Untitled

Forest and Bird, Issue 27, 1 July 1932, Page 1

r preseiwaiion of desirable wild life in New Zealand rests / largely on the method of control, a life disjointed affair. rests largely on the method of control, a truly disjointed affair. The Animals Protection and Came Act, 1921-22, deals almost wholly with the matter from the hunter's point of view. The interests of the farmer, the forester, the nature-lover, etc., etc., are almost entirely neglected, as is shown on analysis of this Act. A legal opinion, however, advises this Society that this particular Act is merely supplemental to such Acts as the Forestry Act, Scenery Preservation Act, etc., etc. The obvious result of the medley is summed up in a Canadian paper by that noted and world-famous artist and naturalist, Major Allen Brooks. He says: “ After spending some time in New Zealand, I never saw a game notice or game Warden throughout my stay. In fact, it was difficult to discover what the game laws really Were, if any." There are officers in the Lands Department looking after Scenic Reserves; officers in the Tourist Department looking after wild life sanctuaries; officers in the Forest Service Department looking after forestry; officers of the Agricultural Department looking after rabbits, stoats, and weasels, etc.; and officers of other Departments similarly employed, to say nothing of officers employed by other bodies outside Government Departments—all supposed to be looking after wild life, including forests and all they contain; yet with all this energy, or rather this dissipation of energy, because of the divided controlwhat is being done? A man is fined £5 for shooting nine tuis and four pigeons. The German owl and other menaces increase and spread unmolested, and wild life is hardly protected at all. Verily there is a great necessity for economy and efficiency in forest and wild life matters, to the advantage of all, but where is the statesman who will realise where the remedy lies and apply it? Opportunity awaits.