By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

´╗┐Title: Our Vanishing Wild Life - Its Extermination and Preservation
Author: Hornaday, William Temple, 1854-1937
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Our Vanishing Wild Life - Its Extermination and Preservation" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.

"_I know no way of judging of the Future but by the Past_."
  --_Patrick Henry_.


of a select committee of the Senate of Ohio, in 1857, on a bill proposed
to protect the passenger pigeon.

       *        *        *        *        *

"The passenger pigeon needs no protection. Wonderfully prolific, having
the vast forests of the North as its breeding grounds, traveling
hundreds of miles in search of food, it is here to-day and elsewhere
to-morrow, and no ordinary destruction can lessen them, or be missed
from the myriads that are yearly produced."

"The snipe (_Scolopax wilsonii_) needs no protection.... The snipe, too,
like the pigeon, will take care of itself, and its yearly numbers can
not be materially lessened by the gun."

Now in the Cincinnati Zoological Gardens. Twenty years old in 1912.
Copyright 1911, by Enno Meyer.]

       *        *        *        *        *


       *        *        *        *        *

            OUR VANISHING
              WILD LIFE





"Hew to the line! Let the chips fall where they will."--_Old Exhortation_.

"Nothing extenuate, nor set down aught in malice."--_Othello_.


       *        *        *        *        *


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

       *        *        *        *        *

[Illustration: Portrait of William Dutcher]


             William Dutcher


"_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_."

       *        *        *        *        *


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

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.

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.

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.

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
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.

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.

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 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.

10 December, 1912. _President of the New York Zoological Society_

       *        *        *        *        *


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!_

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.

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!_"

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

_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._

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?

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 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.

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.

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.

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 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?_

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.

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
from Professor Henry Fairneld Osborn the work involved would have borne
down rather heavily.

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

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.


December 1, 1912.

       *        *        *        *        *



                AND POOR WHITES


               LAW, AND OTHERS

       *        *        *        *        *


The Folly of 1857 and the Lesson of 1912           _Frontispiece_
Shall We Leave Any One of Them Open?
Six Recently Exterminated North American Birds
Sacred to the Memory of Exterminated Birds
Whooping Cranes in the Zoological Park
California Condor
Primated Grouse, or "Prairie Chicken"
Sage Grouse
Snowy Egrets in the McIlhenny Preserve
Gray Squirrel
Skeleton of a Rhytina
Burchell's Zebra
Thylacine, or Tasmanian Wolf
West Indian Seal
California Elephant Seal
The Regular Army of Destruction
G.O. Shields
Two Gunners of Kansas City
Why the Sandhill Crane is Becoming Extinct
A Market Gunner at Work on Marsh Island
Ruffed Grouse
A Lawful Bag of Ruffed Grouse
Snow Bunting
A Hunting Cat and Its Victim
Eastern Red Squirrel
Cooper's Hawk
Sharp-Shinned Hawk
The Cat that Killed Fifty-eight Birds in One Year
An Italian Roccolo on Lake Como
Dead Song-Birds
The Robin of the North
The Mocking-Bird of the South
Northern Robins Ready for Southern Slaughter
Southern-Negro Method of Combing Out the Wild Life
Beautiful and Curious Birds Destroyed for the Feather Trade--I
Sixteen Hundred Hummingbirds at Two Cents Each
Beautiful and Curious Birds Destroyed for the Feather Trade--II
Beautiful and Curious Birds--III
Fight in England Against the Use of Plumage
Young Egrets, Unable to Fly, Starving
Snowy Egret Dead on Her Nest
Miscellaneous Bird Skins, Eight Cents Each
Laysan Albatrosses, Before the Great Slaughter
Laysan Albatross Rookery, After the Great Slaughter
Acres of Gull and Albatross Bones
Shed Filled with Wings of Slaughtered Birds
Four of the Seven Machine Guns
The Champion Game-Slaughter Case
Slaughtered According to Law
A Letter that Tells its Own Story
The "Sunday Gun"
The Prong-Horned Antelope
Hungry Elk in Jackson Hole
The Wichita National Bison Herd
Pheasant Snares
Pheasant Skins Seized at Rangoon
Deadfall Traps in Burma
One Morning's Catch of Trout near Spokane
The Cut-Worm
The Gypsy Moth
Downy Woodpecker
Baltimore Oriole
Purple Martin
Rose-Breasted Grosbeak
Barn Owl
Golden-Winged Woodpecker
Kildeer Plover
A Food Supply of White-Tailed Deer
White-Tailed Deer
Notable Protectors of Wild Life:
  Madison Grant, Henry Fairfield Osborn, John F. Lacey, and William Dutcher
Notable Protectors: Forbush, Pearson, Burnham, Napier
Notable Protectors: Phillips, Kalbfus, McIlhenny, Ward
Band-Tailed Pigeon
Six Wild Chipmunks Dine with Mr. Loring
Chickadee, Tamed
Chipmunk, Tamed
Object Lesson in Bringing Back the Ducks
Gulls and Terns of Our Coast
Egrets and Herons in Sanctuary on Marsh Island
Bird Day at Carrick, Pa
Distributing Bird Boxes and Fruit Trees

       *        *        *        *        *


The Wilderness of North America
Former and Existing Ranges of the Elk
Map Showing the Disappearance of the Lion
States and Provinces Requiring Resident Licenses.
Eighteen States Prohibit the Sale of Game
Map Used in Campaign for Bayne Law
United States National Game Preserves
Bird Reservations on the Gulf Coast and Florida
Marsh Island and Adjacent Preserves
Most Important Game Preserves of Africa

       *        *        *        *        *





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

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.

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.

"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.

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
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.

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.

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.

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.

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:

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

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:

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?

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!_"

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

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.

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.

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 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!"

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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
President Frank M. Miller, we set forth this remarkable exhibit of
old-fashioned abundance in game, A.D. 1909.

       *        *        *        *        *

MONTHS) OF 1909-10


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


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.

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.

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 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
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.


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

       *        *        *        *        *



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

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.

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.

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.

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."

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

There are three kinds 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 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.

_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

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!_

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.

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.

Great Auk             Labrador Duck
Eskimo Curlew         Pallas Cormorant
Passenger Pigeon      Carolina Parrakeet]

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,
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 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 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!

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

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.

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 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 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 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!

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.

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.")

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":

"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."

       *        *        *        *        *

"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.

"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
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."

[Footnote 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.]

       *        *        *        *        *

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.

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 1870, Massachusetts gave pigeons protection except during an "open
season," and in 1878 Pennsylvania elected 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.

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

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
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.

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 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 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."

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.

       *        *        *        *        *

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.

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".

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.

Great Auk
Pallas Cormorant
Labrador Duck
Passenger Pigeon
Eskimo Curlew
Cuban Tricolor Macaw
Gosse's Macaw
Guadeloupe Macaw
Yellow Winged Green Parrot
Purple Guadaloupe Parakeet
Carolina Parakeet

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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!

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!

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.

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."

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.

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

       *        *        *        *        *



       *        *        *        *        *

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

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
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 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.

Very Soon this Species will Become Totally 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
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 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 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.

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.

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.

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_.

next shore-bird species that will follow the Eskimo curlew into
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 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."

[Footnote B: "Special Report on the Decrease of Certain Birds, and its
Causes."--Mass. State Board of Agriculture, 1908.]

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.

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.

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.

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
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.

Now Living in the New York Zoological Park.]

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 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
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.

"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.

"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.

"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

"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.

"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.

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

"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,
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.)"

       *        *        *        *        *

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 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_!

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:

  "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

  "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.

  "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.

  "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."

From the "American Natural History"]

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.

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.

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.

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
however, that like New York with the heath hen, they will arouse and
virtuously lock the stable door--after the horse has been stolen!

