Man fined $100 for shooting trout

Press, 21 April 1977, Page 4

Man fined $100 for shooting trout

Nelson renorter Defence evidence that a ranger had caused fata) damage to a fish by standing on it and stabbing it in the gills after the defendant had stunned it with a rifle bullet was rejected by Mr K. H. J. Headifen, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court at Nelson.

The defendant, Warren Reginald Duder, of Christchurch, had pleaded not guilty to a charge of killing acclimatised fish at Lake Daniels with a .308 rifle on or about September 12 last. He was convicted and fined SIOO, and in view of extensive travelling to hear evidence in Christchurch, was ordered to pay SBO solicitor's fees. The Magistrate said he would note on the criminal record that if he had had the power to do so, he would order the return of the defendant’s rifle. He had been told by counsel that in such cases the forfeiture of “gear” was mandatory, but that the Magistrate could recommend to the Minister of Internal Affairs that it be returned. Mr H. W. Riddoch appeared for the Nelson Acclimatisation Society and Mr C. N. Tuohy for the defendant. The evidence of the defendant and two defence witnesses, Lawrence Sinclair and Wayne Beattie, was taken in Christchurch. A Nelson ranger, Douglas Victor Zumbach, said that he had gone to the Lake Daniels area in September because that was the time rainbow

trout spawned in a small stream which flowed alongside the track into the lake. He had gone there because of suspicions of poaching of the spawning trout, as many as 400 of which would be contained, side by side, in a stream about 2m wide and 15cm deep. Witness and his brother had stayed overnight in a hut with another eight or nine persons. The next morning, the defendant with his rifle and the two defence witnesses had left the hut and although witness and his brother were close behind them they could not find them. Witness formed the opinion they were hiding from him. While talking to other people who had stayed at the hut, witness heard a shot, and he and his brother went about 65m up the track. There they saw the defendant on one knee, his rifle .esting on a log, and a female rainbowtrout lying on the ground and flapping weakly. The defendant had admitted having shot at the trout because he wanted it “for a feed.” Witness said he put the fish back in the water in the vain hope that it might revive, but when it lay over on its side he knew it was dead and so brought it out and laid it on the log. Later he had opened it with a knife and found it had suffered injuries consistent with it having been killed by concussion. Under cross-exam-ination, Mr Zumbach denied having thrown the

fish in the water and then having thrown it back on to a bank. He denied that he had stood on the fish and cut the gills. If defence witnesses said that, they were lying, he said.

Supporting evidence was given by Owen Zumbach. brother of the ranger, and John Meredith Young, a scientist in the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, who gave evidence about the effects of concussion on a fish in a shallow stream.

The Magistrate said that the defendant, in his own evidence, had admitted shooting at the trout, and it was obvious that his intention had been to kill the fish.

“I don’t believe the defendant’s story for one moment, nor the evidence of his witnesses,” the Magistrate said. “One can find inconsistency after inconsistency in their evidence.”