THE RIVER COMMISSION.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 438, 26 September 1908, Page 2

THE RIVER COMMISSION.

The Foxton Sitting.

(The continuation of Thursday’s hearing appears on page 4.) On resuming at 10 a.m. on Friday the hearing of evidence before the River Commission was continued.

Alexander Saunders, flaxmiller, Moutoa, stated that the whole of his land was subject to floods. He was altogether opposed to the cut across Makerua Swamp as the land could not bear the tax. Had been in favour of Himitangi Cut until he had been informed it was impracticable. In consequence he nOw favoured the cut from the Moutoa church which was the most practical scheme before the River Commission. In addition to this he also favoured. the cut through to Hartley’s Bend. The scheme would give the river more speed and more scour. As an alternative to the latter cut one to Robinson’s Point might meet requirements. Did not think there was much peat in the Moutoa Swamp, but there ivas in Makerua. Could sink a pole 40 feet down in the latter without finding the bottom. If this scheme were successful, and he felt confident it would be, it would increase the value of flooded areas by about per acre. Did not think lack of flooding would affect flax seriously, some of the best flax in New Zealand was grown on hilly lauds. Scheme might not benefit flax lands to same extent as grazing land, but flax land might eventually be converted into grazing land. A point in favour of the scheme was the fact of the millers being able to work throughout winter without fear of being stopped by floods; Did not think it right to ask lands outside flooded areas to contribute towards expense of cut but Government should assist instead. Any rate about 5s per acre would be too high. He would rate on an average basis according to the amount ofland flooded, as lands which were now the least valuable would benefit most and go up in value most. Government should take matter up and complete the scheme rating the district for the purpose. When completed control should be handed over to River Board to take charge of area as far as Jackeytown. Was opposed to embankments of any kind but did not object to groynes. Individuals should have right to protect their own banks but we prefer to see River Board do it. People in other areas should not pay for protection works against river erosion above.

To Mr Robinson : He questioned whether flax would deteriorate' if laud were drained, but was confident if flax was submerged for any length of time it would be materially injured. To Mr Hennessy: He had not heard that a pole 16 feet .long could be put down in tbe Moutoa Swamp without reaching the bottom. He thought any cut through these would go through fairly solid. Did not think lowlying Moutoa lauds would become worth per acre if a cut were put through.

To Mr Thomson : He had made bank perfectly secure from erosion by planting willows. To Mr Gower: If they had to pay ios per acre towards cost of scheme they would be no better off than at present, 5s would be all they could afford. He would not care to pay £25 per acre for lauds in the basin of the Moutoa Swamp. The basin might in time be raised by silt and would thus become more valuable. To Mr Stubbs : The Government should contribute towards the scheme because they were deriving a direct benefit from increased taxation.

To Mr Venn: Many of the flax lauds were used for grazing purposes as well as for flax and would benefit by the proposed scheme. To Mr Daw : Floods varied considerably and ho two acted alike, one might be higher than another in places, though not actually larger. Mr Joseph G. Peers, Shannon, stated that the floods affected his land to a considerable extent. His lands would increase in value by about per acre if relieved from flood.

Walter Barber, Motuiti, considered the ,£500,000 scheme too heavy for the settlers to bear. Had favoured Himatangi cut all along but was now of the opinion that the £300,000 scheme, as recommended by Mr Hay, would be the best.

To Mr Short: He thought an increased value of £xo per acre for land relieved by the proposed scheme rather high. To Mr Robinson: Approximately the river at high flood was 15 or 20 feet higher than the normal. To Mr Gower: The lowest parts of the flooded areas were practically valueless. Part of the Moutoa land was very low and would not be increased in value by any scheme to the same extent as other lands.

To Mr Thomson: There was considerable erosion of the river bank in places below Jackeytown and the river was now working towards the Makerua side. During the past five or six years ridges from which flax had been cut had been washed away. To Mr Venn : If the Oroua could be turned into the Himatangi cut it would undoubtedly keep it open but the cut would have to be deeper than the proposed overflow channel otherwise only flood waters would be carried away. Edward Eaw, Shannon, gave evidence as a member of the

