10 
FOREST AND STREAM 
July 5, 1913 
on the other side so. Then I drop it in the 
watther so, and catch a fish so,’ and I pulled 
out another croppie. After that I wint on my 
way. When I came back toward evenin' they 
were still there. I called down to them, ‘What 
luck, byes?’ One of thim says, 'B-b-been 
sph-p-pittin’ on m-my b-b-bait all d-day, t-t-t-ill 
m-my t-t-t-tongue’s shwelled u-up so I c-c-can’t 
t-t-t-talk.’ 
“The domned ij it, he thought I mint it.” 
The old man was no longer able to endure 
a full day’s fishing. Sometimes one of us would 
row him about for an hour or two, until he grew 
tired, enjoying meanwhile the flow of his droll, 
genial comments and stories. His great delight, 
however, was to get in his own little boat, row 
out to a favorite spot, a short distance from 
the shore, and there anchor and fish. For this 
he put on a pair of arctics, a white hat with 
green brim, shielded his eyes with a pair of 
big black goggles, and then girt about him a 
life preserver. One day, seeing him rigged after 
this fashion, I said, “Major, what do you wear 
that life preserver for?” 
“Faith, me bye,” said he, “I’ve been about 
the watther all me life, and I’ve fished since I 
learned to walk, but I niver knew how to shwim. 
One toime I was fishin’, and I climbed out on 
the lower part of a railroad bridge, and fell in. 
I kicked and splashed and I hollered, ‘Hilp, 
hilp.’ But nobody came to hilp me. Presently, 
jusht as I was about to give up, I looked up, 
and there was a man on top of the bridge 
lookin’ at me. I yelled, ‘Hilp, for the love of 
hiven, hilp me.’ And he said, ‘Ye ould fool ye, 
why don’t ye sthand up.’ Sure, and I sthood 
up, and the watther was only up to me 
knees.” 
The Major has gone now to that land where, 
if a friend of mine is correct, no fisherman will 
want to go, because there are no fish there. 
She proves it by Scripture, saying that “nothing 
shall enter there that maketh a lie.” My con¬ 
tention is that no fisherman will go to the other 
place, because there is no water there. How¬ 
ever that may be, I am sure that somewhere by 
the River of Life is a place where fishermen’s 
genial spirits foregather, and that there the old 
Major will be swapping stories with St. Peter 
and Izaak Walton and others of the friendly 
brotherhood of anglers. 
Sanctuaries for Wild , Birds. 
Newbury, Mass., June 19.— Editor Forest 
and Stream: The quickness with which the 
birds discover sanctuaries is astonishing, and 
these places of refuge are often tenanted by 
many species. 
During the winter months considerable num¬ 
bers of wild ducks may be seen upon the bosom 
of Charles River, near Boston, in close prox¬ 
imity to the residences and the busy life along 
the embankment, and these birds even make 
their way up into the creeks in the Back Bay 
Falls, where they are as familiar as so many 
domestic ducks. They apparently know they are 
perfectly safe from molestation there, and gov¬ 
ern themselves accordingly. The same condi¬ 
tions obtain on the Delaware River close to the 
city of Philadelphia, a number of species of sea 
ducks being often seen swimming about among 
the steamers and sailing craft which ply up and 
down that busy river. 
SANCTUARIES FOR UPLAND GAME BIRDS. 
Refuges for upland game birds do not seem 
to possess the charms nor are they as thoroughly 
availed of as are those by the waterfowl. 
Your bold, robust, independent ruffed grouse 
knows nothing of and cares nothing for metes 
and bounds, and unless he has actually domiciled 
himself in a given retreat, he is as likely as not 
to spring away into coverts far removed from 
the sanctuary allotted him. As for your Virginia 
partridge or quail, he is an incessant wanderer 
and often makes long flights apparently only 
for the fun of the thing. More than once have 
I seen coveys of those birds take flight from a 
given feeding place to a most distant cover, and 
that, too, without being disturbed in the slightest 
degree. They are nervous, active birds con¬ 
tinually on the move. 
Forest sanctuaries are unfortunately often 
availed of by natural destroyers of birds, and 
if unmolested, work no inconsiderable havoc 
among them. 
A number of years ago I was invited by 
the park commissioners to suggest some means 
by which the foxes, skunks and other rapacia, 
which were keeping reduced the number of game 
birds in one of the principal reservations of 
Massachusetts, could be destroyed. Naturally 
my first suggestion was the use of strychnine, 
but it was not deemed advisable to employ this 
poison, and trapping seemed to be the only fea¬ 
sible method by which the marauders could be 
kept in check. 
The increase in the numbers of foxes in 
that locality was remarkable, and those nimble¬ 
footed free-booters not only destroyed nearly 
every ruffed grouse, but made such extensive 
forays among the poultry yards of outlying 
farms that they became a complete nuisance. 
Forest sanctuaries for birds should be freed 
of all rapacia, both furred and feathered and 
kept free of them in as complete a degree as 
possible. E. T. S. 
Protection to Bird Life. 
Norwood, Minn., June 12. — Editor Forest 
and Stream: I inclose letter from our Senator 
Clapp. You are at liberty to publish same. Is 
Brother Hornaday using the best method to ac¬ 
quire the desired results? 
Geo. J. Bradley, 
President State Game and Fish Commission. 
United States Senate, Committee on 
Standards, Weights and Measures, Washington, 
D. C., June 9.—Hon. George J. Bradley, Nor¬ 
wood, Minn .—Dear Mr. Bradley: The amend¬ 
ment you refer to does not work against the 
wild bird life of our own country; on the con¬ 
trary it would to some extent serve to save our 
own birds, but the trouble with the amendment 
is that it might encourage the killing of birds 
in foreign countries. We have no control over 
the birds of foreign countries, and inasmuch as 
some would be killed under any circumstances, 
the idea of my amendment was that by allowing 
the feathers of birds usually killed as pests and 
for food purposes to come in, it would, per¬ 
haps, increase the importation of feathers and 
to that extent lessen the temptation to kill birds 
in our own country. But on the other hand it 
may be encouraging the killing of birds in for¬ 
eign countries to the extent of being a greater 
injury to bird life on the whole than it would 
be of protection to bird life in our own terri¬ 
tory; in fact, I am rather inclined to think that, 
taking bird life as a whole throughout the world, 
the amendment is a mistake, although undoubt¬ 
edly it would, to some extent, protect our own 
birds. 
Our friend, Brother Hornaday, wrote me 
on the subject and I wrote him fully, indicating 
that I thought probably it would, in encouraging 
the killing of birds abroad, do more harm to 
bird life generally than it would benefit in les¬ 
sening the temptation to kill our own birds. 
Notwithstanding that, he came over here and 
threw himself into a frenzy over the matter, 
when he knows very well what my reason was, 
and I had already indicated that I thought my 
view was probably a mistaken one. Certainly 
you and I have as much at heart the protection 
of birds as he has, and it is simply the question 
of the better plan. 
I had written to a great many people on the 
subject, and some of them think my plan the 
better, but on the whole I am rather inclined 
to think it might unduly encourage the killing 
of birds in foreign countries. 
Moses E. Clapp. 
Bird Notes. 
BY A. W. BARBER. 
I see that your magazine aims to record not 
only the normal and regular life of birds, but 
also the droll, comical, anomalous or tragic 
variations in their history. Can I recount some 
notes from my own observation, without the 
charge of distorting truth like the science fakers? 
I spent many months in surveys of the great 
Indian reservations of the Dakotas. Prairie 
hawks abound there, for so do small and young 
quadrupeds, but there is seldom even a low wind- 
beaten cottonwood tree to nest in. I have ex- 