[Illustration: SAGE GROUSE
The First of the Upland Game Birds that will Become Extinct]

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.

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

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

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.

It is at This Period That the Parent Birds are Killed for Their Plumes,
and the Young Starve in the Nest
Photo by E.A. McIlhenny]

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."

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.

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 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



[Illustration: WOOD DUCK
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.

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.

_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:

       *        *        *        *        *


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?

Is there in those fifteen states _nothing_ too beautiful or too good to
go into the pot?

       *        *        *        *        *

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!"

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.

It is such occurrences as this that bring the end 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,

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.

Says Mr. Forbush, State Ornithologist of Massachusetts, in his admirable
"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."

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_!

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
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.

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

(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

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."

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

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.

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


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
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."


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.

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?

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
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."

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.

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.

Except over a very small total area, the gray squirrel is already gone
from the wild fauna 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?

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

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.

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

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

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

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *


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 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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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
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.

Now Believed to be Totally 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.

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
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!"

Now Being Exterminated by the Sheep Owners of Tasmania]

       *        *        *        *        *


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:

"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."

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 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.

[Illustration: WEST INDIAN SEAL
In 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_.

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.

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.

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
some roving sea adventurer will pounce upon the Remnant, and wipe it
out of existence for whatever reason may to him seem good.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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


Ridgway's quail (_Colinus ridgwayi_); Arizona elk (_Cervus merriami_),


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


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


Carolina parrakeet, whooping crane; bison.


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


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


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


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


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


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, 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.)


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.


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.)

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


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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.


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


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


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.


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


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.


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.)


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


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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


Records insufficient.


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.)


Records insufficient.


Records insufficient.


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


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


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


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



Passenger pigeon, whooping crane; bison.


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


Pigeon; bison, antelope, gray wolf.




Labrador duck, Eskimo curlew, passenger pigeon.


Wild turkey, pigeon, Eskimo curlew.


(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.




Pigeon; bison.

       *        *        *        *        *


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.


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.)


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

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.)


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.)


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.)

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 sharp-tailed grouse; nearly all the shore birds.


All the shore birds; quail, purple martin.


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-duck, woodcock, turtle dove and bob-white.--(A.R. Spaid,


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


Ruffed grouse, wild turkey.


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.)


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.


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.


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:

"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, 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?"

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."

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,


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.)

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


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


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.)


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.)


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.)

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


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.)


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.)

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.


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.


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.)

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

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.)


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

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


Wood-duck and upland plover.


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.


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, sickle-bill 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.)


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

Ruffed grouse rapidly disappearing; bobwhite becoming scarce.--(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.)


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.)

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


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,

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


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


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


Virginia partridge and woodcock.--(Arthur Chapman.)

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


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


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.)


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


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.)

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

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


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.)


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.)


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.)


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.)

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


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.)

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.)


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



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.)


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 small non-game birds. The sea
otter is almost extinct.--(A. Bryan Williams, Provincial Game Warden,


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.)

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.)


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


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.)


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

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


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.)

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

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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

_First_,--To save valuable species from extermination!

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

_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.

_Fourth_,--To protect our forests, by protecting the birds that keep
down the myriads of insects that are destructive 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

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 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 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.

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 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

Verily, the destruction of wild life makes strange companions.

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.

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 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.

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.

Each Year 2,642,274 Well-Armed Men Take the Field Against the Remnant
of Wild Birds and Mammals In the United States.
Drawn by Dan Beard]

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

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

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.

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.

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

"Justice demands it, and _the law_ doth give 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!

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.

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.

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
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 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 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

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

I said, "How _could_ you do it,--caring for wild ducks as 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!"

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. 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:

"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!"

"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."

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:

"All the game-preserving sportsmen that come to me are just like that!
_They want to kill all they can kill_!"

There is a blood-test by which to separate the conscientious sportsmen
from the mere gunners. Here it is:

A _sportsman_ stops shooting when game becomes scarce; and he does not
object to long-close-season laws; but

A _gunner_ believes in killing "all that the law allows;" and _he
objects to long close 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.

[Illustration: G.O. SHIELDS
A Notable Defender of Wild Life]

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!

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!

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.
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.

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.


_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.

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?

_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 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 Hampshire_, with only 430,572 population, has 33,542 licensed
hunters,--equal to _thirty-three regiments of full strength!_

_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.

_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?

_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.

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

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.

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.

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_.

_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.

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)]

Nineteen of Them Killed as "Game" by Three Gunners. Note 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.

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?

Shall we have five-year close seasons, or close seasons of 500 years? We
must take our choice.

Shall we hand down to our children a gameless continent, with all the
shame that such a calamity will entail?

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 now to deal with THE GUERRILLAS OF DESTRUCTION.

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.

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.

Here is an inexorable law of Nature, to which there are no exceptions:

_No wild species of bird, mammal, reptile or fish can withstand
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.

Does anyone question this statement? If so let him turn backward 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.

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
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.

Killing Mallards for the New Orleans Market. The Purchase of This Island by
Mrs. Russell Sage has now Converted 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

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
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.

[Illustration: RUFFED GROUSE
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.

The reasons why market shooting is so deadly destructive to wild life
are not obscure.

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."

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 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
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.

From "Rod and Gun in Canada"]

Here are some of the methods that have been practiced in the past in
getting 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 very often have been shipped in egg crates,
marked "eggs." They have been shipped in trunks and suit cases,--a very
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.

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.

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_!"

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.

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_!

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.

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.

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
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.

[Illustration: SNOW BUNTING
A Great "Game Bird"! Of These, 8,058 Were Found in 1902
in one New York Cold-Storage Warehouse]

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.

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?

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:


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.

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.

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:

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!

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=, =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.

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 Division of Negroes and Poor Whites who kill song and other birds
indiscriminately will be found 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.

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 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.

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. 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.

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

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

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.

  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.

  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

  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.

  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
  was only a part of the slaughter. Hundreds more were carried to
  other points; 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.

  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.

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 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.

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:

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.

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:

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.

The man was a notorious character, and cruel in the extreme. Finally a
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."

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.

Think of the fate of any wild animal that unkind Fate places at the
mercy of such a man!

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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

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.

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

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
become so scarce that their slaughter by house cats would demand
legislative action in the states.

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 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.

  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, 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.

  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.

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.

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.

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
and bad. We eliminated that pest, and we are keeping it eliminated. And
with what result?

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.

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.

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.

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:

  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.

  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.

  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.

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]

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.

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_!

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

_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.

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.

DOGS AS DESTROYERS OF BIRDS.--I have received many letters from
protectors of wild life informing me that the destruction of
ground-nesting 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.

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:

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

Naturally, we ask, what can be done 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.

WILD ANIMALS.--Beyond question, it is both desirable and necessary that
any excess of wild animals that prey upon our grouse, quail, pheasants,
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.)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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:

6,487 Coyotes
  870 Wild-Cats
   72 Lynxes
  213 Bears
   88 Mountain Lions
  172 Gray Wolves
   69 Wolf Pups

In 1910 the total was 9,103.

A Great Destroyer of Birds]

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
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.

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.

[Illustration: COOPER'S HAWK
A Species to be Destroyed]

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.

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
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.

A Species to be Destroyed]

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."

From Mr. Forbush's Book
Photo by A.C. Dyke]

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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!

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.

The sentiment for the conservation of wild life has changed the mental
attitude of very many people. The old Chinese-Malay spirit which cries
"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

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.

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

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.

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.

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
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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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 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
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.

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.

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

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.

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

"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
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."

"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 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

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.

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."

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_:

  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 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
  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.

  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.

  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

  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

  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 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 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

On Oct. 17, 1911, the annual report of the chief of the Biological
Survey contained the following information on this subject:

  _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.

