THE RABBIT PEST.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVII, Issue 17461, 4 May 1920, Page 6

THE RABBIT PEST.

LAX. PROPERTY 'OWNERS,

MATAMATA PROSECUTIONS',

SEVERAL' FINES IMPOSED.

Several cases wore taken by the inspecters against property owners at the Matamata Magistrate's Court recently for not undertaking to destroy raboits to the satisfaction of the inspectors, and in ail cases fines were imposed.

Exceptional circumstances were mentioned in the case of John Mayr by his counsel Oil. Northcroft), and he was fined £10.

Harry Atkins (Mr. 0. G. Bell)' was charged in connection with bis property of about 520 acres on Buckland Koad. Mr. H. Cleland, inspector, said the rabbits on about 250 acres of the property were especially numerous. A notice had been served on February 17, and a further inspection had been made on March IS. There were no signs of anything being done to eradicate the post. The neighbour on one side was a widow who bad her own farm nearly clear of rabbits. On the other side there was an improved farm. The defendant, a schoolmaster at Maungatautiri, said he left every Saturday afternoon to go on the farm, and had poisoned and trapped extensively prior to March. He had also arranged for professional trappers. He considered that trapping was fifty times more effective than poisoning. To Air. Cleland: He had sold 700 rabbit skins in Auckland at lid each. He denied being, a rabbit farmer. He caught the rabbits to clear his farm. T. Sugrew a professional rabbit trapper, said from March 18 to April 26 he had taken off 1500 rabbits from Atkins property. It was cow practically clear, the eaten having gone down 40 per cent. In about a month the catch 'would go up to 100 per cent., because the rabbits were travelling from the back country. The magistrate said he would accept the defendant's statement that ho had taken certain steps, but not sufficient. Ho later made a success with the trapper, but too late. He should have done that when the first notice was issued. Ho had a reasonable period. On the evidence, it would point to bo to the advantage of property owners to systematically trap with professional trappers, because they would not then have to purchase poison, Defendant was fined £15.

Elisa Underwood was similarly charged in respect to her property on Buckland Road, opposite tho.. last-mentioned property. The inspector said no attempt nad been made to poison or trap up to March

Inspector Stopford said this property ▼as the worst of the three dealt with.

Henry Underwood, son of the owner of the property, and manager, said he put on 401b of pollard in January. He engaged trappers a month before they started on March 12. They were still trapping on it, and bad taken off 1500 rabbits.

Mr. Stopford : These men wait for the tranners, and the trappers wait for high prices, and won't go out till they get them—that is the curse.

The magistrate said he knew the practice in the South Island, and he could now see that he would have to review the question of heavy fines in this district. Another fine of &15 was imposed.