considered of small account by those who make or cause to be made,
the game laws of this state (Pennsylvania), and brother trapper, are
we not as much to blame as the ones who concoct the game laws to
their own liking? The accompanying picture will show a part of the
confiscation from the writer by the game laws of Pennsylvania and
this same confiscation applies to every trapper in the state to a
more or less extent. Had we presented our side of this question to
our respective representatives in a clear and reasonable light would
we not get a square deal? If not, then why not? We are aware that the
man with the dollar has a great influence in comparison with the poor
trapper, but are there not ten of the poor trappers to one of the
dollar men and have we not the just and reasonable side of the
question? Do not our representatives know that the raw fur industry
of the state is of greater importance, financially, than the wheat
crop of the state, for which the legislature does all it can in the
way of appropriations to help the farmer to increase the yield of
wheat? Had this been shown to the assembly, would it not have passed
laws to protect the fur-bearers of the state, instead of bounty laws
to exterminate the fur-bearer, and this act at the expense of the
public?

Every dollar that is appropriated by the House of Representatives in
the way of bounty on so-called noxious animals, must come from the
pockets of the taxpayers, and is not a dollar saved in the way of
protecting the fur-bearers of the state equivalent to a dollar
produced from a bushel of wheat? Now, the dollar man will tell us
that the fox and mink are very destructive to game and game birds.
This, to a great extent, is a mere bugaboo, or an excuse to knock out
the trapper. There is little doubt but that a fox occasionally kills
a grouse or partridge or a rabbit. Admitting this to be the case, is
not a good fox or mink skin worth ten times as much to the trapper as
a partridge or rabbit is to the dollar man?

But that is not all, if it is the pleasure of an individual to amuse
himself with the traps, why should he be deprived of that pleasure?
It is certain that the trap will not cause any more harm in the way
of damage or in a cruel manner, than a dog will. While the dollar man
makes a plea in defense of game, it is generally known that his plea
is in reality in defense of his manner of sporting, regardless of any
desires that the poor trapper may have