Feb. 22. 1908.1 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
297 
through the Fish and Game Commission as an 
intermediary. This motion was adopted, after 
which the disgusted sportsmen filed out of the 
commission’s office, determined to live up to 
the letter of the motion and to make a personal 
canvass among the members of the Legislature 
for their support, in behalf of the following pro¬ 
posed measures: 
Protecting geese, ducks, swans and brant from 
Jan. 1 to Aug. 31 ; making the open season for 
shore birds and jacksnipe Sept. i-Dec. 31 in¬ 
clusive; and for woodcock Oct. i-Dec. 31 in¬ 
clusive. 
Among the associations represented by the 
New Jersey Sportsmen’s Association are the 
following: 
Plainfield Independent Shooting Club, Essex 
Fish and Game Protective Association, Essex 
League of American Sportsmen, Hanover Neck 
Game Association, Troy Meadow Fish and 
Game Protective Association, Audubon Society 
of New Jersey, Trenton Shooting Association, 
Passaic County Fish and Game Association, 
Jackson Park Shooting Association, French 
Town, Freehold, Bound Brook, New Bruns¬ 
wick, Tuckahoe, North Caldwell, Whitehouse, 
Forester, Montclair, Lambertville, Dove, South 
Side, Log Cabin, Orange, Smith, Rahway, Alert, 
Newton, North Camden, South End, Hadden- 
field, Morris, Cumberland, Netcing, Andover, 
Belleville, Hudson, Jersey City, and North Side 
gun clubs. 
Welcomes a Change. 
Amenia, N. Y., Jan. 27 .— Editor Forest and 
Stream: I see the Forest, Fish and Game Com¬ 
mission contemplates a change in game laws 
making them more uniform, etc., instead of 
leaving them the jumbled mess they are at 
present. 
I should say it was time something was done 
to straighten out things in that line. Take for 
example a statute passed by the last Legislature 
permitting the shooting of pheasants in Dutchess 
and Suffolk during November and leaving the 
law on in all the other counties of the 
State. 
If there was ever a foolish statute that cer¬ 
tainly was one. Why should two counties be 
sacrificed that way? I live in Dutchess and 
know how things go. The hunters came in by 
the trainload from New York well supplied with 
dogs, and they just about made a clean sweep, 
not only pheasant, but every other game was 
their victim. It will be some time before 
Dutchess gets back its game if it ever does. 
Near me is a large swamp which had quite 
a few pheasants. Before 7 o’clock A. M. twenty- 
five hunters and a dozen dogs made a charge on 
the opening day. I stopped them on part of the 
^wamp, as it is private property, posted, but they 
had driven everything out, shot six or seven, 
md scared the rest So that I think they reached 
China long ago and some back in old England, 
for, no doubt, the county got a clean up, the 
’pen season being one month. 
I call such laws that open two counties, leav- 
ng all the rest closed, foolish legislation. What 
-Ise is it? It is time there were changes in 
>ur game laws. Open the whole State- if you 
’pen at all. Let hunters have lots of room. Do 
lot sacrifice two counties as was done. 
J. G. R. 
The Ruffed Grouse Scarcity. 
Lowell, Mass., Feb. 8 . —Editor Forest and 
Stream: I read with interest the many articles 
in your fine publication, on the growing scarcity 
of ruffed grouse, quail and woodcock and have 
been looking in vain for any contributor to 
mention what seems to me to be the principal 
cause of such scarcity. Twenty years ago all 
of these birds were plentiful except perhaps 
quail, and then, as now, quail suffered by deep 
snows, which made them poor in flesh and so 
unable to stand cold. In this part of the coun¬ 
try and in New Hampshire I think foxes destroy 
large numbers of grouse, both old and young, 
and I wish fox hunting was more followed. It 
seems to me there are less fox hunters than 
there used to be, and that foxes are more plenti¬ 
ful. I found one grouse nest last year and a few 
days after, on taking my wife to see the nest, 
we found it destroyed, eggs broken and the 
feathers of the bird, large feathers and all, 
strewn around, showing that she had been killed 
and eaten. 
This, however, always occurred, and as I well 
remember thirty years ago many, and, in fact, 
nearly all grouse then taken were snared, as in 
those days pointers and setters were almost un¬ 
known. I only recall three men who regularly 
hunted birds with them. 
