210 THE OREGON SPORTSMAN 
hands. I tore off the blind, the mule gave one sniff at the deer’s feet 
dangling from his back, and they were off. Joe managed to keep up 
with “Jack” for some time, his feet revolving in a blue haze, when 
suddenly they ceased to keep the pace set by the flying mule. The 
last I saw of Joe he was rolling over the rim of the canyon in the 
midst of a young avalanche of shale and rocks, turning alternate 
somersaults and cartwheels as he fell. 
I made my way back to camp and found that “Jack” had preceded 
me by some time. Joe returned an hour or so later and received with 
a good-natured grin the laughter with which I compared his slow rate 
of travel with the manner in which I had last seen him. We were 
very tired, but proud in the possession of a trophy which new hangs 
over the desk in my office. 
THE OREGON PLAN 
From Amercan Field, June 24, 1916. 
The Oregon plan of liberating game birds is one way of restock- 
ing a state with game. Farmers, ranchmen and country estate owners 
are all taken into consideration and their co-operating enlisted in the 
work by the Oregon Fish and Game Commission. In every county 
game birds are being raised each year by landholders, and each year a 
report is made to the Commission by these landholders or a census is 
taken to ascertain the number liberated. 
A report has just been published in the Commission’s official 
publication, The Oregon Sportsman, of the number of different kinds 
of game birds liberated by individuals, under the plan cited, during 
the year from January 1, 1915, to December 31, 1915, and the total 
makes a gratifying showing, the landholders of each county being 
given credit for the number they liberated individually. The different 
kinds of birds turned over to the state for the year mentioned follow: 
Chinese or Ring-necked Pheasants, 2,914; Bob White Quails, 973; 
California Valley Quails, 959; Mountain Quails, 142. By this plan of 
individual co-operation the State of Oregon is richer by 4,988 game 
birds—a ‘splendid showing from the viewpoint of conservation, not 
only in that they will multiply and increase, with another year’s 
product soon to be liberated, but of equal, if not more importance, 
the educating of the public in the great value of this kind of co- 
operative work and an awakening of the public conscience to the 
necessity of obeying the game laws, one of the maxims of the Com- 
mission being, “More game protection sentiment means less money 
spent in patrol service,’ which means more money for propagating 
purposes. Such work is drawing closer the ties that bind the public 
and the Commission in a common cause, and the Commission is not 
slow in acknowledging this condition, as shown in the following 
statement it has published: “The state game department feels that 
it owes a debt of gratitude to the good people of Oregon who assisted 
so nobly in the work of feeding and caring for the wild game during 
the past winter. It will try to compensate them by an even more 
faithful service and co-operation this coming season.” 
What a blessing it would be if this same spirit of effective co- 
operation and unity of purpose could be ae of every state! And, 
why not? 
