GAME BREEDING TUESDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 4, 1936 Chairman: MALCOLM DUNN, superintendent, State Game Farms, Forked River, N. J. Committee: OTTO BEYER, Beyer Game Farms, Portage, Wis.; MARVIN O. POYNER, New York State Conservation Department, Albany, N. Y. SEMINATURAL GAME FARMS FOR WILD WATERFOWL (BY WALLACE GRANGE, Game Breeder and Consultant, Ephraim, Wis.) Somewhere between field game management and chicken wire game farming lies a technique combining the advantages of both. This is what I term "seminatural game farming", and to my mind it offers the greatest pathway to advance in constructive game management which we have yet seen. While it is particularly applicable to the production of wild waterfowl, I am convinced that it can be made effective for every species of native wild game which we possess. The key to success in seminatural game farming is made up of several factors: (1) large tracts of suitable natural environment, either occurring by chance or which have been created by design, (2) complete control over such lands, (3) adequate stocks of breeders, (4) facilities for the hatching and rearing of what may be termed "surplus" eggs and birds, (5) facilities for holding, penning, handling, wintering, and attending the birds the year around. Probably the most important "key" has not been mentioned, namely, a very keen appreciation of the natural habits of the species in question. Without that, all accessories and adjuncts to the venture are beside the point. The two main principles upon which seminatural game bird farming must be founded are (1) the fact that most or all wild game birds have a higher egg producing capacity than is normally utilized in the wild, and (2) the fact that normally the mortality of young birds is terrific. Seminatural methods permit the operator a considerable degree of control over these two factors. Seminatural game farming permits the captive breeding stock to nest in its own manner, in natural cover, and with every reasonable assistance. Efficient keepering is necessary. Nests must be located and successive clutches of eggs must be removed until such time as in the judgment of the keeper it is time to permit the bird to incubate. It is obvious that this involves a high degree of game sense, and considerable manpower. It means that we begin to know our birds as individuals and that we "herd" them like the nomadic peoples of long ago did in subjugating wild sheep to domestication. But our "herding" is done on large land units under close control. The extra eggs are incubated and the ducklings reared according to the usual methods, either by mechanical equipment or by brood ducks. For the most part, I find that best results are secured by using surplus mallard and call duck hens for this purpose. They are much less bother than domestic hens, are more efficient, and may be used throughout the season, for when the ducklings have reached a reasonable age, the whole flock may then be turned out in natural ponds. This is important, for the education of a young duck should not be neglected: It is important that young ducklings become wild, that they forage naturally, that they work hard in the pursuit of tadpoles and minnows, and that they learn the importance and use of cover. It is my belief that nothing has been more sadly neglected than the education of most game farm ducks, and that this has been one of the potent reasons why many restocking programs have been unsatisfactory. This does not minimize the importance of first-class breeding stock, however. Natural enemies are one of the greatest problems on the seminatural game farm. In Wisconsin, most of the control required is confined to great horned owls, which will return night after night to carry off the fllock, to crows, whose eyes for nests and taste for eggs is well known, and to such miscellaneous predators as snapping turtles and fox snakes. If these four predators are taken care of, almost all other control can be held to a minimum. Fencing of the seminatural game farm area is usually required by law. This involves the expenditure of considerable sums of money, but it does assist greatly in handling the stock, in reducing losses of natural enemies, and in controlling trespass. Further, the fencing requirement will tend to eliminate applicants who may be acting in bad faith. It is incumbent upon seminatural game farmers to keep their industry "on the level", and to prevent that type of exploitation which a few years ago threw various fur-farming ventures into disrepute. The surest way to prevent this "wildcatting" is by making the requirements such as will exclude any but legitimate breeders. Perhaps the major obstacle to the development of seminatural farming of wild waterfowl is the question of a market for the live birds so produced. The present market is largely confined to State conservation departments. This circumstance is satisfactory except for the fact that State departments have a habit of ordering at the last minute. The demand varies from year to year and it is common experience for the breeder to produce a fine flock of birds for which he can find no ready market. He then has his "merchandise left on the shelves", so to speak, with his investment tied up. Probably the next year he reduces this particular stock, whereupon he finds that the State departments are again in the market but he has no stock available. It is very desirable, therefore, that State departments anticipate their waterfowl needs and, if possible, let their contracts from 6 months to a year in advance. The investment required in making environments suitable to seminatural production, including dams, dikes, ponds, buildings, fences, and green-food gardens is such that hand-to-mouth markets operate to destroy incentive. Long-term contracts increase incentive and permit the anticipation of needs and intelligent programs to meet them. A, Elk herd on winter feeding ground in Elk Refuge at Jackson, Wyo. (Biological Survey photo.) B. The first buffalo presented to the American Bison Society for the National Bison Range by the C. E. Conrad Estate, Kalispell, Mont. (Biological Survey photo.) Seminatural game farming is seasonable in some respects, but it fits in most advantageously as a part of a year-round program of propagation. It is a more technical pursuit than ordinary game breeding, and there are no trained men available. It requires large tracts of high-grade game lands, and development over a period of years. As such, it is doubtful whether most State departments can afford to undertake this method. It is properly a case for private initiative, private risk, and private profit. But in the course of its development many useful things will be learned which have direct application to public conservation work. Our own experiments with wild waterfowl have shown definitely that this seminatural production is feasible. While our efforts thus far have been confined to some 25 acres, we anticipate the opportunity in the near future to demonstrate the method on a large scale. Reports on the project will be made from time to time. MODERN METHODS OF QUAIL BREEDING (By M. O. POYNER, superintendent, Middle Island State Game Farm, N. Y.) The topic which has been assigned to me for discussion is one about which much has been written during the past 5 or 6 years. During these years several developments have been made which have practically revolutionized the artificial propagation of quail. All of them tend toward lower production cost. These developments might best be shown by a comparison of the old and modern methods. These improvements may be classified as follows: (1) Methods of handling laying stock; (2) Brooding; (3) Feeding. 1. METHOD OF HANDLING LAYING STOCK Several years ago, when quail farming was a new industry, the laying stock was invariably held throughout the year on the ground. In the winter, holding pens approximately 20 by 50 feet were used in which were held from 20 to 40 birds. Much expense was involved in the construction of this pen both for labor and materials and also in maintaining proper sanitation. In the spring, the birds were transferred to laying pens approximately 6 by 10 feet, the birds still being kept on the ground. It was necessary to have a good sod on which to place the pens and enough space so that the position of the pens could be changed frequently. This was done in an effort to insure sanitation and also to afford the birds green vegetation. The same land was usually not used more often than once every 3 years. Between times, it was plowed and seeded and left idle in an effort to reduce disease hazards. This system made it necessary to have two types of pens. Consequently, one was idle. about 6 months of the year. This method proved unsatisfactory for several reasons. First, because there were losses of large numbers of birds from disease. Blackhead and quail disease took an enormous toll both in the winter holding pen and in the laying field. These losses were caused primarily by the birds being on the ground and coming in contact with the droppings. Second, because of the expense. 57282-36--25 |