Eel-pots (Hinaki).

In the journals of early navigators in these seas we find but scant notices of Maori fishing methods and devices. One of the earliest references to fish-traps is to be found in the pages of Nicholas, who sojourned a space in the far North in 1814-15. He writes as follows of what were apparently eel pots or baskets: "The natives informed us that the lake abounded with fish, and showed us two baskets of a circular form which they used for the purpose of catching them. These were made of the bark of a tree called mangemange, and were ingeniously contrived, the mouth of the basket narrowing like that of a mouse-trap, so that when once the fish had made its way in it could not possibly escape. It was, I thought, very similar to the basket used by the country people among us for catching eels." The so-called "bark" was, of course, the fine stems of Lygodium articulatum.

The manufacture of neat fish-traps was an art in which the Maori artisan excelled, and the hinaki, or eel-pot, is an illustration of that deftness. Some of the specimens preserved in our museums are of remarkably neat construction, as will be shown anon.

In describing native industries Colenso writes: "Their large and small fish-traps and creels were very strongly and skilfully made of the flexible stems of two species of Muehlenbeckia (adpressa and ephedroides), and also the long, fibrous roots of the flax (Phormium), &c."

In the Waiapu district I was informed that eel-pots were usually made by tying slim rods of manuka (Leptospermum) to a number of hoops of aka-tea (Metrosideros albiflora), the lashing-material being aka-pohue, the tough pliant stem of a convolvulus. The hoops are called whiti, and a number of these were arranged inside the pot to serve as a framework. The funnel-shaped entrance is the puarero, and the opposite end is the kotore. These pots were not only used to set at weirs, but also in open waters, and they are known as hinaki tukutuku, while crayfish-pots are also sometimes called tukutuku. When so set in open waters, not at a weir, the pot is deposited with the entrance end down-stream, and the bait, often consisting of earthworms, tied to the structure between the entrance funnel and the sides of the pot. If considered necessary, they were anchored when so set, as by securing a stone to either side, while an attached cord page 158 page 159 was tied to a stake, tree, or snag on the bank, or they were tied to a pole thrust into the bed of the stream.

In making an eel-pot the work was commenced at the small inner end of the funnel-shaped entrance-passage. When the funnel was as long as was desired the slim fore-and-aft rods were bent back over the funnel, and the lacing and lashing process was continued in order to form the body of the eel basket or pot. Thus the pot was a single piece of work. In one short account, however, from the Bay of Plenty area an inferior method seems to be alluded to, in which the body of the hinaki was made first as a rectangular fabric, which was then arranged over hoops and secured to them. This would be an inferior and slovenly procedure, and, moreover, would mean that the entrance funnel would have to be a separate piece, inserted after the completion of the body of the pot. I trust that I have misunderstood the remarks of this contributor; it does not look like the methodical and painstaking native artisan. This correspondent speaks of the kaweru, or bait of earthworms, being enveloped in some herbage and secured to the inside of the eel-pot in some cases; others threaded the worms on a string instead of wrapping them up. He also emphasizes the fact that when the manuka brush is being wattled in the stakes of a weir-fence it must be trampled down so as to form a closely packed mass; this is to block the elusive eel.

Hakaraia Pahewa states that when no weir was used, then eel-traps were set in open waters, in pools, and near collections of logs or driftwood in a stream, and in these cases some form of bait was placed in the trap. Weirs, he explains, are erected for one period and purpose only—that is, for taking eels when they are moving down-stream in the autumn to give birth to their young in the ocean. Eels are also taken at other times of the year, but not by placing traps at a weir with the entrances of such traps up-stream. In setting free traps it is often better to set them with the entrances facing downstream. Hakaraia speaks of eel-pots of his district being one maro and a hau, or 1½ fathoms. These would certainly be very large ones; possibly they have stretched somewhat. The maro is the span of the extended arms, and the hau is half a maro—i.e., from the centre of the breast to the extremity of an extended arm. The slim rods or wands of manuka employed in the manufacture of traps he terms tari, which is a new expression to me. The waharua, or eel-pot with an entrance at each end, he explains, is not set at a weir, but in big or deep rivers, some bait being placed in it.

