88 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[Feb. 25, 1886. 



years the increase lias been more marked in this country, for 

 the law has been quite -well enforced. 



At the time tbis law was enacted there were but few deer 

 remaining in the State, the dogs and crust-hunters bad nearly 

 exterminated them, but the efforts of our Commissioners of 

 Game, aided by the local protectionists, have restocked our 

 forests so that we now can boast of one of the finest deer 

 parks in the United States. 



As a sportsman I do feel thankful that we have this most 

 humane law prohibiting the use of dogs in the hunting of 

 deer. If wc kill the deer, let us do it deceutly, not torture, 

 mangle and fiighten to death. 



The law prohibiting the use of dogs is now one of the 

 factors of game protection, without it we should be dis- 

 couraged and feci our foundation was gone. Game in 

 Maine cannot be preserved without it. Yours, 



Sam. B. Hunter. 



Office of 

 V. B. DONWORTH. 

 Attorney and Counsellor at I aw. 



Machias, Me., Feb. 15, 1886. 



Hon. E. M. Stilwett: 



My Dear Sir— As Commissioner of Fisheries and Game 

 you ask my opiuion of the results of the anti-deer hounding 

 law in this section ; and you are good enough to suggest that 

 my anxiety for the preservation of what I consider to be one 

 of the great sources of wealth of our people, and my experi- 

 ence and observation as a lawyer, fit me to make such a re- 

 port. Washington county, as you know, affords peculiar 

 opportunities to measure the wisdom and efficacy of the sev- 

 eral provisions of the protective system. The time is within 

 vivid remembrance when all the larger species of game had 

 almost wholly disappeared from our forests, owing to the 

 lack of a statutory restraint upon the improvident hunter, 

 but as soon as a wise policy of protection was introduced a 

 marked increase was immediately apparent. The law, how- 

 ever, in its earlier stages was found to be painfully lacking 

 in some of its present most essential features. It was seen 

 that an open season of throe months was quite sufficient to 

 greatly retard the desired increase of moose, deer and cari 

 bou. if the use of dogs was to be allowed on the chase. The 

 lawmaking power soon became cognizant of the desideratum, 

 and quickly engrafted on the law the provision prohibiting 

 the use of do«s for such purposes. From the passage of that 

 act moose, deer, caribou and all the larger game began to 

 increase with astonishing rapidity, until now our forests are 

 teeming with animal life. 



This you may well contemplate with satisfaction, and still 

 more the fact that owing to its great abundance dogs are no 

 longer necessary, nor even desirable, for the capture of this 

 kind of game in reasonable quantities. You may thus readily 

 understand why the opposition to the anti-dog law has been 

 so completely and so effectually silenced. 



Yours respectfully, C. B. Donworth. 



THE ECONOMIC VIEW OF DEER 

 HOUNDING. 



GAME LAWS are not based on sentimentality. They 

 are economic. Their purpose is to maintaiu the game 

 supply. To accomplish this they must forbid all modes of 

 killing which are destructive to game beyond its natural in- 

 crease. If experience shows that by the practice of any one 

 mode of capture the number of deer annually killed is greater 

 than the number of deer annually born, that method must 

 be forbidden Otherwise the stock will diminish and the 

 end will be extermination. On this principle the law for- 

 bids crusting and trapping. On the same principle and for 

 the same purpose — because by hounding the annual destruc- 

 tion of deer has been proved by experience to exceed the 

 annual increase — the use of hounds for the pursuit of deer 

 in the Adirondacks is forbidden. On the same economic 

 ground the law against hounds should remain as it is. The 

 conditions have not changed. They remain the same. The 

 law should stand. To repeal it, under any pretext, or with 

 the substitution of any other protective measures, will be to 

 sanction the extermination of the deer from the Adirondack 

 woods. 



Without basing any argument upon the unsportsmanship 

 and evident brutality of the practice of deer hounding, we 

 submit the subjoinea statement of facts, as bearing on the 

 economic view of the question. 



