558 
FOREST AND STREAM 
Nov. i, 1913. 
The Necessity of a Fishing License 
By HENRY CHASE, Author of “Game Protection and Propagation in America” 
when not on its regular spring and fall runs, 
and may be common at a certain point at a 
certain time and entirely absent at other times. 
It is a predaceous species, feeding to a great 
extent on the smaller fishes, and frequents in 
search of food the swiftest waters of the river, 
preferably with a rocky or gravelly bottom. It 
has lately become of unusual importance, eco¬ 
nomically. owing to the fact that it is appar¬ 
ently the exclusive host of one of the most im¬ 
portant fresh water mussels, so important to the 
perpetuation of the pearl button industry. 
In the Lake Toxaway Country. 
Hendersonville, N. C., Oct. 19 .—Editor 
Forest and Stream: Fly-fishing for trout is 
about over, though a friend made a good catch 
this week—all nice rainbows and none under 
ten inches. 
I returned a week ago from a pleasant little 
mountain trip, in which my better half and two 
daughters joined. It was to the Lake Toxaway 
country. The mountains were in their most 
beautiful dress and the weather was fine. One 
day my youngest daughter walked with me 
around the lake, sixteen miles. It was a de¬ 
lightful tramp. On another both the girls joined 
me in a six mile tramp to join some friends 
at lunch at their mountain home, some 3,500 feet 
above sea level, returning after lunch none the 
worse for the tramp of at least twelve miles. 
The mast is very abundant this fall, the 
crop of chestnuts greater than any for the past 
fourteen years, I am told. We picked them up 
in every road we walked. Chestnuts will no 
doubt sell for something like seventy-five cents 
per bushel a week from now. The woods every¬ 
where are strewn with acorns of various kinds, 
from white oak to chestnut oak, the last being 
very large. So we expect fat deer this season, 
and I am told they are plentiful Ruffed grouse, 
too, are said to be more plentiful than for years 
past. This, as well as the heavy crop of chest¬ 
nuts, we attribute to a very dry June, the pollen 
not being knocked off the blooming chestnut 
trees by heavy rains, and the dry weather aiding 
the birds when very young. 
Partridge (quail) are more plentiful than 
in years past. They rise in coveys as the train 
rushes by, or run across the country roads as 
you ride, drive or walk past. I hear them in 
the early morning as they call in coming off their 
ground roosts, no doubt scattered by some dog 
or cat the previous evening. 
That was a capital article in a recent issue on 
the “dry fly” or “dry-fly fishing.” 
I have been reading every letter I have seen 
on the subject, and when I saw the caption of 
this one, I picked it out from all the other good 
ones and got caught on that “dry-fly” in good 
shape. But the idea of a man stowing away a 
quart of strong fire-water at a sitting! Surely, 
“men were men in those days,” but I heard of 
one only a few years ago that would consume 
a quart of whiskey in a half day’s run on a 
passenger train, and yet not one on the train 
not knowing him was the wiser, and he did not 
show any signs of it then. There was quite a 
good lesson in that article on the “dry-fly.” Cer¬ 
tainly in our rough mountain streams it is one 
to remember. 
Certainly dry-fly fishing has more of sport 
in it than wet-flv fishing. Ernest L. Ewbank. 
I F I may be permitted to say so, for over 
twenty years past I have steadily advocated 
the adoption in every State in the Union 
of a system of licensing every person who de¬ 
sires to hunt or fish, and this to include both 
the residents and non-residents of each State. 
When several of us “protection cranks” pro¬ 
posed this scheme at a meeting of sportsmen in 
the West some years ago, we were called vision¬ 
ary radicals. The reasons which led my feeble 
intellect to conceive that this system was neces¬ 
sary for the more effectual protection and propa¬ 
gation of both game and fish were numerous and 
convincing, and I have never had cause since that 
time to apprehend that these reasons were wrong 
in principle or in practice. 
