Noxious Weeds.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVII, Issue 7795, 11 April 1905, Page 2

Noxious Weeds.

-' ' 0 COMMENTS BY THE INSPECTOR At Monday's mooting of the Borough Council the following letter was read from Mr J. Budge, tho ] inspector, Stratford :—"in reply toi , yours of March 38, re noxious weeds on Ngaire reserves, I hud i just made an inspection of Peter's farm a couple of days before receiving your communication and pointed out to Peters that tho oxeye daisy required attention. 1 would point out for the Council's information that I consider that Peters has done a very fair amount of work us regards the keeping in subjection the ox-eye duisy, he having cultivated a piece of land that two years ago was simply covered with the above weed, and I have given him cn»rfit for that. Ox-eye daisy is a troublesome weed on the bush land where dead timber is present, as the only means of checking its growth is by cutting, and this is an everlasting business. However, with the exception of a small area of land 1 consider Peters has ■done fair work, and if I did not think so 1 would have instituted proceedings before this. With regard to Boxner's lease, I am informed by the report of Crs. Wood and ColUs that this man's section is in a very bad state with docks, aJso ox-eye daisy. So far as the first named weed is concerned I have to say that it has not been declared a noxious weed in Stratford County, and in consequence is beyond my jurisdiction. The latter has been cut down and is being attended to, aU so tho ragwort. Your Council suggests a notice, should be sent to him to the effect that after tt certain time, ta be decided by the Council, re eradication of weeds, ett;. I would point out that I consider myself quite competent to state what time should be allowed to eradicate the weeds, and I take this us absolute presumption on the part of the Council. Further comment is unnecessary. As regards tho "docks" and "buttercups" these are i not declared noxious weeds in my , district, and I cannot interfere. I consider it my duty to see that no- ; xious weeds are kept w'ithjn suppression in my district, and I have always done my best in this respect. I know thnt the Council's property is badly infested with oxeye daisy in patches, but where cul- ' Uvation is impossible there is great difficulty'in keeping the weeds down. I have watched the properties carefully this year, and I think I can safely say, without fear of contru- ! di'qtion, that no weeds have been allowed to seed. I shall always be | pleased, lo have any report the Council may have from time to timo by theii* Councillors., but I think that they ought to allow a littlfi credit, as there is a great difference in tho state of reserve!* now •■ and three years ago. The noxious • weeds declared by the Stratford 1 County Council are —Grant bur- ; dock, Bathurst burr, broom, gorse, hakoa 1 , ragwort, and ox-eye daisy."' Mr J. l\ Bonner wrote thnt he • was sorry to see in tho ■newspapcrs a report of a discussion with regird to noxious weeds growing on ■ the lands leased to him as well as on other, lands in the vicinity. He • was a sufferer by this pest of noxi- • ous weeds, which was now troubling the farmers so much. It reduced the feed (or, their cattle and • sheep and put them to very c roat : "Pease. % had been and wab now I ha "? to favour to get | id of the noxious weeds which caused Mm so much loss, and in particular preventing any seeding. The Council could rest assured that n« pains would be wanting on his part - to cope with the evil and free the farm from the pest. The Mayor warmly referred to the inspector's letter as downright insulting and uncalled for., it was aDDo^T^ 1 b ° CaUSe the C °™<=H appointed their own committee to go out and inspect the Council's property and brought up an adverw report, that they should get sucH letter. Ho took it that when a paid .servant of the Government attempted to insult the Council they thould take some action, lie moved that a . copy of the letter' be brought under r the notice of tho Minister for Agriculture. fc Cr. Ahier: Are wo satisfied that the nwmberji of tho Council who f went to inspect the properties arc experts ,„ this matter ? lam rcal- , ly surprised at Mr Budge writing a , letter of that kind, as he is generally very courteous. It seems to me that ho must have some grievance I 1 don t think our Councillors knew . anything at all about the matter. i (Laughtpr.) »h Cr ' 1M? : The inspector admits the weeds are there. He says there ;, is no seeding, but I know that on one property there wore thousands in bloom. It may bo a fact that the comparison with former years is favourable ; all the committee had to do was to report on the condition of the properties as they found them. The inspector apparently feels somo grievance that an outsMo authority had anything to say about it a(, all. The .Mayor said there was no doubt tho weeds were there, oven though there might be a Httle improvement on past years. It was certainly the Countil's duty, as trustees (or the ratepayers, to see their 'valuable estate was kept in order, as the tenants or no one else would do so. jVith all due doteroncc to Mr Budge, thoy would find tho place over-run unless they kept the tenants up, to tho mark".

The motion was curried. With reference to the tenant's letter, the Mayor remarked that he thought the writer should be complimented.