54 ON GAME PROTECTION IN INDIA. 



sambhar. I know of one or two recent cases where men coming 

 from a long distance have taken blocks of forest in these areas, not 

 knowing of the anthrax attack. Take the one animal, sambhar. 

 One or two decent heads were bagged, but after that the most 

 indefatigable and laborious search, both in plain and hill forest, 

 resulted only in the disclosure of the fact that though young 

 2-3-year old stags were numerous, large ones were almost absent. 

 It may be said that this in itself acts as an automatic closure. 

 But it does not, as there is a considerable number of sportsmen 

 who will shoot the smaller head, as an examination of trophies 

 in the bungalows of every station in India will only too clearly 

 disclose. The entire closure of the species to shooting after such 

 visitations is the only fair action to take, both in the interests of 

 the animal and of the sportsman. 



And now to turn for a moment, in conclusion, to the question of 

 the sportsman — the outside sportsman, not the District official — 

 and the rules under which he can enjoy sport in a district. 



The rules under which the District official enjoys sport in his 

 district are, I think, quite fair in most if not all Provinces. 



I think, however, that the outside sportsman has often a 

 justifiable complaint, though more often than not he goes the 

 wrong way about in making it, and so puts himself out of court. 



The whole matter really turns, and must always turn, on the 

 number of individuals of a particular species it is permissible to 

 shoot on a given area. This number can only be fixed by the 

 District Officers on the spot. There can be no cavil against this, 

 as they are, or ought to be, the best judges on the question. 



In fact, as matters in game protection at present stand, 

 and in the absence of a separate Game Protection establishment, 

 there can be no appeal from their decision. 



Probably the best and most elastic method for the outside 

 sportsman is to give him a block or blocks, according as to what is 

 available on receipt of his application, and to enter on his permit 

 the number of individuals of any one species he may shoot and 

 the number of different species. This number would, of course, 

 vary according to the length of time for which the permit was 

 issued, but would never exceed a fixed maximum for each species. 

 So far so good. 



But it will doubtless soon be found necessary to definitely limit 

 the number of head of a species to be shot in any one area in a 

 year, as is done, in fact, in the Central Provinces. It is in this 

 limitation that complaints arise and causes for friction come in. 



For instance, supposing twelve sambhar may be shot in any 

 particular block. A military man, whose leave season will not 

 open before the 15th April, applies for and is allotted a block. He 

 arrives to find the maximum annual number of the animal it is 

 permitted to kill already reached and is debarred from shooting 

 that particular species. It is quite conceivable that he might find 

 more than one species in the same condition. In fact, the total 

 number of head of a particular species might be easily shot off by 

 the local District officials in the first couple of months of the open 



