2 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

Cooperative Pheasant Rearing Projects Get Under Way

THE new federal aid bill, known as the Pittman-Robertson Act, should provide the Nebraska Game Commission with about $75,000 a year federal money when the full amount is appropriated by congress. To this the state must add $25,000, making a total of $100,000 a year. However, the full amount was not appropriated by congress at this time—only about $25,000 is available for the present.

How will the Commission use this money? That is a question a great many sportsmen are asking.

First of all, it should be clearly understood that the money is available only for the purpose of the restoration of game birds and game animals. None of it can be used for the restoration or propagation of fish. Nor can any of it be used under the present regulations for law enforcement work, game farms or for anything that immediately provides more game for the hunter. It is aimed for "long range" restoration—the building up of the game resources not for today but for five or ten years hence.

In a recent letter from the U. S. Bureau of Biological Survey, who has charge of the fund and who makes the regulations with which the several states must conform, the acting chief had the following to say regarding the projects that might be undertaken with this money:

"While not many projects have been approved to date, the following statements will convey a picture of the types so far presented and approved:

"One project already approved involves a statewide wildlife survey and game management undertaking to determine the status of wildlife populations and the opportunity presented for increase or restoration. The information developed by this study is desired to enable the state to proceed, in a more intelligent manner, toward perfecting plans for future proposals and action along restoration lines.

"Another project is concerned with the construction of several miles of dikes and two water-control structures to relieve a bad botulism situation and to provide a first-class feeding, breeding and resting area for migratory waterfowl.

"Another contemplates the determination of present abundance and distribution of beaver, as well as potential beaver areas, also to determine the influence of these animals on stream run-off on two selected experimental streams by the construction of water-measuring devices and their influence on range and plant conditions adjacent to streams now occupied by them.

"Another project is concerned with the survey and inventory of native fur-bearers on a statewide basis through subjecting numerous relatively small areas to intensive study, approximately 100,000 acres to be covered by the undertaking. The resultant information will be used to promote more efficient management of the fur resources through enabling steps to be taken in an intelligent manner to enhance their value.

"Another project is concerned with research and demonstration on pheasants. The work to be done includes the planting of trees and shrubs and for range revegetation on state-owned lands, posting of boundaries and the purchase of a supply of birds for stocking.

"Other project proposals already submitted but not yet approved or, to our knowledge, in process of preparation are concerned with the acquisition of lands for wildlife usage, the leasing of lands for seed stock refuges for upland game birds and fur-bearers, the improvement of food and cover conditions on lands already owned or to be acquired through range revegetation or the planting of trees and shrubs, and research into wildlife problems having a practical application. Projects like the above are well within the scope of the act."

The Nebraska Game Commission has already submitted one application which has been granted. It will use the major part of the $25,000 available for 1938-39. This is a cooperative arrangement for the production of pheasants.

The plan is simple. In the spring of 1939 a total of 25 pheasant rearing units will be placed with sportsmen's organizations, 4-H Clubs, and other groups. These units will hold 200 pheasant chicks and rear them to an age of ten weeks, when they will be banded and released on game refuges in the community where the breeding unit is located. There will be no cost to the local organization except the feed and care of the small birds. The game refuges will be made clean of predators and aid will be given in rearing these birds. This service will be furnished without cost to the local group. It is believed this plan will eventually provide many breeding areas throughout the state and produce thousands of these birds.

It is desired to get one of the units in each of twenty-five counties where pheasants are scarce, but where they have thrived in the past. Therefore, it is felt that those counties that have a good supply of birds should wait until next year when other brooder units will be available if the plan is successful.

The unit consists of a brooder with heat furnished by electric energy, a sunning pen twelve by twelve feet and a run fifty by eighty feet. The pens are constructed so as to be easily knocked down and moved.

The food will be purchased in carload lots by the Commission and sold to cooperators at actual cost. It is very necessary that the proper food be used in order to get animal protein and other ingredients for a balanced diet. Pheasants will start "picking" one another and other troubles develop unless the right food is used. Hence this requirement.

The Nebraska Game Commission, if it takes full advantage of the fund in the future, must find ways and means of raising the $25,000 each year to match this fund. This can be done in only two ways until such time as more permits are sold: That is to discontinue some activity now carried on, or to have a higher permit fee. There does not seem at present to be any activity that can be stopped without interfering with plans already under way and to cause a loss of money already invested. But whether or not the fee is made higher, or some activity dropped, must depend on the wishes and the desires of the fellow who pays the bill—the Nebraska hunter and fisherman

OUTDOOR NEBRASKA 3

Yes, Fish Have Parasites, Too

WORMY FISH

Ever catch a fish that had i i grub or worm in it?

The chances are you threw away the fish and stopped fishing in the infected waters.

Read what Dr. Cuckler says about wormy fish, as well as other parasites, in this interesting article about Nebraska fish.

By ASHTON C. CUCKLER Research Department, Nebraska Game, Forestation and Parks Commission

MANY sportsmen have, no doubt, wondered whether fish have parasites and diseases. They may have asked themselves, what kinds of organisms cause these diseases? What is their economic importance? Do these parasites reduce the possible number of game fishes? What can be done to rid fish of these parasites? In order to give the interested sportsman and conservationist answers to these questions, the principal kinds of fish parasites, their economic importance, and their possible control will be briefly considered in the following paragraphs.

It was such questions as these that prompted the writer to secure the cooperation of the Nebraska Game, Forestation and Parks Commission in a survey of the parasites of Nebraska fishes. During the past year a preliminary survey was begun, and some 200 fish belonging to 22 species were examined, especially for worm parasites. Since the number of fish examined has not been large enough to give complete data on the degree of parasitism prevailing, the Game Commission has made plans to continue the survey work during the summer of 1939.

Among the various causes of diseases in fish may be the presence or absence of certain chemical substances or physical factors which may be necessary for the normal existence of the fish. In other words, certain conditions of the environment are essential for the normal health of fish. Other causes of diseases in fish are parasites. There are many kinds of parasites, such as bacteria, fungi and protozoa, which are so small they are usually seen only with a microscope. Other important causes of diseases in fish are the larger animal parasites, especially those known as worms. There are five groups of worms that are parasitic in fish. These worms, as well as the other parasites of fish, may be classed as either internal or external parasites, depending upon whether they live on the body surface or within some of the organs or tissues. The external parasites will be considered first.

The largest of the parasites which may attack Nebraska fish is the lamprey eel, which has been reported from the Missouri River. This animal attaches itself to a fish by means of its cup-like sucking mouth and then cuts and rasps the flesh of its host with a sharp tongue. The lamprey remains attached to the fish, sucking its blood and body juices. If the lamprey remains attached to its host for long periods of time, the injury to the fish may be severe enough to result in its death. Or the injuries caused by this parasite may be sources of entrance for bacterial parasites, which may be the direct cause of the death of the fish. However, these animals are not important parasites of Nebraska fish since they are relatively uncommon.

Another group of external parasites of fish is known as "fish lice" or parasitic copepods, which are relatives of the crayfish and crab. These parasites live on the gills, the fins, the skin or scales of fish feeding upon the mucous and blood. Usually these animals are small and inconspicuous, but if they are once noticed they may be distinguished as they move about on the surface of the fish. The eggs are laid in pouches attached to the body of the female. When the young hatch they may readily infect the same or other host fish. Such infestations spread readily when fish are confined to small bodies of water, as in holding and rearing ponds in hatcheries. A few "fish lice" harm a fish no more than a few fleas do a dog, but heavy infestations may be fatal. The damage to the host is directly proportional to the- number of parasites present.

Leeches or "blood suckers" which are relatives of the earthworm, often parasitize the skin or fins of fish, causing considerable damage to the host. Leeches may be an inch or more in length, but they are capable of extreme contractions and elongations and thus are quite variable in size. Leeches possess two suckers; one is at the posterior end of the body and is used for attachment to the host. The other sucker surrounds the mouth and is used in sucking blood from the host. Not only do these parasites damage the fish by sucking blood, but the wounds they make in the skin and flesh are foci for infections by bacteria. The effects of this parasite are in direct ratio to the number of parasites present.

