72 



THE GAME BREEDER 



We can inform Mr. Burnham there 

 are in America many thousands of men 

 and women who are not rich and who 

 are now engaged in producing game for 

 profit on the farms which they own. 

 There are thousands of good American 

 sportsmen of small means who produce 

 game at a small annual expense per gun 

 —in some cases $15 per year. We deny 

 Mr. Burnham's assertion that most 

 Americans consider a system which sci- 

 entists say must result in the extermina- 

 tion of game if shooting be permitted, 

 is "way ahead" of the system now used 

 by American game farmers, men and 

 women, which results in game becoming 

 quickly abundant and profitable on pri- 

 vate lands. All intelligent American 

 sportsmen who understand the subject, 

 all the game breeders, all the farmers, 

 hotel men, dealers and the people who 

 like to eat game and say it should not 

 be a crime to profitably produce it, will 

 agree with us that Mr. Burnham is 

 wrong in his opinion — that the people 

 are in favor of the legal criminal absurd- 

 ities which appear in our game laws. 



We are surprised that Mr. Burnham 

 does not know that the poorest classes 

 in England are permitted and encour- 

 aged to shoot the migratory fowl on all 

 public waters and saltings and to sell 

 the food they secure just as our oyster- 

 men and fishermen sell the foods they 

 secure. Thousands of market gunners 

 or wild fowlers bring game to the Lon- 

 don markets. Many game farmers in 

 England make a living selling game and 

 game egers. Their advertisements ap- 

 pear in English magazines, just as the 

 advertisements of similar people now ap- 

 pear in The Game Breeder since we 

 have ridden down Mr. Burnham's no- 

 tion that it should be criminal to pro- 

 duce and sell food. 



The English wild fowlers who sup- 

 port their families in rural habitations 

 by taking and selling food, would seem 

 to have a better excuse for their exist- 

 ence than those who claim to destrov 

 only for fun. In England the true sports- 

 man is very friendlv to the wild fowler 

 and it has been said by English magazine 

 editors there is more freedom in Eng- 

 land than in "the land of the free." 



It is a well, known fact that the Eng- 

 lish wild fowlers are not only permit- 

 ted to shoot wild fowl on all public 

 waters and saltings, with huge guns 

 which often kill several hundred fowl 

 at a single discharge, but also they are 

 permitted to take the public fowl in great 

 wire traps, called decoys, and to send 

 the birds to the markets. These decoys 

 are described in the book, "Our Wild 

 Fowl and Waders," written by the editor 

 of The Game Breeder and for sale by 

 the Game Conservation Society. 



In the Shooting Times and Brirtish 

 Sportsman there was an article not long 

 ago about the formation of shooting syn- 

 dicates or clubs in England formed to 

 produce great quantities of partridges 

 and other game, the members sharing the 

 expense of the production. The editor 

 remarked that before long he expected 

 to see advertisements of shares in The 

 Loamshire Shooting Syndicate and 

 others offering shares representing good 

 shooting for 5 pounds or some other 

 small sum. This system already is popu- 

 lar in America not only with sportsmen, 

 who enjoy plenty of game to shoot and 

 to eat, but also' with the farmers who 

 enjoy having their taxes paid by those 

 who wish to introduce and keep the game 

 plentiful on the farms. 



Game on the Farm and Game Politics. 



Since most of the farms are posted 

 against shooters and some States pro- 

 hibit the shooting of quail at all seasons, 

 all intelligent sportsmen now agree that 

 it is desirable to deal fairly with the 

 farmers and to produce game abund- 

 antly on places where shooting now is 

 prohibited. The U. S. Agricultural De- 

 partment could and should do much to 

 further such industrv. Unfortunately it 

 has a bureau devoted largely to the game 

 law industry and it seems to entertain 

 the idea that possibly food production 

 might be unpopular. We have a large 

 acquaintance among sportsmen and all 

 agree that it should not be a crime to 

 produce any species of food on a farm. 

 Can any one imagine a sportsman, out- 

 side of those who seek to make a living 

 from game politics, being opnosed to 

 the production of game on the farms? 



