CENTRAL IRRIGATION

Evening Star, Issue 19800, 25 February 1928, Page 5

CENTRAL IRRIGATION

ADDRESS BY MR MARKS DESTRUCTIVE CRITICISM DEPLORED THE FUTURE ASSURED [From Our Own Reporter.] ALEXANDRA, February 24. A large crowd assembled in the Town Hall, Alexandra, to hear an address By Mr J. R. Marks, formerly resident engineer, and later District Engineer of Public Works, on irrigation in Central Otago. The mayor of Alexandra (Mr W. Bringans) presided, and among those present were Messrs Horn, M.P., S. B. Macdonald, W. B. Steel (of the Otago Expansion League); also many settlers on the irrigation areas within a radius including Roxburgh East, Chatto Creek, Clyde, and even further afield. Mr Bringans, in opening the proceedings, said the number of people present from widely-separated districts showed the wide interest taken in irrigation. He welcomed the president and secretary of the Expansion League, also the Mayor of Cromwell and the chairman of the Vincent County. He could not refrain from saying that irrigation came to the Central at a very critical juncture. When Mr Marks left Alexandra he was given a public presentation for public services and for other work voluntarily done in the interests of the district. Mr Marks explained at the outset that he 'Vas not inspired by any public bodv, the Government, or individuals. Something had started and threatened to run wild, and he felt he should do what ho. could to help to surmount a crisis. First, he proposed to deal with extravagant criticism of Central Otago irrigation; next with the justification of public expenditure in the district; and third, with the aspect of the general taxpayer in respect of such expenditure. Lastly, he would deal with what he regarded as the best way of expending money in the district in the future. Deferring briefly to his severance of relations with the Public Service, he said reforms in policy were necessary, but he deprecated reports which might prejudice the future development of the district. He asked if any Government could vote further money in face of such criticism. ARROWTOWN SCHEME. Ho wished first to refer to Arrowtown. At the end of January Mr S. B. Macdonald had described Arrowtown conditions as a positive disgrace. He (Mr Marks) was sorry the Expansion League should indulge in such destructive criticism. The reference was that settlers had been put on the land by the Government to make a living off irrigation areas; but in Arrowtown district the settlers had been long on the land “dry farming,” and these settlers had decided when irrigation should be started. If the Government had provided more money to expedite the Arrowtown scheme, the water would not have been available to help production. Through the present droughty season the Public Works Department had experienced difficulties and mishaps, and had doubtless learned much, probably the department still had much more to learn. Mr Marks proceeded to deal with the ‘ Star’s ’ correspondence and criticism in the issues of February 8 and February 16, particularly in respect of settlors walking off because the promised water did not materialise. He (Mr Marks) had known the district for twelve years, and he asked the residents if any of them knew of one settler in the irrigation area who had to walk off. Voice: Yes! Mr Marks; 1 know one did; bo got a good price for his place. Voice: Ho walked off with nothing. Mr Marks: “ I admit I knew of one several years ago. I know settlers have not, been able to resist the enhanced values offered. That is a different thing from walking off.” Mr Marks quoted another case referred to in tho ‘ Star,’ where a couple were threatened by ruin because of the advent of irrigation. He affirmed that there wore now four good homes where before there was one. Voice: Are you making a guess at which property is meant? Mr Marks: Yes, I am making a guess. (Interruption.) Mr Marks reverted to tho Arrowtown scheme, and said the expenditure had been a little over £50,000 instead of the £90,000 alleged. He assured those concerned that tho scheme would prove to be all right. Mr Marks read extracts from tho ‘ Star ’ in re the Government not honoring its part of the agreement with settlors as to the supply of water, and asked if the settlers would take up land if such statements were circulated? Voices: It’s quite true. It is no agreement at all. At this stage a member of the audience challenged Mr Marks’s allegations concerning the Government’s breach of faith with Earnscleugh settlement. The Chairman thereupon asked for interruptions to cease, and said questions might bo in order at tin? end of the address. “ VINDICTIVE CRITICISM.” Mr Marks said the ‘Star’s’ misinformation concerning breaks in the Manuherikia race was apparently vindictive, and was unfair to the local Public Works officials, who were not in a position to defend themselves. (Applause.) The Alexandra office had been carrying out other work beside irrigation, including surveying, planning, taking out quantities for 27J miles of prospective railways. BORDER DYKE SYSTEM. Mr Marks contended that this had not proved a failure in ' tho department’s experimental plots. A Voice; It has not proved a success. Mr .Marks continued that the Galloway plot, after six irrigations of two inches each, was carrying one milking cow to two acres. He admitted that the cost of the border method was too great for general application on all flat lands. Some adjustments would have to be made to enable farmers to adopt it. The Manuherikia irrigation scheme admittedly had had hard luck. He contended that the department had supplied 60 per cent, above the quota last year. He did not say it was enough; he knew this year had been unfortunate in three breaks to the race. It was “ jolly hard luck.” Mr Marks asked: Are you going to let the destinies of your district he guided by the sound utterances of bona fide settlers, or are you to have your impressions put out by land' speculators? IRRIGATION FINANCE. Mr Marks said the total expenditure on the Government’s Otago irrigation to date was £762,000, in addition to which sum a further £IOO,OOO would be needed to complete the schemes in hand. The area served would be 62,000 acres, representing a capital cost of about £l4 per acre. However, £92,000 of the expenditure was not yet reproductive. Completed schemes, costing £67,000, were already serving 48,000 acres, of which, however, settlers were irrigating only 30,000 acres. The average increase in the production from this irrigated land was £5 per acre per annum. Taking into account irrigation schemes other than fitovernment

