THE WAIMARIE CUT.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIV, Issue 4604, 21 September 1923, Page 2

THE WAIMARIE CUT.

PROJECT NOT FAVOURED. NGAHINA WHARF DIFFICULTIES. At the meeting of the Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday evening the following resolution was moved by the president (Mr E. W. Porritt) and seconded by Mr G. P. de Castro :— “That this Chamber consider the advisability of requesting the Public Works Department to proceed with the cut at Waimarie Bend, in lieu of stop-banking round the bend.” The president said that invitations had been sent ,to the secretaries of the Hikutaia and Netherton Farmers’ Unions to be present at the meeting, and he regretted that representatives of those bodies had not attended. A hearty welcome was extended by the chamber to Mr A. F. Baker, district engineer, and Mr L. May, resident engineer, of t,he Public Works Department, who had attended the meeting to supply data, in connection with Waimarie Bend. in formally moving the resolution the president briefly referred to the work that had been laid out. in connection with the Waihou and Ohinemuri Rivers Scheme, in which the cut at Waimarie Bend had been a part of the work. Some time afterwax ds, however, opposition had been shown to the project, and land had increased enormously in value, and it was also thought that the shipping facilities at Netherton would be affected by the cut. in 1917 Mr Holmes, Engineer-in-Chief to the Public Works Department had reported in favour of the cut, and his report had created a storm of protest by the oppositionists. As an outcome the Government agreed .to appoint an independent and outside engineer to report on the advisability of the Waimarie cut or otherwise. As a result Mr Blair Mason had been appointed, and this had met with general approval. The Thames Valley Drainage Board had moved strongly in the matter, and was largely instrumental in having Mr Blair Mason appointed. When Mr Blair Mason presented his report, it was found to corroborate all that the Engineer-in-Chief had said, and was strongly in favour of the cut. The full data had been supplied, and Mr Blair Mason was on the spot. The president said that should the cut be put through, of course the question of flood protection would have to be provided for*. I,t had been agreed that by means of Wie cut there would be an increased velocity of water, which would serve to assist in scouring out the river channel, and thus reduce the cost. When the present flood protection scheme was finished a portion of the cost would have to be borne by all ratepayers and that cost should be kept down to an absolute minimum. For that reason the cut should be supported. He agreed that a few set,tiers would be. affected prejudicially if the cut was pu,t through, but he thought that ample compensation might be paid them. In most undertakings there was often a few who would suffer for the- welfare of the majority. Mr Blair Mason in his report had stated that Netherton would no.t be isolated, as a • metalled road would be made, and ample drainage arranged for. Also., when' the Paeroa-Pokenp railway came through Netherton almost certain to be a station. The president contended that if the cut was put through shipping facilities would be increased, and also that highwatei would be some twenty minutes earlier in Paeroa than it was at present. He thought it was also a question of cost. As regards the present system cf stop-banking, Mr Pprrti/t. said that he would like to draw attention to the recent disasters in Otago and Marlborough. Both the Taieri and the Wairau were stop-banked rivers. He was of the opinion thalt the Public Works Department would not err w. the wrong side. The const! uction an 1 protective works were of enormous dimensions. He was of the opinion .that in years to come thousands of pounds would be saved by haying protection from floods. He favoured the cut. at Waimarie Bend, but at the .same time he was in full sympathy with the settlers whose land woull be cut up. He had pleasure in moving the resolution at. the request of a number of settlers in the Valley, ]n reply to Mr Marshall , the president said thott he was not prepared at that juncture to submit the names of the settlers who had asked him to move in the direction in which he was moving. AN ENGINEER’S VIEWPOINT. Before putting the resolution the president, asked Mr A. F. Raker, district engineer of the Public Works Department, to address the chamber. Mr Baker said that the summary of the resolution as put forward by -the president was substantially correct. The speaker said that he was not aware of such opposition to the cut in 1917. He knew that in 1913 the opposition of the Hikutaia and Netherton settlers was very bitter. It was on account of the strong opposition shown that the Department had decided to stop-bank round the bend. Later on. in 1920, a Commission had decided t.o carry out the stop-banking with the elimination of the cut at Waimarie Bend. Preliminary stepbanks had now been completed as far as Netherton, ■ and the final stopbanks from the Ngahina wharf downwards would be commenced shortly. He was of the opinion that by the cut being put through the velocity of the water would be increased, which would provide for .the quicker discharge of floodwaters. Stop-banks would be necessary on the cut. The width of reserve required would be thirteen chains, so as to provide for 'the depositing of spoil a,nd building stop-banks on both sidqs of the river as far as Kaimanawa. Flood-gate culverts would also have to be providedThe height of the water level in .the river would be raised. The river banks would require cleaning, roads would have to be raised to the top of the stop-banks and metalled, houses would have to be shifted, and the compensation payable to settlers would be enormous. He contended that Mr Blair Mason had only gone ; iUfto the question of the cost of the