• Makerua Drainage ■ Board* 1 About two-thirds of the district was flax land. If any board were formed it should only deal with flood waters alone. Existing drainage boards should not be interfered with in any way and if amalgamation were desired it should be left to the local bodies themselves. Speaking for himself, he stated that some years ago r Government had promised to survey the Himatangi route but nothing had been done. The settlers had always favoured the Himatangi scheme because they wished to stop the water from getting into the very low lauds. Until he had heard the evidence he had thought there were no engineering difficulties in the way of this cut and still held that a survey should be taken. A fall of some 30 feet could be obtained. /An engineer from* India had ' spoken favourably of the scheme and had stated that 'in a few years it would pay for itself in the irrigation afforded. Failing this he favoured the £300,000 scheme to a certain extent and suggested that they keep the cut as close to the high banks as possible. The Government should nominate a board to carry out the whole of the work. He had seeu from 40 to 45 tons of flax to the acre cut off swamp land that had never been flooded. A dirty flood might possibly benefit the flax but no serious harm would be' done if the lands were relieved from flood. Messrs. Akers and Mac Kay had said they would not benefit if relieved from floods. He did not agree with them and had known seven 1 floods to occur within six weeks i which meant that the land was ! never free from water ani a great 1 deal ol damage must result. 1 .To Mr Thomson : The higher areas should contribute towards ( the cost of the scheme by way of a < light rate or a Government subsidy should be granted. If the lauds 1 were relieved from flood they ] would increase in value from .£8 to per acre. The Govern- 1 ment should complete the scheme * and then hand it over to a board 1 to be elected by ratepayers. The t board should be comprised of subdistricts each having representa- ' tives. This board should only con- c trol one area up as far as Jackeytown. If the people above wanted 1 to protect their banks they should I do it at their own expense. s To Mr Short: He did not con- c sider Foxton should have a repre- t sentative on the board unless they contributed towards the cost of 1 construction and maintenance s works above. The scheme would j. not clash with the Foxton t Harbour Bill, in fact it would be c of assistance as the increased flow I of water would tend to keep the I bar clear. The jurisdiction of the a „ board should terminate at the be- i ginning of the cut from Whirokino s -to Hartley’s Bend and the f Harbour Board should control from s there to the mouth of the river. d To Mr Stubbs: Palmerston c should pay a small rate towards *3 the proposed scheme. If they t wanted the work carried out it t would be best for the Government I to control it. It was impossible to get the settlers to pull together r and consequently if they were left c to carry out the work it would v never be done. The question of t compensation should be left to the t Magistrate. c To Mr Venn : If the ,£300,000 s scheme were carried out, Foxton « should not contribute. t Mr Venn: Would Foxton benefit c by the scheme

Mr Law; Yes. t

Mr Venn : If they pay anything towards the scheme should they have any say in the management ? Mr Law: Certainly, To Mr Gower : The uplands - should contribute towards the scheme. The stop-bank at Moutoa had tended to force the river on to the opposite bank, x To Mr Thomson: Foxton would benefited by the scheme because there would be a better port. Frederick W. Venn, Makerua, member of the Horowhenua County Council, stated that he had known the Manawatu River for about 40 years, and in places the bed was not now nearly as deep as then. This was due to silt being brought down from the upper reaches. The face of nature was being altered, and in his opinion, floods would be more frequent in the future than they had been in the past. It was only fair that the people of the upper reaches should contribute towards the expenses of any scheme. All their-debris and silt was coming down and blocking the main drain. Had the scheme been such as to entail only an expenditure of 000, probably the people in the low-lying areas would have borne the expense themselves. It had been said that the floods during past years had been higher than at present. His own experi?rpe had been in accord with this, he Government should take control of the scheme and carry it out, charging interest on the lands benefited. The maintenance of the river, as far as, the rateable area went, should be under one board ■ only, and all other, works under district boards. All who contributed towards the drainage 1, should pay rates, and the whole should be included. In his county they made every owner clean his own water-course. Tlf debris came down from higher -/areas, he contended that those who sent it down should pay for the cost of clearing it away. If the responsible party could not be found, then the county cleared it away. It was not right that a man should be asked to clear , away his neighbour’s rubbish. He ■ would have the franchise for the election of the board fixed on the I:--same basis,as the county elections. Rif the rates were charged only on

the lower lands, then an acreage basis would meet all requirements, but if the whole water-shed area were included, the rating should be on the unimproved value. The drainage boards should contribute as much as anyone else, as they flushed all their spoil into the Manawatu. No rebate should be allowed them. The owners of flax lands also claimed rebate, but it should not be granted them. If the scheme were carried out, and their lands converted into grazing lands, they would be among the best in the country. Another reason why they should pay, was the fact that tail races sent a great deal of short bits of fibre into the river, which helped to make the rivet silt up to a very great extent.

To Mr Stubbs: There had been less rain at Makerua last summer than there had been during the past 20 years. He wanted Palmerston to assist in keeping the silt out of the Mauawatu ; practically the whole of the silt settled within 20 chains of the current, with the result that the bed was rising, and there were now thousands of acres lower than the river itself. He did not not agree with the theory that rich alluvial flats had been made by deposits of silt from the uplands. The water came down very much quicker now because the bush bad been cleared off. On this coast we get quite as much rain as when the bush was standing, but the bush and scrub held back the water, and it did net come dpwn so quickly. Thirty years ago they could swim dozens of horses and men nearly all the way down from Fitzroy St. to the Fitzherbert bridge; there were 20ft of water there then.

