Sept. 6, tgoa.j 
188 
other idea than that of sport, yet while they ate as one 
in the momentary pursuit, they are as diverse and un- 
alifiliated on all other matters as are the people who 
hurry to and fro in the busy streets of a great city. The 
men who cannot go afield have the sporting instinct quite 
as much as those who do go. 
And yet, in tlie legal phases and interests of sport, the 
term "class" is constantly and malevolently encountered. 
Not long since, a California judge, in delivering a deci- 
sion, inimically used the term "classes" as applied to sports- 
men, in passing on a subject which was of interest to the 
people. 
What is free to all and for the benefit of all, cannot be 
properly termed "class" interest. People of every degree 
oi life, who take a few hours or days to engage in diver- 
sion, cannot be properly termed a "class," for they are 
the people themselves, Mohigan. 
tnanly proceeding, yet, neither is it utimanly. It is 
simply a lawful way of gaining food, or of satisfying 
one's taste or vanity. Or it is the securing of the trophy 
emblematical of a successful day's hunt. 
He of "dignity, bravery and boldness" exists in many 
walks of life, other than sport. He is found in his 
highest perfection where he struggles and suffers in self- 
sacrifice for the sake of others — whether in the slums or 
palaces of cities, in the cot on the mountain side, the 
fisherman's hut, or on the mighty deep. And his priceless 
worth and noble manliness are all too often not recog- 
nized or appreciated until the end of Ms weary trial is 
run, and his earthly task is ended. 
William H. Avts. 
fHiGHwooD, Conn. 
Manliness and Sport. 
Editor Forest and Stream: 
To be honest, I believe in killing game for sport. I 
also believe it is more or less brutal to kill any animal, 
whether for sport or. for food. And I do not believe 
that the mere killing of an animal is a manly act, nor 
yet an unmanly act. It is something that for certain 
reasjons, which I cannot explain, affords satisfaction 
under certain conditions. 
To meet and overcome difficulties in the primeval 
wilderness, to be able to provide the necessaries of 
existence' unassisted, while on exploring, fishing or hunt- 
ing expeditions, are qualities conducive to sturdy and 
independent manliness. But the mere killing of ani- 
mals "which lack the weapons and intelligence of man," 
is simply a matter of the strong overcoming the weak. 
Yet it is my firm belief that nature has planned things 
in this way to work out her own wise end. And she is 
not governed by what we consider as manly. 
Webster's definition of manliness is, "The qualities of a 
man; dignity; bravery; boldness." The argument has 
been extensively advanced in Forest and Stream, 
and proved, to my satisfaction at least, that there are no 
wild animals in the United States which will ^oluntarily 
attack man. Then there can be nothing of "dignity, 
bravery," or "boldness" in killing harmless cn atures. 
whether bird, fish, insect or quadruped. Should not the 
element of personal danger, self-sacrifice or mercy be 
nresent in any act which develops qualities of "bravery, 
boldness" or "dignity"? The killing of an animal of the 
chase is but an incident of the chase — the climax of a 
series of preceding incidents, some of which impart 
manliness to a greater or less degree. It is like the 
period at the end of a sentence. 
It somehow appeals to my reason that the elements 
of primitive savagery exist to as great a degree in the 
heart of the man who kills a deer, moose, bear or bird 
as in the breast of the man who sets bloody-jawed bull- 
dogs rending each other in pieces, though the latter be 
of a coarser variety of savagery. 
I confess to a desire to kill a moose before I die; yet, 
if I succeed in my object, I cannot consider the act a 
manly one. To overcome the hardship connected with 
the trip will strengthen nerve and brain, and I trust im- 
part some of the elements of "bravery" and "boldness," 
and the satisfying of a passionate love of nature, by 
getting close to her great, throbbing heart, may dis- 
close some of the wise "dignity" of her ways. Should I 
kill the moose, however, I shall simply consider it the 
securing of a relic which will recall more vividly to 
memory the incidents of a hunt than memory retains 
of other hunts in which no relic was secured, but in 
which the elements of manliness were present in as 
marked a degree as where the relic was secured. 
