274 BIRD LIFE JN ENGLAND. 



extended to all enclosed lands of whatever extent they may 

 be. Unenclosed properties of less than two hundred acres 

 do not entitle their owners to kill the game on their own 

 lands ; these revert, for all sporting purposes, to the com- 

 mune in which they are situated, and form a common 

 shooting district. The communal authorities are bound 

 either to appoint a gamekeeper to shoot over the district, 

 or to let the shooting, or to leave it in abeyance ; in either 

 of the two former cases the profits derived from it are 

 divided between the owners of the lands which form the 

 district. An exception to this rule is made in the case of 

 properties of less than two hundred acres which are situated 

 in the midst of, or are partially surrounded by a forest of 

 more than two thousand acres in extent, which is in the 

 possession of a single owner. In such cases the owner of 

 the land, instead of annexing it, as he would be compelled 

 to do under ordinary circumstances, to the communal shoot- 

 ing district, is bound to let the shooting to the proprietor 

 of the surrounding forest. Should the latter decline to 

 avail himself of this right, the landowner may kill the game 

 himself; or, if they are unable to agree as to the terms of 

 the lease, the landrath is called in to arbitrate. The right of 

 shooting upon all lands owned by corporations, or by more 

 than three joint proprietors, must either be delegated to a 

 gamekeeper or leased to a tenant. 



As regards compensation for damages caused by game, 

 it will be seen by a reference to the 25th Section of the law 

 that no legal claim whatever can be preferred in Prussia for 

 indemnity for any loss or injury incurred under this head. 

 Under the old laws of Prussia, at a time when the right 

 of shooting was separated from the possession of the soil, 

 a landowner whose crops were damaged by the excessive 

 preservation of game, was entitled to compensation for the 

 injury inflicted ; but this is now no longer the case, although 

 the law sanctions or enjoins certain indirect means of counter- 

 acting, or rather of mitigating, the evil. 



