LEGISLATION OF 1901. 15 
Thus, by gradual stages, from the simple prohibition of 1830 
against killing deer and moose, has been developed the comprehensive 
law in force to-day protecting all the big game and nearly all the birds 
found within the State, and prescribing the times and methods for their 
capture. The close seasons have undergone numerous changes during 
the seventy years, but those for moose and deer are much the same as 
they were originally, having merely lengthened a little at each end. 
As a matter of interest, the different close seasons for big game from 
1830 to date are here tabulated: 
Close seasons for Big Game in Maine. 
Year. Deer. 
Moose. 
Caribou. 
1830 Jan. 1-Sept. 1 Jan. 1-Sept. 1 
1841 Julv 1-Nov. 1 Julv 1-Nov. 1 
1848 Mar.l-Julvl Mar. 1-July 1 
1853 Jan. LS-Sept. 1 Apr. 15-Oct. 1 
1855 (No change ) Mar. 15-Oct. 1 
1870 Feb. 1-Oet. 1 Feb. l-Oct. 1 ' Feb. l-O^t. 1. 
1883 Jan. 1-Oct. 1 ] Jan. 1-Oct. 1 Jan. 1-Oet. 1. 
1899 Dec. 15-Oct. 1 Dec. 1-Oct. 15 Protected to 1905. 
LEGISLATION OF 1901. 
The opening year of the new century- has witnessed an unprece- 
dented interest in game protection. Nearly four-tifths of the States 
and Territories have enacted some amendments to their game laws. 
These amendments vary from a slight change in the Delaware law 
regarding close seasons to the adoption of a general game law or code 
in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, 
Nebraska, Nevada. New Hampshire, and New Jersey. Changes in 
dates for opening or closing the seasons have been veiy general, but 
restrictions on methods of capture, on sale, shipment, and storage, 
have also been numerous. In many instances the laws have necessa- 
rily become more complex, but there has been a strong tendency 
toward extending protection to more kinds of game, shortening the 
seasons, limiting bags, and throwing greater restrictions about the 
trade in game. Nebraska and Missouri, which suffered severelv from 
wholesale shipments of game last 3'ear, have joined the great majority 
of States in adopting stringent nonexport laws, leaving less than half 
a dozen States now without protection of this kind. (See PI. VIII.) 
Other States, notabh* Indiana, Montana. Nebraska, Pennsylvania, and 
Washington, have restricted hunting by requiring licen.ses of non- 
resident hunters, a common method, particularly in the Middle West, 
for providing a game protection fund. Nebraska, South Dakota, and 
Washington have followed the example of Michigan. Minnesota, 
North Dakota, and Wisconsin in requiring residents as well as non- 
5037— No. 16—01 2 
