534 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
[Oct. 6, 1906. 
Use Game Birds for Game. 
Editor Forest and Stream: 
Your contributor, J. Clinton Ranson, writes 
an agreeable narrative about "Quail Shooting in 
Southern Maryland.” It is true Mr. Ranson 
gives in considerable detail some rudimentary 
information about the sport, but perhaps there 
are some neophytes who may profit by it. But 
he affords a theme for some remarks in his 
allusion to the growing appreciation among the 
Maryland farmers of the value of these birds as 
destroyers of insects and devourers of the seeds 
of noxious weeds and grasses, and perceives a 
tendency among these people to demand the 
total exemption of the partridges (quail, if you 
will) from pursuit by the sportsman. 
Theory is a fine thing. Indeed, we could make 
no advance in the useful arts without first 
projecting ahead of us theories, to be examined 
at leisure and subjected to the test of verifica¬ 
tion—to be established, modified, or rejected, 
as experience may dictate. Now we have had for 
some dozen years past a number of enthusiasts 
among entomologists and Audubon society 
leaders who seem imbued with a strong deter¬ 
mination towards the conservation of all forms 
of bird life, with little or no discrimination, 
which is perhaps a natural and healthy reaction 
from the generally prevailing desire for the total 
and speedy extermination of the whole feathered 
tribe. 
It is also natural that these reactionary pro¬ 
ceedings should be overdone. In pursuance of 
this purpose of conservation these enthusiasts 
have done much commendable work in labora¬ 
tory investigations, and have acquired much in¬ 
teresting information about the food of various 
birds. They can tell you precisely what per cent, 
of a given bird’s food consists of harmful in¬ 
sects and what per cent, of the seeds of noxious 
weeds, and just how many grasshoppers one 
meadow lark shall eat in a season, etc., etc. 
Literature on this subject has been scattered 
broadcast over the land, with wholesome effect 
in arresting the attention of thoughtless minds 
to the wisdom of a more conservative treatment 
of the birds. 
But the enthusiasts seem desirous of com¬ 
pletely revolutionizing our attitude toward those 
varieties of game birds that eat insects and 
seeds, taking them out of the category of edibles 
and devoting them exclusively to the business 
of devourers, as their highest and sole function. 
That all the creatures of the lower world 
should be so used by man as to afford the 
greatest good to the human race is a funda¬ 
mental proposition, the truth of which shall 
hardly be denied. The question under discus¬ 
sion then, divested of sentiment, must be con¬ 
sidered on a basis of cold facts. How can we 
get “the greatest good for the greatest number” 
out of the game birds that devour insects and 
seeds? By using them as game for the sports¬ 
man and delicacies for the table, under con¬ 
servative regulations, or by devoting them ex¬ 
clusively to the destruction of insects and weeds? 
Here we come to the stage of testing the 
theory by the facts, as regards the alternate 
proposition. There were doubtless myriads of 
weeds, insects and birds, all over the land, under 
nature’s regulation, during the long centuries 
that elapsed before man’s hand was interposed 
to regulate these matters to suit himself. It is 
certain that the birds, when permitted to in¬ 
crease without man’s interference, did not ex¬ 
terminate either weeds or insects, though they 
perhaps did keep the insects somewhat in check. 
The matter of the destruction of weeds by birds 
may be for all practical purposes dismissed with 
short consideration, in view of the manifest fact 
that nature’s lavish provision for the propaga¬ 
tion of weeds would defy the efforts of all the 
birds if multiplied by a million, to make any im¬ 
pression on the supply. For example, in this 
rich river bottom land you - may select any 
field that has been diligently cultivated in cotton 
and corn for a score or more of years, by which 
the weeds have been wholly suppressed; turn it 
out for a single season and you shall find it 
covered with a luxuriant growth of many va¬ 
rieties of weeds. Whence come the seeds? I 
believe nobody has found out. Darwin took a 
few ounces of dried mud from the bed of a 
pond, and placing it in his study, counted 
seventy-five different varieties of vegetable 
growth that sprang from it. 
Coming to the insect proposition, how are we 
to separate fact from theory, and measure the 
influence exerted on the farmer’s interests by 
game birds, by practical results? This is a dif¬ 
ficult question to handle, but some suggestions 
may be offered that bear upon it. In many parts 
of the country game birds are abundant; in many 
other parts they are few or non-existent. Has 
it been observed that the farmers make larger 
crops in the former than the latter, other things 
being equal? I believe he must be a bold man 
to make the assertion. 
It was demonstrated in a part of France that 
the total extermination of bird life resulted in 
such a multiplication of insects as to seriously 
affect the vineyards. But it must be remem¬ 
bered that even when partridges are relatively 
abundant, they constitute but a small part of the 
army of feathered insect-eaters; and if there 
were no partridges at all, this large army would 
continue to do its work. It must also be borne 
in mind that under judicious regulations the 
game birds may continue to afford sport and 
food for the table and still a normal supply be 
kept up to do their share in the destruction of 
insects. 
