surely will admit that my opportunities to meet the sportsmen and gunners of the world are, and for thirty-five years have been, rather favorable. As a matter of fact, I think the efforts of the hunters of my personal acquaintance have covered about seven-tenths of the hunting grounds of the world. If the estimate that I have formed of the average hunter's viewpoint is wrong, or even partially so, I will be glad to have it proven in order that I may reform my judgment and apologize.

The statement above might come off as a bit harsh, and some people might be shocked by it, but it’s based on my experience with thousands of guys who hunt all sorts of game around the globe. My critics would surely agree that I've had pretty good chances to meet sportsmen and hunters for over thirty-five years. In fact, I believe the efforts of the hunters I know personally have spanned about 70% of the world's hunting grounds. If my impression of the average hunter's perspective is wrong, or even just partly wrong, I would be happy to be proven wrong so I can change my view and apologize.

In working with large bodies of bird-shooting sportsmen I have steadily—and also painfully—been impressed by their intentness on. killing, and by the fact that they seek to preserve game only to kill it! Who ever saw a bird-shooter rise in a convention and advocate the preservation of any species of game bird on account of its beauty or its esthetic interest alive? I never did; and I have sat in many conventions of sportsmen. All the talk is of open seasons, bag limits and killing rights. The man who has the hardihood to stand up and propose a five-year close season has "a hard row to hoe." Men rise and say: "It's all nonsense! There's plenty of quail shooting on Long Island yet."

In working with large groups of bird hunters, I've consistently—and also frustratingly—noticed their focus on killing, and the fact that they aim to preserve game only to kill it! Who has ever seen a bird hunter stand up at a convention and advocate for the preservation of any game bird species because of its beauty or aesthetic value while it’s alive? I never have; and I've attended many sportsmen's conventions. All the discussions revolve around open seasons, bag limits, and hunting rights. The person who dares to propose a five-year hunting ban has "a tough road ahead." Men stand up and say, "It's all nonsense! There's still plenty of quail shooting on Long Island."

Throughout the length and breadth of America, the ruling passion is to kill as long as anything killable remains. The man who will openly advocate the stopping of quail-shooting because the quails are of such great value to the farmers, or because they are so beautiful and companionable to man, receives no sympathy from ninety per cent of the bird-killing sportsmen. The remaining ten per cent think seriously about the matter, and favor long close seasons. It is my impression that of the men who shoot, it is only among the big-game hunters that we find [Page 204] much genuine admiration for game animals, or any feeling remotely resembling regard for it.

Throughout the entire country, the main drive is to kill as long as there are things left to kill. The person who openly supports stopping quail hunting because quails are valuable to farmers or because they're so beautiful and friendly toward people gets no sympathy from ninety percent of the bird-hunting enthusiasts. The remaining ten percent seriously consider the issue and support longer closed seasons. In my view, it's only among big-game hunters that we find [Page 204] any real admiration for game animals or any feelings that come close to valuing them.

The moment that a majority of American gunners concede the fact that game birds are worth preserving for their beauty, and their value as living neighbors to man, from that moment there is hope for the saving of the Remnant. That will indeed be the beginning of a new era, of a millennium in fact, in the preservation of wild life. It will then be easy to enact laws for ten-year close seasons on whole groups of species. Think what it would mean for such a close season to be enacted for all the grouse of the United States, all the shore-birds of the United States, or the wild turkey wherever found!

The moment a majority of American hunters recognize that game birds are worth protecting for their beauty and their value as living companions to humans, that will be the moment we can hope to save the remaining populations. That will truly mark the start of a new era, even a millennium, in wildlife conservation. It will then be simple to establish laws for ten-year closed seasons on entire groups of species. Just imagine what it would mean to have such a closed season for all the grouse in the United States, all the shorebirds in the United States, or wild turkeys wherever they are found!

To-day, the great—indeed, the only—opponents of long close seasons on game birds are the gunners. Whenever and wherever you introduce a bill to provide such a season, you will find that this is true. The gun clubs and the Downtrodden Hunters' and Anglers' Protective Associations will be quick to go after their representatives, and oppose the bill. And state senators and assemblymen will think very hard and with strong courage before they deliberately resolve to do their duty regardless of the opposition of "a large body of sportsmen,"—men who have votes, and who know how to take revenge on lawmakers who deprive them of their "right" to kill. The greatest speech ever made in the Mexican Congress was uttered by the member who solemnly said: "I rise to sacrifice ambition to honor!"

Today, the main—indeed, the only—opponents of long close seasons for game birds are the hunters. Whenever and wherever you propose a bill to establish such a season, this holds true. The gun clubs and the Downtrodden Hunters' and Anglers' Protective Associations will quickly pressure their representatives to oppose the bill. And state senators and assembly members will think very carefully and with significant resolve before they choose to do their duty in spite of the pushback from "a large body of sportsmen"—people who vote and know how to get back at lawmakers who take away their "right" to hunt. The greatest speech ever given in the Mexican Congress was made by the member who solemnly declared: "I rise to sacrifice ambition to honor!"

Unfortunately, the men who shoot have become possessed of the idea that they have certain inherent, God-given "rights" to kill game! Now, as a matter of fact, a sportsman with a one-hundred-dollar Fox gun in his hands, a two-hundred-dollar dog at his heels and five one-hundred-dollar bills in his pocket has no more "right" to kill a covey of quail on Long Island than my milkman has to elect that it shall be let alone for the pleasure of his children! The time has come when the people who don't shoot must do one of two things:

Unfortunately, the men who hunt have gotten it into their heads that they have some kind of inherent, God-given "rights" to kill animals! In reality, a sportsman with a one-hundred-dollar Fox gun in his hands, a two-hundred-dollar dog at his feet, and five one-hundred-dollar bills in his pocket has no more "right" to shoot a covey of quail on Long Island than my milkman has to decide that it should be left alone for his kids to enjoy! The time has come for those who don't hunt to do one of two things:

  1. They must demonstrate the fact that they have rights in the wild creatures, and demand their recognition, or
  2. See the killable game all swept off the continent by the Army of Destruction.

Really, it is to me very strange that gunners never care to save game birds on account of their beauty. One living bob white on a fence is better than a score in a bloody game-bag. A live squirrel in a tree is poetry in motion; but on the table a squirrel is a rodent that tastes as a rat smells. Beside the ocean a flock of sandpipers is needed to complete the beautiful picture; but on the table a sandpiper is beneath contempt. A live deer trotting over a green meadow, waving a triangular white flag, is a sight to thrill any human ganglion; but a deer lying dead, —unless it has an exceptionally fine head,—is only so much butcher's meat.

Honestly, it's really strange to me that hunters never appreciate game birds for their beauty. One living bobwhite on a fence is worth more than a dozen in a bloody bag. A live squirrel in a tree is pure poetry in motion; but on a plate, a squirrel is just a rodent that tastes like a rat smells. By the ocean, a flock of sandpipers is essential to complete the beautiful scene; but on the table, a sandpiper is looked down upon. A live deer trotting across a green meadow, waving its triangular white flag, is a sight that can thrill anyone; but a dead deer—unless it has a particularly impressive rack—is just a piece of meat.

One of the finest sights I ever saw in Montana was a big flock of sage grouse slowly stalking over a grassy flat thinly sprinkled with sage-brush. It was far more inspiring than any pile of dead birds that I ever saw. I remember scores of beautiful game birds that I have seen and not killed; but of all the game birds that I have eaten or tried to eat in New York, I remember with sincere pleasure only one. Some of the ancient cold-storage candidates I remember "for cause," as the lawyers say.

One of the best sights I ever saw in Montana was a large flock of sage grouse leisurely moving across a grassy area dotted with sagebrush. It was much more inspiring than any collection of dead birds I’ve seen. I can recall many beautiful game birds that I’ve admired but not hunted; however, out of all the game birds I’ve eaten or attempted to eat in New York, I can genuinely say I remember only one with real pleasure. Some of the old cold-storage birds I remember "for cause," as the lawyers would put it.

ONE MORNING'S CATCH OF TROUT, NEAR SPOKANE

ONE MORNING'S CATCH OF TROUT, NEAR SPOKANE

Another Line of Extermination According to law. Three Times too Many Fish for one rod. In those Cold Mountain Streams, Fish Grow Slowly, and a Stream is Quickly "Fished out"

Another Line of Extermination According to law. Three Times too Many Fish for one rod. In those Cold Mountain Streams, Fish Grow Slowly, and a Stream is Quickly "Fished out"

Sportsmen and gunners, for God's sake elevate your viewpoint of the game of the world. Get out of the groove in which man has run ever since the days of Adam! There is something in a game bird over and above its pound of flesh. You don't "need" the meat any longer; for you don't know what hunger is, save by reading of it. Try the field-glass and the camera, instead of the everlasting gun. Any fool can take a five-dollar gun and kill a bird; but it takes a genius to photograph one wild bird and get "a good one." As hunters, the camera men have the best of it. One good live-bird photograph is more of a trophy and a triumph than a bushel of dead birds. The birds and mammals now are literally dying for your help in the making of long close seasons, and in the real stoppage of slaughter. Can you not hear the call of the wild remnant?

Sports enthusiasts and hunters, for goodness' sake, expand your perspective on the world of gaming. Step out of the rut that humanity has been stuck in since the days of Adam! There's more to a game bird than just its pound of meat. You don’t "need" the meat anymore; you only know hunger through reading about it. Try using binoculars and a camera instead of that constant gun. Any fool can grab a five-dollar gun and shoot a bird, but it takes real skill to photograph a wild bird and capture "a great shot." As hunters, photographers have the advantage. One impressive shot of a live bird is a greater trophy and accomplishment than a whole bushel of dead ones. Birds and mammals are literally crying out for your assistance in creating longer close seasons and genuinely stopping the slaughter. Can you not hear the call of the wild remaining?

It is time for the people who don't shoot to call a halt on those who do; "and if this be treason, then let my enemies make the most of it!"

It’s time for those who don’t fire weapons to put a stop to those who do; "and if this is treason, then let my enemies take full advantage of it!"

Since the above was written, I have read in the Outdoor World for April, 1912, the views of a veteran sportsman and writer, Mr. Emerson Hough, on the wild-life situation as it seems to him to-day. It is a strong utterance, even though it reaches a pessimistic and gloomy conclusion which I do not share. Altogether, however, its breadth of view, its general accuracy, and its incisiveness, entitle it to a full hearing. The following is only an extract from a lengthy article entitled, "God's Acre:"

Since writing the above, I came across an article in the Outdoor World from April 1912, where veteran sportsman and writer Mr. Emerson Hough shares his thoughts on the wildlife situation as he sees it today. It’s a powerful statement, even though it ends on a pessimistic and gloomy note that I don’t agree with. Overall, though, its wide perspective, general accuracy, and sharpness make it worth considering. The following is just an excerpt from a longer article titled, "God's Acre:"


EMERSON HOUGH'S VIEW OF THE SITUATION

EMERSON HOUGH'S PERSPECTIVE ON THE SITUATION

The truth is none the less the truth because it is unpleasant to face. There is no well posted sportsman in America, no manufacturer of sporting goods in America, no man well versed in American outdoor matters, who does not know that we are at the evening of the day of open sport in America. Our old ways have failed, all of them have failed. The declining fortunes of the best sportsman's journals of America would prove that, if proof were asked. Our sportsmanship has failed. Our game laws have failed, and we know they have failed. Our game is almost gone, and we know it is almost gone. America has changed and we know that it has changed, although we have not changed with it. The old America is done and it is gone, and we know that to be the truth. The old order passeth, and we know that the new order must come soon if it is to work any salvation for our wild game and our life in the open in pursuit of it.

The truth doesn’t change just because it’s difficult to accept. Every serious sports fan, manufacturer of sports gear, and expert in American outdoor activities knows we’re reaching the end of an era for open sports in America. Our traditional practices have failed, and they have all let us down. The declining popularity of the leading sports magazines in America would demonstrate this if anyone needed proof. Our sportsmanship has decreased. Our game laws haven’t worked, and we acknowledge that failure. Our wildlife is nearly extinct, and we recognize that reality. America has changed, and we see that change, even if we haven’t adapted to it. The old America is gone, and we understand that truth. The old system is falling away, and we know a new system must come soon if we want to save our wildlife and preserve our outdoor lifestyle.

There are many reasons for this fact, these facts. Perhaps the greatest lies in the steady advance of civilization into the wilderness, the usurpation for agricultural or industrial use of many of the ancient breeding and feeding places of the wild game. All over the West and now all over Canada, the plow advances, that one engine which cannot be gainsaid, which never turns a backward furrow.

There are many reasons for this reality. Perhaps the biggest one is the relentless expansion of civilization into the wild, taking over many ancient breeding and feeding grounds for wild animals for farming or industrial purposes. Everywhere in the West and now throughout Canada, the plow moves forward, that one tool that can't be denied, which never turns back on its path.

Another great agency is the rapid perfection of transportation all over the world. Take the late influx of East African literature. If there really were not access to that country we would not have this literature, would not have so many pictures from that country. And if even Africa will soon be overrun, if even Africa soon will be shot out, what hope is there for the game of the wholly accessible North American continent?

Another major factor is the rapid advancement of transportation worldwide. Consider the recent growth of East African literature. If there wasn't access to that region, we wouldn't have this literature or so many images from there. And if Africa is about to be completely explored, what hope is there for the fully accessible North American continent?

It is all too easy now for the slaughterer to get to his work, all [Page 207] too easy for him to transport the fruits of the slaughter. At the hands of the ignorant, the unscrupulous and the unsparing, our game has steadily disappeared until it is almost gone. We have handled it in a wholly greedy, unscrupulous and selfish fashion. This has been our policy as a nation. If there is to be success for any plan to remedy this, it must come from a few large-minded men, able to think and plan, and able to do more than that—to follow their plans with deeds.

It’s way too easy now for the killer to do his job, way too easy for him to move the results of the kill. Because of the ignorant, the ruthless, and the merciless, our wildlife has gradually vanished until it's almost all gone. We’ve treated it in an entirely greedy, unscrupulous, and selfish way. That has been our approach as a nation. If any plan to fix this is going to work, it needs to come from a few open-minded individuals who can think and strategize, and more importantly—take action on their plans.

I have seen the whole story of modern American sportsmanship, so called. It has been class legislation and organized selfishness—that is what it has been, and nothing else. I do not blame country legislators, game dealers, farmers, for calling the sportsmen of America selfish and thoughtless. I do not blame them for saying that the so-called protective measures advanced by sportsmen have been selfish measures, and looking to destruction rather than to protection. At least that has been their actual result. I have no more reverence for a sportsman than for anyone else, and no reverence for him at all because he is or calls himself a sportsman. He has got to be a man. He has got to be a citizen.

I have witnessed the entire story of modern American sportsmanship, so-called. It's been about class interests and organized self-interest—that's what it's been, plain and simple. I don’t blame local lawmakers, game dealers, or farmers for calling American sportsmen selfish and careless. I understand why they say that the so-called protective measures promoted by sportsmen have been self-serving and aimed at destruction rather than protection. At least, that’s been the actual outcome. I have no more respect for a sportsman than for anyone else, and I have no respect for him simply because he is or claims to be a sportsman. He needs to be a man. He needs to be a citizen.

I have seen millions of acres of breeding and feeding grounds pass under the drain and under the plow in my own time, so that the passing whisper of the wild fowl's wing has been forgotten there now for many years. I have seen a half dozen species of fine game birds become extinct in my own time and lost forever to the American people.

I have watched millions of acres of breeding and feeding grounds get drained and plowed in my lifetime, so the soft sound of wild birds' wings has been gone from there for many years now. I've seen several species of beautiful game birds go extinct during my lifetime, lost forever to the American people.

And you and I have seen one protective society after another, languidly organized, paying in a languid dollar or so per capita each year, and so swiftly passing, also to be forgotten. We have seen one code and the other of conflicting and wholly selfish game laws passed, and seen them mocked at and forgotten, seen them all fail, as we all know.

And you and I have seen one protective organization after another, lazily set up, contributing about a dollar each per year, and then quickly fading away to be forgotten. We’ve witnessed one set of conflicting and entirely self-serving game laws after another enacted, only to be ignored and forgotten, all of them ultimately failing, as we all know.

We have seen even the nation's power—under that Ark of the Covenant known as the Interstate Commerce Act—fail to stop wholly the lessening of our wild game, so rapidly disappearing for so many reasons.

We have seen even the country's power—under that Ark of the Covenant known as the Interstate Commerce Act—fail to completely stop the decline of our wildlife, which is rapidly disappearing for many reasons.

We have seen both selfish and unselfish sportsmen's journals attempt to solve this problem and fail to do so. Some of them were great and broad-minded journals. Their record has not been one of disgrace, although it has been one of defeat; for some of them really desired success more than they desired dividends. These, all of them, bore their share of a great experiment, an experiment in a new land, under a new theory of government, a theory which says a man should be able to restrain himself, and to govern himself. Only by following their theory through to the end of that experiment could they know that it was to fail in one of its most vitally interesting and vitally important phases.

We have seen both selfish and selfless athletes' journals try to tackle this issue and fail. Some of them were impressive and open-minded journals. Their record hasn't been one of shame, though it has been one of defeat; for some genuinely wanted success more than financial gain. All of them played their part in a significant experiment, an experiment in a new land, under a new theory of government, a theory that suggests a person should be able to control and govern themselves. Only by fully following their theory to the end of that experiment could they realize it would fail in one of its most crucial and significant aspects.

But now, as we know, all of these agencies, selfish or unselfish, have failed to effect the salvation of American wild game. Not by any scheme, device, or theory, not by any panacea can the old days of America be brought back to us.

But now, as we know, all of these agencies, whether motivated by self-interest or not, have failed to save American wildlife. No plan, trick, or theory, and no miracle cure can bring back the old days of America.


Mr. Hough's views are entitled to respectful consideration; but on one vital point I do not follow him.

Mr. Hough's views deserve thoughtful consideration, but there’s one crucial point where I don’t agree with him.

I believe most sincerely—in fact, I know,—that it is possible to make a few new laws which, in addition to the many, many good protective laws we already have, will bring back the game, just as fast and as far as man's settlements, towns, railroads, mines and schemes in general ever can permit it to come back.

I truly believe—in fact, I know—that it is possible to create a few new laws that, along with the many good protective laws we already have, will help restore the game as quickly and as far as human developments like settlements, towns, railroads, mines, and various projects can allow.

If the American People as a whole elect that our wild life shall be saved, and to a reasonable extent brought back, then by the Eternal it will be saved and brought back! The road lies straight before us, and the going is easy—if the Mass makes up its mind to act. But on one vital point Mr. Hough is right. The sportsman alone never will save the game! The people who do not kill must act, independently.

If the American people decide that our wildlife should be saved and reasonably restored, then it will be saved and brought back! The path is clear ahead, and it’s straightforward—if the public chooses to take action. However, Mr. Hough is correct about one crucial point. The sportsman alone will never save the game! Those who don’t hunt must take independent action.


PART II. PRESERVATION
[Page 208]
CHAPTER XXII
OUR ANNUAL LOSSES BY INSECTS

"You take my life when you do take the means whereby I live."

"You take my life when you take away what allows me to live."

"In no country in the world," says Mr. C.L. Marlatt, of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, "do insects impose a heavier tax on farm products than in the United States." These attacks are based upon an enormous and varied annual output of cereals and fruits, and a great variety and number of trees. For every vegetable-eating insect, native and foreign, we seem to have crops, trees and plant food galore; and their ravages rob the market-basket and the dinner-pail. In 1912 there were riots in the streets of New York over the high cost of food.

"In no country in the world," says Mr. C.L. Marlatt from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, "do insects take a heavier toll on farm products than in the United States." These attacks are fueled by a huge and diverse yearly production of grains and fruits, as well as a wide range and number of trees. For every plant-eating insect, whether native or introduced, we seem to have plenty of crops, trees, and plant food; and their destruction drains the market basket and the dinner plate. In 1912, there were riots in the streets of New York over the high cost of food.

In 1903, this state of fact was made the subject of a special inquiry by the Department of Agriculture, and in the "Yearbook" for 1904, the reader will find, on page 461, an article entitled, "The Annual Loss Occasioned by Destructive Insects in the United States." The article is not of the sensational type, it was not written in an alarmist spirit, but from beginning to end it is a calm, cold-blooded analysis of existing facts, and the conclusions that fairly may be drawn from them. The opinions of several experts have been considered and quoted, and often their independent figures are stated.

In 1903, the Department of Agriculture conducted a special inquiry into this situation, and in the 1904 "Yearbook," readers can find an article titled "The Annual Loss Caused by Destructive Insects in the United States" on page 461. The article isn't sensational; it's presented without panic, providing a straightforward and objective analysis of the facts at hand along with reasonable conclusions. The views of various experts have been taken into account and quoted, and their independent statistics are frequently mentioned.

With the disappearance of our birds generally, and especially the slaughter of song and other insect-eating birds both in the South and North, the destruction of the national wealth by insects forges to the front as a subject of vital importance. The logic of the situation is so simple a child can see it. Short crops mean higher prices. If ten per cent of our vegetable food supply is destroyed by insects, as certain as fate we will feel it in the increased cost of living.

With the disappearance of our birds overall, especially the killing of songbirds and other insect-eating birds in both the South and North, the loss of national resources due to insects becomes a crucial issue. The reasoning here is so straightforward that even a child can understand it. Fewer crops lead to higher prices. If ten percent of our vegetable food supply is destroyed by insects, we will definitely notice it in the increased cost of living.

I would like to place Mr. Marlatt's report in the hands of every man, boy and school-teacher in America; but I have not at my disposal the means to accomplish such a task. I cannot even print it here in full, but the vital facts can be stated, briefly and in plain figures.

I would like to put Mr. Marlatt's report in the hands of every man, boy, and teacher in America; but I don't have the means to do that. I can't even print it here in full, but I can share the essential facts, briefly and in simple numbers.


Crops And Insects.

Crops and bugs.

Corn. —The principal insect enemies of corn are the chinch bug, corn-root worm (Diabrotica longicornis), bill bug, wire worm, [Page 209] boll-worm or ear-worm, cut-worm, army worm, stalk worm, grasshopper, and plant lice, in all a total of about fifty important species! Several of these pests work secretly. At husking time the wretched ear-worm that ruins the terminal quarter or fifth of an immense number of ears, is painfully in evidence. The root-worms work insidiously, and the moles and shrews are supposed to attack them and destroy them. The corn-root worm is charged with causing an annual loss of two per cent of the corn crop, or $20,000,000; the chinch bug another two per cent; the boll or ear-worm two per cent more. The remaining insect pests are charged with two per cent, which makes eight per cent in all, or a total of $80,000,000 lost each year to the American farmer through the ravages of insects. This is not evenly distributed, but some areas suffer more than others.

Corn. —The main insect threats to corn are the chinch bug, corn rootworm (Diabrotica longicornis), billbug, wireworm, bollworm or earworm, cutworm, armyworm, stalkworm, grasshopper, and plant lice, totaling around fifty significant species! Several of these pests operate hidden. At harvest time, the troublesome earworm that damages the last quarter or fifth of countless ears is particularly noticeable. The rootworms act stealthily, and it's believed that moles and shrews prey on them and reduce their numbers. The corn rootworm is responsible for an annual loss of two percent of the corn crop, equating to $20,000,000; the chinch bug accounts for another two percent; and the boll or earworm takes an additional two percent. The other insect pests are also linked to two percent, making a total of eight percent overall, which amounts to $80,000,000 lost each year to American farmers due to insect damage. This loss is not evenly spread, as some areas experience more devastation than others.

THE CUT-WORM, (Peridroma Sancia)

THE CUTWORM, (Peridroma Sancia)

Very Destructive to Crops

Highly Destructive to Crops

Wheat. —Of all our cereal crops, wheat is the one that suffers most from [Page 210] insects. There are three insects that cause to the wheat industry an annual loss of about ten per cent. The chinch bug is the worst, and it is charged with five per cent ($20,000,000) of the total loss. The Hessian fly comes next in order, and occasionally rolls up enormous losses. In the year 1900, that insect caused to Indiana and Ohio alone the loss of 2,577,000 acres of wheat, and the total cost to us of that insect in that year "undoubtedly approached $100,000,000." Did that affect the price of wheat or not? If not, then there is no such thing as a "law of supply and demand."

Wheat. —Of all our cereal crops, wheat is the one that suffers the most from [Page 210] insects. There are three insects that cause the wheat industry an annual loss of about ten percent. The chinch bug is the worst, responsible for five percent ($20,000,000) of the total loss. The Hessian fly follows, occasionally causing massive losses. In 1900, that insect alone caused a loss of 2,577,000 acres of wheat in Indiana and Ohio, and the total cost from that insect that year "undoubtedly approached $100,000,000." Did that impact the price of wheat or not? If it didn't, then there's no such thing as a "law of supply and demand."

Wheat plant-lice form collectively the third insect pest destructive to wheat, of which it is reported that "the annual loss occasioned by wheat plant-lice probably does not fall short of two or three per cent of the crop."

Wheat plant-lice collectively represent the third major insect pest harmful to wheat, and it is estimated that "the yearly loss caused by wheat plant-lice likely amounts to no less than two or three percent of the crop."

Hay And Forage Crops. —These are attacked by locusts, grasshoppers, army worms, cut-worms, web worms, small grass worms and leaf hoppers. Some of these pests are so small and work so insidiously that even the farmer is prone to overlook their existence. "A ten per cent shrinkage from these and other pests in grasses and forage plants is a minimum estimate."

Hay and forage crops. —These are targeted by locusts, grasshoppers, army worms, cutworms, webworms, small grass worms, and leaf hoppers. Some of these pests are so tiny and operate so subtly that even farmers are likely to miss their presence. "A ten percent reduction due to these and other pests in grasses and forage plants is a conservative estimate."

Cotton. —The great enemies of the cotton-planter are the cotton boll weevil, the bollworm and the leaf worm; but other insects inflict serious damage. In 1904 the loss occasioned by the boll weevil, chiefly in Texas, was conservatively estimated by an expert, Mr. W.D. Hunter, at $20,000,000. The boll worm of the southwestern cotton states has sometimes caused an annual loss of $12,000,000, or four per cent of the crops in the states affected. Before the use of arsenical poisons, the leaf worm caused an annual loss of from twenty to thirty million dollars; but of late years that total has been greatly reduced.

Cotton. —The main enemies of cotton farmers are the cotton boll weevil, the bollworm, and the leaf worm; however, other insects also cause significant damage. In 1904, an expert named Mr. W.D. Hunter estimated that the loss caused by the boll weevil, mostly in Texas, was about $20 million. The bollworm in the southwestern cotton states has sometimes led to an annual loss of $12 million, which is four percent of the crops in the affected states. Before arsenical poisons were used, the leaf worm resulted in an annual loss of twenty to thirty million dollars; but in recent years, that total has been greatly reduced.

Fruits. —The insects that reduce our annual fruit crop attack every portion of the tree and its product. The woolly aphis attacks the roots of the fruit tree, the trunk and limbs are preyed upon by millions of scale insects and borers, the leaves are devastated by the all-devouring leaf worms, canker worms and tent caterpillars, while the fruit itself is attacked by the codling moth, curculio and apple maggot. To destroy fruit is to take money out of the farmer's pocket, and to attack and injure the tree is like undermining his house itself. By an annual expenditure of about $8,250,000 in cash for spraying apple trees, the destructiveness of the codling moth and curculio have been greatly reduced, but that money is itself a cash loss. Add to this the $12,000,000 of actual shrinkage in the apple crop, and the total annual loss to our apple-growers due to the codling moth and curculio is about $20,000,000. In the high price of apples, a part of this loss falls upon the consumer.

Fruits. —The insects that damage our yearly fruit crop attack every part of the tree and its produce. The woolly aphis targets the roots of the fruit tree, while millions of scale insects and borers prey on the trunk and branches. The leaves are ravaged by insatiable leaf worms, canker worms, and tent caterpillars, and the fruit itself is attacked by the codling moth, curculio, and apple maggot. Destroying fruit means taking money out of the farmer's pocket, and damaging the tree is like undermining his very home. By spending around $8,250,000 each year on spraying apple trees, the harm done by the codling moth and curculio has been significantly reduced, but that expenditure is still a financial loss. On top of that, there's a $12,000,000 loss in the actual apple crop, bringing the total yearly loss for our apple growers due to the codling moth and curculio to about $20,000,000. With the high price of apples, part of this loss is passed on to the consumer.

In 1889 Professor Forbes calculated that the annual loss to the fruit-growers of Illinois from insect ravages was $2,375,000. In 1892, insects caused to Nebraska apple-growers a loss computed at $2,000,000 and, in 1897, New York farmers lost $2,500,000 from that cause. "In many sections of the Pacific Northwest the loss was from fifty to seventy-five per cent." (Yearbook, page 470.)

In 1889, Professor Forbes estimated that Illinois fruit-growers lost about $2,375,000 each year due to insect damage. In 1892, insects caused Nebraska apple-growers a loss estimated at $2,000,000, and in 1897, farmers in New York lost $2,500,000 because of them. "In many areas of the Pacific Northwest, the loss was between fifty and seventy-five percent." (Yearbook, page 470.)

Forests. —"The annual losses occasioned by insect pests to forests and forest products (in the United States) have been estimated by Dr. A.D. Hopkins, special agent in charge of forest insect investigations, at not less than $100,000,000. … It covers both the loss from insect damages to standing timber, and to the crude and manufactured forest products. The annual loss to growing timber is conservatively placed at $70,000,000."

Forests. —"Dr. A.D. Hopkins, a special agent overseeing forest insect investigations, has estimated that the annual losses caused by insect pests to forests and forest products in the United States reach at least $100 million. … This figure includes losses from insect damage to standing timber as well as to raw and processed forest products. The annual loss to growing timber is conservatively estimated at $70 million."

THE GYPSY MOTH, (Portheria dispar)

THE GYPSY MOTH, (Lymantria dispar)

Very Destructive to the Finest Shade Trees

Very harmful to the best shade trees

There are other insect damages that we will not pause to enumerate here. They relate to cattle, horses, sheep and stored grain products of many kinds. Even cured tobacco has its pest, a minute insect known as the cigarette beetle, now widespread in America and "frequently the cause of very heavy losses."

There are other kinds of insect damage that we won't list here. They affect cattle, horses, sheep, and various types of stored grain products. Even cured tobacco has its pest, a tiny insect called the cigarette beetle, which is now common in America and often leads to significant losses.

The millions of the insect world are upon us. Their cost to us has been summed up by Mr. Marlatt in the table that appears below.

The millions of insects are all around us. Mr. Marlatt has outlined their impact on us in the table below.


Annual Values Of Farm Products, And Losses Chargeable To Insect Pests.
Official Report in the Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture, 1904.
PRODUCT VALUE PERCENTAGE OF LOSS AMOUNT OF LOSS
Cereals $2,000,000,000 10 $200,000,000
Hay 530,000,000 10 53,000,000
Cotton 600,000,000 10 60,000,000
Tobacco 53,000,000 10 5,300,000
Truck Crops 265,000,000 20 53,000,000
Sugars 50,000,000 10 5,000,000
Fruits 135,000,000 20 27,000,000
Farm Forests 110,000,000 10 11,000,000
Miscellaneous Crops 58,000,000 10 5,800,000
-------------- ------------
  Total $3,801,000,000 $420,100,000
Animal Products 1,750,000,000 10 175,000,000
Natural Forests and Forest Products .. 100,000,000
Products in Storage .. 100,000,000
-------------- ------------
  GRAND TOTAL $5,551,000,000 $795,100,000

The millions of the insect world are upon us. The birds fight them for us, and when the birds are numerous and have nestlings to feed, the number of insects they consume is enormous. They require absolutely nothing at our hands save the privilege of being let alone while they work for us! In fighting the insects, our only allies in nature are the songbirds, woodpeckers, shore-birds, swallows and martins, certain hawks, moles, shrews, bats, and a few other living creatures. All these wage war at their own expense. The farmers might just as well lose $8,250,000 through a short apple crop as to pay out that sum in labor and materials in spraying operations. And yet, fools that we are, we go on slaughtering our friends, and allowing others to slaughter them, under the same brand of fatuous folly that leads the people of Italy to build anew on the smoking sides of Vesuvius, after a dozen generations have been swept away by fire and ashes.

The millions of insects are all around us. The birds fight them for us, and when there are a lot of birds with chicks to feed, they eat a huge number of insects. They really only ask for one thing from us: the chance to be left alone while they help us! In our battle against insects, our only allies are songbirds, woodpeckers, shorebirds, swallows, martins, some hawks, moles, shrews, bats, and a few other creatures. All of them fight at their own expense. Farmers might as well lose $8,250,000 due to a bad apple crop as to spend that amount on labor and materials for spraying. And yet, in our foolishness, we continue to kill our allies and let others do the same, driven by the same kind of reckless folly that prompts people in Italy to rebuild near the volcanic slopes of Vesuvius, despite generations being wiped out by fire and ash.

In the next chapter we will consider the work of our friends, The Birds.

In the next chapter, we will look at the work of our friends, The Birds.


[Page 213]
CHAPTER XXIII
THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF BIRDS

To-day, from Halifax to Los Angeles, and from Key West to Victoria, a deadly contest is being waged. The fruit-growers, farmers, forest owners and "park people" are engaged in a struggle with the insect hordes for the possession of the trees, shrubs and crops. Go out into the open, with your eyes open, and you will see it for yourself. Millions of dollars are being expended in it. Look at this exhibit of what is going on around me, at this very moment,—July 19, 1912:

Today, from Halifax to Los Angeles, and from Key West to Victoria, a dangerous battle is happening. Fruit growers, farmers, forest owners, and park enthusiasts are fighting against swarms of insects for control over trees, shrubs, and crops. Step outside with your eyes wide open, and you’ll see it for yourself. Millions of dollars are being spent on this issue. Take a look at this display of what’s happening around me right now—July 19, 1912:

The bag insects, in thousands, are devouring the leaves of locust and maple trees.

The bag insects, in the thousands, are eating away at the leaves of locust and maple trees.

The elm beetles are trying to devour the elms; and spraying is in progress.

The elm beetles are trying to eat the elms, and spraying is happening.

The hickory-bark borers are slaughtering the hickories; and even some park people are neglecting to take the measures necessary to stop it!

The hickory-bark borers are destroying the hickories, and even some park staff are failing to take the necessary steps to prevent it!

The tent caterpillars are being burned.

The tent caterpillars are being burned.

The aphis (scale insects) are devouring the tops of the white potatoes in the New York University school garden, just as the potato beetle does.

The aphids (scale insects) are munching on the tops of the white potatoes in the New York University school garden, just like the potato beetle does.

The codling moth larvae are already at work on the apples.

The codling moth larvae are already damaging the apples.

The leaves affected by the witch hazel gall fly are being cut off and burned.

The leaves impacted by the witch hazel gall fly are being cut off and burned.

These are merely the most conspicuous of the insect pests that I now see daily. I am not counting those of second or third-rate importance.

These are just the most obvious insect pests that I see every day. I'm not including those that are of lesser importance.

Some of these hordes are being fought with poisonous sprays, some are being killed by hand, and some are being ignored.

Some of these swarms are being dealt with using toxic sprays, some are being killed by hand, and some are being ignored.

In view of the known value of the remaining trees of our country, each woodpecker in the United States is worth twenty dollars in cash. Each nuthatch, creeper and chickadee is worth from five to ten dollars, according to local circumstances. You might just as well cut down four twenty-inch trees and let them lie and decay, as to permit one woodpecker to be killed and eaten by an Italian in the North, or a negro in the South. The downy woodpecker is the relentless enemy of the codling moth, an insect that annually inflicts upon our apple crop damages estimated by the experts of the U.S. Department of Agriculture at twelve million dollars!

Considering the known value of the remaining trees in our country, each woodpecker in the United States is worth twenty dollars in cash. Each nuthatch, creeper, and chickadee is valued between five to ten dollars, depending on local conditions. You might as well cut down four twenty-inch trees and let them sit and rot, as to allow one woodpecker to be killed and eaten by an Italian in the North or a Black person in the South. The downy woodpecker is a relentless enemy of the codling moth, an insect that annually causes damage to our apple crop estimated by the experts at the U.S. Department of Agriculture to be twelve million dollars!

Now, is a federal strong-arm migratory bird law needed for such birds or not? Let the owners of orchards and forests make answer.

Now, is a strong federal law for migratory birds necessary or not? Let the owners of orchards and forests respond.

DOWNY WOODPECKER

Downy Woodpecker

The Case Of The Codling Moth And Curculio. —The codling moth and curculio are twin terrors to apple-growers, partly because of their [Page 214] deadly destructiveness, and partly because man is so weak in resisting them. The annual cost of the fight made against them, in sprays and labor and apparatus, has been estimated at $8,250,000. And what do the birds do to the codling moth,—when there are any birds left alive to operate? The testimony comes from all over the United States, and it is worth while to cite it briefly as a fair sample of the work of the birds upon this particularly deadly pest. These facts and quotations are from the "Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture," for 1911.

The Case of the Codling Moth and Curculio. —The codling moth and curculio are major threats to apple growers, mainly due to their [Page 214] destructive nature, and partly because humans struggle to combat them. The yearly cost of the fight against them, including sprays, labor, and equipment, is estimated at $8,250,000. And what do the birds do to the codling moth—when there are any birds left to help? The evidence comes from all across the United States, and it's worthwhile to briefly highlight it as a representative sample of the birds' impact on this particularly harmful pest. These facts and quotes are from the "Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture," for 1911.

The Downy Woodpecker is the champion tree-protector, and also one of the greatest enemies of the codling moth. When man is quite unable to find the hidden larvae, Downy locates it every time, and digs it out. It extracts worms from young apples so skillfully that often the fruit is not permanently injured. Mr. F.M. Webster reports that the labors of this bird "afford actual and immediate relief to the infected fruit." Testimony in favor of the downy woodpecker has come from New York, New Jersey, Texas and California, "and no fewer than twenty larvae have been taken from a single stomach."

The Downy Woodpecker is the ultimate protector of trees and one of the biggest foes of the codling moth. When humans struggle to locate the hidden larvae, the Downy finds it every time and digs it out. It skillfully extracts worms from young apples, often leaving the fruit unharmed. Mr. F.M. Webster notes that the efforts of this bird "provide real and immediate relief to the affected fruit." Support for the Downy Woodpecker has come from New York, New Jersey, Texas, and California, with "no fewer than twenty larvae taken from a single stomach."

Take the Red-Shafted Flicker vs. the codling moth. Mr. A.P. Martin of Petaluma, Cal., states that during the early spring months (of 1890) they were seen by hundreds in his orchard, industriously examining the trunks and larger limbs of the fruit trees; and he also found great numbers of them around sheds where he stored his winter apples and pears. As the result of several hours' search, Mr. Martin found only one worm, and this one escaped only by accident, for several of the birds had been within a quarter of an inch of it. "So eager are woodpeckers in search, of codling moths that they have often been known to riddle the shingle traps and paper bands which are placed to attract the larvae about to spin cocoons."

Take the Red-Shafted Flicker vs. the codling moth. Mr. A.P. Martin of Petaluma, California, mentions that during the early spring months of 1890, they were spotted by hundreds in his orchard, diligently inspecting the trunks and larger limbs of the fruit trees; and he also found a large number of them around sheds where he stored his winter apples and pears. After several hours of searching, Mr. Martin found only one worm, which barely escaped by chance, as several of the birds had been just a quarter of an inch away from it. "Woodpeckers are so eager in their quest for codling moths that they've often been known to punch holes in the shingle traps and paper bands that are set up to attract the larvae about to spin cocoons."


Behold the array of birds that devour the larvae of the codling moth to an important extent.

Check out the variety of birds that significantly eat the larvae of the codling moth.

Birds That Devour The Codling Moth
Downy Woodpecker (Dryobates pubescens).
Hairy Woodpecker (Dryobates villosus).
Texan Woodpecker (Dryobates scalaris bairdi).
Red-Headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes erythrocephalus).
Red-Shafted Flicker (Colaptes cafer collaris).
Pileated Woodpecker (Phloeotomus pileatus).
Kingbird (Tyrranus tyrranus).
Western Yellow-Bellied Flycatcher (Empidonax difficilis).
Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata).
California Jay (Aphelocoma californica).
Magpie (Pica pica hudsonia).
Crow Blackbird (Quiscalus quiscula).
Brewer Blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus).
Bullock Oriole (Icterus bullocki).
English Sparrow (Passer domesticus).
Chipping Sparrow (Spizella passerina).
California Towhee (Pipilo crissalis).
Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis).
Black Headed Grosbeak (Zamelodia melanocephala).
Lazuli Bunting (Passerina cyanea).
Barn Swallow (Hirundo erythrogastra).
Western Warbling Vireo (Vireosylva gilva swainsoni).
Summer, or Yellow Warbler (Dendroica aestiva).
Lutescent Warbler (Vermivora celata lutescens).
Brown Creeper (Certhia familiaris americana).
White-Breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis).
Black-Capped Chickadee (Penthestes atricapillus).
Plain Titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus).
Carolina Chickadee (Penthestes carolinensis).
Mountain Chickadee (Penthestes gambeli).
California Bush Tit (Psaltriparus minimus californicus).
Ruby-Crowned Kinglet (Regulus calendula).
Robin (Planesticus migratorius).
Bluebird (Sialia sialis).

In all, says Mr. W.L. McAtee, thirty-six species of birds of thirteen families help man in his irrepressible conflict against his deadly enemy, the codling moth. "In some places they destroy from sixty-six to eighty-five per cent of the hibernating larvae."

In total, Mr. W.L. McAtee states, thirty-six species of birds from thirteen families assist humans in their ongoing battle against their deadly foe, the codling moth. "In certain areas, they eliminate between sixty-six to eighty-five percent of the hibernating larvae."

Now, are the farmers of this country content to let the Italians of the North, and the negroes of the South, shoot those birds for food, and devour them? What is the great American farmer going to do about this matter? What he should do is to write and urge his members of Congress to work for and vote for the federal migratory bird bill.

Now, are the farmers in this country okay with letting the Italians in the North and the Black people in the South hunt those birds for food and eat them? What is the great American farmer going to do about this situation? What he should do is write and push his representatives in Congress to support and vote for the federal migratory bird bill.

The Cotton Boll Weevil. —Let us take one other concrete case. The cotton boll weevil invaded the United States from Mexico in 1894. Ten years later it was costing the cotton planters an annual loss estimated at fifteen million dollars per year. Later on that loss was estimated at twenty million dollars. The cotton boll weevil strikes at the heart of the industry by destroying the boll of the cotton plant. While the total [Page 216] loss never can be definitely ascertained, we know that it has amounted to many millions of dollars. The figure given above has been widely quoted, and so far as I am aware, never disputed.

The Cotton Bowl Weevil. —Let’s look at another specific example. The cotton boll weevil came into the United States from Mexico in 1894. By ten years later, it was causing cotton farmers an estimated annual loss of fifteen million dollars. Eventually, that loss was estimated to reach twenty million dollars. The cotton boll weevil attacks the core of the industry by destroying the cotton plant's bolls. While the total [Page 216] loss can never be accurately determined, it’s clear that it has totaled many millions of dollars. The figures mentioned above have been frequently cited, and as far as I know, they have never been challenged.

Fortunately we have at hand a government publication on this subject which gives some pertinent facts regarding the bird enemies of the cotton boll weevil. It is Circular No. 57 of the Biological Survey, Department of Agriculture. Any one can obtain it by addressing that Department. I quote the most important portions of this valuable document:

Fortunately, we have a government publication on this topic that provides some relevant facts about the bird predators of the cotton boll weevil. It's Circular No. 57 from the Biological Survey, Department of Agriculture. Anyone can get it by contacting that Department. I’ll quote the most important parts of this valuable document:


Birds Useful In The War Against The Cotton Boll Weevil.

Birds That Help in the Fight Against the Cotton Boll Weevil.

By H.W. Henshaw, Chief of the Biological Survey.

By H.W. Henshaw, Head of the Biological Survey.

The main purpose of this circular is to direct the attention of cotton growers and others in the cotton growing states to the importance of birds in the boll weevil war, to emphasize the need of protection for them, and to suggest means to increase the numbers and extend the range of certain of the more important kinds.

The primary goal of this circular is to inform cotton growers and others in cotton-producing states about the vital role birds play in controlling the boll weevil, to emphasize the importance of protecting them, and to suggest ways to increase their numbers and expand the range of key species.

Investigations by the Biological Survey show that thirty-eight species of birds eat boll weevils. While some eat them only sparingly others eat them freely, and no fewer than forty-seven adult weevils have been found in the stomach of a single cliff swallow. Of the birds known at the present time to feed on the weevil, among the most important are the orioles, nighthawks, and, foremost of all, the swallows (including the purple martin).

Studies by the Biological Survey indicate that thirty-eight species of birds consume boll weevils. Some species eat them occasionally, while others do so frequently; for instance, as many as forty-seven adult weevils have been found in the stomach of a single cliff swallow. Among the birds known to feed on weevils, the most important are orioles, nighthawks, and especially swallows (including the purple martin).

Orioles. —Six kinds of orioles live in Texas, though but two inhabit the southern states generally. Orioles are among the few birds that evince a decided preference for weevils, and as they persistently hunt for the insects on the bolls, they fill a place occupied by no other birds. They are protected by law in nearly every state in the Union, but their bright plumage renders them among the most salable of birds for millinery purposes, and despite protective laws, considerable numbers are still killed for the hat trade. It is hardly necessary to point out that their importance as insect eaters everywhere demands their protection, but more especially in the cotton belt.

Orioles. —Six types of orioles are found in Texas, but only two are commonly present in the southern states. Orioles are unique because they prefer to eat weevils, and they search for these insects on the bolls, fulfilling a role that no other birds can. They are legally protected in nearly every state, but their bright feathers make them highly desired for hats, and despite these protections, many are still killed for the hat trade. Clearly, their role as insect eaters is crucial and needs protection, especially in cotton-producing areas.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__

From the "American Natural History"

From the "American Natural History"

THE BALTIMORE ORIOLE

THE BALTIMORE ORIOLE

The Deadly Enemy of the Cotton-Boll Weevil

The Deadly Enemy of the Cotton-Boll Weevil

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__

THE NIGHTHAWK

THE NIGHTHAWK

A Goatsucker, not a Song-bird; but it Feeds Exclusively Upon Insects

A Goatsucker, not a Songbird; but it only eats insects.

Nighthawk. —The nighthawk, or bull-bat, also renders important service in the destruction of weevils, and catches them on the wing in considerable numbers, especially during its migration. Unfortunately, the nighthawk is eaten for food in some sections of the South, and considerable numbers are shot for this purpose. The bird's value for food, however, is infinitesimal as compared with the service it renders the cotton grower and other agriculturists, and every effort should be made to spread broadcast a knowledge of its usefulness as a weevil destroyer, with a view to its complete protection.

Nighthawk. —The nighthawk, or bull-bat, is essential in reducing weevil populations, capturing them in large numbers, especially during migration. Unfortunately, the nighthawk is hunted for food in some parts of the South, and many are killed for this reason. However, the bird's value as food is minimal compared to the benefits it provides to cotton farmers and other growers, so we should raise awareness about its role as a weevil predator to ensure its full protection.

Swallows. —Of all the birds now known to destroy weevils, swallows are the most important. Six species occur in Texas and the southern states. [Page 217] The martin, the barn swallow, the bank swallow, the roughwing, and the cliff swallow breed locally in Texas, and all of them, except the cliff swallow, breed in the other cotton states. The white-bellied, or tree swallow, nests only in the North, and by far the greater number of cliff swallows nest in the North and West.

Swallows. —Among the birds known for controlling weevil populations, swallows are the most significant. Six species can be found in Texas and southern states. [Page 217] The purple martin, barn swallow, bank swallow, rough-winged swallow, and cliff swallow all breed locally in Texas, with all but the cliff swallow also breeding in other cotton-producing states. The white-bellied or tree swallow nests only in the North, and most cliff swallows nest in the North and West.

As showing how a colony of martins thrives when provided with sufficient room to multiply, an experiment by Mr. J. Warren Jacobs, of Waynesburg, Pa., may be cited. The first year five pairs were induced to occupy the single box provided, and raised eleven young. The fourth year three large boxes, divided into ninety-nine rooms, contained fifty-three pairs, and they raised about 175 young. The colony was thus nearly three hundred strong at the close of the fourth season. The effect of this number of hungry martins on the insects infesting the neighborhood may be imagined.

An example of a thriving martin colony comes from an experiment by Mr. J. Warren Jacobs from Waynesburg, Pa. In the first year, five pairs settled into a single box and successfully raised eleven young. By the fourth year, three large boxes, each with ninety-nine rooms, housed fifty-three pairs, which raised around 175 young. By the end of the fourth season, the colony had nearly tripled to almost three hundred martins. One can only imagine the impact such a large number of hungry martins had on the local insect population.

From the standpoint of the farmer and the cotton grower, swallows are among the most useful birds. Especially designed by nature to capture insects in midair, their powers of flight and endurance are unexcelled, and in their own field they have no competitors. Their peculiar value to the cotton grower consists in the fact that, like the nighthawk, they capture boll weevils when flying over the fields, which no other birds do. Flycatchers snap up the weevils near trees and shrubbery. Wrens hunt them out when concealed under bark or rubbish. Blackbirds catch them on the ground, as do the killdeer, titlark, meadow lark, and others; while orioles hunt for them on the bolls. But it is the peculiar function of swallows to catch the weevils as they are making long flights, leaving the cotton fields in search of hiding places in which to winter or entering them to continue their work of devastation.

From the farmers' perspective, swallows are among the most beneficial birds. Naturally designed to catch insects in midair, their flying skills and endurance are unmatched, with no other birds rivaling them in this area. Their unique value to cotton growers lies in the fact that, like the nighthawk, they catch boll weevils while flying over fields, something no other birds do. Flycatchers grab weevils near trees and bushes, wrens search for them hidden under bark or debris, and blackbirds catch them on the ground, just like killdeer, titlarks, meadowlarks, and others. Meanwhile, orioles look for them on the bolls. However, it's the special role of swallows to catch weevils during their long flights, as the weevils leave the cotton fields in search of hiding spots for winter or enter them to continue their destructive work.

[Page 218]

Means have been taken to inform residents of the northern states of the value of the swallow tribe to agriculturists generally, and particularly to cotton planters, in the belief that the number of swallows breeding in the North can be substantially increased. The cooperation of the northern states is important, since birds bred in the North migrate directly through the southern states in the fall on their way to the distant tropics, and also in the spring on their return.

Efforts have been made to inform residents of the northern states about the significance of the swallow population for farmers, especially cotton growers, with hopes of significantly increasing the number of swallows breeding in the North. Support from the northern states is crucial, as birds raised in the North migrate directly through the southern states in the fall on their way to the tropics and again in the spring on their return.

Important as it is to increase the number of northern breeding swallows, it is still more important to increase the number nesting in the South and to induce the birds there to extend their range over as much of the cotton area as possible. Nesting birds spend much more time in the South than migrants, and during the weeks when the old birds are feeding young they are almost incessantly engaged in the pursuit of insects.

While it is important to increase the number of northern breeding swallows, it is even more vital to enhance the number nesting in the South and to encourage those birds to expand their range throughout as much of the cotton region as possible. Nesting birds spend much more time in the South than migratory ones, and during the weeks when the adult birds are feeding their young, they are nearly constantly busy chasing insects.

It is not, of course, claimed that birds alone can stay the ravages of the cotton boll weevil in Texas, but they materially aid in checking the advance of the pest into the other cotton states. Important auxiliaries, in destroying these insects, birds aid in reducing their numbers within safe limits, and once within safe limits in keeping them there. Hence it is for the interests of the cotton states that special efforts be made to protect and care for the weevil-eating species, and to increase their numbers in every way possible.—(End of the circular.)

It’s not claimed that birds alone can stop the damage caused by the cotton boll weevil in Texas, but they play a significant role in slowing the spread of the pest to other cotton-growing states. By helping to reduce their population to manageable levels, birds are key in keeping those numbers in check once they’re under control. Therefore, it’s in the best interest of the cotton states to make special efforts to protect and support weevil-eating species and to increase their numbers in every possible way.—(End of the circular.)


Condensed Notes On The Food Habits Of Certain North American Birds.

Condensed Notes on the Eating Habits of Some North American Birds.

Millions of Americans and near-Americans, both old and young, now need to be shown the actual figures that represent the value of our birds as destroyers of the insects, weeds and the small rodents that are swarming to overrun and devour our fields, orchards and forests. Will our people never learn that in fighting pests the birds are worth ten times more to men than all the poisons, sprays and traps that ever were invented or used?

Millions of Americans and near-Americans, both young and old, now need to be shown the actual numbers that reflect the value of our birds as they help control insects, weeds, and the small rodents that threaten to overtake and destroy our fields, orchards, and forests. Will our people ever realize that in battling pests, the birds are worth ten times more to us than all the poisons, sprays, and traps that have ever been invented or used?

THE PURPLE MARTIN

THE PURPLE MARTIN

A Representative of the Swallow Family. A Great Insect-eater; one of the Most Valuable of all Birds to the Southern Cotton planter, and Northern farmer. Shot for "Food" in the South. Driven out of the North by the English Sparrow Pest.

A Representative of the Swallow Family. A Great Insect-eater; one of the Most Valuable Birds for Southern cotton planters and Northern farmers. Shot for "Food" in the South. Driven out of the North by the English Sparrow problem.

We cannot spray our forests; and if the wild birds do not protect, them from insects, nothing will! If you will watch a warbler collecting the [Page 219] insects out of the top of a seventy-foot forest oak, busy as a bee hour after hour, it will convince you that the birds do for the forests that which man with all his resources cannot accomplish. You will then realize that to this country every woodpecker, chickadee, titmouse, creeper and warbler is easily worth its weight in gold. The killing of any member of those groups of birds should be punished by a fine of twenty-five dollars.

We can't spray our forests, and if the wild birds don't protect them from insects, nothing will! If you watch a warbler collecting the [Page 219] insects from the top of a seventy-foot oak tree, working tirelessly hour after hour, you'll be convinced that birds do for the forests what humans, with all their resources, can't achieve. You'll come to understand that every woodpecker, chickadee, titmouse, creeper, and warbler is worth its weight in gold to this country. Killing any of those birds should come with a fine of twenty-five dollars.

The Bob-White. —And take the Bob White Quail, for example, and the weeds of the farm. To kill weeds costs money—hard cash that the farmer earns by toil. Does the farmer put forth strenuous efforts to protect the bird of all birds that does most to help him keep down the weeds? Far from it! All that the average farmer thinks about the quail is of killing it, for a few ounces of meat on the table.

The Bobwhite. —Take the Bob White Quail, for instance, and the weeds on the farm. Killing weeds costs money—real cash that the farmer earns through hard work. Does the farmer make a real effort to protect the one bird that helps him control the weeds? Not at all! What the average farmer thinks about the quail is just about hunting it for a little bit of meat for the table.

It is fairly beyond question that of all birds that influence the fortunes of the farmers and fruit-growers of North America, the common quail, or bob white, is one of the most valuable. It stays on the farm all the year round. When insects are most numerous and busy, Bob White devotes to them his entire time. He cheerfully fights them, from sixteen to eighteen hours per day. When the insects are gone, he turns his attention to the weeds that are striving to seed down the fields for another year. Occasionally he gets a few grains of wheat that have been left on the ground by the reapers; but he does no damage. In California, where the valley quail once were very numerous, they sometimes consumed altogether too much wheat for the good of the farmers; but outside of California I believe such occurrences are unknown.

It’s pretty clear that of all the birds that affect the fortunes of farmers and fruit growers in North America, the common quail, or bobwhite, is one of the most valuable. It stays on the farm all year long. When insects are at their peak, Bob White dedicates all his time to them. He tirelessly hunts them for sixteen to eighteen hours a day. Once the insects are gone, he focuses on the weeds trying to seed the fields for another year. Occasionally, he picks up a few grains of wheat left on the ground by the harvesters, but he does no damage. In California, where valley quail were once very numerous, they sometimes ate too much wheat, harming the farmers; but outside of California, I believe such cases are unknown.

Let us glance over the bob white's bill of fare:

Let’s take a look at what the bobwhite eats:

Weed Seeds.—One hundred and twenty-nine different weeds have been found to contribute to the quail's bill of fare. Crops and stomachs have been found crowded with rag-weed seeds, to the number of one thousand, while others had eaten as many seeds of crab-grass. A bird shot at Pine Brook, N.J., in October, 1902, had eaten five thousand seeds of green fox-tail grass, and one killed on Christmas Day at Kinsale, Va., had [Page 220] taken about ten thousand seeds of the pig-weed. (Elizabeth A. Reed.) In Bulletin No. 21, Biological Survey, it is calculated that if in Virginia and North Carolina there are four bob whites to every square mile, and each bird consumes one ounce of seed per day, the total destruction to weed seeds from September 1st to April 30th in those states alone will be 1,341 tons.

Weed Seeds.—Researchers have identified one hundred and twenty-nine different weeds that make up the quail's diet. Crops and stomachs have been found filled with ragweed seeds numbering in the thousands, with some birds eating as many seeds of crabgrass. A quail shot at Pine Brook, N.J., in October 1902, had consumed five thousand seeds of green foxtail grass, and another one killed on Christmas Day at Kinsale, Va., had consumed about ten thousand seeds of pigweed. (Elizabeth A. Reed.) In Bulletin No. 21, Biological Survey, it is estimated that in Virginia and North Carolina, if there are four bobwhites per square mile and each bird eats one ounce of seeds daily, the total amount of weed seeds destroyed from September 1st to April 30th in those states alone will be 1,341 tons.

In 1910 Mrs. Margaret Morse Nice, of Clark University, Worcester, Mass., finished and contributed to the Journal of Economic Entomology (Vol. III., No. 3) a masterful investigation of "The Food of the Bob-White." It should be in every library in this land. Mrs. Nice publishes the entire list of 129 species of weed seeds consumed by the quail,—and it looks like a rogue's gallery. Here is an astounding record, which proves once more that truth is stranger than fiction:

In 1910, Mrs. Margaret Morse Nice from Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts, completed and contributed a remarkable study titled "The Food of the Bob-White" to the Journal of Economic Entomology (Vol. III., No. 3). This work deserves to be in every library across the country. Mrs. Nice lists all 129 species of weed seeds that quail eat, and it resembles a rogue's gallery. This is an incredible record that demonstrates yet again that truth is stranger than fiction:


Number Of Seeds Eaten By A Bob-White In One Day
Barnyard grass 2,500 Milkweed 770
Beggar ticks 1,400 Peppergrass 2,400
Black mustard 2,500 Pigweed 12,000
Burdock 600 Plantain 12,500
Crab grass 2,000 Rabbitsfoot clover 30,000
Curled dock 4,175 Round-headed bush clover 1,800
Dodder 1,560 Smartweed 2,250
Evening primrose 10,000 White vervain 18,750
Lamb's quarter 15,000 Water smartweed 2,000
Notably Bad Insects Eaten By The Bob-White
(Prof. Judd and Mrs. Nice.)
Colorado potato beetle Clover leaf beetle
Cucumber beetle Cotton boll weevil
Chinch bug Cotton boll worm
Bean-leaf beetle Striped garden caterpillar
Wireworm Cutworms
May beetle Grasshoppers
Corn billbug Corn-louse ants
Imbricated-snout beetle Rocky Mountain locust
Plant lice Codling moth
Cabbage butterfly Canker worm
Mosquito Hessian fly
Squash beetle Stable fly
Summary Of The Quail'S Insect Food
Orthoptera—Grasshoppers and locusts 13 species.
Hemiptera—Bugs 24 "
Homoptera—Leaf hoppers and plant lice 6 "
Lepidoptera—Moths, caterpillars, cut-worms, etc 19 "
Diptera—Flies 8 "
Coleoptera—Beetles 61 "
Hymenoptera—Ants, wasps, slugs 8 "
Other insects 6 "
---
Total 145 "

THE BOB-WHITE

THE BOBWHITE

For the Smaller Pests of the Farm, This Bird is the Most Marvelous Engine of Destruction Ever put Together of Flesh and Blood.

For the smaller pests on the farm, this bird is the most incredible killing machine ever made of flesh and blood.

A few sample meals of insects.—The following are records of single individual meals of the bob white:

A few sample meals of insects.—Here are records of individual meals of the bobwhite:

Of grasshoppers, 84; chinch bugs, 100; squash bugs, 12; army worm, 12; cut-worm, 12; mosquitoes, 568 in three hours; cotton boll weevil, 47; flies, 1,350; rose slugs, 1,286. Miscellaneous insects consumed by a laying hen quail, 1,532, of which 1,000 were grasshoppers; total weigh of the lot, 24.6 grams.

Of grasshoppers, 84; chinch bugs, 100; squash bugs, 12; army worms, 12; cutworms, 12; mosquitoes, 568 in three hours; cotton boll weevils, 47; flies, 1,350; rose slugs, 1,286. Miscellaneous insects consumed by a laying hen quail, 1,532, of which 1,000 were grasshoppers; total weight of the lot, 24.6 grams.

"F.M. Howard, of Beeville, Texas, wrote to the U.S. Bureau of Entomology, that the bob whites shot in his vicinity had their crops filled with the weevils. Another farmer reported his cotton fields full of quail, and an entire absence of weevils." Texas and Georgia papers (please copy.)

"F.M. Howard from Beeville, Texas, wrote to the U.S. Bureau of Entomology that the bobwhites shot in his area had their crops full of weevils. Another farmer mentioned that his cotton fields were full of quail, and there were no weevils at all." Texas and Georgia papers (please copy.)

And yet, because of its few pitiful ounces of flesh, two million gunners and ten thousand lawmakers think of the quail only as a bird that can be shot and eaten! Throughout a great portion of its former range, including New York and New Jersey, the species is surely and certainly on the verge of total extinction. And yet sportsmen gravely discuss the "bag limit," and "enforcement of the bag-limit law" as a means of bringing back this almost vanished species! Such folly in grown men is very trying.

And yet, because of its small amount of flesh, two million hunters and ten thousand lawmakers view the quail only as a bird that can be hunted and eaten! Across a large part of its former range, including New York and New Jersey, the species is definitely on the brink of total extinction. And yet, sportsmen seriously talk about the "bag limit" and the "enforcement of the bag-limit law" as a way to help restore this nearly disappeared species! Such nonsense from grown men is really frustrating.

To my friend, the Epicure:—The next time you regale a good appetite with blue points, terrapin stew, filet of sole and saddle of mutton, touched up here and there with the high lights of rare old sherry, rich claret and dry monopole, pause as the dead quail is laid before you, on a funeral pyre of toast, and consider this: "Here lies the charred remains of the Farmer's Ally and Friend, poor Bob White. In life he devoured 145 different kinds of bad insects, and the seeds of 129 anathema weeds. For the smaller pests of the farm, he was the most [Page 222] marvelous engine of destruction that God ever put together of flesh and blood. He was good, beautiful and true; and his small life was blameless. And here he lies, dead; snatched away from his field of labor, and destroyed, in order that I may be tempted to dine three minutes longer, after I have already eaten to satiety."

To my friend, the Epicure:—The next time you treat your good appetite to blue points, terrapin stew, filet of sole and saddle of mutton, enhanced here and there with the highlights of rare old sherry, rich claret, and dry monopole, take a moment to pause as the dead quail is served to you, resting on a funeral pyre of toast, and think about this: "Here lies the charred remains of the Farmer's Ally and Friend, poor Bob White. In life, he devoured 145 different kinds of harmful insects and the seeds of 129 dreaded weeds. For the smaller pests of the farm, he was the most [Page 222] marvelous engine of destruction that God ever created from flesh and blood. He was good, beautiful, and true; and his small life was blameless. And here he lies, dead; taken away from his field of labor and destroyed, so that I may be tempted to dine for three more minutes after I’ve already eaten my fill."

Then go on, and finish Bob White.

Then go ahead and finish off Bob White.

The Case Of The Robin. —For a long time this bird has been slaughtered in the South for food, regardless of the agricultural interests of the North. No Southern gentleman ever shoots robins, or song birds of any kind, but the negroes and poor whites do it. The worst case of recent occurrence was the slaughter in the town of Pittsboro, North Carolina.

The Robin Case. —For a long time, this bird has been killed in the South for food, overlooking the farming interests of the North. No Southern gentleman ever shoots robins or any songbirds, but the Black community and impoverished white individuals do it. The most severe incident recently happened in the town of Pittsboro, North Carolina.

It was in January, 1912. The Mayor of the town, Hon. Bennet Nooe, was away from home; and during a heavy fall of snow "the robins came into the town in great numbers to feed upon the berries of the cedar trees. In order that the birds might be killed without restriction, the Board of Aldermen suspended the ordinance against the firing of guns in the town, and permitted the inhabitants to kill the robins."

It was January 1912. The Mayor of the town, Hon. Bennet Nooe, was away from home, and during a heavy snowfall, the robins came into town in droves to eat the berries from the cedar trees. To allow the birds to be hunted without limit, the Board of Aldermen suspended the ordinance against firing guns in the town and allowed the residents to shoot the robins.

A disgraceful carnival of slaughter immediately followed in which "about all the male population" participated. Regarding this, Mayor Nooe later on wrote to the editor of Bird Lore as follows:

A shameful festival of killing quickly ensued, with "almost all the men" taking part. In connection with this, Mayor Nooe later wrote to the editor of Bird Lore:

"Hearing of this, on my return, I went to the Aldermen, all of whom were guilty, and told them that they and all others who were guilty would have to be fined. Three out of the five submitted and paid up, but they insisted that the ordinance be changed to read exactly as it is written here, with the exception that all could shoot robins in the town until the first of March; whereupon I resigned, as was stated."—(Bird Lore, XIV, 2. p. 140.)

"Hearing this, when I got back, I went to the Aldermen, all of whom were guilty, and told them that they and everyone else who was guilty would have to pay a fine. Three out of the five agreed and paid up, but they insisted that the ordinance be changed to read exactly as it is written here, except that everyone could shoot robins in town until the first of March; at which point, I resigned, as mentioned."—(Bird Lore, XIV, 2. p. 140.)

The Mayor was quite right. The robin butchers of Pittsboro were not worthy to be governed by him.

The Mayor was totally right. The robin hunters of Pittsboro didn’t deserve to be ruled by him.

The Meadow Lark is one of the most valuable birds that frequent farming regions. Throughout the year insects make up 73 per cent of its food, weed-seeds 12 per cent, and grain only 5 per cent. During the insect season, insects constitute 90 per cent of its food.

The Meadowlark is one of the most beneficial birds found in farming areas. Throughout the year, insects make up 73 percent of its diet, weed seeds 12 percent, and grain just 5 percent. During the insect season, insects account for 90 percent of its food.

The Baltimore Oriole is as valuable to man as it is beautiful. Its nest is the most wonderful example of bird architecture in our land. In May insects constitute 90 per cent of this bird's food. For the entire year, insects and other animal food make 83.4 per cent and vegetable matter 16.6 per cent.

The Baltimore Oriole is just as valuable to humans as it is stunning. Its nest is the most amazing example of bird architecture in our country. In May, insects make up 90 percent of this bird's diet. Over the course of the year, insects and other animal food account for 83.4 percent, while plant material makes up 16.6 percent.

The Crow Blackbird feeds as follows, throughout the whole year: insects, 26.9 per cent; other animal food 3.4; corn 37.2; oats, 2.9; wheat, 4.8; other grain, 1.6; fruits, 5; weed seeds and mast 18.2! This report was based on the examination (by the Biological Survey) of 2,346 stomachs, and "the charge that the blackbird is an habitual robber of birds' nests was disproved by the examinations." (F.E.L. Beal.)

The Black Crow has a diet that varies throughout the year: insects 26.9%; other animal food 3.4%; corn 37.2%; oats 2.9%; wheat 4.8%; other grain 1.6%; fruits 5%; weed seeds and mast 18.2%! This report came from the analysis (by the Biological Survey) of 2,346 stomachs, and "the claim that the blackbird regularly robs birds' nests was disproved by the examinations." (F.E.L. Beal.)

Flycatchers. —The high-water mark in insect-destruction by our birds is [Page 223] reached by the flycatchers,—dull-colored, modest-mannered little creatures that do their work so quietly you hardly notice them. All you see in your tree-tops is a two-foot flit or glide, now here and now there, as the leaves and high branches are combed of their insect life.

Flycatchers. —The peak of insects being wiped out by our birds is [Page 223] achieved by the flycatchers—plain-colored, unassuming little creatures that work so silently you barely notice them. All you see in your treetops is a two-foot dart or glide, popping in and out as the leaves and high branches are cleared of their insect life.

Bulletin No. 44 of the Department of Agriculture gives the residuum of an exhausting examination of 3,398 warbler stomachs, from seventeen species of birds, and the result is: 94.99 per cent of insect food,—mostly bad insects, too,—and 5.01 per cent vegetable food. What more can any forester ask of a bird?

Bulletin No. 44 of the Department of Agriculture presents the findings from an extensive study of 3,398 warbler stomachs across seventeen bird species. The results show that 94.99 percent of their diet consists of insects—mostly harmful ones—and 5.01 percent is made up of plant material. What else could any forester want from a bird?

THE ROSE-BREASTED GROSBEAK

The Rose-breasted Grosbeak

"The Potato-bug Bird," Greatest Enemy of the Potato Beetles From the "American Natural History"

"The Potato-bug Bird," Greatest Enemy of the Potato Beetles From the "American Natural History"

The Sparrows. —All our sparrows are great consumers of weed seeds. Professor Beal has calculated the total quantity consumed in Iowa in one year,—in the days when sparrows were normally numerous,—at 1,750,000 pounds.

The Sparrows. —All our sparrows eat a lot of weed seeds. Professor Beal has estimated the total amount consumed in Iowa in a year—back when sparrows were really common—to be 1,750,000 pounds.

The American Goldfinch as a weed destroyer has few equals. It makes a specialty of the seeds of the members of the Order Compositae, and is especially fond of the seeds of ragweed, thistles, wild lettuce and wild sunflower. But, small and beautiful as this bird is, there are hundreds of thousands of grown men in America who would shoot it and eat it if they dared!

The American Goldfinch is an unmatched weed killer. It primarily feeds on seeds from plants in the Compositae family and particularly enjoys seeds from ragweed, thistles, wild lettuce, and wild sunflower. Yet, as small and beautiful as this bird is, there are hundreds of thousands of adult men in America who would shoot it and eat it if they had the chance!

The Hawks And Owls. —Let no other state repeat the error that once was made in Pennsylvania when that state enacted in 1885, her now famous hawk-and-owl bounty law. In order to accomplish the wholesale destruction of her birds of prey, a law was passed providing for the payment of a bounty of fifty cents each for the scalps of hawks and owls. Immediately the slaughter began. In two years 180,000 scalps were brought in, and $90,000 were paid out for them. It was estimated that the saving to the farmers in poultry amounted to one dollar for each $1,205 paid out in bounties.

The Hawks and Owls. —Let no other state make the same mistake that Pennsylvania did when it enacted its infamous hawk-and-owl bounty law in 1885. To carry out the widespread extermination of these birds of prey, a law was established offering a bounty of fifty cents for each hawk and owl scalp. The killing began immediately. Within two years, 180,000 scalps were collected, and $90,000 was disbursed for them. It was estimated that the benefit to farmers in poultry was only about one dollar for every $1,205 spent on bounties.

The awakening came even more swiftly than the ornithologists expected. [Page 224] By the end of two years from the passage of "the hawk law," the farmers found their fields and orchards thoroughly overrun by destructive rats, mice and insects, and they appealed to the legislature for the quick repeal of the law. With all possible haste this was brought about; but it was estimated by competent judges that in damages to their crops the hawk law cost the people of Pennsylvania nothing less than two million dollars.

The awakening happened even faster than the bird experts anticipated. [Page 224] By the end of two years after the passing of "the hawk law," farmers found their fields and orchards completely invaded by destructive rats, mice, and insects, and they called on the legislature to quickly repeal the law. With all possible speed, this was accomplished; however, it was estimated by knowledgeable sources that the hawk law resulted in damages to their crops costing the people of Pennsylvania no less than two million dollars.

Moral: Don't make any laws providing for the destruction of hawks and owls until you have exact knowledge, and know in advance what the results will be.

Moral: Don't create any laws that lead to the destruction of hawks and owls until you have clear knowledge and understand what the consequences will be.

In the space at my disposal for this subject, it is impossible to treat our species of hawks and owls separately. The reader can find in the "American Natural History" fifteen pages of text, numerous illustrations and many figures elucidating this subject. Unfortunately Dr. Fisher's admirable work on "The Hawks and Owls" has long been out of print, and unobtainable. There are, however, a few observations that must be recorded here.

In the limited space I have for this topic, it’s not feasible to discuss our types of hawks and owls separately. You can find fifteen pages of text, numerous illustrations, and many figures on this topic in "American Natural History." Unfortunately, Dr. Fisher's excellent book "The Hawks and Owls" has been out of print for a long time and is hard to find. However, there are a few observations that need to be noted here.

Each bird of prey is a balanced equation. Each one, I think without a single exception, does some damage, chiefly in the destruction of valuable wild birds. The value of the poultry destroyed by hawks and owls is very small in comparison with their killing of wild prey. Many of the species do not touch domestic poultry! At the same time, when a hawk of any kind, or an owl, sets to work deliberately and persistently to clean out a farmer's poultry yard, and is actually doing it, that farmer is justified in killing that bird. But, the occasional loss of a broiler is not to be regarded as justification for a war of extermination on all the hawks that fly! Individual wild-animal nuisances can occasionally become so exasperating as to justify the use of the gun,—when scarecrows fail; but in all such circumstances the greatest judgment, and much forbearance also, is desirable and necessary.

Each bird of prey is a balanced equation. I believe, without any exceptions, that they all cause some damage, mainly by destroying valuable wild birds. The worth of the poultry taken by hawks and owls is quite small compared to the number of wild prey they kill. Many of these species don’t even touch domestic poultry! However, when any type of hawk or owl starts to systematically wipe out a farmer’s poultry yard and is actually doing so, that farmer is justified in killing that bird. But the occasional loss of a broiler shouldn’t be seen as a reason to wage a war of extermination on all the hawks in the area! Individual wild-animal nuisances can sometimes become so irritating that using a gun is justified—when scarecrows don’t work; but in all such situations, it is important to exercise good judgment and a lot of patience.

The value of hawks and owls rests upon their perpetual warfare on the millions of destructive rats, mice, moles, shrews, weasels, rabbits and English sparrows that constantly prey upon what the farmer produces. On this point a few illustrations must be given. One of the most famous comes via Dr. Fisher, from one of the towers of the Smithsonian buildings, and relates to

The importance of hawks and owls comes from their ongoing battle against the millions of harmful rats, mice, moles, shrews, weasels, rabbits, and English sparrows that constantly threaten the farmer's crops. To illustrate this, let's consider a few examples. One of the most well-known comes from Dr. Fisher, who observed from one of the towers of the Smithsonian buildings, and it relates to

THE BARN OWL

The Barn Owl

Wonderfully Destructive of Rats and Mice, and Almost Never Touches Birds

Wonderfully Destructive to Rats and Mice, and Almost Never Affects Birds

The Barn Owl, (Strix flammea). —Two hundred pellets consisting of bones, hair and feathers from one nesting pair of these birds were collected, and found to contain 454 skulls, of which 225 were of meadow mice, 179 of house mice, 2 of pine mice, 20 were of rats, 6 of jumping mice, 20 were from shrews, 1 was of a mole and 1 a vesper sparrow. One bird, and 453 noxious mammals! Compare this with the record of any cat on earth. Anything that the barn owl wants from me, or from any farmer, should at once be offered to it, on a silver tray. This bird is often called the Monkey-Faced Owl, and it should be called the Farmer's-Friend Owl.

The Barn Owl (Common Barn Owl). — Two hundred pellets made up of bones, hair, and feathers from one nesting pair of these birds were collected and found to contain 454 skulls, including 225 from meadow mice, 179 from house mice, 2 from pine mice, 20 from rats, 6 from jumping mice, 20 from shrews, 1 from a mole, and 1 from a vesper sparrow. One bird, and 453 harmful mammals! Compare this with the record of any cat on earth. Anything the barn owl wants from me or from any farmer should be offered to it immediately, on a silver tray. This bird is often called the Monkey-Faced Owl, but it should really be called the Farmer's-Friend Owl.

The Long-Eared Owl, (Asio wilsonianus) has practically the same kind of a record as the barn owl,—scores of mice, rats and shrews [Page 225] destroyed, and only an occasional small bird. Its nearest relative, the Short-eared Owl (A. accipitrinus) may be described in the same words.

The Long-Eared Owl, (Asio wilsonianus) has a similar track record to that of the barn owl—countless mice, rats, and shrews [Page 225] taken down, with just a rare small bird. Its closest relative, the Short-eared Owl (A. accipitrinus) can be described in the same way.

The Great Horned Owl fills us with conflicting passions. For the long list of dead rats and mice, pocket gophers, skunks, and weasels to his credit, we think well of him, and wish his prosperity. For the song-birds, ruffed grouse, quail, other game birds, domestic poultry, squirrels, chipmunks and hares that he kills, we hate him, and would cheerfully wring his neck, wearing gauntlets. He does an unusual amount of good, and a terrible amount of harm. It is impossible to strike a balance for him, and determine with mathematical accuracy whether he should be shot or permitted to live. At all events, whenever Bubo comes up for trial, we must give the feathered devil his due.

The Great Horned Owl stirs up mixed feelings in us. On one hand, we appreciate him for all the dead rats, mice, pocket gophers, skunks, and weasels he has taken down, and we hope for his continued success. On the other hand, because he preys on songbirds, ruffed grouse, quail, other game birds, domestic poultry, squirrels, chipmunks, and hares, we dislike him and would happily strangle him if given the chance. He does a lot of good, but also a lot of harm. It's hard to find a balance and figure out whether he should be killed or allowed to live. Still, whenever Bubo is put on trial, we have to acknowledge the feathered fiend's contributions.

The names "Chicken Hawk or Hen Hawk" as applied usually refer to the Red-Shouldered or Red-Tailed species. Neither of these is really very destructive to poultry, but both are very destructive to mice, rats and other pestiferous creatures. Both are large, showy birds, not so very swift in flight, and rather easy to approach. Neither of them should be destroyed,—not even though they do, once in a great while, take a chicken or wild bird. They pay for them, four times over, by rat-killing. Mr. J. Alden Loring states that he once knew a pair of red-shouldered hawks to nest within fifty rods of a poultry farm on which there were 800 young chickens and 400 ducks, not one of which was taken. (See the American Natural History, pages 229-30.)

The names "Chicken Hawk" or "Hen Hawk" usually refer to the Red-Shouldered Hawk or Red-tailed species. Neither of these birds is particularly harmful to poultry, but both are really effective at catching mice, rats, and other pests. They are large, striking birds that aren't very fast in flight and are quite easy to approach. They shouldn’t be harmed—even though they might occasionally take a chicken or wild bird. They more than make up for that by keeping the rat population in check. Mr. J. Alden Loring mentions that he once saw a pair of red-shouldered hawks nest within fifty rods of a poultry farm with 800 young chickens and 400 ducks, and not a single one was lost. (See the American Natural History, pages 229-30.)

Hawks That Should Be Destroyed. —There are two small, fierce, daring, swift-winged hawks both of which are so very destructive that they deserve to be shot whenever possible. They are Cooper's Hawk (Accipiter cooperi) and the Sharp-Shinned Hawk (A. velox). They are closely [Page 226] related, and look much alike, but the former has a rounded tail and the latter a square one. In killing them, please do not kill any other hawk by mistake; and if you do not positively recognize the bird, don't shoot.

Hawks That Need to Be Removed. —There are two small, fierce, daring, fast-flying hawks that are so destructive they should be shot whenever possible. They are the Cooper's Hawk (i) Cooper's Hawk and the Sharp-shinned Hawk (A. velox). They are closely [Page 226] related and look very similar, but the former has a rounded tail while the latter has a square one. When trying to kill them, please make sure not to accidentally kill any other hawk; and if you don’t positively recognize the bird, don’t shoot.

The Goshawk is a bad one, and so is the Peregrine Falcon, or Duck Hawk. Both deserve death, but they are so rare that we need not take them into account.

The Goshawk is a bad one, and so is the Peregrine Falcon, or Peregrine Falcon. Both deserve to die, but they are so rare that we don’t need to consider them.

Some of the hawks and owls are very destructive to song-birds, and members of the grouse family. In 159 stomachs of sharp-shinned hawks, 99 contained song-birds and woodpeckers. In 133 stomachs of Cooper's hawks, 34 contained poultry or game birds, and 52 contained other birds. The game birds included 8 quail, 1 ruffed grouse and 5 pigeons.

Some hawks and owls can be quite harmful to songbirds and members of the grouse family. In 159 stomachs of sharp-shinned hawks, 99 had songbirds and woodpeckers. In 133 stomachs of Cooper's hawks, 34 had poultry or game birds, and 52 had other birds. The game birds included 8 quail, 1 ruffed grouse, and 5 pigeons.

The Woodpeckers. [I] —These birds are the natural guardians of the trees. If we had enough of them, our forests would be fairly safe from insect pests. Of the six or seven North American species that are of the most importance to our forests, the Downy Woodpecker, (Dryobates pubescens) is accorded first rank. It is one of the smallest species. The contents of 140 stomachs consisted of 74 per cent insects, 25 per cent vegetable matter and 1 per cent sand. The insects were ants, beetles, bugs, flies, caterpillars, grasshoppers and a few spiders.

The Woodpeckers. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ —These birds are the natural protectors of trees. If we had enough of them, our forests would be pretty safe from insect pests. Of the six or seven North American species that are most important to our forests, the Downy Woodpecker, (Dryobates pubescens) is regarded as the top species. It is one of the smallest types. The contents of 140 stomachs were made up of 74 percent insects, 25 percent plant matter, and 1 percent sand. The insects included ants, beetles, bugs, flies, caterpillars, grasshoppers, and a few spiders.

GOLDEN-WINGED WOODPECKER

Golden-Winged Woodpecker

A Bird of Great Value to Orchards and Forests, now Rapidly Disappearing, Undoubtedly Through Slaughter as "Food"

A Bird That’s Highly Valuable to Orchards and Forests, Now Quickly Vanishing, Definitely Due to Hunting for "Food"

The Hairy Woodpecker, (Dryobates villosus) , a very close relation of the preceding species, is also small, and his food supply is as follows: insects, 68 per cent, vegetable matter 31, mineral 1.

The Hairy Woodpecker, (Dryobates villosus), a close relative of the previous species, is also small, and its food sources are as follows: insects 68 percent, plant matter 31 percent, minerals 1 percent.

The Golden-Winged Woodpecker, (Colaptes auratus) , is the largest and handsomest of all the woodpeckers that we really see in evidence. The Pileated is one of the largest, but we never see it. This bird makes a specialty of ants, of which it devours immense numbers. Its food is 56 per cent animal matter (three-fourths of which is ants), 39 per cent is vegetable matter, and 5 per cent mineral matter.

The Golden-Winged Woodpecker (Colaptes auratus), is the biggest and most beautiful woodpecker we actually encounter. The Pileated is one of the largest too, but we hardly ever see it. This bird mainly eats ants, consuming vast quantities. Its diet consists of 56 percent animal matter (three-fourths of which is ants), 39 percent vegetable matter, and 5 percent mineral matter.

The Red-Headed Woodpecker is a serious fruit-eater, and many complaints have been lodged against him. Exactly one-half his food supply consists of vegetable matter, chiefly wild berries, acorns, beechnuts, and the seeds of wild shrubs and weeds. We may infer that about one-tenth of his food, in summer and fall, consists of cultivated fruit and berries. His proportion of cultivated foods is entirely too small to justify any one in destroying this species.

The Red-Headed Woodpecker is a big fruit-eater, and there have been many complaints about him. Exactly half of his diet consists of plant matter, mainly wild berries, acorns, beechnuts, and seeds from wild shrubs and weeds. We can guess that about one-tenth of his food during summer and fall comes from cultivated fruit and berries. The amount of cultivated food he consumes is way too low to justify anyone harming this species.

In view of the prevalence of insect pests in the state of New York, I have spent hours in trying to devise a practical plan for making woodpeckers about ten times more numerous than they now are. Contributions to this problem will be thankfully received. Yes; we do put out pork fat and suet in winter, quantities of it; but I grieve to say that to-day in the Zoological Park there is not more than one woodpecker for every ten that were there twelve years ago. Where have they gone? Only one answer is possible. They have been shot and eaten, by the guerrillas of destruction.

Given the widespread issue of insect pests in New York, I’ve spent a lot of time trying to come up with a practical plan to significantly increase the number of woodpeckers. Any help with this issue would be greatly appreciated. Yes, we do put out pork fat and suet in winter—plenty of it—but sadly, I must say that today in the Zoo, there’s only one woodpecker for every ten that were around twelve years ago. Where have they all gone? The only answer is clear. They’ve been hunted and consumed by the forces of destruction.

Surely no man of intelligence needs to be told to protect woodpeckers to the utmost, and to feed them in winter. Nail up fat pork, or large chunks of suet, on the south sides of conspicuous trees, and encourage the woodpeckers, nuthatches, chickadees and titmice to remain in your woods through the long and dreary winter.

Surely no smart person needs to be reminded to protect woodpeckers as much as possible, and to feed them in winter. Hang up pieces of fatty pork or large chunks of suet on the sunny sides of noticeable trees, and encourage the woodpeckers, nuthatches, chickadees, and titmice to stay in your woods throughout the long and dreary winter.

The English Sparrow is a nuisance and a pest, because it drives away from the house and the orchard the house wren, bluebird, phoebe, purple martin and swallow, any one of which is more valuable to man than a thousand English sparrows. I never yet have seen one of the pest sparrows catch an insect, but Chief Forester Merkel says that he has seen one catching and eating small moths.

The English Sparrow is a problem and a nuisance because it pushes away the house wren, bluebird, phoebe, purple martin, and swallow from homes and orchards. Each of these birds is far more valuable than a thousand English sparrows. I've never seen one of these pesky sparrows catch an insect, but Chief Forester Merkel claims he has seen one catching and eating small moths.

There is one place in the country where English sparrows have not yet come; and whenever they do appear there, they will meet a hostile reception. I shall kill every one that comes,—for the sake of retaining the wrens, catbirds, phoebes and thrushes that now literally make home happy for my family. A good way to discourage sparrows is to shoot them en masse when they are feeding on road refuse, such as the white-throated, white-crowned and other sparrows never touch. Persistent destruction of their nests will check the nuisance.

There’s one place in the country where English sparrows haven’t shown up yet; and when they do arrive, they will definitely be unwelcome. I’ll make it a point to get rid of every one that comes—just to protect the wrens, catbirds, phoebes, and thrushes that currently bring so much joy to my family. A surefire way to discourage sparrows is to shoot them in groups while they’re feeding on scraps, like the white-throated, white-crowned, and other sparrows wouldn’t even touch. Constantly destroying their nests will help to eliminate the problem.

The Shore Birds. —Who is there who thinks of the shore-birds as being directly beneficial to man by reason of their food habits? I warrant not more than one man in every ten thousand! We think of them only as possible "food." The amount of actual cash value benefit that the shore-birds confer upon man through the destruction of bad things is, in comparison with the number of birds, enormous.

Shorebirds. —Who actually thinks of shore birds as being beneficial to people because of what they eat? I bet it’s not more than one in every ten thousand! We only see them as potential "food." The real cash value that shore birds provide to humans by getting rid of harmful things is, compared to their numbers, huge.

The Department of Agriculture never publishes and circulates anything that has already been published, no matter how valuable to the public at [Page 228] large. Our rules are different. Because I know that many of the people of our country need the information, I am going to reprint here, as an object lesson and a warning, the whole of the Biological Survey's valuable and timely circular No. 79, issued April 11, 1911, and written by Prof. W.L. McAtee. It should open the eyes of the American people to two things: the economic value of these birds, and the fact that they are everywhere far on the road toward extermination!

The Department of Agriculture never publishes or shares anything that’s already been published, no matter how beneficial it might be to the public at [Page 228] large. Our policies are different. Knowing that many people in our country need this information, I’m going to reprint here, as a lesson and a warning, the entire Biological Survey's important and timely circular No. 79, issued April 11, 1911, and written by Prof. W.L. McAtee. It should make the American public aware of two things: the economic value of these birds, and the fact that they are already well on the way to being exterminated!


Our Vanishing Shorebirds

Our Vanishing Shorebirds

By Prof. W.L. McAtee

By Prof. W.L. McAtee

The term shorebird is applied to a group of long-legged, slender-billed, and usually plainly colored birds belonging to the order Limicolae. More than sixty species of them occur in North America. True to their name they frequent the shores of all bodies of water, large and small, but many of them are equally at home on plains and prairies.

The term shorebird refers to a group of long-legged, slender-billed, and usually plain-colored birds that belong to the order Limicolae. There are over sixty species in North America. Like their name suggests, they are commonly found along the shores of various bodies of water, both large and small, but many also thrive in plains and prairies.

Throughout the eastern United States shorebirds are fast vanishing. While formerly numerous species swarmed along the Atlantic coast and in the prairie regions, many of them have been so reduced that extermination seems imminent. The black-bellied plover or beetlehead, which occurred along the Atlantic seaboard in great numbers years ago, is now seen only as a straggler. The golden plover, once exceedingly abundant east of the Great Plains, is now rare. Vast hordes of long-billed dowitchers formerly wintered in Louisiana; now they occur only in infrequent flocks of a half dozen or less. The Eskimo curlew within the last decade has probably been exterminated and the other curlews greatly reduced. In fact, all the larger species of shorebirds have suffered severely.

Throughout the eastern United States, shorebirds are rapidly disappearing. While many species used to be abundant along the Atlantic coast and in the prairies, their numbers have declined so drastically that extinction seems unavoidable. The black-bellied plover, which once roamed the Atlantic seaboard in large numbers, is now rarely seen. The golden plover, once very common east of the Great Plains, is now hard to find. Huge flocks of long-billed dowitchers used to winter in Louisiana; now, they are found in small groups of six or fewer. The Eskimo curlew has likely gone extinct in the past decade, and other curlew species have also seen significant declines. In fact, all larger shorebird species have been severely affected.

So adverse to shorebirds are present conditions that the wonder is that any escape. In both fall and spring they are shot along the whole route of their migration north and south. Their habit of decoying readily and persistently, coming back in flocks to the decoys again and again, in spite of murderous volleys, greatly lessens their chances of escape.

The current conditions are so detrimental to shorebirds that it’s surprising any manage to survive. During both fall and spring, they are hunted throughout their entire migration routes north and south. Their tendency to be easily lured and consistently return in flocks to the decoys, even after encountering deadly gunfire, greatly diminishes their chances of escaping.

The breeding grounds of some of the species in the United States and Canada have become greatly restricted by the extension of agriculture, and their winter ranges in South America have probably been restricted in the same way.

Breeding areas for some species in the United States and Canada have been significantly reduced due to agricultural expansion, and their winter habitats in South America have likely been restricted similarly.

Unfortunately, shorebirds lay fewer eggs than any of the other species generally termed game birds. They deposit only three or four eggs, and hatch only one brood yearly. Nor are they in any wise immune from the great mortality known to prevail among the smaller birds. Their eggs and young are constantly preyed upon during the breeding season by crows, gulls, and jaegers, and the far northern country to which so many of them resort to nest is subject to sudden cold storms, which kill many of the young. In the more temperate climate of the United States small birds, in general, do not bring up more than one young bird for every two eggs laid. Sometimes the proportion of loss is much greater, actual [Page 229] count revealing a destruction of 70 to 80 per cent of nests and eggs. Shorebirds, with sets of three or four eggs, probably do not on the average rear more than two young for each breeding pair.

Unfortunately, shorebirds lay fewer eggs than other species typically classified as game birds. They usually lay three or four eggs and raise just one brood each year. They are also not immune to the high mortality rates seen among smaller birds. Their eggs and young are constantly hunted during the breeding season by crows, gulls, and jaegers, and the far northern regions where many nest experience sudden cold storms that can kill many of the young. In the milder climate of the United States, small birds generally raise only one young bird for every two eggs laid. Sometimes, the loss ratio is even higher, with reports showing a destruction rate of 70 to 80 percent of nests and eggs. Shorebirds, with their clutches of three or four eggs, likely do not, on average, raise more than two young for each breeding pair.

It is not surprising, therefore, that birds of this family, with their limited powers of reproduction, melt away under the relentless warfare waged upon them. Until recent years shorebirds have had almost no protection. Thus, the species most in need of stringent protection have really had the least. No useful birds which lay only three or four eggs should be retained on the list of game birds. The shorebirds should be relieved from persecution, and if we desire to save from extermination a majority of the species, action must be prompt.

It’s not surprising that birds in this group, with their limited ability to reproduce, are disappearing under the constant threats they face. Until recently, shorebirds have had almost no protection. Consequently, the species that need strict protection the most have received the least. Any birds that only lay three or four eggs should not be classified as game birds. Shorebirds should be safeguarded, and if we want to prevent extinction for most species, we need to act quickly.

The protection of shorebirds need not be based solely on esthetic or sentimental grounds, for few groups of birds more thoroughly deserve protection from an economic standpoint. Shorebirds perform an important service by their inroads upon mosquitoes, some of which play so conspicuous a part in the dissemination of diseases. Thus, nine species are known to feed upon mosquitoes, and hundreds of the larvae or "wigglers" were found in several stomachs. Fifty-three per cent of the food of twenty-eight northern phalaropes from one locality consisted of mosquito larvae. The insects eaten include the salt-marsh mosquito (Aedes sollicitans), for the suppression of which the State of New Jersey has gone to great expense. The nine species of shorebirds known to eat mosquitoes are:

Protecting shorebirds doesn’t need to rely only on aesthetic or sentimental reasons; few groups of birds are more deserving of protection from an economic standpoint. Shorebirds provide a vital service by reducing mosquito populations, some of which significantly spread diseases. In fact, nine species are known to feed on mosquitoes, and numerous stomachs have been found to contain hundreds of mosquito larvae or "wigglers." Fifty-three percent of the diet of twenty-eight northern phalaropes from one location was made up of mosquito larvae. The insects they consume include the salt-marsh mosquito (Aedes sollicitans), for which the State of New Jersey has invested substantial resources for control. The nine species of shorebirds known to eat mosquitoes are:

Northern phalarope (Lobipes lobatus).
Semipalmated sandpiper (Ereunetes pusillus).
Wilson phalarope (Steganopus tricolor).
Stilt sandpiper (Micropalama himantopus).
Killdeer (Oxyechus vociferus).
Pectoral sandpiper (Pisobia maculata).
Semipalmated plover (Aegialitis semipalmata).
Baird sandpiper (Pisobia bairdi).
Least sandpiper (Pisobia minutilla).

Cattle and other live stock also are seriously molested by mosquitoes as well as by another set of pests, the horse-flies. Adults and larvae of these flies have been found in the stomachs of the dowitcher, the pectoral sandpiper, the hudsonian godwit, and the killdeer. Two species of shorebirds, the killdeer and upland plover, still further befriend cattle by devouring the North American fever tick.

Cattle and other livestock are also significantly bothered by mosquitoes as well as by another group of pests, horseflies. Adults and larvae of these flies have been found in the stomachs of dowitchers, pectoral sandpipers, hudsonian godwits, and killdeers. Two species of shorebirds, the killdeer and upland plover, further help cattle by eating the North American fever tick.

Among other fly larvae consumed are those of the crane flies (leather-jackets) devoured by the following species:

Among the other fly larvae consumed are those of the crane flies (leather-jackets), which are eaten by the following species:

Northern phalarope (Lobipes lobatus).
Pectoral sandpiper (Pisobia maculata).
Wilson phalarope (Steganopus tricolor).
Baird sandpiper (Pisobia bairdi).
Woodcock (Philohela minor).
Upland plover (Bartramia longicauda).
Jacksnipe (Gallinago delicata).
Killdeer (Oxyechus vociferus).

Crane-fly larvae are frequently seriously destructive locally in grass and wheat fields. Among their numerous bird enemies, shorebirds rank high.

Crane-fly larvae often cause significant damage in grass and wheat fields. Among their many bird predators, shorebirds are prominent.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__

The Killdeer Plover & The Jacksnipe

The Killdeer Plover & The Jacksnipe

TWO MEMBERS OF THE GROUP OF SHORE-BIRDS

TWO MEMBERS OF THE GROUP OF SHORE BIRDS

These, with 28 other species, destroy enormous numbers of locusts, grasshoppers, crane-fly larvae, mosquito larvae, army-worms, cut-worms, cotton-worms, boll-weevils, curculios, wire-worms and clover-leaf weevils. It is insane folly to shoot any birds that do such work! Many species of the shore-birds are rapidly being exterminated.

Along with 28 other species, these birds eliminate large numbers of locusts, grasshoppers, crane-fly larvae, mosquito larvae, armyworms, cutworms, cotton worms, boll weevils, curculios, wireworms, and clover leaf weevils. It’s sheer madness to shoot any birds that do this beneficial work! Many species of shorebirds are quickly being wiped out.

Another group of insects of which the shorebirds are very fond is grasshoppers. Severe local infestations of grasshoppers, frequently involving the destruction of many acres of corn, cotton, and other [Page 230] crops, are by no means exceptional. Aughey found twenty-three species of shorebirds feeding on Rocky Mountain locusts in Nebraska, some of them consuming large numbers, as shown below.

Another group of insects that shorebirds particularly enjoy is grasshoppers. Serious local outbreaks of grasshoppers, often leading to the destruction of many acres of corn, cotton, and other [Page 230] crops, are not uncommon. Aughey discovered twenty-three species of shorebirds feeding on Rocky Mountain locusts in Nebraska, with some consuming a significant amount, as shown below.

9 killdeer stomachs contained an average of 28 locusts each.
11 semipalmated plover stomachs contained an average of 38 locusts each.
16 mountain plover stomachs contained an average of 45 locusts each.
11 jacksnipe stomachs contained an average of 37 locusts each.
22 upland plover stomachs contained an average of 36 locusts each.
10 long-billed curlew stomachs contained an average of 48 locusts each.

Even under ordinary conditions grasshoppers are a staple food of many members of the shorebird family, and the following species are known to feed on them:

Even in normal situations, grasshoppers are a key food source for many shorebirds, and the following species are known to eat them:

Northern phalarope (Lobipes lobatus).
Avocet (Recurvirostra americana).
Black-necked stilt (Himantopus mexicanus).
Woodcock (Philohela minor).
Jacksnipe (Gallinago delicata).
Dowitcher (Macrorhamphus griseus).
Robin snipe (Tringa canutus).
White-rumped sandpiper (Pisobia fuscicollis).
Baird sandpiper (Pisobia bairdi).
Least sandpiper (Pisobia minutilla).
Buff-breasted sandpiper (Tryngites subruficollis).
Spotted sandpiper (Actitis macularia).
Long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus).
Black-bellied plover (Squatarola squatarola).
Golden plover (Charadrius dominicus).
Killdeer (Oxyechus vociferus).
Semipalmated plover (Aegialitis semipalmata).
Marbled godwit (Limosa fedoa).
[Page 231]
Ringed plover (Aegialitis hiaticula).
Yellowlegs (Totanus flavipes).
Mountain plover (Podasocys montanus).
Solitary sandpiper (Helodromas solitarius).
Turnstone (Arenaria interpres).
Upland plover (Bartramia longicauda).

Shorebirds are fond of other insect pests of forage and grain crops, including the army worm, which is known to be eaten by the killdeer and spotted sandpiper; also cutworms, among whose enemies are the avocet, woodcock, pectoral and Baird sandpipers, upland plover, and killdeer. Two caterpillar enemies of cotton, the cotton worm and the cotton cutworm, are eaten by the upland plover and killdeer. The latter bird feeds also on caterpillars of the genus Phlegethontius, which includes, the tobacco and tomato worms.

Shorebirds also hunt various insect pests that harm forage and grain crops, such as the army worm, which is eaten by the killdeer and spotted sandpiper. They also target cutworms, which are preyed on by the avocet, woodcock, pectoral and Baird sandpipers, upland plover, and killdeer. Two caterpillar pests of cotton, the cotton worm and the cotton cutworm, are consumed by the upland plover and killdeer as well. Additionally, the killdeer feeds on caterpillars from the genus Phlegethontius, including the tobacco and tomato worms.

