S18 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[Oct. 12, 1896. 



RANGE FOR SHOOTING GAME. 



Halifax, N. S.— Editor Forest and Stream: Dick of 

 Connecticut and Another Dick have severely criticised 

 my action in shooting at a running moose 200yds. away, 

 but they do not say at what range I would be justified in 

 shooting. I can only surmise from both articles that I 

 am only to shoot when absolutely sure of my shot— but 

 no; I am wrong, because I see in the article in the issue 

 of Sept. 21 that absolute sureness is an impossibility. 



I quite agree with the writer in thinking so, in so far as 

 I myself and the great majority of big game hunters are 

 concerned. Some few may, I believe are, quite Bure 

 where they will hit before pressing the trigger. 



Now, to illustrate how difficult it is to fix a range for 

 yourself or for others at which you may fire at a mooBe, 

 let me quote a few examples, for the accuracy of which I 

 can vouch : 



In the fall of '93 my guide took out moose calling two 

 young friends of mine, both belonging to the militia, and 

 counted among the best shots in their regiment. In due 

 course one very clear evening, as the sun had just gone 

 below the horizon and a beautiful moon was shining and 

 not a vestige of wind (in fact, every condition was such 

 as to afford them an excellent opportunity to make a good 

 shot), my Indian called up a moose. It came out from 

 the sheltering woods and walked out on the open barren 

 to within thirty paces of the spot where my friends were 

 concealed behind a large boulder. 



Now, I think every one will surely agree with me when 

 I say they had a splendid and almost exceptionally good 

 chance to kill that moose, but note the result— both men 

 aimed at the shoulder of the moose, standing quite still 

 and broadside to them; after the shots the animal ran a 

 few paces and fell, but was by no means dead. They 

 stood off fifteen or twenty paces and fired seventeen more 

 shots at the poor animal lying there struggling on the 

 ground before one bullet, more well directed than the 

 rest, found the animal's brain and quieted its struggles, 

 and, I might add, ended its agonies. Its head was so torn 

 by bullets as to make it useless for mounting, and of the 

 two first shots fired one struck it in the abdomen and the 

 other one never hit at all. 



Again, the first time I ever had the fortune to go moose 

 hunting, and the very first day we were out, the Indian 

 went down to the lake near our camp to draw some water 

 for tea, and saw swimming across the lake a young bull. 

 He ran back for me, and I picked up my rifle and three 

 shells and hurried to the water's edge, a distance of some 

 20yds. The animal was then within a few yards of being 

 obscured from view by a point making out into the lake 

 and about 100yds. away. I fired two shots at him quickly, 

 and both missed, owing to a mistake in my elevation. 

 My third and last shot hit the animal in the nose some- 

 where, as we could well see by the way it threw up its 

 head and made directly for the shore and cover. 



Now, any hunter knows what a very small part of a 

 moose's head is exposed when swimming, and of the small 

 exposed portion a smaller portion constitutes the brain and 

 vulnerable part. 



Here is a case where a deviation of one inch in the course 

 of the bullet would alter a miss from a kill. The chances 

 to kill were nearly as great as the chances to miss, if the 

 head were hit at all; and yet, because I might, and in fact 

 did, shoot two or three inches out of the road, I suppose 

 from D. of C.'s and A. D.'s point of view I should never 

 have fired at all. 



But I did fire and did hit the mark, and although only 

 a few inches out of the road, I did not kill the animal, 

 and it would probably become all well again in a few 

 days. 



Another case still — one of our most successful hunters 

 tells the story of his first moose as follows: "We were 

 cruising along through the woods and came out suddenly 

 on a small clearing 50yds. across, and there was a moose 

 standing on the far side, quietly browsing, with his shoul- 

 der to us. I fired at him, and away he went tearing 

 through the bushes, and as no blood was visible on the 

 bushes or ground we had to conclude that I had missed. " 



A moose 50yds. away, standing still and with an ex- 

 posed shoulder! Surely this was an easy shot, and the 

 man could be excused for shooting, and vet he did not 

 kill. 



So much for instances where a moose, although well 

 within the bounds of what we might call easy shooting 

 distance, was missed. 



In my last article I mentioned two particularly difficult 

 shots which were successful. In the case in point the 

 animal, as before stated, was in plain view 200yds. away 

 among bushes which by no means presented an obstacle 

 to my shooting it, and when my first shot was fired was 

 hardly under way, although I did startle it while throw- 

 ing a shell into the firing chamber of my rifle. The bul- 

 let was sufficiently well directed to go through the lung, 

 and possibly 2in. more one way or the other would have 

 made the shot result very differently. 