Generally the most important of the external parasites of fish is the group known as flukes of monogenetic trematodes. These parasites are usually of very small size, and due to this and their transparency are difficult to detect. Although these parasites are small, they are often responsible for severe epidemics among fish, especially those in hatcheries. This is because fish that are confined to small bodies of water are easily infected, since the life cycle of the parasite is direct. That is, the adult parasites produce eggs (usually) from which young soon hatch, which immediately parasitize fish. Thus the infestations are quickly built up once they are established in fish that are closely confined. Fifty per cent of the fish examined during the present survey were infested with these parasites on their gills.

Relatively harmless external parasites occasionally found in the gills or skin of fish are the larvae of fresh-water mussels or clams. These animals live for several weeks as larvae parasitic in the gill filaments or skin of fish. They then break out of the gills or skin and drop to the bottom of the stream or lake in which they are living and mature as free-living animals.

The internal worm parasites are those animals which infect such organs as the stomach, intestine, liver, kidney, eyes, muscles, etc. Either the larval or the adult animal may be found in some of these organs. There are four groups of worms which parasitize the internal organs of fish. They are known as flukes or digenetic trematodes, tapeworms or cestodes, thread worms or nematodes, and spiny-headed worms or acanthocephalans. Pratt (1929) states: "When any of these worms occur in large numbers in a vital organ of a fish they invariably affect its health and act as a brake on its activities, and if the degree of infection is severe enough the fish invariably dies."

Digenetic trematodes or flukes are small, flattened, extremely contractile animals. As adults they may be found in the stomach, the intestine, the urinary bladder, the air bladder, and in the heart and blood vessels of fish. As larval forms, flukes may occur encysted in almost any of the internal organs, in the flesh, in the skin, and even in the lenses or chambers of the eyes. The size of the adult flukes of fish varies considerably. Some are almost microscopic, whereas others are easily seen with the unaided eye. The larval flukes are usually small, although some are conspicuous.

The life cycle of digenetic flukes is always

(Contirmed on page 10)

4 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

Study Shows Pheasants Prolific, But Mortality Factors Cut Down Numbers

What happens to our pheasant nests? What per cent does man destroy? How many do crows get? And what about that stray dog of yours? Why is the hatching time the most critical period for the pheasant? Do grasshopper and other poisons really kill off our young pheasants? The answers to all these important and interesting questions will be found in this article. Don't fail to read it.

EDITOR'S NOTE: The following article, reprinted in part from The Minnesota Conservationist, contains much enlightening information concerning the factors which influence annual pheasant hatches. It was written by Dr. Gustav Swanson, University of Minnesota game management expert.

THE pheasant has ranked high as a game bird for several reasons. It thrives in agricultural areas so intensively cleared and farmed that our native ruffed, sharp-tailed and pinnated grouse have all receded. It can withstand heavy hunting, and its skulking habit makes it difficult to "shoot out". It is polygamous, and the sexes are so easily distinguished that hunting can be restricted to the males until an ideal sex ratio is reached. And the pheasant is reasonably hardy. It can endure more severe winters than our Bob-white quail, at any rate. It has the further advantage of being noncyclic. The factors, whatever they are which cause ruffed grouse to disappear almost to the point of extinction every ten years, do not affect pheasants.

One of the most important advantages is the fact that it is so prolific. Pheasant nests have often been found with more than twenty eggs in them. There is one record of a nest with thirty-one eggs. Obviously such extremely large clutches represent the laying of two or more hens, and cannot be considered normal, but the average, based upon 750 nests, is between eleven and twelve eggs per clutch.

With the advantages which we have enumerated it may seem difficult to explain why pheasants do not become so abundant as to be a real pest, and this is the point at which we must consider the various checks on pheasant population increases. Pheasants are capable of such large increases in numbers that unless the total effect of all mortality factors is very great, the birds will multiply rapidly.

Workers in Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin have been studying pheasant nesting success for several years, and we have, as a result, the data on the success or failure of over 800 pheasant nests. It is from these studies, supplemented by the work which has been done in Minnesota, that the conclusions which follow have been drawn.

A very large number of potential pheasant chicks are lost because the eggs do not have an opportunity to hatch. Since pheasants are capable of laying clutches of eighteen or twenty eggs in nature, the smaller clutches which are the rule, represent a loss of birds already. What are the reasons for these smaller clutches?

First of all, the well-fed hen is capable of laying a larger clutch than the bird to which an abundance of food was not available. This has been demonstrated many times for poultry, and English has also shown it to be true for pheasants. If, therefore, the birds are unable to get plenty of food during the late winter and early spring, either because there is little food present, or because it is covered with snow and thus rendered inaccessible, the number of eggs laid will be smaller than normal. It is necessary for us, therefore, to bear in mind the food problem for game birds not only in mid-winter, when the weather is most severe, but in early spring when the drain on the vigor of the breeding birds is greatest, and when the fate of the next generation is at stake.

Another factor which may affect clutch size is the grit which they eat, not only for grinding purposes, but for the mineral element, calcium. The laying hen in the spring needs a plentiful supply of calcium, and since the foods which pheasants eat are very largely cereals, which are markedly lacking in calcium, they depend heavily upon the grit which they pick up for this element.

Another phase of the grit study promises to be of importance. Poultrymen have known for some time that it is harmful to chickens to feed them dolomitic limestone, that is, limestone which contains magnesium carbonate. Some of our experiments are indicating very strongly that pheasants given this type of grit will lay fewer eggs than birds which have received pure calcium limestone grit.

Another cause of loss of potential pheasants lies in the lackadaisical egg-laying habits of the birds themselves. Especially during the early part of the season it is not uncommon to find single pheasant eggs or even groups of eggs, which are laid at random, and which will never beincubated. Pheasants also lay eggs in other birds' nests occasionally.

Bennett in Iowa found that nearly 5 per cent of the 300 blue-winged teal nests which he studied contained one or more pheasants' eggs. These eggs were not only a total loss to the pheasant population, but represented a loss of ducks as well, because the teal stopped laying when the nest was filled, and consequently the addition of pheasant eggs in their clutches would result in a smaller number of teal eggs. Just last summer in southwestern Minnesota a farmer pointed out to us a chicken's nest in his woodlot in which a pheasant had laid eight eggs. Egg laying at random like this is not always easy to explain. Possibly the pheasant hen has had her own nest just recently destroyed, possibly she couldn't reach her nest in time when the egg-laying urge came, or possibly she is just careless. At any rate, the net result is a loss of potential pheasants.

Cold weather during the pre-incumbation period has very little effect on the eggs.

We come next to the most important source of losses—nesting failures. The data from the various studies I have mentioned show conclusively that between 60 and 75 per cent of all pheasant nests fail to produce young. The factors which contribute to this high figure are many, but man is by far the most important one, directly or indirectly. In every study over half of the nest failures have been due to the operations of man, and, of course, the destruction during haying, particularly during mowing of hay, is by far the most significant.

It is obvious that a pheasant nest in a hayfield is in a very hazardous position because the height of the mowing season comes at a time when the majority of the clutches are about to hatch. Destruction of the nest at this time is especially bad because the vigor of the hen has been sapped by the laying of her large clutch of eggs, and time which elapses between the laying of the first egg and hatching of the clutch is usually over five weeks. Destruction of the nest at or near the end of this long period of critical time catches the pheasant in a weakened condition, far less able to carry off a brood successfully on a second nesting attempt. It is undoubtedly this reason which accounts for the fact that late nests, in late June, July or August, which are chiefly second or

(Continued on page IT)

OUTDOOR NEBRASKA 5

Bigger and Better Trout, Aim of Nebraska Commission

By J. M. MERRITT, Superintendent Nebraska Fisheries Creel Tmuf

What are "Creel Trout?"

What is the Nebraska Commission doing to propagate trout?

What kind of ponds and food are used in the production of these gamey denizens of our western streams?

This article tells you about trout propagation now being carried on in Nebraska.

