Report of the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries and Game
For the State of Maine
For the year 1902

Kennebec Journal Print
Printed 1903

Contents: Letter to Governor , * Fish Hatcheries and Feeding Stations * Caribou Hatchery. * Moosehead Lake Hatchery. * Cobbossecontee Hatchery & Carleton Brook Feeding Station * Edes Falls Hatchery. * Lake Auburn Hatchery. * Sebago Lake Fish Screen * Some General Observations * Farmers' Bulletin, No. 160, * States with Hunting Licenses * J. Manchester Haynes letter 1902 *Bangor Daily News article * Farmers and the Game Laws


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
page 4


To His Excellency, John F. Hill, Governor of Maine:
The Commissioners of Inland Fisheries and Game have the honor to present to Your Excellency their report for the year ending December 31, A. D. 1902, as required by section 33 of chapter 42 of the Public Laws of 1899.

Commissioners of Inland Fisheries and Game.


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
page 5


Report of D. E. Johnson, Superintendent of the Caribou Hatchery.
To the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries and Game:
There were hatched at this hatchery 12,687 trout and 146455 land-locked salmon, and 125,000 other fish—mostly white fish.

One hundred and twenty-five thousand were planted in the spring soon after hatching, as follows :

Presteal Stream 10,000
Cross Lake 20,000
Madawaska Lake 25,000
Little Huston Pond 30,000
Nickerson Lake 30,000
Aroostook River 10,000

The trout and land-locked salmon hatched were fed at the hatchery until fall with a recorded loss of 675 trout and 23,596 land-locked salmon, or about 15 per cent, and were then planted in the following named waters :

Nickerson Lake 12,500
Squaw Pan Lake 8,000
Conroy Lake 5,000
Square Lake 9,800
Cross Lake 20,357
Pleasant Pond 5,000
Drew Lake 5,000
"B" Pond 5,000
"A" Pond 100


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
page 6

Phillips Lake 5,000
Hay Pond 10,000
Farrars Lake 2,500
Wytopitlock Lake 3,750
Lambert Lake 4,250
Spednic Lake 2,500
Spring River Lake 2,500
Tunk Pond and Stream 5,000
Pennamaquam Lake 2,500
Two Pan Lake 3,750
Munsungan Lake 3,000
Now at Hatchery 511


Squaw Pan Lake 3,000
Madawaska Lake 6,200
Jewell Pond 2,000
"'P" Pond 300
Cross Lake 512

Report of C. C. Nichols, Superintendent of the Moosehead Lake Hatchery.

To the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries and Game:
There were hatched at this hatchery, last spring, 450,180 trout and 92,983 land-locked salmon.
These fish were fed at the hatchery until fall, with a recorded loss of 46,180 trout and 12,983 land-locked salmon, or about 10 per cent, and were planted in the following named waters:

Squaw Brook, 257,000; Wilson Pond, 25,000; Sebec Lake, 12,000; Onawa Lake, 10,000; Piper Pond, 10,000; lakes and ponds in Jackman, 30,000; Parlin Pond, 25,000; Roach River, 25,000; now in hatchery, 10,000.

Shadow Lake, 5,000; Squaw Brook, 15,000; Moosehead Lake. 35,000; lakes in Jackman, 10,000; West Branch of Penobscot River, 5,000; Lily Bay, 10.000


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
page 7

Report of W.E. Berry, Superintendent of Cobbossecontee Hatchery and Carleton Brook Feeding Station

To the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries and Game:
One hundred thousand trout eggs were sent from this station to Moosehead Lake Hatchery. There were hatched at this hatchery 90,000 trout and 145,206 land-locked salmon.

Fifty thousand trout were planted as fry in the spring in the following named waters: Cole Spring Brook, 25,000; Delano Spring Brook, 25,000. The balance of the trout were fed at the hatchery until fall and planted as follows:

Cobbosseecontee Lake, 5,000; Great and Long Ponds, 2,000 ; Second and Third Lakes, 2,500; Blunts Pond, 1,000; Togus Pond, 1,000; Mt. Blue Pond, 1,000; Green Lake, 2,000; Pleasant Pond, 1,000; Rowe, Jewett and other ponds, 2,000 ; Lambert Lake, 5,000; on hand, 17,500.

