ASHLEY RIVER TRUST.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19162, 19 November 1927, Page 3

ASHLEY RIVER TRUST.

YESTERDAY'S MEETING. The monthly meeting 'of the Ashley River Trust Commissioners was held yesterday. Present: Messrs. F. Langbein (chairman), T. Wyllie, B. Peach, L. J. Stokes, H. G. Philpott, W. Stalker, T. Dawson, and 0. S. Ayerg. The offer of Mr A. O. Pulley at £1,2 10s a year for seven years for the lease of a river frontage, was accepted. Mr Peach reported on the felling of willows below the Ashley. Questions had been raised at the last meeting of the Trust, he said, that he had exceeded the estimated cost. As he was absent from the meeting he was unable to explain the reason for doing so. They found that the work suggested was not sufficient to give protection, bo it was decided practically to duplicate the work. A vote of thankß was passed to Mr Peach for the work done. Mr Stokes said that at the last meeting of the Trust he was challenged by Mr Wvllie for making a statement that over £IO,OOO had been spent by the late Ashley drainage Board on the north bank in the 18 years of its existence. He produced a statement of the yearly expenditure from 1908 to 1925, which showed that close on '£ll,ooo had been spent. Mr Wyllie said the Board had not spent n«trly that amount, and Mr Stokes's figures iv«re incorrect. Mr Stalker said -if Mr Wyllie still maintained that the figures submitted by Mr Stokes were incorrect, then it was dp to him to prove it. Mr Wyllie said he was not prepared to produce figures at a moment's notice, but would do so for the next meeting. Speaking on hie statement of the cost, Mr Stokes said be had made the statement to show that if it cost £II,OOO to protect the north bank of tbe Ashley, then the estimate submitted by Mr Hayes of £44,000 to do the whole of the protection work of the river was cheap and reasonable. He was prepared to support any scheme that would jsive adequate protection from the Ashley to the settlers on the south side of the-river.

Mr Wyllie said he had submitted a scheme which, in his opinion, would give all the protection needed, which was much more economical than the larger scheme, but _it was not considered. Considerable discussion took place over the action of the Trust in not formulating a definite scheme. The chairman said it was necessary for the Trust to adopt some scheme. If the riTer was to be controlled there must be some definite line of action, and this opinion was backed up by the Chief Engineer of the Public Works Department. No grant or subsidy would be approved by the Department unless there was something definite set before it and approved by its engineers. The Chief Engineer was not going to approve of any scheme if he thought it was not in the best interests of the Government and the landowners. Mr Stokes said it was a great pity the scheme submitted was defeated, as he was sure it would be the cheapest in the long run.

Speaking as the borough representative, Mr Ayers said it was the best thing that could have happened to them, as it would have been a great hardship on the borough to have to find £I3OO a year and not reap any proportional benefit. .The cost to Rangiora was out of all proportion to the protection received.

It was eventually decided that, under the new proportional representation scheme a fre*sh election would have to be held, and that the matter of defining a scheme for river protection be left to the new Commissioners.

Mr Wyllie said a great many questions were being asked as to what the Trust was doing and the cost of administration. The clerk stated that a balance-shwt was being prepared and would be submitted shortly. It was decided to vote £lO for protection work at Coldstream. The treasurer'* statement showed a . bin* credit of £179 lit 4d.