ae FOREST ANt) bTREAM. [Feb. 3, 1966. 
hig out night after night without a fire ; and I am used to 
being out ahuost daily in all sorts of weather during the 
entire year. It was also very discouraging. We would 
start out on an afternoon which gave promise of a 
good follownig morning; tramp quite a distance to a" 
certain spot, and stay there all night, only to have a 
rough, windy or rainy morning; and there was nothing 
to do but hoof it back to the main camp. I was out in 
this way twelve nights in succession before seeing the 
last moose I killed. 
■ Calling from a canoe as practiced in Maine or New 
Brunswick may be somewhat easier. I have been told by 
some who have tried it that they found it rather hard 
work to sit cramped in the bow of a boat often being 
obliged to remain perfectly still for a long time when a 
moose was supposed to be near. I know several gentle- 
men who said they would like to kill a moose, and they 
asked me about the work. I gave them the plain facts of 
tny experience, and most of them decided they did not 
care to undergo so much exposure. Of course there are 
exceptions, and a moose is sometimes killed by calling 
very easily. So also by still-hunting. 
Mr. Sampson's plea in favor of prohibiting calling, is 
for the better protection of the moose and to corroborate 
what he says. There is a rather glowing account in 
the same issue of Forest anb Stream from a camp 
owner and guide of New BrunsAvick, giving an account 
of very successful moose calling. Moose are decreasing 
just as game of all kinds is doing (possibl}^ excepting 
deer). Years ago in that region in eastern Maine, on the 
Magalloway River and near the Canada line, moose were 
quite plenty. Some years since I spent over six weeks in 
that region hunting with one of the best of guides over 
miles of ground day after day. Nearly all the time there 
was the best of tracking snow, yet we never so much as 
saw even an old sign of a moose. Later that region in 
Aroostook county, lying above Oxbow settlement, fur- 
nished a good many large heads. Now the energetic 
moose hunter goes to New Brunswick. The latter region 
may hold out for some time, but it seems safe to predict 
that in time it will take its place with other regions as a 
"has been" good moose country. 
Mr. Sampson's suggestion to abolish calling will cer- 
tainly be of great benefit to what moose are left, making 
the opening Oct. 15 and the closing Dec. i would pretty 
effectually do away with calling, and would reduce to 
some extent the number of sportsmen who now go to the 
moose countr}'. When the lakes and streams are closed 
by ice, it is much harder to get to the hunting grounds, 
and any one going to still-hunt moose on snow should 
be prepared to undergo hard work. I have always 
claimed that the time to kill all large game was in cold 
weather. The greater part of animals killed then can 
be saved. In Nova Scotia there is a law which would be 
well to adopt in other regions. This law compels all 
who kill either moose or caribou in that Province to get 
the meat out within a certain time. We fully realized 
what the law meant when we had two dead moose on 
our hands in the early part of October. By sending a 
long distance for some extra Indians, we just managed to 
get the best parts of those moose out before spoiling. My 
companion said then that he never wanted to kill another 
moose except in cold weather. 
As for still-hunting, the best time is on the first light 
snow. Occasionally a moose may be killed from a canoe 
by finding him on some bog, but there is a good deal of 
luck finding one in such places late in the season. One 
must be there when the moose is on hand. A few mo- 
ments too early or too late may fail (although one may be 
tracked to some extent on bare ground, whereas on 
snow a track hours old may be followed. 
Now what I have found to be the worst feature of 
still-hunting on snow was the uncertainty of getting 
good tracking. Snow may fail to come, or, what is more 
common, a light, noisy crust forms. On one of my trips 
after caribou I was nearly three days reaching the hunt- 
ing grounds, A light snow was falling when I arrived 
and everything looked favorable for good still-hunting. 
A slight spurt of rain at the end of tlie snow storm made 
such noisy traveling that I did not get a single day in 
which it was of any use to hunt, and I waited in vain 
for three weeks. 
Mr. Sampson's proposition will, without doubt, meet 
with considerable opposition. Many sportsmen will op- 
pose, so will the owners and guides at camps where moose 
are still found. 