THE temporary loss of many of our fine sand hill lakes because of the persistent drouth has placed a greater emphasis on stream fishing which, although Nebraska is generally credited with more miles of flowing water than any other state in the union, has been secondary to lake and pond fishing except in those localities where channel catfish can be taken.

Diversions of water for irrigation in the upper north and south Platte valleys has caused restricted and intermittent flow in these streams and has ruined what was at one time excellent walleyed pike fishing.

However, irrigation in the North Platte valley has provided some really fine trout streams in the return flows and drains from irrigated lands. In the northwest part of the state are several small but dependable streams which support trout as well as the upper Niobrara River.

In the north-central counties the Snake River, the Schlegel, Fairfield, Cedar, Pine and Plum Creeks are favorites with the Eagle, Verdigre and their many branches together with numerous small streams flowing north into the Niobrara River supplying fair trout fishing further east.

The original introduction of trout in Nebraska was the brook from their natural habitat in the eastern states where fish culture was first practiced in America. Later, the rainbow during the world-wide distribution from its west coast home became the most popular of the two species. At a still later date the European brown trout was introduced from Germany and is still propagated to some extent in our state.

The surprising adaptability of some species of fish, particularly the rainbow trout and their tendency to change dominant characteristics when segregated for a number of years in water and climate differing from their native habitat, has produced several distinct sub-species of the rainbow such as the famous Cottonwood Lake Golden trout.

This adaptability of the rainbow has been of especial value to Nebraska and other mid-continent states with their average higher water temperatures and lower altitudes than the original home of the species.

Persistent selection over a period of years at federal, state and commercial hatcheries of individuals which survive and thrive in this changed environment is gradually producing an early spawning, fast growing strain of rainbow trout which attain a length of 8 to 12 inches at 14 months in hatchery rearing ponds.

As this work progresses the suitable and the potential trout water in our state is constantly increasing. Recent plants in streams which have hitherto been considered doubtful are giving encouraging results.

These streams include the Calamus, Dismal, Cedar and the upper North and Middle Loup Rivers. Some trout have been taken well below Valentine in the Niobrara River. Experimental plants in the deeper sand pits in the eastern part of the state have also been successful.

However, none of the waters mentioned offer desirable spawning grounds for the natural production of trout. This is true of practically all of the streams in Nebraska. For the most part they originate in and flow through the sand hill section of the state.

The result is a constant shifting of the stream bottom because of the fine sand throughout this section which has no coarse gravel beds where spawning fish may deposit and cover their eggs. Then, too, many of these streams are infested with chub, suckers and other kinds which prey on eggs and young fish whether hatched naturally or planted from hatcheries.

Some trout waters in western Nebraska which remains open through the winter often have heavy concentrations of ducks after the close of the shooting season and a few merganzers as well as mallards may strip a stream of cover and food as well as a majority of trout under six inches.

Two years ago, the Game and Fish Commission, in an effort to develop the potential stream fishing, authorized and directed the production of creel size trout at the hatcheries.

The first requirement was to secure and maintain the earliest spawning and maturing strain possible in order to lessen the growing period and to make December and January eggs available as creel trout at 14 to 15 months of age.

Suitable rearing pools and races designed to be easily cleaned and sterilized and to provide the greatest possible aeration and concentration of trout per gallon of water flow had to be constructed.

After considerable study as to the best type, a series of 12 circular pools were built at the Rock Creek hatchery. The water supply is introduced at a tangent to the surface through 12 jets from a supply pipe extending toward the axis of the pools from the side. The pipe may be adjusted to change the angle at which the water strikes the surface and thus change the speed at which the water circulates ' around the pool. This may be varied from an imperceptible movement to a velocity of two or more feet per second.

The result is a centrifugal effect which carries all waste and sediment to the central outlet, making cleaning simple and keeping food in suspension until taken by the fish.

Other advantages over the rectangular type is the constant changing of surface water with attendant oxygen absorption, forced exercise with better food assimilation, even distribution of fish, and a much greater carrying capacity per gallon of. water flow.

The selection, quantity and cost of food is a major factor in the work. Variations and combinations of cereals, meats and commercial preparations must show growth rates in relation to costs. Experiments designed to establish a dependable cost basis for trout of varying age and size have been carried on and will be continued with the almost endless combinations of foods on which trout thrive.

In experiments up to date, it has been found that trout can be brought to maturity at a comparatively reasonable cost. When one figures costs for what the angler really gets, it is found that the cost of production of creel trout is no greater than the cost of stocking thousands of baby trout, of which as high as 95 per cent never reach a creel size nor find their way into the frying pan of the angler.

It is the intention of the Nebraska Commission to continue experiments with different food combinations in the hope that eventually means will be found where .creel trout can be produced in large numbers at a comparatively low cost. If this can be done, there will be a much brighter day in store for the Nebraska trout fisherman.

EDITORIAL

Planf Trees Now

Never in the history of Nebraska was there a greater need for trees. The drought and the economic situation of the past five years has made terrific inroads on our reserve of timber.

Not only have thousands of trees been cut for fuel, but hundreds of thousands have died. Low water levels, hot winds and disease have all taken a heavy toll. Many fine old trees which had been maturing for years now stand as grim reminders of the havoc that has been wrought.

The dead timber should be cut and used for fuel wherever possible. And in its place should be planted new stock. It takes a good many months to mature a tree, even those that are quick growers. No time should be lost in getting replanting plans under way.

Kill Wrong Hawks

Not long ago several farmers near Central City killed a large number of hawks that were at the time migrating. Over 200 were taken and the farmers thought they were doing a good deed.

Investigation brought to light the fact that the hawks killed were the highly valuable Swainson species. These birds are extremely useful and harmless.

Dozens of letters were received by the Nebraska Game Department, many of them demanding the farmers be prosecuted. However, the investigation disclosed that the birds had not been killed with malicious intent, but through the mistaken belief that the birds were detrimental to the farmers' interests.

Too many valuable hawks are being killed by people who do not take the time to learn what they are shooting. It is better not to kill at all unless the shooter knows what he is doing.

The National Audubon Society has some excellent pamphlets on hawks. Get one of these and learn the valuable hawks as well as those that are harmful.

Big Game Increasing

Are our big animals holding their own under the protection now being given them?

Yes, they are holding their own, and in some cases making notable increases. For example, in 1916 it was estimated that only 40,000 elk remained in the United States. In 1937 there were 165,700.

In 1922 the antelope inventory was estimated at 26,604. In 1937 it was 131,500.

In 1922 there were 11,721 mountain goats. In 1937 there were 13,267.

On the other hand, there has been a notable decrease in Bighorn sheep. In 1921 there were estimated to be 13,800, while in 1937 there were 11,300.

A big-game inventory, made in 1937, showed the following big-game animals on refuges, in parks and at large on state land and public domain:

White-tailed deer - 3,181,675 Mule deer ------ 1,271,196 Black-tailed deer - 231,905 Caribou -..... 27 Elk.......165,764 Moose - -.....13,346 Prong-horned antelope Rocky-Mountain Bighorn - Desert Bighorn - Mountain Goat - Peccary - - - - Wild boar - . - Black bear ... Grizzly bear - Buffalo - - . - 131,555 11,300 7,020 13,267 43,722 725 81,270 1,108 4,101

OUTDOOR NEBRASKA 7

8 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

COMMISSION FIELD ACTIVITIES

Meet the supervisor of the new cooperative pheasant rearing project the Nebraska Game Commission has recently inaugurated under the Pittman-Robertson Act.

Mr. Vance was born at Wolbach, Nebraska, in 1910, and lived later at Eagle, near Lincoln. He attended the consolidated school at Eagle and later attended the University of Nebraska, majoring in poultry husbandry. He worked at the poultry plant at the University while in school and during vacations. He graduated in June, 1934, with B.Sc. degree and immediately obtained a position as assistant extension poultryman with the Agricultural College Extension Service, specializing in turkey culture.

Mr. Vance is a former 4-H Club member and leader, and through his extension work is well acquainted throughout the state.

