48 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
[Jan. 19, igoi. 
ance of power sufficient to defeat it has always been held 
by those actuated by selfish motives. If it shall pr6ve to 
be otherwise now, I shall be surprised. 
Akin to a State preserve, and the next best thing after 
efficient laws for general protection, rigorously enforced, is 
the establishment of private parks under the present 
law. Under a former law numerous private parks con- 
taining deer and elk were established. They therefore 
had a legal standing, and acquired vested rights which 
cannot now be taken away by legislation, and any effort 
to do so is simply an idle dream ; but the law then placed 
them under no restrictions, nor had they any clearly de- 
fined rights. The present law supplies this deficiency, and 
also requires the payment of a license fee and the sur- 
render to the State of 10 per cent, of the natural in- 
crease. 
Some opposition has been manifested to these parks. 
It comes chiefly from a failure to realize that all the game 
captured and confined in these parks, or likel}-- ever to 
be, does not equal the number killed in one week of a 
season in the field, and so far as lessening the number 
open to public hunting cuts no figure. 
Besides, unless a most radical and altogether improb- 
able change in game protection is speedily brought about, 
the only elk and deer in the State will be those in the 
private parks. 
The private propagation of game and fish should be 
encouraged in Colorado, as it is elsewhere; and as it is 
open to all, there is no well foimded objection to it. 
I have been accused of being personally interested in 
private parks and lakes. If it is of any importance, I 
have not now, nor never had, any interest, direct or in- 
direct, present or prospective, in any private park or 
lake, but favor them because I believe they are beneficial 
in every respect and represent progressive ideas. 
The Indians, 
As regularly as the incursions of the Indians occur some 
impulsive but uninformed individual bobs up Avith ihe 
statement that by the Ute treaty the Indians have a right 
to hunt in Colorado. 
The terms of the treaty with the Bannocks in Wyoming 
were similar to those in the Ute treaty, but the Supreme 
Court of the United States decided in 1896 in the case of 
teh Bannock Indian, Racehorse, that such right could only 
be exercised in conformity with the game laws of the 
State. 
A former judge advocate of the Department of the 
Colorado held, and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs 
in 1S97 instructed the agent at White Rocks agency, that 
this decision was applicable to the Ute treaty and directed 
him to so inform the Indians. The alleged treat}* hunt- 
ing rights of these Indians, therefore, have no existence. 
As a member of the commission appointed by the Gov- 
ernor to investigate the killing of the Indians by the game 
wardens in 1897, I visited the Indian camps and scene of 
the conflict on the Snake River, and also interviewed the 
Indians and the agent at the White Rocks agency. This 
investigation showed that the Indians did not kill deer 
for the hides alone, but saved the meat as well. 
It also showed that no effort was made by the agent 
to keep the Indians out of Colorado at any time, although 
fully advised that they had no treaty rights paramount 
to the game laws ; that passes had been given them to go 
to Colorado without making entrj' of names or destina- 
tion on the stub of the pass book, as was usual in other 
cases, and that the Indian police instead of trying to 
prevent their hunting here, connived at it, although able 
to prevent it, as shown by their ability to run them back 
promptl}^ when specially ordered to do so. 
The Indians, however, never pretended to refrain from 
killing does and fawns. None of them claimed anything 
by virtue of the treaty, as they had been advised of the 
Commissioner's instructions in that respect. Snake Pete, 
a leader in the conflict of 1897. tes.ified before us that 
none of the deer he had killed were branded, and that he 
thought he had a right to kill them for that reason. 
