GAME LAWS.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXIII, Issue 3043, 27 April 1867, Page 6

GAME LAWS.

To the Editor of the Daily Southern Cross. Sir, — There is an impression amongst many that any person can shoot game on his own land (or right by lease) without a license. As I have read the Act, 1 take it that all must pay the license for killing game, whether upon his own right »r otherwise. Probably you would receive the thanks of the pablio — I will accord you mine, at any rate — to be enlightened on this head. Doubtless there are many who might subject themselves to the heavy penalty who can ill afford to pay the license fee, much less the penalty of shooting without it. I must say that I think game laws in a young colony like New Zealand premature, and that in the end they will prove obnoxious to most of us ; and will have but a poor effect, as far as preserving game, for the following reasons : — In the first place it will encourage night-ponchine, which is the forerunner of the worst vices amenable to our laws. This haa proved itself in England, which can be shown by the records of Hyde-park Barracks in Sydney ; the convict's first offencp, poaching, leading to others far worse ; hence transportation. Secondly, there are many small owners or holden of land, with perhaps many advantages both for breeding and preserving of pheasants, who cannot afford t» pay £5. Do you suppose that a person will strive to take care of birds that he must not touch upon bis own land ? The thing is absurd to think of; therefore he will get them by hook or by snare, or very soon take steps that there ahall not be many on his land, instead of pheasants increasing as they have done for the last h're yean. To my certain knowledge, there are at least 100 brace now where there were not five then. Again, if our attention is to be turned to growing grain in this province, I can tell you that pheasants are not the most agreeable things either at seed-time or harvest. I have had sufficient proof of this in England, and can with confidence state that I think they may be allowed to increase to do an immense deal of injury over and above any benefit they may be by destroying insects. I believe, with many others, that if the law of trespass had been made stringent it would have proved more effectual, in preserving all kinds of birds, than taxing the person on whoie land they are bred and cared for. If you deem the above worthy a place in your Daily Southern Cross, you will oblige youre, obediently, OxiDE.