HURUNUI RABBIT QUESTION.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18216, 29 October 1924, Page 11

HURUNUI RABBIT QUESTION.

TO TEE EDITOE OF "THE THESS." Sir, —I was interested to ' read in •Saturday's issue of your paper what appears to be an honest attempt of your correspondent to givo ratepayers a true conception. of tho Rabbit Board's position, and their reasons for bringing forward » fencing scheme. I sec, in looking down the list of candidates nominated for a seat'on tho Board, that tho names of two men who have served on the Hurumii Rabbit Board :;re missing. I refer to Messrs Robinson and Little, who have served faithfully on that Board, and mado genuine efforts to safeguard tho interests of the ratepayers. 1 can quite understand why "they refuse to give further time to these matters when criticism of an unfair nature is all tho thanks they receive. I am afraid that unless ratepayers will sift such matters foitheiuselves and not 'rely on the statements of irresponsible men such as go to the various mot-tings in the district and make statements and propose resolutions that they arc unable to substantiate, it will bo difficult to get men of the right stamp to sit on local bodies.

The Board's action should have received the hearty support of all ratepayers, not only in this district, but in many other parts of the Dominion. .Rabbits are increasing, and a scheme that fenoes them into workable areas, must appeal to every thinking person, especially when it can be carried out ou the present rate. No one in opposition to the Board's scheme has yet formulated a plan for the extermination of the rabbit. Are the preseut methods to continue?

It appears to me that the Board acted wisely in meeting the ratepayers of tho 'South-Eastern corner as they did. 1 don't know that the ratepayers acted wisely in accepting their offer. If it had allowed them to cut themselves off, a large amount of revenue would have been lost and an additional amount of expenditure incurred to meet half the cost of the dividing fence. Many persons who are enjoying tho benefit of the existing fences, aro opposed to moro fences beeauso they have been led to believe that, they will bavo to pay an additional rate, which is not correct. But I' would ask my fellow-ratepayers to "'play tho game."' Wc in tbo southeastern corner of the district have helped to erect and maintain a fence for Why should we continue to do so if we can have 110 help in our corner? The south-eastern ratepayers had no knowledge, when tTiey started out for severance, that the Board \rould bo responsible for the half cost of erection of tho new fence. We simply asked to be allowed "to cease paying rates to the present Board, fence ourselves in. destroy the rabbits in our own area, and in our own way.

Why all this bitter feeling for people who are trying to hrlp themselves in 3 legitimate way to keen their properties clear of rabbits:-- Surely this is a laudable action, worthv of assistance instead of abuser —Yours, etc.. D. J. DOAK, .. Christchnrch, October 2Stb.