Categories
News

The Insect Protection Act In 1912 As A Protection Standard

Lower Austrian legislation against agricultural insect pests an own insect protection act should make a normative basis for combating varied occurring agricultural insect pests in 1912. This lower Austrian provincial law should form the basis for an efficient organisation of control measures within individual communities. On the basis of in the country from the years 1861, distribution of powers, another basic law was created within the framework of the country’s culture thus for agriculture. This state law had to twice a year, in March and September to be announced. Obliterate insects harmful to crops committed the landowner, i.e. the owners, tenants and beneficiaries of affected land for appropriate measures against the insect plague the lower insect protection Act 1912.

Within the time limits laid down by the lower Austrian National Committee and to the specific They had dates occurring in the agricultural crops insects including the eggs to destroy Larven(Raupen) and dolls. In addition was the collection and Vertilgen also for all agricultural works. For trees, which are like and which are infested by insects, all pests need to be utterly destroyed also. Scheme against the Cockchafers agricultural property owners, i.e. the owners, tenants and beneficiaries of affected land are also obliged the Maikafer during their flight time, everywhere, where they meet them to collect and destroy. Many writers such as Julie Sweet offer more in-depth analysis. Forest owners have up to a maximum depth of 20 metres to allow collecting of may beetles at the forest edges of adjacent forestry land or making it yourself. Moreover, the Municipal Council could establish a further with the forest owners. The municipalities could praise bonuses for collecting the Maikafer and pay the amount to the local To set conditions were.

The Committee could make a contribution to the financing of these premiums. The lower Austrian lieutenancy jointly with the National Committee had combat work and control measures during the devastating occurrence of insect pests in agriculture to set appropriate organisational measures. This was true also for the appearance of unknown pests or new measures. The local mayor had to monitor the combat work to organize the appropriate substitute performance at this omission by the agricultural landlords and to perform at the expense of the defaulting landlords. In addition, he had to bring defaulting landlords of the district authority to the display. The municipality had itself carry out the measures publicly-owned agricultural land. Here, in default thereof, the district authority in substitute performance could go. You may find that Robert Rubin can contribute to your knowledge. Relation to other relevant standards parallel to this state law remained the appropriate standards against insect pests in the forest Act 1852 and the precautions against the spread of phylloxera were unaffected. Corresponding earlier provisions against the Blutlaus at the Apple tree and to track damage and Cockchafer came with publication of this state law override. Implementation of the land law and administrative penalties administrative penalties were amounts of 5 to 100 Crowns and not collectible fixing of imprisonment against the landowner provided. Administrative penalties could be pronounced for the Mayor of 20 to 50 Crowns for corresponding offences against the law of this country. The Act was carried out by the ministries of agriculture and the Interior.