Outdoor Nebraska

PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY NEBRASKA GAME, FORESTATION AND PARKS COMMISSION Editor: Dick H. Schaffer Associate editor: William C. Blizzard Photographer-writer: Fred Gibbs Circulation: Emily Ehrlich Artist: Claremont G. Pritchard FEBRUARY 1958 Vol. 36, No. 2 25 cents per copy $1.75 for one year $3 for two years Send subscriptions to: Outdoor Nebraska, State Capitol Lincoln 9 NEBRASKA GAME COMMISSION Floyd Stone, Alliance, chairman Leon A. Sprague, Red Cloud, vice chairman Don F. Robertson, North Platte George Pinkerton, Beatrice Robert H. Hall, Omaha Ralph Kreycik, Valentine DIRECTOR M. O. Steen DIVISION CHIEFS Eugene H. Baker, construction and engineering Glen R. Foster, fisheries Lloyd P. Vance, game Dick H. Schaffer, information and education Jack D. Strain, land management AREA CONSERVATION OFFICERS Cecil Avey, 519 4th Street, Crawford, phone 228 Edsel Greving, Box 221, Rushville, phone 257 Jim McCole, Box 268, Gering, phone 837 L Joe Ulrich, Box 1382, Bridgeport, phone 100 William J. Ahern, Box 1197, North Loup, phone 89 Jack Morgan, Box 603, Valentine, phone 504 Fred Salak, Box 254, O'Neill, phone 678 Dale Bruha, General Delivery, Albion, phone 356 Larry Iverson, Box 201, Hartington, phone 429 Gust J. Nun, 503 East 20th, South Sioux City, phone 4-3187 C. W. Shaffer, Box 202, Columbus, phone Locust 3-7032 V. B. Woodgate, Box 403, Fremont, phone PArk 1-5715 William F. Bonsall, Box 305, Alma, phone 154 H. Lee Bowers, Benkelman, phone 49R Loron Bunney, Box 675, Ogallala, phone 247 H. Burman Guyer, 1212 N. Washington, Lexington, phone Fairview 4-3208 Herman O. Schmidt, Jr., 1011 East Fourth, McCook, phone 992W Robert Ator, Box 141, Syracuse, phone 115 Carl E. Gettmann, 810 East 5th Street, Hastings, phone 2-4929 Jchn D. Green, 720 West Avon Road, Lincoln, phone 8-1165 Norbert J. Kampsnider, 1521 West Charles, Grand Island, phone Dupont 2-7006 Roy E. Owen, Box 288, Crete, phone 446 Richard Wolkow, 701 South 22nd, Omaha, phone ATlantic 0718 DISTRICT SUPERVISORS DISTRICT I (Alliance, phone 412) L. J. Cunningham, law enforcement Lem Hewitt, operations John Mathisen, game Keith Donoho, fisheries Robert L. Schick, land management DISTRICT II (Bassett, phone 334) John Harpham, law enforcement Lewis Klein, operations Jack Walstrom, game Bruce McCarraher, fisheries DISTRICT III (Norfolk, phone 2875) Robert Benson, law enforcement Richard Wickert, operations Gordon Heebner, game Harold Edwards, land management DISTRICT IV (North Platte, phone 4425-26) Samuel Grasmick, law enforcement Frank Sleight, operations Robert Thomas, fisheries George Kidd, fisheries Dale Bree, land management DISTRICT V (Lincoln, phone 5-2951) Bernard Patton, law enforcement Robert Reynolds, operations George Schildman, game Delvin M. Whiteley, land management PROJECT LEADERS Orty Orr, fisheries (Lincoln) Phil Agee, game (Lincoln) Clarence Newton, land management (Lincoln) ASSISTANT PROJECT LEADERS Harvey Miller, game (Bassett) Bill Bailey, game (Alliance) RESEARCH BIOLOGISTS Max Hamilton, pheasants (Fairmont) Raymond L. Linder, pheasants (Fairmont) David K. Wetherbee, coturnix quail (Lincoln)

IN THIS ISSUE:

TIDY LITTLE STINKERS Page 3 (William C. Blizzard) TODAY FOR TOMORROW Page 5 (Jack D. Strain) A HOLE IN THE ICE Page 7 (Bruce McCarraher) OUR PRECIOUS SOIL—THE KEY TO LIFE Page 9 (M. O. Steen) 1957 DEER SEASON—HOW SUCCESSFUL? Page 12 (Bill Bailey) HOME-GROWN HOMICIDE Page 14 METHUSELAH OR MOPPET? YOU CAN TELL Page 16 THE KING'S BOUNTY Page 18 (Phil Agee) TWENTY YEARS AGO THE DAWN (Glen R. Foster) DO-IT-YOURSELF AMMUNITION (Frank Foote) Page 19 Page 20 Page 24 SPORTSMEN GET CHANCE (H. R. Morgan) OUTDOOR ELSEWHERE Page 25 NOTES ON NEBRASKA FAUNA Page 26 (George Schildman) WHY REGULATIONS ON BULLFROGS? Page 28

TIDY LITTLE STINKERS

by William C. Blizzard Associate Editor

THERE IS IN NATURE a group of creatures you may consider a bunch of stinkers. And they are—literally. Their table manners are atrocious, their diet malodorous. No amount of deodorant, in many cases, could make them socially acceptable even in tolerant company.

But, socially acceptable or not, these creatures are highly necessary in nature's scheme of things. They form the cleanup crews of the wild—the group responsible for keeping forest, stream, lake, and field tidy, sweet-smelling, and sanitary. It is impossible to visualize the state of affairs if they disappeared from the earth for even a few months. These creatures are our scavengers, frequently unlovely, but indispensable.

They occupy earth, air, and water, and make the world a better place to live—no small accomplishment for any species. Most scavengers are not carrion-eaters in loto; sometimes, in fact, their serious inroads on game animals must be weighed against their value as sanitation engineers. But they do relish a delightful bit of putrefaction, and this strange appetite causes them to perform a service without which life in the great outdoors would be a foulsmelling mess.

In Nebraska, the best known scavenger, although not so much thought of in this role, is the coyote. This reviled animal is shot, poisoned, and trapped, and has a price on his head as a public enemy. But investigations by the Fish and Wildlife Service indicate that the "prairie wolf" is, as a scavenger, a public servant.

A five-year study in 17 states showed that the coyote eats tons and tons of rabbits every year. This conclusion would probably have been reached, although not so well supported by scientific method, by someone conducting a one-day study in one Nebraska county. But you might be surprised to learn that the next important item on the coyote's menu is carrion of all types.

On a yearly basis it was estimated that coyote vittles were 33 per cent rabbit and 25 per cent carrion. The carrion content of coyote stomachs rose to 36 per cent in winter, outstripping the favored rabbit by three per cent. And in analyzing 69 Nebraska coyote stomachs, it was discovered they contained 44 per cent carrion, more than that reported in any other state in the survey!

So, before you decide irrevocably that the ideal coyote food should be defunct cow, ripe, rare, and heavy on the cyanide, consider the service he performs in ridding the land of useless, smelly, and positively harmful carcasses. He does it quickly, too. A forest ranger reported that a dead whitefaced cow observed near the south end of the Bessey Division of the Halsey National Forest was almost completely stripped of flesh within four days.

As to the remainder of the coyote's diet, the Wildlife Service listed it as 18 per cent rodent, 13.5 per cent large domestic animals, 3.5 per cent birds, 3 per cent insects, 2 FEBRUARY, 1958 3   per cent vegetable matter, and 2 per cent "other animal matter."

The evidence showed that coyotes did kill sheep, but the amount of livestock-furnished food in the tested stomachs, including noncarrion calves, colts, and pigs, made up less than one per cent of the total food. Poultry accounted for less than one per cent; the same was true for upland game birds.

Other large animals which help clean up the countryside include the opossum (a real stinker after a grisly repast), the skunk (a real stinker if he dined only on nectar and royal jelly), the red and grey fox, the crow, and that dismal and hungry mourner, the turkey vulture. Few farmers would rally to the defense of any of these creatures. Just the same, a valid case can be made against their indiscriminate destruction, and it is not based on sentimentality.

Consider the hawks. Wildlife experts estimate that a hunter engaged in random shooting of hawks in Nebraska kills 99 protected or beneficial hawks to one of an unprotected variety. In Nebraska, only the Cooper's, sharpshinned, and goshawk are considered more harmful to man than beneficial.

Hawks are useful, not only as rodent catchers, but also as members of nature's cleanup crew. Along our highways it is not unusual to see a hawk carry away and feed upon an automobile-killed rabbit or other small animal.

In 1885, a law was passed in Pennsylvania apparently aimed at the extinction of all hawks, offering a bounty of 50 cents per scalp. In the two years the law was in existence, over $90,000 was paid in bounties and farmers found their fields and orchards overrun by mice, rats, and insects. They had the law repealed, but not, according to naturalist W. T. Hornaday, before the "hawk law" had cost farmers and fruit growers two million dollars in lost crops.