There are, I think, a good many men who enjoy hunt- 
ing and who realize more than they are willing to admit 
the decrease of game of all kinds. Some of them look 
at it in this way: The game is going; we had better put 
in all the time possible and kill as much as we can while 
•it lasts. Doubtless some of them look at the moose in 
the same light. Now a moose is too big to be killed just 
for count. Yet there are men who have killed quite a 
number and they still go year after year after more. I 
have an idea which may be vague and impracticable, and 
that is to limit every sportsman to a certain number of 
moose. After he has killed the limit let him quit moose 
hunting. Give the other fellows who so far have never 
killed one a chance. Surely the supply of moose to-day 
is none too large to fill the demand. 
C. M. Stark. 
DUNBURTON, N. H. 
Albany, N. Y., Jan. 26.— Editor Forest and Stream: 
I have been much interested in the articles discussing 
moose calling and rifles for big game which have appeared 
in the last two issues of Forest and Stream. Although 
sirch discussions probably convince no one, the old savine- 
of Hudibras' that ^ 
"He that complies against his -will 
Is of his own opinion still," 
applying in these cases; yet the interchange of ideas 
which they bring about is at least interesting and perhaps 
of some value to all concerned. I shall, therefore, ven- 
ture to express my views regarding the subjects in 
question, with the hope that I may escape vituperation 
or_ denunciation from those who do not concur in my 
opinions. 
I have been successful iii killing rnoose both by means 
of calling and still-himting, and so perhaps am qualified 
to judge as to the merits and defects of each method. I 
am fully satisfied as to which best pleases me, but I 
appreciate that it is a difficult matter for any one to 
decide the case for another. Why should not the decision 
as to calling or hunting be left to the dictates of the 
sporting conscience of each individual? My own ex- 
perience caused me promptly to renounce calling, and 
my sentiments are ranged with those of Mr. Alden 
Sampson, which he so well expresses in his letter to 
Forest and Stream, published in its issue of Jan. 20. 
But, after all, should it not be "chacun a son gout." 
As to rifles for big game, I believe that there is no 
rifle manufactured either at home or abroad that will 
invariably stop big game. I have used rifles of nearly all 
calibers, except the English express rifles, and believe that 
there are great merits in those of both large and small. 
Within the limits of my own experience last autumn, 
three moose were killed by one shot each, the first from a 
.45-70 Winchester, the second from a Savage .303 and the 
third from a .30-40 Winchester. Some years since I was 
present on a bear hunting expedition when a large black 
bear, after being brought to bay, was knocked over 
and instantly killed by one shot from a .32-20 Winchester. 
In all the above cases the bullets were placed in vital 
spots. On the other hand I have seen one moose riddled 
at close range with .45 cal. bullets, and another with those 
of the .30 cal. before either succumbed, but in both of 
these instances vital parts were untouched by the earlier 
shots. I have never had the good fortune to try the Eng- 
lish express rifles, but can see no reason why there should 
be any great increase in their effectiveness if the bullets 
are not rightly placed. What xperience I have had leads 
me to conclude that the caliber and make of the rifle is of 
little account, unless the bullet reaches a vital spot. I con- 
fess a leaning toward the .30 cal. on account of com- 
parative lightness and small size of the ammunition, flat 
trajectory and medium recoil. It is notable that one 
English manufacturer is experimenting with a high power 
smokeless express rifle of .35 cal., and claiming that the 
shock and killing power of bullets of this caliber from 
this rifle are greater than those of any express of larger 
bore. However, the man behind the gun is an element 
which demands consideration, and with him it is again 
a case of "degustibus." 
Chauncey p. Williams. 
The Hunting Rifle. 
Halifax, Nova Scotia. — Editor Forest and Stream: 
In your issue for Jan. 20 Peep Sight, following out his 
usual plan of action when killing moose, pours a whole 
magazine full of shots into Frank H. R., but I fancy the 
quarry will have enough vitality left to reply, and it will 
take a "brain" shot, or an English express, to stop his 
charge. 
There are many things to be considered in choosing a 
rifle. What is it wanted for? and under what conditions 
wiW it be used? Not only the weapon, but the ammuni- 
tion also, will depend upon a reply of these questions; 
rest assured no one rifle will answer all requirements, any 
more than one suit of clothes will suit all climates. It 
would be impossible to offer advice that would suit all 
persons, I can therefore only give a personal opinion ac- 
cording to my own experience. 
