WATERWAYS COMMISSION.

Franklin Times, Volume 9, Issue 630, 6 May 1921, Page 3

WATERWAYS COMMISSION.

COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE’S REPORT. AN INTERESTING RESUME. At yesterday’s meeting of the Franklin County Council, Mr H. E. R. L. Wily, who represented the Franklin County Council at the sitting of the Inland Waterways Commission, reported that he had attended ten sittings of the Commission and had presented a large number of witnesses and had cross-examined other witnsses in such cases as he deemed necessary. He also accompanied the Commission to a number of places he considered advisable they should inspect in order to arrive at a proper understanding of the position in regard to the Waikato river and the proposed canals as they affected ratepayers He found a general disposition on the part of the advocates of the canals to induce the Commission to report in favour of constructing and maintaining these canals out of leans secured by special rates upon farmers’ lands. He combatted these ideas on the general ground that unless these canals could be shown to be a sound economic proposition w£ should be better without them, and on the special ground that they would be of little, if any, use to farmers. He now felt fairly confident that no recommendation to that effete would be made in the one from the Waikato to the Manukau in which this county is chiefly concerned. He was of opinion no evidence had been tendered to the Commission to show that the canals were necessary or that they would earn enough money to pay working expenses. If the canals were constructed, the work of canalising the Waikato river would have to be undertaken. No estimate of the cost of this was available, but the expense of dealing with the 45 miles from Otaua to Taupiri would be enormous. An alternative canal route giving access from the central Waikato to the Auckland wharves had been brought under the notice of the Commission. This would run from the Waikato river immediately south of Taupiri mountaian by way of the Mangawaro creek to the Piako river. The latter stream had been canalised to where the proposed canal would enter it. The advantages of tliis route over the Manukau route would be that the cost of canalising the Waikato would be obviated and the heavy upstream hauling of cargo from Otaua to Taupiri would be avoided. It would also open up a large area of unroaded country and possibly render the proposed PokenoFr.eroa railway unnecessary. He added that he had always been adverse to any large expenditure upon the Waikato river as economically unsound and had impressed his views upon the Commission not only by his own evidence but by that of other witnesses. He was of the opinion that a comparatvely small sum judiciously expended would afford the very moderate facilities for navigation which would meet the requirements of the -settlers who had to clcoend upon the river and its tributaries for roads, and he trusted the results of the Commission’s inquiries would lead to something in this direction being attempted. The only estimate of the cost of connecting the Waikato river with Auckland was an extremely rough one by Mr Hamer, engineer to tthe Auckland Harbour Board. It was as follows: Waitemata-Manukau, via Tamaki . . .. £900,000 Manukau to Waikato . . £1,250,000 Lock at Needles . . . . £125,000 Total . . . . ■ • £2,375,000 To this amount must be added the c o:it of canalising the Waikato river, and if the Whau route is taken an additional sum of £2,850,000. On the motion of the chairman and Or Wilcox, Mr Wily was accorded a hearty vote of thanks for his report, which was received.