Feb. I, 1913 
FOREST AND STREAM 
141 
September, 1915, but I have heard from wardens 
and others that most foreigners are too blind 
to see any difference between a sage grouse, a 
chickadee and a jack rabbit. 
I think the ruffed grouse are fast decreas¬ 
ing and the sharptails are also disappearing, while 
the dusky or blue grouse, one of the finest birds 
for sport or table in the United States or else¬ 
where, and second only to the wild turkey, are 
getting mighty scarce. 
Our district game warden, Dell Ray, has 
done some fine work in an elk killing case where 
an old-timer killed (or at least will be tried 
for it at present term of court) three to five 
elk. 
A few years since, while in the Hole with 
a party, we found twenty-four elk; nothing taken 
but the teeth and one scalp. Each elk smelled 
like a last year’s corpse, and the maggots by 
the million rolled about in the bodies like waves 
tossing. I would like to have tried kindness on 
those butchers of tooth hunters by hog tying 
and putting them face downward among the 
maggots to stay until winter, when ice was thick 
in Gehenna, and I think even Gehenna is too 
good for such degenerates; you can't honestly 
call them men. Howard Eaton. 
The New York Doe Law. 
Little Falls, N. Y., Jan. 20.— Editor Forest 
and Stream: I believe that the law forbidding 
the killing of does in the Adirondacks is a 
good thing. With the other readers of the 
State, I have seen many stories of five, ten. 
twenty dead does found by hunters in the 
woods, but I do not believe those stories. Of 
course, some does were killed by men who 
shoot first and find out what they shot after¬ 
ward, and there is always a percentage of men 
who shoot, no matter whether they shoot at 
legal game or not. 
The advantages of the law that forbids the 
killing of does are numerous. I think that one 
of the greatest advantages is the fact that it 
brings home to every hunter a definite knowl¬ 
edge that there is now no excuse for shooting 
at moving bushes, at things half seen and at 
game not clearly in sight. 
If a man offers for an excuse that he shot 
some one, that “he thought it was a deer,” he 
is indicted in public opinion instantly for crim¬ 
inal carelessness. Until a man sees the game 
well enough to know that it has horns', and is 
not a doe, there is no excuse for shooting. 
The doe law will make it far easier to convict 
the fools and the scoundrels who shoot men 
“by mistake,” and spoil the hunting of thou¬ 
sands who fear the men who shoot at moving 
bushes and in the direction of noises. 
The conviction in Michigan of a young man 
and his sentence for life imprisonment on the 
charge of killing a man “accidentally’’ is cer¬ 
tain to be followed by other convictions of the 
same kind. 1 he New York law, regarding 
does, is a step toward putting the fool hunters 
where they belong. I think that another step 
should be taken. I think that men who hav'e 
killed or maimed people by their carelessness 
with firearms should be refused hunting licenses 
under the hunting, fishing and trapping laws; 
this would be a measure of public safety, and I 
feel certain that it could be made constitu¬ 
tional. 
Now as to the sporting proposition that the 
doe law is bad; the fact is that it compels 
men to be better hunters, better woodsmen. 
The contingent that goes into the woods and 
demands its toll of meat, even fawn meat and 
doe meat, do not add to the splendor of the 
woods in the least. They are the ones, I feel 
certain, who are making all the foolish claims 
that dead does fill the woods. They find that 
they are naturally doe killers, and that if they 
cannot bring out does, they cannot bring out 
any venison. 
Of course, I know, and every deer hunter 
knows, that it is a good deal easier, as a rule, 
to kill does than it is to kill bucks. To go 
forth and shoot only bucks cuts the kill not 
only in two, but it makes the kill one-third or 
even less. The practice of hunters in camp is 
to kill anything to get meat, and then go after 
“horns.” Doubtless even now, this practice is 
kept up to a large extent. Guides will tell that 
the game laws are scorned by countless men 
who advocate stringent laws and who are be¬ 
fore the world apparently the strictest of sports¬ 
men. This is one thing that makes men scorn 
a type of woods visitors as hypocrites. 
. The doe law brings home the necessity of 
circumspection before killing; it reaches every 
good sportsman, particularly, and the good 
sportsmen are going to profit by it in their own 
increase of skill. It puts a premium on ex¬ 
cellence of hunting, self-sacrifice and ability. 
The tendency of the day in hunting, fishing 
and outdoor life is not quantity, but for quality. 