The principal farm crops have many destructive beetle enemies also, and some of these are eagerly eaten by shorebirds. The boll weevil and clover-leaf weevil are eaten by the upland plover and killdeer, the rice weevil by the killdeer, the cowpea weevil by the upland plover, and the clover-root curculio by the following species of shorebirds:

Main farm crops have many harmful beetle enemies, and some of these are readily eaten by shorebirds. The boll weevil and clover-leaf weevil are consumed by the upland plover and killdeer, the rice weevil by the killdeer, the cowpea weevil by the upland plover, and the clover-root curculio by the following species of shorebirds:

Northern phalarope (Lobipes lobatus).
White-rumped sandpiper (Pisobia fuscicollis).
Pectoral sandpiper (Pisobia maculata).
Upland plover (Bartramia longicauda).
Baird sandpiper (Pisobia bairdi).
Killdeer (Oxyechus vociferus).

The last two eat also other weevils which attack cotton, grapes and sugar beets. Bill-bugs, which often do considerable damage to corn, seem to be favorite food of some of the shorebirds. They are eaten by the Wilson phalarope, avocet, black-necked stilt, pectoral sandpiper, killdeer, and upland plover. They are an important element of the latter bird's diet, and no fewer than eight species of them have been found in its food.

The last two also eat other weevils that target cotton, grapes, and sugar beets. Bill-bugs, which can significantly damage corn, appear to be a preferred meal for some shorebirds. They are eaten by the Wilson phalarope, avocet, black-necked stilt, pectoral sandpiper, killdeer, and upland plover. They are an essential part of the upland plover's diet, with no fewer than eight species of these weevils identified in its food.

Wireworms and their adult forms, click beetles, are devoured by the northern phalarope, woodcock, jacksnipe, pectoral sandpiper, killdeer, and upland plover. The last three feed also on the southern corn leaf-beetle and the last two upon the grapevine colaspis. Other shorebirds that eat leaf-beetles are the Wilson phalarope and dowitcher.

Wireworms and their adult forms, click beetles, are consumed by the northern phalarope, woodcock, jacksnipe, pectoral sandpiper, killdeer, and upland plover. The last three also feed on the southern corn leaf beetle, and the last two consume the grapevine colaspis. Other shorebirds that eat leaf beetles include the Wilson phalarope and dowitcher.

Crayfishes, which are a pest in rice and corn fields in the South and which injure levees, are favorite food of the black-necked stilt, and several other shorebirds feed upon them, notably the jacksnipe, robin snipe, spotted sandpiper, upland plover, and killdeer.

Crayfish, which are a nuisance in rice and corn fields in the South and damage levees, are a favorite food of the black-necked stilt, and several other shorebirds also eat them, especially the jacksnipe, robin snipe, spotted sandpiper, upland plover, and killdeer.

Thus it is evident that shorebirds render important aid by devouring the enemies of farm crops and in other ways, and their services are appreciated by those who have observed the birds in the field. Thus W.A. Clark, of Corpus Christi, Tex., reports that upland plovers are industrious in following the plow and in eating the grubs that destroy garden stuff, corn, and cotton crops. H.W. Tinkham, of Fall River, Mass., says of the spotted sandpiper: "Three pairs nested in a young orchard behind my house and adjacent to my garden. I did not see them once go to the shore for food (shore about 1,500 feet away), but I did see them many times make faithful search of my garden for cutworms, [Page 232] spotted squash bugs, and green flies. Cutworms and cabbage worms were their special prey. After the young could fly, they still kept at work in my garden, and showed no inclination to go to the shore until about August 15th. They and a flock of quails just over the wall helped me wonderfully."

It’s clear that shorebirds provide significant help by eating pests that harm farm crops, and their contributions are recognized by those who have observed them in action. W.A. Clark from Corpus Christi, Texas, reports that upland plovers are diligent in following the plow and consuming grubs that damage garden produce, corn, and cotton crops. H.W. Tinkham from Fall River, Massachusetts, shares about the spotted sandpiper: "Three pairs nested in a young orchard behind my house and next to my garden. I didn't see them once go to the shore for food (the shore was about 1,500 feet away), but I saw them many times thoroughly searching my garden for cutworms, [Page 232] spotted squash bugs, and green flies. Cutworms and cabbage worms were their favorite targets. Even after the young could fly, they continued working in my garden and showed no interest in going to the shore until around August 15th. They, along with a flock of quails just over the wall, were a huge help to me."

In the uncultivated parts of their range also, shorebirds search out and destroy many creatures that are detrimental to man's interest. Several species prey upon the predaceous diving beetles (Dytiscidae), which are a nuisance in fish hatcheries and which destroy many insects, the natural food of fishes. The birds now known to take these beetles are:

In the wild areas of their habitat, shorebirds seek out and eliminate many creatures that harm human interests. Several species target predaceous diving beetles (Dytiscidae), which are a problem in fish hatcheries and destroy various insects, the natural food for fish. The birds currently recognized to eat these beetles are:

Northern phalarope (Lobipes lobatus).
Dowitcher (Macrorhamphus griseus).
Wilson phalarope (Steganopus tricolor).
Robin snipe (Tringa canutus).
Avocet (Recurvirostra americana).
Pectoral sandpiper (Pisobia maculata).
Black-necked stilt (Himantopus mexicanus).
Red-backed sandpiper (Pelidna alpina sakhalina).
Jacksnipe (Gallinago delicata).
Killdeer (Oxyechus vociferus).

Large numbers of marine worms of the genus Nereis, which prey upon oysters, are eaten by shorebirds. These worms are common on both the Atlantic and Gulf coasts and are eaten by shorebirds wherever they occur. It is not uncommon to find that from 100 to 250 of them have been eaten at one meal. The birds known to feed upon them are:

Large numbers of marine worms from the genus Nereis, which feed on oysters, are consumed by shorebirds. These worms are found along both the Atlantic and Gulf coasts and are eaten by shorebirds wherever they are present. It’s not unusual for shorebirds to eat between 100 to 250 of them in one meal. The birds known to feed on these worms are:

Northern phalarope (Lobipes lobatus).
White-rumped sandpiper (Pisobia fuscicollis).
Dowitcher (Macrorhamphus griseus).
Stilt sandpiper (Micropalama himantopus).
Red-backed sandpiper (Pelidna alpina sakhalina).
Robin snipe (Tringa canutus).
Purple sandpiper (Arquatella maritima).
Killdeer (Oxyechus vociferus).

The economic record of the shorebirds deserves nothing but praise. These birds injure no crop, but on the contrary feed upon many of the worst enemies of agriculture. It is worth recalling that their diet includes such pests as the Rocky Mountain locust and other injurious grasshoppers, the army worm, cutworms, cabbage worms, cotton worm, cotton cutworm, boll weevil, clover leaf weevil, clover root curculio, rice weevil, corn bill-bugs, wireworms, corn leaf-beetles, cucumber beetles, white grubs, and such foes of stock as the Texas fever tick, horseflies, and mosquitoes. Their warfare on crayfishes must not be overlooked, nor must we forget the more personal debt of gratitude we owe them for preying upon mosquitoes. They are the most important bird enemies of these pests known to us.

The economic benefits of shorebirds deserve high praise. These birds don’t harm crops; instead, they feed on many of agriculture's worst enemies. It’s important to remember that their diet includes pests like the Rocky Mountain locust and other harmful grasshoppers, armyworms, cutworms, cabbage worms, cotton worms, cotton cutworms, boll weevils, clover leaf weevils, clover root curculios, rice weevils, corn billbugs, wireworms, corn leaf beetles, cucumber beetles, white grubs, and pests that threaten livestock like the Texas fever tick, horseflies, and mosquitoes. We shouldn’t overlook their impact on crayfish, nor can we forget the personal gratitude we owe them for preying on mosquitoes. They are the most significant avian predators of these pests we know of.

Shorebirds have been hunted until only a remnant of their once vast numbers is left. Their limited powers of reproduction, coupled with the natural vicissitudes of the breeding period, make their increase slow, and peculiarly expose them to danger of extermination.

Shorebirds have been hunted to the point that only a small fraction of their once vast populations remain. Their low reproductive capabilities, along with the unpredictable challenges during mating season, make population growth slow and particularly place them at risk of extinction.

In the way of protection a beginning has been made, and a continuous close season until 1915 has been established for the following birds: The killdeer, in Massachusetts and Louisiana; the upland plover, in Massachusetts, and Vermont; and the piping plover in Massachusetts. But, considering the needs and value of these birds, this modicum of protection is small indeed.

Fortunately, some protections have been established, with a continuous closed season until 1915 set for the following birds: killdeer in Massachusetts and Louisiana; upland plover in Massachusetts and Vermont; and piping plover in Massachusetts. However, given the needs and value of these birds, this level of protection is quite minimal.

[Page 233]

The above-named species are not the only ones that should be exempt from persecution, for all the shorebirds of the United States are in great need of better protection. They should be protected, first, to save them from the danger of extermination, and, second, because of their economic importance. So great, indeed, is their economic value, that their retention on the game list and their destruction by sportsmen is a serious loss to agriculture.—(End of the circular.)

The species mentioned above aren’t the only ones that deserve protection; all shorebirds in the United States truly need better safeguards. They require protection, first, to prevent extinction, and second, because they hold significant economic value. In fact, their economic worth is so high that allowing sportsmen to hunt them while keeping them on the game list poses a serious loss to agriculture. —(End of the circular.)


The following appeared in the Zoological Society Bulletin, for January, 1909, from Richard Walter Tomalin, of Sydney, N.S.W.:

The following was published in the Zoological Society Bulletin, for January 1909, by Richard Walter Tomalin, from Sydney, N.S.W.:

"In the subdistricts of Robertson and Kangaloon in the Illawarra district of New South Wales, what ten years ago was a waving mass of English cocksfoot and rye grass, which had been put in gradually as the dense vine scrub was felled and burnt off, is now a barren desert, and nine families out of every ten which were renting properties have been compelled to leave the district and take up other lands. This is through the grubs having eaten out the grass by the roots. Ploughing proved to be useless, as the grubs ate out the grass just the same. Whilst there recently I was informed that it took three years from the time the grubs were first seen until to-day, to accomplish this complete devastation;. in other words, three years ago the grubs began work in the beautiful country of green mountains and running streams.

"In the suburbs of Robertson and Kangaloon in the Illawarra region of New South Wales, what used to be a lush area of English cocksfoot and ryegrass—planted after the thick vine scrub was cleared and burned—has now turned into a barren wasteland. Ninety percent of families renting in the area have had to leave and find new places to live. This is because grubs are destroying the grass by eating its roots. Plowing hasn't helped since the grubs continue to kill the grass. When I visited recently, I discovered that it took three years from the first sighting of the grubs to reach this total devastation; in other words, three years ago is when the grubs began their destruction of what was once a beautiful landscape of green mountains and flowing streams."

"The birds had all been ruthlessly shot and destroyed in that district, and I was amazed at the absence of bird life. The two sub-districts I have mentioned have an area of about thirty square miles, and form a table-land about 1200 feet above sea level."

"The birds had all been brutally hunted and wiped out in that area, and I was shocked by the lack of bird life. The two areas I mentioned cover about thirty square miles and form a plateau that's about 1200 feet above sea level."

The same kind of common sense that teaches men to go in when it rains, and keep out of fiery furnaces, teaches us that as a business proposition it is to man's interest to protect the birds. Make them plentiful and keep them so. When we strike the birds, we hurt ourselves. The protection of our insect-eating and seed-eating birds is a cash proposition,—protect or pay.

The same kind of common sense that tells people to go inside when it rains and stay away from fire teaches us that it's in our best interest to protect the birds. We need to keep them abundant. When we harm the birds, we’re actually harming ourselves. Protecting our insect-eating and seed-eating birds is a financial matter—protect them or pay the consequences.

Were I a farmer, no gun ever should be fired on my premises at any bird save the English sparrow and the three bad hawks. Any man who would kill my friend Bob White I would treat as an enemy. The man who would shoot and eat any of the song-birds, woodpeckers, or shorebirds that worked for me, I would surely molest.

Were I a farmer, no gun would ever be fired on my land at any bird except for the English sparrow and the three harmful hawks. Any person who would kill my friend Bob White I would consider an enemy. Anyone who would shoot and eat any of the songbirds, woodpeckers, or shorebirds that helped me, I would definitely confront.

Every farmer should post every foot of his lands, cultivated and not cultivated. The farmer who does not do so is his own enemy; and he needs a guardian.

Every farmer should clearly mark every part of their land, whether it's cultivated or not. The farmer who doesn't do this is only hurting themselves; they’re in need of protection.

At this stage of wild life extermination, it is impossible to make our bird-protection laws too strict, or too far-reaching. The remnant of our birds should be protected, with clubs and guns if necessary. All our shore birds should be accorded a ten-year close season. Don't ask the gunners whether they will agree to it or not. Of course they will not agree to it,—never! But our duty is clear,—to go ahead and do it!

At this point in the extermination of wildlife, we can't make our bird protection laws too strict or too extensive. The few birds we have left should be protected, even with clubs and guns if needed. All of our shorebirds should have a ten-year closed season. Don’t ask the hunters if they will agree to it or not. Of course, they won’t agree to it—never! But our responsibility is clear—let’s move forward and do it!


[Page 234]
CHAPTER XXIV
GAME AND AGRICULTURE; AND DEER AS A FOOD SUPPLY

As a state and county asset, the white-tailed deer contains possibilities that as yet seem to be ignored by the American people as a whole. It is quite time to consider that persistent, prolific and toothsome animal.

As a state and county resource, the white-tailed deer holds potential that seems to be overlooked by the American public as a whole. It's definitely time to think about that persistent, abundant, and tasty creature.

The proposition that large herds of horned game can not becomingly roam at will over farms and vineyards worth one hundred dollars per acre, affords little room for argument. Generally speaking, there is but one country in the world that breaks this well-nigh universal rule; and that country is India. On the plains between and adjacent to the Ganges and the Jumna, for two thousand years herds of black-buck, or sasin antelope, have roamed over cultivated fields so thickly garnished with human beings that to-day the rifle-shooting sportsman stands in hourly peril of bagging a five-hundred-rupee native every time he fires at an antelope.

The idea that large herds of horned animals can't just roam freely over farms and vineyards worth a hundred dollars per acre leaves little room for debate. Generally, there's only one country in the world that breaks this almost universal rule, and that country is India. For two thousand years, herds of black-buck, or sasin antelope, have wandered through cultivated fields in the plains between the Ganges and the Jumna, where there are so many people that today, a rifle-shooting sportsman risks hitting a five-hundred-rupee native every time he takes a shot at an antelope.

Wherever rich agricultural lands exist, the big game must give way,—from those lands. To-day the bison could not survive in Iowa, eastern Nebraska or eastern Kansas, any longer than a Shawnee Indian would last on the Bowery. It was foredoomed that the elk, deer, bear and wild turkey should vanish from the rich farming regions of the East and the middle West.

Wherever there are fertile agricultural lands, the big game has to move on—from those lands. Today, the bison couldn't survive in Iowa, eastern Nebraska, or eastern Kansas any longer than a Shawnee Indian would last on the Bowery. It was inevitable that the elk, deer, bear, and wild turkey would disappear from the fertile farming areas of the East and the Midwest.

To-day in British East Africa lions are being hunted with dogs and shot wholesale, because they are a pest to the settlers and to the surviving herds of big game. At the same time, the settlers who are striving to wrest the fertile plains of B.E.A, from the domain of savagery declare that the African buffalo, the zebra, the kongoni and the elephant are public nuisances that must be suppressed by the rifle.

Today in British East Africa, lions are hunted with dogs and shot in large numbers because they are a nuisance to the settlers and the remaining herds of big game. Meanwhile, the settlers who are working to reclaim the fertile plains of B.E.A. from the wild declare that the African buffalo, zebra, kongoni, and elephant are public nuisances that must be dealt with using rifles.

Even the most ardent friend of wild life must admit that when a settler has laboriously fenced his fields, and plowed and sowed, only to have his whole crop ruined in one night by a herd of fence-breaking zebras, the event is sufficient to abrade the nerves of the party most in interest. While I take no stock in stories of dozens of "rogue" elephants that require treatment with the rifle, and of grown men being imperiled by savage gazelles, we admit that there are times when wild animals can make nuisances of themselves. Let us consider that subject now.

Even the biggest wildlife enthusiast has to agree that when a settler has worked hard to fence his fields, plow, and sow, only to have his entire crop destroyed in one night by a herd of fence-breaking zebras, it’s enough to strain the nerves of those most affected. Although I don’t believe in tales of numerous “rogue” elephants needing to be dealt with by a rifle, or grown men being threatened by aggressive gazelles, we acknowledge that there are times when wild animals can become a nuisance. Let’s look into that topic now.

Wild Animal Nuisances. —Complaints have come to me, at various times, of great destruction of lambs by eagles; of trout by blue herons; of crops (on Long Island) by deer; of pears destroyed by birds, and of valuable park trees by beavers that chop down trees not wisely but too well. I do not, however, include in this category any cherries eaten by robins, or orioles, or jays; for they are of too small importance to consider in this court.

Wild Animal Problems. —I’ve received complaints over time about eagles causing significant losses of lambs; blue herons depleting trout; deer damaging crops (on Long Island); birds ruining pears; and beavers destroying valuable park trees by cutting them down excessively. However, I do not consider cherries eaten by robins, orioles, or jays to be part of this issue, as they are too minor to address in this forum.

A FOOD SUPPLY OF WHITE-TAILED DEER

A FOOD SUPPLY OF WHITE-TAILED DEER

The Killing of the Does was Wrong

The killing of the does was wrong.

To meet the legitimate demands for the abatement of unbearable wild-animal nuisances, I recommend the enactment of a law similar to Section 158 of the Game laws of New York, which provides for the safe and legitimate abatement of unbearable wild creatures as follows:

To address the valid requests for getting rid of unbearable wild animal nuisances, I suggest creating a law similar to Section 158 of New York’s Game Laws, which outlines the safe and proper removal of bothersome wild animals as follows:

Section 158. Authority to Capture Birds and Mammals. If any species of birds protected under section two hundred and nineteen of this article, or mammals protected by law, become harmful to private or public property at any time, in any location, the commission has the authority to either direct a game protector or issue a permit to any resident of the state to capture those birds or mammals and handle them as the commission determines. This permit will expire four months after the date it is issued.

This measure should be adopted by every state that is troubled by too many, or too aggressive, wild mammals or birds.

This measure should be adopted by every state that is facing issues with too many or overly aggressive wild mammals or birds.

But to return to the subject of big game and farming. We do not complain of the disappearance of the bison, elk, deer and bear from the farms of the United States and Canada. The passing of the big game from all such regions follows the advance of real civilization, just so surely and certainly as night follows day.

But to get back to the topic of big game and farming. We don’t lament the fact that bison, elk, deer, and bears have vanished from the farms of the United States and Canada. The decline of big game in these areas coincides with the progress of true civilization, just as surely and inevitably as night follows day.

But this vast land of ours is not wholly composed of rich agricultural lands; not by any means. There are millions of acres of forest lands, good, bad and indifferent, worth from nothing per acre up to one hundred [Page 236] dollars or more. There are millions of acres of rocky, brush-covered mountains and hills, wholly unsuited to agriculture, or even horticulture. There are other millions of acres of arid plains and arboreal deserts, on which nothing but thirst-proof animals can live and thrive. The South contains vast pine forests and cypress swamps, millions of acres of them, of which the average northerner knows less than nothing.

But this huge country of ours isn't just made up of rich farmland; not at all. There are millions of acres of forests, some good, some bad, and some in between, worth anywhere from nothing to over a hundred [Page 236] dollars per acre. There are millions of acres of rocky, brush-covered mountains and hills that are completely unsuitable for farming or even gardening. There are also millions of acres of dry plains and tree-less deserts where only tough animals can survive and thrive. The South has vast pine forests and cypress swamps, millions of acres of them, of which the average person from the North knows absolutely nothing.

We can not stop long enough to look it up, but from the green color on our national map that betokens the forest reserves, and from our own personal knowledge of the deserts, swamps, barrens and rocks that we have seen, we make the estimate that fully one-third of the total area of the United States is incapable of supporting the husbandman who depends for his existence upon tillage of the soil. People may talk and write about "dry farming" all they please, but I wish to observe that from Dry-Farming to Success is a long shot, with many limbs in the way. When it rains sufficiently, dry farming is a success; but otherwise it is not; and we heartily wish it were otherwise.

We can’t take the time to look it up, but from the green areas on our national map indicating forest reserves, and from what we know about the deserts, swamps, barren lands, and rocks we’ve seen, we estimate that about one-third of the total land area in the United States can’t support farmers who rely on cultivating the soil for their livelihood. People can talk and write about "dry farming" as much as they want, but I want to point out that going from Dry Farming to Success is a long journey, with many obstacles along the way. When there’s enough rain, dry farming works; but when there isn’t, it doesn’t; and we really wish it were different.

The logical conclusion of our land that is utterly unfit for agriculture is a great area of land available for occupancy by valuable wild animals. Every year the people of the United States are wasting uncountable millions of pounds of venison, because we are neglecting our opportunities for producing it practically without cost. Imagine for a moment bestowing upon land owners the ability to stock with white-tailed and Indian sambar deer all the wild lands of the United States that are suitable for those species, and permitting only bucks over one year of age to be shot. With the does even reasonably protected, the numerical results in annual pounds of good edible flesh fairly challenges the imagination.

The obvious conclusion about our land that's completely unsuitable for farming is that it could be a huge area for valuable wildlife. Every year, people in the United States waste millions of pounds of venison because we're overlooking the chance to produce it almost for free. Just think for a moment about giving landowners the ability to stock white-tailed and Indian sambar deer on all the wild lands in the U.S. that are suitable for these species, and allowing only bucks older than a year to be hunted. With does reasonably protected, the amount of good edible meat produced annually would be truly astonishing.

About six years ago, Mr. C.C. Worthington's deer, in his fenced park, at Shawnee-on-Delaware, Pennsylvania, became so numerous and so burdensome that he opened his fences and permitted about one thousand head to go free.

About six years ago, Mr. C.C. Worthington's deer in his fenced park at Shawnee-on-Delaware, Pennsylvania, became so numerous and overwhelming that he opened the fences and let about one thousand of them roam free.

We are losing each year a very large and valuable asset in the intangible form of a million hardy deer that we might have raised but did not! Our vast domains of wooded mountains, hills and valleys lie practically untenanted by big game, save in a few exceptional spots. We lose because we are lawless. We lose because we are too improvident to conserve large forms of wild life unless we are compelled to do so by the stern edict of the law! The law-breakers, the game-hogs, the conscienceless doe-and-fawn slayers are everywhere! Ten per cent of all the grown men now in the United States are to-day poachers, thieves and law-breakers, or else they are liable to become so to-morrow. If you doubt it, try risking your new umbrella unprotected in the next mixed company of one hundred men that you encounter, in such a situation that it will be easy to "get away" with it.

We’re losing a huge and valuable asset every year in the shape of a million tough deer that we could have raised but didn’t! Our vast stretches of forests, mountains, hills, and valleys are basically empty of big game, except for a few rare spots. We’re losing out because we act unlawfully. We’re losing because we’re too careless to protect large wildlife unless the law forces us to! The lawbreakers, greedy hunters, and heartless doe-and-fawn killers are everywhere! Ten percent of all adult men in the United States today are poachers, thieves, and lawbreakers, or they might become one tomorrow. If you don’t believe it, try leaving your new umbrella unguarded in a group of a hundred men, in a situation where it’d be easy for someone to just take it.

We could raise two million deer each year on our empty wild lands; but without fences it would take half a million real game-wardens, on duty [Page 237] from dawn until dark, to protect them from destructive slaughter. At present our land of liberty contains only 9,354 game wardens. [J] The states that contain the greatest areas of wild lands naturally lack in population and in tax funds, and not one such state can afford to put into the field even half enough salaried game wardens to really protect her game from surreptitious slaughter. The surplus of "personal liberty" in this liberty-cursed land is a curse to the big game. The average frontiersman never will admit the divine right of kings, but he does ardently believe in the divine right of settlers,—to reach out and take any of the products of Nature that they happen to fancy.

We could raise two million deer each year on our empty wild lands; but without fences, it would take half a million actual game wardens on duty [Page 237] from dawn until dusk to protect them from destructive hunting. Right now, our land of freedom has only 9,354 game wardens. [J] The states with the largest areas of wild lands typically have low populations and limited tax revenue, and not a single one of those states can afford to hire even half the number of game wardens needed to truly protect their wildlife from illegal hunting. The excess of "personal freedom" in this freedom-cursed land is a curse to big game. The average frontiersman will never admit the divine right of kings, but he strongly believes in the divine right of settlers—to reach out and take whatever natural resources they want.

Wild Meat As A Food Supply. —We hear much these days about the high cost of living, but thus far we have made no move to mend the situation. With coal going straight up to ten dollars per ton, beef going up to fifteen dollars per hundred on the hoof and wheat and hay going-up—heaven alone knows where, it is time for all Americans who are not rich to arouse and take thought for the morrow. What are we going to do about it? The tariff on the coarser necessities of life is now booked to come down; but what about the fresh meat supply?

Wild Game as a Food Source. —These days, we hear a lot about the rising cost of living, but so far, we haven't taken any action to improve the situation. With coal prices skyrocketing to ten dollars per ton, beef reaching fifteen dollars per hundredweight, and wheat and hay also increasing—who knows how high—it's time for all Americans who aren't wealthy to wake up and think about the future. What are we going to do about it? The tariff on basic necessities is set to decrease, but what about the fresh meat supply?

I desire to point out that between Bangor and San Diego and from Key West to Bellingham, our country contains millions of acres of wild, practically uninhabited forests, rough foot-hills, bad-lands and mountains that could produce two million deer each year, without deducting $50,000 a year from the wealth of the country. I grant that in the total number of deer that would be necessary to produce two million deer per annum, the farms situated on the edges of forests, and actually within the forests, would suffer somewhat from the depredations of those deer. As I will presently show by documentary records, every one of those individual damages that exceeds two dollars in value could be compensated in cash, and afterward leave on the credit side of the deer account an enormous annual balance.

I want to highlight that between Bangor and San Diego and from Key West to Bellingham, our country has millions of acres of wild, almost uninhabited forests, rugged foothills, rough terrain, and mountains that could support the hunting of two million deer each year, without costing the country $50,000 annually. I acknowledge that the total number of deer needed to produce two million each year would cause some damage to farms located on the edges of these forests and even within them. However, as I will soon demonstrate with documentary evidence, any individual damages over two dollars in value could be compensated in cash, leaving a significant annual surplus in the deer account afterward.

Stop for a moment, you enterprising and restless men and women who travel all over the United States, and think of the illimitable miles of unbroken forest that you have looked upon from your Pullman windows in the East, in the South, in the West and in southern Canada. Recall the wooded mountains of the Appalachian system, the White Mountain region, the pine forests of the Atlantic Coast and the Gulf States, the forests of Tennessee, Arkansas and southern Missouri; of northern Minnesota, and every state of the Rocky Mountain region. Then, think of the silent and untouched forests of the Pacific Coast and tell me whether you think five million deer scattered through all those forests would make any visible impression upon them. That would be only about twenty-five times as many as are there now! I think the forests would not be over populated; and they would produce two million killable deer each year!

Stop for a moment, you driven and restless men and women who travel all over the United States, and think of the endless miles of untouched forest that you’ve seen from your Pullman windows in the East, South, West, and southern Canada. Remember the wooded mountains of the Appalachian Mountains, the White Mountains, the pine forests of the Atlantic Coast and the Gulf States, the forests of Tennessee, Arkansas, and southern Missouri; of northern Minnesota, and every state in the Rocky Mountain region. Then, consider the silent and unspoiled forests of the Pacific Coast and tell me if you really think five million deer scattered throughout all those forests would make any noticeable impact. That would be about twenty-five times as many as are there now! I believe the forests wouldn’t be overpopulated; and they would produce two million deer that could be hunted each year!

Last year, 11,000 deer were forced down out of their hiding places in [Page 238] the Rocky Mountains, and were killed in Montana. Even the natives had not dreamed there were so many available; and they were slaughtered not wisely but too ill. It is not right that six members of one family should "hog" twelve deer in one season. At present no deer supply can stand such slaughter.

Last year, 11,000 deer were driven out of their hiding spots in [Page 238] the Rocky Mountains and were killed in Montana. Even the locals couldn’t have imagined there were that many available; and they were killed recklessly. It’s not fair that six members of one family should "hog" twelve deer in a single season. Right now, no deer population can survive that kind of killing.

Assuming that the people of the United States could be educated into the idea of so conserving deer that they could draw two million head per year from the general stock, what would it be worth?

Assuming that the people of the United States could be educated to conserve deer in a way that they could sustainably harvest two million annually from the overall population, what would that be worth?

It is not very difficult to estimate the value of a deer, when the whole animal can be utilized. In various portions of the United States, deer vary in size, but I shall take all this into account, and try to strike a fair average. In some sections, where deer are large and heavy, a full-grown buck is easily worth twenty-five dollars. Let him who doubts it, try to replace those generous pounds of flesh with purchased beef and mutton and veal, and see how far twenty-five dollars will go toward it. Every man who is a householder knows full well how little meat one dollar will buy at this time.

It’s not too hard to figure out the value of a deer when you can use the whole animal. In different parts of the United States, deer vary in size, but I'll take all that into account and aim for a fair average. In some areas, where deer are large and heavy, an adult buck is easily worth twenty-five dollars. Whoever doubts this should try to replace those generous pounds of meat with store-bought beef, mutton, and veal and see how far twenty-five dollars will get them. Every homeowner knows how little meat one dollar buys these days.

I think that throughout the United States as a whole every full-grown deer, male or female contains on an average ten dollars worth of good meat. I know of one large preserve which annually sells its surplus of deer at that price, wholesale, to dealers; and in New York City (doubtless in many other cities, also) venison often has sold in the market at one dollar per pound!

I believe that across the entire United States, every adult deer, whether male or female, typically has around ten dollars' worth of quality meat. I know of one large reserve that sells its excess deer wholesale to dealers at that price every year, and in New York City (and likely in many other cities too), venison often sells in the market for one dollar per pound!

Two million deer at $10 each mean $20,000,000. The licenses for the killing of two million deer should cost one million men one dollar each; and that would pay 1,666 new game wardens each fifty dollars per month, all the year round. The damages that would need to be paid to farmers, on account of crops injured by deer, would be so small that each county could take care of its own cases, from its own treasury, as is done in the State of Vermont.

Two million deer at $10 each equals $20,000,000. The licenses for hunting two million deer should cost one million people one dollar each; that would fund 1,666 new game wardens at fifty dollars a month, all year long. The damages that farmers would need to cover due to crops being damaged by deer would be minimal enough that each county could handle its own claims from its own budget, just like they do in the State of Vermont.

There are certain essentials to the realization of a dream of two million deer per year that are absolutely required. They are neither obscure nor impossible.

There are some key things needed to achieve the dream of two million deer per year that are absolutely necessary. They are neither hidden nor unfeasible.

Each state and each county proposing to stock its vacant woods with deer must resolutely educate its own people in the necessity of playing fair about the killing of deer, and giving every man and every deer a square deal. This is not impossible! Not as a general thing, even though it may be so in some specially lawless communities. If the leading men of the state and the county will take this matter seriously in hand, it can be done in two years' time. The American people are not insensible to appeals to reason, when those appeals are made by their own "home folks." The governors, senators, assemblymen, judges, mayors and justices of the peace could, if they would, make a campaign of education and appeal that would result in the creation of an immense volume of free wild food in every state that possesses wild lands.

Each state and county that wants to stock its empty forests with deer needs to seriously educate its residents about the importance of fair hunting practices, ensuring that everyone—both people and deer—gets a fair chance. This is not impossible! Generally speaking, even if it may be the case in some particularly lawless areas. If the key leaders of the state and county take this issue seriously, it can be accomplished within two years. The American public responds to reasonable arguments, especially when they come from their own community members. Governors, senators, assembly members, judges, mayors, and justices of the peace could, if they choose, launch an educational campaign that would result in creating a significant amount of free wild food in every state with wild lands.

When the shoe of Necessity pinches the People hard enough, remember the possibilities in deer.

When the pressure of Necessity becomes too intense for the People, remember the potential in deer.

From the "American Natural History"

From "American Natural History"

WHITE-TAILED DEER

White-tailed deer

If Honestly and Intelligently Conserved, this Species could be made to Produce on our Wild Lands Two Million Deer per annum, as a new Food Supply

If managed honestly and intelligently, this species could produce two million deer per year on our wild lands, serving as a new food supply.

The best wild animal to furnish a serious food supply is the white-tailed deer. This is because of its persistence and fertility. The elk is too large for general use. An elk carcass can not be carried on a horse; it is impossible to get a sled or a wagon to where it lies; and so, fully half of it usually is wasted! The mule deer is good for the Rocky Mountains, and can live where the white-tail can not; but it is too easy to shoot! The Columbian black-tail is the natural species for the forests of the Pacific states; but it is a trifle small in size.

The best wild animal for providing a reliable food supply is the white-tailed deer. This is due to its ability to survive and reproduce effectively. The elk is too big for regular use. You can't transport an elk carcass on a horse, and it's impossible to get a sled or wagon to the location where it lies, which means that typically half of it goes to waste! The mule deer is great for the Rocky Mountains and can survive in areas where the white-tail cannot; however, it is too easy to shoot! The Columbian black-tail is the ideal species for the forests of the Pacific states, but it's a bit small in size.

The Example Of Vermont. —In order to show that all the above is not based on empty theory,—regarding the stocking of forests with deer, their wonderful powers of increase, and the practical handling of the damage question,—let us take the experience and the fine example of Vermont.

Vermont's Example. —To demonstrate that all the above is not just empty theory—about stocking forests with deer, their amazing ability to multiply, and practical ways to deal with the damage issue—let's look at the experience and the great example of Vermont.

In April, 1875, a few sportsmen of Rutland, of whom the late Henry W. Cheney was one, procured in the Adirondacks thirteen white-tailed deer, six bucks and seven does. These were liberated in a forest six miles from Rutland, and beyond being protected from slaughter, they were left to shift for themselves. They increased, slowly at first, then rapidly, and by 1897, they had become so numerous that it seemed right to have a short annual open season, and kill a few. From first to last, many of those deer have been killed contrary to law. In 1904-5, it was known that 294 head were destroyed in that way; and undoubtedly there were others that were not reported.

In April 1875, a few hunters from Rutland, including the late Henry W. Cheney, brought thirteen white-tailed deer from the Adirondacks—six bucks and seven does. They released them in a forest six miles from Rutland, where they were protected from being hunted and left to fend for themselves. Their population grew slowly at first, then rapidly, and by 1897, they had multiplied to such an extent that it seemed appropriate to have a brief annual hunting season and take a few. Unfortunately, many of these deer were killed illegally. In 1904-05, it was reported that 294 were taken unlawfully, and there were likely more that went unreported.


Account Of Deer Killed In Vermont, Of Record Since Killing Began, In 1897
From John W. Titcomb, State Game Commissioner, Lyndonville, Vt., Aug. 23, 1912
Year By Hunters, Legally By Hunters, Illegally By Dogs Wounded Deer Killed By Railroad Trains By Various Accidents Average Weight (lbs.) Gross Weight (lbs.)
1897* 103 47
1898 131 30 40 3
1899 90
1900 123
1901 211
1902 403 81 50 13 14 171 68,747
1903 753 199 190 142,829
1904 541
1905 497 163 74 22 18 17 198
1906 634 200 127,193
1907 991 287 208 62 31 21 196 134,353
1908 2,208 207 457,585
1909 4,597 381 168 69 24 72 155 716,358
* First open season after deer restored to state in 1875.

Damages To Crops By Deer. —For several years past, the various counties [Page 241] of Vermont have been paying farmers for damages inflicted upon their crops by deer. Clearly, it is more just that counties should settle these damages than that they should be paid from the state treasury, because the counties paying damages have large compensation in the value of the deer killed each year. The hunting appears to be open to all persons who hold licenses from the state.

Deer Damage to Crops. —For several years, the various counties [Page 241] in Vermont have been compensating farmers for damages caused to their crops by deer. It's clearly more fair for counties to cover these damages than for the money to come from the state treasury, since the counties that pay for damages also benefit from the value of the deer hunted each year. Hunting seems to be open to anyone who has a state-issued license.

In order that the public at large may know the cost of the Vermont system, I offer the following digest compiled from the last biennial report of the State Fish and Game Commissioner:

To inform the public about the cost of the Vermont system, I present the following summary taken from the most recent biennial report of the State Fish and Game Commissioner:


Damages Paid For Deer Depredations In Vermont During Two Years
Total damages paid from June 8, 1908, to June 22, 1910 $4,865.98
Total number of claims paid 311
Total number of claims under $5 80
Number between $5 and $10, inclusive 102
Number over $25 and under $51 23
Number between $50 and $100 11
Number in excess of $100 4
Number in excess of $200 1
Largest claim paid $326.50

Value Of White-Tailed Deer. —Having noted the fact that in two years (1908-9), the people of Vermont paid out $4,865 in compensation for damages inflicted by deer, it is of interest to determine whether that money was wisely expended. In other words, did it pay?

Value of White-Tailed Deer. —Having observed that in two years (1908-9), the people of Vermont paid a total of $4,865 in compensation for damages caused by deer, it’s worth looking into whether that money was spent wisely. In other words, was it worth it?

We have seen that in the years 1908 and 9, the people of Vermont killed, legally and illegally, and converted to use, 7,186 deer. This does not include the deer killed by dogs and by accidents.

We have seen that in the years 1908 and 1909, the people of Vermont killed, both legally and illegally, and used 7,186 deer. This doesn't include the deer that were killed by dogs or in accidents.

Regarding the value of a full-grown deer, it must be remembered that much depends upon the locality of the carcass. In New York or Pittsburg or Chicago, a whole deer is worth, at wholesale, at least twenty-five dollars. In Vermont, where deer are plentiful, they are worth a less sum. I think that fifteen dollars would be a fair figure,—at least low enough!

Regarding the value of a fully-grown deer, it's important to remember that it largely depends on the location of the carcass. In New York, Pittsburgh, or Chicago, a whole deer is worth, at wholesale, at least twenty-five dollars. In Vermont, where deer are more common, they are worth less. I think that fifteen dollars would be a fair price—at least it’s low enough!

Even when computed at fifteen dollars per carcass, those deer were worth to the people of Vermont $107,790. It would seem, therefore, that the soundness of Vermont's policy leaves no room for argument; and we hope that other states, and also private individuals, will profit by Vermont's very successful experiment in bringing back the deer to her forests, and in increasing the food supply of her people.

Even when calculated at fifteen dollars per carcass, those deer were worth $107,790 to the people of Vermont. Therefore, it seems that Vermont's policy is clearly sound; we hope that other states and private individuals will benefit from Vermont's successful efforts to restore deer populations in its forests and boost the food supply for its residents.

Killing Female Deer. —To say one word on this subject which might by any possibility be construed as favoring it, is like juggling with a lighted torch over a barrel of gunpowder. Already, in Pennsylvania at least one gentleman has appeared anxious to represent me as favoring the killing of does, which in nine hundred and ninety-nine cases out of every thousand I distinctly and emphatically do not. The slaughter of female hoofed game animals is necessarily destructive and reprehensible, and not one man out of every ten thousand in this country ever will see the place and time wherein the opposite is true.

Culling Female Deer. —Saying anything that could be interpreted as supporting this issue is like playing with fire near a barrel of gunpowder. Already, in Pennsylvania, at least one person has tried to portray me as in favor of killing does, which in almost every case I absolutely do not support. Killing female hoofed game animals is inherently harmful and wrong, and very few people in this country will ever understand when it might be justifiable.

At present there are just two places in America, and I think only two, wherein there exists the slightest exception on this point. The state of Vermont is becoming overstocked with deer, and the females have in some counties (not in all), become so tame and destructive in orchards, gardens and farm crops as to constitute a great annoyance. For this reason, the experiment is being made of permitting does to be killed under license, until their number is somewhat reduced.

Right now, there are only two places in America, and I believe just those two, where there’s even a slight exception to this issue. The state of Vermont is becoming overrun with deer, and in some counties (not all), the females have become so tame and damaging to orchards, gardens, and crops that they’re really becoming a nuisance. Because of this, there's an experiment underway to allow licensed hunting of does in order to decrease their population a bit.

The first returns from this trial have now come in, from the county game wardens of Vermont to the state game warden. Mr. John W. Titcomb. I will quote the gist of the opinion of each.

The initial results from this trial have now arrived, from the county game wardens of Vermont to the state game warden, Mr. John W. Titcomb. I'll summarize the main points of each opinion.

The State Commissioner says: "This law should remain in force at least until there is some indication of a decrease in the number of deer." Warden W.H. Taft (Addison County) says: "The killing of does I believe did away with a good many of these tame deer that cause most of the damage to farmers' crops." Harry Chase (Bennington County) says the doe-killing law is "a good law, and I sincerely trust it will not be repealed." Warden Hayward of Rutland County says: "The majority of the farmers in this county are in favor of repealing the doe law.... A great many does and young deer (almost fawns) were killed in this county during the hunting season of 1909." R.W. Wheeler, of Rutland County says: "Have the doe law repealed! We don't need it!" H.J. Parcher of Washington County finds that the does did more damage to the crops than the bucks, and he thinks the doe law is "a just one." R.L. Frost, of Windham County, judicially concludes that "the law allowing does to be killed should remain in force one or two seasons more." C.S Parker, of Orleans County, says his county is not overstocked with deer, and he favors a special act for his county, to protect females.

The State Commissioner says: "This law should stay in effect at least until we see some signs of a decrease in the number of deer." Warden W.H. Taft (Addison County) states: "The killing of does has led to a significant reduction in the number of those tame deer that do the most damage to farmers' crops." Harry Chase (Bennington County) believes the doe-killing law is "a good law, and I really hope it won't be repealed." Warden Hayward of Rutland County mentions: "Most farmers in this county want to get rid of the doe law.... A lot of does and young deer (almost fawns) were killed in this county during the hunting season of 1909." R.W. Wheeler from Rutland County exclaims: "Repeal the doe law! We don't need it!" H.J. Parcher of Washington County finds that does cause more damage to crops than bucks, and he feels the doe law is "a fair one." R.L. Frost from Windham County concludes that "the law allowing the killing of does should stay in effect for one or two more seasons." C.S. Parker from Orleans County states that his county is not overrun with deer, and he supports a special act for his county to protect females.

A summary of the testimony of the wardens is easily made. When deer are too plentiful, and the over-tame does become a public nuisance too great to be endured, the number should be reduced by regular shooting in the open season; but,

A summary of the testimony of the wardens is easy to make. When deer are too numerous, and the overly tame does become a public nuisance that's too much to handle, the number should be reduced by regular hunting during the open season; but,

As soon as the proper balance of deer life has been restored, protect the does once more.

As soon as the right balance of deer population has been restored, protect the does again.

The pursuit of this policy is safe and sane, provided it can be wrought out without the influence of selfishness, and reckless disregard for the rights of the next generation. On the whole, its handling is like playing with fire, and I think there are very, very few states on this earth wherein it would be wise or safe to try it. As a wise friend once remarked to me, "Give some men a hinch, and they'll always try to take a hell." In Vermont, however, the situation is kept so well in hand we may be sure that at the right moment the law providing for the decrease of the number of does will be repealed.

The pursuit of this policy is safe and sensible, as long as it’s executed without the influence of selfishness and a careless disregard for the rights of future generations. Overall, it’s a bit like playing with fire, and I believe there are very few places on this planet where it would be wise or safe to attempt it. As a wise friend once said to me, "Give some men a hint, and they'll always try to take a mile." In Vermont, however, the situation is managed so well that we can be confident that at the right time, the law to reduce the number of does will be repealed.

Hippopotami And Antelopes. —Last year a bill was introduced in the lower House of Congress proposing to provide funds for the introduction into certain southern states of various animals from Africa, especially hippopotami and African antelopes. The former were proposed partly for [Page 243] the purpose of ridding navigation of the water hyacinths that now are choking many of the streams of Louisiana and Mississippi. The antelopes were to be acclimatized as a food supply for the people at large.

Hippos and antelopes. —Last year, a bill was introduced in the House of Representatives that suggested allocating funds to introduce various animals from Africa into certain southern states, particularly hippos and African antelopes. The hippos were partly proposed to help eliminate the water hyacinths that are currently clogging many of the rivers in Louisiana and Mississippi. The antelopes were intended to be acclimatized as a food source for the general population.

This measure well illustrates the prevailing disposition of the American people to-day,—to ignore and destroy their own valuable natural stock of wild birds and mammals, and when they have completed their war of extermination, reach out to foreign countries for foreign species. Instead of preserving the deer of the South, the South reaches out for the utterly impossible antelopes of Africa, and the preposterous hippopotamus. The North joyously exterminates her quail and ruffed grouse, and goes to Europe for the Hungarian partridge. That partridge is a failure here, and I am heartily glad of it, on the ground that the exterminators of our native species do not deserve success in their efforts to displace our finest native species with others from abroad.

This action clearly shows the current attitude of the American people today—to overlook and eliminate their own valuable native wildlife, including wild birds and mammals. After finishing their campaign of extermination, they then look to other countries for foreign species. Instead of protecting the deer in the South, they pursue the completely unrealistic antelopes from Africa and the ridiculous hippopotamus. The North happily wipes out its quail and ruffed grouse, only to bring in the Hungarian partridge from Europe. That partridge doesn’t thrive here, and I am really glad about it, because those who seek to replace our native species with foreign ones don't deserve to succeed.

The hippo-antelope proposition is a climax of absurdity, in proposing the replacing of valuable native game with impossible foreign species.

The hippo-antelope idea is the peak of absurdity, suggesting we replace valuable native animals with unrealistic foreign species.


[Page 244]
CHAPTER XXV
LAW AND SENTIMENT AS FACTORS IN PRESERVATION

There is grave danger that through ignorance of the true character of about 80 per cent of the men and boys who shoot wild creatures, a great wrong will be done the latter. Let us not make a fatal mistake.

There is serious danger that due to the misunderstanding of the true character of about 80 percent of the men and boys who hunt wild animals, a great wrong will be done to them. Let’s not make a life-altering mistake.

After more than thirty years of observation among all kinds of sportsmen, hunters and gunners, I am convinced that it is utterly futile and deadly dangerous to rely on humane, high-class sentiment to diminish the slaughter of wild things by game-hogs and pot-hunters.

After more than thirty years of watching all kinds of athletes, hunters, and shooters, I'm convinced that it's completely pointless and extremely dangerous to depend on kind-hearted, noble feelings to reduce the killing of wild animals by greedy hunters and poachers.

In some respects, the term "game-hog" is a rude, rough word; but it is needed in the English language, and it has come to stay. It is a disagreeable term, but it was brought into use to apply to a class of very disagreeable persons.

In some ways, the term "game-hog" is a harsh and unrefined word; however, it's necessary in English, and it's here to stay. It's an unpleasant term, but it was coined to refer to a group of very unpleasant people.

A "game-hog" is a hunter of game who knows no such thing as sentiment or conscience in the killing of game, so long as he keeps within the limit of the law. Regardless of the scarcity of game, or of its hard struggle for existence, he will kill right up to the bag limit every day that he goes out, provided it is possible to do so. He uses the "law" as a salve for the spot where his conscience should be. He will shoot with any machine gun, or gun of big calibre, in every way that the law allows, and he knows no such thing as giving the game a square deal. He brags of his big bags of game, and he loves to be photographed with a wagon-load of dead birds as a background. He believes in automatic and pump guns, spring shooting, longer open seasons and "more game." He is quite content to shoot half tame ducks in a club preserve as they fly between coop and pond, whenever he secures an opportunity. He will gladly sell his game whenever he can do so without being found out, and sometimes when he is.

A "game-hog" is a type of hunter who has no feelings or morals when it comes to killing animals, as long as he stays within the legal limits. No matter how scarce the game is or how hard it fights to survive, he will hunt up to the legal limit every time he goes out, as long as he can. He uses the "law" to ease his conscience. He’ll shoot with any machine gun or large-caliber firearm, following the law to the letter, and he has no concept of fair play when it comes to hunting. He boasts about his large catches and loves being photographed with a truckload of dead birds behind him. He supports automatic and pump-action guns, longer hunting seasons, and the idea of "more game." He’s perfectly fine with shooting semi-tame ducks in a hunting club’s preserve as they fly between their coop and the pond, seizing every chance he gets. He will happily sell his game whenever he can get away with it, even if it means being caught sometimes.

Often a true sportsman drifts without realizing it into some one way of the confirmed game-hog; but the moment he is made to realize his position, he changes his course and his standing. The game-hog is impervious to argument. You can shame a horse away from his oats more easily than you can shame him from doing "what the Law allows."

Often a genuine athlete unknowingly slides into the behavior of a typical game-hog; however, once he becomes aware of his situation, he adjusts his behavior and reputation. The game-hog doesn't respond to reason. You can drive a horse away from its feed more easily than you can persuade him to stop doing "what the Law permits."

There are hundreds of thousands of gentlemen and gentlewomen who never once have come in touch with real cloven-footed game-hogs, who do not understand the species at all, and do not recognize its ear-marks. Thousands of such persons will tell you: "In my opinion, the best way to save the wild life is to educate the people!" I have heard that, many, many times.

There are hundreds of thousands of men and women who have never encountered real game-hogs, who don’t understand the species at all, and don’t recognize its distinctive traits. Thousands of these people will tell you: "I think the best way to protect wildlife is to educate the people!" I’ve heard that many, many times.

For right-hearted people, a little law is quite sufficient; and the best [Page 245] people need none at all! But the game-hogs are different. For them, the strict letter of the law, backed up by a strong-arm squad, is the only controlling influence that they recognize. To them it is necessary to say: "You shall!" and "You shall not!"

For good-hearted people, a little bit of law is more than enough; and the best [Page 245] people don’t need any at all! But the game-hogs are different. For them, the strict letter of the law, enforced by a strong-arm squad, is the only thing that controls them. To them, it’s necessary to say: “You must!” and “You must not!”

Only yesterday the latest game-hog case was related to me by a game-protector from Kansas. Into a certain county of southern Kansas, from which the prairie-chicken had been totally gone for a dozen years or more, a pair of those birds entered, settled down and nested. Their coming was to many habitants a joyous event. "Now," said the People, "we will care for these birds, and they will multiply, and presently the county will be restocked."

Only yesterday, a game protector from Kansas shared the latest case of a game hog with me. In a county in southern Kansas, where the prairie chicken had been completely absent for over a dozen years, a pair of those birds showed up, settled down, and nested. Their arrival was a cause for celebration among many residents. "Now," said the people, "we'll take care of these birds, they'll multiply, and soon the county will be stocked again."

But Ahab came! Two men from another county, calling themselves sportsmen but not entitled to that name, heard of those birds, and resolved to "get them." They waited until the young were just leaving the nest: and they went down and camped near by. On the first day they killed the two parent birds and half the flock of young birds, and the next day they got all the rest.

But Ahab showed up! Two guys from another county, claiming to be hunters but really not deserving of that title, heard about those birds and decided to "catch them." They waited until the young ones were just leaving the nest and set up camp nearby. On the first day, they killed the two parent birds and half of the young birds, and the next day, they got all the rest.

But there is a sequel to this story. One of those men was a dealer in guns and ammunition; and when his customers heard what he had done, "they simply put him out of business, by refusing to trade with him any more." He is now washing dirty dishes in a restaurant; but at heart he is a game-hog, just the same.

But there’s a continuation to this story. One of those guys was a dealer in guns and ammo; and when his customers found out what he’d done, "they just cut him off by refusing to do business with him anymore." Now he’s washing dirty dishes in a restaurant; but deep down, he’s still a greedy person, just the same.

Near Bridgeport, Connecticut, a gentleman of my acquaintance owns a fine estate which is adorned with a trout stream and a superfine trout pond. Once he invited a business man of Bridgeport to be his guest, and fish for trout in his pond. On that guest, during a visit of three days all the finest forms of hospitality were bestowed.

Near Bridgeport, Connecticut, a gentleman I know owns a beautiful estate featuring a trout stream and an exceptional trout pond. He once invited a businessman from Bridgeport to stay as his guest and fish for trout in his pond. During the three-day visit, the guest received all the best forms of hospitality.

Two weeks later, my friend's game-warden caught that guest, early on a Sunday morning, poaching on the trout-pond, and spoiled his carefully arranged get-away.

Two weeks later, my friend's game warden caught that guest early on a Sunday morning, poaching in the trout pond, and ruined his carefully planned getaway.

In his book "Saddle and Camp in the Rockies," Mr. Dillon Wallace tells a story of a man from New York who in the mountains of Colorado deliberately corrupted his guides with money or other influences, shot mountain sheep in midsummer, and "got away with it."

In his book "Saddle and Camp in the Rockies," Mr. Dillon Wallace tells a story about a man from New York who, in the mountains of Colorado, intentionally bribed his guides with money or other benefits, hunted mountain sheep in midsummer, and "got away with it."

In northern Minnesota, George E. Wood has been having a hand-to-hand fight with the worst community of game-hogs and alien-born poachers of which I have heard. There appears to be no game law that they do not systematically violate. The killers seem determined to annihilate the last head of game, in spite of fines and imprisonments. The foreigners are absolutely uncontrollable. The latest feature of the war is the discovery of a tannery in the woods, where the hides of illegally-slaughtered deer and moose are dressed. Apparently the only kind of a law that will save the game of northern Minnesota is one that will totally disarm the entire population.

In northern Minnesota, George E. Wood has been engaged in a serious struggle with the worst group of poachers and game-hogs I've ever heard of. It seems like there’s no game law they don't regularly break. These poachers are determined to wipe out the last of the wildlife, regardless of fines and jail time. The outsiders are completely out of control. The latest development in this battle is the discovery of a tannery in the woods, where they're processing the hides of illegally killed deer and moose. It seems that the only law that could protect the wildlife in northern Minnesota would be one that completely disarms the entire population.

In Pennsylvania, there exists an association which was formed for the [Page 246] express purpose of fighting the State Game Commission, preventing the enactment of a hunter's license law and repealing the law against the killing of female deer and hornless fawns. The continued existence of that organization on that basis would be a standing disgrace to the fair name of Pennsylvania. I think, however, that that organization was founded on secret selfish purposes, and that ere long the general body of members will awaken to a realizing sense of their position, and range themselves in support of the excellent policies of the commission.

In Pennsylvania, there's an association created specifically to oppose the State Game Commission, block the creation of a hunter's license law, and overturn the law against killing female deer and hornless fawns. The ongoing existence of that organization on those grounds would be a lasting shame for the reputation of Pennsylvania. However, I believe that this organization was established for self-serving reasons, and soon the majority of its members will come to understand their situation and support the commission's commendable policies.

A Pot-Hunter is a man or boy who kills game as a business, for the money that can be derived from its sale, or other use. Such men have the same feelings as butchers. From their point of view, they can see no reason why all the game in the world should not be killed and marketed. Like the feather-dealers, they wish to get out of the wild life all the money there is in it; that is all. Left to themselves, with open markets they would soon exterminate the land fauna of the habitable portions of the globe.

A trophy hunter is a man or boy who hunts animals primarily for profit, whether from selling them or other uses. These individuals have the same mindset as butchers. They believe there’s no reason why all the wildlife in the world shouldn't be killed and sold. Similar to feather dealers, they aim to extract as much money as possible from the wild; that’s all that matters to them. If left unchecked and with open markets, they would quickly wipe out the land animals in livable areas around the globe.

No one can "educate" such people. For the gunners, game-hogs and pot-hunters, there is no check, save specific laws that sternly and amply safeguard the rights of the wild creatures that can not make laws for themselves.

No one can "educate" these people. For the shooters, greedy hunters, and those just looking to fill their bags, there are no limits, except for specific laws that strongly and adequately protect the rights of the wild animals that can't make laws for themselves.

Nor can anyone educate the heartless woman of fashion who is determined to wear aigrettes as long as her money can buy them. The best women of the world have already been educated on the bird-millinery subject, and they are already against the use of the gaudy badges of slaughter and extermination. But in the great cities of the world there are thousands of women who are at heart as cruel as Salome herself, and whose vicious tastes can be curbed only by the strong hand of the law. "Sentiment" for wild birds is not in them.

Nor can anyone teach the heartless woman of fashion who is set on wearing plumes as long as she can afford them. The best women in the world have already been educated about the bird-millinery issue, and they oppose the use of these gaudy symbols of slaughter and extermination. But in the major cities around the world, there are thousands of women who are as cruel at heart as Salome herself, and whose vicious tastes can only be controlled by the strong hand of the law. "Sentiment" for wild birds is not a part of their makeup.

Because of the vicious and heartless elements among men and women, we say, Give us far-reaching, iron-bound LAWS for the protection of wild life, and plenty of courageous men to enforce them.

Because of the cruel and merciless individuals among us, we say, Give us comprehensive, strict LAWS for the protection of wildlife, and many brave people to enforce them.


[Page 247]
CHAPTER XXVI
THE ARMY OF THE DEFENSE

It now seems that the friends of wild life who themselves are not on the firing-line should be afforded some definite information regarding the Army of the Defense, and its strength and weakness. It is an interesting subject, but the limitations of space will not permit an extended treatment.

It now seems that wildlife enthusiasts who are not directly involved should be given clear information about the Defense Army, including its strengths and weaknesses. It’s an intriguing topic, but space limitations won't allow for an in-depth discussion.

Over the world at large, I think the active Destroyers outnumber the active Defenders of wild life at least in the ratio of 500 to 1; and the money available to the Destroyers is to the funds of the Defenders as 500 is to 1. The average big-game sportsman cheerfully expends from $500 to $1,000 on a hunting trip, but resents the suggestion that he should subscribe from $50 to $100 for wild life preservation. If he puts down $10, he thinks he has done a Big Thing. Worse than this, I am forced to believe that at least 75 per cent of the big-game sportsmen of the world never have contributed one dollar in money, or one hour of effort, to that cause. But there are exceptions; and I can name at least fifty sportsmen who have subscribed $100 each to campaign funds, and some who have given as high as $1,000.

Across the globe, I believe the active Destroyers outnumber the active Defenders of wildlife by at least 500 to 1; and the funds available to the Destroyers are about 500 times greater than those of the Defenders. The average big-game hunter happily spends between $500 and $1,000 on a hunting trip, but resents the idea of contributing $50 to $100 for wildlife conservation. If he donates $10, he feels he's done something significant. Even worse, I have to believe that at least 75 percent of big-game hunters worldwide have never contributed a dollar or even an hour of their time to that cause. However, there are exceptions; I can name at least fifty hunters who have each donated $100 to campaign funds, and some who have given as much as $1,000.

Once I sat down beside a financially rich slaughterer of game, and asked him to subscribe a sum of real money in behalf of a very important campaign. I needed funds very much; and I explained, exhorted and besought. I pointed out his duty—to give back something in return for all the game slaughter that he had enjoyed. For ten long minutes he stood fire without flinching, and without once opening his lips to speak. He made no answer no argument, no defense and finally he never gave up one cent.

Once I sat down next to a wealthy game hunter and asked him to contribute a significant amount of money for a very important campaign. I desperately needed funds, so I explained the situation, urged him, and pleaded. I pointed out his responsibility—to give back something in return for all the game he had enjoyed. For ten long minutes, he stood there without flinching and without saying a word. He offered no response, no argument, no defense, and in the end, he didn’t give a single cent.

Wherever the English language is spoken, from Tasmania to Scotland, and from Porto Rico to the Philippines, the spirit of wild life protection exists. Elsewhere there is much more to be said on this point. To all cosmopolitan sportsmen, the British "Blue Book" on game protection, the annual reports of the two great protective societies of London, and the annual "Progress" report of the U.S. Department of Agriculture are reassuring and comforting. It is good to know that Uganda maintains a Department of Game Protection (A.L. Butler, Superintendent), that so good a man as Maj. J. Stevenson-Hamilton is in control of protection in the Transvaal, and that even the native State of Kashmir officially recognizes the need to protect the Remnant.

Wherever English is spoken, from Tasmania to Scotland, and from Puerto Rico to the Philippines, the spirit of wildlife protection is alive and well. There’s much more to discuss on this topic elsewhere. For all global sports enthusiasts, the British "Blue Book" on game protection, the annual reports from the two major protective societies in London, and the yearly "Progress" report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture are both reassuring and comforting. It’s encouraging to know that Uganda has a Department of Game Protection (A.L. Butler, Superintendent), that a great person like Maj. J. Stevenson-Hamilton oversees protection in the Transvaal, and that even the native State of Kashmir officially acknowledges the importance of protecting the Remnant.

There are of course many parts of the world in which game laws and limits to slaughter are quite unknown: all of which is entirely wrong, and in need of quick correction. No state or nation can be accounted [Page 248] wholly civilized that fails to recognize the necessity to protect wild life. I am tempted to make a list of the states and nations that were at latest advices destitute of game laws and game protectors, but I fear to do injustice through lack of the latest information. However, the time has come to search out delinquents, and hold up to each one a mirror that will reflect its shortcomings.

There are definitely many places in the world where game laws and limits on hunting don’t exist at all: this is completely wrong and needs to be fixed quickly. No state or nation can be considered [Page 248] truly civilized if it doesn’t recognize the need to protect wildlife. I'm tempted to create a list of the states and nations that, according to the latest updates, lack game laws and protectors, but I'm concerned I might misrepresent them due to outdated information. However, the time has come to identify those who are falling short and hold up a mirror to show them their shortcomings.

Naturally, we are most interested in our own contingent of the Army of the Defense.

Naturally, we're most interested in our own unit of the Defense Army.

The United States Government. —To-day the feeling in Congress, toward the conservation of wild life and forests is admirable. Both houses are fully awake to the necessity of saving while there is yet something to be saved. The people of the United States may be assured that the national government is active and sympathetic in the prosecution of such conservation measures as it might justly be expected to promote. For example, during the past five years we have seen Congress take favorable action on the following important causes, nearly every one of which cost money:

U.S. Government. —Today, the sentiment in Congress regarding the preservation of wildlife and forests is commendable. Both chambers are fully aware of the importance of saving what we still can. The people of the United States can be confident that the national government is actively and genuinely engaged in supporting reasonable conservation initiatives. For instance, over the past five years, we have seen Congress take positive steps on the following significant issues, almost all of which require funding:

  • The saving of the American bison, in four National ranges.
  • The creation of fifty-eight bird refuges.
  • The creation of five great game preserves.
  • The saving of the elk in Jackson Hole.
  • The protection of the fur seal.
  • The protection of the wild life of Alaska.

There are many active friends of wild life who confidently expect to see this fine list gloriously rounded out by the passage in 1913 of an ideal bill for the federal protection of all migratory birds. To name the friends of wild life in Congress would require the printing of a list of at least two hundred names, and a history of the rise and progress of wild life conservation by the national government would fill a volume. Such a volume would be highly desirable.

There are many enthusiastic supporters of wildlife who confidently expect that this impressive list will be successfully completed with the passing of an ideal bill in 1913 for the federal protection of all migratory birds. Naming the wildlife supporters in Congress would require printing a list of at least two hundred names, and a history of the rise and progress of wildlife conservation by the national government would fill a book. Such a book would be highly valuable.

When the story of the national government's part in wild-life protection is finally written, it will be found that while he was president, Theodore Roosevelt made a record in that field that is indeed enough to make a reign illustrious. He aided every wild-life cause that lay within the bounds of possibility, and he gave the vanishing birds and mammals the benefit of every doubt. He helped to establish three national bison herds, four national game preserves, fifty-three federal bird refuges, and to enact the Alaska game laws of 1902 and 1907.

When the story of the national government's role in wildlife protection is finally told, it will show that during his presidency, Teddy Roosevelt made a significant impact in that area that surely makes his time in office noteworthy. He supported every wildlife initiative that was feasible, and he advocated for the endangered birds and mammals, always giving them the benefit of the doubt. He contributed to the establishment of three national bison herds, four national game preserves, fifty-three federal bird refuges, and the passage of the Alaska game laws in 1902 and 1907.

It was in 1904 that the national government elected to accept its share of the white man's burden and enter actively into the practical business of wild life protection. This special work, originally undertaken and down to the present vigorously carried on by Dr. Theodore S. Palmer, has considerably changed the working policy of the Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture, and greatly influenced game protection throughout the states. The game protection work of that bureau is alone worth to the people of this country at least twenty times more per annum than the entire annual cost of the Bureau. Next to the splendid services of Dr. Palmer, all over the United States, one great value of the Bureau is found in the fact-and-figure ammunition that it prepares and distributes for general use in assaults on the citadels of Ignorance and Greed. The publications of the Bureau are of great practical value to the people of the United States.

It was in 1904 that the national government decided to take on its part of the white man's burden and become actively involved in wildlife protection. This important work, originally started and still strongly led by Dr. Theodore S. Palmer, has significantly changed the operating policies of the Biological Survey within the Department of Agriculture and has greatly impacted game protection across the states. The game protection efforts of that bureau are worth at least twenty times more to the people of this country each year than the total annual cost of the Bureau itself. After Dr. Palmer's outstanding contributions throughout the United States, a major value of the Bureau lies in the fact-and-figure resources it prepares and distributes for general use in fighting Ignorance and Greed. The Bureau's publications are extremely valuable to the people of the United States.

MADISON GRANT

MADISON GRANT

Secretary and Chairman Executive Committee, New York Zoological Society

Secretary and Chairman of the Executive Committee, New York Zoological Society

HENRY FAIRFIELD OSBORN

HENRY FAIRFIELD OSBORN

President, New York Zoological Society

President, New York Zoo Society

JOHN F. LACEY

JOHN F. LACEY

Ex-Member of Congress; Author of the "Lacey Bird Law"

Ex-Congress member; Author of the "Lacey Bird Law"

WILLIAM DUTCHER

WILL DUTCHER

Founder and President, National Association of Audubon Societies

Founder and President, National Association of Audubon Societies

NOTABLE PROTECTORS OF WILD LIFE (I)

NOTABLE WILDLIFE PROTECTORS (I)

Dr. Palmer is a man of incalculable value to the cause of protection. No call for advice is too small to receive his immediate attention, no fight is too hot and no danger-point too remote to keep him from the fray. Wherever the Army of Destruction is making a particularly dangerous fight to repeal good laws and turn back the wheels of progress, there will he be found. As the warfare grows more intense, Congress may find it necessary to enlarge the fighting force of the Biological Survey.

Dr. Palmer is an incredibly valuable asset to the protection cause. No request for advice is too minor to get his immediate attention, no battle is too intense, and no danger zone is too far for him to stay out of the fight. Wherever the Army of Destruction is waging a particularly dangerous campaign to overturn good laws and reverse progress, that’s where he’ll be. As the conflict escalates, Congress might need to expand the fighting force of the Biological Survey.

The work that has been done by the Bureau in determining the economic value or lack of value of our most important species of insectivorous birds, has been worth millions to the agricultural interests of the United States. Through it we know where we stand. The reasons why we need to strive for protection can be expressed in figures and percentages; and it seems to me that they leave the American people no option but to protect!

The work done by the Bureau in assessing the economic value, or lack thereof, of our most important insect-eating birds has been worth millions to the agricultural interests of the United States. Thanks to this, we know where we stand. The reasons we need to push for protection can be shown in numbers and percentages; and it seems to me that they leave the American people with no choice but to protect!

State Game Commissions. —Each of our states, and each province of Canada, maintains either a State Game Commission of several persons, one Commissioner, or a State Game Warden. All such officers are officially charged with the duty of looking after the general welfare of the game and other wild life of their respective states. Theoretically one of the chief duties of a State Game Commission is to initiate new legislative bills that are necessary, and advocate their translation into law. The official standing of most game commissioners is such that they can successfully do this. In 1909 Governor Hughes of New York went so far as to let it be known that he would sign no new game bill that did not meet the approval of State Game Commissioner James S. Whipple. As a general working principle, and quite aside from Mr. Whipple, that was wrong; because even a State game commissioner is not necessarily infallible, or always on the right side of every wild-life question.

State gaming commissions. —Each state and province in Canada has either a State Game Commission made up of several people, one Commissioner, or a State Game Warden. These officials are responsible for ensuring the overall welfare of the game and other wildlife in their states. One of the main roles of a State Game Commission is to propose new legislation that is needed and push for it to become law. Most game commissioners have the official authority to do this successfully. In 1909, Governor Hughes of New York stated that he would not approve any new game bill that did not have the backing of State Game Commissioner James S. Whipple. Generally speaking, and aside from Mr. Whipple, that approach was flawed, because even a State game commissioner is not infallible or always correct on every wildlife issue.

As a rule, state commissioners and state wardens are keenly alive to the needs of their states in new game protective legislation, and a large percentage of the best existing laws are due to their initiative. Often, however, their usefulness is limited by the trammels of public office, and there are times when such officers can not be too aggressive without the risk of arousing hostile influences, and handicapping their own departmental work. For this reason, it is often advisable that bills which propose great and drastic reforms, and which are likely to become storm-centers, should originate outside the Commissioner's office, and be pushed by men who are perfectly free to abide the fortunes of open warfare. It should be distinctly understood, however, that lobbying in behalf of wild-life measures is an important part of the legitimate duty of every state game commissioner, and is a most honorable calling.

As a general rule, state commissioners and wardens are very aware of their states' needs for new game protection laws, and a significant portion of the best current laws exist because of their initiative. However, their effectiveness is often limited by the constraints of public office, and at times, these officials cannot be too assertive without risking backlash and disrupting their own departmental work. For this reason, it is often advisable for bills proposing major reforms, which may become major points of contention, to be introduced outside the Commissioner's office and to be championed by individuals who are free to engage in open conflict. It should be clearly understood, though, that advocating for wildlife legislation is an important part of the legitimate duty of every state game commissioner, and it is a highly honorable profession.

EDWARD HOWE FORBUSH

Edward Howe Forbush

Massachusetts State Ornithologist

Massachusetts State Bird Expert

T. GILBERT PEARSON

T. Gilbert Pearson

Secretary, National Association of Audubon Societies

Secretary, National Association of Audubon Societies

JOHN B. BURNHAM

JOHN B. BURNHAM

President, American Game Protective and Propagation Association

President, American Game Protective and Propagation Association

ERNEST NAPIER

ERNEST NAPIER

President, Fish and Game Commission of New Jersey

President, Fish and Game Commission of New Jersey

NOTABLE PROTECTORS OF WILD LIFE (II)

NOTABLE WILDLIFE PROTECTORS (II)

Of the many strong and aggressive state game commissions that I would like to mention in detail, space permits the naming of only a very few, by way of illustration.

Of the many strong and aggressive state game commissions that I want to discuss in detail, there's room to mention only a few as examples.

New York. —Thanks to the great conservation Governor of this state, John A. Dix, the year 1911 saw our forest, fish and game business established on an ideal business basis. Realizing the folly of requiring a single man to manage those three great interests, and render to each the attention that it deserves and requires, by a well-studied legislative act a State Conservation Commission was created, consisting of three commissioners, one for each of the three great natural departments. These are salaried officers, who devote their entire time to their work, and are properly equipped with assistants. The state force of game wardens now consists of 125 picked men, each on a salary of $900 per year, and through a rigid system of daily reports (inaugurated by John B. Burnham) the activities and results of each warden promptly become known in detail at headquarters.

NYC. —Thanks to the excellent conservation Governor of this state, John A. Dix, 1911 marked the establishment of our forest, fish, and game departments on a solid business foundation. Understanding the impracticality of having one person manage all three vital areas and give each the attention it deserves, a well-planned legislative act created a State Conservation Commission, made up of three commissioners—one for each of the major natural departments. These are salaried officials who dedicate their full time to their roles and are properly supported by assistants. The state's team of game wardens now includes 125 select individuals, each earning a salary of $900 per year. Through a strict daily reporting system (initiated by John B. Burnham), the actions and outcomes of each warden are quickly detailed and communicated to headquarters.

Fortunately, New York contains a very large number of true sportsmen, who are ever ready to come forward in support of every great measure for wild-life protection. The spirit of real protection runs throughout the state, and in time I predict that it will result in a great recovery of the native game of the commonwealth. That will be after we have stopped all shooting of upland game birds and shore birds for about eight years. Even the pinnated grouse could be successfully introduced over one-third of the state, if the people would have it so. It was our great body of conscientious sportsmen who made possible the Bayne-Blauvelt law, and the new codification of the game laws of the state.

Fortunately, New York has a large number of dedicated sports enthusiasts who are always willing to support important wildlife protection measures. The true spirit of conservation is strong throughout the state, and I believe it will lead to a significant recovery of the native game in the region. This will happen after we stop all hunting of upland game birds and shore birds for about eight years. Even the pinnated grouse could be successfully reintroduced in over a third of the state if the people agree. It was our committed group of responsible sportsmen who made the Bayne-Blauvelt law and the updated game laws of the state possible.

Tennessee. —Clearly, Honorable Mention belongs to the unsalaried State Commissioner of Tennessee, Col. J.H. Acklen, "than whom," says Dr. Palmer, "there is no more active and enthusiastic game protectionist in this country. Whatever has been accomplished in that state is due to his activity and public spirit. Col. Acklen, who is now president of the National Association of Game Commissioners, is a prominent lawyer, and enjoys the distinction of being the only commissioner in the country who not only serves without pay, but also defrays a large part of the expenses of game protection out of his own pocket."

Tennessee. —Clearly, Honorable Mention goes to the unpaid State Commissioner of Tennessee, Col. J.H. Acklen, "who," says Dr. Palmer, "is the most active and enthusiastic advocate for game protection in this country. Everything that has been achieved in that state is thanks to his dedication and public spirit. Col. Acklen, who is currently the president of the National Association of Game Commissioners, is a well-respected lawyer and is notable for being the only commissioner in the country who not only works for free but also covers a significant portion of the costs for game protection out of his own funds."

Surely the Commonwealth of Tennessee will not long permit this unsupported condition of such a game commissioner to endure. That state has a wild fauna worth preserving for her sons and grandsons, and it is inconceivable that the funds vitally necessary to this public service can not be found.

Surely, the state of Tennessee won't let this unsupported situation of a game commissioner last for long. The state has wildlife that is worth protecting for future generations, and it's hard to believe that the essential funds needed for this public service can't be located.

Alabama. —I cite the case of Alabama because, in view of its position in a group of states that until recently have cared little about game protection, it may be regarded as an unusual case. Commissioner John H. Wallace, Jr., has evolved order out of chaos,—and something approaching a reign of law out of the absence of law. To-day the State of Alabama stands as an example of what can be accomplished by and through one clear-headed, determined man who is right, and knows that he is right.

Alabama. —I mention Alabama because, given its place among states that have only recently started caring about game protection, it's considered a unique case. Commissioner John H. Wallace, Jr. has brought order to chaos and created something like a system of laws where there used to be none. Today, Alabama serves as a prime example of what can be achieved by one clear-minded, dedicated person who is right and knows they are right.

New Jersey. —Alabama reminds one of New Jersey, and of State Game Commissioner Ernest Napier. I have seen him on the firing-line, and I know that his strong devotion to the interests of the wild life of his state, his determination to protect it at all costs, and his resistless confidence in asking for what is right, have made him a power for good. The state legislature believes in him, and enacts the laws that he says are right and necessary. He serves without salary, and gives to the state time, labor and money. It is a pleasure to work with such a man. In 1912 Commissioner Napier won a pitched battle with the makers of automatic and pump guns, both shotguns and rifles, and debarred all those weapons from use in hunting in New Jersey unless satisfactorily reduced to two shots.

NJ. —Alabama reminds me of New Jersey, and of State Game Commissioner Ernest Napier. I've seen him in action, and I know that his strong commitment to protecting the wildlife in his state, his determination to safeguard it at all costs, and his unwavering confidence in advocating for what's right have made him a force for good. The state legislature supports him and passes the laws he deems necessary. He works without a salary and dedicates time, effort, and money to the state. It's a pleasure to collaborate with someone like him. In 1912, Commissioner Napier won a major battle against the manufacturers of automatic and pump-action firearms, both shotguns and rifles, banning all those weapons from being used in hunting in New Jersey unless they were modified to hold only two shots.

Massachusetts. —The state of Massachusetts is fortunate in the possession of a very fine corps of ornithologists, nature lovers, sportsmen and leading citizens who on all questions affecting wild life occupy high ground and are not afraid to maintain it. It would be a pleasure to write an entire chapter on this subject. The record of the Massachusetts Army of the Defense is both an example and an inspiration to the people of other states. Not only is the cause of protection championed by the State Game Commission but it also receives constant and powerful support from the State Board of Agriculture, which maintains on its staff Mr. E.H. Forbush as State Ornithologist. The bird-protection publications of the Board are of great economic value, and they are also an everlasting credit to the state. The very latest is a truly great wild-life-protection volume of 607 pages, by Mr. Forbush, entitled "Game Birds, Wild-Fowl and Shore Birds." It is a publication most damaging to the cause of the Army of Destruction, and I heartily wish a million copies might be printed and placed in the hands of lawmakers and protectors.

Mass. —Massachusetts is lucky to have a great group of ornithologists, nature enthusiasts, sports lovers, and community leaders who take a strong stand on all matters related to wildlife and aren’t afraid to advocate for it. It would be a joy to write an entire chapter on this topic. The achievements of the Massachusetts Army of the Defense serve as both an example and an inspiration to people in other states. The State Game Commission actively defends wildlife protection, and it also gets ongoing and robust support from the State Board of Agriculture, which employs Mr. E.H. Forbush as the State Ornithologist. The bird-protection publications from the Board are incredibly valuable economically and are a lasting credit to the state. The most recent one is an impressive wildlife protection book of 607 pages, by Mr. Forbush, titled "Game Birds, Wild-Fowl and Shore Birds." This publication significantly undermines the efforts of those against wildlife protection, and I genuinely wish a million copies could be printed and distributed to lawmakers and advocates.

The fight last winter and spring for a no-sale-of-game law was the Gettysburg for Massachusetts. The voice of the People was heard in no uncertain tones, and the Destroyers were routed all along the line. The leaders in that struggle on the protection side were E.H. Forbush, William P. Wharton, Dr. George W. Field, Edward N. Goding, Lyman E. Hurd, Ralph Holman, Rev. Wm. R. Lord and Salem D. Charles. With such leaders and such supporters, any wild-life cause can be won, anywhere!

The fight last winter and spring for a law against selling game was the turning point for Massachusetts. The People’s voice was clear and loud, and the opposition was defeated across the board. The leaders in that struggle for protection were E.H. Forbush, William P. Wharton, Dr. George W. Field, Edward N. Goding, Lyman E. Hurd, Ralph Holman, Rev. Wm. R. Lord, and Salem D. Charles. With such leaders and supporters, any wildlife cause can be successful, no matter where!

Pennsylvania. —The case of Pennsylvania is rather peculiar. As yet there is no large and resistless organized body of real sportsmen to rally to the support of the State Game Commission in great causes, as is the case in New York. As a result, with a paltry fund of only $20,000 for annual maintenance, and much opposition from hunters and farmers, the situation is far from satisfactory. Fortunately Dr. Joseph Kalbfus, Secretary of the Commission and chief executive officer, is a man of indomitable courage and determination. But for this state of mind he would ere this have given up the fight for the hunter's license law (of one dollar per year), which has been bitterly opposed by a very aggressive and noisy group of gunners who do not seem to know that they are grievously misled.

Pennsylvania. — The situation in Pennsylvania is quite unusual. There still isn’t a large, powerful group of dedicated sportsmen to support the State Game Commission like there is in New York. Because of this, with a meager budget of just $20,000 for annual expenses, and significant pushback from hunters and farmers, things are far from ideal. Luckily, Dr. Joseph Kalbfus, the Secretary of the Commission and its chief executive, is a man of unwavering courage and resolve. Without his determination, he might have given up on fighting for the hunter's license law (which costs just one dollar a year), a law that faces strong opposition from a vocal group of hunters who seem to be seriously misled.

Fortunately, Commissioner John M. Phillips, of Pittsburgh is the ardent supporter of Dr. Kalbfus and a vigorous fighter for justice to wild life. He devotes to the cause a great amount of time and effort, and in addition to serving without salary he pays all his campaign expenses out of his own pocket. His only recompense for all this is the sincere admiration of his friends, and the consciousness of having done his full duty toward the wild life and the people of his native state.

Fortunately, Commissioner John M. Phillips from Pittsburgh is a passionate supporter of Dr. Kalbfus and a strong advocate for wildlife justice. He dedicates a significant amount of time and effort to this cause, and besides volunteering his services, he covers all his campaign expenses from his own funds. His only reward for all of this is the genuine admiration of his friends and the satisfaction of knowing he has fulfilled his responsibility to wildlife and the people of his home state.

The State Audubon Societies. —It is impossible to estimate the full value of the influence and work of the State Audubon Societies of the United States. Thus far these societies exist in thirty-nine states. From the beginning, their efforts have tended especially toward the preservation of the non-game birds, and it is well that the song and other insectivorous birds have thus been specially championed. Unfortunately, however, if that policy is pursued exclusively, it leaves 154 very important species of game birds practically at the mercy of the Army of Destruction! It would seem that the time has come when all Audubon Societies should take up, as a part of their work, active co-operation in helping to save the game birds from extermination.

The State Audubon Societies. —It’s hard to fully gauge the impact and work of the State Audubon Societies in the United States. Currently, these societies operate in thirty-nine states. From the start, their main focus has been on preserving non-game birds, which has been beneficial for songbirds and other insect-eating birds. Unfortunately, if they continue to focus solely on this, it leaves 154 essential species of game birds vulnerable to serious threats! It seems that the time has come for all Audubon Societies to include active efforts in protecting game birds from extinction as part of their mission.


The National Organizations Of New York City

The National Organizations of New York City

On January 1, 1895, the United States of America contained, so far as I am aware, not one organization of national scope which was devoting any large amount of its resources and activities to the protection of wild life. At that time the former activities of the A.O.U. Committee on Bird Protection had lapsed. To-day the city of New York contains six national organizations, and it is now a great center of nation-wide activities in behalf of preservation. Furthermore, these activities are steadily growing, and securing practical results.

On January 1, 1895, as far as I know, the United States didn't have any national organizations focused on protecting wildlife that were putting significant resources and efforts into it. Back then, the previous work of the A.O.U. Committee on Bird Protection had come to an end. Today, New York City is home to six national organizations, making it a major hub for nationwide preservation efforts. Moreover, these activities are continually expanding and achieving real results.

The New York Zoological Society. —In 1895 there was born into the world a scientific organization having for its second declared object "the preservation of our native animals." It was the first scientific society or corporation ever formed, so far as I am aware, having a specifically declared object of that kind. It owes its existence and its presence in the field of wild-life conservation to the initiative and persistence of Mr. Madison Grant and Prof. Henry Fairfield Osborn. For sixteen years these two officers have worked together virtually as one man. It is not strange to find a sportsman like Mr. Grant promoting the wild-life cause, but it is a fact well worthy of note that of all the zoologists of the world, Professor Osborn is the only one of real renown who has actively and vigorously engaged in this cause, and taken a place in the front rank of the Defenders.

The Wildlife Conservation Society. —In 1895, a scientific organization was established with its second stated goal being "the preservation of our native animals." It was the first scientific society or corporation, to my knowledge, focused specifically on this purpose. Its creation and ongoing efforts in wildlife conservation are due to the determination and dedication of Mr. Madison Grant and Prof. Henry Fairfield Osborn. For sixteen years, these two leaders have worked together almost as a single unit. While it’s not surprising to see a sportsman like Mr. Grant supporting wildlife initiatives, it’s noteworthy that among all the zoologists globally, Professor Osborn is the only well-known figure who has actively and passionately engaged in this cause and has taken a leading role among the Defenders.

Mr. Grant's influence on the protection cause has been strong and far-reaching,—far more so than the majority of his own friends are aware. He has promoted important protectionist causes from Alaska to Louisiana and Newfoundland, and helped to win many important victories.

Mr. Grant's impact on the protection movement has been significant and widespread—much more than most of his friends realize. He has supported vital protectionist initiatives from Alaska to Louisiana and Newfoundland, and has played a key role in securing many important victories.

The Boone And Crockett Club. —This organization of big game sportsmen was founded in 1885, and is the oldest of its kind in the United States. Its members always have supported the cause of protection, by law and by the making of game preserves. In all this work Mr. George Bird Grinnell, for twenty-five years editor of Forest and Stream, has been an important factor. As stated elsewhere, the club's written and unwritten code of ethics in big-game hunting is very strict. In course of time a Committee on Game Protection was formed, and it actively entered that field.

The Boone and Crockett Club. —This organization of big game hunters was founded in 1885 and is the oldest of its kind in the United States. Its members have always supported the cause of protection through laws and the creation of game preserves. Throughout this work, Mr. George Bird Grinnell, who was the editor of Forest and Stream for twenty-five years, has played a significant role. As mentioned elsewhere, the club's written and unwritten code of ethics for big-game hunting is very strict. Over time, a Committee on Game Protection was established, and it actively engaged in that area.

JOSEPH KALBFUS

JOSEPH KALBFUS

Chief Game Protector and Secretary, Pennsylvavia Board of Game Commissioners

Chief Game Protector and Secretary, Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners

JOHN M. PHILLIPS

JOHN M. PHILLIPS

Member, Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners

Member, Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners

EDWARD A. McILHENNY

EDWARD A. McILHENNY

Founder of Wild-Fowl Preserves in Louisiana

Founder of Wild-Fowl Preserves in Louisiana

CHARLES WILLIS WARD

Charles Willis Ward

Founder of Wild-Fowl Preserves in Louisiana

Founder of Wild-Fowl Preserves in Louisiana

NOTABLE PROTECTORS OF WILD LIFE (III)

NOTABLE WILDLIFE PROTECTORS (III)

The National Association Of Audubon Societies. —This organization was founded by William Dutcher, in 1902, and in 1906 it was endowed to the extent of $322,000 by the bequest of Albert Wilcox. Subsequent endowments, together with the annual contributions of members and friends, now give the Association an annual income of $60,000. It maintains eight widely-separated field agents and lecturers and forty special game wardens of bird refuges. It maintains Secretary T. Gilbert Pearson and a number of other good men constantly on the firing-line; and these forces have achieved many valuable results. After years of stress and struggle, it now seems almost certain that this organization will save the two white egrets,—producers of "the white badge of cruelty,"—to the bird fauna of the United States, as in a similar manner it has saved the gulls, terns and other sea birds of our lakes and coast line.

The National Audubon Society. —This organization was founded by William Dutcher in 1902, and in 1906, it received an endowment of $322,000 from Albert Wilcox's will. Additional endowments, along with annual contributions from members and supporters, now provide the Association with an annual income of $60,000. It has eight widely dispersed field agents and lecturers, as well as forty special game wardens for bird refuges. It employs Secretary T. Gilbert Pearson and several other dedicated individuals on the front lines, and these efforts have led to many significant achievements. After years of effort and struggle, it now seems almost certain that this organization will save the two white egrets—known for producing "the white badge of cruelty"—for the bird population of the United States, just as it has successfully protected gulls, terns, and other seabirds along our lakes and coastlines.

This splendid organization is one of the monuments to William Dutcher. More than two years ago he was stricken with paralysis, and now sits in an invalid's chair at his home in Plainfield, New Jersey. His mind is clear and his interest in wild-life protection is keen, but he is unable to speak or to write. While he was active, he was one of the most resourceful and fearless champions of the cause of the vanishing birds. To him the farmers of America owe ten times more than they ever will know, and a thousand times more than they ever will repay, either to him or to his cause.

This amazing organization stands as a tribute to William Dutcher. Over two years ago, he was hit with paralysis and now spends his time in a wheelchair at his home in Plainfield, New Jersey. His mind is sharp, and he remains passionately interested in wildlife conservation, but he's unable to speak or write. When he was active, he was one of the most inventive and fearless advocates for the protection of disappearing birds. The farmers of America owe him far more than they will ever realize, and a thousand times more than they will ever repay, whether to him or to his cause.

The Camp-Fire Club Of America. —Although founded in 1897, this organization did not, as an organization, actively enter the field of protection until 1909. Since that time its work has covered a wide field, and enlisted the activities of many of its members. In order to provide a permanent fund for its work, each year the club members pay special annual dues that are devoted solely to the wild-life cause. The Committee on Game Protective Legislation and Preserves is a strong, hard-working body, and it has rendered good service in the lines of activity named in its title.

The Campfire Club of America. —Although founded in 1897, this organization didn't actively get involved in protection efforts until 1909. Since then, its work has spanned a wide range of activities and engaged many of its members. To create a permanent fund for its initiatives, club members pay special annual dues each year that are dedicated exclusively to wildlife conservation. The Committee on Game Protective Legislation and Preserves is a dedicated and hard-working group, and it has provided valuable service in the areas outlined in its name.

The American Game Protective And Propagation Association. —This is the youngest protective organization of national scope, having been organized in 1911. Its activities are directed by John B. Burnham, for five years Chief Game Protector of the State of New York, and a man thoroughly conversant with the business of protection. The organization is financed chiefly by means of a large annual fund contributed by several of the largest companies engaged in manufacturing firearms and [Page 257] ammunition, whose directors feel that the time has come when it is both wise and necessary to take practical measures to preserve the remnant of American game. Already the activities of this organization cover a wide range, and it has been particularly active in enlisting support for the Weeks bill for the federal protection of migratory birds.

The American Game Protective and Propagation Association. —This is the newest national protective organization, established in 1911. Its activities are led by John B. Burnham, who served as the Chief Game Protector of New York State for five years and is well-acquainted with protection matters. The organization is primarily funded by a substantial annual contribution from several major companies in the firearms and [Page 257] ammunition industries, whose leaders believe it’s time to take practical steps to protect what's left of American wildlife. The organization is already active in many areas, particularly in rallying support for the Weeks bill to federally protect migratory birds.

The Wild Life Protective Association came into existence in 1910, rather suddenly, for the purpose of promoting the cause of the Bayne no-sale-of-game bill, and other measures. It raised the fund that met the chief expenses of that campaign. Since that time it has taken an important part in three other hotly contested campaigns in other states, two of which were successful.

Wildlife Protection Association was established in 1910, quite unexpectedly, to support the Bayne no-sale-of-game bill and other initiatives. It gathered the funds needed to cover the main expenses of that campaign. Since then, it has played a significant role in three other fiercely contested campaigns in different states, two of which were successful.

At the present moment, and throughout the future, these New York organizations need large sums of money with which to meet the legitimate expenses of active campaigns for great measures. They need some money from outside the state of New York! Too much of the burden of national campaigning has been and is being left to be borne by the people of New York City. This policy is growing monotonous. There is every reason why Chicago, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Boston should each year turn $100,000 into the hands of these well-equipped and well managed national organizations whose officers know how to get results, all over our country.

Right now, and in the future, these New York organizations need large amounts of money to cover the legitimate costs of active campaigns for significant initiatives. They need some funds from outside New York! The people of New York City have been and are still carrying too much of the load for national campaigning. This approach is becoming tiresome. There’s every reason for Chicago, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Boston to each year contribute $100,000 to these well-equipped and efficiently managed national organizations whose leaders know how to get results across the country.

Such organizations as these do not exist in other cities; and this is very unfortunate. New Orleans should be a center of protectionist activity for the South, San Francisco for the Pacific slope, and Chicago for the Middle West. Will they not become so?

Such organizations do not exist in other cities, which is really unfortunate. New Orleans should be a hub for protectionist efforts in the South, San Francisco for the Pacific region, and Chicago for the Midwest. Will they not become that?

Two Independent Workers. —At the western edge of the delta of the Mississippi there have arisen two men who loom up into prominence at an outpost of the Army of Defense which they themselves have established. For what they already have done in the creation of wild-fowl preserves in Louisiana, Edward A. McIlhenny and Charles Willis Ward deserve the thanks of the American People-at-large. An account of their splendid activities, and the practical results already secured, will be found in Chapter XXXVIII, on "Private Game Preserves," and in the story of Marsh Island. Already the home of these gentlemen, Avery Island, Louisiana, has become an important center of activity in wild-life protection.

Two Freelancers. —At the western edge of the Mississippi delta, two men have risen to prominence at an outpost of the Defense Army they established themselves. For their efforts in creating wildfowl preserves in Louisiana, Edward A. McIlhenny and Charles Willis Ward deserve the gratitude of the American public. You can read about their impressive activities and the tangible results achieved in Chapter XXXVIII, on "Private Game Preserves," and in the story of Marsh Island. Their home, Avery Island, Louisiana, has already become a key hub for wildlife protection.


[Page 258]
CHAPTER XXVII
HOW TO MAKE A NEW GAME LAW

The Line Of Action. —In the face of a calamity, the saving of life and property and the check of fire and flood depends upon good judgment and quick action at the critical moment. In emergencies, the slow and academic method will not serve. It is the run, the jump, the short cut and the violent method that saves life. If a woman is drowning, the sensible man does not wait for an introduction to her; nor does he run to an acquaintance to borrow his boat, or stop to put on a collar and necktie. He seizes the first boat that he can find, and breaks its lock and chain if necessary; or, failing that, he plunges in without one. When he reaches the imperiled party, he doesn't say, "Will you kindly let me save you?" He seizes her by the hair, and tries to keep her head above water, without ceremony.

The Action Plan. —In the face of a disaster, saving lives and protecting property from fire and flood relies on quick thinking and immediate action at crucial moments. In emergencies, a slow and methodical approach won’t cut it. It’s the sprint, the leap, the shortcut, and the drastic measures that save lives. If a woman is drowning, a sensible man doesn’t wait for an introduction; he doesn’t go looking for a friend to borrow a boat, or take a moment to put on a collar and tie. He takes the first boat he can find, breaking its lock and chain if needed; or if that’s not possible, he jumps in without one. When he reaches the person in danger, he doesn’t say, “Could I please save you?” He grabs her by the hair and does everything he can to keep her head above water, without hesitation.

That is to-day the condition and the treatment necessary regarding our remnant of wild life. We are compelled to act quickly, directly, and even violently at times, if we save anything worth while.

That is the current state and the necessary actions we need to take for our remaining wildlife. We must act quickly, directly, and sometimes even aggressively, if we want to save anything valuable.

There is no time to depend upon the academic "education" of the public by the seductive illustrated lecture on birds, or the article about the habits of mammals. Those methods are all well enough in their places, but we must not depend upon them in emergencies like the present, for they do not pass laws or arrest lawbreakers. Give the public all of that material that you can supply, and the more the better, but for heaven's sake do not depend upon the spread of bird-lore "education" to stop the work of the game-hogs! If you do, all the wild life will be destroyed while the educational work is going on.

There is no time to rely on the academic "education" of the public through tempting illustrated lectures on birds or articles about mammal behaviors. Those methods are fine in their own time, but we can't rely on them during emergencies like this, as they don't create laws or catch lawbreakers. Provide the public with all the information you can, and the more the better, but for heaven's sake do not rely on spreading bird-related "education" to stop the actions of poachers! If you do, all the wildlife will be wiped out while the educational efforts continue.

Often you can educate a gunner, and make him a protectionist; but you never can do it by showing him pictures of birds. He needs strong reasoning and exhortation, not bird-lore. To-day it is necessary to employ the most direct, forceful and at times even rude methods. Where slaughtering cannot be stopped by moral suasion, it must be stopped with a hickory club. The thing to do is to get results, and get them quickly, before it is too late!

Often you can teach a shooter and turn him into a protector; but you can't do it just by showing him pictures of birds. He needs solid reasoning and motivation, not just bird facts. Today, it’s essential to use the most straightforward, powerful, and sometimes even blunt methods. When stopping the killing can't be achieved through moral persuasion, it has to be done with a heavy hand. The goal is to get results, and get them quickly, before it’s too late!

If the business section of a town is burning down, no one goes into the suburbs to lecture on architecture, or exhibit pictures of fire apparatus. The rush is for water, fire-engines, red-blooded men and dynamite. When the birds all around you are being shot to death by poachers who fear not God nor regard man, and you need help to stop it on the instant, run to your neighbor's house, and ring his bell. If he fails to hear the bell, pound on his door until you jar the whole house.

If the business area of a town is on fire, nobody heads out to the suburbs to talk about architecture or show off pictures of fire equipment. The priority is to get water, fire trucks, determined people, and explosives. When the birds around you are being killed by poachers who have no fear of God or respect for others, and you need immediate help to stop it, go to your neighbor's house and ring their doorbell. If they don’t hear it, bang on the door until you shake the entire house.

When he comes down half-dressed, blinking and rubbing his eyes, shout at him:

When he comes downstairs in his clothes, half-asleep and rubbing his eyes, shout at him:

"Come out! Your birds are all being shot to pieces!"

"Come out! All your birds are getting shot!"

"Are they?" he will say. "But what can I do about it? I can't help it! I'm no game warden."

"Are they?" he will say. "But what can I do about it? I can't help it! I'm not a game warden."

"Put on your clothes, get your shot-gun and come out and drive off the killing gang."

"Put on your clothes, grab your shotgun, and come out to drive off the gang that's killing people."

"But what good will that do? They will come back again."

"But what good will that do? They'll just come back again."

"Not if we do our duty. We must have them arrested, and appear against them in court."

"Not if we do our part. We need to have them arrested and testify against them in court."

"But," says the sleepy citizen, "That won't do much good. The laws are not strict enough; and besides, they are not well enforced, even as they are!"

"But," says the sleepy citizen, "that won't change much. The laws aren't strict enough, and on top of that, they aren't enforced well, even as they are!"

"Then let's make it our business to see that the present laws are enforced, and go to our members of the legislature, and have them pass some stronger laws."

"Then let's take it upon ourselves to ensure the current laws are enforced, and approach our legislators to get them to pass some stronger laws."

And this brings me to a very important subject:

And this leads me to a really important topic:


How To Pass A New Law

How to Pass a New Law

We venture to say that the average citizen little realizes how possible it is to secure the passage of a law that is clearly necessary for the better protection of wild life and forests. Because of this, and of the necessity for exact knowledge, I shall here set down specific instructions on this subject.

We dare say that the average person doesn't realize how possible it is to get a law passed that is clearly needed for better protecting wildlife and forests. Because of this, and the need for accurate information, I will provide specific instructions on this topic.

The Personal Equation. —One determined man can secure the passage of a good law, provided he is reasonably intelligent and sufficiently determined. The man who starts a movement must make up his mind to follow it up, direct its fortunes, stay with it when the storms of opposition beat upon it, and never give up until it is signed by the governor. He must be willing to sacrifice his personal convenience, many of his pleasures, and work when his friends are asleep or pleasuring.

The Personal Equation. —A dedicated person can successfully push through a good law, as long as they are fairly smart and truly committed. The person who initiates a movement must be ready to pursue it, guide its progress, stick with it through the challenges of opposition, and never quit until it gets signed by the governor. They have to be willing to give up their own convenience, many of their pleasures, and put in the work while their friends are resting or having fun.

In working for the protection of wild life there is one mighty and unfailing source of consolation. It is this:

In working to protect wildlife, there is one powerful and dependable source of comfort. It is this:

Your cause always gains in strength, and the cause of the destroyers always loses strength!

Your cause keeps getting stronger, while the cause of those who destroy always gets weaker!

The Choice Of A Cause. —Be broad-minded. Do not rush to the legislature with a demand for a law to permit the taking of bull-heads with June-bugs in the creeks of your township, or to give your county a specially early open season on quail in order that your boy may try his new gun before he goes back to college. Don't propose any "local" legislation; for in progressive states, local game legislation is coming strongly into disfavor,—just as it should! Legislate for your whole state, and nothing less.

Choosing a Cause. —Be open-minded. Don’t rush to the legislature with a request for a law that allows catching bull-heads with June-bugs in the streams of your township, or to give your county an earlier opening season for quail so your son can try out his new gun before heading back to college. Avoid suggesting any "local" legislation; because in forward-thinking states, local game laws are falling out of favor—just as they should! Legislate for your entire state, and nothing less.

Do not bother your legislature with a trivial bill. Choose a cause that [Page 260] is worth while to grown men, and it shall be well with you. It takes no more time to pass a large bill than a small one; and big men prefer to be identified with big measures.

