Rabbit Trapping and Poisoning

Southland Times, Issue 14800, 17 November 1900, Page 4

Rabbit Trapping and Poisoning

♦ . ■ TO THK EDITOR. iSik, — In giving judgment in the recent Wyndham rabbit case the S.M. is, in your issue of the 27th ult., reported to have said : " The mere fining of the owner will not effect the destruction of the rabbits if the owner is not urged thereto by the infliction of the penalty.-' This implies a substantial difference in the meaning of the two words "tine" and "penalty." The latter is represented as effecting the destruction of rabbits, the former as not having that power. Seeing both words mean precisely the same thing, how is the great difference accounted for ? If we substitute the words "giving notice" for "fining" in the passage, that would make sense ; as it stands, it is hardly so. Further, if this section 1 1 of the Rabbit Act gives the Inspector power to set poisoners on to destroy the rabbits; while the infliction of the penalty is being awaited, and so stay the increase of theSst, especially in the breeding season, as! r McCarthy cays, and thus "prevent! disastrous consequences to the individual himself and his neighbours" ; if section 11, I say, does unquestionably give this power to the Inspector at that timer— before; the infliction of the penalty— How can; it be right to call it Legislative non-i ' sense because it does not give thesame power after, and make that the reason -for setting aside the defence ? It seems to me there is a time for the destruction of rabbits by the Inspector, pursuant to section 11, and that time, according to the Magistrate's own showing, is before the: infliction of the tine. Because the Inspector; docs not observe this time, but lets it go by,, not the section but the Inspector should be; blamed, and subsequent diligence on his part, even though comparable to perpetual: motion, will not avail. But suppose this is: wrong, and the Magistrate's ruling is right, that the law, as it stands, left him no after' native but to sustain the Inspector's action, then every level-headed man in the community, who knows the circumstances of the ease,: 'must condemn the Inspector, who has the discretionary power, ' for doing as he has done in this case. At the instance of the Inspector, a man is fined for disobeying his (the Inspector's) order to destroy the rabbits, and is urged to obedience by the infliction of the penalty (in accordance with the natural operation of the law as laid down by the Magistrate in his judgment). But this was not enough for the Inspector, who appears -to have been unwilling to give the man a reasonable opportunity of showing hi* obedience by making a good job of killing his rabbits. The Inspector prevented the man from doing this by setting poisoners on. This prevented the land being cleared by trapping, as it could and should have been. Qno result of the rabbit being continually hunted is that it, in com* monwith other hunted animals, becomes exceedingly wary. 8o much so that we cannot afford to neglect any possible effective means in our power, and trapping is one of the only two such means we have. The beneficial effects of pollard-poison can often be prolonged by afterwards plying the rabbits with poisoned oats— by way of a change. Still, the squealling of the dying, the warning which the half-poisoned give, confirmed by the dead lying about, ere long give the survivors to know there is danger abroad, with the result that they will not touch either for sometime. After working in this way during the summer, while the rabbit is unfit to freeze, the trapping, which is an altogether different, and, to the rabbit, a new mode, can be set on to carry on the war. And by the time the rabbits get to know the traps— as they will— it is also time to change back to the poison. In this way rabbits that become too knowing to be caught with poison will be taken in the trap, and; "Biany of them that escape the traps — minus a paw, perhaps — wiU be slain by the poison. The result of this is that the bulk of the rabbits now taken by either method are young and devoid of experience, and, on that account, more easily captured. To start poisoning again, as the Inspector did in this case, at the end of the poisoning and beginning of the trapping season, would debar the land from receiving to the full the benefit of both methods in one year. But the poor Work resulting from this disregard of proper method is a small matter. The destruction of the rabbit freezing industry, and the trapping which is its exclusive source of supply, must inevitably follow, and with it, of course, one of the only two effectual means of coping with the pest. The- only excuse that can possibly be urged for persisting in this suicidal practice is that of the two methods poisoning is the most expeditious and effectual, that is, in the opinion of the Inspector ; which, of course, implies that he may be mistaken! But suppose he is right, in View of the circumstances affecting this matter, for the Inspector to have regard only to what is expeditious and effectual, wonld be to perpetrate greater folly than the man •who set fire to some cornstaeks, not to check ; the plague, but simply to destroy the rats that infested them. That was " expeditious and effectual " too. . As W* whether it was. wise Iwi 11 leave your readers to judge. The question, therefore, as to 'which of the two rititthodfi is the better is not very material. It has been shown there is plenty of time, and much need, for both methods, and what is wanted is to assign to each a definite time to work, Still, I believe lam voicing the v.erdict of a large number of in-< telligent farmers when I say that trapping • is the most effectual, and, if not in every case, to the farmer it is the most expedi- i tious also, for it always costs him some time to lay flic poison, but seldom any to set thetraps. These men live continually on the land and can base their 1 judgment on results manifested to their eyesight The rabbits are grown and fattened at his cost, and therefore he has no interest for onebr the other except as a^ueanato keep them down, and if there are any who are In a position favourable to the exercise of correct and impartial judgment it is them. What the trapping has done during the past five years is demonstrated by the number exported from Southland alone, which nunVbec we know to have been 11,536,504. In 1899, when rabbits fetched as high as , eightpeiice per, pair, the number exported was 1i*2,957 crates. Counting 28 to the crate, that would bo 3,442,796 and say at sixpence per pair for trapping, would give £43,034 19s. According to the report which appeared in the paper, Inspector Turner stated that, for the hist five years rabbits -were being reduced — the twelve million rabbits (that have beeaexported during tiiese same nfefyears accounts for that reduction. Vet in the face of this well-known fact, the Inspector JtaA.-the boldness to -tell the court that he was more strongly than ever against the trapping. The destruction of the rabbits' natural enemies — whioh the In* spector urged against the trapping modeis, all thuigß considered, I should say a matter for rejoicing rather than lamentation. In any case the destruction of the ferrets must be ascribed to a disease , that is amongst them, as well as to the traps. J. C. Robinson, rabbit agent, in ' the same case, expressed tte epinion that trapping scattered the rabbits. During the last five years it has scattered clo.se on twelve million rabbits clean out of the country. Unless lam much mistaken these rabbit agents are apprehensive of this sort of scattering doing away with the need of some of them. In other words, they realise that if they do not kill the trapping the trapping will kill them. This view, completely explains why they bo belittle the trapping and belaud the poison, and their persistence in layingthe same during the trapping season. Trapping is an entire mistake— so they said in court— and it would lie a good thing for the country if it were knocked on the head. The farmers will hardly believe that ; neither will the trappers, -who in one year got out of it over £43,000. They believe, and for the best of reasons too, that it is an entire mistake to run the country more in the interest of rabbit agents than in their own, and that it is- not, the trapping but the rabbit agents .that should (to use his own expression) be on the head, not literally of course, tut' in thejr official capacity.— l am, &c, - IViUfoii'sC^sfiig, 12tbNov,