222 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[April 16, 1886. 



IP* £portent*n §0nri$t. 



SOME POINTS IN WOODCRAFT. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



Perhaps it is a little late to answer a critique printed last 

 December in Forest and Stream. But as there are some 

 points in it that may mislead the general reader, 1 beg to 

 answer briefly. 



"Wawayanda," under date of Dec. 81, "begs to inform 

 the father of the craft, before whom we are all but as dust, " 

 etc. It is answered that "Nessmuk" does not assume any 

 such paternity; tbat he is only one of an army of outers who 

 love the forest and spend much time therein, with small 

 profit in a worldly point of view. That he gets more com- 

 forts and woodland conveniences into a fifteen-pound knap- 

 sack than the average outer gets into a dry goods box may 

 be true; and he does not go into the woods to rough it, but, 

 as claimed in "Woodcraft," to smooth it. 



We beg to inform "Wawayanda" there is no such dissimi- 

 larity between us on the "shirt" and "soap" question as hi 

 is pleased to assume. We use both — in moderation ; and we 

 may here mention that, on a week's recent outing with a 

 couple of gentlemen who came into camp with a skiff-load 

 of duffle, the knapsack of "Nessmuk" furnished forth the 

 only piece of soap in camp. 



As to the piece of soap and towel that were carried for 

 seven weeks in the North Woods without being once used, 

 the critics and cavilers remember to forget that it is stated in 

 immediate connection that clear water was used, and that at 

 intervals of two or three days woodland hostleries were 

 reached where a thorough ablution could be had, to re- 

 establish the anti-black-fly glaze on once more taking to the 

 woods. 



"Wawayanda" doesn't understand why one should "pre- 

 fer an open brush shanty for a two-months' outing when a 

 tent that will close is obtainable," etc. This is bedgiug the 

 question with a vengeance. "Nessmuk" never recommended 

 or used the brush shanty when anything better was to be had. 

 But it is well for the outer to know how. As a dernier 

 resort, one can be comparatively comfortable in very bad 

 weather with only a brush shanty for shelter. Let "Waway- 

 anda" read just what is said in "Woodcraft" on the shanty 

 question. As to "a tent that wili close." I recently epent a 

 week in one on a lonely spot up the coast, and found it very 

 light, airy and pleasant. I wish I could always have one 

 when camping out. But I cruised there in a ten pouud canoe, 

 and if the tent were cut in two in the middle the little Rush- 

 ton could not carry one-half of it. What she does carry is 

 the oblong square of cotton drilling described in "Wood- 

 craft." It is 7x9 feet, and when skillfully put up and 

 stretched at a pretty sharp angle, makes a sufficient shelter. 

 If intended for more than One night, the sides are closed in 

 with the large fans of the cabbage palmetto. I have lived 

 a good deal in such a camp during the last fourteen months 

 and found it, even during the northers that prevail here, 

 entirely satisfactory. It is intended for two, but will shelter 

 three very well. 



A3 to that "extra shanty" for outdoor cooking in rainy 

 weather, I can best explain the immense trouble connected 

 with it by briefly relating a little episode of an outing wherein 

 I took the role of guide and cook for a party of two gentle- 

 men, one from Lincoln, Del., the other from Chicago. We 

 were camped at the head of Lake Butler, where game was 

 fairly plenty and black bass most abundant, when there 

 came up a norjher, and it was evident we were to have a 

 rough, rainy night of it. The gentlemen referred to will 

 bear me witness that in less than half an hour I had the fire 

 sheltered with that "extra shanty" in a manner that proved 

 effective during an all-night rain and strong wind. To erect 

 an old stove top and build a smoky fire inside a tent in wet 

 weather would hardly take less time and trouble. 



