The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1909-10-24
FRANK 6 HOWE, EditOr and PHblishs
THE DEER QUESTION

towns of Vermont and in close prov
unity to the great extent of wilder
ness that covers the main range G
the Green Mountains is probably a
we'll located to judge the merits c
this deer discussion as any paper i
the state. Moreover the Sitter
level-headed and does not let preju6
ice run away with it's reasoning pow
ers. The following from the Sitter
commended to the attention of som
of the brethren who are inclined t
think and declare that there is onl
one side to the question:
The extensive posting of land
against hunting, during the past few
weeks has caused considerable agita
ton over the present deer laws
There are two sides to the question
1t must be admitted that a land own
er has a perfect right to forbid hunt
ing on his enclosed property If h,
chooses so to do. On the other hand
the hunters. after paying for II
cense, have good reason TO believe
that they are to have chance tC
hunt; otherwise the state of Vermont
would be taking money and granting
nothing in return for it. II would be
like purchasing a ticket for a show
only to find, after passing through
tahe door, that there was no show, o.
1t least, only the semblance of one.
The present arrangement resolves
itself into an annual fall deer shoot
with the state OF Vermont as the pro
moter The annual Thanksgiving
turkey shoot" of few years ago was
pretty much frowned down; but you
remember that the man behind the
scheme had his turkeys ready, took a
fee for allowing contestants to shoot
at them, and gave q turkey to each
one that could kill it under certain
rules. How does the annual fall
deer shoot" differ from the barbarous
turkey shoot?" The state of Yer
mont protects the deer and gets
them fat lin many instances paying
the farmers for fattening them) and
then invites everybody to come to
the Vermont deer shoot to be held
during the last full week in October
hunter from without the state. or fif-
ty cents for 4 resident hunter. The
hunter has the deer II he can kill it
under certain rules" Nice enterprise
for the state of Vermont to be engag
ed in
Our entire statutory law bearing on
this yexed question, is from start to
finish, wrong. II causes too much
Neighbors are made en-
emies. There is pulling and hauling
in at least four directions: Some land
owners want no deer because of the
damage they do; other land owners
want no hunters on their premises for
fear of damage they may do by fire.
Hunters want to be allowed the sport
of Staying the animals Others with
tastes want to see the Gun
ming things" as much and as often as
possible, and want none of them kill
ed
What to do about it. If deer must
be preserved. protected, propagated-
then let the state maintain few
game preserves in different parts of
its territory, instead of trying to keep
the entire state in as primitive a con-
dition as possible. If Vermont is to
keep pace with her sister states in
the march of civilization she should
aim towards something higher than
becoming merely a hunting ground,
and she should have higher ideals
than that of running an annual fall
deer shoot"
While Banner does not agree
with the Sitter, we are GER
tainly glad to see the question dis
cussed on its merits rather than I'M
der more or less violent excitement
and prejudice, which often lead to dis
tortion and unfairness.
The Banner believes with the Stiff
or that there is right on both sides
and that when any one person sets
himself up as the sole guide and rule
Of faith he is not to be taken serious
y.
We regret that there has been
in some quarters to at
empt to prevent giving the new law
4 fair trial. We had hoped that the
state might next fall return to the old
aw with the deer damage issue dis
posed of or greatly minimiZed for a
few years and yet with deer enough
eft to occasionally gladden. the eve
)f both home people and summer Wis
tors The state has only a limited
mount of wild land available to SUP
port wild game. When the quantity
gets beyond a certain limit it must be
reduced or it will cause trouble.
The Incorporate and abusive meth
DDS adopted by the Hapgood type of
lgitators has stirred up hard feelings
On both sides. In some quarters it is
said that they have secured the post
ing of enough land so that the new
law will hardly get fair trial. They
have brought on a row between part
Of the landowners and their neighbors
md the i'll feeling aroused will
be carried into .ne next session of the
legislature. All this might have been
avoided had they been willing to give
he new law fair trial and then join
ed in to demand whatever change
should be indicated by the result as
most desirable.
Neither can we agree with these
agitators of the Hapgood
stripe that there is anything inhuman
Or monstrous in shootinga deer, either
buck or doe. Our ancestors back to