WEDNESDAY’S SITTING

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3541, 23 September 1926, Page 4

WEDNESDAY’S SITTING

Tho Manawatu-Oroua River District Commission resumed the hearing ot evidence this morning, when Mr R. AY. Holmes, the civil engineer engaged by the local bodies, continued to give to the commission tho result of his investigation of the engineering and economic features of the £450,000 flood control scheme of tho River Hoard. Under examination by Mr F. H. Cooke (one of the counsel appearing for the local bodies interested) witness stated that, in his opinion, no lesser length of straightening cut than up to Moutoa from the'" Manawatu river mouth would be really effective. Witness dealt with engineering technicalities of the proposed scheme, stating tiiat the only effective permanent protective work "to guard against erosion of banks along certain reaches of the river would be concrete. Adequate protection in that material would cost from £150,000 to £200,000. While lie did not disagree with Mr F. C. Hay’s estimate of the scheme as such. witness thought that the estimate should ho increased in respect to such extraneous matters as the concreting mentioned. The flood control scheme proposed would, as he had stated in earlier evidence, not improve the bar at, Foxton port. One of its effects would be to generally lower the channels of the Manawatu and Oroua rivers, thus possibly necessitating the extension and strengthening of bridges over tho rivers. Tho lowering of the channel of the Manawatu river might, witness stated, conceivably accelerate the erosion of the river banks adjacent to the Palmerston North Borough. PALMERSTON’S POSITION. “J presume that you would say that the borough of Palmerston North is out of the flood area?” stated Mr Cooke. Witness answered that lie was not sure of the borough boundaries, but towards Terrace End there were some old courses of the river below flood level, hut usually not flooded. What would he the ellect on the Makerua stop-hanks of a flood equal to that of 1880?—It might he somewhat disastrous. , Would the scheme affect the I* ltzherliert bridge?—The lowering of the channel would tend to undermine the foundations and the supporting cylinders would have to he put deeper. Is there not a steep fall from Palmerston North to Longburn?—A fall of 37 feet. The Manawatu river at the Fitzherbert bridge is 100 feet above sea level and the Longburn bridge level, some four miles away 63 feet above. Mr Bergin (appearing for the Foxton Borough Council): Would the scheme affect the navigable reaches of the Manawatu river? No material alteration would result, replied witness. WITNESS CONG R ATULATED. Mr P. E. Baldwin, counsel for the Manawatu-Oroua River Board, before proceeding to cross-examine the witness, congratulated him upon the most lucid, interesting and instructive information lie had given to the.commission. It would be necessary, said Mr Holmes, to start the scheme at the { lower end of the river and work upwards—it could not be done piecemeal. “Then the safety of the upper reaches of the river is hound up with that of the lower reaches?” queried Mr Baldwin who received an affirmative asswer from the witness, who stated that admittedly the River Board’s was the most practicable scheme for the district. Counsel closely questioned the witness concerning the suitabliiy of Willows and other trees as a means of protecting river hanks, and a ripple of laughter ran round the court room, when Mr Holmes asked Mr Baldwin whether he was “looking for some cheap information.” Mr Baldwin later suggested that mangoes and tamarisks might he grown in the tidal reaches where salt water killed other trees. Tamarisks, witness agreed, had been successfully grown at IN KAIRANGA. Evidence was given by the engineer to the Kairanga County Council (J. E. Menzies) as to the flooding m that area, stating that only that part of the county adjacent to the confluence of the two rivers was subject to major flooding. Further flooding could occur in this region from tho Mangaone stream alone and the River Boards scheme would be of use to the county if this stream were to he controlled by it The damage done to roads and bridges was very slight and interruptions to traffic infrequent and of brief duration. „„„ BA I LAVAY DEPARTMENT’S VIEW. Herbert \V. Beasley, district railwavs engineer, AVangamli, stated in evidence that the losses incurred by the Railway Department through flooding of the Manawatu and Oroua rivers had been inconsequential. Only once since the main line was taken over from the old Manawatu Railway Company had the water been over the rails, although speed restrictions hud been imposed on occasions. There had been no interruptions due to flooding although on one occasion a bridge washout of local character had caused some delay. “As a matter of fact,” he said, “the railway benefits from floods, as then it carries the people who cannot use the flooded roads.”

In the event or any serious damage to the line, he continued, the department had an alternative route over the Rimutaka line. Flooding had certainly caused no material trouble on llie main line from Palmerston North to Wellington. POSITION OF FOXTON LINE. As for the Foxton line, flooding in ill is quarter had been serious, but it was an unimportant line and .nterruptions on it did not affect the general railway system. Since 1900 it had been closed on 12 occasions for periods varying in length from two or three days to a week. The loss of revenue so incurred was insignificant. Passenger returns on this route at any time were inconsequential. As for goods traffic it had to wait in any case until the line was repaired, for transport. Repairing damage done to the line since 1900 had cost in all only C 1251 or about £SO per annum, and that did not justify a liberal subsidy to any flood protection scheme.