The new North-west. [volume] (Deer Lodge, Mont.) 1869-1897, 1885-01-30

Councilman Fergus has, we think, raised
q proper protest against the particular game
bill now being considered In the Legislature,
and against feature Of the game laws new
enacted. There has been considerable good
legislation to protect fish and game animals
and birds In Montana, but the laws have to
. great extent failed through lack Of enforce
msnt. One feature Of these laws, and .
part Of the bill new under consideration, il
bad. The law, as 1t new stands, prohibits
any one from killing, even In season, any
grouse, prairie chicken, pheasant, fool hen,
partridge or quail, "for speculative purposes
or for sale" The Chessman bill now before
the Legislature extends this nsn-selling
prohibition to buffalo, Moose, deer, noun.
tain sheep, Rocky Mountain goat and ante
lope. We believe the restriction Ii wrong
in principle and practice. In England,
where there are "preserve" and "poaching"
laws that are considered irksome, the pre-
serves have the color Of equity by being on
the lands Of private owners, but here, in free
America, 1t Is practically extended to the
into market and purchase bird, or, If this
bill passes, any common game. 1t Is an ab-
solute reserve for those who have time, op-
portunity, desire and skill to 60 into the val
leys and mountains and shoot the game
themselves. Now, what better right has the
hunter to eat the game Of the country which
he has killed, than the other person who Is
willing to pay market price for it? The
restriction is Of the same spirit ofthe United
States law requiring all who would use tin.
Der of the public domain to 90 into the
woods and cut and haul it-s provision 50
manifestly unjust that . few years ago 1t |
called forth the most emphatic condemnation |
from the people Of Montana. The prohbi- |
ton Is wrong. Let it not 60 into any new |
legislation and be stricken out Of the old. |
The man who follows his days labor on the |
farm or In the town, has just q much right,
II he can purchase It, to eat elk and grouse
IS the hunter who in field or forest shoots it.
theoretically the primary object
was to preserve the game, the
practical effect Of 1t Is to make hunters q
'pecially favored class In this respect, and no
nan except those who kill said game can
egally become possessed by purchase Of .
bird or bite Of venison. II is = wrong that
las crept into our statutes and should be
ootsd out.
The game laws Of Montana are, aside from
bis, II enforced, adequate to the proper pro.
ection Of game birds and animals. They
rs protected by law from destruction during
be breeding season, and from being wan
only killed at all times. The trouble Ii,
ur laws are not enforced. In this county
'e know that ct oil seasons Indians kill and
estroy game animals, and that there never
an be material increase or protection Of 1t
Vhils they como In bands, camp for weeks
nd months, in the breeding a we'll rs other
easons, along the edge Of the valleys, and
laughter everything they can eat-and they
an eat almost the conception Of game ami
AL. II has been suggested that they be
onfned TO their reservations, but this has
cen judicially pronounced unconstitutional
, depriving them Of their liberty. They
re, however, amenabls to our laws when of
le reservation, and the laws should be en- .
reed against them. The suggestion Of I
anne Constable for each county, which the I
herif might be er c1icio, Is good one, and
10 active cooperation Of the Rod and Gun
lubs, would result in Furnishing Indians
J well as others whs kill game out of sea. d,
IN, and all persons who use giant powder.
lines or other methods declared illegal. Z
'e trust legislation will be directed to this .
lrpose rather than In the direction conten. q
sted by the Cbessman bill, and believe it i
Ill result In better protection without the c
pjust discrimination against citizens who,
re Councilman Fergus, relish bite Of wild !.
,sh, and yet cannot, or do not wish to, 90
I'd kill II themselves. ;,