SIX CHARGES UNDER HYDATIDS ACT

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29830, 24 May 1962, Page 18

SIX CHARGES UNDER HYDATIDS ACT

Six charges under the Hydatids Act of enabling dogs to obtain raw offal were heard by Mr H. Rosen. S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. Convictions were entered against Oliver George Oakley (Mr D. A. Oldham) on one charge and against the New Zealand Refrigerating Company, Ltd. (Mr C. B. Atkinson), on two charges. They pleaded guilty. Oakley was fined £3 and the New Zealand Refrigerating Company £3 and £2. Charges against Patrick Joseph Dugan (Mr H. J. B. Quigley) and Angus Hector McKay (Mr A. D. Holland) were dismissed. Both pleaded not guilty. Mr J. G. Hutchison, who prosecuted on behalf of a joint committee set up by the Paparua County Council, the Waimairi County Council, and the Riccarton Borough Council, said that the Paparua council had advertised the danger of leaving dead stock in paddocks and that prosecutions would be made if dead stock were found. He said the matter was regarded as serious because of the danger of hydatids. Mr Hutchison said that the charge against Oakley related to 18 carcases found on property leased by the defendant at Yaldhurst on February 6. Mr Oldham asked that, as it was the first prosecution brought under the act, a nominal fine as a warning be imposed. The Magistrate said, when imposing the fine, that dogs’ access to offal and the spread of hydatids caused concern. Prosecuting the New Zealand Refrigerating Company. Ltd., Mr Hutchison said

that on February 28 two properties owned by the company were inspected. At the first property, at the corner of the Main South road and Halswell Junction road, eight dead sheep in various stages of decomposition were found. The other paddock, just behind the company’s freeting works at Islington, contained 20 carcases. They were lying in gorse, scrub, and in the open. Mr Hutchison said that in the nearby area of Hei Het hydatids had been experienced. Mr Atkinson said that at the peak killing time the company had 10.000 to 15.000 old ewes in the holding yards, and the holding facilities were strained. The deathrate among old ewes was high, and each day a party inspected the paddocks for dead sheep. The company was very concerned about the prosecution, and had taken all reasonable care. Defended Cases In the defended cases against Dugan and McKay. Colin Peter Catchpole, a hydatids control officer, gave evidence. He said that he visited property leased by Dugan at Sockbum on February 22 and found a sheep’s carcase in the paddock. The sheep had been there for some time. There had been hydatids in the area. In evidence, Dugan said hla son had been grazing sheep on the property, and his tally was the same when he left the paddock. The witness said the sheep was not his, but he buried it the day after he received the notice. A neighbour of Dugan, Patrick Kennedy, said that there were often stray sheep on the road. After hearing legal submissions on the wording of the section of the act under which the charge was brought, the Magistrate reserved his decision until after he had heard the case against McKay. When dismissing the charge, the Magistrate said he could not convict Dugan because the land on which the sheep had been found had not been occupied by the defendant but by his son. Giving evidence against McKay, Catchpole said he inspected property leased by the defendant at Halkett on February 6 and found dead sheep in various stages of decomposition scattered over a paddock. To Mr Holland the witness said there were four sheep scattered in the paddock and others in a pile in a gully. Mr Holland said he had been unable to find any report of any decision or any interpretation of the section—section 32 (2a) —of the Hydatids Act. 1959. He submitted legal argument similar to that of Mr Quigley about the wording of the section. Dismissing the charge, the Magistrate said that the section required proof of an act or omission by which dogs would have acoess to raw offal, and on the evidence he could not find proof of any such acts by the defendant Hearing Adjourned

The hearing of a charge against Frederick Henry Shipley of enabling a dog to obtain raw offal was adjourned to June 6 on application by Mr Hutchison. Shipley had pleaded not guilty, and later instructed Mr Quigley to represent him. When asking for the adjournment Mr Hutchison said that in the light of the Magistrate’s decision in the other cases the charge against Ship, ley might be withdrawn.