26 THE RUFFED GROUSE IN THE MARCH OF TIME 



bantam: ])art in an infubatnr whose tendencies were characteristically unpredictable. Once 

 hatched, these birds were then i)laced under the primitive edition of the now highly developed 

 artificial brooder. The brooder promptly burned and so did the chicks. Some of those en- 

 trusted to hens died of disease, diagnosed as blackhead, and others from a series of accidents 

 which characteristically befall grouse in captivity. Only three survived the winter. 



By now, Hodge and Merrill were well known to each other. The former secured his ban- 

 tam hens in Sutton, as well as a supply of food. Merrill, profiting by these contacts, placed 

 each of his two hand-raised females on the ground in a separate pen, 8 x 60 feet. The cock 

 grouse alternated between the pens. However, the birds proved adamant. One hen laid sev- 

 eral fertile eggs but abandoned her nest when they were only partly incubated. The second 

 hen laid 14, which were promptly removed to encourage her to lay a second clutch — but to 

 no avail. Though most of these eggs were fertile, the chicks died during incubation or .shortly 

 thereafter, as did most of the 50 which emerged from 56 wild-gathered eggs. Only four of 

 these birds survived the winter. 



At Sutton, in 1908. a larger number of eggs than usual was inought in. perhaps 150 in 

 all. However, details of the progress of the work are lacking. There is an indication of a 

 heavy loss at the age of seven weeks. However, a fairly large number was still on hand at 

 the beginning of winter, during which they were again reduced to four. These proved to be 

 a cock and three hens, two of which were killed during the breeding season. The remaining 

 one nested and laid five eggs which failed to hatch. Better luck followed some 20 wild eggs 

 that were collected, in that 11 birds were raised to maturity. Once again, winter losses re- 

 duced the flock to four. 



There is a period, sometimes a recurring one in the life of male grouse in captivity, dur- 

 ing which they are extremely vicious. Apparently Merrill encountered this in 1910, for he 

 states, "This year a cock was so vicious that it was unwise to mate in small pens, and a new 

 experiment was tried. The four birds were wing-clipped and turned loose in a 2-acre enclo- 

 sure. Two nests were found, one with 12 infertile eggs, the other with nine eggs, of which 

 five were fertile and were hatched by a hen. Her last chick was lost by drowning when three 

 weeks old." 



Then came one of those strokes of rare luck. Two wild nests were fomid and brought 

 in. One was quickly lost, but. of the other, every one of the eggs hatched and the 13 chicks 

 were grown in an artificial brooder to the age of six weeks without a single loss. Then, as 

 though to prevent over-confidence on llic jiart of their keepers, all promptly died of an in- 

 fection. 



A change of administration in Massachusetts terminated the work at Sutton. But other 

 hands were ready to take it uj). The American (lame Protective and Propagation Associa- 

 tion had just been formed and Harrv A. Torrey was engaged to take over the work of prop- 

 agating grouse at their farm in South Carver. By 1912. they were readv and a start was 

 made by locating four wild nests. From these, eight young birds reached iiialuiils in l')13. 

 •\l)oiit the same nutnber of eggs was collected and iniough more birds were reared to make 

 a total of 19 on hand at the end of that year. 



Here, significantly, occurs tiic first record of two grouse iuou;:iii to the sci-ond generation 

 in ca])tivity. The birds were raised, for the most part, on the ground and with bantams in 

 much the same manner as has been previously described. In spite of this early success, the 

 farm was closed in January, 1914. and the 19 hand-reared grouse dropped from sight. 



Dr. George Vi'. Field, chairman of the Massachusetts Game Commission, was not at all 