The land-locked salmon hatched at this hatchery were fed at the hatchery until fall, with a recorded loss of 17,790, or about 12 per cent. They attained unusually large growth and were planted as follows:

Webber Pond, 2,500 ; Long and Square Ponds, 10,000; Ellis Pond, 2,500; Flying Pond, 2,500; China Lake, 5,000; Moose Pond, 5,000; Unity Pond, 2,500 ; Lake St. George, 2,500; Cochnewagon Pond, 5,000; Lake George, 2,000 ; Cobbosseecontee Lake, 10,000; Pillsbury Pond, 1,000; Wassakeag Lake, 2,000; Hines Pond, 2,000; Williams Pond, 2,000; Second and Third Ponds, 500; Blunts Pond, 2,500; Narrows Pond, 5,000; Togus Pond, 500; lake in Fayette, I,000; Lake Sebasticook, 2,000 ; Three-Cornered Pond, 2,000; Nicatous Lake, 10,000; Crotched Pond, 1,000; Molasses Pond, 1,500; Bog Lake, 1,500; Cathance Lake, 1,500; Schoodic Lake, (Piscataquis County), 10,000; Little Cathance Lake, 1,500; Schoodic Pond, 1,500; Purgatory Ponds, 2,000; Grand Lake, (Washington County), 2,000; lake at Jonesport, 1,000; Meddybemps Lake, 2,000 ; Mirror Lake, 2,000; Embden Lake, 2,000; Boyden Lake, 1,500.

We have on hand 6,800 steel-head trout which will be wintered.

We also have on hand 32,212 land-locked salmon, which came from the United States Fish


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 8

Culture Station at Green Lake, Me, which were secured through efforts of Congressman Burleigh, which will be wintered and planted in Lake Cobbosseecontee next spring.

Report of C. L. Floyd, Superintendent of the Edes Falls Hatchery.

To the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries and Game:
There were hatched at this hatchery 250,000 salmon. One hundred thousand of these were planted as fry in the spring in the following waters : Smith's Brook 25,000 Burgess Brook 25,000 Crooked River 50,000

The balance were fed at the hatchery until fall, with a recorded loss of 25,000, or about TO per cent, and were planted in the following waters:

Sebago Lake, 15,000; Smith Brook, 15,000; Mile Brook, 25,000; Crooked River, 50,000; in hatchery now, 45,000.

In addition to the above we had 20,000 land-locked salmon on hand this spring which we fed during the winter. These were planted in the following waters:
Crooked River 10,000
Sebago Lake 10,000

Report of John F. Stanley, Superintendent of the Lake Auburn Hatchery.

To the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries and Game:
There were hatched at this hatchery 128,000 trout and 205,000 land-locked salmon. These fish were fed until fall, with a recorded loss of 65,000 trout and 85,000 land-locked salmon, and were planted in the following waters:

Mooselucmaguntic Lake, 1,500; Sabbathday Lake, 2,000; Biscay Lake, 1,800; Howard Lake, 1,200; Seven-Tree Lake, 1,500; South Lake, 1,500; Duck Pond, 1,000; King and Bartlett Lakes, 1,500; Swan Lake, 1,000; Four Ponds, 1,000; Alfred and Canaan Ponds, 1,500; Little Concord Pond, 1,800; lake in Washington, 1,500; Tufts Pond, 1,500; Lake Auburn, and Taylor and Wilson Ponds, 42,700,


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 9

Worthley Pond, 3,500; Mooselucmaguntic Lake, 14,500; Sabbathday Lake, 1,500; Little Wilson Lake, 4,000; Loon Lake, 1,800; Howard Lake, 1,200 7 Crawford Lake, 1,500; Damariscotta Lake, 1,500; Duck Pond, 1,500; King and Bartlett Lakes, 1,000; Georges Lake, 2,500; Swan Lake, 1,500; Upper Kezar Pond, 3,000; Alfred and Canaan Lakes, 1,500; Little Sebago Pond, 3,000; Indian Pond, 1,500; South Pond, 1,500; Songo Pond, 3,000; Pleasant Pond, 1,500; lake in Washington, 1,500; Jim and Spring Ponds, 3,000; Center Lake, 3,000; Keoka and Moose Ponds, 3,000; Long Pond, 3,000 ; Lake Auburn, and Taylor and Wilson Ponds, 55,500.

