GAME FARM AT GREENPARK

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21939, 13 November 1936, Page 10

GAME FARM AT GREENPARK

MINISTER’S PRAISE SUPPLY OF BIRDS FOR SOUTH ISLAND “I came aw&y from Greenpark feeling that with an extension of its equipment, probably the whole of the extensive game-bird territories of the South Island could be equipped with birds from that farm. It pleased me as a sportsman a great deal to see what a fine asset Canterbury has in its game farm and confidently I commend it to the full support of the sportsmen.” This comment was made by the Minister for Internal Affairs (the Hon. W. E. Parry) after a visit yesterday to the North Canterbury Acclimatisation Society’s game farm at Greenpark. With Messrs G. L. Pomfret-Dodd, C. D. Wheeler, and C. W. Hervey, the Minister was shown over all the farm and its equipment. Speaking to a reporter last night, Mr Parry said he was’ delighted with all he. had seen at the farm, which he described as being as up-to-date as it was enterprising. “As a gun sportsman of many years,” remarked the Minister, “I think I am able to pass a reasonably sound opinion on the quality of game birds. The society is certainly breeding some high standard birds at its farm and is well worthy of the praise given it. But it is the excellent lay-out of the farm and the provision made for breeding pheasants and quail that took *my attention. “I know of no better method of undertaking that very often difficult process of incubating and rearing to maturity game chicks than that employed at the Greenpark farm. There everything seemed to me to have been studied to the minutest detail, and consequently there was no wonder at the success achieved and so well recognised by other kindred societies which do similar work.”

PROTECTION OF BIRDS « — : — COLLECTORS’ PERMITS CONDEMNED GREATER RESTRICTIONS URGED Criticism of the system of issuing collectors’ permits to take protected birds or their nest and eggs, is contained in an article in the November number of ‘‘Forest and Bird,” issued by the Forst and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand. The article states: “When Parliament and the Government put a cordon of absolute protection round Host of the New Zealand birds, a hole was left in the fence. The hole is called, collectors’ permits. “While other people who take birds or eggs 'or nests are law-breakers acting at their own risk, a collector with a permit has a legal exemption. It is true that he remains on the. side of law only so long as he observes the restrictions in his permit limiting the species and numbers that he may take. But he is in a better position than is the ordinary law-breaker, to violate the act, because the permit shields him. He may exceed it with more immunity than would be eni»*yed by a man who collects without a permit, because the unpermitted person is clearly in the wrong from the jump. “Any person desirous of taking birds or eggs for which no permit is obtainable could do so more safely if he possessed a permit covering other birds and eggs than if he posses.' d no permit at all.

“This being so, an administering authority charged with the trust of bird protection must of necessity look with jealousy on every permit it issues. A permit in itself is a double-edged weapon. The personal factor of the collector may count, but cannot alter in fact that a bird collector with a permit is a person whose scrupulous observance of permit conditions cannot be taken for granted. “The most eminent and favourable bird collector is no more entitled to pass without scrutiny than an eminent accountant is entitled to escape the audit. Money Value of Specimens “Bird skins, birds’ eggs, etc., have a scientific exchartge value and a money exchange value. That there is a traffic resting on money is indicated by the fact that New Zealand protected birds, including parakeets, can be bought in Sydney; and Australian protected birds can be bought in New Zealand. To say that, is not to say that they were taken on collectors’ permits. But it is a reason for specially supervising collectors and for reducing their permits to a minimum. “Someone may retort: ‘But poachers without permits take and sell 100 birds for everv dozen tak. . legally 'or illegally, by collectors.’ “Even if this be true, the collector’s proportion of responsibility is not merely the proportion of birds he takes to the aggregate of birds taken. The collector is proportionately a much more dangerous factor, because, in his operations among protected New Zealand birds, he is attracted irresistibly to those that are fewest, rarest, and most in demand. A huia (if there is one) is in more danger from one "collector than from all the pigeon pothunters in New Zealand, who probably number hundreds. “The collector is dangerous because he is concerned with the weakest link in the chain of bird life, such a link as is representd by a rare and near-pass-ing species. “No collector should be turned out with a permit in the haunts of the rarest species and treated as an honourable man. If he be an honourable man, he will not expect to be taken on trust. Because he will know that not everybody can be taken on trust, and that there should be uniformity of treatment. Private Permits Not Favoured “The keynote of Government policy should be no more help for private collectors, and extreme strictness in collecting for museum ana public purposes “The ramifications of commercial collecting and the taxidermist business would be brought to light if the Government gave half as much attention to the bird-skin traffic as it gives to opossum skins. “The mentality of the museum activities may be scientific; but ♦’*- mentality of private activities is not scientific, and in most cases is purely commercial. No scientist is On the edge of a discovery that is held up for lack of the skin or the egg of a bird. “The general law-breaking pothunter is impressive, because of the numbers of birds he takes; but the scarcity of birds of a species tends to discourage hint. The same scarcity whets the collector’s interest. His share in the problem is not numerical, but relative, not a matter of quantity but of quality. If the Government is minded to create a staff of rangers under the Department of Internal supervision of permits should be its first duty. If the Ciovernment is not so minded, it should seriously consider whether it is warranted in granting collecting permits at all,"