THE GAME BREEDER 169 



A MONEY MAKING INDUSTRY. 

 The Game Breeders' License and Identification. 



By Dwight W. Huntington. 



We are asked why we favor the licens- of great antiquity going back to the Ro- 

 ing of game breeders and the identifica- man laws, which decided that wild crea- 

 tion of their game when sold. Many peo- tures are owned by the people in common 

 pie claim that the game breeders' indus- because they have no other owner, 

 try should be absolutely free ; that the Since the State, or possibly the Nation, 

 breeder should not be required to have owns the wild game or game on public 

 a license ; that he should not be required lands and waters, it seems reasonable for 

 to identify the game he sells either by it to require those who rear game, ex- 

 tagging it or shipping it with a prescribed actly similar in appearance to the State 

 invoice or label, as the Colorado statute game, to list themselves as licensed breed- 

 provides. A prominent and practical ers and to identify the game they send 

 game protectionist of Indiana, Mr. John to the public markets. This is done, of 

 W. Talbot, is openly opposed to all "li- course, to prevent the sale of wild game, 

 cense and tag foolishness," as he puts it. If the State owns the game, and will fur- 

 Indiana has taken his advice and the law nish or permit the taking of breeding 

 provides that any one may breed game stock, it should, of course, prescribe the 

 ''in captivity" for sale without identifica- terms under which the breeder can sell 

 tion. We have never opposed such legis- his product. 



lation, excepting to comment on the Game bred in a wild state on inclosed 



words, ''in captivity," which are in our farms, which some States now. say can 



opinion, a worse restraint than a small be sold by those who look after it, is. more 



license fee and the requirement that the easily stolen than poultry is. If the 



game produced for market must be iden- thief can mot dispose of- the stolen' game 



tified before it is sold. • because he has no license and no tags or 



Certain species of game, notably the invoices to identify it, he will soon find 



quails and grouse, can be produced far the stealing too unprofitable to warrant 



more cheaply in a wild state on protected his taking the risks, 

 areas than they can be produced "in cap- If, therefore, the State charges noth- 



tivity." They are far better both for ing for the license issued to reputable 



sport and food when bred wild in the breeders, as is the case in Massachusetts, 



fields and woods than they are when or even makes a nominal charge of 50 



raised in small enclosures. Captivity cents a year (Ohio) or two dollars per 



bred game is subject to many diseases year (Iowa and other States), it seems 



which do not occur to wild game and to us the breeder should not object to the 



tame birds are not so satisfactory from regulations. The charge made for labels 



the sporting viewpoint as the birds bred or tags to identify the game sold should 



under natural conditions are. also be nominal, in no case more than the 



Why should the breeder of game birds cost of the labels or tags, 

 be required to take- out a license and to Fruit farmers often use expensive 



identify the game he sells when the poul- labels to identify their fruit and to ad- 



trymen go free? This question sounds vertise their farms. The game farmer 



quite reasonable, to be sure, but we should be willing, for the present at least, 



should remember that there is a decided to put inexpensive labels On the packages 



difference between game and poultry, or inexpensive tags On the game he sends 



The idea that the State owns the game to market. 



has been given prominence by the courts We should remember that the game 



in America and undoubtedly it is an idea breeding history in America is young ; 



