WHO PROTECTS?

Evening Post, Volume CXXXII, Issue 43, 19 August 1941, Page 5

WHO PROTECTS?

WILD LIFE INTERESTS

NATURAL HABITAT

At a recent meeting of the Wellington .Acclimatisation Society a letter was received from the president of the Forest and Bird Protection Society quoting statements by a senior pupil of Horowhenua College regarding illegal bird-shooting at Horowhenua Lake and the vicinity. The society in reply defended the work of its rangers and said that the Forest and Bird Protection Society should take the initiative in instituting proceedings under the appropriate Act.

The question thus raised—the respective responsibilities of the Forest and Bird Society and the acclimatisation societies for the preservation of wild life—is discussed editorially in the latest issue of "Forest and Bird" issued by the Protection Society.

"It is constantly being stated by some acclimatisation societies," the journal states, "that they do all the protecting of native birds, that is, ranging in their districts, but they do not say at the same time that they receive moneys for the purpose." From the privilege of issuing permits to take certain birds and fish they derive a revenue round about £25,000 a year. Banging is included as one of the main responsibilities imposed by the Animals Protection and Game Act; not merely ranging with a view of preventing the illegal taking or killing of j those birds which are usually declared to be game birds, but the birds protected as laid out in the three schedules of the Act. The Forest and Bird Protection Society has to confine its activities to the securing of public sympathy in the preservation of native birds, surely a truly important and essential role, when it is remembered that no laws are enforceable, unless a majority of the public approves.of them. The.expenditure of the society's funds is governed by a deed of trust and all income must be disbursed in accordance with the conditions of this deed. When ithe conditions of this deed of trust were being defined strenuous efforts were made to have j included the power to employ and pay rangers, but the Department of Internal Affairs was adamant in the matter and declined to agree to any conditions which would overlap or clash with the privileges already granted to acclimatisation societies. It must be admitted that the argument was logically good, but supposing the Forest and Bird Protection Society had been successful in its endeavours to obtain, the j>ower to employ rangers, how much benefit would have been derived therefrom? Its income is just about one twenty-fifth of that of the acclimatisation societies, and if the society had teen able to spend half its income in ranging, which is a proportion far in excess of that spent by acclimatisation societies, the result would, when spread over the whole of the Dominion, have been infinitesimal. "No restrictions whatever appear to be placed on the manner in which the income of acclimatisation societies is spent. Many shooters and anglers consider that a large part of the moneys received is ill spent, and no biologist has yet come under our notice who has much sympathy with their methods." COVER AND FOOD. The writer quotes the statement of "American Forests" that what wild life needs most of all is a favourable habitat —sufficient cover and proper food. "But what," asks the writer, "aid find acclimatisation "societies doing? Deer and other plant-eating mammals were protected-and most ac- ; climatisation societies strenuously, but unavailingly, fought against the removal of the protection of these mammals, apparently oblivious of the iact that such mammals damage and destroy the floor of the forest, which is the most important factor in checking excessive water run-off. They forgot, or did not know, that fish, from the catching of which comes their main revenue, are dependent upon the functioning of rivers and streams in a natural manner. Thus they endeavoured to burn the candle at both ends for revenue purposes until an active publicity campaign on the part of the Forest and Bird Protection Society finally led to the removal of all protection of the forest-destroying mammals and to Government efforts to check their increase, which was all to the benefit and in the interests of the followers of Isaac Walton."

The article criticises the influence of revenue upon policy and concludes: "The real crux of wild bird conservation is the presence of a congenial habitat and food every week all the year round. When this is realised and acted upon game birds and other birds will increase if there is an efficient warden service, and they will not increase until the necessity of such conditions is realised and acted upon."