Ruffed Grouse 151 



Bogardus (1874) says: 



"The ruffed grouse is ... nowhere found in ... such multi- 

 tudes as the pinnated (grouse) . It is most abundant in some parts of Wisconsin 

 and the northwest part of lower peninsula of Michigan." 



His definition of abundance, however, was probably a more generous one 

 than we can now afford to entertain. In comparison with the north central region, 

 he considers ruffed grouse as "sparse" in New York and New Jersey. He killed 

 up to 15 per day in what is now Chicago, but infers that this represented a mere 

 scattering. In 1866, during three weeks turkey hunting on Shoal Creek just east 

 of St. Joseph, Missouri, he killed 50 ruffed grouse, just as a sort of incident to 

 his major quest of turkeys. 



Mershon (1923), writing of the region south of Saginaw Bay, says that 10 

 to 11 birds were his usual bag of a short day's hunt during his boyhood. He 

 quotes a letter from C. E. Pettit, one of two former market hunters, who between 

 them claim to have put up 2,000 birds in one day near Hemlock, Michigan, in 

 1891. Pettit recalls that if a market hunter killed less than 25 per day, he would 

 sneak them into the store, which presumably purchased his kill, by the back door 

 in order to avoid ridicule. The market hunter's usual bag was up to 40 birds per 

 day per man. The traffic lasted up to 1894, when market shooting of grouse was 

 made illegal in Michigan. They were still very plentiful in the Saginaw region 

 in that year. 



The observations of both Bogardus and Mershon fall within the central part 

 of the range, from which the species has now been largely excluded by agri- 

 cultural development. Neither author mentions periods of scarcity as prevailing 

 in those days on this central range. Jack O'Hara, born in Rock County, Wiscon- 

 sin, 1857, told me that as a boy he often found six to eight broods of ruffed grouse 

 in a single grove or woodlot in the vicinity of Janesville, where now there would 

 hardly be one bird to ten woodlots. 



All of this evidence indicates that the ruffed grouse was once abundant in the 

 agricultural belt, and there is at least an inference that it did not fluctuate in 

 abundance. Constant questioning of old-timers during the survey failed to glean 

 a single report of fluctuation in this central region, whereas hundreds of such re- 

 ports were gathered for the marginal range (see Chart 7). It is only fair to say, 

 however, that these were mostly recent, whereas the species has recently been so 

 scarce in the central range that fluctuations might pass unnoticed. 



Was the ruffed grouse originally more or less abundant in the Agricultural 

 Belt than in the Forest Belt? On this highly significant question I have but one 

 fragment of information. Hatch (1892) quotes Washburn as finding ruffed 

 grouse "less abundant in those portions of the State (Minnesota) that are oc- 

 cupied by Canada grouse," meaning of course, the northern portions. 



Bogardus' general comparison of abundance cannot be admitted as evidence 

 here, because he was probably unfamiliar with the real north woods. 