As conducted in the North Woods, hounding consists in 

 driving the deer into a lake, pond or stream, and killing the 

 game while it is helpless in the water. A hunt is usually 

 participated in by several individuals. 



One man takes the dogs away from the lake and puts them 

 on a deer track. The rest of the men remain at the lake, two 

 in each boat, at points where.with the aid of a field -glass, the 

 whole lake can be watched. When a deer enters the water 

 to escape from the dogs, it is allowed to swim out, and then 

 the nearest boat is rowed so as to cut the deer off from shore, 

 and as it swims for some landing, the boat is sometimes run 

 so as to force the deer's head under water, and when it comes 

 to the surface, half strangled, a charge of buckshot, bullets 

 from a repeating rifle, or blows from an oar or club, soon 

 finish the work. 



Sometimes the pursued deer is killed on land as it runs by 

 a hunter posted on a "runway," but in the North Woods 

 this style of killing is the rare exceptiou. The rule is that 

 the game is killed in the water. That is the kind of deer 

 killing the advocates of the present bill desire. They want 

 it because it is a more successful method than any other and 

 requires less skill and exertion. 



HOUNDING IS THE SOREST WAY TO KILL DEER, 



1. Because tbe dog penetrates to tbe deepest cover and 

 routs out deer which could not be approached by a man. 

 Dense spruce and balsam swamps, fallen timber, dry brush, 

 rocky defiles, thickets or "trip-shin," it is all one to the dog. 

 Where no still-hunter could penetrate he goes with ease, and 

 drives out the game to the water. 



2. Because the dog can be successfully used at all times 

 and in all weathers. No matter what the season, no mutter 

 where the locality, no matter what the day, whether, hot or 

 cold, wet or dry, when the hound is put out the deer must 

 go, and go it will for the nearest body of water, where the 

 sportsman is waiting for his victim. 



3. Hounding is the surest method because it is based on 

 the instinct of the game. When a deer is pursued instinct 

 tells her to rush into tbe water to baffle the hounds. Obedi- 

 ence to instinct brings escape from the dogs on shore, but 

 death at the hand of the man in the boat. 



4. To water-kill deer requires absolutely no skill nor expe- 

 rience. The only requisite is money enough to hire a 

 "guide," a boat and the hounds. Most deer are killed at 

 very short range with guns loaded with buckshot, or with 

 magazine rjfles. It is a comQJdn thing for the <f guide" .to 



hold the struggling creature by the tail while the "sports- 

 man" shoots it or clubs it with oar or bludgeon. 



Tbe ease and certainty of hounding invite to indulgence in 

 it numbers of summer tourists, who have no special taste for 

 hunting, are absolutely without any hunting skill, and could 

 kill a deer in no other way. With dog, guide (t. e., oars- 

 man), boat, and rifle, shotgun or club, they are sure of a deer 

 if a deer is in the neighborhood. They kill principally 

 because it is quite the correct thing to tell of having "shot 

 that buck when 1 was in tbe Adirondacks." No question of 

 their perfect right to this privilege would be raised, provided 

 they could all kill deer and a proper supply of the game still 

 be left. But they cannot. 



HOUNDING EASTER THAN STILL HUNTING. 



Any one can kill the poor, tired creature in the water. If 

 he can't shoot well enough, his guide can row him up near 

 enough so he can beat bis brains out with an oar. The 

 victim stands no c\ance whatever for its life. In still- 

 hunting the hunter may break a twig with his foot; a 

 quick motion of the hand or a puff of wind may give 

 the deer its life at the last moment. It is only a few 

 days at most between Nov. 1 and Dec. 1 that the still- 

 hunter can follow a deer with any degree of success, 

 and those days are when the ground is covered with wet 

 leaves, or when the ground is covered with light snow 

 and upon leaves not frozen, and those are the exceptional 

 days. Still-hunters do not kill a large number per man, but 

 from one, two or three, and, in rare instances, five or more 

 deer to each gun or sportsman in camp, during the fall. 

