CHARGES BY RANGER.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIX, Issue 162, 10 June 1929, Page 7

CHARGES BY RANGER.

TROUT AT MOUTOA. USE OF NETS ALLEGED. On the information of P. W. Willson, ranger to the Wellington Acclimatisation Society, Matthew Connelly, mill-hand, of Moutoa, was charged in the Magistrate’s Court this morning, before Mr J. L. Stout, S.M., with unlawfully taking trout from the Manawatu River without a license, and, further, with using a net, which was an unsportsmanlike device. He pleaded not guilty. Similar charges were preferred against Stephen Bain, a fellow employee, who pleaded guilty. It was stated by Mr Willson that in consequence of information received, the ranger proceeded to a place three miles below Shannon, and Bain was found with a three pound trout, while Connelly was noticed hurrying across an open space with what appeared to be a set net. When apprehended, however, he denied possessing or using one, and refused to allow Jiis whare to be searched without a warrant. The fins and tail of a trout were found, and at the back of the whare was a net which might have been passed through the window. It was added that there was evidence of the extensive use of nets, six anchorages being found in fifty yards of river. TRIMMING A TROUT.

The Manawatu ranger, T. Andrews, stated that he visited the .locality and found Bain trimming a trout, while another man, who subsequently proved to be Connelly, was hurrying over to the whare with what was evidently a net. When taxed with having it in his possession, he strenuously denied ever owning one. When witness walked round to the back of the building, he found a net just under the window. Bain admitted that it had been used to take trout.

Mr Ongley, who appeared for defendants, suggested that nets were used extensively for taking mullet in the river.

Witness stated that there were always more signs of trout than mullet. The fins he found were fresh, and had been trimmed that morning. Mr Ongley: Did not Connelly mention smoked fish to you?—No.

Witness stated that Connelly maintained that the apparatus found was for taking mullet. Mr Ongley said that Connelly hnd never owned a net and did not know how to set one. The fins found were those of smoked fish from Foxton.

Giving evidence, defendant stated that ithe fish-fins were between his whare and the Maori whare, and were still there. The net found behind his whare belonged to another man, and had been used by Bain. It had never been pushed out of the window. Although there was a certain amount of suspicion, stated the Magistrate, he did not think that the case against Connelly had been proved, and it would bo dismissed. ONE CONVICTION ENTERED.

For Bain Mr Ongley stated that the net was set for mullet, and left over the week-end. When defendant returned he found that a trout had been entangled for some time, and he had to dispatch it. The ranger intimated that the time of tho offence the trout had begun to make their way upstream, and a tremendous number wore taken in set nets, and the bffences were difficult to detect.

Defendant was fined £2 10s on each charge, together with 12s costs.