May 9, 1950. 
THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN NATURALIST 
Page Nine 
Island in Hd. of Menzies). Incidentally, 
probably to make doubly sure of it, the list 
mentions Sulphur-crested Cockatoo, Warbling 
Grass Parrot, Zebra Finch, Native Hen (black- 
tailed), and Musk Lorikeet a second time. 
Practically all species of introduced birds 
are unprotected. 
It will be noted that the Greenshank and 
the Snipe, usually referred to as the Jack 
Snipe, are on the Third Schedule and a close 
season from March 1 to September 30 has 
been declared. This is somewhat surprising 
when it is known that both birds migrate 
from the Northern Hemisphere — to escape the 
severe winter there — to Australia. They 
arrive here in September, remain with us 
until the approach of wintry conditions in 
April-May, when they start off on their long 
northern flight. They do not breed in Aus- 
tralia, preferring the tundral regions of 
Siberia and in Japan respectively. 
It is hoped that our efforts to protect the 
Greenshank and Snipe during the scheduled 
period will not lead to international com- 
plications. 
The Jack Snipe is considered a good table 
bird; its rather erratic zig-zag flight makes it 
difficult to shoot and consequently it is much 
sought after by real sportsmen. Rather than 
continue the farce of giving it legal protection 
between March — September, it is suggested 
that the Snipe sou Id be placed on the Fourth 
Schedule — unprotected birds — but a “bag 
limit” should be fixed for a day’s shooting. 
The Greenshank is not generally considered 
much of a table bird, and true sportsmen do 
not hunt for it. Almost all of the migratory 
wading birds, except the Greenshank, are fully 
protected, and there seems to be no good 
reason why this very attractive and pleasant- 
voiced visitor should not be protected during 
its stay with us. 
The schedules under the Act may be altered 
by proclamation. Severe penalties can be 
imposed on those found guilty of an infringe- 
ment of the Act. There is provision for the 
issue of game licences for any period up 
to 12 months; for fixing the number of 
birds to be taken; the sale of animals or 
birds; skins and eggs of unprotected fauna 
under licence; preventing the taking an any 
special permit. Pets may be purchased 
without a permit from a licensed dealer. 
Under Section 19 of the Act any person 
can be prosecuted for “entering upon pri- 
vately held land for the purpose of taking 
any animal, bird or skin and eggs of same 
without the permission of the owner or occu- 
pier of the land. The onus of providing the 
permission of the owner or occupier shall lie 
upon the defendant. Proof that any person 
entering the land having in his possession 
any dog, gun, net, trap or other instrument 
capable of being used for the purpose of 
taking any animal or bird shall be prima 
facie evidence that such person entered 
upon or was upon such land for the purpose 
of taking some animal or bird.” 
The powers under the Act are wide and 
generally all phases of animal and bird 
destruction and interference are well covered. 
The legislation provides for satisfactory 
protection and preservation of our native 
animals and birds and for the safeguarding 
of land owners who may under certain con- 
ditions suffer loss and damage through native 
animals and birds. In short, there appears 
to be little room for any improvement in the 
Act as it now reads. As the animals and 
birds on the unprotected list are known to 
be destructive when they, as they do at inter- 
vals, become numerous, there is little likeli- 
hood of them being exterminated and no 
protection is warranted at present. 
The Crown cannot truthfully be blamed if 
insufficient sanctuaries and reserves have been 
provided for the welfare of our fauna and 
flora. It cannot be denied that it has pro- 
vided the machinery for the purpose, and 
if it is not used as fully as seems desirable 
it is the fault of nature lovers not being able 
to put up acceptable proposals or to rouse 
public demand for the propositions put for- 
ward. When only a few people appear 
interested, it is not surprising that the Crown 
is not impressed with a proposal for further 
sanctuaries or for further protective action 
regarding our wild life. To be successful 
all nature lovers must stir up public interest, 
as indeed was essential before Flinders Chase 
was gazetted. 
It may be of interest to show the repre- 
sentation at a deputation which brought 
Flinders Chase into being. Those present 
represented, to quote a report in “The 
Register of August 8, 1906, “The Univer- 
sities of Adelaide, Sydney and Melbourne, 
the Royal Societies of S.A., Victoria and 
Tasmania, the Microscopical Society, Field 
Naturalists, Fauna and Flora Protection Com- 
