GUN LICENSES AND GAME.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1379, 17 July 1878, Page 2

GUN LICENSES AND GAME.

To the Editor of the Globe.

Sib, —A few days ago I observed that the Acclimatisation Society made .a resolution to apply to the Government for authority to issue gun licenses instead of game licenses — that is, us I understand it, that no person would be permitted to carry a gun without a .license. In the Britain of the North every man, woman, or child is allowed to carry a gun to shoot any wild animals and birds not game. Will the Britons of the South submit to pay a license tu carry a gun ? I say emphatically no. In the North I perceive that pebple are beginning to kick against the doings of the pseudo-acclimatisers. For many years philanthropists have been writing against the evils of game laws, and now, forsooth, these gentlemen (many of them public servants) are trying to introduce game laws of the worst kind into New Zealand. When Mr Thomas Henderson introduced pheasants into the North Island, years ago, the country was very little settled or cultivated, but just at the time when the settlers said “ These birds are becoming troublesome and too numerous, we must stop their progress,” up sprung Acclimatisation Societies, who actually persuaded the Government to protect birds that were destroying the settler’s crops. I myself, in the North, suffered from pheasants. I planted about an acre of maize; just as the green shoots appeared above ground a few pheasants appeared in the neighborhood. What was the result ? Why, with the first Streak of dawn, these birds were scratching up my maize, and, instead of a fair crop, it was so thinned out that I had not half a crop. Well, we will say that the loss was, at the lowest calculation, live pounds. And so a paternal Government, in a Republic, makes a law for what not to protect the poor settlers’ crops, but to afford amusement and sport, at the settlers’ expense, to a few individuals! Does any man like to have common fowls in his garden ? What is the difference between barn-door fowls and pheasants ? They are nearly related ; they are all scratcbers (Rasores). The common fowl may be kept within bounds, but the pheasants are scratching before it is fairly daylight. A settler who goes to bed tired at night can hardly be expected to become a “Peep-o’-day Boy” to scare away pheasants. Most people in the North would have what are called Cape gooseberries (a kind of Solatium) growing on their places, which made excellent jam, but as soon as the pheasants arrived the gooseberries disappeard as fast as they ripened, and the only fruit the backwoodsman could get a taste of was devoured by these protected birds. Another piece of wisdom was displayed by the acclimatisers—they denounced the morepork (New Zealand owl), which, they said, destroyed young birds. I have seen five rats destroyed by the moroporks in one evening while I was sitting outside the door, and I think we may venture to say, at a low calculation, that these farmers’ friends destroy at least five rats every night on a square mile, on an average. In New Zealand there are about 80,000 square miles, so that probably 400,000 rats are nightly destroyed by owls. A few years ago Governor Bowen, in connection with Maori matters, issued a proclamation in Auckland that all guns should bo registered. The proclamation was treated with such contempt that in three days’ time it was withdrawn. Yours, &c., CLODHOPPER.