RABBIT PEST

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVIII, Issue 58, 6 February 1928, Page 5

RABBIT PEST

FAILURE TO DESTROY. TAIKOREA FARMER FINED. (From Our Own Correspondent.) EOXTON, Feb. 4. A charge of failing to destroy rabbits on his property at Taikorea' was preferred against C. E. Pdcley by tho Manawatu Rabbit Board at tho Magistrate’s Court yesterday beforo Mr J. L. Stout, S.M. Defendant was represented by Mr Cooper and tho case for tho board was conducted by Inspector Barron. The inspector tendered lengthy evidence as to routine and special notices sent to defendant requesting him to eradicate tho pest. Personal visits and inspections leading up to a joint inspection of tho property on January 6th of this year by himself and Inspector Palmer, of Feilding, were also detailed. After each visit defendant had ordered cyanide and a certain amount of work had been carried out on the farm, but the work had been done at odd intervals which was not in tho best interests of rabbit eradication.

Cross-examined by Mr Cooper witness denied ever telling defendant that his property was clean of. rabbits. Inspector Palmer gave evidence as to having carried out a joint inspection of defendant’s property with Inspector Barron. He had seen about 13 rabbits that morning between 10 a.m. and 12 p.m. und a good many signs of rabbits. The property was not in a good state. Defendant, in evidence, said that ho leased his farm from the Public Trust and it was inspected annually. There was a covenant in the lease that he had to keep down rabbits. On the last inspection in November the Public Trustee had made no complaint about tho presence of rabbits. Inspector Rankin had given witness credit for keeping his property _ clean. Witness gave evidence as to fumigation work that was done on tho farm, but denied receiving two notices sent out by the inspector. The latter had informed witness on one occasion that his property was clean and had said he did not believe a statement made to the effect that six or eight rabbits had been shot there one evening. The last poisoning (carrot) had been carried out on January 6th of this year, when 30 rabbits had been taken from a furrow near the boundary of witness’s and Mr Dixon’s property. To the inspector: Tho rabbits came on to witness’s property from the low-lying ground adjoining. Tho inspector pointed out that it was to 1 to twelve years since Inspector Rankin had operated over the country referred to. Mrs Pedley corroborated her husband’s evidence with regard to tho inspector’s alleged remarks about the property being clean.

Edward, Archie, and Reginald Pedley and T. Goodwin all gave evidence as to having carried out poisoning work on tho farm and H. J. Fenny, J. Martin and G. A. Barnett, neighbours, gave evidence that they considered Pedley’s farm fairly clear of the pest. The Magistrate, in summing up, raid that a certain amount of work had evidently been carried out and probably if tho work had been concentrated and done when the inspector had first notified defendant there would have been no prosocution. Also, had defendant put 'as much energy into : rabbit eradication as 110 had into defending the case there would not have been any need for a prosecution. The inspector did not deny that work had been done on the property but _ he had asked defendant to concentrate his efforts to destroy tho rabbits which was not done. There was no doubt that the Manawatu Rabbit Board had done good work and a lot of farmers would agree with this view. Defendant would bo convicted and fined £5, with costs £1 2s.