Forest and Stream 
A Weekly Journal of the Rod and Gun. 
Copyright, 1808. bv Forest and Stream Publishing Ca 
Terms, $4 a Year. 10'Cts. a Copy. 
Six Months, $2. 
NEW YORK, SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 190S, 
J VOL. LX.-No. 9. 
( No. 846 Broadway, New York 
THE MASSACHUSETTS COMMISSION. 
If we were asked to point to a State in which the 
protection of game and fish had in marked measure popu- 
lar indorsement and appreciation, we would without 
hesitation name Massachusetts. The protective work ot 
the Commission and its agents is there conducted not as 
in some cases in opposition to a public sentiment, but 
with the intelligent support of the community. When 
such a condition prevails half the battle has 'been won. 
This is not to say that the game and fish laws are uni- 
versally lived up to. On the contrary, there are fre- 
quent violations. But the violations serve to demonstrate 
the condition of public feeling; since, instead of being 
condoned by indifference or shielded by sympathy, such 
offenses are reprobated by the sentiment of the com- 
munity, and are put on a plane with the infractions of 
other statutes. It is in the nature of this public attitude 
toward the enforcement of the laws that we may look 
for a true indication of the actual condition of game 
protection in Massachusetts as administered by the pres- 
ent commissioners of fisheries and game. 
Of not less importance in estimating the character and 
service of the Commission is the relation existing be- 
tween it and those individual sportsmen and organiza- 
tions of sportsmen most concerned for protection and 
most active in the work of keeping up the game supply. 
The fact is highly significant that we find a hearty co- 
operation with the Commission on the part of such men 
— to name only a few — as Mr. A. B. F. Kinney, of 
Worcester; Mr. Paul Butler, of Lowell, and Mr. Chas. 
Dimick, of Cambridge; and such organizations as the 
powerful Massachusetts Fish and Game Protective Asso- 
ciation and the clubs throughout the Commonwealth 
which are associated with it, and the Rod and Gun Club 
of Boston, one of the simplest, most direct and business- 
like game protective clubs in the country. That these, 
and in fact all who are sincerely interested in the cause 
and honestly laboring for it, are working hand in hand 
with the Commission and gratefully acknowledge the co- 
operation received from the Commission and its agents, is 
the strongest possible evidence that the Commission is 
serving its purpose. 
In view of these facts it is difificult to account for the 
measure which has been introduced into the Massachu- 
setts Legislature to abolish the present Commission of 
Fisheries and Game and to substitute in the place of it a 
new commission of six members, who shall meet once in 
three months, and shall serve without compensation, ex- 
cept that the chairman and secretary and a superintend- 
ent, who may be members of the board, shall receive 
such compensation as the Governor and counsel may 
determine. 
The abolition of the board and the substitution of a 
' new one are extremely radical measures, and such as 
should not be resorted to unless some sufficient reason 
demands them. The only reasons we have heard ad- 
vanced by the promoters of the movement for a change is 
that the present commission knows only about lobsters 
and concerns itself with the protection only of lobsters, 
neglecting the general fish and game interests of the 
Commonwealth. 
It would be difficult to devise a charge more prepos- 
terous than this. The Commission, it is true, is engaged 
in the enforcement of the short lobster law, and has 
done excellent work in this field. But that is only a part, 
and comparatively a minor part, of the service. Of the 
156 arrests made last year, 57 were for Sunday shooting, 
34 for illegal fishing, 10 for shooting song and insectivor- 
ous birds, 8 for using ferrets, 15 for illegal shooting, 4 
for snaring, 5 for selling game and i for killing a deer, 
while 20 were for violation of the lobster laws. As a 
matter of fact, never before the coming into office of the 
present Commission was the game of Massachusetts pro- 
tected so thoroughly and efficiently in all parts of the 
Commonwealth as it has been by them in the past and is 
to-day. Measured by actual results, the service is most 
commendable, and Commissioner Collins and his asso- 
ciates have fairly won and should be given a vote of 
confidence. We believe that they do enjoy the confidence 
of all who are cognizant of their official record; and we 
cannot believe it possible that the Legislature will con- 
sider such an unwise measure as is this scheme of dis- 
pensing with public ofi&cials who have so conspicuously 
demonstrated the v^Iq? of their service^, Th? interests 
of game and fish protection in Massachusetts can best 
be advanced by keeping them in the same experienced 
and capable hands. 
ABOLISH SPRING SHOOTING. 
It is well recognized that two causes exist for the ex- 
traordinary diminution of our wildfowl during the last 
few years. The chief of these is unquestionably over- 
shooting. The other is the settling up of the country 
and the consequent contraction of their breeding grounds 
east and west. Yet the wildfowl, being gregarious, con- 
gregate — when found at all — in great numbers, and peo- 
ple now say of the ducks that they can never be exter- 
minated, just as they used to say that there would be 
wild pigeons, or that there would be buffalo, in the time 
of our children's children. But within the recollection of 
many men both buffalo and wild pigeon have been exter- 
minated, as has also one species of duck; while another, 
the wood duck, is growing so scarce that serious alarm 
is felt for its continuation as a species. 
A bill has been introduced in the New York Legisla- 
ture by Senator E. R. Brown amending certain sections 
of the game law so as to provide that wildfowl shall not 
be taken in the State from January i to September 15, 
both inclusive. 
Senator Brown has more than once before introduced 
bills to the same general effect, and while there seems 
little doubt that the State, as a whole, is in favor of a 
'law prohibiting the spring shooting of wildfowl, it is 
nevertheless the fact that the residents of one' section of 
the State — Suffolk count}' — have been able to? stave off 
the greatly to be desired action by the Legislature. 
