GAME PROTECTION IN INDIA 261 



that the native soldier of shikar-loving propensities, as also 

 his British brother, will act in an exactly similar manner 

 when occasion offers. Once, however, this matter is properly 

 faced, the latter class of offenders can easily be coped with. 

 For the non-military native offender a licence to protect 

 his crops should be given only after careful personal enquiry 

 on the ground by the District Officer. Also the sale of 

 venison in the open market should be made a criminal 

 offence. 



The whole crux of the position is, of course, the necessity 

 for regulating the number of animals killed, so as to prevent 

 deterioration or extermination of the game. The European 

 has generally been considered to be more destructive than 

 the native of the larger animals, gaur, rhinoceros, buffalo. 

 But even this is doubtful, when the poaching proclivities of 

 the native are taken into account. In any event rules and 

 the proper control and management of shooting-grounds 

 can control the European. The native is, however, not so 

 easily dealt with. In order, therefore, to arrest the slaughter 

 which takes place ostensibly to protect crops, some special 

 measures are necessary. Wherever it can be proved that 

 game is no longer destructive, the licences should be can- 

 celled and the weapons called in. In other cases where 

 destruction is still being done the guns must be retained. 

 Since, however, these weapons are given merely for the 

 protection of the crops, they should be restricted to that 

 purpose and be rendered unfit for any other. This can be 

 easily done by cutting down the gun-barrel to eighteen 

 inches or two feet. 



There remains the unarmed poacher. To date this man 

 and his methods appear to have escaped all notice. And 

 yet the part he has played in the past and is playing at 

 present is bringing about a serious decrease in the game 

 — and other animals — which is at least as great if not greate r 

 than the rest of the above-mentioned causes put together. 

 The Government to date has never considered this side of 

 the question. And yet this is the conviction held, I believe, 

 by many well-known authorities, such as, e.g., Mr. Douglas 

 Dewar, I.C.S., P.Wyndham, I.C.S., P. H. Clutterbuck, I.F.S., 

 and W. F. Perree, I.F.S. I have detailed in the previous 

 chapter some of the poachers' methods, the diabolic barbarity 

 and inhuman cruelty of which is beyond credence. There can 

 be little doubt that with this record before one, and but a 