While I believe in killing game, that does not neces- 
sarily indicate that it affords me pleasure to look upon 
the dying agonies of an animal, done to death by my 
hand. And here the thought comes that personally I 
don't know one single sportsman that does not express 
some word of regret as he looks upon a dying animal, 
brought low by his aim. And who knows that like 
feelings are not experienced many times by the butcher 
as he slaughters for the meat trade? Ihe animal brutal- 
ity that exists, in some manner, to a greater or less de- 
gree in all of us, reinforced by the desire to outwit ani- 
mals of other species to ourselves, causes us to fire the 
fatal shot; then sympathy, the extreme opposite to bru- 
tality, manifests itself — like fever following a chill. Even 
in athletics, one experiences a feeling of sympathy for 
a loser, while rejoicing in the victory of a favorite. 
But if the elements of manliness do not exist in the 
mere act of killing an animal, but are associated with 
the obstacles attendant with that end, then it must appear 
that good has been accomplished, and that the killer has 
unconsciously absorbed manliness in the chase. 
Personally, I know men whose morality has been of the 
loosest. They have "reformed." These voluntarily pose 
as shining examples for their fellow men to follow. 
They disgustingly presume to advise their natural supe- 
riors — those naturally endowed with good morals. They 
lie, believe they are telling the truth; steal, and do 
not know it. Their natural bestiality at one time caused 
them to drink to excess. To keep from filling a drunk- 
ard's grave they "signed tlie pledge," They question 
the chastity of all women who drink a glass of wine, 
and had they the power, so deep is their bigotry, they 
would sweep all wine from the tables of the cultured, 
refined and noble of our land. I firmly believe their 
ravings to be the reflections of minds weakened by 
ormer excesses. In this class of moral degenerates 
I would place the worst of the sentimentalists, who 
would stop the killing of all game simply because they 
have scruples. Perhaps in their time they may have 
killed to excess, and in mere wantonness. 
One kills a chicken to satisfy his hunger, or smokes 
pipe or cigar, because it affords a certain satisfaction. 
Another collects relics, postage stamps, etc., etc. 
■Another wears the most outlandish toggery, the 
'lighest of collars, the loudest of breeches, neckties, 
;tc. In fact, persons of different temperaments 
bllow different fashions, fads and whatnots. And 
lone of these eccentricities conduce to make one manly 
)r unmanly. They are simply a means of affording sati- 
sfaction to different tastes. Thus, while the legitimate 
let of killing an animal in the field may not be a strictly 
The Nature of Sport* 
Editor Forest and Stream: 
I am much beholden to your able correspondent, Mr. 
Jos. W. Shurter, for his clean-cut and vigorous argu- 
m.ent in Forest and Stream of Aug. 23, in opposition to 
the views recently expressed by myself on the subject 
of ".sport." With your permission I will endeavor to 
mollify Mr. Shurter's indignation by throwing out a few 
additional remarks on the same subject. Mr. Shurter 
combats my theory of the origin of the hunting instinct 
in man's nature by pointing to the fact that the hunting 
propensity still subsists though the conditions which im- 
planted the instinct no longer obtain. From my point of 
view this is clearly a non sequitor, as it would akso be 
if applied to the domestic dog, in which the same in- 
stinct, derived from the same source, is so strongly mani- 
fested that he continues to pursue game with a keen relish 
for the sole benefit of his master, long after the conditions 
have ceased that gave it birth. 
[ think Mr. Shurter is unfortunate in appealing to 
Webster's dictionary for a definition of "true sport" in 
an argument before the Forest and Stream tribunal, in 
the face of my distinct announcement that my own plea 
was offered within the jurisdiction of this court alone. It 
shall hardly be contended that this journal is a proper 
arena for discussing the comparative merits of "draw 
poker," "old sledge," horse racing, or baseball, etc., as a 
means of diversion; for the members of the Forest and 
Stream brotherhood, as such, are supposed to Icnow 
nothing aboiit these things. Neither is it likely that it 
should occur to the average member of this same brother- 
hood to associate Webster's dictionary in any way with 
his conception of what constitutes "true sport," as he 
could probably have given Uncle Daniel pointers on the 
subject when his dictionary was being compiled. 
It has heretofore been a matter of discussion in Forest 
AND Stream, with deprecation of the unfair or unfor- 
tunate terminology that confoimds "sport" as contem- 
plated in the official organ of the brotherhood, with those 
games mentioned above, and other athletic exercises that 
belong to the same general category, and come under the 
classification of games. The term games in this connec- 
tion, may be held as antithetical to game, as by common 
agreement the word "sport" is antithetical to "sports- 
man," the latter being applied to the man with gun and 
dog, or rod; while the former is appropriated by the 
"gent" who is typified by a velvet coat, red necktie, large 
gold chain, and nether garments of loud pattern. 
