THE SMALL BIRDS QUESTION.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1366, 16 July 1885, Page 2

THE SMALL BIRDS QUESTION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — I notice the Rabbit Nuisance Act Continuance Bill hag been read a third time and passed, and cannot but think it unjust that the destruction of rabbits should receive more consideration than the destruction of small birds. It is true the present Act provides for the Local Bodies to expend moneys for collection of eggs and supplying poisoned grain, but it should have gone lurther and made it compulsory for all infected districts to poison simultaneously. It appears to me the whole affair could be worked well and simply by the local body supplying the poisoned grain—the tanner to go and get it in quantities according to his acreage, and he should be com pelled tolay it atesrtain distances, according to the width and breadth of his holding. And why should the Government not find Inspectors (if inspection is necessary) to see the Act carried into effect, as well as to find them to see the Rabbit Act is complied with. IF not, it is certainly transparent that the farmer is receiving less consideration at Wellington than the runholder. Perhaps some nill say, Why poison at one date ? I answer, because it is well known that birds tnigiate as soon as poison is laid and go where it is not being used. In conclusion, Sir, I think it would be wise to ask our Member to try and get the Small Birds Act amended so as to make it more useful to the farming community,—l am, etc., F. JR. Fla than. Woodbury, July 13, 1885.