614 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



Rut where game has reached a precarious stage, a more 

 drastic means of preserving the breeding stock is needed ; 

 and here again some of the western States are experi- 

 menting with local closed seasons. The local closed sea- 

 son may apply for one or more years to any species of 

 animal in any region. For example, a mountain range or 

 a certain valley might l)e closed to deer hunting. The 

 local closed season, as compared with the game refuge, 

 ought to be particularly useful for such game as quail or 

 grouse and also for game fishes ; for game birds in par- 

 ticular are often subject to wide fluctuations in numbers 

 from season to season, so that the closed season may be a 

 more flexible means of protection than the permanent, 

 posted refuge. 



The details of administration for these types of protec- 

 tion will be discussed later. 



Another principle for safeguarding the breeding-stock 

 as yet hardly tried is the quantitative limit of kill. 

 This presupposes a roughly accurate census of game and 

 the determination of how many animals of a given species 

 can be spared each year without impairing the breeding 

 stock. Then only enough licenses to insure the killing of 

 this number would be issued. The obvious criticism of 

 this method is that, as respects most species of game, no 

 game management yet in sight in this country is likely 

 to be intensive enough to insure the detailed game census 

 required. Yet it might be successfully applied even now 



ELK AT LARGE 



These elk are a part of the remnant of a once abundant and wide- 

 ranging species. The first duty of game protection is to save the 

 various species of game from extinction. 



to such gregarious species as elk or to fur-bearing ani- 

 mals of such restricted habitat as beavers. 



In contrast with (|uantitative or volume regulation, the 

 method of refuges and closed seasons may be called regu- 

 lation by area. Quantitative regulation would obviously 

 require an absolute determination of the animals on a 



MOUNTAIN SHEEP NEAR OURAY, COLORADO 



Protection has made them very tame. Only by closed seasons 

 and refuges will it be possible in the long run to preserve the 

 breeding stock of game. 



given range (even though the determination were only 

 roughly correct). Regulation by area, on the other 

 hand, requires first an arbitrary setting aside of a certain 

 proportion of the game range as refuges. Then by an 

 annual check on the number of animals killed in propor- 

 tion to the number of men engaged in hunting on that 

 range, it would be possible to determine whether the 

 game were increasing or decreasing in other words, 

 whether too much or too little of the range were included 

 in the refuges. 



This discussion of the breeding stock of game has 

 necessarily brought in the equally important question of 

 game range particularly the game refuge. It is now 

 necessary to make a careful distinction between the wild 

 life preserve and the game refuge. At the outset of this 

 article, attention was called to the difference between 

 wild life preservation and game production. The same 

 difference marks off the wild life preserve froin the 

 game refuge. The preserve seeks to perpetuate wild life 

 in its natural state over a comparatively large area an 

 entirely justifiable and laudble object. It has no eco- 

 nomic motive, but appeals solely to the instinctive ad- 

 miration that all men feel for the grace and beauty of 

 wild animals, and recognizes that they too have claims 

 on existence. In recognizing this claim man performs a 

 moral act. 



The game refuge, on the other hand, is economic in 