SEEN THIS MOTOR? To The Editor:

I am enclosing a number from my motor—the outboard motor that was stolen out of my garage last fall. I would very much like to locate this motor and I believe we might be able to locate it through your magazine. I am giving a $25 reward for recovery of this motor, so if any of your readers want to make extra money here is a chance for them. If there is any idea you may have to locate this motor I sure would appreciate it very much. The motor number is Tr. 7206.

Yours truly, V. C. HOVORKA, Randolph, Nebraska. WHERE THE MONEY GOES

Every sportsman and citizen of Nebraska is interested in how the hunting and fishing permit funds are spent.

In the table on this page are the expenditures in 1938. These are broken down so that the reader can see exactly for what purpose the expenditure was made.

In the item "W.P.A., Game Refuges, Lakes and Recreation Areas," most of this money was used to match federal funds, which totaled nearly $100,000. The $7,000 expenditure was for a tract of land on the Elkhorn River near West Point. Of the above amount, $3,000 was donated, but on the books it is carried as an expenditure.

Under the item of "Capital Investment" are the following:

Partitions and improvement of quarters in the state capitol building, $1,936.

The Commission was required to move and to remodel new quarters.

Over $6,000 was spent for pens, brooders, etc., at the Game Farm.

Fencing and improvement at the Transfer Plant at Lincoln required $999.60.

The seven State Parks are not included in the above. They are maintained out of the general fund appropriations.

January 1, 1938, to December 31, 1938 EXPENDITURES OF THE GAME COMMISSION Field Work, IV.P.A., Game Office and Fish Salvage; Refuges, Lakes Game Adminis- Law Distri- Game Fish and Recreat. Transfer Expenditures Commission tration Enforcement bution, etc. Farms Hatcheries Areas Plant General Total Salaries per Diem and Wages $865.00 $11,207.00 $20,520.45 $6,439.22 $5,346.80 $15,815.76 $7,631.56 $67,825.70 Travel and Operating Exp. 1,151.06 2,318.01 7,565.24 2,817.88 3,326.70 4,470.52 4,543.28 26,194.67 Printing, Badges, Signs 7,436.47 7,436.47 Postage 1,450.00 1,450.00 Publicity and Permit Sales Promotion 3,013.76 3,013.76 Feed 3,138.43 1,771.86 4,910.34 Cars and Trucks 3,443.65 3,445.65 Gas and Oil 7,335.63 2,748.43 2,117.34 12,201.40 Tires 670.72 548.30 1,219.02 Repairs (Truck and Car) 2,777.92 1,627.58 4,405.50 Supplies 2,779.66 2,864.59 5,644.25 Material 1,211.78 3,525.21 4,736.99 Leases 850.00 232.80 1,082.80 Eggs 406.56 630.00 1,036.56 Nets and Bait 348.76 348.76 Fish Purchased 4,810.92 4,810.92 Fish Car, Rail Fare 107.64 107.64 Birds, Purchase 1,933.80 1,933.80 Workmen's Compensation 720.00 720.00 Capital Investment 1,938.00 6,212.52 7,000.00 999.60 16,150.12 Miscellaneous 1,023.93 1,042.88 962.16 389.32 1,083.36 615.92 5,117.57 $2,016.06 $28,387.17 $43,356.49 $15,599.97 $24,383.89 $28,567.87 $25,668.09 $999.60 $4,810.92 $173,790.01   OUTDOOR NEBRASKA 9 KILL THE 120,000,000 STRAY CATS To The Editor:

I was much interested in your editorial stating that the Pennsylvania legislature had given the Game Commission authority to fine every individual for carrying away a cat and turning it loose to destroy small game birds and small game. Few of us realize the tremendous amount of damage caused by these stray cats.

Now there is a nation-wide movement to kill these pests. According to the figures of the Cat Society, as it is called, the average stray cat kills 50 birds per year, or an annual total of 600,000,000 within the United States.

Suppose these were quail or young pheasant. We can very readily see what a tremendous amount of game birds are destroyed by the stray cat. Doctor Hornaday says that about half this amount are game birds.

Each year brings to us some new pest to destroy our gardens, fields and crops. Birds destroy or kill bugs; bugs destroy crops; cats kill birds. The cash value of a few birds in our country is here given: A woodpecker is worth $20; a nuthatch, creeper or chickadee is worth $10.

You might as well cut down four 20-inch trees and let them decay as to kill one woodpecker. A robin that nests and raises two sets of brood will carry 100 pounds of bugs and worms from your garden. Now if these birds are of real money value, why not protect them?

Let us take a look at some benefits that come to us from the tree sparrow: In a state like Iowa, if there are two to every section of land, this one species alone eat 875 tons of weed seed a year, and the total value of the farm products of the United States in 1910 was $8,926,000,000. If the birds saved seed consumption 1 per cent, they saved the farmers $89,260,000. Are they worth saving?

Too many of us class hawks and owls as thieves, robbers and killers, yet a great majority of them are the farmers best friends. Hawks work by day and owls by night. As many as 100 grasshoppers have been found in the stomach of a Swainson hawk. The retreat of a pair of barn owls have been found to contain more than 3,000 skulls, 97 per cent of which were field mice, house mice and common rats.

Pennsylvania has paid out thousands of dollars for the destruction of noxious animals, but has not wakened up to the fact until last summer that the tramp cat does more damage than all the other enemies the small game has. Our game laws operate mostly for the benefit of the tramp cat.

The human hunter is forbidden to kill certain birds at any season. At the game sanctuaries, where he is forbidden at all seasons of the year, these murderous marauders invade and destroy the young in their nests, or under their mother's guidance on the ground. The cat is especially fitted for its criminal part in destruction of birdlife.

Few animals see better at night, yet it can stalk its prey by day, or prowling around till it smells out the young of the species that nest on the ground and at night climbs the trees in search of the tree nesting bird, and destroys both old and young.

In these years when we hear so much about saving our wildlife, let us begin at the beginning. Let every hunter kill on sight every cat he sees in the wood, field or meadow. Get rid of these 120,000,000 stray cats and our wildlife will come back by leaps and bounds.

Let our state legislature think more about protecting our birdlife and pass a law to tax every female cat $10 a year, and the torn $5, and out of this money pay a premium of $1 for the scalp of every cat shot in the woods or field.

H. A. McKELVEY, Milford, Nebraska.

IKES TO CHICAGO

The seventeenth annual convention of the Izaak Walton League of America will be held in Chicago March 16, 17 and 18, 1939.

All sportsmen and conservationists and others interested in the free and frank discussion of national conservation issues are invited to attend.

It is likely a delegation from Nebraska will be in attendance.

10 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

Yes, Fish Have Parasites

(Continued from page 3)

complicated, involving at least two or more hosts. Briefly the life cycle is as follows: The eggs produced by the adult fluke pass out of the host and into the water, where they hatch into a freeswimming stage. This stage seeks and penetrates the tissues of a mollusk, usually a snail, which is the first intermediate host. Within the snail several larval generations of flukes are produced, which are capable of becoming established in the body of a fish. Within the body of the fish the flukes may encyst in some organ and remain in a larval condition until the host is eaten by another fish or some bird or mammal in whose body they reach maturity. Or the flukes may develop directly to the adult stage within some organ of the fish.

The adult flukes are seldom seen by any one except the biologist who is searching for them, since those in the viscera are removed when the fish is prepared for cooking. However, the larval flukes, which may be encysted in the flesh, are very often seen by the fisherman when removing the skin of the fish. If the cysts are ruptured the larvae are liberated, and due to their movements readily attract attention. Such infected fish are commonly spoken of as being "grubby", and are usually discarded as undesirable food. The "grubs" or larvae, however, are completely harmless if eaten by man, since they mature in fish-eating birds, usually. Aside from the esthetic considerations such fish are no more unfit as food than are beef cattle which have "grubs" in their skins.