Again, "Wawayanda" admits that it may require less 

 labor to outstay a rattler than to build a bedstead. Say 150 

 bedsteads and add time to the labor. Then say that among 

 ten of the grayest woodsmen you can find not more than one 

 was ever called on to outstay a, rattler at all. I have certainly 

 made as many as 150 camps, and if I had my choice between 

 building that many bedsteads or chancing a rattler's strike 

 in the dark, I would take chances. Not to mention the facts, 

 that a rattler when disturbed in the dark is pretty certain to 

 strike at a slight noise, and that a bedstead raised a few 

 inches from the ground affords no safety from the stroke of 

 a large rattlesnake. 



As to that old stovetop, I "dunno." It rather beats me, 

 though I have met with much the same notions in my out- 

 ings. ! once had a friend, a genial, wholesouled fellow, who 

 was delighted to camp out with us in the crisp October days, 

 although he was no hunter and a poor shot. We always 

 gave him the runway nearest the shanty, which he usually 

 left in less than two hours to cook and monkey around camp, 

 and his weakness was broiled venison. So long as he con- 

 fined himself to a three-pronged frizzling stick of birch or 

 hickory, this was en regie and even commendable. But one 

 unlucky day he came across the discarded wheel of a baby 

 wagon, and th« plentitude of wire spoke being suggestive of 

 broiling, he adopted it as a broiler and went into camp with 

 it dangling from his kuapsack, to the intense delight and 

 merriment of the older hunters. Ofcourse.it made a good 

 enough broiler, and as we happened to get a deer on the first 

 day, he devoted his time mostly to broiling and eating choice 

 bits of venison steak. It happened, one morning, that he 

 had a ruuway near camp, while I watched one-half a mile 

 further down. And I sat on a log and heard our best hound 

 go through his runway with the rapid, eager yelps I so well 

 knew the meaning of, and no shot ! It was clear that Billy 

 R. had quit his runway and gone to camp to broil venison. 

 Deer were not plenty enough to fool away in that fashion, 

 and I left my runwav and walked up stream to see about it. 

 The camp Was on a little flat on the east side of the creek, 

 and on the other side was a high bank with a dense growth 

 of laurel. It was easy to bushwhack the camp from the 

 laurel to within twenty -five yards of the camp-fire without 

 being seen. So I crept up in moccasins and took a peep 

 through the laurel. There he was, the little wheel resting 

 on the summits of three small stakes driven in the ground, a 

 bed of bright embers underneath, and a nice, juicy steak be- 

 ing broiled to a turn. It was a grand chance to run a rig on 

 him and he deserved it, Waiting until he squatted on his 

 heels trving to get a turn on his steak, I drew a fine bead on 

 the rim" of the wheel and cut loose. There was sudden com- 

 motion in that camp. Wheel and venison flew off into space, 

 Billy gave a spasmodic yell, and the last I saw of it all as I 

 backed silently out of sight was a pair of boot heels keeling 

 ud over the wearer's head. In ten minutes 1 was back to my 

 runway with the rifle reloaded, and drowsily smoking by the 



smouldering watch-fire. Down came Billy, pale with ex- 

 citement. 



"Did you hear the shot?" he asked wildly. 



"Well, I thought I heard a shot. Sounded as though it 

 was near your runway." 



"My runway? I should say so. May I never breathe or 

 speak again if that shot wasn't made at me. Yes, sir, 

 missed me by an inch or two and hit the br'iler. You ought 

 to see it. It's just a tangle of twisted wire. Some of these 

 Babbs Creek sneak hunters did it. Crawled along the bank 

 in the high laurel and took a standing shot at five rods. It's 

 a cold-blooded attempt at murder, and it's a miracle how I 

 escaped." 



"Well, if any sneak hunter in these woods has really 

 missed you at five rods it is a miracle. Looks to me as 

 though some feller had been trying his sights on that br'iler." 



A light seemed to break in on him. His under jaw 

 dropped, he looked me steadily in the eye for a full minute, 

 and then said in tones of mingled reproach and entreaty : 



"George, if you did it, don't tell the boys." 



There was uproarious fun and laughter in camp that night. 

