VISITORS’ RIGHT TO FISH

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22305, 20 January 1938, Page 10

VISITORS’ RIGHT TO FISH

SHARE OF LICENCE FEE

SOUGHT

NORTH ISLAND MONOPOLY

ALLEGED

Means of assuring that acclimatisation societies should receive some revenue from’ visitors who came into their districts to fish, after taking out licences in other districts, were discussed by the council of the North Canterbury Acclimatisation Society at its meeting last evening. It was claimed in discussion that 60 per cent, of the overseas visitors who came to the South Island to fish had taken out licences in the Taupo district, which received all the revenue from them.

The question arose in discussion of a remit from the Southern Lakes Acclimatisation Society to be presented at the conference of South Island societies this morning, “That sportsmen should be able to purchase fishing and game licences for the districts they intended to visit from any Government tourist office in New Zealand.”

Major P. Mackenzie, a delegate from the Lakes society, said that the remit was chiefly designed to meet the needs of overseas visitors. At present tourists arrived in the north, bought licences there, and then came to the South Island, where they did most of their fishing. Because the licences were bought in the north the southern societies received none of the revenue from those licences, although most of the fishing might be done in the south. Mr J. Mackeuzie: I think our visitor is optimistic if he expects any North Island organisation, Governmental .or otherwise, to sell a South Island fishing licence. It was decided to support the remit. Fee for Each District Another remit proposed that sportsmen coming with a licence issued in another district should have to pay a fee of 2s 6d before being entitled to fish. Mr C. J. Drabble suggested that the fee should be 2s 6d a day or 10s for a longer period. Mr A. G. Williams, a delegate from the Otago Acclimatisation Society, considered that the fee should be Is a day, with a maximum of 10s. It was decided to support the remit in the form suggested by Mr Drabble.

The question of the domicile of licence-holders was also brought up by Mr C. H. Lawrence, who proposed that the North Canterbury Society should put forward a remit providing that where a licence was Issued by one society to an angler domiciled in another district, the fee should be remitted to the district of domicile.

it was decided to put this remit to the conference.

“Overseas anglers come to New Zealand, go to Rotorua or Taupo, and take out a licence there, and later come on down here,” said Mr E. L. Wyles. “The overseas angler should pay an additional fee, or we in other districts where he fishes should get some of what he pays. I do not think anv of the visitors would object to a higher fee. Most of them are wealthy men.

“Sixty per cent, of those who come down here have taken out licences in the Taupo district, and we get nothing. They would not object to paying when they come down h§re.” The council decided to put to the conference Mr Eyles’s proposal that overseas anglers should pay a separate licence fee for each district in which they fished.