SHIPPING CONTROVERSY

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 11, Issue 8, 21 March 1947, Page 5

SHIPPING CONTROVERSY

WHARF AT KUTARERE PROTEST BY CARRIERS Mr Hislop, secretary Opotiki Carriers’ Association, has received the following letter dated Bth March, from Mr E. J. H. Hewitt, manager of the Northern Steamship Co., Ltd.:— “Yesterday afternoon we received your telegram reading: “Carriers Association consider Kutarere Wharf and approaches unsafe and will continue carting only if your company agreeable indemnify member against any loss of cargo or damage to vehicles” to which we replied:— “Cannot agree indemnify members using Kutarere Wharf. You should make your representations to authority controlling wharf. Your action will penalise Opotiki merchants until channel position improves as at present unworkable. If controlling authority unwilling carry out necessary repairs you should appeal to Marine Department Wellington asking them take necessary action to have wharf and approaches repaired immediately.

“In the first place it is very difficult to understand why we should be asked to indemnify the carriers. We do not own nor control the wharf and our responsibility ceases when the goods are landed on the wharf at Kutarere.

“As we stated in our telegram your representations should have been made to the authority controlling the wharf and if they are not willing to carry out the necessary repairs then an appeal should be made to the Marine Department, Wellington, asking them either to take the necessary action to have the wharf and approaches repaired immediately or to' have the wharf condemned. In the latter event and while Opotiki was unworkable we would of course be compelled , to adopt no other alternative than discharge the goods at Whakataner You will appreciate that we are«iot prepared to risk the lives of those employed on the vessel, the vessel, or the cargo, in trying to work the Opotiki bar and channel when the master of the vessel concerned considers it is unsafe to do so. Further it is not right or proper on the other hand that having got into Opotiki we should place the Dairy Association in the position of a big financial loss by having their butter on board for days on end waiting to get out: While we have no desire to enter into the affairs or administration of what are purely local matters we may be forgiven for suggesting that in our opinion the present divided control of Opotiki and Kutarere is not in the best interests of either Opotiki or the surrounding district. Obviously the Kutarere wharf is a necessary adjunct to the facilities at Opotiki and in our opinion if there was one controlling authority for both wharves then the revenue obtained from the Opotiki wharf could be used to make the long overdue improvements to the approaches and wharf at Kutarere for use during the short period each year when Opotiki is not woi’kable. We submit, we. must admit with some temerity, that this is the line of action your members should consider. We are at all times willing and anxious to do all we can to give a better service to Opotiki but when conditions are such that it is impossible to work Opotiki then we have no option but either to discharge at Kutarere or failing there at Whakatane. I feel sure your members will appreciate that in any matters of navigation the master of the vessel must be the sole judge. If there is any way in which this company can assist in having the facilities at Kutarere improved, please do not hesitate to call on us.” Copies of the letter have been forwarded to Mr W. Burrett, Opotiki Borough Council, Opotiki County Council, Opotiki Chamber of Commerce, Opotiki Dairy Association, Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington.