No. 4.] DECREASE OF BIRDS. 525 



countries have long had hunting licenses. In England a 

 man must have a gun license, a hunting license, a license to 

 use a hunting dog, and even, in some cases, a game keeper's 

 license also. In America a resident is usually taxed one 

 dollar, while a non-resident is required to contribute from 

 ten to one hundred dollars. 



The main objects of hunting licenses are two: (1) to 

 limit shooting, especially on the part of non-residents ; ( 2 ) 

 to raise money for game or bird protection. The license 

 tends to preserve the game of the State for the benefit of 

 its own people, to whom it is held to belong. The utility 

 of the license may be gathered from the fact that ten States 

 licensed more than a quarter of a million hunters in 1903. 

 The license has the advantage that by it the OAvner may be 

 positively identified. It may contain his description and 

 photograph, and he may be obliged to produce it at the 

 request of any citizen. While I would not be understood 

 as advocating any })articular license law, it seems to me that 

 the subject is worthy of careful consideration. 



The following extract from a letter from Dr. T. S. Palmer 

 of the Biological Survey of the United States Department 

 of Agriculture, who has charge of the matter of game pres- 

 ervation, shows clearly the measures that he advocates to 

 protect the birds : " The decrease in certain species of birds 

 is not diflicult to explain, and it is attributable largely to 

 long open seasons and open markets. Comparatively few 

 States afford shore birds any real protection, the seasons 

 often being open during the height of the migration season, 

 and closed when the birds are absent from the State. The 

 exemptions in some of the laws, allowing practically unre- 

 stricted sale of birds taken outside the State, place a pre- 

 mium on the destruction of birds in States where the laws 

 are lax. Fortunately, since the passage of the new law last 

 spring, sale in Massachusetts is now prohibited during the 

 close season, though the privilege of storing game and hold- 

 ing it in possession from one season to another still invites 

 wholesale destruction of game birds for market purposes 

 elsewhere. The destruction of non-game birds is not due 

 to lack of protection so much as to failure to deal efiectively 



