ROBBING OYSTER BEDS.

Northern Advocate, 26 January 1922, Page 4

ROBBING OYSTER BEDS.

TWO WOMEN FINED.

CAUGHT KED-ifANDED

Two women, Dinah Johnson and Mrs Thomas McKonzie, were -charged at the Whangarei Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr F. H. Levien, S.M., with having .--.ornnutted ;> breach of the Fisheries Act by taking oysters out of season at McLeod's Bay, Wlhangarei Heads. Neither of the .defendants appealed, but they forwarded letters stating that at the time they were unaware that they were committing ;an offence.

The evidence of Mr J. P. Flyim, inspector of fisheries, who prosecuted, showed that he had seen the defendants, who wore camping at McLeod'j a 7» go down to the beach armed with | hammars and billies, and start to take the oysters from the roeks. When he approached they retreated to the camp, }so he thought that they knew that thoy were breaking the law. Mr Flyim slated that the depiction >of the oyster beds was a very serious matter, and he declared that the beds at several points at Whangarei Heads had been quite spoilt by the depredations of icaanpers and .others. Such taking of oysters if not stopped would nullify all the efforts being made to promote the stocking of the harbour with oysters, ajid the work already done a*j Government expense in that direction. The Government had granitad a further £100 for expenditure upon the work, in the harbour,, and operations would be continued within a few months; but it would be useless if people did not desist from taking the oysters meanwhile. If the ibeds were left alone for two years the harbour would be well-sitocked, to the benefit of the public generally.

The Magistrate stated that he had had a good deal of experience of the promotion of the oyster beds at Russell and had inspected them. When ihe came to the district first he had imposed light fines for offences similar to •that tinder consideration, buit experience ha 1 led him. to increase fheni gradually, for he realised that it wias essential that illegal picking should be stopped, because the oysters would increase three or four-fold if left alone for a wliifle. and that result would Ibe beneficial to the country as a wfhole. lit would lead to a more plentiful supply and cheaper prices. The statute prohibiting picking was there for a purpose, and it was his duty to uphold it and to take into consideration the efforts of the Government and the expenditure undertaken by tihe State, in protecting and ext3nding tho-'beds. The defendants were fined £5 and 16s costs each.