  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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

In the well settled portions of the United States, such species as
quail, ruffed grouse, wild turkey, pinnated grouse and sage grouse hang
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.

Mr. Erasmus Wilson, of the _Pittsburgh Gazette-Times_ is the apostle of
that movement.

_Quail should be fed every winter, in every northern state_. The methods
to be pursued will be mentioned elsewhere.

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).

It would be possible to record many instances similar to the above, but
why multiply them? And now behold the cruel corollary:

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!"

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?

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

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:

       *        *        *        *        *


  _152. Petition for additional protection; notice of hearings; power
  to grant additional protection; notice of prohibition or regulation;

  _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.

  _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.

  _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.

  _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.

  _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.

       *        *        *        *        *

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.

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
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."

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.

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

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.

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.

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!"

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
is in response to that sentiment that thousands of people are today 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.

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.

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

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.

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.

Fortunately the work of the Bronx River Parkway Commission soon will
terminate the present 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
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_.

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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

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.

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

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

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.

A Death-Trap for Song-Birds. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Hark! A whirring, whistling sound fills the air, like the air 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!

Horrors! 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!

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

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 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.

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.

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.

And above that awful roccolo 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."

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
bird-lovers' society in Italy, the blinding of decoy birds for roccolos
is to be stopped.

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.

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.

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.

And what is the final exhibit of the gallant knight of the roccolo, the
feudal lord of the modern castle and its retainers?

The answer is given by Dr. Louis B. Bishop, in an article on "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

"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."

[Footnote C: It is probable that these birds were killed by piercing the
head through the eyes.]

"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,

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,
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

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:

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:

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.

"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_.

"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."

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!

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!

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_.

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.

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.

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

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.

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!"

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.

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".

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.

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.

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.

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
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 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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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:

  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 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 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 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.

Other sections provide for the full 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!

_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_!

Those two powerful forces should enter seriously upon this task. In
every other respect, the naturalized Italian tries to become a good
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.

[Illustration: DEAD SONG-BIRDS
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.]

       *        *        *        *        *



Before going farther, there is one point that I wish to make quite

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.

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."

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

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:

       *        *        *        *        *


Louisiana    North Carolina   Tennessee  Texas
Mississippi  South Carolina   Maryland   Florida


Louisiana    Pennsylvania        Tennessee
District of Columbia    South Carolina


Colorado    North Dakota    Nevada    Oklahoma    Nebraska

In Mississippi, the _cedar bird_ is legally shot and eaten! In North
Carolina, the meadow lark is shot and eaten.


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.

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!

Here is a case by way of illustration, copied very 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.

  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.

  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.

Dallas, Texas, papers and Oklahoma papers, please copy!

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:--

"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.

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

"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.

This sweet singer of the South is NOT being shot in the North
for food! No northern lawmaker ever will permit such barbarity.]

"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,
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."

195 Birds at Avery Island, La. in January 1912, Photographed Daring the
Annual Slaughter, by E.A. McIlhenny]

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

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.

An officer of the Louisiana Audubon Society states that a conservative
estimate of the number of robins annually killed in Louisiana for food
purposes when they are usually plentiful, is a _quarter of a million_!

The food of the robin is as follows:

Insects, 40 per cent; wild fruit, 43 per cent; cultivated fruit, 8 per
cent, miscellaneous vegetable food, 5 per cent.

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!"

"What for?" I asked, rather puzzled.

"Why, to get the aigs and _eat 'em!_" she responded with a bright smile
and flashing teeth.

"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

"Do the colored people of Virginia make a _practice_ of hunting for the
eggs of wild birds, 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!"

Her face fairly beamed 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

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 _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 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.

       *        *        *        *        *


  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.

  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 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.

  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

"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.
Reproduced from Recreation Magazine. By permission of the Outdoor World.]

  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.

  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.

  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

  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.

  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
  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.

  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

  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.

  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.

       *        *        *        *        *

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



[Footnote 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.]

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 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.

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.

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.

Belted Kingfisher
Victoria Crowned Pigeon
Superb Calliste
Greater Bird of Paradise
Common Tern
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."

Part of Lot Purchased by the Zoological Society at the Regular Quarterly
London Millinery Feather Sale, 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
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.

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.

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.

Why should London be the Mecca of the feather-killers of the world?

It is easily explained:

(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.

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.

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 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.

But behold the list of rare, curious and beautiful birds that are today
in grave peril:

Lyre Bird
White Ibis
Golden Eagle
Resplendent Trogan
Silver Pheasant
Toco Toucan]

       *        *        *        *        *


_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.
"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:

"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."

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *


_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 "


_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 "


_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.

The total number of bird corpses auctioned 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.

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


                            _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

[Footnote E: Chiefly Ostrich feathers.]

The above does not take into account 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:


                                    _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

Griffon Vulture
Herring Gull
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:

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.

[Footnote F: "The Feather Trade," by C.F. Downham, p. 63-4.]

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.

       *        *        *        *        *


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                                 .01-1/2
Hummingbird, various              3/16 of    .01 "    .02
Hummingbird, others               1/32 of    .01 "    .01
Egret ("Osprey") skins                      1.08 "   2.78
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                                1.08

       *        *        *        *        *

Many thoughts are suggested by these London lists of bird slaughter and

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.

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.

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.

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!"

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
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. 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."

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 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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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."

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

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

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 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
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_.

Sandwich-men Employed by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds,
that Patroled London Streets 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!)

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.

That the great supply of immaculately perfect egret plumes that annually
come out of Venezuela could by any possibility be picked up in the
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_."

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:

  Avery Island, La., June 17, 1912.


  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.

  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.

  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.

  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 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.

  Very truly yours,

  E.A. McIlhenny.

I am more than willing to set the above against the fairy tale of Mr.

Here is the testimony of A.H. Meyer, an ex-plume-hunter, who for nine
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.

"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.

"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:

"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.

"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.

"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.

"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

"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

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

"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."

Here is the testimony of Mr. Julian A. Dimock, of Peekamose, N.Y., the
famous 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_.

"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.

"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.

The Parent Birds had Been Killed by Plume Hunters]

Wounded in the Feeding-Grounds, and Came Home to Die. Photographed in a
Florida Rookery Protected by the National Association of Audubon

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."

This sworn testimony from Mr. T.J. Ashe, of Key West, Florida, is very
direct and to the point:

"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

Mr. Arthur T. Wayne, of Mount Pleasant, S.C., relates in sworn testimony
his experience in attempting to secure egret plumes without killing the

"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.

"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."

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.

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.

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.

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!

I have space to notice one other important erroneous conclusion that Mr.
Downham publishes in his book, on page 105. He says:

"The destruction of birds in foreign countries is something that no
trade can direct or control."

This is an amazing declaration; and absolutely contrary to experience.
Let me prove what I say by a fresh and incontestable illustration:

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

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 cleaned our Augean stable. The greatest game market in America was
absolutely closed.

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.

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.

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!

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 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
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.

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!

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):

"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."

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.

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_!

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

By the Courtesy of Hon. Walter Rothschild.]

The Same Ground as Shown in the Preceding Picture, Photographed 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.

For several months they slaughtered diligently and without mercy.
Apparently it was the ambition of Schlemmer to kill every bird on the

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.

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.

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
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.

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.

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:

"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.

"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


"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

"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.

"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.)

The report of Professor Bryan contains the following pertinent

"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
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.

"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."

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.

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

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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!"

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.

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
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:

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




Loaded and cocked by its own recoil.

Loaded and cocked by its own recoil.]

THE ETHICS OF SHOOTING AND SHOT-GUNS.--Are the American people willing
that their wild birds shall be shot by machinery?

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?

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.

That is Sportsmanship!

But how is it with the men who handle the shot-gun?

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.

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

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.

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:



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:

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.

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
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?

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.

Every human action is a matter of taste and individual honor.

