WATER FOR TIROHIA.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXX, Issue 5485, 9 October 1929, Page 3

WATER FOR TIROHIA.

DEPUTATION TO COUNTY.

SUPPLY TO BE CONSIDERED.

At the Ohinemuri County Council meeting on Thursday last a deputation representing the setlers of Tirohia and consisting of Messrs W. J. Noble and B. E. Veale, waited on the council and presented the following petition on the subject of an adequate water supply in that area. “We, the undersigned property owners of Tirohia within the Ohinemuri County, hereby respectfully make application to have the present water supply along Te Aroha Road extended from its present termination point to such a point as will give our respective properties a supply. We strongly urge upon your council r o give this matter its consideration, as the matter of a supply is of the utmost importance to us, and failing favourable consideration we will be at a loss to furnish ourselves with a supply of sufficient permanency to relieve our anxieties.”

Nine signatures were appended, representing 19 paddocks, 7 dwellings, and 4 cowsheds. , Both members of the deputation stressed the fact that the settlers were grievously handicapped through lack of good water, and their stock suffered in consequence. It was a serious mattea, too, for the school, which depended on tanks, the supply from which was neither good nor reliable, and such conditions were not fair to the children.

The chairman, Cr. C. Mason, said he was only too pleased to see the deputation. It was the council’s duty to go fully into the subject, and while no definite promise could be given at the present stage, the matter would be given special consideration. The county’s first duty, however, was towards the Paeroa borough, and the county must see that the borough’s supply was not interfered with. Cr. A. R. Robinson maintained that a fair amount pf money was likely to be involved. The country in question was high lying, and the present water main was rather small. An alternative scheme,' such as water from a nearby creek, might be evolved to give a satisfactory supply. Cr. W. F. Johnstone disagreed with the chairman’s remark that the council’s first duty was towards the borough. He maintained that its first duty was towards the ratepayers. The settlers should be the first to be considered. The water storage capacity of the county had recently been increased 50 per cent., which ought to give the borough a reasonable supply of water for 20 years to come at the present rate of increase. If it was possible for the county to extend the water supply to Tirohia it should do so. There was apparently always a tendency in local bodies to consider town and borough before settlers. He did not know whether it was because of greater rating powers, and therefore voting powers, but at the same time primary producers must be considered.

Cr. T. Barrett suggested, as the best thing to “do, that the engineer go into the matter.

The engineer explained that despite the 50 per cent, increase in supply there was no more pressure. Without an increased main the water supply could 'not be extended. Without incurring a great deal of expense it could not be done. If the mains were to be enlarged the borough must be taken into consideration, as it would have to enlarge its mains also, and he did not think the borough would entertain the idea.

Cr. Mace contended that the first duty of the engineer would be to take levels. Tirohia was on higher ground than the surrounding country, and it would be of no use laying pipes to there and then finding them useless. A creek would be an excellent alternative.

In reply to Cr. Mace Mr Veale said that there was no suitable creek. There was a creek in the vicinity," but it dried up in summer, just when the supply was most needed. Cr. R. R. Morrison asked if there was a pressure gauge at the dam. The peak of water consumption, he said, was in the morning and evening. By means of a pressure gauge, if a loss of 251 b pressure was shown a loss of 100 ft level would be registered. The engineer replied that there was 901 b pressure on the- average, but at peak times there was a difference of 251 b.

Cr. Morrison said that this was caused through friction owing to the pipes being too small. The engineer said it should be definitely stated that the council could not give an extended service without a supplementary supply. From the whole discussion it was quite evident that there was an ample water supply, but the existing mains were not large enough to make an extended supply practicable. It was evident, too, that the pressure of water in parts was not satisfactory with the present pipes.

It was finally decided that the engineer go thoroughly into the whole matter and report to the Water Committee in time for the next meeting of the council.

Cr. Morrison, questioned later by a representative of this paper on the subject of pressure gauges and watermains, said :—

“In determining the quantity of water a pipe will discharge the following factors have to be taken into consideration : Height of intake above point of delivery ; diameter of pipe in feet; velocity in feet per second of water in pipes. Water-mains are generally provided with pressure gauges, which indicate the pressure in pounds per square inch. As a column of water one inch square and one foot high equals .4341 b the pressure gauge, if the elevation of the point of intake is 200 ft above where the pressure gauge is placed, should read 86.81 b, that is, 200 x .434. Where water requirements are greater than the main is capable of delivering, loss of head, or pressure, results, due to increased velocity and friction in the pipes. This

is indicated by a substantial decrease in the reading of the pressure gauge. When this takes place to any great extent it is quite evident that the pipes are of not sufficient diameter to supply the amount of water required.”