FOREST AND STREAM: 



Feeding Quail in Winter. 
Editor Forest and Stream: 
In the interest of Bob White, who has had 
rather more than his share of tribulations dur- 
ing the past two severe winters, I venture to 
make an addition to the excellent article by Mr. 
Cyrus A. Taft on the subject of feeding quail 
in winter. 
Every article on the subject, which the writer 
has thus far seen, deals with the food problem 
alone, and overlooks another matter quite as 
important, namely, the providing of free sand 
or fine gravel, which is essential to the bird’s 
digestion. Indeed, after following the birds for 
some years, more as a naturalist than a hunter, 
I am convinced that more birds perish from the 
lack of gravel than from the lack of food. The 
conclusion will probably be questioned, and so 
I give the reasons which lead to it, hoping that 
other sportsmen and naturalists will contribute 
their mites and aid in the preservation of a 
splendid bird in which we are all interested. 
It is generally known, I think, that sand or 
gravel is absolutely necessary to the quail in 
order to crush the hard and slippery seeds upon 
which he feeds, which unless the shells are 
crushed, would mostly pass through the alimen- 
tary tract unchanged and so afford no nourish- 
ment. Now free gravel is harder for the birds 
to obtain in winter than food. A heavy snow, 
or a sleet storm, will seal the ground so hard 
that often the birds, with all their searching, 
cannot find a single free pebble; in which case, 
I am convinced, many birds suffer and die, no 
matter how well fed, unless sand is provided 
or unless a thaw comes speedily to help them. 
If soft food is provided they can, of course, 
digest it without trouble; but for the ordinary 
diet of hard seeds the gravel is essential. Two 
years ago I found a small covey of quail dead 
in a fence corner. I opened them, and to my 
surprise found plenty of food to sustain life, 
but not a particle of sand or gravel. In the past 
two severe winters I have examined perhaps a 
dozen other quail found dead in the snow, and 
in only two cases were the birds entirely with- 
out food. These certainly were not cases of 
freezing, for Bob White does not apparently 
suffer from cold when he is sufficiently nour- 
ished, and in all the cases I have referred to 
the birds had already passed through much 
colder weather than that which prevailed at the 
time they perished. 
As a boy, when I followed the tracks of Bob 
White eagerly after every soft snow, there was 
one spot where I was almost sure of finding a 
flock of the birds at some time during the day. 
That was an overhanging bank, facing the south, 
under which could always be found some bare 
ground, no matter how deep the snow was lying 
all around. Many times I tracked the birds 
from their feeding ground to this bank, and one 
winter three flocks resorted to it almost daily. 
I used to think that they went here for shelter, 
but soon noticed that it was only in deep snow 
or severe cold that they came here. Then I 
watched more carefully, and found them often 
engaged in picking up the gravel. 
Since then I have sometimes followed a flock 
on its daily round, and find that, after the morn- 
ing feed, they generally head for the nearest spot 
where they can find a bit of ground which the 
wind or an overhanding bank has left free of 
snow and ice. One day I tracked a flock to 
the nearest railroad embankment, and saw them 
all busy between the rails. I went and flushed 
them, after a time, and found not a particle of 
food, but only scattered cinders from the engine. 
No gravel was to be obtained, and they were 
evidently using these cinders as a substitute. 
In Mr. Taft’s excellent article there is one 
suggestive paragraph which I would interpret 
 GAMIE RAG AND GUN 
in a way somewhat different from his own. 
He says: ‘‘We found it of advantage to clear 
away the snow after a heavy fall, so the sun 
would melt a bare place. The birds seemed to 
like to get on this little bare ground and sun 
themselves. We often saw them so.” From 
my own observations I would say without hesi- 
tation that the birds sought this little bare spot, 
not so much to sun themselves, as to find gravel, 
which elsewhere was covered up by the deep 
snow. 
My suggestion, therefore, to those who are 
engaged in the good work of protecting quail 
in winter would be either to keep one spot of 
ground always bare near their feeding boxes, 
or better still to place near the boxes a shallow 
pan of sand or fine gravel. Except in the 
severest weather quail will manage to find some 
food for themselves; but to find gravel under 
the snow is a much more difficult matter. 
I shall welcome any further observations on 
this point, and am sure that naturalists and 
sportsmen generally will welcome any sugges- 
tions which will help them intelligently to care 
for a bird that needs some protection besides 
the law, if he is to survive our severe New 
England winters. WiLiiaM J. Lone. 
STAMFORD, Conn, Jan, 81. 

