THE FISHERIES ACT.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIV, Issue 18817, 4 March 1931, Page 8

THE FISHERIES ACT.

RANGER'S APPEAL DISMISSED. By Telegraph—Press Association DUNEDIN, March 3. Interesting remarks on the game and fishing laws of New Zealand were made by Mr Justice Ostler in the course of a decision in an appeal case in the Supreme Court. The appeal was made by the ranger to the Otago Acclimatisation Society against the dismissal of an information laid by him against James Harwood Wilson, Papatowai, for taking or catching trout by means of a net. On the hearing before Mr Dixon, S.M., the information was dismissed, on the ground that at the time the fish entered the net it was dead, and that the Act did not apply to dead fish. “Although the question seems to be somewhat trivial, it is one of prime importance to Acclimatisation Societies,” said Mr Bayle, for appellant. He added that if the Magistrate was right, Societies would find themselves in the position that most trout that were netted would be dead before they were discovered. His Honour: “That is a question of fact, not law. I am a firm believer in our game and fisheries laws, and in the wisdom in the public interest of upholding them,” said his Honour. He quite agreed that the Fisheries Act and the Animals Protection Act were remedial measures, deserving of fair, large and liberal interpretation. Nevertheless, he could not agree that any offence under the Fisheries Act or its regulations had been committed by a person who merely picked up a fish and took possession of it. Whether the fish was dead or alive was not a question of law, but a question of fact. If the 1 prosecution was not able to prove that the fish taken was alive, the prosecution would fail, not on a question of law, but on a question of fact. The appeal would be dismissed.”