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 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 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!"

Is it not high time for American sportsmen to cease taking their moral
principles and their codes of ethics from the gun-makers?

Here is a question that I would like to put before every hunter of game
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?

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
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.

One Hour's Slaughter (218 Geese) With Two Automatic Shot-Guns]

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.

It is up to the American People to say _now_ whether their wild life
shall be slaughtered by machinery, 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

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?"

It is strange that a conscientious man should ask such a question, when
the answer is apparent.

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
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

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 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:

"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....

"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.

"After we had investigated 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_.

"At the end of one hour's shooting we had 218 birds to our credit and
were 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_!

"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.

A Result of a Faulty System. Such Pictures as this are Very Common in
Sportsmen's Magazines Note 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."

Another picture was published in a Canadian magazine, illustrating 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.

"More and more followed. Sometimes they came singly, and then in twos
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_.

"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,

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.

_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.

"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

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

I think that the pump and automatic guns make about 75 _per-cent of
difference, against the game_; that is all!

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:

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

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.

       *        *        *        *        *

[Illustration: Copy of letter:
National Association of Audubon Societies
Founded 1901. Incorporated 1906.

For the Protection of Wild Birds and Animals

JOHN E. THAYER, 1st Vice-President
THEO. S. PALMER, M.D., 2d Vice-President
SAMUEL T. CARTER, Jr., Attorney

525 Manhattan Avenue, New York City

[Illustration: Map showing (shaded) States having
Audubon Societies.]

[Illustration: Map showing (shaded) States which have adopted
the A.O.U. model law protecting the non-game birds.]

141 Broadway.

Feb. 26th 1906.

My dear Mr. Hornaday:--

It is with much surprise that I learn through your communication of even
date that certain persons are claiming that the National Association of
Audubon Societies for the Protection of Wild Animals and Birds is in
favor of the use of automatic or pump guns, and consequently is not in
favor of the passage of laws to prevent the use or sale of such

I beg officially to state that the National Association of Audubon
Societies is absolutely opposed to either the manufacture, sale, or use
of such firearms, and therefore hopes that the meritorious bill
introduced by the New York Zoological Society will become a law.

I beg further to add that any statement contrary to the above in effect
is unauthorized.

This society is working for the preservation of the wild birds and game
of North America, and it sincerely should not stultify itself by
advocating the use of one of the most potent means of destruction that
has ever been devised.

You are at liberty to use this communication either publicly or

Very sincerely yours,
[Signature: William Dutcher]


       *        *        *        *        *

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.

_No immunity for wild-life 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.


  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.

  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.

  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.

  Very truly yours,


       *        *        *        *        *


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:

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




Adirondack League Club, New York
Blooming Grove Park Hunting and Fishing Club, Penn.
Greenwing Gun Club, Ottawa, Ill.
Western Ducking Club, Detroit, Minn.
Bolsa Chica Club, Los Angeles, Cal.
Westminster Club, Los Angeles, Cal.
Los Patos Club, Los Arigeles, Cal.
Pocahontas Club, Va.
Tobico Hunting Club, Kawkawlin, Mich.
Turtle Lake Club, Turtle Lake, Mich.
Au Sable Forest Farm Club, Mich.
Wallace Ducking Club, Wild Fowl Bay, Mich.
Lomita Club, Los Angeles, Cal.
Golden West Club, Los Angeles, Cal.
Recreation Club, Los Angeles, Cal.

       *        *        *        *        *


  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 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.

_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 "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 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
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 "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.

Now, what are the People going to do about it?

My recommendation is that each state enact a law in the following terms:

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.

The carrying of any rifle or shotgun concealed on the person shall
constitute 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.

Incidentally, we wonder what will be the next devilish device for the
destruction of wild life that American inventive genius will produce.

[Illustration: THE "SUNDAY GUN!"
A Deadly Combination of Concealable Rifle-and-Shot-Gun.]


       *        *        *        *        *



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

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.

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.

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.

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
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.

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:

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 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.

woodland caribou, white-tailed deer and black bear.

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.

THE SIERRA MADRE OF MEXICO, containing jaguar, puma, _grizzly_ and black
bears, mule deer, white-tailed deer, antelope, mountain sheep and

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.

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:

       *        *        *        *        *


THE MAINE WOODS: Well stocked with white-tailed deer.

NEW BRUNSWICK: Well stocked with moose; a few caribou, deer and black


THE ADIRONDACKS, NEW YORK: Well stocked with white-tailed deer, only.

PENNSYLVANIA MOUNTAINS: Contain many deer and black bears, and soon will
contain more.



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.

WESTERN AND SOUTHWESTERN MONTANA: Elk in season, mule and white-tail
deer; no sheep that it would be right to kill.

NORTHWESTERN MONTANA: Mule and white-tailed deer, only. No sheep, bear,
moose, elk or antelope _to kill_!

WYOMING, EAST OF YELLOWSTONE PARK: A few elk, by migration from the
Park; a few deer, and bear of two species.


SOUTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA: Goat, a few sheep and deer; grizzly bear.
Moose, caribou and elk should not be killed.

NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA: Six fine species of big game.

NORTHWESTERN ALBERTA: Grizzly bear, big-horn 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.

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.

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_!

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!

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.

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
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.

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

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!

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:

"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.

"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:

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.

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
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!


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

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.

Two serious attempts have been made to transplant and acclimatize the
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.

The Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan, in Canada, still permit the
hunting and killing of antelope; which is wholly and entirely 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.

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.

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?

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 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
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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Yes, indeed! In time the wilderness will be opened up, and the big game
will _all_ be shot out, save from 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.

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.

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.

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.

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
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 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.

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:

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.

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."

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.

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.

_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.

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).

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.

_Outdoor Life_ magazine (Denver, Colo.) for August, 1912, contains an
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

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 following is a condensed summary of the results of the work:

                            Number of   Hours on   Killed or    Died After
         Destination           Elk       Road      Died in Car  Unloading

1 Car. Startup, Washington 60: calves,    94          11          7
                           and two-year
1  "   Hamilton, Montana   43: cows &     30           4          1
1  "   Thompson Falls,
       Montana             40             --           2          O
1  "   Stephensville,
       Montana             36             --           1          1
1  "   Deer Lodge, Montana 40             24           2          O
1  "   Hamilton, Montana   40             --           O          O
1  "   Mt. Vernon,
       Washington          46          4 days;         7          O
                                       unloaded &
                                       fed twice
                          ---                         --          -
                          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

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.

The splendid photographs of the elk herds that recently have been made
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

Part of a Herd of About 2,500 Head, being fed on hay, in the Winter of
1910-11 Note the Absence of Adult Bulls. Copyright, 1911, by S.N.

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

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.

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

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 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.


1.--There are at present _too many_ breeding cows in the Yellowstone

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.

_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.

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

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.)

       *        *        *        *        *


About ten years more will see the extinction of the mountain sheep of
Lower California,--in the wake of the recently exterminated Mexican
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.

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.

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

       *        *        *        *        *




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.

The worst shooting that I ever did or saw done at game was at running
white-tailed deer, in the Montana river bottoms.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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:

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
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.

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 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 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.

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.

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 reasons for these conclusions are by no means obscure, or

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

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.

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

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 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 of the northwestern wilderness are in a situation peculiarly
their own. They inhabit a region of naked mountains and _thin_ forests,
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 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 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.

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.

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
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 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 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.

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."

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.

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
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.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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
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.

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

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.

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.

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
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.

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!"

The answer? _Not by a long shot_!

Only three things were wrong with the ex-governor's view:

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.

2.--The preservation of the Alaskan fauna on the public domain should
not be left unreservedly to the people of Alaska, because

3.--As sure as shooting, they will _not_ preserve 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.

