LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2415, 22 March 1915, Page 7

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

ONSLOW WATER SCHEME, A quantity of correspondence on tha subject of the Onslow water schenio continues to reach this office daily, and we aro compelled for reasons of space to compress to-day's budget. "Inquirer" asks: (1) What is tho differonco between the present proposal and that rejected at tho last poll? (2) Is it a layman's illusion, or an engineering proposition backed "by a; professional man's reputation? (3) Under present unsettled conditions, whilo "private traders and experienced financiers are curtailing expenditure, what ,is the reason for rushing a poll involving an expenditure of £50 to £100 (whether the proposal be carried or negatived), while pledging the council not to borrow for perhaps years? (4) How the allowance of 20,000, gallons per house per year was arrived at? and how many shillings per house per year for extra water nave been assumed in caiculatiug possible revenue? (o) What quantity of water is allowed for fire emergency supply? And what pressure will be available on the higher levels? (6) Assuming the 20,000 gallons, or more, to have been U6ed by each household : what is to become of it afterwards? "A Ratepayer" thinks good roads and footpaths are more urgently needed than water. He says: "It should ba the duty of ratepayers to put men into the council who will see to these urgent needs, as mind at this election they will be elected for two years; also that they pledge themselves to do their utmost to secure a grant every year from the Khandallah ward for the maintenance of the George Road. -At the present time Ngaio pays for tho whole of it, although every cart or motor that goes to Khandallah goes by that road. So Ngaio take the advice and wake up."

. Another' contributor, the original user of the same nom de plume, writes: "Who are the authorities Mr. Crump quotes when he says 'consulting author-' ities I_ find we have over six and a half million gallons per month we can rely on, or 78,000,000 a year out. oi' 147,000,000 gallons'? Why, Sir, an expert civil engineer, who has just computed the. outflow of the stream from the conservation area after a close investigation, estimates the output for 24 hours at 26,000 gallons, or at the rate of 9,672,500 gallons per annum. What has' become of the rest ? According to Mr. Crump one and a third million gallons would be running to waste every month, the reservoir of 5,000,000 gallons being full, and 2,400,000 gallons being used monthly as well by consumers, a total of nearly 8-J million gallons, whereas we see there h only 795,000 gallons per month outflow, when there is no reservoir and no consumers. I do not deny Mr. Crump's figures as to the amount of the rainfall, but he has not allowed nearly enough for waste by evaporation, seepage, and outflow, which should be nearer 75 per cent, of the total amount than the four-tenths he allows. Again, if Mr. Crump is so certain that as lie says there is plenty for our purpose, enough for t'hree times our population, why is the council limiting vthe use to 40 gallons per head ana installing' meters ? In conclusion, Sir, let me say I must thank Mr. Crump for one frank admission, one in which we both stand on a common platform, when he says we have no more conveniences than a back-block, with the exception of the electric light. But 1 1- have at least the inestimable privilege of paying over £21 on 4J acres of land, where my brother in the backblocks of Taranaki pays less than half that amount for 750 acres with a far superior road."

"Pro Bono Publico's" contribution is as follows :-r-"Mr. Crump deals with a lot of figures, evidently his own, as he refers to them as 'my calculations.' He states that the average rainfall is about 46 inches per year,, but he does not give us the average figures for the eight, very often dry, months from August to May, as everyone knows that the bulk of the rainfall takes place during our winter months. If he is relying on the winter' rainfall it meanß that in a dry season the reservoir would have to hold sufficient to provide water for 2000 people for eight-months, and on- his figures that would amount to 19,200,000 gallons less theV flow of stream, about 20,000 gallons per 24 hours, amounting to '4,800,000 gallons. This means that the reservoir would require to be of 14,400,000 gallons capacity to supply present needs instead of 5,000,000 as suggested by Mr. Crump. It is only about 9,400,000 gallotis short and in the above figures no allowance has been made for evaporation, eto. Mr.. Crump asks where the £40,000 comes in, while as a matter of fact his own figures amount to £35,500, that is £22,500 for water and £13,000 for drainage, and that is merely the estimated oost which is always far below the actual expenditure. With regard to. road-grading, which will certainly have- to he done, Mr. Cramp admits that compensation will be payable to people whose property is left |on a bank in consequence., Like the riparian rights question, where is this going to end? If the council's solicitor has advised Mr. Crump, or his predecessor in office, that there"'can be no serious claims.for compensation under the above heading of riparian rights What possible objection has the Mayor to making that opinion known to the ratepayers?"