THE OREGON SPORTSMAN 193 
NOW SELF-SUPPORTING 
For the first time in the history of the state the Game and Fish 
Department is now on a self-supporting basis. This is due to increased 
revenues for hunting licenses and from fishing privileges, chiefly pro- 
vided for by acts of the last Legislature, which was productive of 
much good and wholesome legislation in the interest of game and fish. 
This is as it should be. There is no reason why the general taxpayer 
should be charged anything for the work of conservation, propagation 
and protection of game and fish when it is a simple matter to raise 
all the revenues required from hunting and fishing licenses. In such 
case the persons receiving the benefit are paying the cost—to which 
they do not object. It should not be understood that the receipts 
of the Game and Fish Department go into the department funds. They 
do not. The game and fish work is supported solely from appropriations 
by the Legislature, and all receipts and revenues received are paid into 
the general revenue fund of the state. They serve to balance the 
expenditures, however, relieving the taxpayers accordingly.—Fin, 
Feathers and Fur (Minnesota). 
WILD LIFE MOVIES IN MINNESOTA 
A beginning has been made on the acquisition of a series of edu- 
cational moving picture films which will show grapically the processes 
of fish culture work and other interesting information relating to the 
propagation of fishes, commercial fishing operations, angling and other 
wild life pictures pertaining to Minnesota. These will be for use in 
connection with lectures and otherwise in any way available for educa- 
tional purposes.—Fin, Feathers and Fur (Minnesota). 
EIGHTEEN STATES HAVE “BUCK” LAW 
Governor Whitman of New York has vetoed the bill permitting 
the shooting of does. The bill by the amendments proposed gave 
protection only to fawns, for it provided that during the open season 
a person might take one deer not less than a year old, of either sex. 
In his memorandum Governor Whitman said: 
“No person can conceive of a surer way of exterminating deer 
than that provided under the proposed bill which permits the killing 
of the breeders. I believe that the genuine sportsmen of the state 
are in favor of the retention, without change, of the present so-called 
‘buck law.’ 
“In eighteen states, including New York, the killing of female 
deer is prohibited by law. For New York to step out of this column of 
states would, in my judgment, be a long step backward in the matter 
of conservation, and I believe that this state cannot afford to offer 
such an example as this to the world. 
“The number of hunting fatalities in this state is considerably 
lower than in states without such a law as the present one, the theory 
being that a hunter who has to look carefully enough to ascertain 
whether the animal at which he is about to fire has horns is not 
likely to mistake another hunter for a deer.—Forest and Stream. 