While Mr. Shurter perhaps intended to comprehend 
only the manly, athletic games, in his definition of "true 
sport," I think the brotherhood will join me in the desire 
to exclude all manner of games from kinship with the 
sport of pursuing game, or fish, as a means of diversion. 
Mr. Shurter argues that the chasing of mountain lions 
and foxes is true sport, notwithstanding the fact that 
these animals are not eaten when taken ; also that tarpon 
fishing is true sport under the same restriction. I did not 
think it necessary in my former article to specifically 
justify the pursuit of predatory animals that prey upon 
man's domestic creatures, the benefit to man from their 
destruction being too obvious. 
As to_ tarpon fishing, that pursuit has always in my own 
estimation, fallen short of true sport for the very reason 
assigned to sustain Mr. Shurter's argument, that the fish, 
is useless after capture ; and I cannot but believe that the 
sport of tarpon fishing would be immensely enhanced 
if the tarpon were as great a table delicacy as the salmon 
for instance. 
It appears to me that the destruction of any living 
creature, for the mere pleasure of its destruction, if 
pleasure can be so derived, is ethically wrong, and un- 
justifiable; and "I am apt to believe," as Samuel Peppys 
would say, that the majority of "true sportsmen" will 
agree with me in this proposition. 
I quote Mr. Shurter as follows: "I regard his (my) 
teaching as pernicious, because if generally inculcated it 
would_ degrade our fields and forests to the level of 
abattoirs, our game to the level of swine and our sports- 
men to the level of gluttons." 
Shades of Christopher North! what degraded creatures 
have sportsmen been during all these past centuries, be- 
fore this new era of sublimated head hunters and tarpon 
fishers was ushered in but yesterday I In ye olden time 
the trophies of the chase that decorate baronial halls 
had their value not alone as mementoes of the pursuit and 
capture of the lordly stag and ferocious wild boar, but 
also from their association with feast and revelrj^ wheii 
the lord and his retainers gathered around the festal board 
nobly laden with the savory haunch of venison or smok- 
ing boar's head. Certainly these trophies did not bear 
evidence that the sportsman had paid an expert ten times 
as much as the game was worth to procure him a shot at 
close range, at the animal that bore the horns exhibited. 
If there is mercenary implication anywhere, it seems to 
me that here it lies. 
In conclusion, this issue between Mr. Shurter and my- 
self is fairly presented before the court, and I am con- 
tent to leave it to the "consensus of opinion" of the 
Forest and Stream brotherhood to decide between us. 
. Coahoma. 
SUBSCRIPTIONS, 
The date of exptfation of youf sttfascflptioo Is given on the 
address label on the wrapper. A change of date on the 
address wrapper is equivalent to a receipt for money sent for 
sofascriptioQ. Take note of the date on yoot address label. 
The Forest Reserves* 
BY FILIBERT ROTH, CHIEF OF THE FORESTRY DIVISION OF THE 
general land OFFICE, DEPA3JTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. 
From the Year Book of the Department of Agriculture. 
In a consideration of the grazing problem in the forest 
reserves of the United States, it is necessary at every 
step to keep in mind the objects for which the reserves 
were set aside and the character, as well as the behavior, 
of the woods which exist on these several reserves. 
Since there appears to be still a great deal of confusion 
concerning the motives and objects which led to the 
formation of reserves, and also as to the character and 
behavior of forests in general, and the woods of the sev- 
eral reserves in particular, it may be helpful to review 
some of these points more in detail. 