 But, on the other hand, the hounders — say three in a party, 

 with as many dogs— kill two or three deer each day, not 

 being confined to particular days. The hounds will drive a 

 deer on frozen leaves, in dry or hot or wet weather, all the 

 same. 



HOUNDING IS EVEN MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN CRUSTING. 



Thelawforbids crusting. On tbe same principle it should 

 forbid hounding. Hounding and crusting are very similar. 

 Crusting means killing deer when there is a crust on the 

 snow, through which the deer breaks, but which sustains 

 the man. The crusteddeer is killed when, floundering per- 

 fectly helpless in the snow , it is easily approached by the 

 man on the snow and clubbed or its throat cut. The hounded 

 deer is killed when, floundering perfect lyjhelpless in the 

 water, it is easily approached by the man in the boat and 

 clubbed or its throat cut. Crusting is destructive, water- 

 killing is more destructive. One is just as bad as the other 

 iu principle; in actual practice water-killing would destroy 

 more deer than crusting. 



HOUNDING DESTROYS THE DOES. 



The proportion of does to bucks killed by hounding is 

 fully 8 to 2. The reason of this is not at all difficult to 

 explain. The doe is weaker than the buck and when 

 hounded will sooner take to the water. Through the 

 season when the voice of the hound is heard in the woods, 

 the does linger in the vicinity of streams, ponds and lakes 

 to be near their water refuge. The guides know this; they 

 put out the dogs in tbe same vicinity, and the natural result 

 is that more does than bucks are driven into the water. 

 Some hounders profess to discriminate and not to kill does; 

 but the doe that is permitted to go free is the exception. 

 The common practice is that when a deer — male or female — 

 takes to the water it is considered legitimate game. Wet 

 does, heated by a long run, are killed by the sudden chill to 

 their lacteal glands, before the sportsmen in tbe boats reach 

 them; if others are permitt3d to escape their subsequent 

 agony perhaps renders that escape less merciful than death 

 itself. The bill now before the Legislature provides for the 

 hounding of does in the nursing season. 



When it is remembered that the killing of one doe is equal 

 in effect on the future supply to the killing of four bucks* it 

 will be seen that in this respect hounding is especially ruin- 

 ous of the game supply. 



The proportion of does to bucks killed by hounding 

 is greater than the proportion killed by still-hunting. A 

 record of deer killed by a party of four still-hunters for six 

 seasons (1879-85) shows' a total of 55 deer, of which 9 were 

 does, a proportion of does to bucks killed by still-hunting of 

 1 to 6. (Forest and Stream, Jan. 8, 1885.) 



Moreover, to the aggregate actually killed must be added 

 the number of does rendered ban-en by the practice of hound- 

 ing. In this respect hounding is peculiarly atrocious in its 

 effect upon the natural increase of the game, by preventing 

 conception. Guides and old visitors to the North Woods 

 say that the proportion of barren does to those with fawns 

 is constantly increasing. To-day the relative number is 

 very greatly in excess of what it was ten years ago. This 

 is due to hounding. Hounding is practiced in the breeding 

 season. The does are in a state of constant excitement from 

 fear of the hounds. Under such conditions, according to a 

 principle well-known to all physiologists, and familiar to all 

 stockmen, the does will not conceive. There is no specula- 

 tion about this. The facts are well established, and are 

 recognized by breeders of horses and cattle. It is beyond 

 cavil that the barren does are increasing, and equally beyond 

 question that the practice of hounding is responsible for it 



HOUNDING DESTROYS THE FAWNS. 



To the sportsman in the boat on the lake "the enchanting 

 music of the hounds" is just as pleasing whether the dogs be 

 chasing an "antlered monarch of the glen," a nursing doe or 

 a fawn. Because weaker than the old deer and less able to 

 care for themselves, many fawns are caught by the dogs and 

 killed (often without the knowledge of the hunter). Some 

 are driven into the water and killed by the sportsmen. Some 

 die of exhaustion. Others perish of starvation when the 

 mother does have been hounded to death. [Others may be 

 poisoned by tbe milk of hounded does which have escaped. 