There are a great many species of birds in 
our fields and woods whose sole business in 
life is to devour insects and rear their young, 
while the food of the Bob White is mainly 
vegetable matter, with insects “on the side.” 
It is conceivable that by diligent cultivation, 
with an abundant food supply, our fields might 
be thickly covered with partridges kept for the 
sole purpose of destroying insects. It would 
then be a question whether the cost would not 
exceed the benefit, for they would devour much 
of the crop also. On the whole, it would seem 
that the claims of the enthusiasts of the great 
practical value of these birds to the farmer as 
insect and weed destroyers, are probably much 
exaggerated, and as weighed against their value 
for other purposes should take second place. 
The conclusion of this argument is, that the 
wisest course should be to use this class of 
game birds for purposes of sport and recreation, 
and to serve as delicacies on our tables, under 
such conservative regulations as to insure an 
approximately constant supply, to serve both of 
its functions, the primary one as cited above, 
and the secondary one of contributing to the 
keeping in check of insect life. 
Coahoma. 
Mississippi. 
ON A FOWLER. 
With reeds and birdlime from the desert air 
Eumelus gather’d free, though scanty, fare. 
No lordly patron’s hand he deign’d to kiss; 
Nor luxury knew, save liberty, nor bliss. 
Thrice thirty years he lived, and to his heirs 
His reeds bequeathed, his birdlime and his 
snares. 
Isidorus. 
Adirondack Deer. 
Opinions differ radically in the matter of the 
dates of the open season for deer hunting in 
those counties of the Adirondack region where 
there are no special county laws. As the new 
law stands, Oct. 1 is opening day instead of 
Sept. 1, and the season closes Nov. IS at mid¬ 
night. It is argued that there will be fewer 
cases of heedless shooting at moving objects, 
now that the leaves are falling rapidly, but on 
the other hand, this is believed to be unfortunate 
for the deer, which can be more readily seen 
than in September, when the foliage was more 
dense. Extending the season into the middle of 
November, when it is quite certain there will be 
snow in the mountains, is believed by many 
sportsmen to be an unfavorable feature of the 
present law, for, given a tracking snow, even the 
beginner at deer hunting stands a much better 
chance of following deer until a shot is offered, 
whereas on dry ground only old hunters can 
follow up a deer with reasonable assurance of 
success. Commissioner Whipple is quoted as 
saying that if he had his way fifteen days in 
November would have been cut off instead of 
all of September, and he believes the time is not 
far distant when the open season will be the 
month of October only. 
In view of the fact that in states where grown 
bucks only may be shot, more care is taken by 
hunters lest they incur a severe penalty by shoot¬ 
ing a doe or a fawn; and the further fact, that 
under the ruling of such laws fewer deer are 
shot annually, it seems that if the danger of de¬ 
pleting the Adirondacks is imminent, a law per¬ 
mitting the killing of adult bucks only would 
work both ways, saving the deer and lessening 
the number of careless shootings that so often 
have a tragic ending. 
It should be said, in this connection, that cer¬ 
tain up-state papers have published statements 
in which Nov. 20 is given as the new closing 
date, whereas this is not the case, and sportsmen 
should regulate themselves accordingly. 
Deer In New England. 
Attorney-General King, of Connecticut, 
whose opinion was asked by President Mathew- 
son, of-the Fish and Game Commission, in the 
matter of a claim for damages made by a fruit¬ 
grower of Glastonbury, has construed the law 
relating to damages by deer to “crops grown on 
cultivated land” to include immature fruit trees, 
and the appraisers are instructed to fix the 
damages in a sum representing the actual loss 
the owner has sustained. The latter claims wild 
deer destroyed several hundred dollars’ worth 
of young peach trees and has presented his bill 
for the amount. The attorney-general holds 
that while the language of the act does not 
cover fruit trees, he believes the act should be 
so construed, and holds that mature . crops, 
plants, shrubs, vines and trees come within its 
fair meaning. 
Connecticut. Massachusetts and Rhode Island, 
protecting all deer just at present, seem to be 
overrun with semi-tame deer this autumn, and 
many are the complaints of farmers, fruit¬ 
growers and gardeners, who accuse the deer 
with causing more than half their troubles. The 
farmer who comes to town without a tale of 
woe in which deer play an important part seems 
to be the exception, and one can almost fancy 
the irate individual standing over his garden 
truck, club in hand, while the deer loiter around 
just beyond his reach, awaiting the turning of 
his back to resume their interrupted meal of 
cabbages and carrots. Of course the situation 
is not so bad as that, but it is kept prominently 
before the public by farmers, while the fox- 