There were also raised at this hatchery 8,000 brown trout and 7,500 steel-head trout which were planted in Lake Auburn, Taylor and Wilson Ponds.

We have been unusually successful in the raising of fish at these hatcheries,—escaping any epidemic and raising a larger percentage of the hatch than ever before.

The call for the product of these hatcheries continues to be much in excess of their present capacity. The new hatchery provided for by act of the last legislature was erected on Squaw Brook, an inlet of Moosehead Lake. It has been in successful operation the past season, as will be seen by the superintendent's report, and has fully met the expectation, so far, of those who were instrumental in causing its erection. Its capacity can be greatly enlarged. It seems to fully meet the requirements for hatching and raising a large number of trout annually.

The last Legislature, chapter 204 of the Resolves, appropriated $1,000.00 to screen Lake Sebago. We contracted with the American Bridge Company to put in a screen at the dam at the outlet, at a cost of $1,284.00, the excess being secured by subscriptions of citizens of Portland and vicinity, through the efforts of Hon. Harry R. Virgin of Portland. It is believed that it will prove of great practical benefit to that lake.


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 10

The year 1902 has witnessed greater activity in this department than any previous year since its creation about thirty-five years ago. More people have come to Maine to fish, to spend a vacation and to hunt our game birds and big game than in any previous year.

The work of the department has steadily grown in recent years until it now requires the presence of one of the commissioners in the office a greater part of the time, the services of one skilled clerk, and also extra clerical help a portion of the time.

There have been mailed from the office during the year 9,641 letters, or an average of about 41 daily. A careful record of each letter mailed, to whom sent, has been kept, so, this record is accurate and not an estimate.

Regular monthly, and many special meetings of the commissioners have been held, and we trust that the business of the department has been as well attended to as could be reasonably expected under the adverse circumstances under which we have been compelled to work.

The necessity for the better protection of the big game in the State, and the game birds, and fish on the spawning beds, has attracted widespread attention throughout the State, as well as in neighboring states, during the last year.

It has been much discussed by our people generally. The need of more money for warden service seems to be generally conceded, if we are to retain our big game in any sufficient quantities to attract visiting sportsmen, or to reasonably satisfy our people whose number annually increases who go a-hunting, or obtain a livelihood out of our big game interests.

In this connection we would call attention to the Farmers' Bulletin, No. 160, issued by the U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1902, as follows :

"Game protection should appeal to many persons besides sportsmen and those who derive a pecuniary interest from the sale of game for the market. To the farmer especially, the preservation of the game on his land is a matter of more consequence than is generally supposed even though he cares nothing for hunting


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 11 He may still derive a benefit by no means inconsiderable from the game on his farm, provided it is properly preserved. He will find a knowledge of game laws, and some attention to their enforcement, valuable in several ways:

"(i) Game birds may be increased, some of whicH are very useful in destroying insects which injure his crops.
"(2) The privilege of hunting on his land is a valuable asset.

"According to decisions of the highest courts game is the property of the State. It should, therefore, like other public property, be carefully administered for the public good ; for under proper management it may become one of the chief attractions of the State and may even be developed into a source of revenue. Its principal value lies, not so much in the few dollars it may- bring to the individual hunter, or in the money it may contribute to the State treasury, but in the benefits it contributes to the people at large by furnishing them an incentive to recreation and health. Moreover, it may serve as an attraction to persons from other states, who, in the pursuit of pleasure, spend far more than the intrinsic value of the game they kill, and who often by this means become familiar with natural resources and opportunities for investment that otherwise would remain unknown to them.

