COMBATING EROSION

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 8, Issue 53, 2 March 1945, Page 5

COMBATING EROSION

CONFERENCE IN "WHAKATANE

EORMATION OF CATCIHMENT W BOARD DELEGATES AT VARIANCE Delegates from all parts of the Bay of Plenty and Rotorua attended the conference convened by the' Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Council for the purpose of setting up a catchment board ar&a to control the ■rivers in the wide watershed of the Eastern Bay and to safeguard agains't erosion and' flood; The meeting took place in the Wh!akatane .Counity Council Chambers last Wednesday f and was presided over by Mr J. L. Burnett, Chairman, of the Whakatane County Council. An apology for absence was received from Mr M.F. A wide •diversity of opinion was expressed particularly by those delegates from, a distance who •claimed that they had little or no community of interests with -the Rangitaiki and therefore would reap no direct benefit from the activities of the proposed "board. No unanimity of opinion was> reached and it was finally left for all local bodies concerned to confer on the matter and to make' their separate represent tations to the Rivers Control Council before the end of April. Representative speakers from Tauranga, Rotorua, Opotiki and Whakatane gave their views on the pro-

,jected scheme but all raised the -query of financial obligation to the w rural ratepayer, and contended that " 'the'project was a national one and therefore should be met by the -State. - i» Mr W. L. Newnham, Chairman of the Rivers Control Council, addressed the meeting at lengthy point- * ing but the vital problems which had arisen in other parts of the world as a result of the complete neglect •of ion In America he contended, 50 million acres of crop land had iDeen put entirely out of production whilst in Australia millions of tons of topsoil had disappeared into the clouds. Whilst in New Zealand the. problem was less serious than in other coun--I"*"'tries, we were nevertheless suffering for the sins of our forebears and it "behoved us to conserve the position ■*' as it obtained today antl thus- pro-tect-from further erosion the heritage 'of New Zea'anders of the. future. Aims' of the Act . Discussing the act under which the Council had been Mr Newnham said that it had been passed to act as a means of lessen, ing the consequences of the steady * loss qf .soil by erosion. Its activities could be grouped under four heads. 1. Soil conservation. 2. Prevention of erosion. 3. Mitigation -of and 4. The discovery of ways and means of combining the previous three. The Council was; given wide powers and would ■eventually achieve .excellent; results. "The recognising . that 4 .no one district could stand the heavy financial commitments involved was prepared to make liberal advances in subsidies ranging from one to four pounds up tff as much -as five pounds to one in .accordance with the requirements of ' the individual case. . With regard to the Bay of Plenty, Mr Newnham said that it' was obvious that river control, was urgently needed. Important rivers with ex- * tensive watersheds had their effluence into the Bay . and extensive floodings had resulted. He put forward three proposals for the forma- * tion of catchment areas with a central control board: (a) Extending * from Opotiki to; Matata and inland "including portions of the Waikohu and Rotorua Counties; (b) From Opotiki to the Kaituna watershed ;at Te Puke and extending a similar .distance inland and (c) A major scheme embracing Opoti'ki j Rotorua and Tauranga Counties as far west :as Waihi. The second proposal, or intermedplan was favoured by Departmental officers who had studied the problem and he therefore suggested « that it should be supported by the imeeting if a catchment board was -decided upon. Mr Under-Secretary for Lands spoke of the tremendous influence of the Waioeka, Whakatane, Tarawera and Rangitaiki rivers upon the Eastern Bay of Plenty, and tod-out tfeat settlers were particularly fortunate in having most tL of the native bush at their headB waters still intact. It was, howP' *ever, urgently necessary that every|f -thin gj possible should be done to

protect the watershed s, and to control the river How as a .safeguard against the erosion of valuable pasture lands.

Aversion to New Rate Delegates were particularly outspoken in their views concerning the levying of yet another rate upon the fanning communities in their respective counties. Whilst endorsing the principle warmly all were of the opinion that to sponsor the levying of yet a new rate upon the already overburdened farming community would be. toi court trouble. The Rotorua Borough Council notified that it could see no good purpose by attending the. meeting as its interests lay well beyond the scope of the rivers involved. Mr J. T. Chairman of the Tauranga County Council, declared that his Council did not favour its inclusion in the larger scheme and would protest strongly against it. Tauranga desired the creation of a smaller board taking in the area in which it was interested with portion of the Rotorua County. In this way they could handle their own affairs. This view was endorsed by Mr Copeland-Smith (Rotorua County), who declared that the Rotorua Lakes constituted a cushion against the possibility of floods. They were not laced with the erosion problems of the Rangitaiki and the ratepayers in Rotorua whilst being averse to the larger area would probably endorse the smaller scheme. Mr Rutledge (Waikoliu County) declared that there would be little or no. area in. which his. County could take any real interest. Comprehensive Scheme Not Favoured For the Opotiki County Council, Mr Gault declared that they had not as yet had the opportunity of discussing the- scheme but." he considered that if left alone', the County Council shquld be able to handle its own erosion problems without the creation of an expensive board scheme, Mr Brewer for the Tauranga Borough maintained that most of the rivers in. which they were interested had their source in the Kaimais, were short and swift anid had their unhampered effluence into the 1 aura nga harbour. .