Do not waste your legislature's time with a trivial bill. Choose a cause that [Page 260] is worthwhile to grown men, and you will be in good shape. It takes no more time to pass a large bill than a small one, and important people prefer to be associated with significant measures.

Before you have a bill drawn, advise with men whose opinions are worth having. If the end you have in mind is a great and good one, go ahead, whether you secure support in advance or not. If the needs of the hour clearly demand the measure, go ahead, even though you start absolutely alone. A good measure never goes far without attracting company.

Before you draft a bill, consult with people whose opinions are valuable. If your goal is significant and positive, go for it, whether you get support beforehand or not. If the current situation clearly calls for the action, go for it, even if you start completely on your own. A good initiative never stays isolated for long.

Drafting A Bill. —As a rule, the members of a legislative body do not have time to draft bills on subjects that are new or strange to them. A short bill is easily prepared by your own representative; but a lengthy bill, covering a serious reform, is a different matter. Hire a lawyer to draft the bill for you. A really good lawyer will not charge much for drafting a bill that is to benefit the public, and grind no private axe; but if the bill is long, and requires long study, even the good citizen must charge something.

Writing a Bill. —Generally, members of a legislative body don't have the time to write bills on topics that are unfamiliar to them. Your own representative can easily prepare a short bill; however, a lengthy bill addressing significant reform is more complicated. It's best to hire a lawyer to draft the bill for you. A good lawyer won't charge much for drafting a bill that aims to benefit the public, without any personal agenda; but if the bill is lengthy and requires extensive analysis, even the most dedicated citizen must charge a fee.

Your bill must fully recognize existing laws. It must be either prohibitory or permissive; which means that it can say what shall not be done, or else that which may be done according to law, all other acts being forbidden. Your lawyer must decide which form is best. For my part, I greatly prefer the prohibitive form, as being the stronger and more impressive of the two. I think it is the province of the law to forbid the destruction of wild life and forests, under penalties.

Your bill needs to fully comply with existing laws. It should be either prohibitive or permissive; which means it can specify what must not be done, or what can be done according to law, with all other actions being forbidden. Your lawyer should determine which form is best. As for me, I strongly prefer the prohibitive form because it's the stronger and more impactful of the two. I believe it's the role of the law to forbid the destruction of wildlife and forests, with penalties in place.

Penalties. —Every law should provide a penalty for its infringement; but the penalty should not be out of all proportion to the offense. It is just as unwise to impose a fine of one dollar for killing song-birds for food as it is to provide for a fine of three hundred dollars. A fine that is too small fails to impress the prisoner, and it begets contempt for the law and the courts! A fine that is altogether too high is apt to be set aside by the court as "excessive." In my opinion, the best fines for wild life slaughter would be as follows:

Fines. —Every law should have a penalty for breaking it; however, the penalty shouldn’t be way out of line with the offense. It’s just as unreasonable to impose a one-dollar fine for killing songbirds for food as it is to impose a three-hundred-dollar fine. A fine that's too small doesn’t make an impression on the offender and creates disrespect for the law and the courts! A fine that’s too high is likely to be dismissed by the court as "excessive." In my opinion, the best fines for wildlife slaughter would be as follows:


Shooting, netting or trapping song-birds, and other non-game birds, each bird $5 to $25
Killing game birds out of season, each bird 10 to 50
Selling game contrary to law, each offense 100 to 200
Dynamiting fish 100 to 200
Seining or netting game fishes 50 to 200
Shooting birds with unfair weapons 10 to 100
Killing an egret, Carolina parakeet or whooping crane 100 to 200
Killing a mountain sheep or antelope anywhere in the U.S. 500
Killing an elk contrary to law 50
Killing a female deer, or fawn without horns, each offense 50
Trapping a grizzly bear for its skin 100

For killing a man "by mistake," the fine should be $500, payable in five annual instalments, to the court, for the family of the victim.

For accidentally killing someone, the fine should be $500, to be paid in five annual installments to the court for the victim's family.

Whenever fines are not paid, the convicted party should be sentenced to imprisonment at hard labor at the rate of one-half day for each dollar [Page 261] of the fine imposed; and a sentence at hard labor should be the first option of the court! Many a rich and reckless poacher snaps his fingers at fines; but a sentence to hard labor would strike terror to the heart of the most brazen of them. To all such men, "labor" is the twin terror to "death."

Whenever fines go unpaid, the convicted person should be sentenced to hard labor at a rate of half a day for each dollar [Page 261] of the imposed fine; and a hard labor sentence should be the first choice of the court! Many wealthy and reckless poachers disregard fines; but a hard labor sentence would instill fear in even the boldest of them. For all such individuals, "labor" is just as frightening as "death."

The Introduction Of A Bill. —Much wisdom is called for in the selection of legislative champions for wild-life bills. It is possible to state here only the leading principles involved.

Introducing a Bill. —Choosing the right advocates for wildlife bills requires a lot of thought. Here, we can only outline the main principles involved.

Of course it is best to look for an introducer within the political party that is in the majority. A man who has many important bills on his hands is bound to give his best attention to his own pet measures; and it is best to choose a man who is not already overloaded. If a man has a host of enemies, pass him by. By all means choose a man whose high character and good name will be a tower of strength to your cause; and if necessary, wait for him to make up his mind. Mr. Lawrence W. Trowbridge waited three long and anxious weeks in the hope that Hon. George A. Blauvelt would finally consent to champion the Bayne bill in the New York Assembly. At last Mr. Blauvelt consented to take it up; and the time spent in waiting for his decision was a grand investment! He was the Man of all men to pilot that bill through the Assembly.

Of course, it’s best to look for an introducer within the ruling political party. A person who has many important bills to handle is likely to focus on their own preferred measures; it’s better to choose someone who isn’t already overwhelmed. If someone has a lot of enemies, skip over them. Definitely choose someone whose strong character and good reputation will be an asset to your cause; and if needed, wait for them to decide. Mr. Lawrence W. Trowbridge waited three long and tense weeks hoping that Hon. George A. Blauvelt would eventually agree to support the Bayne bill in the New York Assembly. Finally, Mr. Blauvelt agreed to take it on; the time spent waiting for his decision was a fantastic investment! He was the perfect person to guide that bill through the Assembly.

Very often the "quiet man" of a legislative body is a good man to champion a new and drastic measure. The quiet man who makes up his mind to take hold of "a hard bill to pass" often astonishes the natives by his ability to get results. Representative John F. Lacey, of Iowa, made his name a household word all over the United States by the quiet, steady, tireless and finally resistless energy with which for three long years in Congress he worked for "the Lacey bird bill." For years his colleagues laughed at him, and cheerfully voted down his bill. But he persisted. His cause steadily gained in strength; and his final triumph laid the axe at the root of a thousand crimes against wild life, throughout the length and breadth of this land. He rendered the people of America a service that entitles him to our everlasting gratitude and remembrance.

Very often, the "quiet person" in a legislative body is the right person to stand up for a new and bold measure. The quiet person who decides to tackle "a tough bill to pass" often surprises everyone with their ability to achieve results. Representative John F. Lacey from Iowa became a well-known name across the United States because of the quiet, steady, tireless, and ultimately unstoppable energy he put into advocating for "the Lacey bird bill" over three long years in Congress. For years, his colleagues mocked him and happily voted against his bill. But he kept going. His cause gradually gained momentum, and his eventual success cut down on numerous crimes against wildlife across the entire country. He provided a service to the people of America that deserves our lasting gratitude and remembrance.

After The Introduction Of A Bill. —As soon as a bill is introduced it is referred to a committee, to be examined and reported upon. If there is opposition,—and to every bill that really does something worth while there always is opposition,—then there is a "hearing." The committee appoints a day, when the friends and foes of the bill assemble, and express their views.

After the introduction of a bill. —As soon as a bill is introduced, it gets sent to a committee for review and a report. If there's any opposition—and there usually is for a bill that actually does something significant—then a "hearing" takes place. The committee schedules a day for supporters and opponents of the bill to come together and share their opinions.

The week preceding a hearing is your busy week. You must plan your campaign, down to the smallest details. Pick the men whom you wish to have speak (for ten minutes each) on the various parts of your bill, and divide the topics and the time between them. Call upon the friends of the bill in various portions of the state to attend and "say something." Go up with a strong body of fine men. Have as many organizations represented as you possibly can! The "organizations" represent the great mass of people, and the voters also.

The week before a hearing is your busiest week. You need to plan your campaign down to the smallest details. Choose the people you want to speak (for ten minutes each) on the different parts of your bill, and divide the topics and time among them. Reach out to supporters of the bill from various parts of the state to come and "say something." Bring a strong group of great people with you. Make sure as many organizations are represented as you can! The "organizations" represent the vast majority of people, including voters.

When you reach the hearing, hand to your bill's champion, who will be floor manager for your side, a clear and concise list of your speakers, carefully arranged and stating who's who. That being done, you have only to fill your own ten minutes and afterward enjoy the occasion.

When you get to the hearing, give your bill's advocate, who will be managing the discussion for your side, a clear and concise list of your speakers, organized and identifying everyone. Once that's done, just use your own ten minutes and then enjoy the event.

The Value Of Accuracy. —It is unnecessary to say, in working for a bill,—always be sure of your facts. Never let your opponents catch you tripping in accuracy of statement. If you make one serious error, your enemies will turn it against you to the utmost. Better understate facts than overstate them. This shrewd old world quickly recognizes the careful, conservative man whose testimony is so true and so rock-founded that no assaults can shake it. Legislators are quick to rely on the words and opinions of the man who can safely be trusted. If your enemies try to overwhelm you with extravagant statements, that are unfair to your cause, the chances are that the men who judge between you will recognize them by their ear-marks, and discount them accordingly.

The Importance of Accuracy. —It’s important to emphasize that when advocating for a bill,—always make sure your facts are correct. Never let your opponents catch you making a mistake in your statements. A single serious error can be used against you by your enemies to the fullest extent. It’s better to understate facts than to exaggerate them. This savvy world quickly identifies the careful, conservative person whose testimony is so truthful and solid that no attack can undermine it. Legislators readily trust the words and opinions of someone who can be relied upon. If your opponents try to overwhelm you with exaggerated claims that are unfair to your cause, it’s likely that the people judging between you will recognize those claims for what they are and discount them appropriately.

Work With Members. —Sometimes a subject that is put before a legislative body is so new, and the thing proposed is so drastic, it becomes necessary to take measures to place a great many facts before each member of the body. Under such circumstances the member naturally desires to be "shown." The cleanest and finest campaigning for a reform measure is that in which both sides deal with facts, rather than with personal importunities. With a good cause in hand, it is a pleasure to prepare concise statements of facts and conditions from which a legislator may draw logical conclusions. Whenever a bill can be won through in that way, game protection work becomes a delight.

Collaborate with members. —Sometimes a topic that comes before a legislative body is so new, and the proposal so extreme, that it becomes necessary to present a wealth of information to each member. In these situations, members naturally want to be "shown." The best campaigning for a reform measure is when both sides focus on facts rather than personal appeals. With a strong cause at hand, it’s rewarding to create clear and concise statements of facts and conditions that allow a legislator to draw logical conclusions. Whenever a bill can be supported this way, game protection work becomes truly enjoyable.

In all important new measures affecting the rights and the property of the whole people of a state, the conscientious legislator wishes to know how the people feel about it. When you tell him that "The wild life belongs to the whole people of the state; and this bill is in their interest," he needs to know for certain that your proposition is true. Sometimes there is only one way in which he can be fully convinced; and that is by the people of his district.

In all significant new laws that impact the rights and property of everyone in a state, a dedicated legislator wants to understand how the public feels about it. When you say, "The wildlife belongs to all the people of the state, and this bill is for their benefit," he needs to be sure that your claim is accurate. Sometimes, the only way for him to be completely convinced is through the opinions of the people in his district.

Then it becomes necessary to send out a general alarm, and call upon the People to write to their representatives and express their views. Give them, in printed matter, the latest facts in the case, forecast the future as you think it should be forecast, then demand that the men and women who are interested do write to their senators and assemblyman, and express their views, in their own way! Let there be no "machine letters" sent out, all ready for signature; for such letters are a waste of effort, and belong in the waste baskets to which they are quickly consigned. The members of legislative bodies hate them, and rightly, too. They want to hear from men who can think for themselves, give reasons of their own, and express their desires in their own way.

Then it’s necessary to send out a general alert and urge the people to write to their representatives and share their opinions. Provide them, in printed materials, the latest facts on the situation, predict the future as you believe it should unfold, and then ask that those who care do write to their senators and assembly members to communicate their thoughts, in their own way! There shouldn’t be any "template letters" sent out, all ready for signatures; those letters are a waste of effort and should go straight to the trash where they belong. Legislative members dislike them, and they’re right to feel that way. They want to hear from individuals who can think for themselves, provide their own reasons, and express their wishes in their own way.

The Press And The Newspapers. —It is impossible to overestimate the influence of the newspapers and the periodical press in general, in the protection of wild life. But for their sympathy, their support and their independent assaults upon the Army of Destruction, our game species [Page 263] would nearly all of them have been annihilated, long ago. Editors are sympathetic and responsive good-citizens, as keenly sensitive regarding their duties as any of the rest of us are, and from the earliest times of protection they have been on the firing line, helping to beat back the destroyers. It is indeed a rare sight to see an editor giving aid, comfort or advice to the enemy. I can not recall more than a score of articles that I have seen or heard of during thirty years in this field that opposed the cause of wild life protection. [K] At this moment, for instance, I bear in particularly grateful remembrance the active campaign work of the following newspapers:

The Press and the Media. —It's impossible to underestimate the impact of newspapers and the periodical press on the protection of wildlife. Without their support, empathy, and independent efforts against the destructive forces, most of our game species [Page 263] would have been wiped out long ago. Editors are committed and responsive citizens, deeply aware of their responsibilities, and since the early days of wildlife protection, they've been on the front lines, helping to push back against the destroyers. It's quite rare to see an editor offering assistance, support, or guidance to the opposition. Over thirty years in this field, I can’t recall more than a handful of articles that went against the cause of wildlife protection. [K] Right now, I particularly appreciate the active campaign efforts of the following newspapers:

The New York Times The Victoria Colonist
The New York Tribune The Brooklyn Standard-Union
The New York Herald The New York Evening Post
The New York Globe The New York Press
The New York Mail and Express The Buffalo News
The New York World The Minneapolis Journal
The New York Sun The Pittsburgh Index-Appeal
The Springfield (Mass.) Republican The St. Louis Globe-Democrat
The Chicago Inter-Ocean The Philadelphia North American
The San Francisco Call The Utica Observer
The Rochester Union and Advertiser The Washington Star.

These magazines have done good service in the cause; and some of them have spent many years on the firing line:

These magazines have made valuable contributions to the cause, and some of them have been on the front lines for many years:

Forest and Stream Sports Afield Collier's Weekly
The American Field Western Field The Independent
Field and Stream Outdoor Life Country Life
Recreation (old and new) Shield's Magazine Outdoor World
Rod and Gun in Canada Sportsman's Review Bird Lore
In the Open Outing

In campaigning, always appeal for the help of the newspapers. If there are no private axes to grind, they help generously. The weekly journals are of value, but the monthlies are printed so long in advance of their dates of issue that they seldom move fast enough to keep abreast of the procession. Their mechanical limitations are many and serious.

In campaigning, always seek the help of newspapers. If there are no personal agendas involved, they are usually very supportive. Weekly publications are useful, but monthly magazines are printed well in advance of their release dates, so they rarely keep up with the news. They have many significant mechanical limitations.

Every newspaper likes "exclusive" news, letters and articles. On that basis they will print about all the live matter that you can furnish. But at the same time, the important news of the campaign must be sent to the press broadcast, in the form of printed slips all ready for the foreman. Many of these are never used, but the others are; and it pays. The news in every slip must be vouched for by the sender, or it will not be used. Often it will appear as a letter signed by the sender; which is all right, only the news is most effective when printed without a signature. Do not count on the Associated Press; because its peculiar demands render it almost impossible for it to be utilized in game protection work.

Every newspaper loves "exclusive" news, letters, and articles. Based on that, they'll print any relevant information you can provide. However, it’s crucial that the key news of the campaign must be sent to the press as printed slips ready for the foreman. Many of these slips are never used, but the ones that are definitely pay off. Each slip of news needs to be verified by the sender, or it won’t be published. Often, it appears as a letter signed by the sender; that works fine, but the news is most impactful when printed anonymously. Don’t rely on the Associated Press; its unique requirements make it nearly impossible for them to be involved in game protection efforts.

How To Meet Opposition. —There is no rule for the handling of opposition [Page 264] that is fair and open. For opposition that is unfair and under-handed, there is one powerful weapon,—Publicity. The American people love fair play, and there is nothing so fatal to an unfair fighter as a searchlight, turned full on him without fear and without mercy. If it is reliably and persistently reported that some citizen who ought to be on the right side has for some dark reason become active on the wrong side, print the reports in a large newspaper, and ask him publicly if they are true. If the reports are false, he can quickly come out in a letter and say so, and end the matter. If they are true, the public will soon know it, and act accordingly.

How to Deal with Opposition. —There’s no set rule for dealing with opposition [Page 264] that is fair and honest. For opposition that is unfair and sneaky, there’s one powerful tool—Publicity. The American people value fair play, and nothing threatens an unfair opponent more than being exposed in the spotlight, without fear or mercy. If it’s reliably and consistently reported that someone who should be on the right side has, for some shady reason, gotten involved on the wrong side, publish those reports in a major newspaper and publicly ask him if they are true. If the reports are false, he can quickly respond in a letter to clear things up and put the matter to rest. If they are true, the public will find out soon enough and will react accordingly.

Eternal Vigilance. —The progress of a bill must be watched by some competent person from day to day, and finally from hour to hour. I know one bill that was saved from defeat only because its promoter dragged it, almost by force, out of the hands of a tardy clerk, and accompanied it in person to the senate, where it was passed in the last hour of a session.

Stay alert always. —The progress of a bill needs to be monitored by a qualified person daily, and ultimately hourly. I know of one bill that was rescued from failure only because its supporter physically pulled it away from a slow clerk and personally took it to the senate, where it was approved in the final hour of a session.

A bill should not be left to a long slumber in the drawer of a committee. Such delays nearly always are dangerous.

A bill shouldn't be left to sit for too long in a committee's drawer. These delays are almost always risky.

Signing The Bill. —The promoter of a great measure always seeks the sympathy of the Chief Executive early in the day; but he should not make the diplomatic error of trying to exact promises or pledges in advance. Good judges do not give away their decisions in advance.

Signing the Bill. —The person behind a major initiative always tries to gain the support of the Chief Executive early on; however, they shouldn't make the mistake of trying to get promises or commitments beforehand. Smart decision-makers don’t reveal their conclusions ahead of time.

Because a Chief Executive remarks after a bill has been sent to him for signing that he "cannot approve it," it is no reason to give up in despair. Many an executive approval has been snatched at the last moment, as a brand from the burning. Ask for a hearing before the bill is acted upon. At the hearing, and before it and after, the People who wish the bill to become a law must express themselves,—by letter, by telegram, and by appeal in person. If the governor becomes convinced that an overwhelming majority of his people desire him to sign the bill, he will sign it, even though personally he is opposed to it! The hall mark of a good governor is a spirit of obedience to the will of the great majority.

Because a Chief Executive says after receiving a bill for signing that he "cannot approve it," that doesn't mean we should lose hope. Many executive approvals have been secured at the last minute, just like a brand pulled from the fire. Request a hearing before the bill is considered. At the hearing, as well as before and after it, the people who want the bill to become law must make their voices heard—through letters, telegrams, and in-person appeals. If the governor becomes convinced that an overwhelming majority of his constituents want him to sign the bill, he will sign it, even if he personally disagrees! A good governor is marked by their willingness to follow the will of the great majority.

Not until your bill has been signed by the governor are you ready to go home with a quiet mind, take off your armor, and put your ear to the telephone while you hear some one say as your only reward,—"Well done, good and faithful servant."

Not until your bill is signed by the governor can you head home with peace of mind, take off your armor, and listen to the phone as someone says as your only reward, “Well done, good and faithful servant.”

As To "Credit." —Do not count upon receiving any credit for what you do in the cause of game protection, outside the narrow circle of your own family and your nearest friends. This is a busy world; and the human mind flits like a restless bird from one subject to another. The men who win campaigns are forgotten by the general public, in a few hours! There is nothing more fickle or more fleeting than the bubble called "popular applause." Judging by the experiences of great men, I should say that it has no substance, whatever. The most valuable reward of the man who fights in a great cause, and helps to win victories, is the profound satisfaction that comes to every good citizen who bravely does his whole duty, and leaves the world better than he found it, without the slightest thought of gallery applause.

Regarding "Credit." —Don't expect to get any credit for your efforts in game protection, except from your close family and friends. This is a busy world, and people's attention shifts quickly from one topic to another. The heroes of significant campaigns are forgotten by the public within hours! There’s nothing more unreliable or fleeting than the illusion of "popular applause." Based on the experiences of great individuals, I'd say it has no real substance at all. The most valuable reward for someone who fights for a great cause and helps achieve victories is the deep satisfaction that comes from being a good citizen who fully fulfills their duty and leaves the world better than they found it, without any concern for public praise.


[Page 265]
CHAPTER XXVIII
NEW LAWS NEEDED: A ROLL-CALL OF THE STATES

The principles of wild-life protection and encouragement are now so firmly established as to leave little room for argument regarding their value. When they are set forth before the people of any given state, the only question is of willingness to do the right thing; of duty or a defiance of duty; of good citizenship or the reign of selfishness. Men who do not wish to do their duty purposely befog great issues by noisy talk and tiresome academic discussions of trivial details; and such men are the curse and scourge of reform movements.

The principles of wildlife protection and promotion are now so well established that there’s little room for debate about their importance. When these principles are presented to the people of any given state, the only question is whether they are willing to do the right thing; it's about duty versus defying duty; about being a good citizen or letting selfishness take over. People who don't want to fulfill their responsibilities tend to cloud important issues with loud chatter and exhausting academic debates over trivial details; such individuals are the bane of reform movements.

There are a very few persons who foolishly assert that "there are too many game laws!" It is entirely wrong for any person to make such a statement, for it tends to promote harmful error. The fact that our laws are too lenient, or are not fully enforced, is no excuse for denouncing their purposes. We have all along been too timid, too self indulgent, and too much afraid of hurting the feelings of the game-hogs.

There are very few people who foolishly claim that "there are too many game laws!" It's completely wrong for anyone to say that, as it promotes harmful misinformation. The reality that our laws are too lenient, or not fully enforced, doesn't justify criticizing their intentions. We have always been too timid, too indulgent, and too worried about offending the poachers.

Give me the power to make the game laws of any state or province and I will guarantee to save the non-migratory wild life of that region. I will not only make adequate laws, but I will also provide means, men and penalties by which they will be enforced! It is easy and simple, for men who are not afraid.

Give me the authority to establish the game laws of any state or province, and I will ensure the protection of the non-migratory wildlife in that area. I won't just create effective laws; I'll also supply the resources, personnel, and consequences needed to ensure they will be enforced! It's straightforward and uncomplicated for those who aren't afraid.

I have been at considerable pains to analyze the game laws of each state, ascertain their shortcomings, and give a list of the faults that need correction by new legislation. It has required no profound wisdom to do this, because the principles involved are so plain that any intelligent schoolboy fifteen years old can master them in one hour. I have performed this task hopefully, in the belief that in many states the real issues have not been plainly put before the people. Hereafter no state shall destroy its wild life through ignorance of the laws that would preserve it.

I have put in a lot of effort to analyze the game laws of each state, identify their weaknesses, and provide a list of the issues that need to be fixed with new laws. It hasn’t taken any deep insight to accomplish this, since the principles are so straightforward that any smart fifteen-year-old can learn them in an hour. I've completed this task with optimism, believing that in many states, the important issues haven’t been clearly presented to the public. From now on, no state should harm its wildlife due to ignorance of the laws that would protect it.

Let no man say that "it is too late to save the wild life"; for excepting the dead-and-gone species, that is not true. Let no man say that "we can not save the wild life by law"; for that is not true, either. As long as laws are lax, even law-abiding people will take advantage of them.

Let no one say that "it's too late to save wildlife"; that's simply not true, except for the species that are already extinct. Let no one say that "we can't protect wildlife through laws"; that's not true either. As long as laws are weak, even people who usually follow the law will exploit them.

There are millions of men who think it is right to kill all the game that the law allows! There are thousands of women who think it is right to wear aigrettes as long as the law permits their sale! And yet, if we are resolute and diligent there is plenty of hope for the future. During the past three years, to go no farther back, we have seen the whole state of New York swept clean of the traffic in native wild game by the [Page 266] Bayne law, and of the traffic in wild birds' plumage on women's hats through the Dutcher law. To-day, in this state, we find ninety-nine women out of every one hundred wearing flowers, and laces, and plush and satin on their hats, instead of the heads, bodies and feathers of wild birds that were the regular thing until three years ago. The change has been a powerful commentary on the value of good laws for the protection of wild life. The Dutcher law has caused the plumage of wild birds almost wholly to disappear from the State of New York!

There are millions of men who believe it's okay to kill all the game that the law allows! There are thousands of women who believe it's fine to wear aigrettes as long as the law allows their sale! Yet, if we stay determined and work hard, there’s plenty of hope for the future. In the last three years, to go no further back, we’ve seen the whole state of New York completely eliminate the trade in native wild game through the [Page 266] Bayne law, and the trade in wild birds' feathers on women's hats thanks to the Dutcher law. Today, in this state, we find ninety-nine out of every one hundred women wearing flowers, lace, and plush and satin on their hats, instead of the heads, bodies, and feathers of wild birds that were common just three years ago. This change is a strong testament to the importance of good laws for protecting wildlife. The Dutcher law has made the plumage of wild birds almost completely disappear from the State of New York!

We shall here point out the plain duty of each state; and then it will be up to them, individually, to decide whether they can stand the blood-test or not.

We will now highlight the clear responsibility of each state; after that, it will be up to them, individually, to decide whether they can handle the blood test or not.

A state or a nation can be ungentlemanly, unfair or mean, just the same as an individual. No state has a right to maintain shambles for the slaughter of migratory game or song birds that belong in part to sister states. Every state holds its migratory bird life in trust, for the benefit of the people of the nation at large. A state is just as responsible for its treatment of wild life as any individual; and it is time to open books of account.

A state or a nation can be inconsiderate, unjust, or cruel, just like any individual. No state has the right to allow chaos for the hunting of migratory game or songbirds that partly belong to neighboring states. Every state is responsible for its migratory bird population, for the benefit of the entire nation. A state is just as accountable for how it treats wildlife as any individual, and it's time to take responsibility.

It is robbery, as well as murder, for any southern state to slaughter the robins of the northern states, where no robins may be killed. No southern gentleman can permit such doings, after the crime has been pointed out to him! In the North, the men who are caught shooting robins are instantly haled to court, and fined or imprisoned. If we of the North should kill for food the mockingbirds that visit us, the people of the South instantly would brand us as monsters of greed and meanness; and they would be perfectly justified in so doing.

It’s both robbery and murder for any southern state to slaughter the robins from the northern states, where no robins are allowed to be killed. No southern gentleman can allow such actions once the crime has been brought to his attention! In the North, men who are caught shooting robins are immediately taken to court and fined or jailed. If we in the North were to kill the mockingbirds that visit us for food, the people of the South would quickly label us as greedy and heartless; and they would be completely justified in doing so.

Let us at least be honest in "agreeing upon a state of fact," as the lawyers say, whether we act sensibly and mercifully or not. Just so long as there remains in this land of ours a fauna of game birds, and the gunners of one-half the states are allowed to dictate the laws for the slaughter of it, just so long will our present protection remain utterly absurd and criminally inadequate. Look at these absurdities:

Let’s at least be honest in “agreeing on a state of fact,” as lawyers would say, whether we act reasonably and kindly or not. As long as there’s still a population of game birds in our country, and the hunters from half the states can dictate the laws governing their hunting, our current protections will remain completely ridiculous and criminally insufficient. Look at these absurdities:

New York, New Jersey and many other northern states rigidly prohibit the late winter and spring shooting of waterfowl and shore birds, and limit the bag; North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, and other southern states not only slaughter wild fowl and shore birds all winter and spring, without limit, but several of them kill certain non-game birds besides!

New York, New Jersey, and many other northern states strictly forbid hunting waterfowl and shorebirds in late winter and spring, and they set limits on how many can be taken; in contrast, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, and other southern states not only hunt wildfowl and shorebirds all winter and spring without any limits, but several of them also kill certain non-game birds as well!

All the northern states protect the robin, for the good that it does; but in North Carolina, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana and some other southern states, thousands of robins are shot for food. Minnesota has stopped spring shooting; but her sister state on the south, Iowa, obstinately refuses to do so.

All the northern states protect the robin because of the benefits it brings; however, in North Carolina, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, and some other southern states, thousands of robins are shot for food. Minnesota has banned spring hunting, but its neighboring state to the south, Iowa, stubbornly refuses to do the same.

The United States At Large. —There are two great measures that should be carried into effect by the governing body of the United States. One is the enactment of a law providing federal protection for all migratory [Page 267] birds; and Canada and Mexico should be induced to join with the United States in an international treaty to that effect.

The U.S. Overall. —There are two major actions that the U.S. government should implement. One is to pass a law that offers federal protection for all migratory [Page 267] birds, and Canada and Mexico should be encouraged to partner with the United States in an international treaty to that effect.

The other necessary measure is the passage of a joint resolution of Congress declaring every national forest and forest reserve also a game preserve and general sanctuary for wild life, in which there shall be no hunting or killing of wild creatures of any kind save predatory animals.

The other necessary step is for Congress to pass a joint resolution declaring every national forest and forest reserve as a game preserve and general sanctuary for wildlife, where there will be no hunting or killing of any wild creatures except for predatory animals.

The tendency of the times,—and the universal slaughter of wild life on this continent,—point straight as an arrow flies in that direction. Soon or late, we have GOT to come to it! If Congress does not take the initiatory steps, the People will! Such a consummation is necessary; it is justified by common sense and the inexorable logic of the situation, and when done it will be right.

The trend of our times—and the widespread killing of wildlife on this continent—clearly leads us there. Sooner or later, we have to face it! If Congress doesn’t take the first steps, the People will! This outcome is essential; it’s backed by common sense and the undeniable logic of the situation, and once it happens, it will be the right thing to do.

The time was when the friends of wild life did not dare speak of this subject in Washington save in whispers. That was in the days when the Appalachian Park bill could not be passed, and when there were angry mutterings and even curses leveled against Gifford Pinchot and the Forestry Bureau because so many national forests were being set aside. That was in the days when a few western sheep-men thought that they owned the whole Rocky Mountains without having bought them. To-day, the American people have grown accustomed to the idea of having the resources of the public domain saved and conserved for the benefit of the millions rather than lavished upon a favored few. To-day it is perfectly safe to talk about making every national forest a first class wild-life sanctuary, and it is up to the People to request Congress to take that action, at once.

The time was when wildlife advocates barely dared to talk about this issue in Washington, except in hushed tones. That was back when the Appalachian Park bill couldn't get passed, and there were angry murmurs and even curses directed at Gifford Pinchot and the Forestry Bureau for reserving so many national forests. That was when a handful of western sheep ranchers thought they owned the entire Rocky Mountains without actually buying them. Today, the American public has become used to the idea of conserving public land resources for the benefit of millions instead of letting a privileged few exploit them. Nowadays, it's completely safe to discuss turning every national forest into a top-tier wildlife sanctuary, and it's up to the people to urge Congress to make that happen immediately.

The Weeks bill, the Anthony bill, and the McLean bill now before Congress to provide federal protection for migratory birds are practically identical. All three are good bills; and it matters not which one finally becomes a law. Whichever is put forward finally for passage should provide federal protection for all migratory birds that ever enter the United States, Alaska, or Porto Rico. Why favor the duck and leave the robin to its fate, or vice versa? It will be just as easy to do this task by wholes as by halves. The time to hesitate, to feel timid, or to be afraid of the other fellow has gone by. To-day the millions of honest and serious-minded Americans are ready to back the most thorough and most drastic policy, because that has become the most necessary and the best policy. Furthermore, it is the only policy worthy of serious consideration.

The Weeks bill, the Anthony bill, and the McLean bill currently before Congress to provide federal protection for migratory birds are essentially the same. All three are good bills, and it doesn't matter which one ultimately becomes law. Whichever one is finally passed should ensure federal protection for all migratory birds that ever enter the United States, Alaska, or Puerto Rico. Why protect the duck and leave the robin to fend for itself, or the other way around? It will be just as easy to address this issue completely as it is to do it partially. The time for hesitance, timidity, or fear of opposition has passed. Today, millions of honest and serious-minded Americans are ready to support the most comprehensive and robust policy, because that has become the most necessary and effective approach. Moreover, it is the only policy deserving of serious consideration.

Some of our states have done rather well in wild-life protection,—considering the absurdity of our national policy as a whole; others have done indifferently, and some have been and still are very remiss. Here is where we intend to hew to the line, and without fear or favor set forth the standing of each state according to its merits or its lack of merits. In a life-or-death matter such as now confronts us regarding the wild life of our country, it is time to speak plainly.

Some of our states have done quite well in wildlife protection, considering the ridiculousness of our national policy overall; others have done just okay, and some have been very negligent and continue to be. This is where we plan to stick to the facts, and without fear or favoritism, present the status of each state based on its merits or shortcomings. In a life-or-death situation like the one we face now regarding the wildlife in our country, it's time to speak openly.

In the following call of the States, the glaring deficiencies in state game laws will be set forth in detail, in order that the sore spots may [Page 268] be exposed to the view of the doctors. Conditions will be represented as they exist at the end of the summer of 1912, and it is to be hoped that these faults soon may be corrected.

In the upcoming report from the States, the obvious shortcomings in state game laws will be outlined in detail so that the problem areas can be clearly seen by the experts. The situation will be presented as it stands at the end of summer 1912, and hopefully, these issues will be addressed soon.


A Roll-Call Of The States

A Roll Call of the States

Alabama:

It is a satisfaction to be able to open this list with the name of a state that is entitled to a medal of honor for game protection. In this particular field of progress and enlightenment, the state of Alabama is the pioneer state of the South. New York now occupies a similar position in the North; but New York is an older state, and stronger in her general love of nature. The attainment of advanced protection in any southern state is a very different matter from what it is in the North.

It’s gratifying to start this list with a state deserving of a medal of honor for protecting wildlife. In this area of progress and awareness, Alabama is the leading state in the South. New York holds a similar status in the North; however, New York is an older and more passionate state when it comes to nature. Achieving effective wildlife protection in any southern state is quite different from doing so in the North.

Five years ago Alabama set her house in order. The slaughter of song and insectivorous birds has been so far stopped as any Southern state can stop it unaided by the federal government, and those birds are recognized and treated as the farmers' best friends. The absurd system of attempted protection through county laws has been abandoned. The sale of game has been stopped, and since that stoppage, quail have increased. The trapping and export of game have ceased, and wild turkeys and woodcock are now increasing. It is unlawful to kill or capture non-game birds. Bag limits have been imposed, but the bag limit laws are all too liberal, and should be reduced. A hunter's license law is in force, and the department of game and fish is self-supporting. Night hunting is prohibited, and female deer may not be killed. A comprehensive warden system has been provided. As yet, however, Alabama

Five years ago, Alabama got its act together. The killing of songbirds and insect-eating birds has been halted as much as any Southern state can manage without help from the federal government, and those birds are now recognized as the farmers' best friends. The ridiculous practice of trying to protect them with county laws has been dropped. Selling game is no longer allowed, and since the ban, quail populations have risen. The trapping and exporting of game has stopped, and wild turkeys and woodcock are on the rise now. It is illegal to kill or capture non-game birds. There are bag limits in place, but the bag limit laws are still too generous and should be lowered. A hunting license requirement is enforced, and the game and fish department is self-sustaining. Night hunting is banned, and female deer cannot be hunted. A comprehensive warden system has been implemented. However, Alabama is still

  • Permits the shooting of waterfowl to March 15, which is too late, by one and one-half months.
  • The use of automatic and pump guns in hunting should be suppressed.
  • There should be a limit of two deer per year, and killing should be
  • restricted to deer with horns not less than three inches long.

The story of game protection in Alabama began in 1907. Prior to that time, the slaughter of wild life was very great. It is known that enormous numbers of quail were annually killed by negro farm hands, who hunted at least three days each week, regardless of work to be done. The slaughter of quail, wild ducks, woodcock, doves, robins and snipe was described as "nauseating."

The story of game protection in Alabama started in 1907. Before that time, the killing of wildlife was overwhelming. It's known that huge numbers of quail were killed each year by Black farm workers, who hunted at least three days a week, no matter what work needed to be done. The killing of quail, wild ducks, woodcock, doves, robins, and snipe was described as "nauseating."

The change that has been wrought since 1907 is chiefly due to the efforts of one man. Alabama owes her standing to-day to the admirable qualities of John H. Wallace, Jr., her Game and Fish Commissioner, author of the State's policy in wild-life conservation. His broad-mindedness, his judgment and his success make him a living object lesson of the power of one determined man in the conservation of wild life.

The change that has happened since 1907 is mainly because of one person. Alabama's current reputation is thanks to the admirable qualities of John H. Wallace, Jr., her Game and Fish Commissioner, who created the State's policy on wildlife conservation. His open-mindedness, sound judgment, and success make him a living example of how one determined individual can have a significant impact on wildlife conservation.

Commissioner Wallace is an ardent supporter of the Weeks and Anthony bills for federal protection, and as a lawyer of the South, he believes there is "no constitutional inhibition against federal legislation for the protection of birds of passage."

Commissioner Wallace is a strong supporter of the Weeks and Anthony bills for federal protection, and as a Southern lawyer, he believes there is "no constitutional barrier against federal legislation for the protection of migratory birds."

Alaska: [Page 269]
  • The sale of game must be absolutely prohibited, forever.
  • The slaughter of big game by Indians, miners and prospectors should now be limited, and strictly regulated by law, on rational lines.
  • The slaughter of walrus for ivory and hides, both in the Alaskan and Russian waters of Bering Sea, should be totally prohibited for ten years.
  • The game-warden service should be quadrupled in number of wardens, and in general effectiveness.
  • The game-warden service should be supplied with two sea-going vessels, independent for patrol work.
  • The bag limit on hoofed game is 50% too large.
  • To accomplish these ends, Congress should annually appropriate $50,000 for the protection of wild life in Alaska. The present amount, $15,000, is very inadequate, and the great wild-life interests at stake amply justify the larger amount.

It is now time for Alaska to make substantial advances in the protection of her wild life. It is no longer right nor just for Indians, miners and prospectors to be permitted by law to kill all the big game they please, whenever they please. The indolent and often extortionate Indians of Alaska,—who now demand "big money" for every service they perform,—are not so valuable as citizens that they should be permitted to feed riotously upon moose, and cow moose at that, until that species is exterminated. Miners and prospectors are valuable citizens, but that is no reason why they should forever be allowed to live upon wild game, any more than that hungry prospectors in our Rocky Mountains should be allowed to kill cattle.

It’s time for Alaska to make serious progress in protecting its wildlife. It’s no longer right or fair for Indians, miners, and prospectors to have the legal right to hunt all the big game they want, whenever they want. The lazy and often greedy Indians of Alaska—who now demand "big money" for every service they offer—aren't so essential as citizens that they should be allowed to overhunt moose, especially cow moose, until that species disappears. Miners and prospectors are valuable citizens, but that doesn’t mean they should always be allowed to rely on wild game for food, just like hungry prospectors in our Rocky Mountains shouldn’t be allowed to kill cattle.

Alaska and its resources do not belong to the very few people from "the States" who have gone there to make their fortunes and get out again as quickly as possible. The quicker the public mind north of Wrangel is disabused of that idea, the better. Its game belongs to the people of this nation of ninety-odd millions, and it is a safe prediction that the ninety millions will not continue to be willing that the miners, prospectors and Indians shall continue to live on moose meat and caribou tongues in order to save bacon and beef.

Alaska and its resources don’t belong to the handful of people from "the States" who just go there to get rich and leave as fast as they can. The sooner everyone understands this beyond Wrangel, the better. Its wildlife belongs to the people of this country of around ninety million, and it’s a safe bet that these ninety million won’t keep allowing miners, prospectors, and Native people to survive on moose meat and caribou tongues just to conserve bacon and beef.

Mr. Frank E. Kleinschmidt said to me that at Sand Point, Alaska, he saw eighty-two caribou tongues brought in by an Indian, and sold at fifty cents each, while (according to all accounts) most of the bodies of the slaughtered animals became a loss.

Mr. Frank E. Kleinschmidt told me that in Sand Point, Alaska, he saw eighty-two caribou tongues brought in by an Indian and sold for fifty cents each, while (according to all accounts) most of the bodies of the slaughtered animals ended up as a loss.

Governor Clark has recommended in his annual report for 1911 that the protection now enjoyed by the giant brown bear (Ursus middendorffi) on Kadiak Island be removed, for the benefit of settlers and their stock! It goes without saying that no one proposes that predatory wild animals shall be permitted to retard the development of any wild country that is required by civilized man. All we ask in this matter is that, as in the case of the once-proposed slaughter of sea-lions on the Pacific Coast, the necessity of the proposed slaughter shall be fully and adequately proven before the killing begins! It is fair to insist that the sea-lion episode shall not be repeated on Kadiak Island.

Governor Clark has suggested in his annual report for 1911 that the protection currently given to the giant brown bear (Ursus middendorffi) on Kadiak Island should be lifted for the benefit of settlers and their livestock. It goes without saying that no one is advocating for predatory wild animals to hold back the development of any wilderness that civilized people need. All we ask in this matter is that, just like the previously proposed killing of sea lions on the Pacific Coast, the necessity of the proposed killing must be fully and adequately established before it starts! It's fair to demand that the sea lion situation does not repeat itself on Kadiak Island.

[Page 270]

The big game of Alaska can not long endure against a "limit" of two moose, three mountain sheep, three caribou and six deer per year, per man. At that rate the moose and sheep soon will disappear. The limit should be one moose, two sheep, two caribou and four deer,—unless we are willing to dedicate the Alaskan big game to Commercialism. No sportsman needs a larger bag than the revised schedule; and commercialists should not be allowed to kill big game anywhere, at any time.

The big game in Alaska can't last long with a limit of two moose, three mountain sheep, three caribou, and six deer per year, per person. At that rate, the moose and sheep will vanish quickly. The limit should be one moose, two sheep, two caribou, and four deer—unless we're okay with turning Alaskan big game into a commercial opportunity. No sportsman needs a bigger catch than this updated limit, and commercial hunters shouldn't be allowed to hunt big game anywhere or anytime.

Let us bear in mind the fact that Alaska is being throughly "opened up" to the Man with a Gun. Here is the latest evidence, from the new circular of an outfitter:

Let’s remember that Alaska is being thoroughly "opened up" to the Man with a Gun. Here is the latest proof, from the new circular of an outfitter:

"I will have plenty of good horses, and good, competent and courteous guides; also other camp attendants if desired. My intention is to establish permanently at that point, as I believe it is the gateway to the finest and about the last of the great game countries of North America."

"I will have plenty of good horses and capable, friendly guides, along with other camp staff if needed. My plan is to settle permanently at that spot because I believe it is the gateway to the best and one of the last great game areas in North America."

The road is open; the pack-train is ready; the guides are waiting. Go on and slay the Remnant!

The road is clear; the pack-train is prepared; the guides are waiting. Go ahead and take down the Remnant!

Arizona:
  • The band-tailed pigeons and all non-game birds should immediately be given protection; and a salaried warden system should be established under a Commissioner whose term is not less than four years.
  • The use of automatic and pump guns, in hunting, should be prohibited.
  • Spring shooting should be prohibited.

Arizona has good reason to be proud of her up-to-date position in the ranks of the best game-protecting states. No other state or territory of her age ever has made so good a showing of protective laws. The enactment of laws to cover the points mentioned above would leave little to be desired in Arizona. That state has a bird fauna well worth protecting, and game wardens are extremely necessary.

Arizona has every reason to take pride in its current status among the top states for game protection. No other state or territory of its age has ever demonstrated such effective protective laws. Implementing regulations to address the issues mentioned above would greatly enhance Arizona’s efforts. The state has a bird population that deserves protection, and game wardens are very much needed.

Arkansas:
  • The enforcement of game laws should be placed in charge of a salaried commissioner.
  • Spring shooting of wildfowl should be stopped at once.
  • A reasonable close season should be provided for water fowl, and swans should be protected throughout the year.
  • A bag-limit law should be enacted.
  • A force of game wardens, salaried and unsalaried, should at once be created.
  • The killing of female deer and the hounding of deer, should be stopped.
  • No buck deer should be shot, unless horns three inches long are seen before firing.
  • A hunter's license law is necessary; and the fees should go to the support of the game protection department.
  • The local exemptions in favor of market hunters in Mississippi county should be repealed.

It appears that in Arkansas the laws for the protection and increase of wild life are by no means up to the mark. At this moment, Arkansas is next to Florida, the rearmost of all our states in wild-life protection. [Page 271] Awake, Arkansas! Consider the peril that threatens your fauna. The Sunk Lands, in your northeastern corner along the St. Francis River, are the greatest wild-fowl refuge anywhere in the Mississippi Valley between the Gulf Coast of Louisiana and the breeding-grounds of Minnesota. A duty to the nation devolves upon you, to protect the migratory waterfowl that visit your great bird refuge from the automatic and pump guns of the pothunters who shoot for northern markets, and kill all that they can kill. Protect those Sunken Lands! Confer a boon on all the people of the Mississippi Valley by making that region a bird refuge in fact as well as in name.

It seems that Arkansas’s laws for protecting and increasing wildlife are definitely lacking. Right now, Arkansas is second only to Florida as the least protective state for wildlife. [Page 271] Wake up, Arkansas! Think about the danger facing your animals. The Sunk Lands, located in your northeastern corner along the St. Francis River, are the best wildfowl refuge in the entire Mississippi Valley, stretching from the Gulf Coast of Louisiana to the breeding grounds of Minnesota. You have a responsibility to the nation to protect the migratory waterfowl that visit your amazing bird refuge from the automatic and pump guns of hunters who shoot for northern markets, killing as many as they can. Protect those Sunken Lands! Do a favor for everyone in the Mississippi Valley by making that area a bird refuge both in reality and in name.

Heretofore, you have permitted hired market gunners from outside your borders to slaughter the wild-fowl of your Sunk Lands literally by millions, and ship them to northern markets, with very little benefit to your people. It is time for that slaughter to cease. Don't maintain a duck and goose shambles in Mississippi County, year after year, as North Carolina does! Do unto other states as you would have other states do unto you. Do not be afraid to pass nine good laws in one act. Clear your record in the Family of States, and save your fauna before it is too late. It is not fair for you to permit the slaughter of the insectivorous birds that are like the blood of life to the farmer and fruit grower.

Until now, you have allowed hired hunters from outside your area to kill millions of wild birds in your Sunk Lands and send them to northern markets, with very little benefit for your community. It's time for this slaughter to stop. Don’t maintain a duck and goose operation in Mississippi County, year after year, like North Carolina does! Treat other states the way you want to be treated. Don’t hesitate to pass nine good laws in one act. Clean up your record in the Family of States and protect your wildlife before it’s too late. It’s unfair for you to allow the killing of insect-eating birds that are vital to farmers and fruit growers.

California:
  • The sale of all wild game should be forever prohibited.
  • The use of automatic and pump shotguns, in hunting, should be prohibited.
  • The killing of pigeons and doves as "game" and "food" should be stopped.
  • The sage grouse and every other species of bird threatened with extinction should be given ten year close seasons.
  • The mule deer (if any remain) and the Columbian black-tailed deer in the southern counties should be accorded a ten-year close season.
  • A large state game preserve should be created immediately, on or near Mount Shasta and abundantly stocked with nucleus herds of antelope, black-tailed deer, bison and elk.
  • A suitable preserve in the southern part of the state should be set aside for the dwarf elk.

As game laws are generally regarded, California has on her books a series that look rather good to the eye, but which are capable of considerable improvement. All along the line, the birds and quadrupeds of the Golden State are vanishing! Under that heading, a vigorous chapter could be written; but space forbids its development here. Just fancy laws that permit gunning and hunting with dogs, from August until January—one-half the entire year! Think of the nesting birds that are disturbed or killed by dogs and gunners after other birds!

As laws about hunting are usually viewed, California has a set that looks appealing at first glance, but there's definitely room for improvement. Across the board, the bird and animal populations in the Golden State are dwindling! A strong case could be made about this, but there isn’t enough space to explore it here. Just imagine laws that allow hunting with dogs from August to January—covering half the year! Consider the nesting birds that are disturbed or killed by dogs and hunters going after other birds!

California's wild ducks and geese have been slaughtered to an extent almost beyond belief. The splendid sage grouse and the sharp-tailed grouse are greatly reduced in numbers. Of her hundreds of thousands of antelope, once the cheapest game in the market, scarcely "a trace" remains. Her mountain sheep and mule deer are almost extinct. Her grizzly bears are gone!

California's wild ducks and geese have been killed off almost beyond comprehension. The beautiful sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse have significantly declined in numbers. Of the hundreds of thousands of antelope, which used to be the most affordable game available, hardly "a trace" is left. Her mountain sheep and mule deer are nearly extinct. Her grizzly bears are gone!

The most terrible slaughter ever recorded for automatic guns occurred [Page 272] in Glenn County, Cal., on Feb. 5, 1906, when two men (whose story was published in Outdoor Life, xvii, p. 371, April, 1906), killed 450 geese in one day, and actually bagged 218 of them in one hour!

The worst mass killing ever documented with automatic guns happened [Page 272] in Glenn County, California, on February 5, 1906, when two men (whose story was published in Outdoor Life, xvii, p. 371, April 1906) shot 450 geese in a single day, and managed to catch 218 of them in one hour!

Every person who has paid attention to game protection on the Pacific coast well knows that during the past eight years or more, the work of game protection in California has been in a state of frequent turmoil. At times the lack of harmony between the State Fish and Game Commission and the sportsmen of the state has been damaging to the interests of wild life, and deplorable. In the case of Warden Welch, in Santa Cruz County, pernicious politics came near robbing the state of a splendid warden, but the courts finally overthrew the overthrowers of Mr. Welch, and reinstated him.

Every person who has followed game protection on the Pacific coast knows that for the past eight years or so, game protection work in California has been in constant upheaval. At times, the lack of cooperation between the State Fish and Game Commission and the sportsmen in the state has harmed wildlife interests and has been unfortunate. In the case of Warden Welch in Santa Cruz County, harmful politics almost cost the state a great warden, but the courts ultimately rejected those trying to remove Mr. Welch and reinstated him.

The fish and game commissioners of any state should be broad-minded, non-partisan, strictly honest and sincere. So long as they possess these qualities, they deserve and should have the earnest and aggressive support of all sportsmen and all lovers of wild life. The remnant of wild life is entitled to a square deal, and harmony in the camp of its friends. Fortunately California has an excellent force of salaried game wardens (82 in all) and 577 volunteer wardens serving without salary.

The fish and game commissioners in any state should be open-minded, unbiased, completely honest, and genuine. As long as they have these traits, they deserve and should receive the strong and active support of all sports enthusiasts and wildlife lovers. The remaining wildlife deserves a fair chance, along with unity among its supporters. Luckily, California has a great team of paid game wardens (82 total) and 577 volunteer wardens who serve without pay.

Colorado:
  • The State of Colorado should instantly stop the sale of native wild game to be used as food.
  • It should stop all late winter and spring shooting of native wild birds.
  • It should give the sage grouse, pinnated grouse and all shore birds a ten year close season, remove the dove from the list of game birds, and give it a permanent close season.
  • It should remove the crane and the swan from the list of game birds.

In twenty-five short years we have seen in Colorado a waste of wild life and the destruction of a living inheritance that has few parallels in history. Possibly the people of Colorado are satisfied with the residuum; but some outsiders regard all Rocky Mountain shambles with a feeling of horror.

In just twenty-five years, we've witnessed a massive decline in wildlife and the destruction of a living legacy in Colorado that is almost unparalleled in history. While the people of Colorado might be okay with the leftovers, some outsiders view the devastation in the Rocky Mountains with horror.

A brief quarter-century ago, Colorado was a zoological park of grand scenery and big game. The scenery remains, but of the great wild herds, only samples are left, and of some species not even that.

A short 25 years ago, Colorado was like a huge zoo filled with stunning landscapes and large wildlife. The beautiful scenery is still there, but now only a few of the great herds remain, and for some species, there are none left at all.

The last bison of Colorado were exterminated in Lost Park by scoundrels calling themselves "taxidermists," in 1897. Of the 200,000 mule deer that inhabited Routt County and other portions of Colorado, not enough now remain to make deer hunting interesting. A perpetual close season was put on mountain sheep just in time to save a dozen small flocks as seed stock. Those flocks have been permitted to live, and they have bred until now there are perhaps 3,500 sheep in the state. Of elk, only a remnant is left, now protected for fifteen years.

The last bison in Colorado were wiped out in Lost Park by con artists who called themselves "taxidermists" in 1897. Of the 200,000 mule deer that lived in Routt County and other parts of Colorado, not enough are left now to make deer hunting worthwhile. A permanent closed season was placed on mountain sheep just in time to save a dozen small herds as breeding stock. Those herds have been allowed to thrive, and they've multiplied until there are now about 3,500 sheep in the state. As for elk, only a small remnant remains, now protected for the past fifteen years.

BAND-TAILED PIGEON

Band-tailed pigeon

Often Mistaken for the Passenger Pigeon. The rapid Slaughter of this Species has Alarmed the Ornithologists of California, who now fear its Extinction

Often Mistaken for the Passenger Pigeon. The rapid killing of this species has alarmed the ornithologists of California, who now fear its extinction.

The grizzly bear is so thoroughly gone that one is seen only by a rare accident; but black bears and pumas are sufficiently numerous to afford fair sport, provided the hunter has a fine outfit of dogs, horses and [Page 273] guides. Of prong-horned antelope, several bands remain, but it is reported that they are steadily diminishing. The herds and herders of domestic sheep are blamed for the decrease, and I have no doubt they deserve it. The sheep and their champions are the implacable enemies of all wild game, and before them the game vanishes, everywhere.

The grizzly bear is almost completely gone, now seen only by rare chance; however, black bears and pumas are still common enough to provide decent sport, as long as the hunter has a good team of dogs, horses, and [Page 273] guides. There are still several groups of pronghorn antelope, but they're said to be steadily declining. The herds and herders of domestic sheep are blamed for this decline, and I have no doubt that's justified. The sheep and their supporters are relentless enemies of all wild game, and because of them, wildlife disappears everywhere.

The lawmakers of Colorado have tried hard to provide adequate statutes for the protection of the wild life of the state. In fact, I think that no state has put forth greater or more elaborate efforts in that direction. For example, in 1899, under the leadership of Judge D.C. Beaman of Denver, Colorado initiated the "more game movement," by enacting a very elaborate law providing for the establishment of private game preserves and farms for the breeding of game under state license, and the tagging and sale of preserve-bred game under state supervision.

The lawmakers in Colorado have worked hard to create sufficient laws to protect the state's wildlife. In fact, I believe no other state has made greater or more detailed efforts in this area. For instance, in 1899, under the leadership of Judge D.C. Beaman from Denver, Colorado started the "more game movement" by passing a comprehensive law that allowed for the creation of private game preserves and farms for breeding game with state licenses, as well as the tagging and sale of game bred on preserves under state supervision.

The history of game destruction in Colorado is a repetition of the old, old story,—plenty of laws, but a hundred times too many hunters, killing the game both according to law and contrary to it, and doing it five times as fast as the game could breed. That combination can safely be warranted to wipe out the wild life of any country in the world, and accomplish it right swiftly.

The history of game destruction in Colorado is a familiar tale—there are plenty of laws, but way too many hunters, taking down wildlife both legally and illegally, and doing it five times faster than the animals can reproduce. That mix is guaranteed to eliminate the wildlife in any country quickly.

As a big-game country, Colorado is distinctly out of the running. Her people are too lawless, and her frontiersmen are, in the main, far too selfish to look upon plenteous game without going after it. Some of these days, a new call of the wild will arise in Colorado, demanding an open season on mountain sheep. Those who demand it will say, "What harm will it do to kill a few surplus bucks? It will improve the breed, and make the herds increase faster!"

As a place for big-game hunting, Colorado is clearly not in the race. Its people are too unruly, and most of its frontiersmen are far too self-centered to see abundant game without wanting to hunt it. One of these days, a new call of the wild will emerge in Colorado, pushing for an open season on mountain sheep. Those in favor will argue, "What harm does it do to take a few extra bucks? It will enhance the breed and help the herds grow faster!"

[Page 274]

By all means, have an "open season" on the Colorado big-horn and the British Columbia elk. It will "do them good." The excitement of ram slaughter will be good for the females, will it not? Of course, they will breed faster after that,—with all the big rams dead. Any "surplus" wild life is a public nuisance, and should promptly be shot to pieces.

By all means, have an "open season" on the Colorado big-horn and the British Columbia elk. It will "do them good." The thrill of killing rams will benefit the females, won’t it? Naturally, they’ll breed faster after that—with all the big rams gone. Any “surplus” wildlife is a public nuisance and should be promptly eliminated.

In Colorado there is some desire that Estes Park should be acquired as a national park, and maintained by the government; but the strong reasons for this have not yet appeared. As yet we have not heard any reason why the State of Colorado should not herself take it and make of it a state park and game preserve. If done, it could be offered as a partial atonement for her wastefulness in throwing away her inheritance of grand game.

In Colorado, there is a desire for Estes Park to be turned into a national park and managed by the government; however, strong arguments for this haven't emerged yet. We haven't heard any reasons why the State of Colorado shouldn't take it over and create a state park and wildlife preserve. If that happened, it could serve as a partial way to make up for the state's past negligence in squandering its rich wildlife.

Colorado has work to do in the preservation of her remnant of bird life. In several respects she is behind the times. The present is no time to hesitate, or to ask the gunners what they wish to have done about new laws for the saving of the remnant of game. The dictates of common sense are plain, and inexorable. Let the lawmakers do their whole duty by the remnant of wild life, whether the game killers like it or not.

Colorado has work to do to preserve its remaining bird life. In several ways, it’s falling behind. Now is not the time to hesitate or to ask hunters what they want regarding new laws to protect the remaining wildlife. The rules of common sense are clear and unavoidable. Lawmakers need to do their job fully to protect the remaining wild life, whether hunters agree or not.

The Curse of Domestic Sheep Upon Game and Cattle.—Much has been said in print and out of print regarding the extent to which domestic sheep have destroyed the cattle ranges and incidentally many game ranges of the West; but the half hath not been told. The American people as a whole do not realize that the domestic sheep has driven the domestic steer from the free grass of the wild West, with the same speed and thoroughness with which the buffalo-hunters of the 70's and 80's swept away the bison. I have seen hundreds of thousands of acres of what once were beautiful and fertile cattle-grazing lands in Montana, that has been left by grazing sheep herds looking precisely as if the ground had been shaven with razors and then sandpapered. The sheep have driven out the cattle, and the price of beef has gone up accordingly. Neither cattle, horses nor wild game can find food on ground that has been grazed over by sheep.

The Curse of Domestic Sheep Upon Game and Cattle.—A lot has been said, both in print and out, about how much domestic sheep have harmed the cattle and game ranges in the West; but the full story hasn't been told. Most Americans don’t realize that domestic sheep have pushed domestic cattle away from the open grasslands of the wild West just as quickly and completely as the buffalo hunters of the 1870s and 1880s wiped out the bison. I’ve seen hundreds of thousands of acres that used to be lush cattle-grazing land in Montana now looking as if the ground has been shaved with razors and then sanded down. The sheep have chased off the cattle, and as a result, beef prices have risen. Neither cattle, horses, nor wild game can find food on land that has been grazed by sheep.

The following is the testimony of a reliable eye witness, Mr. Dillon Wallace, and the full text appears in his book, "Saddle and Camp in the Rockies," (page 169):—

The following is the account of a trustworthy eyewitness, Mr. Dillon Wallace, and the complete text can be found in his book, "Saddle and Camp in the Rockies," (page 169):—

Domestic sheep and sheep herders are the greatest enemies of the antelope, as well as of other game animals and birds in the regions where herders take their flocks. The ranges over which domestic sheep pasture are denuded of forage and stripped of all growth, and antelope will not remain upon a range where sheep have been.

Domestic sheep and their herders pose the biggest threats to antelope and other game animals and birds in areas where herders bring their flocks. The land grazed by domestic sheep has been stripped of food and all vegetation, causing antelope to leave areas where sheep have been.

Thus the sheep, sweeping clean all before them and leaving the ranges over which they pass unproductive, for several succeeding seasons, of pasturage for either wild or domestic animals, together with the destructive shepherds, are the worst enemies at present of Utah's wild game, particularly of antelope, sage hens, and grouse.

As a result, the sheep clear everything in their way, leaving the areas they graze unproductive for several seasons, preventing both wild and domestic animals from grazing there. Along with the damaging shepherds, they are currently the major threats to Utah's wildlife, particularly to antelope, sage hens, and grouse.

In Iron county, which has already become an extensive sheep region, settlers tell us that before the advent of sheep, grass grew so luxuriously that a yearling calf lying in it could not be seen. Not only has the grass here been eaten, but the roots tramped out and killed by the hoofs of thousands upon thousands of sheep, and now wide areas, where not long since grass was so plentiful, are as bare and desolate as sand-piles.

In Iron County, which has become a major sheep region, settlers report that before sheep arrived, the grass was so thick that you couldn’t see a yearling calf lying in it. Not only has the grass been eaten, but the roots have also been trampled and destroyed by the hooves of countless sheep. Now, large areas that were once filled with grass are as bare and empty as sand piles.


[Page 275]
CHAPTER XXIX
NEW LAWS NEEDED IN THE STATES
(Continued)
Connecticut:
  • The sale of all native wild game, regardless of its source, should be prohibited at all times. Enact at once a five-year close season law on the remnant of ruffed grouse, quail, woodcock, snipe, and all shore birds.
  • Even in the home of the newest and deadliest "autoloading" shotgun, those guns and pump guns should be prohibited in hunting.
  • The enormous bag limits of 35 rail and 50 each per day of plover, snipe and shore birds is a crime! They should be replaced by a ten-year close season law for all of those species.
  • The terms of the game commissioners should be not less than four years.

Like so many other states, Connecticut has recklessly wasted her wild-life inheritance. During the fifteen years preceding the year 1898, the bird life of that state had decreased 75 per cent. On March 6, 1912, Senator Geo. P. McLean, of Connecticut stated at the hearing held by his Committee on Forest Reservations and the Protection of Game this fact: "We have more cover than there was thirty or forty years ago, more brush probably, but there is not one partridge [ruffed grouse] today where there were twenty ten years ago!"

Like many other states, Connecticut has carelessly squandered its wildlife resources. In the fifteen years leading up to 1898, the bird population in the state decreased by 75 percent. On March 6, 1912, Senator Geo. P. McLean of Connecticut pointed out at a hearing held by his Committee on Forest Reservations and the Protection of Game: "We have more cover than there was thirty or forty years ago, probably more brush, but there is not a single partridge [ruffed grouse] today where there were twenty ten years ago!"

First of all, Connecticut needs a ten-year close season law to save her remnant of shore birds before it is completely annihilated. Then she needs a Bayne law, and needs it badly. Under such a law, and the tagging system that it provides, the state game wardens would have so strong a grip on the situation that the present unlawful sale of game would be completely stopped. Half-way measures in preventing the sale of game will not answer. Already Connecticut has wasted thousands of dollars in fruitless efforts to restock her desolated woodlands and farms with quail, and to introduce the Hungarian partridge; but even yet she will not protect her own native species!

First of all, Connecticut needs a ten-year ban on hunting to save its remaining shorebirds before they’re completely wiped out. Then it really needs a Bayne law. With that law and the tagging system it requires, the state game wardens would have such control over the situation that the illegal sale of game would be completely eliminated. Half-hearted measures to prevent the sale of game simply won’t work. Connecticut has already wasted thousands of dollars trying to restock its devastated woodlands and farms with quail, and to introduce the Hungarian partridge; yet it still refuses to protect its own native species!

Men of Connecticut, save the last remnants of your native game birds before they are all utterly exterminated within your borders! Don't ask the killers of game what they will agree to, but make the laws what you know they should be! If you want a gameless state, let the destruction go on as it now is going, with 16,000 licensed gunners in the field each year, and you will surely have it, right soon.

Men of Connecticut, save the last bits of your native game birds before they disappear completely from your state! Don't ask the hunters what they will accept, but create laws based on what you know they should be! If you want a state without game, let the destruction continue as it is now, with 16,000 licensed hunters out in the field each year, and you will definitely get it, very soon.

Delaware:
  • Stop all spring shooting, at once; stop killing shore birds for ten years, and protect swans indefinitely. [Page 276]
  • Enact bag-limit laws, in very small figures.
  • Stop the sale of all native wild game, regardless of its use, by enacting a Bayne law.
  • Enact a resident license law, and provide for a force of paid game wardens.
  • Stop the use of machine shot-guns in killing your birds.

The state of Delaware is nearly twenty years behind the times. Can it be possible that her Governor and her people are really satisfied with that position? We think not. I dare say they are afflicted with apathy, and game-hogs. The latter can easily back up General Apathy to an extent that spells "no game laws." In one act, and at one bold stroke, Delaware can step out of her position at the rear of the procession of states, and take a place in the front rank. Will she do it? We hope so, for her present status is unworthy of any right-minded, red-blooded state this side of the Philippines.

The state of Delaware is almost twenty years behind the times. Is it really possible that the Governor and the people are satisfied with this? We don't think so. It seems they are suffering from indifference and game-hogs. The latter can easily support General Apathy to the point where it means "no game laws." In one action, with one bold move, Delaware could change its position at the back of the lineup of states and take a spot at the front. Will it do that? We hope so, because its current status is unworthy of any decent, spirited state on this side of the Philippines.

Washington, D.C.
  • The sale of all native wild game, regardless of its source, should be stopped immediately, by the enactment of a complete Bayne law.
  • If game-shooting within the District is continued, on the marshes of the Eastern Branch and on the Potomac River, common decency demands the enactment of bag-limit laws and long close-season laws of the most modern pattern.

Just why it is that gross abuses against wild life have so long been tolerated in the territorial center of the American nation, remains to be ascertained. But, whatever the reason the situation is absurd and intolerable, and Congress should terminate it immediately. As late as 1897, and I think for two or three years thereafter, thousands of robins were sold every year in the public markets of Washington as food! As a spectacle for gods and men, behold to-day the sale of quail, ruffed grouse, wild turkeys and other American game, half way between the Capitol and the White House! Look at Center Market as a national "fence" for the sale of game stolen by market gunners from Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas and Pennsylvania.

Just why gross abuses against wildlife have been tolerated for so long in the heart of America remains to be figured out. But, whatever the reason, the situation is absurd and unacceptable, and Congress needs to put an end to it right away. As recently as 1897, and for a couple of years after, thousands of robins were sold every year in Washington's public markets as food! Just take a look at the current scene: the sale of quail, ruffed grouse, wild turkeys, and other American game happening halfway between the Capitol and the White House! Check out Center Market as a national "fence" for the sale of game illegally taken by market hunters from Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas, and Pennsylvania.

It is time for Congress to bring the District of Columbia sharply into line; for Washington must be made to toe the mark beside New York. The reputation of the national capital demands it, whether the gods of the cafes will consent or not.

It’s time for Congress to get the District of Columbia in order; Washington needs to keep pace with New York. The reputation of the national capital requires it, regardless of whether the trendy spots agree.

Florida:
  • Shooting shore birds and waterfowl in late winter and spring should be stopped.
  • The sale of all native wild game should be prohibited.
  • A State Game Commissioner whose term of office should be not less than four years, and a force of salaried game wardens, should be appointed.
  • A general resident license should be required for hunting.
  • The killing of does and fawns should be stopped, and no deer should be killed save bucks with horns at least three inches long.
  • The bag limit of five deer per year should be two deer; of twenty quail, and two turkeys per day should be ten quail and one turkey.
  • The open season on all game birds should end on February 1, for domestic reasons.
  • Protection should be accorded doves, and robins should be removed from the game list.
[Page 277]

In the destruction of wild life, I think the backwoods population of Florida is the most lawless and defiant that can be found anywhere in the United States. The "plume-hunters" have practically exterminated the plume-bearing egrets, wholly annihilated the roseate spoonbill, the flamingo, and also the Carolina parrakeet. On July 8, 1905, one of them killed an Audubon Association Warden, Guy M. Bradley, whose business it was to enforce the state laws protecting the egret rookeries. The people really to blame for the shooting of Guy Bradley, and the extermination of the egrets by lawless and dangerous men, are the vain and merciless women who wear the "white badges of cruelty" as long as they can be purchased! They have much to answer for!

In the destruction of wildlife, I believe the backwoods population of Florida is the most lawless and defiant anywhere in the United States. The "plume hunters" have nearly wiped out the feathered egrets, completely eliminated the roseate spoonbill, the flamingo, and also the Carolina parakeet. On July 8, 1905, one of them killed an Audubon Association warden, Guy M. Bradley, whose job was to enforce the state laws protecting the egret nesting sites. The people really responsible for Guy Bradley's shooting and the egrets' extermination at the hands of these lawless and dangerous men are the vain and ruthless women who wear the "white badges of cruelty" as long as they can afford them! They have a lot to answer for!

Originally, Florida was alive with bird life. For number of species, abundance of individuals, and general dispersal throughout the whole state, I think no other state in America except possibly California ever possessed a bird fauna quite comparable with it. Once its bird life was one of the wonders of America. But the gunners began early to shoot, and shoot, and shoot. During the fifteen years preceding 1898, the general bird life of Florida decreased in volume 77 per cent. In 1900 it was at a very low point, and it has steadily continued to decrease. The rapidly-growing settlement and cultivation of the state has of course had much to do with the disappearance of wild life generally, and the draining and exploitation of the Everglades will about finish the birds of southern Florida.

Originally, Florida was full of bird life. In terms of the number of species, the abundance of individuals, and their distribution throughout the state, I believe no other state in America, except maybe California, ever had a bird population quite like it. Once, its bird life was one of America's great wonders. But hunters started shooting early and kept at it. In the fifteen years leading up to 1898, the overall bird population in Florida dropped by 77 percent. By 1900, it was at a very low point, and it has continued to decline steadily. The rapidly-growing settlements and farming in the state have certainly contributed to the loss of wildlife in general, and the draining and exploitation of the Everglades will likely wipe out the birds in southern Florida.

The brown pelicans' breeding-place on Pelican Island, in Indian River, has been taken in hand by the national government as a bird refuge, and its marvelous spectacle of pelican life is now protected. Nine other islands on the coast of Florida have been taken as national bird refuges, and will render posterity good service.

The brown pelicans' breeding ground on Pelican Island, in Indian River, has been taken over by the national government as a bird sanctuary, and its amazing display of pelican life is now protected. Nine other islands along the coast of Florida have been designated as national bird refuges, which will benefit future generations.

The great private game and bird preserve of Dr. Ray V. Pierce, at Apalachicola, known as St. Vincent Island, containing twenty square miles of wonderful woods and waters, is performing an important function for the state and the nation.

The large private game and bird reserve of Dr. Ray V. Pierce, located at Apalachicola, known as St. Vincent Island, covering twenty square miles of amazing forests and waters, is serving an important role for the state and the nation.

The Florida bag limit on quail is entirely too liberal. I know one man who never once exceeded the limit of twenty birds per day, but in the season of 1908-9 he killed 865 quail! Can the quail of any state long endure such drains as that?

The bag limit for quail in Florida is way too generous. I know a guy who never once went over the limit of twenty birds a day, but during the 1908-09 season, he shot 865 quail! How can any state's quail population survive that kind of pressure?

From a zoological point of view, Florida is in bad shape. A great many of her people who shoot are desperately lawless and uncontrollable, and the state is not financially able to support a force of wardens sufficiently strong to enforce the laws, even as they are. It looks as if the slaughter would go on until nothing of bird life remains. At present I can see no hope whatever for saving even a good remnant of the wild life of the state.

From a zoological perspective, Florida is in serious trouble. A large number of people who hunt there are completely lawless and uncontrollable, and the state doesn’t have enough money to maintain a strong enough warden force to uphold the laws, even as they currently exist. It seems like the killing will continue until there’s nothing left of the bird population. Right now, I see no hope at all for saving even a decent amount of the wildlife in the state.

The present status of wild-life protective laws in Florida was made the subject of an article in Forest and Stream of August 10, 1912, by John H. Wallace, Jr., Game Commissioner of the State of Alabama, in an article entitled "The Florida Situation." In view of his record, no one [Page 278] will question either the value or the honest sincerity of Mr. Wallace's opinions. The following paragraphs are from that article:

The current state of wildlife protection laws in Florida was discussed in an article in Forest and Stream on August 10, 1912, by John H. Wallace, Jr., Game Commissioner of Alabama, titled "The Florida Situation." Given his background, no one [Page 278] would question the value or genuine sincerity of Mr. Wallace's views. The following paragraphs are from that article:

The enactment of a model and modern game law for the State of Florida is absolutely imperative in order to save many of the most valuable species of birds and game of that State from certain depletion and threatened extinction. The question of the protection of the birds and game in Florida is not a local one, but is national in its scope. Birds know no state lines, and while practically all the States lying to the north of Florida protect migratory birds and waterfowl, yet these are recklessly slaughtered in that state to such an extent as to be appalling to all sportsmen and bird lovers.

Creating a modern game law for Florida is absolutely essential to protect many of the most valuable bird and game species from serious decline and potential extinction. The issue of safeguarding birds and game in Florida isn’t just a local matter; it’s a national concern. Birds don’t recognize state lines, and while almost all the states north of Florida protect migratory birds and waterfowl, these animals are still hunted recklessly in Florida to a degree that shocks both sportsmen and bird lovers.

So alarming has become the decrease of the birds and game of Florida that unless a halt is called on the campaign of reckless annihilation that has been ceaselessly waged in that state, the sport and recreation enjoyed by primeval nimrods will linger only in history and tradition.

The decline of birds and wildlife in Florida has become so alarming that if we don’t stop the ongoing reckless slaughter in the state, the sport and recreation enjoyed by earlier hunters will only be found in history and tradition.

It is the sincerest hope of all lovers of wild life of the American continent that a strong and invincible sentiment, relative to the imperative necessity of real conservation legislation, be crystallized in the minds of the members elect of the Florida Legislature, to the end that the next Legislature will spread upon the statute books of the State of Florida a model and modern law for the preservation and protection of the birds and game of that State, which when put into practical operation will elicit the thanks of all good citizens, and likewise the gratitude of future generations.

Everyone who loves wildlife in America genuinely hopes that a strong and undeniable belief in the urgent need for real conservation laws will take root in the minds of the elected members of the Florida Legislature. The aim is for the next Legislature to enact a modern and exemplary law for preserving and protecting Florida's birds and wildlife, which, once implemented, will be appreciated by all good citizens and remembered with gratitude by future generations.

Georgia:
  • Prohibit late winter and spring shooting, and provide rational seasons for wild fowl.
  • Reduce the limit on deer to two bucks a season, with horns not less than three inches long.
  • Protect the meadow lark and stop forever the killing of doves and wood-ducks.
  • Prohibit the use of automatic and pump shot-guns in hunting.
  • Extend the term of the game commissioner to four years.

We are glad to report that Georgia has already begun to take up the white man's burden. The protection of wild life is now a gentleman's proposition, and in it every real man with red blood in his veins has a duty to perform. The state of Georgia has recently awakened, and under the comprehensive law of 1911 has resolutely undertaken to do her whole duty in this matter.

We’re happy to say that Georgia has already started to take on the responsibilities that come with its development. Protecting wildlife is now a matter of honor, and every true man with passion has a role to play. Georgia has recently become aware and, under the thorough law of 1911, has firmly committed to fulfilling its obligations regarding this issue.

Idaho:

The imperative duties of Idaho are as follows:

The essential responsibilities of Idaho are as follows:

  • Stop all hunting of mountain sheep, mountain goat and elk.
  • Give the sage grouse and sharp-tail ten-year close seasons, at once, to forestall their extermination.
  • Stop the killing of doves as "game."
  • Stop the killing of female deer, and of bucks with horns less than three inches long.
  • Enact the model law to protect non-game birds.
  • Prohibit the use of machine shot-guns in hunting.
  • Extend the State Warden's term to four years.

Like Montana, Wyoming and Colorado, the state of Idaho has wasted her stock of game, and it is to be feared that several species are now about to disappear from that state. I am told that the sage grouse is almost "gone"; and I think that the antelope, caribou, and mountain sheep are in the same condition of scarcity.

Like Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado, Idaho has depleted its wildlife, and it’s feared that several species are on the verge of disappearing from the state. I’ve heard that the sage grouse is nearly "extinct"; and I believe that the antelope, caribou, and mountain sheep are facing a similar decline in numbers.

[Page 279]

If the people of Idaho wish to save their wild fauna, they must be up and doing. The time to temporize, theorize, be conservative and easy-going has gone by. It is that fatal policy that causes men to slumber until it is too late to act; and we will watch with keen interest to see whether the real men of Idaho are big enough to do their whole duty in time to benefit their state.

If the people of Idaho want to protect their wildlife, they need to take action now. The time for delaying, theorizing, and being complacent is over. That passive attitude only causes people to sleep on issues until it’s too late to make a difference; we're watching closely to see if the true leaders of Idaho are capable of fulfilling their responsibilities in time to help their state.

In 1910, Dr. T.S. Palmer credited Idaho with the possession of about five hundred moose and two hundred antelope.

In 1910, Dr. T.S. Palmer noted that Idaho had around five hundred moose and two hundred antelope.

There is one feature of the Idaho game law that may well stand unchanged. The open season on "ibex," of which one per year may be killed, may as well be continued. One myth per year is not an extravagant bag for any intelligent hunter; and it seems that the "ibex" will not down. Being officially recognized by Idaho, its place in our fauna now seems assured.

There is one aspect of Idaho's game law that may remain the same. The open season on "ibex," allowing one to be killed each year, can continue. One ibex per year is not an unreasonable limit for any smart hunter; and it seems that the "ibex" is here to stay. With its official recognition by Idaho, its place in our wildlife now appears guaranteed.

Illinois:
  • Enact a Bayne law, and stop the sale of all native wild game, regardless of source, and regardless of the gay revelers of Chicago.
  • In Illinois the bag limits on birds are nearly all at least 50 per cent too high. They should be as follows: No squirrels, doves or shore birds; six quail, five woodcock, ten coots, ten rail, ten ducks, three geese and three brant, with a total limit of ten waterfowl per day.
  • Doves should be removed from the game list.
  • All tree squirrels and chipmunks should be perpetually protected, as companions to man, unfit for food.
  • The sale of aigrettes should be stopped, and Chicago placed in the same class as Boston, New York, New Orleans and San Francisco.
  • The use of all machine shotguns in hunting should be prohibited.

The chief plague-spots for the grinding up of American game are Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans and San Francisco. St. Louis cleared her record in 1909. New York thoroughly cleaned her Augean stable in 1911, and Massachusetts won her Bayne law by a desperate battle in 1912. In 1913, Pennsylvania probably will enact a Bayne law.

The main hotspots for the destruction of American wildlife are Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans, and San Francisco. St. Louis cleaned up its act in 1909. New York completely overhauled its situation in 1911, and Massachusetts achieved its Bayne law through a tough struggle in 1912. In 1913, Pennsylvania is likely to pass a Bayne law.

Fancy a city in the center of the United States sending to Norway for 1,500 ptarmigan, to eat, as Chicago did in 1911; and that was only one order.

Fancy a city in the heart of the United States ordering 1,500 ptarmigan from Norway to eat, just like Chicago did in 1911; and that was just one order.

For forty years the marshes, prairies, farms and streams of the whole upper Mississippi Valley have been combed year after year by the guns of the market shooters. Often the migratory game was located by telegraphic reports. Game birds were slain by the wagon-load, boat-load, barrel, and car-load, "for the Chicago market." And the fool farmers of the Middle West stolidly plowed their fields and fed their hogs, and permitted the slaughter to go on. To-day the sons of those farmers go to the museums and zoological parks of the cities to see specimens of pinnated grouse, crane, woodcock, ducks and other species that the market shooters have "wiped out"; and their fathers wax eloquent in telling of the flocks of [Page 280] pigeons that "darkened the sky," and the big droves of prairie chickens that used to rise out of the corn-fields "with a roar like a coming storm."

For forty years, the marshes, prairies, farms, and streams of the entire upper Mississippi Valley have been searched year after year by market hunters. Often, migratory game was tracked using telegram reports. Game birds were killed by the wagonload, boatload, barrel, and carload, "for the Chicago market." And the clueless farmers of the Midwest simply plowed their fields and fed their pigs while allowing the slaughter to continue. Today, the sons of those farmers visit museums and zoos in the cities to see specimens of pinnated grouse, cranes, woodcock, ducks, and other species that the market hunters have "wiped out"; and their fathers proudly recount stories of the flocks of [Page 280] pigeons that "darkened the sky" and the large groups of prairie chickens that used to rise from the cornfields "with a roar like a coming storm."

To-day, Chicago stands half-way reformed. Her markets are open to only one-half the game killable in Illinois, but they are wide open to all "legally killed game imported from other states, from Oct. 1 to Feb. 1." Through that hole in her game laws any game-dealer can drive a moving-van! Of course, any game offered in Chicago has been "legally killed in some other state!" Who can prove otherwise?

Today, Chicago is partially reformed. Her markets are open to only half the game that can be hunted in Illinois, but they are completely open to all "legally killed game imported from other states, from Oct. 1 to Feb. 1." Through this loophole in her game laws, any game dealer can easily operate! Naturally, any game offered in Chicago has been "legally killed in some other state!" Who can prove otherwise?

In addition to the imported game illegally killed in other states, the starving population of Chicago may also buy for cash, and consume with their champagne in November and December, all the Illinois doves that can be combed out by the market-gunners.

In addition to the illegal game hunted in other states, the starving population of Chicago can also buy for cash, and enjoy with their champagne in November and December, all the Illinois doves that can be gathered by the market-gunners.

After the awful Iroquois Theatre fire in Chicago, in 1903, the game dealers reported a heavy falling off in the consumption of game! The tragedy caused the temporary closing of the theaters, and the falling off in after-theater suppers may be said to have taken away the appetites of thousands of erstwhile consumers of game. Incidentally it showed who consumes purchased game.

After the terrible Iroquois Theatre fire in Chicago in 1903, game dealers reported a significant drop in game consumption! The tragedy led to the temporary closure of theaters, and the decline in after-theater dinners seemed to take away the appetites of thousands of former game consumers. Interestingly, it revealed who buys purchased game.

The people of Illinois should now enact a full-fledged Bayne law, without changing a single word, and bring Chicago up to the level of New York, St. Louis and Boston.

The people of Illinois should now put in place a complete Bayne law, without altering a single word, and elevate Chicago to the status of New York, St. Louis, and Boston.

The present bag limits on Illinois game birds are fatally high. As they stand, with 190,000 licensed gunners in the field each year, what else do they mean than extermination? The men of Illinois have just two alternatives between which to choose: drastic and immediate preservation, or a gameless state. Which shall it be?

The current bag limits on Illinois game birds are dangerously high. With 190,000 licensed hunters in the field each year, what else can they lead to but extinction? People in Illinois have only two choices: drastic and immediate preservation, or a state without game. Which will it be?

Indiana:
  • Indiana should hasten to stop spring shooting.
  • She should enact a law, prohibiting the sale for millinery purposes of the plumage of all wild birds save ducks killed in their open season.
  • A Bayne law, absolutely prohibiting the sale of all native wild game, should be enacted at once.
  • The killing of squirrels should be prohibited; because they are not white men's game.
  • Ruffed grouse and quail should have five year close seasons.
  • The use of pump and autoloading guns in hunting should be prohibited.

In Indiana the white-tailed deer is extinct. This means very close hunting, and a bad outlook for all other game larger than the sparrow. On October 2, 1912, eleven heads of greater bird of paradise, with plumes attached, were offered for sale within one hundred feet of the headquarters of the Fourth National Conservation Congress. The prices ranged from $35 to $47.50; and while we looked, two ladies came up, one of whom pointed to a bird-of-paradise corpse and said: "There! I want one o' them, an' I'm a-goin' to have it, too!"

In Indiana, the white-tailed deer is extinct. This means very close hunting, and a grim outlook for all other game larger than a sparrow. On October 2, 1912, eleven heads of greater bird of paradise, complete with plumes, were offered for sale just one hundred feet from the headquarters of the Fourth National Conservation Congress. The prices ranged from $35 to $47.50; and while we were observing, two women approached, and one of them pointed to a dead bird of paradise and said: "There! I want one of those, and I'm going to have it, too!"

Iowa:
  • Spring shooting should be stopped, at once and forever. [Page 281]
  • The killing of all tree squirrels and chipmunks should cease.
  • All shore birds that visit Iowa deserve a five-year close season.
  • Especially is the shooting of plover, sandpiper, marsh and beach birds, rail, duck, geese and brant from September 1, to April 15, an outrage.
  • Iowa should prohibit the use of the machine guns, and it is to be hoped that she will awaken sufficiently to do so.

It is said that the Indian word "Iowa" means "the drowsy, or sleepy ones." Politically, and educationally, Iowa is all right, but in the protection of wild life she is ten years behind the times, in almost everything save the prohibition of the sale of game. Iowa knows better than to pursue the course that she does! She boasts about her corn and hogs, but she is deaf to the appeals of the states surrounding her on the subject of spring shooting. For years Minnesota has set her a good example; but nothing moves her to step up where she belongs in the phalanx of intelligent game-protecting states.

It’s said that the Indian word "Iowa" means "the drowsy or sleepy ones." Politically and educationally, Iowa is fine, but when it comes to wildlife protection, she is ten years behind the times, except for the ban on selling game. Iowa knows better than to keep taking this path! She takes pride in her corn and hogs, but she ignores the requests from neighboring states about spring shooting. For years, Minnesota has set a good example, but nothing gets Iowa to step up and join the ranks of enlightened game-protecting states.

The foregoing may sound harsh, but in view of what other states have endured from Iowa's stubbornness regarding migratory game, the time for silent treatment of her case has gone by. She is to-day in the same class as North Carolina, South Carolina and Maryland,—at the tail end of the procession of states. She cares everything for corn and hogs, but little for wild life.

The above may seem harsh, but considering what other states have dealt with due to Iowa's stubbornness about migratory game, the time for ignoring her situation has passed. Today, she is on par with North Carolina, South Carolina, and Maryland—at the back of the pack of states. She values corn and hogs above all, but shows little concern for wildlife.

Kansas:
  • Spring shooting should be stopped, at once: with apologies for not having done so long ago.
  • The continued shooting of prairie chickens when the species is near extermination is outrageous, and should be prohibited for ten years.
  • Doves should be removed permanently from the game list, partly as a measure of self respect.
  • Kansas should treat herself to a force of salaried game wardens rendering real service.
  • She should bar out the machine guns as unfit for use in a well-regulated State.

Kansas has calmly witnessed the extermination of her bison, elk, deer, antelope, wild turkeys, sage grouse, whooping cranes, and the beginning of the end of her pinnated grouse, without a pang. What is wild game in comparison with fat hogs, and seventy-bushels-to-the-acre!

Kansas has quietly watched the slaughter of her bison, elk, deer, antelope, wild turkeys, sage grouse, whooping cranes, and the start of the decline of her prairie chickens, without any regret. What are wild animals compared to fat pigs and seventy-bushel crops per acre!

Draw a line around the hog-and-corn area of the United States, and within it you will find more spring shooting, more sale of game and more extermination of species than in any other area in the United States. I refer to Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee. In not one of these states except Missouri is there any big game hunting, and in the majority of them spring shooting is lawful!

Draw a line around the hog-and-corn region of the United States, and inside it you'll find more spring hunting, more game sales, and more species extinction than in any other area in the country. I'm talking about Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. With the exception of Missouri, there’s no big game hunting in any of these states, and in most of them, spring hunting is legal!

In the Island of Mauritius, it was swine that exterminated the dodo. In the United States, hogs and game extermination still go hand in hand. Since the days of the dodo, however, a new species of swine has been developed. It is now widely known as the "game-hog," and it has been officially recognized by both bench and bar.

In the Island of Mauritius, it was pigs that wiped out the dodo. In the United States, pigs and game extermination still go hand in hand. Since the days of the dodo, though, a new breed of pig has emerged. It's now commonly referred to as the "game-hog," and it has been officially recognized by both the courts and the legal profession.

Kentucky: [Page 282]

Nearly everything that a state should maintain in the line of wild life protection Kentucky lacks! It is easier to tell what she has than to recite what she should have. Kentucky permits spring shooting; she has no bag limits, and she has long open seasons on everything save introduced pheasants; She protects from sale only quail, grouse and wild turkey killed within her own borders. This means that her markets are practically wide open.

Nearly everything that a state should have for wildlife protection Kentucky lacks! It's easier to say what it has than to list what it should have. Kentucky allows spring hunting; it has no bag limits, and it has long open seasons on everything except for introduced pheasants. It only protects from sale quail, grouse, and wild turkey that are killed within its own borders. This means that its markets are practically wide open.

Until recently the people of Kentucky have been very indifferent to the value of her wild-life; but with the new law enacted this year providing for a game commission and a game protection fund, surely every member of the Army of the Defense will wish God-speed to her efforts in game conservation, and stand ready to lend a helping hand whenever help can be utilized.

Until recently, the people of Kentucky have been quite indifferent to the importance of their wildlife. However, with the new law passed this year that establishes a game commission and a game protection fund, surely every member of the Army of the Defense will wish her efforts in game conservation well and be ready to offer support whenever needed.

Kentucky should at one grand coup stop spring shooting and all sale of wild game, accord long close seasons to all species that are verging on extinction, protect doves, establish moderate bag limits and stop the use of machine guns. If she takes up these measures at the rate of only one at each legislative session, by the time her laws are perfect all her game will be gone!

Kentucky should make a bold move to end spring shooting and all sales of wild game, implement long close seasons for all species that are close to extinction, protect doves, set reasonable bag limits, and ban the use of machine guns. If she addresses these issues one at a time during each legislative session, by the time her laws are in place, all her game will be gone!

Louisiana:

On more counts than one, Louisiana is in the list of Great Delinquents; for behold the things that she needs to do:

On more than one occasion, Louisiana is on the list of Great Delinquents; for look at the things she needs to do:

  • Protect deer for five years.
  • Instantly take the robin, red-winged black-bird, dove, grosbeak, wood-duck and gull off the list of birds that may be killed as "game."
  • Stop all late winter and spring shooting.
  • Stop the sale of all native game, and the possession and transportation of game sold or intended for sale. In short,
  • Enact a Bayne law.
  • Re-establish a game warden system.

In legally permitting the slaughter of the robin, red-winged blackbird, dove, grosbeak, wood-duck and gull the state of Louisiana is very culpable.

In legally allowing the killing of the robin, red-winged blackbird, dove, grosbeak, wood duck, and gull, the state of Louisiana is highly at fault.

For good reasons, forty states of the American Union strictly prohibit the killing of song and insectivorous birds. The duty of every state to protect those birds is not a debatable proposition. I put this question to the people of Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee and other states where the robin is treated as a game bird: Is it fair of you to kill and eat robins when that species is carefully protected by forty other states of our country for grave economic reasons? What would you say of the people of the North if they slaughtered your mockingbird to eat!

For good reasons, forty states in the U.S. strictly forbid the killing of songbirds and insect-eating birds. It's a clear duty for every state to protect these birds. I ask the people of Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and other states where robins are considered game birds: Is it fair for you to kill and eat robins when that species is carefully protected by forty other states for significant economic reasons? What would you think of people in the North if they slaughtered your mockingbird to eat?

Remember this proportion:

Keep this ratio in mind:

The Robin : The North :: The Mockingbird : The South.

The Robin is to the North as the Mockingbird is to the South.


[Page 283]
CHAPTER XXX
NEW LAWS NEEDED IN THE STATES
(Continued)
Maine:

There are reasons for the belief that Maine is conserving her large game better than any other state or province in North America. One glance over her laws is sufficient to convince anyone that instead of studying the clamor of her shooting population, Maine has actually been studying the needs of her game, and providing for those needs. If all other states were doing equally well, the task of writing a book of admonition would have been unnecessary. The proof of Maine's alertness is to be found in the number of her extra short, or entirely closed, seasons on game. For example:

There are reasons to believe that Maine is doing a better job of conserving its large game than any other state or province in North America. Just a quick look at its laws is enough to show anyone that, instead of just responding to the demands of hunters, Maine has been focusing on the needs of its wildlife and making sure those needs are met. If all other states were achieving similar results, writing a book to caution them wouldn’t be necessary. The evidence of Maine's attentiveness can be seen in the number of extra short or completely closed hunting seasons for game. For example:

  • Cow and calf moose are permanently protected.
  • Only bull moose, with at least two 3-inch prongs on its horns, may be killed.
  • Caribou have had a close season since 1899.
  • On gray and black squirrels, doves and quail, there is no open season.
  • The open season for deer varies from ten weeks to four weeks, and in parts of three counties there is no open season at all.
  • Silencers are prohibited, and firearms in forests may be prohibited by the Governor during droughts.
  • Nearly all wild-fowl shooting ends January 1, but in two places, on December 1.

People who have not learned the facts habitually think of Maine as a vast killing-ground for deer; and it is well for it to be known that the hunting-grounds have been carefully designated, according to the abundance or scarcity of game.

People who haven't learned the facts often think of Maine as a huge slaughterhouse for deer; and it's important to note that the hunting areas have been carefully marked out based on how much game is available.

Maine has wisely chosen to regard her hunting-grounds and her deer as a valuable asset, and she manages them accordingly. To be a guide in that state is to be a good citizen, and a protector of game from illegal slaughter. No non-resident may hunt without a licensed guide. The licenses for the thousands of deer killed in Maine each year, and the expenses of the visiting sportsmen who hunt them, annually bring into the state and leave there a huge sum of money, variously estimated at from $2,000,000 to $3,000,000. One can only guess at the amount from the number of non-resident licenses issued; but certainly the total can not be less than $1,000,000.

Maine has smartly decided to see its hunting areas and deer as valuable resources, managing them accordingly. Being a guide in that state means being a good citizen and a protector of wildlife from illegal hunting. No non-resident can hunt without a licensed guide. The licenses for the thousands of deer hunted in Maine each year, along with the expenses of visiting sportsmen, bring a massive amount of money into the state, estimated to be between $2,000,000 and $3,000,000 annually. One can only speculate on the total based on the number of non-resident licenses issued; however, the total is certainly not less than $1,000,000.

Although Mr. L.T. Carleton is no longer chairman of the Commission of Inland Fisheries and Game, the splendid services that he rendered the state of Maine during his thirteen years of service, especially in the creation of a good code of game laws, constitute an imperishable monument to his name and fame.

Although Mr. L.T. Carleton is no longer the chairman of the Commission of Inland Fisheries and Game, the outstanding contributions he made to the state of Maine during his thirteen years of service, particularly in establishing a solid set of game laws, stand as a lasting tribute to his name and legacy.

[Page 284]

There is very little that Maine needs in the line of new legislation, or better protection to her game. With the enactment of a resident license law and a five-year close season for woodcock, plover, snipe and sandpipers, I think her laws for the protection of wild life would be sufficiently perfect for all practical purposes. The Pine-Tree State is to be congratulated upon its wise and efficient handling of the wild-life situation.

There’s not much that Maine needs in terms of new laws or better protection for its wildlife. With the introduction of a resident license law and a five-year closed season for woodcock, plover, snipe, and sandpipers, I believe the state's wildlife protection laws are pretty much perfect for all practical purposes. The Pine Tree State deserves praise for its smart and effective management of wildlife issues.

Maryland

How has it come to pass that Maryland lacks more good wild-life laws than any other state in the Union except North Carolina? Of the really fundamental protective laws, embracing the list that to every self-respecting state seems indispensable, Maryland has almost none save certain bag-limit laws! Otherwise, the state is wide open! It is indeed high time that she should abandon her present attitude of hostility to wild life, and become a good neighbor. She should do what is fair and right about the protection of the migratory game and bird life that annually passes twice through her territory!

How did Maryland end up with fewer good wildlife laws than any other state in the Union except North Carolina? When it comes to essential protective laws that every respectable state should have, Maryland has hardly any, except for some bag-limit laws! Otherwise, the state is completely open! It's really time for her to drop her current hostility toward wildlife and start being a good neighbor. She should do what's fair and right in protecting the migratory game and bird life that pass through her territory twice a year!

At the last session of the Maryland legislature, the law preventing the use of power boats in wild-fowl shooting was repealed. That was a step ten years backward; and Maryland should be ashamed of it!

At the last session of the Maryland legislature, the law banning the use of power boats for wild-fowl shooting was repealed. That was a step ten years backward, and Maryland should be ashamed of it!

The list of things that Maryland must do in order to clear her record is a long one. Here it is:

The list of things that Maryland needs to do to clear her record is a long one. Here it is:

  • Local regulations should be replaced by a uniform state law.
  • The sale of all native wild game should be stopped.
  • Spring and late winter shooting of game should be stopped.
  • All non-game birds not already included under the statutes should be protected.
  • The exportation of all game should be prohibited, unless accompanied by the man who shot it, bearing his license, and the law should be state-wide instead of depending upon a separate enactment for each county.
  • There should be a hunter's license law for all who hunt.
  • The use of machine shotguns in hunting should be stopped, at once.
  • Stop the use of power boats in wild-fowl shooting.
Massachusetts:

In 1912 the state of Massachusetts moved up into the foremost rank of states, where for one year New York had stood alone. She passed a counterpart of the New York law, absolutely prohibiting the sale of all wild American game in Massachusetts, but providing for the sale of game that has been reared in preserves and tagged by state officers. This victory was achieved only after three months of hard fighting. The coalition of sportsmen, zoologists and friends of wild life in general proved irresistible, just as a similar union of forces accomplished the Bayne law in New York in 1911. The victory is highly instructive, as great victories usually are. It proves once more that whenever the American people can be aroused from their normal apathy regarding wild life, any good conservation legislation can be enacted! The prime necessities to success are good measures, good management, a reasonable [Page 285] campaign fund, and tireless energy and persistence. Massachusetts is to be roundly congratulated on having so thoroughly cleaned up her sale-of-game situation.

In 1912, Massachusetts rose to the forefront among states, where New York had previously stood alone for a year. They enacted a law similar to New York's, completely banning the sale of all wild American game in Massachusetts, while allowing the sale of game that has been raised in preserves and tagged by state officials. This victory was achieved only after three months of hard work. The partnership of sports enthusiasts, zoologists, and wildlife advocates proved powerful, just as a similar coalition achieved the Bayne law in New York in 1911. This victory is quite insightful, as major victories often are. It demonstrates once again that whenever Americans are motivated to care about wildlife, any good conservation legislation can be passed! The key elements for success are effective measures, good management, a reasonable [Page 285] campaign fund, and relentless energy and persistence. Massachusetts deserves full credit for effectively addressing its game sale issues.

Incidentally, five bills for the repeal of the Massachusetts law against spring shooting were introduced, and each one went down to the defeat that it deserved. The repeal of a spring-shooting law, anywhere, is a step backward ten years!

Incidentally, five bills to repeal the Massachusetts law against spring shooting were introduced, and each one failed miserably, as it should have. Repealing a spring shooting law, anywhere, is a step backward by ten years!

Massachusetts needs a bag-limit law more in keeping with her small remnant of wild life; and that she will have ere long. Very soon, also, her sportsmen will raise the standard of ethics in shotgun shooting, by barring out the automatic and pump shotguns so much beloved by the market shooters. As matters stand at this date (1912) the Old Bay State needs the following new laws:

Massachusetts needs a bag-limit law that better reflects her dwindling wildlife, and she'll get it soon. In addition, her hunters will soon elevate the standards of ethics in shotgun shooting by excluding the automatic and pump shotguns that market hunters love so much. As it stands now (1912), the Old Bay State needs the following new laws:

  • Low bag limits on all game.
  • Five-year close seasons on all shore birds, snipe and woodcock.
  • Expulsion of the automatic and pump shotguns, in hunting.
Michigan:

On the whole, the game laws of Michigan are in excellent shape, and leave little to be desired in the line of betterment except to be simplified. All the game protected by the laws of the state is debarred from sale; squirrels, pinnated grouse, doves and wild turkeys enjoy long close seasons; the bag limits on deer and game birds are reasonably low; spring shooting still is possible on nine species of ducks; and this should be stopped without delay.