For all animals up to, and including the common deer, 
any of the American express rifles are good. But the 
Savage and other 03.3 rifles are better. 
For moose and such large deer, which we usually find 
in heavy cover, so that a second shot is not always sure, 
we need a rifle which combines the following properties : 
A moderate degree of accuracy, considerable penetra- 
tion and immense striking energy. These qualities we 
have combined in their highest degree in the following 
English express rifles : Caliber, .500 charge of powder 
drams; caliber .577, charge of powder, 6 drams. Weight 
of bullet about 648 grains of nearly pure lead and solid. 
This bullet will nearly always remain in a moose, being 
usually found under the skin on the opposite side, hence 
the paralyzing effect of this rifle; all the striking 'energy 
remains in the animal, without any waste at all. 
If then a .577 bullet weighing 648 grains has, at 50 feet, 
a stnkmg energy of 3,500 foot-pounds, as I am told it 
has, that amount of force is expended on the moose, pro- 
vided the ball does not go through. 
This retention of the bullet is one of the arguments 
advanced in favor of the ,303, whose bullets break into 
minute fragments on striking the first portion of hard 
tissue or bone, but I think that by so doing the bullet 
has committed suicide, although it may in so doing have 
fatally torn the animal's vitals; still, it has destroyed 
itself; it is no longer a compact body — in fact, it has 
disappeared. 
In my opinion the sine qua non of all shooting is to 
kill outright, and not to wound ; this you will accomplish 
with the .577. A shot into an animal from any quarter 
directed toward its vitals, will surely get there. ' 
A post-mortem investigation of a shoulder shot would 
reveal a crushed shoulder, with small fragments of bone 
driven all through the lungs like a charge of shot in 
addition to the havoc created by the large diameter of' the 
big bullet. 
But the best test of a rifle is the work it does in actual 
practice. From the following cases which have come 
under my own observation you can judge: 
Mr. Dall Deweese, of Canon City, Colo., has spent three 
seasons in Alaska hunting, and killed some very large 
moose, bear and deer, with a Savage .303, a rifle he 
strongly favors ; yet on one occasion a large moose with a 
69-inch spread of horn, took two fatal shots and fell then 
regained his feet and charged, to use the hunter's own 
words, with the force of a runaway engine." A bullet 
m the brain droped the animal at his feet almost. For- 
tunately Mr. Deweese is an experienced, cool, deliberate 
and steady shot, otherwise it makes one shudder to think 
what the consequence might have been. A big bear which 
he knocked down was only kept from charging by several 
rapid and accurate shots. 
Adam Moore, a noted New Brunswick guide, a few 
years ago killed two caribou with one shot from' a -^o^ 
They fell where they stood when he fired, one failing 
against the other. Quite naturally he thought he had the 
one and only caribou gun. The following season his first 
game was a very large moose, which took thirteen shots 
before it condescended to stop. He has changed his mind 
now about rifles and wants an English express. 
Henry Braithwaite, known, at least by reputation, to all 
Forest and Stream readers, probably knows more about 
moose than any other man in America to-day, and has 
had every opportunity to see the results on moose of all 
the common rifles, his most emphatic opinion is that the 
.500 English express is the best. 
Personally, I have killed several moose and caribou 
with the American .45-90, .50-110 and .303. Not once did 
I kill an animal clean; they always ran some distance 
before falling, and on two occasions I badly wounded and 
lost moose. 
Your correspondent, Peep Sight, says he has killed only 
four moose. No. i took the whole magazine; No. 2 took 
seven shots and ran 159 yards; No. 3 took the magazine 
full and ran 20 yards; No. 4, at ten paces distant, took 
three shots and yet ran some distance. Nevertheless he is 
satisfied and thinks no rifle could have done better. I feel 
sure he can never have seen the work of an English ex- 
press or he would not have made such a statement, and 
can assure him that an English express, under like con- 
ditions and in the hands of a fair marksman, would have 
killed the four moose in, at most, six shots. 
Peep Sight was certainly very fortunate, first in getting 
his moose so close; secondly, in persuading them to wait 
for so many shots, and thirdly, in finding them in such 
open cover. 
