14 



THE GAME BREEDER 



better than to see the safeguards applied 

 at this end in America, but there are 

 many who believe, for the present at 

 least, such regulations are not enough. 

 As to Mr. Talbot's statement that build- 

 ing sand should not be identified, the 

 ownership of the sand is absolute and 

 not a qualified ownership. 



As to his idea that we have reared 

 pheasants only in an office, we may say 

 that we have reared many of these birds 

 single-handed and thousands of them 

 with the aid of skilled keepers who know 

 probably more about this industry than 

 either Mr. Talbot or the writer ever will 

 know. We have reared thousands of 

 wild ducks also and we have seen hun- 

 dreds of them depart to be legally shot 

 by others in the neighborhood because 

 the qualified ownership was lost. Poul- 

 try could not be so shot. 



We have feared that the words "in 

 captivity" might be held to mean that 

 grouse and quail which left the rearing 

 field and no longer came to feed and no 

 longer were in control, although still 

 on the premises of the owner, would 

 be held to have returned to a wild state, 

 and that the qualified ownership was 

 lost. This is a serious matter to sports- 

 men since if such birds become subject 

 to the bag limit laws, providing that only 



a very few birds can be taken in a sea- 

 son, and to the open season laws, which 

 in some States make very short seasons 

 during cold, rainy weather, it will not be 

 worth while to produce grouse or quail 

 or to own a bird dog. We fear there 

 would be objections to the sale of such 

 game. 



We would like to ask Mr. Talbot if a 

 grouse or quail, which has left the rear- 

 ing field and returned to a wild state, 

 can be taken in replevin as poultry can 

 be taken, or if the "qualified owneship" 

 has been lost. 



We would like to ask him if such 

 game under the "in captivity" law he 

 cites can be shot at any time and in any 

 numbers and if such game can be sold 

 as food in his State and shipped to 

 New York? If we are right in our ideas 

 of "in captivity," the breeding of our 

 native game in the best manner may still 

 be illegal. Those who breed pheasants 

 in inclosures and who are content to kill 

 them "otherwise than by shooting," of 

 course, have nothing to fear. 



The industry of breeding duck, pheas- 

 ants and deer, "in captivity," is thriving 

 in many states. Vast numbers are pro- 

 duced annually. We propose to en- 

 courage grouse and quail breeding for 

 sport and for profit, and we hope to see 

 the game bred wild in protected fields. 



THE CASE OF MARY RAHLMAN. 



We published last month an account 

 of the interference of a California game 

 officer with the excellent work of a mem- 

 ber of our society in breeding quail. The 

 officer informed Miss Rahlman, who had 

 reared seventy-five quail, that this was 

 too many; that he only could permit her 

 to have "a limited number." 



Here are some additional facts which 

 are especially interesting, since they sug- 

 gest losses of quail eggs due to irriga- 

 tion. Such losses must be large in re- 

 gions where irrigation is common, and 

 if the California laws prohibit the hatch- 



ing of eggs taken from irrigation water 

 after the hen quail has been obliged to 

 desert them, such laws certainly should 

 be repealed, and in the meantime they 

 might well be forgotten. The people 

 certainly would not approve of arrestmg 

 and jailing a woman for such industry. 



The facts as written to The Game 

 Breeder by Miss Rahlman are as follows : 



"Last fall Mr. Pritchard, Game Com- 

 missioner of Los Angeles, visited our 

 place. My brother and I have a pheas- 

 ant farm where we raise hundreds of 

 pheasants. My brother being absent, I 