Overall, Michigan's game laws are in great shape and only need to be simplified for improvement. All game protected by state laws cannot be sold; squirrels, prairie chickens, doves, and wild turkeys have extended closed seasons; the bag limits on deer and game birds are quite reasonable; spring hunting is still allowed for nine species of ducks; and this should be stopped immediately.

Only three or four suggestions are in order:

Only three or four suggestions are needed:

  • All spring shooting should be prohibited.
  • All shore birds should have a five-year close season.
  • The use of the machine shotguns in hunting should be stopped.
  • The laws should permit the sale, under tag, of all species of game that can successfully be reared in preserves on a commercial basis.
  • Two or three state game preserves, for deer, each at least four miles square, should be established without delay.
Minnesota:
  • This state should at once enact a bag-limit law that will do some good, instead of the statutory farce now on the books. Make it fifteen birds per day of waterfowl, all species combined, and no grouse or quail.
  • There should be five-year close seasons enacted for quail, grouse, plover, woodcock, snipe, and all other shore birds.
  • A law should be enacted prohibiting the use of firearms by unnaturalized aliens, and a $20 license for all naturalized aliens.
  • Provision should be made for a large state game refuge in southern Minnesota.
  • The state should prohibit the use of machine guns in hunting.

To-day, direct and reliable advices show that the game situation in [Page 286] Minnesota is far from encouraging. Several species are threatened with extinction at an early date. In northern Minnesota it is reported that much game is surreptitiously trapped and slaughtered. The bob white is reported as threatened with total extinction at an early date; but I think the prairie chicken will be the first bird species to go. Moose will soon be extinct everywhere in Minnesota except in the game preserves. Apparently there is now about one duck in Minnesota for every ten ducks that were there only ten years ago.

To day, direct and reliable advice shows that the game situation in [Page 286] Minnesota is far from encouraging. Several species are threatened with extinction soon. In northern Minnesota, it is reported that a lot of game is being illegally trapped and killed. The bobwhite is said to be facing total extinction in the near future; however, I believe the prairie chicken will be the first bird species to disappear. Moose will soon be extinct throughout Minnesota except in the game preserves. It seems there is now about one duck in Minnesota for every ten ducks that were here just ten years ago.

Now, what is Minnesota going to do about all this? Is she willing through Apathy to become a gameless state? Her people need to arouse themselves now, and pass several strong laws. Her bag limit of forty-five birds per day of quail, grouse, woodcock and plover, and fifty per day of the waterbirds, is a joke, and nothing more; but it is no laughing matter. It spells extermination.

Now, what is Minnesota going to do about all this? Is she willing to become a state without game through apathy? Her people need to wake up now and pass several strong laws. Her bag limit of forty-five birds per day for quail, grouse, woodcock, and plover, and fifty per day for waterbirds, is a joke, and nothing more; but it is no laughing matter. It means extermination.

Mississippi:
  • The legalized slaughter of robins, cedar birds, grosbeaks and doves should cease immediately, on the basis of economy of resources and a square deal to all the states lying northward of Mississippi.
  • The shooting of all water-fowl should cease on January 1.
  • A reasonable limit should be established on deer.
  • A hunting license law should be passed at once, fixing the fee at $1 and devoting the revenue to the pay of a corps of non-political game wardens, selected on a basis of ability and fitness.
  • The administration of the game laws should be placed in charge of a salaried game commissioner.

It is seriously to the discredit of Mississippi that her laws actually classify robins, cedar-birds, grosbeaks and doves as "game," and make them killable as such from Sept. 1 to March 1! I should think that if no economic consideration carried weight in Mississippi, state pride alone would be sufficient to promote a correction of the evil. If we of the North were to slaughter mockingbirds for food, when they come North to visit us, the men of the South would call us greedy barbarians; and they would be quite right.

It’s really disappointing that Mississippi’s laws actually label robins, cedar waxwings, grosbeaks, and doves as "game," and allow them to be hunted from September 1 to March 1! I would think that even if economic reasons didn’t matter in Mississippi, state pride alone would be enough to inspire a change. If we in the North started killing mockingbirds for food when they migrate up here, the people in the South would call us greedy barbarians; and they would be absolutely correct.

Missouri:
  • The Missouri bag limits that permit the killing or possession of fifty birds per day are absurd, and fatally liberal. The utmost should be twenty-five; and even that is too high.
  • Doves should be taken off the list of game birds, and protected throughout the year; and so should all tree squirrels.
  • Spring shooting of shore birds and waterfowl should be prohibited without delay.
  • A law against automatic and pump guns should be enacted at the next legislative session, as a public lesson on the raising of the standard of ethics in shooting.

The state of Missouri is really strong in her position as a game-protecting state. She perpetually protects such vanishing species as the ruffed grouse, prairie chicken (pinnated grouse), woodcock, and all her shore birds save snipe and plover. She prohibits the sale of native game and the killing of female deer; but she wisely permits the [Page 287] sale of preserve-bred elk and deer under the tags of the State Game Commission. For nearly all the wild game that is accessible, her markets are tightly closed.

The state of Missouri is really strong in her role as a game-protecting state. She continuously protects disappearing species like the ruffed grouse, prairie chicken (pinnated grouse), woodcock, and all her shorebirds except for snipe and plover. She prohibits the sale of native game and the hunting of female deer; however, she wisely allows the [Page 287] sale of preserve-bred elk and deer with permits from the State Game Commission. For nearly all the wild game that is available, her markets are strictly closed.

We heartily congratulate Missouri on her advanced position on the sale of game, and we hope that the people of Iowa will even yet profit by her good example.

We sincerely congratulate Missouri on her leadership in the sale of game, and we hope that the people of Iowa will still benefit from her positive example.

Montana:

Like Colorado and Wyoming, Montana is wasting a valuable heritage of wild game while she struggles to maintain the theory that she still is in the list of states that furnish big-game hunting. It is a fact that ten years ago most sportsmen began to regard Montana as a has-been for big game, and began to seek better hunting-grounds elsewhere. British Columbia, Alberta and Alaska have done much for the game of Montana by drawing sportsmen away from it. Mr. Henry Avare, the State Game Warden, is optimistic regarding even the big game, and believes that it is holding its own. This is partially true of white-tailed deer, or it was up to the time of great slaughter. It is said that in 1911, 11,000 deer were killed in Montana, all in the western part of the state, seventy per cent of which were white-tails. The deep snows and extreme cold of a long and unusually severe winter drove the hungry deer down out of the mountains into the settlements, where the ranchmen joyously slaughtered them. The destruction around Kalispell was described by Harry P. Stanford as "sickening."

Like Colorado and Wyoming, Montana is wasting a valuable legacy of wild game while trying to hold onto the idea that it still ranks among the states that offer big-game hunting. The truth is that ten years ago, most hunters began to see Montana as a has-been for big game and started looking for better hunting spots elsewhere. British Columbia, Alberta, and Alaska have done a lot for Montana’s game by attracting hunters away from it. Mr. Henry Avare, the State Game Warden, is hopeful about even the big game and believes that it is managing to hold its own. This is somewhat true for white-tailed deer, or it was until the great slaughter began. It's reported that in 1911, 11,000 deer were killed in Montana, all in the western part of the state, with seventy percent of those being white-tails. The deep snow and severe cold of an unusually long winter pushed the hungry deer down from the mountains into the settlements, where ranchers eagerly hunted them. The devastation around Kalispell was described by Harry P. Stanford as "sickening."

Mr. Avare estimates the prong-horned antelope in Montana at three thousand head, of which about six hundred are under the quasi-protection of four ranches.

Mr. Avare estimates the pronghorn antelope in Montana at three thousand head, of which about six hundred are under the quasi-protection of four ranches.

  • The antelope need three or four small ranges, such as the Snow Creek Antelope Range, where the bad lands are too rough for ranchmen, but quite right for antelopes and other big game.
  • All the grouse and ptarmigan of Montana need a five-year close season. The splendid sage grouse is now extinct in many parts of its previous range. Fifty-eight thousand licensed gunners are too many for them!
  • The few mountain sheep and mountain goats that survive should have a five-year close season, at once.
  • The killing of female hoofed animals should be prohibited by law.
  • Montana has not yet adopted the model law for the protection of non-game birds. Only seven states have failed in that respect.
  • The use of automatic and pump shotguns, and silencers, should immediately be prohibited.

Montana's bag-limits are not wholly bad; but the grizzly bear has almost been exterminated, save in the Yellowstone Park. Some of these days, if things go on as they are now going, the people of Montana will be rudely awakened to the fact that they have 50,000 licensed hunters but no longer any killable game! And then we will hear enthusiastic talk about "restocking."

Montana's bag limits aren't entirely bad, but the grizzly bear has nearly been wiped out, except in Yellowstone Park. If things keep going this way, the people of Montana will soon realize they have 50,000 licensed hunters but no game left to hunt! Then we'll start hearing excited chatter about "restocking."

Nebraska

No other state has bestowed close seasons upon as many extinct species [Page 288] of game as Nebraska. Behold how she has resolutely locked the doors of her empty cage after all these species have flown: Elk, antelope, wild turkey, passenger pigeon, whooping crane, sage grouse, ptarmigan and curlew. In a short time the pinnated grouse can be added to the list of has-beens.

No other state has imposed hunting seasons on as many extinct game species as Nebraska. Look how she has firmly closed the doors of her empty cage after all these species have disappeared: Elk, antelope, wild turkey, passenger pigeon, whooping crane, sage grouse, ptarmigan, and curlew. Soon, the pinnated grouse will also be added to the list of lost species.

There is little to say regarding the future of the game of Nebraska; for its "future" is now history.

There isn't much to say about the future of the game of Nebraska, because its "future" is now part of history.

  • Provision should be made for one or more state game preserves.
  • Spring shooting of shore birds and waterfowl should be prohibited.
  • A larger and more effective warden service should be provided.
  • Doves should be removed from the game list.
Nevada
  • The sage grouse should be given a ten-year close season, for recuperation.
  • All non-game birds should have perpetual protection.
  • The cranes, now verging on extinction, and the pigeons and doves should at once be taken out of the list of game birds, and forever protected.
  • All the shore birds need five years of close protection.
  • A State Game Warden whose term of office is not less than four years should be provided for.
  • A corps of salaried game protectors should be chosen for active and aggressive game protection.
  • Nevada's bag limits are among the best of any state, the only serious flaw being "10 sage grouse" per day: which should be 0!

Nevada still has a few antelope; and we beg her to protect them all from being hunted or killed! It is my belief that if the antelope is really saved anywhere in the United States outside of national parks and preserves, it will be in the wild and remote regions of Nevada, where it is to be hoped that lumpy-jaw has not yet taken hold of the herds.

Nevada still has a few antelope, and we urge her to protect them all from being hunted or killed! I believe that if antelope are truly saved anywhere in the United States outside of national parks and preserves, it will be in the wild and remote areas of Nevada, where hopefully lumpy-jaw hasn't affected the herds yet.

New Hampshire:

Speaking generally, the New Hampshire laws regulating the killing and shipment of game are defective for the reason that on birds, and in fact all game save deer, there appear to be no "bag" limits on the quantity that may be killed in a day or a season. The following bag limits are greatly needed, forthwith:

Speaking generally, the New Hampshire laws regulating the killing and shipment of game are flawed because there seem to be no "bag" limits on the number of birds, and in fact all game except deer, that can be killed in a day or a season. The following bag limits are urgently needed:

  • Gray Squirrel, none per day, or per year; duck (except wood-duck), ten per day, or thirty per season; ruffed grouse, four per day, twelve per season; hare and rabbit, four per day, or twelve per season.
  • Five-year close seasons should immediately be enacted for the following species: quail, woodcock, jacksnipe and all species of shore or "beach" birds.
  • The sale of all native wild game should be prohibited; and game-breeding in preserves, and the sale of such game under state supervision, should be provided for.
  • The use of automatic and pump guns in hunting should be barred,—through state pride, if for no other reason.
NJ:

New Jersey enjoys the distinction of being the second state to break [Page 289] the strangle-hold of the gun-makers of Hartford and Ilion, and cast out the odious automatic and pump guns. It was a pitched battle,—that of 1912, inaugurated by Ernest Napier, President of the State Game and Fish Commission and his fellow commissioners. The longer the contest continued, the more did the press and the people of New Jersey awaken to the seriousness of the situation. Finally, the gun-suppression bill passed the two houses of the legislature with a total of only fourteen votes against it, and after a full hearing had been granted the attorneys of the gunmakers, was promptly signed by Governor Woodrow Wilson. Governor Wilson could not be convinced that the act was "unconstitutional," or "confiscatory" or "class legislation."

New Jersey has the honor of being the second state to break the control of the gun manufacturers in Hartford and Ilion, and eliminate the offensive automatic and pump guns. It was an intense battle in 1912, led by Ernest Napier, the President of the State Game and Fish Commission, along with his fellow commissioners. As the fight went on, both the press and the people of New Jersey grew increasingly aware of how serious the situation was. Eventually, the gun-suppression bill passed both houses of the legislature with only fourteen votes against it, and after the gunmakers' attorneys were given a full hearing, it was quickly signed by Governor Woodrow Wilson. Governor Wilson could not be convinced that the act was "unconstitutional," or "confiscatory," or "class legislation."

This contest aroused the whole state to the imperative necessity of providing more thorough protection for the remnant of New Jersey game, and it was chiefly responsible for the enactment of four other excellent new protective laws.

This contest got the entire state fired up about the urgent need to offer better protection for the remaining wildlife in New Jersey, and it played a major role in the creation of four other great new protective laws.

New Jersey always has been sincere in her desire to protect her wild life, and always has gone as far as the killers of game would permit her to go! But the People have made one great mistake,—common to nearly every state,—of permitting the game-killers to dictate the game laws! Always and everywhere, this is a grievous mistake, and fatal to the game. For example: In 1866 New Jersey enacted a five-year close-season law on the "prairie fowl" (pinnated grouse); but it was too late to save it. Now that species is as dead to New Jersey as is the mastodon. The moral is: Will the People apply this lesson to the ruffed grouse, quail and the shore birds generally before they, too, are too far gone to be brought back? If it is done, it must be done against the will of the gunners; for they prefer to shoot,—and shoot they will if they can dictate the laws, until the last game bird is dead.

New Jersey has always been genuine in wanting to protect its wildlife and has gone as far as the game hunters would allow! But people have made a major mistake, which is common in nearly every state—allowing the hunters to dictate the game laws! This is always and everywhere a serious mistake and detrimental to wildlife. For instance: In 1866, New Jersey implemented a five-year close-season law for the "prairie fowl" (pinnated grouse); but it was too late to save it. Now that species is as extinct in New Jersey as the mastodon. The lesson is: Will the people learn from this regarding the ruffed grouse, quail, and shorebirds in general before they too are too far gone to save? If it happens, it must be done against the wishes of the hunters; because they prefer to hunt—and they will keep hunting if they can set the laws, until the last game bird is gone.

In 1912, New Jersey is spending $30,000 in trying to restock her birdless covers with foreign game birds and quail. In brief, here are the imperative duties of New Jersey:

In 1912, New Jersey is investing $30,000 to restock its birdless areas with foreign game birds and quail. In short, here are New Jersey's essential responsibilities:

  • Provide eight-year close seasons for quail, ruffed grouse, woodcock, snipe, all shore birds and the wood-duck.
  • Prohibit the sale of all native wild game; but promote the sale of preserve-bred game.
  • Prevent the repeal of the automatic gun law, which surely will be attempted, each year.
  • Prohibit all bird-shooting after January 10, each year, until fall.
  • Prohibit the killing of squirrels as "game."
New Mexico:

All things considered, the game laws of New Mexico are surprisingly up to date, and the state is to be congratulated on its advanced position. For example, there are long close seasons on antelope, elk (now extinct!), mountain sheep, bob white quail, pinnated grouse, wild pigeon and ptarmigan,—an admirable list, truly. It is clear that New Mexico is wide awake to the dangers of the wild-life situation. On two counts, her laws are not quite perfect. There is no law prohibiting spring shooting, [Page 290] and there is no "model law" protecting the non-game birds. The sale of game will not trouble New Mexico, because the present laws prevent the sale of all protected game except plover, curlew and snipe,—all of them species by no means common in the arid regions of the Southwest.

All things considered, New Mexico's game laws are surprisingly up to date, and the state deserves praise for its progressive stance. For instance, there are long closed seasons for antelope, elk (now extinct!), mountain sheep, bobwhite quail, pinnated grouse, wild pigeons, and ptarmigan—a truly commendable list. It's clear that New Mexico is alert to the dangers facing wildlife. However, there are two areas where the laws fall short. There’s no law against spring hunting, [Page 290] , and there’s no "model law" protecting non-game birds. The sale of game isn't an issue for New Mexico because current laws ban the sale of all protected game except for plover, curlew, and snipe—all species that are not particularly common in the Southwest's arid regions.

  • A law prohibiting spring shooting of shore birds and waterfowl should be passed at the next session of the legislature.
  • The enactment of the "model law" should be accomplished without delay to put New Mexico abreast of the neighboring states of Colorado, Oklahoma and Texas.
  • The term of the State Warden should be extended to four years.
NYC:

In the year of grace, 1912, I think we may justly regard New York as the banner state of all America in the protection of game and wild life in general. This proud position has been achieved partly through the influence of a great conservation Governor, John A. Dix, and the State Conservation Commission proposed and created by his efforts. In these days of game destruction, when our country from Nome to Key West is reeking with the blood of slaughtered wild creatures, it is a privilege and a pleasure to be a citizen of a state which has thoroughly cleaned house, and done well nigh the utmost that any state can do to clear her bad record, and give all her wild creatures a fair chance to survive. The people of the Empire State literally can point with pride to the list of things accomplished in the discharge of good-citizenship toward the remnant of wild life, and toward the future generations of New Yorkers. That we of to-day have borne our share of the burden of bringing about the conditions of 1912, will be a source of satisfaction, especially when the sword and shield hang useless upon the walls of Old Age.

In the year 1912, I believe we can rightly view New York as the leading state in all of America for the protection of game and wildlife. This esteemed status has been achieved partly thanks to a great conservation Governor, John A. Dix, and the State Conservation Commission that he helped establish. In these times of wildlife destruction, when our country from Nome to Key West is stained with the blood of killed animals, it is a privilege and a pleasure to be a citizen of a state that has thoroughly cleaned house and done nearly everything possible to improve its poor record and give all its wildlife a fair chance to survive. The people of the Empire State can genuinely take pride in what has been accomplished in support of wildlife and for future generations of New Yorkers. Knowing that we have played our part in creating the conditions of 1912 will be a source of satisfaction, especially when the sword and shield hang useless upon the walls of old age.

New York began to protect her deer in 1705 and her heath hens in 1708. In 1912 she stopped the killing of female deer, and of bucks having horns less than three inches in length. Spring shooting was stopped in 1903. A comprehensive law protecting non-game birds was enacted in 1862. New York's first law against the sale of certain game during close seasons was enacted in 1837.

New York started protecting her deer in 1705 and her heath hens in 1708. In 1912, she prohibited hunting female deer and bucks with antlers shorter than three inches. Spring hunting was banned in 1903. A comprehensive law protecting non-game birds was put in place in 1862. New York's first law against selling certain game during closed seasons was established in 1837.

In 1911 New York enacted, with only one adverse vote, a law prohibiting the sale of all native wild game throughout the state, no matter where killed, and providing liberally for the encouragement of game-breeding, and the sale of preserve-bred game.

In 1911, New York passed a law, with just one opposing vote, banning the sale of all native wild game across the state, regardless of where it was hunted, and generously supporting the promotion of game breeding and the sale of game bred in preserves.

In 1912 a new codification of the state game laws went into effect, through the initiative of Governor Dix and Conservation Commissioners Van Kennen, Moore and Fleming, assisted (as special counsel) by Marshall McLean, George A. Lawyer and John B. Burnham. This code contains many important new provisions, one of the most valuable of which is a clause giving the Conservation Commission power, at its discretion, to shorten or to close any open season on any species of game in any locality wherein that species seems to be threatened with extermination. This very valuable principle should be enacted into law in every state!

In 1912, a new set of state game laws took effect, initiated by Governor Dix and Conservation Commissioners Van Kennen, Moore, and Fleming, with assistance from special counsel Marshall McLean, George A. Lawyer, and John B. Burnham. This code includes several important new provisions, one of the most valuable being a clause that gives the Conservation Commission the authority, at its discretion, to shorten or close any open season on any species of game in any area where that species appears to be at risk of extinction. This essential principle should be enacted into law in every state!

[Page 291]

In 1910, William Dutcher and T. Gilbert Pearson and the National Association of Audubon Societies won, after a struggle lasting five years, the passage of the "Shea plumage bill," prohibiting the sale of aigrettes or other plumage of wild birds belonging to the same families as the birds of New York (Chap. 256). This law should be duplicated in every state.

In 1910, William Dutcher, T. Gilbert Pearson, and the National Association of Audubon Societies achieved victory after a five-year struggle with the passage of the "Shea plumage bill," which banned the sale of aigrettes and other feathers from wild birds in the same families as the birds of New York (Chap. 256). This law should be replicated in every state.

Two things remain to be done in the state of New York.

Two things still need to be done in the state of New York.

  • All the shore birds, quail and gray squirrels of the state should be given five-year close seasons, by the action of the State Conservation Commission.
  • For the good name of the state, and the ethical standing of its sportsmen, as an example to other states, and the last remaining duty toward our wild life, the odious automatic and pump shotguns should be barred from use in hunting, unless their capacity is reduced to two shots without reloading.

[Page 292]
CHAPTER XXXI
NEW LAWS NEEDED IN THE STATES
(Concluded)
North Carolina:

The game laws of North Carolina form a droll crazy-quilt of local and state measures, effective and ineffective. In 1909, a total of 77 local game laws were enacted, and only two of state-wide application. During the ten years ending in 1910, a total of 316 game laws were enacted! She sedulously endeavors to protect her quail, which do not migrate, but in Currituck County she persistently maintains the bloodiest slaughter-pen for waterfowl that exists anywhere on the Atlantic Coast. There is no bag limit on waterfowl, and unlimited spring shooting. So far as waterfowl are concerned, conditions could hardly be worse, except by the use of punt guns. Doves, larks and robins are shot and eaten as "game" from November 1 to March 1! Twenty-one counties have local restrictions on the sale of game, but the state at large has only one,—on quail.

The game laws of North Carolina create a quirky patchwork of local and state regulations, some effective and some not. In 1909, there were 77 local game laws enacted, and only two that applied statewide. Over the ten years leading up to 1910, a total of 316 game laws were introduced! The state makes a strong effort to protect its non-migrating quail, but in Currituck County, it still has the most brutal slaughtering ground for waterfowl found anywhere on the Atlantic Coast. There is no limit on the number of waterfowl that can be hunted, and spring hunting is unrestricted. The situation for waterfowl is almost as bad as it could be without using punt guns. Doves, larks, and robins can be hunted and eaten as "game" from November 1 to March 1! Twenty-one counties have local rules about selling game, but the state as a whole only has one—regarding quail.

The market gunners of Currituck Sound are a scourge and a pest to the wild-fowl life of the Atlantic Coast. For their own money profit, they slaughter by wholesale the birds that annually fly through twenty-two states. It is quite useless to suggest anything to North Carolina in modern game laws. As long as a killable bird remains, she will not stop the slaughter. Her standing reply is "It brings a lot of money into Currituck County; and the people want the money." Even the members of the sportsmen's clubs can shoot wild fowl in Currituck County, quite without limit; and I am told that the privilege often is abused. Quite recently I heard of a member of one of the clubs who shot 164 ducks and geese in two days!

The market gunners of Currituck Sound are a serious problem for the wildfowl population along the Atlantic Coast. For their own financial gain, they slaughter birds on a massive scale that migrate through twenty-two states each year. It's pointless to suggest any changes to North Carolina's game laws. As long as there are birds to kill, they won’t stop the hunting. Their usual response is, "It brings in a lot of money for Currituck County; and the people want that money." Even members of sportsmen's clubs can hunt wildfowl in Currituck County without restrictions, and I've heard that this privilege is often misused. Just recently, I heard about a member of one of the clubs who shot 164 ducks and geese in just two days!

Apparently any suggestions made to North Carolina would not be treated seriously, especially if they would tend really to elevate the sport of game shooting, or better protect the game. There is, however, a melancholy interest attached to the framing of good game laws, whether they ever are likely to be adopted or not. Here is the duty of North Carolina:

Apparently, any suggestions made to North Carolina wouldn’t be taken seriously, especially if they aimed to truly improve the sport of game shooting or better protect the game. However, there is a sad interest in creating good game laws, regardless of whether they are ever likely to be adopted. Here is the duty of North Carolina:

  • Stop the killing of robins, doves and larks for food, absolutely and forever. This measure is necessary to agriculture and to the good name of the state.
  • Stop the shooting of any game for sale, prohibit the possession of game for sale, and the sale of wild native game.
  • Establish bag limits on all waterfowl, and on all other game birds and mammals. [Page 293]
  • Prepare to protect, at an early date, the wild turkey and quail; for soon they will need it. Moreover, enact a law prohibiting the use of automatic and pump guns in hunting, covering the entire state.
  • Provide a resident-license system and thereby make the game department self-sustaining, and render it possible to employ a salaried State Game Commissioner.

It is quite wrong for the people of North Carolina to hold grudges against northern members of the ducking clubs of Currituck for the passage of the Bayne law. They had nothing whatever to do with it, and I can say this because I was in a position which enabled me to know.

It’s completely unfair for the people of North Carolina to resent northern members of the ducking clubs of Currituck for the Bayne law being passed. They didn’t have anything to do with it, and I know this because I was in a position to understand.

North Dakota:

In 1911, this sovereign state enacted a law prohibiting the use of automobiles in hunting wild-fowl; also rifles. North Dakota was the first state to recognize officially the fact that the use of automobiles in hunting is a serious menace to some forms of wild life. Beyond all question, the machines do indeed bring an extra number of birds within reach of the gun! They increase the annual slaughter; and it is right and necessary to prohibit by law their use in hunting game of any kind.

In 1911, this state passed a law banning the use of cars for hunting wild fowl, as well as rifles. North Dakota was the first state to officially acknowledge that using cars for hunting poses a serious threat to certain wildlife. There's no doubt that these vehicles make it easier to reach more birds with a gun! They raise the number of birds killed each year, and it's both right and necessary to legally prohibit their use in hunting any game.

In Putman County, New York, I have seen them in action. A load of three or four gunners is whirled up to a likely mountain-side for ruffed grouse, and presently the banging begins. After an hour or so spent in combing out the birds, the hunters jump in, whirl away in a dust-cloud to another spot two miles away, and "bang-bang-bang" again. After that, a third locality; and so on, covering six or eight times the territory that a man in a buggy, or on foot, could possibly shoot over in the same time!

In Putman County, New York, I've seen them at work. A group of three or four shooters is driven up to a promising mountainside to hunt ruffed grouse, and soon the shots start ringing out. After about an hour of searching for the birds, the hunters hop back in, kick up a dust cloud, and speed off to another spot two miles away, where they start shooting again. Then it’s on to a third location, and so on, covering six or eight times the area that someone in a car or on foot could realistically shoot in the same amount of time!

North Dakota has done well, in the passage of that act. On certain other matters, she is not so sound.

North Dakota has done well with the passing of that act. However, on some other issues, she isn't doing as well.

For instance:

Understood! Please provide the text you'd like me to modernize.

  • The killing of pinnated grouse should be stopped for ten years; and it should be done immediately.
  • The killing of cranes as "game" should stop, instantly and forever. It is barbarous.
  • Fifty dead birds in possession at one time is fully thirty too many. The game cannot stand such slaughter!
  • All shore birds (Order Limicolae) should have at least a five-year close season, before they are exterminated.
  • The use of machine guns in hunting should be stopped, forever.

It is to the credit of the state that antelope are absolutely protected until 1920, and an unlimited close season has been accorded the quail, dove and swan.

It’s commendable that the state completely protected antelope until 1920, and has established an unlimited off-season for quail, dove, and swan.

Ohio:

I think that Ohio comes the nearest of all the states to being gameless. With but slight exceptions her laws are about as correct as those of most other states, but the desire to "kill" is so strong, and the majority of her gunners are so thoroughly selfish about their "rights" [Page 294] that the game has ruthlessly been swept away according to law! Ohio is a striking example of the deplorable results of legalized slaughter. The spirit of Ohio is like that of North Carolina. Her "sportsmen" will not have an automatic gun law! Oh, no! "Limit the bag, shorten the season, and the gun won't matter!"

I think Ohio is the closest of all the states to being without game. With just a few exceptions, its laws are about as good as those in most other states, but the urge to "kill" is so strong, and most of its hunters are so completely selfish about their "rights" [Page 294] that the game has been ruthlessly wiped out according to law! Ohio is a glaring example of the terrible consequences of legalized slaughter. The attitude in Ohio is similar to that in North Carolina. Its "sportsmen" refuse to accept an automatic gun law! Oh, no! "Limit the catch, shorten the season, and the type of gun doesn't matter!"

To-day, the visible game supply of Ohio does not amount to anything; and when the last game bird of that state falls before the greediest shooter, we shall say, "A gameless state is just what you deserve!"

To date, Ohio's visible game supply is negligible; and when the last game bird in that state is taken down by the greediest hunter, we will say, "A state without game is exactly what you deserve!"

It is useless to make any suggestions to Ohio. Her shooting Shylocks want the last pound of flesh from wild life, and I think they will get it very soon. Ohio is in the area of barren states. The seed stock has been too thoroughly destroyed to be recuperated. I think that Ohio's last noteworthy exploit in lawmaking for the preservation (!) of her game was in 1904, when she put all her shore birds into the list of killable game, and bravely prohibited the shooting of doves on the ground! Great is Ohio in game conservation!

It’s pointless to suggest anything to Ohio. Her hunters want the last bit of wildlife, and I think they’ll get it very soon. Ohio is among the barren states. The wildlife population has been so severely depleted that it can't recover. I believe Ohio's last significant effort in creating laws to protect her game was in 1904, when she made all her shorebirds fair game and boldly banned the shooting of doves on the ground! Ohio is truly great at game conservation!

Oklahoma:

For a state so young, the wild-life laws of Oklahoma are in admirable shape; but it is reasonably certain that there, as elsewhere, the game is being killed much faster than it is breeding. The new commonwealth must arouse, and screw up the brakes much tighter.

For a state that’s still quite young, Oklahoma's wildlife laws are in great condition; however, it’s pretty clear that, like in other places, animals are being hunted much faster than they can reproduce. The new state needs to take action and tighten up restrictions significantly.

Recently, an observing friend told me that on a trip of 250 miles westward from Lawton and back again, watching sharply for game all the way, he saw only five pinnated grouse! And this in a good season for "prairie chickens."

Recently, a friend who was watching told me that during a 250-mile trip west from Lawton and back, keeping a keen eye out for wildlife the entire time, he only spotted five prairie chickens! And this was during a good season for "prairie chickens."

  • Oklahoma must stop all spring shooting.
  • The prairie chicken must have a ten-year close season, immediately.
  • Next time, her legislature will pass the automatic gun bill that failed last year only because the session closed too soon for its consideration.

Oklahoma is wise in giving long protection to her quail, and "wild pigeon," and such protection should be made equally effective in the case of the dove. She is wise in rigidly enforcing her law against the exportation of game.

Oklahoma is smart to provide long-term protection for its quail and "wild pigeon," and that same level of protection should also be applied to doves. It is smart to strictly enforce the law against the export of game.

The Wichita National Bison herd, near Cache, now contains forty head of bison, all in good condition. The nucleus herd consisted of fifteen head presented by the New York Zoological Society in 1907.

The Wichita National Bison herd near Cache now has forty bison, all in good health. The founding herd had fifteen bison provided by the New York Zoological Society in 1907.

Oregon:

The results of the efforts that have been made by Oregon to provide special laws for each individual shooter are painful to contemplate. Like North Carolina, Oregon has attempted the impossible task of pleasing everybody, and at the same time protecting her wild life. The two propositions can be blended together about as easily as asphalt and [Page 295] water. The individual shooter desires laws that will permit him to shoot—when he pleases, where he pleases, and what he pleases! If you meet those conditions all over a great state, then it is time to bid farewell to the game; for it surely is doomed.

The results of Oregon's attempts to create special laws for each individual shooter are tough to think about. Similar to North Carolina, Oregon has tried the impossible task of satisfying everyone while also protecting its wildlife. Combining those two goals is as challenging as mixing asphalt and [Page 295] water. Individual shooters want laws that let them shoot—when they want, where they want, and whatever they want! If those conditions are met across such a large state, then it's time to say goodbye to the game; it's definitely doomed.

No, decidedly no! Do not attempt to pass game laws that will "please everybody." The more the game-hogs are displeased, the better for the game! The game-hogs form a very small and very insignificant minority of the whole People. Why please one man at the expense of ninety-nine others? The game of a state belongs to The People as a whole, not to the gunners alone. The great, patient,—and sometimes sleepy,—majority has vested rights in it, and it is for it to say how it shall and shall not be killed. Heretofore the gunning minority has been dictating the game laws of America, and the result is—progressive extermination.

No, absolutely not! Don’t try to create game laws that will "satisfy everyone." The more disgruntled the game-hogs are, the better it is for the game! The game-hogs are a very small and insignificant minority of the entire population. Why cater to one person at the cost of ninety-nine others? The game in a state belongs to the whole community, not just the hunters. The large, patient — and sometimes lethargic — majority has a vested interest in it, and it should decide how it should and shouldn’t be hunted. Until now, the hunting minority has been setting the game laws in America, and the result is — ongoing extinction.

  • First of all, Oregon should bury the pernicious idea of individual and local laws.
  • She should enact a concise, clearly cut, and thoroughly effective code of wild life laws, just as New York did last winter.
  • Her game seasons should be uniform in application, all over the state.
  • Every species of bird, mammal or fish that is threatened with extermination should be given a close season of from five to ten years.
  • It is now time to protect the white goose and brant. Squirrels, band-tailed pigeons and doves should be perpetually protected.
  • The State Game Commission should have power to close the shooting seasons on any species of game in any locality, whenever a species is threatened with extinction.
  • The sale of native wild game, from all sources, should be permanently stopped, by a Bayne law.
  • The use of automatic, "autoloading" and pump shot guns in hunting should be perpetually barred.
Pennsyltucky:

As a game protecting state, Pennsylvania is a close second to New York and Massachusetts. She protects all native game from sale; she has the courage to prohibit aliens from owning guns; she bars out automatic shot-guns in hunting; she makes refuges for deer, and feeds her quail in winter, and she permits the killing of no female deer, or fawns with horns less than three inches in length. Her splendid State Game Commission is fighting hard for a hunter's license law, and will win the fight for it at the next session of the legislature (1913).

As a state focused on wildlife protection, Pennsylvania comes in just behind New York and Massachusetts. It safeguards all native game from being sold; it has the boldness to stop non-residents from owning guns; it excludes automatic shotguns in hunting; it creates refuges for deer, provides food for quail in the winter, and does not allow the hunting of female deer or fawns with antlers shorter than three inches. The impressive State Game Commission is working hard for a hunter's license law and will secure it in the next session of the legislature (1913).

But there are certain things that Pennsylvania should do:

But there are specific actions that Pennsylvania should take:

  • She should stop all spring shooting. She must stop killing doves, blackbirds, wild turkeys, sandpipers, and all the squirrels save the red squirrel.
  • She should give all her shore birds a rest of at least five years, for recuperation.
  • She should enact a comprehensive Dutcher plumage law, stopping the sale of aigrettes.
  • She should provide a resident license to furnish her Game Commission with adequate funds to carry on its work and exterminate game-killing vermin.
Rhode Island
  • Little Rhody needs some good, small bag limits; for now (1912) she has none! [Page 296]
  • She should enact a Bayne law, a Pennsylvania law against aliens, and a New Jersey law against the automatic and pump guns.
  • She should stop killing the beautiful wood-duck, and gray squirrel.
  • She should stop all spring shooting of waterfowl.
South Carolina;
  • She should save her game while she still has some to save.
  • First of all, stop spring shooting; secondly, enact a Bayne law.
  • In the name of mystery, who is there in South Carolina who desires to kill grackles? And why?
  • And where is the gentleman sportsman who has come down to killing foolish and tame little doves for "sport?" Stop it at once, for the credit of the state.
  • Enact a dollar resident license law and thus provide adequate funds for game protection.
  • South Carolina bag limits are all 50 per cent too high; and they should be reduced.

It is strange to see one of the oldest of the states lagging in game protection, far behind such new states as New Mexico and Oklahoma; but South Carolina does lag. It is time for her to consider her position, and reform.

It’s odd to see one of the oldest states falling behind in game protection, way behind newer states like New Mexico and Oklahoma; but South Carolina is indeed lagging. It's time for her to evaluate her situation and make changes.

South Dakota:
  • South Dakota should stop all spring shooting.
  • Her game-bag limits are really no limits at all! They should be reduced about 66 per cent without a moment's unnecessary delay.
  • The two year term of the State Warden is too short for effective work. It should be extended to four years.

Unless South Dakota wishes to repeat the folly of such states as Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, Missouri and Ohio, she needs to be up and doing. If her people want a gameless state, except for migratory waterfowl, all they need do is to slumber on, and they surely will have it. Why wait until greedy sportsmen have killed the last game bird of the state before seriously taking the matter in hand? In one act, all the shortcomings of the present laws can be corrected.

Unless South Dakota wants to make the same mistake as states like Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, and Ohio, it needs to take action. If its residents want a state without game animals, except for migratory waterfowl, all they have to do is remain passive, and that’s exactly what will happen. Why wait until the self-serving hunters have wiped out the last game bird in the state before addressing the issue seriously? With one action, all the flaws in the current laws can be fixed.

South Dakota needs no Bayne law, because she prohibits at all times the sale or exportation of all wild game.

South Dakota doesn't need a Bayne law because it already bans the sale or export of all wild game at all times.

Tennessee

In wild life protection, Tennessee has much to do. She made her start late in life, and what she needs to do is to draft with care and enact with cheerful alacrity certain necessary amendments.

In wildlife protection, Tennessee has a lot to accomplish. She got a late start, and what she needs to do is carefully draft and happily enact some necessary amendments.

We notice that there are open seasons for blackbirds, robins, doves and squirrels! It seems incredible; but it is true.

We see that there are open seasons for blackbirds, robins, doves, and squirrels! It sounds unbelievable, but it's true.

Behold the blackbird as a "game" bird, with a lawful open season from September 1 to January 1. Consider its stately carriage, its rapid flight on the wing, its running and hiding powers when attacked. As a test of marksmanship, as the real thing for the expert wing shot, is it [Page 297] not great? Will not any self-respecting dog be proud to point or retrieve them? And what flesh for the table!

Check out the blackbird as a "game" bird, with a legal hunting season from September 1 to January 1. Look at its impressive posture, its swift flight, and its ability to run and hide when threatened. As a challenge for marksmanship, for the true expert wing shooter, is it [Page 297] not amazing? Wouldn't any self-respecting dog be eager to point or retrieve them? And think about how great they are for dinner!

Fancy an able-bodied sportsman going out in a fifty-dollar hunting suit, carrying a fifteen-dollar gun behind a seven-dollar dog, and returning with a glorious bag of twenty-five blackbirds! Or robins! Or doves! Proud indeed, would we be to belong (which we don't) to a club of "sportsmen" who go out shooting blackbirds, and robins, and foolish little doves, as "game!" "Game" indeed, are those birds,—for little lads of seven who do not know better; but not for boys of twelve who have in their veins any inheritance of sporting blood. (I am proud of the fact that at twelve years of age,—and ever so keen to "go hunting,"—I knew without being told that squirrels and doves were not real "game" for real boys.)

Imagine a fit sportsman stepping out in a fifty-dollar hunting outfit, carrying a fifteen-dollar gun, accompanied by a seven-dollar dog, and coming back with an impressive haul of twenty-five blackbirds! Or robins! Or doves! How proud we would be to belong (which we don’t) to a club of "sportsmen" who go out shooting blackbirds, robins, and silly little doves as "game!" "Game," indeed, are those birds—for little kids of seven who don’t know any better; but not for twelve-year-olds who have any trace of sporting blood in them. (I take pride in the fact that at the age of twelve—eager to "go hunting"—I knew without being told that squirrels and doves were not real "game" for real boys.)

The killers of doves, squirrels, blackbirds and robins belong in the same class as the sparrow-and-linnet-killing Italians of Venice, Milan and Turin, and in that company we will leave them.

The people who kill doves, squirrels, blackbirds, and robins are in the same category as the Italians from Venice, Milan, and Turin who kill sparrows and linnets, and we'll leave them there.

Tennessee needs:

Tennessee wants:

  • A resident license system to provide funds for game protection.
  • A salaried warden force.
  • A law prohibiting spring shooting of shore birds and waterfowl.
  • A law protecting robins, doves and other non-game birds not covered by the present statute.
Texas:

I remember well when the great battle was fought in Texas by the gallant men and women of the State Audubon Society, to compel the people of Texas to learn the economic value to agriculture and cotton of the insectivorous birds. The name of the splendid Brigadier-General who led the Army of the Defense was Capt. M.B. Davis. That was in 1903.

I clearly remember when the big battle took place in Texas, led by the brave men and women of the State Audubon Society, to make the people of Texas understand the economic importance of insect-eating birds for agriculture and cotton. The amazing Brigadier General who commanded the Defense Army was Capt. M.B. Davis. That was in 1903.

Since that great fight was won, Texas has been a partly reformed state, at times quite jealous of her bird life; but still she tolerates spring shooting and has not made adequate close seasons for her waterfowl; which is wrong. To-day, the people of Texas do not need to be told that forty-three species of birds feed on the cotton boll weevil; for they know it.

Since that big battle was won, Texas has become a somewhat reformed state, at times quite protective of its bird population; but it still allows spring hunting and hasn't established proper closed seasons for its waterfowl, which is not right. Nowadays, the people of Texas don’t need to be told that forty-three species of birds feed on the cotton boll weevil because they already know it.

On the whole, and for a southern state, the wild-life laws of Texas are in fairly good shape. On account of the absence of game-scourge markets, a Bayne law is not so imperatively necessary there as in certain other states. All the game of the state is protected from sale.

On the whole, and for a southern state, the wildlife laws of Texas are in pretty good shape. Because there are no game-scourge markets, a Bayne law isn't as urgently needed there as in some other states. All the game in the state is protected from being sold.

We do assert, however, that if robins are slaughtered as F.L. Crow, the former Atlantan asserts, all robin shooting should be forever stopped; that the pinnated grouse should be given a seven-year close season, and that doves should be taken off the list of game birds and perpetually protected, both for economic and sentimental reasons, and also because the too weak and confiding dove is not a "game" bird for red-blooded men.

We do maintain, however, that if robins are killed, as F.L. Crow, the former Atlantan, claims, then all robin hunting should be banned for good; that the pinnated grouse should have a seven-year no-hunting period, and that doves should be removed from the game bird list and protected forever, both for economic and emotional reasons, and also because the gentle and trusting dove is not a "game" bird for real men.

  • Texas should enact without delay a law providing close seasons for ducks, geese and other waterfowl;
  • A law prohibiting spring shooting, and
  • A provision reducing the limit on deer to two bucks a season.
[Page 298] Utah:

The laws of Utah are far from being up to the requirements of the present hour. One strange thing has happened in Utah.

The laws of Utah are far from meeting the demands of today. One odd thing has happened in Utah.

When I spent a week in Salt Lake City in 1888, and devoted some time to inquiring into game conditions, the laws of the state were very bad. At the mouth of Bear River, ducks were being slaughtered for the markets by the tens of thousands. The cold-blooded, wide open and utterly shameless way in which it was being done, right at the doors of Salt Lake City, was appalling.

When I spent a week in Salt Lake City in 1888 and took some time to look into the state of wildlife, the laws were really terrible. At the mouth of Bear River, ducks were being killed for the markets by the tens of thousands. The cold-blooded, completely open, and totally shameless way it was happening right at the edge of Salt Lake City was shocking.

At the same time, the law permitted the slaughter of spotted fawns. I saw a huge drygoods box filled to the top with the flat skins of slaughtered innocents, 260 in number, that a rascal had collected and was offering at fifty cents each. In reply to a question as to their use, he said: "I tink de sportsmen like 'em for to make vests oud of." He lived at Rawlins, Wyo.

At the same time, the law allowed the killing of spotted fawns. I saw a big dry goods box filled to the brim with the flat skins of slaughtered innocents, 260 in number, that a scoundrel had gathered and was selling for fifty cents each. When asked what they were used for, he said: "I think the sportsmen like them to make vests out of." He lived in Rawlins, Wyo.

After a long and somnolent period, during which hundreds of thousands of ducks, geese, brant and other birds had been slaughtered for market at the Bear River shambles and elsewhere, the state awoke sufficiently to abate a portion of the disgrace by passing a bag-limit law (1897).

After a long and sleepy time, during which hundreds of thousands of ducks, geese, brant, and other birds were killed for sale at the Bear River slaughterhouse and other places, the state finally took action to reduce some of the shame by introducing a bag-limit law (1897).

And then came Nature's punishment upon Utah for that duck slaughter. The ducks of Great Salt Lake became afflicted with a terrible epidemic disease (intestinal coccidiosis) which swept off thousands, and stopped the use of Utah ducks as food! It was a "duck plague," no less. It has prevailed for three years, and has not yet by any means been stamped out. It seems to be due to the fact that countless thousands of ducks have been feeding on the exposed alluvial flats at the mouth of the creek that drains off the sewage of Salt Lake City. The conditions are said to be terrible.

And then Nature punished Utah for the duck slaughter. The ducks of Great Salt Lake were hit by a terrible epidemic disease (intestinal coccidiosis) that took out thousands and halted the use of Utah ducks as food! It was a "duck plague," no less. It’s been around for three years and isn’t anywhere close to being eradicated. It seems to be caused by the fact that countless thousands of ducks have been feeding on the exposed alluvial flats at the mouth of the creek that drains the sewage of Salt Lake City. The conditions are said to be horrific.

To-day, Utah is so nearly destitute of big game that the subject is hardly worthy of mention. Of her upland game birds, only a fraction remains, and as her laws stand to-day, she is destined to become in the near future a gameless state. In a dry region like this, the wild life always hangs on by a slender thread, and it is easy to exterminate it!

Today, Utah has almost no big game left, making the topic hardly worth mentioning. Of its upland game birds, only a small number remain, and with the current laws, it is likely to become a state without game in the near future. In a dry area like this, wildlife always survives by a thin margin, and it’s easy to wipe it out!

  • Utah should instantly stop the sale of game that she now legally provides for,—twenty-five shore birds and waterfowl per day to private parties!
  • Deer should be given a ten-year close season, at once. All bag limits should instantly be reduced one-half. The sage grouse, quail, swans, woodcock, dove, and all shore birds should be given a ten-year close season,—and rigidly protected,—before the stock is all gone.
  • The model law for the protection of non-game birds should be enacted at once.
  • The absolute protection of elk, antelope and sheep (until 1913) should be extended for twenty years.
  • Utah should create a big-game preserve, at once.

If Utah proposes to save even a remnant of her wild life for posterity, she must be up and doing.

If Utah wants to preserve any part of its wildlife for future generations, it needs to take action now.

Vermont: [Page 299]

In view of all conditions, it must be stated that the game laws of Vermont are, with but slight exceptions, in good condition. It is a pleasure to see that there is no spring shooting; that there is no "open" season of slaughter for the moose, caribou, wood-duck, swan, upland plover, dove or rail; that no buck deer with antlers less than three inches long may be killed; and that there is a law under which damages by deer to growing crops may be assessed and paid for by the county in which they occur. Moreover, if there is to be any killing of game, her bag limits are not extravagant. All the game protected by the state is immune from sale for food purposes, but preserve-reared game may legally be sold. We recommend the following new measures:

Considering everything, it's clear that Vermont's game laws are mostly in good shape, with just a few minor exceptions. It's great to see that there's no spring hunting; there isn't an "open" season for the slaughter of moose, caribou, wood-ducks, swans, upland plovers, doves, or rails; no buck deer with antlers shorter than three inches can be hunted; and there's a law that allows counties to assess and compensate for damage done by deer to growing crops. Additionally, if hunting does occur, the bag limits are reasonable. All game protected by the state cannot be sold for food, but game raised on preserves can be sold legally. We suggest the following new measures:

  • Absolute close seasons of five-years' duration for ruffed grouse, quail, woodcock, snipe and all shore birds without a single exception.
  • The gray squirrel should be perpetually protected,—because he is too beautiful, too companionable and too unfit for food to be killed. Even the hungry savages of the East Indies do not eat squirrels.
  • Pass an automatic pump-gun law.
  • Extend the term of the Fish and Game Commissioner to four years.

Vermont's great success in introducing and colonizing deer is both interesting and valuable. Fifty years ago, she had no wild deer, because the species had been practically exterminated. In 1875, thirteen deer were imported from the Adirondacks and set free in the mountains. The increase has been enormous. In 1909 the number of deer killed for the year was about 5,311, which was possible without adversely affecting the herds. It is a striking object-lesson in restoring the white-tailed deer to its own, and it will be found more fully described in chapter XXIV.

Vermont's remarkable success in introducing and populating deer is both fascinating and significant. Fifty years ago, there were no wild deer because the species had nearly been wiped out. In 1875, thirteen deer were brought in from the Adirondacks and released into the mountains. The population growth has been tremendous. In 1909, about 5,311 deer were harvested that year, which was sustainable and didn't harm the herds. It's an impressive example of bringing the white-tailed deer back to its natural habitat, and you can find more detailed information in chapter XXIV.

Virginia:

Virginia is far below the position that she should occupy in wild-life conservation. To set her house in order, and come up to the level of the states that have been born during the past twenty years, she must bestir herself in these ways:

Virginia is far behind where she should be in wildlife conservation. To get her act together and catch up to the states that have emerged in the last twenty years, she must take action in the following ways:

  • She must provide for a resident hunting license, a State Game Commissioner and a force of salaried wardens.
  • She must prohibit spring shooting.
  • She must impose small bag limits on game-slaughter.
  • She must resolutely stop the sale of all wild game.
  • She must stop the killing of female deer, and of bucks with horns under three inches long.
  • She must stop killing gray squirrels and doves as "game."
  • She should not permit the beautiful wood-duck to be killed as "game."
  • She should accord a five-year close season to grouse, and all shore birds.
  • She should rule out the machine shot-guns which gentlemen can no longer use in hunting.
[Page 300]

She should adopt at once a comprehensive code of game laws, and clean her house in one siege, instead of fiddling and fussing with all these matters one by one, through a series of ten long, weary years. The time for puttering with game protection has gone by. It is now time to make short cuts to comprehensive results, and save the game before it is too late.

She should immediately implement a complete set of game laws and tackle everything all at once, instead of dragging it out over ten long, tiring years. The time for small, scattered efforts in game protection is over. It's time to take direct action for effective results and save the game before it's too late.

Washington, D.C.:

The state of Washington still flatters herself that she has all kinds of big game to kill,—moose, antelope, goat, sheep, caribou and deer. Evidently this is on the theory that so long as a species is not extinct, it is "legal" and right to pursue it with rifles during a specified "open season."

The state of Washington still believes it has plenty of big game to hunt—moose, antelope, goat, sheep, caribou, and deer. This seems to be based on the idea that as long as a species isn't extinct, it's "legal" and okay to pursue it with rifles during a designated "open season."

The people of Washington need to be told that conditions have greatly changed, and it is now high time to put on the brakes. It is time for them to realize that if they wait any longer for the sportsmen to take the initiative in securing the enactment of really adequate preservation laws, all their big game will be dead before those laws are born! Every man shrinks from cutting off his own pet privilege.

The people of Washington need to understand that things have changed a lot, and it's time to slow down. They need to realize that if they wait any longer for the sportsmen to lead the way in getting strong preservation laws passed, all their big game will be gone before those laws even happen! No one wants to give up their own favorite privilege.

Some of the game laws of Washington are up to date; and her big-game laws look all right to the unaided eye, but are not. Her bird laws are a chaotic jumble of local exceptions and special privileges. As a net result of all her shortcomings, the remnant of a once fine fauna of big game and feathered game is surely being exterminated according to law. A few local exceptions will not disprove the general truthfulness of this assertion.

Some of Washington's game laws are current, and the big-game laws seem fine at first glance, but they're not. The bird laws are a confusing mix of local exceptions and special privileges. As a result of these flaws, what's left of a once thriving population of big game and birds is definitely being exterminated according to law. A few local exceptions don't change the overall truth of this statement.

Ten years ago a few men in Seattle resented the idea of outside co-operation in the protection of Washington game. They said they were abundantly able to take care of it; but the march of events has proven that they overestimated their capacity. To-day the wild-life laws of that state are only half baked. Come what may to me, I shall set down without malice the things that the great and admirable State of Washington should do to set her house in order. It is not good for the resourceful and progressive men of the Great Northwest to be clear behind the times in these matters.

Ten years ago, a few guys in Seattle didn't like the idea of outside help in protecting Washington's wildlife. They claimed they could manage it just fine; however, events that unfolded have shown they overestimated their abilities. Today, the wildlife laws in that state are still underdeveloped. Regardless of the consequences for me, I will outline without any ill will what the impressive State of Washington needs to do to get things in order. It's not ideal for the capable and forward-thinking people of the Great Northwest to fall behind the times in these issues.

Stop local game legislation, and enact a code of laws covering the entire state, uniformly. County legislation is twenty years behind the times!

Stop local game laws and create a single set of laws that apply across the entire state. County laws are twenty years out of date!

  • For ten (10) full years, stop the killing of elk, mountain sheep, mountain goat, caribou, moose, and antelope. Regarding deer, I am in doubt.
  • Prohibit the sale of all wild game, no matter where killed, by the enactment of a Bayne law, complete, which will also
  • Promote the breeding, killing and sale of domestic game for food purposes.
  • Make a careful investigation of the present status of your sage grouse, every other grouse, quail, and all species of shore birds, then give a five-year close season, all over the state, to every species that is "becoming scarce." This will embrace certainly one-half of the whole number, if not two-thirds.
  • Provide two bird refuges in the eastern portion of the state, where they are very greatly needed to supplement the good effects of the State Game Preserve established on Puget Sound in 1911.
  • Bar the use in hunting of the odious automatic and pump shotguns that are now so generally in use all over the United States to the great detriment of the game and the people.
West Virginia: [Page 301]

Considering the fact that West Virginia contains no plague-spot city for the consumption of commercial wild game, that the sale of all game is prohibited at all times, and the game of the state may not be exported for sale elsewhere, the wild life of West Virginia is reasonably secure from the market gunner,—if an adequate salaried warden force is provided. Without such a force her game must continue to be destroyed in the future as in the past to supply the markets of Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington. The deer law is excellent, and the non-game birds, and the dove and wood-duck are perpetually protected.

Considering that West Virginia doesn't have any cities known for the commercial hunting of wild game, that selling any game is always prohibited, and that the state's game can't be exported for sale elsewhere, the wildlife in West Virginia is fairly protected from market hunters—if there is a sufficient, paid warden force in place. Without such a force, the state's game will continue to be depleted in the future, just as it has been in the past, to meet the demands of markets in Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington. The deer laws are great, and non-game birds, as well as doves and wood ducks, are always protected.

One fly in the ointment is—spring shooting; which for ducks, geese and brant continues from September 1 to April 20. Unfortunately the law enacted in 1875 against spring shooting has been repealed, and so has the resident hunting license law (1911).

One drawback is—spring shooting; which for ducks, geese, and brant runs from September 1 to April 20. Unfortunately, the law passed in 1875 against spring shooting has been repealed, and so has the resident hunting license law (1911).

In view of the impossibility of imagining a good reason for the repeal of a good law, we recommend:

In light of the inability to think of a valid reason for getting rid of a good law, we suggest:

  • That the law against spring shooting be re-enacted.
  • That the resident hunter's license law be re-enacted, and the proceeds specifically devoted to the preservation and increase of game.
  • That a force of regular salaried wardens be provided to enforce the laws.
  • That the bag limit on quail should be 10 per day or 40 per season, instead of 12 and 96; and on ruffed grouse it should be 3 per day (as in New York) or 12 per season. One wild turkey per day, or three per season is quite enough for one man. The visible supply will not justify the existing limit of two and six.
Wisconsin

In spite of the fierce fight made in 1910-11 by the saloon-element game-shooters of Milwaukee for the control of the wild-life situation, and the repeal of the best protective laws of the state, the Army of Defense once more defeated the Allied Destroyers, and drove them off the field. Once more it was proven that when The People are aroused, they are abundantly able to send the steam roller over the enemies of wild life.

In spite of the intense efforts made in 1910-11 by the bar owners and hunters in Milwaukee to take control of the wildlife situation and overturn the best protective laws in the state, the Army of Defense once again triumphed over the Allied Destroyers and pushed them off the battlefield. It was once more demonstrated that when the public is mobilized, they can easily crush the opponents of wildlife.

Alphabetically, Wisconsin may come near the end of the roll-call; but by downright merit in protection, she comes mighty close to the head of the list of states. Her slate of "Work to be done" is particularly clean; and she has our most distinguished admiration. Her force of game wardens is not a political-machine force. It amounts to something. The men who get within it undergo successfully a civil service examination that certainly separates the sheep from the goats. For particulars address Dr. T.S. Palmer, Department of Agriculture, Washington.

Alphabetically, Wisconsin might be near the bottom of the list; however, in terms of actual merit in protection, it ranks very high among the states. Its "Work to be done" list is especially impressive, earning our highest respect. The game wardens are not part of a political machine; they truly make a difference. Those who become part of this team go through a rigorous civil service exam that clearly identifies the qualified individuals. For more information, contact Dr. T.S. Palmer, Department of Agriculture, Washington.

According to the standards that have been dragging along previous to this moment, Wisconsin has a good series of game laws. But the hour for a Reformation of ideas and principles has struck. We heard it first in April, 1911. The wild life of America must not be exterminated according [Page 302] to law, contrary to law, or in the absence of law! Wisconsin must take a fresh grip on her game situation, or it will get away from her, after all.

According to the standards that have been in place up until now, Wisconsin has a decent set of game laws. But the time for a change in ideas and principles has come. We first heard it in April 1911. America's wildlife must not be wiped out, whether by legal means, illegal actions, or in the absence of laws! Wisconsin needs to seriously reassess its game situation, or it will slip through her fingers after all.

  • Not another prairie chicken or woodcock should be killed in Wisconsin between 1912 and 1922. When any small bird becomes so scarce that the bag limit needs to be cut down to five, as it now is for the above in Wisconsin, it is time to stop for ten years, before it is too late.
  • Wisconsin should immediately busy herself about the creation of bird and game preserves.
  • For goodness sake, Wisconsin, stop killing squirrels as "game!" You ought to know better—and you do! Leave that form of barbarism for the Benighted States.
  • And pass a law shutting out the machine guns. They are a disgrace to our country, and a scourge to our game. Continually are they leading good men astray.
  • Extend the term of your State Warden to four years.
Wyoming:

The State of Wyoming once had a magnificent heritage of game. It embraced the Rocky Mountain species, and also those of the great plains. First and last, the state has worked hard to protect her wild life, and hold the killing of it down to a decent basis.

The State of Wyoming used to have an incredible variety of wildlife. It included species from the Rocky Mountains as well as those from the Great Plains. Throughout its history, the state has put in significant effort to protect its wildlife and keep hunting at a reasonable level.

As far back as 1889, I met on the Shoshone River a very wide-awake warden, actually "on his job," who was maintained by a body of private citizens headed by Col. Pickett and known as the Northern Wyoming Game Protective Association. And even then we saw that the laws were too liberal for the game. In one man's cold-storage dug-out we saw enough sheep, deer and elk meat to subsist a company of hungry dragoons, all killed and possessed according to law.

As far back as 1889, I met a very alert warden on the Shoshone River who was actually "on duty," supported by a group of private citizens led by Col. Pickett, known as the Northern Wyoming Game Protective Association. Even then, we noticed that the laws were too lenient for the game. In one person's cold-storage dug-out, we saw enough sheep, deer, and elk meat to feed a company of hungry soldiers, all killed and owned legally.

In the protection of her mountain game, Wyoming has had a hard task. In the Yellowstone Park between 1889 and 1894, the poachers for the taxidermists of Livingston and elsewhere slaughtered 270 bison out of 300; and Howell was the only man caught. England can protect game in far-distant mountains and wildernesses; but America can not,—or at least we don't! With us, men living in remote places who find wild game about them say "To h--- with the law!" They kill on the sly, in season and out of season, females and males; and the average local jury simply will not convict the average settler who is accused of such a trifling indiscretion as killing game out of season when he "needs the meat."

In protecting her mountain wildlife, Wyoming has faced a tough challenge. Between 1889 and 1894, poachers for the taxidermists in Livingston and elsewhere killed 270 out of 300 bison in Yellowstone Park; and Howell was the only person caught. England can safeguard wildlife in far-off mountains and wilderness areas, but America cannot—or at least we don't! Here, people living in remote areas who come across wild game often say, "To hell with the law!" They hunt secretly, in season and out of season, both females and males; and the average local jury simply will not convict a typical settler accused of such a minor offense as hunting out of season when he "needs the meat."

And so, with laws in full force protecting females, the volume of big game steadily disappears, everywhere west of the Alleghanies where the law permits big-game hunting! An interesting chapter might be written on game exterminated according to law.

And so, with laws fully in place protecting women, the amount of big game is steadily disappearing, everywhere west of the Alleghanies where the law allows big-game hunting! An interesting chapter could be written about game that has been wiped out legally.

The deadly defects in the protection of western big game are:

The serious flaws in the protection of western big game are:

  • Structural weakness in the enforcement of the laws;
  • Collusion between offenders for the suppression of evidence;
  • Perjury on the witness stand;
  • Dishonesty and disloyalty on the part of local jurors when friends, are on trial;
  • Sympathy of judges for "the poor man" who wants to eat the game to save his cattle and sheep.
[Page 303]

From Farmers' Bulletin No. 510, U-S. Dept. of Agriculture

From Farmers' Bulletin No. 510, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture

STATES AND PROVINCES WHICH REQUIRE RESIDENTS TO OBTAIN HUNTING LICENSES, 1912

STATES AND PROVINCES THAT REQUIRE RESIDENTS TO GET HUNTING LICENSES, 1912

In Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma and Rhode Island an additional fee of 10 to 20 cents is charged for issuing the license.

In Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, and Rhode Island, an extra fee of 10 to 20 cents is applied for issuing the license.

Inclosed names indicate States which permit residents to hunt on their own land without license. Nova Scotia has a $5 resident license and exempts landowners.

Inclosed names show States that allow residents to hunt on their own property without a license. Nova Scotia requires a $5 resident license but exempts landowners.

Note that many of the States adopt the French method of exempting landowners, while some, particularly in the West follow the English method of requiring everyone who hunts to obtain a license.

Note that many States adopt the French method of exempting landowners, while some, particularly in the West, follow the English method of requiring everyone who hunts to obtain a license.


Elsewhere there appears a statement regarding the elk of Jackson Hole, and the efforts made and being made to save them. At this point we are interested in the game of Wyoming as a whole.

Elsewhere, there’s a note about the elk in Jackson Hole and the efforts being made to save them. Right now, we’re focused on the wildlife of Wyoming as a whole.

  • First of all, the killing of mountain sheep should absolutely cease, for ten years.
  • A similar ten-year close season should be accorded moose and prong-horned antelope.
  • All grouse should now be classed with doves and swans (no open season), and kept there for ten years.
  • Spring shooting is wrong in principle and vicious in practice; and it should be stopped in Wyoming, as elsewhere.
  • The automatic and pump shotguns when used in hunting are a disgrace to Wyoming, as they are to other states, and should be suppressed; and the silencer for use in hunting is in the black list.

[Page 304]
CHAPTER XXXII
NEED FOR A FEDERAL MIGRATORY BIRD LAW, NO-SALE-OF-GAME LAW, AND OTHERS

We are assuming that the American people sincerely desire the adequate protection and increase of bird life, for reasons that are both sentimental and commercial. Surely every good citizen dislikes to see millions of dollar's worth of national wealth foolishly wasted, and he dislikes to pay any unnecessary increased cost of living. There must be several millions of Americans who feel that way, and who are disposed to demand a complete revolution in bird protection.

We assume that the American people genuinely want effective protection and growth of bird populations, for both sentimental and financial reasons. Surely, every responsible citizen hates to see millions of dollars' worth of national resources wasted and doesn't want to deal with unnecessary increases in living costs. There are likely millions of Americans who share this sentiment and are ready to call for a complete overhaul of bird protection.

There are four needs of wild bird life that are fundamental, and that can not be ignored, any more than a builder can ignore the four cornerstones of his building. Listed in the order of their importance, they are as follows:

There are four essential needs for wild bird life that cannot be overlooked, just like a builder can't ignore the four cornerstones of a building. Listed in order of importance, they are as follows:

  1. The federal protection of all migratory birds.
  2. The total suppression of the sale of native wild game.
  3. The total suppression of spring shooting and of shooting in the breeding season, and
  4. Long close seasons for all species that are about to be "shot out."

If the gunners of America wish to have a gameless continent, all they need do to secure it is to oppose these principles, prevent their translation into law, and maintain the status quo. If they do this, then all our best birds are doomed to swift destruction. Let no man make a mistake on that point. The "open seasons" and "bag limits" of the United States to-day are just as deadly as the 5,000,000 sporting guns now in use, and the 700,000,000 annual cartridges. It is only the ignorant or the vicious who will seriously dispute this statement.

If America's hunters want a continent without game, all they need to do is reject these principles, stop them from becoming law, and keep things as they are. If they do this, then all our best birds are doomed to swift destruction. No one should misunderstand that. The "open seasons" and "bag limits" in the United States today are just as destructive as the 5,000,000 sporting guns currently in use, and the 700,000,000 annual cartridges. Only the uninformed or the malicious would seriously argue against this statement.

The Federal Protection Of Migratory Birds .—The bill now before Congress for the protection of all migratory birds by the national government is the most important measure ever placed before that body in behalf of wild life. A stranger to this proposition will need to pause for thought in order to grasp its full meaning, and appreciate the magnitude of its influence.

The Federal Protection of Migratory Birds .—The bill currently in front of Congress aimed at protecting all migratory birds by the federal government is the most significant legislation ever presented to that body for the benefit of wildlife. Someone unfamiliar with this idea will need to take a moment to fully understand its importance and recognize the extent of its impact.

The urgent necessity for a law of this nature is due to the utter inadequacy of the laws that prevail throughout some portions of the United States concerning the slaughter and preservation of birds. Any law that is not enforced is a poor law. There is not one state in the [Page 305] Union, nor a single province in Canada, in which the game birds, and other birds criminally shot as game, are not being killed far faster than they are breeding, and thereby being exterminated.

The urgent need for a law like this arises from the complete failure of existing laws in some areas of the United States regarding the hunting and protection of birds. A law that isn't enforced is ineffective. There isn't a single state in the [Page 305] Union or a single province in Canada where game birds and other birds that are illegally hunted are not being killed much faster than they can reproduce, leading to their extinction.

Several states are financially unable to employ a force of salaried game wardens; and wherever that is true, the door to universal slaughter is wide open. Let him who questions this take Virginia as a case in point. A loyal Virginian told me only this year that in his state the warden system is an ineffective farce, and the game is not protected, because the wardens can not afford to patrol the state for nothing.

Several states can't afford to hire a team of paid game wardens, and wherever that’s the case, it leads to widespread killing. Anyone who doubts this should look at Virginia as an example. A devoted Virginian told me just this year that in his state, the warden system is a joke and the wildlife isn't protected because the wardens can't patrol the state without getting paid.

This condition prevails in a number of states, north and south, especially south. It is my belief that throughout nine-tenths of the South, the negroes and poor whites are slaughtering birds exactly as they please. It is the permanent residents of the haunts of birds and game that are exterminating the wild life.

This situation exists in various states, both north and south, but especially in the south. I believe that in about nine-tenths of the South, both black people and poor white folks are killing birds whenever they want. It’s the permanent residents of the areas where birds and game live who are wiping out the wildlife.

The value of the birds as destroyers of noxious insects, has been set forth in Chapter XXIII. Their total value is enormous—or it would be if the birds were alive and here in their normal numbers. To-day there are about one-tenth as many birds as were alive and working thirty years ago. During the past thirty years the destruction of our game birds has been enormous, and the insectivorous birds have greatly decreased.

The importance of birds in controlling harmful insects has been highlighted in Chapter XXIII. Their overall value is huge—or it would be if the birds were alive and present in their usual numbers. Today, there are about one-tenth as many birds as there were thirty years ago. Over the past thirty years, the decline of our game birds has been significant, and insect-eating birds have also greatly diminished.

The damages annually inflicted upon the farm, orchard and garden crops of this country are very great. When a city is destroyed by earthquake or fire, and $100,000,000 worth of property is swept away, we are racked with horror and pity; and the cities of America pour out money like water to relieve the resultant distress. We are shocked because we can see the flames, the smoke and the ruins.

The annual damage to farms, orchards, and gardens in this country is significant. When a city is devastated by an earthquake or fire, resulting in $100,000,000 in property loss, we feel horror and sympathy; and cities across America donate generously to help with the aftermath. We are disturbed because we can see the flames, the smoke, and the destruction.

And yet, we annually endure with perfect equanimity (because we can not see it?) a loss of nearly $400,000,000 worth of value that is destroyed by insects. The damage is inflicted silently, insidiously, without any scare heads or wooden type in the newspapers, and so we pay the price without protest. We know—when we stop to think of it—that not all this loss falls upon the producer. We know that every consumer of bread, cereals, vegetables and fruit pays his share of this loss! To-day, millions of people are groaning under the "increased cost of living." The bill for the federal protection of all migratory birds is directly intended to decrease the cost of living, by preventing outrageous waste; but of all the persons to whom the needs of that bill are presented, how many will take the time to promote its quick passage by direct appeals to their members of Congress? We shall see.

And yet, every year we calmly accept (because we can't see it?) a loss of nearly $400,000,000 in value that gets destroyed by insects. The damage happens quietly, sneakily, without any big headlines in the newspapers, and so we end up paying for it without complaining. We realize—when we take a moment to think about it—that not all of this loss falls on the producers. We know that everyone who buys bread, cereals, vegetables, and fruit pays their share of this loss! Today, millions of people are struggling with the "high cost of living." The federal funding for protecting all migratory birds is meant to lower the cost of living by stopping outrageous waste; but among all the people who are aware of the need for that funding, how many will actually take the time to push for its quick approval by reaching out to their members of Congress? We'll see.

The good that would be accomplished, annually, by the enactment of a law for the federal protection of all migratory birds is beyond computation; but it is my belief that within a very few years the increase in bird life would prevent what is now an annual loss of $250,000,000. It is beyond the power of man to protect his crops and fruit and trees as the bird millions would protect them—if they were here as they were in 1870. The migratory bird bill is of vast importance because it would throw the strong arm of federal protection around 610 species of birds. [Page 306] The power of Uncle Sam is respected and feared in many places where the power of the state is ignored.

The benefits that would come from passing a federal law to protect all migratory birds each year are immeasurable. I believe that within just a few years, the growth in bird populations would offset what is currently an annual loss of $250 million. No one can protect their crops, fruits, and trees as well as millions of birds could—if they were present like they were in 1870. The migratory bird bill is extremely important because it would provide federal protection to 610 species of birds. [Page 306] Uncle Sam's authority is respected and feared in many places where state power is ignored.

The list of migratory birds includes most of the perching birds; all the shore birds (great destroyers of bad insects); all the swifts and swallows; the goat-suckers (whippoorwill and nighthawk); some of the woodpeckers; most of the rails; pigeons and doves; many of the hawks; some of the cranes and herons and all the geese, ducks and swans.

The list of migratory birds includes most of the perching birds; all the shorebirds (great destroyers of harmful insects); all the swifts and swallows; the goat-suckers (whip-poor-will and nighthawk); some of the woodpeckers; most of the rails; pigeons and doves; many of the hawks; some of the cranes and herons; and all the geese, ducks, and swans.

A movement for the federal protection of migratory game birds was proposed to Congress by George Shiras, 3rd, who as a member of the House in the 58th Congress introduced a bill to secure that end. An excellent brief on that subject by Mr. Shiras appeared in the printed hearing on the McLean bill, held on March 6, 1912, page 18. Omitting the bills introduced in the 59th, 60th and 61st sessions, mention need be made only of the measures under consideration in the present Congress. One of these is a bill introduced by Representative J.W. Weeks, of Massachusetts, and another is the bill of Representative D.R. Anthony, Jr., of Kansas, of the same purport.

A movement to protect migratory game birds at the federal level was put forward to Congress by George Shiras, 3rd. As a member of the House during the 58th Congress, he introduced a bill to accomplish this goal. An excellent summary on this topic by Mr. Shiras was included in the printed hearing on the McLean bill, held on March 6, 1912, page 18. Leaving out the bills introduced in the 59th, 60th, and 61st sessions, we only need to mention the measures being considered in the current Congress. One of these is a bill introduced by Representative J.W. Weeks from Massachusetts, and another is the bill from Representative D.R. Anthony, Jr. from Kansas, which has the same purpose.

Finally, on April 24, 1912, an adequate and entirely reasonable bill was introduced in the Senate by Senator George P. McLean, of Connecticut, as No. 6497 (Calendar No. 606). This bill provides federal protection for all migratory birds, and embraces all save a very few of the species that are specially destructive to noxious insects. The bill provides national protection to the farmer's and fruit-grower's best friends. It is entitled to the enthusiastic support of 90,000,000 of people, native and alien. Every producer of farm products and every consumer of them owes it to himself to write at once to his member of Congress and ask him (1) to urge the speedy consideration of the bill for the federal protection of all migratory birds, (2) to vote for it, and (3) to work for it until it is passed. It matters not which one of the three bills described finally becomes a law. Will the American people act rationally about this matter, and protect their own interests?

Finally, on April 24, 1912, a reasonable bill was introduced in the Senate by Senator George P. McLean of Connecticut, as No. 6497 (Calendar No. 606). This bill provides federal protection for all migratory birds, covering almost all species except a handful that are particularly harmful to pests. The bill grants national protection to the farmer's and fruit-grower's best allies. It deserves the enthusiastic support of 90 million people, both citizens and immigrants. Every farm product producer and every consumer should immediately write to their member of Congress and ask them (1) to push for the quick consideration of the bill for the federal protection of all migratory birds, (2) to vote for it, and (3) to advocate for it until it is passed. It doesn't matter which of the three bills described ultimately becomes law. Will the American people act sensibly about this issue and protect their own interests?

Suppress The Sale Of All Native Wild Game .—The deadly effect of the commercial slaughter of game and its sale for food is now becoming well understood by the American people. One by one the various state legislatures have been putting up the bars against the exportation or sale of any "game protected by the state." The U.S. Department of Agriculture says, through Henry Oldys, that "free marketing of wild game leads swiftly to extermination;" and it is literally true.

Prohibit the Sale of All Native Wild Game.—The harmful impact of the commercial hunting of game and its sale for food is now widely recognized by the American public. One by one, state legislatures have started implementing restrictions against the export or sale of any "game protected by the state." According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, represented by Henry Oldys, "the unrestricted sale of wild game quickly leads to extinction;" and that's entirely accurate.

Up to March, 1911, it appears that several states prohibited the sale of game, sixteen states permitted the sale of all unprotected game, and in eight more there was partial prohibition. Unfortunately, however, many of these states permitted the sale of imported game. Now, since it happened to be a fact that the vast majority of the states prohibit the export of their game, as well as the sale of it, a very large quantity of such game as quail, ruffed grouse, snipe, woodcock and shore birds was illegally shot for the market, exported in defiance both of state [Page 307] laws and the federal Lacey Act, and sold to the detriment of the states that produced it. In other words, in the laws of each state that merely sought to protect their own game, regardless of the game of neighboring states, there was not merely a loop-hole, but there was a gap wide enough to drive through with a coach and four. The ruffed grouse of Massachusetts and Connecticut often were butchered to make Gotham holidays in joyous contempt of the laws at both ends of the line. As a natural result the game of the Atlantic coast was disappearing at a frightful rate.

Up until March 1911, it seems that several states banned the sale of game, sixteen states allowed the sale of all unprotected game, and in eight other states, there were partial bans. Unfortunately, many of these states allowed the sale of imported game. Since the vast majority of states prohibit the export of their game, as well as its sale, a large amount of game, like quail, ruffed grouse, snipe, woodcock, and shore birds, was illegally hunted for the market, exported in violation of both state [Page 307] laws and the federal Lacey Act, and sold to the detriment of the states that produced it. In other words, the laws of each state aimed to protect their own game, without regard for the game of neighboring states, had not just a loophole, but a gap wide enough to drive a coach and four through. The ruffed grouse from Massachusetts and Connecticut were often killed to celebrate holidays in New York City, in blatant disregard for the laws at both ends of the line. As a result, the game on the Atlantic coast was disappearing at an alarming rate.

Solid = Sale of Game Prohibited

Solid = Sale of Game Not Allowed

Hatched = Sale of Nearly all Game Prohibited

Hatched = Almost All Game Sales Are Not Allowed

EIGHTEEN STATES ENTIRELY PROHIBIT THE SALE OF GAME WHY DO THE OTHERS LAG BEHIND?

EIGHTEEN STATES COMPLETELY BAN THE SALE OF GAME. WHY ARE THE OTHERS FALLING BEHIND?

In 1911, the no-sale-of-game law of New York was born out of sheer desperation. The Army of Destruction went up to Albany well-organized, well provided with money and attorneys, with three senators in the Senate and two assemblymen in the lower house, to wage merciless warfare on the whole wild-life cause. The market gunners and game dealers not only proposed to repeal the law against spring shooting but also to defeat all legislation that might be attempted to restrict the sale of game, or impose bag limits on wild fowl. The Milliners' Association proposed to wipe off the books the Dutcher law against the use of the plumage of wild birds in millinery, and an assemblyman was committed to that cause as its special champion.

In 1911, New York's no-sale-of-game law emerged from absolute desperation. The Army of Destruction made its way to Albany well-organized and equipped with funding and lawyers, featuring three senators in the Senate and two assemblymen in the House, to launch an aggressive campaign against the entire wildlife cause. The market hunters and game dealers aimed not only to repeal the law banning spring shooting but also to block any legislation that sought to limit the sale of game or set bag limits on wild birds. The Milliners' Association sought to eliminate the Dutcher law prohibiting the use of wild bird feathers in hats, and one assemblyman had committed to champion that cause.

Then it was that all the friends of wild life in the Empire State resolved upon a death grapple with the Destroyers, and a fight to an absolute finish. The Bayne bill, entirely prohibiting the sale of all native wild game throughout the state of New York, was drafted and [Page 308] thrown into the ring, and the struggle began. At first the no-sale-of-game bill looked like sheer madness, but no sooner was it fairly launched than supporters came flocking in from every side. All the organizations of sportsmen and friends of wild life combined in one mighty army, the strength of which was irresistible. The real sportsmen of the state quickly realized that the no-sale bill was directly in the interest of legitimate sport. The great mass of people who love wild life, and never kill, were quick to comprehend the far-reaching importance of the measure, and they supported it, with money and enthusiasm.

Then all the wildlife advocates in New York State decided to fight back against the Destroyers for a decisive battle. The Bayne bill, which completely banned the sale of all native wild game across New York, was drafted and [Page 308] thrown into the spotlight, and the struggle began. Initially, the no-sale-of-game bill seemed completely crazy, but as soon as it was officially introduced, supporters began flocking in from all directions. All the organizations of sportsmen and wildlife supporters united into one powerful force that was unstoppable. The true sportsmen in the state quickly understood that the no-sale bill was directly in the interest of legitimate sport. The vast number of people who love wildlife and never hunt quickly recognized the bill’s significant implications, and they backed it with both funding and enthusiasm.

The members of the legislature received thousands of letters from their constituents, asking them to support the Bayne-Blauvelt bill. They did so. On its passage through the two houses, only one vote was recorded against it! Incidentally, every move attempted by the Army of Destruction was defeated and in the final summing up the defeat amounted to an utter rout.

The members of the legislature got thousands of letters from their constituents, asking them to support the Bayne-Blauvelt bill. They did. When it went through both houses, only one vote was against it! By the way, every effort made by the Army of Destruction was crushed, and in the end, their defeat was total.

In 1912, after a tremendous struggle, the legislature of Massachusetts passed a counterpart of the Bayne law, and took her place in the front rank of states. That was a great fight. The market-gunners of Cape Cod, the game dealers and other interests entered the struggle with men in the lower house of the legislature specially elected to look after their interests. Just as in New York in 1911, they proposed to repeal the existing laws against spring shooting and throw the markets wide open to the sale of game. From first to last, through three long and stormy months, the Destroyers fought with a degree of determination and persistence worthy of a better cause. They contested with the Defenders every inch of ground. In New York, the Destroyers were overwhelmed by the tidal wave of Defenders, but in Massachusetts it was a prolonged hand-to-hand fight on the ramparts. Five times was a bill to repeal the spring-shooting law introduced and defeated!

In 1912, after a huge struggle, the Massachusetts legislature passed a law similar to the Bayne law, putting the state among the leaders. It was a tough battle. The market-gunners of Cape Cod, game dealers, and other interests entered the fight with representatives in the lower house of the legislature specifically elected to protect their interests. Just like in New York in 1911, they aimed to repeal the current laws against spring shooting and open up the market for selling game. From start to finish, through three long and turbulent months, the Destroyers fought with a level of determination and persistence that deserved a better cause. They contested every inch of ground against the Defenders. In New York, the Destroyers were overwhelmed by a wave of Defenders, but in Massachusetts, it was an extended hand-to-hand battle on the front lines. Five times a bill to repeal the spring-shooting law was introduced and defeated!

Even after the bill had passed both houses by good majorities, the Governor declared that he could not sign it. And then there poured into the Executive offices such a flood of callers, letters, telegrams and telephone calls that he became convinced that the People desired the law; so he signed the bill in deference to the wishes of the majority.

Even after the bill passed both houses with solid majorities, the Governor said he couldn’t sign it. Then a surge of visitors, letters, telegrams, and phone calls flooded into the Executive offices, convincing him that the people wanted the law; so he signed the bill out of respect for the majority’s wishes.

The principle that the sale of game is wrong, and fatal to the existence of a supply of game, is as fixed and unassailable as the Rocky Mountains. Its universal acceptance is only a question of intelligence and common honesty. The open states owe it to themselves and each other to enact both the spirit and the letter of the Bayne law, and do it quickly, before it is too late to profit by it! Let them remember the heath hen,—amply protected when entirely too late to save it from extinction!

The idea that selling game is wrong and threatens the availability of game is as solid and undeniable as the Rocky Mountains. Everyone accepting this is just a matter of understanding and basic honesty. The open states owe it to themselves and each other to establish both the spirit and the letter of the Bayne law, and do it quickly, before it’s too late to benefit from it! They should remember the heath hen—heavily protected when it was already too late to save it from extinction!

It is fairly beyond question that the killing of wild game for the market, and its sale in the "open season" and out of it, is responsible for the disappearance of at least fifty per cent of our stock of American feathered game. It is the market-gunner, the game-hog who shoots "for sport" and sells his game, and the game dealer, who have swept away the wild ducks, the ruffed grouse, the quail and the prairie [Page 309] chickens that thirty years ago were abundant on their natural ranges. The foolish farmers of the middle West permitted the market-hunters of Chicago and the East to slaughter their own legitimate game by the barrel and the car-load, and ship it "East," to market. To-day the waters of Currituck Sound are a wholesale slaughter-place for migratory wild fowl with which to supply the markets of Baltimore, Washington and Philadelphia. Furthermore, the market gunners of Currituck are robbing the people of 16 states of tens of thousands of wild-fowl that legitimately belong to them, during the annual autumn flight. The accompanying map shows how it is done.

It’s pretty clear that hunting wild game for sale and selling it during both the "open season" and off-season is causing at least fifty percent of our American feathered game to disappear. It’s the market hunter, the sport shooter who sells their game, and the game dealer who have wiped out the wild ducks, ruffed grouse, quail, and prairie [Page 309] chickens that were plentiful thirty years ago. The shortsighted farmers in the Midwest allowed market hunters from Chicago and the East to take their legitimate game by the barrel and by the trainload, shipping it "East" to the markets. Today, Currituck Sound is a major slaughterhouse for migratory waterfowl, supplying the markets in Baltimore, Washington, and Philadelphia. Moreover, the market hunters in Currituck are depriving the people of 16 states of tens of thousands of waterfowl that rightfully belong to them during the annual autumn migration. The map included shows how this is happening.

MAP USED IN THE CAMPAIGN FOR THE BAYNE LAW

MAP USED IN THE CAMPAIGN FOR THE BAYNE LAW

To-day, the cash rewards of the market-hunter who can reach a large city with his product are dangerously great. Observe the following wholesale prices that prevailed in New York city in 1910, just prior to the passage of the Bayne law. They were compiled and published by Henry Oldys, of the Biological Survey.

Today, the cash rewards for the market-hunter who can deliver their product to a big city are incredibly high. Check out the following wholesale prices that were in effect in New York City in 1910, just before the Bayne law was passed. These were compiled and published by Henry Oldys of the Biological Survey.

Grouse, domestic per pair $3.00
Grouse, foreign " " $1.25 to 1.75
Partridge, domestic " " 3.50 " 4.00 [Page 310]
Woodcock, domestic " " 1.50 " 2.00
Golden plover per dozen 2.50 " 3.50
English snipe " " 2.00 " 3.00
Canvasback duck per pair 2.25 " 3.00
Redhead duck " " 1.50 " 2.50
Mallard duck " " 1.25
Bluewing teal " " .75 " 1.00
Greenwing teal " " .75 " .90
Broadbill duck " " .50 " .75
Rail, No. 1 per dozen 1.00
Rail, No. 2 " " .60
Venison, whole deer per pound .22 " .25
Venison, saddle " " .30 " .35

All our feathered game is rapidly slipping away from us. Are we going to save anything from the wreck? Will we so weakly manage the game situation that later on there will be no legitimate bird-shooting for our younger sons, and our grandsons?

All our game birds are quickly disappearing. Are we going to save anything from the destruction? Will we handle the game situation so poorly that later there will be no proper bird hunting for our sons and grandsons?

All laws that permit the killing of game for the market, and the sale of it afterward, are class legislation of the worst sort. They permit a hundred men selfishly to slaughter for their own pockets the game that rightfully belongs to a hundred thousand men and boys who shoot for the legitimate recreation that such field sports afford. Will any of the sportsmen of America "stand for" this until the game is all gone?

All laws that allow the killing of game for profit and its sale afterward are really bad for the community. They enable a small group of people to selfishly hunt for their own gain, taking away the game that rightly belongs to thousands of men and boys who hunt for the genuine enjoyment that such outdoor activities provide. Will any of the sportsmen in America accept this until the game is all gone?

The people who pay big prices for game in the hotels and restaurants of our big cities are not men who need that game as food. Far from it. They can obtain scores of fine meat dishes without destroying the wild flocks. In civilized countries wild game is no longer necessary as "food," to satisfy hunger, and ward off starvation. In the United States the day of the hungry Indian-fighting pioneer has gone by and there is an abundance of food everywhere.

The people who pay high prices for game in the hotels and restaurants of our major cities aren’t those who actually need it for food. Not at all. They can get plenty of great meat dishes without hunting wild animals. In developed countries, wild game isn’t necessary to satisfy hunger or prevent starvation. In the United States, the era of the hungry pioneer battling Native Americans is long gone, and there’s food available everywhere.

The time to temporize and feel timid over the game situation has gone by. The situation is desperate; and nothing but strong and vigorous measures will avail anything worth while. The sale of all wild game should be stopped, everywhere and at all seasons, throughout all North America, and throughout the world. To-day this particular curse is being felt even in India.

The time to hesitate and be cautious about the game situation has passed. The situation is serious, and only bold and decisive actions will make a difference. The sale of all wild game should be banned, everywhere and at all times, across all of North America and the entire world. Today, this particular issue is being felt even in India.

It is the duty of every true sportsman, every farmer who owns a gun, and every lover of wild life, to enter into the campaign for the passage of bills absolutely prohibiting all traffic in wild game no matter what its origin. Of course the market hunters, the game-hogs and the game dealers will bitterly oppose them, and hire a lobby to attempt to defeat them. But the fight for no-sale-of-game is now on, and it must not stop short of complete victory.

It’s the responsibility of every genuine sports fan, every farmer with a gun, and every wildlife enthusiast to join the effort to pass laws that completely ban all trade in wild game, regardless of where it comes from. Naturally, the market hunters, the greedy game hunters, and the game dealers will strongly resist these efforts and hire lobbyists to try to block them. But the battle for a no-sale-of-game policy is underway, and it must not rest until there’s total victory.


Reasons Why The Sale Of Wild Game Should Cease Everywhere
  1. —Because fully 95 per cent of our legitimate stock of feathered game has already been destroyed.
  2. —Because if market-gunning and the sale of game continue ten years longer, all our feathered game will be swept away. [Page 311]
  3. —Because when the sale of game was permitted one dealer was able to sell 1,000,000 game birds per year in New York City, so he himself said.
  4. —Because it is a fixed fact that every wild species of mammal, bird or reptile that is pursued for money-making purposes eventually is wiped out of existence. Even the whales of the sea are no exception.
  5. —Because at least 50 per cent of the decrease in our feathered game is due to market-gunning, and the sale of game. Look at the prairie chicken of the Mississippi Valley, and the ruffed grouse of New England.
  6. —Because the laws that permit the commercial slaughter of wild birds for the benefit of less than five per cent of the inhabitants of any state are directly against the interest of the 95 per cent of other people, to whom that game partly belongs.
  7. —Because game killed "for sale" is not intended to satisfy "hunger." The people who eat game in large cities do not know what hunger is, save by hearsay. Purchased game is used chiefly in over-feeding; and as a rule it does far more harm than good.
  8. —Because the greatest value to be derived from any game bird is in seeing it, and photographing it, and enjoying its living company in its native haunts. Who will love the forests when they become destitute of wild life, and desolate?
  9. —Because stopping the sale of game will help bring back the game birds to us, in a few years.
  10. —Because the pace that New York and Massachusetts have set in this matter will render it easier to procure the passage of Bayne laws in other states.
  11. —Because those who legitimately desire game for their tables can be supplied from the game farms and preserves that now are coming into existence.

When New York's far-reaching Bayne bill became a law, the following dead birds lay in cold storage in New York City:

When New York's far-reaching Bayne bill was signed into law, the following dead birds were stored in cold storage in New York City:

Wild duck 98,156
Plover 48,780
Quail 14,227
Grouse 21,202
Snipe 7,825
Woodcock 767
Rail 419
---------
191,376

They represented the last slaughterings of American game for New York. To-day the remaining plague-spots are Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Baltimore, Washington and New Orleans; but in New Orleans the brakes have at last (1912) been applied, and the market slaughter that formerly prevailed in that state has at least been checked.

They were the final hunts of American wildlife for New York. Today, the remaining hotspots are Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Baltimore, Washington, and New Orleans; however, in New Orleans, restrictions have finally (in 1912) been put in place, and the mass killings that used to be common in that state have at least been curtailed.

As an instance of persistent market shooting on the greatest ducking [Page 312] waters of the eastern United States, I offer this report from a trustworthy agent sent to Currituck Sound, North Carolina, in March, 1911.

As an example of ongoing market hunting on the top duck hunting waters of the eastern United States, I present this report from a reliable source who was sent to Currituck Sound, North Carolina, in March 1911.

I beg to submit the following information relative to the number of wild ducks and geese shipped from this market and killed in the waters of Back Bay and the upper or north end of Currituck Sound, from October 20th to March 1st, inclusive.

I want to share some information about the number of wild ducks and geese shipped from this market and hunted in the waters of Back Bay and the northern end of Currituck Sound, from October 20th to March 1st, inclusive.

Approximately there were killed and shipped in the territory above named, 130,000 to 135,000 wild ducks and between 1400 and 1500 wild geese. From Currituck Sound and its tributaries there were shipped approximately 200,000 wild ducks.

Approximately 130,000 to 135,000 wild ducks and around 1,400 to 1,500 wild geese were killed and shipped in that area. From Currituck Sound and its tributaries, about 200,000 wild ducks were shipped.

You will see from the above figures that each year the market shooter exacts a tremendous toll from the wild water fowl in these waters, and it is only a question of a short time when the wild duck will be exterminated, unless we can stop the ruthless slaughter. The last few years I have noted a great decrease in the number of wild ducks; some of the species are practically extinct. I have secured the above information from a most reliable source, and the figures given approximately cannot be questioned.

These figures show that every year, hunters significantly impact the wild waterfowl population in these waters, and it’s only a matter of time before wild ducks are completely wiped out unless we stop this unnecessary killing. In recent years, I’ve noticed a significant decline in the number of wild ducks; some species are nearly extinct. I got this information from a very reliable source, and the numbers provided are indisputable.

The effect of the passage of the Bayne law, closing the greatest American market against the sale of game was an immediate decrease of fully fifty per cent in the number of ducks and geese slaughtered on Currituck Sound. The dealers refused to buy the birds, and one-half the killers were compelled to hang up their guns and go to work. The duck-slaughterers felt very much enraged by the passage of the law, and at first were inclined to blame the northern members of Currituck ducking clubs for the passage of the measure; but as a matter of fact, not one of the persons blamed took any part whatever in the campaign for the new law.

The impact of the Bayne law, which closed off the largest American market for game, led to an immediate 50% drop in the number of ducks and geese killed in Currituck Sound. The dealers stopped buying the birds, forcing half of the hunters to put down their guns and find other jobs. The duck hunters were very angry about the law's passing and initially blamed the northern members of Currituck ducking clubs for the push behind it; however, the truth is that none of the people they blamed were involved in the campaign for the new law at all.

The Unfairness Of Spring Shooting. —The shooting of game birds in late winter and spring is to be mentioned only to be condemned. It is grossly unfair to the birds, outrageous in principle, and most unsportsmanlike, no matter whether the law permits it or not. Why it is that any state like Iowa, for example, can go on killing game in spring is more than I can understand. I have endeavored to find a reason for it, in Iowa, but the only real reason is:—"The boys want the birds!"

The Injustice of Spring Shooting. —Shooting game birds in late winter and spring should only be criticized. It's extremely unfair to the birds, completely wrong in principle, and highly unsportsmanlike, regardless of whether the law allows it. I can't understand why a state like Iowa continues to allow game hunting in spring. I've tried to find a justification for it in Iowa, but the only real reason is:—"The guys want the birds!"

I think we have at last reached the point where it may truthfully be said that now no gentleman shoots birds in spring. If the plea is made that "if we don't shoot ducks in the spring we can't shoot them at all!" then the answer is—if you can't shoot game like high-minded, red-blooded sportsman, don't shoot it at all! A gentleman can not afford to barter his standing and his own self-respect for a few ducks shot in the spring when the birds are going north to lay their eggs. And the man who insists on shooting in spring may just as well go right on and do various other things that are beyond the pale, such as shoot quail on the ground, shoot does and fawns, and fish for trout with gang hooks.

I think we've finally reached a point where we can honestly say that no respectable person hunts birds in the spring. If someone argues that "if we don't hunt ducks in the spring, we can't hunt them at all!" then the response is—if you can't hunt game like a principled, passionate sportsman, don't hunt it at all! A gentleman can't sacrifice his reputation and self-respect for a few ducks hunted in the spring when the birds are migrating north to lay their eggs. And a person who insists on hunting in the spring might as well go ahead and do other unacceptable things, like shooting quail on the ground, shooting does and fawns, and fishing for trout with gang hooks.

There are no longer two sides to what once was the spring shooting question. Even among savages, the breeding period of the wild creatures is under taboo. Then if ever may the beasts and birds cry "King's excuse!" It has been positively stated in print that high-class fox hounds have been known to refuse to chase a pregnant fox, even when in full view.

There are no longer two sides to what used to be the spring shooting debate. Even among the wild, the breeding season for animals is considered off-limits. So, if there's ever a time for the beasts and birds to say "King's excuse!" it’s now. It's been reported that high-class foxhounds have been known to ignore a pregnant fox, even when they can clearly see her.


[Page 313]
CHAPTER XXXIII
BRINGING BACK THE VANISHED BIRDS AND GAME

The most charming trait of wild-life character is the alacrity and confidence with which wild birds and mammals respond to the friendly advances of human friends. Those who are not very familiar with the mental traits of our wild neighbors may at first find it difficult to comprehend the marvelous celerity with which both birds and mammals recognize friendly overtures from man, and respond to them.

The most delightful quality of wild animals is the eagerness and trust with which wild birds and mammals react to the friendly gestures of humans. People who aren't very familiar with the behaviors of our wild neighbors might initially struggle to grasp the amazing speed at which both birds and mammals recognize friendly intentions from humans and respond to them.

At the present juncture, this state of the wild-animal mind becomes a factor of great importance in determining what we can do to prevent the extermination of species, and to promote the increase and return of wild life.

At this point, understanding the wild-animal mindset is crucial for figuring out how we can stop species from going extinct and encourage the growth and return of wildlife.

I think that there is not a single wild mammal or bird species now living that can not, or does not, quickly recognize protection, and take advantage of it. The most conspicuous of all familiar examples are the wild animals of the Yellowstone Park. They embrace the elk, mountain sheep, antelope, mule deer, the black bear and even the grizzly. No one can say precisely how long those several species were in ascertaining that it was safe to trust themselves within easy rifle-shot of man; but I think it was about five years. Birds recognize protection far more quickly than mammals. In a comparatively short time the naturally wild and wary big game of the Yellowstone Park became about as tame as range cattle. It was at least fifteen years ago that the mule deer began to frequent the parade ground at the Mammoth Hot Springs military post, and receive there their rations of hay.

I believe that every wild mammal and bird species alive today can quickly recognize protection and take advantage of it. The most obvious examples are the wild animals in Yellowstone Park, which include elk, mountain sheep, antelope, mule deer, black bears, and even grizzlies. No one can say exactly how long it took those species to figure out it was safe to come close to humans, but I think it was about five years. Birds catch on to protection much faster than mammals do. In a relatively short time, the naturally wild and cautious big game in Yellowstone Park became almost as tame as livestock. It was at least fifteen years ago that mule deer started hanging out at the parade ground at the Mammoth Hot Springs military post to get their hay rations.

Whenever you see a beautiful photograph of a large band of big-horn sheep or mule deer taken at short range amid Rocky Mountain scenery, you are safe in labeling it as having come from the Yellowstone Park. The prong-horned antelope herd is so tame that it is difficult to keep it out of the streets of Gardiner, on the Montana side of the line.

Whenever you see a stunning photo of a large group of bighorn sheep or mule deer taken up close against the backdrop of the Rocky Mountains, you can be sure it’s from Yellowstone Park. The pronghorn antelope herd is so used to people that it’s hard to keep them off the streets of Gardiner, on the Montana side of the border.

But the bears! Who has not heard the story of the bears of the Yellowstone Park,—how black bears and grizzlies stalk out of the woods, every day, to the garbage dumping-ground; how black bears actually have come into the hotels for food, without breaking the truce, and how the grizzlies boldly raid the grub-wagons and cook-tents of campers, taking just what they please, because they know that no man dares to shoot them! Indeed, those raiding bears long ago became a public nuisance, and many of them have been caught in steel box-traps and shipped to zoological gardens, in order to get them out of the way. And yet, outside the Park boundaries, everywhere, the bears are as wary and wild as the wildest.

But the bears! Who hasn’t heard the story of the bears in Yellowstone Park—how black bears and grizzlies come out of the woods every day to the garbage dump; how black bears have even come into the hotels for food, without breaking the truce, and how the grizzlies confidently raid the food wagons and camps of campers, taking whatever they want, because they know that no one dares to shoot them! In fact, those raiding bears became a public nuisance long ago, and many have been caught in steel box traps and sent to zoos to get them out of the way. And yet, outside the park boundaries, bears are as cautious and wild as the wildest creatures.