"Maine affords a conspicuous example of the advantages, both direct and indirect, which a state may derive from carefully pre- serving its fish and game. To these benefits special laws are necessary, and the general appreciation of this fact is shown by the existence of game laws in practically every.state and territory in the Union, and in all the Provinces of Canada."

Without such laws many valuable species would be exterminated. Every state in which prairie chickens still exist now prohibits their export, and practically all but three of the states in which quail occur protect the birds at all seasons or make shipment out of the state illegal.

"Three additional states, Kentucky, New Jersey, and Ohio, have joined the ranks of those which require non-resident hunters to secure licenses."

The following states now have a law requiring a license to hunt:
Arkansas, for non-residents, $10.00.


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 12
Colorado licenses game preserves.
Delaware has no big game but imposes a license of $5.00 on non-residents for hunting quail, woodcock, partridge, grouse, rabbit or hare.
Florida, license fee $10.00.
Georgia, license fee $25.00.
Illinois, license fee $10.50, non-residents.
Indiana, license fee $25.50, non-residents.
Iowa, $10.50 per county for non-residents.
Michigan, residents, $ .75; non-residents, $25.00.
Minnesota, $ .75 for residents; $25.00 non-residents.
Missouri prohibits non-residents from hunting at all.
Montana, non-residents who are not taxpayers license to hunt big game, $25.00; game birds, $15.00.
Nebraska, non-residents, $10.00; residents, $1.00.
New Mexico, close time on big game until March, 1906.
North Dakota, residents, $ .75; non-residents, $25.00.
Oregon, fee for exporting game out of the state.
Pennsylvania, license fee for non-residents, $10.00.
South Carolina, license for non-residents, $25.00.
South Dakota, non-residents, license fee to hunt birds, $10.00; game, $25.00. For residents, $1.00.
Washington, license fee for non-residents, $10.00. If a male elk is killed the further sum of $20.00. $1.00 for a resident.
West Virginia, non-residents' license, $25.00.
Wisconsin, residents' license, $1.00; non-residents may hunt all protected game except deer for $10.00. If deer are hunted, $25.00.
Wyoming, residents, $1.00. Non-residents, $40-00.
New Jersey, non-resident license, $10.00.
Kentucky, non-resident license, $25.00.
Ohio, non-resident license, $25.00.

Several counties of Maryland have likewise provided for nonresident licenses so that Alleghany county is the only one in the state in which non-residents are permitted to hunt without restrictions.

Louisiana, following the lead of Missouri, has prohibited nonresidents from killing game within the state, and New York, like Minnesota, has enacted a provision by which non-residents from states which require licenses can kill game in New York only under licenses similar to those required in the case of non-residents in their own state.


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 13

British Columbia, non-resident license, $50.00.
Manitoba, non-resident license, $25.00.
New Brunswick, non-resident license, $30.00.
Newfoundland, non-resident license, $100.00.
North West Territory, non-resident license, $15.00.
Nova Scotia, non-resident license for birds, hares and rabbits, $10.00. All other game, $30.00.
Ontario, non-resident license fee, $25.00; resident, $2.00.
Province of Quebec, non-resident license is $25.00. This is a general permit. Twenty dollars for fur bearing animals ; $10 for birds for the season; $1.50 per day for birds for a short time.

Thus it will be seen that in twenty-six states, and everywhere in Canada, licenses must be procured before non-residents may hunt certain game or hunt at all.

In nine states and two Canadian provinces a like restriction is imposed on residents, but the fees are usually very much smaller and often merely nominal.

Minnesota has a special license with a fee of $25.00 for nonresidents from states that issue non-resident licenses. Licenses are generally issued only for the season and thus expire at a fixed date.

In six states, Florida, Iowa, Maryland, South Dakota, Washington and West Virginia, they are good only in a single county, and the fees for these county licenses vary from $1.00 to $25.00.

In some states licenses are required only for hunting certain kinds of game. Thus in Michigan they are issued only for hunting deer, in Florida for deer, quail, turkeys, and in South Dakota for big game. In Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Ohio and Wisconsin licenses carry with them the privilege of shipping out of the state a limited amount of game, but generally require that it shall be properly marked or accompanied by the owner. Colorado issues storage licenses at $1.00, importation licenses at $1.00, and park licenses at $1.00 to $100.00.