The rewards offered for stories of record fish 
is an indication of this tendency, which is now 
against the large count—years ago fishermen 
called their success by count and not by size. 
In hunting, it is not the number of heads shot 
that matter, but the size and beauty of the 
game secured. The photographer is crowding 
the killer hard. If it were harder to kill an ani¬ 
mal than it is to photograph it, the killer would 
be supreme. 
The cry to have the doe law repealed is 
urged by many good people who think that 
meat is really wasted by the butchery of does. 
There is a great deal of meat wasted, anyhow, 
by faulty shooting. There is more meat wasted 
under the old lawq which allowed killing of 
either bucks or does. 
The anti-doe law is really a saver of meat. 
The number of men who would “take a chance” 
at a fleeting deer under the old system is very 
large. Taking a chance would result in the 
wounding of many deer which would get away 
and die. Now men take no chances of break¬ 
ing the law by shooting at a deer whose sex 
they cannot determine. There are hundreds 
of deer shot at under a buck and doe law, which 
are not shot at under the anti-doe law. 
It happens that I have not hunted deer 
under the law that forbids the killing of does, 
but I know from my own experience in the 
woods, counting more than twenty-five years, 
that this law is the best possible preventive 
of carelessness in hunting. I have hunted for 
bucks alone on many occasions, and have let 
the does go—and the reward in compulsory 
skill and woodcraft is ample return for all the 
pounds of venison that may have been lost. 
The only valid argument against the law 
forbidding the killing of does is found in the 
statement that dry does are growing more and 
more plentiful. There is, perhaps, no remedy 
for this. In the long run, however, I question 
whether much harm will be done by having 
fewer fawns in proportion to the number of 
the deer. Probably the loss is made up in the 
better condition of the deer during the winter, 
especially the does which, unweakened by care 
of fawns, survive in strength and fitness, where¬ 
as mother does would die of exposure. The 
deer as a race will be stronger and better with 
fewer fawns. 
At least the people who know that the buck 
law is a good thing should present their side 
of the argument and not permit the howlers 
for permission and excuse for banging away at 
anything moving in the brush to go unchal¬ 
lenged. The law, merely as a saver of human 
life, is well worth the investment. Under this 
law there is absolutely no excuse for the crim¬ 
inal carelessness that mistakes men for deer. 
Raymond S. Spears. 
Game in District of Columbia. 
BY RICHARD SYLVESTER, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE. 
T. HE District of Columbia territory embraces 
nearly seventy square miles and includes a large 
unimpioved, suburban section. There is found 
large tracts of timber and underbrush, all abund¬ 
antly watered. There is an extensive natural 
park where the rocks, trees of large dimensions 
and conditions make excellent cover for quail, 
squirrels, foxes, rabbits and range for birds of 
plumage. 
Under the supervision of the Game and Fish 
Protective Association, of which Walter S. Har- 
ban is the honored president, and protected by 
abundant laws enforced by the warden of the 
association, quail and game and the birds are 
secure against shooting. This condition is en¬ 
couraged to the end that the District may be¬ 
come throughout one large preserve as a natural 
attraction. In addition to the quail and small 
game, the association purchased woodduck, can- 
vasback and other varieties of ducks, wild geese 
and swan and affords them protection. During 
the winter season the writer employs the 
mounted policemen to distribute screenings as 
feed for the birds, and the “population” of quail 
under this treatment has increased from 400 to 
about 2,000. 1 he warden of this jurisdiction 
initiated this practice several i^ears ago, and it 
has been followed in many other jurisdictions. 
Along the Eastern Branch of the Potomac River 
and on the marshes of the Potomac within the 
District, reedbird and ortolan shooting is per¬ 
mitted by law after Sept, i, and under permits 
issued by the Superintendent of Police of the 
District, excess of rabbits are permitted to be 
killed off by truck gardeners by careful qualifi¬ 
cation. 
Likewise the Potomac River within the Dis¬ 
trict of Columbia is a spawning bed for shad, 
herring, small-mouth black bass and smaller 
species. Fishing with hook and live bait during 
the open season is allowed. 
It is to be regretted that the long open quail 
season in the District enables the pot-hunter to 
make it a sale place until March. The associa¬ 
tion fought the long open period, but stronger 
influence prevailed in Congress, and the sports¬ 
men were defeated. An attempt will be made 
to shorten the period this i^ear by the Game and 
Fish .Association. 