 This is pure conjecture. We can only base it on the fact 

 that hounded does have been tracked by the bloody milk 

 dripping from their dugs and leaving a trail on the lichens of 

 the rocks over which the creatures staggered ] 



Without any allusion to the ethics of "the historic and 

 most sportsmanlike method" of hunting deer, is it not per- 

 tinent to inquire, If the does and fawns are to be hounded 

 to death, what is to become of the deer supply? 



DOGS KILL DEER IN THE WOODS ALL THE YEAR AROUND. 



The fawns killed by the hounds aud not recovered by the 

 doggers are only a small proportion of the total number of 

 deer killed in the woods by the dogs without the doggers. 

 Hounds kill deer at all seasons in every county in the Adi- 

 rondackB. The statements by Mr. Bainbridge Bishop, of 

 New Russia, recently published, described what is going 

 on to-day in Essex county. 



In winter it is a common expedient to turn the hounds out 

 to hunt on their own account. Under certain conditions of 



*See letter of Dr. Samuel B. Ward, in Forest and Stream Feb. lfl, 



the snow dogs can easily catch and kill the deer, which at 

 that time are often weak. The destruction of deer by dogs 

 goes on through the twelve months of the year, //' hounding 

 be permitted at all — no matter how short the prescribed season — 

 thit will furnish an excuse for keeping packs of hounds. If 

 hounds are kept, they will be used to destroy 'deer the year 

 around. No legislation will be effective to preserve ichich does 

 not absolutely prohibit the use of the dogs at all times. 



WHAT ARE THE ACTUAL RESULTS OP ANTI-DOG GING LAWS. 



New York i3 not a pioneer in prohibiting the use of dogs 

 iu deer hunting. The same law has been successfully en- 

 forced elsewhere. Some years ago, when the deer supply of 

 Maine bad been depicted by the doggers, that State passed an 

 anti-hounding law, and this was made more stringent in 

 1883. The results are told elsewhere by the State Game 

 Commissioners. 



A similar law obtains in Pennsylvania. In Potter, McKean 

 and Cameron counties deer had in 1878 become practically 

 extinct. The act of June 3, 1878, contained the following 

 provision: "* * * No person shall pursue any elk or 

 wild deer with dogs in any part of this State, or shall kill in 

 the water any elk, wild deer or fawn which has been driven 

 thereto by dogs. Any person offending against any of the 

 provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misde- 

 meanor, and shall be liable to a fine of $50 for each elk. 

 wild deer or fawn so killed, or pursued, or trapped. * * * 

 Auy dogs pursuing elk, wild deer or fawns may be killed by 

 any person; and any constable or other town official may 

 kill any dog that habitually pursues elk, wild deer or fawns." 

 The result has been a great increase in the game. Deer are 

 still-hunted there two and one-half months, aud the supply is 

 reported by old hunters to be as abundant to-day as it was 

 in 1860. 



In many portions of the Adirondacks the ISew York law 

 was not stringently enforced last season. Some of the city 

 sportsmen who are now asking for the law's repeal violated 

 it last fall. But where it was enforced the result was bene- 

 ficial beyond all question. 



Peter B. Leonard, State Game Protector for St. Law- 

 rence and Franklin counties, says: "In its working there 

 can be no question but tbe law" prohibiting dogging has 

 saved large numbers of deer. Instead of the open and de- 

 clared preparations and practices, we have now the secret 

 and covert methods pursued by the doggers. With such 

 efforts as the game protectors aud game protectionists are 

 able to make, the practice has been much abated. With 

 continued efforts it will be suppressed, except as isolated 

 cases shall occur beyond the reach of vigilance to prevent, 

 and to be classed with other crimes that, to an extent, always 

 have and always will baffle the best police." 



