24 June 1998

POACHERS have been warned by a Judge they face heavy fines and possible jail sentences when convicted in his court.

Judge Dan Shields issued the warning at Newport court when he fined two women found in possession of a net and two salmon by fishery officers with the North West Regional Fisheries Board. The defendants were Molly Neary, Shragaddy, Bangor Erris, Ballina, and Breege Shaw, Doolough, Geesala, Ballina.

Fisheries Officer Gerard Sweeney told the court on July 20 last he was patrolling the Owenmore River with another officer when they saw three people leaving the home of Molly Neary at 11p.m.

They proceeded in the direction of Bangor Erris to a fishery pool. The officers crossed the river and positioned themselves between the fishery pool and Neary's house. They could see two people along the bank and the other person disappeared. That person then joined the other two and they started walking back in the direction of the house.

Two of them were carrying a bag when the officers confronted them. The third person, later identified as Neary's husband, ran away. Officer Sweeney followed him "but he eluded me."

The bag was found to contain a net which was wet and two salmon weighing about 6/7 lbs. Neary, the court heard, pleaded guilty to possession and control of the net and possessing the salmon.

It was submitted that at first she refused to name her husband as the person who ran away as she did not wish to incriminate him.

It was alleged to another witness, Officer Kennedy, that Shaw had been roughly held with a stick. He denied this, adding one salmon caught on the rod was worth £1,500 to the local economy and those caught by nets were worth nothing.

"There was no rough treatment or no complaints about rough treatment," he added.

Molly Neary gave evidence Shaw came to visit her at 10.30p.m. and she decided she wanted to go for some fish. Shaw said she would come along and take a walk down the fields but not do any Fishing.

She got a net and a bag and headed for the river with her husband. Shaw waited in a field while the other two crossed into other land, got two fish and came back out.

She said she did not tell lies about who ran away and thought Mr. Sweeney would catch her husband. "I appreciate what I did was wrong and I apologise."

Mr. Patrick Durcan, solicitor (representing the North Western Regional Fisheries Board) said: "You got two nice fish but sadly not the feed you were looking forward to."

While Neary and her husband fished it helped to have someone else keep an eye out.

"This was a well organised poaching expedition," he said, "you were not foolish enough not to have someone keeping watch."

Neary agreed in relation to the allegation with the stick that nothing improper happened or nothing of a violent nature.

Breege Shaw told the court said she visited Neary who said she was going fishing. "I knew nothing about fishing but I said I would go a bit of the way."

The two Nearys had carried the bag, she said, and a fishery officer had "put a stick in front of me."

After hearing evidence from the witness that she did not drink or smoke Mr. Durcan put it to her: "You don't drink or smoke but you poach for recreation. You knew what you were doing. You knew you were off on an exercise to poach the river."

Shaw replied and Nearys had gone fishing while "I went to see the cattle."

Had she been watching for fishery officers, she said, "I made a bad job about it."

The officers, she said, had placed the stick across her chest as they thought she was going to run away.

Mr. Durcan put it to her she was not manhandled or treated roughly in any way. She had not written to the chief officer of the Board about this complaint or told the Gardai about the allegation.

"You were spurned because you did not have your feed of salmon the following morning."

Judge Dan Shields told the defendant: "You knew what was happening. You were not in a field looking at cattle at 11p.m.

"This is a plain and simple case in the Erris area of people who were poaching and were caught; caught red handed."

Neary was the principle person involved and as she admitted it he was not going for maximum fines. On the charge of possessing and having control of a net he imposed a £100 fine plus £100 expenses and £75 costs. A fine of £100 plus £75 costs and £20 expenses was imposed on the charge of possessing an unlawfully captured salmon and he marked the charge of refusing to give a name proved and taken into account.

Shaw, he said, "was lesser in a sense but at the same time had refused to acknowledge any responsibility. She was at least a substantial help and at the time of capture was bodily in possession of a net and salmon.

On the charge of possessing a et Judge Shields imposed a £50 fine plus £50 expenses and £75 costs. A fine of £50 plus £10 expenses and £75 costs was imposed on the possession of an unlawfully caught salmon.

Judge Shields told the court the defendants lived in an area beside a valuable pool and it was pointed out to him the valuable contribution it made to the economy of the area. The practice of poaching had to be discourage.

This was the defendants first convictions and if they were to come before him again they would certainly get much higher fines.

"For anyone who is taking up poaching I must emphasise there is a very good prospect of ending up in prison for a substantial term."

Connaught Telegraph - News & Sport - June 1998