THE BLACK BEAR is an interesting citizen. He harms nobody nor anything;
he affords good sport; he objects to being exterminated, and wherever in
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 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 species reached its lowest ebb in 1889, when there were only 256
head in captivity and 835 running wild. The increase has been as

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


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
Niobrara (Neb.) National Bison Range, now in process of creation  To be


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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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!_

 2 Buffalo
 2 Rhinoceros
 2 Hippopotamus
 1 Eland
 2 Grevy Zebra
20 Common Zebra
 2 Fringe-eared Oryx
 4 Beisa Antelope
 4 Waterbuck
 1 Sable Antelope
 1 Roan Antelope
 1 Greater Kudu
 4 Lesser Kudu
10 Topi
20 Coke Hartebeest
 2 Neumann Hartebeest
 4 Jackson Hartebeest
 6 Hunter's Antelope
 4 Thomas Kob
 2 Bongo
 4 Pallah
 2 Sitatunga
 3 Gnu
12 Grant Gazelle
 4 Waller's Gazelle
10 Harvey's Duiker
10 Isaac's Duiker
10 Blue Duiker
10 Kirk's Dik-dik
10 Guenther's Dik-dik
10 Hinde's Dik-dik
10 Cavendish Dik-dik
10 Abyssinian Oribi
10 Haggard's Oribi
10 Kenya Oribi
10 Suni
10 Klipspringer
10 Ward's Reedbuck
10 Chanler's Reedbuck
10 Thompson Gazelle
10 Peters Gazelle
10 Soemmerring Gazelle
10 Bushbuck
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,
cheetahs, cape hunting dogs and hyaenas that the hunter can kill, and
it will be enough to stock a zoological garden!

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.

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.

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!"

_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_!

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.

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.

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.

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
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.

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.]

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
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:

"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 was in 1890. And how is it to-day?

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.

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.

And how is it with the game of that day?

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.

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.

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:

       *        *        *        *        *


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:

_Blesbok_: About 400 in Steynsburg, and 35 in Queen's Town divisions.

_Bontebok_: About 30 in Bredasdorp and 45 in Swellendam divisions.

_Buffalo_: About 340 in Uitenhage, 120 in Alexandria, and 75 in Bathurst

_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.

_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.

_Oribi_: About 120, in the divisions of Albany and Alexandria.

_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.

_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.

_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.

_Hartebeest_: About 9,700, principally in the divisions 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

_Eland_: About 12 in the Graaff-Reinet division, privately bred.

       *        *        *        *        *

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 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!

This list is of startling interest, because it shows how closely the
small remnants of big game are now marked down in South Africa.

In view of the success with which Englishmen protect their game when
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.

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.

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 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.

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 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

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
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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, 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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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

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

"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."

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?

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 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.

_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.

_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:

"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!"

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
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

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.

_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.

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!

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."

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.

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.

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.

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?

       *        *        *        *        *


                           _Totals for       Totals for
                            1911, Skins      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
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

       *        *        *        *        *


Curator of Birds, New York Zoological Park

[Footnote 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.]

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 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

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
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.

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.

[Footnote H: "Game Sanctuaries and Game Protection in India,"
Proc. Zool. Soc., London, 1912. pp. 23-35.]

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

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
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."

[Illustration: PHEASANT SNARES
Made of Yak Hair, Taken from a Shepherd in Nepal by Mr. Beebe]

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."

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
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."

About 600 Skins out of Several Thousand Confiscated in 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.

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.

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]

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
pounds 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.

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
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.

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.

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.

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
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.

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.

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.

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
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.

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.

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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 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.

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

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
much genuine admiration for game animals, or any feeling remotely
resembling regard for it.

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!

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!"

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:

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

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.

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

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?

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!"

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:"

       *        *        *        *        *


  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.

  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

  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?

  It is all too easy now for the slaughterer to get to his work, all
  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

  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 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

  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.

  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

  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.

  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.

       *        *        *        *        *

Mr. Hough's views are entitled to respectful consideration; but on one
vital point I do not follow 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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *




"You take my life when you do take the means whereby I 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 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.

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_.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *


CORN.--The principal insect enemies of corn are the chinch bug,
corn-root worm (_Diabrotica longicornis_), bill bug, wire worm,
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

[Illustration: THE CUT-WORM, (_Peridroma Sancia_)
Very Destructive to Crops]

WHEAT.--Of all our cereal crops, wheat is the one that suffers most from
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 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."

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."

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.

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.

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.)

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

[Illustration: THE GYPSY MOTH, (_Portheria dispar_)
Very Destructive to the Finest 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."

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.

       *        *        *        *        *


_Official Report in the Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture,

                                       % OF
  PRODUCT              VALUE            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                              100,000,000
   Forest Products
 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.

In the next chapter we will consider the work of our friends, The 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:

The bag insects, in thousands, are devouring the leaves of locust and
maple trees.

The elm beetles are trying to devour the elms; and spraying is in

The hickory-bark borers are slaughtering the hickories; and even some
park people are neglecting to take the measures necessary to stop it!

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

The codling moth larvae are already at work on the apples.

The leaves affected by the witch hazel gall fly are being cut off and

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.

Some of these hordes are being fought with poisonous 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!

Now, is a federal strong-arm migratory bird law needed for such birds or
not? Let the owners of orchards and forests make answer.

curculio are twin terrors to apple-growers, partly because of their
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.

[Illustration: DOWNY WOODPECKER]

_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."

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."

Behold the array of birds that devour the larvae of the codling moth to
an important extent.

       *        *        *        *        *


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."

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.

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
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.

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

       *        *        *        *        *


By H.W. Henshaw, Chief 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.

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).

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.

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.

SWALLOWS.--Of all the birds now known to destroy weevils, swallows are
the most important. Six species occur in Texas and the southern states.
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.

The Deadly Enemy of the Cotton-Boll Weevil
From the "American Natural History"]

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.

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.

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.

[Illustration: THE NIGHTHAWK
A Goatsucker, not a Song-bird; but it Feeds Exclusively Upon Insects]

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.

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.)

       *        *        *        *        *


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

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
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.

[Illustration: 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.]

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.

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

Let us glance over the bob white's bill of fare:

_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
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.

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:

       *        *        *        *        *


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


(Prof. Judd and Mrs. Nice.)

Colorado potato beetle
Cucumber beetle
Chinch bug
Bean-leaf beetle
May beetle
Corn billbug
Imbricated-snout beetle
Plant lice
Cabbage butterfly
Squash beetle
Clover leaf beetle
Cotton boll weevil
Cotton boll worm
Striped garden caterpillar
Corn-louse ants
Rocky Mountain locust
Codling moth
Canker worm
Hessian fly
Stable fly


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    "

       *        *        *        *        *

[Illustration: THE BOB-WHITE
For the Smaller Pests of the Farm, This Bird is the Most
Marvelous Engine of Destruction Ever put Together of Flesh and Blood.]

_A few sample meals of insects_.--The following are records of single
individual meals of the bob white:

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.

"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.)

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.

_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
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."

Then go on, and finish 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.

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."

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:

"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.)

The Mayor was quite right. The robin butchers of Pittsboro were not
worthy to be governed 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 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 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.)

FLYCATCHERS.--The high-water mark in insect-destruction by our birds is
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.

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?

"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

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 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 awakening came even more swiftly than the ornithologists expected.
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

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.

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.

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

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 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

THE LONG-EARED OWL, (_Asio wilsonianus_) has practically the same kind
of a record as the barn owl,--scores of mice, rats and shrews
destroyed, and only an occasional small bird. Its nearest relative, the
_Short-eared Owl (A. accipitrinus_) may be described in the same words.

[Illustration: THE BARN OWL
Wonderfully Destructive of Rats and Mice, and
Almost Never Touches Birds]

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 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.)

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
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

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

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.

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.