General Discussion of the Funcfions of Fotesis, 
When a farmer in Ohio or Indiana has a piece of 
woods on fairly level ground he has no good reason for 
keeping it as woods unless he considers the wood grow- 
ing on the land to be as valuable as any other crop he 
might raise — a inatter often difficult to decide. A farmer 
in Mississippi, on the other hand, may be induced to 
leave a patch of forest on a hillside, not because he cares 
much for the wood, but because, if the forest is cut 
away, the land will wash into a labyrinth of deep gullies 
and soon become utterly worthless for any purpose. In 
Ihe former case the forest is merely for the crop it 
yields; in the latter it is for both crop and protection, 
and this case is far more common than is usually sup- 
posed. But while the farmer in Mississippi may use the 
forest to keep a piece of land from gullying, and thus 
use it as a protection against erosion, he cares little as 
to how this forest affects the flow of water or the cli- 
mate, for he has ample rain and does not utilize tlie 
creek or stream. With the farmer in Gallatin Valley, 
Montana, this is quite different. He takes what seems 
to he a desert gravel bar and by the use of 1 inch of 
water per acre* he converts this arid ground into a 
farm and raises as high as 90 bushels of a superior qual- 
ity of oats per acre. To him the little mountain stream 
i.s everything. Here the forest takes on another func- 
tion; it holds the soil of the neighboring mountains and 
keeps it more pervious, and thus it regulates the flow 
in these important streams. The manner in which it 
does this will be clearer from the following: Suppose 
we take a table and tilt it several inches, so that its top 
represents a slanting surface. If we sprinkle water on 
this surface, it is clear that the water runs off about as 
fast as it strikes the table. If the table is now covered 
with a layer of soil about 3 inches thick, and the sprink- 
ling is renewed, some of the water runs off from the 
sm-face and some soaks into the layer of soil, so that if, 
after a time, we quit sprinkling there will still be water 
running off from the table for hours. We have here 
then a "surface run-oft'" and an "underground run-otf," 
and it is clear that the thicker the layer of earth, and the 
more pervious, the more water it would take up and the 
longer and steadier it would be giving off this under- 
ground water. 
The above statement shows exactly wliat happens all 
over the land, and is especially noticeable in the moun- 
tains. On the soilless, rocky slopes the water runs off 
as fast as it falls or the snow melts, but on slopes witH 
deep, pervious soils part of the water is stored and con- 
tinues to flow for nronths after the rain or the melting 
of snow has ceased. 
Returning to the experiment with the layer of earth 
on the table, we notice that if we sprinkle more briskly, 
part of the earth is carried away, the layer is eroded, and 
the storage ground is diminished. If covered by a layer 
of cotton batting this erosion stops, and in addition we 
gam another very important point— the soil is kept softer, 
and allows water to soak in more easily than when the 
cotton is wanting, for then the water "pats" down; it 
hardens the surface where it does not wash it away. 
Much the same result might be obtained by sowing grass 
on the layer of earth, for then the tops of the grass 
would keep the drops from pounding the earth, form a 
mechanical obstacle to the surface run-off, and the roots 
would be an additional help in holding the eanh and 
keeping it from washing away. But the grass is small, 
its tops are short, open, and close to the ground; its 
roots are short; it rarely forms a dense sod, and. espe- 
cially m dry countries, it leaves a large part of the 
ground without protection. Here, then, the larger, long- 
lived, deep-rooted trees, with dense, shading crowns 
high above the ground, give far better and more con- 
stant protection against erosion, and are far better able 
to keep the ground in a pervious condition, since they 
strew it annually with large quantities of leaves and 
twigs and provide a network of slowly decaying roots 
which keep the forest soil mellowed for a foot and more 
■n depth. An upturned hemlock, spruce, etc., will read- 
ily illustrate how much of the ground is occupied by the 
roots of these forest trees. 
The trees, then, are in nature what the cotton is in the 
experiment; they help to keep the soit' from being car- 
ried away, they keep it soft, and they break the force 
of the dovvnpouring rain. 
How much additional service trees perform by keep- 
ing sun and wind from the ground is well illustrated by 
the forests of the Lake Slates and Canada, where thou- 
sands of swamps have dried up and hundreds of miles 
of corduroy road have become useless, not by ditching 
and draining, but by removing the woods and giving sun 
and wind access to the soil. 
In this connection, it may be well to mention a theory 
sometimes advocated, which teaches that it would be bet- 
ter for water-storage purposes to have the forest^ re- 
moved m order that the snow may gather in lar<ye drifts 
since as it is claimed, it is these snowdrifts which sup- 
ply the water of the streams throughout the dry sum- 
mer season This is not borne out by facts, for a study 
of the Big Horn Mountains and the Rockies of Wyom- 
ing, Montana, or Idaho wdl convince anyone that the 
few lingering snowdrifts of August have very little to 
do with the streams, and that it is the wooded and not 
the bald districts of each basin which serve as feeders 
and m aintain the steady flow of water. The. allied claim 
f The inch of water here referred to is a miners' inch Fiftv 
miners mcheS require a Btream furnishing 1 cubic foot ijersecond. 
