THE BABBIT ACT.

Otago Witness, Issue 2403, 22 March 1900, Page 28

THE BABBIT ACT.

The following temperate remarks by "Ru«ticu's," the writer oi JSefmmg Notes in the Bruce Herald, on the administration of the provibions of- •the above enactment, in which the pros and cono of Poisoning v. Trapping are dispassionately contrasted, will be read with interest by those who are immediately affected : —

The evergreen rabbit question is just now receiving more than its tt&ual amount of attention. Ido not purpose at the present time to uphold the Rabbit Act, which might certainly be profitablly amended, nor to defend the doings of the inspectors, although more might be said in their favour than is generally allowed. The ground of action Feems to have shifted for the time being irom the prosecutions under the Rabbit Act, which some hold are really persecutions, to the relative rights of trapper and poisoner. At first sight it certainly seems hard that landowners should be compelled to poison at the very time when a good thing is beginning to be mado by trapping. But we really have to go farther back to get at the root of the matter. In spite of all that has been said to the contrary, I believe that rabbit trapping means nothing more nor lets than rabbitfarming. When trapping first became general, bold assertions wore made as to the great possibilities of rabbit extermination by that means. So far from these predictions being fulfilled, the rabbits, after several years of successful trapping, seem to be as numerous as, if not more so than, ever. The number of truekloads passing through Milton daily is testimony to that. On the other hand, by the regular and systematic use of poison there is a possibility, if not of exterminating the rabbits, at least of very materially reducing their numbers. Maryborough, where rabbits were so numerous a few years ago, is a case in point. With the exception of two or three properties, rabbits there are now practically a thing of the past, and this state of affairs has been brought about by the systematic use of poisoned pollard and other poisons, and preventing the use of traps. If trapping the rabbits, then, tends to farming the rabbits, and poisoning tends to their extermination, , the question of the rights of the two systems becomes shifted a stage farther back, and the question really is : Ought rabbit-farming to be allowed as being a profitable industry, or ought continued efforts be made to keep the pesl in cheek by means of poisoning? In other words: is the grazing of rabbits or sheep the source of the greater wealth to the individual landowner and the country generally? If the former, then repeal the Rabbdt Act, abolish the departmont, dismiss, all its officials, and let farmers pursue the rabbit farming industry for all it is worth; if the latter, then let the department continue to enforce the work of poisoning as being at present the best known means of keeping the rabbits in check, always providing that it does so in a proper spirit of justice, and with fair play to all.