HOW DID RAINBOWS GET 
TO THE “SOO”? 
Dear Forest and Stream : 
OTING in August number article 
by Ben C. Robinson on “Emerson 
Hough’s Wild Waters,” it appears that 
the rainbow trout is found in the 
waters of the “Soo” rapids, and in fact 
he refers to those waters as “the home 
of the rainbow.” 
About twenty-five years ago I used 
to fish those rapids, with both fly and 
bait, and remember the big square tail 
brook trout we used to get. The same 
trout in fact as was to be found around 
the shores of Lake Superior generally, 
and in the streams flowing into the 
Lake. 
Although familiar with the rainbow 
(which we then used to find in streams 
in Wisconsin, which I know), I never 
saw one taken from the Soo waters. 
So I presume to learn about this, if the 
facts are obtainable. 
Benj. H. Baker, New York City. 
READER DISAGREES WITH 
MR. JONES 
Dear Forest and Stream : 
LEASE allow me to reply to the 
letter of Mr. B. T. Jones, which 
appeared in the October issue. It 
seems that Mr. Jones is more or less 
prejudiced against our method of fox 
hunting north of the Mason-Dixon. 
Of course, Mr. Jones, environment has 
a great deal to do with cases of this 
sort, so we’ll just take a look at the 
country up here where Mr. Reynard is 
hunted. It usually consists of rather 
high hills, which sometimes assume the 
proportions of young mountains, and 
these are very frequently densely 
covered with scrub-oak, laurel and 
other thick vegetation. Now how under 
the scintillating rays of the blazing sun 
are you ever going to run a pack of 
hounds through such stuff? Answer: 
Yau can’t do it. Therefore we must 
let one or two hounds ferret out the 
trail, and post ourselves at advanta¬ 
geous joints, which, in my estimation, 
gives Reynard (who, by the way, has a 
two-dollar bounty on his head in this 
state) a much greater chance for 
freedom than piling a whole mess of 
hounds on his trail to run him to death. 
On the other hand, Mr. Jones, you’d 
better look to your Southern laurels of 
sportsmanship, for to hunt deer with 
dogs (such as* you intimated in your 
letter when you stated that our fox 
hunting reminded you of deer hunting) 
is considered,, and justly so, a terrible 
crime up here. 
However, “I should not be harsh, for 
every country has its own custonis(?).” 
With all good will, 
R. Bailey, Eagleville, Pa. 
FIGHTING DISTEMPER 
Dear Forest and Stream: 
I HAVE before me an advertisement 
* containing a letter written by Mr. 
L. S. Worden and published in one of 
the weeklies on August 18th last* In 
this letter the writer, in speaking of 
prevention and cure of Distemper in 
Dogs, over-stresses one of the possible 
vehicles of the transmission of the dis¬ 
ease. 
Now we are all deeply interested in 
the prevention and cure of Distemper, 
and the gravity of the situation has 
been recently emphasized by the 
“Field” Distemper Fund in England 
and the American Distemper Com¬ 
mittee here. 
I need not go into the question of 
the communicability and history of the 
disease, but I might say that it is 
closely analogous to and as old as In¬ 
fluenza in man. This (under a hun¬ 
dred names) is as old as history, at 
least. It is in all probability the 
Plague that has been with us always, 
breaking out into epidemic form every 
now and then. 
I am not at this writing touching 
upon the treatment of the disease, but 
am trying to point out the real chief 
sources and carriers of infection. 
Until we have a certainly effective 
treatment of distemper we must, of 
course, take every precaution to guard 
our dogs against infection. 
First, in regard to Mr. Worden’s let¬ 
ter : Benching has less to do as a 
carrier of the disease than any other 
suspected vehicle. Probably the few 
owners of benching plants—and cer¬ 
tainly ‘the principal owner—disinfect 
the benching between shows, frequently 
painting the boards and scraping, 
steaming and disinfecting in various 
ways the unpainted parts. 
Mr. Worden speaks of the chalk 
marks that he has seen on benching at 
successive shows. I understand from 
the aforesaid largest owner that this 
marking of this show outfit is a source 
of great annoyance and expense, the 
annoyance arising from a little sus¬ 
pected cause: Chalk marks made on 
ordinary good paint cannot be washed 
off. 
How then is the infection carried 
from show to show? An analogous 
question would be: “How did I catch 
this cold?” 
Given a case of low resistance, due 
to fatigue and exitement, and the dis¬ 
temper germ finds easy lodgment. If 
we were always in a receptive condition 
for the ever-present and ever-wander¬ 
ing disease germs, no street car, no 
place where people are gathered to¬ 
gether would be safe. 
Hygiene and good physical condition 
are the best defences. Cleanliness (in 
which water is the chief purifying 
agent and, better still, soap and water) 
is the next best guard. 
It has long been the opinion of those 
that really watch these things with un¬ 
prejudiced eyes, that the traveling 
boxes, kennels, crates, etc., that go 
from show to show, not always looked 
after by the most careful attendants 
in the world, carry far more infection 
than ever benching did. 
Ask your kennelman when he disin¬ 
fected his travelling crates last and if 
one of his dogs has come back from a 
show with distemper, ask him what he 
did with the crate that brought the 
dog back? 
H. Vander Roest, 
D..V. S. 
READER WANTS INFORMA¬ 
TION ON FALCONRY 
Dear Forest and Stream: 
T AM very anxious to learn whether 
^ the sport of Falconry or Hawking 
is practised anywhere in the United 
States. Rumors have reached me of a 
Falconry Club recently started on Long 
Island, also of the existence of one 
somewhere on the western plains. 
May I ask you to give me any exact 
information which you may have as to 
this? 
I understand that an article ap¬ 
peared recently in one of our sporting 
magazines descriptive of the efforts of 
a certain lady in this country who in¬ 
dulges in Hawking as a pastime. Did 
your magazine contain any such article 
in its recent editions? 
Perhaps you can tell me of some 
dealers who trade in Falcons and in 
the furniture and fittings used in the 
process of training Hawks. 
John P. S. Harrison, 
New York City. 
CORRECTION 
Dear Forest and Stream : 
In my article on the General Purpose 
Shot Gun in the September number, the 
type makes me say that the 2% x % 
load in a 16-gauge is superior in veloc¬ 
ity to the popular 2% x lVs load in a 
12-gauge. This is erroneous. What 
was intended to be written was that the 
above 16-gauge load gave a higher 
velocity than the popular 3!4 x lVs 
combination in a 12-gauge. 
Please make the correction. 
Geo. G. Clough. 
Page 636 