 We hung the demoralized "br'iler" in the light of the camp 

 fire, and I told the story as well as I could under the circum- 

 stances. Billy also gave his version, and he had wit and 

 good sense to get as much fun out of it as any man in camp, 

 while returning to sound woodland principles in the shape of 

 a three-pronged birch fork. 



And there is no moral that 1 recollect. The little wagon- 

 wheel made as good a "br'iler" as the birch fork, but no 

 better. And it was a ridiculous piece of hunting kit to carry 

 into the woods. 



By the same token, I have no doubt the old stove-top 

 answers the same purpose as two small logs placed side by 

 side on the ground as a cooking range, after the manner 

 described in "Woodcraft." But it is no better; and if there 

 be any significance in the fitness of things, one would be 

 more apt to look for it in a camp of gypsey tinkers than in a 

 camp of hunters. Nevertheless, I have no disposition to 

 "pay out" on "Camp Flotsam," and none but genial feelings 

 for "Wawayanda." I am about done with Florida for the 

 present; and I half promise myself another cruise across the 

 Northern Wilderness in a very light canoe. I think Camp 

 Flotsam is on Long Lake, not far from Mitchell Sabattis's 

 landing. If so, I am likely enough to paddle in on it some 

 pleasant July evening, and take a (knife and fork) shot at 

 that old, old stove-top. Nessmuk. 



P. S. — "Kingfisher" alluded to me a long time since with 

 some mild criticism, but so gentle and genial withal that it 

 is without sting. And his conclusions are sound, i. e., to 

 take all the comfort you conveniently can when going to the 

 woods, but go. Would that I might cruise in on a "Camp 

 of the Kingfishers." The liberal and free-hearted manner in 

 which I would wade into their 11 cwt. of groceries should 

 convince them that I am not so prejudiced against weight 

 after all — when some one else carries it. N k. 



THE AUDUBON SOCIETY. 



Editor ForeM and Stream: 



Your note about the Audubon Society followed me to 

 Mexico and here. After this long delay, if it is of any ser- 

 vice to you, I should be glad to be quoted as in entire 

 sympathy with its object. A dead bird does not help the 

 appearance of an ugly woman, and a pretty woman needs 

 no such adornment. If you can get the women to recognize 

 these two things a great deal will be done for the protection 

 of our song birds. Yours sincerely, 



Charles Dudley Warner. 



New Orleans, April 5, 188(5. 



At a meeting of the Narrows Island Club, held in this 

 city April 12, the subject of the destruction of our non-game 

 birds wa3 brought up by Mr. Lewis Edwards. Mr. Grin 

 nell made some remarks on the magnitude of the evil and the 

 methods which were being taken to suppress it, and Mr. 

 Elliot urged the importance of each individual exercising 

 his influence to put an end to the present fashion of wearing 

 birds in hats. Dr. J. C. Barron presented the following 

 resolution : 



llcxolved, That this club heartily indorses the plans and 

 work of the committee of the A. O. IT. on the protection of 

 birds and of the Audubon Society, in their efforts to sup- 

 press this wholesale destruction. 



The motion was seconded by Mr. Edwards and unani- 

 mously carried. 



A writer in the Evening Post of April 7 says: "My visit 

 to the National Academy was spoiled yesterday. Not by 

 viewing bad pictures, either. It was by a young lady's hat. 

 There was nothing in her face to denote excessive cruelty. 

 Indeed, she was very pretty, and the attention she paid to 

 the best pictures seemed to indicate that her artistic taste 

 was not uncultivated. But her hat! The front rim of this 

 was decorated with the heads of over twenty little birds. I 

 counted them at the risk of seeming to stare rudely. These 

 heads were simply sewed on side by side as closely as possi- 

 ble. Aside from the shock that any lover of bud life must 

 receive on seeing this evidence of slaughter of innocent 

 warblers, their use as a decoration was so inartistic and ugly 

 that I wondered that any milliner would so apply them. I 

 hope the Legislature will not fail to push the bill to check 

 the extermination of our song birds by the milliners and 

 their customers." 