I cut to a very small extent, and his I data had been incomplete, he More recent surveys had shown thatJlF the biggest part of the cost of putting . the cut through would be on the cut itself. He was of the opinion that the most satisfactory, and certainly the cheaper, proposition : was the stop-banking of the existing river. This would also have the advantage of giving at least temporary protection to sett,lei’s at an early date. , He was doubtful if it was realised how much land would be involved in putting the cut through. The section,s in that locality were very irregular in shape, and a large tract of land would be required, and there ' a serious difficulty presented itself in arriving at a reconciliation with settlers when land was taken at such wholesale rates. A plan was produced showing the proposed cut and the immediate locality. Mr Baker said that .the estimated cost of the stop-bank works at present under way was £105,000. The estimated cost of the cut was £178,-. 000, a difference of £70,000. In reply to the president said that the £105,000 was the, estimated cost of the stop-bank completed. Answering Mr Marshall said that the quantity of earth that required to be removed was 1,200,000 yards. QUESTIONS. . Mr de Castro asked if the cut would not be cheaper than the recenfc floods in Otago. Mr Baker said that the stop-banking in the two places could not be compared. Further, the mining in Otago was entirely different to that in these parts. ' The Taieri River received wholesale tailings, whereas the Ohinemuri only received a very small quantity of mining tailings. Mr de Castro: Well, what about the Wairau River in Blenheim., Mr Baker replied that the' stopbanks on that river, to the best of his knowledge, were only about 3ft high. As regards this district, the stop banks would be approximately 80 ft through at the bottom. Since the scheme was undertaken there ha l been no floods to reach the magnitude of the existing stop-banks. Mr Porritt asked Mr Baker did he consider the better scheme. ! Mr Baker said that from an engineering point of view he was in favour of the cut. Mr de Castro asked if the navigability of the river would be affected to any extent. Mr Baker said that he thought the , river would be considerably improved for navigation. The Public Works Department was obtaining a 12in suction dredge from England, and he was in hopes that a start to dredge the river would be commenced in about 12 months’ time. Mr Brenan asked if the spoil would be taken from the river. Mr Baker : Yes, from the river bed. In reply to Mr Steedman, Mr Baker said (hat the area required to put through the cut was 234 acres. The president asked if it, w ere not - possible for the Government to consolidate the land and hand it back to the settlers. Mr'Baker said that it might possibly be done, but ah equitable adjustment would be a huge undertak- > ing. The properties on’the Netherton/ side would be at a dead end, as t>«e river would be dammed up and no launch would be able to get from Paeroa to Netherton on that account. Replying ,to Mr Porritt, Mr L. May (resident engineer) said that the cut would save 3% miles, in the length of the river. Mr Taylor referred to the remark made by the president that the cut would have the effect of making high tide in Paeroa tweny minutes earlier, and asked if Mr Baker could confirm that remark. Mr Baker said that Mr BlahMason’s figures had been checked and found correct. The effect of earljer tides was obvious, because thertifiegk wave had a less distance to travel. Mr Brenan asked if the tides being earlier would affect the steamers using the river. In reply, Mu May said that the affect of the earlier tide would givo ', steamers about 20 minutes lopger coming up and 15 minutes going down. The tide itself did not rah any faster. He thought that would improve the shallow parts ' the river, temporarily at any rate.. The dredge would start at the top and work down the river. The Department did not propose to do anything towards improving the Paeroa wharf or Ohinemuri River meander. He was afraid the Northern Steamship Co. would have to do its own dredging. Mr Brenan: Does the Department wish all steamers to utilise the Ngahina wharf? Mr May: I do not know what my Department’s wishes are'. (Laughter.) Mr; Baker remarked that a definite reply had already been; given- the Thames Valley Drainage’: Board that the Department would do nothing towards the Paeroa wharf and Ohinemuri meander. The Ngahina- wharf ■ had been built for steamers to use. Mr Brenan said that he understood that the Ngahina wharf'was welt u der wtaer in flood time,. and . he thought the wharf was more dangerous than the present Paeroa wharf. The approach to Ngahina could not be used with safety In flood time,' and the floor of the wharf shed was "weH -• awash. People were not going to risk produce and provisions under such conditions, in addition to the rjsk already stated the Public Works Department intended charging 2s per top wharfage on all goods going over ... Ngahina. He considered that the consignees were entitled to protection, and he would like to know what the Department intended to do- in the matter. ” Mr Baker said that as far as he knew his Department did not intend to take any further steps in the mat- : ter. In the event - of a flood, thought settlers should “take time oFtb the forelock" and remove their goodsw to a place of safety, the same as had' been necessary on the Paeroa wharf. Mr Brenan: Yes, that is so, but we are not asked to pay 2s a. ton wharfage there.. • The president v that llr '