In this connection attention may be called to the Canadian law regarding non-resident hunters. Those who visit Canada for the purpose of hunting, camping, etc., are required to deposit with the customs officer at the port of entry an amount equal to the duty (30 per cent of the appraised value) on such guns, canoes,


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 14

tents, cooking utensils, kodaks, etc as they take with them. If these articles, properly identified, are taken out within six months at the same port at which they were carried in, the deposit will be returned. But members of shooting or fishing clubs that own preserves in Canada and have filed a guarantee with the Canadian commissioner of customs, may present club membership certificates in lieu of making the deposit. They must, however, pay duty on all ammunition and provisions.

Thirty states and territories, and most of the Provinces of Canada, now prohibit the sale of all or certain kinds of game at all seasons. There has been a steady increase in the prohibitions against sale, and during the past two years such provisions have been enacted by Arizona, California, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and Quebec.

In Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Montana and Nevada, the sale of all game protected by the state law is prohibited ; in South Dakota, all big game; in Minnesota, deer, quail, ruffed grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, prairie chicken, and all aquatic fowl ; in California, Washington and Manitoba, all big game and upland game. In a few instances prohibitions against the sale of certain game are so general as to afford protection over a considerable area in adjoining states. Thus ruffed grouse cannot be sold in New Brunswick, Ontario, Manitoba, Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Michigan, or Minnesota. Practically every state in which prairie chickens occur now prohibits their sale or export.

How to obtain the necessary funds to protect our big game and our game birds is an important question. Other states and other countries having big game, having passed through the same experience that we are now passing through, have adopted the license system in order to secure the necessary funds to protect their game and birds. This fee, as will be seen by the map at the commencement of this report, varies from $10 to $100 for non-residents, and a nominal fee of from twenty-five cents to $1.00 for residents.

It should be borne in mind that Maine is the only State in the American Union that has the moose, the largest of all game animals. If we are to preserve them from extinction more money must be provided for their better protection.


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902

The carcasses of 109 of these noble animals have been found during the year that were illegally slain, while the records show that 352 were killed legally. It is an old and trite saying "that it is too late to lock the stable after the horse is stolen," nevertheless it is as true as trite.

New York suffered its moose to be exterminated, and is now expending large sums of money in an effort to restock its forests, and at its last session of the legislature adopted the license system for non-resident hunters.

Inasmuch as there appears to be no other way by which we can obtain more money to protect our big game, we recommend the enactment of a license law for this sole purpose, and to pay for damage done to growing crops by deer. We are aware that there is some opposition to a license law to hunt big game by some who are greatly interested in its proper protection. Some advocate having a license fee to hunt moose alone, but this would not give the necessary revenue, and, besides, the deer sadly need better protection. At least 20,000 — probably many more, have been killed the last year. Our forests are not large enough to sustain this enormous drain indefinitely from the ever increasing numbers who annually engage in hunting them in open season and in close season.

If those who are opposed to a license law will glance at the financial statement in this report they will see that nearly all of the money available for warden service to protect our game is now derived from licenses from our own people, and the fines collected for violations of our game laws.

From the regular appropriation we have but $2,439.06 for this purpose,—not "a drop in the bucket" so to speak.

From the license fees of guides, hunters and trappers, dealers in deer skins, camp proprietors, marketmen, taxidermists, commissioners to take birds for scientific purposes, and the licenses for the transportation of game and game birds and fish, and fines collected, the balance is derived. Why it is more objectionable to tax a non-resident, who comes to hunt in our forests, than to tax our own people, for the necessary protection of game, we confess we are unable to understand.

It should be borne in mind that large as our game preserves are, they cannot long sustain the enormous drain of the present


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 16

year,—a drain much larger than ever before in the history of the State.

The following letter from J. Manchester Haynes, which was sent to be read at Bangor at the meeting of the Fish and Game Association, contains so much that is sound reasoning and good common sense that we append it herewith and invite attention to it.