That spring shooting should be forbidden is quite gen- 
erally acknowledged ; and the reason for forbidding it 
is merely that the season for the shooting of wildfowl 
is too long and that under present conditions so great a 
number of birds are killed each year that the supply of 
fcwl is constantly being reduced, and there seems a, pros- 
pect that before long some species of our ducks will be 
exterminated. The question is one of public policy. 
Wildfowl are a valuable possession to the State, and it 
is desirable to keep up the supply. The State passes laws 
forbidding the dynamiting and the netting of trout in 
brooks and rivers, for the reason that these methods 
destroy more fish than the supply will stand, and there- 
fore are injurious to the public. The same reasoning ap- 
plies to spring shooting. 
As things stand at present, wildfowl are shot from the 
last of August to the first of May, or during eight months 
of the year; in other words, during the whole time that 
these migratory birds are with us. Over all the southern 
States the shooting goes on through all these months, 
and except when the birds are absent from the northern 
States, it is continuous there as well. 
The wildfowl which pass through the State are more 
valuable to it alive than dead. At certain seasons many 
men earn a living by means of these birds, and they 
afford sport to a far greater number. To have them still 
further reduced in number would be a misfortune. They 
should be protected, in order that as many of them as 
possible may return to their northern home to reproduce 
their kind, to return in the fall accompanied by hordes 
of young birds. 
If spring shooting were abolished many of these wild- 
fowl would breed within the State. Remaining undis- 
turbed through the summer, they and their broods would 
set as decoys in the autumn to bring down great numbers 
of migrating fowl, and would give to sportsmen and 
professional gunners far better autumn shooting than 
is had at present. The experience of Jefferson county — 
v/here the shooting of fowl in the spring has been forbid- 
den — offers an object lesson to the rest of the State 
which we may well heed. 
We continue to shoot ducks in the spring largely be- 
cause we always have shot them at that season, yet there 
is a growing sentiment in favor of shortening the shoot- 
ing season, and the proper way to shorten it is to cut off 
two or three months from the end of the winter and the 
spring. It is generally recognized that by the month 
of February the birds soon to start on their northward 
journey toward their breeding grounds are mated, and it 
is obvious — for reasons of sentiment if for no others — 
that birds which are mated and about to hfeed ought not 
t« be shot 
The growth of the feeling against spring shooting has 
been continuous within the past few years. One or two 
of the Canadian Provinces prohibit the practice, while 
two of the New England States also forbid it, and there 
is a strong feeling in at least two others that it should 
be stopped. Several of the western States protect ducks 
and geese in the spring, and others while protecting 
ducks permit the shooting of geese. 
It is recognized that the inliabitants of Suffolk county, 
a large number of whom depend to a greater or less ex- 
tent on the duck shooting through the winter and spring, 
will feel themselves to some extent injured by the aboli- 
tion of spring shooting. But, on the other hand, the in- 
habitants of all the rest of the State have for many years 
been injured by this practice. We believe that the aboli- 
tion of spring shooting throughout the whole State will 
prove to the Long Islanders a blessing in disguise, and 
that after the law shall have been in force for a few 
years they will be among its strongest advocates. It 
cannot fail to greatly increase their supply of wildfowl, 
and will give them such shooting as they used to have in 
the good old times. 
ADIRONDACK PRESERVES. 
There are in the Adirondacks sixty hunting and fish- 
ing preserves, aggregating 789,993 acres. They are for 
the most part well wooded areas, and included within their 
boundaries are many of the choicest waters of the North 
Woods. So far as the protection of the forests is con- 
cerned. Superintendent Fox points out, the preserve 
lands are in good hands. In the very nature of the case, 
ihe owners find it to their interest to preserve the woods, 
and under private control these hundreds of thousands 
of acres are administered as wisely, and will be preserved 
as long and as carefully and advantageously with respect 
to the conservation of the water supply, as they would 
be if the State owned and cared for them. In fact, ex- 
perience has demonstrated that the preserved lands are 
protected far more efficiently, as to immunity from fires, 
than are the State lands. "In 1899," says Col. Fox, "the 
dry season in which forest fires were raging in the Adi- 
rondacks to an unusual extent, it was noticed that there 
were no fires on the private preserves, aside from in- 
cipient ones that were extinguished before any serious 
danger was incurred." 
This is an illustration of the familiar rule that the in- 
dividual owner will care for his property while the peo- 
IJle will let the public possessions go to destruction. It 
is not an argument for giving over the North Woods 
into private control; it is a teaching that forest fires and 
the consequent destruction of public property may be re- 
duced by the adoption for public lands of the system 
which has been efficacious for the preservation of private 
woodlands. 
THE APPALACHIAN PARK. 
It is announced in the press dispatches from Washing- 
ton that there is little prospect that the Appalachian 
Park bill will pass the House at this session of Congress. 
This will be a severe disappointment to the very large 
number of friends of this bill who had hoped that the 
B'ifty-seventh Congress would surely establish this Park 
and appropriate the money for the purchase of the lands 
for it. 
The Appalachian Park has many friends and no ene- 
mies; but, though a measure which all acknowledge to 
be excellent, it still has in Congress no active enthusiasm 
behind it. As a result, it has been put aside in favor of 
measures in which there are more or less politics, and 
for the present will fail. 
The bill is of great interest to all residents of the 
Southern Atlantic seaboard, is warmly advocated by the 
President, the Secretary of Agriculture and the United 
States Forester, and has the support of the best people 
everywhere, but it is not backed up by public sentiment 
so strongly as it should be, and a further campaign of 
education is required to bring about its passage by 
Congress. 
Reports of phenomenal scores of wildfowl come to ' 
us from Rhode Island, where the shooting has been 
done at night. That State is one of the few in which 
night shooting is not under the ban of the law, as it 
is almost universally condemned by the sentimeiit 
sportsmeti^ 