In some cases the slim tari, or wand-like manuka stems, were arranged so as to extend straight from one end of the pot to the other—this is the torotika method (fig. 52); in others they were arranged page 160 page 161 page 162 page 163 page 164 in a diagonal manner, called whakawiri (figs, 53, 54, 55). The lacing of these slim pieces together was done with aka-pohue (the stem of a creeping-plant), sometimes with the roots of the Phormium plant, as also other materials. The hoops that imparted stability to the trap might consist of one piece of aka or of several. In the northern half of the North Island a number of thin mangemange stems were often twisted together to form a hoop (whiti). Some traps are made with few of these hoops; others have a considerable number.

In the Otaki district the materials used in making eel-pots were generally the aerial roots of kiekie (Freycinetia Banksii) and the stem of aka-tororaro (Muehlenbeckia complexa), a climbing-plant. Occasionally, as elsewhere, supplejack (Rhipogonum scandens) was used, but it is an inferior material for the purpose. Now and again pots of mangemange are obtained from the northern part of the North Island, and these are highly prized, for if well cared for they will last a lifetime. When about to be carried a long distance they are soaked in water, then pressed flat, when several are placed together and stiffened by having several poles lashed to them, when they are easily carried. When the restraining ties are removed they spring back into their original form. This material was much desired for corfs in which numbers of living eels were kept; it is pliable, but strong and durable. Eel-pots were all about the same form in the Otaki district, but differed in size. The small ones, about 30 in. in length, were used in small streams, where waters were shallow and eels small. Some pots had an opening at the side, through which eels were taken out, but in most cases it was at the end. The corfs used in this district were of the same form as the hinaki tukutuku, and were made up to 8 ft. in length; possibly these are no longer used. They are known locally as hinaki whakatiko-tiko; at Whanganui as korotete, puhara, and puwai; in some places as punga whakatitiko; while the name hinaki ruru was recorded at Hawke's Bay. These Otaki pots were wide and long, and would hold, I was told, up to three hundred eels—size of eels not stated. Eels caught in the trapping-pots were preserved alive in these corfs, and so were taken as wanted. They were fed on potatoes, stale shell-fish, or anything else available. These corfs were in use at the Huritini Lake, at Waikawa, in the "eighties." Mr. Downes includes puhara as a corf-name at Whanganui. A Waikato native applied the name hinaki whakatiko to them. When eels were placed in these corfs they were put into a handy part of a stream and secured by means of a cord to a stake or tree. Thus eels could be taken as wanted for food, or when a large number were caught they might be consigned to these corfs for a day or two until the folk had time to despatch page 165 and cure them. The circular corfs, termed korotete, of the Whanganui district seem to have been used for both lampreys and eels, the larger ones for the eels. A capacious one seen at Pipiriki was used for eels.

It is evident that the ordinary hinaki tukutuku was not infrequently employed as a corf; in other cases special wickerwork pots resembling a hinaki in form were made for the purpose. In the Whanganui district such corfs were fashioned in a form very different from that of the ordinary hinaki, or eel-pot—a short, squat form, as shown by the illustrations. I have not seen this form in other districts; possibly its use was confined to the Whanganui district, or perchance to the Aotea tribes. This is the korotete form.

A good specimen of this korotete form is No. 3837 in the Dominion Museum, (See fig. 57.) This is one of the large-sized ones used for keeping eels alive in, as explained by Wiwi, of Pipiriki. It was made at that place, and was presented to the Museum by local natives. These wicker pots have but the one aperture, at the top. No. 3837 is 2 ft. 8 in. in height and some 2 ft. 4 in. in width; the hoop ribs are but 1 in. apart throughout, showing careful and thorough work. The longitudinals are arranged in what may be termed a semi-ripeka form sometimes noted in these fabrics. In this method we do not see two diagonals crossing, but one series of longitudinals is laid parallel, or nearly so, to the longer axis of the pot, while another series is laid obliquely across them. Cross-ties of aka secure these longitudinals in the usual manner. There are two long loop lugs at the top (one on either side of the aperture), a small one 8 in. from the top, and an ingenious form of wooden hand-grip lashed to one side. This specimen preserves its major diameter for 1 ft. 2 in. and then narrows rapidly to 8 in. at the top. The cover, or lid, fits over the neck of the pot.

