Commission of ConservationCanada

ANIMAL SANCTUARIESINLABRADOR

AN ADDRESS PRESENTEDBYLT. -COLONEL WILLIAM WOOD, F. R. S. C. 

Before the Second Annual Meetingof the Commission of Conservationat Quebec, January, 1911

OTTAWA: CAPITAL PRESS LIMITED, 1911

_Animal Sanctuariesin Labrador_

An Address PresentedBYLT. -COLONEL WILLIAM WOODBEFORETHE SECOND ANNUAL MEETINGOF THE COMMISSION OF CONSERVATIONHELD AT QUEBEC, JANUARY, 1911

An Appeal

All to whom wild Nature is one of the greatest glories of the Earth, all who know its higher significance for civilized man to-day, and allwho consequently prize it as an heirloom for posterity, are asked tohelp in keeping the animal life of Labrador from being wantonly doneto death. 

There is nothing to cause disagreement among the three main classes ofpeople most interested in wild life--the men whose business depends inany way on animal products, the sportsmen, and the Nature-lovers ofevery kind. There are very good reasons why the general public shouldsupport the scheme. And there are equally good reasons why it shouldbe induced to do so by simply telling it the truth about the senselessextermination that is now going on. 

Every reader can help by spreading some knowledge of the subject inhis or her home circle. Canada, like all free countries, is governedby public opinion. And sound public opinion, like all other goodthings, should always begin at home. 

The Press can help, as it has helped many another good cause, bygiving the subject full publicity. Free use can be made of the presentpaper in any way desired. It is left non-copyright for this verypurpose. 

Experts can help by pointing out mistakes, giving information, andmaking suggestions of their own. And if any of them will undertake tolead, the present author will undertake to follow. 

It is proposed to issue a supplement in 1912, containing all theadditional information collected in the mean time. Every such item ofinformation will be duly credited to the person supplying it. 

All correspondence should be addressed--

 COLONEL WOOD, 59, Grande Allée, Quebec. 

Animal Sanctuaries in LabradorBYLIEUT. -COLONEL WILLIAM WOOD, F. R. S. C. , ETC. 

MR. CHAIRMAN AND GENTLEMEN:--

To be quite honest I must begin by saying that I am not a scientificexpert on either animals, sanctuaries or Labrador. But, by way ofexcusing my temerity, I can plead a life-long love of animals, a gooddeal of experience and study of them--especially down the Lower St. Lawrence, and considerable attention to sanctuaries in general andtheir suitability to Labrador in particular. Moreover, I can pleadthis most pressingly important fact, that a magnificent opportunity isfast slipping away before our very eyes there, without a single effortbeing made to seize it. I have repeatedly discussed the question withthose best qualified to give sound advice--with naturalists, explorers, missionaries, fishermen, furriers, traders, hunters, sportsmen, and many who are accustomed to look ahead into the higherdevelopment of our public life. I have also read the books, papers andreports written from up-to-date and first-hand knowledge. And, thoughI have been careful to consult men who regard such questions from verydifferent points of view, and books showing quite as wide a generaldivergence, I have found a remarkable consensus of opinion in favourof establishing a system of sanctuaries before it is too late. Ishould like to add that any information on the subject, or anycorrection of what I have written here, will be most welcome. Thesimple address, Quebec, will always find me. The only special point Iwould ask correspondents to remember is that even the bestrecommendations must be adapted to the peculiarities of the Labradorproblem, which is new, strange, immense, and full of complex humanfactors. 

Perhaps I might be allowed to explain that I speak simply as aCanadian. I am not connected with any of the material interestsconcerned. I do not even belong to a Fish and Game club. My onlyobject is to prove, from verifiable facts, that animal life inLabrador is being recklessly and wantonly squandered, that this isdetrimental to everyone except the get-rich-quickly people who areready to destroy any natural resources forever in order to reap animmediate and selfish advantage, that sanctuaries will betterconditions in every way, and that the ultimate benefit to Canada--bothin a material and a higher sense--will repay the small present expenserequired, over and over again. And this repayment need not be longdeferred. I can show that once the public grasps the issues at stakeit will supply enough petitioners to move any government based onpopular support, and that the scheme itself will supply enough moneyto make the sanctuaries a national asset of the most paying kind, andenough higher human interest to make them priceless as a possessionfor ourselves and a heritage for all who come after. 

If, Sir, you would allow me to make one more preliminary explanation, I should like to say that I have purposely left out all the usualarray of statistics. I have, of course, examined them carefullymyself, and based my arguments upon them. But I have excluded themfrom my text because they would have made an already long paper undulylonger, and because they are perfectly accessible to every member ofthe Commission which I have the honour of addressing to-night. 

SANCTUARIES. 

A sanctuary may be defined as a place where Man is passive and therest of Nature active. Till quite recently Nature had her ownsanctuaries, where man either did not go at all or only as atool-using animal in comparatively small numbers. But now, in thismachinery age, there is no place left where man cannot go withoverwhelming forces at his command. He can strangle to death all thenobler wild life in the world to-day. To-morrow he certainly will havedone so, unless he exercises due foresight and self-control in themean time. There is not the slightest doubt that birds and mammals arenow being killed off much faster than they can breed. And it is alwaysthe largest and noblest forms of life that suffer most. The whales andelephants, lions and eagles, go. The rats and flies, and all meanparasites, remain. This is inevitable in certain cases. But it iswanton killing off that I am speaking of to-night. Civilized manbegins by destroying the very forms of wild life he learns toappreciate most when he becomes still more civilized. The obviousremedy is to begin conservation at an earlier stage, when it iseasier and better in every way, by enforcing laws for close seasons, game preserves, the selective protection of certain species, andsanctuaries. I have just defined a sanctuary as a place where man ispassive and the rest of Nature active. But this general definition istoo absolute for any special case. The mere fact that man has toprotect a sanctuary does away with his purely passive attitude. Then, he can be beneficially active by destroying pests and parasites, likebot-flies or mosquitoes, and by finding antidotes for diseases likethe epidemic which periodically kills off the rabbits and thus starvesmany of the carnivora to death. But, except in cases where experimenthas proved his intervention to be beneficial, the less he upsets thebalance of Nature the better, even when he tries to be an earthlyProvidence. 