John Liberty, State Game Protector for Essex and Clinton 

 counties, says there have been many undetected violations 

 in his district, and adds: "Notwithstanding, I thiuk the law 

 has saved a great many deer in my district, and wherever I 

 go the indications are that deer are very plenty. What 

 hounding has been done was away from tbe settlements, and 

 theu very slyly." 



John L. Brinkerhopf, State Game Protector tor parts of 

 Lewis and Hamilton counties (himself an advocate of hound- 

 ing), reported adversely to the working of the law because 

 he could not enforce it. But the Beaver River country,, in 

 Brinkerhoff's district, was watched by a special constable 

 paid by the hotel keepers, guides and visitors. Here is a re- 

 port of the result, written by Mr. Chas. Fenton, of Number 

 Four: 



"In the Beaver river country not less than 260 deer were 

 killed in the season of 1884; 200 were killed by driving into 

 tbe water with hounds and about 60 by still-huuting. Last, 

 fall less than 60 were killed on the same territory. Why 

 was this? Simply because the law against hounding was 

 strictly enforced. In other sections where the. law has not 

 been enforced many deer have been killed by hounding and 

 credited to still-hunting. A year ago last fall a party from 

 Jefferson county camped on Beaver River aud killed about 

 30 deer; last fall they went on the same ground and killed 4. 

 Another party who the previous fall killed 23, last fall did 

 not kill any. Altogether the deer houndinsr law has been a 

 success if we take into account the preservation of deer. It 

 is safe to say that at least 1,000 have been saved through the 

 instrumentality of this law. No wanton slaughter has been 

 committed, as pot-hunters dare not market venison killed in 

 this way. The sentiment against hounding deer will doubt- 

 less be stronger the next year, and the law be more generally 

 observed during the close season, as almost every one came 

 out of the woods the 1st and 2d of December." 



That was in the western part of the woods. The same 

 happy results were seen elsewhere, wherever the law was 

 enforced. Mr. R M. Sbutts reports from the Chaleaguay 

 Lake district, in the northeastern part of the woods: 



"The majority of the people living in this section of the 

 country are satisfied with the non-hounding law. The hotel 

 owners, club house owners and guides are pleased with the 



law. • , , , 



"The men who are not pleased are the ones who have 

 rented a hotel for the year and want to kill the last deer be- 

 fore the year is up ; also the outsiders who have to go into 

 the woods in the fall and camp out for a couple of weeks, 

 anil with the aid of a dozen hounds kill or drive every deer 

 off the range. 



"None of the old-time hounders have indulged in the pas- 

 time here this season. I don't think a dozen races were made 

 at this lake the past fall, and we have seen the good effect of 

 it. The deer come to the water late as well as early, and are 

 now yarding within a mile of where I write this at my office 

 desk." 



"This season has been the best one lor still hunting we 

 have known for a score of years, and yet very few deer were 

 killed— only twentv at Ohateaugay Lake, and these by five 

 different hunters; "three were killed from this house, two 

 from the Merrill House and fifteen from a huuting camp 

 four miles south of here. 



"If there is any legislation this winter m regard to the 

 game of our State, let them provide a game protector for each 

 town where needed, appoint good men and true and pay 

 them for their services. If they serve the State, keep them; 

 if not, discharge them and appoint others. Keep a good 

 man at each game center and game will increase.— R. M. 

 Sbutts."* 



~*Tbe Union League Club, New York, Feb. 15, 16fiii. — Editor Forest 

 and Stream : In reply to yours of the l3ih icst.. desiring my opinion 

 of Richard ftl. Shutts, of Upper Chateaugay Lake, I would say that 

 after many years of experience hunting in the Nonh woods, and know- 

 ing many of the guides in that region, I know of none more efficient 

 and conscientious. He knows the country for miles around. His testi- 

 mony as to the present law regulating the killing of deer I consider 

 invaluable. If all the guides were aa honest as ".pick bliilMS," there 

 would be more sport in the North Woods, very truly yourM. Sptm 

 O. Rbed. 