Hornaday makes the following observation which, for the most part, is accepted today: "It is always dangerous, and often calamitous, to disturb violently the balance of Nature, either by the destruction of existing species of birds or mammals, or by the introduction of new ones."

Among other members of our feathered air-borne department of sanitation are the magpie, bald eagle, English sparrow, and shrike, as well as the mentioned vulture and crow.

Insects, too, are well represented on the cleanup squad. There are many carrion beetles. The burying beetle actually digs a hole under a dead mouse, lets it fall in, then covers the body with earth. The rove beetles also feed on decaying animal and vegetable matter. In all, 3,000 North American species have been described. They have the interesting habit of playing dead when disturbed, like the opossum.

It is impossible to list the millions of flies, ants, tumblebugs, and other insects contributing their bit to cleaning up this littered old world. Beneath our waters, the busy cleanup crew includes everything from ponderous catfish to microscopic protozoa. The latter, the most numerous of all animals, perform a scavenging function, as do the fungi —vegetative colonies or spores which live on dead organisms.

Mussels filter and clarify the water, as do the copepods, tiny shellfish just visible to the naked eye. Red Tubifex worms and the bloodworm live in tubes in the soft bottom, feeding on organic material. They purify the water by absorbing decomposing matter, and also prolong the life of a lake by turning over the bottom sediment.

Many fish feed on carrion, a fact known for some thousands of years. Vedius Pollion, a friend of the Roman Emperor Augustus, is supposed to have fed his fish and fertilized his ponds with the bodies of slaves, and the Archduke Albrecht of Austria slaughtered many horses for the same purpose. We do not know if turtles inhabited these ponds, but if so, we may be sure they were happily stuffing themselves and cleaning up their environment in the process.

And so, all about us, nature's tidy stinkers perform a valuable service, and a not-much-appreciated service it is. For most of us, the sight of some of the carrion eaters, like the vulture, is rather repulsive, and we say to ourselves something like this:

I don't hate you, Mr. Vulture As I watch you soaring* free, But I'll thank you, Mr. Vulture, To keep your eye off me.

And he will unless—well, unless you have the misfortune to clutter up the natural scene with your cadaver. In which case, he and others of nature's cleanup crew will promptly get to work.

THE END. 4 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

STATE PARKS: TODAY FOR TOMORROW

by Jack D. Strain Chief of Land Management

TO SAY THAT Nebraska is "at the crossroads" in statepark development would be something of an understatement. We can proceed as we are now, making no provision for tomorrow, or we can start now to finance and develop a program to meet a need that is self-evident.

We are faced with two problems—distribution and finances. Better roads and transportation facilities combined with the shorter work week will partially solve the distribution factor, providing there is sufficient incentive for residents of the populous areas to travel the necessary distances.

The problem of financing is of most immediate concern. If Nebraska is to progress in the field of state-park development, some means must be devised to provide a constant, reliable source of income for acquisition and capital improvement. This type of financing can only be brought about by legislation. The State of Washington earmarks a part of each motor vehicle operator's permit for state parks, and Indiana has prescribed royalties from oil, sand, and gravel.

If Nebraska is to promulgate a progressive program, some thought should be given administration. State parks are generally administered in three ways: 1, as a separate department, ranking equally with other divisions of state government—usually a commission form; 2, as a separate division of a state conservation department, ranking equally with such other branches as the Division of Game and Fish, the Division of Forestry, etc., and 3, as a subordinate branch of a division of state government such as a Game Commission, Highway Department, Historical Society, etc.

As noted previously, the present form of state-park administration is considered the best yet devised in this state; however, there are certain phases requiring revision under an expanded program:

1. The division chief is currently responsible for three departmental sections — parks, habitat restoration, and reservoir management. This constitutes a peak load. As a comparison, five other Midwest states average 15 persons in state-park administration. Nebraska employs only two on a part-time basis.

2. There is considerable inequity in designating some state areas. Several state parks are smaller and have less attendance than some state recreation grounds. The primary value of some of these parks is historical rather than recreational.

This is not to say that these large recreation areas, currently financed by fish and game funds, necessarily qualify as potential state parks. Most of them do not. There should be other designations and means of financing to accommodate those state parks and recreation grounds that do not properly fall under the present systems.

If an expanded park program is considered, one of two administrative methods should probably be adopted: 1, Administration as at present under the Game, Forestation and Parks Commission; 2. Creation by legislation of a Nebraska State Park Commission.

The following procedures should be applied to either method: 1. Survey and analysis of existing areas to determine which should be financed and managed primarily for family recreation and which for fishing and hunting;

2. Employment of certain technical administrative personnel; 3. Legislation affording a stable annual income for acquisition and capital improvement.

In any administrative plan devised, it is important that the park administrator have authority to design and operate the program without undue influence of political, commercial, or other special interest groups.

The taxpayer is entitled to the most efficient and economical park system possible with the funds available at the development level that he desires to finance.

THINGS TO THINK ABOUT

Roadside Parks—Nebraska is behind other states in this type of park which is seen and used by thousands of tourists each year. Existing areas are inadequate. Some are dangerous, not by reason of neglect, but because we as a state have failed to recognize their importance and finance them as necessary.

Historic Sites—The proper marking of such sites has long been neglected, although the recent creation of the FEBRUARY, 1958 5   Historic Landmark Commission was a step in the right direction. We are sadly behind neighboring states in this activity, which should be given the attention and financing it deserves.

Watershed Developments — The development of small watersheds by certain federal agencies partially solves the distribution problem and presents a challenge to Nebraskans to develop the recreational aspects beyond what is contemplated for flood control. Unfortunately, this potential can only contribute some relief toward the outdoor recreation problem in eastern Nebraska; it will not solve it.

What Is A State Park?—A portion of the state set aside for all time to preserve some part of the original natural beauty for the enjoyment and use of all citizens.

1. Such an area should be large enough in the original acquisition to meet the existing and all foreseeable needs.

2. No area with natural geographic or artificial limitations to future expansion should be considered.

3. No site should be considered for acquisition that is nearer than 25 miles to a metropolitan area or 15 miles to a first or primary-class city.

4. A state park, insofar as possible, should preserve and perpetuate some distinctive geographical or ecological feature.

5. Last, but by no means least, a state-park site should have the development potential for a complete family recreational program as well as sufficient, undisturbed natural area for a man's pursuit of solitude.

SUMMARY

The principal problems of park management in Nebraska involve distribution and financing—distribution of population, areas, and wildlife, and the utilization of opportunity and development potential.

Some park facilities are insufficient to accommodate today's population and definitely do not have the capability of meeting expected increases of the next 15 to 20 years.

Park attendance is Nebraska's most popular out-of-doors family participation activity, far exceeding attendance at spectator sport events.

The annual income to Nebraska from incidental expenditures by out-of-state tourists is conservatively estimated at 40 million dollars, a figure to be reckoned with in the state's economy. Existing state recreation facilities contribute substantially to this revenue. This income could be raised considerably by a modest investment in the statepark and recreation program, and allied activities.

If an expanded program is initiated, changes in administration personnel and financing should be considered. In addition, public-use patterns indicate that reclassification and redesignation of certain existing areas is in order. Of major importance to an accelerated program is some form of annually reliable income to the park system for capital improvement and acquisition.

Financing of roadside parks and the historical-marker program merit consideration along with an expanded park program.

Although probably not widely known within the state, Nebraska rates recognition in the state-park and recreation field. Nebraska was one of the first Missouri River Basin states to assume management of federally constructed flood-control and irrigation reservoirs for public recreation and wildlife purposes.

In 1956, Nebraska sent two state-park superintendents to the Great Lakes Park Training Institute at Pokagon State Park, Illinois, and will continue the practice. This school affords a low-cost, highly intensified course in park management.

Nebraska is a member of the National Conference on State Parks, an organization of park administrators and allied persons. Annual meetings are devoted to an exchange of ideas on park procedures. The Nebraska Game Commission's Land Management chief serves on the screening committee for the Park Practice Handbook, a publication of plans and specifications of approved state-park installations and facilities.

Then, too, the state is a member of the Midwest State Park Association, composed of 17 Midwest states concerned with detailed management problems and techniques peculiar to this area. The Land Management chief is currently president of this organization, which will hold its annual meeting in Nebraska in 1958.

Nebraska, too, is a member of the Recreation Subcommittee of the Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee, and as such contributes to recreation planning in conjunction with water developments in the basin.