The most conspicuous "grub" or larva found in the flesh of fish in this survey is known as Clinostomum. These larvae occur in nodules or cysts which are about the size of a match head. The flesh near the dorsal and tail fins is most commonly infected. The bullheads and yellow perch are the most heavily infected of any of the fish examined in this region. The parasite reaches maturity when the fish in which it is encysted is eaten by a great blue heron, in whose mouth and throat the adult parasite lives.

A rather generally known group of internal parasites is the group known as tapeworms or cestodes. These animals are the largest of the internal parasites, reaching a length of 10 inches or more in fish. In appearance tapeworms are ribbon-like, and usually consist of numerous segments, each of which contains an entire set of male and female reproductive organs. These animals have terminal organs of attachment which enable them to remain in the intestine of the host, where nourishment is secured by absorption through the body wall, since there is no digestive system present. The adult tapeworm never occurs outside of the intestine, but larval tapeworms may occur in almost any organ except the intestine.

Tapeworms of fish require at least one host other than the fish in their life cycle. This host is some arthropod, usually an insect or crustacean which becomes infected by eating the tapeworm eggs. In the body of the arthropod a larval tapeworm develops, which may become established in the digestive tract of a fish that happens to eat the infected arthropod. In some cases, however, the larval tapeworm from the arthropod host does not remain in the digestive tract of the fish, but migrates to some visceral organ or the flesh where it encysts. Here it remains until the host fish is eaten by another fish or some fish-eating bird or mammal, in whose digestive tract it reaches maturity.

It is generally considered that the adult tapeworms of fish cause little injury to their hosts. The larval forms, however, are very often injurious, especially when they are numerous. A larval tapeworm parasite of the black bass has been known to cause sterility in this fish, since the parasite often encysts in the reproductive organs. Sixteen per cent of the fish examined during the present survey contained adult tapeworms, and 3.5 per cent were infected with larval forms.

There is only one parasite that man can contract from fish in this country. This parasite is known as the broad or fish tapeworm of man. The larvae are encysted in the flesh of a considerable variety of different fish of the Great Lakes region. If infected, poorly cooked or raw fish is eaten, the larval parasites develop to maturity in the human intestine.

Another group of internal parasites is the nematodes, commonly known as the round or thread worms. These animals have an elongated cylindrical or spindle shape, and range from a microscopic size to an inch or more in length in fish. In this group the sexes are separate; the females are usually larger than the males. As adults they occur most generally in the digestive tract; as larvae they may encyst in the flesh or some visceral organ. The life histories of nematodes vary considerably. In some cases the cycle may be direct, and in others an intermediate host, usually an arthropod of some kind, is necessary for the completion of the life cycle. About 25 per cent of the fish examined had adult nematodes in their digestive tracts, and nearly 5 per cent contained larvae encysted in the viscera. The nematode parasites encountered in this survey seem to be of little economic significance.

The last group of worm parasites of fish to be considered is known as acanthocephalans or spiny- -headed worms. These are somewhat flattened spindleshaped animals. A spiny, protrusible structure is present at the anterior end; this structure enables the animal to attach itself to the intestinal wall. Food is absorbed through the body wall, since, like the tapeworms, the spiny-headed worms lack a digestive system.

Considerable damage is done to the intestinal wall by these parasites, especially when they are present in large numbers. Little is known concerning the life cycle of the acanthocephalans of fishes. In so far as known, however, an arthropod serves as an intermediate host. When the intermediate host is eaten by the fish the larva is liberated. Usually it reaches maturity in this fish; in some cases the parasite may use the fish as another intermediate host. In this case the parasite encysts in some visceral organ, where it remains until the host fish is eaten by a carnivorous fish. About 13 per cent of the fish examined had the adult acanthocephalans in their intestines; 2.5 per cent were infected with larvae.

The control of the parasites of fish is a difficult problem. It is possible to control or prevent certain diseases of fish reared in hatchery troughs and ponds, where the young and the breeding stock are kept under conditions that are controlled to a certain extent. The ponds and troughs may be treated chemically to destroy the parasites in the water, or the fish may even be dipped in solutions of chemicals. In hatcheries it is also possible to control the food supply so that sources of infection with internal parasites may be eliminated, since internal parasites utilize some food animal of the final host for the larval stages. For the control of the larval parasites in certain fish, the destruction of the hosts of the adult parasites has been advocated by some writers. Such control measures, however, do not conform to the accepted conservation practices.

Much work remains to be done on the control of parasites of fish. Although disease control measures are rather widely used in hatcheries, little is definitely known concerning the exact effect of the treatment on the parasite or the host. Carefully controlled experiments should be conducted in order to determine the most useful methods of treatment for the various diseases of fish. Also, in order to develop adequate control measures, it is necessary to know the life cycles of the parasites of fish. Relatively few life cycles of fish parasites are known at present. When this information is at hand the result will be that more fish, raised more economically, will be available for distribution to the streams and lakes.

REFERENCES

Pratt, H. S. (1929)—Parasites of freshwater fishes, comprising some general considerations. U. S. Bur. Fish, etc., Circ. No. 42, 1-10.

"Van Cleave, H. J., and Mueller, J. P. (1934)—Parasites of Oneida Lake fishes. Part 3. A biological and ecological survey of the worm parasites. Roosevelt Wild Life Animals, 3 (3-4): 161-334.

OUTDOOR NEBRASKA 11

Study Shows Pheasants Prolific, But Mortality Cuts Down Numbers

(Continued from page 4)

third attempts, average smaller clutches of eggs than the early nestings.

In the case of nest destruction during mowing operations all too often the incubating pheasant is destroyed together with her nest. Sometimes the head is cut off, and she dies instantly. More often the legs are cut off or she is otherwise injured, to escape at the time and die a lingering death elsewhere. But if she does escape this she will usually attempt to renest, and it is from these re-nesting attempts that result the late broods of pheasant chicks which are seen coming off in July or August or even September. There is no basis for speaking of second or third or fourth broods of pheasants in the wild. If the first brood is carried off successfully there is no second nesting, but if the first attempts are failures the hen will continue to try, and ultimately probably between 70 and 80 per cent of them do succeed in bringing off a brood of some size.

Other operations of man besides mowing hay which contribute to the high proportion of nest destruction are burning harvesting and spring plowing. Spring burning is often disastrous in its effect. Domestic animals such as cattle, horses, hogs and cats or dogs, for which man is at least indirectly responsible, cause serious losses; also usually by trampling the nest, destroying the cover or causing the bird to abandon.

Many of the losses from these man-made causes are unpreventable, but many could be prevented with care. The use of flushing-bars during mowing is perhaps the greatest aid that can be suggested, but it must not be presumed that it will save all hayfield nests. Those birds whose eggs are at the point of hatching will sit so closely that they will be killed even if a iiushing-bar is used. The hens which escape through the use of the flushingbar usually do not succeed in returning to hatch their eggs, even if the farmer is careful to leave an island of hay surrounding the nest; but at least the old birds are saved and will attempt to renest. A few will escape without the use of any such device, but the flushing-bar does increase the number of birds saved very definitely, and should be encouraged, for both humane and economic reasons.

The reason why so many of our pheasants nest in hayfields is that these sites usually offer the greatest amount of cover available at the time nesting begins. Railroad and highway rights-of-way attract many nests for the same reason, but here, as in hayfields, the mower is likely to destroy the nest at the critical time. Although these rights-of-way are not the safest sites imaginable, birds which nest in them should be protected if at all possible, and it is my conviction that preventing the burning of cover along railroads and delaying the cutting along highways until July 1st, whether it is for hay or for clean-up purposes, would save a large number of birds.

Another factor which causes some nesting losses is predators, and the worst of these is the crow. Crows are on the alert for eggs, and nests which have been destroyed or uncovered by mowing or other farming practices are often robbed almost immediately. The loss of these eggs is not a serious matter since they would be wasted anyway, but crows do locate undisturbed nests as well. In Hamerstrom's study of over 500 pheasant nests in northwestern Iowa, an area exactly like our southwestern Minnesota pheasant country, he found that 8 per cent of the nest destruction was by crows. This percentage is high enough, but it does not compare with the 52 per cent of losses caused by man. Nevertheless, it is sufficient to justify the control of crows in areas where they are abundant and conditions are otherwise suitable for pheasant nesting.