Moose have frequently been known to stop still at the 

 sound of a gun, even when hit; in fact, I know of one 

 such case in my own experience, and had this one done 

 so of course I would have had a second good chance. I 

 think, therefore, that in consideration of the above 

 authenticated cases any man going moose hunting should 

 avail himself of every possible chance of shooting his 

 game, be the range long or short, or the conditions good 

 or bad. 



The element of ohance in moose hunting is very great, 

 and a man can ill afford to lose one, for goodness knows 

 'tis a hard enough job to find a moose, let alone to shoot it. 

 It does not usually run across your path unsought £and 

 any man who can point to a moose head and say, "I shot 

 It," has just reason to be proud of his abilities as a hunter 

 (I won't say sportsman). 



Such, therefore, is my opinion of the range at which we 

 may shoot moose. 



D. of C. and A. D.— the latter of whom I suspect of 

 being none other than D. of C. himself—bring into the 

 discussion matter entirely at variance with the heading 

 of the article — "Range for Shooting Game." 



They accuse me of not being a sportsman. Now the 

 definition of a sportsman I would like to see made the 

 topic of another article; I must say that for myself I 

 really could not define a Bportsman, and I could not be 

 the judge of sportsmanlike conduct in another; I can, 

 however, in this article answer one or two of the state- 

 ments in A. D.'s letter. 



He implies that a sportsman to be a sportsman must 

 make use of the meat he kills and must not kill th i ani 

 mal unless his meat be utilized. 



Now must the man who hunts the tiger, the lion and 

 the grizzly, or the people who follow the hounds in a 

 fox hunt or wildcat hunt or even the coon, must they be 

 unsportsmanlike because they do not utilize the flesh or 

 in fact any portion, but kill only for what I always called 

 the sport of it. 



I most certainly think that in the case of a moose all 

 the meat should, if possible, be taken out and used. In the 

 case in point we used what meat we wanted; I sent a 

 small piece to some of my friends, the balance I gave 

 away to the nearest country people, who were very glad 

 to get it, and I could easily have disposed of ten carcasses 

 among them, as lots of men were willing, aye, more than 

 willing, to hitch up their oxen and pull out any quantity 

 of meat for the sake of one hind quarter. I have, how- 

 ever, known cases where the moose was killed bo far from 

 any habitation that the meat would all spoil before it 

 could be taken out. 



Perhaps though, in such a case, to be sportsmanlike, we 

 should try and drive the moose out toward a settlement 

 and then knock it on the head with an axe, the surest 

 way of killing it. 



A. D. says "Tiam clearly implies that the sportsman 

 sallies forth for the mere gratification of killing." Now I 

 don't quite see how my words could be made to convey 

 any such idea; in the first place the greater portion of men 

 do not go to the woods on a moose hunt for no other pur- 

 pose than killing a moose; they go for the reBt, recreation 

 and change incident to the life lived in the woods, also 

 for the hundred and one little pleasures incident to life in 

 the woods. I have been asked why I go away hunting 

 alone with an Indian, my answer is always ready — "I am 

 fond of the woods." The killing of the moose is merely 

 a link in the chain, it furnishes a definite end for you to 

 keep in view, the very difficulty of attainment making 

 the fulfillment of which all the more desirable. 



Did a sportsman go to the woods with only a desire to 

 kill something, I have no doubt some country farmers 

 would be very much obliged to him if he would go to 

 their houses and shoot their fatted steer's, etc. 



Re the sportsmanship question also, I would like to ask 

 my friend A. D. if he saw a grouse sitting on the ground 

 a short distance ahead of him, I presume, in order to 

 carry out his role as a sportsman, he would put up the 

 bird and shoot at it on the wing. Now, why do sports- 

 men flush birds before shooting? (I am, of course, dealing 

 now with the shotgun, not taking off heads with a small 

 rifle.) Simply because a bird on the wing has a much 

 greater chance to escape and consequently of getting 

 slightly wounded, and still getting away and possibly 

 dying in some corner. 



Now a moose and a grouse are both game and both are 

 noble game; won't you, please, A. D., allow me to give 

 the poor moose a chance, even though an occasional one 

 does go away maimed? All wild animals are the property 

 of the people and rightly so. I hope the day in America is 

 far off when the animals will become so guarded that 

 only the wealthy will be able to shoot, as is the case in 

 England to-day. 



