72 
ANSERI FORMES 
interests and apportion them according to the recuperative powers of the 
species affected. This was accomplished by the Migratory Birds Conven- 
tion between the United States and Canada. By this treaty, for the first 
time, Canada has a voice in the formation of game laws in states outside her 
jurisdiction and is assured that protection to Canadian migrating game 
birds follows them south, and that we are not protecting birds solely for 
the benefit of foreigners. 
The effect of the Act on wild fowl has been more beneficial than its 
most enthusiastic advocates had hoped. With the elimination of spring 
shooting and market-hunting, and with reasonable open seasons intelli- 
gently allotted to various localities over the whole continent, the rapid 
reduction of our wild fowl was momentarily stayed and the numbers even 
increased. If no additional factor had arisen we might feel confident that 
the problem of using our migratory game, without depletion, had been 
solved. The effect of the Migratory Bird Convention has been importantly 
beneficial; whether it is sufficient under the cumulative effect of the 
various adverse agencies acting today there is cause to doubt, unless greater 
self denial on the part, of our shooters becomes more evident than it has 
been in the past. 
One other important question remains to be solved, that of shooting 
grounds for the general public. It matters little to the ordinary man 
whether we have many or few game birds if the best shooting grounds are 
in the hands of private individuals and clubs. As Canadians we do not 
take kindly to private preserves and privileged classes. Already, large, 
suitable areas have been set aside from the government lands for reserves, 
where birds may breed undisturbed by cattle or by haymaking and other 
human activities. These reserves will tend to scatter their surplus life 
about the surrounding country and offer sport beyond their confines. Some 
of them may, under proper regulation, furnish suitable shooting grounds for 
the general public in localities where many such spots are already under 
private control and open to none but a privileged few. Just how far it is 
possible to proceed along these lines will depend altogether on the attitude 
of the interested public. 
The grain-eating proclivities of some ducks is a factor that cannot be 
quite overlooked. It seems hardly believable to experienced eastern 
shooters that wild ducks can occur in such numbers as to be seriously 
detrimental to agriculture. In some parts of the Prairie Provinces, where 
large numbers of some species — mostly Mallards — concentrate in the early 
autumn, the cost of their support in some cases falls heavily upon the fields 
they frequent. Geese are occasionally as bad, cropping the newly sprout- 
ing grain to such an extent as to make replanting necessary and thus 
cause the loss of valuable growing time. Complaints of this kind are 
naturally often selfishly exaggerated, but there is enough truth in them to 
warrant serious consideration. When the duck season opens the remedy 
is obvious, but if closed there is occasionally a race between the harvesters 
and the ducks as to who will get the most grain from certain fields. It is 
not always the grain actually consumed that is in question, but the 
trampled condition of the straw may prevent proper harvesting. It 
is said that in spring when the grain is well rooted geese bite off only 
the tender tops without disturbing the roots, and thus encourage a stronger 
growth of the plants, which is an advantage rather than a detriment. When 
the ground is soaked and soft the roots may come up with the tops and 