"December 10, 1902.
Hon. L. T. Carleton,
Dear Sir : I am very sorry that I shall not be able to meet with you tomorrow.

"Since I have been away I have met several non-resident sportsmen, and have discussed with them the preservation of Maine game. They have been unanimously and earnestly in favor of a license law, and declare their firm belief that it will not deter hunting in Maine.

"'The point is made that with the Maine hunting grounds a sportsman may pay a good license fee and have a less expensive outing than in any other direction ; and also that the sport itself is so rare and fascinating that a license fee will never interfere with the enjoyment of it; that if any person declines to pay a license it will be only such as comes into the State for the purpose of destroying game at the least possible cost.

"It was also suggested to me that the killing of does and lambs should be prohibited. The point is made in this connection, that if only bucks were killed the element of danger to human life would be almost entirely eliminated, and also, of course, that such a prohibition would very materially increase the number of deer.

No guns allowed in the woods in close time is also a popular idea, and I myself believe, the more I think of it, that it would be, perhaps, the strongest preventative of killing in open season that could be adopted.

"I want also to suggest, that the open season on deer should be terminated the first day of December. Very few sportsmen go into the woods after December 1st but the woods are full of lumbermen, and the fifteen days in December gives them a great opportunity for destroying game.

"I feel that we have hitherto been engaged in the pursuit of two inconsistent objects. We have been trying to preserve the game, and we have been trying to sell it ; and every time a proposition to preserve it is made, it is treated from the standpoint of the effect it may have upon the disposition of the game to sportsmen---that is, we are trying to preserve our game and at the same


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 17

time get all we can out of it by inducing sportsmen to come into the State and kill it. I feel that we should have but one single object in view, that we should treat the subject entirely from that standpoint, namely: the preservation of the game. It seems to me obvious to any man of common sense that if we have the game in the State, that the getting of a revenue from it will take care of itself. We do not need to trouble ourselves about that. Sportsmen will come and kill all the game we have, to spare. I am in favor of preserving the game, even by the most radical methods, in the firm belief that nothing that we can do in that direction will ever seriously interfere with the revenue to the State, nor the benefit that oux people will get from the game. It goes without saying that that side of the question will take care of itself.

"We have, all things considered, the most remarkable game country in the world. Its variety, its accessibility, the nature of the game, its abundance, surpasses anything in any other part of what is known as the civilized and settled portions of the earth. The New York or Boston sportsman can be on the ground in from twelve to twenty-four hours at small expense. He can be in the very heart of the game region in so much less time than is necessary to go to Canada or to New Brunswick, or the west, that no laws in the State of Maine, or license fees, will ever suggest to him that he should go to the greater expense of time and money to hunt his game in other parts.

"When we consider that in no other civilized and settled country is there any game owned by and hunted by the public, we must know that that condition has been the result of the almost physical impossibility of preserving wild animals in inhabitated places. We shall find ourselves in the same condition unless we adopt with firmness the most radical measures. I sometimes believe, reviewing the history of the world, that it is not possible, permanently, to preserve game for the use of the public, as we are now doing in Maine; that the laws of nature, and the diseases and influences which effect wild life are such that the existence of that life in intimate connection with human life is incompatible, and must finally reach the state where, perhaps, the only game will be that half domestic kind, the deer, protracting a precarious and uncertain existence in private preserves. If this


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 18

is the case, then the most radical game laws will only protract the present conditions and the more radical they are, the longer the present conditions will be continued.

"Of course, laws are of no use unless they are enforced. There has been a feeling that it would not do to press the more radical features of our laws on account of a public sentiment hardly yet in accord with our ideas. I feel that we have reached the time when we can take a step in advance, when we can apply the laws more forcibly than we have. I think the public has been educated to the necessity 6f these laws and that any measures' which we may adopt may be enforced in the spirit and the letter, without creating any adverse public sentiment.