The only other predator which was found to be of real importance during the nesting season was the stray dog. In Michigan, English found that over 2.5 per cent of his nests were destroyed by dogs running wild. Stoddard found much the same to be the case in his quail study in Georgia. There is no doubt that much good could be accomplished by keeping all dogs in pheasant territory tied during the nesting season.

In the Iowa study, fourteen nests, or about 4 per cent, were destroyed by ground squirrels and other small mammals. This was three times as many as were destroyed by skunks, badgers, foxes and coyotes together, and it indicates very clearly that the losses should be studied carefully before conclusions are drawn. The chief natural enemies of the ground squirrels are such predators as hawks, owls, foxes, badgers, etc., and if these were reduced in numbers too greatly there would undoubtedly be a consequent increase in nest destruction by ground squirrels.

In some instances pheasant nests are placed in such situations that they are flooded by a sudden run-off of water, or by a rising water-level. In the Iowa study 6 per cent of nest losses were due to flooding, over a period of three years. This type of loss depends entirely upon the individual season, of course.

This covers the factors which have been found to be important in causing losses of pheasant nests. There are others which cause the loss of a nest now and then, but these are the most important.

And now, what about losses of pheasants after the nesting season? Information on this phase is much more difficult to obtain than for nesting losses, but there is some evidence.

There is no doubt but that heavy rains during the period when pheasant chicks are small may cause some damage, but it is difficult to say how much. A brood of chicks located in a low spot may be drowned by the sudden rise of water, or chicks in such locations as ditches may be swept away by the rush of water draining from nearby fields, but it is unlikely that this type of loss takes a large proportion of birds.

Very often the mewing of hay destroys chicks even after they have hatched and left the nest. The young chicks will often remain in hayfields for days, feeding upon the insects. Sometimes the whole brood is destroyed by the mower, but usually some escape. Another frequent cause of losses is in chicks becoming lost from the brood, especially if the hen has been flushed accidentally.

This is the best point at which to emphasize the fact that hatching time is a very critical period for any game bird. During the rest of the incubating period the hen and nest have been relatively safe, because she has been so quiet. Predators which depend upon their sense of smell have very little chance of finding her, because remaining perfectly quiet upon the nest she gives off little scent. Movement is necessary for birds to give off scent. Predators which depend upon sight or hearing also have very little chance.

The moment the first egg is chipped, however, conditions are very different. The young chicks inside of the eggs, and even more when the first chicks have hatched, are calling almost constantly, and the hen pheasant is moving in the nest and fluffing her feathers so much that she gives off considerable scent. The period between the time the first egg is pipped and the time when the whole brcod is hatched, dried and ready to leave the nest may vary between a few hours and two days, but it is usually at least 24 hours. It is during this period that both mother and chicks are most likely to be found, especially by such predators as stray dogs and cats, and this emphasizes the necessity for keeping them confined during the hatching season.

The losses from other predators is usually small. Sometimes an individual hawk or owl may cultivate the habit of eating pheasants, but this is the exception.

Other factors are of lesser importance. A few chicks are killed by flying into fences or trees, some by automobiles on highways, some by grass fires in midsummer, some by fighting among themselves, but these causes are of relatively little importance. The workers in Michigan found that the summer losses of   12 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA young pheasants average about 20 per cent of the original brood.

It is during this period that the theory arises each year that our pheasant population, young and old alike, is being killed off by the poison spread to kill grasshoppers.

A great deal of work has been done upon this very point in several states. The types of work have varied from studying the areas where the poison has been used to locate any dead birds that might be there, to feeding captive birds the poison mash in pens.

All that needs to be said here is that when the poison is used properly there is little or no chance that it will kill pheasants, quail, songbirds or poultry either from eating the poison mash directly or from feeding upon grasshoppers which have fed upon the poison. Pheasants and poultry will eat relatively small amounts of the poison mash, but not enough to injure them. The question arises, then, whether humans will be poisoned by eating pheasants or poultry which have picked up such grasshopper poison. Experimental work on this point in Wisconsin shows that a man would have to eat 60 chickens at one sitting to get sufficient poison to harm Mm, even when the chickens had been deliberately fed the poison mash!

We are familiar with the fact that hunting is one of the most important checks upon pheasant increase, so little needs to be said upon this point, but I would like to mention that our figures on crippling losses in pheasant hunting indicate that between one in five and one in six pheasants shot escape to die elsewhere. These birds are all wasted and anything we can do to reduce this loss is well worth while. One thing that would be an aid would be encouraging the use of retrieving dogs. An untrained or unsuited dog is worse than nothing, but one which is properly trained will prevent many of these wasted crippling losses.

Another measure which I feel should be taken is discouraging the hunting of pheasants by large parties of men. When a large party of hunters drives a cornfield there is usually a proportionately higher loss of crippled birds than when the group is restricted. I believe that a party of pheasant hunters, hunting abreast, should be restricted to three or four men and much of the tendency to leave birds lying in order to keep up with the group would be eliminated.

Winter losses vary tremendously, depending upon the type of weather. Pheasants are not as well suited for severe winter weather as our ruffed grouse, and in very severe snowstorms, with fine drifting snow, the losses are often very great, because the snow drifts into the feathers, melts and forms ice.

These losses are often terrific, and the best way to prevent them is to provide sufficient winter cover for the birds. In adequate cover, and with sufficient food; pheasants are capable of withstanding the . worst winters.

The size of the game crop in the fall depends very largely upon the size of the over-wintering population the preceding spring. When few birds are killed by severe winter weather we will usually have a good crop in the fall.

OLD TREES INDICATE BIG WET SPELL DUE

The wettest period in the last 90 years is upon us, according to Dr. Edwin L. Moseley of Ohio State University. Dr. Moseley bases his prediction on the readings of tree trunks.

It's going to rain some more, lots more, pine stumps say.

Plenty of snow this winter, plenty of run-off next spring. Pond holes filling up. The sun-baked lake beds of the northwest that took last summer's rain, and dried out again, will hold water next spring.

Restoration projects in the wildfowl breeding grounds need plenty of water to reach full production.

Dr. Moseley has examined hundreds of stumps. The annual rings indicate by their width whether a season is wet or dry, space between the rings varying according to the amount of moisture available for the roots of the growing tree.

Not only has Dr. Moseley checked hundreds of stumps, but he has studied records of high water in the Ohio River. He is convinced that a rainy cycle swings around every 90 years.

Maximum high water reports were recorded in Cincinnati and Pittsburgh in 1847. The annual rings on logs and stumps show a similar period of heavy precipitation 180 years ago and 270 years ago.

TOO MANY FISH SPOIL FISHING

Two hundred Missouri fishermen have devoted a lot of time during the summer prying into the age of fish. Now Roland E. Miller of the University of Missouri, with a staff of assistants, is tabulating the returns.

The age of a fish can be determined as accurately as the age of a tree, by counting the rings on the scales—if you know how.

The volunteers signed up early in the season to collect scales of large-mouth bass, crappies and green sunfish, record the size and weight of the fish from which the scales were taken and mail the scales and data to the University of Missouri.

Many states have discovered that the more fish—beyond a certain point—the less fishing. When the fish population exceeds the food resources of the water, through planting, the fish never reach legal size.

Vast fortunes have been expended by conservation departments rearing and planting fish with a net result, in many places, damaging to sport.

University of Missouri experts working with the state conservation department, will endeavor to find out the ideal fish population for various waters. This season's study is focussed on the Lake of the Ozarks.

Meanwhile the United States Forest Service awaits the returns from several hundred bass that were marked with metal tags and released in the Meramec River.

In a number of other states, affiliates of the National Wildlife Federation have volunteered to cooperate in gathering fish facts.

"Improvements of stream and lake conditions to support more fish is now getting more attention than planting," says Jay N. Darling, president of the Federation and former chief of the Bureau of the Biological Survey.