The law, however, allows a man two moose in a season 

 here, and that is wise, as evinced by the fact that they 

 are increasing slowly and surely. 



This being the case, no sportsman need hesitate one 

 moment about killing two moose if he can. 



In our case there were two of us, and naturally we 

 were each anxious to take home a trophy even though one 

 man did shoot both animals, and so I do not think the 

 accusation of being selfish and of killing for the mere 

 sake of killing holds good. 



You must also remember every one is not so fortunate 

 as to get away moose hunting more than once or twice in 

 • a lifetime, and if he shoots up to the limit at one time 

 when the chance presents itself, I would not be the one 

 to censure him for it. 



Nobody hates killing more than I do — it is the only 

 portion in the sport which I do not like. I can hunt for 

 weeks and enjoy it immensely up until the point when 

 the animal dies. To see a moose lying there on the ground, 

 a few moments before full of life and vigor, thinking 

 only of his lady love, whose voice he had heard so seduc- 

 tively calling him to her — to look at him there, I don't 

 see how any one, barring a butcher, could feel any other 

 way than sorry for what he had done — for the life he had 

 taken to satisfy his love for sport. 



But not only a moose; a wounded rabbit, grouse, snipe, 

 duck, or in fact anything, they all inspire the same feel- 

 ing of regret in me, and many a time have I resolved not 

 to kill again, but the very next chance finds me at it as 

 hard as ever. 



It is one of the queer phases of human nature, I suppose. 



Now I will close this screed with an honest confession 

 made up of the above facts. I do not know what range 

 to shoot game at in order to be sportsmanlike, and I do 

 not know what a sportsman is. 



I am going away on my fall hunt thiB year on the 7th 

 of November, and should another moose show up at 

 200yds. away, I am afraid the temptation to shoot will be 

 too great for me to overcome. Tiam. 



Railroads and the Park. 



Sioux City, la. , Oct. 2.— Editor Forest and Stream: I in- 

 close clipping from the Omaha Bee of to-day, which reads: 

 "Much speculation has been indulged in concerning the 

 plans of the Burlington in building into the Yellowstone 

 Park country. News from that section of the country is 

 to the effect that a surveying party is now at work in 

 JohnBon county, Wyoming, on a survey that is supposed 

 to be under the direction of the Burlington. Along with 

 the survey is an irrigation company that proposes to re- 

 claim thousands of acres of arid lands along the line. 

 The survey will tap the north end of the Salt Creek and 

 Powder River oil fields, cross the Big Horn range and 

 enter the National Park either at the Yellowstone River 

 or in the Stinking Water Valley. Railroad men generally 

 believe that the Burlington is seeking a Pacific coast line 

 of its own, and believe that the National Park extension 

 will be built soon." I don't know what there is in the 

 story. Judging, however, by the way the Burlington 

 people get everything they want, it looks as though they 

 might break into the Park. W. R. Hall 



Game Laws in Brief. 



The Game Laws in Brief, current edition, sold everywhere, has 

 new game and nah laws for more than thirty of the States. It covers 

 the entire country, is carefully prepared, and gives all that shooters 

 and anglers ratjuire. See advertisement , 



SHOOTING FOR RECORDS. 



Englewood, N. J., Sept. 28.— Editor Forest and 

 Stream: It's not often that I sit down to write with the 

 special object of adding to the mass of "rejected ad- 

 dresses" in some waste basket, and if you wax mad and 

 kick because of my useless work you must lay it all on the 

 shoulders of B. Squires. 



In his contemptuous sneer at record hunters he touches 

 a sympathetic chord in the soul of every true sportsman; 

 yet I cannot see why he might not consistently have in- 

 cluded trap-shooting "record hunters." 



Many long years ago, before gray hairs increased my 

 wisdom, I bad a reputation for skill in shooting of which 

 I felt as proud as an American beauty of an English title. 

 My hobby was difficult bush shooting, but trap-shooting I 

 was then, and am still, almost a stranger to, having never 

 indulged in it more than half a dozen times in my life. 



An acquaintance in Cincinnati sometimes spoke of a 

 friend of his whom he considered the best shot— "present 

 company excepted" — that he ever saw, and he always 

 hankered after getting us together. 