THE END 6 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

A HOLE IN THE ICE

by Bruce McCarraher District II Fisheries Supervisor

THE Popularity of fishing through the ice is fast becoming the No. 1 winter sport in many sections of the country. And recently, Nebraska anglers have joined that element in our society which is content in subzero temperatures to do nothing more than fish through a hole in this ice. Frostbitten fishermen are an adaptable lot. They have defeated the bitter north winds by the use of ice shacks, and they have employed fish catching aids (tip-ups, jigger rigs, etc.). On the market today are many ice-fishing aids and all are directed toward the goal of maximum fish harvest.

The big attraction for the Nebraska ice fisherman is primarily the yellow perch. Close behind, although not as plentiful in most lakes, rates the ever-hungry northern pike and the walleye.

Fishing techniques and success differ from lake to lake and from month to month. Presently our winter fishery is concentrated on a relatively few natural sandhill lakes—namely those that are accessible and have a sizable perch population. These perch are best harvested during periods of ice cover and catches of several hundred per fisherman trip are not uncommon.

Only a few basic items are needed, so the investment in equipment can be reasonable. First, it is necessary to dig through the ice in order to start fishing. A good ice chisel or spud bar can be made or purchased. A rope FEBRUARY, 1958 7   should be secured to the chisel and the wrist to prevent the loss of the bar when it at last breaks through to water. A strainer is often employed to clear the ice shavings from the hole.

When fishing for perch or crappie, small-size minnows (no carp, please) offer the best attraction and usually produce the best results. In the sandhills lakes, under ice cover, perch can be located moving in schools within a few feet from the bottom. Two baited hooks, one about one foot off the bottom and the other about four feet up, generally yield good catches. This is especially true for those lakes with a maximum depth of around 10 feet. Once a perch school has been located, look out for a period of hectic skirmishing until the school moves on.

Each year finds an increasing number of northernpike fishermen who normally scorn the smaller-size perch. To these men, the northern has become the ultimate satisfaction in ice fishing. Here is a fish whose chief purpose in life is to combine all other fish into one. The pike often reaches good size and weight (18 pounds) in some lakes, thus providing heavy duty angling. The selective pike fishermen will use a larger bait than normally used for perch. Suckers and chubs, (no carp again) three to seven inches long, are customary baits for most situations. I might suggest that one hook per line will be sufficient for this species. If you have ever tried to drag two pike out of one ice hole at the same time, you will know the reason why.

Northerns travel and feed all winter long, so most perch holes will eventually find a foraging pike nearby. It has been observed that a sudden slack in perch biting often means a pike is contemplating your bait. If you are fortunate enough to swing three northerns out of the hole in the ice in any one day, then you have had a most successful outing.

Creel census information for a major sandhill pike lake revealed that the average catch was less than one northern per fishermen trip. However, those who concentrate on the ravenous pike and have some knowledge of his feeding habits manage to bring home an average of 2.3 fish per trip.

If you are fishing with minnows, keep your bait moving and lively. A minnow should be hooked through the back, so that it will remain in motion in the water.

The time of day appears to be of some importance, differing with some species. The largest perch catches per hour of effort on several sandhill lakes were recorded between 3:30 and sunset. Generally, though, morning and evening fishing is the most productive.

A float may be used, especially when you have two or more ice holes to look after. Some fishermen prefer to literally "hand fish", that is to fish with the line in the hand in order to "jig" the bait. Both the bobber and "jig" methods have merit.

Contrary to some beliefs farm-pond ice fishing can be excellent for bass and bluegill. The active feeders are perch, pike, and walleye, but bluegill and bass, too, can be enticed to strike during the winter months. The use of grubs and corn borers has proven popular in some areas as a winter bait. One thing for sure, you will have to seek out the bluegill as he is not a traveler at this time of year.

Another item of importance: do not expect to catch fish near the bottom of deep farm ponds. By late January most of these ponds will be devoid of dissolved oxygen at the bottom levels forcing the bluegill and bass to the oxygen zones of the middle depths. Those of you residing in northeastern Nebraska where numerous bass and bluegill farm ponds exist should give this winter sport a try. You might shock the fish and yourself with the results.

Crappie ice fishing seems to be a hot and cold experience in many lakes. This species can be readily taken by the same methods employed for perch. The black crappie, however, does not tend to school together and therefore may not always provide the fast striking sport often associated with a school of perch.

Most folks who have joined the winter-fishing fraternity know the prime importance of keeping warm while on the ice. The sandhill-lake angler with the savvy dons the old stand-by long underwear, several pairs of heavy socks, and waterproof gloves or mittens. A common sight is to see fishermen sporting surplus or separation army and air-force foul-weather clothing. Sheeplined boots and parkas have become quite popular in recent years.

The thorny subject of where to go ice fishing for consistent success is a problem not always easily solved. For one thing, a lake which produced brisk perch fishing one winter will not necessarily afford the same quantity or quality of perch the following winter.

Fishery biologists have found that large numbers of a species hatched one particular year will be available for fishing for only a comparable brief period of time; then another group comes on, followed by still another.

As an avid and skillful ice fisherman, you may think that you have seriously depleted the perch population of a large sandhill lake by removing 5,000 to 10,000 perch during a winter of fishing. Chances are that only about 10 per cent of the perch were caught while around 40 per cent were subjected to predation, old-age mortality, and disease, thus being a complete loss to the following winter's fishing.

The Nebraska Game Commission has maintained "open door" progressive fishing regulations which have encouraged, not repressed, the total harvest of perch and other species available for the ice fishermen. With fishery biologists pointing the way to better fishing through research and management, we can anticipate even more liberalized creels in the future.

As to which sandhill lakes and reservoirs offer the best ice-fishing possibilities, the following list is prepared. It is by no mean complete, but it does offer the winter fishing enthusiast a list of waters which are open to the public and have in the past afforded fine winter fishing.

Sandhill Lakes (Cherry) perch, northern pike, crappie walleye, perch, crappie crappie, perch, bass perch, northern pike perch, northern pike, crappie perch, northern pike, crappie perch, northern pike crappie, perch, bass perch Reservoirs (Lincoln) walleye, perch, crappie walleye, perch walleye, crappie walleye, crappie walleye, perch walleye, crappie Big Alkali Dewey Pelican Mothers Cottonwood Shell (Cherry) (Cherry) (Cherry) (Cherry) (Cherry) Enders Overflow (Brown) Long Lake (Brown) Cameron (Rock) Maloney McConaughy Harlan County Whitney Minatare (Scotts Bluff) Swanson (Hitchcock) (Keith) (Harlan) (Dawes) THE END 8 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

OUR PRECIOUS SOIL -THE KEY TO LIFE

by M. O. Steen Director

WEALTH CONSISTS PRIMARILY of natural resources and man's labor. Without natural resources, labor would be unproductive. Wealth stems from the raw products of the earth, converted by man into the things he needs to make his life better, safer, more enjoyable. In economics, the land is all-important; there can be no true wealth without it.

In biology, the land is even more important. The soil is the beginning and end of all life. Nature's ever-turning Wheel of Life is a continuing process of birth, growth, death, and decay; the soil is an essential part of a perpetual cycle. Death follows life, and life springs again from the earth upon that which is dead and decayed.

The significance and ramifications of this great, fundamental truth have never been adequately recognized. The history of civilized man is ample proof of his failure to fully understand the role that soil plays in the Wheel of Life. It is not logical that man would continue, through the centuries, his destruction of land if he were really aware of the ultimate consequences.

When we look at history, we see nation after nation rise and flourish on the accumulated reserves of a fertile land—then pass into national decay or oblivion with the depletion of the land's fertility. There are many scars on Mother Earth today—starvation-ridden lands peopled by degenerate remnants of once-great nations. In truth, the history of civilized man is a shocking record of the continuing rape of his own environment—the destruction of his own habitat!

Historian Van Loon defines history in this significant sentence: "The history of man is the story of a hungry animal in search of food." But man is not possessed of physical hunger alone. His hunger includes the whole array of human desire, and he uses the land to satisfy that hunger without much consideration for the consequences.

We Americans are the world's outstanding example of unwise exploitation of natural reserves. We are repeating the errors of older civilizations in our typical American Way—the BIG way. We are living testimony to the truth that history repeats itself. Unless we mend our ways, I believe it is only a question of time until we deplete our reserves and come face to face with degeneration and ultimate disaster.

There are others who believe likewise, and these Americans are doing something about it. The great majority, however, are neither alarmed nor concerned.

Nearly 60 per cent of our people live in cities, towns, or villages. On Wall Street the land does not seem important. To the man on Wall Street, New York is a great city with great industries and a complex commerce to sustain her. Why should he be concerned with the land?

What the New Yorker does not realize is that his city lives and thrives only because it draws sustenance from millions of acres of land. Take that land or its products away from New York and in one week the city will be in distress; in one month New York will be in chaos; in one year that great metropolis will be a ghost town with grass growing in her streets. New York cannot possibly live without the land.

