Even when computed at fifteen dollars per carcass, those deer were worth to the people of Vermont $107,790.  It would seem, therefore, that the soundness of Vermont’s policy leaves no room for argument; and we hope that other states, and also private individuals, will profit by Vermont’s very successful experiment in bringing back the deer to her forests, and in increasing the food supply of her people.

KILLING FEMALE DEER.—­To say one word on this subject which might by any possibility be construed as favoring it, is like juggling with a lighted torch over a barrel of gunpowder.  Already, in Pennsylvania at least one gentleman has appeared anxious to represent me as favoring the killing of does, which in nine hundred and ninety-nine cases out of every thousand I distinctly and emphatically do not.  The slaughter of female hoofed game animals is necessarily destructive and reprehensible, and not one man out of every ten thousand in this country ever will see the place and time wherein the opposite is true.

At present there are just two places in America, and I think only two, wherein there exists the slightest exception on this point.  The state of Vermont is becoming overstocked with deer, and the females have in some counties (not in all), become so tame and destructive in orchards, gardens and farm crops as to constitute a great annoyance.  For this reason, the experiment is being made of permitting does to be killed under license, until their number is somewhat reduced.

The first returns from this trial have now come in, from the county game wardens of Vermont to the state game warden.  Mr. John W. Titcomb.  I will quote the gist of the opinion of each.

The State Commissioner says:  “This law should remain in force at least until there is some indication of a decrease in the number of deer.”  Warden W.H.  Taft (Addison County) says:  “The killing of does I believe did away with a good many of these tame deer that cause most of the damage to farmers’ crops.”  Harry Chase (Bennington County) says the doe-killing law is “a good law, and I sincerely trust it will not be repealed.”  Warden Hayward of Rutland County says:  “The majority of the farmers in this county are in favor of repealing the doe law....  A great many does and young deer (almost fawns) were killed in this county during the hunting season of 1909.”  R.W.  Wheeler, of Rutland County says:  “Have the doe law repealed!  We don’t need it!” H.J.  Parcher of Washington County finds that the does did more damage to the crops than the bucks, and he thinks the doe law is “a just one.”  R.L.  Frost, of Windham County, judicially concludes that “the law allowing does to be killed should remain in force one or two seasons more.”  C.S Parker, of Orleans County, says his county is not overstocked with deer, and he favors a special act for his county, to protect females.

A summary of the testimony of the wardens is easily made.  When deer are too plentiful, and the over-tame does become a public nuisance too great to be endured, the number should be reduced by regular shooting in the open season; but,