ANGLERS SPEND 9 MILLION DOLLARS FOR LICENSES

Anglers in the United States bought 6,901,587 licenses during 1936-37, for which they paid $9,309,949, according to Charles E. Jackson, acting commissioner, Bureau of Fisheries. More than 89,000 anglers' licenses were sold to women and children, although many states permit women and children to fish without a license. In 1932-33, there were only 4,858,058 licensed anglers.

The total number of regular fishing licenses issued to residents and non-residents in 1936-37 was 4,952,775, while combination licenses (hunting and fishing) numbered 1,948,812. Of the 6,901,587 licenses issued of all classes, 6,234,478 were purchased by residents, and 667,109 by non-residents. Thirty states, where short-term licenses are sold, reported the sale of 223,128 tourist licenses.

While the states gained over $2,500,000 in revenue from the sale of anglers' licenses from 1932-33 to 1936-37, on an average they received 5 cents less for every license issued in 1936-37 than in 1932-33, when the average license fee was $1,39 as against $1.34 in 1936-37.

Figures obtained from the State Fish and Game Departments of Alabama, Arkansas, California, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Washington, show an estimated $136,485,212 spent by their 1,533,321 licensed anglers in 1936-37. Expenditures for tackle, bait, transportation, guides, boats,   OUTDOOR NEBRASKA 13 gasoline, food, lodging and other equipment in these states averaged $87.33. Fishing license fees averaged $1.68. Less than 2 per cent of their total average expenditure of $89.01 found its way into the State Fish and Game Departments for the enforcement of the fish laws, educational work, administration, the raising of fish and restocking programs. In this connection it is interesting to note the ratio of daily catch per angler compared with daily limit as reported by 11 states: Alabama, 25 per cent; California, about 20 per cent; Florida, 60 per cent; Idaho, 50 per cent; Maine, 8 per cent; Maryland, 70 per cent; New Mexico, 30 per cent; Rhode Island, 30 per cent; South Dakota, 60 per cent; Utah, 30 per cent, and Washington, 60 per cent—or a general average of 40 per cent.

When less than 2 per cent of the anglers' expenditures is allotted to the State Game and Fish Departments for their work, that an angler is able to catch 40 per cent of the daily limit, shows the provident use of license money by the states in carefully managed and financed programs.

5,000,000 BIG GAME ANIMALS IN UNITED STATES

The first nation-wide attempt to determine the number of big-game animals in the United States showed more than 5,000,000, reports the Bureau of Biological Survey, U. S. Department of Agriculture.

The survey—conducted in 1937 by the Bureau with cooperation from the National Park Service, the Forest Service, state game and conservation commissions and other well informed agencies and individuals—covered deer, elk, antelope, buffalo, moose, mountain goat, big-horn sheep, peccary, bears, caribou and exotic European wild boars. The inventory did not include animals in captivity.

Deer numbered more than 4,500,000. Michigan and Pennsylvania led in whitetailed deer with approximately 800,000 in each state. California had 450,000 mule and black-tailed deer. Elk in the country totalled 165,000; moose, 13,000; antelope, 130,000; big-horn sheep, 17,000; black bear, 81,000; grizzly bear, 1,100, and buffalo, 4,100. There were 43,000 peccaries and 700 European wild boars.

Data for two or more years, the Division of Wildlife Research of the Bureau of Biological Survey points out, are required before definite conclusions can be drawn on recent trends in big-game numbers. Accounts of animal numbers published some years ago, however, provide the Division with some basis for comparison.

Antelope, once thought facing extinction, increased about 500 per cent from 1924 to 1937. The number of big-horn sheep, on the other hand, dropped from 28,000 (an estimate made by E. T. Seton) to 17,000 within 22 years.

Protective measures have helped the deer, elk, antelope and buffalo, the Bureau declares, but the inventory makes apparent the need for cooperative administrative efforts and vigorous application of sound management plans for preserving other big-game species. The mountain goat, grizzly bear, moose and caribou, in addition to the big-horn sheep, have apparently declined in numbers during the past 20 years.

State game and conservation commissions and the various federal and state land-management agencies are contemplating intensive estimates of big-game numbers annually. Such an inventory comprising data carefully and correctly gathered year after year, the Bureau believes, will become increasingly valuable.

To The Editor:

I accidentally learned of a way to destroy one of the worst water predators in our state—the mossback turtle. I killed eight in three hours.

I use a heavy spear and light boat. When a mossback sticks his head above water, I mark the spot, if possible, by using moss or weeds. When the mossback ducks below the surface he settles directly to the bottom and stays there. Sometimes, in clear water, he moves away along the bottom. With the turtle on the bottom it is an easy matter to spear him, for the heavy spear will break through his shell. If he is speared through the head, cut off the head and cut the spear loose.

The small, hardshell turtles can seldom be caught in this way as they swim away immediately after submerging.

Thinking others will be interested, I am passing this along.

S. S. PARKINSON, Seneca, Nebraska.

DUCK STAMP SALES INCREASE

Sales of "duck stamps" in the fourth year of the annual series—July 1, 1937, to June 30, 1938—surpassed those for 1934-1935, the next highest year, by almost 150,000. The stamps, costing $1 each, are required of hunters of migratory waterfowl. However, persons who never go hunting but are interested in conservation, and stamp collectors, bought many. For the year ended June 30, 1938, sales reached a new high of $783,039. At least 90 per cent of the proceeds, together with other available funds, are used by the Bureau of Biological Survey, U. S. Department of Agriculture, to acquire and maintain refuges for migratory birds and other wildlife.

Minnesota was clearly ahead of the other states for the year, with sales of 97,609 stamps. Wisconsin, Michigan, California, Illinois, Texas and Washington followed in that order. The four leading states and Washington all showed appreciable gains over previous years, as did other states, notably Indiana, North Dakota and South Dakota. Nebraska sales were 22,939. Total sales for the four years amount to 2,469,867.

Stamps for the fifth year, the current 1938-39 season, are now available at postoffices in all county seat towns, in cities of 2,500 population and over, and at some specially designated postoffices. Until June 30, 1939, this year's stamps, showing pintails coming in to a landing, may be bought singly, in blocks, or in complete sheets of 28 stamps. Unsold issues for past years are destroyed as required by. law and can be obtained only from stamp collectors, dealers and others willing to part with them.

APPROVES PURCHASES OF LANDS

The Migratory Bird Conservation Commission has approved the proposed acquisition by the U. S. Biological Survey of additions to 21 refuges, in 18 states. The approvals apply to 101 proposed transactions involving 18,219 acres.

An addition of 6,180 acres to the White River Migratory Bird Refuge in Arkansas and one of 2,508 acres to the Delta Refuge in Louisiana were among those approved. Additions of more than a thousand acres each were approved for the Rice Lake and Tamarac Refuges, in Minnesota; the Hart Mountain Refuge, in Oregon; and the Bombay Hook Refuge, in Delaware.

Other refuges to receive additions, varying from 983 to 8 acres, include the following in order of size of additions: Valentine, in Nebraska; St. Marks, in Florida; Moosehorn, in Maine; Bitter Lake, in New Mexico; Union Slough, in Iowa; Long Lake, in North Dakota; Aranas, in Texas; Squaw Creek, in Missouri;   14 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA Lower Souris, in North Dakota; Montezuma, in New York; Seney, in Michigan; Hutton Lake, in Wyoming; Ruby Lake, in Nevada; Willapa Harbor, in Washington; and Swan Lake in Missouri.

The Migratory Bird Conservation Commission includes the secretaries of agriculture, interior and commerce; Senators Key Pittman of Nevada, and Charles L. McNary of Oregon; and Representatives Sam D. McReynolds of Tennessee, and James Wolfenden of Pennsylvania. Secretary of Agriculture Henry A. Wallace is chairman. Rudolph Dieffenbach, chief of he Biological Survey's division of land acquisition, is secretary of the Commission.