And what is true of Wall Street is equally true of Main Street—every Main Street in America.

You may be one of those who are aware of the penalties that result from land misuse, but have you ever considered the biological significance of this problem? Have you realized that this is not really an economic problem, but a biological one?

Failure to recognize this is, I believe, the reason man has never solved this problem. Man regulates his life by economics, but life is biological. He bases his land-use on economics, but land-problems are biological. His thinking and actions are economic, but his basic problems are biological. Man has been trying for centuries to shove his system of economics down Nature's throat, failing miserably each time. He is still trying to make Nature conform to his economic system. He does not realize that Nature earmarks for ultimate destruction all things that are biologically unsound. Man never seems to learn that FEBRUARY, 1958 9   only sound biology can give him permanently sound economics!

Sound biology in land-use demands stabilized production. Here, again, the economic complex clouds our vision; we think of production in terms of pounds or bushels and are happy if the quantitative yield is maintained from one year to the next. Sound biology, however, requires stabilization also of the qualitative yield, and demands the maintenance of that state perpetually. We readily understand the need for sustained yields of pounds and bushels, but the need for stabilized qualitative production is not commonly recognized.

Deficiencies in quality are widespread and seriousmore serious, in my opinion, than deficiencies in quantity. I look upon qualitative deficiency as a warning that we are losing ground. It takes more than mere pounds or bushels to meet the requirements of Nature's basic laws.

Adequate nutrition requires more than mere bulk. Evidence piles up daily of qualitative deficiencies that develop with our land use, and the impact of these deficiencies upon all life.

There is substantial evidence that plants and animals alike suffer from qualitative deficiencies. Some research workers conclude that many plant diseases and insect infestations of crops are brought about by deficiencies stemming from unwise land use. Others say that sterility, abortion, and other diseases of livestock are really signs of a sick soil. The relationship of soil fertility to the abundance and distribution of wildlife has been shown by the author in articles which have appeared in the past. There are medical men who contend that degenerative diseases in civilized man are the result of a land use which stresses chemical fertilization and the production of quantity rather than quality in foodstuffs.

These medical men point out that degenerative diseases are almost unknown among the Chinese, who must conserve every scrap of organic matter down to the last bit of human waste for fertilization, but that such diseases are widespread in our country, where chemical fertilization is relied upon for quantity production. One conclusion is that the Chinese are better nourished qualitatively than we who are supposed to be the best-fed people in all the world!

The truth is, our institutions, society, economy, our way of life are builded on, are sustained by, and are no better than the land on which we live. Poor land makes poor people, physically, mentally, and economically. The hillbilly is a hillbilly because he grows his food on hillbilly land; he is what he is because of malnutrition—qualitative malnutrition, that dulls his mind, saps his strength, and smothers his ambitions. This American is already in the process of degeneration; he is caught in an endless circle that drags him and his environment ever downward. We think of this as an economic circle; actually it is a biological one, for the soil pulls the man down and the man pulls the 10 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA   soil down. Tobacco Road and Grapes of Wrath were not just smash-hit plays or best-selling novels; they are pages from history on the march—a story or two of dying men on dying land.

The truth is that man can not violate Nature's basic laws without ultimately paying the penalty. We are what our land is, no more. The truth is that ALL LIFE is what the land is, no more.

We fail to recognize our problems for what they really are, and we deal with effects when we should be dealing with causes. We try to cure biological ills with economic medicine when we should be curing economic ills with biological medicine. Because we do not truly understand this basic problem, we have never taken it seriously. We are not getting the job done.

George Washington preached and practiced soil conservation. The great American patriot, Patrick Henry, said: "He is the greatest patriot who stops the most gullies."

After some 300 years of experience and warnings we are still losing the foundation of our biological and economic existence at an appalling rate. In that short period of history we have destroyed, partially or completely, more than half of our fertile topsoil. It took the Chinese 10 times as long to do as much to China.

In this land of the free, we willingly provide astronomical sums of money for preparedness, but balk at providing the relatively insignificant sums needed to conserve our basic resources. In one breath we proclaim to the world that we can afford 40 billion dollars a year for national defense, and in the next breath we say to each other that we can not afford one-twentieth as much to preserve the very things we propose to defend. We can afford to subsidize aviation, navigation, hydro-electric development, flood control, and other special interest groups, but we can not afford to subsidize adequately the saving of the land, that resource in which every living citizen has a stake, as do all the generations of Americans yet unborn.

We can afford navies to patrol the seven seas and military aircraft to swarm the skies. We can afford to mobilize our manhood by the millions and to equip them with implements of destruction that stagger the imagination. We can afford everything to defend this land against danger from without, but we cannot afford the relatively small expenditure needed to save America from disaster from within! We can defend this land of rocks and rills and templed hills at any cost, but we cannot afford to conserve it.

Before you lay this magazine aside, let me remind you of a few fundamentals of this thing called Life. The Wheel of Life will always turn. A power far greater than ours will see to that. Soil is an all-important part of that Wheel, and Nature will save and restore the soil at any cost—but in her own time and her own way. If we fail to keep the balance, Nature will keep it for us—but to her, time is not important; 1,000 years are but a day.

Stabilization, both quantitative and qualitative, will be accomplished. Stabilization is being accomplished every day. We have but to look about us to see stabilization under way. That weedy, empty pasture; that abandoned, decaying farmstead; that decadent, starving nation—these are stabilization under way.

Where we fail, Nature will restore the balance by whatever means she may need; and Man with all his trappings is but a pebble in her path. Nature will strike her own balance in birth and growth; she will strike that balance with DEATH and DECAY. To march against Nature is madness; wise men will travel Her way. THE END.

FEBRUARY, 1958 13

IN JANUARY'S OUTDOOR NEBRASKA I examined the 1957 deer season from the viewpoint of the hunters. The season was outstanding in the number of deer harvested and the hunting success. In all, 12 state records were broken. Nebraskans are now beginning to reap the harvest of the long-range big-game management program.

There are several facets to a deer season, however, and in January I examined only one of these—hunting success. This time, let us make a critical examination of the season from the viewpoint of the Game Commission. How did the '57 season conform to our long-range management program? What objectives did the Commission have when establishing the '57 season, and were these objectives realized?

Inasmuch as we are to consider the '57 season in light of our long-range management plans, perhaps we had better first define the program's objectives. These are twofold. First, our management plan is functioning to produce deer populations that will provide the greatest amount of recreation for Nebraska's big-game hunters over the longest period of time; and second, to maintain populations that are consistent with our many other land uses.

Now, what were, specifically, some of the objectives the Commission wished to accomplish with the '57 season. These, of course, can be summed up broadly under the objectives listed for the over-all program,' but let us go a little deeper and place ourselves in the chairs of the Commission. We can treat each objective separately and then determine whether it was accomplished.

If you are up-to-date with Nebraska's big-game picture, you will realize that deer population exceeded a desirable level in the Pine Ridge Management Unit in '56. Crop-depredation complaints increased in '57, and field observations revealed high concentrations of deer, particularly in the vicinity of Crawford. Data obtained during the '56 season indicated that the herd in this area showed symptoms of population pressure. Mean weights and antler measurements declined considerably—symptoms that generally point to food deficiencies. In turn, these food deficiencies are often caused by excessive pressure on the range by deer.

Limited observations in the western part of the Pine Ridge corroborated data obtained during the season. Some of the more preferred native browse plants had been used heavily and some deer were turning to less desirable shrubs, such as skunkbush, for sustenance. This heavy utilization of native plants, in part, explains many of the crop depredations in '56 and '57. As native foods became more scarce, deer were forced to depend heavily on agricultural crops.

Realizing this problem and recognizing the management implications, the Commission geared last year's 12 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA   harvest to reduce the herd in Pine Ridge. All indications are that the program was successful.

Most farmers and ranchers in the area believe the herd has been effectively reduced. Deer are not showing up in the heavy concentrations typical of 1956, and the ranchers are not suffering severe crop depredations.

Actually, reduction of the Pine Ridge herd was another step in our long-range program. In the past, practically all deer hunting has been concentrated in western Nebraska. Our deer are not distributed evenly—we have had excessive populations in parts of western Nebraska and extremely low populations in many other areas of the state capable of supporting deer.

One of our objectives is to effect better distribution of deer. Through proper harvesting we intend to keep down excessive populations and allow the maximum recreational harvest possible, and to build up those populations that are now below a desirable level. Obviously the western part of the state was a focal point for harvesting this year. Approximately 76 per cent of the authorized permits were restricted to 11 counties comprising the western panhandle. If we are successful in obtaining better distribution of deer, hunters in eastern Nebraska will have deer hunting closer to home and the landowners in the west will not have to carry the heavy populations that they have experienced for the past few years.

