ZOOLOGY. 529 



low as not to offer an inducement to destroy noxious animals and thus 

 practically annul the law, as was the case with the Montana act of 

 1879, which seems to fail entirely, since county treasurers' reports 

 failed to show any expenditure for bounties during - the 4 years that 

 the law was in force. On the other hand, if the rate is too high, the 

 results are very disastrous, especially where the proof required is not 

 of the proper kind or is not sufficient. This is shown by the fact that 

 in Pennsylvania, under the scalp act, bounties were paid on the heads 

 of domestic fowls, partridges, pheasants, cuckoos, butcher birds, and 

 even night hawks which were accepted as those of hawks and owls; 

 and further, that a few years ago it was more profitable in Iowa to 

 raise coyotes for the bounty than to raise sheep. In Kentucky and 

 New Mexico affidavits are required showing that the animals have not 

 been raised for the rewards. 



Considering the subject of what bounties have accomplished, it is 

 shown that in the Old World, notwithstanding all the efforts made 

 against various animals from very early times, they either have not 

 been exterminated or were exterminated only after a very long time. 

 Although larger animals are becoming more and more rare in this coun- 

 try, the author states that bounties have not brought about the exter- 

 mination of a single species in any State. The rarity of wolves east of 

 the Mississippi IJiver is attributed to the settlement of the country, 

 rather than to the number killed for rewards. The killing of bears has 

 been encouraged in Maine since 1830. The last five years show no notice- 

 able decrease in the number of scalps presented for bounty. Kesults 

 have been similar in New Hampshire and in New York, and, in the case 

 of gophers, ground squirrels, and rabbits, in Iowa, Idaho, Minnesota, 

 South Dakota, Washington, and California. 



Under the head of substitutes for bounties, there arc mentioned the 

 acceptance of scalps of crows, squirrels, and coyotes in place of 

 taxes — a plan that was necessitated in early times — competitive hunts 

 where prizes are offered by gun clubs, etc., and, lastly, the free distri- 

 bution of poisons, a method that has been resorted to in North and 

 South Dakota, Washington, and Manitoba. 



In the summary, the author notes that the expense of bounty legis- 

 lation seems to increase rather than decrease. The objections to the 

 system are briefly summarized as follows : (1) Expense, which is usually 

 out of all proportion to the benefit gained and may be greater than the 

 county or State can afford. (2) Impossibility of maintaining bounties 

 in all parts of an animal's range for any length of time. (3) Impossi- 

 bility of maintaining equal rates in all States. (4) Impossibility of 

 preventing payment for animals imported from other States, for coun- 

 terfeited scalps, or for animals raised especially for the bounty. These 

 objections, he states, have never been satisfactorily overcome, and most 

 laws have failed from one or another of the causes noted. While 

 rewards for wolves, coyotes, and panthers are now shown to act as a 