The arrogance of the bears that couldn't be shot once led to a droll and also exciting episode.

The arrogance of the bears that couldn’t be shot once led to a quirky and also thrilling episode.

During the period when Mr. C.J. Jones ("Buffalo" Jones) was superintendent of the wild animals of the Park, the indignities inflicted upon tourist campers by certain grizzly bears quite abraded his nerves. He obtained from Major Pitcher authority to punish and reform a certain grizzly, and went about the matter in a thoroughly Buffalo-Jonesian manner. He procured a strong lariat and a bean-pole seven feet long and repaired to the camp that was troubled by too much grizzly.

During the time when Mr. C.J. Jones ("Buffalo" Jones) was in charge of the park's wild animals, the constant issues caused by some grizzly bears seriously tested his patience. He got permission from Major Pitcher to discipline and train a particular grizzly, and he tackled the job in a very Buffalo-Jones style. He got a strong lariat and a seven-foot bean pole and headed to the camp that was being haunted by too many grizzlies.

The particular offender was a full-grown male grizzly who had become a notorious raider. At the psychological moment Jones lassoed him in short order, getting a firm hold on the bear's left hind leg. Quickly the end of the rope was thrown over a limb of the nearest tree, and in a trice Ephraim found himself swinging head downward between the heavens and the earth. And then his punishment began.

The offender was an adult male grizzly that had become a well-known troublemaker. At the right moment, Jones lassoed him quickly, securing a tight grip on the bear's left hind leg. He quickly threw the end of the rope over a branch of the nearest tree, and in an instant, Ephraim found himself swinging upside down between the sky and the ground. And then his punishment began.

Buffalo Jones thrashed him soundly with the bean-pole! The outraged bear swung to and fro, whirled round and round, clawing and snapping at the empty air, roaring and bawling with rage, scourged in flesh and insulted in spirit. As he swung, the bean-pole searched out the different parts of his anatomy with a wonderful degree of neatness and precision. Between rage and indignation the grizzly nearly exploded. A moving-picture camera was there, and since that day that truly moving scene has amazed and thrilled countless thousands of people.

Buffalo Jones beat him soundly with the bean-pole! The furious bear swung back and forth, spun around, clawing and snapping at the empty air, roaring and bellowing with rage, tormented in body and insulted in spirit. As he swung, the bean-pole expertly targeted different parts of his body with remarkable accuracy. Caught between anger and indignation, the grizzly nearly exploded. A movie camera was there, and since that day, that genuinely captivating scene has amazed and thrilled countless thousands of people.

When it was over, Mr. Jones boldly turned the bear loose! Although its rage was as boundless as the glories of the Yellowstone Park, it paused not to rend any of those present, but headed for the tall timber, and with many an indignant "Woof! Woof!" it plunged in and disappeared. It was two or three years before that locality was again troubled by impudent grizzly bears.

When it was over, Mr. Jones confidently released the bear! Even though its anger was as vast as the wonders of Yellowstone Park, it didn’t take the time to attack anyone there, but instead ran toward the tall trees, barking indignantly, "Woof! Woof!" before diving in and vanishing. It took two or three years for that area to be bothered by cheeky grizzly bears again.

And what is the mental attitude of every Rocky Mountain black or grizzly bear outside of the Yellowstone Park? It is colossal suspicion of man, perpetual fear, and a clean pair of heels the moment man-scent or man-sight proclaims the proximity of the Arch Enemy of Wild Creatures. And yet there are one or two men who tell the American public that wild animals do not think, that they do not reason, and are governed only by "instinct"!

And what is the mindset of every Rocky Mountain black or grizzly bear outside of Yellowstone Park? It's massive distrust of humans, constant fear, and a quick escape the moment they catch a human scent or see a person, signaling the presence of their greatest threat. Yet, there are still a few people who tell the American public that wild animals don’t think, that they don’t reason, and are driven only by "instinct"!

"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!"

Taming Wild Birds. —As incontestable proof of the receptive faculties of birds, I will cite the taming of wild birds in the open, by friendly advances. There are hundreds, aye, thousands, of men, women, boys and girls who could give interesting and valuable personal testimony on this point.

Taming Wild Birds. —To clearly demonstrate how open birds can be, I will mention the successful taming of wild birds in the wild through friendly approaches. There are countless men, women, boys, and girls who could share fascinating and valuable personal experiences on this topic.

My friend J. Alden Loring (one of the naturalists of the Roosevelt African Expedition), is an ardent lover of wild birds and mammals. The taming of wild creatures in the open is one of his pastimes, and his results serve well to illustrate the marvelous readiness of our wild [Page 315] neighbors to become close friends with man when protected. I will quote from one of Mr. Loring's letters on this subject:

My friend J. Alden Loring (one of the naturalists from the Roosevelt African Expedition) is a passionate lover of wild birds and mammals. Taming wild animals in their natural habitats is one of his hobbies, and his experiences highlight how surprisingly willing our wild neighbors are to become good friends with humans when they feel safe. I'll share a quote from one of Mr. Loring's letters about this:

"Taming wild birds is a new field in nature study, and one never can tell what success he will have until he has experimented with different species. Some birds tame much more easily than others. On three or four occasions I have enticed a chickadee to my hand at the first attempt, while in other cases it has taken from fifteen minutes to a whole day.

"Taming wild birds is a new area of nature study, and you can never really know how successful you'll be until you try working with different species. Some birds are much easier to tame than others. A few times, I’ve managed to get a chickadee to my hand on the first try, while in other cases, it took anywhere from fifteen minutes to a whole day."

"Chipping sparrows that frequent my doorway I have tamed in two days. A nuthatch required three hours before it would fly to my hand, although it took food from my stick the first time it was offered. When you find a bird on her nest, it is of course much easier to tame that individual than if you had to follow it about in the open, and wait for it to come within reach of a stick. By exercising extreme caution, and approaching inch by inch, I have climbed a tree to the nest of a yellow-throated vireo, and at the first attempt handed the bird a meal-worm with my fingers. At one time I had two house wrens, a yellow-throated vireo, a chipping sparrow and a flock of chickadees that would come to my hand."

"Chipping sparrows that hang around my doorway I’ve tamed in just two days. A nuthatch took three hours before it would fly to my hand, even though it took food from my stick the first time I offered it. When you find a bird on her nest, it’s obviously much easier to tame that one than if you had to chase it around in the open, waiting for it to come close enough for you to reach with a stick. By being super careful and approaching inch by inch, I climbed a tree to the nest of a yellow-throated vireo, and on my first attempt, I handed the bird a mealworm with my fingers. At one point, I had two house wrens, a yellow-throated vireo, a chipping sparrow, and a group of chickadees that would come to my hand."

SIX WILD CHIPMUNKS DINE WITH MR. LORING

SIX WILD CHIPMUNKS EAT WITH MR. LORING

It would be possible—and also delightful—to fill a volume with citations of evidence to illustrate the quick acceptance of man's protection by wild birds and mammals. Let me draw a few illustrations from my own wild neighbors.

It would be possible—and also enjoyable—to fill a book with examples showing how quickly wild birds and mammals accept protection from humans. Let me share a few examples from my own wild neighbors.

On Lake Agassiz, in the N.Y. Zoological Park, within 500 feet of my office in the Administration Building, a pair of wild wood-ducks made [Page 316] their nest last spring, and have just finished rearing nine fine, healthy young birds. Whenever you see a wood-duck rise and fly in our Park, you may know that it is a wild bird. During the summer of 1912 a small flock of wild wood-ducks came every night to our Wild-Fowl Pond, and spent the night there.

On Lake Agassiz at the N.Y. Zoological Park, just 500 feet from my office in the Administration Building, a pair of wild wood ducks made their nest last spring and have now finished raising nine healthy young birds. Whenever you see a wood duck take off and fly in our Park, you can be sure it’s a wild bird. During the summer of 1912, a small group of wild wood ducks visited our Wild-Fowl Pond every night and stayed there for the night.

A year ago, a covey of eleven quail appeared in the Park, and have persistently remained ever since. Last fall and winter they came at least twenty times to a spot within forty feet of the rear window of my office, in order to feed upon the wheat screenings that we placed there for them.

A year ago, a group of eleven quail showed up in the Park, and they've stuck around ever since. Last fall and winter, they came at least twenty times to a spot within forty feet of the back window of my office to feed on the wheat screenings we put out for them.

When we first occupied the Zoological Park grounds, in 1899, there was not one wild rabbit in the whole 264 acres. Presently the species appeared, and rabbits began to hop about confidently, all over the place. In 1906, we estimated that there were about eighty individuals. Then the marauding cats began to come in, and they killed off the rabbits until not one was to be seen. Thereupon, we addressed ourselves to those cats, in more serious earnest than ever before. Now the cats have disappeared; and one day last spring, as I left my office at six o'clock, everyone else having previously gone, I almost stepped upon two half-grown bunnies that had been visiting on the front door-mat.

When we first took over the Zoological Park grounds in 1899, there wasn’t a single wild rabbit in the entire 264 acres. Eventually, the species showed up, and rabbits started to roam around freely everywhere. By 1906, we estimated there were about eighty of them. Then the stray cats started coming in, and they wiped out the rabbits until not one was left. After that, we focused on those cats more seriously than ever before. Now the cats are gone; and one day last spring, as I was leaving my office at six o'clock, after everyone else had already left, I nearly tripped over two young bunnies that had been hanging out on the front door mat.

When we were macadamizing the yards around the Elephant House, with a throng of workmen all about every day, a robin made its nest on the heavy channel-iron frame of one of the large elephant gates that swung to and fro nearly every day.

When we were paving the yards around the Elephant House, with a crowd of workers around every day, a robin built its nest on the heavy channel-iron frame of one of the large elephant gates that swung open and closed almost every day.

In 1900 we planted a young pine tree in front of our temporary office building, within six feet of a main walk; and at once a pair of robins nested in it and reared young there.

In 1900, we planted a young pine tree in front of our temporary office building, just six feet from a main walkway; and right away, a pair of robins built a nest in it and raised their young there.

WILD CREATURES QUICKLY RESPOND TO FRIENDLY ADVANCES

WILD CREATURES QUICKLY RESPOND TO FRIENDLY ADVANCES

Chickadee and Chipmunk Tamed by Mr. Loring

Chickadee and Chipmunk Tamed by Mr. Loring

THE COLORADO OBJECT LESSON IN BRINGING BACK THE DUCKS

THE COLORADO OBJECT LESSON IN BRINGING BACK THE DUCKS

Up in Putnam County, where for five years deer have been protected, the exhibitions that are given each year of the supreme confidence of protected deer literally astonish the natives. They are almost unafraid of man and his vehicles, his cattle and his horses, but of course they are unwilling to be handled. Strangers are astonished; but people who know something about the mental attitude of wild animals under protection know that it is the natural and inevitable result of real protection.

Up in Putnam County, where deer have been protected for five years, the annual displays of the deer’s supreme confidence genuinely astonish the locals. They’re almost unafraid of people, cars, cattle, and horses, but of course, they don’t want to be touched. Visitors are amazed; however, those familiar with the mindset of wild animals under protection understand that this is the natural and unavoidable outcome of real protection.

At Mr. Frank Seaman's summer home in the Catskills, the phoebe birds nest on the beams under the roof of the porch. At my summer home in the Berkshires, no sooner was our garage completed than a phoebe built her nest on the edge of the lintel over the side door; and another built on a drain-pipe over the kitchen door.

At Mr. Frank Seaman's summer house in the Catskills, the phoebe birds nest on the beams under the porch roof. At my summer house in the Berkshires, as soon as our garage was finished, a phoebe built her nest on the edge of the lintel above the side door, and another one built on a drain pipe over the kitchen door.

Near Port Jervis, last year a wild ruffed grouse nested and reared a large brood in the garden of Mr. W.I. Mitchell, within two feet of the foundation of the house.

Near Port Jervis, last year a wild ruffed grouse nested and raised a large brood in the garden of Mr. W.I. Mitchell, just two feet from the foundation of the house.

On the Bull River in the wilds of British Columbia two trappers of my acquaintance, Mack Norboe and Charlie Smith, once formed a friendship with a wild weasel. In a very few visits, the weasel found that it was among friends, and the trappers' log cabin became its home. I have a photograph of it, taken while it posed on the door-sill. The trappers said that often when returning at nightfall from their trap-lines, the weasel would meet them a hundred yards away on the trail, and follow them back to the cabin.

On the Bull River in the wilderness of British Columbia, two trappers I know, Mack Norboe and Charlie Smith, once became friends with a wild weasel. After just a few visits, the weasel realized it was safe with them, and their log cabin turned into its home. I have a photograph of it, taken while it posed on the threshold. The trappers said that often, when they returned at dusk from their traplines, the weasel would meet them a hundred yards away on the trail and follow them back to the cabin.

"Old Ben," the big sea-lion who often landed on the wharf at Avalon, Santa Catalina, to be fed on fish, was personally known to thousands of people.

"Old Ben," the large sea lion who often came ashore at the wharf in Avalon, Santa Catalina, to be fed fish, was known personally by thousands of people.

An Object Lesson In Protection. —A remarkable object lesson in the [Page 318] recognition of protection by wild ducks came under my notice in the pages of "Recreation Magazine" in June, 1903, when that publication was edited by G.O. Shields. The article was entitled,—" A Haven of Refuge," and the place described well deserved the name. It is impossible for me to impress upon the readers of this volume with sufficient force and clearness the splendid success that is easily attainable in encouraging the return of the birds. The story of the Mosca "Haven of Refuge" was so well told by Mr. Charles C. Townsend in the publication referred to above, that I take pleasure in reproducing it entire.

A Lesson in Protection. — A striking example of how wild ducks recognize protection came to my attention in the pages of "Recreation Magazine" in June 1903, when G.O. Shields was the editor. The article was titled "A Haven of Refuge," and the place it described truly deserved that name. I cannot emphasize enough to the readers of this book how easily we can achieve great success in encouraging the return of these birds. Mr. Charles C. Townsend told the story of the Mosca "Haven of Refuge" so well in the mentioned publication that I am pleased to reproduce it in full.

One mile north of the little village of Mosca, Colorado, in San Luis valley, lives the family of J.C. Gray. On the Gray ranch there is an artesian well which empties into a small pond about 100 feet square. This pond is never entirely frozen over and the water emptying therein is warm even during the coldest winter.

One mile north of the small village of Mosca, Colorado, in San Luis Valley, lives the family of J.C. Gray. On the Gray ranch, there’s an artesian well that feeds into a small pond roughly 100 feet square. This pond never completely freezes over, and the water flowing into it stays warm even during the coldest winter months.

Some five years ago, Mr. Gray secured a few wild-duck eggs, and hatched them under a hen. The little ducks were reared and fed on the little pond. The following spring they left the place, to return in the fall, bringing with them broods of young; also bringing other ducks to the home where protection was afforded them, and plenty of good feed was provided. Each year since, the ducks have scattered in the spring to mate and rear their families, returning again with greatly increased numbers in the fall, and again bringing strangers to the haven of refuge.

About five years ago, Mr. Gray discovered some wild-duck eggs and hatched them under a hen. The ducklings were raised and fed in the small pond. The following spring, they left the area but returned in the fall with their own young; they also brought other ducks to a safe place with plenty of food. Every year since, the ducks scatter in the spring to mate and raise their families, returning in the fall with even more birds and bringing newcomers to their safe haven.

I drove out to the ranch November 24, 1902, and found the little pond almost black with the birds, and was fortunate enough to secure a picture of a part of the pond while the ducks were thickly gathered thereon. Ice had formed around the edges, and this ice was covered with ducks. The water was also alive with others, which paid not the least attention to the party of strangers on the shore.

I drove out to the ranch on November 24, 1902, and found the small pond almost black with birds. I was fortunate enough to get a picture of a section of the pond packed with ducks. Ice had formed around the edges, and this ice was covered with ducks. The water was also bustling with others that didn’t pay any attention to the group of strangers on the shore.

From Mr. Gray I learned that there were some 600 ducks of various kinds on the pond at that time, though it was then early for them to seek winter quarters. Later in the year, he assured me, there would be between 2,000 and 3,000 teal, mallards, canvas-backs, redheads and other varieties, all perfectly at home and fearless of danger. The family have habitually approached the pond from the house, which stands on the south side, and should any person appear on the north side of the pond the ducks immediately take fright and flight. Wheat was strewn on the ground and in the water, and the ducks waddled around us within a few inches of our feet to feed, paying not the least attention to us, or to the old house-dog which walked near.

From Mr. Gray, I learned that there were about 600 ducks of various kinds on the pond at that time, even though it was still early for them to start looking for winter homes. He assured me that later in the year, there would be between 2,000 and 3,000 teal, mallards, canvas-backs, redheads, and other varieties, all completely at home and unafraid of danger. The family usually approached the pond from the house, which is on the south side; if anyone appeared on the north side of the pond, the ducks would immediately panic and take off. Wheat was scattered on the ground and in the water, and the ducks waddled around us within just a few inches of our feet to eat, showing no concern for us or for the old house dog that was walking nearby.

Six miles east of the ranch is San Luis lake, to which these ducks travel almost daily while the lake is open. When they are at the lake it is impossible to approach within gunshot of the then timid birds. Some unsympathetic boys and men have learned the habit of the birds, and place themselves in hiding along the course of flight to and from the lake. Many ducks are shot in this way, but woe to the person caught firing a gun on or near the home-pond. When away from home, the birds are as other wild-ducks and fail to recognize any members of the Gray family. While at home they follow the boys around the barn-yard, squawking for feed like so many tame ducks.

Six miles east of the ranch is San Luis Lake, where these ducks go almost every day when the lake is open. When they are at the lake, it's impossible to get within shooting range of the now skittish birds. Some unsympathetic hunters have figured out the ducks' habits and hide along their flight path to and from the lake. Many ducks get shot this way, but be careful if you're caught firing a gun on or near the home pond. When they're away from home, the birds behave like other wild ducks and don’t recognize any members of the Gray family. But when they're home, they follow the boys around the barnyard, quacking for food as if they’re tame ducks.

This is the greatest sight I have ever witnessed, and one that I could not believe existed until I had seen it. Certainly it is worth travelling many miles to see, and no one, after seeing it, would care to shoot birds that, when kindly treated, make such charming pets.

This is the most incredible thing I’ve ever seen, and I wouldn’t have believed it existed until I witnessed it. It's definitely worth traveling a long way to experience, and anyone who has seen it wouldn’t want to hunt birds that can be such delightful pets when treated well.

Since the above was published, the protected flocks of tame wild ducks have become one of the most interesting sights of Florida. At Palm Beach the tameness of the wild ducks when within their protected area, and their wildness outside of it, has been witnessed by thousands of visitors.

Since the above was published, the protected flocks of tame wild ducks have become one of the most interesting sights in Florida. At Palm Beach, the tameness of the wild ducks within their protected area, and their wildness outside of it, has been seen by thousands of visitors.

The Saving Of The Snowy Egret In The United States. —The time was when [Page 319] very many persons believed that the devastations of the plume-hunters of Florida and the Gulf Coast would be so long continued and so persistently followed up to the logical conclusion that both species of plume-furnishing egrets would disappear from the avifauna of the United States. This expectation gave rise to feelings of resentment, indignation and despair.

The Conservation of the Snowy Egret in the United States. —There was a time when [Page 319] a lot of people thought that the relentless actions of plume-hunters in Florida and along the Gulf Coast would continue for so long that both types of egrets that provide plumes would vanish from the bird life of the United States. This belief led to feelings of anger, outrage, and hopelessness.

It happened, however, that almost at the last moment a solitary individual set on foot an enterprise calculated to preserve the snowy egret (which is the smaller of the two species involved), from final extermination. The splendid success that has attended the efforts of Mr. Edward A. McIlhenny, of Avery Island, Louisiana, is entitled not only to admiration and praise, but also to the higher tribute of practical imitation. Mr. McIlhenny is, first of all, a lover of birds, and a humanitarian. He has traveled widely throughout the continent of North America and elsewhere, and has seen much of wild life and man's influence upon it. To-day his highest ambition is to create for the benefit of the Present, and as a heritage to Posterity, a mid-continental chain of great bird refuges, in which migrating wild fowl and birds of all other species may find resting-places and refuges during their migrations, and protected feeding-grounds in winter. In this grand enterprise, the consummation of which is now in progress, Mr. McIlhenny is associated with Mr. Charles Willis Ward, joint donor of the splendid Ward-McIlhenny Bird Preserve of 13,000 acres, which recently was presented to the State of Louisiana by its former owners.

It just so happened that, almost at the last minute, a single person started an initiative aimed at saving the snowy egret (the smaller of the two species involved) from extinction. The amazing success of Mr. Edward A. McIlhenny from Avery Island, Louisiana, deserves not just admiration and praise but also the greater honor of being emulated. Mr. McIlhenny is primarily a bird lover and a humanitarian. He has traveled extensively across North America and beyond, witnessing a lot of wildlife and the impact of humans on it. Today, his greatest ambition is to establish a chain of major bird sanctuaries in the mid-continental U.S., where migrating waterfowl and other types of birds can find rest and refuge during their migrations, as well as protected feeding grounds in winter. In this significant project, which is currently underway, Mr. McIlhenny is collaborating with Mr. Charles Willis Ward, who co-donated the impressive Ward-McIlhenny Bird Preserve of 13,000 acres, recently gifted to the State of Louisiana by its former owners.

The egret and heron preserve, however, is Mr. McIlhenny's individual enterprise, and really furnished the motif of the larger movement. Of its inception and development, he has kindly furnished me the following account, accompanied by many beautiful photographs of egrets breeding in sanctuary, one of which appears on page 27.

The egret and heron preserve is, however, Mr. McIlhenny's personal project, and it truly inspired the larger movement. He kindly provided me with the following account of its beginnings and growth, along with many stunning photos of egrets breeding in the sanctuary, one of which is on page 27.

In some recent publications I have seen statements to the effect that you believed the egrets were nearing extinction, owing to the persecution of plume hunters, so I know that you will be interested in the enclosed photographs, which were taken in my heron rookery, situated within 100 yards of my factory, where I am now sitting dictating this letter.

In some recent articles, I’ve seen claims that you believe the egrets are nearly extinct due to threats from plume hunters. So, I know you’ll be interested in the attached photos taken in my heron nesting area, located just 100 yards from my factory, where I'm currently writing this letter.

This rookery was started by me in 1896, because I saw at that time that the herons of Louisiana were being rapidly exterminated by plume hunters. My thought was that the way to preserve them would be to start an artificial rookery of them where they could be thoroughly protected. With this end in view I built a small pond, taking in a wet space that contained a few willows and other shrubs which grow in wet places.

I started this rookery in 1896 because I noticed that the herons in Louisiana were being rapidly wiped out by plume hunters. I thought the best way to protect them was to create an artificial rookery where they could be safe. With that in mind, I built a small pond that included a wet area with a few willows and other shrubs that thrive in damp conditions.

In a large cage in this pond, I raised some snowy herons. After keeping the birds in confinement for something over six months I turned them loose, hoping that they would come back the next season, as they were perfectly tame and were used to seeing people. I was rewarded the next season by four of the birds returning, and nesting in the willows in the pond. This was the start of a rookery that now covers 35 acres, and contains more than twenty thousand pairs of nesting birds, embracing not only the egrets but all the species of herons found in Louisiana, besides many other water birds.

In a large cage in this pond, I raised some snowy herons. After keeping the birds in captivity for a little over six months, I released them, hoping they would return the following season since they were completely tame and used to people. The next season, four of the birds returned and nested in the willows by the pond. This marked the start of a rookery that now covers 35 acres and is home to over twenty thousand pairs of nesting birds, including not only the egrets but all the heron species found in Louisiana, along with many other water birds.

With a view to carrying on the preservation of our birds on a larger scale, Mr. Chas. W. Ward and I have recently donated to the State of Louisiana 13,000 acres of what I consider to be the finest wild fowl feeding ground on the Louisiana coast, as it contains the only gravel beach for 50 miles, and all of the geese within that space come daily to this beach for gravel. This territory also produces a great amount of natural food for geese and ducks.

To help preserve our birds on a larger scale, Mr. Chas. W. Ward and I have recently donated 13,000 acres to the State of Louisiana, which I believe to be the best wildlife feeding ground along the Louisiana coast. It features the only gravel beach for 50 miles, and all the geese in that area come to this beach daily for gravel. This land also provides plenty of natural food for geese and ducks.

Saving The Gulls And Terns. —But for the vigorous and long-continued efforts of the Audubon Societies, I think our coasts would by this time have been swept clean of the gulls and terns that now adorn it. Twenty years ago the milliners were determined to have them all. The fight for them was long, and hotly contested, but the Audubon Societies won. It was a great victory, and has yielded results of great value to the country at large. And yet, it was only a small number of persons who furnished the money and made the fight which inured to the benefit of the millions of American people. Hereafter, whenever you see an American gull or tern, remind yourself that it was saved to the nation by "the Audubon people."

Saving Gulls and Terns. —If it weren't for the vigorous and ongoing efforts of the Audubon Societies, our coasts would likely be completely devoid of the gulls and terns that currently grace them. Twenty years ago, the hat makers were determined to acquire them all. The battle for them was long and fiercely contested, but the Audubon Societies emerged victorious. It was a significant win that has brought substantial benefits to the country as a whole. Yet, only a small group of people provided the funding and led the fight that benefited millions of Americans. From now on, whenever you spot an American gull or tern, remember that it was preserved for the nation by "the Audubon people."

In times of grave emergency, such as fire, war and scarcity of food, the wild creatures forget their fear of man, and many times actually surrender themselves to his mercy and protection. At such times, hard is the heart and low is the code of manly honor that does not respond in a manner becoming a superior species.

In serious emergencies, like fires, wars, and food shortages, wild animals forget their fear of humans and often submit to our mercy and protection. During these times, it reflects poorly on anyone whose heart is hard and whose sense of honor is low, failing to act in a way that befits a superior species.

The most pathetic wild-animal situation ever seen in the United States on a large scale is that which for six winters in succession forced several thousand starving elk into the settlement of Jackson Hole, Wyoming, in quest of food at the hands of their natural enemies. The elk lost all fear, partly because they were not attacked, and they surrounded the log-enclosed haystacks, barns and houses, mutely begging for food. Previous to the winter of 1911, thousands of weak calves and cows perished around the haystacks. Mr. S.N. Leek's wonderful pictures tell a thrilling but very sad story.

The most heartbreaking situation for wild animals ever seen on a large scale in the United States occurred over six consecutive winters, when several thousand starving elk were forced into the settlement of Jackson Hole, Wyoming, in search of food from their natural enemies. The elk lost all fear, partly because they weren’t attacked, and they gathered around the log-enclosed haystacks, barns, and houses, silently begging for food. Before the winter of 1911, thousands of weak calves and cows died around the haystacks. Mr. S.N. Leek's incredible pictures tell a gripping but very sad story.

To the everlasting honor of the people of Jackson Hole, be it recorded that they rose like Men to the occasion that confronted them. In 1909 they gave to the elk herds all the hay that their domestic stock could spare, not pausing to ascertain whether they ever would be reimbursed for it. They just handed it out! The famishing animals literally mobbed the hay-wagons. To-day the national government has the situation in hand.

To the lasting credit of the people of Jackson Hole, it should be noted that they stepped up to the challenge they faced. In 1909, they provided all the hay they could spare from their livestock to the elk herds without worrying about whether they would get paid back. They just distributed it! The starving animals practically surrounded the hay wagons. Today, the federal government is managing the situation.

In times of peace and plenty, the people of Jackson Hole take their toll of the elk herds, but their example during starvation periods is to be commended to all men.

In times of peace and abundance, the people of Jackson Hole take their share from the elk herds, but their example during times of starvation deserves recognition from everyone.

A Slaughter Of Restored Game. —The case of the chamois in Switzerland teaches the world a valuable lesson in how not to slaughter game that has come back to its haunts through protected breeding.

A Killing of Restored Game. —The situation with the chamois in Switzerland offers an important lesson on how not to hunt animals that have returned to their habitats thanks to conservation efforts.

A few years ago, one of the provinces of Switzerland took note of the fact that its once-abundant stock of chamois was almost extinct, and enacted a law by which the remnant was absolutely protected for a long period. During those years of protection, the animals bred and multiplied, until finally the original number was almost restored.

A few years ago, one of the provinces in Switzerland realized that its once-thriving population of chamois was nearly extinct and passed a law to completely protect the remaining ones for an extended time. During those years of protection, the animals bred and increased in number until the original population was nearly restored.

Then,—as always in such cases,—there arose a strong demand for an open season; and eventually the government yielded to the pressure of the hunters, and fixed a date whereon an open season should begin.

Then, as usual in situations like this, there was a strong push for an open season; and eventually, the government gave in to the hunters' pressure and set a date for when the open season would start.


From the "American Natural History"

From "American Natural History"

GULLS AND TERNS OF OUR COASTS, SAVED FROM DESTRUCTION

Gulls and terns on our coasts, rescued from ruin

These Birds have been Saved and Brought back to us by the Splendid Efforts of the Audubon Societies, and other Bird-Lovers. But for the Anti-Plumage Laws, not one Gull or Tern would now Remain on our Atlantic Coast

These birds have been saved and brought back to us thanks to the amazing efforts of the Audubon Societies and other bird lovers. Without the anti-plumage laws, not a single gull or tern would now be left on our Atlantic coast.


During the period preceding that fatal date, the living chamois, grown half tame by years of immunity from the guns, were all carefully located and marked down by those who intended to hunt them. At daybreak on the fatal day, the onset began. Guns and hunters were everywhere, and the mountains resounded with the fusillade. Hundreds of chamois were slain, by hundreds of hunters; and by the close of that fatal "open season" the species was more nearly exterminated throughout that region than ever before. Once more those mountains were nice and barren of game.

During the time leading up to that tragic day, the living chamois, having become somewhat accustomed to humans due to years of being safe from hunters, were all carefully located and noted by those planning to hunt them. At dawn on that tragic day, the hunt kicked off. Guns and hunters were everywhere, and the mountains echoed with gunfire. Hundreds of chamois were killed by hundreds of hunters; by the end of that tragic "open season," the species was closer to being wiped out in that area than ever before. Once again, those mountains were empty of game.

Let that bloody and disgraceful episode serve as a warning to Americans who are tempted to demand an open season on game that has bred back from the verge of extinction. Particularly do we commend it to the notice of the people of Colorado who even now are demanding an open season on the preserved mountain sheep of that state. The granting of such an open season would be a brutal outrage. Those sheep are now so tame and unsuspicious that the killing of them would be cold-blooded murder!

Let that bloody and disgraceful episode serve as a warning to Americans who are tempted to call for an open season on game that has come back from near extinction. We especially urge the people of Colorado, who even now are calling for an open season on the protected mountain sheep of that state. Allowing such an open season would be a brutal outrage. Those sheep are now so tame and unsuspecting that killing them would be cold-blooded murder!

The Logical Conclusion. —Within reasonable limits, any partly-destroyed wild species can be increased and brought back by giving absolute protection from harassment and slaughter. When a species is struggling to recuperate, it deserves to be left entirely unmolested until it is once more on safe ground.

The Logical Conclusion. —Within reasonable limits, any partially-destroyed wild species can be restored and brought back by providing complete protection from disturbance and killing. When a species is trying to recover, it deserves to be left completely undisturbed until it is back on secure ground.

Every breeding wild animal craves seclusion and entire immunity from excitement and all forms of molestation. Nature simply demands this as her unassailable right. It is my firm belief that any wild species will breed in captivity whenever its members are given a degree of seclusion that they deem satisfactory.

Every wild animal that breeds wants privacy and complete freedom from disturbance and all kinds of interference. Nature insists on this as her undeniable right. I strongly believe that any wild species will breed in captivity as long as its members are provided with a level of privacy that they find acceptable.

With species that have not been shot down to a point entirely too low, adequate protection generously long in duration will bring back their numbers. If the people of the United States so willed it, we could have wild white-tailed deer in every state and in every county (save city counties) between the Atlantic and the Rocky Mountains. We could easily have one thousand bob white quail for every one now living. We could have squirrels in every grove, and songbirds by the million,—merely by protecting them from slaughter and molestation. From Ohio to the great plains, the pinnated grouse could be made far more common than crows and blackbirds.

With species that haven't been hunted to an alarmingly low level, proper protection for a long enough time will help their populations bounce back. If the people of the United States wanted it, we could have wild white-tailed deer in every state and county (except urban areas) from the Atlantic to the Rocky Mountains. We could easily have a thousand bobwhite quail for every one that exists today. We could have squirrels in every grove and millions of songbirds—simply by protecting them from being killed and harassed. From Ohio to the Great Plains, the prairie chicken could be made much more common than crows and blackbirds.

Inasmuch as all this is true,—and no one with information will dispute it for a moment,—is it not folly to seek to supplant our own splendid native species of game birds (that we never yet have decently protected!) with foreign species? Let the American people answer this question with "Yes" or "No."

As true as all this is—and no one knowledgeable would argue otherwise—isn't it foolish to try to replace our wonderful native game birds (that we have never properly protected!) with foreign ones? Let's have the American people respond to this question with "Yes" or "No."

The methods by which our non-game birds can be encouraged and brought back are very simple: Protect them, put up shelters for them, give them nest-boxes in abundance, protect them from cats, dogs, and all other forms of destruction, and feed those that need to be fed. I should think [Page 323] that every boy living in the country would find keen pleasure in making and erecting nest-boxes for martins, wrens, and squirrels; in putting up straw teepees in winter for the quail, in feeding the quail, and in nailing to the trees chunks of suet and fat pork every winter for the woodpeckers, nuthatches, and other winter residents.

The ways we can encourage and bring back our non-game birds are really straightforward: Protect them, set up shelters for them, provide plenty of nest boxes, keep them safe from cats, dogs, and any other threats, and feed those that need food. I would think [Page 323] that every boy living in the countryside would really enjoy making and putting up nest boxes for martins, wrens, and squirrels; setting up straw teepees in winter for the quail, feeding the quail, and attaching chunks of suet and fat pork to the trees every winter for the woodpeckers, nuthatches, and other winter birds.

Will any person now on this earth live long enough to see the present all-pervading and devilish spirit of slaughter so replaced by the love of wild creatures and the true spirit of conservation that it will be as rare as it now is common?

Will anyone on this planet live long enough to witness the current pervasive and destructive spirit of violence replaced by a love for wild animals and a genuine commitment to conservation, making it as rare as it is now common?

But let no one think for a moment that any vanishing species can at any time be brought back; for that would be a grave error. The point is always reached, by every such species, that the survivors are too few to cope with circumstances, and recovery is impossible. The heath hen could not be brought back, neither could the passenger pigeon. The whooping crane, the sage grouse, the trumpeter swan, the wild turkey, and the upland plover never will come back to us, and nothing that we can do ever will bring them back. Circumstances are against those species,—and I fear against many others also. Thanks to the fact that the American bison breeds well in captivity, we have saved that species from complete extinction, but our antelope seems to be doomed.

But let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that any species that disappears can be brought back; that would be a serious mistake. There comes a point for every such species when the remaining individuals are too few to survive in their environment, and recovery becomes impossible. The heath hen and the passenger pigeon couldn't be revived. The whooping crane, the sage grouse, the trumpeter swan, the wild turkey, and the upland plover will never return, and nothing we do will change that. Conditions are against those species—and I worry that many others are in the same boat. Fortunately, because the American bison can breed well in captivity, we've saved that species from total extinction, but it seems our antelope is doomed.

It is because of the alarming condition of our best wild life that quick action and strong action is vitally necessary. We are sleeping on our possibilities.

It’s because of the urgent state of our best wildlife that swift and decisive action is absolutely necessary. We're ignoring our potential.


[Page 324]
CHAPTER XXXIV
INTRODUCED SPECIES THAT HAVE BEEN BENEFICIAL

Man has made numerous experiments in the transplantation of wild species of mammals and birds from one country, or continent, to another. About one-half these efforts have been beneficial, and the other half have resulted disastrously.

Man has conducted many experiments in moving wild species of mammals and birds from one country or continent to another. About half of these efforts have been successful, while the other half have ended in failure.

The transplantation of any wild-animal species is a leap in the dark. On general principles it is dangerous to meddle with the laws of Nature, and attempt to improve upon the code of the wilderness. Our best wisdom in such matters may easily prove to be short-sighted folly. The trouble lies in the fact that concerning transplantation it is impossible for us to know beforehand all the conditions that will affect it, or that it will effect, and how it will work out. In its own home a species may seem not only harmless, but actually beneficial to man. We do not know, and we can not know, all the influences that keep it in check, and that mould its character. We do not know, and we can not know without a trial, how new environment will affect it, and what new traits of character it will develop under radically different conditions. The gentle dove of Europe may become the tyrant dove of Cathay. The Repressed Rabbit of the Old World becomes in Australia the Uncontrollable Rabbit, a devastator and a pest of pests.

Transplanting any wild animal species is risky. Generally speaking, it's dangerous to interfere with the laws of nature and try to improve the natural world. Our best ideas on this can often turn out to be foolish. The problem is that when it comes to transplantation, it is impossible for us to know beforehand all the conditions that will affect it, or that it will affect, and how it will turn out. In its natural habitat, a species may seem not only harmless but even beneficial to humans. We don’t know, and we cannot know, all the factors that keep it in check and shape its behavior. We don’t know, and we cannot know without testing, how a new environment will impact it and what new traits it will develop under completely different conditions. The gentle dove of Europe could become the tyrant dove of Asia. The Repressed Rabbit of the Old World turns into the Uncontrollable Rabbit in Australia, becoming a destroyer and a pest among pests.

No wild species should be transplanted and set free in a wild state to stock new regions without consulting men of wisdom, and following their advice. It is now against the laws of the United States to introduce and acclimatize in a wild state, anywhere in the United States, any wild-bird species without the approval of the Department of Agriculture. The law is a wise one. Furthermore, the same principle should apply to birds that it is proposed to transplant from one portion of the United States into another, especially when the two are widely separated.

No wild species should be moved and released into new areas without consulting experts and following their recommendations. It’s currently against U.S. law to introduce or acclimatize any wild bird species anywhere in the country without the approval of the Department of Agriculture. This law is a smart one. Additionally, the same principle should apply to birds that are proposed to be relocated from one part of the United States to another, especially when the two areas are far apart.

On this point, I once learned a valuable lesson, which may well point my present moral. Incidentally, also, it was a narrow escape for me!

On this point, I once learned a valuable lesson that might highlight my current moral. By the way, it was also a close call for me!

A gentlemen of my acquaintance, who admires the European magpie, and is well aware of its acceptable residence in various countries in Europe, once requested my cooperation in securing and acclimatizing at his country estate a number of birds of that species. As in duty bound, I laid the matter before our Department of Agriculture, and asked for an opinion. The Department replied, in effect, "Why import a foreign magpie when we have in the West a species of our own quite as handsome, and which could more easily be transplanted?"

A gentleman I know, who appreciates the European magpie and understands its suitable habitat in different European countries, once asked for my help in obtaining and adapting some of those birds at his country property. As I felt it was my responsibility, I brought the issue to our Department of Agriculture and requested their input. The Department responded, essentially saying, "Why import a foreign magpie when we have a native species in the West that is just as beautiful and could be more easily introduced?"

The point seemed well taken. Now, I had seen much of the American [Page 325] magpie in its wild home,—the Rocky Mountains, and the western border of the Great Plains,—and I thought I was acquainted with it. I knew that a few complaints against it had been made, but they had seemed to me very trivial. To me our magpie seemed to have a generally unobjectionable record.

The point was valid. I had seen quite a bit of the American [Page 325] magpie in its natural habitat—the Rocky Mountains and the western edge of the Great Plains—and I thought I knew it well. I was aware that there had been some complaints about it, but those seemed pretty insignificant to me. Overall, our magpie appeared to have a mostly acceptable track record.

Fortunately for me, I wrote to Mr. Hershey, Assistant Curator of Ornithology in the Colorado State Museum, for assistance in procuring fifty birds, for transplantation to the State of New York. Mr. Hershey replied that if I really wished the birds for acclimatization, he would gladly procure them for me; but he said that in the thickly-settled farming communities of Colorado, the magpie is now regarded as a pest. It devours the eggs and nestlings of other wild birds, and not only that, it destroys so many eggs of domestic poultry that many farmers are compelled to keep their egg-laying hens shut up in wire enclosures!

Fortunately for me, I wrote to Mr. Hershey, Assistant Curator of Ornithology at the Colorado State Museum, asking for help in getting fifty birds to transplant to New York. Mr. Hershey responded that if I really wanted the birds for acclimatization, he would gladly help me get them. However, he mentioned that in the densely populated farming communities of Colorado, the magpie is now seen as a nuisance. It eats the eggs and chicks of other wild birds, and on top of that, it destroys so many eggs of domestic chickens that many farmers have to keep their laying hens confined in wire cages!

Now, this condition happened to be entirely unknown to me, because I never had seen the American magpie in action in a farming community! Of course the proposed experiment was promptly abandoned, but it is embarrassing to think how near I came to making a mistake. Even if the magpies had been transplanted and had become a nuisance in this state, they could easily have been exterminated by shooting; but the memory of the error would have been humiliating to the party of the first part.

Now, this situation was completely unfamiliar to me because I had never seen the American magpie in action in a farming community! Naturally, the proposed experiment was quickly dropped, but it's uncomfortable to realize how close I was to making a mistake. Even if the magpies had been introduced and become a nuisance here, they could have easily been eliminated by shooting; however, the memory of the error would have been embarrassing for the first party involved.

The Old World Pheasants In America. —In 1881 the first Chinese ring-necked pheasants were introduced into the United States, twelve miles below Portland, Oregon; twelve males and three females. The next year, Oregon gave pheasants a five-year close season. A little later, the golden and silver pheasants of China were introduced, and all three species throve mightily, on the Pacific Coast, in Oregon, Washington and western British Columbia. In 1900, the sportsmen of Portland and Vancouver were shooting cock golden pheasants according to law.

Old World Pheasants in America. —In 1881, the first Chinese ring-necked pheasants were brought to the United States, twelve miles south of Portland, Oregon; there were twelve males and three females. The following year, Oregon implemented a five-year close season for pheasants. Soon after, the golden and silver pheasants from China were introduced, and all three species thrived significantly along the Pacific Coast, in Oregon, Washington, and western British Columbia. By 1900, sportsmen in Portland and Vancouver were legally hunting male golden pheasants.

The success of Chinese and Japanese pheasants on the Pacific Coast soon led to experiments in the more progressive states, at state expense. State pheasant hatcheries have been established in Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa and California.

The success of Chinese and Japanese pheasants on the Pacific Coast quickly resulted in experiments in the more forward-thinking states, funded by the state. State pheasant hatcheries have been set up in Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, and California.

In many localities, the old-world pheasants have come to stay. The rise and progress of the ring-neck in western New York has already been noted. It came about merely through protection. That protection was protection in fact, not the false "protection" that shoots on the sly. It is the irony of fate that full protection should be accorded a foreign bird, in order that it may multiply and possess the land, while the same kind of protection is refused the native bob white, and it is now almost a dead species, so far as this state is concerned.

In many places, the old-world pheasants have settled in. The growth of the ring-neck in western New York has already been mentioned. This happened simply because of protection. That protection was genuine, not the false "protection" that comes from shooting secretly. It’s ironic that a foreign bird is given full protection so it can multiply and take over, while the same type of protection is denied to the native bobwhite, which is now almost extinct in this state.

In looking about for grievances against the ring-necked and English pheasant, some persons have claimed that in winter these birds are "budders," which means that they harmfully strip trees and bushes of the buds that those bushes will surely need in their spring opening. On [Page 326] that point Dr. Joseph Kalbfus, Secretary of the Pennsylvania Game Commission, sent out a circular letter of inquiry, in response to which he received many statements. With but one exception, all the testimony received was to the effect that pheasants are not bud-eaters, and that generally the charge is unfounded.

In looking for complaints about the ring-necked and English pheasant, some people have said that in winter these birds are "budders," meaning they damage trees and bushes by stripping away the buds that those plants will need for spring growth. On [Page 326] regarding this issue, Dr. Joseph Kalbfus, Secretary of the Pennsylvania Game Commission, sent out a survey letter, and in response, he received many replies. With only one exception, all the statements indicated that pheasants are not bud-eaters, and that the accusation is generally baseless.

The introduction of old-world pheasants, and the attempted introduction of the Hungarian partridge, are efforts designed first of all to furnish sportsmen something to shoot, and incidentally to provide a new food supply for the table. The people of this country are not starving, nor are they even very hungry for the meat of strange birds; but as a food-producer, the pheasant is all right.

The introduction of traditional pheasants and the attempted introduction of the Hungarian partridge are efforts primarily aimed at giving hunters something to shoot at, while also providing a new food option. People in this country aren't starving, nor are they particularly craving the meat of unfamiliar birds; however, as a source of food, pheasants are fine.

It disgusts me to the core, however, to see states that wantonly and wickedly, through sheer apathy and lack of business enterprise, have allowed the quail, the heath hen, the pinnated grouse and the ruffed grouse to become almost exterminated by extravagant and foolish shooters, now putting forth wonderfully diligent efforts and spending money without end, in introducing foreign species! Many men actually take the ground that our game "can't live" in its own country any longer; but only the ignorant and the unthinking will say so! Give our game birds decent, sensible, actual protection, stop their being slaughtered far faster than they breed, and they will live anywhere in their own native haunts! But where is there one species of upland game bird in America that has been sensibly and adequately protected? From Portland, Maine, to Portland, Oregon there is not one,—not a single locality in which protection from shooting has been sensible, or just, or adequate.

It really disgusts me to see states that recklessly and carelessly, out of sheer indifference and a lack of initiative, have allowed the quail, the heath hen, the pinnated grouse, and the ruffed grouse to be nearly wiped out by extravagant and foolish hunters, now putting in a ton of effort and spending endless money to introduce foreign species! Some people actually argue that our game "can't survive" in its own country anymore; but only the ignorant and thoughtless would say that! If we give our game birds proper, sensible, actual protection, and stop them from being killed off faster than they can reproduce, they will thrive anywhere in their native habitats! But is there one species of upland game bird in America that has been sensibly and adequately protected? From Portland, Maine, to Portland, Oregon, there is not one—not a single place where protection from hunting has been sensible, fair, or adequate.

We have universally given our American upland game birds an unfair deal, and now we are adding insult to slaughter by bringing in foreign game birds to replace them—because our birds "can't live" before five million shot-guns!

We’ve treated our American upland game birds unfairly, and now we’re making matters worse by bringing in foreign game birds to take their place—because our birds “can’t survive” with five million shotguns out there!

Our American game birds CAN live, anywhere in the haunts where nature placed them that are not to-day actually occupied by cities and towns! Give me the making of the laws, and I will make the prairie chicken and quail as numerous throughout the northern states east of the Great Plains as domestic chickens are outside the regular poultry farms. There is only one reason why there are not ten million quail in the state of New York to-day,—one for each human inhabitant,—and that reason is the infernal greed and selfishness of the men who have almost exterminated our quail by over-shooting. Don't talk to me about the "hard winters" killing off our quail! It is the hard cheek of the men who shoot them when they ought to let them alone.

Our American game birds can thrive anywhere in the habitats where nature placed them that aren't currently occupied by cities and towns! Just let me create the laws, and I can make prairie chickens and quail as common across the northern states east of the Great Plains as domestic chickens are outside regular poultry farms. The only reason there aren't ten million quail in New York today—one for every person—is the awful greed and selfishness of those who have nearly wiped out our quail by overhunting. Don't tell me it's the "harsh winters" that are killing our quail! It's the hard-heartedness of the people who shoot them when they should leave them alone.

The State of Iowa could support 500,000 prairie chickens and never miss the waste grain that they would glean in the fields; but now the prairie chicken is practically extinct in Iowa, only a few scattered specimens remaining as "last survivors" in some of the northern counties. The migration of those birds that unexpectedly came down from the north last winter was like the fall of a meteor,—only the birds promptly faded away again. Why should New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts [Page 327] exterminate the heath hen and coddle the ring-necked pheasant and the Hungarian partridge?

The State of Iowa could easily support 500,000 prairie chickens without even noticing the leftover grain they would pick up in the fields; but now the prairie chicken is nearly extinct in Iowa, with only a few scattered individuals left as "last survivors" in some of the northern counties. The migration of those birds that unexpectedly showed up from the north last winter was like a meteor’s fall—only the birds quickly disappeared again. Why should New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts [Page 327] wipe out the heath hen while pampering the ring-necked pheasant and the Hungarian partridge?

The introduction of the old-world pheasants interests me very little. Every one that I see is a painful reminder of our slaughtered quail and grouse,—the birds that never have had a square deal from the American people! Thus far the introduction of the Hungarian partridge has not been successful, anywhere. Connecticut, Missouri, New Jersey and I think other states have tried this, and failed. The failure of that species brings no sorrow to me. I prefer our own game birds; and if the American people will not conserve those properly and decently they deserve to have no game birds.

The introduction of old-world pheasants doesn’t interest me at all. Every one I see is a painful reminder of our massacred quail and grouse—the birds that have never received a fair chance from the American people! So far, the introduction of the Hungarian partridge hasn’t been successful anywhere. Connecticut, Missouri, New Jersey, and I believe other states have tried and failed. Their failure doesn’t upset me at all. I prefer our own game birds; and if the American people won’t take care of them properly and respectfully, they deserve to have no game birds.

The European Red Deer In New Zealand. —Occasionally a gameless land makes a ten-strike by introducing a foreign game animal that does no harm, and becomes of great value. The greatest success ever made in the transplantation of game animals has been in New Zealand.

The European Red Deer in New Zealand. —Sometimes, a land without game experiences a major success by introducing a non-disruptive foreign game animal that turns out to be very valuable. The most successful instance of relocating game animals has occurred in New Zealand.

Originally, New Zealand possessed no large animals, and no "big-game." When Nature passed around the deer, antelopes, sheep, goats, wild cattle and bears, New Zealand failed to receive her share. For centuries her splendid forests, her grand mountains and picturesque valleys remained untenanted by big game.

Originally, New Zealand had no large animals or "big-game." When Nature was distributing deer, antelopes, sheep, goats, wild cattle, and bears, New Zealand missed out. For centuries, its stunning forests, impressive mountains, and beautiful valleys were untouched by big game.

In 1864, the Prince Consort of England caused seven head of European red deer to be taken from the royal park at Windsor, and sent to Christchurch, New Zealand. Only three of the animals survived the long voyage; a buck and two does. For several weeks the two were kept in a barn in Christchurch, where they served no good purpose, and were not likely to live long or be happy. Finally some one said, "Let's set them free in the mountains!"

In 1864, the Prince Consort of England had seven European red deer taken from the royal park at Windsor and sent to Christchurch, New Zealand. Only three of the animals survived the long journey: one buck and two does. For several weeks, the two does were kept in a barn in Christchurch, where they weren’t benefiting anyone and were unlikely to live long or be happy. Eventually, someone suggested, "Let's set them free in the mountains!"

The idea was adopted. The three animals were hauled an uncertain number of miles into the interior mountains and set free.

The idea was accepted. The three animals were taken an unknown distance into the mountains and released.

They promptly settled down in their new home. They began to breed, and now on the North Island there are probably five thousand European red deer, every one of which has descended directly from the famous three! And here is the strangest part of the story:

They quickly got comfortable in their new home. They started to breed, and now on the North Island, there are probably five thousand European red deer, all of which have directly descended from the famous three! And here's the weirdest part of the story:

The red deer of the North Island represent the greatest case of in-and-in breeding of wild animals on record. According to the experience of the world in the breeding of domestic cattle (not horses), we should expect physical deterioration, the development of diseases, and disaster. On the contrary, the usual evil results of in-breeding in domestic cattle have been totally absent. The red deer of New Zealand are to-day physically larger and more robust animals, with longer and heavier antlers, and longer hair, than any of the red deer of Europe west of Germany!

The red deer of the North Island are the most significant example of inbreeding among wild animals ever recorded. Based on global experiences with domestic cattle (not horses), we would expect physical decline, the emergence of diseases, and a catastrophic outcome. However, the typical negative effects of inbreeding seen in domestic cattle have been completely absent here. The red deer of New Zealand are now larger and more robust, with longer and heavier antlers and longer fur than any red deer found in Europe west of Germany!

Red deer have been introduced practically all over New Zealand, and the total number now in the Islands must be somewhere near forty thousand. The sportsmen of that country have grand sport, and take many splendid trophies. That transplantation has been a very great success. [Page 328] Incidentally, the case of the in-bred deer of the North Island, taken along with other cases of which we know, establishes a new and important principle in evolution. It is this:

Red deer have been introduced nearly everywhere in New Zealand, and the total population on the Islands is probably around forty thousand. Sportsmen in the country enjoy fantastic hunting and bring home many impressive trophies. This relocation has been a huge success. [Page 328] By the way, the situation with the inbred deer of the North Island, along with other known cases, establishes a new and significant principle in evolution. It is this:

When healthy wild animals are established in a state of nature, either absolutely free, or confined in preserves so large that they roam at will, seek the food of nature and take care of themselves, in-and-in breeding produces no ill effects, and ceases to be a factor. The animals develop in physical perfection according to the climate and their food supply; and the introduction of new blood is not necessary.

When healthy wild animals live in their natural environment, either completely free or in large reserves where they can move around freely, find their natural food, and take care of themselves, inbreeding has no negative effects and stops being an issue. The animals thrive physically based on the climate and the food available to them, and there's no need to introduce new genetic material.

The Fallow Deer On The Island Of Lambay. —In the Irish Sea, a few miles from the southeast coast of Ireland, is the Island of Lambay, owned by Cecil Baring, Esq. The island is precisely one square mile in area, and some of its sea frontage terminates in perpendicular cliffs. In many ways the island is of unusual interest to zoologists, and its fauna has been well set forth by Mr. Baring.

The Fallow Deer on Lambay Island. —In the Irish Sea, a few miles off the southeast coast of Ireland, lies the Island of Lambay, owned by Cecil Baring, Esq. The island covers exactly one square mile, and some of its coastline features steep cliffs. In many respects, the island is particularly intriguing to zoologists, and its wildlife has been thoroughly documented by Mr. Baring.

In the year 1892 three fallow deer (Dama vulgaris) a buck and two does, were transplanted from a park on the Irish mainland to Lambay, and there set free. From that slender stock has sprung a large herd, which, but for the many deer that have been purposely shot, and the really considerable number that have been killed by going over the cliffs in stormy weather, the progeny of the original three would to-day number several hundred head. No new blood has been introduced, and no deer have died of disease. Even counting out the losses by the rifle and by accidental death, the herd to-day numbers more than one hundred head.

In 1892, three fallow deer (Dama vulgaris)—one buck and two does—were moved from a park on the Irish mainland to Lambay and released there. From that small group, a large herd has developed. If not for the many deer that have been intentionally hunted and the significant number that have fallen off the cliffs during storms, the descendants of the original three would now number in the hundreds. No new blood has been introduced, and no deer have died from disease. Even when excluding the losses from hunting and accidental death, the herd currently has more than one hundred members.

Mr. Baring declares that neither he nor his gamekeeper have ever been able to discover any deterioration in the deer of Lambay, either in size, weight, size of antlers, fertility or general physical stamina. The deterioration through disease, especially tuberculosis, that always is dreaded and often observed in closely in-bred domestic cattle, has been totally absent.

Mr. Baring states that neither he nor his gamekeeper have ever found any decline in the deer on Lambay, whether in size, weight, antler size, fertility, or overall physical stamina. The decline due to disease, especially tuberculosis, which is always feared and often seen in closely inbred domestic cattle, has been completely absent.

In looking about for wild species that have been transplanted, and that have thriven and become beneficial to man, there seems to be mighty little game in sight! The vast majority belong in the next chapter. We will venture to mention the bob white quail that were introduced into Utah in 1871, into Idaho in 1875, and the California valley quail in Washington in 1857. Wherever these efforts have succeeded, the results have been beneficial to man.

In searching for wild species that have been introduced and have thrived, it looks like there isn't much to find! Most of them belong in the next chapter. We will mention the bobwhite quail, which were brought to Utah in 1871, to Idaho in 1875, and the California valley quail in Washington in 1857. Wherever these efforts have succeeded, the outcomes have been beneficial to people.

In 1879 a well-organized effort was made to introduce European quail into several of the New England and Middle States,—to take the place of the bob white, we may suppose,—the bird that "can't stand the winters!" About three thousand birds were distributed and set free,—and went down and out, just as might have been expected. During the past twenty years it is safe to say that not less than $500,000 have been expended in the northern states, and particularly in the northeastern states, in importing live quail from Kansas, the Indian Territory, Oklahoma, Texas, the Carolinas and other southern states, for restocking areas from which the northern bob white had been exterminated by foolish over-shooting! I [Page 329] think that fully nine-tenths of these efforts have ended in total failure. The quail could not survive in their strange environment. I cannot recall a single instance in which restocking northern covers with southern quail has been a success.

In 1879, a well-organized effort was made to introduce European quail into several New England and Middle States—likely to replace the bobwhite, as they say, "that can't handle the winters!" About three thousand birds were released, but they quickly disappeared, just as expected. Over the last twenty years, it's safe to say that at least $500,000 has been spent in the northern states, especially in the northeastern states, to import live quail from Kansas, the Indian Territory, Oklahoma, Texas, the Carolinas, and other southern states, in an attempt to restock areas where the northern bobwhite had been wiped out due to careless over-hunting! I [Page 329] believe that about nine-tenths of these attempts have ended in complete failure. The quail couldn’t adapt to their new environment. I can’t recall a single instance where restocking northern areas with southern quail has been successful.

There is no royal road to the restoration of an exterminated bird species. Where the native seed still exists, by long labor and travail, thorough protection and a mighty long close season, it can be encouraged to breed back and return; but it is an evolution that can not be hurried in the least. Protect Nature, and leave the rest to her.

There’s no easy way to bring back an extinct bird species. If the native seeds are still around, with a lot of hard work, strong protection, and a very long closed season, it can be helped to breed back and return; but it’s an evolution that can’t be rushed at all. Protect Nature, and let her handle the rest.

With mammals, the case is different. It is possible to restock depleted areas, provided Time is recognized as a dominant factor. I can cite two interesting cases by way of illustration, but this subject will form another chapter.

With mammals, it’s a different story. It’s possible to replenish depleted areas, as long as Time is acknowledged as a key factor. I can mention two interesting examples to illustrate this, but this topic will be covered in another chapter.

In the transplantation of fishes, conditions are widely different, and many notable successes have been achieved.

In fish transplantation, the conditions vary greatly, and many impressive successes have been reached.

One of the greatest hits ever made by the United States Bureau of Fisheries in the planting of fish in new localities was the introduction of the striped bass or rock-fish (Roccus lineatus) of our Atlantic coast, into the coast waters of California. In 1879, 135 live fish were deposited in Karquines Strait, at Martinez, and in 1882, 300 more were planted in Suisun Bay, near the first locality chosen.

One of the greatest achievements by the United States Bureau of Fisheries in introducing fish to new regions was bringing the striped bass or rockfish (Roccus lineatus) from the Atlantic coast to the coastal waters of California. In 1879, 135 live fish were released in Karquines Strait, near Martinez, and in 1882, 300 more were introduced in Suisun Bay, close to the original release site.

Twelve years after the first planting in San Francisco Bay, the markets of San Francisco handled 149,997 pounds of striped bass. At that time the average weight for a whole year was eleven pounds, and the average price was ten cents per pound. Fish weighing as high as forty-nine pounds have been taken, and there are reasons for the belief that eventually the fish of California will attain as great weight as those of the Atlantic and the Gulf.

Twelve years after the initial planting in San Francisco Bay, the markets in San Francisco handled 149,997 pounds of striped bass. At that time, the average weight of an entire fish was eleven pounds, with an average price of ten cents per pound. Fish weighing up to forty-nine pounds have been caught, and there are reasons to believe that eventually, California's fish will reach the same weight as those from the Atlantic and the Gulf.

The San Francisco markets now sell, annually, about one and one half million pounds of striped bass. This fish has taken its place among anglers as one of the game fishes of the California coast, and affords fine sport. Strange to say, however, it has not yet spread beyond the shores of California.

The San Francisco markets now sell about one and a half million pounds of striped bass each year. This fish has become one of the favorite sport fish along the California coast and provides great enjoyment for anglers. Interestingly, it hasn't yet spread beyond California's waters.

Regarding this species, the records of the United States Bureau of Fisheries are of interest. In 1897, the California markets handled 2,949,642 pounds, worth $225,527.—(American Natural History.)

Regarding this species, the records from the United States Bureau of Fisheries are impressive. In 1897, the California markets dealt with 2,949,642 pounds, valued at $225,527.—(American Natural History.)

Nowhere else in the world, we venture to say, were such extensive, costly and persistent efforts put forth in the transplantation of any wild foreign species as the old U.S. Fish Commission, under Prof. Spencer F. Baird, put forth in the introduction of the German carp into the fresh water ponds, lakes and rivers of the United States. It was held that because the carp could live and thrive in waters bottomed with mud, that species would be a boon to all inland regions where bodies of water, or streams, were scarce and dear. Although the carp is not the best fish in the world for the table, it seemed that the dwellers in the prairie and great plains regions would find it far better than bullheads, or no fish at all,—which are about the same thing.

Nowhere else in the world, we would argue, were such extensive, costly, and ongoing efforts put into introducing any wild foreign species as the old U.S. Fish Commission, led by Prof. Spencer F. Baird, made with the introduction of the German carp into the freshwater ponds, lakes, and rivers of the United States. It was believed that since the carp could live and thrive in muddy waters, this species would be a great benefit to all inland areas where water bodies or streams were limited and precious. Although carp may not be the best fish for eating, it seemed that people living in the prairie and great plains regions would find it much better than bullheads, or having no fish at all—which are pretty much the same thing.

By means of special fish cars, sent literally all over the United States, at a great total expense, live carp, hatched in the ponds near the Washington Monument were distributed to all applicants. The German carp spread far and wide; but to-day I think the fish has about as many enemies as friends. In some places, strong objections have been filed to the manner in which carp stir up the mud at the bottom of ponds and small lakes, greatly to the detriment of all the native fishes found therein.

Using specialized fish cars that were sent across the United States at a significant cost, live carp hatched in the ponds near the Washington Monument were distributed to all who requested them. The German carp spread extensively; however, today I believe the fish has just as many detractors as supporters. In some areas, serious complaints have been made about how carp disturb the mud at the bottom of ponds and small lakes, which is harmful to all the native fish that live there.


[Page 330]
CHAPTER XXXV
INTRODUCED SPECIES THAT HAVE BECOME PESTS

The man who successfully transplants or "introduces" into a new habitat any persistent species of living thing, assumes a very grave responsibility. Every introduced species is doubtful gravel until panned out. The enormous losses that have been inflicted upon the world through the perpetuation of follies with wild vertebrates and insects would, if added together, be enough to purchase a principality. The most aggravating feature of these follies in transplantation is that never yet have they been made severely punishable. We are just as careless and easy-going on this point as we were about the government of the Yellowstone Park in the days when Howell and other poachers destroyed our first national bison herd, and when caught red-handed—as Howell was, skinning seven Park bison cows,—could not be punished for it, because there was no penalty prescribed by any law.

The person who successfully moves or "introduces" any persistent species of living thing into a new environment takes on a serious responsibility. Every introduced species is a potential problem until proven otherwise. The massive damage caused by misguided attempts to introduce wild animals and insects could, if totaled, buy a small kingdom. The most frustrating part of these mistakes in transplantation is that they have never been made seriously punishable. We're just as careless and relaxed about this as we were regarding the management of Yellowstone Park back when Howell and other poachers wiped out our first national bison herd, and when caught red-handed—as Howell was, skinning seven Park bison cows—could not be punished for it, because there was no penalty prescribed by any law.

To-day, there is a way in which any revengeful person could inflict enormous damage on the entire South, at no cost to himself, involve those states in enormous losses and the expenditure of vast sums of money, yet go absolutely unpunished!

Today, there's a way for any vengeful person to cause significant harm to the entire South, with no cost to themselves, leading those states to suffer huge losses and spend large amounts of money, yet face no consequences at all!

The Gypsy Moth is a case in point. This winged calamity was imported at Maiden, Massachusetts, near Boston, by a French entomologist, Mr. Leopold Trouvelot, in 1868 or '69. History records the fact that the man of science did not purposely set free the pest. He was endeavoring with live specimens to find a moth that would produce a cocoon of commercial value to America; and a sudden gust of wind blew out of his study, through an open window, his living and breeding specimens of the gypsy moth. The moth itself is not bad to look at, but its larvae is a great, overgrown brute, with an appetite like a hog. Immediately Mr. Trouvelot sought to recover his specimens, and when he failed to find them all. like a man of real honor, he notified the State authorities of the accident. Every effort was made to recover all the specimens, but enough escaped to produce progeny that soon became a scourge to the trees of Massachusetts. The method of the big, nasty-looking mottled-brown caterpillar was very simple. It devoured the entire foliage of every tree that grew in its sphere of influence.

The Spongy Moth is a perfect example. This winged disaster was brought to Maiden, Massachusetts, near Boston, by French entomologist Mr. Leopold Trouvelot in 1868 or '69. History shows that this scientist didn't intentionally release the pest. He was trying to find a moth that would create commercially valuable cocoons for America using live specimens, but a sudden gust of wind blew his living and breeding gypsy moth specimens out of an open window. The moth itself isn’t bad to look at, but its larvae are big, nasty creatures with an appetite like a pig. Immediately, Mr. Trouvelot tried to recover his specimens, and when he couldn’t find them all, out of honor, he informed the state authorities about the incident. Efforts were made to retrieve all the specimens, but enough got away to produce offspring that quickly became a plague to the trees of Massachusetts. The approach of the large, ugly mottled-brown caterpillar was very straightforward. It devoured all the leaves of every tree within its reach.

The gypsy moth spread with alarming rapidity and persistence. In course of time the state authorities of Massachuestts were forced to begin a relentless war upon it, by poisonous sprays and by fire. It was awful! Up to this date (1912) the New England states and the United States Government service have expended in fighting this pest about $7,680,000!

The gypsy moth spread with alarming speed and persistence. Eventually, the state authorities of Massachusetts had no choice but to launch an ongoing battle against it, using toxic sprays and fire. It was terrible! Up to this point (1912), the New England states and the United States government have spent around $7,680,000 fighting this pest!

The spread of this pest has been retarded, but the gypsy moth never will be wholly stamped out. To-day it exists in Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Hampshire, and it is due to reach New York at an early date. It is steadily spreading in three directions from Boston, its original point of departure, and when it strikes the State of New York, we, too, will begin to pay dearly for the Trouvclot experiment. It is said that General S.C. Lawrence, of Medford, Massachusetts, has spent $75,000 in trying to protect his trees from the ravages of this scourge.

The spread of this pest has been slowed down, but the gypsy moth will never be completely eradicated. Today, it is present in Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Hampshire, and it's expected to reach New York soon. It is steadily advancing in three directions from Boston, its original point of departure, and when it hits New York, we too will start to suffer the consequences of the Trouvclot experiment. Reports say that General S.C. Lawrence from Medford, Massachusetts, has spent $75,000 trying to protect his trees from the damage caused by this threat.

The Rabbit Plague In Australia And New Zealand. —The rabbit curse upon Australia and New Zealand is so well known as to require little comment. In this case the introduction was deliberate. In the days when the sheep industry was most prosperous, a patriotic gentleman conceived the idea that the introduction of the rabbit, and its establishment as a wild animal, would be a good thing. He reasoned that it would furnish a good food supply, that it would furnish sport, and being unable to harm any other creature of flesh and blood it was therefore harmless. Accordingly, three pairs of rabbits were imported and set free.

The Rabbit Plague in Australia and New Zealand. —The rabbit problem in Australia and New Zealand is so well known that it hardly needs explaining. In this case, the introduction was intentional. Back when the sheep industry was thriving, a patriotic man thought that bringing in rabbits and establishing them as a wild species would be beneficial. He believed it would provide a good food source and recreational hunting, and since rabbits wouldn’t threaten other animals, he deemed them harmless. So, three pairs of rabbits were brought in and released.

In a short time, the immense number of rabbits that began to overrun the country furnished food for reflection, as well as for the table. A very simple calculation brought out the startling information that, under perfectly favorable conditions, a single pair of rabbits could in three years' time produce progeny amounting to 13,718,000 individuals. Ever since that time, in discussing the rabbits of Australia it has been necessary to speak in millions.

In a short time, the huge number of rabbits that started to take over the country provided food for thought, as well as for meals. A very simple calculation revealed the shocking fact that, under perfectly favorable conditions, a single pair of rabbits could produce about 13,718,000 offspring in just three years. Since then, when discussing the rabbits of Australia, it has been necessary to talk in terms of millions.

"The inhabitants of the colony," says Dr. Richard Lydekker, "soon found that the rabbits were a plague, for they devoured the grass, which was needed for the sheep, the bark of trees, and every kind of fruit and vegetable, until the prospects of the colony became a very serious matter, and ruin seemed inevitable. In New South Wales upwards of 15,000,000 rabbits skins have been exported in a single year; while in thirteen years ending with 1889 no less than 39,000,000 were accounted for in Victoria alone.

"The people of the colony," says Dr. Richard Lydekker, "quickly realized that the rabbits were a huge problem, as they ate up the grass needed for the sheep, the bark of trees, and all sorts of fruits and vegetables, leading to a dire situation for the colony where ruin seemed unavoidable. In New South Wales, over 15,000,000 rabbit skins have been exported in just one year; while in the thirteen years ending in 1889, a staggering 39,000,000 were reported in Victoria alone."

"To prevent the increase of these rodents, the introduction of weasels, stoats, mongooses, etc., has been tried; but it has been found that those carnivores neglected the rabbits and took to feeding on poultry, and thus became as great a nuisance as the animals they were intended to destroy. The attempt to kill them off by the introduction of an epidemic disease has also failed. In order to protect such portions of the country as are still free from rabbits, fences of wire netting have been erected; one of these fences erected by the Government of Victoria extending for a distance of upwards of one hundred and fifty geographical miles. In New Zealand, where the rabbit has been introduced little more than twenty years, its increase has been so enormous, and the destruction it inflicts so great, that in some districts it has actually been a question whether the colonists should not vacate the country rather than attempt to fight against the plague. The average number of rabbit skins exported from New Zealand is now twelve millions."—(Royal Natural History.)

"To stop the rise in these rodents, people have tried bringing in weasels, stoats, mongooses, and others; but it turned out that these carnivores ignored the rabbits and started feeding on poultry, becoming just as much of a problem as the animals they were meant to eliminate. Attempts to wipe them out using an epidemic disease have also failed. To protect areas of the country that are still rabbit-free, wire netting fences have been built; one of these, constructed by the Government of Victoria, stretches over one hundred and fifty geographical miles. In New Zealand, where rabbits have been present for just over twenty years, their population has skyrocketed and the damage they cause is so severe that in some areas, it has actually been debated whether colonists should leave the country instead of trying to combat the infestation. The average number of rabbit skins exported from New Zealand is now twelve million."—(Royal Natural History.)

The Fox Pest In Australia. —And now unfortunate Australia has a new pest, also acquired by importation of an alien species. It is the European fox (Vulpes vulpes). The only redeeming feature about this fresh calamity is found in the fact that the species was not deliberately introduced into Australia for the benefit of the local fauna. Mr. O.W. Rosenhain, of Melbourne, informs me (1912) that about thirty years ago the Hunt Club brought to Australia about twenty foxes, for the promotion of the noble sport of fox hunting. In some untoward manner, the most of those animals escaped. They survived, multiplied, and have provided New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia with a fox pest of the first rank.

Foxes in Australia. —Now, unfortunately, Australia has a new pest, brought in by the importation of an alien species. It's the European fox (Vulpes vulpes). The only silver lining to this new disaster is that the species wasn’t intentionally introduced to Australia to benefit local wildlife. Mr. O.W. Rosenhain, from Melbourne, tells me (1912) that about thirty years ago, the Hunt Club brought around twenty foxes to Australia to promote the noble sport of fox hunting. Somehow, most of those animals escaped. They survived, multiplied, and have created a significant fox problem in New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia.

The destruction of wild bird life and poultry has become so serious that Australia now is making vigorous efforts to exterminate the pest. The government pays ten shillings bounty on fox scalps, besides which each prime fox skin is worth from four to five dollars. It is hoped that these combined values will eliminate the fox pest.

The destruction of wild birdlife and poultry has become such a significant issue that Australia is now making strong efforts to eradicate the problem. The government offers a ten shilling bounty for each fox scalp, and a prime fox skin is worth between four to five dollars. It's hoped that these combined incentives will help get rid of the fox problem.

Regarding foxes in Australia, Mr. W.H.D. Le Souef has this to say in his extremely interesting and valuable book, "Wild Life in Australia," page 146:

Regarding foxes in Australia, Mr. W.H.D. Le Souef says in his very interesting and valuable book, "Wild Life in Australia," page 146:

"We found that foxes were unfortunately plentiful in this district, and in a hollow log that served to shelter some cubs were noticed the remains of ducks, fowls, rabbits, lambs, bandicoots and snakes; so they evidently vary their fare, snakes even not coming amiss. They also sneak on wild ducks that are nesting by the edge of the water among the rushes and tussocky grass, and catch quail also, especially sitting birds. These animals are, and always will be, a great source of trouble in the thickly timbered country and stony ranges, and will gradually, like the rabbit, extend all over Australia. They are evidently not contented with ground game only, as Mr. A.F. Kelly, of Barwonleigh, in Victoria, states: "When riding past a bull-oak tree about twenty-five feet high, with either a magpie's or crow's nest on top. I noticed the nest looked very bulky, and had something red in it. On going nearer I saw a large fox coiled up in it!"

"We found that foxes were unfortunately abundant in this area, and in a hollow log that sheltered some cubs, we noticed the remains of ducks, chickens, rabbits, lambs, bandicoots, and snakes; so they clearly mix up their diet, with snakes being an option too. They also sneak up on wild ducks nesting by the water among the reeds and grassy tufts, and they catch quail as well, especially when they're sitting. These animals are, and always will be, a significant source of trouble in densely wooded areas and rocky ranges, and will gradually, like the rabbit, spread all over Australia. They are evidently not satisfied with just ground animals, as Mr. A.F. Kelly of Barwonleigh in Victoria notes: 'When riding past a bull-oak tree about twenty-five feet high, with either a magpie's or crow's nest on top, I noticed the nest looked very bulky and had something red in it. As I got closer, I saw a large fox curled up in it!'"

The Mongoose. —Circumstances alter cases, and a change of environment sometimes works marvelous changes in the character of an animal species. Now, why should not the gray Indian mongoose (formerly called the ichneumon, (Herpestes griscus)) destroy poultry in India, as it does elsewhere? There is poultry in plenty to be destroyed, but "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi" elects to specialize on the killing of rats, and cobras, and other snakes.

The Mongoose. —Circumstances change situations, and a shift in environment can sometimes create remarkable changes in the behavior of an animal species. So, why shouldn’t the gray Indian mongoose (formerly known as the ichneumon, (Herpestes griscus)) kill poultry in India, like it does in other places? There’s plenty of poultry available to be harmed, but "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi" chooses to focus on hunting rats, cobras, and other snakes.

In his own sphere of influence,—India and the orient,—the mongoose is a fairly decent citizen, and he fits into the time-worn economy of that region. As a destroyer of the thrice-anathema domestic rat, he has no equal in the domain of flesh and blood. His temper is so fierce that one "pet" mongoose has been known to kill a full grown male giant bustard, and put a greyhound to flight.

In his own territory—India and the East—the mongoose is a pretty decent creature, and he fits well into the long-established economy of the area. As a killer of the extremely unwanted domestic rat, he has no rival in the world of living things. His temperament is so intense that one "pet" mongoose has been known to take down a fully grown male giant bustard and send a greyhound running.

In an evil moment (1872) Mr. W.B. Espeut conceived the idea that it would be a good thing to introduce mongooses to the rats of Barbadoes and Jamaica that were pestering the cane-fields to an annoying extent. It was done. The mongooses attacked the rats, cleaned them out, multiplied, and then looked about for more worlds to conquer. Snakes and lizards were few; but they cheerfully killed and devoured all there were. Then, being continuously hungry, they attacked the wild birds and poultry, indiscriminately, and with their usual vigor. I have been told that in Barbadoes "they cleaned out every living thing that they could catch and kill, and then they attacked the sugar-cane." The last count in the indictment may seem hard to believe; but it is a fact that the Indian mongoose often resorts to fruit and vegetable food.

In a moment of bad judgment (1872), Mr. W.B. Espeut thought it would be a good idea to bring mongooses to deal with the rats in Barbados and Jamaica that were infesting the sugar cane fields. So, he did it. The mongooses went after the rats, wiped them out, multiplied, and then looked for more areas to conquer. There weren't many snakes and lizards, but they happily hunted down and ate all the ones there were. Still hungry, they then targeted wild birds and poultry, attacking them without hesitation and with their usual energy. I've heard that in Barbados, "they wiped out every living thing they could catch and kill, and then they went after the sugar cane." The last claim might sound unbelievable, but it's true that the Indian mongoose often eats fruits and vegetables too.

In Jamaica, at the end of the rat-killing period, the planters joyfully estimated that the labors of Herpestes had saved between £500,000 and £750,000 to the industries of that island. That was before the slaughter of wild birds and poultry began. I am told that up to date the damage done by the mongoose far exceeds the value of the benefit it once conferred, but the total has not been computed.

In Jamaica, at the end of the rat-killing period, the planters happily calculated that the efforts of the mongoose had saved between £500,000 and £750,000 for the industries of the island. That was before the killing of wild birds and poultry started. I've heard that to this day, the damage caused by the mongoose far outweighs the benefits it once provided, but the total has not been determined.

Up to this date, the mongoose has invaded and become a destructive pest in Barbadoes, Jamaica, Cuba, St. Vincent, St. Lucia, Trinidad, Nevis, Fiji and all the larger islands of the Hawaiian group. It would require many pages to contain a full account of each introduction, awakening, reckoning of damages and payment of bounties for destruction that the fiendish mongoose has wrought out wherever it has been introduced. The progress of the pest is everywhere the same,—sweeping destruction of rats, snakes, wild birds, small mammals, and finally poultry and vegetables.

Up to now, the mongoose has invaded and become a destructive pest in Barbados, Jamaica, Cuba, St. Vincent, St. Lucia, Trinidad, Nevis, Fiji, and all the larger islands in the Hawaiian group. It would take many pages to provide a full account of each introduction, the ensuing chaos, the damage caused, and the bounties paid for its extermination wherever it has been brought. The pattern of destruction is always the same—widespread devastation of rats, snakes, wild birds, small mammals, and eventually poultry and vegetables.

Every country that now is without the mongoose will do well to shut and guard diligently all the doors by which it might be introduced.

Every country that currently doesn't have the mongoose should make sure to close and carefully guard all the doors through which it could be introduced.

Throughout its range in the western hemisphere, the mongoose is a pest; and the Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture has done well in securing the enactment of a law peremptorily prohibiting the importation of any animals of that species into the United States or any of its colonies. The fierce temper, indomitable courage and vaulting appetite of the mongoose would make its actual introduction in any of the warm portions of the United States a horrible calamity. In the southern states, and all along the Pacific slope clear up to Seattle, it could live, thrive and multiply; and the slaughter that it could and would inflict upon our wild birds generally, especially all those that nest and live on the ground, saying nothing of the slaughter of poultry, would drive the American people crazy.

Throughout its range in the western hemisphere, the mongoose is a pest; and the Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture has done well in securing a law that strictly prohibits the importation of any animals of that species into the United States or any of its territories. The fierce temperament, unyielding courage, and voracious appetite of the mongoose would make its introduction in any warm areas of the United States a terrible disaster. In the southern states and all along the Pacific coast up to Seattle, it could live, thrive, and reproduce; and the destruction it could and would cause to our wild birds, especially those that nest and live on the ground, not to mention the impact on poultry, would drive the American people insane.

Fancy an animal with the murderous ferocity of a mink, the agility of a squirrel, the penetration of a ferret and the cunning of a rat, infesting the thickets and barnyards of this country. The mongoose can live wherever a rat can live, provided it can get a fair amount of animal food. Not for $1,000,000 could any one of the southern or Pacific states afford to have a pair of these little gray fiends imported and set free. If such a calamity ever occurs, all wheels should stop, and [Page 334] every habitant should turn out and hunt for the animals until they are found and pulverized. No matter if it should require a thousand men and $100,000, find them! If not found, the cost to the state will soon be a million a year, with no ending.

Imagine an animal with the violent aggression of a mink, the speed of a squirrel, the stealth of a ferret, and the cleverness of a rat, invading the bushes and barns of this country. The mongoose can thrive anywhere a rat can, as long as it has access to enough food. No amount of money, not even $1,000,000, could convince any southern or Pacific state to import and release a pair of these little gray pests. If such a disaster ever happens, all activities should come to a halt, and every resident should come together to hunt down the creatures until they are captured and destroyed. It doesn’t matter if it takes a thousand people and $100,000, find them! If they’re not caught, the cost to the state will quickly rise to a million a year, with no end in sight.

In spite of the vigilance of our custom house officers, every now and then a Hindoo from some foreign vessel sneaks into the country with a pet mongoose (and they do make great pets!) inside his shirt, or in the bottom of a bag of clothing. Of course, whenever the Department of Agriculture discovers any of these surreptitious animals, they are at once confiscated, and either killed or sent to a public zoological park for safe-keeping. In New York, the director of the Zoological Park is so genuinely concerned about the possibility of the escape of a female mongoose that he has issued two standing orders: All live mongooses offered to us shall at once be purchased, and every female animal shall immediately be chloroformed.

Despite the watchfulness of our customs officers, now and then a Hindu from some foreign ship sneaks into the country with a pet mongoose (and they really do make great pets!) tucked inside his shirt or at the bottom of a bag of clothes. Naturally, whenever the Department of Agriculture discovers these hidden animals, they are immediately confiscated and either killed or sent to a public zoo for safekeeping. In New York, the director of the Zoological Park is truly concerned about the risk of a female mongoose escaping, so he has issued two standing orders: All live mongooses offered to us will be immediately purchased, and every female animal will be chloroformed right away.

If Herpestes griseus ever breaks loose in the United States, the crime shall not justly be chargeable to us.

If Herpestes griseus ever gets loose in the United States, the blame shouldn't just fall on us.

The English Sparrow. —In the United States, the English sparrow is a national sorrow, almost too great to be endured. It is a bird of plain plumage, low tastes, impudent disposition and persistent fertility. Continually does it crowd out its betters, or pugnaciously drive them away, and except on very rare occasions it eats neither insects nor weed seeds. It has no song, and in habits it is a bird of the street and the gutter. There is not one good reason why it should exist in this country. If it were out of the way, our native insect-eaters of song and beauty could return to our lawns and orchards. The English sparrow is a nuisance and a pest, and if it could be returned to the land of its nativity we would gain much.

The House Sparrow. —In the United States, the English sparrow is a national problem, almost too much to bear. It has plain feathers, low standards, a cheeky attitude, and breeds prolifically. It constantly pushes out better birds or aggressively drives them away, and except for very rare moments, it doesn’t eat insects or weed seeds. It doesn’t sing, and it is a bird of the streets and gutters. There's no good reason for it to exist in this country. If it were gone, our native songbirds that eat insects and are beautiful could return to our lawns and gardens. The English sparrow is a nuisance and a pest, and if it could be sent back to its homeland, we would benefit greatly.


[Page 335]
CHAPTER XXXVI
NATIONAL AND STATE GAME PRESERVES, AND BIRD REFUGES

Out West, there is said to be a "feeling" that game and forest conservation has "gone far enough." In Montana, particularly, the National Wool-Growers' Association has for some time been firmly convinced that "the time has come to call a halt." Oh, yes! A halt on the conservation of game and forests; but not on the free grazing of sheep on the public domain. No, not even while those same sheep are busily growing wool that is so fearfully and wonderfully conserved by a sky-high tariff that the truly poor Americans are forced to wear garments made of shoddy because they cannot afford to buy clothing made of wool! (This is the testimony of a responsible clothing merchant, in 1912.)

Out West, people say that the approach to game and forest conservation has "gone far enough." In Montana, especially, the National Wool-Growers' Association has long believed that "it's time to put a stop to it." Oh, sure! A stop on conserving game and forests; but not on letting sheep graze freely on public land. No, not even while those same sheep are producing wool that is so heavily protected by high tariffs that genuinely struggling Americans have to wear cheap clothing because they can't afford wool garments! (This is the statement of a reputable clothing merchant, in 1912.)

We can readily understand the new hue and cry against conservation that the sheep men now are raising. Of course they are against all new game and forest reserves,—unless the woolly hordes are given the right to graze in them!

We can easily see the new uproar against conservation that the sheep farmers are making. Naturally, they oppose all new game and forest reserves—unless their sheep are allowed to graze in them!

Many men of the Great West,—the West beyond the Great Plains,—are afflicted with a desire to do as they please with the natural resources of that region. That is the great curse that to-day rests upon our game. When the nearest game warden is 50 miles away, and big game is only 5 miles away, it is time for that game to take to the tall timber.

Many men in the Great West—the area beyond the Great Plains—struggle with a desire to exploit the natural resources of that region. This is the major issue affecting our wildlife today. When the closest game warden is 50 miles away and big game is only 5 miles out, it’s time for that wildlife to seek shelter in the dense woods.

But in the West, and East and South, there are many men and women who believe in reasonable conservation, and deplore destruction. We have not by any means reached the point where we can think of stopping in the making of game preserves, or forest preserves. Of the former, we have scarcely begun to make. The majority of the states of our Union know of state game preserves only by hearsay. But the time is coming when the states will come forward, and perform the serious duty that they neglect to-day.

But in the West, East, and South, there are many men and women who believe in sensible conservation and regret destruction. We definitely haven't reached the point where we can consider halting the creation of game preserves or forest preserves. As for the former, we’ve barely started. Most of the states in our Union are only familiar with state game preserves through secondhand information. But the time will come when the states will step up and fulfill the important responsibility they are neglecting today.

Let the statesmen of America be not afraid of making too many game preserves! For the next year, one per day would be none too many! Remember, that on one hand we have the Army of Destruction, and on the other the expectant millions of Posterity. No executor or trustee ever erred in safeguarding an estate too carefully. Fifty years hence, if your successors and mine find that too much land has been set aside for the good of the people, they can mighty easily restore any surplus to the public domain, and at a vastly increased valuation. Give Posterity at least one chance to debate the question: "Were our forefathers too liberal in the making of game and forest reserves?"

Let America’s leaders not hesitate to create plenty of game preserves! For the coming year, one per day wouldn’t be too many! Remember, on one side we have the Army of Destruction, and on the other, the hopeful millions of the future. No executor or trustee has ever made a mistake by being too careful in protecting an estate. Fifty years from now, if your successors and mine think that too much land has been set aside for the public good, they can easily return any excess to the public domain, and at a much higher value. Let’s give future generations at least one chance to discuss the question: "Were our ancestors too generous in creating game and forest reserves?"

We can always carve up any useless surplus of the public domain, and restore it to commercial uses; but none of the men of to-day will live long enough to see so strange a proceeding carried into effect.

We can always take any unnecessary surplus from the public domain and put it back to commercial use; but none of the people today will live long enough to see such a strange action put into practice.

The game preserves of the United States government are so small (with the exception of the Yellowstone and Glacier Parks), that very few people ever hear of them, and fewer still know of them in detail. It seems to be quite time that they should be set forth categorically; and it is most earnestly to be hoped that this list soon will be doubled.

The game preserves managed by the United States government are so small (except for Yellowstone and Glacier Parks) that very few people ever hear about them, and even fewer know the details. It seems like the right time to list them clearly, and we can only hope that this list will soon be expanded.

The Yellowstone National Park. —This was the first of the national parks and game preserves of the United States. Some of our game preserves are not exactly national parks, but this is both, by Act of Congress.

Yellowstone National Park. —This was the first national park and game preserve in the United States. Some of our game preserves aren't technically national parks, but this one is both, as established by an Act of Congress.

It is 62 miles long from north to south, 54 miles wide and contains a total area of 3,348 square miles, or 2,142,720 acres. Its western border lies in Idaho, and along its northern border a narrow strip lies in Montana. It is under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior, and it is guarded by a detachment of cavalry from the United States Army. The Superintendent is now a commissioned officer of the United States Army. The business of protecting the game is performed partly by four scouts, who are civilians specially engaged for that purpose, but the number has always been totally inadequate to the work to be performed.

It is 62 miles long from north to south, 54 miles wide, and covers a total area of 3,348 square miles, or 2,142,720 acres. Its western border is in Idaho, and a narrow strip along its northern border is in Montana. It falls under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior and is protected by a detachment of cavalry from the United States Army. The Superintendent is now a commissioned officer of the United States Army. The task of protecting the game is partly handled by four scouts, who are civilians hired specifically for that purpose, but this number has always been completely insufficient for the job that needs to be done.

At least one-half of the public interest attaching to the Yellowstone Park is based upon its wild animals. There, the average visitor sees, for the first time, wild mountain sheep, antelope, mule deer, elk, grizzly bears and white pelicans, roaming free. But for the tragedy of the Park bison herd,—slaughtered by poachers from 1890 to 1893, from 300 head down to 30—visitors would see wild bison also; but now the few wild bison remaining keep as far as possible from the routes of tourist travel. The bison were slaughtered through an inadequate protective force, and (then) utterly inadequate laws.

At least half of the public interest in Yellowstone Park comes from its wild animals. There, the average visitor encounters wild mountain sheep, antelope, mule deer, elk, grizzly bears, and white pelicans for the first time, all roaming freely. However, due to the tragic decline of the Park's bison herd—decimated by poachers from 1890 to 1893, falling from 300 to just 30—visitors no longer see these wild bison. The few bison that are left now try to avoid tourist paths as much as possible. The bison were killed because of an insufficient number of protective officials and completely inadequate laws.

Lieut.-Col. L.M. Brett, U.S.A., Superintendent of the Yellowstone Park advises me (July 29, 1912) that the wild big game in the Yellowstone Park in the summer of 1912, is as shown below, based on actual counts and estimates of the Park scouts, and particularly Scout McBride. "The estimates of buffalo, elk, antelope, deer, sheep and bear are based on actual counts, or very close observations, and are pretty nearly correct." (Col. Brett).

Lieut.-Col. L.M. Brett, U.S.A., Superintendent of Yellowstone Park, informed me on July 29, 1912, that the wild big game in Yellowstone Park during the summer of 1912 is detailed below, based on actual counts and estimates from the Park scouts, especially Scout McBride. "The estimates of buffalo, elk, antelope, deer, sheep, and bear are based on actual counts or very close observations, and are quite accurate." (Col. Brett).

Wild Buffalo 49
Moose 550
Elk (in summer) 35,000
Antelope 500
Mountain Sheep 210
Mule Deer 400
White-tailed Deer 100
Grizzly Bears 50
Black Bears 100 [Page 337]
Pumas 100
Gray Wolves none
Coyotes 400
Pelicans 1,000

The actual count of 49 wild bison in the Park, 10 of which are calves of 1912, will be to all friends of the bison a delightful surprise. Heretofore the little band had seemed to be stationary, which if true would soon mean a decline.

The current count of 49 wild bison in the Park, including 10 calves born in 1912, will be a pleasant surprise for all bison enthusiasts. Until now, this small group seemed to be stuck in one place, which, if it were true, would soon lead to a decline.

The history of the wild game of the Yellowstone Park is blackened by two occurrences, and one existing fact. The fact is: the town of Gardiner is situated on the northern boundary of the Park, in the State of Montana. In Gardiner there are a number of men, armed with rifles, who toward game have the gray-wolf quality of mercy.

The history of the wild game in Yellowstone Park is marked by two events and one current fact. The fact is: the town of Gardiner is located on the northern border of the Park, in the State of Montana. In Gardiner, there are several men carrying rifles who show a wolf-like quality of mercy toward the game.

The first stain is the massacre of the 270 wild bison for their heads and robes, already noted. The second blot is the equally savage slaughter in the early winter of 1911, by some of the people of Gardiner, reinforced by so-called sportsmen from other parts of the state, of all the park elk they could kill,—bulls, cows and calves,—because a large band wandered across the line into the shambles of Gardiner, on Buffalo Flats.

The first mark is the killing of 270 wild bison for their heads and hides, as previously mentioned. The second mark is the equally brutal slaughter in early winter 1911, by some people from Gardiner, joined by so-called hunters from other areas of the state, of all the elk in the park they could hunt—bulls, cows, and calves—because a large herd crossed the line into the killing grounds of Gardiner, on Buffalo Flats.

If the people of Gardiner can not refrain from slaughtering the game of the Park—the very animals annually seen by 20,000 visitors to the Park,—then it is time for the American people to summon the town of Gardiner before the bar of public opinion, to show cause why the town should not be wiped off the map.

If the people of Gardiner can’t stop killing the wildlife in the Park—the very animals that 20,000 visitors come to see every year—then it’s time for the American people to hold the town of Gardiner accountable in public opinion and explain why it shouldn’t be erased from the map.

The 35,000 elk that summer in the Park are compelled in winter to migrate to lower altitudes in order to find grass that is not under two feet of snow. In the winter of 1911-12, possibly 5,000 went south, into Jackson Hole, and 3,000 went northward into Montana. The sheep-grazing north of the Park, and the general settlement by ranchmen of Jackson Hole, have deprived the elk herds of those regions of their natural food. For several years past, up to and including the winter of 1910-11, some thousands of weak and immature elk have perished in the Jackson Hole country, from starvation and exposure. The ranchmen of that region have had terrible times,—in witnessing the sufferings of thousands of elk tamed by hunger, and begging in piteous dumb show for the small and all-too-few haystacks of the ranchmen.

The 35,000 elk that spend the summer in the Park have to migrate to lower altitudes in the winter to find grass that isn't buried under two feet of snow. During the winter of 1911-12, around 5,000 went south into Jackson Hole, and 3,000 headed north into Montana. The sheep grazing north of the Park and the general settlement by ranchers in Jackson Hole have taken away the elk herds' natural food in those areas. For several years, up to and including the winter of 1910-11, thousands of weak and young elk have died in the Jackson Hole area from starvation and exposure. The ranchers in that region have faced terrible challenges witnessing the suffering of thousands of elk, weakened by hunger, pleading silently for the small and far too few haystacks of the ranchers.

The people of Jackson Hole, headed by S.N. Leek, the famous photographer and lecturer on those elk herds, have done all that they could do in the premises. The spirit manifested by them has been the exact reverse of that manifested in Gardiner. To their everlasting credit, they have kept domestic sheep out of the Jackson Valley,—by giving the owners of invading herds "hours" in which to get their sheep "all out, and over the western range."

The people of Jackson Hole, led by S.N. Leek, the well-known photographer and lecturer on the elk herds, have done everything they can. Their attitude has been completely different from that of Gardiner. To their lasting credit, they have prevented domestic sheep from entering the Jackson Valley by giving owners of invading herds specific timeframes to move their sheep “all out and over the western range.”

In 1909, the State of Wyoming spent in feeding starving elk $5,000
In 1911, the State of Wyoming spent in feeding starving elk 5,000[Page 338]
In 1911, the U.S. Government appropriated for feeding starving elk, and exporting elk $20,000
In 1912, the Camp-Fire Club of Detroit gave, for feeding hungry elk 100
In 1910-11, about 3,000 elk perished in Jackson Hole
In 1911-12, Mr. Leek's photographs of the elk herds showed an alarming absence of mature bulls, indicating that now the most of the breeding is done by immature males. This means the sure deterioration of the species.

The prompt manner in which Congress responded in the late winter of 1911 to a distress call in behalf of the starving elk, is beyond all ordinary terms of praise. It was magnificent. In fear and trembling, Congress was asked, through Senator Lodge, to appropriate $5,000. Congress and Senator Lodge made it $20,000; and for the first time the legislature of Wyoming appealed for national aid to save the joint-stock herds of Wyoming and the Yellowstone Park.

The quick way Congress reacted in late winter of 1911 to a call for help for the starving elk is truly impressive. It was remarkable. Congress, through Senator Lodge, was requested to allocate $5,000. Instead, Congress and Senator Lodge raised it to $20,000; and for the first time, the Wyoming legislature sought national aid to save the joint-stock herds of Wyoming and Yellowstone Park.

Glacier Park, Montana. —In the wild and picturesque mountains of northwestern Montana, covering both sides of the great Continental Divide, there is a region that has been splendidly furnished by the hand of Nature. It is a bewildering maze of thundering peaks, plunging valleys, evergreen forests, glistening glaciers, mirror lakes and roaring mountain streams. Its leading citizens are white mountain goats, mountain sheep, moose, mule deer and white-tailed deer, and among those present are black and grizzly bears galore.

Glacier National Park, Montana. —In the beautiful and rugged mountains of northwestern Montana, stretching across both sides of the great Continental Divide, lies a region that Nature has crafted beautifully. It's a stunning mix of towering peaks, deep valleys, evergreen forests, sparkling glaciers, reflective lakes, and rushing mountain streams. The main inhabitants are white mountain goats, mountain sheep, moose, mule deer, and white-tailed deer, along with plenty of black and grizzly bears.

Commercially, the 1,400 square miles of Glacier Park, even with its 60 glaciers and 260 lakes, are worth exactly the price of its big trees, and not a penny more. For mining, agriculture, horticulture and stock-raising, it is a cipher. As a transcendant pleasure ground and recreation wilderness for ninety millions of people, it is worth ninety millions of dollars, and not a penny less. It is a pleasure park of which the greatest of the nations of the earth,—whichever that may be,—might well be overbearingly proud; and its accessibility is almost unbelievable until seen.

Commercially, the 1,400 square miles of Glacier Park, with its 60 glaciers and 260 lakes, are only worth the value of its big trees, and not a cent more. It's meaningless for mining, farming, gardening, or livestock. As a significant recreational area and wilderness for ninety million people, it's worth at least ninety million dollars, and not a cent less. It’s a pleasure park that any of the greatest nations on Earth—whoever that may be—would be justifiably proud of; and its accessibility is nearly unbelievable until you see it.

This park is bounded on the south by the Great Northern Railway, on the east by the Blackfoot Indian Reservation, on the north by Alberta and British Columbia, and on the west by West Fork of the Flathead River. Horizontally, it contains 1,400 square miles; but as the goat climbs, its area is at least double that. Its valleys are filled and its lakes are encircled by grand forests of Douglas fir, hemlock, spruce, white pine, cedar and larch; and if ever they are destroyed by fire, it will be a national calamity, a century long.

This park is bordered to the south by the Great Northern Railway, to the east by the Blackfoot Indian Reservation, to the north by Alberta and British Columbia, and to the west by the West Fork of the Flathead River. It covers 1,400 square miles horizontally, but when you factor in the elevation, its area is at least double that. Its valleys are filled, and its lakes are surrounded by majestic forests of Douglas fir, hemlock, spruce, white pine, cedar, and larch. If these forests were ever to be destroyed by fire, it would be a national disaster lasting a century.

So long as the American people keep out of the poorhouse, let there be no lumber-cutting vandalism in that park, destroying the beauty of every acre of forest that is touched by axe or saw. The greatest beauty of those forests is the forest floor, which lumbering operations would utterly destroy.

As long as the American people stay out of poverty, there should be no reckless logging in that park, ruining the beauty of every inch of forest affected by axe or saw. The true beauty of those forests lies in the forest floor, which logging would completely ruin.

Never mind if there is "ripe timber" there! The American nation is not suffering for the dollars that those lovely forest giants would fetch by board measure. What if a tree does fall now and then from old age! We can stand the expense. If Posterity a hundred years hence finds itself lumberless, and wishes to use those trees, then let Posterity pay the price, and take them. We are not suffering for them; and our duty is to save them inviolate, and hand them down as a heritage that we proudly transmit unimpaired.

Forget about the "ripe timber" over there! The American people aren't in need of the cash those beautiful trees would bring if they were cut down. So what if an occasional tree falls due to old age? We can handle that cost. If future generations, a hundred years from now, find themselves without lumber and want to use those trees, then let them pay for it and take them. We're not in need of them, and our responsibility is to protect them untouched and pass them down as a legacy that we can proudly share intact.