page 166

A certain difference in form is seen in these Whanganui corfs, and one illustrated by Mr. Downes in Vol. 50 of the Transactions of the New Zealand Institute shows its greatest diameter in the middle. It is also braced externally in two ways; it has four stout pieces (probably of aka) lashed to the wickerwork and extending from base to aperture, also four stout hoops secured horizontally and overlying the others. These containing-braces would doubtless be necessary when the pot became old and the materials somewhat brash, not to speak of having 1 cwt. or so of eels in it. The middle specimen in fig. 56, p. 165, also shows external braces.

The funnel-shaped entrance to an eel-pot is an ingenious contrivance, albeit it suffers the inconvenience of being known by the following names: Akura, inaha, puarero, toine, and tohe. An Otaki native gave naha as the inner end of the funnel, while Williams's Maori Dictionary gives rea as a name of the entrance funnel. Now, when an eel passes through the akura, and so enters the trap, it is required that he should remain there, and not return to the outer world by the way he had come. There are several ways of preventing such an escape. In some cases a small net-like fabric in the form of a bottomless bag, termed a rohe, maene, and toherere, is secured by one end to the inner end of the akura, or funnel. When an eel enters the page 167trap it passes easily through this net, but finds it impossible to re-enter it when seeking to escape from the trap, owing to it not being distended. In other cases the slim rods forming the funnel-entrance are not cut off at the inner end so as to leave an aperture of several inches in width, but are left so that they almost meet together in apex-like form. For some little distance these rods are not laced together, but are left free, so that when an eel is entering the trap through this constricted passage the slim yielding twigs are easily displaced by it. When that eel seeks to return, however, it finds no open passage, but a closely-set bunch of sharp-pointed sticks that cannot be passed. Sometimes this latter arrangement was a separate piece, called a kuao, that was lashed on to the inner end of the akura. A fish-trap of this hinaki form is used in Borneo, as shown in Ling Roth's work on that region.

The renowned Maui of native myth is said to have been the inventor of the peculiar akura of the Maori eel-pot. His brothers are said to have made pots having no such baffling funnels; hence eels entered them, consumed the bait, and withdrew scathless.

The waharua form offish-trap is used by the natives of New Britain. It is figured and described in Wanderings in a Wild Country, by Wilfred Powell. The description is as follows: "This fish-trap is made of plaited cane …. and is oblong in form, open at both ends, with a number of slight canes converging from the opening to the centre, where a space is left for the fish to get into the pot; but these canes being pointed, the fish, on trying to return, are met by the points and so cannot get out." Here we see that the "New Britons" employed the same device as did the Maori for preventing the escape of the fish.

The Tuhoe natives use the tonakenake creeper and the slim, flexuous, and tough branches of the kai (the young form of Podo-carpus spicatus) in the manufacture of these traps, the latter even for the process of lacing together the slim longitudinal and wand-like manuka stems. The Ngati-Manawa folk of Galatea use the roots of the Phormium plant as binding-material. Both were substitutes for the better materials, mangemange and kiekie, which are not procurable in the districts occupied by those tribes. The aerial roots of the kiekie are excellent lashing or lacing material—pliant, strong, and durable. In order to strip them of bark the trap-makers draw them through the cleft of a split supplejack. They are then carefully split down the middle with marvellous exactitude, and these split pieces are, of course, yet more pliant than the unsplit root. Aka-tea (Metro-sideros scandens) is widely used for the hoops. A Ngati-Porou native applied the terms toa and katoa to the slim stems of manuka used, page 168popoki to the cap or lid at the rear end (tou) of the trap, and taupo-poia to a small lug of aka-kiekie on the outer side of the trap to secure a cord to. These Waiapu folk apply the term kaweru to bait for an eel-trap, and also use the word in a verbal manner, as in "Kawerutia ta taua hinaki." The bait consists of earthworms, which are first threaded on a string and then wound round a short piece of korari, the extremely light scape of the Phormium plant. This is placed inside the eel-pot. Eels entering the pot assail the bait, which is, however, so elusive, owing to the buoyancy of the stick, that eels find it difficult to secure the tied worms. Local natives term the entrance funnel the puhatero. An Otaki native termed the entrance funnel the tohe, and the inner end thereof the naha. Hakaraia Pahewa, of Te Kaha, seems to apply the term maene to the small net-like fabric fastened to the inner end of the entrance funnel, but Williams's Maori Dictionary applies it to the ngutu of a weir. I believe that tohe and puhatero denoted the baffling-net attached to the entrance funnel.