YOUNG ASSIGNED TO WOLF STUDIES

Effective on January 1, 1939, Stanley P. Young, principal biologist and chief of the Division of Predator and Rodent Control, U. S. Bureau of Biological Survey, was assigned to duty on the staff of the Bureau to conduct special work under the direction of the chief, Dr. Ira N. Gabrielson.

The transfer was made to enable Mr. Young first to devote himself to the completion of studies of the timber wolf, a subject in which he has been especially interested for many years. In the course of his investigations Mr. Young developed much information hitherto unknown concerning the wolf, and this material will eventually be published in the Survey's North American Fauna Series.

Mr. Young is a leading authority on the predators of this continent. With Tappan Gregory, of the Chicago Acadamy of Natural Sciences, Mr. Young experimented with self-photography of animals in the wild. He and Gregory used this method successfully for the first time in making photographs of wolves and mountain lions in their native habitat. Results of the work have been published in Academy monographs.

Mr. Young also collaborated with Arthur Carhart in a popular book on wolves published in 1929 and titled "The Last Stand of the Pack." He is also the author of numerous scientific publications on conservation matters.

Mr. Young is a graduate of Oregon University, and has a degree from the University of Michigan. He joined the Biological Survey in 1917 as a predatory animal hunter. In 1927 he was assigned to the Bureau's staff in Washington, and in 1928 was promoted to be chief of the Division of Economic Investigations. When the Survey was reorganized in 1934 he was assigned as chief of the newly created Division of Game Management. He later became chief of the Division of Predator and Rodent Control, which position he now holds.

Mr. Young is well known among stockmen and conservationists throughout the country. He is a member of the American Society of Mammalogists, the Biological Society of Washington, the Explorer's Club of New York, and the collegiate fraternity of Sigma Nu.

The vacancy in the Survey's staff (in the position of chief, Division of Predator and Rodent Control), occasioned by Mr. Young's transfer, will be filled by the promotion of Dorr D. Green, who has been the principal assistant in this important division. He is a graduate of Oregon State College, where he specialized in animal husbandry. Much of the work of the Predator and Rodent Control Division is of direct importance to livestock growers and farmers.

Mr. Green joined the Survey's field „ force in 1920, and has a wide range of experience in the predatory animal and rodent problems of the West.

PLEA BROADCAST TO SPARE EAGLE

Duck hunter, don't shoot that eagle!

The National Wildlife Federation has been urged to appeal to sportsmen through its state affiliates to persuade duck hunters to spare the national bird of the United States during the fall shooting season.

Because the American or bald eagle presents an inviting target, the species has been gradually decreasing in numbers throughout the United States. The National Association of Audubon Societies has fought for a number of years to prevent the extinction of the nation's emblem. In a number of states, eagles are protected by law.

"Probably the heaviest mortality among eagles occurs during duck shooting season," says Richard H. Pough of the Audubon Societies. "Although we have no record of an eagle taking an uninjured duck, eagles do prey on crippled birds. The eagles learn that the vicinity of a duck blind is a good place to hunt for cripples. When an eagle comes within range of a shotgun it is far too often shot down on suspicion that it may prey on game.

"As a matter of fact, the eagle is a distinct aid to duck shooting. It disposes of wounded birds that otherwise would perish slowly in the marsh, and it keeps feeding and resting flocks in motion from time to time.

"Chesapeake Bay is one of the last strongholds of the eagle in the eastern part of the United States. A number of pairs are found along the Great Lakes although the surviving percentage is pitifully small.

"Now that baiting and live decoys are barred, also the disturbing of flocks by motor boats, duck hunters complain that ducks often spend all of the daylight hours in open water, not coming near shooting points. When an eagle passes over a flock of ducks, those able to fly get up and go. The eagle then pursues any crippled bird that remains on the water.

"Much as our patriotic sentiment may resent the fact, the American eagle is very largely a scavenger. Its diet consists largely of fish, and most of the fish it eats are picked up dead, or else stolen from the eagle's more enterprising cousin, the fish hawk or osprey."

BEAVERS AID FISHING

Beavers are in many instances essential to good trout fishing, asserts K. C. Jakoubek, head of the beaver control section of the Wisconsin Conservation Department. Jakoubek, who has spent more than thirty years working with beaver in Wisconsin, believes this wildwood engineer is one of the most intelligent of all wild animals and that he plays an important role in the restoration of the balance of nature. "By damming up certain streams and swamps," says Jakoubek, "beaver create flowages which act as natural fire barriers and provide the necessary environment for muskrats, mink, otter and waterfowl." Biggest beaver Jakoubek actually weighed tipped the scales at 63 pounds.

NEW COMMISSIONER

Just as Outdoor Nebraska is going to press, we are informed that Gov. R. L. Cochran has appointed Mr. Carl S. Horn, Hay Springs, Nebraska, to serve on the Nebraska Game, Forestation and Parks Commission. He will replace Mr. William Tiley, North Platte, whose term has expired.

Mr. Horn comes from northwest Nebraska where there are so many natural resources in which the Commission is interested. He is greatly interested in the outdoors and has also had considerable business experience.

All the many friends of Mr. Horn throughout the state feel that Nebraska is fortunate to secure the services of a man of his ability and experience.

The Game Commission now consists of the following personnel:

Frank Haskin, Benkelman, Chairman. Guy Spencer, Omaha. J. B. Douglas, Tecumseh. M. M. Sullivan, Spalding. Carl S. Horn, Hay Springs.

REGULATIONS for FISHING Season of 1939

OPEN SEASON, BAG AND POSSESSION LIMITS, AREAS OPEN FOR GAME FISH

The following open seasons, bag and possession limits and areas are fixed, prescribed and published, effective September 15, 1938, and will be effective during the 1939 season:

Specie Open Season Area Open Size Limits Daily Bag Possession Any Time *Trout April 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state (except state owned lakes) Keep all 10 10 Bass (L. M.) Mar. 1 to April 30 and from June 15 to Nov. 30 Entire state 10 inch 5 10 Bass (S. M.) Mar. 1 to April 30 and from June 15 to Nov. 30 Entire state 10 inch 5 5 Crappie Mar. 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state (except Wal-gren Lake) 6 inch 15 25 Sunfish (Bluegill and Green) Mar. 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state Keep all 15 25 Rock Bass Mar. 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state 6 inch 15 25 Bullheads Mar. 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state 6 inch 15 25 Perch Jan. 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state Keep all 25 25 Catfish Mar. 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state (except Missouri River under permit) 10 inch 10 15 Catfish Jan. 1 to Mar. 16 From May 1 to Dec. 31 Missouri River only and by Commercial Permit 13 inch No limit No limit Pike, Walleye May 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state 12 inch 5 5 Pike, Northern May 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state 15 inch 5 5 Pike, Sauger or Sand May 1 to Nov. 30 Entire state 10 inch 5 5

*Trout may be taken from state-owned lakes (i. e. Fremont Sand Pits, Louisville Sand Pits, Rock Creek Lake) from April 1 to November 30, but not more than 5 fish daily bag nor 5 fish in possession at any time. All fish caught must be kept and counted in bag.

It shall be unlawful except in the Missouri River under commercial permit to take a daily bag or have more than twenty-five (25) fish of all species in possession at any one time.

All fish caught that are under size, or not to be kept as enumerated above, must be returned to the water from where taken at once and with as little injury as possible.

"Daily bag" means fish taken from midnight to midnight.

'Possession at any time" means fish in possession of person taking same at any and all times.

Carp, buffalo, suckers and other non-game fish may be taken at any time without limit on size, bag or possession.

The only legal method of taking fish is with hook and line, but carp, buffalo, suckers and non-game fish can be speared between sunrise and sunset from April 1st to December 1st.

GAME, FORESTATION & PARKS COMMISSION LINCOLN, NEBRASKA

A NEW YEAR RESOLUTION for SPORTSMEN

HUNTERS: This year I will leave seed for future crops of game birds and I will cooperate with farmers in the protection of their property.

FISHERMEN: This year I shall fish for sport and take a sportsman's creel.

TRAPPERS: This year I will take fur only when prime, observe property rights, and save dens and houses so I can get a crop next year.