In those days it was unusual to go through 
any extensive wood lands without finding lines 
of snares, and grouse were always on sale in 
every city, still they were plentiful, and in a 
day’s walk without any dogs twenty grouse were 
not an unusual number to put up. But accord¬ 
ing to abundant testimony sent to you, such is 
not the case now anywhere in this country, and 
bird hunters are all wondering what has become 
of them. Some say cold winters, some say 
damp springs; but none suggest hot falls, by 
which I mean the constant and persistent hunt¬ 
ing by crack shots, who hunt in companies of 
two, three and four men, with trained dogs, and 
before whom the grouse has a poor show. 
I believe most States prohibit hunting deer 
with dogs, and many attribute the present num¬ 
bers of deer to that fact, and if deer cannot 
stand dogs, why should we expect grouse to? 
It cannot be denied that every condition sug¬ 
gested existed years ago, and in addition, snar¬ 
ing, which is not now practiced, so the bird 
hunters now enforce the law against snaring as 
no other game law ever was enforced, by de¬ 
stroying the snares. I hope none will think I 
am a snarer or want to be one, as I never 
snared or tried to snare a bird in my life, and I 
do like to shoot them and have kept bird dogs, 
and to that extent write from experience; but I 
am convinced that the trouble is, too many 
hunters and too many and too good dogs. 
We all know that in every community of any 
size there are those who boast of shooting one 
to two hundred birds to a season, and if this is 
true or half true, why need we seek further to 
find the cause of grouse scarcity? I suppose 
it would be idle to suggest prohibiting hunting 
grouse with dogs, but with our growing popu¬ 
lation and increasing interest in field sports, it 
is equally idle to expect grouse to be plentiful 
otherwise. 
There is another thing that I want to speak 
of, bird hunters scarcely-ever hunt grouse alone, 
and it is because grouse often refuse to lie to 
a dog and then they are driven from one hunter 
to another, which is another fruitful cause of 
extermination and I think is wrong. I want 
also to add a word in regard to licenses for 
hunting, and I think States make a great mis¬ 
take in requiring nonresidents to pay a large 
tax and a resident a very small tax or none at 
all. I think all hunters should pay a tax of five 
dollars regardless of place of residence, and the 
same in every State they hunt in. 
It seems to me that would He reasonable, as 
no one now objects to two dollars for a dog 
license, and a right to hunt over a whole State 
should be worth five dollars, if a dog license of 
two dollars is reasonable. My experience and 
observation are that residents in most cases 
kill vastly more game than visitors, not only 
as they have the whole season to do it in, but 
they know the country and besides having 
venison and other game in and out of season, 
they sell it to visitors. In one town in Maine, 
where I have been on fishing trips, and am 
well acquainted, venison is shot and divided at 
all seasons, and I was told last fall that in that 
town five cow moose were killed, and it was 
well known to many, yet I cannot go there to 
hunt without paying fifteen dollars for a license 
and hiring a guide, so I do not go, and the 
residents lose the opportunity to board me 
or sell me game to bring home. 
I for one am willing to pay five dollars for 
the privilege of hunting wherever I go and 
most willing of all to my own State, for game 
protection, but I am not willing to pay ten, 
fifteen or twenty-five dollars to another State, 
for perhaps only two or three days’ time to 
hunt, when residents of the same State may 
hunt free through the season, though they may 
not even pay their poll taxes. Speed the time 
of a general hunting license for resident and 
nonresident alike, of not less than five dollars, 
and he who cannot afford five dollars cannot 
afford the time to hunt at all. 
C. H. McEwy. 
An Alberta Wolf Measure. 
An Edmonton (Alberta) correspondent sends 
us clippings from the Bulletin of Feb. 1, as fol¬ 
lows : 
“Yesterday afternoon’s session of the Legisla¬ 
ture was a brief one, devoted to routine. An 
interesting feature of the afternoon, bearing upon 
the fur trade of the north country, was a notice 
of motion given by Ally Brick, the member for 
Peace River, of a motion he will introduce on 
Monday concerning the use of poisons in the de¬ 
struction of wolves. The bill will have force 
only in that portion of the Province lying north 
of the fifty-fifth degree. 
“This bill aims at a revival of the old ordi¬ 
nance in force over the territories nine years 
ago. As it was at that time greatly abused, and 
fur bearing animals killed with poisons by per¬ 
sons who would endeavor to shelter themselves 
under this act, the law was permitted to lapse. 
Now Mr. Brick’s constituents are asking for its 
re-enactment and strict enforcement. 
“Their hope is to kill off now in a lean sea¬ 
son for fur-bearing animals as many wolves as 
they possibly can, and when in the natural order 
of things the fur-bearing animals return in larger 
quantities, the ranks of their old hereditary ene¬ 
mies, the wolves, will be diminished.” 