schemes, the increased production was £170,000 per annum, or 25 per cent, on tne capital expenditure. He prophesied that in. time the, increased production would be £1,500,000 per annum. WHAT IS WRONG? Mr Marks continued that, in all. irrigation schemes a time arrived when the settlers felt that tho payments required readjustment, but it was imperative that the settlers should not impose on the general taxpayers of New Zealand. He reviewed the past history of irrigation in the United States, when the settlers took charge of tho schemes from the original companies, and eventually prospered on the ’misfortunes of the companies—in some cases through the intervention of the Federal Government of the United States, who arranged for deferred payments, and bore the brunt of a considerable loss. From a national point of view that was all right, but in this country we could not afford to let tho situation get out of hand like that. It might be necessary for the State to take over a considerable part ot the loss. It had been hoped that our irrigation settlements would bo selfsupporting in their earlier years. Our schemes were not proving so, but there should he no difficulty in satisfying tho people of New Zealand that the Otago schemes were nationally sound. Wo did not want to alarm the taxpayers by saying that they had a number of “ white elephants ” on their hands. THE FUTURE. Mr Marks proceeded to outline the Advisory Committee’s method of dealing with the proposed Upper Mauuherikia schemes. This committee, ot which lie had been chairman, proposed the classification of lands, water requirements, and charges; but, to prevent lands being overloaded with money charges, a Government subsidy ot ho to 40 per cent, would be needed. A similar subsidy would be needed for settlements already under irrigation, and he admitted that a greater quantity of water per acre should be supplied than at present. He realised that the Public Works Department was essentially a construction department. It did not pretend to be a business department, and might not therefore be fitted to administer the schemes in operation. It was a difficult matter for a district, engineer in Dunedin to control details from that distance. He believed the running of these works should in time be undertaken by a separate body on the lines of the Land Board. There should be an irrigation commissioner to co-ordinate research work with other officials, and recommend schemes for construction by the Public Works Department, and on their completion the administration should revert to the board under the irrigation commissioner. This board would constitute a board of appeal where settlers’ grievances could be ventilated and adjusted. Mr Marks concluded his address by paying a tribute to Mr Horn and Mr Coates for the interest taken,_ particularly by the latter, when Minister of Public Works, in irrigation in Central Otago. He resumed his scat amid applause. Mr Horn, M.P., thanked Mr Marks for the clear way the latter had handled the figures to show how eventually the expenditure on irrigation would prove a remunerative investment to the dominion. He would regret if anything should prejudice the idea that irrigation would lie the salvation of Central Otago. He knew many matters required remedy. One head of water for 200 acres was not enough, while tho concessions on charges had proved inadequate. He hoped that in the near future things would bo run much better than heretofore. The Hon. K. S. Williams (Minister of Works) and possibly Mr Coates also, would reach Dunedin a week bonce, and tour Otago Central with him (Mr Horn). (Applause.) EXPANSION LEAGUE VIEWS.

Mr S. B. Macdonald, speaking for the Expansion League, said this was a national and not a political question. Whether or not wild statements had been made, as Mr Marks had alleged, ho contended that the situation demanded tho Royal Commission now being petitioned for. He defended his previously published criticism of the Arrow-Frankton scheme, and tho “ciilf-and-collar brigade ” in the Public Works Department. The league had no bone to pick with Mr Marks. He (Mr Macdonald personally had much admiration for Mr Marks as an engineer. He wanted to see a Commission investigate and find where the blame lay—whether it was with Mr Marks or even with Mr Furkcrt. The league had taken up the matter of cost of construction, maintenance, water supplied, and charges brought within reason. (Applause.) Irrigation would be the salvation. of Otago, and to stop it would be a calamity; but there must be an investigation into the past and present administration. (Applause.) Mr W. Sanders, mayor of Cromwell, said this had been a great opportunity of knowing what had been going on behind the scenes. He and others had often thought that in the resident engineer’s office there were many officials who would bo better emplovcd at the business end of a long-handled shovel, irrigating. (Laughter.) Mr Andrew Scoullar, of Matakamii, speaking as a member of tho Vincent County Council, said if one-tweaticth of Mr Marks’s prophecies came true it would be of great benefit to tho district. The Chairman at this stage (10.15 p.ra.) invited questions short and to tho point. A Voice: Why don’t they pay the Public Works employees by results? Mr Marks said that query should bo directed to tho Minister of Works. Mr John George (Roxburgh East) asked the cost per acre of the border dyke plot at Galloway. Mr Marks said that, including seed and other charges, it was about £l4 per acre. In reply to further questions on this system, Mr Marks admitted the heavy cost of preparing the land, but suggested that farmers should extend their border dyke area each season. A question was put as to what inducement was offered settlers on the ‘‘near’’side of the breach in Hhe Manuherikia race to take the water on, Mr Marks replying that the water was offered cheaper. A member of the' audience said lie had offered 2s per head and had got the water for one day only, after which it was cut off from him and run to absolute waste. Towards 10.30 p.m. there was a lively fusillade of questions, and at times there was a good deal of hilarity, until Mr E. Marslin moved a vote of thanks to the lecturer, and the chairman thereupon put this promptly to the meeting. and it was carried.