Mr A/E. Martin (Opotiki County) said that all he was prepared to do was to report back to his own Council with a view to gaining some indication of local opinion on the subject. "If we could be permitted to form the Tabranga County, part of Rotorua County and part of Ohinemuri, into a catchment board area, we would carry out our duties- faithfully and well " declared Mr J. T. Reid who said that he. did not favour the combined scheme. This was endorsed by Mr N. E. Hookey (Te Puke Borough Council) who said that all his interests lay in the direction of Tauranga where the watershed was identical. He mentioned that in his opinion the natural boundary for the proposed northern board would be Matata. He was supported by Mr Cruikshank (Kaituna Drainage Board).

Support from Borough "We in the Borough of Whakatane have no erosion problems to face up to" declared Mr B. S. Barry. "Nevertheless. we realise that there are very acute problems in the district and therefore we must regard it from a district point of view. The Borough Council is prepared to accept the scheme and become part of it." He suggested that the intermediate area would be regarded most favourably by his Council. Mr Newnham: If we are going to look at it from a local point of view we are not going to get anywhere. This is a national matter and broad, ly concerns everyone of us. For the Whakatane County Council Mr J. L. Burnett sajd it was recognised that its area lay in the very centre of the scheme and therefore it could not get out of it. It was not their wish to drag in others to help with the but Whakatane realised that it had to face the problem, and the longer it was put off the worse it was going to be. The greatest bogey was the rating question and he would like to know approximately how much State aid would be forthcoming. The farming community on the Plains was already meeting a heavy drainage rate and to increase it to any great extent would be a sheer impossibility. He raised the point of the exemption ol" Crown Lands and considered that if the State was to benefit by the scheme; then it should be prepared to accept its share of the financial responsibility. He too liked the intermediate area scheme. Mr W. A. MeCracken backed up the previous speaker's remarks declaring that he welcomed the principle which lay behind the formation of the board. He pointed i however the heavy rate commitI (Continued in next column^

ments which the farmer was already facing up to but agreed that in spite of this something should be done as all the existing protection work on the Plains was in danger of being swept away by a major Hood. Opotiki Opinion "Anything that tends to put more rates on the farmer is bound to have a pretty warm reception," declared Mr A. E. Martin. He con* tended that floods on the Rangitaiki Ave re not entirely due to forest denudation but to the fact that the Plains Avcre in reality a reclaimed SAvamp Avhich could not help but be flooded by any flush of waters from the higher lcA r els, The question of riA'ers control Avas hoAveA r er to his > A mind, one for the national purse and should not be levied upon any one section. The fertility in the Bay of Plenty was not decreasing, but increasing. This assertion could be proved bj r the butterfat figures taken for any district over a period. Mr NeAvnham: It would appear from the last speaker's remarks that there were no erosion problems in this part of the country*. If that is so it is different from all other places we have visited, and if we cannot reah harmonious agreement amongst local bodies it Avill probably be left to us to administer the terms of the act and to set up a by appointment. Mr G. P. Spratt (Te PUkc) d c -« clarcd that the rivers in the Western Bay did not erode and therefore did not present the problems of those on the Rangitaiki. He urged that this area be left intact to administer and control its oavi\ particular difficulties. Mr Gault raised the question of the Waioeka and Otara streams which he declared were simply mountain torrents Avell confined to their beds and which needed little or no protection. Mr N'ewnliam said that in that case the board's duty would be to see that the watershed remained intact and that it Avas protected from fire. The Alternative Mr Reid: Is it. the intention of the Government to foist this scheme on us AA'hether Ave like it or not? Mr Newnham: All I can say is that if the district is not prepared to help itself the Government will not be prewired to advance public monies for the protection against erosion, but it rests Avitli the Government whether a board shall be formed or not. It. is our endeavour to AA r ork in concert AA'ith the local bodies concerned but if this is impossible the onus is then on the Government to consider the matter and decide whether in the interests of the country as a whole a board should be formed. Mr Burnett suggested that the meeting should endorse the opinion that the formation of the catchment board was necessary in the Bay of Plenty and leave it to the Rivers Control Council, Wellington, to go further into the matter of appoint™ ing its boundaries. This suggestion Avas later modified on the motion of Mr Reid Avho moved that the question of the formation of a catchment district in the Bay of Plenty be referred back to each local body in the area giving each the right to report back to the Rivers Control Council its own opinion with regard to the formation of a catchment board or boards in the. Bay of Plenty before the end ol' April.