One day his friend came to town and he introduced us, 

 and we agreed to test our skill at pigeons, each one pay- 

 ing for his birds, and no stakes. We both scorned single 

 birds, looking upon it as simply bird butchery, affording 

 no test of skill; so we agreed pn twenty double birds each, 

 and we tied on eighteen. Now, that might be considered 

 a pretty good score even in this enlightened age; but as 

 that was either my first or second trial at the trap, I ana 

 quite sure I might have made astraight twenty with a little 

 practice and without the excitement of a crowd. I also, at; 

 St. Louis, killed 130 English snipe in one day when out 

 with some members of the St. Louis Hunting Club, and 

 for this my only excuse was that they took me to their 

 famous snipe ground for the express purpose of snowing 

 me how to shoot. 



That was my only day's shooting that I look back on 

 "with shame and confusion of face," and I'll never for- 

 get the scoring I got from Fidstaff Hackett when I told 

 him exultingly of my famous feat. 



Since then, if not before, many other snipe hogs have 

 smashed that record and they ought to blush for doing it. 



In those early days I thought my skill was something 

 to be proud of — but was it? With the almost constant 

 practice that I had and with a gun that exactly suited 

 me I must have been stupid not to become a first-class 

 shot. 



I have not the slightest admiration for professionals who 

 waste their time in constant efforts to break records, for 

 I do not look upon such efforts as anything to boast of. I 

 think the usual distance for trap-shooting is 30yds. at 

 single birds, and in many cases good strong birds will get' 

 a start of 5 or 10yds. before being covered, and at a dis-- 

 tance of 35 or 40yds. the shot is so scattered that even, 

 when the aim is perfect the bird may not be hit in a vital' 

 part. 



A dozen shot through the breast of a pigeon will faili 

 to stop him ; so the result of a match between two men; 

 of equal skill may depend on the merest accident and 

 sometimes on superior nerve; so that where there are 

 hundreds of men all over the country who are about on 

 a par, contesting matches seem like folly. 



Shooting as an accomplishment and a source of pleas- 

 ure is commendable, but sensible men should not indulge 

 in "record-breaking." Didymtjs. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In last week's issue Mr. B. Squires asks what true sports- 

 man does not read with contempt the accounts of the per- 

 formances of would-be "record" hunters. The answer 

 can be but one thing. Not one. No, not one. If 

 Forest and Stream and others more generally under- 

 stood the nefarious practice these hunters have of band- 

 ing together and scouring a section of the country for a 

 week and then one of their number takes a trunk load of 

 birds to New York, there would be many a public retort. 

 Of course the law has not been violated, for the birds were 

 accompanied by the owner. 



Living as we do in a border country we have the best 

 opportunity to observe the working of the laws. There 

 are a number of men near the State line who after Oct. 1 

 carry on their guerrilla warfare on the birds, shooting in 

 New York and carrying over the line to ship. There was 

 consternation in their camp when that law passed the 

 Pennsylvania Legislature last winter. They boasting said 

 they would kill every bird if they were obliged to throw 

 it away to rot. Those in position to best know give but 

 little credence to the report of these record makers. If 

 they are such wonderful live-bird shots and it is money 

 they are after why iB it that they don't come and take a 

 hand in some of the live-bird shooting going on around 

 here? They can get as big money as they want and good 

 big odds as well. 



There is but one alternative, "Stop the sale of game." 

 Surely B. Squires harped upon the right key of a respon- 

 sive chord, and many a hearty amen has gone up in echo 

 to his reply to Braggadocia. H. W. Brown. 



\A Mexican Game Country- 

 LAS Cruces, N. M., Sept. 24.— Editor Forest, and 1 . 

 Stream: In view of the rapidly growing scarcity of 

 game in the United States and the inadequacy of game 

 laws for its protection, attention is invited to a tract of 

 2,000,000 acres in the State of Chihuahua, Mexico, which 

 is situated in the southeast part of the State and lies on 

 the Rio Grande River. The eastern portion of this tract 

 is broken by rough hills, furnishing almost inaccessible 

 refuge for bears, deer and turkeys. Tributaries to the Rio 

 Grande flowing from the hills abound in trout and other 

 fishes. The plains are covered with antelope, wolves, 

 foxes, and other smaller game— jack rabbits and quail of 

 several varieties. 



During a recent visit, President Bell, of the New Mexico 

 & Chihuahua Land and Stock Co., headquarters El Paso, 

 Tex., authorized me to invite friends who might look: 

 favorably upon such an enterprise, and to say that con- 

 veyances will meet a party at an eligible point on the 

 Mexican Central Railway to transport it, free of cost, 

 across the country. 



Concessions can be obtained from the Mexican Govern- 

 ment, and all arrangements will be made at the Custom 

 House at Juarez for free entry on conveniences for excur- 

 sionists. W. R. Fall. 