My worthy correspondent Karaka Tarawhiti, of Huntly, Waikato, gave me some interesting data concerning the eel-lore of his district. These notes appear in the original in Appendix 6. Eel-taking was evidently an important pursuit in those parts in pre-European times. Karaka explains that weirs were not constructed in the Waikato River in that district on account of the depth of water, but in the tributary streams, where eels were taken by the whakaheke device during the moonless nights of January, February, and March. Great numbers of eels were taken each year in the lagoons and lakes of this district and from their outlet streams. The eels taken during the three months mentioned were those known as puhi, a small variety but fat, and a much appreciated food-supply.

These Waikato folk used two kinds of eel-pots—a large form, called hinaki tarino, and a small one with an entrance funnel at each end, termed, waharua. The former kind was used in the main river, and probably also in tributaries; the waharua was for setting in the shallow lakes and lagoons that form so marked a feature of the district. The tarino trap was manipulated as follows: The bait (poa) was attached to the tou (the small rear end), and the trap was anchored by means of a stone attached to a cord, lest it be carried away by the current. A cord attached to the trap was led to the bank of the river, and generally secured to a stake or snag underwater lest the eel-trap be interfered with by dishonest persons. In so setting a trap in the open, weirless river the entrance to the trap is faced down-stream; the smaller end, facing up-stream, is covered with a potae, or lid, and when it is desired that a catch of eels be taken out page 169 this small trap-lid is unfastened, the fore end of the hinaki is lifted up, and the enclosed eels slide out. Eels usually move up-stream at night, and are said to scent bait and to work up-stream in search of it. The small end of the trap being up-stream, it takes less of the thrust of the current than would the wide end. A second portion of bait is placed at the entrance end of the trap, apparently in the space between the funnel and the side of the trap. The bait secured at the small, up-stream end is said to attract the attention of the eel first when it enters the trap, but ere long it turns to discuss the other bait, after which, says my correspondent, it is a case of "All ye who enter here, abandon hope." Other eels entering the trap act in the same manner: they first make for the bait at the up-stream end of the trap, but owing the the strength of the current they turn to assail the other bait. Large eels of the kokopu, ringo, and para-haraha varieties are taken in these traps.

The hinaki tukutuku with double entrance, known as waharua, used in the shoal lakes of the same district, are, or were, about 30 in. in length. The entrance funnels have small apertures, as the traps are for taking the small eel called whitiki. Of these eels I am told the tail end is fat and luscious, but not so the head end. They are strung together and hung up to dry, after which they are kauitia ki te manuka (impaled or skewered in numbers on rods of manuka), partially cooked before a mass of glowing embers, then hung up in a shed for future use.

page 170

Large numbers of these double-mouthed traps were set in the lagoons. Earthworms were used as bait, in the form of what are termed tahoa. This is the fastening of a number of worms to a piece of the dry, light flower-stalk of the Phormium plant, as explained above as an East Coast practice. A number of these buoyed baits were placed in a trap when it was set. The traps were set among the water-plants (raupo, &c.) in the shallow lagoons, and in a straight line, perhaps a chain or less apart. The traps were secured to long, green manuka poles, the uppermost brush on each one being left intact, the lower branchlets stripped off. These traps would be examined before dawn, or, if eels were entering freely, then several times during the night. Those who lifted, emptied, and reset the traps used canoes, and they were enabled to locate the various traps by means of the brush-topped poles—i.e., by the loom of the bushy tops against the sky.

