OCR Text |
Show Noxious Weed Inspector Demands Law Enforcement i Inactivity of some of the farmers j throughout the county is going to caus-e some grief and incidentally the heads of the agricultural department of the state are going ahead and destroy de-stroy the noxious weeds and the land owner will have to dig down in his pocket to pay the bill. Fair warning is now being sounded by Clinton Kjar, district agricultural inspector, who! has been making' a close inspection of the weed condition and of the places where the cooperation is lacking. Mr. Kjar has compiled an article addressed ad-dressed 'to the property owners, as follows: "All property owners within the ! various cities and towns and within I the county are hereby notified that j I immediate action must be taken in jthe eradication of noxious weeds, especially es-pecially whitetop, Canada thistle and morning glory, wherever they exist. where it is thoroughly done. Sail should be used on ditch banks and along fence lines. The amount of j salt required is one pound and a half-per half-per square foot, then care should be taken to get it evenly distributed over infested area and area to be j covered should be a little' greater j than the amount infested,, then salt i should be sprinkled with water so as j to obtain best results. Cutting weeds j should be done to obtain best results j where salt is used." For the benefit of those who are not familiar with the state statutes, j relative to destruction of weeds that cause injury, the following opinion has been handed down by Harvey H. I Cluf f, attorney general for the state: I In your yetter of the 9th instant in-stant you call attention to the j procedure outlined by the provi- : sions of Chapter 66, Session ine scattering oi straw over iniesieu areas should be done and then burn, 1 so that the weeds are not allowed to ! seed. Cultivation and salting meth-I meth-I ods will be facilitated, if weeds are burned off and this will destroy J weeds and danger of seeding, as in J some cases the whitetop is ncearly mature. Where veultivation is employed em-ployed it is advisable to carry out a program of a frequent shallow cultivation, culti-vation, and this should be car vied oul as often as every week or ten days throughout the growing season. Salt-, Salt-, ing the infested areas is being carried out in a great many localities and is Very successful as well as permanent Laws ot Utah, 192d, as amended j by Chapter 47, Session Laws of i Utah, 1927, for the eradication i of noxious weeds under the di- j rection of the state board of agriculture. ag-riculture. Section 2 of said Chapter 66 j empowers the state board of ag-j ag-j riculture to designate. ; andj de-j de-j clare by regulation the injurious j and noxious weeds of the state, and the same section further provides that canal, ditch and water companies and every per-j per-j son, firm or corporation owning, (Continued on last page.) statement so filed to the board of county commissioners within a certain specified time. If the hearing is had upon any objection objec-tion made, or if no objections are made within the time provided for in the statute, the county treasurer is required to enter the amount of such statement upon the tax roll in a column prepared for that purpose. You ask whether or not these provisions can be enforced with respect to canal companies, in view of the fact that as a rule such canal companies do not have tayable property, that is, such canal companies do not appear upon the tax rolls as the owner of property subject to tax. In reply I wish to say that it is my opinion that it becomes the duty of the county treasurer to j place upon the tax rolls of the county the property of canal companies com-panies for the purpose of listing this particular expense of tax I that may have been incurred under un-der the provisions of the sections hereinbefore referred to, and that the mere fact that the property prop-erty of such canal companies is exempt from the payment of a property tax docs not relieve such companies from the payment pay-ment of the expenses incurred in removing noxious weeds from property owned by them. . ...... t t ... ... ... J. J. A J. .t. XAAAAA as noxious and injurious to vegetation vege-tation before such weeds shall piopagate or spread, whenever required to do so by the state board of agriculture or the agricultural agri-cultural inspector or deputy. Section 4 of said Chapter CG I provides the form of notice to be I given the said owners of land j with respect to the eradication I of noxious weeds that may be giowing upon the land of said owners. Section 5 of the same chapter j provides that if any owner or occupant oc-cupant of such lands described in the notice served by the inspector in-spector or deputy shall fail to cut, destroy or eradicate the weeds on the land described, in accordance with the requirements of said notice, it shall be the duty of said inspector or deputy, at the expense of the county in which notice haas been served, to employ the necessary assistants assist-ants and to cause such weeds to be removed or destroyed, and to I make in triplicate an itemized statement of all expenses incurred incur-red in the removal and destruction destruc-tion of the weeds in question. Section 6 then provides that upon receipt of the itemized statement of the cost of removing remov-ing the weeds it becomes the duty of the county treasurer to mail a copy thereof to the owner of the land from which the weeds were removed, together with a statement that objections may be made to the whole or part of the NOXIOUS WEED INSPECTOR DEMANDS LAW ENFORCEMENT 1 (Continued from page one.) I controlling or occupying lands in this state shall cut or destroy all ' weeds declared and designated I |