In itself a sanctuary is a kind of wild "zoo, " on a gigantic scale andunder ideal conditions. As such, it appeals to everyone interested inanimals, from the greatest zoologist to the mere holiday tourist. Before concluding I shall give facts to show how well worth while itwould be to establish sanctuaries, even if there were no other peopleto enjoy the benefits. Yet the strongest of all arguments is thatsanctuaries, far from conflicting with other interests, actuallyfurther them. But unless we make these sanctuaries soon we shall beinfamous forever, as the one generation which defrauded posterity ofall the preservable wild life that Nature took a million years toevolve into its present beautiful perfection. Only a certain amount ofanimal life can exist in a certain area. The surplus must go outside. So sanctuaries are more than wild "zoos", they are overflowingreservoirs, fed by their own springs, and feeding streams of life atevery outlet. They serve not only those interested in animal life, butthose legitimately interested in animal death, for business, sport orfood. I might mention many instances of successful sanctuaries, permanent or temporary, absolute or modified--the Algonquin, RockyMountains, Yoho, Glacier, Jasper and Laurentides in Canada; theYellowstone, Yosemite, Grand Cañon, Olympus and Superior in the UnitedStates; with the sea-lions of California, the wonderful revival ofibex in Spain and deer in Maine and New Brunswick, the great preservesin Uganda, India and Ceylon, the selective work of Baron von Berlepschin Germany, the curious result of taboo protection up the Nelsonriver, and the effects on seafowl in cases as far apart in time andspace as the guano islands under the Incas of Peru, Gardiner island inthe United States or the Bass rock off the coast of Scotland. 

Yet I do not ignore the difficulties. First, there is the universaldifficulty of introducing or enforcing laws where there have been nooperative laws before. Next, there is the difficulty of arousingpublic opinion on any subject, however worthy, which requires bothinsight and foresight. Then, we must remember that protected speciesincreasing beyond their special means of subsistence have to seekother kinds of food, sometimes with unfortunate results. And thenthere are the several special difficulties connected with Labrador. There are three British governments concerned--Newfoundland, theDominion and the province of Quebec. There are French and Americanfishermen along the shore. The proper protection of some migratoryspecies will require co-operation with the United States, perhaps withMexico and South America for certain birds, and even with Denmark forthe Greenland seal. Then, there are the Indians, the whole trade inanimal products, the necessity of not interfering with any legitimatedevelopment, and the question of immediate expense, however small, fora deferred benefit, however great and near at hand. And, finally, wemust remember that scientific knowledge is not by any means adequateto deal with all the factors of the problem at once. 

LABRADOR

But in spite of all these and many other difficulties, I firmlybelieve that Labrador is by far the best country in the world for thebest kinds of sanctuary. The first time you're on a lee shore there, in a full gale, you may well be excused for shrinking back from thewild white line of devouring breakers. But when you actually make forthem you find the coast opening into archipelagoes of islands, to letyou safely through into the snug little "tickles, " between island andmainland, where you can ride out the storm as well as you could in alandlocked harbour. This is typical of many another pleasant surprise. Labrador decidedly improves on acquaintance. The fogs have beengrossly exaggerated. The Atlantic seaboard is clearer than the BritishIsles, which, by the way, lie in exactly the same latitudes. And theGulf is far clearer than New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and the Banks. Theclimate is exceptionally healthy, the air a most invigorating tonic, and the cold no greater than in many a civilized northern land. Besides, there is a considerable range of temperatures in a countrywhose extreme north and south lie 1, 000 miles apart, one in thelatitude of Greenland, the other in that of Paris. Taking the Labradorpeninsula geographically, as including the whole area east of a linerun up the Saguenay and on from lake St. John to James bay, itcomprises 560, 000 square miles--eleven Englands! The actual residentshardly number 20, 000. About twice as many outsiders appear off thecoasts at certain seasons. So it would take a tenfold increase, afloatand ashore, to make one human being to each square mile of land. But, all the same, wild life needs conservation there, and needs it badly, as we shall presently see. 

Most of Labrador is a rocky tableland, still rising from the depths, with some old beaches as much as 1, 500 feet above the present level ofthe sea. The St. Lawrence seaboard is famous for its rivers andforests. The Atlantic seaboard has the same myriads of islands, ismagnificently bold, is pierced by fiords unexcelled in Norway, andcrowned by mountains higher than any others east of the Rockies. Hamilton inlet runs in 150 miles. At Ramah the cliffs rise sheer threethousand five hundred feet and more. The Four peaks, still untroddenby the foot of man, rise more than twice as high again. And thecolouration, of every splendid hue, adds beauty to the grandeur of thescene. Inland, there are lakes up to 100 miles long, big rivers by thescore, deep canyons and foaming rapids--to say nothing of thecountless waterfalls, of which the greatest equals two Niagaras. Thisvast country is accessible by sea on three sides, and will soon beaccessible by land on the fourth. It lies directly half-way betweenGreat Britain and our own North West and is 1, 000 miles nearer Londonthan New York is. Its timber, mines and water-power will beincreasingly exploited. It should also become increasingly attractiveto the best type of tourist, naturalist and sportsman. But supposingall this does happen. The mines, water-powers and lumbering will onlycreate small towns and villages. There will surely be someconservation to have the forests used and not abused especially byfire: and the white man should remember that he is the worst of all inturning a land from green to black. Except in the southwest and a fewisolated spots, the country cannot be farmed. At the same time, theurban population must have communications with the outside world, bywhich regular supplies can come in. This will make the settlersindependent of wild life for necessary food; and wild life, in anycase, would be too precarious if exploited in the usual way. Thetraders in wild-animal products, as well as the naturalists, sportsmenand tourists, are interested in keeping the rest of the country wellstocked. So that, one way and another, the human and wild-animal lifewill not conflict, as they do where farming creates a widespread ruralpopulation, or wanton destruction of forests ruins land and water, andhuman and animal life have to suffer for it afterwards. All thedifferent places required for business spheres of influence in thenear future, added to all the business spheres of the present, canhardly exceed the area of one whole England, especially if allsuitable areas are not thrown open simultaneously to lumbering, at therisk of the usual bad results. So there will remain ten otherEnglands, admirably fitted, in all respects, to grow wild life in themost beneficial abundance, and quite able to do so indefinitely, if areasonable amount of general protection is combined with well-situatedsanctuaries. 

The fauna is much more richly varied than people who think ofLabrador as nothing but an arctic barren are inclined to suppose. Thefisheries have been known for centuries, especially the cod, which hasa prerogative right to the simple word "fish. " There are herring andlobsters in the Gulf, plenty of salmon and trout in most of therivers, winninish in all the tributary waters of the Hamilton, as wellas in lake St. John, whitefish in the lakes, and so forth. Then, thestone-carrying chub is one of the most interesting creatures in theworld.... But the fish and fisheries have problems of their own toogreat for incidental treatment; and I shall pass on to the birds andmammals. 