[Footnote 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 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 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 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.

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.

A Bird of Great Value to Orchards and Forests, now
Rapidly Disappearing, Undoubtedly Through Slaughter as "Food"]

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.

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.

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.

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.

The Department of Agriculture never publishes and circulates anything
that has already been published, no matter how valuable to the public at
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!

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

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.

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 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.

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
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.

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.

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:

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.

Among other fly larvae consumed are those of the crane flies
(leather-jackets) devoured 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

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
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.

 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.

The Killdeer Plover     The Jacksnipe
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.]

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:

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)_.
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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

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,
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

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:

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)_.
Kill deer _(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:

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.

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.

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.

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 following appeared in the _Zoological Society Bulletin_, for
January, 1909, from Richard Walter Tomalin, of 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.

"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 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.

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.

_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.

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_!

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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:

  Section 158. _Power to Take Birds and Quadrupeds_. In the event that
  any species of birds protected by the provisions of section two
  hundred and nineteen of this article, or quadrupeds protected by
  law, shall at any time, in any locality, become destructive of
  private or public property, the commission shall have power in its
  discretion to direct any game protector, or issue a permit to any
  citizen of the state, to take such species of birds or quadrupeds
  and dispose of the same in such manner as the commission may
  provide. Such permit shall expire within four months after the date
  of issuance.

This measure should be adopted by every state that is troubled by too
many, or too 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 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
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.

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.

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

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

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 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
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.

[Footnote 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.]

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?

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.

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_!

Last year, 11,000 deer were forced down out of their hiding places in
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.

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?

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

When the shoe of Necessity pinches the People hard enough, remember the
possibilities in deer.

[Illustration: 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
From the "American Natural History"]

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 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

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.

                   BEGAN, IN 1897

_From John W. Titcomb, State Game Commissioner, Lyndonville, Vt.,
 Aug. 23, 1912_

     By       By       By   Wounded By       By       Average Gross
Year Hunters, Hunters, Dogs Deer    Railroad Various  Weight  Weight
     Legally  Illegally     Killed  Trains   Accidents (lbs.) (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
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.

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:

                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?

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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,

As soon as the proper balance of deer life has been restored, protect
the does once more.

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.

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
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.

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.

The hippo-antelope proposition is a climax of absurdity, in proposing
the replacing of valuable native game with impossible foreign species.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

For right-hearted people, a little law is quite sufficient; and the best
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!"

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."

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 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.

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.

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.

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 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 Pennsylvania, there exists an association which was formed for the
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.

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

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.

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.

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_.

       *        *        *        *        *



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

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.

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.

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.

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
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.

Naturally, we are most interested in our own contingent of the Army of
the Defense.

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

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.

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.

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.

Secretary and Chairman Executive Committee, New York Zoological Society

President, New York Zoological Society

Ex-Member of Congress; Author of the "Lacey Bird Law"

Founder and President, National Association of Audubon Societies]

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.

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_!

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.

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.

Massachusetts State Ornithologist

Secretary, National Association of Audubon Societies

President, American Game Protective and Propagation Association

President, Fish and Game Commission of New Jersey]

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

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.

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.

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.

Chief Game Protector and Secretary, Pennsylvania Board of Game

Member, Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners

Founder of Wild-Fowl Preserves in Louisiana

Founder of Wild-Fowl preserves in Louisiana]

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.

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.

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.

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
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 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.

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.

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?

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

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_!

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.

When he comes down half-dressed, blinking and rubbing his eyes, shout
at him:

"Come out! Your birds are all being shot to pieces!"

"Are they?" he will say. "But what can _I_ do about it? I can't help it!
I'm no game warden."

"Put on your clothes, get your shot-gun and come out and drive off the
killing gang."

"But what good will that do? They will come back again."

"Not if we do our duty. We must have them arrested, and appear 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

"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."

And this brings me to a very important subject:

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

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.

In working for the protection of wild life there is one mighty and
unfailing source of consolation. It is this:

_Your cause always gains in strength, and the cause of the destroyers
always loses strength!_

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.

Do not bother your legislature with a trivial bill. Choose a cause that
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.

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.

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.

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.

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:

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.

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
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."

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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
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:

[Footnote 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

The New York Times
The New York Tribune
The New York Herald
The New York Globe
The New York Mail and Express
The New York World
The New York Sun
The Springfield (Mass.) Republican
The Chicago Inter-Ocean
The San Francisco Call
The Rochester Union and Advertiser
The Victoria Colonist
The Brooklyn Standard-Union
The New York Evening Post
The New York Press
The Buffalo News
The Minneapolis Journal
The Pittsburgh Index-Appeal
The St. Louis Globe-Democrat
The Philadelphia North American
The Utica Observer
The Washington Star.

These magazines have done good service in the cause; and some of them
have spent many years on the firing line:

Forest and Stream
The American Field
Field and Stream
Recreation (old and new)
Rod and Gun in Canada
In the Open
Sports Afield
Western Field
Outdoor Life
Shield's Magazine
Sportsman's Review
Collier's Weekly
The Independent
Country Life
Outdoor World
Bird Lore

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.

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.

HOW TO MEET OPPOSITION.--There is no rule for the handling of opposition
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.

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

A bill should not be left to a long slumber in the drawer of a
committee. Such delays nearly always are dangerous.

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.

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.

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."

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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
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_!

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.

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.

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.

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:

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

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.

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
birds; and Canada and Mexico should be induced to join 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

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 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 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.

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

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
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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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

  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 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

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."


  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

  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 per cent 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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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:

"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

The road is open; the pack-train is ready; the guides are waiting. Go on
and slay the Remnant!


  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

  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.


  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

  The killing of female deer and the hounding of deer, should be

  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.
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.

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.


  The sale of all wild game should be forever prohibited.

  The use of automatic and pump shotguns, in hunting, should be

  The killing of pigeons and doves as "game" and "food" should be

  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!

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!

The most terrible slaughter ever recorded for automatic guns occurred
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_!

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.

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 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

  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.

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.

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 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
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 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.

Often Mistaken for the Passenger Pigeon. The rapid Slaughter
of this Species has Alarmed the Ornithologists of California,
who now fear its Extinction]

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.

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!"

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.

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

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.

_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 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):--

  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.

  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.

  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.

       *        *        *        *        *




  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

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!"

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!

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.


  Stop all spring shooting, at once; stop killing shore birds for ten
  years, and protect swans indefinitely.

  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

  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 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.

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.


  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

  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.

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!

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.

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 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 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?

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.

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
will question either the value or the honest sincerity of Mr. Wallace's
opinions. 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.

  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.

  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.


  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

  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.


The imperative duties 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.

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.

In 1910, Dr. T.S. Palmer credited Idaho with the possession of about
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.


  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.

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

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
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

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?

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.

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.

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 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?


  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

  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

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!"


  Spring shooting should be stopped, at once and forever.

  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

  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.

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.


  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!

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!

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.


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.

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.

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_!


On more counts than one, Louisiana is in the list of Great Delinquents;
for behold the things that 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

  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

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_!

Remember this proportion:

The Robin : The North :: The Mockingbird : The South.

       *        *        *        *        *




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:

  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

  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.

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.

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.

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.


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!

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!

The list of things that Maryland must do in order 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

  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

  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.


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
campaign fund, and tireless energy and persistence. Massachusetts is to
be roundly congratulated on having so thoroughly cleaned up her
sale-of-game situation.

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!_

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:

  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.


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.

Only three or four suggestions are in order:

  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.


  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

  The state should prohibit the use of machine guns in hunting.

To-day, direct and reliable advices show that the game situation in
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.

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.


  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.


  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
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.

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.


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."

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.

  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


No other state has bestowed close seasons upon as many extinct species
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

There is little to say regarding the future of the game of Nebraska; for
its "future" is now 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.


