CLOSED SEASONS

Evening Post, Volume CXXVII, Issue 34, 10 February 1939, Page 6

CLOSED SEASONS

TO SAVE WATERFOWL

REVENUE AND DUCKS

An appreciation of the stand taken by the Minister of Internal Affairs (the Hon. W. E. Parry) for close seasons for native duck, appears in the current issue of "Forest and Bird," and the writer points out that unless the principle is carried further, and other measures taken, there will soon be neither ducks nor revenue for the acclimatisation societies.

The Hon. W. E. Parry has repeatedlywarned acclimatisation societies as to the necessity of a periodical closed season for grey duck and all native ducks, says the writer. Some years ago duck shooting was not nearly so popular as it is at present, simply because it is usually a cold wet job and* upland game birds, such as pheasants, Caiifornian quail, etc., were plentiful. Recent years have seen a rapid lessening of all upland game birds and hares and an increasing number of hunters.. The result is that now nearly all shooting is concentrated on the unfortunate duck with disastrous effect on the capital stock. Added to the ever-in-creasing proportionate slaughter are such factors as improved guns and ammunition and the reprehensible practice of baiting the birds before the beginning of the season, in order that they will confidently come within easy range of the guns on the -opening day. The oft-heard objection- to close seasons is the loss of revenue from licences by acclimatisation societies. The final result of the present practice will be, of course, no ducks, no revenue, and no acclimatisation societies, unless these bodies are able to carry on solely with the revenue from fishing licences. This source of revenue is scarcely likely to maintain its present volume when the effect of forest destruction becomes more impressed on rivers and streams.

Hunters are already down to shooting such non-game birds as pukeko, the shooting of which is certainly not sport, in any sense of the word. The public are told that the killing of these birds is for the farmer's protection, as though they were not well able to look after their own interests. A permit to destroy any birds, which any farmer considers are doing him more harm than good, is not likely to be refused.

The desire to furnish something to kill for the mere killer and thus secure additional revenue is the main incentive when application is made to the Minister to include such clumsy-flying birds in his seasonal warrant. The man who is out for sport would not bother about them.

The Department of Internal Affairs has to shoulder the responsibility in such matters as the preservation of waterfowl. The Minister has the power! and, in this case, the knowledge of the! precarious position of native ducks and must know that delay is dangerous, because it is a well-known fact that when the numbers of a species are reduced to almost vanishing point, reestablishment of, the species is generally an impossibility, and extermination follows. There are, however, other methods of saving the waterfowl besides periodical clc-^d seasons. One is to subdivide each acclimatisation society's district into areas like the pattern of a chessboard, and alternatively open and close adjoining areas each week. This scheme would prevent all waters being manned with guns at the same time, as they have been on the opening day of the waterfowl shooting season, but it might make ranging difficult.

The surest way of saving the fastdiminishing native ducks is the setting up of a chain of efficiently-managed sanctuaries under the care and control of the Department. The whole responsibility in the preservation of waterfowl rests with the Minister and his Department. It is sincerely hoped that they will not be lulled into any sort of a sence of false security by considering that there is plenty of time because ducks can be seen in considerable numbers in a few places. These are concentrations. There are innumerable places now where they used to be present- in numbers but are absent today. ' .