Yet I must not forget the "flies"--who that has felt them once canever forget them? Labrador is not a very happy hunting-ground for theentomologist. But all it lacks in variety of kinds it more than makesup in number of individuals, especially in the detestable trio ofbot-flies, blackflies and mosquitoes. The bot-fly infests the caribouand will probably infest the reindeer. The blackfly and mosquitoattack both man and beast in maddening millions. The mosquito is notmalarious. But that is the only bad thing he is not. Destruction is"conservation" so far as "flies, " parasites and disease germs areconcerned. 

Labrador has over 200 species of birds, from humming-birds andsanderlings to eagles, gannets, loons and herons. Among those able tohold their own, with proper encouragement, are the following: twoloons, two murres, the puffin, guillemot, razor-billed auk, dovekieand pomarine jæger; six gulls--ivory, kittiwake, glaucous, greatblack-back, herring and Bonaparte; two terns--arctic and common; thefulmar, two shearwaters, two cormorants, the red-breasted merganserand the gannet; seven ducks--the black, golden-eye, old squaw andharlequin, with the American, king and Greenland eiders; threescoters; four geese--snow, blue, brant and Canada; two phalaropes, several sandpipers, with the Hudsonian godwit and both yellowlegs; twosnipes; five plovers; and the Eskimo and Hudsonian curlews. These twocurlews should be absolutely closed to all shooting everywhere forseveral seasons. They are on the verge of extinction; and it may evennow be too late to save them. The great blue heron and Americanbittern are not common, but less rare than they are supposed to be. Except for the willow and rock ptarmigans the land game-birds are notmany in kind or numbers. There are a fair number of ruffed grouse inthe south, and more spruce grouse in the north. The birds of prey arewell represented by a few golden and more bald-headed eagles, theAmerican rough-legged and other hawks, the black and the whitegyrfalcons, the osprey, and eight owls, including the great hornedowl, the boldest bird of all. The raven is widely distributed all theyear round. Several woodpeckers, kingfishers, jays, bluebird, kingbird, chickadee, snow bunting; several sparrows, including, fortunately, the white-crowned, white-throat and song, but now, unfortunately, the English as well. There are blackbirds, red-polls, adozen warblers, the American robin, hermit thrush and ruby-throatedhumming-bird. 

Both the land and sea mammals are of great importance. Several whalesare well known. The Right is almost exterminated; but the Greenland, or Bow-head, is found along the edge of the ice in all Hudsonianwaters. The Pollock is rare, and the Sperm, or Cachalot, as nearlyexterminated as the Right. But the Little-piked, or _rostrata_, isfound inshore along the north and east, the Bottle-nose on the north, the Humpback on the east and south; and the Finback and Sulphur-bottomare common and widely distributed, especially on the east. The LittleWhite whale, or "White porpoise, " is fairly common all round; theKiller is widely distributed, but most numerous on the east, where theNarwhal is also found. The Harbour and Striped porpoises, and theCommon and Bottle-nosed dolphins, are chiefly on the east and south. There are six Seals--the Harbour, Ringed, Harp, Bearded, Grey andHooded. The Harbour seal is also called the "Common" and the "Wise"seal, and is the _vitulina_ of zoology. It is common all round thecoasts, and the Indians of the interior assert that many livepermanently in the lakes. Big and Little Seal lakes are more than 100miles from the nearest salt water. The Ringed seal is locally called"floe rat" and "gum seal. " It is the smallest and least valuable ofall, and fairly common all round. The Harp seal is "seal, " in the sameway as cod is "fish. " It has various local names, five among theFrench-Canadians alone, but is specifically known as the Greenlandseal. The young, immediately after birth, have a fine white coat, which makes them valuable. The herds are followed on a large scale atthe end of the winter season, which is also the whelping season, andhundreds of thousands are killed, females and young preponderating. They are still common along the east and south, but diminishingsteadily, especially in the St. Lawrence. The Bearded, or"Square-flipper, " seal is rare in the St. Lawrence and on theAtlantic, but commoner in Hudsonian waters. It is a large seal, eightfeet long, and bulky in proportion. The Grey, or Horse-head, sealruns up to about the same size occasionally and is one of the gamestanimals that swims. It is rare on the Atlantic and not common anywhereon the St. Lawrence. The "Hoods" are the largest of all and the lionsof the lot. They run up to 1, 000 pounds and over, and sometimesfourteen feet long. They are rare on the Atlantic and decreasing alongthe St. Lawrence, owing to the Newfoundland hunters. The Walrus, formerly abundant all round, is now rarely seen except in the farnorth, where he is fast decreasing. 

Moose may feel their way in by the southwest to an increasing extent, and might possibly be reinforced by the Alaskan variety. Red deermight possibly be induced to enter by the same way in fair numbersover a limited area. The woodland caribou is almost exterminated, butmight be resuscitated. The barren-ground caribou is still plentiful inthe north, where most of the herds appear to migrate in an immenseellipse, crossing from west to east, over the barrens, in the fall, tothe Atlantic, and then turning south and west through the woods inwinter, till they reach their original starting-point near Hudson bayin the spring. But this is not to be counted on. The herds divide, change direction, and linger in different places. Their tame brother, the reindeer, is being introduced as the chief domestic animal ofEastern Labrador, with apparently every prospect of success. Beaverare fairly common and widely distributed in forested areas. Otherrodents are frequent--squirrels, musk-rats, mice, voles, lemmings, hares and porcupines. There are two bats. Black bears are general;polars, in the north. Grizzlies have been traded at Fort Chimo inUngava, but they are probably all killed out. The lynx is commonwherever there are woods. There are two wolves, arctic and timber, thelatter now rare in the south. The Labrador red fox is very common inthe woods, and the "white, " or arctic fox, in the barrens and furthersouth on both coasts. The "cross, " "silver" and "black" variations ofcourse occur, as they naturally increase towards the northern limitsof range. The "blue" is a seasonal change of the "white. " Thewolverine and otter are common. The skunk is only known in thesouthwest. The mink ranges through the southern third of thepeninsula. The Labrador marten, or "sable, " is a sub-species, generally distributed in the forested parts, like the weasel. The"fisher, " or Pennant's marten, is much more local, ranging onlybetween the "North Shore" and Mistassini. 

From the St. Lawrence to the Barren Grounds three-fourths of the landhas been burnt over since the white man came. The resultant loss ofall forms of life may be imagined, especially when we remember thatthe fire often burns up the very soil itself, leaving nothing butrocks and black desolation. Still, there is plenty of fur and featherworth preserving. But nothing can save it unless conservation replacesthe present reckless destruction. 