They told us in those pioneer days of game 
conservation that if such a system were adopted, 
it would be vicious class legislation, and tend to 
strike at the great principle of American per¬ 
sonal liberty, and should any Legislature attempt 
to enact such a measure, it would do so at its 
peril. But I take it that at present we have 
outlived that notion, for we now find that hunt¬ 
ing license laws are in force in every State in 
the Union and fishing licenses are required in 
seven States. The reasons which led many of 
us to believe that such licenses were a good 
thing for a State and the cause of game and 
fish protection were exactly identical with re¬ 
spect to both game birds and mammals and the 
fish. We never thought or conceived of segre¬ 
gating the two theories, and personally it has 
always passed my comprehension why a State 
should license the hunters and not the fisher¬ 
men. But, you may inquire, why do you favor 
a fishing license? Before answering this query, 
permit me to propound one in return : Why do 
you advocate a hunting license? (As we shall 
assume that you do.) 
Now, let us examine this question and see 
what the answer brings forth. There are just 
two strong, convincing arguments in favor of 
the adoption of hunting licenses which the ad¬ 
vocates of such measures have used with tell¬ 
ing effect before every Legislature in the coun¬ 
try. 
First, and primarily, a hunting license sys¬ 
tem will produce revenue, independently of a 
general appropriation, with which to establish, 
support and maintain a separate State depart¬ 
ment of game and fisheries; to pay salaries and 
expenses of special officers in enforcing the game 
laws; to purchase tracts of land for game 
refuges and breeding farms, and to engage in 
artificial propagation of game. 
Second, hunting licenses tend to the more 
efficient regulation of the privilege of hunting— 
a privilege over which the sovereign State exer¬ 
cises control. Such licenses aid in eliminating 
an undesirable class of hunters who kill song 
and insectivorous birds, and make the real 
sportsman take more of a personal interest in 
the game which is the common property of all 
the people of a State in their collective sovereign 
capacity. 
If, then, we will admit that these reasons 
are controlling and have proved of practical 
benefit in every State, why will not the same 
arguments apply with equal force in the case of 
the fishermen ? To my mind they are even much 
stronger with respect to the latter. The busi¬ 
ness of artificial propagation of game birds and 
mammals is yet in its infancy in this country, 
while that of fish has long since passed the ex¬ 
perimental stage and has now entered the do¬ 
main of recognized value, efficiency and certainty. 
Every State has its fish hatcheries. Some have 
only a few, while others are abundantly supplied 
with expensive plants, buildings and equipment, 
and the National Government has a long string 
of hatching stations extending from the Atlantic 
to the Pacific, and from the Great Lakes to the 
Gulf of Mexico. All of these hatcheries are 
in charge of trained experts who can calculate 
to a nicety in advance just what the total pro¬ 
duct of their establishments will be when they 
are informed what amount of funds they will 
be permitted to use in their work. 
If, now, we will only pause and investigate 
from whence these funds are derived, we will 
undoubtedly be surprised to learn that in most 
of the States they come directly and wholly from 
the pockets of the hunters who pay for licenses. 
Very naturally then we inquire, why should this 
be so? If the hunting license is a good thing 
for the State, why is not the fishing license an 
equally good thing? Why should the hunters 
be compelled to support and maintain the whole 
department of game and fisheries without any 
contribution upon the part of the fishermen? 
It is a matter of common knowledge that there 
are hundreds—and even thousands, perhaps—of 
persons in each State who enjoy the sport of 
fishing, but w r ho never take a gun in their hands. 
Fishing is a summer sport which comes at vaca¬ 
tion time when thousands.of recreationists are 
enjoying the glorious open air in the wilds and 
the country, and most of them want to fish. 
They are very greatly in the majority among 
sportsmen—some by preference and others from 
the necessity of their vacation time. A numer¬ 
ous class of fishermen come into a State from 
outside its borders, and are permitted to enjoy 
the benefit of stocked streams and ponds that 
were all so stocked at the expense of the hunt¬ 
ers. Manifestly this is unjust, and we can now 
hear the great murmur of discontent, growing 
stronger each year, among the hunters. And it 
is only a matter of time when this protest from 
the hunters is bound to be heard and heeded. 
So why delay and wait longer before final ac¬ 
tion ? The case is clear and the need urgent. 
We need more fish, obtained by artificial propa¬ 
gation, and more stocking of our streams and 
lakes; we need more hatcheries and trained men 
to handle the planting of stock fish. It goes 
without saying that these objects cannot be ac¬ 
complished without more sinews of war, and 
certainly this revenue ought not be raised by 
increasing the tax on hunters. That would be 
outrageous, and tend to discredit the whole 
American system of game protection as unjust 
and unfair. 
On the other hand, the hunters are entitled 
to the greater part of the present game funds 
