The Destruction of Our Wildfowl. 
^Boston, March 7 .— Editor Forest and Stream: 
All reports indicated that the flight of ducks 
again decreased last fall. The excessive shooting 
of wildfowl must be regulated by all the New 
England States. Why should any civilized people 
legalize the shooting of wildfowl in spring? It 
would be just as reasonable to allow spring 
shooting of grouse, quail and woodcock. What 
is the result of spring shooting? The swans and 
snow geese have almost disappeared. The edible 
wild ducks have grown fewer year by year until 
now the inland ponds and rivers, formerly swarm¬ 
ing with waterfowl, are almost untenanted by 
them. 
Sixty to seventy years ago green-winged teal 
were abundant in New England. Now they are 
1 rare. Fifty years ago blue-winged teal were 
plentiful. Now they are few. Forty years ago 
the woodduck bred commonly throughout the 
New England States. Now it is in danger of ex¬ 
termination. 
Already most of the States and Provinces of 
North America have awakened to the necessity 
of protecting wildfowl in spring; but Massachu- 
• setts and Rhode Island lag far behind the lead¬ 
ers in this movement. Fully thirty species of 
wildfowl that normally visit these States have 
practically no protection under the law. The 
statutes are so arranged as to allow the shooting 
of some of these birds during every month of 
the year, while others are protected only when 
they are out of the State. 
A limited amount of fall shooting would not 
decrease the numbers of the birds were they pro¬ 
tected for the rest of the year. But shooting in 
January and February—which takes advantage 
of the necessities of the birds on the ice-bound 
shoals and ponds—and spring shooting of mated 
or breeding birds inevitably tend toward extinc¬ 
tion. Unless the shooting of all wildfowl from 
January to September, at least, is prohibited by 
law everywhere the pond and river ducks of New 
England—those that are esteemed as table deli¬ 
cacies—will disappear and the sportsman will 
find only dippers, coots and fish ducks along our 
shores. 
Were it not that the Canadian Provinces have 
passed and enforced laws prohibiting spring 
shooting the day of reckoning would have been 
at hand long ago. Now the breeding places of 
the wildfowl in Canada are fast being encroach¬ 
ed upon by agriculture and civilization and 
we must either make it possible for the birds to 
breed here’in New England or lose a great part 
of this source of recreation and food supply for¬ 
ever. 
Wherever spring shooting has been prohibited 
by law for a series of years the ducks have in¬ 
creased. This has been true of even the most 
limited regions, such as counties, islands and 
areas comprising only a few farms. Wildfowl 
would breed near most of the streams, ponds 
and marshes of New England if they were not 
molested in spring. 
Great numbers of wild ducks still breed in the 
marshes and fens of England under protection. 
Hundreds of thousands of black ducks, wood- 
ducks, teal, whistlers and other ducks should be 
reared in the New England States annually. An 
attempt is now making to bring Massachusetts 
and Rhode Island in line with New York, Con¬ 
necticut and the other States which prohibit the 
shooting of all wildfowl in spring. 
This is a matter of great interest to the people 
of the interior. Every fall before the ice locks 
the streams and ponds the ducks that breed near 
inland waters migrate to the coast region. Some 
remain there all winter while others go South. 
In the early spring they crowd northward and 
eastward along the coast awaiting the breaking 
up of the ice in the ponds and streams. All this 
time the shore gunner takes his toll from the 
A WILDCAT FROM THE HIGHLANDS OF SCOTLAND. 
This cat weighs about 20 pounds. Her owner, C. J. H. 
Cassells, says she and another wildcat kept by him, 
escaped one night, and together they killed over forty 
turkeys, chickens and ducks. These wildcats (rehx catus) 
are nearly extinct. 
• 
birds until, when spring opens, few birds are left 
to return to their breeding grounds in the in¬ 
terior. 
The shore gunner prefers to kill birds in 
spring, for then when a bird is shot its mate is 
usually an easy prey. When the ice breaks up 
and the few remaining birds return to their 
homes in the interior they are pursued by pot¬ 
hunters and farmers’ boys who can legally shoot 
most species of wildfowl in spring, and therefore 
will shoot anything that comes within range. 
Thus it is that the geese, ducks, loons and grebes 
that formerly bred here have been driven out, 
and thus has a whole people been deprived of its 
birthright in the wildfowl of lake and river. 
To control and replenish this supply of birds 
it is only necessary for the States to enact wise, 
uniform laws and then provide the means of en¬ 
forcing them. Edward Howe Forbush. 
The Forest and Stream may be obtained from 
any newsdealer on order. Ask your dealer to 
supply you regularly. 
Do Animals Reason? 
Owego, N. Y., Feb. 24 . — Editor Forest and 
Stream: In your issue of the 23d Mr. Julian 
Burroughs heads an article with the query, “Do 
Animals Reason?” Yes they do. They are like 
some people; some argue that animals don't 
reason and some that they do. I believe that 
they do. 
In the course of his article Mr. Burroughs 
says: “Place a piece of meat just out of reach 
of a hungry chained-up dog. Place a hooked 
stick within his reach. Will the dog take the 
stick in his mouth and draw the meat to him¬ 
self? No. Will he even turn around and haul 
the meat within reach of his mouth .with his 
hind foot? No, simply because any of these acts 
involves a mental conception, an act of what the 
psychologists call reason.” 
With a view to convincing Mr. Burroughs 
that according to his own argument above 
quoted, some animals do sometimes reason, I 
offer the following evidence: 
The entertainment at the Sportsmen’s Show 
at Grand Central Palace last December included 
a moving picture which depicted a large black 
bear in the act of securing a bunch of grapes 
that had been hung beyond his reach. Although 
I did not see the picture, friends have described 
it as follows, and if I have not told it correctly, 
I trust that some of your readers, many of whom 
must have seen it, will prompt me. 
The bear was chained up. The grapes were 
suspended in the air and as soon as the animal 
discovered that he could not get them by stand¬ 
ing on his hind feet he rolled a large packing 
box over and over, until it was nearly under the 
grapes. Climbing upon it, he tried vainly to 
reach them, but discovering that he had miscal¬ 
culated, he dropped to the ground and shoved 
the box about until he finally got it in position. 
Again he mounted it, and again he could not ac¬ 
complish his object, for the box was not square, 
and he had placed it with its broadest side 
down, so he dismounted, turned it upon its edge 
and was then able to reach the grapes. Now, 
provided the animal was not trained to do this, 
Mr. Burroughs will have to confess according 
to his own conception of the meaning as quoted 
above, that this animal showed unmistakable 
evidence of being able to reason . 1 
This was a little game of the master and his 
bear, and experience should have taught the ani¬ 
mal how to get the fruit without so much 
maneuvering, but it didn’t, which is a point in 
favor of Mr. Burroughs; its reasoning power 
was extremely limited. 
As regards an animal securing things placed 
beyond the reach of its teeth or its front feet, I 
have repeatedly seen bears that were chained up, 
reach out with their hind feet and get them in 
the manner suggested by Mr. Burroughs. 
While studying in the Zoological Garden in 
London, I made the acquaintance of a mischiev¬ 
ous baboon that, because of its irresistible de¬ 
sire to make a rough house of the cage and its 
many smaller occupants, was chained in one QOf- 
\ 