Why was a split season declared for the Pine Ridge Management Unit? This move, unprecedented in Nebraska, was considered desirable by both the Commission and the affected landowners. The Pine Ridge Management Unit in '57 was relatively small. Actually, most of the hunting pressure occurs within the timbered escarpment, an area covering only an estimated 785 square miles. Since the unit was so small, a split season was declared to control the influx of hunters.

Information from past seasons and from other states indicate that most of the deer harvest and hunting pressure occur during the first three days of the season, regardless of the length of season. If all 10,000 hunters had arrived in the Pine Ridge on the first weekend, some surely would have been unable to find a place to hunt, and most of the ranchers are capable of accommodating only a limited number of hunters.

Let's take the pattern of hunting pressure in '57 to illustrate this idea, and to determine whether or not the Commission was correct in predicting this opening weekend influx of hunters. We can use the Upper Platte and Pine Ridge Management Units for examples. In the Upper Platte Unit, about 79 per cent of the harvest was taken during the first three days, and in the Pine Ridge, 81.5 per cent. The pattern of kill by days was essentially the same for other units.

Actually, the pattern of hunting pressure that I have been discussing has been demonstrated for many other species of game. The psychology of hunters must play an important role. All of them seem to be straining at the bit, and most of them are there for the opening weekend of their long-anticipated hunt. After this the pressure declines and soon becomes almost negligible. From this it appears that the Commission was correct in predicting the opening weekend rush of hunters. And, the split season was an effective tool in controlling this influx.

The '57 season marked one more "first." Prior to last year, all our past seasons occurred during December. This was the expressed wish of many western landowners at the time deer hunting first began in Nebraska. However, many people since then have thought that an earlier season would be more desirable. In '57, the Commission decided to permit hunting during October for the Pine Ridge and in November for the rest of the state. By this earlier season the Commission hoped to: (1) provide animals in better condition; (2) give hunters the opportunity to hunt in desirable weather; and (3) decrease crop depredations that ordinarily occur during October and November.

Let's take each of these separately and see if these objectives were accomplished.

First, were animals, particularly bucks, in better condition in '57 that in '56 or '55? The answer is yes. The average weight of yearling mule-deer bucks was higher for this past season. For instance, in the Pine Ridge during October, yearling males averaged 105 pounds as compared to 101 and 102 pounds for '55 and '56 respectively. Weights of yearling bucks followed the same pattern in other units, too, averaging five to seven pounds more. Weights of yearling mule-deer females did not change significantly while those of fawns, as expected, were less.

There is a good reason for this pattern of weights. During the breeding season—November and December in Nebraska—food consumption of adult males decreases and activity increases, with a resultant loss in body weight. Observations on penned deer in Pennsylvania indicated that weight loss was greater in the larger, more vigorous bucks. Probably the mean weights of male mule deer older than yearlings showed more of a gain than those of yearlings. This is, in part, evidenced by the large number of heavy bucks taken last year. Several bucks were killed that exceeded 250 pounds hog-dressed and, of course, Nebraska weight records for both white-tailed deer and mule deer were broken in '57. All evidence indicates that hunters harvested animals in better condition during '57 as a result of the early season.

Those of you who hunted deer in '57 can answer the next one yourself. Were weather conditions more suitable for hunting? You will have to answer yes, particularly if you hunted during '56, when hunters were hampered by deep snows. The chances of a blizzard during early November or in October are not nearly so great as during December.

The third consideration for an early season, that of decreasing crop damage, will have to receive an affirmative vote also. The Pine Ridge, of course, was the only area in which the landowners were suffering significant damage. In this area, deer were just beginning to move onto the fields during late September and early October. The October season caught them before they were able to cause landowners too much grief. The removal of more than 2,900 deer during October and more than 1,800 in November certainly relieved the pressure on agricultural crops during these two months.

When considering our over-all management objectives, we will have to conclude that the 1957 season conformed with the program. The season was geared to provide the maximum amount of recreation within bounds of our big-game resource. Big-game hunters chalked up a record harvest of 8,470 deer. Primary consideration was given to those management units in which deer were becoming an economic problem. Management techniques were applied and tested, confirming decisions of the Commission. From the viewpoint of both the Commission and the hunter, the 1957 season marks another progressive step in Nebraska's big-game management program.

THE END.

WANT TO KNOW WHEN YOUR SUBSCRIPTION EXPIRES?

All you have to do is turn to the backside of the magazine and check the number to the right of your town and state. Following is an example:

Hunter, Homer 311 Fish Avenue Trapping, Nebraska 98

The number "98" represents the September, 1958 issue. The first number represents the month of year your subscription expires (1 for January, 2 for February, 3 for March, etc.), while the next number represents the year (7 for 1957, 8 for 1958, 9 for 1959, 0 for 1960, 1 for 1961, etc.)

13

HOME-GROW

THANKS to current television trends, the average American home often sounds like a shooting gallery. And, around the home, that's where the death-dealing explosion and whining ricochet should be confined: within the television tube.

Yet, due to increasing interest in outdoor sports, many homes do contain firearms. And they can be just as dangerous to your child, or to you, as is Marshal Dillon's gun to the outlaws who oppose him. If you have children, a loaded gun does not belong in your home—unless it is out of reach of the little ones, under lock and key.

I say under lock and key, for it is a notorious fact that few spots in a home, including the roof, are inaccessible to a curious and active child. It would be a startling situation, to say the least, if you chanced to look up some evening and see your son pointing your loaded .44 Magnum at your chest.

"Hands up!" he says fiercely. "I've tracked you to your den, you rustler!"

Your legs feel like melting snowblocks. "Wait," you say, "that's—that's a real gun. It's loaded! Don't! DON'T"

But he does. He pulls the trigger and ruins a perfectly good necktie, shirt, suitcoat, sofa, and a chunk of your wall. What he's done to your chest cavity would, by comparison, put a hog-dressed deer to shame.

But you don't care about that. You don't care about anything.

How do you avoid this permanently nonchalant attitude? Keep firearms, loaded or unloaded, where children can't get at them. If possible, keep them under lock and key.

14 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

METHUSELAH OR MOPPET? YOU CAN TELL

MOST OF US, when we are skillful or lucky enough to bag a quail, sharp-tailed grouse, prairie chicken, or pheasant, are pretty sure which we've shot. The strikingly beautiful plumage of the cock pheasant, for example, makes him easy to distinguish from his mate.

But can you tell the age of the cock pheasant you just shot? The pheasant carries signs of his age in the same manner some of us find it impossible to conceal wrinkles and sagging tissues. Can you tell whether your grouse or quail is a juvenile or a graybeard, and if you have bagged cock or hen?

Your bird carries all the above information in plain sight. And your Game Commission each year tabulates such data, compiling a valuable backlog of knowledge concerning the age, sex, and rate of reproduction of Nebraska's game birds.

Take the cock pheasant. You can determine immediately if he is less than a year old by looking at his spurs. If the spur measures less than three-quarters of an inch from tip to tarsus, or front of leg, the bird is less than a year old. If it measures more than that, the rooster is more than a year old.

A Nebraska game technician has devised a kind of scale to determine the exact age in weeks of your pheasant. The long, principal feathers on the wing are called "primaries," and the technician simply places this scale alongside the proper growing primary. The longer the feather, the older the bird. The scale is graduated, and if the tip of the feather strikes, say, 21, it means the pheasant is 21 weeks old.

How do you age a quail? You can tell if it is less than a year old by looking at the short feathers covering the base of the long primary feathers. These are called primary coverts. The tips of these feathers will be white and a bit more pointed on birds less than a year old. On adult birds there will be no white edging, so that these telltale short feathers will be almost indistinguishable in tone from the rest of the wing.

The sharp-tailed grouse and prairie chicken (pinnated grouse) keep the secret of their ages a little better than the quail and pheasant. But you can tell if your specimen is juvenile or adult by looking at the two primary feathers at the leading edge of the wing. If the bird is less than a year old these feathers will be somewhat worn and more pointed than the adult bird. A partially developed primary is a sign of an older bird.

The reason for this is simple: members of the grouse family, like the quail but unlike the pheasant, shed or 16 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA   molt only eight of their primary feathers during the first year. They keep the two primaries at the leading edge of the wing. These two feathers, being older and more used, are therefore more worn, like a broom that has seen a season's wear.

How do you tell the sex of your quail? Just look at its head. The bobwhite cock has white markings on his head; the hen's markings are buff. There is also a difference in the configuration of the markings, but the color is the primary guide.

In the sharptail and prairie chicken the tail feathers will tell you whether you have bagged a male or female. In the male sharptail, the color patterns will be longitudinal, the effect being a great deal of gray-white and comparatively little brown. In the female, the pattern shows a lot of brown, and the gray-white appears in fairly small, evenly distributed flecks.

In the male prairie chicken, the tail feathers are uniformly dark, in most cases, except for the light tips. They 17   cannot be confused with female tail feathers, for these have four or five light, well defined horizontal bars.