DESTRUCTION

When rich virgin soil is first farmed it yields a maximum harvest fora minimum of human care. But presently it begins to fail, and willfail altogether unless man returns to it in one form some of therichness he expects to get from it in another. Now, exploited wildlife fails even faster under wasteful treatment; but, on the otherhand, with hardly any of the trouble required for continuous farming, quickly recovers itself by being simply let alone. So when we considerhow easily it can be preserved in Labrador, and how beneficial itspreservation is to all concerned, we can understand how the wantondestruction going on there is quite as idiotic as it is wrong. 

Take "egging" as an example. The Indians, Eskimos and other beasts ofprey merely preserved the balance of nature by the toll they used totake. No beast of prey, not even the white man, will destroy his ownstock supply of food. But with the nineteenth century came thewhite-man market "eggers", systematically taking or destroying everyegg in every place they visited. Halifax, Quebec and other towns werecentres of the trade. The "eggers" increased in numbers andthoroughness till the eggs decreased in the more accessible spotsbelow paying quantities. But other egging still goes on unchecked. Thegame laws of the province of Quebec distinctly state: "It is forbiddento take nests or eggs of wild birds at any time". But the swarms offishermen who come up the north shore of the St. Lawrence egg whereverthey go. If they are only to stay in the same spot for a day or two, they gather all the eggs they can, put them into water, and throw awayevery one that floats. Sometimes three, four, five or even ten timesas many are thrown away as are kept, and all those bird lives lost fornothing. Worse still, if the men are going to stay long enough theywill often go round the nests and make sure of smashing every singleegg. Then they come back in a few days and gather every single egg, because they know it has been laid in the mean time and must befresh. When we remember how many thousands of men visit the shore, andthat the resident population eggs on its own account, at least as highup as the Pilgrims, only 100 miles from Quebec, we need not beprophets to foresee the inevitable end of all bird life when subjectedto such a drain. And this is on the St. Lawrence, where there are lawsand wardens and fewer fishermen. What about the Atlantic Labrador, where there are no laws, no wardens, many more fishermen, and ruthlesscompetitive egging between the residents and visitors? Of course, where people must egg or starve there is nothing more to be said. Butthis sort of egging is very limited, not enough to destroy the birds, and the necessity for it will become less frequent as other sources ofsupply become available. It is the utterly wanton destruction that isthe real trouble. 

And it is just as bad with the birds as with the eggs. A schoonercaptain says, "Now, boys, here's your butcher shop: help yourselves!"and this, remember, is in the brooding season. Not long ago the menfrom a vessel in Cross harbour landed on an islet full of eiders andkilled every single brooding mother. Such men have grown up to this, and there is that amount of excuse for them. Besides, they ate thebirds, though they destroyed the broods. Yet, as they always say, "Wedon't know no law here, " it may be suspected that they do know therereally is one. These men do a partly excusable wrong. But what aboutthose who ought to know better? In the summer of 1907 an Americanmillionaire's yacht landed a party who shot as many brooding birds onSt. Mary island as they chose, and then left the bodies to rot andthe broods to perish. That was, presumably, for sport. For the samekind of sport, motor boats cut circles round diving birds, drown them, and let the bodies float away. The North Shore people have drownedmyriads of moulting scoters in August; but they use the meat. Bestialforms of sport are many and vile. "C'est un plaisir superbe" was thedescription given by some voyageurs on exploring work, who had spentthe afternoon chasing young birds about the rocks and stamping them todeath. Deer were literally hacked to pieces by construction gangs onnew lines last summer. Dynamiting a stream is quite a common trickwherever it is safe to play it. Harbour seals are wantonly shot indeep fresh water where they cannot be recovered, much as seagulls areshot by blackguards from an ocean liner. 

And the worst of it is that all this wanton destruction is not by anymeans confined to the ignorant or those who have been brought up toit. The men from the American yacht must have known better. So dothose educated men from our own cities, who shoot out of season downthe St. Lawrence and plead, quite falsely, that there is no game lawbelow the Brandy Pots. It is, of course, well understood that a mancan always shoot for necessary food. But this provision is shamelesslymisused. Last summer, when a great employer of labour down the Gulfwas telling where birds could be shot to the greatest advantage out ofseason, and I was objecting that it was not clean sport, he said, "Oh, but Indians can shoot for food at any time--_and we're all Indianshere!"_ And what are we to think of a rich man who used caribou simplyas targets for his new rifle, and a scientific man who killed 72 inone morning, only to make a record? We need the true ideal of sportand an altogether new ideal of conservation, and we need them verybadly and very soon. 

We have had our warnings. The great auk and the Labrador duck haveboth become utterly extinct within living memory. The Eskimo curlew isdecreasing to the danger point, and the Yellowlegs is following. Thelobster fishing is being wastefully conducted along the St. Lawrence;so, indeed, are the other fisheries. Whales are diminishing: the CapeCharles and Hawke Harbour establishments are running, but those atL'Anse au Loup and Seven islands are not. The whole whaling industryis disappearing all over the world before the uncontrolled persecutionof the new steam whalers. The walrus is exterminated everywhere inLabrador except in the north. The seals are diminishing. Every yearthe hunters are better supplied with better implements of butchery. The catch is numbered by the hundreds of thousands, and this only forone fleet in one place at one season, when the Newfoundlanders come upthe St. Lawrence at the end of the winter. The woodland caribou hasbeen killed off to such an extent as to cause both Indians and wolvesto die off with him. The barren-ground caribou is still plentiful, though decreasing. The dying out of so many Indians before the time ofthe Low and Eaton expedition of 1893-4 led to an increase offur-bearing animals. But renewed, improved, increased and uncontrolledtrapping has now reduced them below their former level. Hunting forthe market seems to be going round in a vicious circle, alwaysnarrowing in on the quarry, which must ultimately be strangled todeath. The white man comes in with better equipment, more systematicmethods and often a "get-rich-and-get-out" idea that never entered anative head. The Indian has to go further afield. The white follows. Their prey shrinks back in diminishing numbers before them both. Prices go up. The hunt becomes keener, the animals fewer and fartheroff. Presently hunters and hunted will reach the far side of theutmost limits. And then traded, traders and trade will all disappeartogether. And it might so well be otherwise. 