UNITED STATES NATIONAL GAME PRESERVES

U.S. National Game Preserves

and Five Pacific Bird Refuges

and Five Pacific Bird Reserves

The friends of wild life are particularly interested in Glacier Park as a national game reservoir, and refuge for wild life. On the north, in Alberta, it is soon to be extended by Waterton Lakes Park.

The wildlife enthusiasts are especially interested in Glacier Park as a national game reserve and a sanctuary for wildlife. To the north, in Alberta, it will soon be expanded by Waterton Lakes Park.

When I visited Glacier Park, in 1909, with Frederick H. Kennard and Charles H. Conrad, I procured from three intelligent guides their best estimates of the amount of big game then in the Park. The guides were Thomas H. Scott, Josiah Rogers and Walter S. Gibb. [L]

When I visited Glacier Park in 1909 with Frederick H. Kennard and Charles H. Conrad, I got the best estimates from three knowledgeable guides about the amount of big game in the Park at that time. The guides were Thomas H. Scott, Josiah Rogers, and Walter S. Gibb. [L]

They compared notes, and finally agreed upon these figures:

They shared their insights and ultimately settled on these numbers:

Elk 200
Moose 2,500
Mountain Sheep 700
Mountain Goats 10,500
Grizzly Bears 1,000 to 1,500
Black Bears 2,500 to 3,000

As previously stated, one of the surprising features of this new wonder land is its accessibility. The Great Northern lands you at Belton. A ride of three miles over a good road through a beautiful forest brings you to the foot of Lake McDonald, and in one hour more by boat you are at the hotels at the head of the lake. At that point you are within three hours' horse-back ride of Sperry Glacier and the marvelous panorama that unrolls before you from the top of Lincoln Peak. At the foot of that Peak we saw a big, wild white mountain goat: and another one watched us climb up to the Sperry Glacier.

As mentioned earlier, one of the surprising features of this incredible place is how accessible it is. The Great Northern trains you to Belton. A three-mile ride on a well-maintained road through a stunning forest gets you to Lake McDonald, and in just another hour by boat, you reach the hotels at the lake's head. From there, you're only a three-hour horseback ride away from Sperry Glacier and the amazing view that awaits you at the top of Lincoln Peak. At the base of that peak, we spotted a large, wild white mountain goat, and another one watched us as we climbed up to the Sperry Glacier.

Mt. Olympus National Monument. —For at least six years the advocates of the preservation of American wild life and forests vainly desired that the grand mountain territory around Mount Olympus, in northwestern Washington, should be established as a national forest and game preserve. In addition to the preservation of the forests, it was greatly desired that the remnant bands of Olympic wapiti (described as Cervus roosevelti) should be perpetuated. It now contains 1,975 specimens of that variety. In Congress, two determined efforts were made in behalf of the region referred to, but both were defeated by the enemies of forests and wild life.

Mount Olympus National Monument. —For at least six years, advocates for the preservation of American wildlife and forests have been trying, without success, to get the vast mountain area around Mount Olympus, in northwestern Washington, designated as a national forest and game preserve. Along with protecting the forests, there was a strong desire to ensure the survival of the remaining Olympic wapiti (known as Cervus roosevelti). There are currently 1,975 individuals of that species. In Congress, two serious attempts were made to support this region, but both were blocked by those opposed to forests and wildlife.

In an auspicious moment, Dr. T.S. Palmer, Assistant Chief of the Biological Survey, Department of Agriculture, thought of a law under which it would be both proper and right to bring the desired preserve into existence. The law referred to expressly clothes the President of the United States with power to preserve any monumental feature of nature which it clearly is the duty of the state to preserve for all time from the hands of the spoilers.

In a fortunate moment, Dr. T.S. Palmer, Assistant Chief of the Biological Survey at the Department of Agriculture, came up with a law that would make it both appropriate and just to create the desired preserve. This law specifically gives the President of the United States the authority to protect any notable natural feature that the state has a clear obligation to safeguard from destruction forever.

With the enthusiastic approval and assistance of Representative William E. Humphrey, of Seattle, Dr. Palmer set in motion the machinery [Page 341] necessary to the carrying of the matter before the President in proper form, and kept it going, with the result that on March 2, 1909, President Roosevelt affixed his signature to the document that closed the circuit.

With the enthusiastic approval and help of Representative William E. Humphrey from Seattle, Dr. Palmer set in motion the machinery [Page 341] needed to present the matter to the President properly and kept it moving, resulting in President Roosevelt signing the document that completed the circuit on March 2, 1909.

Thus was created the Mount Olympus National Monument, preserving forever 608,640 acres of magnificent mountains, valleys, glaciers, streams and forests, and all the wild creatures living therein and thereon. The people of the state of Washington have good reason to rejoice in the fact that their most highly-prized scenic wonderland, and the last survivors of the wapiti in that state, are now preserved for all coming time. At the same time, we congratulate Dr. Palmer on the brilliant success of his initiative.

Thus was created the Mount Olympus National Monument, preserving forever 608,640 acres of stunning mountains, valleys, glaciers, streams, and forests, along with all the wildlife living in and around them. The people of Washington have every reason to celebrate the fact that their most treasured scenic wonderland, along with the last remaining wapiti in the state, are now protected for future generations. At the same time, we congratulate Dr. Palmer on the incredible success of his initiative.

The Superior National Game And Forest Preserve. —The people of Minnesota long desired that a certain great tract of wilderness in the extreme northern portion of that state, now well stocked with moose and deer, should be established as a game and forest preserve. Unfortunately, however, the national government could go no farther than to withdraw the lands (and waters) from entry, and declare it a forest reserve. At the right moment, some bright genius proposed that the national government should by executive order create a "forest reserve," and then that the legislature of Minnesota should pass an act providing that every national forest of that state should also be regarded as a state game preserve!

The Superior National Game and Forest Preserve. —The people of Minnesota had long hoped that a large stretch of wilderness in the far northern part of the state, which is now home to many moose and deer, would be designated as a game and forest preserve. Unfortunately, the national government could only go as far as to withdraw the lands (and waters) from entry and declare it a forest reserve. At the right time, someone came up with the idea that the national government should create a "forest reserve" through an executive order, and then the Minnesota legislature should pass a law stating that every national forest in the state should also be considered a state game preserve!

Both those things were done,—almost as soon as said! Mr. Carlos Avery, the Executive Agent of the Board of Game and Fish Commissioners of Minnesota is entitled to great credit for the action of his state, and we have to thank Mr. Gifford Pinchot and President Roosevelt for the executive action that represented the first half of the effort.

Both of those things were done—almost as soon as they were mentioned! Mr. Carlos Avery, the Executive Agent of the Board of Game and Fish Commissioners of Minnesota, deserves a lot of credit for his state's actions, and we have to thank Mr. Gifford Pinchot and President Roosevelt for the executive action that represented the first part of the effort.

The new Superior Preserve is valuable as a game and forest reserve, and nothing else. It is a wilderness of small lakes, marshes, creeks, hummocks of land, scrubby timber, and practically nothing of commercial value. But the wilderness contains many moose, and zoologically, it is for all practical purposes a moose preserve.

The new Superior Preserve is important as a game and forest reserve, and nothing more. It’s a wild area of small lakes, marshes, streams, patches of land, and scrappy trees, with hardly anything of commercial value. However, this wilderness is home to many moose, making it essentially a moose preserve from a zoological standpoint.

In it, in 1908 Mr. Avery saw fifty-one moose in three days, Mr. Fullerton saw 183 in nine days, and Mr. Fullerton estimated the total number of moose in Minnesota as a whole at 10,000 head.

In 1908, Mr. Avery spotted fifty-one moose over three days, while Mr. Fullerton counted 183 in nine days. Mr. Fullerton estimated that the total number of moose in Minnesota was around 10,000.

In area it contains 1,420,000 acres, and the creation of this great preserve was accomplished on April 13, 1909.

In size, it covers 1,420,000 acres, and the establishment of this large preserve was completed on April 13, 1909.

The Wichita National Game Preserve. —In the Wichita Mountains, of southwestern Oklahoma, there is a National game preserve containing 57,120 acres. On this preserve is a fenced bison range and a herd of thirty-nine American bison which owe their existence to the initiative of the New York Zoological Society. On March 25, 1905, the Society proposed to the National Government the founding of a range and herd, on a basis that was entirely new. To the Society it seemed desirable that for the encouragement of Congress in the preservation of species that [Page 342] are threatened with extermination, the scientific corporations of America, and private individuals also, should do something more than to offer advice and exhortations to the government.

The Wichita National Wildlife Refuge. —In the Wichita Mountains of southwestern Oklahoma, there’s a national game preserve that covers 57,120 acres. This preserve includes a fenced area for bison and a herd of thirty-nine American bison, which were saved thanks to the efforts of the New York Zoological Society. On March 25, 1905, the Society proposed to the National Government the creation of a range and herd based on a completely new approach. The Society believed it was important for scientific organizations in America, as well as private individuals, to take action beyond just advising and urging the government to help protect species that are at risk of extinction.

Accordingly, the Zoological Society offered to present to the Government, delivered on the ground in Oklahoma, a herd of fifteen pure-blood bison as the nucleus of a new national herd, provided Congress would furnish a satisfactory fenced range, and maintain the herd. The offer was at once accepted by Hon. James Wilson, Secretary of Agriculture, and the Society was invited to propose a site for a range. The Society sent a representative to the Wichita National Forest Reserve, who recommended a range, and made a report upon it, which the Society adopted.

Accordingly, the Zoological Society offered to present to the Government, delivered on-site in Oklahoma, a herd of fifteen purebred bison as the foundation for a new national herd, as long as Congress would provide a suitable fenced area and take care of the herd. The offer was quickly accepted by Hon. James Wilson, Secretary of Agriculture, and the Society was asked to suggest a location for the range. The Society sent a representative to the Wichita National Forest Reserve, who recommended a site and submitted a report on it, which the Society approved.

By act of Congress the range was at once established and fenced. Its area is twelve square miles (9,760 acres). In October, 1908, the Zoological Society took from its herd in the Zoological Park nine female and six male bison, and delivered them at the bison range. There were many predictions that all those bison would die of Texas fever within one year; but the parties most interested persisted in trying conclusions with the famous tick of Texas.

By an act of Congress, the range was quickly set up and fenced. It covers an area of twelve square miles (9,760 acres). In October 1908, the Zoological Society took nine female and six male bison from its herd in the Zoological Park and moved them to the bison range. Many predicted that all those bison would die from Texas fever within a year; however, those most involved continued to challenge the notorious tick of Texas.

Mr. Frank Rush was appointed Warden of the new National Bison Range, and his management has been so successful that only two of the bison died of the fever, the disease has been stamped out, and the herd now contains thirty-nine head. Within five years it should reach the one-hundred mark. Elk, deer and antelope have been placed in the range, and all save the antelope are doing well. The Wichita Bison Range is an unqualified success.

Mr. Frank Rush was appointed Warden of the new National Bison Range, and his management has been so successful that only two bison died from the fever, the disease has been eliminated, and the herd now has thirty-nine animals. Within five years, it should reach one hundred. Elk, deer, and antelope have been introduced to the range, and all except the antelope are thriving. The Wichita Bison Range is a complete success.

The Montana National Bison Range. —The opening of the Flathead Indian Reservation to settlement, in 1909, afforded a golden opportunity to locate in that region another national bison herd. Accordingly, in 1908, the American Bison Society formulated a plan by which the establishment of such a range and herd might be brought about. That plan was successfully carried into effect, in 1909 and '10.

The Montana Bison Range. —The opening of the Flathead Indian Reservation to settlement in 1909 created a great opportunity to establish another national bison herd in that area. So, in 1908, the American Bison Society developed a plan to create such a range and herd. That plan was successfully implemented in 1909 and '10.

The Bison Society proposed to the national government to donate a herd of at least twenty-five bison, provided Congress would purchase a range, fence it and maintain the herd. The offer was immediately accepted, and with commendable promptness Congress appropriated $40,000 with which to purchase the range, and fence it. The Bison Society examined various sites, and finally recommended what was regarded as an ideal location situated near Ravalli, Montana, north of the Jocko River and Northern Pacific Railway, and east of the Flathead River. The nearest stations are Ravalli and Dixon.

The Bison Society proposed to the national government to donate a herd of at least twenty-five bison, on the condition that Congress would buy a range, fence it, and take care of the herd. The offer was quickly accepted, and Congress promptly allocated $40,000 to purchase and fence the range. The Bison Society reviewed several sites and ultimately recommended what was seen as an ideal location near Ravalli, Montana, just north of the Jocko River and Northern Pacific Railway, and east of the Flathead River. The nearest stations are Ravalli and Dixon.

The area of the range is about twenty-nine square miles (18,521 acres) and for the purpose that it is to serve it is beautiful and perfect beyond compare. In it the bison herd requires no winter feeding whatever.

The area of the range is about twenty-nine square miles (18,521 acres) and for the purpose it serves, it's beautiful and unmatched. In this area, the bison herd needs no winter feeding at all.

In 1910 the Bison Society raised by subscription a fund of $10,526, and with it purchased 37 very perfect pure-blood bison from the famous Conrad herd at Kalispell, 22 of which were females. One gift bison was added by Mr. and Mrs. Charles Goodnight, two were presented by the [Page 343] estate of Charles Conrad, and three were presented from the famous Corbin herd, at Newport, N.H., by the Blue Mountain Forest Association.

In 1910, the Bison Society raised a total of $10,526 through donations and used this money to buy 37 high-quality pure-blood bison from the renowned Conrad herd in Kalispell, 22 of which were female. An additional bison was donated by Mr. and Mrs. Charles Goodnight, two were given by the [Page 343] estate of Charles Conrad, and three came from the famous Corbin herd in Newport, N.H., donated by the Blue Mountain Forest Association.

Starting with that nucleus (of 43 head) in 1910, the herd has already (1912) increased to 80 head. The herd came through the severe winter of 1911-1912 without having been fed any hay whatever, and the founders of it confidently expect to live to see it increase to one thousand head.

Starting with that core group of 43 in 1910, the herd has already grown to 80 by 1912. The herd survived the harsh winter of 1911-1912 without any hay being fed to them, and the founders confidently expect to see it expand to one thousand.

The Grand Canyon National Game Preserve of northern Arizona, embraces the entire Grand Canyon of the Colorado River, for a meandering distance of 101 miles, and adjacent territory to an extent of 2,333 square miles (1,492,928 acres). Owing to certain conditions, natural and otherwise, it is not the finest place in the world for the peaceful increase of wild game. The Canyon contains a few mountain sheep, and mule deer, but Buckskin Mountain, on the northwestern side, is reeking with mountain lions and gray wolves, and both those species should be shot out of the entire Grand Canyon National Forest. It was on Buckskin and the western wall of the Canyon itself that "Buffalo" Jones, Mr. Charles S. Bird, and their party caught nine live mountain lions, in 1909.

The Grand Canyon National Park in northern Arizona spans the entire length of the Grand Canyon of the Colorado River, stretching 101 miles, along with an adjacent area of 2,333 square miles (1,492,928 acres). Due to various natural and other factors, it’s not the best place in the world for the peaceful growth of wildlife. The Canyon is home to a few mountain sheep and mule deer, but Buckskin Mountain, on the northwestern side, is full of mountain lions and gray wolves, and both species should be eliminated from the entire Grand Canyon National Forest. It was on Buckskin and the western wall of the Canyon itself that "Buffalo" Jones, Mr. Charles S. Bird, and their group captured nine live mountain lions in 1909.

I regret to say that "Buffalo" Jones's catalo experiment on the Kaibab Plateau seems to have met an untimely and disappointing fate. For three years the bison and domestic cattle crossed, and produced a number of cataloes; but in 1911, practically the whole lot was wiped off the earth by cattle rustlers! Mr. Jones thinks that it was guerrillas from southern Utah who murdered his enterprise, partly for the reason that no other persons were within striking distance of the herd.

I’m sorry to report that "Buffalo" Jones's catalo experiment on the Kaibab Plateau has unfortunately ended in failure. For three years, bison and domestic cattle interbred, creating several cataloes; however, in 1911, nearly all of them were wiped out by cattle rustlers! Mr. Jones believes that it was guerrillas from southern Utah who sabotaged his efforts, partly because there were no other people nearby to protect the herd.

Mount Rainier National Park. —This fine forest park is the great summer outing ground of the people of the state of Washington. Its area is 324 square miles, and as its name implies it embraces Mount Rainier. Easily accessible from Seattle and Tacoma, and fairly well—though not adequately—provided with roads, trails, tent camps, hotels and livery transportation, it is really the Yellowstone Park of the Northwest.

Mount Rainier National Park. —This beautiful forest park is the main summer getaway for the people of Washington state. It covers 324 square miles and, as its name suggests, includes Mount Rainier. It’s easy to reach from Seattle and Tacoma and has a good, though not adequate, network of roads, trails, campgrounds, hotels, and transportation services. It truly is the Yellowstone Park of the Northwest.

The Yosemite National Park in California is so well known that no description of it is necessary. Its area is 1,124 square miles (719,622 acres). Its great value lies in its scenery, but along with that it is a sanctuary for such of the wild mammals and birds of California as will not wander beyond its borders to the certain death that awaits everything that may legally be killed in that state.

Yosemite National Park in California is so famous that it doesn't need any description. Its area is 1,124 square miles (719,622 acres). Its real value comes from its breathtaking scenery, but it also serves as a refuge for wild mammals and birds of California that don’t venture outside its boundaries to face the certain death that awaits everything that can be legally hunted in the state.

Crater Lake National Park. —Like all the National Parks of America generally, this one also is a game sanctuary. It is situated on the summit of the Cascade Mountains of Oregon. The wonderful Crater Lake itself is 62 miles from Klamath Falls, 83 miles from Ashland, and it is 6 miles long, 4 miles wide and 200 feet deep. This National Park was created by Act of Congress in 1902. Its area is 249 square miles (159,360 acres), and it contains Columbian black-tailed deer, black bear, the silver-gray squirrel, and many birds, chiefly members of the grouse family. Owing to its lofty elevation, there are few ducks.

Crater Lake National Park. —Like all the National Parks in America, this one is also a wildlife sanctuary. It’s located at the top of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon. The stunning Crater Lake itself is 62 miles from Klamath Falls, 83 miles from Ashland, and measures 6 miles long, 4 miles wide, and 200 feet deep. This National Park was established by an Act of Congress in 1902. It covers an area of 249 square miles (159,360 acres) and is home to Columbian black-tailed deer, black bears, silver-gray squirrels, and many birds, mostly members of the grouse family. Because of its high elevation, there are few ducks.

The Sequoia And General Grant National Parks were created for the special purpose of preserving the famous groves of "big trees," (Sequoia gigantea). The former is in Tulare County, the latter in Tulare and Fresno counties, California, on the western slope of the Sierra Nevadas. The area of Sequoia Park is 169,605 acres, and that of General Grant Park is 2,560 acres. They are under the control of the Interior Department. These Parks are important bird refuges, and Mr. Walter Fry, Forest Ranger, reports in them the presence of 261 species of birds, none of which may be hunted or shot. Into Sequoia Park 20 dwarf elk and 84 wild turkeys have been introduced, the former from the herd of Miller and Lux.

Sequoia and General Grant National Parks were established to specifically protect the famous groves of "big trees," (Sequoia gigantea). The former is located in Tulare County, and the latter spans Tulare and Fresno counties in California, on the western slope of the Sierra Nevadas. Sequoia Park covers an area of 169,605 acres, while General Grant Park is 2,560 acres. Both parks are managed by the Department of the Interior. These parks serve as significant bird refuges, and Mr. Walter Fry, Forest Ranger, reports that they are home to 261 species of birds, none of which can be hunted or shot. In Sequoia Park, 20 dwarf elk and 84 wild turkeys have been introduced, with the elk coming from the herd of Miller and Lux.


Other National Parks

Other National Parks

Sully Hills National Park, at Devil's Lake (Fort Totten), North Dakota. Area 960 acres.

Sully Hills National Park, at Devil's Lake (Fort Totten), North Dakota. Size 960 acres.

Platt National Park, Sulphur Springs, Oklahoma; on account of many mineral springs. Area 848 acres.

Platt National Park, Sulphur Springs, Oklahoma; due to its numerous mineral springs. Area 848 acres.

Mesa Verde National Park, Southwestern Colorado; on account of cliff dwellings, and wonderful cliff and canyon scenery. Area, 66 square miles.

Mesa Verde National Park, Southwestern Colorado; known for its cliff dwellings, stunning cliffs, and beautiful canyon views. Area, 66 square miles.


National Monuments

National Parks

Under a special act of Congress, the President of the United States has the power forever to set aside from private ownership and occupation any important natural scenery, or curiosity, or wonderland, the preservation of which may fairly be regarded as of National importance, and a duty to the whole people of the United States. This is accomplished by presidential proclamation creating a "national monument."

Under a special act of Congress, the President of the United States has the permanent authority to protect key natural landscapes, curiosities, or wonderlands that can be seen as important to the nation, as a responsibility to all the people of the United States. This is done through a presidential proclamation that establishes a "national monument."

Under the terms of this act, 28 national monuments have been created, up to 1912, of which 17 are under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior, and 11 are managed by the Department of Agriculture. The full list is as follows:

Under the terms of this act, 28 national monuments have been created, up to 1912, of which 17 are overseen by the Department of the Interior, and 11 are managed by the Department of Agriculture. The full list is as follows:

Alaska: Colorado: South Dakota:
 Sitka  Wheeler  Jewel Cave
 Colorado
Arizona:
 Montezuma Castle Montana: Utah:
 Petrified Forest  Lewis & Clark Cavern  Natural Bridges
 Tonto  Big Hole Battlefield  Mukuntuweap
 Grand Canyon  Rainbow Bridge
 Tumacacori
 Navajo New Mexico:
 El Morro Washington:
California:  Chaco Canyon  Mount Olympus
 Lassen Peak  Gila Cliff Dwellings
 Cinder Cove  Gran Quivira
 Muir Woods Wyoming:
 Pinnacles Oregon:  Devil's Tower
 Devil's Postpile  Oregon Caves  Shoshone Cavern

The National Bird Refuges. —Says Dr. T.S. Palmer [M] : "National bird reservations have been established during the last ten years by Executive order for the purpose of affording protection to important breeding colonies of water birds, or to furnish refuges for migratory species on their northern or southern flights, or during winter. With few exceptions these reservations are either small rocky islets or tracts of marsh land of no agricultural value."

The National Wildlife Refuges. —Dr. T.S. Palmer says [M] : "In the last ten years, national bird reserves have been set up by executive order to protect key breeding colonies of water birds, to provide safe havens for migratory species during their northward or southward journeys, or during winter. With a few exceptions, these reserves are either small rocky islands or marshlands that aren't suitable for farming."

These reservations are of immense value to bird life, and their creation represents the highest possible wisdom in utilizing otherwise valueless portions of the national domain. Dr. Palmer's alphabetical list of them is as follows, numbered in the order of their creation:

These reservations are extremely valuable to bird life, and their establishment reflects the best possible judgment in making use of otherwise worthless areas of the national land. Dr. Palmer's alphabetical list of them is as follows, numbered in the order of their creation:

Belle Fourche, S. Dak. 34
Bering Sea, Alaska 44
Bogoslof, Alaska 51
Breton Island, La. 2
Bumping Lake, Wash. 39
Carlsbad, N. Mex. 31
Chase Lake, N. Dak. 20
Clealum, Wash. 38
Clear Lake, Cal. 52
Cold Springs, Oreg. 33
Conconully, Wash. 40
Copalis Rock, Wash. 13
Culebra, P. R. 48
Deer Flat, Idaho 29
East Park, Cal. 28
East Timhalier, La. 14
Farailon, Cal. 49
Flattery Rocks, Wash. 11
Forrester Island, Alaska 53
Green Bay, Wis. 56
Hawaiian Is., Hawaii 26
Hazy Islands, Alaska 54
Huron Islands, Mich. 4
Indian Key, Fla. 7
Island Bay, Fla. 24
Kachess, Wash. 37
Kecchelus, Wash. 36
Key West, Fla. 17
Klamath Lake, Oreg. 18
Loch-Katrine, Wyo. 25
Malheur Lake, Oreg. 19
Matlacha Pass, Fla. 23
Minidoka, Idaho 43
Mosquito Inlet, Fla. 15
Niobrara, Nebr. 55
Palma Sola, Fla. 22
Passage Key, Fla. 6
Pathfinder, Wyo. 41
Pelican Island, Fla. 1
Pine Island, Fla. 21
Pribilof, Alaska 50
Quillayute N'dles, Alaska 12
Rio Grande, N. Mex. 32
St. Lazaria, Alaska 46
Salt River, Ariz. 27
Shell Keys, La. 9
Shoshone, Wyo. 42
Siskiwit, Mich. 5
Strawberry Valley, Utah 35
Stump Lake, N. Dak. 3
Tern Islands, La. 8
Three Arch Rocks, Oreg. 10
Tortugas Keys, Fla. 16
Tuxedni, Alaska 45
Willow Creek, Mont. 30
Yukon Delta, Alaska 47

In addition to the above, the following governmental reservations have been established for the protection of wild life: Yes Bay, Alaska, of 35,200 acres; Afognak Island, Alaska, 800 sq. miles; Midway Islands Naval Reservation, H.T.; Farallon Island, Point Reyes and Ano Nuevo Island, California; Destruction Island, Washington, and Hawaiian Islands Reservation (Laysan).

In addition to the above, the following government reservations have been set up to protect wildlife: Yes Bay, Alaska, covering 35,200 acres; Afognak Island, Alaska, spanning 800 sq. miles; Midway Islands Naval Reservation, H.T.; Farallon Island, Point Reyes, and Ano Nuevo Island, California; Destruction Island, Washington; and the Hawaiian Islands Reservation (Laysan).


State Game Preserves In The United States

State Game Preserves in the United States

Pennsylvania:

The proposition that every state, territory and province in North America and everywhere else, should establish a series of state forest and game preserves, is fairly incontestable. As a business proposition it is to-day no more a debatable question, or open to argument, than is the water supply or sewer system of a city. The only perfect way to conserve a water supply for a great human population is by acquiring title to water sheds, and either protecting the forests upon them, or planting forests in case none exist.

The idea that every state, territory, and province in North America and beyond should create a network of state forests and wildlife preserves is pretty undeniable. As a business proposal, it's no more up for debate today than a city's water supply or sewage system. The best way to ensure a water supply for a large population is by securing ownership of watersheds and either safeguarding the existing forests or planting new ones if there aren't any.

In one important matter the state of Pennsylvania has been wide awake, [Page 346] and in advance of the times. I will cite her system of forest reserves and game preserves as a model plan for other states to follow; and I sincerely hope that by the time the members of the present State Game Commission have passed from earth the people of Pennsylvania will have learned the value of the work they are now doing, and at least give them the appreciation that is deserved by public-spirited citizens who do large things for the People without hope of material reward. At this moment, Commissioner John M. Phillips and Dr. Joseph Kalbfus are putting their heart's blood into the business of preserving and increasing the game and other wild life of Pennsylvania; and the utter lack of appreciation that is now being shown in some quarters is really distressing. I refer particularly to the utterly misguided and mistaken body of hunters and anglers having headquarters at Harrisburg, whose members are grossly mislead into a wrong position by a man who seeks to secure a salaried state position through the hostile organization that he has built up, apparently for his own use. In the belief that those members generally are mislead and not mean-spirited, and that the organization contains a majority of conscientious sportsmen, I predict that ere long the evil genius of Pennsylvania game protection will be ordered to the rear, while the organization as a whole takes its place on the side of the Game Commission, where it belongs.

In one important area, the state of Pennsylvania has been alert and ahead of its time. I will point out its system of forest reserves and game preserves as a model for other states to emulate; and I truly hope that by the time the current members of the State Game Commission have passed away, the people of Pennsylvania will recognize the value of the work they are doing now, and at least give them the appreciation that is deserved by public-spirited citizens who do significant things for the People without expecting any personal gain. At this moment, Commissioner John M. Phillips and Dr. Joseph Kalbfus are dedicating themselves wholeheartedly to preserving and increasing the game and other wildlife in Pennsylvania; and the complete lack of appreciation currently shown in some circles is quite troubling. I am particularly referring to the misguided group of hunters and anglers based in Harrisburg, whose members are led astray by a person seeking to obtain a paid state position through the hostile organization he created, seemingly for his own benefit. I believe that most of those members are misled rather than ill-intentioned, and that the organization has a majority of sincere sportsmen. I predict that soon the detrimental influence on Pennsylvania's game protection will be pushed aside, while the organization as a whole aligns itself with the Game Commission, where it rightfully belongs.

The game sanctuary scheme that Pennsylvania has developed is so new that as yet only a very small fraction of the people of that state either understand it, or appreciate its far-reaching importance.

The game sanctuary program that Pennsylvania has created is so new that only a tiny portion of the people in the state currently understand it or recognize its significant importance.

To begin with, Pennsylvania has acquired up to date about one million acres of forest lands, scattered through 26 of the 67 counties of the state. These great holdings are to be gradually increased. These wild lands, including many sterile mountain "farms" of no real value for agricultural purposes, have been acquired, first of all, for the purpose of conserving the water supply of the state; and they are called the State Forest Reserves.

To start, Pennsylvania has recently acquired about one million acres of forest land, spread across 26 of the 67 counties in the state. These vast holdings will be gradually expanded. These wild lands, which include many unproductive mountain "farms" that aren't really useful for agriculture, have been obtained mainly to conserve the state's water supply; they are known as the State Forest Reserves.

Next in order, the State Game Commission has created, in favorable localities in the forest reserves, five great game preserves. The plan is decidedly novel and original, but is very simple withal. In the center of a great tract of forest reserve, a specially desirable tract has been chosen, and its boundaries marked out by the stringing of a single heavy fence wire, surrounding the entire selection. The area within that boundary wire is an absolute sanctuary for all wild creatures save those that prey upon game, and in it no man may hunt anything, nor fire a gun. The boundary wire is by no means a fence, for it keeps nothing out nor in.

Next up, the State Game Commission has established five large game preserves in suitable areas within the forest reserves. The plan is quite innovative and unique, yet very straightforward. In the middle of a vast forest reserve, a particularly desirable section has been chosen, and its borders have been marked by running a single heavy fence wire all around the selected area. This space within the boundary wire is a complete sanctuary for all wildlife except for those that hunt game, and no one is allowed to hunt or fire a gun there. The boundary wire isn't really a fence, as it neither keeps anything out nor holds anything in.

Outside of the wire and the sanctuary, men may hunt in the open season, but at the wire every chase must end. If the hunted deer knows enough to flee to the sanctuary when attacked, so much the better for the deer. The tide of wild life ebbs and flows under the wire, and beyond a doubt the deer and grouse will quickly find that within it lies absolute safety. There the breeding and rearing of young may go on undisturbed.

Outside the fence and the sanctuary, men can hunt during the open season, but once you’re at the fence, every chase must come to an end. If the deer being hunted knows to escape to the sanctuary when threatened, that’s definitely a bonus for the deer. The wildlife shifts and changes around the fence, and it's clear that the deer and grouse will quickly realize that absolute safety is found within it. There, breeding and raising their young can happen without interruption.

[Page 347]

In view of the fact that hunting may go on in the forest reserve areas surrounding these sanctuaries, no intelligent sportsman needs to be told that in a few years all such regions will be teeming with deer, grouse and other game. Where there is one deer to-day there will be twenty ten years hence,—because the law of Pennsylvania forbids the killing of does; and then there will be twenty times the legitimate hunting that there is to-day. For example, the Clinton County Game Preserve of 3,200 acres is surrounded by 128,000 acres of forest reserve, which form legitimate hunting grounds for the game bred in the sanctuary reservoir. In Clearfield County the game sanctuary is surrounded by 47,000 acres of Forest Reserve.

In light of the fact that hunting may continue in the forest reserve areas around these sanctuaries, no smart hunter needs to be told that in a few years, all those regions will be full of deer, grouse, and other game. Where there’s one deer today, there will be twenty in ten years—because the law in Pennsylvania prohibits the killing of does; and then there will be twenty times the legal hunting that exists today. For example, the Clinton County Game Preserve, which spans 3,200 acres, is surrounded by 128,000 acres of forest reserve that serve as legitimate hunting grounds for the game bred in the sanctuary. In Clearfield County, the game sanctuary is surrounded by 47,000 acres of Forest Reserve.

The game preserves created in Pennsylvania up to date are as follows:

The game preserves currently created in Pennsylvania are as follows:

In Clinton County 3,200 acres
In Clearfield County 3,200 acres
In Franklin County 3,200 acres
In Perry County 3,200 acres
In Westmoreland County 2,500 acres

It is the deliberate intention of the Game Commission to increase these game preserves until there is at least one in each county.

It is the Game Commission's deliberate goal to expand these game preserves until there is at least one in every county.

It is the policy of the Commission to clear out of the game sanctuaries all the mammals and birds that destroy wild life, such as foxes, mink, weasels, skunks and destructive hawks and owls. This is accomplished partly by buying old horses, killing them in the preserves and poisoning them thoroughly with strychnine.

It is the Commission's policy to remove all mammals and birds that harm wildlife from game sanctuaries, including foxes, mink, weasels, skunks, and harmful hawks and owls. This is done partly by purchasing old horses, euthanizing them in the preserves, and thoroughly poisoning them with strychnine.

Each preserve now contains a nucleus herd of white-tailed deer, some of them imported from northern Michigan. Ruffed grouse are breeding rapidly, and in the Clearfield County Preserve there are said to be at least three thousand. The Game Commission considers it a patriotic duty to preserve the wild turkey, ruffed grouse and quail, rather than have those species replaced at great expense by species imported from the old world. In their work for the protection, preservation and increase of the game of Pennsylvania—partly for the purpose of providing legitimate hunting for the mechanic as well as the millionaire,—the State Game Commissioners are putting a great amount of thought and labor, and whenever their efforts are criticized, their motives impugned or their honesty questioned by men who are not worthy to unlace their shoes, it makes me tired and angry.

Each preserve now has a core herd of white-tailed deer, some of which were brought in from northern Michigan. Ruffed grouse are breeding quickly, and it's reported that there are at least three thousand in the Clearfield County Preserve. The Game Commission sees it as a civic responsibility to protect the wild turkey, ruffed grouse, and quail, rather than replace these species at a high cost with species from abroad. In their efforts to protect, preserve, and increase the game in Pennsylvania—partly to provide legitimate hunting opportunities for both the working class and the wealthy—the State Game Commissioners are investing a significant amount of thought and effort. Whenever their work is criticized, their intentions questioned, or their integrity doubted by people who don't deserve to unlace their shoes, it frustrates and angers me.

NYC:

The Adirondack State Park. —With wise and commendable forethought, the state of New York has preserved in the Adirondack wilderness, familiarly known as "the North Woods," a magnificent forest domain forever dedicated to campers, outdoorsmen and hunters. At present (1912) it contains 2,031 square miles (1,300,000 acres) of forest-clad hills, valleys and mountains, adorned by countless lakes and streams. By some persons it has been believed that in the State's forests the cutting and [Page 348] sale of large trees would be justifiable business, and agreeable to the public; but it has been demonstrated that this is not the case. The people of the state firmly object to the havoc that is unavoidably wrought by logging operations in beautiful forests. The state does not yet need any of the money that could be derived from such operations. The chief anxiety of the public is that hereafter forest fires shall be prevented, no matter what fire protection may cost! The burning of coal on any railway operated through the Adirondacks should be made a penal offense.

Adirondack State Park. —With thoughtful planning, the state of New York has preserved the Adirondack wilderness, commonly referred to as "the North Woods," as a stunning forest area dedicated forever to campers, outdoor enthusiasts, and hunters. As of now (1912), it spans 2,031 square miles (1,300,000 acres) of forested hills, valleys, and mountains, filled with countless lakes and streams. Some people have believed that cutting and selling large trees in the state’s forests would be a reasonable business and beneficial to the public; however, it has been shown that this is not true. The people of the state strongly oppose the destruction that is unavoidably caused by logging in these beautiful forests. The state does not currently need any money that could be made from such activities. The main concern of the public is that forest fires should be prevented at all costs, regardless of the price of fire protection! Burning coal on any railway passing through the Adirondacks should be made a criminal offense.

Montana:

In 1911 Governor Norris, Senator Cone and the legislature of Montana, at the solicitation of W.R. Felton, L.A. Huffman and others, created the Snow Creek Game Preserve, fronting for ten miles on the Missouri River, in the northern side of Dawson County. It is a magnificent tract of bad-lands, very deeply eroded and carved, and highly picturesque. The new state preserve contains 96 square miles, but there is so little grazing ground for antelope and bison it is absolutely imperative that a narrow strip of level grass land should be added along the southern border. This proposed addition is being fiercely resisted, by an organized movement of the sheep owners of Montana (the National Wool Growers' Association), who naturally want the public domain for the free grazing of their tariff-protected sheep-herds. It remains to be seen whether the three sheep men south of the preserve,—the only men who really are affected,—will be able to thwart a movement that has for its object the development of a very good game preserve for the benefit of the ninety millions of the general American public. The range is necessary to contain representatives of the big game of the plains that has been so ruthlessly swept away, and particularly the vanishing prong-horned antelope, once very numerous in that region.

In 1911, Governor Norris, Senator Cone, and the Montana legislature, at the request of W.R. Felton, L.A. Huffman, and others, established the Snow Creek Game Reserve, which spans ten miles along the northern side of the Missouri River in Dawson County. It’s a stunning area of badlands, deeply eroded and beautifully shaped. The new state preserve covers 96 square miles, but there isn’t enough grazing land for antelope and bison, so it's crucial to add a narrow strip of flat grassland along the southern border. This proposed addition is being strongly opposed by an organized group of Montana sheep owners (the National Wool Growers' Association), who obviously want public land for their tariff-protected sheep herds. It remains to be seen whether the three sheep ranchers south of the preserve—who are the only ones directly affected—can stop a movement aimed at developing a valuable game preserve for the benefit of the general American public, which numbers around ninety million. The range is essential to protect the big game from the plains that have been so ruthlessly eliminated, especially the dwindling population of pronghorn antelope, which once thrived in that area.

In order to relieve the sheep men of all trouble on account of that preserve, the area should be enlarged to the right dimensions and made a national preserve. A bill for that purpose (Senate 5,286) is now before the Senate, in Senator McLean's Committee, and help is needed to overcome the active hostility of the sheep men, who vow that it never shall be passed! All persons who read this are invited to take this matter up with their Senators and Representatives, without a moment's delay.

To ease the concerns of the sheep farmers regarding the preserve, the area should be expanded to the right size and designated as a national preserve. A bill for this purpose (Senate 5,286) is currently in the Senate, in Senator McLean's Committee, and support is needed to counter the strong opposition from the sheep farmers, who are determined to block its passage! Everyone reading this is encouraged to discuss this issue with their Senators and Representatives without delay.

Wyoming

The Teton State Preserve. —One of the largest and most important state game preserves thus far established by any of our states is that which was created by Wyoming, in 1904. It is situated along the south of, and fully adjoining, the Yellowstone Park, and its area is 900 square miles (576,000 acres). Its special purpose is to supplement for the elk herds and other big game the protection from killing that previously had been found in the Yellowstone Park alone. The State Preserve is an admirable half-way house for the migrating herds when they leave the National Park to seek their regular winter ranges in and around the Jackson Valley.

Teton State Park. —One of the largest and most significant state game preserves established by any state so far is the one created by Wyoming in 1904. It is located to the south of and completely adjacent to Yellowstone Park, covering an area of 900 square miles (576,000 acres). Its main purpose is to provide additional protection for elk herds and other big game that previously only found safety within Yellowstone Park. The State Preserve serves as an excellent stopping point for migrating herds as they leave the National Park to find their usual winter ranges in and around the Jackson Valley.

[Page 349]

In 1909, Wyoming established the Big Horn Game Preserve, in the mountain range of that name. Into it 25 elk were taken from Jackson Hole, and set free, in 1910, at the expense of the Sheridan County Sportsmen's Club.

In 1909, Wyoming created the Big Horn Game Preserve in the mountain range of the same name. In 1910, 25 elk were relocated from Jackson Hole and released there, funded by the Sheridan County Sportsmen's Club.

BIRD RESERVATIONS ON THE GULF COAST AND FLORIDA

BIRD RESERVATIONS ON THE GULF COAST AND FLORIDA

Louisiana:

Great developments for the preservation of wild life have recently been witnessed in Louisiana, all due to the initiative and persistent activities of two men, Edward A. McIlhenny, of Avery Island, La., and Charles Willis Ward, of Michigan, lumberman and horticulturist.

Great progress for wildlife preservation has recently been seen in Louisiana, thanks to the initiative and ongoing efforts of two men: Edward A. McIlhenny from Avery Island, LA, and Charles Willis Ward from Michigan, a lumberman and horticulturist.

The Louisiana State Wild Fowl Refuge on Vermillion Bay, has an area of 13,000 acres. It was presented to the state by Messrs. Ward and McIlhenny, and formally accepted and protected. It contains a great area of fresh-water ponds and marshy meadows, wherein grows an abundant supply of food for wild fowl. It contains several miles of gravel beach, which during the winter season is visited by thousands of wild geese in quest of their indispensable supply of gravel. The ponds within its borders furnish feeding-grounds for canvasback ducks, redhead, mallard, blackhead and various species of wild geese.

The Louisiana State Wildlife Refuge on Vermillion Bay covers 13,000 acres. It was donated to the state by Messrs. Ward and McIlhenny, and has been officially accepted and protected. The refuge features extensive fresh-water ponds and marshy meadows that provide a plentiful food supply for wild birds. It includes several miles of gravel beach, which during the winter attracts thousands of wild geese looking for essential gravel. The ponds within its boundaries serve as feeding grounds for canvasback ducks, redheads, mallards, blackheads, and various species of wild geese.

Other State Game Preserves

Other State Wildlife Reserves

Idaho. —Payette River Game Preserve (230,000 Acres)

Idaho. —Payette River Game Preserve (230,000 Acres)

California. —Pinnacles Game Preserve (2,080 Acres)

California. —Pinnacles National Park (2,080 Acres)

Wyoming. —Big Horn Mountains Game Preserve.

Wyoming. —Big Horn Mountains Wildlife Refuge.

Montana. —Yellowstone Game Preserve. Pryor Mountain Game Preserve.

Montana. —Yellowstone Game Preserve. Pryor Mountain Game Preserve.


[Page 350]
CHAPTER XXXVII
GAME PRESERVES AND GAME LAWS IN CANADA

As now set forth on the map of North America, Canada is a vast country. We must no longer think of Ontario and Quebec as "Canada West" and "Canada East," because the new assistant-nation owns and rules everything from Labrador to British Columbia, and all the northern mainland save Alaska.

As shown on the map of North America, Canada is a vast country. We shouldn’t refer to Ontario and Quebec as "Canada West" and "Canada East" anymore, because the new assistant nation now owns and governs everything from Labrador to British Columbia, and all of the northern mainland except for Alaska.

Although the fauna of Canada is strictly boreal, it is sufficiently dispersed and diversified to demand wise legislation, and plenty of it. For a nation with an outfit of provinces so new, Canada already is well advanced in the matter of game laws and game preserves, and in some respects she has set the pace for her southern neighbors. For example, in New Brunswick we see the lordly moose successfully hunted for sport, not only without being exterminated but actually on a basis that permits it to increase in number. In Nova Scotia we see a law in force which successfully prohibits the waste of moose meat, a loss that characterizes moose hunting everywhere else throughout the range of that animal. All over southern Canada the use of automatic shotguns in hunting is strictly prohibited.

Although Canada's wildlife is primarily boreal, it's diverse enough to require thoughtful legislation, and lots of it. For a country with such a new set of provinces, Canada is already quite advanced in terms of game laws and game reserves, and in some ways, it has set a standard for its southern neighbors. For instance, in New Brunswick, we see the majestic moose being hunted for sport, not only without facing extinction but actually in a way that allows their population to grow. In Nova Scotia, there's a law in place that effectively prevents the waste of moose meat, which is a common problem in moose hunting throughout the rest of its habitat. Across southern Canada, the use of automatic shotguns for hunting is strictly banned.

On the other hand, the laws of the Canadians are weak in not preventing the sale of all wild game and the killing of antelope. In the matter of game-selling, there are far too many open doors, and a sweeping reform is very necessary.

On the other hand, Canada's laws are weak because they don't stop the sale of wild game and the hunting of antelope. When it comes to selling game, there are way too many loopholes, and a major reform is needed.

Speaking generally, and with application from Labrador to British Columbia, the American process of game extermination according to law is vigorously and successfully being pursued by the people of Canada. The open seasons are too long, and the bag limits are too generous to the gunners. As it is elsewhere, the bag-limit laws on birds are a farce, because it is impossible to enforce them, save on every tenth man. For example, in his admirable "Final Report of the Ontario Game and Fisheries Commission" (1912), Commissioner Kelly Evans says:

Speaking generally, and from Labrador to British Columbia, the American method of hunting animals to extinction according to law is being actively and effectively carried out by the people of Canada. The open seasons are too long, and the bag limits are too generous for the hunters. Like in other places, the bag-limit laws on birds are a joke because it's impossible to enforce them, except on every tenth person. For instance, in his excellent "Final Report of the Ontario Game and Fisheries Commission" (1912), Commissioner Kelly Evans states:

"The prairie chicken, which formerly was comparatively plentiful throughout the greater portion of the Rainy River District, has now become practically extinct in that region. Various causes have been assigned for this, but it would seem, as usual, to have been mainly the fault of indiscriminate and excessive slaughter." (Page 226.)

"The prairie chicken, once fairly common across most of the Rainy River District, has now nearly vanished from that area. Several reasons have been given for this, but it appears that, as usual, the primary issue has been the careless and excessive hunting." (Page 226.)

Like the United States, the various portions of Canada have their various local troubles in wild-life protection. I think the greatest practical difficulties, and the most real opposition to adequate measures, is found in the Provinces of Quebec and Ontario. Is it because [Page 351] the French-descended population is impatient of real restraint, and objects to measures that are drastic, even though they are necessary? In Ontario, Commissioner Evans has been splendidly supported by the Government, and by all the real sportsmen of that province; but the gunners and guerrillas of destruction have successfully postponed several of the reforms that he has advocated, and which should have been carried into effect.

Like the United States, different areas of Canada have their own local challenges with wildlife protection. I believe the biggest practical issues and the strongest opposition to effective measures can be found in the provinces of Quebec and Ontario. Is it because [Page 351] the French-descended population is resistant to real constraints and objects to necessary but drastic measures? In Ontario, Commissioner Evans has received fantastic support from the government and all the true sports enthusiasts in that province; however, those who seek to exploit and destroy have managed to delay several of the reforms he has promoted, which should have already been implemented.

So far as public moral support for game protection is concerned I think that the prairie and mountain provinces have the best of it. In Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Athabasca and British Columbia, the spirit of the people is mainly correct, and the chief thing that seems to be lacking is a Kelly Evans in each of those provinces to urge public sentiment into strong action. For example, why should Alberta still permit the hunting and killing of prong-horned antelope, when it is so well known that that species is vanishing like a mist before the morning sun? I think it is because no one seems to have risen up as G.O. Shields did in the United States, to make a big fuss about it, and demand a reform. At any rate, all the provinces of Canada that still possess antelope should immediately pass laws giving that species absolute close seasons for ten years. Why neglect it longer, when such neglect is now so very wrong? Whether this is done or not, I sincerely hope that hereafter no true American sportsman, will be guilty of killing one of the vanishing antelope of Canada, even though "the law doth give it."

So far as public moral support for game protection goes, I think the prairie and mountain provinces have the upper hand. In Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Athabasca, and British Columbia, the people generally have the right outlook, but what’s missing is someone like Kelly Evans in each province to galvanize public sentiment into strong action. For instance, why does Alberta still allow the hunting and killing of pronghorn antelope when it’s clear that this species is disappearing like mist in the morning sun? I believe it’s because no one has stepped up like G.O. Shields did in the United States to raise a big issue about it and call for change. At the very least, all the provinces in Canada that still have antelope should immediately pass laws ensuring that species has an absolute closed season for ten years. Why let it go any longer when such neglect is clearly wrong? Regardless of what happens, I genuinely hope that from now on, no true American sportsman will be guilty of killing one of Canada’s vanishing antelope, even if "the law allows it."


The Game Preserves Of Canada

Canada's Game Preserves

In the creation of National parks and game preserves, some of the provinces of the Canadian nation have displayed a degree of foresight and enterprise that merits sincere admiration. While in different provinces the exact status of these establishments may vary somewhat, the main purpose of each is the same,—the preservation of the forests and the wild life. In all of them a regulated amount of fishing is permitted, and in some the taking of fur-bearing animals is permitted; but I believe in all the birds and furless mammals are strictly protected. In some parks the carrying of firearms still is permitted, but that privilege is quite out of harmony with the spirit and purposes of a game preserve, and should be abolished. If it is necessary to carry firearms through a preserve, as often happens in the Yellowstone Park, it can be done under seals that are affixed by duly appointed officers and thus will temptation be kept out of the way of sinners.

In creating national parks and wildlife reserves, some provinces in Canada have shown a level of foresight and initiative that deserves genuine respect. While the specific status of these places may differ slightly across provinces, their primary aim is the same—protecting the forests and wildlife. All of them allow a controlled amount of fishing, and in some, hunting fur-bearing animals is also permitted; however, I believe all birds and mammals without fur are strictly protected. In some parks, carrying firearms is still allowed, but that privilege clashes with the spirit and goals of a wildlife reserve and should be removed. If there’s a need to carry firearms through a preserve, as is often the case in Yellowstone Park, it can be done under seals issued by authorized officials to help keep temptation away from wrongdoers.

Up to this date I never have seen a publication which set forth in one place even so much as an annotated list of the game preserves of the various provinces of Canada, and at present exact information regarding them is rather difficult to obtain. It seems that an adequate governmental publication on this subject is now due, and overdue.

Up until now, I've never seen a publication that provides even a simple annotated list of the game preserves in the different provinces of Canada, and currently, getting accurate information about them is quite challenging. It seems that a proper government publication on this topic is not only necessary but long overdue.

Ontario. —"At the present time," says Commissioner Evans in his "Final Report," "the Algonquin National Park is the only actual game preserve [Page 352] in the Province, being in fact a game reserve and not a forest reserve; but in the past at least a measure of protection would seem to have been afforded the game in most of the [forest] reserves, owing to the fact that the carrying of firearms therein has been discouraged, and it would appear to require but the passing of an Order-in-Council to render the carrying of firearms in all reserves illegal. It is sincerely to be hoped that not only will such action be taken without delay, but also that all the forest reserves will be declared game reserves in the strictest sense."

Ontario. —"Right now," says Commissioner Evans in his "Final Report," "the Algonquin National Park is the only real game preserve [Page 352] in the Province, actually functioning as a game reserve rather than a forest reserve; however, in the past, a certain level of protection for wildlife seems to have been provided in most of the [forest] reserves, because carrying firearms there has been discouraged. It appears that it wouldn’t take much more than passing an Order-in-Council to make carrying firearms illegal in all reserves. We sincerely hope that this action will be taken without delay and that all forest reserves will be designated game reserves in the strictest sense."

To this sentiment all friends of wild life will join a fervent wish for its realization. As conditions are to-day, it is impossible to have too many game reserves! There is everything to gain and nothing to lose by making every national forest and forest reserve on the whole continent of North America a game preserve in the strictest sense, and we hope to live to see that end accomplished, both in the United States and Canada.

To this sentiment, all wildlife supporters will share a strong desire for it to come true. Given the current state of things, it is impossible to have too many game reserves! There's everything to gain and nothing to lose by making every national forest and forest reserve across North America a game preserve in the truest sense, and we hope to see that goal achieved, both in the United States and Canada.

The Algonquin National Park is situated in the Parry Sound region, just above the Muskoka Lakes, and it has an area of 1,930 square miles. It is well stocked with moose, caribou, white-tailed deer, black bear and beaver. During the period of protection the beaver have increased so greatly that about 1,000 were trapped last year for the market, by officers of the government; and about 25 were sold to zoological gardens and parks, at $25 each.

Algonquin Park is located in the Parry Sound area, just north of the Muskoka Lakes, covering 1,930 square miles. It's home to a large population of moose, caribou, white-tailed deer, black bears, and beavers. Due to protection efforts, the beaver population has grown so much that around 1,000 were trapped last year for the market by government officers; about 25 were sold to zoos and parks for $25 each.

The Quetico Forest Reserve, area 1,560 square miles, was created as the Canadian complement of the Minnesota National Forest and Game Preserve. The two join on the international boundary, and each helps to protect the other. Both are well stocked with moose, and will render valuable service in the preservation of a mid-continental contingent of that species.

Quetico Provincial Park, covering 1,560 square miles, was established as Canada’s counterpart to the Minnesota National Forest and Game Preserve. They connect along the international border, and each supports the other’s conservation efforts. Both areas are rich in moose populations and play an important role in preserving a mid-continental group of that species.

Alberta. —In the making of game preserves the province of Alberta has been splendidly progressive and liberal. The total result is fairly beyond the reach of ordinary words of praise. It sets a pace that should result in wide-spread benefits to the wild life of North America. In it there is nothing faint-hearted. It should make some of our States think seriously regarding their own shortcomings in this particular field of endeavor.

Alberta. —In establishing game preserves, the province of Alberta has been remarkably forward-thinking and open-minded. The overall achievement is truly impressive and deserves high praise. It sets a standard that should lead to significant benefits for North America's wildlife. There's nothing timid about it. It should prompt some of our States to seriously reconsider their own shortcomings in this area.


Alberta's National Parks
Acres Sq. miles
Rocky Mountains Park 2,764,800 4,320
Yoho Park 1,799,680 2,812
Glacier Park 1,474,560 2,304
Buffalo Park 384,000 600
Elk Island Park 40,000 62
Jasper Park 3,488,000 5,450
Waterton Lakes Park 34,560 54
--------- ------
9,985,600 15,602

The Rocky Mountains Park is near Banff. The Yoho and Glacier Parks are near Field. The Buffalo Park is near Wainwright, on the plains, [Page 353] and it was created and fenced especially as a home for the herd of American bison that was purchased in Montana in 1909. It now contains 1,052 head of bison, 20 moose, 35 deer, 7 elk, and 6 antelope.

The Rocky Mountains Park is close to Banff. The Yoho and Glacier Parks are near Field. The Buffalo Park is located near Wainwright, on the plains, [Page 353] and it was established and enclosed specifically as a home for the herd of American bison that was bought in Montana in 1909. It now consists of 1,052 bison, 20 moose, 35 deer, 7 elk, and 6 antelope.

The Elk Island Park is near Fort Saskatchewan and Lamont, and at this date (1912) it contains 53 bison, 28 elk, 30 deer and 5 moose. The bison subsist entirely by grazing, and upon hay cut within the Park.

The Elk Island Park is located near Fort Saskatchewan and Lamont, and as of now (1912), it has 53 bison, 28 elk, 30 deer, and 5 moose. The bison survive exclusively on grazing and hay harvested within the Park.

Jasper Park, established in 1908, is on the Athabasca River and the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, near Strathcona. Sixty miles of the railway line lie within the Park. Scenically, Jasper Park is a rival of Rocky Mountains Park, and undoubtedly possesses great attractions for travellers who appreciate the beauties and grandeur of Nature as expressed in mountains, valleys, lakes and streams.

Jasper Park, established in 1908, is located on the Athabasca River and the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, near Strathcona. Sixty miles of the railway line run through the Park. Scenically, Jasper Park rivals Rocky Mountains Park and definitely has a lot to offer for travelers who appreciate the beauty and majesty of nature as reflected in mountains, valleys, lakes, and streams.

Waterton Lakes Park is situated in the extreme southwestern corner of Alberta, in the Rocky Mountains surrounding the Waterton Lakes. At present it is nine miles long from north to south and six miles wide, with its southern end resting on the international boundary, and adjoining our Glacier Park. It is the home of a few bands of mountain sheep that carry very large horns. Through the initiative of Frederick K. Vreeland, the Camp-Fire Club of America two years ago represented to the Government of Alberta the great desirability of enlarging this preserve, toward the north and west, the better to protect the mountain sheep and other big game of that region. The suggestion was received in a friendly spirit, and there is good reason to hope that at an early date the enlargement will be made.

Waterton Lakes Park is located in the far southwestern corner of Alberta, in the Rocky Mountains surrounding the Waterton Lakes. Right now, it's nine miles long from north to south and six miles wide, with its southern end bordering the international boundary and adjacent to Glacier Park. It’s home to a few herds of mountain sheep that have very large horns. Thanks to the initiative of Frederick K. Vreeland, the Camp-Fire Club of America two years ago urged the Government of Alberta to expand this preserve to the north and west, in order to better protect the mountain sheep and other big game in the area. This suggestion was received positively, and there’s good reason to believe that the expansion will happen soon.

British Columbia. —This province has made an excellent beginning in the creation of game preserves. The first agitation on that subject was begun in 1906, by two sportsmen whose names in connection with it have long since been forgotten. On November 15, 1908, the Legislative Council of British Columbia issued a proclamation that created a very fine game preserve in the East Kootenai District, between the Elk and Bull Rivers and northwestward thereof to the White River country. By an unfortunate oversight, the new preserve never has been officially named, but we may designate it here as

BC. —This province has made a great start in establishing game preserves. The first push for that initiative began in 1906, led by two sportsmen whose names have faded over time. On November 15, 1908, the Legislative Council of British Columbia issued a proclamation that created a very impressive game preserve in the East Kootenai District, between the Elk and Bull Rivers and extending northwest to the White River area. Due to an unfortunate oversight, the new preserve has never been officially named, but we can refer to it here as

The Elk River Game Preserve.—This preserve has a total area of about 450 square miles, and includes a fine tract of mountains, valleys, lakes and streams. It contained in 1908 about 1,000 mountain goats, 200 sheep, a few elk and deer, and about 50 grizzly bears. All these have notably increased during the period of absolute protection that they have enjoyed. It is probable that this preserve contains more white mountain goats than any other preserve that thus far has been made. It was in this region that Mr. John M. Phillips and Prof. Henry Fairfield Osborne made the first mountain goat photographs ever made at close range. It is to be hoped that the protection of this preserve, both as to its wild life and its timber, will be made perpetual.

The Elk River Game Preserve.—This preserve covers about 450 square miles and includes beautiful mountains, valleys, lakes, and streams. As of 1908, it was home to around 1,000 mountain goats, 200 sheep, a few elk and deer, and about 50 grizzly bears. All of these populations have significantly increased due to the complete protection they've received. It's likely that this preserve has more white mountain goats than any other preserve created so far. In this area, Mr. John M. Phillips and Prof. Henry Fairfield Osborne took the first close-range photographs of mountain goats. It's hoped that the protection of this preserve, for both its wildlife and timber, will be maintained forever.

Frazer River Preserve.—Next after the above there was created in British Columbia a game preserve covering a large portion of the mountain territory that rises between the North and South Forks of the Fraser River. It is about 75 miles long by 30 miles wide and contains [Page 354] about 2,250 square miles. Concerning its character and wild-life population we have no details.

Frazer River Preserve.—Following the previous point, a game preserve was established in British Columbia that encompasses a substantial area of the mountainous land located between the North and South Forks of the Fraser River. It stretches approximately 75 miles long and 30 miles wide, totaling around 2,250 square miles. We currently lack details regarding its characteristics and wildlife population.

Yalakom Game Preserve.—On the north side of Bridge River (a western tributary of the Fraser), about twenty miles above Lilloet, there has been established a game preserve having an area of about 215 square miles.

Yalakom Game Preserve.—On the north side of Bridge River (a western tributary of the Fraser), approximately twenty miles upstream from Lilloet, a game preserve has been created that covers an area of about 215 square miles.

Manitoba. —In the making of game preserves, Manitoba has made an excellent beginning. It is good to see from Duck Mountain in the north to Turtle Mountain in the south a chain of four liberal preserves, each one protected in unmistakable terms as follows: "Carrying firearms, hunting or trapping strictly prohibited within this area."

Manitoba. —Manitoba has made a great start in creating game preserves. It’s encouraging to see a series of four generous preserves stretching from Duck Mountain in the north to Turtle Mountain in the south, all clearly marked with the following message: "Carrying firearms, hunting, or trapping is strictly prohibited within this area."

The lake regions of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta form what is probably the most important wild-fowl breeding-ground in North America. To a great extent it rests with those provinces to say whether the central United States shall have any ducks and geese, or not! It is high time that an international treaty should be made between the United States, Canada and Mexico for the federal protection of all migratory birds.

The lake areas of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta create what is likely the most significant breeding ground for wildfowl in North America. It largely depends on these provinces whether the central United States will have any ducks and geese or not! It’s about time that an international treaty is established between the United States, Canada, and Mexico for the federal protection of all migratory birds.

These preserves are of course intended to conserve wild-fowl, shore-birds, grouse and all other birds, as well as big game. Thanks to the cooperation of Mr. J.M. Macoun, of the Canadian Geological Survey, I am able to offer the following:

These preserves are obviously meant to protect wildfowl, shorebirds, grouse, and all other birds, along with big game. Thanks to the help of Mr. J.M. Macoun from the Canadian Geological Survey, I can provide the following:


List Of Manitoba's Game Preserves
Sq. miles Acres
Duck Mountain Preserve 324 207,360
Riding Mountain Preserve 360 230,000
Spruce Woods Preserve 64 40,960
Turtle Mountain Preserve 100 64,000
--- -------
848 542,320

Manitoba is to be congratulated on this record.

Manitoba should be congratulated on this achievement.

Quebec. —This province has created two huge game preserves, well worthy of the fauna that they are intended to conserve when all hunting in them is prohibited!

Quebec. —This province has established two large game reserves that are truly deserving of the wildlife they aim to protect, especially since all hunting is banned in these areas!

The Laurentides National Park is second in area of all the national parks of Canada, being surpassed only by the Rocky Mountains Park of British Columbia. Its area is 3565 square miles, or 2,281,600 acres. It occupies the entire central portion of the great area surrounded by Lake St. John, the Saguenay River, the wide portion of the St. Lawrence, and the St. Maurice River on the west. Its southern boundary is in several places only 16 miles from the St. Lawrence, while its most northern angle is within 13 miles of Lake St. John. Its greatest width from east to west is 71 miles, and its greatest length from north to south is 79 miles. It covers a huge watershed in which over a dozen large rivers and many small ones have their sources. It is indeed a forest primeval. The [Page 355] rivers are well stocked with fish, and the big game includes moose, woodland caribou, black bear, lynx, beaver, marten, fisher, mink, fox, and—sad to say—the gray wolf. The caribou live in rather small bands, from 10 up to 100.

The Laurentides National Park is the second largest of all the national parks in Canada, surpassed only by the Rocky Mountain Park in British Columbia. It spans 3,565 square miles, or 2,281,600 acres. The park occupies the entire central area surrounded by Lake St. John, the Saguenay River, the wide section of the St. Lawrence River, and the St. Maurice River to the west. Its southern boundary is only 16 miles from the St. Lawrence in several places, while its northernmost point is within 13 miles of Lake St. John. Its widest point from east to west is 71 miles, and its longest point from north to south is 79 miles. It encompasses a vast watershed where more than a dozen large rivers, along with many smaller ones, originate. It is truly a primeval forest. The [Page 355] rivers are rich in fish, and the big game includes moose, woodland caribou, black bear, lynx, beaver, marten, fisher, mink, fox, and—sadly—the gray wolf. The caribou typically live in small groups, ranging from 10 to 100.

Unfortunately, hunting under license is permitted in the Laurentian National Park, and therefore it is by no means a real game preserve! It is a near-preserve.

Unfortunately, hunting with a license is allowed in Laurentian National Park, so it’s not really a true game preserve! It’s more like a near-preserve.

The Gaspesian Forest, Fish and Game Preserve, created in 1906, is in "the Gaspe country," and it has an area of 2500 square miles situated in the eastern Quebec counties of Gaspe and Matane.

The Gaspesian Forest, Fish and Game Preserve, established in 1906, is located in "the Gaspe region," covering an area of 2,500 square miles in the eastern Quebec counties of Gaspe and Matane.

The Connaught National Park, to be named in honor of H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught, has been proposed by Mr. J.M. Macoun, of the Canadian Geological Survey. The general location chosen is the mountains and forested territory north of Ottawa and the Ottawa River, within easy access from the Canadian capitol. On the map the location recommended lies between the Gatineau River on the east and Wolf Lake on the west. The proposal is meeting with much popular favor, and it is extremely probable that it will be carried into effect at an early date.

The Connaught National Park, named in honor of H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught, has been proposed by Mr. J.M. Macoun from the Canadian Geological Survey. The chosen location is the mountains and forested area north of Ottawa and the Ottawa River, easily accessible from the Canadian capital. On the map, the recommended site is situated between the Gatineau River to the east and Wolf Lake to the west. The proposal is gaining a lot of public support, and it’s highly likely that it will be implemented soon.

Labrador. —During the past two years Lieut.-Col. William Wood has strongly advocated the making of game preserves in Labrador, that will not only tend to preserve the scanty fauna of that region from extinction but will also aid in bringing it back. While Col. Wood's very energetic and praiseworthy campaign has not yet been crowned with success, undoubtedly it will be successful in the near future, because ultimately such causes always win their objects, provided they are prosecuted with the firm and unflagging persistence which has characterized this particular campaign. We congratulate Col. Wood on the success that he will achieve in the near future!

Labrador Retriever. —In the last two years, Lieutenant Colonel William Wood has strongly supported the creation of game preserves in Labrador. These preserves will not only help protect the limited wildlife in that area from extinction but will also assist in its recovery. Although Colonel Wood's dedicated and commendable efforts haven't yet achieved their goals, it's clear that they will be successful soon, because in the end, such initiatives always accomplish their objectives, as long as they are pursued with the strong and unwavering determination that has marked this campaign. We congratulate Colonel Wood on the success that he will achieve in the near future!


Game Laws Of The Canadian Provinces

Game Laws Of The Canadian Provinces

Alberta. —The worst feature of the Alberta laws is the annual open season on antelope, two of which may be killed under each license. This is entirely wrong, and a perpetual close season should at once be enacted. Duck shooting in August is wrong, and the season should not open until September. It is not right that duck-killing should be made so easy and so fearfully prolonged that extermination is certain. All killing of cranes and shore birds should be absolutely stopped, for five years. No wheat-producing province can afford the expense to the wheat crops of the slaughter of shore birds, thirty species of which are great crop-protectors.

Alberta. —The worst part of the Alberta laws is the annual open season for antelope, allowing two to be killed per license. This is completely wrong, and there should be a permanent close season implemented immediately. Duck hunting in August is also wrong, and the season shouldn’t start until September. It’s not fair that duck hunting is made so easy and lasts so long that extinction is unavoidable. All hunting of cranes and shore birds should be completely banned for five years. No wheat-producing province can afford the damage to wheat crops caused by the killing of shore birds, thirty species of which are vital for protecting crops.

The bag limit of two sheep is too high, by 50 per cent. It should immediately be cut down to one sheep, before sheep hunting in Alberta becomes a lost art. Sheep hunting should not be encouraged—quite the reverse! There are already too many sheep-crazy sportsmen. The bag limit on grouse and ptarmigan of 20 per day or 200 in a season is simply legalized slaughter, no more and no less, and if it is continued, a grouseless province will be the quick result. The birds are not [Page 356] sufficiently numerous to withstand the guns on that basis. Alberta should be wiser than the states below the international boundary that are annihilating their remnants of birds as fast as they can be found.

The bag limit of two sheep is way too high, by 50 percent. It should be immediately reduced to one sheep before sheep hunting in Alberta becomes a lost art. Sheep hunting should not be promoted—quite the opposite! There are already too many sheep-crazy hunters. The bag limit of 20 grouse and ptarmigan per day or 200 in a season is just legalized slaughter, plain and simple, and if it continues, we'll quickly end up with no grouse in the province. The birds are not [Page 356] enough to handle that kind of hunting pressure. Alberta should be smarter than the states below the international border that are wiping out their remaining bird populations as quickly as they can find them.

British Columbia. —We note with much satisfaction that the Provincial Game Warden, Mr. A. Bryan Williams, has been allowed $37,000 for the pay of game wardens, and $28,000 for the destruction of wolves, coyotes, pumas and other game-destroying animals. During the past two years the following game-destroyers were killed, and bounties were paid upon them:

BC —We are pleased to see that the Provincial Game Warden, Mr. A. Bryan Williams, has been allocated $37,000 for the salaries of game wardens and $28,000 for the eradication of wolves, coyotes, pumas, and other animals that threaten game. Over the last two years, the following game predators were killed, and bounties were issued for them:

1909-10 1910-11
Wolves 655 518
Coyotes 1,464 3,653
Cougars 382 277
Horned Owls 854 2,285
Golden Eagles 29 73
----- -----
3,374 6,806

"Now," says Warden Williams in his excellent annual report for 1911, "in these two years a total of 2,896 wolves and cougars and 5,141 coyotes were destroyed, as well as a number of others poisoned and not recovered for the bounty. Allowing fifty head for each wolf and cougar and ten for each coyote, by their bounties alone 196,210 head of game and domestic animals were saved. Is it any wonder that deer are increasing almost everywhere?"

"Now," says Warden Williams in his excellent annual report for 1911, "in these two years, a total of 2,896 wolves and cougars and 5,141 coyotes were killed, along with several others that were poisoned and not retrieved for the bounty. Assuming fifty animals for each wolf and cougar and ten for each coyote, just from their bounties alone, 196,210 game and domestic animals were saved. Is it any surprise that deer are increasing almost everywhere?"

The great horned owl has been and still is a great scourge to the upland game birds, partly because when game is abundant "they become fastidious, and eat only the brains of their prey." The destruction of 3,139 of them on the Lower Mainland during the last two years has made these owls sing very small, and says the warden, "Is it any wonder that grouse are again increasing?"

The great horned owl has been, and still is, a significant threat to upland game birds, partly because when prey is plentiful, "they become picky and only eat the brains of their victims." The killing of 3,139 of these owls on the Lower Mainland over the past two years has drastically reduced their numbers, and the warden notes, "Is it any wonder that grouse are starting to increase again?"

I have discussed with the Provincial Game Warden the advisability of putting a limit of one on the grizzly bear, but Mr. Williams advances good reasons for the opinion that it would be impracticable to do so at present. I am quite sure, however, that the time has already arrived when a limit of one is necessary. During the present year three of my friends who went hunting in British Columbia, each killed 3 grizzly bears! Hereafter I will "locate" no more bear hunters in that country until the bag limit is reduced to one grizzly per year. Since 1905 the trapping of bears south of the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway has been stopped; and an excellent move too. A Rocky Mountain without a grizzly bear is like a tissue-paper rose.

I talked with the Provincial Game Warden about setting a limit of one grizzly bear per hunter, but Mr. Williams made some good points about why it wouldn’t be practical right now. Still, I’m pretty sure we’ve reached a point where we need to limit hunters to one bear each. This year, three of my friends went hunting in British Columbia, and each of them killed three grizzly bears! From now on, I won’t "locate" any more bear hunters there until the limit is reduced to one grizzly per year. Since 1905, trapping bears south of the main Canadian Pacific Railway line has been banned, and it's a great decision. A Rocky Mountain without a grizzly bear is like a tissue-paper rose.

The bag limit on the big game of British Columbia is at least twice too liberal,—five deer, two elk, two moose (one in Kootenay County), three caribou and three goats. There is no necessity for such wasteful liberality. Few sportsmen go to British Columbia for the sake of a large lot of animals. I know many men who have been there to hunt, and the great majority cared more for the scenery and the wild romance of camping out in ground mountains than for blood and trophies.

The bag limit on big game in British Columbia is way too lenient—five deer, two elk, two moose (one in Kootenay County), three caribou, and three goats. There's no need for such wasteful excess. Few hunters travel to British Columbia just to take home a lot of animals. I know many guys who have been there to hunt, and the vast majority cared more about the scenery and the wild adventure of camping in the mountains than about taking trophies.

Manitoba. —What are we to think of a "bag limit" of fifty ducks per day in October and November? A "limit" indeed! Evidently, Manitoba is tired of having ducks, ruffed grouse, pinnated and other grouse pestering her farmers and laborers. While assuming to fix bag limits that will be of some benefit to those species, the limit is distinctly off, and nothing short of a quick and drastic reform will save a remnant that will remain visible to the naked eye.

Manitoba. —What should we make of a "bag limit" of fifty ducks per day in October and November? A "limit" for sure! Clearly, Manitoba is fed up with ducks, ruffed grouse, pinnated grouse, and other birds bothering her farmers and workers. While attempting to set bag limits that would somewhat help those species, the limit is way off, and only a swift and serious reform will keep a few visible to the naked eye.

New Brunswick. —This is the banner province in the protection of moose, caribou and deer, even while permitting them to be shot for sport. Of course, only males are killed, and I am assured by competent judges that thus far the killing of the finest and largest male moose has had no bad effect upon the stature or antlers of the species as a whole.

New Brunswick. —This is the leading province in the protection of moose, caribou, and deer, while still allowing sport hunting. Naturally, only males are hunted, and I’ve been told by experts that so far, hunting the best and largest male moose hasn’t negatively impacted the size or antlers of the species overall.

Nova Scotia. —If there is anything wrong with the game laws of Nova Scotia, it lies in the wide-open sale of moose meat and all kinds of feathered game during the open season. If that province were more heavily populated, it would mean a great destruction of game. Even with conditions as they are, the sale permitted is entirely wrong, and against the best interests of 97 per cent of the people.

Nova Scotia. —If there's anything wrong with the hunting laws in Nova Scotia, it's the unrestricted sale of moose meat and various types of game birds during the hunting season. If the province had a larger population, it would lead to significant game depletion. Even with the current situation, allowing these sales is completely wrong and not in the best interest of 97 percent of the people.

As previously mentioned, the law against the waste of moose meat is both novel and admirable. The saving of any considerable portion of the flesh of a full-grown bull moose, along with its head, is a large order; but it is right. The degree of accountability to which guides are held for the doings of the men whom they pilot into the woods is entirely commendable, and worthy of imitation. If a sportsman or gunner does the wrong thing, the guide loses his license.

As mentioned earlier, the law against wasting moose meat is both new and commendable. Saving a significant amount of the meat from a full-grown bull moose, along with its head, is quite a task; but it’s the right thing to do. The level of responsibility that guides have for the actions of the people they lead into the woods is truly admirable and should be emulated. If a hunter or shooter makes a mistake, the guide risks losing their license.

Saskatchewan. —This is another of the too-liberal provinces having no real surplus of big game with which to sustain for any length of time an excess of generosity. I am told that in this province there is now a great deal of open country around each wild animal. And yet, it cheerfully offers two moose, two elk, two caribou and two antelope per season to each licensed gunner or sportsman. The limit is too generous by half. Why throw away an extra $250 worth of game with each license? That is precisely what the people of Saskatchewan are doing to-day.

Saskatchewan. —This is another one of those overly generous provinces that doesn't have a real surplus of big game to support such excess for any lengthy period. I've heard that in this province, there's a lot of open land around each wild animal. And yet, they happily allow two moose, two elk, two caribou, and two antelope per season for each licensed hunter or sports enthusiast. The limit is way too generous. Why waste an extra $250 worth of game with each license? That's exactly what the people of Saskatchewan are doing today.

And that antelope-killing! It should be stopped at once, and for ten years.

And that antelope hunting! It needs to be stopped immediately, and for ten years.

Yukon. —This province permits the sale of all the finest and best wild game within its borders,—moose, elk, caribou, bison, musk-ox, sheep and goats! The flesh of all these may be sold during the open season, and for sixty days thereafter. Of the species named above, the barren ground caribou is the only one regarding which we need not worry; because that species still exists in millions. The Osborn caribou (Rangiferosborni), can be exterminated in our own times, because it is nowhere really numerous, and it inhabits exposed situations.

Yukon. —This province allows the sale of all the finest wild game within its borders—moose, elk, caribou, bison, musk-ox, sheep, and goats! The meat from all these can be sold during the open season and for sixty days after that. Of the species mentioned, the barren ground caribou is the only one we don't need to worry about because that species still numbers in the millions. The Osborn caribou (Rangiferosborni) could be wiped out in our time since it's not really abundant and lives in exposed areas.


[Page 358]
CHAPTER XXXVIII
PRIVATE GAME PRESERVES

Primarily, in the early days of the Man-on-Horseback, the self-elected and predatory lords of creation evolved the private game preserve as a scheme for preventing other fellows from shooting, and for keeping the game sacred to slaughter by themselves. The idea of conserving the game was a fourth-rate consideration, the first being the estoppel of the other man. The old-world owner of a game preserve delights in the annual killing of the surplus game, and we have even heard it whispered that in the Dark Ages there were kings who enjoyed the wholesale slaughter of deer, wild boar, pheasants and grouse. If we may accept as true the history of sport in Europe, there have been men who have loved slaughter with a genuine blood-lust that is quite foreign to the real nature-loving sportsman.

Primarily, in the early days of the Man-on-Horseback, the self-proclaimed and predatory lords of creation developed private game preserves as a way to stop others from hunting and to keep the game exclusively for their own slaughter. The idea of conserving the game was a minor concern, with the main goal being to prevent others from participating. The traditional owner of a game preserve takes pleasure in the annual culling of excess game, and we've even heard rumors that during the Dark Ages, there were kings who relished the mass slaughter of deer, wild boar, pheasants, and grouse. If we can take the history of sport in Europe at face value, there have been men who have enjoyed killing with a genuine bloodlust that is completely alien to the true nature-loving sportsman.

In America, the impulse is different. Here, there is raging a genuine fever for private game preserves. Some of those already existing are of fine proportions, and cost fortunes to create. Every true sportsman who is rich enough to own a private game preserve, sooner or later acquires one. You will find them scattered throughout the temperate zone of North America from the Bay of Fundy to San Diego. I have had invitations to visit preserves in an unbroken chain from the farthest corner of Quebec to the Pacific Coast, and from Grand Island, Lake Superior to the Gulf of Mexico. It was not necessarily to hunt, and kill something, but to see the game, and the beauties of nature.

In America, the situation is different. There's a real craze for private game preserves. Some of the existing ones are quite large and cost a fortune to set up. Every true sportsman wealthy enough to own a private game preserve eventually gets one. You'll find them scattered across the temperate zone of North America, from the Bay of Fundy to San Diego. I've received invitations to visit preserves all the way from the farthest corner of Quebec to the Pacific Coast, and from Grand Island on Lake Superior to the Gulf of Mexico. It wasn’t necessarily about hunting and killing something, but about experiencing the wildlife and the beauty of nature.

The wealthy American and Canadian joyously buys a tract of wilderness, fences it, stocks it with game both great and small, and provides game keepers for all the year round. At first he has an idea that he will "hunt" therein, and that his guests will hunt also, and actually kill game. In a mild way, this fiction sometimes is maintained for years. The owner may each year shoot two or three head of his surplus big game, and his tenderfoot guests who don't know what real hunting is may also kill something, each year. But in most of the American preserves with which I am well acquainted, the gentlemanly "sport" of "hunting big game" is almost a joke. The trouble is, usually, the owner becomes so attached to his big game, and admires it so sincerely, he has not the heart to kill it himself; and he finds no joy whatever in seeing it shot down by others!

The wealthy American and Canadian happily buys a piece of wilderness, fences it in, fills it with various types of game, and hires gamekeepers year-round. Initially, he thinks he’ll “hunt” there, and that his guests will hunt too and actually kill some game. This idea is sometimes maintained in a lighthearted way for years. The owner might shoot a few of his surplus big game each year, and his inexperienced guests, who don’t know what real hunting is, might also manage to kill something. However, in most of the American preserves I know well, the gentlemanly “sport” of “hunting big game” is pretty much a joke. The issue is that the owner usually becomes so attached to his big game and admires it so genuinely that he can’t bring himself to kill it and finds no pleasure in seeing others do it either!

In this country the slaughter of game for the market is not considered a gentlemanly pastime, even though there is a surplus of preserve-bred [Page 359] game that must be reduced. To the average American, the slaughter of half-tame elk, deer and birds that have been bred in a preserve does not appeal in the least. He knows that in the protection of a preserve, the wild creatures lose much of their fear of man, and become easy marks; and shall a real sportsman go out with a gun and a bushel of cartridges, on a pony, and without warning betray the confidence of the wild in terms of fire and blood? Others may do it if they like; but as a rule that is not what an American calls "sport." One wide-awake and well-armed grizzly bear or mountain sheep outwitted on a mountain-side is worth more as a sporting proposition than a quarter of a mile of deer carcasses laid out side by side on a nice park lawn to be photographed as "one day's kill."

In this country, hunting game for the market isn’t seen as a classy activity, even though there's an oversupply of preserve-bred [Page 359] game that needs to be reduced. For the average American, hunting semi-tame elk, deer, and birds bred in a preserve doesn’t appeal at all. They understand that, inside a preserve, wild animals lose much of their fear of humans and become easy targets. Should a true sportsman head out with a gun and a bunch of ammo, riding a pony, and without any warning, betray the trust of these creatures with violence? Others might do it if they want, but generally, that’s not what Americans consider "sport." One clever, well-armed grizzly bear or mountain sheep outsmarted on a mountain is worth much more as a sporting challenge than a quarter-mile stretch of deer carcasses lined up on a nice lawn for a photo as "one day's kill."

In America, the shooting of driven game is something of which we know little save by hearsay. In Europe, it is practiced on everything from Scotch grouse to Italian ibex. The German Crown Prince, in his fascinating little volume "From My Hunting Day-Book," very neatly fixes the value of such shooting, as a real sportsman's proposition, in the following sentence:

In America, hunting driven game is something we know little about except through word of mouth. In Europe, it’s done with everything from Scotch grouse to Italian ibex. The German Crown Prince, in his interesting little book "From My Hunting Day-Book," succinctly sums up the value of such hunting, as a genuine sportsman's endeavor, in the following sentence:

"The shooting of driven game is merely a question of marksmanship, and is after all more in the nature of a shooting exercise than sport."

"The hunting of driven game is really just about skill in shooting, and it's more like a practice session than an actual sport."

I have seen some shooting in preserves that was too tame to be called sport; but on the other hand I can testify that in grouse shooting as it is done behind the dogs on Mr. Carnegie's moor at Skibo, it is sport in which the hunter earns every grouse that falls to his gun. At the same time, also, I believe that the shooting of madly running ibex, as it is done by the King of Italy in his three mountain preserves, is sufficiently difficult to put the best big-game hunter to the test. There are times when shooting driven game calls for far more dexterity with the rifle than is ordinarily demanded in the still-hunt.

I’ve seen some hunting in preserves that was too easy to be called a sport; but on the flip side, I can say that in grouse hunting done with the dogs on Mr. Carnegie's moor at Skibo, it’s a sport where the hunter earns every grouse that drops to his gun. At the same time, I also think that hunting madly running ibex, like the King of Italy does in his three mountain preserves, is challenging enough to test even the best big-game hunters. There are moments when shooting driven game requires far more skill with the rifle than what’s usually needed in a still hunt.

In America, as in England and on the Continent of Europe, private game preserves are so numerous it is impossible to mention more than a very few of them, unless one devotes a volume to the subject. Probably there are more than five hundred, and no list of them is "up to date" for more than one day, because the number is constantly increasing. I make no pretense even of possessing a list of those in America, and I mention only a few of those with which I am best acquainted, by way of illustration.

In America, just like in England and across Europe, there are so many private game preserves that it’s impossible to name more than a handful, unless you write a whole book on the topic. There are probably over five hundred, and no list of them stays “current” for more than a day since the number keeps growing. I don’t even pretend to have a complete list of those in America, and I’ll just mention a few that I know well to illustrate my point.

One of the earliest and the most celebrated deer parks of the United States was that of Hon. John Dean Caton, of two hundred acres, located near Ottawa, Ill., established about 1859. It was the experiments and observations made in that park that yielded Judge Caton's justly famous book on "The Antelope and Deer of America."

One of the first and most famous deer parks in the United States was owned by Hon. John Dean Caton, covering two hundred acres near Ottawa, Illinois, and established around 1859. The experiments and observations conducted in that park led to Judge Caton's renowned book, "The Antelope and Deer of America."

The first game preserve established by an incorporated club was "Blooming Grove Park," of one thousand acres, in Pennsylvania, where great success has been attained in the breeding and rearing of white-tailed deer.

The first game preserve set up by an official club was "Blooming Grove Park," spanning one thousand acres in Pennsylvania, where significant success has been achieved in breeding and raising white-tailed deer.

In the eastern United States the most widely-known game preserve is Blue [Page 360] Mountain Forest Park, near Newport, New Hampshire. It was founded in 1885, by the late Austin Corbin, and has been loyally and diligently maintained by Austin Corbin, Jr., George S. Edgell and the other members of the Corbin family. Ownership is vested in the Blue Mountain Forest Association. The area of the preserve is 27,000 acres, and besides embracing much fine forest on Croydon Mountain, it also contains many converted farms whose meadow lands afford good grazing.

In the eastern United States, the most well-known game preserve is Blue [Page 360] Mountain Forest Park, near Newport, New Hampshire. It was established in 1885 by the late Austin Corbin and has been faithfully and actively maintained by Austin Corbin, Jr., George S. Edgell, and other members of the Corbin family. The Blue Mountain Forest Association owns the preserve. It covers an area of 27,000 acres, and in addition to featuring a lot of beautiful forest on Croydon Mountain, it also includes many converted farms with meadows that provide good grazing.

This preserve contains a large herd of bison (86 head), elk, white-tailed deer, wild boar and much smaller game. The annual surplus of bison and other large game is regularly sold and distributed throughout the world for the stocking of other parks and zoological gardens. Each year a few surplus deer are quietly killed for the Boston market, but a far greater number are sold alive, at from $25 to $30 each in carload lots.

This preserve is home to a large herd of bison (86 head), elk, white-tailed deer, wild boar, and smaller game. The annual surplus of bison and other large game is regularly sold and distributed worldwide to stock other parks and zoos. Each year, a few surplus deer are quietly harvested for the Boston market, but many more are sold live, ranging from $25 to $30 each in carload lots.

In the Adirondacks of northern New York, there are a great many private game preserves. Dr. T.S. Palmer, in his pamphlet on "Private Game Preserves" (Department of Agriculture) places the number at 60, and their total area at 791,208 acres. Some of them have caused much irritation among some of the hunting, fishing and trapping residents of the Adirondack region. They seem to resent the idea of the exclusive ownership of lands that are good hunting-grounds. This view of property rights has caused much trouble and some bloodshed, two persons having been killed for presuming to assert exclusive rights in large tracts of wilderness property.

In the Adirondacks of northern New York, there are a lot of private game preserves. Dr. T.S. Palmer, in his pamphlet on "Private Game Preserves" (Department of Agriculture), estimates there are 60, covering a total area of 791,208 acres. Some of these have caused significant frustration among local residents who hunt, fish, and trap in the Adirondack region. They seem to dislike the idea of exclusive ownership of land that is prime hunting territory. This perspective on property rights has led to a lot of conflict and some violence, with two people killed for trying to claim exclusive rights to large areas of wilderness.

"In the upland preserve under private ownership." says Dr. Palmer, "may be found one of the most important factors in the maintenance of the future supply of game and game birds. Nearly all such preserves are maintained for the propagation of deer, quail, grouse, or pheasants. They vary widely in area, character, and purpose, and embrace some of the largest game refuges in the country. Some of the preserves in North Carolina cover from 15,000 to 30,000 acres; several in South Carolina exceed 60,000 acres in extent." The Megantic Club's northern preserve, on the boundary between Quebec and Maine, embraces nearly 200 square miles, or upward of 125,000 acres.

"In the privately owned upland preserve," says Dr. Palmer, "you can find one of the most crucial elements for ensuring the future supply of game and game birds. Almost all such preserves are managed for the breeding of deer, quail, grouse, or pheasants. They differ greatly in size, type, and purpose, and include some of the largest game refuges in the country. Some preserves in North Carolina range from 15,000 to 30,000 acres; several in South Carolina exceed 60,000 acres in size." The Megantic Club's northern preserve, located on the border between Quebec and Maine, spans nearly 200 square miles, or over 125,000 acres.

Comparatively few of the larger preserves are enclosed, and on such grounds, hunting becomes sport quite as genuine as it is in regions open to free hunting. In some instances part of the tract is fenced, while large unenclosed areas are protected by being posted. The character of their tenure varies also. Some are owned in fee simple; others, particularly the larger ones, are leased, or else comprise merely the shooting rights on the land. In both size and tenure, the upland preserves of the United States are comparable with the grouse moors and large deer forests of Scotland.

Comparatively few of the larger preserves are fenced in, and on such land, hunting is just as much a sport as it is in areas open to free hunting. In some cases, part of the area is fenced, while large open regions are protected by posting signs. The nature of ownership also varies. Some are owned outright, while others, especially the larger ones, are leased or only include shooting rights on the land. In terms of both size and ownership, the upland preserves in the United States are similar to the grouse moors and large deer forests in Scotland.

Of the game preserves in the South, I know one that is quite ideal. It is St. Vincent Island, near Apalachicola, Florida, in the northern edge of the Gulf of Mexico. It was purchased in 1909 by Dr. Ray V. Pierce, and his guests kill perhaps one hundred ducks each year out of the thousands that flock to the ten big ponds that occupy the eastern third of the island. Into those ponds much good duck food has been [Page 361] introduced,—Potamogeton pectinatus and perfoliatus. The area of the island is twenty square miles. Besides being a great winter resort for ducks, its sandy, pine-covered ridges and jungles of palms to and live oak afford fine haunts and feeding grounds for deer. Those jungles contain two species of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus louisiana and osceola), and Dr. Pierce has introduced the Indian sambar deer and Japanese sika deer (Cervus sika), both of which are doing well. We are watching the progress of those big sambar deer with very keen interest, and it is to be recorded that already that species has crossed with the Louisiana white-tailed deer.

Of the game preserves in the South, I know one that’s pretty perfect. It’s St. Vincent Island, near Apalachicola, Florida, on the northern edge of the Gulf of Mexico. Dr. Ray V. Pierce bought it in 1909, and his guests hunt about one hundred ducks each year from the thousands that gather at the ten large ponds in the eastern part of the island. A lot of good duck food has been [Page 361] introduced into those ponds—Potamogeton pectinatus and perfoliatus. The island covers an area of twenty square miles. In addition to being a great winter spot for ducks, its sandy, pine-covered ridges and jungles of palms and live oak provide excellent habitats and feeding grounds for deer. Those jungles are home to two species of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus louisiana and osceola), and Dr. Pierce has introduced the Indian sambar deer and Japanese sika deer (Cervus sika), both of which are thriving. We are closely monitoring the progress of the big sambar deer, and it’s worth noting that this species has already interbred with the Louisiana white-tailed deer.

MAP OF MARSH ISLAND AND ADJACENT WILD-FOWL PRESERVES

MAP OF MARSH ISLAND AND ADJACENT WILDFOWL PRESERVES

During the autumn of 1912, public attention in the United States was for a time focused on the purchase of Marsh Island, Louisiana, by Mrs. Russell Sage, and its permanent dedication to the cause of wild-life protection. This delightful event has brought into notice the Louisiana State Game Preserve of 13,000 acres near Marsh Island, and its hinterland (and water) of 11,000 acres adjoining, which constitutes the Ward-McIlhenny Wild Fowl Preserve. These three great preserves taken together as they lie form a wild-fowl sanctuary of great size, and of great value to the whole Mississippi Valley. Now that all duck-shooting therein has been stopped, it is safe to predict that they shortly will be inhabited by a wild-fowl population that will really stagger the imagination.

During the fall of 1912, the public in the United States was briefly focused on Mrs. Russell Sage's purchase of Marsh Island, Louisiana, which she dedicated permanently to wildlife protection. This wonderful event highlighted the Louisiana State Game Preserve, covering 13,000 acres near Marsh Island, along with an additional 11,000 acres of adjoining land and water that make up the Ward-McIlhenny Wild Fowl Preserve. Together, these three large preserves create a significant wild-fowl sanctuary that is incredibly valuable to the entire Mississippi Valley. With all duck hunting now prohibited in this area, it’s safe to say that it will soon be home to a wild-fowl population that will truly amaze everyone.

Duck-Shooting "Preserves." —A ducking "preserve" is a large tract of land and water owned by a few individuals, or a club, for the purpose of preserving exclusively for themselves and their friends the best [Page 362] possible opportunities for killing large numbers of ducks and geese without interference. In no sense whatever are they intended to preserve or increase the supply of wild fowl. The real object of their existence is duck and goose slaughter. For example, the worst goose-slaughter story on record comes to us from the grounds of the Glenn County Club in California, whereon, as stated elsewhere, two men armed with automatic shotguns killed 218 geese in one hour, and bagged a total of 452 in one day.

Duck-hunting "Preserves." —A duck "preserve" is a large area of land and water owned by a few individuals or a club, intended to give them and their friends the best chance to kill large numbers of ducks and geese without any interruptions. They're not meant to conserve or boost the wild fowl population. The main goal of these places is to slaughter ducks and geese. For instance, the worst goose-slaughter incident on record happened at the Glenn County Club in California, where, as mentioned elsewhere, two men with automatic shotguns killed 218 geese in just one hour and a total of 452 in a single day.

I shall not attempt to give any list of the so-called ducking "preserves." The word "preserve," when applied to them, is a misnomer. Thirteen states have these incorporated slaughtering-grounds for ducks and geese, the greatest number being in California, Illinois, North Carolina and Virginia. California has carried the ducking-club idea to the limit where it is claimed that it constitutes an abuse. Dr. Palmer says that one or two of the club preserves on the western side of the San Joaquin Valley contain upward of 40 square miles, or 25,000 acres each! With considerable asperity it is now publicly charged (in the columns of The Examiner of San Francisco) that for the unattached sportsmen there is no longer any duck-shooting to be had in California, because all the good ducking-grounds are owned and exclusively controlled by clubs. In many states the private game preserves are a source of great irritation, and many have been attacked in courts of law. [N]

I won’t try to list the so-called ducking "preserves." The term "preserve" is really a misnomer when it comes to them. Thirteen states have these licensed areas for duck and goose hunting, with the highest numbers in California, Illinois, North Carolina, and Virginia. California has taken the idea of ducking clubs to the extreme, and it’s even claimed to be an abuse. Dr. Palmer notes that one or two of the club preserves on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley are over 40 square miles, or 25,000 acres each! There are now serious accusations being made (in the pages of The Examiner of San Francisco) that for independent hunters, there’s no more duck shooting available in California because all the prime duck-hunting spots are owned and solely controlled by clubs. In many states, private game preserves are a major source of frustration, and several have faced legal challenges. [N]

But I am not sorrowing over the woes of the unattached duck-hunter, or in the least inclined to champion his cause against the ducking-club member. As slaughterers and exterminators of wild-fowl, rarely exercising mercy under ridiculous bag-limits, they have both been too heedless of the future, and one is just as bad for the game as the other. If either of them favored the game, I would be on his side; but I see no difference between them. They both kill right up to the bag-limit, as often as they can; and that is what is sweeping away all our feathered game.

But I'm not feeling sorry for the struggling duck hunter, nor am I inclined to support his issues against the duck club member. As killers and exterminators of wild birds, both of them rarely show any mercy under silly bag limits; they've both ignored the future, and neither one is better for the game than the other. If either of them cared about the game, I'd back him; but I see no difference between them. They both hunt right up to the bag limit, as often as they can, and that's what's wiping out all our feathered game.

Curiously enough, the angry unattached duck-hunters of California are to-day proposing to have revenge on the duck-clubbers by removing all restrictions on the sale of game! This is on the theory that the duckless sportsmen of the State of California would like to buy dead ducks and geese for their tables! It is a novel and original theory, but the sane people of California never will enact it into law. It would be a step just twenty years backward!

Interestingly, the frustrated solo duck hunters in California are now suggesting getting back at the duck club members by lifting all restrictions on the sale of game! The idea is that the duck-less sports enthusiasts in California would want to purchase dead ducks and geese for their dinners! It's a unique and original thought, but rational people in California will never turn it into law. It would be a move just twenty years backward!

The Public vs. The Private Game Preserve. —Both the executive and the judiciary branches of our state governments will in the future be called upon with increasing frequency to sit in judgment on this case. Conditions about us are rapidly changing. The precepts of yesterday may be out of date and worthless tomorrow. By way of introspection, let us see what principles of equity toward Man and Nature we would lay down as the basis of our action if we were called to the bench. Named in logical sequence they would be about as follows:

The Public vs. The Private Game Preserve. —Both the executive and judicial branches of our state governments will increasingly be expected to weigh in on this case. The circumstances around us are changing quickly. The rules of yesterday might be outdated and irrelevant tomorrow. Through self-reflection, let's consider the principles of fairness toward people and nature that we would establish as the foundation for our decisions if we were in a position to judge. Listed in logical order, they would look something like this:

  • Any private game "preserve" that is maintained chiefly as a [Page 363] slaughter-ground for wild game, either birds or mammals, may become detrimental to the interests of the people at large.
  • It is not necessarily the duty of any state to provide for the maintenance of private death-traps for the wholesale slaughter of migratory game.
  • An oppressive monopoly in the slaughter of migratory game is detrimental to the interests of the public at large, the same as any other monopoly.
  • Every de facto game preserve, maintained for the preservation of wild life rather than for its slaughter, is an institution beneficial to the public at large, and therefore entitled to legal rights and privileges above and beyond all which may rightly be accorded to the so-called "preserves" that are maintained as killing-grounds.
  • The law may justly discriminate between the actual game preserve and the mere killing-ground.
  • Whenever a killing-ground becomes a public burden, it may be abated, the same as any other public infliction.

In private game preserves the time has arrived when lawmakers and judges must begin to apply the blood-test, and separate the true from the false. And at every step, the welfare of the wild life involved must be given full consideration. No men, nor body of men, should be permitted to practice methods that spell extermination.

In private game reserves, it's time for lawmakers and judges to start using the blood test to distinguish between the genuine and the fake. Throughout this process, the welfare of the wildlife involved must be fully considered. No individual or group of individuals should be allowed to use methods that lead to extermination.

EGRETS AND HERONS IN SANCTUARY ON MARSH ISLAND

EGRETS AND HERONS IN A SANCTUARY ON MARSH ISLAND


[Page 364]
CHAPTER XXXIX
BRITISH GAME PRESERVES IN AFRICA AND AUSTRALIA

This brief chapter is offered as an object-lesson to the world at large.

This short chapter is presented as a lesson for everyone.

In the early days of America, the founders of our states and territories gave little heed, or none at all, to the preservation of wild life. Even if they thought of that duty, undoubtedly they felt that the game would always last, and that they had no time for such sentimental side issues as the making of game preserves. They were coping with troubles and perplexities of many kinds, and it is not to be wondered at that up to forty years ago, real game protection in America went chiefly by default.

In America's early days, the founders of our states and territories paid little attention, if any, to protecting wildlife. Even if they considered that responsibility, they probably believed that game would always be plentiful and that they had no time for such sentimental matters as creating game preserves. They were dealing with various troubles and challenges, so it's not surprising that up until about forty years ago, effective game protection in America mostly didn't happen.

In South Africa, precisely the same conditions have prevailed until recent times. The early colonists were kept so busy shooting lions and making farms that not one game preserve was made. If any men can be excused from the work and worry of preserving game, and making preserves, it is those who spend their lives pioneering and state-building in countries like Africa. Men who continually have to contend with disease, bad food, rains, insect pests, dangerous wild beasts and native cussedness may well claim that they have troubles enough, without going far into campaigns to preserve wild animals in countries where animals are plentiful and cheap. It is for this reason that the people of Alaska can not be relied upon to preserve the Alaskan game. They are busy with other things that are of more importance to them.

In South Africa, similar conditions have existed until recently. The early settlers were so occupied with hunting lions and establishing farms that no game reserves were created. If anyone can be excused from the task and concern of preserving wildlife and creating reserves, it’s those who dedicate their lives to pioneering and nation-building in places like Africa. Men who constantly face challenges like disease, poor food, heavy rains, pests, dangerous wildlife, and local conflicts can rightly argue that they have enough problems without taking on the effort to protect wild animals in regions where wildlife is abundant and inexpensive. This is why the people of Alaska can’t be expected to safeguard Alaskan wildlife; they have other priorities that matter more to them.