The tarino form of eel-trap was used in winter. Birds were sometimes used as a bait for them. The small net fabric fastened to the inner end of the akura, or funnel, is styled a toherere by my Waikato correspondent.

"The young folk of the present time know nothing of the pursuits of former times; they have all become Europeanized. All their pursuits are those of the Europeans; all they work for is money; they despise eel-catching as a waste of time. The tarino eel-traps are made in a different way nowadays—namely, of fine wire netting; the old kinds were made of mangemange only." Thus moralizes my correspondent.

A specimen of the ordinary single-entrance eel-traps, lately examined is but a small one, being 2 ft. 6 in. in length. It is a bottle, like form, having a pronounced shoulder but 10 in. from the small end, instead of decreasing gradually in size. (See fig. 59.) The akura-or funnel entrance, is 1 ft. in length. This trap is said to have come from the Waikato district, but this is not assured. Stability is imparted to it by means of inserting eleven whiti, or hoop ribs, each of which is composed of a number of the slim stems or vines of Lygodium articulatum, or mangemange, twisted tightly together. Eight of these hoops are arranged in four pairs, the two of each pair being but ½ in. to ¾ in. apart. The single hoops are situated midway between the different series of pairs. Material employed consists of mangemange only, and the longitudinal pieces are about ¼ in. apart, while the cross-tie or lacing-bands are from ½ in. to ¾ in. apart. There are four small loops of the twisted vines near the small end, to which the cap or cover of the discharge aperture was secured; two others on the pronounced shoulder, one on either side of the page 171 trap; also two at the wide end of the trap, near the extreme end, one on either side; a single one appears in the middle of the trap. A sketch sent to me by Karaka seems to show that the cord secured to the trap, and which was attached to some object on or near the bank of the river, was not merely attached to one part of the trap, but to a series of small loops such as those described above, and seemingly on both sides of the trap. The stone anchor seems to have been secured to the long holding-cord by means of a short line. The sketch alluded to is not any too illuminating, and further information is desirable.

The term pohea, applied to eel-pots in the Hauraki district, may or may not include all forms of such traps. I have heard it applied to medium-sized hinaki tukutuku by Thames natives. In some of the pohea of those parts the discharge aperture is near the large end, and, to judge from a remark made by Kamura, of Paeroa, occasionally in the base of the funnel entrance itself, not in the outer or main part of the trap. Kamura remarked. "Ko te kuaha o tena hinaki kei te taha ki te rae; ko ona tukunga kei roto i te repo, kei i te nehenehe repo." Apparently the term rae is applied to the wide end of the traps, possibly to the entrance funnel. In response to a query he sent me sketches of two pohea showing the discharge apertures as explained above. He writes, "Ko tetahi o aua pohea kei waho te kuaha o te rae, ko tetahi kei roto te kuaha o te rae. Ko aku whakautu tenei mo ngeo patai."

page 172

In some districts eel-pots were constructed in two different forms, according to the conditions of the places in which they were to be used. Thus those to be set in rivers and streams with a firm bed, stony or otherwise, were made with much straighter sides than those used in lakes or lagoons having soft, muddy beds. The latter sink into the soft mud to some extent, and so are made with a pronounced curve in the sides. By this means the entrance aperture is kept clear of the mud. I have been told that these two forms were formerly used in the Otaki district, where, between swift streams with stony beds, are found lagoons with beds of soft mud.

The accompanying illustration (fig. 60) shows the form of eel-trap used in lagoons or other waters the beds of which were composed of soft mud. This specimen is No. 2667 in the Dominion Museum, and it is a comparatively short and wide form. Length of trap, 3 ft. 4 in.: diameter—across big end, 1 ft. 10 in.; across small end, 6 in.; across middle, 2 ft. 3 in. The mouth of the funnel entrance does not extend to the periphery of the circular trap-end, but some 5½ in. to 6 in. inside it, so that it occupies only half the diameter of that end, instead of the whole of it. Not only so, but the body of the trap is much rounded longitudinally, so that, were the traps laid on a hard streambed, then the lowermost part of the entrance funnel would be about 8 in. above the level of such bed, which would not be desirable. This means that the trap might sink at least 7 in. in soft mud, yet the entrance passage would still be clear. The diameter of the mouth of the akura, or funnel, is 11 in.