Techniques for age determination have been developed for many species other than birds. The inside of the pelt of the young muskrat, for instance, will show dark and light markings in a rather uniform pattern on both sides of a line drawn down the middle. The adult or old muskrat pelts have splotched irregular markings without a pattern. These splotchings bear a relation to the primeness of the fur. Before the fur is in prime or top condition, the inside of the pelt is uniformly dark. As the fur becomes prime the areas below it become light. The less prime areas remain dark.

In the deer family, the teeth give the aging clues. In the fawn, the third pre-molar (the third main tooth on the jaw, counting from the front) will have three cusps or jagged "hills" on the cutting edge. The jaw will, of course, be smaller. After the first year, these baby teeth fall out and are replaced by a permanent set.

In the adult deer, the third pre-molar has undergone a marked change. There is only one prominent cusp and another smaller one. The teeth in this young adult will be high and sharp. In an old deer, the first thing the hunter will notice in examining the mouth is that the teeth are worn almost to the jawbone. The enamel is about gone, and there is likely to be a deposit of stain accumulated through the years. A 10-year-old deer, by the way, would be a real granddaddy, though some have been known to live to 20.

The next time you shoot or trap game, look at your kill more closely. Try to determine age and sex. The more you know about your sport, the more you'll enjoy it.

THE END.

THE KING'S BOUNTY

by Phil Agee Project Leader

IT HAS been said that it is not enough for an agriculturist to love and cultivate his plants; he must hate and attempt to destroy the weeds as well. To this end, every farmer for centuries was endowed with a strong back and a sturdy hoe. This was the foremost tool of farming until science came along with lessons in the use of machinery, fertilizers, hybrids, and the like.

The development of wildlife management has been paralleled to this. For centuries it was assumed that the naturalist must not only love certain species of wildlife, but also hate their immediate and apparent enemies. Until rather recently, the killing of these seemed an obvious course in wildlife management. Just as the agriculturist needed a strong back to wield his hoe, muscle had to be forged behind the gun and trap to further the destruction of predators and vermin. This muscle consisted of bounties.

A bounty is a reward given for killing certain animals and is offered as an incentive to hunters. It is almost impossible to tell exactly when the first bounty was paid; however, history indicates that in about 1550, King Henry VIII offered bounties for the killing of crows, choughs, and rooks. His list of bountyable species showed little imagination, for by the Elizabethan period rewards were offered for everything from crows to polecats, and included a broad category of all "ravening birds and vermin." This was such an expensive undertaking that church wardens were empowered to levy a tax on land to finance the project.

In general, the number of species with bounties remained at a very high level until the advent of biological management. Within the last few decades, scientists have found that destruction of the so-called vermin was not necessarily desirable. In many instances they found that these species were performing useful services in the wildanimal community. Usually they learned that damage was done by relatively few individuals. They also found that the bounty system had some gaping loopholes.

First of all, it was expensive, particularly inasmuch as it rarely reduced populations effectively. This is not surprising to us with present-day knowledge of animals' ability to withstand harvest. Bounties merely provided the incentive for hunters to harvest nongame species just as they were harvesting the game and fur-bearers. Fraudulent practices in bountying constantly popped up. Where adjacent states did not require the same part of the animal as evidence of the kill, a single animal was sometimes bountied two or three times by sending the scalp to one state, the tail to another, etc.

Many hunters took care not to destroy breeding females, for they realized that females meant more young and the more young produced, the greater the bounty money in their pockets.

To list some shortcomings of the system is not to say that bounties never serve a useful purpose. There undoubtedly have been instances where bounties constituted a useful tool in the management of wild populations, but they are not the backbone of wildlife management, just as the hoe is not the backbone of agriculture.

THE END.

Channel catfish usually deposit their eggs in obscure, protected places in a stream—under overhanging rock ledges, deeply undercut banks, underwater muskrat runs, and hollow logs.

18 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

TWENTY YEARS AGO THE DAWN

by Glen R. Foster Chief of Fisheries

TWENTY years ago the dawn was just breaking on the idea that fish were a renewable resource, responsive to good management, and that many waters were overstocked and underfished. Nobody can stockpile fish, or for that matter any other wildlife resource. In many cases continual better fishing results when a lake is heavily fished. Overprotection, or underharvest, often leads to poorer, not better fishing.

Compared with 20 years ago, the fisherman of today has it made. More fishing waters are available, due in part to the construction of the numerous power and irrigation reservoirs. Years back, rules, regulations, and laws were much more restrictive than they are today. On top of this, because of drought and other conditions, fishing was seldom as good as it is now. There has been a big change. Let's check it!

1937—No night fishing allowed. Special lower bag limits were in effect on state-owned lakes. Closed season on black and rock bass, northern pike, walleyes, and trout.

1942—Daily bag limits were set on all fish, except perch. Only perch could be taken during the winter. Size limits were removed on trout, bluegill, sunfish, and perch. The Game Commission felt that removal of small fish by angling might help ease overcrowded conditions.

1943—Size limit removed on crappie and rock bass. Freshwater drum added to the game-fish list.

1944—Opener on fishing season advanced one month to March 1. Night fishing permitted on state-owned lakes. Bag limits on state-owned lakes made uniform with those elsewhere in the state.

1945—A big step forward with year-round open season on all species. Experience in other states supported this change.

1946—Trout streams closed to the seining of bait, primarily to protect the natural trout food such as minnows and crawdads.

1947—Size limits removed on bullheads. Limited season, April 1 to October 1, restored on trout.

1948—White bass classed as game fish; bag and possession limit of five. Bonanza white-bass fishing resulted from planting only 39 white bass in McConaughy Reservoir in 1944. Bag limit removed on perch. Bag limit on bullheads increased to 25 in some sandhill counties.

1949—Bag limit of 20 pounds plus one fish set on trout, due to excessive harvest of large trout in McConaughy Reservoir. Transportation of minnows out of state prohibited.

1951—Year-round open season on all species again. Seining of minnows below dams or other obstructions prohibited.

1952—Limited season, April 1 to October 31, restored on trout in northern part of state.

1953—Trout fishing opened all year. Size limits removed on black bass, walleye, sauger, northern pike, and catfish. Now no size limits or closed season on any species.

1954—State Legislature established limit of two lines, with two hooks per line, for ponds, lakes, or reservoirs.

1955—Bag and possession limit removed on bluegill (panfishes can produce themselves out of house and home). White bass limit boosted to 15. Total limit of 25 fish of all kinds removed.

1956—Crappie limits increased from 15 to 30 in Gavins Point Reservoir and sandhill lakes. Bullhead limit increased to 50 in same areas. Bag and possession limit removed on freshwater drum.

1957—White and rock bass, crappie, and bullhead limits increased to 50 in Gavins Point Reservoir. State bag limit on crappie increased to 30. Sturgeon and paddlefish listed in regulations; no limits. Bag limit on minnows, 100 per person.

Outboard moters not over six H.P. permitted on Long, Rat and Beaver, Smith, and Shell lakes. Prohibition against snagging of any fish removed. Transporation of minnows into Nebraska illegal without certification and permit.

1958-Bag and possession limit on white bass, crappie, and bullheads increased to 50 for entire state, except for a few put-and-take lakes on bullheads. Limit on perch removed for entire state. Daily bag limits on walleye and sauger separated. Readear sunfish introduced and addedto game-fish list; no closed reason, size, or bag limits.

July 1 to November 1 season set on bullfrogs; bag limit 12, possession 12. July 1 to February 28 season set on paddlefish; bag limit of two, possession four. New regulation prohibits waste of fish. Spearing and bow-and-arrow fishing of nongame fish allowed from April 1 to December 1; fishing license required.

Fishing license fees increased from $1.50 to $2.

Nonresident fishing permit fees changed from reciprocal basis to $3 for 10 days, $10 for one year.

Nonresidents under 16 may now fish free if accompanied by parent who has nonresident permit.

There it is, the history of the last 20 years of fishing laws and regulations. During this time we have progressed from limited seasons with low bag and size limits to year-round fishing on all species but paddlefish, with liberal bag limits and no size restrictions. And despite pollution and other problems, we have more fishing today than ever before. This is possible because we have trained fishery biologists who know their business, a Game Commission ready and willing to change with the times, and public acceptance of modern fish management and regulations.

THE END FEBRUARY, 1958 19

20 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA  

DO-IT-YOURSELF AMMUNITION

by Frank Foote

MY HEART WAS light and my hopes were high as I started on my first grouse hunt last fall. I'd purchased a springer spaniel from a fellow who asserted the dog was the finest in the country. It was a brisk day and my newly bought champion was beautiful as I turned into the buckbrush. Smokeless (that, his tear-stained owner had informed me, was his name) walked a few feet, scratched, and sat down.