There is another point that should never be passed over. In these daysthe public conscience is beginning to realize that the objection toman's cruelty towards his other fellow-beings is something more than afad or a fancy. And wanton slaughter is very apt to be accompanied byshameless cruelty. To kill off parents when the young are helpless.... But I have already given enough sickening details of this. Thetreatment of the adults is almost worse in many typical cases. AnIndian will skin a hare alive and gloat over his quiveringdeath-agonies. The excuse is, "white man have fun, Indian have fun, too. " And it is a valid excuse, from one point of view. When "there'snothing in caribou" except the value of the tongue, the tongue hasbeen cut out of the living deer, whose only other value is consideredto be the amusement afforded by his horrible fate. And, fiendishcruelty like this is not confined to the outer wilds. When somecivilized English-speaking bird-catchers get a bird they do not want, they will deliberately wrench its bill apart, so that it must die oflingering starvation. Sometimes the cruelty is done to man himself. Not so many years ago some whalers secured a lot of walrus hides andtusks by having a whole herd of walrus wiped out, in spite of the factthat these animals were, at that very time, known to be the only foodavailable for a neighbouring tribe of Eskimos. The Eskimos werestarved to death, every soul among them, as the Government explorersfound out. But Eskimos have no votes and never write to the papers;while walrus hides were booming in the markets of civilization. 

Things like these are not much spoken of. They very rarely appear inprint. And when they are mentioned at all it is generally with anapology for introducing unpleasant details. But I am sure I need notapologize to gentlemen who are anxious to know the full truth of thisgreat question, who cannot fail to see the connection between wantondestruction and revolting cruelty, and who must be as ready to rousethe moral conscience of our people against the cruelty as they are torouse its awakening sense of conservation against the destruction. 

CONSERVATION

All the sound reasons ever given for conserving other naturalresources apply to the conservation of wild life--and with three-foldpower. When a spend-thrift squanders his capital it is lost to him andhis heirs; yet it goes somewhere else. When a nation allows any onekind of natural resource to be squandered it must suffer a real, positive loss; yet substitutes of another kind can generally be found. But when wild life is squandered it does not go elsewhere, likesquandered money; it cannot possibly be replaced by any substitute, assome inorganic resources are: it is simply an absolute, dead loss, gone beyond even the hope of recall. 

Now, we have seen verifiable facts enough to prove that Labrador, outof its total area of eleven Englands, is not likely to beadvantageously exploitable over much more than the area of one Englandfor other purposes than the growth and harvesting of wild life by landand water. How are these ten Englands to be brought underconservation, before it is too late, in the best interests of the fivechief classes of people who are concerned already or will be soon? Ofcourse, the same individual may belong to more than one class. Imerely use these divisions to make sure of considering all sides ofthe question. The five great interests are those of--1. Food. 2. Business. 3. The Indians and Eskimos. 4. Sport, and 5. TheZoophilists, by which I mean all people interested in wild-animallife, from zoologists to tourists. 

1. FOOD. --The resident population is so sparse that there is not oneperson for every 20, 000 acres; and most of these people live on thecoast. Consequently, the vast interior could not be used for foodsupplies in any case. Besides, ever since the white man occupied thecoast, the immediate hinterland, which used to be full of life, hasbecome more and more barren. Fish is plentiful enough. A few smallcrops of common vegetables could be grown in many places, and outsidesupplies are becoming more available. So the toll of birds and mammalstaken by the present genuine residents for necessary food is not amenace, if taken in reason. In isolated places in the Gulf, likeHarrington, the Provincial law might safely be relaxed, so as to allowthe eggs of ducks and gulls to be taken up to the 5th of June andthose of murres, auks and puffins up to the 15th. Flight birds mightalso be shot at any time on the outside capes and islands. There is alocal unwritten law down there--"No guns inside, after the 1st ofJune"--and it has been kept for twenty years. Similar relaxationsmight be allowed in other places, in genuine cases of necessity. Butthe egging and out-of-season slaughter done by people, resident ornot, who are in touch with the outside world, should be stoppedabsolutely. And the few walrus now required as food by the fewout-living Eskimos should be strictly protected. Of course, killingfor food under real stress of need at any time or place goes withoutsaying. The real and spurious cases will soon be discriminated by anyproper system. 

2. BUSINESS. --Business is done in fish, whales, seals, fur, game, plumage and eggs. The fish are a problem apart. But it is worth notingthat uncontrolled exploitation is beginning to affect even theircountless numbers in certain places. Whales have always been exploitedindiscriminately, and their wide range outside of territorial watersadds to the difficulties of any regulation. But some seasonal andsanctuary protection is necessary to prevent their becoming extinct. The "white porpoise" could have its young protected; and whalingstations afford means of inspection and consequent control. The onlychance at present is that when whales become too scarce to pay theyare let alone, and may revive a little. The seals can be protectedlocally and ought to be. The preponderance of females and young killedin the whelping season is a drain impossible for them to withstandunder modern conditions of slaughter. The difficulty of policing largeareas simultaneously might be compensated for by special sanctuaries. The Americans are protecting their seals by restrictions on thenumbers, ages and sex of those killed; and doing so successfully. Thefur trade is open to the same sort of wise restriction, whennecessary, to the protection of wild fur by the breeding of tame, asin the fox farms, and to the benefits of sanctuaries. Marketable game, plumage and eggs can be regulated at out ports and markets. And theextension of suitable laws to non-game animals, coupled with theestablishment of sanctuaries, would soon improve conditions all round, especially in the interest of business itself. No one wants hisbusiness to be destroyed. But if Labrador is left without controlindefinitely every business dealing with the products of wild lifewill be obliged to play the suicidal game of competitive grab till thelast source of supply is exhausted, and capital, income and employmentall go together. 

3. INDIANS AND ESKIMOS. --The Eskimos are few and mostly localized. TheIndians stand to gain by anything that will keep the fur trade in fullvigour, as they are mostly hunters and trappers. Restriction on thenumber of skins, if that should prove necessary, and certainly on thesale of all poisons, could be made operative. Strychnine is said tokill animals eating the carcases even so far as to the seventh remove. Close seasons and sanctuaries are difficult to enforce with allIndians. But the registration of trappers, the enforcement of laws, the employment of Indians as guides for sportsmen, and other means, would have a salutary effect. The full-bloods, unfortunately, do nottake kindly to guiding. Indians wishing to change their way of life orproving persistent lawbreakers might be hived in reserves with theirwives and families. The reserves themselves would cost nothing, theIndians could find employment as other Indians have, and the expenseof establishing would be a bagatelle. As a matter of fact, in spite ofall the bad bargains having always been on the Indian side when salesand treaties were made with the whites, there is enough money to thecredit of the Indians in the hands of the Government to establish adozen hives and keep the people in them as idle as drones on the mereinterest of it. But good hunting grounds are better than good hives. 