It is perfectl}'^ apparent that the entire Indian manage- 
ment, from the Board of Indian Commissioners down to 
the Indian police, are in sympathj' with these raids, and 
will never do anything to prevent them until the State 
authorities make it expensive or dangerous. They will 
defend and excttse the Indians at all times. The conflict 
of 1897 was also investigated by E. B. Reynolds, special 
agent of the Board of Indian Commissioners, and his 
report fully agreed with ours in all respects, and that the 
Indians were the first aggressors and fired the first shot, 
yet the Board in its next annual report wholly ignored 
their agent's report, and stated in reference to the conflict: 
"Investigations by army officers seem to prove clearly that 
the white men were the real aggressors, and that the In- 
dians suffered rather than committed outrage." 
As there was no investigation made by army officers 
other than to interview the two wounded squaws while 
they were having their wounds dressed, the animus is 
apparent. 
When the Board itself will thus falsify the facts, what 
can be expected from the subordinates? 
It is useless to continue the time-worn practice of wait- 
mg until word comes that the Indians are on the hunt- 
ing ground. It is a sure thing that they will be there every 
year, ii not prevented. Nor is anything accomplished 
by driving them oitt when they have- got all the game 
they want. 
The matter should be taken up in the early fall with the 
Interior Department and the agents, and they given to 
understand that serious consequences will ensue if they 
are allowed to come. If they do come, a few of the 
leaders should be arrested and jailed, and their ponies and 
outfits sold to pay the costs. That will settle it for that 
year, but it will require constant vigilance as long as the 
Department and tlie agents fail to make honest efforts at 
prevention. 
Formerly they raided Wyoming in the same way, but I 
learn that the passage of a hunting license law there has 
kept them out since, they thinking they will be made to 
pay, although they care nothing for other provisions of 
the law. 
The stopping of the Indian raids would go far toward 
inclining the residents of the game regions to a strict 
observance of the law on their part, for it is their usual 
claim, not without merit, that there is no reason for 
prohibiting the whiter ^^Qan 4Qing what the Indi^AS are 
p^TWUtted to do. 
The recent raid by the Commissioner on the Indian 
and Mormon game butchers shows what can be done, but 
spasmodic efforts are of no permanent good. The game 
butchers will all be back on the hunting ground next 
year, if they were not there by the time the wardens 
got home. 
Sale of Game. 
The markets A Denver are and have been for months 
full of feathered game of all kinds. Some big game has 
also been in the market, most or all of it imported. In- 
quirjr at the Game Commissioner's office shows that the 
principal dealers comply with the law so far as procuring 
importation certificates is concerned, but few or none 
of them comply with the law requiring them to publicly 
expose such certificate in connection with the game, that 
all may see that the law is not being violated. As it is, ob- 
servers suppose that the law is being openly violated in 
the sale. This serves to bring both the law and its 
administration into disrepute and encourage others to 
disregard the law in other particulars. 
It is as much a violation of the law to expose foreign 
game for sale without the certificate being publicly ex- 
posed with it, as it is to do so without having a cer- 
tificate. 
Where the revenue laws of the United States require 
liquor dealers and others to keep exposed to view their 
evidence of compliance with the law, it is done, or some 
one suffers, and that is the difference in the way State and 
Federal laws are enforced. 
The game laws will never be obeyed in the country so 
long as they are openly violated on Market and Six- 
teenth streets in Denver. 
The conditions to which I have referred have about dis- 
couraged those who are eaniest advocates of game pro- 
tection, and I for one have about concluded that if the 
coming Legislature fails to realize the situation and enact 
the laws necessary to meet it, I will join that numerous 
and happy throng whose constitution and by-laws are 
comprised in a single line. "Look out for yourself and let 
posterity go to the devil." 
The Hunting License. 
The most efficient revenue producer, and at the same 
time the greatest assistant to the enforcement of a game 
law, is the hunting license. 
This feature was stricken out of the present law by 
the Legislature, not because they thought it bad, but 
because some of their constituents were bitterly opposed 
to anything which would more effectually restrict their 
operations or tax them directly for game protection. 
Objections have been made to this feature. Most of 
them arise from a misconception of the license provisions, 
and their purpose. It is not a gun licence, nor applicable 
to the hunting of any game not protected by the act. 