Yours truly,



We would also respectfully call attention to the following editorial in the Bangor Daily News of December 16th of this year, as clearly indicating the trend of public sentiment in this State upon that question :

"BIG GAME CAN REST. "Let us rejoice that the season of 1902 has been the greatest one ever known to Maine for big game. Not only have more hunters come to our State than in any previous year, but these hunters have had better luck. New railroads and new hotels and new regions opened up for the sportsmen have proved beyond doubt that Maine is the only State where moose and deer can be had in numbers sufficient to warrant the hunting.

"The record of more than 5,000 deer out of Bangor is beyond doubt more than the supply can stand for long, but even this big number has taught us a lesson, if we shall be wise enough to profit by it.

"Maine is the one State where big game abounds. Men who live in other states know this for a fact and are coming to us in increasing numbers every year. Most of these men—let us hope —come to Maine for big game regardless of the cost of getting the same. They want the game,—as to the cost, that is of secondary account.

"By strict warden service and due care we may so conserve our game that the record of 1902 may be repeated every year. We need more money for game protection. The visiting sports-


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 19

men will pay any reasonable license lee as soon as tney learn that they cannot hunt without it.

"It should be the duty of the incoming legislature to pass a license act early in the session. No doubt the charging of a fee will keep a few away. But we can get along very well without them. Most men are honest. Those who are not willing to pay to the State a fee for the privilege of hunting in the State, had better go elsewhere. Our large game interests are of too much value to be wasted upon poachers and others who wish to get something for nothing. Let us draw the line now. If we wait longer, our game will not be so plentiful."

The State of Maine has within its borders the greatest game preserves of any state in the Union available to our larger cities. But one-third of our area is included in farms. Since 1880 the number of farms has been decreasing—the loss for the past decade being 2,714, and a loss in improved acreage of 557,777 acres. The percentage of farm land improved being smaller than ever before. (Census Bulletin, number 139.)

There are many hundreds of farms owned and operated by non-residents, purchased by them for a summer outing home, attracted here solely on account of our fish and game and wonderful summer climate.

The one great attraction that induces people from other states to come to Maine is our unparalleled facilities for fishing and hunting. By far the greater proportion are found around our inland lakes and ponds. This industry has assumed very large proportions.

As careful a census as we were able to take, employing thoroughly reliable canvassers, shows that more than 133,000 persons have visited Maine this year to fish, on a vacation or to hunt from outside the State. This same canvass shows that from six to twelve million dollars were spent by them among our people, nor will this industry be temporary. The number will surely increase, provided our fish and our game do not decrease, and to prevent their decrease wise laws carefully administered are absolutely necessary.

Repeal the fish and game laws and our fish and game will practically disappear so sure as dead birds, dead fish and dead game


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 20

bring forth no increase, and our non-resident visitors will become a thing of the past.

Some damage is undoubtedly done growing crops by deer. It is greatly magnified, however.

Sometimes real substantial damage is done, and we renew our recommendation made in former reports that the commissioners be given authority to adjust and pay for such damage. The license fee above spoken of, if adopted, would enable us to do it.

Comparisons are sometimes said "to be odious" but we would call attention to the fact, as reported by the U. S. Census Bureau, that the total value of all farm crops in Maine for the year 1899 was $21,954,054. Thus it will be seen that the total amount of money spent in Maine this year by non-resident fishermen summer visitors and hunters is more than 30 per cent of the total value of all farm crops raised in Maine in the year 1899, the last year of which we have any report.

The general passenger agents of our railroads declare that our most excellent train service is only possible on account of this business.

It goes without saying that the farming interests of the State are of the greatest importance—of fundamental importance, and any new industry that contributes to their development, to their upbuilding, should be encouraged, not discouraged or obliterated.

It is a fact susceptible of the fullest demonstration that the fish and game interests of the State contribute very largely and directly to the farming interests of the State, and our citizens are coming more and more to realize this fact. More than 500 farmers of the State engage during some portion of the year in guiding, at very remunerative wages; many hundreds, yes, thousands, entertain at their homes summer vacationists, fishermen and hunters at remunerative rates.