4. SPORT. --Sport should have a great future in Labrador. Inland gamebirds, except ptarmigan, are the only kind of which there is neverlikely to be a great abundance, owing to the natural scarcity of theirfood. But, besides the big game on land and game birds on the coast, there are some unusual forms of sport appealing to adventurousnatures. Harpooning the little white whale by hand in a North Shorecanoe, or shooting the largest and gamest of all the seals--the great"hood"--also out of a canoe, requires enough skill and courage to makesuccess its own reward. The extension and enforcement of proper gamelaws would benefit sport directly, while indirectly benefitting allthe other interests. 

5. ZOOPHILISTS. --The zoophilist class seems only in place as anafterthought. But I am convinced that it will soon become of at leastequal importance with any other. All the people, from zoologists totourists, who are drawn to such places by the attraction of seeinganimal life in its own surroundings, already form an immense class inevery community. And it is a rapidly increasing class. Could we doposterity any greater injury than by destroying the ten Englands ofglorious wild life in Labrador, just at the very time when our own andother publics are beginning to appreciate the value of the appealwhich such haunts of Nature make to all the highest faculties ofcivilized man?

The way can be made clear by scientific study. The laws can be drawnup by any intelligent legislators, and enforced quite as efficientlyas other laws have been by the Mounted Police in the North West. Theexpense will be small, the benefits great and widely felt. The onlyreal hitch is the uninformed and therefore apathetic state of publicopinion. If people only knew that Labrador contained a hundredSaguenays, wild zoos, Thousand Islands, fiords, palisades, seamountains, cañons, great lakes and waterfalls, if they only knew thatthey could get the enjoyment of it for a song, and make it an heirloomfor no more trouble than letting it live, they might do all that isneeded to-morrow. But they don't know. And the three Governmentscannot do much without the support of public opinion. At present theydo practically nothing. The Ungavan Labrador has neither organizationnor laws. The Newfoundland Labrador has organization but no laws. Andthe Quebec Labrador has laws but no observance of them. 

However, Quebec has laws, which are something, legislators who havemade the laws, and leaders who have introduced them. The trouble isthat the public generally has no sense of responsibility in the matterof enforcement. It still has a hazy idea that Nature has anoverflowing sanctuary of her own, somewhere or other, which will fillup the gaps automatically. The result is that poaching is commonlyregarded as a venial offence, poachers taken red-handed are rarelypunished, and willing ears are always lent to the cry that richsportsmen are trying to take the bread out of the poor settler'smouth. The poor settler does not reflect that he himself, and allother classes alike, really have a common interest in the conservationof any wild life that does not conflict with legitimate humandevelopment. There is some just cause of complaint that the big-gamereserves are hampering the peasants in parts of India and the settlersand natives in parts of Uganda. But no such complaint can be raisedagainst the Laurentide National Park, so wisely established by theQuebec Government. The worst of it is that many of the richer peopleset the example in law-breaking. The numbers of big game allowed areexceeded, out-of-season shooting goes on, and both out-of-season andforbidden game is sold in the markets and served at the dinner tablesof the very class who should be first in protecting it. 

Partly because Quebec has taken the lead in legislation, and partlybecause an ideal site is ready to hand under its jurisdiction, I wouldventure to suggest the immediate establishment of an absolutesanctuary for all wild birds and mammals along as much of the coast aspossible on either side of cape Whittle. The best place of all to keepis from cape Whittle eastward to cape Mekattina, 64 miles in astraight line by sea. The 45 miles from cape Mekattina eastward toShekatika bay are probably the next best; and, next, the 35 from capeWhittle westward to Cloudberry point. As there are 800 miles betweenQuebec and the Strait, I am only proposing to make from one-tenth toone-fifth of them into a sanctuary. And this part is the least fittedfor other purposes, except sea-fishing, which would not be restrictedat all, the least inhabited, and the most likely to succeed as asanctuary, especially for birds. 

Cape Whittle is 550 miles below Quebec, 70 below Natashkwan, which isthe last port of call for the mail boats, and 50 below Kegashka, thelast green spot along the shore. It faces cape Gregory, near the bayof Islands in Newfoundland, 130 miles across; and is almost as farfrom the north-east point of Anticosti. It is a great landmark forcoasting vessels, and for the seal herds as well. A refuge for sealsis absolutely necessary to preserve their numbers and the businessconnected with them. Of course, I know there is a feeling that, ifthey are going to disappear, the best thing to do is to exploit themto the utmost in the meanwhile, so as to snatch every presentadvantage, regardless of consequences. But is this business, sense, orconservation? Even if any restriction in the way of numbers, sex, ageor season should be imposed on seal hunting, a small sanctuary cannotbut be beneficial. While, if there is no other protection, a sanctuaryis a _sine qua non_. It is possible that some protection might also beafforded to the whales that hug the shore. 

The case of the birds is quite as strong, and the chance of protectionby this sanctuary much greater. With the exception of the limitedegging and shooting for the necessary food of the few residents--thewhole district of Mekattina contained only 213 people at the lastcensus--not an egg nor a bird should be touched at all. The birds soonfind out where they are well off, and their increase will recruit thewhole river and gulf. A few outlying bird sanctuaries should beestablished in connection with this one, which might be called theHarrington Sanctuary, as Harrington is a well-known telegraph station, a central point between cape Whittle and Mekattina, and it enjoys aname that can be easily pronounced. In the Gulf the Bird rocks andBonaventure island to the south; one of the Mingan islands, thePerroquets and Egg island to the north; with the Pilgrims, up theRiver, above the Saguenay and off the South Shore, are the best. ThePilgrims, 700 miles from the Atlantic, are probably the furthestinland point in the world where the eider breeds. They would make anideal seabird sanctuary. On the Atlantic Labrador there are plenty ofsuitable islands from which to choose two or three sanctuaries, between Hamilton inlet and Ramah. The east coast of Hudson bay is fullof islands from which two corresponding sanctuaries might be selected, one in the neighbourhood of the Portland promontory and the other inthe southeast corner of James bay. 

