NAPIER

New Zealand Mail, 29 January 1902, Page 25

NAPIER

(By Telegraph.—Own Correspondent.) NAPIER, January 23. The contribution by Mr A. W. Hogg, M.H.R., to the "New Zealand Times,” in reply to my recent article on the rabbit question, and his reference to the subject in his Masterton address, must be my excuse for again touching on this matter. Mr Hogg having been the mover of the amendment of the Rabbit Act, by which the principal machinery of that important Act was broken down, "in spite of Ministerial opposition,” as he declares, naturally he defends his pet amendment "by which landowners were no longer at the mercy of officials." That is tlfe crux of the whole difficulty. These Government officials, instead of being protected by Parliament,, have, through the kindly offices of Mr Hogg, become mere figureheads in the administration of the Act.

I hasten to assure the member for Masterton that no one has “grossly imposed on the credulity of the Napier contributor.” Mr Hogg surely will admit that he has not a monopoly of the information that is available on this question. I refrained in my first communication from hinting that anyone in the Wairarapa, least of all Mr Hogg, is desirous of establishing the rabbit canning industry in that province, and that for thi3 reason the rabbits were being allowed to purposely increase. Yet, lam afraid, from what I have learned from Wairarapa settlers, I must now make this assertion, and if the member for Masterton would only open his heart, he would be amongst the first to admit that such a proposal has been seriously entertained. Pity ’tis for the sake of the farmers, that rabbits have been allowed to so increase that canning the pest should be mooted. Mr Hogg denies that rabbits are on the increase. Well, l must bring some Wairarapa evidence to bear on this point, just to show ’him that he has not been keeping pace with what is passing around him. On December 3rd, 1901, the Press Association agent at Masterton sent the following throughout the colony:—“It is stated on good authority that rabbits are on the increase in many parts of the district, and that efforts to cope with the pest will entail a considerably greater amount of labour and. cost than during recent years. The phenomenally dry season has favoured the growth of young rabbits to an unprecedented extent.” Here is an independent witness to corroborate my statements, and yet Mr Hogg says my “assertions are incapable of tho slightest proof.” Further, a few weeks, back the Wairarapa correspondent of the "Otago Witness” wrote:—"An old settler, of 20 years’ residence, stated during a conversation the other day that the present season will be the worst as regards the prevalence of bunny that has fallen to tli® lot of the farmer during the last 12 or 15 years. Rabbits in large numbers are now seen in localities where they have been practically extinct for two or three years past, consequently, as will be readily perceived by the foregoing facts, the work of those interested in endeavouring to exterminate the pest this season will entail a heavier expenditure than for some years past. Verily, it can truly be said that the lot of the farmer is not a happy one. It i 3 reported that tho pest is not on the increase in South Wairarapa, but it is rather on the contrary.”

A correspondent of tlie_ “New Zealand Mail,” in comparing the condition of Hawke’s Bay and Wairarapa, in December, wrote:—“l am certain that if the Government and its Babbit Inspector had the control of rabbits in the beautiful and niagnifieent grazing province of Hawke’s Bay, the whole province would have been another rabbit-eaten Wairarapa long ago.” I want Mr Hogg to note the words “rabbit-eaten.” The idea of allowing the rabbits to sufficiently accumulate in the Wairarapa so that an export trade might be opened up is not a new one. Three years ago when Messrs J. N. Williams and T. Crosse (chairman of the Hawke’s Bay ltabbit Board) visited Wairarapa, they reported on a certain locality in that province in these terms:—“Even here there are one or two settlers who think rabbit-canning might pay, and have been the means of preventing the country being cleared as soon as it otherwise would.” And now we have the Wairarapa correspondent of the “Otago Witness,’’ writing on January 15tli last, stating:—“lt has been suggested that, if the quantity warranted, it would be very desirable to commence exporting rabbits, ag is done in the South Island, where it has, I understand, resulted in a very remunerative industry being established.” All this, of course, must be information to Mr Hogg. I venture to say that the sheep farmers of the Wairarapa would very much prefer stringent measures being enforced for the eradication of the pest than to see their lands overrun in order to enable an industry of questionable profit (questionable when compared with the ravages of rabbits over fertile country) to be started. If Mr Hogg should' remain still unconvinced regarding the increase of rabbits in his district, I can furnish him with a little more information of an interesting nature.