Fishing Offences

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31363, 8 May 1967, Page 14

Fishing Offences

Sir,—lt must have appalled nearly everyone who saw the report about the three Ashburton youths having been fined nearly £2O for spearing fish. This, compared with the £7 10s fine imposed on the Japanese fishermen who did in fact commit a similar offence, is a gross miscarriage of justice. For those caught spearing, no person or their business was being impaired in any way. The Japanese, were however, violating our waters, taking our fish and selling them in another country, quite apart from the damage being done to our own industry. This was an international incident. The fines imposed for other offences, such as theft, are usually less than £2O. In these cases actual damage has been done and someone is having to make up the loss. Surely the Magistrate can differentiate between these, and be more lenient in future on cases where the offences are so nearly harmless.—Yours, etc., „ H. RANGER. May 4, 1967.

Sir,—With the penalty for a minor offence such as spearing fish being so stiff, those committing other offences in Ashburton such as speeding had better look out—they may end up doing a few weeks in prison. It appears that mud trout speared in an irrigation ditch are twice as valuable as the snapper caught in the Hauraki Gulf. Who knows, Mid-Canterbury may have just discovered a valuable natural asset which could drag the country out of its financial rat -Jt also seems that all

the Japanese need to do if they must fish in our waters is set up a mint and print plenty of £7 10s notes. Even this may have an appreciable effect on the economy, judging by the number of intrusions over the last 18 months. However, if the fines for spearing are substantial enough, they may finance a more effective coastal defence system, but I doubt if there will be any appreciable reduction in Canterbury’s own provincial sport!—Yours, etc., CONTINUATION. May 5, 1967.