Mr Stubbs : You say that thousands of years ago the river flowed deeply down this channel ? Mr Venn : Probably ; I haven’t had much experience of that period. In commou justice, the Government should contribute towards the scheme. A fairly good endowment would be a means of doing this.

To Mr Gower : The silt deposits were not enriching the surrounding country. To Mr Thomson: The river had been over the railway line at Makerua in the years 1897, 1902, and 1906. There was one other occasion which he could not remember.

Mr Frederick W. Franklaud, Foxton, favoured Mr Heunessy’s scheme iu preference to the ,£300,000 scheme, because he felt the greatest anxiety as to the effect of the latter scheme in regard to Foxton. The cut proposed by Mr Hennessy was the most feasible of any, and the least expensive, while it was only a few feet above the sea level. The soil from Whirokiuo to Hartley’s Bend was of a sandy nature, and would be more difficult to deal with than that recommended by Mr Heunessy. The interests of the majority of the small struggling settlers should be considered, as .against the few large land holders in the district.

To Mr Thomson: Mr Hennessy’s cut would give a straighter cut to the river than the other, and would cause just as much scour at the bar ; besides, it would obviate the necessity of dredging the river opposite Foxton. The “red” scheme was preferable to the “green” scheme, the “red” being the scheme that has for its object the straightening of the river, while the “green” goes through the Moutoa and Makerua swamps.

To Mr Venn : Mr Henuessy’s scheme would benefit Foxton and residents could pay a little towards

Bernard Gower, Mayor of FoxtoU, chairman of the Moutoa Drainage Board, stated he would favour the Himitaugi scheme, and before having it condemned he would like to see a survey made of it. The higher up the floodwater could be cut off the better it would be for all concerned. The laud through which this cut would go was in the hands of two or three owners and was only of the second or third-rate quality. The land had recently changed hands at 4s. or ss. per acre, but if the scheme were carried out in a few years it would be worth that many pounds per acre. The channel should be taken out to the sea and should not be an expensive one to make as the floods would help to sqsMir it out. If the water was not taken out there then a cut should be made through to Hartley’s bend or thereabouts. The straighter this cut could be made the better it wou'.il be, but its action on the river at Foxton had to be considered. He favoured the “ red ” scheme as against Hennessy’s.

To Mr. Thomson: Of all the schemes he favoured the Himitangi cut. If the ‘‘ red ” scheme were feasible without injuring the port he liked it next to the Himitangi scheme.

To Mr. Robinson; If the “ red” scheme affected the port adversely he would be opposed to it. According to Mr. Hay’s report this channel was to be 2,100 feet wide for the first five miles to Oroua Bridge, from there to Moutoa 2,880 feet wide and 12 feet deep, and from there to Whirokino bend 2,300 feet wide and 16 feet deep, while the cut between Whirokino bend and Hartley’s would be 2,300 feet wide and 16 feet deep. The width of this was too great and was unnecessary. He wished to know why it was narrower in places than others. Mr. Vickerman pointed out that where the cut was narrower it was deeper and would still carry the quantity of water. The figures given contained that outside cubic capacity necessary to come down. Mr. Gower contended that the narrowing of the channel lower

down would tend to make the water bank up. Mr. Vickerman pointed out that the extra depth would do away with this.

Continuing Mr. Gower stated the work should be under the control of a board which could also have control ol the Oroua. The rating should be on the acreage basis and the uplands should contribute a certain amount, or failing that the Government should contribute. The higher areas contributed towards the damage and they should also contribute towards the expense. The rate to be struck depended largely upon the cost of the scheme. The lands on this side of the river could only stand a rate of about 3s. 6d. or 4s. per acre, and some of it would have to be classified. By taking the floods off some of the Moutoa land, it would increase considerably in value. He would elect the board on tfie same lines as the drainage boards or county councils; the Government could perhaps reserve the right to elect one members. The drainage boards in this district should remain as at present. , To Mr. Short : He hoped no banks would be required.

Mr. Vickerman : You will require banks no matter what scheme you adopt. To Mr. Venn : It would be a good plan to divide the district into ridings each to have a representative in the same ratio as the rates they paid. Mr. Fitzherbert of Fielding was the means of originating the Commission. To Mr. Stubbs; Lands to be rated should be classified and the classification left in the hands of the board.

To Mr. Law: In the case of disputes between two boards each could bring their case before a magistrate or responsible person, and let him decide ; but expensive litigation should be avoided. This concluded the evideuce, and Mr. Stubbs thanked the members of the Commission for the courtesy and extreme patience with which they had listened to the evideuce. Mr. Venn also expressed his appreciation of the courtesy accorded to the delegates. Mr. Thomson stated that the Commission had not necessarily concluded taking evidence ; in the meantime they adjourned sine die. They would probably make their repoit some time iu November.