32 THE RUFFED GROUSE IN THE MARCH OF TIME 



pens in which his birds were successfully maintained to the second and third generation opened 

 fresh possibilities. His studies of breeding behavior, completed in 1933'", for the first time 

 pointed the way to the successful handling of grouse breeders, a problem heretofore little un- 

 derstood. In fact, it was these experiments that first served to focus the attention of other 

 scientists on the field of grouse propagation and to encourage the present Investigation to in- 

 clude large-scale attempts to raise grouse artificially among its projects. 



The successes — and the failures — of these more modern attempts to raise grouse, are so 

 inextricably interwoven with present-day propagation methods as to make it more logical to 

 refer to them in some detail in the forthcoming chapter on artificial propagation. One can- 

 not leave the old order for the new, however, without a strong realization of the important 

 part all of these patient pioneers played in unraveling many strands of the life thread of this 

 grand bird. 



THE PERIOD OF CORRELATED RESEARCH 



So long as grouse increased in popularity, it was inevitable that modern scientific methods 

 of analysis should some day be invoked to evaluate the problem of increasing grouse abun- 

 dance and to seek a solution. A bird's-eye view of the attention this species has received may 

 be gained from a glance at table 5. Forbush's 1904 questionnaire was the forerunner of 

 this, quite in keeping with the advanced thoughts of his day. Woodruff and Stoddart, in col- 

 laboration with the American Game Protective Association, one may remember, carried this 

 sampling of public opinion to its productive limit, for there is a point beyond which addi- 

 tional observations, even without bias, become increasingly unproductive. The existence and 

 extent of a condition may often be determined by a questionnaire but the causes of changes 

 in grouse abundance were too diverse and interrelated in their results to yield to productive 

 analysis by a mere canvass of observers. 



Likewise, the early attempts to rear grouse artificially contributed much to our understand- 

 ing of grouse habits. Allen, in particular, not content to limit his studies, took full advantage 

 of all opportunities to become familiar with the various diseases and parasites to which grouse 

 are subject, either in captivity or in the wild. Through the cooperation of the New York State 

 Conservation Department in the fall of 1922, he received 6.5 viscera of grouse from ten dif- 

 ferent parts of the Stale. Fourteen of these were found to be infected with the stomach worm 

 ( Dis pharynx spiralis). The following year grouse were reported as abnormally scarce in the 

 areas from which the infected specimens were secured. This was purely circumstantial evi- 

 dence, but it was closely in line with his experience with the local birds about Ithaca, New 

 York, and with his birds which had died in captivity. Thus he felt justified in concluding that 

 he had discovered "one of the causes, if not the main cause, for the periodic disap|)earance 

 of the species", and in reporting his findings to the American Game Conference, at their 1923 

 session. 



There was abundant opportunity to harvest grouse in 1923. A year later in many parts 

 of the Northeast only a fraction of them remained. Their disapjiearance, certainly not caused 

 by man, was a prime topic of conversation as the report, just mentioned, was read. Upon 

 the recommendation of Senator F. C. Wolcott who was Chairman of the Conference, a Grouse 

 Committee was formed to \Aiut jiossible remedial measures. The late John Rurnham, President 

 of the American Game Protective Association, was appointed chairman with C. C. Adams, 

 A. A. Allen, William B. Mershon and F. C. Wolcott as the other members. 



At the next Game Conference, this Committee called for an intensive study of the "grouse 