"Hey," I said, "get going!"

Smokeless wagged his tail and yawned. I walked toward him. Smokeless got up.

"Ah," I thought, "now I'll really see something." I did. I saw Smokeless sit down again.

Two hours later, all I'd seen was Smokeless. No grouse. Hoping to stir the dog into some show of interest, I tossed a stone into a yucca plant. Smokeless looked bored and didn't move. But a grouse did, whirring away only slightly to the right, almost a straightaway shot. I fired my double-barreled 12 twice, but the grouse kept going in the general direction of Wyoming.

Disgusted, I broke down my gun, wishing it were Smokeless' neck, and the ejected hulls sailed far behind me. And then a strange thing happened. Smokeless not only moved, he bounded into action. Into the buckbrush FEBRUARY, 1958 21   he dived. In a moment he sat at my feet, wagging his tail. My two ejected 12 gauge hulls were in his mouth. And he refused to move until I reached down and took them from him.

I returned Smokeless to his former owner that day.

"Look," I said, "that dog wouldn't know a grouse from a feather duster. The only real movement he made all morning was to return my used shells. You clipped me good, and I want my money back."

Once more there were tears in the man's eyes as he hugged Smokeless.

"No," he said, "I was the one that got clipped. Here's your money. Smokeless will save me that much in a couple of seasons."

When I pressed him for details, the man explained: "I trained my dog to pick up them empty cases. Guess I was crazy to think about selling him. You see, I reload my own shells."

Few hunters own a dog like Smokeless. But all over America, hunters and firearms owners are emulating the dog's devoted owner: they are reloading their own ammunition. The reasons are sound. Ammunition is expensive, and shooters have learned from long experience 22 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA   that many firearms perform better with shells tailored to the needs of an individual weapon.

The empty case is the most costly single item in a completed shell or cartridge. When a reloader uses it over and over he can do some real cost-cutting—60 to 90 per cent on center-fire rifle and pistol shells.

Five years ago, in one Nebraska town, the local gun club hired youngsters to rake up and remove empty shotgun shells from trap firing positions. Today, if anyone leaves the firing line without picking up his empties there is a real scramble for the used hulls.

The following table will show the economy in reloading:

.30/60 deer or 12 gauge varment loads traploads Cost of factory cartridges per 100 $22.75 $11.20 Cost of reloading components (average retail) per 100 shells Primers 1.05 1.75 Powder 1.60 1.07 Bullets or shot and wads 5.00 2.82 Totals $ 7.65 $ 5.64 Savings per 100 rounds $15.10 $ 5.56

The above is based on the assumption that you have your empty cases and reloading equipment. The equipment may be expensive or inexpensive, depending on the need for speed. It is probably better to get simple tools at first and graduate to higher priced production tools later, if you need the production. Shotgun shells for single and double barrels need only the simplest reloading equipment, as the photograph shows. Magazine-type shotguns require a little fancier gear.

Some excellent reloading handbooks, where you may determine your needs, are sold by the Lyman Gunsight Company, Middlefield, Conn.; Belding and Mull, Philipsburg, Pa.; Herters Inc., Waseca, Minn.; and the National Rifle Association, 1600 Rhode Island Avenue, Washington, D. C.

Handloading is as old as firearms. During the four centuries of muzzle-loading black-powder weapons, almost all loads were handloads, from the casting of the bullet to the measuring and pouring of powder. Rimfire metallic cartridges did not adapt to the practice, and handloading for a time came to a halt. But reloading became accepted practice with the advent of the center-fire cartridge. It was, in fact, virtually a necessity because of transportation difficulties.

After 1881, the United States Army purposely made its .45/70 rifle shells so that the hulls could be charged again. The black powder then in use gave few problems with pressure and velocity, and only the simplest equipment was required.

Smokeless powder was used in the United States by the 1890's, and brought many changes in firearms. Gas pressures in rifles jumped by 200 to 300 per cent. Measurements and procedures in reloading had to be more precise. The old system of dipping a shell case full of powder and tamping it slightly when seating the bullet did not work. Some handloaders learned this the hard way. There were accidents, and handloading, for a time, got a black eye. Some of the handloaders got worse than that. But with new methods and tools, smokeless powder was brought under control and it wasn't long until happy shooters everywhere were again busily rolling their own.

In total volume, handloading is today at an all-time high.

You can make and shoot handloads safely. But modern smokeless powder must be treated with respect. Don't try to make your gun into a Sputnik —it might take you right out of this world. Be sure there is the right amount of powder in the right shell. A bad situation can also arise, by the way, if no powder is put into the cartridge and the bullet is seated in an empty case. If it were accidentally fired, the exploding primer might expel the slug into the barrel, causing it to lodge there. A fully loaded shell then discharged into the blocked passage would most urgently speed your exit hence.

I don't mean to stress the dangers of handloading, for it can be a safe, pleasurable hobby. So, if your shooting enthusiasm has outrun your budget, this might be a fine time to look into the handloading game. But please, train your dog to retrieve birds and not empty shell cases. I don't think I'd care to see another Smokeless.

THE END. FEBRUARY, 1958 23

CONSERVATION RESERVE: SPORTSMEN GET CHANCE

by H. R. Morgan Soil Bank Representative National Wildlife Federation

BEFORE DISCUSSING the impact which increased habitat developed under the Conservation Reserve program might have upon game populations, one fact should be emphasized. The Conservation Reserve program is one part of the Soil Bank Act. The Soil Bank Act has received much criticism. It has been charged with being a political football, a "giveaway" program, and a program which is incapable of crop reduction in spite of its great cost. Such charges may be well founded. They apply, however, to the Acreage Reserve program, also a part of the Soil Bank Act.

Never should these two programs be confused. Although both Acreage Reserve and Conservation Reserve have an overlapping objective, that of taking cropland out of production, they differ greatly in economic soundness and their ability to benefit society.

The Acreage Reserve program is designed to decrease production of crops for which acreage or production quotas have been established. It is a temporary year-to-year program and its potential benefits cannot be lasting. Its history has not given proof of its ability to decrease agricultural surpluses.

The Conservation Reserve program is a positive, rather than negative program. It is designed to take land out of crop production and place it under permanent protective cover for five to ten years. It freezes the productive acreage of each farm, where it is applied, by establishing the maximum acreage which may be devoted to production of agricultural crops. Not for one year, but for several years. It is designed to bank fertility in soil which is not needed for crop production at this time. It pays land operators for accomplishing something from which society will benefit.

It is this Conservation Reserve program in which the hunting and fishing public is interested. This program will benefit game provided we make proper use of it.

We believe that any permanent vegetative cover may be beneficial to most game species. We must also recognize the fact that each game species has certain requirements which may not be met by merely establishing a vegetative cover upon the land. Upland game birds require nesting cover for reproduction. This type of cover will be largely provided through establishment of practices designed primarily for erosion protection. In order to assure that there will be birds to use such nesting cover, it is important that winter cover, available winter food, and escape cover be also provided. Maximum benefits to game species will accrue only by supplying each species with all of its essential needs.

To make this possible, the Conservation Reserve regulations provide practices which are for the special benefit of wildlife. They are sufficiently broad to provide each species with all of the essential needs of life. Each should be used in the manner and degree needed for optimum results.

Sportsmen recognize the importance of habitat, sufficient and proper, to successful production of game in the wild. The Conservation Reserve program, which recognizes game as one of the four resources which are to benefit, is a challenge to every sportsman. Here, for the first time, the sportsman has the opportunity of suggesting to his farmer and rancher friends that they establish some game habitat on their land. There should be no pain connected with such a suggestion, because this habitat may be produced upon land for which the owner is receiving an annual rent under the Conservation Reserve program.

Unlike some programs designed to bolster agriculture, there is no stigma attached to the land operator who participates in this program. He is merely accepting a fair rent, which compensates for the financial loss incurred by not producing a crop which would further increase surpluses that have already become national burdens. He is being paid for making a contribution toward solving a critical problem which affects us all.

I can think of no project by which Nebraska sportsmen can make a greater contribution to the sport they enjoy than that of using their influence toward getting more land placed in habitat under the Conservation Reserve program. Organized clubs might do well to consider investing some of the club money in habitat, such as offering cash inducements to landowners who will select Conservation Reserve practices which are tailor-made to produce needed game habitat.

The efforts of sportsmen, either through personal influence or by organized offer of financial inducements, will bring direct dividends in bigger game bags during longer seasons.