In May, 1900, representatives of the great powers owning territory in Africa held a conference in the interests of the wild-animal life of that continent. As a result a Convention was signed by which those powers bound themselves "to make provision for the prevention of further undue destruction of wild game." The principles laid down for universal observance were as follows:

In May 1900, representatives from the major powers that had territories in Africa held a conference focused on the continent's wildlife. As a result, a Convention was signed where those powers committed to "make arrangements to prevent further unnecessary destruction of wild game." The principles established for global adherence were as follows:

  1. Sparing of females and immature animals.
  2. The establishment of close seasons and game sanctuaries.
  3. Absolute protection of rare species.
  4. Restrictions on export for trading purposes of skins, horns, tusks, etc.
  5. Prohibition of the use of pits, snares and game traps.

The brave and hardy men who are making for the British people a grand empire in Africa probably are greater men than far-distant people realize. To them, the white man's burden of game preservation is accepted as all in the day's work. A mere handful of British civil officers, strongly aided by the Society for the Preservation of the Fauna of the British Empire, have carved out and set aside a great chain of game preserves reaching all the way from Swaziland and the Transvaal to Khartoum. Taken either collectively or separately, it represents [Page 365] grand work, characteristic of the greatest colonizers on earth. Those preserves are worthy stones in the foundation of what one day will be a great British empire in Africa. The names of the men who proposed them and wrought them out should, in some way, be imperishably connected with them as their founders, as the least reward that Posterity can bestow.

The brave and resilient men who are creating a grand empire for the British people in Africa are probably greater than most people realize. For them, the white man's responsibility of game preservation is just part of the job. A small group of British civil officers, strongly supported by the Society for the Preservation of the Fauna of the British Empire, has established an extensive network of game reserves stretching from Swaziland and the Transvaal all the way to Khartoum. Whether viewed as a whole or individually, this represents [Page 365] significant effort, typical of the greatest colonizers in history. These reserves are essential foundations for what will eventually become a great British empire in Africa. The names of those who proposed and created them should be permanently linked to these reserves as their founders, as the least recognition that future generations can give.

In Major J. Stevenson-Hamilton's fine work, "Animal Life in Africa," [O] the author has been at much pains to publish an excellent series of maps showing the locations of the various British game preserves in Africa, and the map published herewith has been based chiefly on that work. It is indeed fortunate for the wild life of Africa that it has today so powerful a champion and exponent as this author, the warden of the Transvaal Game Preserves.

In Major J. Stevenson-Hamilton's excellent book, "Animal Life in Africa," [O] the author has worked hard to provide an outstanding series of maps that show where the various British game reserves in Africa are located, and the map included here is primarily based on that work. It is truly fortunate for Africa's wildlife that it has such a strong advocate and representative as this author, the warden of the Transvaal Game Preserves.

Events move so rapidly that up to this date no one, so far as I am aware, has paused long enough to make and publish an annotated list of the African game preserves. Herein I have attempted to begin that task myself, and I regret that at this distance it is impossible for me to set down under the several titles the names of the men who made these preserves possible, and actually founded them.

Events are moving so quickly that, as far as I know, no one has taken the time to create and publish a detailed list of the African game preserves. Here, I’m trying to start that task myself, and I regret that from this distance, I cannot list the names of the individuals who made these preserves possible and actually established them under the various headings.

To thoughtful Americans I particularly commend this list as a showing of the work of men who have not waited until the game had been practically exterminated before creating sanctuaries in which to preserve it. In view of these results, how trivial and small of soul seems the mercenary efforts of the organized wool-growers of Montana to thwart our plan to secure a paltry fifteen square miles of grass lands for the rugged and arid Snow Creek Antelope Preserve that is intended to help save a valuable species from quick extermination.

To thoughtful Americans, I especially recommend this list as evidence of the efforts of people who didn't wait until the game was practically extinct before creating safe spaces to protect it. Given these results, the self-serving attempts of the organized wool-growers in Montana to stop our plan to secure a mere fifteen square miles of grasslands for the rugged and dry Snow Creek Antelope Preserve—designed to help save a valuable species from rapid extinction—seem so petty and small-minded.

At this point I must quote the views of a high authority on the status of wild life and game preserves in Africa. The following is from Major Stevenson-Hamilton's book.

At this point, I need to share the opinions of an expert on the status of wildlife and game reserves in Africa. The following is from Major Stevenson-Hamilton's book.

"It is a remarkable phenomenon in human affairs how seldom the experience of others seems to turn the scale of action. There are, I take it, very few farmers, in the Cape Colony, the Orange Free State, or the Transvaal, who would not be glad to see an adequate supply of game upon their land. Indeed, the writer is constantly dealing with applications as to the possibility of reintroducing various species from the game reserves to private farms, and only the question of expense and the difficulty of transport have, up to the present, prevented this being done on a considerable scale. When, therefore, the relatively small populations of such protectorates as are still well stocked with game are heard airily discussing the advisability of getting rid of it as quickly as possible, one realizes how often vain are the teachings of history, and how well-nigh hopeless it is to quote the result of similar action elsewhere. It remains only to trust that things may be seen in truer perspective ere it is too late, and that those in whose temporary charge it is may not cast recklessly away one of nature's most splendid assets, one, moreover, which once lightly discarded, can never by any possibility, be regained.

It’s intriguing how seldom other people’s experiences seem to affect individual actions. I believe there are very few farmers in the Cape Colony, the Orange Free State, or the Transvaal who wouldn’t appreciate a decent supply of game on their land. In fact, I regularly get inquiries about the possibility of reintroducing various species from game reserves to private farms, and the main obstacles to doing this on a larger scale are costs and transportation challenges. So when the relatively small populations in protectorates that still have plenty of game casually talk about the need to eliminate it as quickly as possible, it shows how often the lessons of history are overlooked and how nearly impossible it is to use similar situations elsewhere as warnings. We can only hope that a clearer understanding develops before it’s too late, and that those temporarily overseeing these resources don’t thoughtlessly waste one of nature's greatest treasures—a loss that, once it happens, can never be recovered.

THE MOST IMPORTANT GAME PRESERVES OF AFRICA

THE MOST IMPORTANT GAME PRESERVES OF AFRICA

The Numbers Refer to Corresponding Numbers in the Text

The numbers refer to the matching numbers in the text.

"It is idle to say that the advance of civilization must necessarily mean the total disappearance of all wild animals. This is one of those glib fallacies which flows only too readily from unthinking lips. Civilization in its full sense—not the advent of a few scattered pioneers—of course, implies their restriction, especially as regards purely grass-feeding species, within certain definite bounds, both as regards numbers and sanctuaries. But this is a very different thing from wholesale destruction, that a few more or less deserving individuals may receive some small pecuniary benefit, or gratify their taste for slaughter to the detriment of everyone else who may come after. The fauna of an empire is the property of that empire as a whole, and not of the small portion of it where the animals may happen to exist; and while full justice and encouragement must be given to the farmer and pioneer, neither should be permitted to entirely demolish for his own advantage resources which, strictly speaking, are not his own."—("Animal Life in Africa." p. 24.)

"It's pointless to say that civilization's progress will inevitably lead to the complete extinction of all wild animals. This is one of those slick misconceptions that easily rolls off the tongues of those who don't think critically. True civilization—not just the arrival of a few scattered pioneers—means managing their populations, especially for purely herbivorous species, by confining them to specific areas regarding numbers and protected spaces. But this is very different from total destruction just so a few individuals, who may or may not deserve it, can make a little money or fulfill their desire to kill at the expense of everyone else who comes afterward. The wildlife of an empire belongs to that empire as a whole, not just to the small part where the animals happen to live; and while full fairness and support must be given to farmers and pioneers, neither should be allowed to completely deplete resources for their own benefit that, strictly speaking, aren't theirs."—("Animal Life in Africa." p. 24.)


African Game Preserves

African Wildlife Reserves

East Africa under British rule:

1. [P] The Athi Plains Preserve.—This is situated between the Uganda Railway and the boundary of German East Africa. Its northern boundary is one mile north of the railway track. It is about 215 miles long east and west by 105 miles from north to south, and its area is about 13,000 square miles. It is truly a great preserve, and worthy of the plains fauna that it is specially intended to perpetuate.

1. [P] The Athi Plains Preserve.—This is located between the Uganda Railway and the border of German East Africa. Its northern boundary is one mile north of the railway line. It stretches about 215 miles from east to west and 105 miles from north to south, covering an area of around 13,000 square miles. It’s genuinely a significant preserve, designed to protect the unique wildlife of the plains.

2. The Jubaland Preserve.—This preserve lies northwest of Mount Kenia. Its southwestern corner is near Lake Baringo, the Laikipia Escarpment is its western boundary up to Mt. Nyiro, and from that point its northern boundary runs 225 miles to Marsabit Lake. From that point the boundary runs south-by-west to the Guaso Nyiro River, which forms the eastern half of the southern boundary. Its total area appears to be about 13,000 square miles.

2. The Jubaland Preserve.—This preserve is located northwest of Mount Kenya. Its southwestern corner is close to Lake Baringo, the Laikipia Escarpment forms its western border up to Mt. Nyiro, and from there its northern border stretches 225 miles to Marsabit Lake. From Marsabit Lake, the border goes south-by-west to the Guaso Nyiro River, which makes up the eastern part of the southern border. Its total area is roughly 13,000 square miles.

In addition to the two great preserves described above the government of British East Africa has established on the Uasin Gishu Plateau a centrally located sanctuary for elands, roan antelopes and hippopotamii. There is also a small special rhinoceros preserve about fifty miles southeastward of Nairobi, around Kiu station, on the railway.

In addition to the two major reserves mentioned above, the government of British East Africa has set up a central sanctuary on the Uasin Gishu Plateau for elands, roan antelopes, and hippopotamuses. There's also a small, dedicated rhinoceros reserve about fifty miles southeast of Nairobi, near Kiu station on the railway.

Sudan

3. A great nameless sanctuary for wild life exists on the eastern bank of the Nile, comprising the whole territory between the main stream, the Blue Nile and Abyssinia. Its length (north and south) is 215 miles, and its width is about 125 miles; which means a total area of about 26,875 square miles. Natives and others living within this sanctuary may hunt therein—if they can procure licenses.

3. A vast, unnamed wildlife sanctuary is located on the eastern bank of the Nile, covering the entire area between the main river, the Blue Nile, and Abyssinia. It's 215 miles long (north to south) and about 125 miles wide, totaling around 26,875 square miles. Locals and others living within this sanctuary can hunt there—if they can obtain licenses.

Somaliland:

4. Hargeis Reserve, about 1,800 square miles.

4. Hargeis Reserve, approximately 1,800 square miles.

5. Mirso Reserve, about 300 square miles.

5. Mirso Reserve, around 300 square miles.

Uganda:

6. Budonga Forest Reserve.—This small reserve embraces the whole eastern shore and hinterland of Lake Albert Nyanza, and is shaped like a new moon.

6. Budonga Forest Reserve.—This small reserve includes the entire eastern shore and surrounding area of Lake Albert Nyanza and is shaped like a crescent moon.

7. Toro Reserve.—This small reserve lies between Lakes Albert Nyanza and Albert Edward Nyanza, touching both.

7. Toro Reserve.—This small reserve is located between Lake Albert Nyanza and Lake Edward Nyanza, bordering both.

Nyasaland, or the British Central Africa Protectorate.

A small territory, but remarkably well stocked with game.

A small area, but incredibly well-populated with wildlife.

8. Elephant Marsh Preserve.—A small area in the extreme southern end of the Protectorate, on both sides of the Shire River, chiefly for buffalo.

8. Elephant Marsh Preserve.—A small area at the far southern end of the Protectorate, on both sides of the Shire River, primarily for buffalo.

9. Angoniland Reserve.—This was created especially to preserve about one thousand elephants. It is forty miles west of the southwestern arm of Lake Nyasa.

9. Angoniland Reserve.—This was established specifically to protect around one thousand elephants. It's located forty miles west of the southwest arm of Lake Nyasa.

Transvaal: [Page 368]

10. Sabi-Singwitza-Pongola Preserve.—This great preserve occupies the whole region between the Drakenberg Mountains and the Lebombo Hills. Its total area is about 10,500 square miles. It lies in a compact block about 210 miles long by 50 miles wide, along the Portuguese border.

10. Sabi-Singwitza-Pongola Preserve.—This vast preserve covers the entire area between the Drakenberg Mountains and the Lebombo Hills. Its total size is about 10,500 square miles. It stretches in a solid block approximately 210 miles long and 50 miles wide, along the Portuguese border.

11. Rustenburg Reserve.—This is situated at the head of the Limpopo River, and covers about 3,500 square miles.

11. Rustenburg Reserve.—This is located at the source of the Limpopo River and spans approximately 3,500 square miles.

Eswatini:

12. The Swaziland Reserve contains about 1,750 square miles, and occupies the southwestern corner of Swaziland.

12. The Swaziland Reserve covers roughly 1,750 square miles and is located in the southwestern corner of Swaziland.

Zimbabwe

13. The Nweru Marsh Game Reserve is in northwestern Rhodesia, bordering the Congo Free State. The description of its local boundaries is quite unintelligible outside of Rhodesia.

13. The Nweru Marsh Game Reserve is in northwestern Zimbabwe, next to the Congo Free State. The description of its local boundaries doesn't make much sense outside of Zimbabwe.

Luangwa Reserve.—The locality of this reserve cannot be determined from the official description, which gives no clue to its shape or size.

Luangwa Reserve.—The location of this reserve can't be figured out from the official description, which provides no hints about its shape or size.


Game Preserves In Australasia

Game Reserves in Australasia

NZ

Little Barrier Island in the north, and Resolution Island, in the south; and concerning both, details are lacking.

Little Barrier Island in the north, and Resolution Island, in the south; and there is not much information available about either.

Australia:

Kangaroo Island, near Adelaide, South Australia, is 400 miles northwest of Melbourne. Of the total area of this rather large island of 300 square miles, 140 square miles have been set aside as a game preserve, chiefly for the preservation of the mallee bird (Lipoa occelata). It is believed that eventually the whole island will become a wild-life sanctuary, and it would seem that this can not be consummated a day too soon for the vanishing wild life.

Kangaroo Island, near Adelaide, South Australia, is 400 miles northwest of Melbourne. Out of the total area of this relatively large island, which is 300 square miles, 140 square miles have been designated as a game preserve, mainly to protect the mallee bird (Lipoa occelata). It's believed that eventually the entire island will become a wildlife sanctuary, and it seems that this can't happen soon enough for the disappearing wildlife.

Wilson's Promontory. Adelaide, is a peninsula well suited to the preservation of wild life, especially birds, and it is now a sanctuary.

Wilson's Promontory. Adelaide is a peninsula that's great for protecting wildlife, especially birds, and it is now a sanctuary.

Many private bird refuges have been created in Australia.

Many private bird reserves have been established in Australia.

Tasmania

Eleven Bird Refuges have been created, with a total area of 26,000 acres,—an excellent record for Tasmania!

Eleven Bird Refuges have been established, covering a total area of 26,000 acres—an impressive achievement for Tasmania!

Freycinet's Peninsula.—At present this wild-life sanctuary is not adequately protected from illicit hunting and trapping; but its full protection is now demanded, and no doubt this soon will be provided by the government. I am informed that this offers a golden opportunity to secure a fine wild-life sanctuary at ridiculously small cost to the public. The whole world is interested in the preservation of the remarkable fauna of Tasmania. The extermination of the thylacine would be a zoological calamity; but it is impending.

Freycinet's Peninsula.—Right now, this wildlife sanctuary isn't properly protected from illegal hunting and trapping; however, there’s a strong call for complete protection, and it's likely that the government will respond soon. I've been told that this presents a fantastic opportunity to establish a great wildlife sanctuary at a very low cost to the public. People all over the world care about preserving the unique wildlife of Tasmania. The extinction of the thylacine would be a huge loss for zoology, and it’s a real threat.


[Page 369]
CHAPTER XL
BREEDING GAME AND FUR IN CAPTIVITY

Game Breeding. —The breeding of game in captivity for sale in the markets of the world is just as legitimate as the breeding of domestic species. This applies equally to mammals, birds, reptiles and fishes. It is the duty of the nation and the state to foster such industries and facilitate the marketing of their products without any unnecessary formalities, delays or losses to producers or to purchasers.

Game Breeding. —Breeding game animals in captivity to sell in markets worldwide is just as valid as raising domestic species. This applies to mammals, birds, reptiles, and fish alike. It is the responsibility of the nation and the state to support these industries and make it easier to market their products without unnecessary red tape, delays, or losses for producers or buyers.

Already this principle has been established in several states. Without going into the records, it is safe to say that Colorado was the pioneer in the so-called "more-game" movement, about 1899; but there is one person who would like to have the world believe that it started in the state of New York, about 1909. The idea is not quite as "old as the hills," but the application of it in the United States dates back through a considerable vista of years.

Already this principle has been established in several states. Without going into the records, it’s safe to say that Colorado was the pioneer in the so-called "more-game" movement, around 1899; but there’s one person who would like the world to believe that it started in New York around 1909. The idea isn’t exactly “old as the hills,” but its implementation in the United States goes back a good number of years.

The laws of Colorado providing for the creation of private game preserves and the marketing of their product under a tagging system, are very elaborate, and they show a sincere desire to foster an industry as yet but slightly developed in this country. The laws of New York are much more simple and easy to understand than those of Colorado.

The laws in Colorado that allow for the establishment of private game reserves and the sale of their products using a tagging system are quite detailed, demonstrating a genuine intention to support an industry that is still only minimally developed in this country. In contrast, the laws in New York are much simpler and easier to understand than those in Colorado.

There is one important principle now fully recognized in the New York laws for game breeding that other states will do well to adopt. It is the fact that certain kinds of wild game can not be bred and reared in captivity on a commercial basis; and this being true, it is clearly against public policy to provide for the sale of any such species. Why provide for the sale of preserve-bred grouse and ducks which we know can not be bred and reared in confinement in marketable numbers? For example, if we may judge by the numerous experiments that thus far have been made,—as we certainly have a right to do,—no man can successfully breed and rear in captivity, on a commercial basis, the canvasback duck, teal, pintail duck, ruffed grouse or quail. This being the case, no amount of clamor from game dealers and their allies ever should induce any state legislature to provide for the sale of any of those species until it has been fully demonstrated that they have been and can be bred in captivity in large numbers. The moment the markets of a state are thrown open to these impossible species, from that moment the state game wardens must make a continuous struggle to prevent the importation and sale of those birds contrary to law. This proposition is so simple that every honest man can see it.

There’s an important principle now fully acknowledged in New York's laws for game breeding that other states should consider adopting. It’s the fact that certain types of wild game cannot be bred and raised in captivity on a commercial scale; and since this is true, it's clearly against public policy to allow the sale of any such species. Why allow the sale of preserve-bred grouse and ducks when we know they can’t be bred and raised in confinement in sufficient numbers? For instance, if we look at the numerous experiments that have taken place so far,—as we certainly have the right to do—no one has been able to successfully breed and rear in captivity, on a commercial scale, the canvasback duck, teal, pintail duck, ruffed grouse, or quail. Given this situation, no amount of pressure from game dealers and their supporters should ever convince any state legislature to allow the sale of these species until it has been thoroughly proven that they have been and can be bred in captivity in large quantities. The moment a state’s markets are opened to these unfeasible species, from that moment state game wardens must constantly work to stop the illegal importation and sale of those birds. This idea is so straightforward that any honest person can understand it.

All that any state legislature may rightfully be asked to do is to [Page 370] provide for the sale, under tags, of those species which we know can be bred in captivity in large numbers.

All that any state legislature can legitimately be asked to do is to [Page 370] enable the sale, under tags, of those species which we know can be bred in captivity in large numbers.

When the Bayne law was drafted, its authors considered with the utmost care the possibilities in the breeding of game in the United States on a commercial basis. It was found that as yet only two wild native species have been, and can be, reared in captivity on a large scale. These are the white-tailed deer and mallard duck. Of foreign species we can breed successfully for market the fallow deer, red deer of Europe and some of the pheasants of the old world. For the rearing, killing and marketing of all these, the Bayne law provides the simplest processes of state supervision that the best game protectors and game breeders of New York could devise. The tagging system is expeditious, cheap and effective. Practically the only real concession that is required of the game-breeder concerns the killing, which must be done in a systematic way, whereby a state game warden can visit the breeder's premises and affix the tags without any serious sacrifice of time or convenience on either side. The tags cost the breeder five cents each, and they pay the cost of the services rendered by the state.

When the Bayne law was written, its authors carefully considered the potential for commercial game breeding in the United States. They discovered that only two wild native species can be raised in captivity on a large scale: the white-tailed deer and the mallard duck. For foreign species, we can successfully breed the fallow deer, European red deer, and some pheasants from the old world for the market. The Bayne law outlines straightforward state supervision processes for breeding, harvesting, and selling these animals, designed by the top game protectors and breeders in New York. The tagging system is quick, affordable, and efficient. Essentially, the only real requirement for game breeders involves the systematic killing of the animals, allowing a state game warden to visit the breeder’s property to attach the tags without significant loss of time or convenience for either party. The tags cost the breeder five cents each, and they cover the expenses for the state's services.

By this admirable system, which is very plainly set forth in the New York Conservation Commission's book of game laws, all the wild game of New York, and of every other state, is absolutely protected at all times against illegal killing and illegal importation for the New York market. Now, is it not the duty of Connecticut, Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas and every other state to return our compliment by passing similar laws? Massachusetts came up to public expectations at the next session of her legislature after the passage of our Bayne law. In 1913, California will try to secure a similar act; and we know full well that her ducks, geese, quail, grouse and band-tailed pigeon need it very much. If the California protectors of wild life succeed in arousing the great quiet mass of people in that state, their Bayne bill will be swept through their legislature on a tidal wave of popular sentiment.

By this excellent system, clearly explained in the New York Conservation Commission's book of game laws, all the wild game in New York, and every other state, is completely protected at all times from illegal hunting and illegal importation for the New York market. Now, isn’t it the responsibility of Connecticut, Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas, and every other state to respond by enacting similar laws? Massachusetts met public expectations in the next session of its legislature after the passage of our Bayne law. In 1913, California will try to pass a similar act, and we know that its ducks, geese, quail, grouse, and band-tailed pigeons really need it. If California’s wildlife protectors can energize the large, quiet majority in that state, their Bayne bill will likely pass through the legislature on a wave of popular support.

Elk.—For people who own wild woodlands near large cities there are good profits to be made in rearing white-tailed deer for the market. I would also mention elk, but for the fact that every man who rears a fine herd of elk quickly becomes so proud of the animals, and so much attached to them, that he can not bear to have them shot and butchered for market! Elk are just as easy to breed and rear as domestic cattle, except that in the fall breeding season, the fighting of rival bulls demands careful and intelligent management. Concerning the possibilities of feeding elk on hay at $25 per ton and declaring an annual profit, I am not informed. If the elk require to be fed all the year round, the high price of hay and grain might easily render it impossible to produce marketable three-year-old animals at a profit.

Elk.—For those who own wild woodlands near big cities, there are good profits to be made in raising white-tailed deer for the market. I would also mention elk, but the issue is that anyone who has a nice herd of elk quickly becomes so proud of them and so attached that they can't stand the thought of having them shot and processed for sale! Elk are just as easy to breed and raise as domestic cattle, except during the fall breeding season when the fighting among rival bulls requires careful and smart management. I don't have any information on the feasibility of feeding elk hay at $25 per ton and still declaring an annual profit. If elk need to be fed year-round, the high cost of hay and grain could easily make it unfeasible to produce marketable three-year-old animals at a profit.

White-tailed Deer.—Any one who owns from one hundred to one thousand acres of wild, brushy or forest-covered land can raise white-tailed (or Virginia) deer at a profit. With smaller areas of land, free range [Page 371] becomes impossible, and the prospects of commercial profits diminish and disappear. In any event, a fenced range is absolutely essential; and the best fence is the Page, 88 inches high, all horizontals of No. 9 wire, top and bottom wires of No. 7, and the perpendicular tie-wires of No. 12. This fence will hold deer, elk, bison and wild horses. In large enclosures, the white-tailed deer is hardy and prolific, and when fairly cooked its flesh is a great delicacy. In Vermont the average weights of the deer killed in that state in various years have been as follow:—in 1902, 171 lbs.; in 1903, 190 lbs.; in 1905, 198 lbs.; in 1906, 200 lbs.; in 1907, 196 lbs.; in 1908, 207 lbs.; and in 1909, 155 lbs. The reason for the great drop in 1909 is yet to be ascertained.

White-tailed Deer.—Anyone who owns between one hundred to one thousand acres of wild, brushy, or forested land can raise white-tailed (or Virginia) deer for profit. With smaller plots of land, free range [Page 371] becomes unfeasible, and the potential for commercial profits lessens and fades away. In any case, a fenced area is absolutely necessary; the best fence is the Page, 88 inches tall, with all horizontal wires made of No. 9 wire, top and bottom wires of No. 7, and vertical tie-wires of No. 12. This fence will contain deer, elk, bison, and wild horses. In large enclosures, white-tailed deer are hardy and reproduce well, and when cooked properly, their meat is quite a delicacy. In Vermont, the average weights of the deer harvested in various years were as follows:—in 1902, 171 lbs.; in 1903, 190 lbs.; in 1905, 198 lbs.; in 1906, 200 lbs.; in 1907, 196 lbs.; in 1908, 207 lbs.; and in 1909, 155 lbs. The reason for the significant drop in 1909 is still to be determined.

In 1910, in New York City the wholesale price of whole deer carcasses was from 22 to 25 cents per pound. Venison saddles were worth from 30 to 35 cents per pound. On the bill of fare of a first class hotel, a portion of venison costs from $1.50 to $2.50 according to the diner's location. It is probable that such prices as these will prevail only in the largest cities, and therefore they must not be regarded as general.

In 1910, in New York City, the wholesale price of whole deer carcasses was between 22 and 25 cents per pound. Venison saddles were priced from 30 to 35 cents per pound. On the menu of a high-end hotel, a serving of venison costs between $1.50 and $2.50, depending on where the diner is located. It's likely that prices like these will only be seen in the largest cities, so they shouldn't be considered typical.

Live white-tailed deer can be purchased for breeding purposes at prices ranging from $25 to $35 each. A good eastern source of supply is Blue Mountain Forest, Mr. Austin Corbin, president (Broadway and Cortlandt St., New York). In the West, good stock can be procured from the Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Company, through C.V.R. Townsend, Negaunee, Mich., whose preserve occupies the whole of Grand Island, Lake Superior.

Live white-tailed deer can be bought for breeding at prices between $25 and $35 each. A reliable source in the East is Blue Mountain Forest, run by Mr. Austin Corbin, located at Broadway and Cortlandt St., New York. In the West, good stock can be obtained from the Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Company, through C.V.R. Townsend in Negaunee, Mich., which has a preserve that covers all of Grand Island in Lake Superior.

The Department of Agriculture has published for free distribution a pamphlet entitled "Raising Deer and Other Large Game Animals" in the United States, by David E. Lantz, which contains much valuable information, although it leaves much unsaid.

The Department of Agriculture has made a pamphlet titled "Raising Deer and Other Large Game Animals" available for free distribution in the United States, authored by David E. Lantz. It contains a lot of valuable information, though it doesn't cover everything.

All breeders of deer are cautioned that during the fall and early winter months, all adult white-tailed bucks are dangerous to man, and should be treated accordingly. A measure of safety can be secured in a large park by compelling the deer always to keep at a respectful distance, and making no "pets," whatever. Whenever a buck finds his horns and loses his fear of man, climb the fence quickly. Bucks in the rutting season sometimes seem to go crazy, and often they attack men, wantonly and dangerously. The method of attack is to an unarmed man almost irresistible. The animal lowers his head, stiffens his neck and with terrible force drives straight forward for your stomach and bowels. Usually there are eight sharp spears of bone to impale you. The best defense of an unarmed man is to seize the left antler with the left hand, and with the right hand pull the deer's right front foot from under him. Merely holding to the horns makes great sport for the deer. He loves that unequal combat. The great desideratum is to put his fore legs out of commission, and get him down on his knees.

All deer breeders are warned that during the fall and early winter months, all adult white-tailed bucks can be dangerous to people and should be treated with caution. A good way to ensure safety in a large park is to keep the deer at a respectful distance and not make any "pets" of them. Whenever a buck grows its antlers and stops fearing humans, quickly climb the fence. Bucks during the rutting season can act erratically and may attack people without provocation. Their method of attack can be nearly impossible to withstand for an unarmed person. The animal lowers its head, stiffens its neck, and charges forward with powerful force aimed at your stomach and bowels. Usually, there are eight sharp bone points that can impale you. The best defense for an unarmed person is to grab the left antler with the left hand while using the right hand to pull the deer's right front leg out from under it. Simply hanging on to the horns is great fun for the deer; it enjoys that unequal struggle. The main goal is to incapacitate its front legs and get it down on its knees.

Does are sometimes dangerous, and inflict serious damage by rising on their hind feet and viciously striking with their sharp front hoofs. These tendencies in American deer are mentioned here as a duty to persons who may desire to breed deer for profit.

Does can be dangerous at times, causing serious harm by standing on their hind legs and viciously striking with their sharp front hooves. These behaviors in American deer are noted here as a caution to anyone considering breeding deer for profit.

The Red Deer of Europe.—Anyone who has plenty of natural forest food for deer and a good market within fair range, may find the European red deer a desirable species. It is of size smaller, and more easily managed, than the wapiti; and is more easily marketed because of its smaller size. As a species it is hardy and prolific, and of course its venison is as good as that of any other deer. Live specimens for stocking purposes can be purchased of S.A. Stephan, Agent for Carl Hagenbeck, Cincinnati Zoological Gardens, or of Wenz & Mackensen, Yardley, Pa., at prices ranging from $60 to $100 each, according to size and age. At present the supply of specimens in this country on hand for sale is very small.

The Red Deer of Europe.—Anyone who has a lot of natural forest food for deer and a good market nearby may find the European red deer to be a desirable species. It is smaller and easier to manage than the wapiti; plus, its smaller size makes it easier to sell. As a species, it is hardy and prolific, and its venison is just as good as that of any other deer. Live specimens for stocking purposes can be purchased from S.A. Stephan, Agent for Carl Hagenbeck, Cincinnati Zoological Gardens, or from Wenz & Mackensen, Yardley, Pa., at prices ranging from $60 to $100 each, depending on size and age. Right now, the supply of specimens available for sale in this country is very limited.

The Fallow Deer.—This species is the most universal park deer of Europe. It seems to be invulnerable to neglect and misuse, for it has persisted through countless generations of breeding in captivity, and the abuse of all nations. In size it is a trifle smaller than our white-tailed deer, with spots in summer, and horns that are widely flattened at the extremities in a very interesting way. It is very hardy and prolific, but of course it can not stand everything that could be put upon it. It needs a dry shed in winter, red clover hay and crushed oats for winter food; and no deer should be kept in mud. As a commercial proposition it is not so meaty as the white-tail, but it is less troublesome to keep. The adult males are not such vicious or dangerous fighters as white-tail bucks. Live specimens are worth from $50 to $75. The Essex County Park Commissioners (Orange, New Jersey) have had excellent success with this species. In 1906 they purchased twenty-five does and four bucks and placed them in an enclosure of 150 acres, on a wooded mountain-side. In 1912 they had 150 deer, and were obliged to take measures for a disposal of the surplus. Messrs. Wenz & Mackensen, keep an almost continuous supply of fallow deer on hand for sale.

The Fallow Deer.—This species is the most common park deer in Europe. It seems to withstand neglect and mistreatment, as it has survived through countless generations of breeding in captivity and the mistreatment of various nations. It is slightly smaller than our white-tailed deer, has spots in summer, and its antlers are interestingly flattened at the tips. It is very hardy and reproduces well, but it cannot endure every condition. It requires a dry shelter in winter, red clover hay, and crushed oats for winter food; and no deer should be kept in mud. As a commercial option, it isn't as meaty as the white-tail, but it is less troublesome to keep. Adult males are not as aggressive or dangerous as white-tail bucks. Live specimens range in value from $50 to $75. The Essex County Park Commissioners (Orange, New Jersey) have had great success with this species. In 1906, they bought twenty-five does and four bucks and placed them in a 150-acre enclosure on a wooded mountainside. By 1912, they had 150 deer and had to take measures to handle the surplus. Messrs. Wenz & Mackensen maintain a nearly constant supply of fallow deer available for sale.

The Indian Sambar Deer.—I have long advocated the introduction in the southern states, wherever deer can be protected, of this great, hulking, animated venison-factory. While I have not delved deeply into the subject of weight and growth, I feel sure from casual observations of the growth of about twenty-five animals that this species produces more venison during the first two years of its life than any other deer with which I am acquainted. I regard it as the greatest venison-producer of the whole Deer Family; and I know that is a large order. The size of a yearling is almost absurd, it is so great for an animal of tender years. When adult, the species is for its height very large and heavy. As a food-producing animal, located in the southern hill forests and taking care of itself, "there's millions in it!" But it must be kept under fence; for in no southern (or northern) state would any such mass of juicy wild meat long be permitted to roam at large unkilled. Through this species I believe that a million acres of southern timber lands, now useless except for timber growth, could be made very productive in choice venison. The price would be,—a good fence, and protection from poachers.

The Indian Sambar Deer.—I have long supported bringing this impressive, large deer to the southern states, wherever deer can be protected. Although I haven't researched their weight and growth in depth, I’m confident from my casual observations of about twenty-five animals that this species produces more venison in its first two years than any other deer I know of. I consider it the top venison producer in the entire Deer Family, and I recognize that’s a bold claim. The size of a yearling is almost unbelievable; it’s so large for such a young animal. When fully grown, this species is quite big and heavy for its height. As a food-producing animal in the southern hill forests, "there's millions in it!" But it must be kept enclosed; in no southern (or northern) state would such a large source of tender wild meat be allowed to roam free for long. I believe that through this species, a million acres of southern timberlands, currently only good for timber, could be transformed into a valuable source of premium venison. The cost would be—a sturdy fence and protection from poachers.

The Indian sambar deer looks like a short-legged big-bodied understudy of our American elk. It breeds well in captivity, and it is of quiet [Page 373] and tractable disposition. It can not live in a country where the temperature goes down to 25° F. and remains there for long periods. It would, I am firmly convinced, do well all along the Gulf coast, and if acclimatized along the Gulf, with the lapse of time and generations it would become more and more hardy, grow more hair, and push its way northward, until it reached the latitude of Tennessee. But then, in a wild state it could not be protected from poachers. As stated elsewhere, Dr. Ray V. Pierce has successfully acclimatized and bred this species in his St. Vincent Island game preserve, near Apalachicola, Florida. More than that, the species has crossed with the white-tailed deer of the Island.

The Indian sambar deer resembles a shorter-legged, larger version of our American elk. It thrives in captivity and has a calm and manageable nature. It cannot survive in regions where the temperature drops to 25°F and stays there for long periods. I firmly believe it would prosper along the Gulf coast, and if acclimatized there, over time and generations, it would become hardier, grow denser fur, and move northward until it reached the latitude of Tennessee. However, in the wild, it would be vulnerable to poachers. As mentioned elsewhere, Dr. Ray V. Pierce has successfully acclimatized and bred this species at his St. Vincent Island game preserve near Apalachicola, Florida. Additionally, this species has interbred with the white-tailed deer on the Island.

Living specimen of the Indian Sambar deer are worth from $125 to $250, according to size and other conditions. Just at present it seems difficult for Americans to procure a sufficient number of males! We have had very bad luck with several males that we attempted to import for breeding purposes.

Living specimens of the Indian Sambar deer are valued between $125 and $250, depending on their size and other factors. Right now, it appears challenging for Americans to get enough males! We've had a lot of bad luck with several males we tried to import for breeding.

The Mallard Duck.—A great many persons have made persistent attempts to breed the canvasback, redhead, mallard, black duck, pintail, teal and other species, on a commercial basis. So far as I am aware the mallard is the only wild duck that has been bred in sufficient numbers to slaughter for the markets. The wood duck and mandarin can be bred in fair numbers, but only sufficient to supply the demand for living birds, for park purposes. One would naturally suppose that a species as closely allied to the mallard as the black duck is known to be, would breed like the mallard; but the black duck is so timid and nervous about nesting as to be almost worthless in captivity. All the species named above, except the mallard, must at present, and in general, be regarded as failures in breeding for the market.

The Mallard Duck.—Many people have consistently tried to breed canvasbacks, redheads, mallards, black ducks, pintails, teal, and other species for commercial purposes. As far as I know, the mallard is the only wild duck that has been bred in large enough numbers to be slaughtered for the market. The wood duck and mandarin can be bred in decent quantities, but only enough to meet the demand for live birds for parks. One would naturally think that a species as closely related to the mallard as the black duck is known to be would breed similarly to the mallard; however, the black duck is so timid and anxious when it comes to nesting that it’s nearly worthless in captivity. Currently, all the species mentioned above, except the mallard, should generally be considered unsuccessful in breeding for the market.

Of all American ducks the common mallard is the most persistent and successful breeder. It quickly becomes accustomed to captivity, it enjoys park life, and when given even half a chance it will breed and rear its young.

Of all American ducks, the common mallard is the most determined and effective at breeding. It quickly gets used to captivity, thrives in parks, and whenever given the opportunity, it will breed and raise its young.

Unquestionably, the mallard duck can be reared in captivity in numbers limited only by the extent of breeder's facilities. The amount of net profit that can be realized depends wholly upon the business acumen and judgment displayed in the management of the flock. The total amount of knowledge necessary to success is not so very great, but at the same time, the exercise of a fair amount of intelligence, and also careful diligence, is absolutely necessary. Naturally the care and food of the flock must not cost extravagantly, or the profits will inevitably disappear.

Without a doubt, the mallard duck can be raised in captivity in numbers only limited by the breeder's facilities. The net profit that can be achieved relies entirely on the business skills and judgment shown in managing the flock. The overall knowledge needed for success isn't too extensive, but at the same time, a reasonable amount of intelligence and careful diligence is essential. Naturally, the care and feeding of the flock shouldn't be excessively costly, or the profits will inevitably vanish.

As a contribution to the cause of game-breeding for the market, and the creation of a new industry of value, Mr. L.S. Crandall and the author wrote for the New York State Conservation Commission a pamphlet on "Breeding Mallard Ducks for Market." Copies of it can be procured of our State Conservation Commission at Albany, by enclosing ten cents in stamps.

As a contribution to the game-breeding industry for the market and the establishment of a new valuable sector, Mr. L.S. Crandall and the author created a pamphlet for the New York State Conservation Commission titled "Breeding Mallard Ducks for Market." Copies are available from our State Conservation Commission in Albany by sending ten cents in stamps.


Breeding Fur-Bearing Animals

Raising Fur-Bearing Animals

When hundreds of persons wrote to me asking for literature on the breeding of fur-bearing animals for profit, for ten years I was compelled to tell them that there was no such literature. During the past three years a few offerings have been made, and I lose not a moment in listing them here.

When hundreds of people contacted me asking for information on breeding fur-bearing animals for profit, I had to tell them for ten years that there was no such information available. In the last three years, some resources have become available, and I want to share them here without delay.

"Life Histories of Northern Animals", by Ernest T. Seton (Charles Scribner's Sons, 2 volumes, $18), contains carefully written and valuable chapters on fox farming, skunk farming, marten farming, and mink farming, and other valuable life histories of the fur-bearing animals of North America.

"Life Histories of Northern Animals", by Ernest T. Seton (Charles Scribner's Sons, 2 volumes, $18), includes well-researched and important chapters on fox farming, skunk farming, marten farming, and mink farming, along with other insightful life histories of the fur-bearing animals of North America.

Rod and Gun in Canada, a magazine for sportsmen published by W.J. Taylor, Woodstock, Ontario, contained in 1912 a series of articles on "The Culture of Black and Silver Foxes," by R.B. and L.V. Croft. Country Life in America has published a number of illustrated articles on fox and skunk farming.

Rod and Gun in Canada, a magazine for sports enthusiasts published by W.J. Taylor in Woodstock, Ontario, featured a series of articles in 1912 titled "The Culture of Black and Silver Foxes," by R.B. and L.V. Croft. Country Life in America has also published several illustrated articles on fox and skunk farming.

With its usual enterprise and forethought, the Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture has published a valuable pamphlet of 22 pages on "Silver Fox Farming," by Wilfred H. Osgood, copies of which can be procured by addressing the Secretary of Agriculture. In consulting that contribution, however, it must be borne in mind that just now, in fox farming, history is being made more rapidly than heretofore.

With its typical initiative and planning, the Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture has released a useful 22-page pamphlet on "Silver Fox Farming" by Wilfred H. Osgood, which can be obtained by contacting the Secretary of Agriculture. However, while reviewing this contribution, it's important to remember that history in fox farming is currently being made faster than ever before.

I do not mean to say that the above are the only sources of information on fur-farming for profit, but they are the ones that have most impressed me. The files of all the journals and magazines for sportsmen contain numerous articles on this subject, and they should be carefully consulted.

I’m not saying that the above are the only sources of information on fur-farming for profit, but they are the ones that have made the biggest impression on me. The archives of all the journals and magazines for sports enthusiasts have many articles on this topic, and they should be looked at carefully.

Black-Fox Farming. —The ridiculous prices now being paid in London for the skins of black or "silver" foxes has created in this country a small furore over the breeding of that color-phase of the red fox. The prices that actually have been obtained, both for skins and for live animals for breeding purposes, have a strong tendency to make people crazy. Fancy paying $12,000 in real money for one pair of live black foxes! That has been done, on Prince Edward Island, and $10,000 per pair is now regarded as a bargain-counter figure.

Black-Fox Farming. —The outrageous prices currently being paid in London for the pelts of black or "silver" foxes has sparked a bit of a sensation in this country over breeding that color variation of the red fox. The prices that people have actually received, both for pelts and for live animals for breeding, tend to drive people wild. Can you believe someone paid $12,000 in real money for a pair of live black foxes? That has happened on Prince Edward Island, and now $10,000 per pair is seen as a bargain.

On Prince Edward Island, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, black-fox breeding has been going on for ten years, and is now on a successful basis. One man has made a fortune in the business, and it is rumored that a stock company is considering the purchase of his ten-acre fox ranch at a fabulous figure. The enormous prices obtainable for live black foxes, male or female, make diamonds and rubies seem cheap and commonplace; and it is no wonder that enterprising men are tempted to enter that industry.

On Prince Edward Island, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, black fox breeding has been happening for ten years and is now thriving. One person has made a fortune in this business, and it's rumored that a stock company is thinking about buying his ten-acre fox ranch for an impressive amount. The huge prices being paid for live black foxes, male or female, make diamonds and rubies look cheap and ordinary; so it's no surprise that ambitious people are eager to get into this industry.

The price of a black fox is one of the wonders of a recklessly extravagant and whimsical age. All the fur-wearing world knows very well [Page 375] that fox fur is one of the poorest of furs to withstand the wear and tear of actual use. About two seasons' hard wear are enough to put the best fox skin on the wane, and three or four can be guaranteed to throw it into the discard. Even the finest black fox skin is nothing superlatively beautiful! A choice "cross" fox skin costing only $50 is far more beautiful, as a color proposition; but London joyously pays $2,500 or $3,000 for a single black-fox skin, to wear!

The price of a black fox fur is one of the marvels of a wildly extravagant and unpredictable time. Everyone in the fur-wearing world knows that fox fur is one of the least durable options for everyday wear. About two seasons of regular use is enough to wear down the best fox skin, and three or four will definitely lead to its being discarded. Even the finest black fox skin isn’t exceptionally beautiful! A top-quality "cross" fox skin, which costs only $50, is far more stunning in terms of color; yet London happily pays $2,500 or $3,000 for a single black fox skin to wear!

Of course, all such fads as this are as ephemeral as the butterflies of summer. The Russo-Japanese war quickly reduced the value of Alaskan blue foxes from $30 to $18; and away went the Alaskan fox farms! A similar twist of Fortune's fickle wheel may in any year send the black fox out of royal favor, and remove the bottom from the business of producing it. Let us hope, however, that the craze for that fur will continue; for we like to see our friends and neighbors make good profits.

Of course, all trends like this are as temporary as summer butterflies. The Russo-Japanese War quickly dropped the price of Alaskan blue foxes from $30 to $18, and that was the end of the Alaskan fox farms! A similar twist of Fate's unpredictable wheel could anytime take the black fox out of style, completely ruining the business that produces it. Let’s hope, though, that the demand for that fur keeps going strong; we love seeing our friends and neighbors do well.

Pheasant Rearing. —This subject is so well understood by game-breeders, and there is already so much good literature available regarding it, it is not necessary that I should take it up here.

Pheasant Farming. —This topic is well known among game breeders, and there is already plenty of good literature about it, so I don't need to cover it here.


[Page 376]
CHAPTER XLI
TEACHING WILD LIFE PROTECTION TO THE YOUNG

Thousands of busy and burdened men and women are to-day striving hard, early and late, to promote measures that will preserve the valuable wild life of the world. They desire to leave to the boys and girls of tomorrow a good showing of the marvelous bird and animal forms that make the world beautiful and interesting. They are acting on the principle that the wild life of to-day is not ours, to destroy or to keep as we choose, but has been given to us in trust, partly for our benefit and partly for those who come after us and audit our accounts. They believe that we have no right to squander and destroy a wild-life heritage of priceless value which we have done nothing to create, and which is not ours to destroy.

Thousands of busy and burdened men and women today are working hard, early and late, to promote measures that will protect the valuable wildlife of the world. They want to leave the boys and girls of tomorrow a vibrant representation of the amazing birds and animals that make the world beautiful and interesting. They believe that today’s wildlife isn't ours to destroy or manage as we please, but has been entrusted to us in trust, partly for our benefit and partly for those who will come after us and review our actions. They think we have no right to waste and destroy a priceless wildlife legacy that we did not create and that isn’t ours to ruin.

Duty Of Parents. —This being the case, it is very necessary that the young people of to-day should be taught, early and often, the virtue and the necessity of wild-life protection. There is no reason that the boy of to-day should not take up his share of the common burden, just as soon as he is old enough to wander alone through the woods. Let him be taught in precise terms that he must not rob birds' nests, and that he must not shoot song-birds, woodpeckers and kingfishers with a 22-calibre rifle, or any other gun. At this moment there lies upon my side table a vicious little 22-calibre rifle that was taken from two boys who were camping in the woods of Connecticut, and amusing themselves by shooting valuable insectivorous birds. Now those boys were not wholly to blame for what they were doing; but their fathers and mothers were very much to blame! They should have been taught at the parental knee that it is very wrong to kill any bird except a genuine game bird, and then only in the lawful open season. Those two fathers paid $10 each for having failed in their duty; and it served them right; for they were the real culprits.

Parents' Responsibilities. —Given this situation, it's crucial for today's young people to be educated early and often about the importance and necessity of wildlife protection. There's no reason a boy today can't help share the common responsibility as soon as he's old enough to explore the woods on his own. He should be taught clearly that he must not rob birds' nests, and that he must not shoot songbirds, woodpeckers, and kingfishers with a 22-calibre rifle, or any other gun. Right now, there's a nasty little 22-calibre rifle sitting on my side table that was taken from two boys who were camping in the woods of Connecticut, having fun by shooting valuable insect-eating birds. Those boys weren't entirely to blame for their actions; however, their fathers and mothers were very much to blame! They should have taught them from a young age that it's wrong to kill any bird except for actual game birds, and then only during the legal open season. Those two fathers each paid $10 for their failure to fulfill their responsibilities; and they deserved it, because they were the real offenders.

Small-calibre rifles are becoming alarmingly common in the hands of boys. Parents must do their duty in the training of their boys against bird-shooting! It is a very serious matter. A million boys who roam the fields with small rifles without having been instructed in protection, can destroy an appalling number of valuable birds in the course of a year. Some parents are so slavishly devoted to their children that they wish them to do everything they please, and be checked in nothing. Such parents constitute one of the pests of society, and a drag upon the happiness of their own children! It is now the bounden duty of each parent to teach each one of his or her children that the time has come [Page 377] when the resources of nature, and especially wild life, must be conserved. To permit boys to grow up and acquire guns without this knowledge is very wrong.

Small-caliber rifles are becoming disturbingly common in the hands of boys. Parents need to take responsibility for training their sons against bird-shooting! This is a very serious issue. A million boys roaming the fields with small rifles, without proper instruction on safety, can wipe out an enormous number of valuable birds each year. Some parents are so overly devoted to their kids that they let them do whatever they want without any guidance. Such parents are a burden on society and hinder their children's happiness! It is now each parent's duty to teach their children that the time has come [Page 377] to conserve nature's resources, especially wildlife. Allowing boys to grow up and get guns without this understanding is extremely irresponsible.

The Duty Of Teachers And Schools. —A great deal of "nature study" is being taught in the public schools of the United States. That the young people of our land should be taught to appreciate the works of nature, and especially animal life and plant life, is very desirable. Thus far, however, there is a screw loose in the system, and that is the shortage in definite, positive instruction regarding individual duty toward the wild creatures, great and small. Along with their nature studies all our school children should be taught, in the imperative mood:

The Responsibility of Teachers and Schools. —A lot of "nature study" is being taught in public schools across the United States. It's really important for young people to learn to appreciate the wonders of nature, especially animals and plants. However, there's a gap in the system: there's not enough clear, direct instruction about individual duty toward wild creatures, big and small. Along with their nature studies, all our school children should be taught, in a commanding tone:

  1. That it is wrong to disturb breeding birds, or rob birds' nests;
  2. That it is wrong to destroy any harmless living creature not properly classed as game, except it be to preserve it in a museum;
  3. That it is no longer right for civilized man to look upon wild game as necessary food; because there is plenty of other food, and the remnant of game can not withstand slaughter in that basis;
  4. That the time has come when it is the duty of every good citizen to take an active, aggressive part in preventing the destruction of wild life, and in promoting its preservation;
  5. That every boy and girl over twelve years of age can do something in this cause, and finally,
  6. That protection and encouragement will bring back the almost vanished birds.

We call upon all boards of education, all principals of schools and all teachers to educate our boys and girls, constantly and imperatively, along those lines. Teachers, do not say to your pupils,—"It is right and nice to protect birds," but say:—"It is your Duty to protect all harmless wild things, and you must do it!"

We urge all school boards, principals, and teachers to consistently and urgently educate our boys and girls in this way. Teachers, don’t tell your students, “It’s nice to protect birds,” but rather say: “It is your duty to protect all harmless wild creatures, and you must do it!”

In a good cause, there is great virtue in "Must."

In a good cause, there is great value in "Must."

Really, we are losing each year an immense amount of available wild-life protection. The doctrine of imperative individual duty never yet has been taught in our schools as it should be taught. A few teachers have, indeed, covered this ground; but I am convinced that their proportion is mighty small.

Really, each year we are losing a huge amount of wildlife protection. The idea of essential individual responsibility has not been taught in our schools the way it should be. A few teachers have touched on this topic, but I believe their numbers are very limited.

Text Books. —The writers of the nature study text books are very much to blame because nine-tenths of the time this subject has been ignored. The situation has not been taken seriously, save in a few cases, by a very few authors. I am glad to report that in 1912 there was published a fine text book by Professor James W. Peabody, of the Morris High School, New York, and Dr. Arthur E. Hunt, in which from beginning to end the duty to protect wild life is strongly insisted upon. It is entitled "Elementary Biology; Plants, Animals and Man."

Textbooks. —The authors of nature study textbooks have a lot to answer for because most of the time, this topic has been overlooked. Only a few authors have taken this issue seriously. I'm pleased to share that in 1912, a great textbook was published by Professor James W. Peabody from Morris High School in New York and Dr. Arthur E. Hunt, which emphasizes the responsibility to protect wildlife throughout its pages. It’s titled "Elementary Biology; Plants, Animals and Man."

Hereafter, no zoological or nature study text book should be given a place in any school in America unless the author of it has done his full share in setting forth the duty of the young citizen toward wild life. [Page 378] Were I a member of a board of education I would seek to establish and enforce this requirement. To-day, any author who will presume to write a text book of nature study or zoology without knowing and doing his duty toward our vanishing fauna, is too ignorant of wild life and too careless of his duty toward it, to be accepted as a safe guide for the young. The time for criminal indifference has gone by. Hereafter, every one who is not for the preservation of wild life is against it and it is time to separate the sheep from the goats.

From now on, no zoology or nature study textbook should be allowed in any school in America unless the author has fully addressed the responsibility of young citizens toward wildlife. [Page 378] If I were on a school board, I would work to implement and enforce this requirement. Today, any author who attempts to write a nature study or zoology textbook without understanding and fulfilling their responsibility toward our disappearing wildlife is too uninformed and negligent to be a reliable resource for young people. The time for ignoring this issue is over. From now on, anyone who isn't actively supporting wildlife preservation is opposing it, and it's time to distinguish between those who care and those who don't.

From this time forth, the preservation of our fauna should be regarded as a subject on which every candidate for a teacher's certificate should undergo an examination before receiving authority to teach in a public school. The candidate should be required to know why the preservation of birds is necessary; why the slaughter of wild life is wrong and criminal; the extent to which wild birds and mammals return to us and thrive under protection; why wild game is no longer a legitimate food supply; why wild game should not be sold, and why the feathers of wild birds (other than game birds) never should be used as millinery ornaments.

From now on, the protection of our wildlife should be seen as an essential topic for anyone applying for a teaching certificate. Every candidate should be tested on why it’s important to protect birds, why hunting wild animals is wrong and a crime, how wild birds and mammals can recover and flourish when they are protected, why wild game is no longer considered a valid food source, why wild game should not be sold, and why the feathers of wild birds (excluding game birds) should never be used as fashion accessories.

As sensible Americans, and somewhat boastful of our intelligence, we should put the education of the young in wild-life protection on a rational business basis.

As sensible Americans, and a bit proud of our intelligence, we should approach the education of young people in wildlife protection in a smart, business-like manner.

State Efforts. —In several of our states, systematic efforts to educate children in their duty toward wild life are already being made. To this end, an annual "Bird Day" has been established for state-wide observance. This splendid idea is now legally in force in the following states:

Government Initiatives. —In several of our states, organized efforts to teach children about their responsibilities toward wildlife are already underway. To support this, an annual "Bird Day" has been set up for statewide celebration. This great initiative is now officially active in the following states:

California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin.

California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

Bird Day is also more or less regularly observed, though not legally provided for, in New York, Indiana, Colorado and Alabama, and locally in some cities of Pennsylvania. Usually the observance of the day is combined with that of Arbor Day, and the date is fixed by proclamation of the Governor.

Bird Day is also pretty regularly observed, even though it isn't required by law, in New York, Indiana, Colorado, and Alabama, and locally in some cities in Pennsylvania. Typically, the celebration of this day is combined with Arbor Day, and the date is set by the Governor’s proclamation.

Alabama and Wisconsin regularly issue elaborate and beautiful Arbor and Bird Day annuals; and Illinois, and possibly other states, have issued very good publications of this character.

Alabama and Wisconsin regularly produce detailed and beautiful Arbor and Bird Day annuals; Illinois, along with possibly other states, has also released some excellent publications of this kind.

The Phillips Educational Campaign For The Birds. —Quite recently there has come under my notice an episode in the education of school children that has given the public profound satisfaction. I cite it here as an object lesson for pan-America.

The Phillips Educational Campaign for the Birds. —Recently, I learned about an event in the education of school children that has made the public really happy. I'm sharing it here as a lesson for all of the Americas.

In Carrick, Pennsylvania, just across the Monongahela River from the city of Pittsburgh, lives John M. Phillips, State Game Commissioner, nature-lover, sportsman and friend of man. He is a man who does things, and gets results. Goat Mountain Park (450 square miles), in British Columbia, to-day owes its existence to him, for without his initiative and labor it would not have been established. It was the first game preserve of British Columbia.

In Carrick, Pennsylvania, right across the Monongahela River from Pittsburgh, lives John M. Phillips, State Game Commissioner, nature lover, sportsman, and friend to all. He’s a doer who gets things done. Goat Mountain Park (450 square miles) in British Columbia owes its existence to him today, as it wouldn't have been established without his initiative and hard work. It was the first game preserve in British Columbia.

Three years ago, Mr. Phillips became deeply impressed by the idea that one of the best ways in the world to protect the wild life, both of to-day and the future, would be in teaching school children to love it and protect it. His fertile brain and open check-book soon devised a method for his home city. His theory was that by giving the children something to do, not only in protecting but in actually bringing back the birds, much might be accomplished.

Three years ago, Mr. Phillips was really struck by the idea that one of the best ways to protect wildlife today and in the future is by teaching school kids to love and care for it. His creative mind and willingness to spend money quickly came up with a plan for his hometown. His theory was that by giving the kids something to do, not just in protecting but in actually bringing back the birds, a lot could be achieved.

BIRD DAY AT CARRICK, PA.

Bird Day in Carrick, PA.

Marching Behind the Governor

Marching with the Governor

In studying the subject of bringing back the birds, he found that the Russian mulberry is one of the finest trees in the world as a purveyor of good fruit for many kinds of birds. The tree does not much resemble our native mulberry, but is equally beautiful and interesting. "The fruit is not a long berry, nor is it of a purple color, but it grows from buds on the limbs and twigs something after the manner of the pussy-willow. It is smaller, of light color and has a very distinct flavor. The most striking peculiarity about the fruit is that it keeps on ripening during two months or more, new berries appearing daily while others are ripening. This is why it is such good bird food. Nor is it half bad for folks, for the berries are good to look at and to eat, either with cream or without, and to make pies that will set any sane boy's mouth a-watering at sight."—(Erasmus Wilson).

In studying the topic of reviving bird populations, he discovered that the Russian mulberry is one of the best trees in the world for providing delicious fruit for various types of birds. The tree doesn't closely resemble our native mulberry, but it's just as beautiful and intriguing. "The fruit isn't a long berry, nor is it purple in color; instead, it grows from buds on the branches and twigs, somewhat like the pussy willow. It's smaller, lighter in color, and has a very unique taste. The most remarkable thing about the fruit is that it continues to ripen for two months or more, with new berries appearing every day while others are maturing. This makes it an excellent food source for birds. It's not bad for people either, as the berries are pleasing to the eye and tasty to eat, whether with cream or on their own, and they can be used to make pies that will make any sane boy drool just at the sight."—(Erasmus Wilson).

Everyone knows the value of sweet cherries, both to birds and to children.

Everyone knows how much sweet cherries mean to both birds and kids.

Mr. Phillips decided that he would give away several hundred bird boxes, and also several hundred sweet cherry and Russian mulberry trees. The first gift distribution was made in the early spring of 1909. Another followed in 1910, but the last one was the most notable.

Mr. Phillips decided to donate several hundred birdhouses, along with several hundred sweet cherry and Russian mulberry trees. The first round of gifts was distributed in early spring 1909. Another distribution happened in 1910, but the final one was the most noteworthy.

On April 11, 1912, Carrick had a great and glorious Bird Day. Mr. Phillips was the author of it, and Governor Tener the finisher. On that day occurred the third annual gift distribution of raw materials designed to promote in the breasts of 2,000 children a love for birds and an active desire to protect and increase them. Mr. Phillips gave away 500 bird boxes, 500 sweet cherry trees and 200 mulberry trees. The sun shone brightly, 500 flags waved in Carrick, the Governor made one of the best speeches of his life, and Erasmus Wilson, faithful friend of the birds, wrote this good story of the occasion for the Gazette-Times of Pittsburgh:

On April 11, 1912, Carrick celebrated a fantastic Bird Day. Mr. Phillips organized the event, and Governor Tener wrapped it up. That day marked the third annual distribution of materials aimed at inspiring 2,000 children to love and protect birds. Mr. Phillips handed out 500 birdhouses, 500 sweet cherry trees, and 200 mulberry trees. The sun was shining brightly, 500 flags were flying in Carrick, the Governor delivered one of the best speeches of his life, and Erasmus Wilson, a true friend of the birds, wrote this wonderful account of the event for the Gazette-Times of Pittsburgh:

The Governor was there, and the children, the bird-boxes, and the young trees. And was there ever a brighter or more fitting day for a children and bird jubilee! The scene was so inspiring that Gov. Tener made one of the best speeches of his life.

The Governor was there, along with the kids, the birdhouses, and the young trees. It was the perfect day for a celebration for kids and birds! The uplifting atmosphere inspired Gov. Tener to give one of the best speeches of his life.

The distribution of several hundred cherry and mulberry trees was the occasion, and the beautiful grounds of the Roosevelt school, Carrick, was the scene.

The event was the distribution of several hundred cherry and mulberry trees, held at the beautiful grounds of Roosevelt School in Carrick.

Mr. John M. Phillips, sane sportsman and enthusiastic friend of the birds, has been looking forward to this as the culmination of a scheme he has been working on for years, and he was more than pleased with the outcome. The intense delight it afforded him more than repaid him for all it has cost in all the years past.

Mr. John M. Phillips, a thoughtful sportsman and passionate advocate for birds, was looking forward to this as the highlight of a project he had dedicated years to, and he was incredibly happy with the outcome. The immense joy it brought him made all the years of effort worthwhile.

But it was impossible to tell who were the more delighted,—he, or the Governor, or the children, or the visitors who were so fortunate as to be present. County Superintendent of Schools Samuel Hamilton was simply a mass of delight. And how could he be otherwise, surrounded as he was by 2,000 and more children fairly quivering with delight?

It was hard to tell who was more excited—him, the Governor, the kids, or the lucky visitors. County Superintendent of Schools Samuel Hamilton was full of joy. How could he feel any differently with over 2,000 kids buzzing around him with excitement?

Children will care for and defend things that are their very own, fight for them and stand guard over them. Realizing this Mr. Phillips undertook to show them how they could have birds all their own. Being clever in devising schemes for achieving things most to be desired, he began giving out bird-boxes to those who would agree to put them up, and to watch and defend the birds when they came to make their homes with them. And he found that no more faithful sentinel ever stood on guard than the boy who had a bird-house all his own.

Kids care for and protect what belongs to them, standing up for it and keeping watch over it. Understanding this, Mr. Phillips aimed to show them how they could have their own birds. By coming up with clever plans, he started giving out birdhouses to those willing to set them up and look after the birds that might choose to live there. He found that no one could take better care of a birdhouse than a boy who owned it.

Here was the solution to the vexed problem. Provide boxes for those who would agree to put them up, care for the birds, and study their habits and needs. The children agreed at once, and the birds did not object, so Mr. Phillips had some hundreds, four or five, blue-bird and wren boxes constructed during the past winter. These were passed out some weeks ago to any boys or girls who would present an order signed by their parents, and countersigned by the principal of the school.

This was the solution to the challenge: provide boxes for those who would commit to installing them, caring for the birds, and learning about their habits and needs. The kids immediately agreed, and the birds had no objections, so Mr. Phillips had several hundred bluebird and wren boxes built over the winter. A few weeks ago, these were given out to any boys or girls who could present an order signed by their parents and countersigned by the school principal.

He knows enough about a boy to know that he does not prize the things that come without effort, nor will he become deeply interested in anything for which he is not held more or less responsible. Hence the advantage in having him write an order, have it indorsed by his parents, and vouched for by his school principal.

He knows that kids don’t value things that come too easily, nor do they genuinely care about things they aren't somewhat responsible for. That’s why it was smart to have them place an order, get it signed by their parents, and confirmed by their school principal.

That he had struck the right scheme was proven by the avidity with which the girls and boys rushed for the boxes. The fact that a heavy rain was falling did not dampen their ardor for a moment, nor did the fact that they were tramping Mr. Phillips' beautiful lawn into a field of mud.

It was clear he had come up with the right idea when the kids eagerly rushed for the boxes. The pouring rain didn’t dampen their excitement, nor did the fact that they were turning Mr. Phillips' beautiful lawn into a muddy mess.

Mr. Phillips, seeing the necessity of providing food for the prospective hosts of birds, and wishing to place the responsibility on the boys and girls, offered to provide a cherry tree or mulberry tree for every box erected, provided they should be properly planted and diligently cared for.

Mr. Phillips, aware of the need to provide food for the future birds and wanting to assign responsibility to the kids, offered a cherry tree or a mulberry tree for every box set up, provided that they were properly planted and cared for.

[Page 381]

This was practically the culmination of the most unique bird scheme ever attempted, and yesterday was the day set apart for the distribution of these hundreds of fruit trees, the products of which are to be divided share and share alike with the birds.

This marked the highlight of the most unique bird project ever attempted, and yesterday was designated for distributing these hundreds of fruit trees, the fruits of which are to be shared equally with the birds.

Nowhere else has such a scheme been attempted, and never before has there been just such a day of jubilee. The intense interest manifested by the children, and the earnest enthusiasm manifested, leaves no doubt about their carrying out their part of the contract.

No other place has tried such a plan, and never before has there been a celebration like this. The strong interest shown by the kids and their genuine excitement leaves no doubt that they will fulfill their part of the agreement.

DISTRIBUTING BIRD BOXES AND FRUIT TREES

DISTRIBUTING BIRD BOXES AND FRUIT TREES

Up to date (1912) Mr. Phillips has given away about 1,000 bird boxes, 1,500 cherry and Russian mulberry trees, and transformed the schools of Carrick into seething masses of children militantly enthusiastic in the protection of birds, and in providing them with homes and food. As a final coup, Mr. Phillips has induced the city of Pittsburgh to create the office of City Ornithologist, at a salary of $1200 per year. The duty of the new officer is to protect all birds in the city from all kinds of molestation, especially when nesting; to erect bird-houses, provide food for wild birds, on a large scale, and report annually upon the increase or decrease of feathered residents and visitors. Mr. Frederic S. Webster, long known as a naturalist and practical ornithologist, has been appointed to the position, and is now on active duty.

As of now (1912), Mr. Phillips has distributed around 1,000 birdhouses, 1,500 cherry and Russian mulberry trees, and turned the schools of Carrick into bustling places filled with children passionately dedicated to protecting birds and providing them with homes and food. In a final achievement, Mr. Phillips has persuaded the city of Pittsburgh to establish the role of City Ornithologist, with a salary of $1,200 per year. The new officer's job is to protect all birds in the city from any kind of disturbance, especially during nesting season; to build birdhouses, provide food for wild birds on a large scale, and report annually on the increase or decrease of bird populations. Mr. Frederic S. Webster, who has been recognized for a long time as a naturalist and practical ornithologist, has been appointed to the role and is currently on the job.

So far as we are aware, Pittsburgh is the first city to create the office of City Ornithologist. It is a happy thought; it will yield good results, and other cities will follow Pittsburgh's good example.

As far as we know, Pittsburgh is the first city to establish the position of City Ornithologist. It’s a great idea; it will bring positive outcomes, and other cities will likely follow Pittsburgh's lead.


[Page 382]
CHAPTER XLII
THE ETHICS OF SPORTSMANSHIP

I count it as rather strange that American and English sportsmen have hunted and shot for a century, and until 1908 formulated practically nothing to establish and define the ethics of shooting game. Here and there, a few unwritten principles have been evolved, and have become fixed by common consent; but the total number of these is very few. Perhaps this has been for the reason that every free and independent sportsman prefers to be a law unto himself. Is it not doubly strange, however, that even down to the present year the term "sportsmen" never has been defined by a sportsman!

I find it pretty odd that American and English hunters have been pursuing game for a century, yet until 1908, they really hadn’t come up with much to establish and define the ethics of hunting. Here and there, a few unwritten rules have emerged and become accepted by general agreement, but the overall number of these is quite small. Maybe it’s because every free and independent hunter prefers to make their own rules. Isn’t it even stranger that, up to this year, the term “sportsmen” has never been defined by a sportsman themselves?

Forty years ago, a sportsman might have been defined, according to the standards of that period, as a man who hunts wild game for pleasure. Those were the days wherein no one foresaw the wholesale annihilation of species, and there were no wilderness game preserves. In those days, gentlemen shot female hoofed game, trapped bears if they felt like it, killed ten times as much big game as they could use, and no one made any fuss whatever about the waste or extermination of wild life.

Forty years ago, a sportsman might have been defined, according to the standards of that time, as a man who hunted wild game for fun. Back then, no one predicted the massive extinction of species, and there weren't any wilderness game preserves. In those times, gentlemen shot female hoofed game, trapped bears when they felt like it, killed way more big game than they actually needed, and no one made a big deal about the waste or destruction of wildlife.

Those were the days of ox-teams and broad-axes. To-day, we are living in a totally different world,—a world of grinding, crunching, pulverizing progress, a world of annihilation of the works of Nature. And what is a sportsman to-day?

Those were the days of ox teams and broad axes. Today, we are living in a completely different world—a world of intense, crushing, and destructive progress, a world that destroys the works of Nature. And what does it mean to be a sportsman today?

A Sportsman is a man who loves Nature, and who in the enjoyment of the outdoor life and exploration takes a reasonable toll of Nature's wild animals, but not for commercial profit, and only so long as his hunting does not promote the extermination of species.

An Athlete is a man who appreciates Nature and enjoys outdoor life and exploration. He takes a reasonable number of Nature's wild animals, but not for profit, and only as long as his hunting doesn't contribute to the extinction of species.

In view of the disappearance of wild life all over the habitable globe, and the steady extermination of species, the ethics of sportsmanship has become a matter of tremendous importance. If a man can shoot the last living Burchell zebra, or prong-horned antelope, and be a sportsman and a gentleman, then we may just as well drop down all bars, and say no more about the ethics of shooting game.

In light of the decline of wildlife across the world and the ongoing extinction of species, the ethics of sportsmanship has become extremely important. If someone can kill the last living Burchell zebra or pronghorn antelope and still be considered a sportsman and a gentleman, then we might as well get rid of all the rules and stop discussing the ethics of hunting game.

But the real gentlemen-sportsmen of the world are not insensible to the duties of the hour in regard to the taking or not taking of game. The time has come when canon laws should be laid down, of world-wide application, and so thoroughly accepted and promulgated that their binding force can not be ignored. Among other things, it is time for a list of species to be published which no man claiming to be either a gentleman or a sportsman can shoot for aught else than preservation in a public museum. Of course, this list would be composed of the species [Page 383] that are threatened with extermination. Of American animals it should include the prong-horned antelope, Mexican mountain sheep, all the mountain sheep and goats in the United States, the California grizzly bear, mule deer, West Indian seal and California elephant seal and walrus.

But the true gentleman-sportsmen of the world are aware of their responsibilities regarding hunting game. The time has come for universal guidelines to be established, so widely accepted and communicated that their authority cannot be ignored. Among other things, it’s time to publish a list of species that no one claiming to be either a gentleman or a sportsman should hunt except for preservation in a public museum. Naturally, this list would include species [Page 383] that are at risk of extinction. For American animals, it should feature the pronghorn antelope, Mexican mountain sheep, all the mountain sheep and goats in the United States, the California grizzly bear, mule deer, West Indian seal, California elephant seal, and walrus.

In Africa that list should include the eland, white rhinoceros, blessbok, bontebok, kudu, giraffes and southern elephants, sable antelope, rhinoceros south of the Zambesi, leucoryx antelope and whale-headed stork. In Asia it should include the great Indian rhinoceros and its allied species, the burrhel, the Nilgiri tahr and the gayal. The David deer of Manchuria already is extinct in a wild state.

In Africa, that list should include the eland, white rhinoceros, bontebok, kudu, giraffes, southern elephants, sable antelope, rhinoceros south of the Zambezi, leucoryx antelope, and whale-headed stork. In Asia, it should include the great Indian rhinoceros and its related species, the burrhel, the Nilgiri tahr, and the gayal. The David deer of Manchuria is already extinct in the wild.

In Australia the interdiction should include the thylacine or Tasmanian wolf, all the large kangaroos, the emu, lyre bird and the mallee-bird.

In Australia, the ban should include the thylacine or Tasmanian wolf, all the large kangaroos, the emu, lyrebird, and the mallee bird.

Think what it would mean to the species named above if all the sportsmen of the world would unite in their defense, both actively and passively! It would be to those species a modus vivendi worth while.

Think about what it would mean for the species mentioned if all the sportsmen in the world came together to defend them, both actively and passively! It would provide those species with a way of living that really matters.

Prior to 1908, no effort (so far as we are aware) ever had been made to promote the establishment of a comprehensive and up-to-date code of ethics for sportsmen who shoot. A few clubs of men who are hunters of big game had expressed in their constitutions a few brief principles for the purpose of standardizing their own respective memberships, but that was all. I have not taken pains to make a general canvass of sportsmen's clubs to ascertain what rules have been laid down by any large number of organizations.

Before 1908, as far as we know, there hadn't been any effort to create a comprehensive and modern code of ethics for sportsmen who hunt. A few clubs of big game hunters had outlined some basic principles in their constitutions to standardize their members, but that was about it. I haven't made a thorough survey of sportsmen's clubs to find out what rules have been established by any significant number of organizations.

The Boone and Crockett Club, of New York and Washington, had in its constitution the following excellent article:

The Boone and Crockett Club, based in New York and Washington, included this outstanding article in its constitution:

"Article X. The use of steel traps, the making of large bags, the killing of game while swimming in water, or helpless in deep snow, and the unnecessary killing of females or young of any species of ruminant, shall be deemed offenses. Any member who shall commit such offenses may be suspended, or expelled from the Club by unanimous vote of the Executive Committee."

"Article X. Using steel traps, making large bags, killing animals while they are swimming or helpless in deep snow, and unnecessarily killing females or young of any ruminant species will be considered offenses. Any member who commits these offenses may be suspended or expelled from the Club by a unanimous vote of the Executive Committee."

In 1906, this Club condemned the use of automatic shotguns in hunting as unsportsmanlike.

In 1906, this Club criticized the use of automatic shotguns in hunting as unfair play.

The Lewis and Clark Club, of Pittsburgh, has in its constitution, as Section 3 of Article 3, the following comprehensive principle:

The Lewis and Clark Club in Pittsburgh has this comprehensive principle in its constitution as Section 3 of Article 3:

"The term 'legitimate sport' means not only the observance of local laws, but excludes all methods of taking game other than by fair stalking or still hunting."

"The term 'legitimate sport' means not just following local laws, but also excludes any methods of hunting that aren't fair stalking or still hunting."

At the end of the constitution of this club is this declaration, and admonition:

At the end of this club's constitution is this statement and warning:

"Purchase and sale of Trophies.—As the purchase of heads and horns establishes a market value, and encourages Indians and others to "shoot for sale," often in violation of local laws and always to the detriment of the protection of game for legitimate sport, the Lewis and Clark Club condemns the purchase or the sale of the heads or horns of any game."

"Purchase and sale of Trophies.—Buying heads and antlers creates a market value and encourages Indigenous people and others to "hunt for profit," often breaking local laws and harming the protection of wildlife for genuine sport. Therefore, the Lewis and Clark Club disapproves of the buying or selling of any game heads or antlers."

In 1906 the Lewis and Clark Club condemned the use of automatic shotguns as unsportsmanlike.

In 1906, the Lewis and Clark Club criticized the use of automatic shotguns as un-sportsmanlike.

The Shikar Club, of London, a club which contains all the big-game hunters of the nobility and gentry of England, [Q] and of which His Majesty King George is Honorary President, has declared the leading feature of its "Objects" in the following terms:

The Shikar Club in London, a club that includes all the big-game hunters from the English nobility and gentry, [Q] and is presided over by His Majesty King George as Honorary President, has declared the main focus of its "Objects" as follows:

"To maintain the standard of sportsmanship. It is not squandered bullets and swollen bags which appeal to us. The test is rather in a love of forest, mountains and desert; in acquired knowledge of the habits of animals; in the strenuous pursuit of a wary and dangerous quarry; in the instinct for a well-devised approach to a fair shooting distance; and in the patient retrieve of a wounded animal."

"To uphold the standard of sportsmanship. It's not wasted bullets and full bags that attract us. The real measure lies in a love for forests, mountains, and deserts; in the learned knowledge of animal behavior; in the challenging pursuit of a cautious and challenging target; in the skill for a well-planned approach to an appropriate shooting distance; and in the patient retrieval of a wounded animal."

In 1908 the Camp-Fire Club of America formally adopted, as its code of ethics, the "Sportsman's Platform" of fifteen articles that was prepared by the writer and placed before the sportsmen of America, Great Britain and her colonial dependencies in that year. In the book of the Club it regularly appears as follows:

In 1908, the Camp-Fire Club of America officially adopted the "Sportsman's Platform," a code of ethics consisting of fifteen articles that the author prepared and presented to sports enthusiasts in America, Great Britain, and its colonial territories that year. In the Club's book, it is regularly shown as follows:


CODE OF ETHICS
OF THE
CAMP-FIRE CLUB OF AMERICA

CODE OF ETHICS
OF THE
CAMP-FIRE CLUB OF AMERICA

Proposed by Wm. T. Hornaday and adopted December 10, 1908

Proposed by Wm. T. Hornaday and adopted December 10, 1908

  1. Today's wild animal life does not belong to us to exploit as we wish. The original population is given to us in trust, for the benefit of both the present and future generations. We must account for this trust to those who come after us.
  2. Considering the current rate at which wild creatures in North America are being wiped out, in fifty years there may be no large game left in the United States or Canada, except in strictly protected game preserves. Therefore, it's the responsibility of every good citizen to support the protection of forests and wildlife and the establishment of game preserves while there is still game available. Anyone who enjoys hunting or fishing should be willing to invest time and money into actively protecting forests, fish, and game.
  3. Selling game is incompatible with the long-term preservation of an adequate game population; therefore, it should be banned by law and public opinion.
  4. In the settled and civilized areas of North America, there is no real necessity for consuming wild game as human food: nor is there any valid reason for selling game for food purposes. Employing hired laborers to rely on wild game should be banned everywhere, with strict penalties.
  5. An Indian has no more right to hunt wild game or depend on it year-round than any white person in the same area. The Indian does not have any inherent or God-given claim to the game of North America, just like they don't for its mineral resources; and they should follow the same game laws as white people.
  6. No one can be a good citizen while being a slaughterer of game or fish beyond the limited scope that aligns with high-class sportsmanship. [Page 385]
  7. A game butcher or market hunter is an undesirable citizen and should be treated as such.
  8. The highest purpose of hunting wild game and fish should be to provide overworked individuals with opportunities for tramping and camping in nature; the value of wild game as food should no longer be seen as a significant reason for hunting.
  9. If preserved correctly, wild game is a valuable asset to any country that has it; protecting it is good statesmanship.
  10. An ideal hunting trip involves a good companion, beautiful scenery, and very few trophies per hunter.
  11. In an ideal hunting trip, the death of the game is merely an incident; it is not essential for a successful outing.
  12. The best hunter is the one who finds the most game, kills the least, and leaves no wounded animals behind.
  13. Killing an animal marks the end of its most intriguing life phase. When the environment is beautiful, the pursuit is often more satisfying than possession.
  14. Killing a female hoofed animal, except for special preservation, should be viewed as inconsistent with the highest standards of sportsmanship; and it should be universally banned by strict laws.
  15. A particularly great photograph of a large wild animal in its natural habitat deserves more appreciation than the dead trophy of a similar animal. An animal that has been photographed should never be killed, unless it was injured while being pursued.

This platform has been adopted as a code of ethics by the following organizations, besides the Camp-Fire Club of America:

This platform has been accepted as a code of ethics by the following organizations, in addition to the Camp-Fire Club of America:

The Lewis and Clark Club, of Pittsburgh, John M. Phillips, President.

The Lewis and Clark Club, located in Pittsburgh, John M. Phillips, President.

The North American Fish and Game Protective Association (International)

The North American Fish and Game Protective Association (International)

Massachusetts Fish and Game Protective Association, Boston.

Massachusetts Fish and Game Protective Association, Boston.

Camp-Fire Club of Michigan, Detroit.

Campfire Club of Michigan, Detroit.

Rod and Gun Club, Sheridan County, Wyoming.

Rod and Gun Club, Sheridan County, Wyoming.

The platform has been endorsed and published by The Society for the Preservation of the Wild Fauna of the British Empire (London), which is an endorsement of far-reaching importance.

The platform has been approved and published by The Society for the Preservation of the Wild Fauna of the British Empire (London), which is an endorsement of significant importance.

Major J. Stevenson-Hamilton, C.M.Z.S., Warden of the Government Game Reserves of the Transvaal, South Africa, has adopted the platform and given it the most effective endorsement that it has received from any single individual. In his great work on game protection in Africa and wild-animal lore, entitled "Animal Life in Africa" (and "very highly commended" by the Committee on Literary Honors of the Camp-Fire Club), he publishes the entire platform, with a depth and cordiality of endorsement that is bound to warm the heart of every man who believes in the principles laid down in that document. He says, "It should be printed on the back of every license that is issued for hunting in Africa."

Major J. Stevenson-Hamilton, C.M.Z.S., Warden of the Government Game Reserves of the Transvaal, South Africa, has adopted the platform and given it the strongest endorsement it has received from any individual. In his significant work on game protection in Africa and animal lore, titled "Animal Life in Africa" (which was "very highly commended" by the Committee on Literary Honors of the Camp-Fire Club), he publishes the entire platform, with a depth and enthusiasm of endorsement that is sure to resonate with everyone who believes in the principles outlined in that document. He states, "It should be printed on the back of every license that is issued for hunting in Africa."

I am profoundly impressed by the fact that it is high time for sportsmen all over the world to take to heart the vital necessity of adopting high and clearly defined codes of ethics, to suit the needs of the present hour. The days of game abundance, and the careless treatment of wild life have gone by, never to return.

I am truly amazed by how it's crucial for athletes worldwide to embrace the need for strong and clearly defined codes of ethics that fit our current times. The era of plentiful games and reckless treatment of wildlife is behind us, and it won't come back.


[Page 386]
CHAPTER XLIII
THE DUTY OF AMERICAN ZOOLOGISTS AND EDUCATORS TO AMERICAN WILD LIFE

The publication of this chapter will hardly be regarded as a bid for fame, or even popularity, on the part of the author. However, the subject can not be ignored simply because it is disagreeable.

The release of this chapter shouldn’t be seen as an attempt for fame or even popularity by the author. Still, the topic cannot be overlooked just because it’s uncomfortable.

Throughout sixty years, to go no further back, the people of America have been witnessing the strange spectacle of American zoologists, as a mass, so intent upon the academic study of our continental fauna that they seem not to have cared a continental about the destruction of that fauna.

Throughout sixty years, not to go any further back, the people of America have been watching the odd sight of American zoologists, as a group, so focused on the academic study of our continental wildlife that they seem not to have cared at all about the destruction of that wildlife.

During that tragic period twelve species of North American birds have been totally exterminated, twenty-three are almost exterminated, and the mammals have fared very badly.

During that tragic period, twelve species of North American birds have been completely wiped out, twenty-three are nearly extinct, and mammals have suffered significantly.

If "by their works ye shall know them," then no man can say that the men referred to have been conspicuous on the firing line in defense of assaulted wild life. In their hearts, we know that in an academic way the naturalists of America do care about wild-life slaughter, and the extermination of species; and we also know that perhaps fifty American zoologists have at times taken an active and serious interest in protection work.

If "you'll know them by their actions," then no one can argue that the men mentioned have been prominent on the front lines defending endangered wildlife. We know that, in an intellectual sense, the naturalists of America do care about the killing of wildlife and the extinction of species; and we also know that maybe fifty American zoologists have occasionally shown an active and genuine interest in conservation efforts.

I am speaking now of the general body of museum directors and curators; professors and teachers of zoology in our institutions of learning—a legion in themselves; teachers of nature study in our secondary schools; investigators and specialists in state and government service; the taxidermists and osteologists; and the array of literary people who, like all the foregoing, make their bread and butter out of the exploitation of wild life.

I’m talking about the group of museum directors and curators; professors and teachers of zoology in our educational institutions—who are a significant presence on their own; nature study teachers in our high schools; researchers and specialists in state and government positions; taxidermists and osteologists; and the variety of writers who, like all of the above, earn their living through the exploration of wildlife.

Taken as a whole, the people named above constitute a grand army of at least five thousand trained, educated, resourceful and influential persons. They all depend upon wild life for their livelihood. When they talk about living things, the public listens with respectful attention. Their knowledge of the value of wild life would be worth something to our cause; but thus far it never has been capitalized!

Taken as a whole, the people named above make up a large group of at least five thousand trained, educated, resourceful, and influential individuals. They all rely on wildlife for their livelihoods. When they discuss living things, the public pays attention with respect. Their understanding of the importance of wildlife could be valuable to our cause; but so far, it has never been utilized!

These people are hard workers; and when they mark out definite courses and attainable goals, they know how to get results. Yet what do we see?

These people are hard workers, and when they outline clear paths and achievable goals, they know how to make things happen. But what do we observe?

For sixty long years, with the exception of the work of a corporal's guard of their number, this grand army has remained in camp, partly [Page 387] neglecting and partly refusing to move upon the works of the enemy. For sixty years, with the exception of the non-game-bird law, as a class and a mass they have left to the sportsmen of the country the dictating of laws for the protection of all the game birds, the mammals and the game fishes. When we stop to consider that the game birds alone embrace 154 very important species, the appalling extent to which the zoologist has abdicated in favor of the sportsman becomes apparent.

For sixty long years, except for a small group of guards, this great army has stayed in camp, partly ignoring and partly refusing to attack the enemy's positions. For sixty years, aside from the non-game-bird law, as a group, they have left it to the sportsmen of the country to set the laws for protecting all game birds, mammals, and fish. When we think about the fact that game birds alone include 154 very important species, it's clear just how much the zoologist has stepped back in favor of the sportsman.

It is a very great mistake, and a wrong besides, for the zoologists of the country to abandon the game birds, mammals and fishes of North America to the sportsmen, to do with as they please! Yet that is practically what has been done.

It’s a huge mistake, and it’s also wrong, for the country’s zoologists to leave the game birds, mammals, and fish of North America to the sportsmen to do whatever they want! That’s basically what has happened.

The time was, thirty or forty years ago, when wild life was so abundant that we did not need to worry about its preservation. That was the golden era of study and investigation. That era ended definitely in 1884, with the practical extermination of the wild American bison, partly through the shameful greed and partly through the neglect of the American people. We are now living in the middle of the period of Extermination! The questions for every American zoologist and every sportsman to answer now are: Shall the slaughter of species go on to a quick end of the period? Shall we give posterity a birdless, gameless, fishless continent, or not? Shall we have close seasons, all over the country, for five or ten years, or for five hundred years?

The time was, thirty or forty years ago, when wildlife was so abundant that we didn’t have to worry about its preservation. That was the golden era of study and investigation. That era ended definitively in 1884, with the practical extinction of the wild American bison, partly due to shameful greed and partly due to the neglect of the American people. We are now living in the middle of the period of Extermination! The questions for every American zoologist and every sportsman to answer now are: Should the slaughter of species continue to a quick end of this period? Are we going to leave future generations a birdless, gameless, fishless continent, or not? Should we implement close seasons all over the country for five or ten years, or for five hundred years?

If we are courageous, we will brace up and answer these questions now, like men. If we are faint-hearted, and eager for peace at any price, then we will sidestep the ugly situation until the destroyers have settled it for us by the wholesale extermination of species.

If we’re brave, we’ll face these questions head-on now, like real adults. If we’re scared and just want peace no matter the cost, then we’ll avoid confronting the harsh reality until those who want to destroy things do it for us by completely wiping out species.

If the zoologist cares to know, then I will tell him that to-day the wild life of the world can be saved by law, but not by sentiment alone! You cannot "educate" a poacher, a game-hog, a market-gunner, a milliner or a vain and foolish woman of fashion. All these must be curbed and controlled by law. Game refuges alone will not save the wild life! All species of birds, mammals and game fishes of North America must have more thorough and far-reaching protection than they now have.

If the zoologist wants to know, I'll tell him that today the wild life of the world can be saved by law, but not by sentiment alone! You can't "educate" a poacher, a game hog, a market hunter, a milliner, or a vain and foolish woman of fashion. All of these need to be restricted and controlled by law. Game refuges alone won't save the wild life! All species of birds, mammals, and game fish in North America need more comprehensive and extensive protection than they currently have.

Do not always take your cue from the sportsmen, especially regarding the enactment of long close seasons! If you need good advice, or help about drafting a bill, write to Dr. T.S. Palmer, Department of Agriculture, Washington, and you will receive prompt and valuable assistance. The Doctor is a wise man, and there is nothing about protective laws that is unknown to him. Go to your state senator and your assemblyman with the bills that you know should be enacted into law, and assure them that those measures are necessary for the wild life, and beneficial to 98 per cent of the people who own the wild life. You will be heard with respectful attention, in any law-making body that you choose to enter.

Don’t always follow the lead of athletes, especially when it comes to implementing lengthy off-seasons! If you need solid advice or assistance with drafting a bill, reach out to Dr. T.S. Palmer at the Department of Agriculture in Washington, and you’ll receive quick and valuable help. The Doctor is knowledgeable, and there’s nothing about protective laws that he doesn’t understand. Go to your state senator and your assembly member with the bills you believe should become law, and let them know that these measures are essential for wildlife and beneficial to 98 percent of the people who own the wildlife. You will be listened to with respect in any legislative body you choose to approach.

People who cannot give time and labor must supply you with money for your campaigns. Ask, and you will receive! I have proven this many [Page 388] times. With care and exactness account to your subscribers for the expenditure of all money placed in your hands, and you will receive continuous support.

People who can't contribute their time and effort should provide you with financial support for your campaigns. Ask, and you'll receive! I've demonstrated this many [Page 388] times. If you carefully and accurately account for all the money given to you by your subscribers, you'll get ongoing support.

In times of great stress, print circulars and leaflets by the ten-thousand, and get them into the hands of the People, calling for their help. Our 42,000 copies of the "Wild Life Call" (sixteen pages) were distributed by organizations all over the state of New York, and along with Mr. Andrew D. Meloy's letters to the members of the New York State League, aroused such a tidal wave of public sentiment against the sale of game that the Bayne bill was finally swept through the Legislature with only one dissenting vote! And yet, in the beginning not one man dared to hope that that very revolutionary measure could by any possibility be passed in its first year in New York State, even if it ever could be!

In times of great stress, print out circulars and leaflets by the thousands and get them into the hands of the people, asking for their help. Our 42,000 copies of the "Wild Life Call" (sixteen pages) were distributed by organizations all over New York State, and along with Mr. Andrew D. Meloy's letters to members of the New York State League, sparked such a huge wave of public support against the sale of game that the Bayne bill was finally passed in the Legislature with only one opposing vote! Yet, at the start, not a single person dared to hope that such a groundbreaking measure could possibly be passed in its first year in New York State, even if it ever could!

It was the aroused Public that did it!

It was the awakened public that did it!

This volume has been written (under great pressure) in order to put the whole situation before the people of America, including the zoologists, and to give them some definite information, state by state, regarding the needs of the hour. Look at the needs of your own state, in the "Roll Call of States," and you will find work for your hand to do. Clear your conscience by taking hold now, to do everything that you can to stop the carnage and preserve the remnant. Twenty-five or fifty years hence, if we have a birdless and gameless continent, let it not be said that the zoologists of America helped to bring it about by wicked apathy.

This book has been written (under a lot of pressure) to present the entire situation to the people of America, including zoologists, and to provide them with clear information, state by state, about the urgent needs. Check the needs in your own state in the "Roll Call of States," and you'll find ways you can help. Clear your conscience by getting involved now, doing everything you can to stop the destruction and protect what's left. Twenty-five or fifty years from now, if we end up with a continent without birds or game, let it not be said that the zoologists of America contributed to this through indifference.

At this juncture, a brief survey of the attitude toward wild life of certain American institutions of national reputation will be decidedly pertinent. I shall mention only a few of the many that through their character and position owe specific duties to this cause. Noblesse oblige!

At this point, a quick look at the attitudes toward wildlife of some well-known American institutions will be definitely relevant. I will only mention a few of the many that, due to their nature and status, have specific responsibilities to this cause. Noblesse oblige!

The Biological Survey of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is a splendid center of activity and initiative in the preservation of our wild life. The work of Dr. T.S. Palmer has already been spoken of, and thanks to his efforts and direction, the Survey has become the recognized special champion of preservation in America.

The Biological Survey of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is an excellent hub for action and innovation in protecting our wildlife. The contributions of Dr. T.S. Palmer have already been mentioned, and thanks to his leadership and dedication, the Survey has become the acknowledged leader in conservation in America.

The U.S. Forestry Bureau is developing into a very valuable ally, and we confidently look forward to the time when its influence in preservation will be a hundred times more potent than it is to-day. That will be when every national forest is made a game preserve, and every forest ranger is made a game warden. Let us have both those developments, and quickly.

The U.S. Forestry Bureau is becoming a really important partner, and we eagerly anticipate the day when its impact on conservation will be a hundred times stronger than it is now. That will happen when every national forest is turned into a game preserve, and every forest ranger becomes a game warden. Let’s make both of these changes happen soon.

In 1896 the American Museum Of Natural History became a center of activity in bird protection, and the headquarters of the New York State Audubon Society. The president of the Museum (Professor Henry Fairfield Osborn) is also the president of that organization.

In 1896, the American Museum of Natural History became a hub for bird protection efforts and the main office for the New York State Audubon Society. The museum's president, Professor Henry Fairfield Osborn, also serves as the president of that organization.

In several of the New York State movements for bird conservation, especially those bearing on the plumage law, the American Museum has been active, and at times conspicuous. No one (so I believe) ever appealed to the President of the Museum for help on the firing line without receiving help of some kind. Unfortunately, however, the [Page 389] preservation of wild life is not one of the declared objects of the American Museum corporation, or one on which its officers may spend money, as is so freely and even joyously done by the Zoological Society. The Museum's influence has been exerted chiefly through the active workers of the State Audubon Society, and it was as president of that body that Professor Osborn subscribed to the fund that was so largely instrumental in creating the New York law against the sale of game.

In several of the New York State movements for bird conservation, especially those related to the plumage law, the American Museum has been involved and at times quite noteworthy. No one (to my knowledge) ever reached out to the Museum's President for assistance on the front lines without receiving some form of help. Unfortunately, the preservation of wildlife is not one of the official goals of the American Museum corporation, nor is it something its officials can spend money on, unlike the Zoological Society, which does so generously and even enthusiastically. The Museum's influence has mainly been through the dedicated members of the State Audubon Society, and it was as president of that organization that Professor Osborn contributed to the fund that played a significant role in establishing the New York law against the sale of game.

There is room for an important improvement in the declared objects of the American Museum. To the cause of protection it is a distinct loss that that great and powerful institution should be unable to spend any money in promoting the preservation of our fauna from annihilation. An amendment to its constitution is earnestly recommended.

There is an opportunity for a significant enhancement in the stated goals of the American Museum. It is a clear setback for conservation that this influential institution cannot allocate any funds to support the protection of our wildlife from extinction. A change to its constitution is strongly advised.

The activities of the New York Zoological Society began in 1896, and they do not require comment here. They have been continuous, aggressive and far-reaching, and they have been supported by thousands of dollars from the Society's treasury. It is true that the funds available for protection work have not represented a great annual sum, such as the work demands, but the amount being expended from year to year is steadily increasing. In serious emergencies there is always something available! During the past two years, to relieve the Society of a portion of this particular burden, the director of the Park secured several large subscriptions from persons outside the Society, who previously had never entered into this work.

The activities of the New York Zoo Society started in 1896, and they don't need further comment. They've been ongoing, proactive, and extensive, supported by thousands of dollars from the Society's funds. It's true that the money available for conservation efforts hasn't been a large annual amount, as the work requires, but the amount spent each year is steadily growing. In serious situations, there's always something available! In the past two years, to relieve the Society of some of this burden, the Park's director secured several large donations from individuals outside the Society who had never previously been involved in this work.

The Milwaukee Public Museum has entered actively and effectively into the fight to preserve the birds of Wisconsin from annihilation by the saloon-loafer element that three years ago determined to repeal the best bird laws on the books, and throw the shooting privilege wide open. Mr. Henry L. Ward, Director of the Museum, went to the firing line, and remained there. Last year the saloon element thought that they had a large majority of the votes in the legislature pledged to vote their way. It looked like it; but when the decent people again rose and demanded justice for the birds, the members of the legislature stood by them in large majorities. The spring-shooting, bag-limit and hunting-license laws were not repealed.

The Milwaukee Public Museum has actively and effectively joined the fight to protect Wisconsin's birds from destruction by the saloon-loafer crowd that three years ago aimed to repeal the best bird laws and open up unrestricted hunting. Mr. Henry L. Ward, the Director of the Museum, stepped up and stayed in the battle. Last year, the saloon lobby believed they had a solid majority of votes in the legislature secured for their agenda. It certainly seemed that way; however, when concerned citizens once again demanded justice for the birds, a significant number of legislators sided with them. The spring shooting, bag limit, and hunting license laws were not repealed.

The University Of Kansas (Lawrence) scored heavily for the cause of wild-life protection when in 1908 it gave to the Governor of the state the services of a member of its faculty, Professor Lewis Lindsay Dyche, who was wanted to fill the position of State Fish and Game Commissioner. Professor Dyche proved to be a very live wire, and his activities have covered the State of Kansas to its farthest corners. We love him for the host of enemies he has made—among the poachers, game-butchers, pseudo-"sportsmen" and lawbreakers generally. The men who thought they had the "pull" of friendship for lawbreaking were first warned, and then as second offenders hauled up to the bar, one and all. The more the destroyers try to hound the Commissioner, the more popular is he with the great, solid mass of good citizens who believe in the saving of wild life.

University of Kansas (Lawrence) made a significant contribution to wildlife protection in 1908 when it offered the services of one of its faculty members, Professor Lewis Lindsay Dyche, to the state's Governor for the role of State Fish and Game Commissioner. Professor Dyche turned out to be an energetic and effective leader, and his efforts spanned every corner of Kansas. People admire him for the many enemies he’s made—among poachers, game butchers, fake "sportsmen," and general lawbreakers. Those who thought they could get away with breaking the law were first warned, and then, if they offended again, brought to justice. The harder the violators try to undermine the Commissioner, the more support he gains from the large majority of law-abiding citizens who believe in preserving wildlife.

The Museum Of Comparative Zoology has at last made a beginning in the field of protection. Last winter, while the great battle raged over the Wharton no-sale-of-game bill, several members of the Museum staff appeared at the hearings and otherwise worked for the success of the measure. It was most timely aid,—and very much needed. It is to be hoped that that auspicious beginning will be continued from year to year. The Museum should keep at least one good fighter constantly in the field.

The Museum of Comparative Zoology has finally started making progress in the area of conservation. Last winter, during the intense debate over the Wharton no-sale-of-game bill, several staff members from the Museum participated in the hearings and actively supported the measure. Their help was timely and greatly needed. It's hoped that this promising start will continue year after year. The Museum should always have at least one strong advocate working in this field.

The Boston Society Of Natural History takes a very active part in promoting the preservation of the fauna of Massachusetts, and in resisting the attempts of the destroyers to repeal the excellent laws now in force. Its members put forth vigorous efforts in the great campaign of 1912.

The Boston Society of Natural History plays a significant role in promoting the protection of wildlife in Massachusetts and fighting against those trying to dismantle the effective laws currently in place. Its members made strong efforts during the major campaign of 1912.

The Brooklyn Institute Of Arts And Sciences is well represented in the field of protection by Director Franklin W. Hooper, now president of the American Bison Society, and an earnest promoter of the perpetuation of the bison. When, the Wind Cave National Bison Herd is fully established, in South Dakota, as it practically is already, the chief credit for that coup will be due to the unflagging energy and persistence of Professor Hooper.

The Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences is well represented in the field of conservation by Director Franklin W. Hooper, the current president of the American Bison Society, and a passionate advocate for the preservation of the bison. Once the Wind Cave National Bison Herd is fully established in South Dakota, which it essentially already is, the main credit for that achievement will go to the relentless energy and determination of Professor Hooper.

The Buffalo Academy Of Sciences in 1911 entered actively and effectively, under the leadership of Dr. Lee H. Smith, into the campaign for the Bayne bill. Besides splendid service rendered in western New York, Dr. Smith appeared in Albany with a strong delegation in support of the bill.

