Captain Sanderson, of the Forest and Bird Protection Society, wrote asking the Society's co-operation in opposing the proposal of the Wellington Acclimatization Society to obtain permission from the Minister of Internal Affairs to liberate opossums in forest areas where they had not yet penetrated. This matter was also referred to the Wild Life Control Committee. Owing to geographical difficulties it was found impossible for this Committee to meet and the views of its members were obtained by correspondence. Mr. Aston, convener of the Committee, reported to the Standing Committee that the members of the Committee were strongly opposed to the liberation of opossums and it was decided to write to the Government protesting against the proposal of the Acclimatization Society. This was done, and the Minister replied that the views of the Society would receive careful consideration. In regard to the larger question of a Biological Survey in New Zealand, Mr. Aston forwarded to the Standing Committee a memorandum drawn up by Mr. Falla and approved by Mr. Archey and Mr. Stead as follows:— Suggestions for Organisation of Biological Survey in New Zealand. While approving of and supporting the policy of the Government in legislating for the preservation of native flora and fauna and the control of imported plants and animals, this Committee believes that a much fuller scientific inquiry into the complexities and separate aspects of the problem is urgently needed to guide both legislative and administrative action. In the past it has been found desirable to create and maintain research institutions, either wholly or partially under Government control, in connection with such major industries as agriculture, animal husbandry, forestry and sea fisheries. Matters relating to the rest of the indigenous and introduced plant and animal life have been, in effect, regarded as of recreational and secondary economic importance, and their welfare controlled by Acclimatization Societies and the various Boards connected with national reserves and parks. Although the bodies function under Government supervision there is little provision made for the scientific collection and examination of essential data upon which future legislation and administrative action should be based. Examples could be quoted if necessary, but it is felt that the inadequacy of our present knowledge and control of wild life problems will be admitted by all. It is also clear from the experience of other countries that there are two possible methods by which the necessary research work can be organised. The first is the method adopted in the United States, namely, State organisation of biological research. From the original development of “divisions” within the Department of Agriculture an independent Bureau of Biological Survey was founded in 1904. This now comprises its own Divisions of Administration, Public Relations, Wild Life Research, Land Acquisition, Migratory Wild Fowl, and Game Management. The technical staff alone, in 1938, number 250. On a smaller scale a similar organisation could eventually be provided in New Zealand by extension or subdivision of some existing Department such as Scientific and Industrial Research. The second method, which would not involve the expense of creating a new department, is the co-ordination, direction, and support of existing research workers and institutions. An advance could be made if certain urgent problems were selected and use made of the resources, chiefly personnel, of biological departments of the universities, of museums, of active working sections of the Royal Society of New Zealand, and of horticultural organisations. It seems desirable that one or other of the existing Government departments should adopt, encourage, direct and initiate such investigatory work, but the Committee feels that such details may be outside the scope of its reference at least until the principle is approved. The above report was referred to the Annual Meeting for consideration.