GAME PROTRCTIOX IN INDIA. 31 



that the animals would soon learn wliere the sanctuary was. He 

 also agrees that before opening a sanctuaiy to sportsmen the 

 area should be beaten through so as to distribute and disperse tlie 

 game, and not have them collected together Noah's-ark-fashion on 

 a large scale for the first permit-holder who enters to shoot down 

 with ease. 



Whilst, however, this system of opening and closing areas to 

 shooting is best adapted to some localities and to certain classes 

 of game, it is quite inadequate for the satisfactory protection of 

 others. In many parts of India I would favour the second 

 suggestion as being by far the most satisfactory in the long run 

 and in some cases essential. 



II. The area is closed tmtil the head of game has become 

 satisfactory, and the shooting o)i the area is then definitely 

 regulated, no further periods of closure being enforced save for 

 exceptional circumstances. 



The length of time a Sanctuary should be in existence is of 

 very considerable importance, and to a certain extent is intimately 

 dependent upon a knowledge of the habits of the animals for 

 which the sanctuary is formed. The period of closure to be 

 effective must depend : — 



(1) On the condition of the head of game of the area when the 

 sanctuary is first formed. 



(2) On the nature of the animal, e. g., the rhinoceros, with a period 

 of gestation of two years and a period of fifteen years before it 

 reaches maturity, would require practically permanent closure of 

 its haunts to produce any appreciable result, as has, in eflect, been 

 carried out in Goalpara in Assam. 



The procedure followed should usually be determined by the 

 condition of the head of game on an area. There would be no 

 question of fixing a definite period for the sanctuary in the first 

 instance. Wlien the requisite effect on the game had resulted 

 from its formation, careful and elficient rules and management 

 should be sufficient to keep up the head of game, and it would 

 not be necessary to continue the rigid exclusion of sportsmen. 

 It would be sutticient to limit the mimber of head of each species 

 to be shot each year, as is done in many parts of the Centi-al 

 Provinces. When the limit had been reached the shooting of 

 that species in that locality would cease for the year. 



Once a sufiicient head of game has been established in a 

 locality, it is questionable whether regulated shooting each year 

 would not have a better efiect than the alternative proposal of 

 closure for a ternr followed by a period of unchecked shooting. 

 It would certainly minimise the chance of the animals becoming 

 too tame. 



The size of a Sanctuary must, of course, entirely depend on local 

 conditions and on the nature of the animals to be protected. 

 Such animals as the rhinoceros or gaur, which are of an extremely 

 shy disposition and are given to roaming considerable distances, 

 would require an area of considerable dimensions, whereas chital 



