Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1906-08-16
A VIEW.
Thinks Farmers should Control All the
Game Within boundary Lines
of His Land.

(E. NJ. Pike of Rutland County in Ameri-
can Cultivator.)
Why should not all birds and animals
which live upon the farmers crops be
the property of the land owner and sub
ject to his c~ontrol7
If the bird Or animal is a friend TO him
and beneficial to his crops. the farmer will
soon find It out and protect it the same
as he does his domestic nocks and herds.
If it is detrimental to him and destroys
his crops so as to become a nuisance he
will tax means 10 protect the crops and
cxtermirate the animal from his premises
if not prevented by fear of the law.
Most noxious animals and birds that
prey upon tho farmers crops have become
so scarce, unless it be in a few remote
and thinly settled localities. that but little
trouble is experienced from them. There
are. however. n few pests that need the
cooperation of State and national Iegis-
~llatures to prevent their destroying Ncge-
%tation. There are others that need only
the free will Of the land owners to keep
them in check.
Time was, and not so very long ago,
that it was of rare occurrence TO see a
deer in Vermont, especially in the Guilt
waited portions Of the State. Some %
years or So ago II was Thought ny ''iil
that 1t would be a fine idea TO again intro
duce that gamey little animal into the
State. which was accordingly done, A
number were turned loose in some of the
widest parts of the country and a law
was enacted for their protection, which
was kept in force until the deer became
quite plentiful. Then sportsmen Were
given the right to hrnt them for Z few
Ida vg at n rartnin season of the Np1I
wherever they chose to do so. And the
law was kept in force and is strictly en-
forced during the rest of the year.
Deer are strict vesetarians. and live Up
on the products Of the soil. Why, then
should they not be the property of tn,
owners of the land on which they live az
much as cattle. sheep, goats or any othel
2 stock which the farmer keeps? If they
p were then he could protect his crops, in {
y measure at least, against their depreda
lions. the same as they do from their do
| nestle animals.
If any one wished to allow them to rl'
at random through his crops he woul'
-, have a perfect right to do so. If he ha'
certain crops that he thought of mor'
value TO save for the use of his family
n or his more useful domestic stock, h
i could try at least to protect II agains
= their ravages, the same as he does agains
the ravages and destruction of his ow'
or his neighbours cattle.
I If he saw n flock OF deer destroying
n choice field of grain or eating his garde'
vegetables, he could at least set his do
on them without fear or prosecutions. an
they would soon learn to visit places NOR
$ secluded: or, if he chose to fatten ther
= on the choicest grass and grain who
they chose to select, he could shoot thet
when fit for market, or for his ow
family use. the same as he can n shee
or n fat steer, and thus derive some beno
y, fit from them. He could also protect ther
and his crops and fields against disintei
d, ested sportsmcn, who have helped to cor
tribute nothing for their living an
growth. why nave they any better RICH
to hunt and kill them than they hav
the farmer's sheep, young stock or COWS
Let every man control them as he see
fit on his own land, and II he goes on I
his neighbor's land'after them, serve MI
the same as though he were after sheel
cattle or other property.