February, 1922 
FOREST AND STREAM 
61 
The coveys had settled down for the winter where there was an abundance of weed seed for them to feed upon 
“A rough day for song bird hunters,” 
said Nimrod. “I can’t stand this dis- 
criminative class legislation that suffers 
hawks and foxes and cats to hunt quails, 
' and prohibits my hunting quail on my 
own land. If I may not hunt quail, 
neither may the cat.” Again, I won- 
• dered how many of the self-constituted 
• protectors of quail have taken the pains 
to kill the prowling cat. 
'~PHE legal situation in Ohio is 'such 
that the sportsman is effectively 
blocked by an agricultural bloc in the 
General Assembly. At present, “blocs” 
are new and, therefore, in fashion. Ohio 
had an agricultural bloc before Congress 
thought of such a thing. One definition 
of block is “ a unit of persons.” Why 
the French “bloc” is substituted for the 
English “block,” I do not know. It may 
be because, in its popular sense in 
France, “bloc” means “lock-up.” And 
in Ohio the General Assembly locked up 
the quail and threw away the key. It has 
been said that bobwhite is a bird of civili- 
zation. Quail, however, cannot thrive 
where there is too much civilization. To 
thrive, bobwhite must have cover; and 
cover means briars, and weeds, and un- 
dergrowth, and high stubble, and fence 
j rows. Such conditions are not consistent 
“ with modern husbandry. In short, quail 
rannot exist in fields devoted to intensive 
agriculture. In southern Ohio the quail 
i have come back. For several years they 
were so reduced in numbers, that I was 
apprehensive that the balance so favored 
their natural enemies that they could not 
multiply and replenish the fields. The 
rigors of the first severe winter will now 
destroy what the sportsmen may not kill. 
Increased population, modern weapons 
and ammunition, good roads, motor 
transportation, wire fences in lieu of rail 
fences, and better agriculture all tell 
against the quail. I have little faith in 
the efficacy of a game bag limit as a 
protective measure. One course is open 
to the sportsman, and that course seems, 
at first blush, revolutionary. 
B y the common law of property the 
ownership of fish and game is in the 
state, until reduced to actual individual 
possession as permitted by statute law. 
The state owns the fish and game in trust 
for the people and, therefore, may enact 
legislation for its protection. But these 
principles had their origin in the neces- 
sity for conserving food supply in early 
times, for insuring food for the pioneers. 
Such necessity, in respect to game, no 
longer exists. It is now well established 
that quail are very useful to agriculture ; 
therefore, their economic status becomes 
the reason for the exercise of the protec- 
tive power of the state. So conservative 
an authority as Henry W. Henshaw, 
former Chief of the United States 
Biological Survey, tells us in the Na- 
tional Geographic’s “Book of Birds” 
that fifty per cent, of the food of bob- 
white consists of weed seeds and that 
about fifteen per cent, of his food is com- 
posed of insects, including several of the 
most serious pests of agriculture. He 
concludes that quails are very useful to 
farms and that every farmer should see 
that his farm is not made barren of these 
feathered friends by sportsmen all too 
eager. Mr. Henshaw’s statement of the 
facts is fair and his conclusions are 
sound. But it is known by all men that 
public property is never so zealously 
guarded and conserved as is private prop- 
erty. Because quail are useful to the 
farmer, by destroying weed seeds and in- 
sect pests that reduce the crop of food- 
stuffs, and therefore useful to us all, and 
because such grain, as the quail may feed 
upon, is grain raised upon the farms, 
why not, by appropriate legislation, vest 
the ownership of quail in the owner of 
the land where the quail may be ? 
Contemporaneously, legislation with 
proper safeguards may be enacted afford- 
ing a short open season ; hunting, how- 
ever, to be only upon the permission of 
the landowner. The farmer will, in many 
instances, permit reasonable hunting. 
Furthermore, ownership of quail and 
reasonable hunting privileges will prove 
a strong incentive to stock the country- 
side with game. If the quail are his 
property, the landowner will not suffer 
the coveys to be unreasonably reduced by 
the game hog. If the ownership of quail 
is in the farmer, subject always to the 
right to capture or kill only as the law 
(Continued on page 84) 