I saw a caribou killed with a .303, which had been hit 
in the side; the ball mushroomed on the hair and merely 
made a big, ragged flesh wound, not fatal, although placed 
over the lungs; even the rib was not broken. 
These are instances of the failures of the .303 to kill 
clean and quick ; and prove my first assertion that the .303 
does not always act the same. 
It is not necessary for my purpose to give any of the 
numerous instances of clean kills which might be cited 
to its credit Now I have never yet met a man, who has 
used an English express, who could honestly say that it 
did not kill clear and quick. I myself have used one for 
the past three years, and have killed two moose and three 
caribou with it. In only one case was a second shot used, 
and even then it was not needed. I fired it because I 
wanted to sooner put the animal out of its misery, my first 
shot being in the paunch, which is not immediately fatal. 
I need not specify^ each case ; it is sufficient for rny pur- 
pose to state that in every case the animal did not travel 
more than the length of its self after being hit. 
The .577 will never fail; hold your gun true and you 
will surely kill, and kill clean. 
People see very little mention of the English express in 
American sporting papers, first because it is an English 
gun, and secondly because a good one costs at least $125; 
whereas, the average good American gun costs about $25. 
I cannot see why our American gunmakers do not turn 
out a similar weapon. It would undoubtedly find a ready 
sale in many quarters. In the foregoing remarks I have 
spoken from a personal experience on both sides. I have 
killed moose with both of the guns in question, and should 
for that reason be well qualified to judge between them. 
My emphatic opinion is, as can be seen, decidedly in favor 
of the English express. 
If there is any point not quite clear to any Forest and 
Stream reader, I will be only too glad to answer any 
questions. ' 
Let me say, in finishing, to any man who has used 
both rifles, I would be glad to hear from you if your 
opinion does not coincide with mine. 
James Turneiill. 
^Brooklyn, Jan. 26.— Editor Forest and Stream: In 
his recent contribution to the subject of moose calling 
and caUber of rifles, Mr. Frederick Irland, the discoverer 
of Frank H. Risteen, Esq., in Frank H. R., Riverside, 
Cal., accuses me of writing a "truly ill-natured and also, ' 
if one was cruel enough to say it, a truly foolish and ill- 
informed thing when he said Frank H. R. had probably 
only a superficial knowledge of rifles." In the first 
place, I made no such assertion as above quoted, verbatim, 
grammar and all. 
I resent Mr. Frederick Irland's officious intermeddling 
in this regard, only a little less than his presumptuous 
patronizing manner in wasting "only a word, and a kind 
one, on Peepsight, who would better sign his honest 
name." Mr. Frederick Irland goes on "kindly" to say 
that "the contribution in regard to rifles for moose signed 
Frank H. R., was, as intelligent readers of Forest and 
Stream know, written by Mr. Risteen." Now, if there is 
a single line in my letter in the least ill-natured, or cal- 
culated to wound the sensibilities of Mr. Risteen, whose 
identity I knew perfectly well before I wrote my letter and 
before I had received a note from the editor of Forest and 
Stream conveying that information, I offer him an 
apology, while at the same time reiterating my belief that 
if he thinks an express (so-called) rifle possesses greater 
smashing and shocking powers than a .30-cal. rifle using 
a soft-pointed bullet and nitrous powder, then his knowl- 
edge of such rifle must necessarily be superficial. I well 
knew that my reply to Mr. Risteen's strictures would 
result either in his unearthing his identity or in some 
"intelligent reader of Forest and Stream" doing it for 
him. 
Unless I could write upon a subject without being so 
gratuitously discourteous as Mr. Frederick Irland has 
shown himself in his recent letter, I should most care- 
fully refrain from calling attention to my infirmity by 
going out of my way to accuse some one else of writing in 
an ill-natured, ill-informed strain. Some individuals are 
so peculiarly and unfortunately constructed mentally that 
they are unable to write or converse upon any subject with- 
out becoming unnecessarily offensive, but who are so 
wrapped up in their own importance as to be unable to 
discover m their own deportment those faults and short- 
comings so palpably apparent to every one else. 
Peepsight. 
Forest and Stream is a chosen medium for the inter- 
change of experience, opinion, sentiment and suggestion 
among its sportsmen readers; and communications on 
these lines are welcomed to its columns. 