Buffalo Academy of Sciences got actively involved in 1911, led by Dr. Lee H. Smith, in the campaign for the Bayne bill. Along with providing excellent service in western New York, Dr. Smith showed up in Albany with a strong group backing the bill.

The University Of California was the first institution of learning to enter the field of wild-life protection for active, aggressive and permanent work. W.L. Taylor and Joseph Grinnell, of the University Museum, have taken up the fight to save the fauna of California from the dangers that now threaten it.

UC Berkeley was the first educational institution to actively pursue ongoing efforts in wildlife protection. W.L. Taylor and Joseph Grinnell, from the University Museum, have taken the lead in the battle to save California's wildlife from the current threats it faces.

At this point our enumeration of the activities of American zoological institutions comes to an unfortunate end. There are many individuals to be named elsewhere, in the roll of honor, but that is another story. I am now going to set before the public the names of certain institutions largely devoted to zoology and permeated by zoologists, which thus far seem to have entirely ignored the needs of our fauna, and which so far we know have contributed neither men, money nor encouragement to the Army of the Defense.

At this point, our list of the activities of American zoological institutions comes to an unfortunate end. There are many individuals to be recognized elsewhere, in the roll of honor, but that’s a different story. I’m now going to present to the public the names of certain institutions primarily focused on zoology and filled with zoologists, which so far seem to have completely overlooked the needs of our wildlife and have not contributed any people, funding, or support to the Army of Defense.


Partial List Of Institutions Owing Service To Wild Life.

Partial List Of Institutions Owing Service To Wildlife.

The United States National Museum contains a large and expensive corps of zoological curators and assistant curators, some of whom long ago should have taken upon themselves the task of reforming the laws of the District of Columbia, Virginia and Maryland, at their very doors! This museum should maintain at least one man in the field of protection, and the existence of the Biological Survey is no excuse for the Museum's inactivity.

The United States National Museum has a large and well-funded team of zoological curators and assistant curators, some of whom should have taken on the job of reforming the laws in the District of Columbia, Virginia, and Maryland a long time ago, right in their own backyard! This museum should have at least one person focused on protection, and just because the Biological Survey exists doesn't mean the Museum can be inactive.

The Field Museum of Chicago is a great institution, but it appears to be inactive in wild-life protection, and indifferent to the fate of our wild life. Its influence is greatly needed on the firing line, especially in Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa and northern Minnesota. First of all the odious sale-of-game situation in Chicago should be cleaned up!

The Field Museum of Chicago is a fantastic institution, but it seems to be inactive in wildlife protection and indifferent to the fate of our wildlife. Its influence is greatly needed on the front lines, especially in Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, and northern Minnesota. First of all, the awful situation regarding the sale of game in Chicago needs to be fixed!

The Philadelphia Academy of Sciences has been represented on the A.O.U. Committee on Bird Protection by Mr. Witmer Stone. The time has come when this Academy should be represented on the firing line as a virile, wide-awake, self-sacrificing and aggressive force. It is perhaps the oldest zoological body in the United States! Its scientific standing is unquestioned. Its members must know of the carnage that is going on around them, for they are not ignorant men. The Pennsylvania State Game Commission to-day stands in urgent need of active, vigorous and persistent assistance from the Philadelphia Academy in the fierce campaign already in progress for additional protective laws. Will that help be given?

The Philadelphia Academy of Sciences has been represented on the A.O.U. Committee on Bird Protection by Mr. Witmer Stone. The time has come for this Academy to step up as a strong, aware, selfless, and proactive force. It is possibly the oldest zoological organization in the United States! Its scientific reputation is beyond question. Its members must be aware of the destruction happening around them, as they are not uninformed individuals. The Pennsylvania State Game Commission urgently needs active, energetic, and consistent support from the Philadelphia Academy in the intense campaign already underway for additional protective laws. Will that support be provided?

The Carnegie Institute of Washington (endowment $22,000,000) unquestionably owes a great duty toward wild life, no portion of which has yet been discharged. Academic research work is all very well, but it does not save faunas from annihilation. In the saving of the birds and mammals of North America a hundred million people are directly interested, and the cause is starving for money, men and publicity. Education is not the ONLY duty of educators!

The Carnegie Institute of Washington (endowment $22,000,000) definitely has a major responsibility to wildlife, and it hasn’t fulfilled that duty yet. While academic research is important, it doesn’t protect animal species from extinction. One hundred million people in North America have a direct stake in saving the birds and mammals, and the cause is in desperate need of funding, manpower, and awareness. Educators have more responsibilities than just teaching!

The Carnegie Museum at Pittsburgh should be provided by Pittsburgh with sufficient funds that its Director can put a good man into the field of protection, and maintain his activities. The State of Pennsylvania, and the nation at large, needs such a worker at Pittsburgh; and this statement is not open to argument!

The Carnegie Museum in Pittsburgh should receive adequate funding from the city so that its Director can hire a skilled individual for protection efforts and sustain their work. The state of Pennsylvania, along with the nation as a whole, requires such a professional in Pittsburgh; and this point is not up for debate!

The California Academy of Sciences; Appear to have done nothing noteworthy in promoting the preservation and increase of the wild life of America.
The Chicago Academy of Sciences;
The New York Academy of Sciences;
The National Academy of Sciences;
The Rochester Academy of Sciences;
The Philadelphia Zoological Society;
The National Zoological Park;

A Few Of The Institutions Of Learning Which Should Each Devote One Man To This Cause.

A Few Of The Educational Institutions That Should Each Assign One Person To This Cause.

Columbia University, of New York, has a very large and strong corps of zoological professors in its Department of Biology. No living organism is too small or too worthless to be studied by high-grade men; but does any man of Columbia ever raise his voice, actively and determinedly, for the preservation of our fauna, or any other fauna? Columbia should give the services of one man wholly to this cause.

Columbia University, in New York, has a large and impressive group of zoology professors in its Department of Biology. No living organism is too small or insignificant for serious study by qualified individuals; however, does anyone at Columbia ever speak up, actively and passionately, for the preservation of our wildlife or any other wildlife? Columbia should dedicate one person's full efforts to this cause.

There are men whose zoological ideals soar so high that they can not see [Page 392] the slaughter of wild creatures that is so furiously proceeding on the surface of this blood-stained earth. We don't want to hear about the "behavior" of protozoans while our best song birds are being exterminated by negroes and poor whites.

There are men whose ideals about animals are so lofty that they cannot see [Page 392] the killing of wild creatures that is violently happening on this blood-stained earth. We don't want to hear about the "behavior" of protozoans while our best songbirds are being wiped out by Black people and poor white individuals.

Cornell University should now awaken to the new situation. All the zoological Neros should not fiddle while Rome burns. For the sake of consistency, Cornell should devote the services of at least one member of its large and able faculty to the cause of wild-life protection. Cornell was a pioneer in forestry teaching; and why should she not lead off now in the new field?

Cornell University should now recognize the current situation. All the zoological Neros shouldn't waste time while Rome is in crisis. For the sake of consistency, Cornell should dedicate at least one member of its large and talented faculty to the cause of wildlife protection. Cornell was a pioneer in teaching forestry; so why shouldn't it take the lead in this new area?

Yale University, in Professor James W. Toumey, Director of the School of Forestry, possesses a natural, ready-made protector of wild life. From forestry to wild life is an easy step. We hopefully look forward to the development of Professor Toumey into a militant protectionist, fighting for the helpless creatures that must be protected by man or perish! If Yale is willing to set a new pace for the world's great universities, she has the Man ready at hand.

Yale University, under the leadership of Professor James W. Toumey, the Director of the School of Forestry, has a natural and prepared advocate for wildlife. Transitioning from forestry to wildlife protection is a smooth move. We eagerly anticipate Professor Toumey becoming a passionate defender, fighting for the vulnerable animals that must be safeguarded by humans or face extinction! If Yale is ready to lead the way for the world's top universities, they have the right person ready to step up.

The University of Chicago should become the center of a great new protectionist movement which should cover the whole Middle West area, from the plains to Pittsburgh. This is the inflexible, logical necessity of the hour. Either protect zoology, or else for very shame give up teaching it!

The University of Chicago should lead a major new protectionist movement that spans the entire Midwest, from the plains to Pittsburgh. This is the unavoidable, logical requirement of the moment. Either protect zoology, or for the sake of dignity, stop teaching it!

Every higher institution of learning in America now has a duty in this matter. Times have changed. Things are not as they were thirty years ago. To allow a great and valuable wild fauna to be destroyed and wasted is a crime, against both the present and the future. If we mean to be good citizens we cannot shirk the duty to conserve. We are trustees of the inheritance of future generations, and we have no right to squander that inheritance. If we fail of our plain duty, the scorn of future generations surely will be our portion.

Every college and university in America now has a responsibility in this matter. Times have changed. Things are not the same as they were thirty years ago. Letting valuable wildlife be destroyed and wasted is a crime against both the present and the future. If we want to be good citizens, we cannot avoid our obligation to conserve. We are caretakers of the inheritance for future generations, and we have no right to waste that inheritance. If we neglect our clear duty, the contempt of future generations will surely be our fate.


[Page 393]
CHAPTER XLIV
THE GREATEST NEEDS OF THE WILD-LIFE CAUSE AND THE DUTY OF THE HOUR

The fate of wild life in North America hangs to-day by three very slender threads, the names of which you will hardly guess unaided. They are Labor, Money and Publicity! The threads are slender because there is so little raw material in them.

The fate of wildlife in North America today hangs by three very thin threads, the names of which you would probably never guess by yourself. They are Labor, Money, and Publicity! The threads are thin because there is so little raw material in them.

We do not need money with which to "buy votes" or "influence," but money with which to pay workers; to publish things to arouse the American people; to sting sportsmen into action; to hire wardens; to prosecute game-hogs and buy refuges for wild life. If a sufficient amount of money for these purposes cannot be procured, then as sure as the earth continues to revolve, our wild life will pass away, forever.

We don’t need money to “buy votes” or “influence,” but money to pay workers; to publish materials that inspire the American people; to motivate sports enthusiasts to take action; to hire wardens; to prosecute poachers and purchase refuges for wildlife. If we can’t raise enough money for these purposes, then just as sure as the earth keeps spinning, our wildlife will disappear forever.

This is no cause for surprise, or wonder. In this twentieth century money is essential to every great enterprise, whether it be for virtue or mischief. The enemies of wild life, and the people who support them, are very powerful. The man whose pocket or whose personal privilege is threatened by new legislation is prompted by business reasons to work against you, and spend money in protecting his interests.

This is not surprising or shocking. In this twenty-first century, money is essential for every major project, whether it's for good or bad. The opponents of wildlife and their supporters are very influential. The person whose wallet or personal privileges are at risk from new laws is motivated by financial interests to work against you and spend money to protect those interests.

Now, it happens that the men of ordinary means who have nothing personal at stake in the preservation of wild life save sentimental considerations, cannot afford to leave their business more than three or four days each year on protection affairs. Yet many times services are demanded for many days, or even weeks together, in order to accomplish results. Bad repeal bills must be fought until they are dead; and good protective bills must be supported until the breath of life is breathed into them by the executive signature.

Now, it turns out that ordinary people who don’t have a personal investment in wildlife conservation beyond sentimental reasons can only spare three or four days a year for protection efforts. However, there are often demands for their services for many days, or even weeks, to achieve results. Struggles against harmful repeal bills have to continue until they’re completely defeated; meanwhile, supportive efforts for constructive protective bills must go on until they’re signed into law by the executive.

With money in hand, good men aways can be found who will work in game protection for about one-half what they would demand in other pursuits. With the men whom, you really desire, sentiment is always a controlling factor. It is my inflexible rule, however, in asking for services, that men who give valuable time and strength to the cause shall not be allowed to take their expense money from their own pockets. Soldiers on the firing line cannot provide the sinews of war that come from the paymaster's chest!

With cash in hand, good people can usually be found who will work in game protection for about half of what they would expect in other jobs. With the people you really want, feelings are always a key factor. However, my firm rule when requesting services is that those who contribute valuable time and effort to the cause should not have to cover their expenses out of their own pockets. Soldiers on the front line cannot supply the resources for war that come from the paymaster's chest!

Campaigns of publicity are matters of tremendous necessity and importance; but their successful promotion requires hundreds, or possibly thousands of dollars, for each state that is covered.

Campaigns of publicity are really important and necessary; however, successfully promoting them needs hundreds, or maybe thousands of dollars, for each state involved.

I believe that the wealthy men and women of America are the most liberal [Page 394] givers for the benefit of humanity that can be found in all the world. New York especially contains a great number of men who year in and year out work hard for money—in order to give it away! The depth and breadth of the philanthropic spirit in New York City is to me the most surprising of all the strange impulses that sway the inhabitants of that seething mass of mixed humanity. Every imaginable cause for the benefit of mankind,—save one,—has received, and still is receiving, millions of gift dollars.

I believe that the wealthy people in America are the most generous givers for the benefit of humanity found anywhere in the world. New York, in particular, has a large number of individuals who work tirelessly for money—just to give it away! The extent of the philanthropic spirit in New York City is, to me, the most surprising among all the strange impulses that influence the people in that bustling mix of humanity. Every conceivable cause for the benefit of mankind—except one—has received, and continues to receive, millions of donation dollars.

Some enterprises for the transcendant education of the people are at this moment hopelessly wallowing in the excess of wealth that has been thrust upon them. Men are being hired at high salaries to help spend wealth in high, higher, highest education and research. It is now fashionable to bequeath millions to certain causes that do not need them in the least! In education there is a mad scramble to educate every young man to the topmost notch, often far above his probable station in life, and into tastes and wants far beyond his powers to maintain.

Some organizations focused on the advanced education of the public are currently drowning in the abundance of wealth that's come their way. People are being hired at high salaries to manage the spending of this wealth on elite education and research. It's trendy now to donate millions to particular causes that don’t actually need them at all! In education, there’s a crazy race to push every young person to the highest level, often way above what their likely future will be, and into lifestyles and desires that they can't afford to support.

In all this, however, there would be no cause for regret if the wild life of our continent were not in such a grievous state. If we felt no conscience burden for those who come after us, we would not care where the millions go; but since things are as they are, it is heartbreaking to see the cause of wild-life protection actually starving, or at the best subsisting only on financial husks and crumbs, while less important causes literally flounder in surplus wealth.

In all this, though, we wouldn’t have any regrets if the wildlife on our continent wasn’t in such terrible shape. If we didn’t feel a sense of responsibility for those who come after us, we wouldn’t care where the millions go; but since that’s not the case, it’s heartbreaking to see the wildlife protection cause actually struggling to survive, or at best getting by on scraps and leftover funds, while less significant causes are literally drowning in excess wealth.

This regret is intensified by the knowledge that in no other cause for the conservation of the resources most valuable to mankind will a dollar go so far, or bring back such good results, as in the preservation of wild life! The promotion of "the Bayne bill" and the enactment of the Bayne law is a fair example. That law is to-day on the statute books of the State of New York because fifty men and women promptly subscribed $5,000 to a fund formed with special reference to the expenses of the campaign for that measure; and the uplift of that victory will be felt for years to come, just as it already has been in Massachusetts.

This regret is heightened by the understanding that no other effort to conserve the resources most important to humanity can make a dollar stretch as far or yield such great outcomes as the preservation of wildlife! The support for "the Bayne bill" and the implementation of the Bayne law serve as a clear example. That law is currently on the books in the State of New York because fifty individuals quickly contributed $5,000 to a fund specifically set up for the expenses related to the campaign for that measure; and the positive impact of that victory will be felt for years to come, just as it already has been in Massachusetts.

At one time I was tempted to show the financial skeleton in the closet of wild-life protection, by inserting here a statement of the funds available to be expended by all the New York organizations during the campaign year of 1911-1912. But I cannot do it. The showing is too painful, too humiliating. From it our enemies would derive too much comfort.

At one point, I thought about revealing the financial issues within wildlife protection by sharing the available funds of all the New York organizations for the campaign year of 1911-1912. But I can’t do that. The truth is too painful and too embarrassing. Our enemies would gain too much satisfaction from it.

Even in New York State, in view of the great interests at stake, the showing is pitiful. But what shall we say of Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, New Jersey, and a dozen other states where the situation is much worse? In the winter of 1912 a cry for help came to us from a neighboring state, where a terrific fight was being made by the forces of destruction against all reform measures, and in behalf of retrogression on spring shooting. The appeal said: "The situation in our legislature is the worst that it has been in years. Our enemies are very strong, well organized, and they fight us at every step. We have no funds, and we are expected to make bricks without straw! Is there not something that you can do to help us?"

Even in New York State, considering the huge interests at stake, the situation is dismal. But what can we say about Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, New Jersey, and a dozen other states where things are even worse? In the winter of 1912, we received a desperate plea from a neighboring state, where a fierce battle was being waged by forces against all reform measures, pushing for a rollback on spring shooting. The message read: "The situation in our legislature is the worst it’s been in years. Our opponents are very powerful, well-organized, and they challenge us at every turn. We have no funds, and we’re expected to make bricks without straw! Is there not something you can do to help us?"

There was!

There it was!

Only one week previously, a good friend (who declines to be named) gave us two thousand dollars, of real money, for just such emergencies.

Only a week ago, a good friend (who prefers to remain anonymous) gave us two thousand dollars in cash for just these kinds of emergencies.

Within thirty-six hours an entirely new fighting force had been organized and equipped for service. Within one week, those reinforcements had made a profound impression on the defenses of the enemy, and in the end the great fight was won. Of our small campaign fund it took away over one thousand dollars; but the victory was worth it.

Within thirty-six hours, a completely new fighting unit was organized and ready for action. Within a week, these reinforcements had significantly impacted the enemy's defenses, and ultimately, the major battle was won. It cost our small campaign fund over a thousand dollars; but the victory was worth it.

With money enough,—a reasonable sum,—the birds of North America, and some of the small-mammal species also, can be saved. The big game that is hunted and killed outside the game preserves, and outside of such places as New Brunswick and the Adirondacks, can not be saved—until each species is given perpetual protection. Colorado is saving a small remnant of her mountain sheep, but Montana and Wyoming are wasting theirs, because they allow killing, and the killers are ten times too numerous for the sheep. They imagine that by permitting only the killing of rams they are saving the species; but that is an absolute fallacy, and soon it will have a fatal ending.

With enough money—a reasonable amount—the birds of North America, along with some small mammal species, can be saved. The big game that is hunted and killed outside game reserves, and in places like New Brunswick and the Adirondacks, cannot be saved—until each species is given permanent protection. Colorado is managing to save a small number of its mountain sheep, but Montana and Wyoming are squandering theirs because they allow hunting, and the hunters are far too many for the sheep. They think that by only allowing the killing of rams, they are protecting the species; but that is a complete misconception, and it will soon lead to a disastrous outcome.

With an endowment fund of $2,000,000 (only double the price of the two old Velasquez paintings purchased recently by a gentleman of New York!) a very good remnant of the wild life of North America could be saved.

With an endowment fund of $2,000,000 (just double the price of the two old Velasquez paintings recently bought by a guy from New York!), a significant part of the wild life of North America could be preserved.

But who will give the fund, or even a quarter of it?

But who will provide the funding, or even a fraction of it?

Thus far, the largest sums ever given in America for the cause of wild-life protection, so far as I know personally, have been the following:

Thus far, the largest amounts ever donated in America for wildlife protection, as far as I personally know, have been the following:

Albert Wilcox, to the National Association of Audubon Societies, $322,000
Mary Butcher Fund, to the National Association of Audubon Societies 12,000
Mrs. Russell Sage, for the purchase of Marsh Island 150,000
American Game Protective and Propagation Association, from the manufacturers of firearms and ammunition, annually 25,000
Charles Willis Ward and E.A. McIlhenny, purchase of game preserve presented to Louisiana 39,000
Mrs. Russell Sage, miscellaneous gifts to the National Audubon Society 20,000
The American Bison Society for the Montana National Herd 10,526
New York Zoological Society, total about 20,000
John E. Thayer, purchase of game preserve 5,000
Caroline Phelps Stokes Bird Fund, N.Y. Zoological Society 5,000
Boone and Crockett Fund for Preservation 5,000
A Friend in Rochester 2,500
Henry C. Frick 1,500
Samuel Thorne 1,250

Of all the above, the only endowment funds yielding an annual income are those of the National Association of Audubon Societies and the Caroline Phelps Stokes fund of $5,000 in the treasury of the Zoological Society.

Of all the above, the only endowment funds generating annual income are those of the National Association of Audubon Societies and the Caroline Phelps Stokes fund of $5,000 in the treasury of the Zoological Society.

A fund of $25,000 per year for five years has been guaranteed by the makers of shot-guns, rifles and ammunition, to the American Game Protective and Propagation Association. This is like a limited endowment.

A fund of $25,000 each year for five years has been guaranteed by the makers of shotguns, rifles, and ammunition to the American Game Protective and Propagation Association. This functions like a limited endowment.

In the civilized world there are citizens of many kinds; but all of them can be placed in two groups: (1) those with a sense of duty toward mankind, and who will do their duty as good citizens; and (2) those who from the cradle to the grave meanly and sordidly study their own selfish interests, who never do aught save in expectation of a quick return benefit, and who recognize no such thing as duty toward mankind at large.

In the modern world, there are all sorts of citizens; however, they can be divided into two groups: (1) those who feel a sense of responsibility toward others and act as good citizens, and (2) those who, from birth to death, selfishly focus only on their own interests, only doing things when they expect an immediate benefit, and who disregard any sense of duty to society as a whole.

Men and women of the first class are honored in life, mourned when dead, and gratefully remembered by posterity. They leave the world better than they found it, and their lives have been successful.

Men and women of high status are celebrated in life, grieved when they pass away, and fondly remembered by future generations. They make the world a better place than they found it, and their lives are deemed successful.

Men and women of the second class are merely so many pieces of animated furniture; and when they pass out the world cares no more than when old chairs are thrown upon the scrap-heap.

Men and women of the lower class are just like pieces of furniture; when they leave, the world cares no more than it does when old chairs are put on the junk pile.

There are many men so selfish, so ignorant and mean of soul that even out of well-filled purses they would not give ten dollars to save the whole bird fauna of North America from annihilation. To all persons of that brand, it is useless to appeal. As soon as you find one, waste no time upon him. Get out of his neighborhood as quickly as you can, and look for help among real MEN.

There are many men who are so selfish, ignorant, and cruel that even with full wallets, they wouldn’t donate ten dollars to save all the birds in North America from extinction. It's pointless to appeal to people like that. As soon as you encounter one, don’t waste your time. Leave their area as fast as you can and seek help from genuine MEN.

The wild life of the world cannot be saved by a few persons, even though they work their hearts out in the effort. The cause needs two million more helpers; and they must be sought in Group No. 1. They are living, somewhere; but the great trouble is to find them, before it is too late.

The wildlife of the world can't be saved by just a few people, no matter how hard they try. The cause needs two million more supporters, and we have to look for them in Group No. 1. They are out there somewhere, but the big challenge is finding them, before it’s too late.

There are times and causes in which the good citizen has no option but to render service. The most important of such causes are: the relief of suffering humanity, the conservation of the resources of nature, and the prevention of vandalism. If the American Nation had refused aid to stricken San Francisco, the callous hard-heartedness of it would have shocked the world. If the German army of 1871 had destroyed the art treasures and the libraries of Paris, it would have set the German nation back ten centuries, into the ranks of the lowest barbarians.

There are times and situations where a good citizen has no choice but to help out. The most important reasons for this include: alleviating human suffering, conserving natural resources, and preventing vandalism. If the American nation had declined to assist devastated San Francisco, the sheer cruelty of it would have appalled the world. If the German army of 1871 had destroyed the art treasures and libraries of Paris, it would have pushed the German nation back ten centuries, placing them among the lowest of barbarians.

And yet, in America, and in the regions now being scourged by the feather trade, a wonderful FAUNA is being destroyed! It took millions of years to develop that marvelous array of wild life; and when gone it never can be replaced! Yet the Army of Destruction is sweeping it away as joyously as a hired laborer cuts down a field of corn.

And yet, in America, and in the areas currently suffering from the feather trade, a remarkable wildlife is being wiped out! It took millions of years to create that incredible variety of wildlife; and once it's gone, it can never be replaced! Yet the Army of Destruction is clearing it away as happily as a day laborer harvests a field of corn.

That wild life can be saved! If done, it must be done by the men and women of Group No. 1. The means by which it can be saved are: Money, labor and publicity. Every man of ordinary means and intelligence can contribute either money or labor. The men on the firing line must not be expected to furnish their own food and ammunition. The Workers MUST be provided with the money that active campaign work imperatively demands! [Page 397] Those who cannot conveniently or successfully labor should give money to this cause; but at the same time, every good citizen should keep in touch with his lawmaking representatives, and in times of need ask for votes for whatever new laws are necessary.

That wild life can be saved! If it’s going to happen, it has to be done by the people of Group No. 1. The ways to save it are: Money, labor , and publicity. Every person with average means and intelligence can help by giving either money or labor. Those on the front lines shouldn’t be expected to provide their own food and supplies. The Workers MUST be given the funds that active campaign work absolutely requires! [Page 397] Those who can’t easily or effectively work should contribute money to this cause; but at the same time, every responsible citizen should stay in touch with their lawmakers and, when needed, ask for support for any new laws that are necessary.

With money enough to arouse the American people in certain ways, the wild life of North America (north of Mexico) can be saved. Money can secure labor and publicity, and the People will do the rest. For this campaign work I want, and must have, a permanent fund of $10,000 per annum,—cash always ready for every emergency in field work. I greatly need, and must have, immediately, an endowment Wild-Life Fund of at least $100,000, and eventually $250,000. I can no longer "pass the hat" each year. This is needed in addition to the several thousands of dollars annually being expended by the Zoological Society in this work. The Society is already doing its utmost in wild-life protection, just as it is in several other fields of activity.

With enough money to motivate the American people in certain ways, the wild life of North America (north of Mexico) can be saved. Money can secure labor and publicity, and the people will do the rest. For this campaign work, I want, and must have, a permanent fund of $10,000 per year—cash always ready for every emergency in field work. I urgently need, and must have, immediately, an endowment Wild-Life Fund of at least $100,000, and eventually $250,000. I can no longer "pass the hat" each year. This is in addition to the several thousands of dollars that are already being spent annually by the Zoological Society on this work. The Society is already doing its best in wild-life protection, just as it is in several other fields of activity.

Outside of New York many wealthy men will say, "Let New York do it!" That often is the way when national campaigning is to be done. In national wild-life protection work, New York is to-day bearing about nine-tenths of the burden. It is my belief that in 1912 outside of New York City less than $10,000 was raised and expended in wild-life protection save by state and national appropriations. We know that in the year mentioned New York expended $221,000 in this cause, all from private sources.

Outside of New York, many wealthy men will say, "Let New York handle it!" That's often the case when it comes to national campaigning. In national wildlife protection efforts, New York is currently shouldering about ninety percent of the workload. I believe that in 1912, less than $10,000 was raised and spent on wildlife protection outside of New York City, aside from state and national funding. In the year mentioned, we know that New York spent $221,000 on this cause, all from private sources.

In a very short time I shall call for the $100,000 that I now must have as an endowment fund for nation-wide work, to be placed at 5-1/2 per cent interest for the $5,500 annual income that it will yield. How much of this will come from outside the State of New York? Some of it, I am sure, will come from Massachusetts and Pennsylvania; but will any of it come from Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago, St. Louis and San Francisco?

In a very short time, I will be asking for the $100,000 that I now need as an endowment fund for work across the country, to be invested at 5.5% interest, which will generate an annual income of $5,500. How much of this will come from outside New York? I’m sure some will come from Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, but will any of it come from Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago, St. Louis, and San Francisco?


The Duty Of The Hour

The Responsibility of the Moment

I have now said my say in behalf of wild life. Surely the path of duty toward the remnant of wild life is plain enough. Will those who read this book pass along my message that the hour for a revolution has struck? Will the millions of men commanded by General Apathy now arouse, before it is too late to act?

I’ve shared my thoughts on behalf of wildlife. The right course of action for the remaining wildlife is clear. Will those who read this book spread my message that it’s time for a revolution? Will the millions of people led by General Apathy awaken before it’s too late to make a change?

Will the true sportsmen rise up, and do their duty, bravely and unselfishly?

Will the real athletes step up and do their duty, bravely and selflessly?

Will the people with wealth to give away do their duty toward wild life and humanity, fairly and generously?

Will those with wealth to share fulfill their responsibilities to both wildlife and humanity, in a fair and generous way?

Will the zoologists awake, leave their tables in their stone palaces of peace, and come out to the firing-line?

Will the zoologists wake up, leave their desks in their cozy offices, and come out to the front lines?

Will the lawmakers heed the handwriting on the wall, and make laws that represent the full discharge of their duty toward wild life and humanity?

Will the lawmakers recognize the obvious signs and create laws that fully fulfill their responsibility toward wildlife and humanity?

Will the editors beat the alarm-gong, early and late, in season and out of season, until the people awake?

Will the editors sound the alarm, early and late, in good times and bad, until the people wake up?

On the answers to these questions hang the fate of the wild creatures of the world,—their preservation or their extermination.

On the answers to these questions depends the fate of the wild creatures of the world—their survival or their destruction.


FOOTNOTES
A

To-day, we think that the fowlers of the roccolos of northern Italy are very cruel in their methods of catching song-birds wholesale for the market (chapter xi); but our own countrymen of Wilson's day were just as cruel in the method described above.

Toady, we believe that the bird catchers of the roccolos in northern Italy are really harsh in their ways of catching songbirds in bulk for the market (chapter xi); but our own people back in Wilson's time were just as cruel in the method mentioned above.

B

"Special Report on the Decrease of Certain Birds, and its Causes."—Mass. State Board of Agriculture, 1908.

"Special Report on the Decrease of Certain Birds, and its Causes."—Mass. State Board of Agriculture, 1908.

C

It is probable that these birds were killed by piercing the head through the eyes.

It’s likely that these birds were killed by stabbing through their eyes.

D

In the preparation of this chapter and its illustrations, I have had much valuable assistance from Mr. C. William Beebe, who recently has probed the London feather trade almost to the bottom.

In preparing this chapter and its illustrations, I received a lot of valuable help from Mr. C. William Beebe, who has recently explored the London feather trade in great depth.

E

Chiefly Ostrich feathers.

Mainly ostrich feathers.

F

"The Feather Trade," by C.F. Downham, p. 63-4.

"The Feather Trade," by C.F. Downham, p. 63-4.

G

The observations which furnished this valuable chapter were made by Mr. Beebe in 1911 while conducting an expedition in southern Asia, Borneo and Java for the purpose of studying in life and nature all the members of the Pheasant Family inhabiting that region. The results of these studies and collections will shortly appear in a very complete monograph of the Phasianidae.—W.T.H.

The insights that formed this valuable chapter were gathered by Mr. Beebe in 1911 while he was on an expedition in southern Asia, Borneo, and Java to study all the members of the Pheasant Family living in that area. The findings from these studies and collections will soon be published in a comprehensive monograph on the Phasianidae.—W.T.H.

H

"Game Sanctuaries and Game Protection in India," Proc. Zool. Soc., London, 1912. pp. 23-35.

"Game Sanctuaries and Game Protection in India," Proc. Zool. Soc., London, 1912. pp. 23-35.

I

The reader is advised to consult Prof. F.E.L. Beale's admirable report on "The Food of Woodpeckers," Bulletin No. 7, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The reader is encouraged to check out Prof. F.E.L. Beale's excellent report on "The Food of Woodpeckers," Bulletin No. 7, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

J

Of this force, there are only 1,200 salaried wardens. The most of those who serve without salaries naturally render but little continuous or regular service.

Of this force, there are only 1,200 paid wardens. Most of those who work without pay typically provide very little consistent or regular service.

K

Just one hour after the above paragraph was written, a long telegram from San Francisco advised me that the Examiner of that city had begun an active and aggressive campaign for the sale of all kinds of game.

Just one hour after the paragraph above was written, a lengthy telegram from San Francisco informed me that the Examiner in that city had started a proactive and assertive campaign to sell all kinds of game.

L

See Recreation Magazine, May, 1910, p. 213

See Recreation Magazine, May 1910, p. 213

M

National Reservations for the Protection of Wild Life, by T.S. Palmer, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Circular No. 87, Oct. 5, 1912.

National Reservations for the Protection of Wildlife, by T.S. Palmer, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Circular No. 87, Oct. 5, 1912.

N

"Private Game Preserves and their Future in the United States," by T.S. Palmer, United States Department of Agriculture, 1910.

"Private Game Preserves and their Future in the United States," by T.S. Palmer, United States Department of Agriculture, 1910.

O

Published by Heinemann, London, 1912.

Published by Heinemann, London, 1912.

P

These numbers refer to corresponding numbers on the map of Africa.

These numbers correspond to the numbers on the map of Africa.

Q

This organization contains in its list of members the most distinguished names in the modern annals of British sport and exploration. Its honorary membership, of eight persons, contains the names of three Americans: Theodore Roosevelt, Madison Grant and W.T. Hornaday; and of this fact at least one person is extremely proud!

This organization includes some of the most notable names in the recent history of British sports and exploration. Its honorary membership, which consists of eight people, includes three Americans: Theodore Roosevelt, Madison Grant, and W.T. Hornaday; and at least one person is very proud of this fact!




  1. Abundance of wild life, 1
  2. Accuracy, value of, in campaigning, 262
  3. Acklen, J. H., 252
  4. Actinomycosis, 82, 83
  5. Adams, Cyrus C., on the lion, 183
  6. Adirondack State Park, 347
  7. Adjutant, 123
  8. Africa,
    1. big game of, 181
    2. game preserves in, 364, 367
    3. rinderpest in, 83
    4. "soon to be shot out", 206
  9. African big game disappearing, 187
  10. African game that needs exemption, 383
  11. Agriculture, Department of, 208, 212
  12. Aigrette, 120
  13. Akeley, C. E., 186
  14. Alabama, 42, 46, 49, 106
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. laws of, 268
  15. Alabama Game Commissioner, 252
  16. Alaska, 46
    1. brown bears of, 178
    2. new laws needed in, 264
    3. game of, 270
    4. Sitka National Monument in, 344
  17. Alaska—Yukon region, 157
  18. Albatross, steamer, seals taken by, 40
  19. Albatrosses, Laysan, 138, 140
  20. Alberta, 45, 51, 158, 162, 165
    1. at fault on antelope-shooting, 351
    2. laws of parks of, 352
  21. Alden, M.P., Percy, 135
  22. Algonquin National Park, 351
  23. Aliens,
    1. game wardens killed by, 103
    2. prohibited from owning firearms, 103
    3. slaughter of song-birds by, 100
  24. Altai Mountains of western China, 190
  25. American Bison Society, 180
  26. American Game Protective and Propagation Association, 257, 395
  27. "American Natural History" on hawks and owls, 224, 395
  28. American, North, Fish and Game Protective Association, 385
  29. American private game preserves, 358
  30. Amsterdam, 120
  31. Animallai Hills to-day and in 1877, 188
  32. "Animal Life in Africa," on status of settlers, 365
  33. Animals,
    1. predatory, 73
    2. caught by cats, 73
    3. wild, may become nuisances, 234
  34. Antelope,
    1. prong-horned, 2
    2. attempts to transplant, 163
    3. in Alberta, 51
    4. in Montana, 287
    5. in Nevada, 288
    6. in Texas, 51
    7. in Wyoming, 51
    8. lumpy jaw in, 83, 84
    9. physical weakness of, 160
    10. present status of, 159
    11. preserve in Montana, 2
    12. wrong to kill, 351
  35. Anthony bill for migratory birds, 267, 306
  36. Antelopes, African, for the South, 242
  37. Aphis devouring potato-tops, 213
  38. Apple crop, losses on, 210
  39. Aquarium, West Indian seals in, 39
  40. Areas inhabitatcd by big game, 157
  41. Argali, Siberian, 191
  42. Arizona, 42, 46
    1. new laws needed in, 270
    2. national monuments in, 344
  43. Arizona elk exterminated, 35
  44. Arkansas, 42, 106
    1. new laws needed in, 270
  45. Army of Defense, 248, 257
  46. Army of Destruction, 54, 59
  47. Army worm, 221
  48. Arnold, Craig D., 43
  49. Ashe, T. J., 133
  50. Asia, future of big game of, 188
  51. Asiatic game that should be close-seasoned, 383
  52. Askins, Charles, article in Recreation by, 107
  53. Association in Pennsylvania fighting Game Commission, 245
  54. Association, Wool-Growers, fighting antelope preserve, 2, 348
  55. Astley, Hubert D., 94
  56. Atkinson, George, 86
  57. Atlanta Journal, 106
  58. Audubon Societies, National Association of, 28, 254, 256, 291, 395
  59. Auk, Great, 9, 10
  60. Austrians in Minnesota, 49
  61. Australia,
    1. animal pests in, 331, 332
    2. game preserves in, 364
  62. Automatic and pump shot-guns, 61, 65, 144
    1. campaign against, won in New Jersey, 289
    2. denounced by organizations, 152
    3. use of, prohibited by law, 152
  63. Automobile, use of, in hunting forbidden, 60
  64. Automobiles detrimental to wild life, 293 [Page 400]
  65. Avare, Game Warden Henry, 49, 159, 287
  66. Avery, Carlos, 341
  67. Avery Island, La., robin slaughter at, 108
  68. Avicultural Magazine, 94
  69. Avocet, 230



  1. Bag insects, 213
  2. Bag limit,
    1. in Africa, 181, 186
    2. a delusion, 60, 66
    3. Alberta, 355
    4. British Columbia, 356
    5. Manitoba, 357
    6. Saskatchewan, 357
  3. Baird, Spencer F., 329
  4. Baker, Frank, 180
  5. Bancroft, W.F., 50
  6. Barber, Charles, 52
  7. Barren grounds of the Arctic regions, 157
  8. Baynard, Oscar E., 28
  9. Bayne law
    1. against sale of game in New York, 68
    2. bill, 252, 257
    3. breeding game under, 370
    4. genesis of, 307
  10. Beal, F.E.L., 222
  11. Bear,
    1. black, in South Carolina, 150, 179
    2. grizzly, ethics of hunting the, 176
    3. almost gone from United States, 178
    4. California grizzly, 41
  12. Bears,
    1. Alaskan brown, 178
    2. alleged damages by, 178
    3. grizzly, bag limit demanded on, 356
    4. in Yellowstone Park, estimated, 336
    5. killed by Forestry Bureau, 70
    6. of Yellowstone Park, 313
  13. Beard, Daniel C.
    1. cartoon by, 55
    2. on bird destruction, 77
  14. Beaver in New Brunswick, 52
  15. Bedford, Duke of, David's deer saved by, 36
  16. Beebe, C. William, 69, 93, 115, 192
    1. chapter written by, 195
  17. Bell, Rudolph, 102
  18. Bell, W.B., 44, 50
  19. Berlin feather trade, 120
  20. Beyer, G.E., 48
  21. Big Horn Game Preserve, 349
  22. Biological Survey, 388
    1. on duck disease, 87
    2. work of, 249
    3. on wood-duck, 28
  23. Biology, Elementary, by Peabody and Hunt, 376
  24. Bird, Charles S., 343
  25. Bird boxes distributed by J.M. Phillips, 381
  26. Bird Day in various states, 378
  27. Bird Refuges, National, full list of, 345
  28. Birds,
    1. becoming extinct in North America, 17
    2. feeding in winter, 227
    3. killed
      1. by cats, 73
      2. by dogs, 76
      3. by foxes, 332
      4. by mongoose, 333
      5. by negroes, 105
      6. by telephone wires, 77
      7. by wild animals, 77
    4. destruction of, in Far East, 195
    5. extinct, 9, 15
    6. food habits of certain, 218
    7. extinct in North America, 7
    8. in distress, 82
    9. killed in New York City, 101
    10. list of, that devour codling moth, 215
    11. threatened with extermination, 18
  29. Bird skins purchased in London, 116, 135
  30. Bishop, Dr. Louis B., 98
  31. Bison, American,
    1. now living, 180
    2. last of Colorado, killed, 69, 272
    3. Yellowstone Park, 337
    4. wild, in Yellowstone Park, 336
    5. value of, 2
  32. Bison herd, Wichita National, 179
  33. Bison ranges created, 249
  34. Bison ranges, National:
    1. in United States, 180
    2. in Canada, 180
  35. Bison Society, American, 395
    1. proposes National herd, 342
  36. Beaman, D.C., 273
  37. Blackbird, Crow, 222
  38. Blackbirds,
    1. destroy cotton-boll weevil, 217
    2. killed as "game", 105
  39. Black-Snake, Pilot, 81
  40. Blair, Dr. W. Reid, 84, 85, 86
  41. Blaubok, extinct, 35
  42. Blauvelt, George A., 251, 281
  43. Blesbok in Cape Colony, 185
  44. Blinding decoy birds, 12, 97
  45. Blooming Grove Park, 359
  46. Bluebirds killed by cold weather, 9
  47. Blue Mountain Forest Association, 343
  48. Bontebok in Cape Colony, 185
  49. Bob-White, food habits of, 219
  50. Boone and Crockett Club, 152, 161, 256, 383, 395
  51. Boston Society of Natural History, 390
  52. Bowdish, B.S., 50
  53. Boxes for birds distributed, 381
  54. Boy Scouts of America, appeal to, 32
  55. Bradley, Guy M., killed by a plume-hunter, 26, 27
  56. Brazil, birds' plumage from, 122
  57. Breeding,
    1. ducks in captivity, 373
    2. game and fur in captivity, 369, 374
  58. Breeding wild animals need seclusion, 322
  59. Brett, Lieut.-Col. L.M., animal census from, 336
  60. Brewster, William, 24, 43, 48
  61. Brimley, H.H. and C.S., 44, 50
  62. Bringing back
    1. birds and game, 313, 323
    2. vanishing species, 322
  63. British Columbia, 45, 51, 157, 158, 162, 165
    1. game conditions in, 356
    2. game preserves in, 353
  64. British East Africa, remarkable bag "limit" in, 181, 186
  65. Bronx River, ducks killed by pollution of, 92
  66. Brooklyn Institute, 390
  67. Brooks, Earle A., 51
  68. Brown, William Harvey, at Salisbury, 184
  69. Brown, William P., 51
  70. Bryan, W.A., 137, 139
  71. Buckland, James, 125, 135, 136 [Page 401]
  72. Buckskin Mountain, 343
  73. Buffalo Academy of Sciences, 390
  74. Buffalo in Cape Colony, 185
  75. Buffalo, American,
    1. now living, 180
    2. see Bison
  76. Buffalo Park, Alberta, 352
  77. Bunting, Snow, 8, 58
    1. killed for food, 68
  78. Burnham, John B., 251, 252, 257, 290
    1. portrait of, 251
  79. Burtch, Verdi., 93
  80. Bustard being exterminated, 119
  81. Butcher bird, 80
  82. Butler, A.L., 247
  83. Butler, Amos W., 43, 47



  1. California, 42, 47, 59, 65, 106, 165
    1. grizzlies, 178
    2. new laws needed in, 271
    3. Academy of Sciences, 391
    4. National monuments of, 344
    5. State Game Preserve, 349
    6. University of, 390
  2. Call, San Francisco, 263
  3. Calliste, Superb, 115
  4. Camp-Fire Club of America, 152, 256, 353, 384
    1. code of ethics of, 384
  5. Camp-Fire Club of Detroit, 338, 385
  6. Campion, C, 14
  7. Camp laborers as game destroyers, 71
  8. Canada, 45
    1. game laws and preserves in, 350
  9. Cape Province, South Africa, big game in, 185
  10. Carbonell, E.T., 46
  11. Caribou, 83
    1. in Nova Scotia, 52
    2. in general, status of, 173
    3. killed for their tongues, 46, 269
    4. Osborn, 357
    5. slaughtered and wasted, in Quebec, 70
  12. Caribou disease, 83
  13. Carleton, L.T., 283
  14. Carnegie Institute of Washington, 391
  15. Carrick, Penn., bird day at, 379
  16. Cartridges, estimated annual production of, 150
  17. Cat and its victim, 76
  18. Cats, birds destroyed by, 73, 81
  19. Caterpillars eaten by shore-birds, 231
  20. Caton, John Dean, 359
  21. Cause, choice of a, 258
  22. Cedar Bird, eaten as "game", 106
  23. Cereals, losses on, from insects, 212
  24. Corbin bison herd, 342
  25. Chambers, Fred. W., 51
  26. Chamois, slaughter of protected, in Switzerland, 321
  27. Chapman, Arthur., 45, 50
  28. Charles, Salem D., 253
  29. Cheney, Henry W., 240
  30. Chicago Academy of Sciences, 391
  31. Chicago
    1. as a plague-spot for sale of game, 280
    2. devours Norway ptarmigan, 69
    3. University of, 392
  32. Chimpanzee, 187
  33. China
    1. barren of wild life, 192
    2. raked and scraped for ducks, 69
  34. Chinch-bug, 209, 210
  35. Chinese now buyers of game, 198
  36. Christian, L.T., 51
  37. Cigarette beetle, 212
  38. Cincinnati Zoological Gardens, 11
  39. Clark, J.C., 50
  40. Clark, W.A., 231
  41. Claxton, Dr. P.P., on Tennessee robin slaughter, 107
  42. Clergy, Italian, duty of, 103
  43. Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co., 371
  44. Close season law in New York, 90
  45. Close season,
    1. at discretion, 89
    2. long, needed, 62
  46. Clubs opposed to automatic guns, 153
  47. Coccidiosus, intestinal, in ducks, 87
  48. Cock of the Rock, 113
  49. Codling moth, birds that devour the, 215
  50. Cold storage of game in New York, 68
  51. Cold storage warehouses and steamers in China, 200
  52. Collier's Weekly, 263
  53. Colonist, Victoria, 263
  54. Colorado, 42, 47, 59, 71
    1. new laws needed in, 272
    2. game-breeding laws of, 369
    3. national monuments of, 344
  55. Comity between states, lack of, 266
  56. Commission, New York Conservation, 252
  57. Commissions, State Game, 250
  58. Comparative Zoology, Museum of, 390
  59. Condor, California, 21, 22, 119, 123
  60. Conference of Powers on African wild life, 364
  61. Congo Free State, 187
  62. Congress, 267
    1. acts of, for wild life, 249
    2. creates National Bison Range, 342, 343
    3. creates National monuments, 344
    4. saves the starving elk, 338
  63. Connaught National Park, 355
  64. Connecticut, 42, 47, 59, 106
    1. new laws needed in, 275
    2. protects wood-duck, 28
  65. Conrad bison herd, 342
  66. Conrad, Charles H., 340
  67. Corbin, Austin, 360
    1. deer sold by, 371
  68. Cormorant, Pallas, 9, 11
  69. Corn and hogs, and wild life protection, 281
  70. Corn, losses on, 208, 212
  71. Corn-root worm, 208
  72. Cornell University, 392
  73. Cotton-boll weevil, 215, 216, 221
  74. Cotton,
    1. loss on, 210, 212, 215
    2. rise in price of, affects birds, 110
  75. Cougars destroyed in British Columbia, 356
  76. Country Life in America, 372
  77. Cox, J.D., 50 [Page 402]
  78. Coyotes, 53
    1. destroyed, 79
    2. destroyed in British Columbia, 356
  79. Crandall, L.S., on breeding mallard duck, 373
  80. Cranes in Alberta, 355
  81. Crane, Whooping, 18
  82. Crater Lake National Park, 343
  83. Crayfishes eaten by shore-birds, 231
  84. Credit for work done, 264
  85. Cree Indians, 8
  86. Crow, ducklings destroyed by, 80
  87. Crow, F.L., robins slaughtered by, 106
  88. Cruelty
    1. of "aigrette" hunters, 130
    2. of albatross killers, 141
  89. Cuppy, W.B., deer raised by, 171
  90. Curculio, 210
  91. Curlew,
    1. Eskimo, 9, 14, 228
    2. long-billed, 18
  92. Currituck County wild-fowl slaughter, 292, 311
  93. Currituck Sound, N.C., 64, 134
  94. Cuthbert Rookery, 131
  95. Cut-worm, 209, 221



  1. Dakota, South, National monuments of, 344
  2. Dallas, Tex., disgraced by robin slaughter, 106
  3. Dalton and Young, 121
  4. Damages by deer in Vermont, 241
  5. David's deer, 8, 35
  6. Davis, C.B., narrative of elk slaughter, 70
  7. Davis, Capt. M.B., 45, 50
  8. Deadfall traps in Burma, 198
  9. Deer,
    1. accept protection, 313
    2. as a food supply, 234, 242
    3. cash value of, 241
    4. caught in Hudson River, 82
    5. damages to crops by, 240
    6. danger from, 371
    7. in New York City, 91
    8. killed in Louisiana, 5
    9. killed in Vermont since 1897, 240
    10. pamphlet on raising, 371
    11. possibilities in, 236
    12. present status of, 173
    13. slaughter in Montana, 287
    14. value of, 371
    15. black-tailed, 173
    16. European red, 372
    17. fallow, 372
    18. Indian sambar, 372
    19. red, of Europe, 372
    20. white-tailed, breeding, 369
    21. future of, 171
    22. in Iowa, 171
    23. killed in various states, 172
    24. portrait of, 237
    25. weights of, in Vermont, 371
  10. Defects in the protection of western big game, 302
  11. Defenders of wild life, 248
  12. Delaware, 42, 47, 106
    1. new laws needed in, 275
  13. Denmead, Talbott, 48
  14. Destroyers of wild life, 248
  15. Destruction, Army of, 54, 55, 59
  16. Detroit, Camp-Fire Club of, 338
  17. Dike, A.C., on cats, 75
  18. Dill, Homer R., 139, 140
  19. Dimock, Julian A., 131
  20. Diseases, destruction of wild life by, 82
  21. District of Columbia, new laws needed in, 276
  22. Ditmars, Raymond L., 81
  23. Dix, Governor John A., 134, 252, 290
  24. Dodo, 17, 28, 281
  25. Dogs as destroyers of birds, 76
  26. Doves
    1. killed and eaten as "game", 106
    2. killed 1909-10 in Louisiana, 5
  27. Dowitcher, 18, 31, 228, 230
  28. Downham, C.F., 124, 127, 129, 134
  29. Downtrodden hunters and anglers, 204
  30. Duck disease, 87
  31. Duck,
    1. Labrador, 9, 11
    2. mallard, breeding of, in captivity, 373
  32. Duck breeder, ducks killed by, 57
  33. Duck Mountain Game Preserve, 354
  34. Duck-shooting preserves, 361
  35. Ducks,
    1. accept protection, 317, 318
    2. in distress from severe winter, 92
    3. killed 1909-10 in Louisiana, 5
  36. Dutcher fund, Mary, 395
  37. Dutcher law against bird millinery, 115
  38. Dutcher, William, 28, 217, 256, 291
    1. denounces automatic guns, 151
  39. Duties of the hour, 53, 397
  40. Duty
    1. of nations, states and lawmakers, 266
    2. of zoologists, 386
  41. Dyche, Lewis Lindsay, 43, 389



  1. Eagle, golden,
    1. destroys sheep and goats, 78
    2. in British Columbia, 356
  2. Eagles being exterminated, 118, 119
  3. Ear-worm, 209
  4. Eastgate, Alfred, 44, 50
  5. Eaton, Howard, 51
  6. Edgell, George S., 360
  7. Egret,
    1. American, 26
    2. colonies in Florida, 28
    3. preserve of E.A. McIlhenny, 26
    4. snowy, 26
  8. Egrets,
    1. being exterminated, 119, 121, 122, 124, 126
    2. slaughter of, in Venezuela, 129
    3. young, starving on nest, 132
  9. Eland in Cape Colony, 185
  10. Elephant, Congo Pygmy, 187
  11. Elephant Seals taken by C.H. Townsend, 40
  12. Elk,
    1. Arizona, now extinct, 34
    2. calves killed by pumas, 78
    3. distribution of living, 167
    4. easily bred in captivity, 370
    5. fed in Jackson Hole, 320
    6. of Yellowstone Park and Jackson Hole, 337
    7. progressive extermination of, 164
    8. saved by Congress in 1911, 166
    9. Seton's map of former and existing ranges, 163
    10. slaughter on Buffalo Flats, Mont., 70
    11. supply of elk wasted, 166
  13. Elk Island Park, 352, 353
  14. Elk River Game Preserve, B.C., 353 [Page 403]
  15. Elm beetles, 213
  16. Elrod, Morton J., 49
  17. Emeu, 123
  18. Engel, C.M., on the lion, 183
  19. Epicure and quail, 221
  20. Espeut, W.B., 332
  21. Estes Park, 274
  22. Ethics of sportsmanship, 143, 144, 382, 384
  23. Eaton's "Birds of New York", 13
  24. Evans, Game Commissioner Kelly, 350, 351
  25. Ewbank, E.L., 44, 50
  26. Exempt species, lists of proposed, 383
  27. Extermination,
    1. African animals in line for, 187
    2. birds threatened with, 18
    3. defined, 8
    4. of big game, 158
    5. of birds for women's hats, 115
    6. of birds of paradise, 125
    7. of species, by states, 42
  28. Extinct species of North American birds, 7



  1. Falcon, perigrine, 226
  2. Fallow deer, 372
    1. introduced in Lambay, 328
  3. Farmers, supineness of, 4, 279
  4. Farming, fox, 374
  5. Feather sales in London, 120, 121, 122
  6. Federal migratory bird law needed, 266, 304, 305, 306
  7. Felton, W.R., 49, 348
  8. "Fence" for sale of stolen game, in Washington, 276
  9. Ferry, John F., 19
  10. Fever tick eaten by plovers, 229
  11. Field, George W., 24, 253
  12. Field, The American, 263
  13. Field and Stream, 263
  14. Figgis & Co., 121
  15. Fines, schedule of suitable, 260
  16. Finley, W.L., 50
  17. Firearms,
    1. owned by natives in India, 189
    2. unfair, 143, 148, 149, 150
  18. Fisher, Walter K., 137
  19. Flamingo, American, 20
  20. Fleming, James W., 290
  21. Flies eaten by quail, 221
  22. Florida, 43, 47, 105
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. new laws needed in, 276
  23. Flycatchers, 222
    1. destroy boll weevil, 217
  24. Foes of wild life, 73
  25. Food for winter birds, 227
  26. Food habits of certain birds, 218
  27. Food supply of deer, possible, 236
  28. Forbes, Professor, 210
  29. Forbush, E.H., 14
    1. on heath hen, 24
    2. quotation from, 75
    3. on the Sunday gun, 153
    4. on upland plover, 21, 31
    5. portrait of, 251, 253
  30. Forest and Stream, 263
  31. Forestry Bureau, United States, 388
    1. on predatory animals, 79
  32. Forests,
    1. losses on, 210, 212
    2. National, should be game preserves, 267
    3. of the Far East, 192
    4. preservation of National, 338
  33. Fox, black or "silver", 374
  34. Fox pest in Australia, 331
  35. Fox skins sold in London, 193
  36. Foxes as bird destroyers, 78
  37. Fruit, losses on, 210, 212
  38. France,
    1. bird plumage trade in, 117
    2. song birds sold for food in, 98
  39. Frazer River Game Preserve, 353
  40. Frick, Henry C., 395
  41. Fullerton, Samuel, 341
  42. Fund, wild life endowment, 397
  43. Funk Island, 11
  44. Fur-bearing mammals killed in Louisiana, 5
  45. Fur News Magazine, 193
  46. Furs, degradation of fashions in, 105
  47. Fur Seal, 249
  48. Furs sold in London, 193



  1. Game,
    1. and agriculture, 234-242
    2. as a state asset, 283
    3. belongs to the People, 143
    4. big, of North America, 155, 157
    5. bill, how to draw a, 260
    6. birds, as a mass, 3
    7. in Yellowstone Park, 336
    8. in Glacier Park, 340
    9. killed in Louisiana, 5
    10. law, how to make a new, 258
    11. market value of, 309
    12. dead game in New York, 311
    13. of Africa, absurd bag limit on, 181
    14. preserves, map of national, 339
    15. slaughter with automatic guns, 147, 148, 149, 150
  2. "Game Birds, Wild Fowl and Shore Birds", 253
  3. Game-hog, 58, 244
    1. not easily educated, 258
  4. Game preserve, see Preserve
  5. "Garceros", 126, 127
  6. Gardiner, Montana, 70, 337
    1. antelope attacked in, 91
  7. Gaspesian F.F. and G. Preserve, 355
  8. Geay, F., 127, 129
  9. Geer vs. Connecticut, decision in Supreme Court, 3, 143
  10. Geese,
    1. killed 1909-10 in Louisiana, 5
    2. slaughter of, by automatic guns, 148, 149, 150
  11. Gemsbok in Cape Colony, 185
  12. Georgia, 43, 47, 106
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. new laws needed in, 278
  13. Gerard, W.W., 52
  14. Gerhardt, Fred., 51
  15. German Carp, 329
  16. Gibb, Walter S., 340
  17. Glacier Park, Alberta, 352, 338
    1. game in, 340 [Page 404]
  18. Glenn County Club, record slaughter at, 65, 148
  19. Globe, New York, 263
  20. Globe-Democrat, St. Louis, 263
  21. Goat, White Mountain, present status of, 164
  22. Goats,
    1. in Glacier Park, 340
    2. killed for food, 70
    3. mountain, killed by eagles, 78
  23. Goding, Edward N., 253
  24. Godwit, 231
    1. Hudsonian, 18
  25. Goeldi, E.A., 20
  26. Goodnight, Charles, 50, 342
  27. Gorilla, 187
  28. Goshawk, 226
  29. Grand Canyon Game Preserve, 343
  30. Grant, General, National Park, 344
  31. Grant, Madison, 247
    1. portrait of, 254
    2. game laws proposed by, 46
  32. Grasshoppers eaten
    1. by quail, 221
    2. by shore-birds, 229
  33. Gray, J.C., protector of ducks, 318
  34. Grinnell, G.B., 256
  35. Grinnell, Joseph, on California condor, 22
  36. Grisol, Mayeul, 126, 129
  37. Grizzly,
    1. California, almost extinct, 41, 178
    2. punishing an impudent, 314
    3. silver-tip, in British Columbia, 178
  38. Grosbeak, 223
  39. Grouse
    1. becoming extinct in
      1. California, 47
      2. Idaho, 47
      3. Montana, 49
      4. North Dakota, 50
      5. Virginia, 51
      6. Wisconsin, 51
      7. Wyoming, 51
  40. Grouse, Canada, 52
  41. Grouse, pinnated,
    1. diminishing in
      1. Manitoba, 52
      2. Illinois, 47
      3. Indiana, 47
      4. Iowa, 47
      5. Kansas, 48
      6. Missouri, 49
      7. North Dakota, 50
      8. Oklahoma, 50
    2. increasing in Manitoba, 52
    3. shot in Kansas, 245
  42. Grouse, Prairie Sharp-Tailed, 25
  43. Grouse, Ruffed, illegally shipped, 66, 67
  44. Grouse, Sage, 25
    1. in California, 47
    2. in Idaho, 47
    3. becoming extinct in Montana, 49
  45. Guadaloupe Island, elephant seals on, 40
  46. Guanaco in Patagonia, 169
  47. Guerrillas of destruction, 63
  48. Guessaz, O.L., 51
  49. Gulls,
    1. slaughtered on Laysan Island, 139
    2. and terns saved by Audubon Societies, 320
  50. Gunners,
    1. two, of Kansas City, 61
    2. who kill to the limit, 56, 58, 65
    3. will not give up shooting "rights", 305
  51. Guns, automatic or machine, 153
    1. bill to prohibit use of, 153
    2. increase in deadliness of, 145
    3. four machine, 144
    4. statistics of, 145, 150
    5. swivel and punt, suppressed, 143
  52. Gurkha soldiers destroying game, 190
  53. Gypsy Moth, 211
    1. cost of fighting, 330



  1. Hagenbeck, Carl, 126
    1. agent for, 372
  2. Hale & Sons, 121
  3. Halifax, Curator of Museum at, 52
  4. Hankow, cold storage plant in, 200
  5. Harrison, George L., experience of, 190
  6. Hartebeest in Cape Colony, 185
  7. Hathaway, Harry S., 45, 50
  8. Hawaiian Islands Reservation (Laysan), 142
  9. Hawk,
    1. Cooper's, 80, 225
    2. sharp-shinned, 81
    3. pigeon, 80
    4. duck, 80
    5. red-shouldered, 225
    6. red-tailed, 25
  10. Hawk law of Pennsylvania, 223
  11. Hawks,
    1. being exterminated, 119
    2. general status of, 223
  12. Hay, loss on, 210, 212
  13. Heath hen, 8, 48
    1. present status of, 24
  14. Henshaw, Henry W., pamphlet by, 216
  15. Herald, New York, 263
  16. Heron,
    1. colonies under protection, 28
    2. plumage sold in London, 121, 126
  17. Hessian fly, 210
  18. Hippopotami for the South, 242
  19. Himalayan birds being exterminated, 196
  20. Hodge, C.F., 14
  21. Hog-and-corn area of extermination, 281
  22. Holman. Ralph, 253
  23. Hooper, Franklin W., 390
  24. Hopkins, A.D., 211
  25. Hornaday, W.T.,
    1. bison census, 180
    2. code of ethics written by, 384
  26. Horse, bicolored wild, 192
  27. Hough, Emerson, gloomy views of, 206
  28. Howard, F.M., 221
  29. Howard, James, 43, 48
  30. Huffman, L.A., 49, 348
  31. Hume, A.O., 197
  32. Hummingbirds,
    1. being exterminated, 120
    2. skins sold in London, 116, 121, 124
  33. Humphrey, J.J., 150
  34. Humphrey, William E., 340
  35. Hungarian partridge, 327
  36. Hungarians, song birds killed by, 102
  37. Hunt, Arthur E., text book by, 376
  38. Hunter, W.D., 210
  39. Hunting licenses in all states, 59
  40. Hurd, Lyman E., 253



  1. Ibis being exterminated, 118, 119
  2. Ibis, Scarlet, 18, 20
  3. Idaho, 43, 47, 59, 106, 165
    1. grizzlies, 178
    2. new laws needed in, 278
    3. slaughter of starving elk in, 90
    4. state game preserve, 349
  4. Illinois, 43, 47, 59, 106
    1. new laws needed in, 279
  5. Impeyan pheasant not bred in captivity, 198
  6. In-and-in breeding in wild animals, 328
  7. Independent, New York, 263 [Page 405]
  8. Index-Appeal, Pittsburgh, 263
  9. India, sasin antelope in, 82
  10. Indiana, 43, 47, 59
    1. new laws needed in, 280
  11. Indianapolis assists in exterminating bird-of-paradise, 280
  12. Indians,
    1. and game of Alaska, 269
    2. as game exterminators, 46
    3. rights of, in game, 384
    4. unjustifiable license given to, 176
  13. Insect ravages in New South Wales, 233
  14. Insectivorous birds killed for food in Minnesota, 49
  15. Insects,
    1. eaten by quail, 220
    2. eaten by shore-birds, 229-233
    3. losses by, 208, 212
  16. In the Open magazine, 263
  17. Introduced pests, 330
    1. English sparrow, 334
    2. fox in Australia, 332
    3. gypsy moth, 330
    4. mongoose, 332
    5. pheasants, 325
    6. rabbits in Australia and New Zealand, 331
  18. Iowa, 43, 47, 59
    1. new laws needed in, 280
    2. deer in, 171
  19. Iroquois Theatre fire, lesson of the, 280
  20. Italian peninsula a migration route, 94
  21. Italian population,
    1. in Minnesota, 94
    2. must be educated, 103
  22. Italians,
    1. slaughter of song birds by, 94, 102
    2. song birds caught alive by, 97
    3. song birds sold as food by, 98
    4. vulture, eaten by, 101



  1. Jabiru, 123
  2. Jackson Hole, starving elk of, 320, 337
  3. Jacobs, Captain of the Thetis, 139
  4. Jacobs, J. Warren, 217
  5. Japanese poachers on Laysan Island, 139
  6. Jasper Park, 352, 353
  7. Jones, C.J. ("Buffalo"), 78, 314
    1. captures nine pumas, 343
  8. Jordan, Arthur, 182
  9. Journal, Minneapolis, 263
  10. Judd, Sylvester, 220



  1. Kadiak Island, bear slaughter proposed on, 269
  2. Kaegebehn, Ferdinand, 35
  3. Kaibab Plateau, catalo herd on, 343
  4. Kalbfus, Joseph, 254, 326, 346
    1. portrait of, 255
  5. Kamchatka, 193
  6. Kangaroo skins, 194
  7. Kansas, 43, 48, 59
    1. new laws needed in, 281
    2. University of, 389
  8. Kansas City gunners, 61
  9. Kashmir, game protection in, 190
  10. Keller, H.W., 47
  11. Kelly, A.F., 332
  12. Kennard, Frederic H., 340
  13. Kentucky, 43, 106
    1. new laws needed in, 282
    2. robbed of game for Pittsburgh, 67
  14. Keuka Lake, ducks in distress on, 93
  15. Kildeer Plover, 228, 229, 230
    1. portrait 255portrait of, 230
  16. Killing men by "mistake", 260
  17. Kingfisher, Belted, 113
  18. Kite, White-Tailed, 12-23
  19. Klamath Lakes of Oregon, 64
  20. Kleinschmidt, Frank E., 46, 269
  21. Kudu in Cape Colny, 185



  1. Laborers as game-killers, 71
  2. Labrador, 157, 355
  3. Lacey, John F., 247
  4. Laglaize, Leon, 126, 127, 128, 129
  5. Lampson & Co., C.M., 193
  6. Lark, meadow, eaten as game, 106, 222
  7. Laurentides Park, 354
  8. Law,
    1. making close seasons by petition, 90
    2. of Nature, an inexorable, 63
    3. prohibiting firearms to aliens, 103
    4. proposed for animal nuisances, 235
    5. proposed for Sunday gun, 153
  9. Lawmakers, work with, 262
  10. Lawrence, S.C., 331
  11. Laws,
    1. absolutely necessary to wild life, 245
    2. how to secure new, 387
    3. new, needed, 265
  12. Lawyer, George A., 290
  13. Laysan Island, bird tragedy on, 137
  14. League of American Sportsmen, 102, 152
  15. Leek, S.N., 51, 320, 337
    1. elk photographs by, 167
  16. Lemon, Frank E., 136
  17. Le Souef, W.H.D., 332
  18. Lewis and Clark Club, 152, 383
  19. Lewis & Peet., 121, 124, 126
  20. Licenses, hunting, in all states, 59
  21. "Life Histories of Northern Animals", 374
  22. Lincoln, Robert Page, 49
  23. Lion, map of disappearance of the, 183
  24. Lobbying a duty, 250
  25. Locusts eaten by shore-birds, 230
  26. Lodge, Senator Henry Cabot, 338
  27. London Chamber of Commerce, 122, 127, 136
  28. London feather trade, 115, 117
  29. Lord, William R., 253
  30. Loring, J. Alden, wild birds tamed by, 314
  31. Louisiana, 43, 48, 59, 105, 106, 108
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. game in, 4
    3. new laws needed in, 282
    4. state game preserve, 361
    5. state wild-fowl refuge, 349
  32. Lumpy-jaw in antelope and sheep, 83
  33. Lydekker, Richard, on rabbits, 331
  34. Lynxes destroyed, 79
  35. Lyre bird being exterminated, 118, 125



  1. MacDougal, Dr. D.T., 46
  2. McAtee, W.L.
    1. on enemies of codling moth, 215
    2. on "Our Vanishing Shore-Birds", 228-233
  3. McBride, scout, counts game in Yellowstone Park, 336
  4. McIlhenny, Edward A., 5, 255, 349, 395
    1. on egret preserve, 26
    2. on Louisiana birds, 48
    3. robin slaughter mentioned by, 108
    4. testimony from, on shed plumes, 129
  5. McLean, Marshall, on codification of New York game laws, 290
  6. McLean, Senator George P., 275
    1. bill for migratory birds, 267, 306
  7. Macaw,
    1. Gosse's, 16
    2. Guadeloupe, 16
  8. Mackay, G.H., 14
  9. Mail and Express, New York, 263
  10. Maine, 43, 45, 59, 157
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. new laws needed in, 283
    3. protects wood-duck, 28
  11. Malayana, wild life in, 192
  12. Mammals, wholly or nearly extinct, 34
  13. Manitoba, 45, 52
    1. game reserves of, 354
  14. Map,
    1. of game preserves in Africa, 366
    2. of National game preserves, 336
    3. of states prohibiting sale of game, 307
    4. of wilderness area of North America, 156
    5. used in campaign for Bayne law, 309
  15. Market-gunners, 63, 64, 65
  16. Marlatt, C.L., on losses by insects, 207, 212
  17. Marlin Fire-Arms Co., 144, 146
  18. Marsh Island,
    1. a market-gunner on, 64
    2. map of, 361
  19. Martin, A.P., 214
  20. Martin, Purple, 217
    1. shot for food, 219
    2. disappearing, 48
  21. Maryland, 43, 48, 105, 106
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. new laws needed in, 284
  22. Mashonaland, 186
  23. Massachusetts, 43, 48, 59, 115, 253
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. excellent laws of, 284
    3. Fish and Game Protective Association, 385
    4. Game Commission, 253
    5. protects wood-duck, 28
    6. State Board of Agriculture, 75
  24. Megantic Club, 360
  25. Meloy, Andrew D., 388
  26. Merkel, Hermann W., 227
  27. Mershon, W.B., 11, 49
  28. Mesa Verde National Park, 344
  29. Mexico, 169
    1. elephant seals of, 41
    2. Sierre Madre of, 157
  30. Meyer, A.H., 129
  31. Mice and rats destroyed by owls, 224
  32. Michigan, 43, 49, 59, 157
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. good laws of, 285
  33. Migratory birds, federal protection demanded for, 266
  34. Miles, George W., Indiana Game Commissioner, 47
  35. Miller, Frank M., on wood-duck, 48
  36. Miller, H.N., 49
  37. Milliners' Association, American, 307
  38. Millinery, bird extermination for, 115
  39. Miners as game destroyers in Wyoming, 51
  40. Minnesota, 43, 49, 106, 157
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. National Game Preserve in, 341
    3. new laws needed in, 285
  41. Mississippi, 43, 105, 106, 165
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. new laws needed in, 286
  42. Missouri, 44, 49, 59, 106
    1. new laws needed in, 286
  43. Mitchell, Consul Mason, and the takin, 191
  44. Mitchell, W.I., 317
  45. Monachus tropicalis almost extinct, 39
  46. Monal pheasant skins, 197
  47. Money, need for, 257, 393, 394, 397
  48. Mongoose pest in various islands, 332
  49. Montana, 44, 49, 59, 158
    1. grizzlies of, 178
    2. National Bison Range, 180
    3. National monuments of, 344
    4. new laws needed in, 287
    5. state game preserves, 348, 349
  50. Monuments, National, full list of, 344
  51. Moody, C.S., 43, 47
  52. Moore, John D., 290
  53. Moose,
    1. in Alaska, 176
    2. increasing in New Brunswick, 52, 175
    3. in Glacier Park, 340
    4. in the United States, 175
    5. season in Wyoming, 51
  54. Mosquitoes eaten by quail, 221
  55. Moth,
    1. codling, 210, 214
    2. gypsy, 211
  56. Mt. Olympus National Monument, 340
  57. Mulberry, Russian, as food-tree for birds, 379
  58. Murder of wild animals, 34
  59. Museum,
    1. American, 388
    2. Carnegie, 391
    3. Field, 391
    4. Milwaukee Public, 389
    5. of Comparative Zoology, 390
    6. United States National, 390
  60. Musk-Ox, previous slaughter of, 176



  1. Napier, Ernest, 50, 253
    1. arouses New Jersey against machine guns, 289
    2. portrait of, 251
  2. Nash, C.W., 52
  3. National Academy of Sciences, 391
  4. National measures for wild-life protection, 266
  5. National Museum, United States, 36, 37, 390
  6. National organizations of New York City, 254
  7. National Zoological Park, 391
  8. Natives, rights of, in game, 384
  9. Nebraska, 44, 49, 59, 106
    1. protection for extinct game in, 287 [Page 407]
  10. Needs of wild-life cause, greatest, 393
  11. Negroes, song-bird slaughter by, in the South, 108, 109, 110
  12. Nelson, E.W., 35
  13. Nepal, destruction of pheasants in, 196
  14. Nets used in taking pigeons, 12, 13
  15. Nevada, 44, 106
    1. new laws needed in, 288
  16. New Brunswick, 45, 152, 157
    1. game laws of, 357
  17. Newfoundland, 157
  18. New Hampshire, 44, 49, 59, 157
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. new laws needed in, 288
  19. New Jersey, 28, 44, 49, 59, 115, 253
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. few new laws needed in, 288
    3. game commissioner, 253
  20. New Mexico, 44, 59, 106
    1. good game laws in, 289
    2. National monuments of, 344
  21. New South Wales, birds destroyed in, 233
  22. New York, 44, 49, 59, 115, 157, 165
    1. Academy of Sciences, 391
    2. Conservation Commission, 252
    3. deer killed in, 172
    4. excellent laws of, 289
    5. nuisance law of, 235
    6. protects wood-duck, 28
    7. state game preserve of, 317
  23. New York City
    1. formerly a "fence", 68
    2. wild deer in, 91
  24. News, Buffalo, 263
  25. Newspapers, value of, in campaigns, 262
  26. New Zealand
    1. game preserves, 368
    2. red deer in, 327
  27. Niagara Falls, swans swept over, 93
  28. Nice, Margaret M., 220
  29. Nicol, G.H., 48
  30. Nighthawk
    1. as insect-destroyer, 216
    2. shot for food, 216, 218
  31. Niobrara Bison Range, 180
  32. Nooe, Bennet, 222
  33. Norboe, R.M., 317
  34. Norris, Governor Edward P., 348
  35. North, Paul, 50
  36. North American, Philadelphia, 263
  37. North Carolina, 44, 50, 105, 106
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. hopeless condition of, 292
    3. private preserves in, 360
  38. North Dakota, 44, 50, 106
    1. new laws needed in, 293
  39. Norton, Arthur H., 43, 48
  40. Nova Scotia, 45, 52
    1. game laws of, 357
  41. Nuisances, wild animals may become, 234



  1. Observer, Utica, 263
  2. Ohio, 44, 50, 106
    1. hopeless condition, 293
  3. Oklahoma, 44, 50, 106
    1. bison in, 341
    2. new laws needed in, 294
    3. new code of game laws needed, 294
  4. Oldys, Henry,
    1. on sale of game, 307
    2. on value of game, 309
  5. Olympus, Mount, 340
  6. Ontario, 45, 52, 157
    1. game preserves of, 351
  7. Opposition,
    1. to game protection
      1. in Pennsylvania, 346
      2. in Montana, 348
    2. to legislation, how to meet, 263
  8. Oregon, 44, 50, 106, 125, 165
    1. grizzlies of, 178
  9. Oriole, 222
    1. destroy cotton-boll weevil, 216, 217
  10. Orlady, Judge, decision of, 147
  11. Ornithologist,
    1. case of the, 57
    2. Italian, kills song birds for food, 98
  12. Osborn, Prof. Henry Fairfield, 128, 247, 254, 389
  13. Otter, sea, 193
  14. Outdoor Life magazine, 48, 74, 166, 263, 272
  15. Outdoor World magazine, 206, 263
  16. Outing magazine, 263
  17. Owl,
    1. barn, 224
    2. great horned, 80, 225
    3. long-eared, 224
    4. screech, 80
  18. Owls,
    1. general status of, 224
    2. horned, in British Columbia, 356



  1. Pacific bird refuges, 339
  2. Page wire fence, 371
  3. Palmer, Theodore S., 248
    1. circular on National Reserves, 345
    2. deer statistics from, 172
    3. game laws proposed by, 46
    4. Olympus National Monument, 340
    5. on antelope, 159
    6. on laws, 387
  4. Paradise,
    1. birds of, being exterminated, 119, 121, 122, 124, 125
    2. greater bird of, 113, 115, 119
  5. Parakeet,
    1. Carolina, 9, 16
    2. purple Guadeloupe, 16
  6. Parasitic infection of ducks, 86
  7. Parents, duty of, 376
  8. Park,
    1. Crater Lake, 343
    2. General Grant, 344
    3. Laurentides, 354
    4. Mt. Rainier, 343
    5. Platt, 344
    6. Sequoia, 344
    7. Sully Hills, 344
    8. Yosemite, 343
  9. Parliament, British, 135
  10. Parrot, Yellow-Winged Green, 16
  11. Patagonia, guanaco in, 169
  12. Peabody, James W., text book by, 377
  13. Pearson, T. Gilbert, 28, 44, 50, 107, (portait 251), 291
  14. Pelican Island bird sanctuary, 277
  15. Pellett, F.C., 48
  16. Penalties, schedule of, 2
  17. Pennock, C.J., 47
  18. Pennsylvania, 44, 50, 105, 115, 157, 253
    1. aliens may not own firearms, 103
    2. decision on automatic guns, 147
    3. deer killed in, 172
    4. game wardens killed, 103
    5. new laws needed by, 295
    6. state game preserves, 345
  19. Penrose, Dr. C.B., 45, 50
  20. Pests, introduced species that have become, 330
  21. Petrel, Black-Capped, 21 [Page 408]
  22. Phalaropes, 229, 230
  23. Pheasants,
    1. being exterminated, 118, 119, 124
    2. blood, 196
    3. English, value of in market, 69
    4. impeyan, 196
    5. introduced species of, 325
    6. not bud-eaters, 326
    7. shipped from China to England, 200
    8. shipped at Hankow, China, 69
  24. Philadelphia Academy of Sciences, 391
  25. Phillips, John M., 254
    1. educational campaign in schools by, 378, 381
    2. on goats killed for food, 70
    3. Pennsylvania Game Commissioner, 345
    4. portrait of, 255
  26. Photographing live game, code of ethics on, 385
  27. Pickhardt, Carl, on caribou slaughter, 69
  28. Pierce, Ray V.,
    1. private game preserve of, 360
    2. sambar deer acclimatized by, 373
  29. Pigeon,
    1. Band-Tailed, 22, 273
    2. Passenger, 9, 11, 12
    3. Victoria crowned, 113
  30. Pinchot, Gifford, 267, 341
  31. Pinnated Grouse
    1. disappearing, in
      1. Kansas, 48
      2. Nebraska, 49
      3. Montana, 49
      4. Minnesota, 49
  32. Pioneer, value of game to the, 2
  33. Pittsboro, disgrace of, by robin slaughter, 222
  34. Pittsburgh, City
    1. ornithologist of, 381
    2. illegal sale of game in, 67
  35. Plague-spots for sale of game, 279
  36. Plant-lice in wheat, 210
  37. Platform, Sportsman's, 384
  38. Platt National Park, 344
  39. Plover,
    1. black-bellied, 228, 230
    2. golden, 18, 31, 228, 230
    3. upland, 20, 31
  40. Plume-hunters, 26, 28
  41. Post, New York Evening, 263
  42. Posting farm lands advised, 233
  43. Potato-bug bird, 223
  44. Pot-hunter defined, 246
  45. Poultry destroyed by hawks and owls, 224
  46. Predatory wild animals, 73
  47. Preserve, every National forest should be a game, 267
  48. Preserve,
    1. Alberta, 352
    2. Angoniland, 367
    3. Athi Plains, 367
    4. British Columbia, 352
    5. Budonga Forest, 367
    6. Duck Mountain, 354
    7. Elephant Marsh, 367
    8. Freycinet's Peninsula, 368
    9. Grand Canyon, 343
    10. Hargeis, 367
    11. Jubaland, 367
    12. Kangaroo Island, 368
    13. Little Barrier Island, 368
    14. Luangwa, 368
    15. Manitoba, 354
    16. Mirso, 367
    17. Nweru Marsh, 368
    18. Ontario, 352
    19. Pennsylvania State, 347
    20. Riding Mountain, 354
    21. Rustenburg, 368
    22. Sabi-Pongola, 368
    23. Snow Creek, 348
    24. Spruce Woods, 354
    25. Superior National Game, 341
    26. Swaziland, 368
    27. Teton, 348
    28. Toro, 367
    29. Turtle Mountain, 354
    30. Wichita, 341
    31. Wilson's Promontory, 368
  49. Preserved game, murdering, 273, 274
  50. Preserves,
    1. private game, 358, 360
    2. private and public interests in, 361
  51. Press,
    1. duty of Italian, 103
    2. New York, 263
    3. value of, in campaigns, 262
  52. Prichard, W.H.H., on guanaco, 169
  53. Prospectors, license given to, 176
  54. Protection,
    1. accepted by
      1. antelopes, 313
      2. bears, 313
      3. mule deer, 313
      4. song-birds, 314
      5. chipmunks, 315
    2. of shore-birds, 232
  55. "Protected" game, sale of, forbidden, 67
  56. Protective Association, Wild Life, 257
  57. Prince Consort of England, 327
  58. Prince Edward Island, 45, 52
    1. breeding foxes on, 374
  59. Prince, German Crown, 359
  60. Ptarmigan, Norway, eaten in Chicago, 69
  61. Publicity
    1. in campaign work, 262
    2. value of, 393
  62. Puma as a game-destroyer, 78, 79
  63. Pumas destroyed in British Columbia, 356
  64. Pump guns, 144
    1. campaign against, won in New Jersey, 289



  1. Quagga, extinct, 35
  2. Quail, 89, 90
    1. food habits of, 219
    2. portrait of, 221
    3. protection recognized by, 316
    4. failures in restocking with, 328
    5. California Valley, very scarce, 47
    6. Egyptian, 69
    7. feeding, 89
    8. introduced, 329
    9. killed in 1909-10 in Louisiana, 5
    10. killed by cats, 74
  3. Quebec, 45, 157, 158, 354
  4. Quetico Forest Reserve, 352



  1. Rabbit plague, 85, 331
  2. Rabbits, 53
    1. killed in Louisiana, 5
    2. introduced on Laysan Island, 142
  3. Rangoon, pheasant plumage seized in, 198
  4. Ranier National Park, 343
  5. Rainey, Paul J., 177
  6. Rats and mice destroyed by owls, 224
  7. Reasons against sale of game, 310
  8. Recreation Magazine, 109, 263, 318
  9. Refuges, National bird, 345
  10. Red deer,
    1. introduced in New Zealand, 327
    2. of Europe, 372
  11. Reed, Elizabeth A., 219
  12. Remington Arms Co., 144, 146
  13. Renshaw, Graham, 35
  14. Republican, Springfield, 263
  15. Resident game-butchers, 69, 70
  16. Rhea being exterminated, 119
  17. Rhinoceros,
    1. great Indian, 189
    2. white, 186
  18. Rhodesian fauna, 186
  19. Rhode Island, 45, 50, 59
    1. new laws needed in, 295
  20. Rhytina, extinction of, 36
  21. Rice, Jr., James H., 45
  22. Riding Mountain Game Preserve, 354
  23. Rifles in hands of boys, 376
  24. Rinderpest in Africa, 83
  25. Roberts. Mrs. Mary G., of Tasmania, 38 [Page 409]
  26. Robin slaughter,
    1. in Pittsboro, N.C., 222
    2. by Italians, 102
    3. by negroes, 105
    4. in eight southern states, 105
    5. in Texas, 106
    6. in Tennessee, 107
    7. in Louisiana, 108
  27. Robins,
    1. food of, 109
    2. killed by cats, 75, 76, 81
  28. Robinson, Arthur, on automatic guns, 152
  29. Roccolo, Italian, for catching birds, 95, 97
  30. Rochester Academy of Sciences, 391
  31. Rocky Mountain Park, 352
  32. Rod and Gun in Canada, 66, 263, 374
  33. Rod and Gun Club of Sheridan, Wyoming, 385
  34. Rogers, Josiah, 340
  35. Roosevelt, Kermit, 186
  36. Roosevelt, Theodore, 142, 249, 341
  37. Rose, John J., 102
  38. Rothschild, Walter, 14, 17, 137
  39. Rubber culture and wild life, 192, 201
  40. Ruffed Grouse, 65, 317
  41. Rush, Frank, 342



  1. Sage Grouse in California, 47
  2. Sage, Mrs. Russell, gifts by, to cause of bird protection, 395
  3. Sale of game,
    1. plague spots for, 279
    2. proposed for California, 361
    3. suppress, the, 306, 312
  4. Salt Lake, mortality in ducks on, 87
  5. Sambar deer, 372
  6. Sanctuaries, demand for forest reserve, 267
  7. Sanctuaries in India, 190
  8. Sandhill Crane nearly extinct in Alberta, 51
  9. Sandpipers, 229, 230
    1. killed for food, 68
    2. Bartramian, 20
    3. pectoral, 18
    4. red-breasted, 18, 31
  10. Sandwichmen employed in London, 128
  11. Sanford, L.C., 20
  12. Saskatchewan, 45, 165
  13. Sauter, Frederick, 84
  14. Scab in Mountain Sheep, 83
  15. "Scatter" rifle for ducks, 60, 153
  16. Schlemmer, Max, 137
  17. Sconce, Harvev J., 47
  18. Scott, Thomas H., 340
  19. Sea-lion accepts protection, 317
  20. Seal,
    1. California Elephant, 40
    2. West Indian, in New York Aquarium, 39
  21. Sea otter, 52
  22. Seaman, Frank, phoebe birds of, 317
  23. Sentiment in preservation of game, 244
  24. Sequoia Park, 344
  25. Seton, Ernest T., 19, 85
    1. map of elk by, 163, 165
  26. Sharp-shinned hawk, 225
  27. Shea plumage bill, 291
  28. Sheep,
    1. big-horn, 71
      1. next species to become extinct, 161
      2. killed by pumas, 78
      3. in Colorado, 272
      4. present status of, 161
      5. in Lower California, 162, 169
      6. in Glacier Park, 340
    2. domestic, 273
      1. curse of cattle and game, 335
      2. opposition from owners of, 348
  29. Sheep-herders of Wyoming, 50
  30. Sheep, black, lumpy-jaw in, 83, 84
  31. Sheep owners exterminating Thylacine, 38
  32. Shields, G.O., 58, 351
    1. protects birds of New York City, 101
  33. Shield's Magazine, 263
  34. Shikar Club of London, 384
  35. Shiras, 3rd, George, 306
  36. Shikaree, new status of native, 188
  37. Shooting game in preserves, 358, 359
  38. Shore birds,
    1. becoming extinct, in
      1. Montana, 49
      2. Kansas, 48
      3. Massachusetts, 48
      4. Michigan, 49
      5. New York, 49
      6. North Dakota, 50
      7. South Carolina, 50
      8. Texas, 50
      9. Wisconsin, 51
    2. general status of, 227
    3. killed in Louisiana, 5
    4. disappearing, 30
  39. Shore, W.B., on elk shipments, 166
  40. Shrike, 80
  41. Skunk as bird destroyer, 78
  42. Slaughter-grounds for wild fowl, 64
  43. Slaughter,
    1. of wild fowl in North Carolina, 311
    2. of non-game birds in North Carolina, 292
    3. in Tennessee, 296
    4. of deer in Montana, 287
    5. in Louisiana, 5
    6. of geese in California, 148
    7. of band-tailed pigeons, 22, 273
    8. of protected chamois, 321
    9. of song birds in New York City, 101
    10. of starving elk, 90
  44. Sloanaker, J.L., on pinnated grouse, 47
  45. Smith, Charles L., 317
  46. Smith, Lee H., 390
  47. Smyth, C. H., 43, 48
  48. Snakes as bird destroyers, 81
  49. Snares for pheasants, 197
  50. Snipe, Jack, portrait of, 230
  51. Snow Creek
    1. antelope preserve, 2
    2. game preserve, 348
  52. Society,
    1. Audubon, National, see Audubon
    2. Royal, for the Protection of Wild Birds, 127, 128, 135, 143
    3. N.Y. Zoological, see Zoological Society
  53. South America, 169
  54. South Carolina, 45, 50, 105, 106
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. almost hopeless condition of, 296
    3. private preserves in, 360
  55. South Dakota, 45, 50, 59
    1. few laws needed by, 296
  56. Sparrow pest, 334
  57. Sparrows consume weed-seeds, 223
  58. Spoonbill, Roseate, 20
  59. Sportsman,
    1. case of a, 57
    2. character of true, 54, 58, 64
    3. definition of a, 382
  60. Sportsman's Platform, 384
  61. Sportsman's Review, 363
  62. Sports Afield, 263
  63. Sprague, John F., 48
  64. Spruce Woods Game Preserve, 354 [Page 410]
  65. Squirrel,
    1. fox, extinct in New York, 44
    2. gray, in danger, 32
    3. red, as bird destroyer, 79
  66. Squirrels killed in Louisiana, 5
  67. Standard-Union, Brooklyn, 263
  68. Stanford, Harry P., 49
    1. on deer slaughter, 287
  69. Staley, Walter C., 50
  70. Star, Washington, 263
  71. States, a roll-call of the, 263
  72. State game preserves, 345
    1. New York, 347
    2. Pennsylvania, 347
  73. Stratton, James W., 50
  74. Stebbing, E.P., 190, 196
  75. Stephan, S.A., agent for Carl Hagenbeck, 372
  76. Stevens Arms Co., 144, 146
  77. Stevenson-Hamilton, Maj. J., of the Transvaal, 177, 248
    1. status of the settlers, 365
    2. on Sportsman's Platform, 385
  78. Stilt, 230
  79. Stokes fund, Caroline Phelps, 395
  80. Stone, Witmer, 45, 50, 391
  81. St. Vincent Island game preserve, 360
  82. Sully Hills National Park, 344
  83. Sunday gun, 153
  84. Sunken Lands of Arkansas, 271
  85. Sun, New York, 263
  86. Superior National Game Preserve, 341
  87. Supreme Court decision, 3
  88. Swan, Trumpeter, 19
  89. Swans swept over Niagara Falls, 93
  90. Swallows, as insect destroyers, 216, 218
  91. Switzerland, chamois slaughter in, 322



  1. Tagging game for sale, 370
  2. Taming wild birds and mammals, 314
  3. Taylor, W.P., 47
  4. Taylor, W.J., 374
  5. Teachers, duty of, 377
  6. Teaching wild life protection to the young, 376
  7. Telegraph wires, birds killed by, 77
  8. Tener, Governor, at Carrick, Pa., 380
  9. Tennessee, 45, 105, 106, 107, 252
    1. a reformation needed in, 296
    2. Game Commissioner of, 252
  10. Tern, Common, 113
  11. Terns and Gulls saved by Audubon people, 320
  12. Terns
    1. becoming extinct
      1. in Delaware, 47
      2. in North Carolina, 50
  13. Teton Game Preserve, 348
  14. Texas, 45, 50, 105, 106
    1. insects destroyed by birds, 216
    2. laws needed in, 297
  15. Text-books, 377
    1. duty of writers of, 378
  16. Thayer John E., 24, 395
  17. Thome, Samuel, 395
  18. Thylacine of Australia disappearing, 38
  19. Tibet, 190
  20. Tilcomb, John W., 51, 240, 242
  21. Timber in National forests not to be cut, 338
  22. Times, New York, 263
  23. Tinkham, H.W., 231
  24. Tobacco pest, 212
  25. Tomalin, Richard W., 233
  26. Tortoises, 17
  27. Toucan, toco, being exterminated, 118
  28. Toumay, James W., 392
  29. Towne, S.G., 49
  30. Townsend, C.V.R., 371
  31. Townsend, Charles C., on protected ducks, 318
  32. Townsend, C.H., elephant seals taken by, 40
  33. Tragopans, 196
  34. Trapper uses game for bait, in Wyoming, 72
  35. Trappers as game destroyers, 196
  36. Trapping grizzly bears strongly opposed, 177
  37. Traps on Burma-Chinese border, 198
  38. Treaty, international, for protecting migratory birds, 354
  39. Triangle Islands, seals on, 39
  40. Tribune, New York, 263
  41. Trogon being exterminated, 118
  42. Trophies, purchase and sale of, 383
  43. Trout caught near Spokane, 205
  44. Trouvelot, Leopold, introducer of gypsy moth, 331
  45. Truck crops, 212
  46. Tuna Club, angling ethics of, 144
  47. Turkey vulture
    1. incident on Long Island, 91
    2. eaten by Italians, 101
  48. Turkey, Wild, in
    1. South Carolina, 50
    2. Texas, 50
    3. Missouri, 49
  49. Turner, J.P., 52
  50. Turtle Mountain Game Preserve, 354



  1. Union and Advertiser, 263
  2. Union Fire-Arms Co., 144, 146
  3. United States Government, recent work in game protection by, 249, 266
  4. Upp, Thomas M., 81
  5. "Useful Birds and Their Protection", 75
  6. Utah, 45, 51, 59, 106
    1. new laws needed in, 298
    2. national monuments of, 344



  1. Vancouver Island, elk on, 165
  2. Vanishing species not always recoverable, 323
  3. Van Kennan, E.A., 290
  4. Venezuela,
    1. a plume-hunter in, 129
    2. wild birds' plumage from, 122
  5. "Vermin" destructive to birds, 78
  6. Vermont, 45, 51, 59, 157
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. deer killed in Vermont since 1897, 240
    3. few new laws needed in, 298
    4. management of deer in, 240-242
    5. protects wood-duck, 28 [Page 411]
    6. re-stocking, with deer, 240
  7. Viquesnev, J.A., 51
  8. Virginia, 45, 51, 106, 109
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. many new laws needed in, 298
  9. Vreelarid, Frederick K., 353



  1. Wagner, George E., 51
  2. Wallace, Dillon, 245
    1. estimates 3,500 sheep in Colorado, 161
  3. Wallace, John H., Jr., 46, 253, 268
    1. on Florida laws, 277
  4. Wapiti, 164
    1. in Mt. Olympus National Monument, 340
    2. (see also, Elk)
  5. Ward, Charles Willis, 255, 349, 395
    1. donor of bird preserve, 319
  6. Ward, Henry L., 51, 389
    1. seals discovered by, 39
  7. Warden service based on merit system, 301
  8. Wardens, game, 60
    1. killed on duty, 103
    2. number of salaried, 237
  9. Ward-McIlhenny Wild Fowl Preserve, 361
  10. Waterton Lakes Park, 352, 353
  11. Washington, 45, 59, 165
    1. grizzlies in, 178
    2. a new code of laws needed in, 298
  12. Wayne, Arthur T., 133
  13. Weasel, 78, 317
  14. Webber, F.T., on Colorado quail, 89
  15. Webster, F.M., 214, 381
  16. Webster, Frederic S., 381
  17. Weed seeds eaten by quail, 219, 220
  18. Weeks, J.W., bird bill of, 267, 306
  19. Weevil, cotton-boll, 215, 216, 221
  20. Western Districts Game and Trout Protective Association, 185
  21. Western Field, 263
  22. West Virginia, 45, 51
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. good conditions in, 298
    3. protects wood-duck, 28
  23. Wharton, William P., 43, 49, 253
    1. bison, census by, 180
  24. Wheat, losses on, 209, 210
  25. Whipple, James S., 250
  26. Whitney, Caspar, 131
  27. Whooping Crane extinct, 49
    1. in Manitoba, 52
  28. Wichita National Bison Herd, 178, 294
  29. Wichita National Game Preserve, 341
  30. Wilcox, Albert, 395
    1. bequest from, 256
  31. Wild fowl, 48
    1. slaughter grounds, 64
    2. refuge, Louisiana State, 344
  32. Wildebeest in Cape Colony, 185
  33. Wild Life Call, 388
  34. "Wild Life in Australia", 332
  35. Wild Life Protective Association, 152, 257
  36. Wilderness area of North America, 156
    1. game will disappear from, 163
  37. Willet, 13, 31
  38. Williams, A. Bryan, British Columbia game warden, 52, 178, 356
  39. Wilson, Mrs. Minnie Moore, 16
  40. Wilson, Alexander, on the passenger pigeon, 12
  41. Wilson, Erasmus,
    1. on quail feeding, 89
    2. on Carrick's bird day, 379
  42. Wilson, Governor Woodrow, signs bill against machine guns, 289
  43. Wilson, James, Secretary of Agriculture, 343
  44. Winchester Arms Co., 144, 146, 150
  45. Wind Cave Bison Range, 180, 390
  46. Wisconsin, 45, 51, 59, 157
    1. deer killed in, 172
    2. new laws needed in, 301
  47. Woburn Park, David's deer at, 36
  48. Wolves destroyed, 79
    1. in British Columbia, 356
  49. Wombat in list of fur-bearers, 193
  50. Women promote bird slaughter, 7
  51. Wood, George E., 49
  52. Wood, Lieut.-Col. William, 355
  53. Woodcock, 30, 49, 50, 51, 52
  54. Wood-Duck, 28
    1. eaten in seventeen States, 29
    2. disappearing in Louisiana, 48
    3. nesting in Zoological Park, 207
  55. Woodpecker,
    1. Downy, 214, 226
    2. golden-winged, 226
    3. hairy, 226
  56. Woodpeckers, food of, 226
  57. Wooley-Dod, Arthur G., 51
  58. Wool-Growers' Association, 2
    1. opposes game preserves, 335, 348
  59. World, New York, 263
  60. Worthington, C.C., 236
  61. Wrens destroy boll weevil, 218
  62. Wyoming, 45, 51, 59
    1. efforts by, to feed starving elk, 166
    2. elk case, 71
    3. deer, 158
    4. grizzlies, 178
    5. laws needed, 302
    6. succor of elk in, 337
    7. National Monuments in, 344
    8. State Game Preserve in, 348



  1. Yale University, 392
  2. Yalakom Game Preserve, British Columbia, 354
  3. Yellowstone Park,
    1. animals in, 336
    2. bison herd of, 180
    3. elk in, 165
    4. protected animals of, 313
  4. Yoho Park, 352
  5. Yosemite National Park, 343
  6. Yukon Territory, sale of game in, 357



  1. Zebra,
    1. Burchell's, extinct, 37
    2. in Cape Colony, 185
  2. Zoological Park, New York, 19
    1. ducks killed in, 92
    2. thylacine in, 38
    3. wood-duck, quail and rabbits in, 315, 316
    4. woodpeckers decreasing in, 226
  3. Zoological Society, New York, 389, 395
    1. gift of bison herd from, 178, 294, 341
    2. on "extermination", 32
    3. protects birds of New York City, 101
  4. Zoologists, duty of American, 386

[Page 412]
BOOKS BY W.T. HORNADAY

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 153-157 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 153-157 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK

THE AMERICAN NATURAL HISTORY

THE AMERICAN NATURAL HISTORY

Featuring 220 original illustrations by Beard, Rungius, and Sawyer, along with 100 photographs by Sanborn, Keller, and Underwood, and multiple maps and diagrams. This book covers the most significant mammals, birds, reptiles, and fish of North America. It has over 400 pages, in double columns, measuring 5-1/2 x 8 inches. Priced at $3.50, net.

CAMP-FIRES IN THE CANADIAN ROCKIES

Campfires in the Canadian Rockies

Photographically illustrated by John M. Phillips. Experiences and observations in the habitat of the White Goat, Grizzly Bear, and Mountain Sheep. Received a gold medal from the Camp-Fire Club of America. 8vo., pp. 353. Price, $3.00.

CAMP-FIRES ON DESERT AND LAVA

Campfires on desert and lava

Illustrated by MacDougal, Phillips, and the author. Discoveries and adventures in the amazing Sonoran Desert: from Tucson, Arizona to the Pinacate Mountains. 8vo, pp. 366. Price, $3.00.

TWO YEARS IN THE JUNGLE

2 YEARS IN THE JUNGLE

The adventures and explorations of a hunter-naturalist in India, Ceylon, the Malay Peninsula, and Borneo. (Eighth edition). Illustrated. 8vo., pp. 512. Price: $2.50.

TAXIDERMY AND ZOOLOGICAL COLLECTING

Taxidermy and Wildlife Collecting

A comprehensive guide for amateur taxidermists, collectors, osteologists, sports enthusiasts, and travelers. (Seventh edition). Illustrated. 8vo., pp. 364. Price, $2.50.

OUR VANISHING WILD LIFE: Its Extermination and Preservation

OUR VANISHING WILDLIFE: Its Extinction and Conservation

A book that warns and appeals to protect wildlife. Illustrated. 8vo., 428 pages. Price: $1.50.

Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!