Is it not possible to persuade the women of Boston — the 

 city we are proud to consider a center of refinement , reason 

 and intelligence— to take a decided stand in the matter of 

 the slaughter of birds, and protect them by refusing to wear 

 them? We are fostering a grievous wrong out of pure 

 thoughtlessness. A bit of ribbon, or a bunch of flowers, or 

 any of the endless variety of materials used by the milliner 

 would answer every purpose of decoration without involving 

 the sacrifice of bright and beautiful lives. But women do 

 not know what they are doing when they buy and wear 

 birds and feathers, or they never would do it. How should 

 people brought up in cities know anything of the sacred lives 

 of birds? What woman whose head is bristling with their 

 feathers knows, for instance, the hymn of the song sparrows, 

 the sweet jargon of the blackbirds, the fairy fluting of the 

 oriole, the lonely, lovely wooing call of the sandpiper, the 

 cheerful challenge of the chickadee, the wild, clear whistle 

 of the curlew, the twittering of the swallows as they go 

 careering in wide curves through summer air, filling earth 

 and heaven with tones of pure gladness, each bird a marvel 



of grace, beauty and joy? God gave us these exquisite crea- 

 tures for delight and solace, and we suffer them to be slain 

 by thousands for our "adornment." When I take note of 

 the headgear of my sex, a kind of despair overwhelms me. 

 I go mourning at heart in an endless funeral procession of 

 slaughtered birds, many of whom are like dear friends to me. 

 From infancy I have lived among them, have watched them 

 with the most profound reverence and love, respected their 

 rights, adored their beauty and their song, and I could no 

 more injure a bird than I could hurt a child. No woman 

 would if she knew it. 



The family life of most birds is a lesson to men and women. 

 But how few people have had the privilege of watching that 

 sweet fife, of knowing how precious and sacred it is, how 

 the little beings guard their nests with almost human wis- 

 dom, and cherish their young with faithful, careful, self- 

 sacrificing love. If women only knew these things, there i3 

 not one in the length and breadth of the land, I am happy to 

 believe, who could be cruel enough to encourage this mass- 

 acre of the innocents by wearing any precious rifled plume 

 of theirs upon her person. At this moment, when again 

 comes April back to us, bringing once more these sky-born 

 minstrels and poets dear, troops of boys throughout the 

 whole country are slaughtering the bluebirds for the milliner! 

 and not only the bluebirds, but every feathered thing that 

 flies. Oh, let us begin to try to put an end to this evil 

 "wrought from want of thought"! The Audubon Society 

 furnish some facts which prove how far it has gone. "From 

 one small district on Long Island about 70,000 birds were 

 brought to New York in four months' time. In New York 

 one firm had on hand Feb. 1, 1886, 200,000 skins. The sup- 

 ply is not limited by domestic consumption ; American bird 

 skins are sent abroad; one New York firm had a contract to 

 supply 40,000 skins of American birds to one Paris firm." 



Will not the women of Boston lead the way as a city of 

 merciful women, and take vigorous steps toward putting an 

 end to this outrage against our Mother Nature? Once let 

 refined and cultivated women see the matter in its true light, 

 refuse to wear feathers and refuse to allow their children to 

 wear them, the evil in this city at least would soon disap- 

 pear. And it would be a beginning — let the fine women lead 

 the way, the rest will soon follow; the servant will not 

 wear what the lady refuses to countenance, for curiously 

 enough fashion is respected as much by the ignorant as by 

 the cultured— high and and low alike bow down before the 

 grim goddess and fashion has become a murderous fiend. 



It is spriog, the old hats and bonnets are to be laid aside. 

 Let us buy no more birds with which to "decorate" the new 

 head covering. More than this, let us not keep any we have 

 now for future use, neither give them away, but destroy them 

 at once, without hesitation, that they may never again set 

 a bad example. Let us all be proud to walk abroad without 

 a badge of cruelty upon our heads. Destroy them and never 

 purchase others. How slight a sacrifice is this for us, how 

 great a gain in the cause of humanity! At once, this day, 

 this hour let us, in the name of love and pity, begin to spare 

 and try to save the birds. — Oelia Tkaxter, in Boston Tran- 

 script. 



