PROTECTING SHEEP FROM DOGS AND WOLVES 367 



The direct loss from the ravages of dogs and wolves 

 is probably far less than the indirect loss resulting there- 

 from, which means the adverse influence which these 

 losses exert upon the extension of the industry. During 

 recent years especially the demand for mutton has greatly 

 increased, while the increase in the number of sheep 

 grown has made but little advance for many years. The 

 number of sheep in the United States in 1884 is officially 

 stated as 50,626,626, and in 1907 as 53,240,282. The in- 

 crease in the 23 years included has been only 2,613,656. 

 In Great Britain the number of sheep kept at the present 

 time is about half as many as are maintained in all the 

 states of the Union. In the older states where sheep hus- 

 bandry has declined, as, for instance, in New England, 

 the losses incurred by vagrant dogs is the reason usually 

 given by the farmers for the lessened numbers of the 

 sheep kept. In some of the range states during recent 

 years the number of the sheep kept has grown less, and 

 one reason most commonly given is the loss resulting 

 from the presence of wolves. 



At the present time it is not possible to state whether 

 the actual loss from dogs or wolves is the greater loss. 

 Viewed from the standpoint of the hindrance to exten- 

 sion in sheep husbandry, however, there can be no ques- 

 tion that the former exert the greater influence. The 

 greatest relative increase in the numbers of sheep kept in 

 the future should come from the arable rather than from 

 the range states'; hence the great importance of protective 

 measures in these against the ravages of dogs. 



While the losses incurred from the ravages of wolves 

 have been very serious, and are even now, it can scarcely 

 be said that these could have been prevented in the past. 

 The same is not true, however, of the losses resulting 

 from the attacks of dogs. In great measure they could 

 have been prevented. That they have not been prevented 

 is little less than a blot upon our civilization. That the 

 farmers have not risen in resistless protest against the in- 