There is the further question--affecting all migratory animals, butespecially birds--of making international agreements for theirprotection. There are precedents for this, both in the Old World andin the New. And, so far as the United States are concerned, thereshould be no great difficulty. True, they have set us some lamentableexamples of wanton destruction. But they have also set us some nobleexamples of conservation. And we have good friends at court, in themembers of the New York Zoological, the Audubon and other societies, in Mr. Roosevelt, himself an ardent conserver of wild life, and in Mr. Bryce, who is an ex-president of the Alpine Club and a devoted loverof nature. Immediate steps should be taken to link our own birdsanctuaries with the splendid American chain of them which runs roundthe Gulf of Mexico and up the Atlantic coast to within easy reach ofthe boundary line. Corresponding international chains up theMississippi and along the Pacific would be of immense benefit to allspecies, and more particularly to those unfortunate ones which areforced to migrate down along the shore and back by the middle of thecontinent, thus running the deadly gauntlet both by land and sea. 

Inland sanctuaries are more difficult to choose and manage. A deersanctuary might answer near James bay. Fur sanctuaries must also be insome fairly accessible places, on the seaward sides of the variousheights-of-land, and not too far in. The evergreen stretches of theEastmain river have several favourable spots. What is needed most isan immediate examination by a trained zoologist. The existinginformation should be brought together and carefully digested for himin advance. There are the Dominion, Provincial and Newfoundlandofficial reports; the Hudson Bay Company, the Moravian missionaries;Dr. Robert Bell, Mr. A. P. Low, Mr. D. I. V. Eaton, Dr. Grenfell, Dr. Hare, Mr. Napoléon Comeau, not to mention previous writers, likePackard, McLean and Cartwright--a whole host of original authorities. But their work has never been thoroughly co-ordinated from azoological point of view. A form of sanctuary suggested for thefur-bearing Yukon is well worth considering. It consists in openingand closing the country by alternate sections, like crops and fallowland in farming. The Indians have followed this method forgenerations, dividing the family hunting grounds into three parts, hunting each in rotation, and always leaving enough to breed back thenumbers. But the pressure of the grab-all policy from outside maybecome irresistible. 

The one great point to remember is that there is no time to lose inbeginning conservation by protecting every species in at least twoseparate localities. 

A word as to the management and wardens. Two zoologists and twenty menafloat, and the same number ashore, could probably do the whole work, in connection with local wardens. This may seem utterly ridiculous asa police force to patrol ten Englands and three thousand miles of sea. But look at what the Royal North West Mounted Police have done overvast areas with a handful of men, and what has been effected in Maine, New Brunswick and Ontario. Once the public understands the question, and the governments mean business, the way of the transgressor will beso hard--between the wardens, zoologists and all the preventivemachinery of modern administration--that it will no longer pay him towalk in it. Special precautions must be taken against that vilest ofall inventions of diabolical ingenuity--the Maxim "silencer. " Noargument is needed to prove that silent firearms could not suit crimebetter if they were made expressly for it. The mere possession of anykind of "silencer" should constitute a most serious criminal offence. The right kind of warden will be forthcoming when he is really wantedand is properly backed up. I need not describe the wrong kind. We allknow him, only too well. 

BENEFITS

I am afraid I have already exceeded my allotted time. But, with yourkind indulgence, Sir, I should like, in conclusion, simply toenumerate a few of the benefits certain to follow the introduction andenforcement of law and the establishment of sanctuaries. 

First, it cannot be denied that the constant breaking of the presentlaw makes for bad citizenship, and that the observance of law willmake for good. Next, though it is often said that what Canada needsmost is development and not conservation, I think no one will denythat conservation is the best and most certainly productive form ofdevelopment in the case before us. Then, I think we have here a reallyunique opportunity of effecting a reform that will unite and notdivide all the legitimate interests concerned. What could appear tohave less in common than electricity and sanctuaries? Yet electricityin Labrador requires water-power, which requires a steady flow, whichrequires a head-water forest, which, in its turn, is admirably fit toshelter wild life. Except for those who would selfishly andshortsightedly take all this wealth of wild life out of the worldaltogether, in one grasping generation, there is nobody who will notbe the better for the change. I have talked with interested parties ofevery different kind, and always found them agree that conservation isthe only thing to do--provided, as they invariably add, that it isdone "straight" and "the same for all. "

Fourthly, a word as to sport. I have invoked the public conscienceagainst wanton destruction and its inevitable accompaniment ofcruelty. I know, further, that man is generally cruel and a bullytowards other animals. And, as an extreme evolutionist, I believe allanimals are alike in kind, however much they may differ in degree. ButI don't think clean sport cruel. It does not add to the sum total ofcruelty under present conditions. Wild animals shun pain and death aswe do. But under Nature they never die what we call natural deaths. They starve or get killed. Moreover, town-bred humanitarians feel painand death more than the simpler races of men, who, in their turn, feelit more than lower animals. A wild animal that has just escaped deathwill resume its occupation as if nothing had happened. The sportsman'sclean kill is only an incident in the day's work, not anxiouslyapprehended like an operation or a battle. But pain and death are veryreal, all the same. So death should be inflicted as quickly aspossible, even at the risk of losing the rest of one's bag. And, evenbeyond the reach of any laws, no animal should ever be killed in sportwhen its own death might entail the lingering death of its young. Asportsman who observes these rules instinctively, and who never killswhat he cannot get and use, is not a cruel man. He certainly is abeast of prey. But so is the most delicate invalid woman when drinkinga cup of beef tea. Sport has its use in the development of health andskill and courage. Its practice is one of life's eternal compromises. And the best thing we can do for it now is to make it clean. We havefar too much of the other kind. The essential difference has neverbeen more shrewdly put than in the caustic epigram, that there is thesame difference between a sportsman and a "sport" as there is betweena gentleman and a "gent. " I believe that the enforcement of laws andthe establishment of sanctuaries will raise our sport to a higherplane, reduce the suffering now inflicted when killing for business, and help in every way towards the conversion of the human into thehumane. Besides, paradoxical as it may seem to some good people, thetrue sportsman has always proved to be one of the very best conserversof all wild life worth keeping. So there is a distinctly desirablebenefit to be expected in this direction, as in every other. 

Finally, I return to my zoophilists, a vast but formless class ofpeople, both in and outside of the other classes mentioned, and onewhich includes every man, woman and child with any fondness for wildlife, from zoologists to tourists. There are higher considerations, never to be forgotten. But let me first press the point that there'smoney in the zoophilists--plenty of it. A gentleman, in whom you, Sir, and your whole Commission have the greatest confidence, and who wasnot particularly inexpert at the subject, made an under-valuation tothe extent of no less than 75 per cent. , when trying to estimate theamount of money made by the transportation companies directly out oftravel to "Nature" places for sport, study, scenery and other kinds ofouting. There is money in it now, millions of it; and there is goingto be much more money in it later on. Civilized town-dwelling men, women and children are turning more and more to wild Nature for aholiday. And their interest in Nature is widening and deepening inproportion. I do not say this as a rhetorical flourish. I have takenparticular pains to find out the actual growth of this interest, whichis shown in ways as comprehensive as educational curricula, picturebooks for children, all sorts of "Animal" works, "zoos", museums, lectures, periodicals and advertisements; and I find all factspointing the same way. The president of one of the greatestpublishers' associations in the world told me, and without beingasked, that the most marked and the steadiest development in the tradewas in "Nature" books of every kind. And this reminds me of thecountless readers who rarely hear the call of the wild themselves, except through word and picture, but who would bitterly andjustifiably resent the silencing of that call in the very places whereit ought to be heard at its best. 