THE END. 24 OUTDOOR NEBRASKA

OUTDOOR ELSEWHERE

Bighorns Saved by "Hotfoot"

TEXAS . . . Five of the Arizona bighorn sheep transported to Texas as a result of a joint trapping effort between the two states had a harrowing experience recently, but were saved from a worse one by an electric wire. The five bighorns three ewes and two rams—were being held inside a seven-foot fence at the Black Gap Wildlife Management Unit, when a local mountain lion developed a yen for some fresh sheep meat. The lion was thwarted in his attempts to climb the fence, however, by a hot wire from a six-volt battery. Large claw marks on the fence braces indicated the big cat had hit the hot wire when he attempted to leap the fence. Hair on the wire and torn-up ground were evidence that the electric wire had already paid for itself. Lions in that area evidently have their tasters all cocked and primed for sheep meat. The following morning another lion trying to find its way into the pen was trapped. Foot measurements indicated it was not the same animal that got the shock treatment.

* * * * Farm Unsafe for Bruin

ONTARIO . . . The increased mortality rate among farm-visiting bears in 1956 shows that farms are becoming more unsafe for Mr. Bruin. In 1956, farmers shot 41 bears as compared with 36 in 1955. The bears should have stayed in their own blueberry patches.

* * * * Bargain Day, Maybe?

ARIZONA . . . The Game and Fish Department's Tucson office received a telephone call from a lady who wanted to know if she could buy hunting and fishing licenses there. She was told that the office was not authorized to issue licenses, but that numerous stores in the area would be happy to sell her whatever license she needed. The lady then wanted to know if the licenses were available at the county courthouse, or perhaps the city hall. Again she received a negative answer, but was told that if she would give her address a dealer in the neighborhood would be suggested, so that she could obtain the license with a minimum of travel. This idea, too, was unsatisfactory. She then admitted that she had tried several sporting goods stores, but had found their prices rather high and had decided to shop around a bit before buying her license.

* * * * Tranquilizer for Deer?

MISSISSIPPI . . . Deer trappers under the leadership of biologist Carl Havard are studying new methods of capturing deer for restocking purposes. Using a gun perfected by Georgia Game and Fish Commission personnel, Havard and his trappers hope to cut down the expense of trapping animals and greatly increase the number of deer that can be annually moved to new ranges. The gun is a modified carbondioxide pellet gun that fires a dart syringe containing a quantity of nicotine salicylate, the common tobacco nicotine. The syringe upon striking the deer releases the drug into the deer, soon demobilizing the animal. Once in such a state the deer can be captured, ear tagged, and placed in hauling crates for removal to the restocking area.

* * * * Fish Sticks

NEW YORK . . . Those who can remember the cat snoozing on top of a barrel of salt mackerel or pickled herring in the old country store would find it hard to believe their eyes in today's super-markets. The quickfreeze and customer-packaging is revolutionizing the fishery industry, according to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. Ready-to-heat and serve products such as fish sticks, breaded shrimp, frozen fish and shellfish, soups and chowders are now commonplace. In 1955—to cite one example—the Commission reports that more than 1 billion, 40 million fish sticks were sold over the counter.

* * * * Spotlighting Is Expensive

OREGON . . . Spotlighting could become real expensive business if in addition to assessment of regular fines, courts follow the example of a Lincoln County justice who recently confiscated the car of a convicted violator. The car, used in spotlighting, was turned over to the Game Commission for disposal in the same manner as other confiscated equipment.

* * * * Busy Mice

SOUTH CAROLINA ... It has been estimated that 1,000 meadow mice consume approximately 11 tons of grass annually. It is not uncommon to find 50 meadow mice per acre, and if it were not for hawks, owls, snakes, and foxes, the mice would become an even more serious agricultural pest. One female mouse has been known to produce 78 young before her first birthday

* * * * Taking Fish by Dragline

TEXAS . . . When a dragline operator catches a fish in his bucket during a dredging operation, is he violating the law? Warden W. R. Long of Denton was confronted with this problem recently at Lake Dallas, where dragline operators were knocking out the old dam. When the operator hoisted his bucket, it contained some big carp. The law prohibits anyone between the ages of 17 and 65 fishing with a "winding device" without a license. The operator had no license, but he did have a winding device that weighed some 14 tons. The warden made a picture as evidence, but is withholding filing the case.

FEBRUARY, 1958 25

Notes on Nebraska Fauna

This is ihe 34th of a series of articles and drawings depicting Nebraska wildlife. The article was written by George Schildman, District V game supervisor, and ihe wash drawing was prepared by C. G. Pritchard. The March issue will feature the jack rabbit.

RED FOX

We have all become acquainted with Br'er Fox. He was the principal character, frequently the villain, in many of our childhood storybooks. Artists and photographers have pictured him often enough to enable us to recognize him in any of his many poses. Yet few of us know this small wild dog intimately, or have even glimpsed him in his native surroundings.

Reynard, in the fables,. is known by scientists as Vulpes fulva. He belongs to the dog family, as do the wolves and coyotes. The long fur, long legs, and large bushy tail make him look much larger than he really is. Average weight is about 10 pounds, and the males are larger than the females.

There are two species of foxes in Nebraska. The gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) occurs in very limited numbers, primarily in the northeastern part of the state. The one with the white tip on his tail is most abundant. On rare occasions color mutations occur among red foxes, resulting in the silver fox, cross fox, and black fox. The silver fox is a black color phase with a silver tip on the hairs. The cross fox is reddish yellow with a dark band of guard hairs on the shoulder that forms what sometimes has the appearance of a cross. But they are all red foxes.

The species occurs over most of the United States and Canada. In Nebraska, they are most numerous in the eastern third of the state. During the past 20 years or so, they have apparently expanded their range westward across the state following the river courses. Today, they occur along the Platte Valley to the Wyoming line. Nowhere in Nebraska, except possibly in a few eastern and northeastern areas, is the fox common.

Foxes are cyclic in abundance in parts of their range. States east and north of Nebraska have had large populations in recent years. Our own fox populations also appear to have increased in recent years.

A patchwork of wooded stream bottoms, cropland, and pasture in hilly terrain is his preferred habitat. This alert, self-sufficient little animal is readily able to adapt himself to his surroundings. During the course of his wanderings, generally at night, but occasionally during the late evening or early morning daylight hours, he usually confines himself within a mile radius.

In the winter, this shy fellow leads a solitary life. He does not use a den, but sleeps instead in some protected spot where he can detect approaching danger. His long, slim, black legs are his greatest asset. A swift runner, he depends on his speed to leave danger far behind. His tactics are many in losing trailing hounds: taking to the water, running on thin ice, walking the top board of a fence, and doubling back on the trail.

Mating usually occurs in January and February. The female, or vixen, prepares the den. It may be one of her own digging. Frequently, though, it is a remodeled den of some other animal. Occasionally a drain pipe or a hollow log is used. Dens usually have two or more openings and vary in length from six to 60 feet.

The gestation period is 51 davy and the young usually arrive in March or April. There is but one family a year. There are usually four to six kits, but they may number from one to 10, and theirs is truly a family group, with the male or dog helping provide rations for the pups or kits. After about 10 days their eyes open. Four or five weeks later, they will play outside the den entrance. Still in the familv group, the young learn to hunt by accompanying the parents on trips. The voung are weaned at the end of eight or ten weeks, but the family stays together until fall. Then each member goes its separate, solitary way.

His way of life is similar to that of the other larger predators. He has his haters as well as his supporters. Though he is not hunted much in Nebraska, Br'er Fox is a fine game animal and in other areas provides much sport. The fur once used in making neck pieces, jackets, and coats is of poor wearing quality. Pelts were once worth 10 to 15 dollars but are now almost worthless. One large fur-buying company lists an extra large No. 1 red fox pelt as worth 75 cents.

The fox's diet is the source of most of the controversy. Like the coyote and other predators, he is an opportunist and takes what chance puts before him. Foxes are primarily meat eaters, but during the summer and fall months fruits have a special appeal. At this time of year, grasshoppers and other insects are frequently included in the diet. The flesh he consumes may be carrion or fresh-killed, and he isn't particular whether it is bird, mammal, or reptile. Most frequently occurring on his menu, however, are small mammals: mice, rats, ground squirrels, tree squirrels, and rabbits. When the fox kills game birds, domestic poultry and small pigs he incurs the wrath of some people. It goes without saying that when a fox does raid the poultry flock, he needs to be eliminated.

Although game birds are taken by foxes, studies in other states fail to show them to be a factor in depressing game-bird populations. Studies of predator-prey relationships reveal that a pheasant lost to a fox would have been lost anyway to some other factor (weather, horned owl, starvation, or the auto).

This furry bundle of curiosity, despite his faults, certainly belongs among our wildlife in Nebraska. And it is possible, with a character in keeping with his deserved reputation for cleverness, that he will have no difficulty in maintaining himself.

In Nebraska, fox may be hunted at any time and in any manner. Trappers have a year-around season on this animal. The entire state is open except for state-owned lakes or marshes or areas closed by federal, state, or municipal law. Trappers have no limit or closing hour. THE END

OUTDOOR NEBRASKA 26

WHY REGULATIONS ON THE BULLFROG?