The materials are all aka; the tie-bands are probably the aerial roots of the kiekie, while the longitudinals are slim stems of climbing-page 173plants ⅛ in. to 3/16 in. in diameter, placed ¼ in. apart. The cross-ties that retain the longitudinals in position are ¾ in. to ⅞ in. apart, and are round, unspiit aka about ⅛ in. in thickness. In most cases two of these are used, but in some places four, and they have been twisted so as to enclose each longitudinal as the work proceeded. In the process of manufacture, the making of such a trap being commenced at the wide end, as the diameter of the trap decreased a number of the longitudinals were discontinued and the balance carried on to the small end of the trap, a method that reminds one of the tihoi process in garment-weaving.

The whiti, or hoops that distend the structure and preserve its form, are mostly slender manuka stems 3/16 in. to ¼ in. in thickness. and these are arranged in a peculiar manner. There is one of these hoops at the inner end of the akura, or funnel, which funnel is 1 ft. 4 in. long, but no more until the entrance is reached; between that point and the outer part of the wide end of the trap there are six such hoops. Proceeding along the side of the trap, we first note a hoopless space of 4½ in., then six hoops in the next 5 in., then a blank space of 6½ in., then six hoops in 5 in., a blank space of 5½ in., then four hoops in 3 in., a blank of 7 in., and then three hoops close together at the small end, but, unlike the others, these three are of vines, not manuka wands. An attached and flared collar of twisted vines is securely fastened to this small end of the trap, and into it fits a very peculiar conical lid that is fastened at one point to the page 174trap by means of twisted vines that serve as a hinge. The cone-like protuberance of the lid fits into the flared mouth of the kotore.

A peculiarity of the funnel-entrance structure of this pot is that its inner end is flared, or bell-mouthed, being 6 in. wide—an unusual page 175 width—whereas at a point 5 in. from the inner end the passage is much narrower. The reason for making the akura of this peculiar form is not clear.

This trap is well provided with loop handles or lugs, reminding one of the tarino form of Waikato. There are two at the wide end, one on either side of the funnel entrance; also there is one on either side of the small end, and three on either side of the trap, making ten in all.

In order to show the other kind of eel-trap used—the comparatively straight-sided form used in streams, &c., where no deposit of soft mud called for a high-lying entrance funnel—we turn to No. 2666 in the Dominion Museum, for which see fig. 63. This specimen, as shown in the illustration, is of a very different form to that of the last one described. It is 4 ft. 9 in. in length, exclusive of 2½ in. of the projecting rounded cap or cover, yet its width is but 10 in. to 12 in. The mouth of the entrance funnel occupies the full width of the end of the trap and is 7 in. in width, the trap contracting somewhat at this extremity. The funnel itself is abnormally short, being but 6 in. long, and tapers but little, the inner aperture being 6 in. wide, and to this a baffling toherere net must have been attached when the trap was in use.

page 176

The whiti, or interior hoops that serve as a framework, are in this specimen about ¼in. thick, and these are numerous, being but 1¼ in. apart throughout the entire length of the trap. In scanning the longitudinals of this specimen we note that they are arranged in the crossed form termed ripeka, a method that marks some of the neatest and most interesting traps we have seen. These longitudinals are of split aka, and cross each other obliquely about ½in. apart. The cross-ties that lace the structure together are also split aka (stems of climbing-plants and aerial roots of Freycinetia so termed), and each longitudinal is enclosed between these two ties, so that the longitudinals cross each other between the cross-tie bands. The cross-ties are immediately over the hoops, and there are forty-five of each, while at intervals of from 3 in. to 4 in. the ties are passed round the hoops underneath. An extra and much stouter hoop is lashed to the outer side of the funnel entrance. The taupoki (cap or cover for the aperture at the rear end of the trap) differs widely in form from that of the last specimen described, inasmuch as it is of basin-like form, and fits over the end of the trap, not into it. It is hinged on to the pot, however, in the same manner. At this end are two large loop page 177 page 178 lugs, one on either side of the cover, and these would be utilized when securing such cover. There is also a small lug at each end of the trap, but these are on opposite sides.