Now, where can the call of wild Nature be heard to greater advantagethan in Labrador, which is a land made on purpose to be the home offur, fin and feather? And it is accessible, in the best of allpossible ways--by sea. It is about equidistant from central Canada, England and the States--a wilderness park for all of them. Means ofcommunication are multiplying fast. Even now, it would be possible, ina good steamer, to take a month's holiday from London to Labrador, spending twenty days on the coast and only ten at sea. I think we maybe quite sure of such travel in the near future; that is, of course, if the travellers have a land of life, not death, to come to. And anexcellent thing about it is that Labrador cannot be overrun and spoiltlike what our American friends so aptly call a "pocket wilderness". Ten wild Englands, properly conserved, cannot be brought into thecatalogue of common things quite so easily as all that! Besides, Labrador enjoys a double advantage in being essentially a seaboardcountry. The visitor has the advantage of being able to see a greatdeal of it--and the finest parts, too--without getting out of touchwith his moveable base afloat. And the country itself has thecorresponding advantage of being less liable to be turned into acommonplace summer resort by the whole monotonizing apparatus ofhotels and boarding houses and conventional "sights". 

And now, Sir, I venture once more to mention the higher interests, andactually to specify one of them, although I have been repeatedlywarned by outsiders that no public men would ever listen to anythingwhich could not be expressed in "easy terms of dollars and cents!" AndI do so in full confidence that no appeal to the intellectual lifewould fall on deaf ears among the members of a Commission which wasfounded to lead rather than follow the best thought of our time. Ineed not remind you that from the topmost heights of Evolution you cansee whole realms of Nature infinitely surpassing all those ofbusiness, sport and tourist recreation, and that the theory ofEvolution itself is the crowned brain of the entire Animal Kingdom. But I doubt whether, as yet, we fully realize that Labrador isabsolutely unique in being the only stage on which the prologue andliving pageant of Evolution can be seen together from a singlepanoramic point of view. The sea and sky are everywhere the sameprimeval elements. But no other country has so much primeval land tomatch them. Labrador is a miracle of youth and age combined. It isstill growing out of the depths with the irresistible vigour of youth. But its titanic tablelands consist of those azoic rocks which form thevery roots of all the other mountains in the world, and which are soold, so immeasurably older than any others now standing on the surfaceof the globe, that their Laurentians alone have the real right to bearthe title of "The Everlasting Hills". Being azoic these Laurentiansare older than the first age when our remotest ancestors appeared inthe earliest of animal forms, millions and millions of years ago. They are, in fact, the only part of the visible Earth which waspresent when Life itself was born. So here are the three greatelemental characters, all together--the primal sea and sky andland--to act the azoic prologue. And here, too, for all mankind toglory in, is the whole pageant of animal life: from the weakestinvertebrate forms, which link us with the illimitable past, to themightiest developments of birds and mammals at the present day, theleviathan whales around us, the soaring eagles overhead, and manhimself--the culmination of them all--and especially migrating man, whose incoming myriads are linking us already with the most pregnantphases of the future. Where else are there so many intimate appealsboth to the child and the philosopher? Where else, in all this world, are there any parts of the Creation more fit to exalt our visions andmake us "Look, through Nature, up to Nature's God"?

But, Sir, I must stop here; and not without renewed apologies forhaving detained you so long over a question on which, as I havealready warned you, I do not profess to be a scientific expert. I fearI have been no architect, not even a builder. But perhaps I have donea hodman's work, by bringing a little mortar, with which some of thenobler materials may presently be put together. 

Bibliography

This short list is a mere indication of what can be found in any goodlibrary. 

General information is given in _Labrador; its Discovery, Explorationand Development--By W. G. Gosling: Toronto, Musson. _ The AtlanticLabrador is dealt with by competent experts in _Labrador: the Countryand the People--By W. T. Grenfell and Others: New York, The MacmillanCompany, 1910. _ This has several valuable chapters on the fauna. ThePeninsula generally, the interior especially, and the faunaincidentally, are dealt with in the reports of _A. P. Low_ and _D. I. V. Eaton_ to the _Geological Survey of Canada, 1893-4-5. _ An excellentgeneral paper on the country is _The Labrador Peninsula, By RobertBell_, in _The Scottish Geographical Magazine_ for July, 1895. The N. Of the S. W. Part is more particularly described in his _RecentExplorations to the South of Hudson Bay_ in _The Geographical Journal_for July, 1897. The Quebec Labrador is the subject of a recentProvincial report, _La Côte Nord du Saint Laurent et le LabradorCanadien--Par Eugène Rouillard: Quebec, 1908--Ministère de laColonisation, des Mines et des Pêcheries. _ An excellent account ofanimal life on the W. Half of the Quebec Labrador is to be found in_Life and Sport on the North Shore--By Napoléon A. Comeau: Quebec, 1909. _ The zoology of the Mammals, though not particularly in theirLabrador habitat, is to be found in _Life-Histories of NorthernMammals--By Ernest Thompson-Seton: London, Constable, 2 Vols. , 1910. _The birds, similarly, in the _Catalogue of Canadian Birds--By JohnMacoun and James M. Macoun: Ottawa, Government Printing Bureau, 1909. _Some books about adjacent areas may be profitably consulted, like_Newfoundland and its Untrodden Ways--By John Guille Millais, _ andAmerican official publications, like the _Birds of New York--By ElonHoward Eaton: Albany, University of the State of New York, 1910. _ No. 34 of the _New York Zoological Society Bulletin_--for June, 1909--is a"Wild-life Preservation Number. " The best general history andpresent-day summary of the world's fur trade is to be found in arecent German work, a genuine _Urquellengeschichte. _ French andEnglish translations will presumably appear in due course. Thestatistical tables are wonderfully complete. The illustrations are theleast satisfactory feature. This book is--_Aus dem Reiche der Pelze. Von Emil Brass: Berlin, Im Verlage der Neuen Pelzwaren-Zeitung, 1911. _