RANGER FINED

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume 51, Issue 3111, 27 April 1942, Page 5

RANGER FINED

FISHED WITH WRONG LURE INCIDENT IN WAITAWHETA MEN USING SPOON AND LOCUST For fishing in a restricted area on the Waitawheta river with locusts and a spoon two men, John Henwood Thomas, a ranger of the Waihi Acclimatisation Society and Kenneth Birchall, a miner of Waihi, were fined £5 Is, costs 10s, solicitor’s fee £1 Ils 6d and £2 10s, costs 10s and solicitor’s fee £1 Us 6d. respectively in the Paeroa Court on Monday by Mr W. H. Freeman S.M. Mr H. L. Boughton appeared for defendants and pleaded not guilty. Mr R. S. Garden who prosecuted 1 on behalf of the Auckland Acclimatisation Society, stated that on January 18 Mr H. H. Follas, secretary of the Paeroa Acclimatisation Society and his wife had been fishing in the Waitawheta river and when half-a-mile above Franklin’s bridge Follas heard a reel and saw both defendants in the river. As soon as they saw Follas they hurried out of the river and commenced dismantling their rods. _ Follas hurried up to them and asked if they had had any luck. Defendants replied that they had caught six fish using locusts and spoon. Rules On Licence When .Follas asked them whether they knew that the Waitawheta river above Franklin’s bridge was restricted. to fly fishing only they had replied that they thought the area was below the bridge. Mr Carden explained that the rules governing the river were printed on the back of the' licences held by defendants. Follas pointed out that as one of | defendants was a ranger he should know the regulations.

When questioned by Mr Boughton Follas said that no heat had .been shown when the men met on the river and they had discussed the conservation of trout. Thomas had stated that he thought the area restricted was below the bridge and offered to put up a notice on the bridge. Follas added that a notice had been put up but it had been removed by somebody.

He explained that when the Paeroa Club had. had the area restricted the Waihi fishermen had opposed it strongly. At present there was a good deal of illegal fishing going on. Both men, added Follas, had said they were sorry for what they had done and that it would not occur again. He had reported the matter to the Auckland Acclimatisation Society and they had. brought the prosecution. Caught 68 Eels Mrs Follas confirmed the evidence given by her husband. Both men had admitted in her presence having, used locusts and spoon. Mr Boughton said that Thomas was a ranger and a member of the Waihi Acclimatisation Society of many years’ standing. He was himself interested in protecting in the river and last year set three eel traps 4n the river, killing some 68 eels.

He explained that in the morning the two men had. fished below the bridge and had caught four fish. After lunch they had fished above the bridge and did not catch a fish. They denied that they were fishing with anything other than with the proper lure. Thomas who appeared in court in the uniform of the Independent Mounted Rifles, stated that he had been on the executive of the Waihi Acclimatisation Society and a ranger for some years. He knew that the use of lure was not allowed, above Franklin bridge. On the day in question he and Birchall had left home early and had fished below the bridge until a’bout 2.30 p.m. taking four fish on the spoon. After 2.30 p.m. they had fished above the bridge but had caught no fish. They had used only the lure allowed in the afternoon.

When Follas had come up to them he had asked if they had caught any fish' and they had replied yes, on a spoon and with locusts. “What We Caught Fish On”

A friendly discussion followed and he had told Follas that to preserve the fish it would foe better to catch the eels and leave the spoon as a legal lure. He denied that he had said that he was sorry with being charged with what he was charged with.

When questioned by Mr Carden, Thomas denied that he had told Follas that he did not know where the restrictions started.

Magistrate: Did Follas ask you what you were fishing with? Thomas: No, only what we caught the fish on.

The Magistrate then put several questions to Thomas regarding the type of lure he was using and Thomas said he was using a wet fly fishing

upstream. Birchall confirmed the statements made by Thomas that they caught all the fish below the bridge and used only fly above the bridge. When Follas came up to them he had said: “My name is Smith and I’m the secretary of the Paeroa Acclimatisation Society.” Follas then asked what lure they were using and how many fish they- had caught. He replied fly and spoon. Follas did not ask them any other questions. Magistrate: Didn’t Follas ask to see your licence. Birchall: Yes.

Magistrate: Then your previous statement was just another slip of the tongue. Mr Carden questioned Birchall on his statement that Follas had asked what lure they were using. Not Satisfactory

“What we caught the fish on, corrected Birchall. Mr Carden quoted Birchall’s earlier evidence in which he said Follas asked what lure they were using.

Birchall: Much the same thing, isn’t it. In summing up the Magistrate said that the evidence of the defendants was wholly unsatisfactory. Because Thomas was a ranger made no difference. The men were caught redhanded and had immediately taken down their rods. Thomas in evidence had admitted that he was against the restrictions. There is no doubt they were using locusts and spoon. If Thomas was an ordinary fisherman it would not be so bad.

Fines as stated above were imposed.