A hinaki obtained by Mr. Downes at Waitotara is of oval form, made for use in a stream with a soft muddy bed; it is 7ft. 5in. long and 9ft. 5in. in circumference. Local term for parts thereof are: taka, the vines secured outside as a protective measure; taringa, loops to which vines are attached; tangitangi, a form of vine cringle used in hinging the lid; papakirango, design of the plaited lid or cover (cf. papakingard); potaka, spiral vine portion of structure.

An ingenious form of eel-trap was formerly made for temporary purposes from the green leaves of the flax (Phormium) plant. This trap was a whaharua, having a funnel-shaped entrance at each end. It was used to some extent in the Manawatu River and elsewhere. It was cylindrical in form. The Phormium leaves used in its construction were simply divided down the middle, and the broad half-leaf was the plaiting unit. The plait was a close one, through which the larger eels could not pass. Three hoops of supplejack were used in order to preserve the cylindrical form, and these hoops were secured page 179outside the fabric. To give stability to the whole, four longitudinal pole braces were lashed to the outer sides of the hoops; these kept the fabric extended, while the hoops preserved its round form. To the inner ends of the two entrance funnels were attached cords that were led to the opposite ends of the trap, pulled taut, and secured to the end hoops. This device kept the flax funnels extended, and so provided an easy entrance for questing eels. These traps were quickly made, and were used for taking the larger kinds of eels. Such a trap, we are told, would last about a month; but it would certainly be necessary to keep it in water all the time, otherwise the drying and shrinking leaves would allow any eel to escape. Information has been collected in both Islands as to this use of flax in making eel-pots for temporary use. In fig. 66 the leaf-strips are shown somewhat too narrow, and the plait is too open.

The bait for a hinaki was sometimes placed in a small bait-pot called a pu toke (see fig. 67), constructed in the form of a diminutive eel-pot, and often of the same materials, and which was placed inside the eel-pot. The bait used in eel-pots is called poa and kaweru, but not mounu. Whakapuka ngoiro denotes bait for conger-eels enclosed in a kind of bag.

Some of the finest and neatest work in fish-trap making was that of the natives of the northern parts of the North Island—that is, the folk who were able to procure as material the small, long, and pliant stems of the climbing-fern called mangemange (Lygodium articula-tum)—a plant not found south of the Bay of Plenty - Kawhia line. In southern districts the more favoured materials were the aerial roots of kiekie (Freycinetia Banksii) and thin stems of manuka (Leptospermum), as already mentioned. Of the first-mentioned material the entire trap might be constructed; no need to seek a second material.

page 180

When such materials were obtained they were placed in water until wanted, which kept them in a soft and pliant condition.

There is another fact to which attention may be directed— namely, that the work of the native artisan seems to have deteriorated since the advent of Europeans to these shores. This seems to be the lesson derived from an observation of modern examples of fish-traps and of others that have been found buried in swamps through the activities of drain-excavators. Some of these latter specimens must have been so buried for a long time, and they show extremely fine workmanship. Such a trap dredged up from the bed of the Ohinemuri River by gold-seekers serves as a good example of the neat work of the old-time Maori. (See fig. 68.) This specimen is a small one, being but 3 ft. in length, the diameter at the larger or entrance end being 16 in. This diameter is carried for half the length of the trap, from which point it tapers off to the kotore, or rear end. This is the form of trap termed a pohea by the local natives of Hauraki, and which we have already scanned. The hoops forming the framework of the trap are eight in number, and each one has been formed by twisting into rope-like form about eight slim stems of the mangemange climber. Not only the hoops, but also the longitudinal pieces forming the body of the trap, the lacing or cross-ties, the funnel entrance, and lugs are all of the same material. The slim stems comprising the hoop are from 1/16 in. to 1/12 in. in thickness and are in the round, but the whole of the slim stems used as longitudinal pieces and ties have been precisely split down the middle, a task requiring much care and long practice, as I myself can testify; where necessary, two pieces have been deftly spliced. The narrow longitudinals are but about 1/16 in. apart, while the tie-bands running across them are only ¼ in. apart; truly a neat fabric.