One objection made is that a license to hunt is an im- 
portation of English methods and foreign to American 
ideas. The objection is prompted by selfish motives or 
lack of information, rather than patriotism. The mere 
fact that a thing is of English origin cannot make it per se 
objectionable. Usefulness and not origin is the test of 
desirability, and licenses are as essentially American as 
anything we have, and are required in professions and 
business callings without number. The right to kill game 
is no higher than the right to keep a saloon or drive an 
express wagon or a hack, and without these licenses the 
revenue of the city of Denver would be insufficient to 
support its government. The purpose of all licenses is 
twofold, viz. . to produce revenue and to enable the gov- 
ernmental authorities to control and regulate the business, 
and they are especially adapted to an effective adminis- 
tration of game laws. 
It being fundamental law that the game and fish in a 
State belong to the State, the same as its land, timber, 
etc., and held in trust for all the people, the State has a 
right and it is its duty to enact regulations in relation 
to its acquisition, as no one person has a right to appro- 
priate either, ad libitum. Hence, the State, when dis- 
posing of its land by lease or sale, rightfully exacts from 
those who desire to acquire it some compensation for the 
special privileges thus obtained. This is fair to those ob- 
taining the privileges as well as to those who do not care 
to have them, and yet have an interest therein as citizens 
of the State. 
The same principle is applicable to the game, for if left 
to the unrestrained desire of the few, they alone will be 
benefited, and that temporarily only, as it would soon be 
gone. 
There has been a general prejudice against all game 
laws, but it is disappearing, and the importance of game 
and fish as a food supply is now being more and more 
realized. This opposition is selfish and short sighted. 
A widespread but altogether erroneous idea has pre- 
vailed that game laws are for the benefit of the rich. If 
the game would last without protection, no laws would 
be needed. But as it will not, its protection is more in 
the interest of the poor man than the rich. The only 
remedy left the average man is the protection and preser- 
vation of game in every locality where it exists, that he 
may have it within reach, and he above all others should 
not object to paying a nominal sum for a license, the 
principal purpose of which is to restrain and identify 
the lawless hunter rather than to burden the legitimate 
one. 
Lender the license feature, those who receive the most 
benefit from the game will contribute most to the cost of 
protection. Every hunter of protected game must pro- 
cure a license having coupons, one of which, must be 
attached to every game quadruped killed. By this means 
every animal is identified with and traceable to the per- 
son who killed it. and every animal without a coupon 
attached is contraband. 
Thus the legitimate hunter is fully protected, while the 
detection of the lawless one is rendered easy. 
The hunting license proceeds on the theory that those 
who hunt should pay all or a large share of the cost of 
preserving the game. This is the true theory. As it has 
been and is now to a large degree, the cost is borne by 
the general taxpayers, 90 per cent, of whom do not 
hunt, and 50 pet cent of whom derive little or no' direct 
benefit from game protection. 
Fifteen States now require hunting licenses, the fee 
varying from 25 cents to $50. Most of these license laws 
were pt^ssed wTOin two years sipsx tl» (;^estipn -wra^s^ 
agitated in Colorado, and the license feature is now uni- 
versally regarded as the most perfect methpd of game 
protection ever devised. 
In some of these States a license is exacted for non- 
residents only. The constitutionality of this discrimina- 
tion against citizens of other States is still an open ques- 
tion. In any ^vent, it is in a sense unfair, and in this 
State will not produce the necessary revenue. A uniform 
fee for a State license, regardless of residence, with a 
much less fee for a county license, will be, in my opinion, 
much better. Most non-residents and city hunters will 
take out the State license, while residents of the game 
regions will need only a county license, and as the law 
now requires an export fee, the non-resident will not ob- 
ject to paying the extra fee for taking home what he 
kills, and thus he will in fact pay more for his htxnting 
privilege than the resident. 