  The sage grouse should be given a ten-year close season, for

  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

  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.


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:

  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

  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.


New Jersey enjoys the distinction of being the second state to break
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."_

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.

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.

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:

  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."


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,
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.

  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.


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

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.

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 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 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._

_Two things_ remain 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.

       *        *        *        *        *




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 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!

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

  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.

  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

  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.


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 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

North Dakota has done well, in the passage of that act. On certain other
matters, she is not so sound.

For instance:

  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.


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"
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!"

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!"

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!


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.

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."

  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

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.

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 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
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.

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.

  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

  Every species of bird, mammal or fish that is threatened with
  extermination should be given a close season of from five to ten

  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.


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).

But there are certain things that Pennsylvania should do:

  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.


  Little Rhody needs some good, small bag limits; for now (1912) she
  has none!

  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.


  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.


  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.

South Dakota needs no Bayne law, because she prohibits at all times the
sale or exportation of all wild game.


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.

We notice that there are open seasons for _blackbirds, robins, doves and
squirrels_! It seems incredible; but it is 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
not great? Will not any self-respecting dog be proud to point or
retrieve them? And what flesh for the table!

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.)

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.

Tennessee needs:

  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.


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.

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.

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.

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

  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.


The laws of Utah are far from being up to the requirements of the
present hour. One strange 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.

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.

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).

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.

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!

  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.


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:

  Absolute close seasons of five-years' duration for ruffed grouse,
  quail, woodcock, snipe and all shore birds without a single

  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

  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.


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:

  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

  She should accord a five-year close season to grouse, and all shore

  She should rule out the machine shot-guns which gentlemen can no
  longer use in hunting.

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


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 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.

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.

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.

_Stop local game legislation, and enact a code of laws covering the
entire state, uniformly. County legislation is twenty years behind the

  For ten (10) full years, stop the killing of elk, mountain sheep,
  mountain goat, caribou, moose, and antelope. Regarding deer, I am in

  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

  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.


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

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).

In view of the impossibility of imagining a good reason for the repeal
of a good law, we recommend:

  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

  That a force of regular salaried wardens be provided to enforce the

  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.


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

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.

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
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

  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.


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.

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.

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

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.

The deadly defects 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.


  In Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma and Rhode Island an
  additional fee of 10 to 20 cents is charged 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.

  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.

From Farmers' Bulletin No. 510, U-S. Dept. of Agriculture]

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.

  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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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:

  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

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.

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

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
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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.
The power of Uncle Sam is respected and feared in many places where the
power of the state 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.

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.

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?

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.

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
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.


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.

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
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

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.

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!

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.

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

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
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.

This map shows how the sale of ducks killed on the Carrituck Sound
robs the people of 16 states, for the benefit of a few.
(Signed W.T. Hornaday, March 6, 1911.)]

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.

Grouse, domestic     per pair             $3.00
Grouse, foreign       "    "    $1.25  to  1.75
Partridge, domestic   "    "     3.50  "   4.00
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 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?

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 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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *


  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.

  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

  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:

Wild duck          98,156
Plover             48,780
Quail              14,227
Grouse             21,202
Snipe               7,825
Woodcock              767
Rail                  419

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.

As an instance of persistent market shooting on the greatest ducking
waters of the eastern United States, I offer this report from a
trustworthy agent sent to Currituck Sound, North Carolina, in March,

  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.

  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.

  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.

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 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!"

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

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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

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.

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.

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.

The arrogance of the bears that couldn't be shot once led to a droll
and also exciting 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

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.

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.

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.

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"!

"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

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
neighbors to become close friends with man _when protected_. I will
quote from one of Mr. Loring's letters on this subject:

"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.

"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."


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.

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
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.

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.

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 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.

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.

Chickadee and Chipmunk Tamed by Mr. Loring]


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

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.

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.

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.

"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

AN OBJECT LESSON IN PROTECTION.--A remarkable object lesson in the
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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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

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

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.

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.

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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

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."

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.

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.

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

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.

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 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.

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.

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
From the "American Natural History"]

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.

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!_

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.

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.

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

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."

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
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.

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?

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.

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

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

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!

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?"

The point seemed well taken. Now, I had seen much of the American
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.

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!

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.

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.

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

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 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
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.

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.

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_.

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!

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.

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
exterminate the heath hen and coddle 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 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.

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.

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!"

The idea was adopted. The three animals were hauled an uncertain number
of miles into the interior mountains and set free.

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:

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_!

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.
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:

_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_.

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.

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.

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.

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 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
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.

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.

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.

In the transplantation of fishes, conditions are widely different, and
many notable successes have been achieved.

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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.)

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.

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

       *        *        *        *        *



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_.

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!

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 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 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.

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.

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.

"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.

"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.)

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.

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.

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

"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!"

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.

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 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 Jamaica, at the end of the rat-killing period, the planters joyfully
estimated that the labors of Herpestes had saved between 500,000 pounds
and 750,000 pounds 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.

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

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.

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.

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
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.

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.

If _Herpestes griseus_ ever breaks loose in the United States, the crime
shall not justly be chargeable to 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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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

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!

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.

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

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?"

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.

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 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.

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

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.

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).

  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
  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 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 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.

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.

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 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."

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
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
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.

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.

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.

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.

_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_.

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.

and Five Pacific Bird Refuges]

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.

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]

[Footnote L: See _Recreation_ Magazine, May, 1910, p. 213]

They compared notes, and finally agreed upon these figures:

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.

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.

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.

With the enthusiastic approval and assistance of Representative William
E. Humphrey, of Seattle, Dr. Palmer set in motion the machinery
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.

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.

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_!

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.

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.

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 area it contains 1,420,000 acres, and the creation of this great
preserve was accomplished on April 13, 1909.

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
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.

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.

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.

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

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 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 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

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
estate of Charles Conrad, and three were presented from the famous
Corbin herd, at Newport, N.H., 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.


SULLY HILLS NATIONAL PARK, at Devil's Lake (Fort Totten), North Dakota.
Area 960 acres.

PLATT NATIONAL PARK, Sulphur Springs, Oklahoma; on account of many
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

       *        *        *        *        *


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 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:

ALASKA:                COLORADO:                SOUTH DAKOTA:
  Sitka                  Wheeler                  Jewel Cave

  Montezuma Castle     MONTANA:                 UTAH:
  Petrified Forest       Lewis & Clark Cavern     Natural Bridges
  Tonto                  Big Hole Battlefield     Mukuntuweap
  Grand Canyon                                    Rainbow Bridge
  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."

[Footnote M: National Reservations for the Protection of Wild Life, by
T.S. Palmer, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Circular No. 87, Oct. 5, 1912.]

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:

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).

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

In one important matter the state of Pennsylvania has been wide awake,
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The _game_ preserves created in Pennsylvania up to date 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 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.

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.


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
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


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 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


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.


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.


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.

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.


IDAHO.--Payette River Game Preserve      230,000
CALIFORNIA.--Pinnacles Game Preserve       2,080
WYOMING.--Big Horn Mountains Game Preserve.
MONTANA.--Yellowstone Game Preserve.
          Pryor Mountain Game Preserve.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

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:

"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.)

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
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.

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."

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

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.

ONTARIO.--"At the present time," says Commissioner Evans in his "Final
Report," "the Algonquin National Park is the only actual game preserve
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."

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.

_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.

_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.

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


                                   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,
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 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.

_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.

_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.

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

_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.

_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
about 2,250 square miles. Concerning its character and wild-life
population we have no details.

_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

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."

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

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:


DUCK MOUNTAIN PRESERVE   324 sq. miles, 207,360 acres.
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.

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!

_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
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.

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.

_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 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.

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!

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

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
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.

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:

                  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

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?"

