HORAHIA DRAINAGE.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVI, Issue 4900, 9 November 1925, Page 3

HORAHIA DRAINAGE.

CONFERENCE OF BOARDS. HAURAKI BOARD’S VIEWS. The Hauraki and the Horahia drainage boards met in conference at Turua on Saturday morning for the purpose of discussing the Horahia board’s drainage scheme as it affected the 'Hauraki board’s area. There was a full attendance of members of both boards, and the clerks, and Mr J. N. Anderson, the Horahia board’s engineer, were also in attendance. Mr G. Gray, chairman of the Hauraki board, was appointed chairim an. Prior to the opening of .the conference ;Mr Gray'said that the Hauraki board desired it to be definite y understood that whatever any of its members, isa id was without prejudice. Mr Gray said the Hauraki, board had received and considered the propi sals of the Horahia board, and had formed an opinion on them He desired to know if there were any further points

Mr J. C. Miller replied in the negative and expressed the opinion that each matter should be discussed separately. Naturally there was bound to be a difference of opinion, but if the matters were discussed in a friendly spirit some satisfactory arrangement might be arrived at. TAYLOR’S OUTLET.

This course was agreed to) and the first drain dealt with -was Tower s outlet. The Horahia board’s scheme provided for. the utilisation of this outlet to drain 390 acres. The improvements necessary were estimated to cost £lll3 6s Bd, of which the Hauraki board was aisked' to find £351 10. S.

Mr Gray, the representative of the area in which the drain was situated, said that the board considered that there were sufficient drains in the northeiih area. The Hauraki board considered that the Horahia board should, have a new drain constructed to the Waihou River. It did not object in any way to the Horahia board draining to the Waihou River, but it had strong objections to the Towers outlet being utilised. If a new drain was constructed the roads.ide drains at the intersection would be dammed. Mr McDuff did not see the reasonableness of a second drain so close to the existing outlet, but Mr Gray pointed out the Hauraki board’s reasons and these were supported by Mr S. S. Murray, the new member of the Horahia board, who stated that he was familiar with the nature of the country and realised the force of the argument.

At this stage Mr McMillan pointed out that some record of the discussion should be taken’ for future reference. Mr McDuff said that ’.he report of the* Hauraki Plains Gazette would be sufficient. This was agreed to, and if was also agreed that the decisions arrived at should be in writing and signed by the chairman of each board. Discussion followed on the probable areas that would be- jserved by the new 1 drain, and Mr Hale raised the point as to whether the Hauraki board could prohibit its ratepayers draining into the Horahia Board’s drain.

. Mr Gray said that the Horahia Board would have to make arrangements with the land owners, to get the land for the new drain, and the ■matter of drainage of their land could likewise be a matter for arrangement. - No decision was arrived at. JUBILEE OUTLET. Mr J. Mules; the representative of the* area in which the Jubilee outlet was situated, said that the position was similar to that of the Towers outlet. A straight route to the river would be preferable from. all points of view. . Mr Heappey stressed the point that a big drain was not an advantage to the land traversed. This was being demonstrated in no uncertain manner at the Willow drain, where the land owner had had an enormous area washed out to sea. At one time it was possible to jump over the drain, but now the outlet was over a chain wide. On the land which had been washed away the farmer had ,to pay rates and interest. Discussion followed bn the state of the flood-gate. Mr Anderson expressed the opinion that it was not large enough, but the Hauraki Board differed. Mr McDuff aisked if . the Hauraki Board would object to the Board using the drain provided it paid the full cost of ,the necessary work. Mr Mules asked what coiisiderfttion would be given the Hauraki Board’s settlers for the lessened efficiency of the draim Mr Miller pointed out that about 160 acres of the Horahia area was draining Into the Jubilee drain and the board proposed to drain a further 500 acres. He was sure that if the Hauraki Board had to do the draining of the area it would utilise the Jubilee outlet. Mr Mules suggested that the Horahia Board take over the drain entirely and pay compensation iso that other outlets could be provided for the Hauraki Board’s settlers. The country on the riverside was very different to that of .the country in the back areas. A system of underground drains was necessary for, efficient results, and it was the purpose of the board to provide an outlet for every settler. This had been done. After further • discussion Mr Hale said that he would like -to hear the Hauraki Board’is proposal. Both boards were out to do the best for the whole area. Mr Gray said .that it Was obvious that both boards were out to drive as hard a bargain as possible. Mr Mules repeated his suggestion that the Horahia Board should take oven the Jubilee outlet. The settlers would lose the advatnage of the drain if a large quantity of water was poured in from the back country, and some provision would have to be made to provide other outlets for the tsettlens,. They would not be permitted to drain into the outlet. Mr Hale pointed out that the Horahia area was higher than that of the

Hauraki area, and that the hoard proposed to have a number of drains constructed to the Piako River. This would give some relief ,to the Hauraki area. Mr Baker pointed out) that the Turua area could not afford to pay the maintenance charge for the suggested dual drain if it should be enlarged. Though the Horahia Board'would pay half the cost trie maintenance would be more than doubled. On request Mr Anderson explained the details of the Horahia scheme to the Piako River, and showed the watersheds and the area that would be drained, the object being to show that adequate provision was to be made and that the Hauraki area would be benefited. Mr McDuff asked the of conistruction of the Jubilee drain. Mr Green pointed out that this would not be a fair indication of the value, because some of the drains had cost more of recent years than the original cost. An equitable way would be to assess the cost of constructing the drain to-day.. Mr McMillan offered the suggestion that the acreages benefited be left out of the discussion, and that the proportion of maintenance be charged according to the amount of mohey spent and the additional amount spent to benefit the Horahia area. Mr Heappey suggested gauging the volume of water at the Hauraki boundary and at the flood-gate and paying the manitenance charges according to the proportion. Atfer further discussion the Hauraki Board Stated that its final decision was that it would sell the Jubilee drain to the Horahia Board and prevent the Hauraki settlers using it. Other drains in the area were visits ed, the discussion on which, will be reported in our issue of Wednesday.