In no State where the license feature has been adopted 
is there any movement for its repeal. In some of them 
the license revenue amounts to $28,000 per annum. It 
places the cost where it belongs, and wherever it exists, as 
to residents as well as non-residents, it pays the entire 
expense of a strict enforcement of the law. 
There is, however. I find, a very general opinion favor- 
ing a non-resident fee greater than that for a resident, 
and if stich is the conclusion, I recommend three grades. 
1. Non-resident, good all over the State $25.00 
2. Resident, good all over the State .'. 5.00 
3. Resident, good only in the county where the 
licensee resides i.oo 
A great many resident hunters will take the State 
license, that will enable them to hunt in all the counties, 
while most residents of the game regions will take only 
a count}' license, and this is all the advantage they ought 
to ask. 
Taxidermist Licenses. 
This was also a feature of the present laAV, which was 
stricken out by the Legislature because it was new and 
untried. 
As the taxidermists reap more clear profit from the 
killing of game than any other class, and are therefore 
quite as much interested in continuing its existence, they 
ought to be willing to contribute a small amount in that 
direction. 
The law should provide for an examination of their 
stock and the tagging of specimens, and thus prevent 
the hide and horn hunter from passing through their 
hands his illegal acquisitions, as he can now do without 
the slightest danger of detection. 
All professional taxidermists should be licensed. The 
fee should be small, but sufficient to keep the business in 
responsible hands and protect them and their patrons in 
their lawful possessions only. 
Of course some of them will kick, but it is impossible 
to enact laws that touch ne one. 
Guide Licenses. 
This was also a feature of the present law, but was 
eliminated by the Legislature. 
I found the best professional guides to be in favor of 
it as a protection against those who pretended to be 
gtiides. but get lost in the mountains and do an injury to 
the guide business. 
The guides should be made ex officio deputy game war- 
dens and their licenses subject to revocation for "over- 
looking" violations of the law. 
License should be required only in case of a profes- 
sional, not from a person, who. being one of a party, acts 
temporarily as a guide. 
The guide license is in vogue in several States, and 
has been found to be a great assistance in enforcement 
of the game laws. 
Forest Rangers as Game "Wardens. 
The present law confers on Government forest rangers' 
the powers of game wardens, but they have never ex- 
ercised them. Great assistance could be rendered by them 
if the Interior Department could be induced to instruct 
them to enforce the game laws in connection with their 
other duties, and it would be entirely germane to forest 
protection, as the more restrictions there are on lawless 
hunting, the less likely it is that forest fires will be set. 
These rangers ride daily among the hunters' camps, 
while well authenticated instances of game wardens having 
been seen in such places are extremely rare. 
During the present season some of them have been re- 
ported as making political speeches, just at the time when 
the greatest game slaughter was going on. 
Probably this may be excused on the grotmd that the 
politicians were provided with funds for their purposes 
while the game department was not. 
A Game Commission. 
Game commissions controlling the administration of 
the laws have always proved more efficient than single- 
handed control. 
These should be composed of men able and willing to 
serve without pay or with very small pay, and so divided 
in politics and serve for such a length of time as to 
remove that element from the administration of the law. 
A bill to that effect was introduced in the last Legis- 
lature along with the game law, but it was crowded out 
by the prize fight law, the horse tail docking law and 
other similar acts for the advancement of civilization and 
the public welfare. 
Although, as I have stated, the best revenue and pro- 
tective features of the present law, as drafted, were 
eliminated by the Legislature, it has nevertheless produced 
in tAvo years more revenue than all previous game laws. 
The following are the receipts from May i, 1899, to 
Nov. 30, 1900, from the various sources named : 
Park and lake licenses $1,195 
Private preserve licenses 325 
Importation certificates 188 
Transportation permits 638 
Storage perrnits 22 
Seining permits 37 
Scientific permits 9 
Capture permits 10 
Fines 3nd seized garne. , 197 