Silcock, the Northern Co’s, agent at Paerpa, had told him that the Ngahine wharf was at least two feet too low. Mr Baker said that the stop banks had yet to be raised four feet, and it was quite impracticable to raise a wharf to that level. Mr Marshall: Who is going to send out the S.O.S. call that the flood is coming ? Mr Baker? said he did not know. He would like to point out that the road leading on to the Ngahina wharf was to be raised about 18 inches. Mr Marshall asked if the velocity of the additional water from the Waihoii River at- the Ngahina wharf was not a factor to be consdeired. Mr Baker said it was no.t anticipated that the velocity of the water would be any greater at Ngahina. Mr Brenan said thdt he would like ; to know if the cut at Waimarie Bend would be any advantage to the Ngahina wharf'. Mr Baker: No, none whatever. Mr Marshall inquired if the earlier tid“ would affect the storm water in the town of Paerpa during a flood. Mr Taylor contended that if the banks at Ngahina to be raised a further four fdet the Ngahina wharf would be practically useless. • He thought that the big question to be considered was adequate wharfage accommodation. Mr Brenan asked if the height of the water would be icduced when dredging operations were commenced. Mr Baker, replied that if there was dredged, say, 2ft, the course in the channel would be increased, but in flood the' effect, would be very The depth of the river was governed by high tides, and dredging would not affect the flood level. The most im- . portant point to his mind was that the settlers for years had been content to use a shed that had been falling to pieces, and now, when a new shed had been buil.t at the same level as the old one, fault was found with it. It had to be remembered that the shod was not erected for- the purpose of storing goods in. He contended that the Ngahina shed was not in a worse position than either of the Northern Company’s two sheds. Mr Brenan: We will be when we to pay 2s per ton wharfage. ! ’ Mr Baker replied that if the. settlers were paying a portion of the cost of the scheme by way of wharfage dues he thought that that amount would be taken' into consideration when further land tax rates were lev.'ed. He wished to point out. that the level of the flood at Ngahina would be the same whether the cut was put thr»ugh“or not. Mr J. T. Brown asked what would be the position if no dredging was dore to the Ohinemuri meander, and the flood-gate draining all the land from the Thames road became blocked. Mr Baker: The Ohinemuri meander is not at all likely to silt up. Mr E. A. Porritt asked if the only c ffective way to save the shipping in the future would be by dredging the i old meander, in view of the work being dpne by the Department. Mr; Baker : I will not admit that. Mr May said that .the Ngahina v harf could not be raised any higher, «"s at low-tide the lift from the steamers was as far as could be permitted. 1 f the steamers were to be worked on tides only, then half an houV would be about the time available. Mr Taylor asked Mr Baker if he thought the Department would favour rny recommendation ‘or suggestion that the chamber might put forward for adequate shipping facilities. He thought the time had arrived when that most important point should be seriously considered. Tn reply Mr Baker said that the Ngahina wharf shed had been put in position for a certain purpose, after very careful consideration. He .did not think that it, would now be possible to move the shed. The Department had received no encouragement, and the townspeople had refused to have anything tp do with Ngahina. Mr de Castro: Then does the Department recommend the cut at Waimarie Bend ? Mr Baker: The desirability nr otherwise of the cut was thrashed out ■ years ago, and it was decided to carry but the scheme as at present. As there were no further questions the president moved a very hearty of thanks to Messrs Baker and May for attending the meeting and for the valuable information given to the chamber members. The motion was carried with acclamation. Tn returning thanks on behalf of ' Mr May and himself Mr Baker said that they regarded it as a part of their job to attend the meetings, and it had afforded them great pleasure in attending.- He regretted that the delegates from Hikutaia and Netherton were not present. After the engineers had left the room the president said he thought p that it was useless pushing his mo- ’ tion any further. Mr de Castro said he was of the opinion that the Department, although they had supplied valuable information, were no doubt desirous of pushing the Ngahina wharf. He thought that the chamber should make furJfLther representations to the Governiment to keep the old Ohinemuri River channel open for navigation. There -* was at least a passable road to the . old shed in flood time. The president said he did not think there was any chance- of getting the Department to do anything towards the maintenance and navigation of the Ohinemuri meander and wharf sheds. The Rail,way Department would in the future, no doubt, ne • placing its railway bridge across the river above the Ngahina wharf. The following resolution was then moved by Mr. Brenan and seconded by Mr Marshall:— ■ ' ‘•That the Public Works Department be urged to meet the Northern Steamship Co. in regard to berthage and wharfage accommodation anl , charges at the Ngahina rMvharf to permit the present wharf to be abandoned in favour of the Ngahina wharf.” The motion was carried on the voices. , Mr Brenan said that he was of the opinion that Ngahina wharf should

be a free wharf, as the Department had only given something in return for what it had previously taken away. The president said that he agreed with the resolution. He thought that it was only a matter of time when the Paeroa-Pokeno railway came through, when the people would have to u,se Ngahina. He had heard a suggestion that a grating could be put down on a portion of the Ngahina shed, thereby raising goods above flood level. If that was done there would still be a. part of the shed available for the working of cargo.