THE A. O. U. CHECK LIST. 



A T the first session of the American Ornithologists' 

 xjL Union, held in New York in September, 1883, a com- 

 mittee was appointed to consider the question of a Re- 

 vision of the Classification and Nomenclature of the Birds 

 of North America. This committee, which consisted of 

 Messrs. Allen, Coues, Ridgway, Brewster and Henshaw, 

 reported to the Union at its second meeting in October, ] 884. 

 The report was accepted, adopted and referred back to the 

 committee, with instructions to complete their work and 

 submit it to the Council, which was empowered to accept 

 and adopt the report and to publish it in the name and under 

 the auspices of the A. O. U. The Council accepted the re- 

 port in April, 1885, and it is now issued in its completed form. 



The volume, which is handsomely printed on laid paper, 

 contains 400 pages. Of these seventeen are devoted to an 

 historical introduction, in which is briefly set forth what has 

 been done in zoological nomenclature up to the present time 

 and the ba^is upon which its principles are founded. 



Then follow fifty pages devoted to "Principles, Canons 

 and Recommendations. " The principles are five in number, 

 and while briefly stated, are quite fully explained in the re- 

 marks which accompany them. The fifty-one canons come 

 next in order and are also fully annotated, as are the 

 recommendations, of which there are ten. 



The Check List proper completes the volume, and to those 

 who have not altogether kept up with the progress of modern 

 ideas on nomenclature and classification, it will be a surprise. 

 It is an absolute overturning of old methods, the order of the 

 species being reversed, and the lower forms of bird life com- 

 ing first in order, while the higher ones bring up the rear. 

 This is, of course, the natural order, and the one which has 

 Ion 0- been followed in all groups except birds, and why the 

 desirability of such an arrangement has never before oc- 

 curred to ornithologists is one of the mysteries that will per- 

 haps never be solved. As soon as the idea was suggested, it 

 at once commended itself to every one; but it was long in 

 coming. 



Beginning then with the Pygopodes, the List takes us 

 through the Longipennes, Tubinares, Steganopodes and Au- 

 seres, the trumpeter swan ending the true swimming birds. 

 Then follow in order Odontoglossse, Herodiones, Paludico- 

 lse, Limicola?, GalliDse, Columbse, Raptores, Psittaci, Coccy- 

 zes, Pici, Macrochires (goatsuckers,) swifts and humming 

 birds, and finally Passeres. 



Recent investigations into the nomenclature of our birds 

 has brought about many changes of names, and old and well- 

 known titles have disappeared to give place to others, older, 

 no doubt, but not as well known. Thus, the loon is no 

 longer Colymbus torquatus Brunn., but Urinator imber (Gum.), 

 and the red throated diver is IT. lumim. The black-headed 

 gulls, long generically separated from Larus under the name 

 Chr otocephalus, now return to their former place. The 

 generic name PMus has become Anhinga, Mergus is changed 

 to Merganser, Anas includes the old genera Anas, Chaule- 

 lasmus, Marecu, Nettion and Querguedvla; AytJiya includes 

 the old AytJiya, Fulix and FuliguU. The name Clangula is 

 no longer applied to the golden-eyes and burfle-head. Glau- 

 cionetta is the generic name of the former and C'karitonetta- 

 that of the Anas albeola of Linna?us. CUngula is now used 

 for the old wife or long-tailed duck, once Harelda. A long 

 list of these important changes might be given, but they 

 would not supply the place of the volume itself, which must 

 be in the library of every working ornithologist. 



A number of doubtful species have been thrown out of the 

 list, so that it now number* but 768 species as against nearly 

 900 (878 to be exact) in the last edition of Dr. Coues's Key. 



Following the Check List is a Hypothetical List of twenty- 