In many portions of the State a ready market is found for all of the butter, cheese, milk, poultry, eggs and other farm produce raised on the farm and at higher prices than the city market affords, and as seen above, far better railroad facilities are enjoyed in all sections of the State than would otherwise be possible. Our more intelligent and progressive farmers fully realize these facts and are among the most ardent supporters of our fish and game laws.


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 21

In this connection we wish to quote from a statement made by Hon. W. P. Frye, U. S. Senator from Maine, a few years ago, as follows : "In all times of business depressions and distress, financial panics and consequent unemployment of labor, so seriously affecting the country, the State of Maine has suffered much less than any other state in the American Union, mostly, if not entirely, due to the large amount of money left with us by the fisherman, the summer tourist and the fall hunter, the seeker after change, rest and recreation."

We also quote from a recent editorial in the Daily Kennebec Journal as follows : "'The steady growth of population in Maine, and the increasing popularity of its summer resorts, have largely increased the demand for dairy produce in the State. The number of dairy cows has steadily increased, and in 1900 there were 173,592. The present importance of this industry is shown by the fact that in 1899 the proprietors of 17,740 farms, or 29.9 per cent of the farms of the State, derived their principal income from dairy produce."

We also quote from an editorial in the Boston Globe, as follows: "The summer tourist represents at once a diversification and an industry, which has been created wholly within the present century, largely within the past fifty years, and mostly since the Civil War. In our day he, is so familiar a figure that it is difficult for us to appreciate either his novelty or his importance. But if, in the processes of atavism, he should suddenly revert from his nomadic habit to the settled, stay-at-home ways of big fathers, we should not only miss him greviously in our landscape, but scores of trades would be paralized by his disappearance from his accustomed haunts.

"Millions and millions of dollars' worth of summer resort property would go utterly to waste, many a town would lose its principal sources of support, railroad schedules would be revolutionized and steamship railings sadly deranged. All the complicated economics of our little day are involved in his vacation idlings. He has become an integral and vital part of our social and commercial organization. 'One man's meat is another man's poison ;' one man's vagrancy is another man's harvest."

The above quotations from leading newspapers in New England clearly express the facts, and show how obserbing and intelligent men view the situation.


Inland Fisheries and Game 1902
Page 22

This question or proposition of developing and calling the attention of the country to our natural resources and advantages as a recreation State is much misrepresented and misunderstood.

There are those who persist in misunderstanding this question, and a great deal of misinformation is disseminated through various channels. It is practically impossible to distinguish between the game interests, the inland fishing interests and the recreation or vacationist's interest.

There are those who seek to array the farmer or grange influence against our inland fish and game interests, and this disposition has been, and is, quite determined. It is represented to the farmer that he is being taxed for something that he derives no benefit from ; that it is all for sport ; that deer are protected that they may destroy his crops ; that restrictions areplaced on brooks flowing through his land so that he cannot fish in them, for the benefit of the city chap, etc., etc., and it cannot be denied that this talk has had, and still has, its effect in arraying against these interests a very considerable influence, so much so that talk is not infrequently heard of the entire abolishment of this important department of our State government, and the sweeping off the statute book of all fish and game legislation.

There are those who profess to be alarmed at this condition of affairs and prophesy disaster. It does not count that the $25,000 appropriated by the State for the artificial propagation, of fish and game protection, entails but a very slight tax ; it is a tax, and therefore gives those so disposed a golden opportunity to undertake to make the people believe that they are being taxed for something that does them no good.

It is, as we have said, a fundamental fact that agriculture is our most important industry, and must necessarily continue to be so, and every encouragement possible ought to be given to it, and we should not, as it seems to us, "give a cold shoulder" to those fish and game interests that contribute so directly and so largely to the farming interests of our goodly State.















These reports are copied from (1) original paper editions of the Report of the Commissioners of Inland Fish and Game 1895.

Digitized and uploaded to the internet by Ron Huber, Rockland, Maine, 2004-2009. Please contact him to point out errata, or for more information.

Original paper editions of these documents are in the collection of the Bangor Public Library, A sincere thank you! to the patient assistance of the librarians stewarding these invaluable information resources.