Now, the narrow longitudinals, though parallel to each other and neatly spaced, are not laid parallel with the longer axis of the trap, but are arranged in a diagonal manner so that each strip embraces about half the circumference of the trap in its 3 ft. of length. This is the whakawiri method. The process of tying or lacing together the longitudinals has been effected by twisting together two of the slim split strips and enclosing one of the longitudinals in each twist. The hoop at the mouth of the entrance funnel is secured by a running cincture, two slim stems passed round the hoop and the edge of the trap. The other hoops are attached to the fabric by small strips of the only material used. As explained elsewhere, this pohea trap had no aperture at the small end.

No. 3658 in the Dominion Museum, shown in fig. 70 as the central trap, is a specimen of the waharua of the Waikato district, one of two page 181 page 182 page 183 presented to that institution by Karaka Tarawhiti, of Huntly. The two entrance funnels are clearly shown in the illustration, and, though an old specimen, the trap is still sound and shapely. It is made entirely of mangemange. Of the slender stems of this plant we read in Cheeseman's Flora: "The tough and wiry twining stems were formerly twisted into ropes by the Maoris and used for securing the thatch on the roofs of their houses; and they were also employed for making eel-traps."

The specimen shown as No. 3658 in fig. 70 is 23½ in. long, and in diameter is 11in. Each of the akura, or cone-shaped entrance funnels, is about 7½ in. deep. The longitudinal pieces of mangemange are about 1 line in thickness, and preserve their size throughout in a remarkable manner. They are arranged in a parallel but oblique manner, deviating about 5in. from the perpendicular in viewing the trap in an upright position; the spaces between them are about 3/16 in. wide. There are four hoops within the trap to preserve its shape, each of which is a two-ply twist of the same material, each ply consisting of two pieces of the plant-stem. The transverse binding by means of which the longitudinal pieces are confined and firmly bound is again of the same material, which forms a two ply-twist as closely laid as though it were a cord of Phormium fibre. In the manufacture of the trap each twist of the two pliant stems encloses one of the longitudinal pieces, and the process throughout is marked by regularity and neatness. The ends of the longitudinal pieces are bent inwards and down over a stiffening hoop in order to form the funnel-shaped entrances. These are bound transversely, as in the body of the trap, the lines of binding being about the same distance apart—viz., ¾ in. The binding page 184continues inward for 6 in., when it ceases, and the rest of the funnel its smaller inner end, is formed by the loose or unbound ends of the longitudinal pieces. These almost meet at their extreme ends, but, being unbound, an eel can easily push his way in to get at the bait. When he tries to escape, however, he is opposed by the close-set ends, through which he cannot force his way.

At the side, near one end, is one aperture 3 in. by 2 in., through which eels are passed when emptying the trap, and which at other times is covered with a small piece of wattle-work. Two popoia, or loop lugs, on one side serve as handles or places to which cords are attached.

In No. 3728 of fig. 70 we observe a smaller form, of a somewhat different shape, inasmuch as it is smaller at one end than the other. The diameter of the larger end is 10in., that of the smaller end about 7 in., but here it is much rounded off; its length is 17 in. The method of constructure and material is the same as in the first-described trap, but this one has six stiffening hoops. The Lygodium stems are finer, and closer spaced, the same remarks being applicable to the lacing or transverse binding. There is but one lug on this specimen.

No. 3729 of fig. 70 shows a similar trap, slightly smaller and of like structure. It contains the flax-bound piece of korari (scape of Phormium tenax) to which the bait was attached, and which is known as the tahoa.

Nos. 3728 and 3729 represent old specimens. Tarawhiti obtained them in 1878 from his father, who is said to have used them since his early life. The small varieties of eels known as puhi and whitiki were taken in these double-entrance waharua traps in the Waikato district.

page 185