New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-01-26
Connecticut's Deer Slaughter.

10 the fdl'Or OF ne lIlpuNe.
Sir: | have before me a clipping from the
weekly edition OF THE Danbury Comm
News under date of January ., 1916. The
heading tells the story: zone Thousand
Deer Killed Wholesale Slaughter Of Ami
mails in State Since August" These figures
are apparently given out by the superln-
tendent of the State Fish and Game Com
mission, and may therefore be called Official
As | write I have not the latest data at
hand. summary OF the game laws of the
several states for 1915, corrected 10 October
90 1914 fails to reveal any legislation SINH
lar TO Connecticut's in any other state. In
most Of the states other than Connecticut
an absolute "close season prevails. In a
few no "open season" is allowed. Local
exceptions" Of course, exist IN certain states.
The Connecticut act does not stipuate
that deer may be taken or killed only when
damage has been done by them 20 growing
crops, etc II does not limit the number
that may be killed or taken. 1t does not
restrict the privilege TO residents OF the
state: for the words, "any member Of his
family" may be construed to include nom
residents. II specifies that for killing a
shotgun Is to be used. No sportsman thinks
Of hunting such game as deer with shot
gun. The use of shotguns increases the
number Of animals who are wounded and
escape. perhaps to die a lingering death-an
event which is deplored by every true sports
man. It specifies all bucks and both fawns
and does as lawful subjects for slaughter at
any time. This is quite counter TO the bet
ter sentiment now generally existing
In New Brunswick any one who hunts
takes. hurts, Injuries, traps, snares, shoots,
wounds. kills or destroys a COW or call
moose or caribou is liable to $500 fine or
three months in Jail. The law defines male
animal as a calf until he is at least three
wears old and has at least three tines not
loss than four inches long on each antler.
Moose and caribou have more commercial
value as "trophies" than deer, and deer are
comparatively more plentiful But the same
general principle should be applied to the
killing Of deer
The Connecticut act allows capture by
any means except trap, snare or device
Whether this includes the lasso or the bolas
r,ight be a matter for debate. But it does
apparently leave loophole whereby deer
NAV be run down by dogs-one of the mean
est Of obsolete hunting practices. lacking
another indefensibe method. may also ap-
parently be employed when feasible Lastly
the report OF the killing or capture IS not
10 be made TO a game warden, constable or
other local official, but TO one OF the fish
and Game Commissioners or to the commis'
sion as a whole This would probably never
he done within twenty-four hours as the
law provides; and frequently, we may sup
nose would not be done at all. For failure
70 report penalties are imposed. to be sure
but the possibilities of evasion are obvious.
have above presented an object lesson
in cause and effect Until the passage oil
this act protection was to be given to Con-
necticut deer 70 June /, 1917. The act was
nassed. and wholesale slaughter followed
Have DR.. Hornaday and others labored IN
vain TO instruct our legislators?
'"''' G. s. BRYAN.
Brookfeld Centre, Conn, Jan. II, 1916.