OORRESPONDENCE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 4, Issue 1080, 22 May 1882, Page 2

OORRESPONDENCE.

DRIVING INFECTED SHEEP,

To the Editor,

- Sir,—On the 14th of last month Mr Sheep Inspector Drummond when at Tenui discovered that a fl»ck of sheep which were passing through the Castle PuiKt District from the Provincial District of Napier, were infected with lice. This occurrence calls for some and as it may effect sheep owners in this naiuhbouvdood, and poiuts to laxity, or incapacity on the part of some official, or officials appointed to work the sheep Act, I beg through the medium of your columns to draw attention to it, with the hope that it will lead to a strict enquiry as to how, and from where the person in in charge of those sheep obtained a permit to.remove them from Napier to Whareama. >'

The Sheep Act 1878 makes'iio distintion between sheep infected with lice, and those infected with scab, in proof of this I may refer to Inspector Sutton's public notifications dated Nov. 16th and 20th 1881, the..former reminding sheep owners that they were liable under the Act with regard to lice infected sheep, and the latter intimating that Mr Thompson's sheep at TeOre Ore were so infected. Yet in face of this we find infected sheep, allowed to travel from District to-District, Scab infected sheep are not allowed to travel from here to Napier and" why in •the name of all that is reasonable should lice infected sheep be permitted to traf el from there to here. The Napier settlers wisely-erected a fence to protect themselves from scab in the Castle Point District, and I feel sure if a flock, or one scabby sheep entered that district with anlnspector's permit that there would be, and justly, such a stir made that the offending official would be sacrificed to appeaf-o their indignation 1 Why should iwo in this neighbourhood put up with an invasion of infected sheep from there 1 Wo havo suffered, and aro suffering frdm ono plague, scab, and do not want another in the form of lice. Sheepowners throughout the Colony are rated for the purpose of providing funds to administer the Sheep Act, the rate is usually paid cheerfully; it being looked upon aB an insurance which doubtless it is, so long as efficient safeguard* are provided to preventdes'ease. When howeverinfectedsheep are allowed to travol the country without jet or hindrance, it is patent that fluck- ', owners do not recieve value in return for the rates they pay. One thing settlers both here and in Napier should insist on, ,and that is, that proper applicances for the inspection should be. provided atWaimata. Perhaps the ndn-existance of these may, in a measure account for the sheep before mentioned having crossed the boundary without infection being detected. The Governmentcanhave ho reasonable excuse for not erecting proper yards auddip3 at all crossing places for sheep between the various distriols in the colony, for there are ample funds'from the Sheep Bate to do so.

BBreoflntipread.of.Bc#§|thß.feit ■ ; Coast and other circuimtan.ee> fill known ,--; to t t there , area number of inconipetent Inspectors • employed by tb» Goveiment. Tricomtnon with many others 1 think it very desirable that an inquiry should be instituted respecting the working of the Sheep Act, and Sheep Department., If the only result was the dismissal of unpractical officials,' a great stride would be made towards stamping out scab in the colony The fact of infected sheep having travelled through a distriot very naturally leads one to afik have Inspectors' powerto Btopsuoh sheep or destroy them. The Act appoars to give none, and I am strongly of opinion that. It should, True it imposes a fine, but circumstances may arise when it would suit a sheepfarmer to drive his infected stock to a slaughtering place or market and pay the fine. ■ ' m Our representatives in Parliament would do a good work if they were instrumental in improving the Sheep Act in this and other ways.' lam,&o/, , , Thomas Maokay. Whareama May 20th.