CATCHMENT BOARD

Evening Post, Volume CXL, Issue 23, 27 July 1945, Page 4

CATCHMENT BOARD

WELLINGTON AREA

PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION

Though speakers at a preliminary conference of' local body representatives of the Wellington district held j yesterday were agreed that soil conser-j vation and prevention of liver erosion were matters of vital importance and that the Government was to be congratulated upon taking action .while yet it is still not too late, the conference was not agreed that the system of administration and rating laid down by the Act of 1941 was the soundest to meet the conditions of the district. It was agreed, therefore, that the officers of the regional planning committee should report upon the proposals and that a further conference should be held later. The meeting was called by the Mayor of Wellington (Mr. Apple ton) and there were present representatives of Wellington, Lower Hutt, Petone, Upper. Hutt, Eastbourne, Johnsonville, and the Hutt and Makara Counties. The main catchment area in which the proposed catchment board would be interested was that of the Hutt River, and all the authorities were interested in water supplies from that river, either from artesian reservoirs or from surface supplies, said Mr. Appleton. The Engineer-in-Chief of the Public Works Department (Mr. W. L. Newnham), who is chairman of the Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Council, under which the district boards will operate, explained the proposals in detail, saying that the four main purposes of the council and boards were: Promotion of soil conservation, prevention, or mitigation, of soil erosion, prevention of flood damage, and utilisation of land in such manner as the above objects were achieved. The work to be done was not the work of a year or two, but of a generation or more, and a main responsibility of the council would be to lay the foundation for a long-term programme. Both the central council and the district boards possessed wide powers under the Act, but success could not be achieved without the full co-opera-tion of all concerned. Ten major catchment boards had now been set up and others were in process of formation. Because of war conditions those already set up had been unable to go beyond preliminary investigations, but that had been well worth while. SAFEGUARD FOR FUTURE. A large part of the catchment area of the Hutt River was already under the control of the Water Board, though there were many thousands of acres outside the control of that board which would require consideration, said Mr. Newnham. Erosion problems were much less serious in the Wellington district than in many other places in the Dominion, but nevertheless there were erosion problems that should be met as a safeguard for the future. Mr. Appleton remarked that as there were already highly expert officers in the Wellington area no elaborate staff would be needed and they should be able to get along without any expensive organisation. To Mr. F. S. Hewer" (Lower Hutt City Council and Hutt River Board) Mr. Newnham said that the Catchment Board would have full control over the operations of the River Board, but one could not imagine that the Catchment Board would interfere with the operations of a river board carrying ! out successful work, though the operations of that board would be subject [to the approval of the Catchment I Board. I Considerable discussion ensued about rates and rating powers, several speakers objecting to the idea of local bodies acting as agencies for yet an--1 other body. The maximum administration rate under the Act is one-eighth of a penny in the £, but Mr. Newnham suggested that probably not more than one-fiftieth of a penny would be required for administrative purposes. NATIONAL IMPORTANCE. Mr. Appleton moved that the board should be set up, but Mr. R. L. Button (Hutt County), while seconding the motion, pro forma, said that he considered the work envisaged—soil conservation and river erosion—so vital that it was a first national responsibility, which should be the responsibility of a special Government Department financed from the Consolidated Fund. Mr. Newnham said that the Act threw some" financial responsibility upon local bodies, though in fact a large part of the expenditure in future would have to be met by the Government. Mr. Appleton said that it was necessary to obtain the co-operation of local authorities for efficient operation. Mr. J. Draper (Hutt River Board) thought that the problems of the Hutt River could be solved by extending the area over which the River Board operated. Mr. E. W. Wise (Mayor of Eastbourne) stated that his council was •wholeheartedly behind the principle 'of soil conservation, but regarded the work as a national responsibility, to which his council would be prepared to contribute, but it was opposed to the setting up of additional local bodies. The general principle was one which all must . applaud, said Mr. J. W. Andrews (Mayor of Lower Hutt City), but he was concerned over the possibility of the over-riding of the successful River Board, whose operations were such that control of the lower reaches was effective, at a lessening cost to the ratepayers. Actually straightening of the river higher up would lead to increased problems in the lower reaches, because of the quicker run-off, necessitating building of higher stop-banks. That would be inevitable in any event, whether or not a Catchment Board was set up, said Mr. Newnham. If the Wellington district refused to set up its board, the council had power to set up a board itself, but in fact refusal would probably result in the matter being deferred indefinitely, he said in answer to another question. ' It was at the suggestion of Mr. H. Green (Mayor of Petone) that the conference agreed to ask the Regional Planning Committee to report in detail upon the proposal; this' report will reach all local authorities concerned for their consideration pending a further conference.