THE WAIMAKARIRI.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18659, 7 April 1926, Page 11

THE WAIMAKARIRI.

TO TUB EDITOR Of "THE PR*SS." Sir. —The question of the Waimaknriri loan divides itself into two divisions—engineering and finance. I would submit to my fellow-ratepayers that data is being collected which will improve our knowledge of the Wainiakariri problem within the nest two years, and it will be advisable to continue the present payment for improving the conditions out of revenue for a few years, rather than rush a loan on the market and find in a few years' time that a better, even if a larger, scheme might have been evolved. Evidently doctors differ; let the patient have time to look round.

On tlii> second problem of finance, the ratepayers should clearly understand that the loan proposal is, that they should have to pay the rate for 50 years, thereby depreciating the value of all property in the district. We are rapidly approaching' the point where the rates payable are taken into account when purchasing property. In England the excessive rates have about halved the value of rural land ac compared with of) years ago. In 50 years the original loan is paid three times over. For permanent improvements that will last longer than the term of the loan borrowed under favourable rates of interest may be advisable. At the present high rates every proposal should Ikj severely criticised. : Our producers are handicapped at least I per cent, on money necessarily borrowed owing to the excessive Government and local bodies' loans of recent years. The producer is, after all, the only tangible asset the colony has. I think the engineer of the Board i s on right lines, but he should collect more facts before the Trust borrows £200,000. The City of Christchurdi is liable for twothirds of the rate, and it should consider its position carefully.—Yours, etc., B. TO THE EDITOR OP "THE FP.E3S." Sir,—lt is a pity that Mr Chrystall has seen fit to characterise Mr Hay's letter as an attempt to discredit him without any regard to fact. No one attempted to discredit him. Mr Hay quoted both chapter and verse from a report in the possession of the Waimakariri River Trust, written by a qualified and reputable engineer. If Mr Chrystall contends that this report is in error why does he not coma into the open and tell us how he obtained these wonderfully accurate estimates of travelling shingle? Will be exactly the methods adopted by him to estimate the quantity of shingle going through the Gorge? Did he erect a dam across the Gorge so that the gravel would be intercepted for a definite period?—the only method (vide Professor Speight's report to Messrs Chas. Hawley and Co.) by which such an , estimate could be made. He has gone so far now that he must' finish. He has criticised the methods adopted by the Trust to measure the shingle, but the Trust's method is exactly the same as that advanced by Profeßsor Speight. Mr Chrystall advances statements which would mean the ruin of Christohurch if" they were facts. Let him substantiate them and convince us that imagination is not the real source of his figures. I am glad he admits that the fences were ''utter nonsense," and surprised that he even erected two of them, as he admits. I will be surprised to learn that his other experiments (the result of . which Messrs Hawley and Co. did not wait to hear) were not also "utter nonsense." The Trust is both able and willing to place all the facts in relation to its scheme before the public. Let Mr Chrystall back up his criticism by doing the same.—Yours, etc. H. W. HARRIS. Christchurch, April 6th. to teb csitob or "ih» raws." Sir, —Yesterday I quoted from one of my. confidential weekly reports rendered through Messrs Hawley and Co. to the Christchurcb. City Council. To-da;jr I quote from a reply by Hawley and Co. to a letter of mine on the subject enclosing my conclusions.

August 22nd, 1924. " . . . Youi interest in and effort to get a reasonable basis for estimating the- Waimaka" riri gravel movement is. indeed commendable, and I hope that you may be able to discover a praotical scheme as it will find many uses in New Zealand. In contrast to this the phrases "No experiments worth mentioning wore made, but between February and April, 1922," and "absolutely futile" appearing in ,Mr Hay's anonymous "engineering report" tickle- my sense of humour considerably. The investigation did not start till until December 16th, 1922. What delicious imagination and invention!

Though the use of grabs, screens, etc., contributed knowledge on tho matter °f gravel measurement, I based my experiments on methods not calculated to disturb natural flow conditions. The whole of my experments are embodied in a report on gravel movement in the HVaimakariri,* presented late in 1924, after further private investigations on my part. Mr Hay, a qualified engineer, says "it must be obvious that the measurement of shingle moving in a river during flood is impossible," whilst Mr Harris, not a qualified engineer, but a surveyor, and therefore somewhat out of his depth, says: "It may be news to Mr Chrystall to learn that the Trust has made considerable use of a current meter during the last two years . . . and it can be positively stated that no idea of the amount of gravel and silt movement past a given point can be deduced from its use." As an engineer to' a layman I have pleasure in explaining to Mr Harris that no current meter manufacturer ever specified his instrument to measure ideas. A current mete- is for measuring water velocities which have a direct-relation to the gravel velocities, and it has been my very interesting task to establish this relation, and also the width and depth of gravel moving. I would think still less of the -Trust's methods than I do at present if they had not used a current meter. However, at this late stage, whether tlurc is anything in what I say or not, there is only too much evidence that the shingle menace is worse than the Trust make out, and they cannot before polling day design a new throttle to handle "enormous quantities" and "practically none" and satisfy-all. ' I would urgo all ratepayers tafore they nibble at the attractive bait put into the trap in the last few days, namely, "reduction of rates," to think of an imprisoned rat faced either with an enormous expenditure of energy to get out, o r with death by drowning.— Yours, etc., H. M. CHRYSTALL.

TO THB BDITOX 0» TH« Sir,—The two outstanding and crucial facts about the Waimakakriri are these: (1) Shingle is being brought down by the river and deposited in its lower .reaches; (2) the bed of the river is being slowly raised by this shingle deposit to the danger of the surrounding country and of Christciurch City. These facts are agreed upon by all concerned. It follows, then, as the night the day, that the only solution of tho Waimakariri puzzle is to dredge

tho river. No shortening of the course of the river, no r building of weirs, nor anything else will stop tbe deposit ot shingle' or cause it to be earned out to sea." It is to be hoped that the public, in their own intrest, will loot tho matter squarely in the face and turn down the scheme of the- Kivtr Trust, which at best can be only a palliative.—Yours, etc., ' J. JOHNSTON. Slater street, Christchurch, April 6th.