Ontario Non-Resident Tax. 
AT the meeting of the Ontario Fish and Game 
Commission held on Jan. 10, the subject of non- 
resident lessees of hunting and fishing privileges 
in the Province of Quebec was discussed in the 
presence of Hon. Jean Prevost, Minister of Colo- 
nization, Mines and Fisheries of that Province, 
who there announced his adherence to the policy, 
with certain unimportant modifications, of levying 
upon such lessees a license fee of $25 for hunting 
deer upon their leased territory. Mr. W. R. 
White, K. C., of Pembroke, thereupon made a 
verbal protest against this proposal as being a 
breach of contract. He also obtained the Minis- 
ter’s consent to publish a memorial which he had 
written, setting forth his view of the case, This 
statement is as follows: 
“PEMBROKE, December, 1905.—Hon. Jean Pre- 
vost, Minister Colonization, Mines and Fisheries, 
Quebec, Que.: Sir—I had the honor of an in- 
vitation from you to attend, and did attend, the 
Fish and Game Congress at the Windsor Hotel 
on the 13th and 14th inst., at which you so ably 
presided. I was much pleased to hear you state 
in your opening remarks that your Government 
intended to respect the contracts and leases at 
present existing between the Province and the 
various clubs and individuals with whom these 
contracts and leases had been made. 
“I was much surprised, however, on the second 
day of the Congress, to hear you express your- 
self as favorable to the recommendation of the 
Committee on Big Game—that the members of 
clubs and individual lessees of hunting territory 
who did not reside in the Province should be 
compelled to pay a license fee of $25 each for 
hunting deer upon their leased territory. As you 
were kind enough to invite discussion I took the 
liberty of protesting viva voce, as strongly and as 
fully as I could against this proposition. But, as 
you are well aware, the discussion was of a some- 
what irregular character, and unless I wished to 
make myself specially obnoxious, which I had no 
desire to do, I could not fully place before you 
all the arguments that occurred to me at the 
time as being germane to the question. 
“I therefore take the liberty, with your per- 
mission, of placing myself upon record as most 
strongly opposed to the proposed license fee of 
$25 and to lay before you as briefly as possible 
some of the reasons why the imposition of such 
a license fee would be against law, equity and 
[FEB. 10, 1906. 

natural justice and derogatory to the honor of 
the crown. 
“The club, of which I am president, holds from 
the crown, during the period and under the con- 
ditions therein mentioned, a certain tract of land 
for the sole purpose of enjoying the hunting and 
shooting rights thereon; and for this the club 
pays annually the rental demanded by your de- 
partment; and I assume that this is the same as 
other leases to other clubs and persons. Assum- 
ing that the rent is paid and the conditions com- 
plied with, the club and its members have the 
right to hunt and shoot over the tract of land 
leased until the expiration of the term fixed in the 
lease. What then would be the effect of the im- 
position of the proposed license fee? It can have 
no other logical effect than this: I and the other 
members of my club would have no right to the 
enjoyment of the hunting and shooting rights 
solemnly granted to us by the crown, upon pay- 
ment of a specific annual rental, unless we go 
further and each pay to the crown $25 before we 
can enjoy these rights. I most respectfully sub- 
mit that the imposition of such a license fee 
would be a breach of faith on the part of the 
crown for which no parallel can be found any- 
where in the world, where the rights of the sub- 
ject are respected, and where responsible govern- 
MENTE (Exists. : 
“During the discussion, you pointed out that 
the lease is subject to a compliance on the part 
of the lessees with rules and regulations that 
might thereafter be made by the Lieutenant-Govy- 
ernor in council in relation to the hunting and 
shooting rights, and you argued therefrom that 
the proposed imposition of the license fee was 
intra vires of the Government of the Province. 
With all possible respect, I beg to dissent from 
such a view. Rules or regulations may be made 
by the Government as to the manner in which 
and the seasons when game may be hunted, or 
taken, or disposed of when taken. But when you 
say that unless we pay to the crown the sum of 
$25 each we cannot exercise the right the crown 
has already agreed to give, and has given us for 
another valuable consideration or annual payment, 
you strike at once at the root of the contract, 
which has been entered into in the most formal 
manner between the crown and the lessees, and 
practically annul the contract. You give with the 
one hand and take away with the other. 
“I do not know the modern term applicable to 
this course of proceeding. The old English writ- 
ers used to call it spoliation or confiscation. 
“You stated at the Congress that even if these 
regulations could not be made legally effective, 
the Legislature could pass an act which could be 
enforced. I then stated in reply, and now repeat, 
that I concede the supremacy of Parliament and 
its rights to pass an act vesting your property in 
me, Or mine in you. But never, since the subject 
obtained his freedom and the right to legislate for 
himself, through his representatives in Parlia- 
ment, has any Parliament attempted to exercise 
such a right. Certainly, not in Britain or any of 
its self-governing dependencies. I venture to ex- 
press the hope that the Legislature of the Prov- 
ince of Quebec will not be the first in the civilized 
world to pass such an act of legalized confisca- 
tion, 
“Have you, sir, considered the effect of such a 
departure from the crown’s solemn contract with 
its lessees? Take any club such as ours and what 
is our position? Relying absolutely upon the 
crown keeping faith with our club, it has ex- 
pended several thousands of dollars; has built a 
club house, two hunting lodges, stables and out 
buildings, guardian’s residence, ice house, seven 
boat houses, docks, etc., and has constructed 
three and one-half miles of road over the Lauren- 
tian Hills. with seven bridges, admittedly the 
best road in the township. Assuming that our 
lease had expired, and some other club or person 