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

And that antelope-killing! It should be stopped at once, and for ten

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
(_Rangifer osborni_), can be exterminated in our own times, because it is
nowhere really numerous, and it inhabits exposed situations.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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

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
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 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:

"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."

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.

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

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."

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.

In the eastern United States the most widely-known game preserve is Blue
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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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
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.


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

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
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

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

[Footnote N: "Private Game Preserves and their Future in the United
States," by T.S. Palmer, United States Department of Agriculture, 1910.]

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.

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_!

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:

1. Any private game "preserve" that is maintained chiefly as a
slaughter-ground for wild game, either birds or mammals, may become
detrimental to the interests of the people at large.


2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. The law may justly discriminate between the actual game preserve and
the mere killing-ground.

6. 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.

       *        *        *        *        *



This brief chapter is offered as an object-lesson to the world at large.

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

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

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:

  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
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.

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.

[Footnote O: Published by Heinemann, London, 1912.]

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.

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.

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.

"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.

The Numbers Refer to Corresponding 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.)

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

[Footnote P: These numbers refer to corresponding numbers on the map of

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.

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.


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.


4. _Hargeis Reserve_, about 1,800 square miles.

5. _Mirso Reserve_, about 300 square miles.


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.

7. _Toro Reserve_.--This small reserve lies between Lakes Albert Nyanza
and Albert Edward Nyanza, touching both.

territory, but remarkably well stocked with game.

8. _Elephant Marsh Preserve_.--A small area in the extreme southern end
of the Protectorate, on both sides of the Shire River, chiefly for

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.


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.

11. _Rustenburg Reserve_.--This is situated at the head of the Limpopo
River, and covers about 3,500 square miles.


12. _The Swaziland Reserve_ contains about 1,750 square miles, and
occupies the southwestern corner of Swaziland.


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.

_Luangwa Reserve_.--The locality of this reserve cannot be determined
from the official description, which gives no clue to its shape or size.

       *        *        *        *        *



_Little Barrier Island_ in the north, and _Resolution Island_, in the
south; and concerning both, details are lacking.


_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.

_Wilson's Promontory_. Adelaide, is a peninsula well suited to the
preservation of wild life, especially birds, and it is now a sanctuary.

Many private bird refuges have been created in Australia.


_Eleven Bird Refuges_ have been created, with a total area of 26,000
acres,--an excellent record 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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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.

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.

All that any state legislature may rightfully be asked to do is to
provide for 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.

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.

_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.

_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
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

_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 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 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

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
and tractable disposition. It can not live in a country where the
temperature goes down to 25 degrees 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.

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.

_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.

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.

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

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

       *        *        *        *        *


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.

"_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.

_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.

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.

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

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.

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

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
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!

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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.

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
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.

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:

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

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_!"

In a good cause, there is great virtue 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.

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."

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.
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 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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Illustration: BIRD DAY AT CARRICK, PA.
Marching Behind 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).

Everyone knows the value of sweet cherries, both to birds and to

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.

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:

  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 distribution of several hundred cherry and mulberry trees was
  the occasion, and the beautiful grounds of the Roosevelt school,
  Carrick, was the scene.

  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.

  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?

  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.

  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

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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.


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

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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!

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.

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?

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.

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.

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
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

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 Australia the interdiction should include the thylacine or Tasmanian
wolf, all the large kangaroos, the emu, lyre bird 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.

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

The Boone and Crockett Club, of New York and Washington, had in its
constitution the following excellent article:

"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."

In 1906, this Club condemned the use of automatic shotguns in hunting as

The Lewis and Clark Club, of Pittsburgh, has in its constitution, as
Section 3 of Article 3, the following comprehensive principle:

"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."

At the end of the constitution of this club is this declaration, and

"_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."

In 1906 the Lewis and Clark Club condemned the use of automatic
shotguns as unsportsmanlike.

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:

"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."

[Footnote 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!]

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:

       *        *        *        *        *

_Proposed by Wm. T. Hornaday and adopted December 10, 1908_

  1. The wild animal life of to-day is not ours, to do with as we
  please. The original stock is given to us _in trust_, for the
  benefit both of the present and the future. We must render an
  accounting of this trust to those who come after us.

  2. Judging from the rate at which the wild creatures of North
  America are now being destroyed, fifty years hence there will be no
  large game left in the United States nor in Canada, outside of
  rigidly protected game preserves. It is therefore the duty of every
  good citizen to promote the protection of forests and wild life and
  the creation of game preserves, while a supply of game remains.
  Every man who finds pleasure in hunting or fishing should be willing
  to spend both time and money in active work for the protection of
  forests, fish and game.

  3. The sale of game is incompatible with the perpetual preservation
  of a proper stock of game; therefore it should be prohibited by laws
  and by public sentiment.

  4. In the settled and civilized regions of North America there is no
  real _necessity_ for the consumption of wild game as human food: nor
  is there any good excuse for the sale of game for food purposes. The
  maintenance of hired laborers on wild game should be prohibited
  everywhere, under severe penalties.

  5. An Indian has no more right to kill wild game, or to subsist upon
  it all the year round, than any white man in the same locality. The
  Indian has no inherent or God-given ownership of the game of North
  America, anymore than of its mineral resources; and he should be
  governed by the same game laws as white men.

  6. No man can be a good citizen and also be a slaughterer of game or
  fishes beyond the narrow limits compatible with high-class

  7. A game-butcher or a market-hunter is an undesirable citizen, and
  should be treated as such.

  8. The highest purpose which the killing of wild game and game
  fishes can hereafter be made to serve is in furnishing objects to
  overworked men for tramping and camping trips in the wilds; and the
  value of wild game as human food should no longer be regarded as an
  important factor in its pursuit.

  9. If rightly conserved, wild game constitutes a valuable asset to
  any country which possesses it; and it is good statesmanship to
  protect it.

  10. An ideal hunting trip consists of a good comrade, fine country,
  and a _very few_ trophies per hunter.

  11. In an ideal hunting trip, the death of the game is only an
  incident; and by no means is it really necessary to a successful

  12. The best hunter is the man who finds the most game, kills the
  least, and leaves behind him no wounded animals.

  13. The killing of an animal means the end of its most interesting
  period. When the country is fine, pursuit is more interesting than

  14. The killing of a female hoofed animal, save for special
  preservation, is to be regarded as incompatible with the highest
  sportsmanship; and it should everywhere be prohibited by stringent

  15. A particularly fine photograph of a large wild animal in its
  haunts is entitled to more credit than the dead trophy of a similar
  animal. An animal that has been photographed never should be killed,
  unless previously wounded in the chase.

This platform has been adopted as a code of ethics by the following
organizations, besides the Camp-Fire Club of America:

The Lewis and Clark Club, of Pittsburgh, John M. Phillips, President.

The North American Fish and Game Protective Association (International)

Massachusetts Fish and Game Protective Association, Boston.

Camp-Fire Club of Michigan, Detroit.

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.

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

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.

       *        *        *        *        *



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.

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

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.

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.

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_.

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!

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?

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
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.

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.

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?

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 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.

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.

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
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.

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!

It was the aroused 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.

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

       *        *        *        *        *

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 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

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 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
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.

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.

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 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 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

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

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

       *        *        *        *        *


_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

_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 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 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 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 California Academy of Sciences;      |
  The Chicago Academy of Sciences;         | Appear to have done nothing
  The New York Academy of Sciences;        |  noteworthy in promoting
  The National Academy of Sciences;        |  the preservation and increase
  The Rochester Academy of Sciences;       |  of the wild life of America.
  The Philadelphia Zoological Society;     |
  The National Zoological Park;            |

       *        *        *        *        *


_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.

There are men whose zoological ideals soar so high that they can not see
the slaughter of wild creatures that is so furiously proceeding on the
surface of this blood-stained earth. We don't want to