RIVER FLOOD CONTROL

Manawatu Herald, Volume L, Issue 3907, 14 February 1929, Page 3

RIVER FLOOD CONTROL

MANAWATU COUNTY COUNCIL’S ATTITUDE. WILL JOIN DELEGATION.' At Tuesday’s meeting of the Manawatu County Council, correspondence was received from the Manawatu-Oroua River Board relative to the scheme of Hood control of the Manawatu and Oroua rivers. The board notified that it had been resolved to wait on the Government to ask for a, subsidy of £1 for £1 towards the cost of the work. Local bodies Kvould not be asked to contribute towards the cost of the scheme, as it was considered that local bodies’ contributions would be fully covered in the £1 for £1 subsidy to be asked for from the Government, in return for the public benefit accruing when the scheme was completed. The hoard forwarded the resolution moved at the conference last month !by Mr. J. Ohrystall (Foxton) in order* that the scheme could be. fully considered by local bodies. Cr. J. Boyce, who attended the conference, said all the delegates present were very cautious —they were all more or less sitting on the rail, seeking information. He had no objection to giving support to the deputation but in this, there was a danger in the council being, at a future date, drawn in for' something it never anticipated. 'The initial cost was at present under consideration and not future maintenance, concluded the speaker. As far as they) could gather, there was another point which had been omitted from the scheme and that was attention to the drains. If the river baulks were raised and the drain banks left, no benefits would accrue to the land affected.

The chairman ('Cr. W. E. Baiber) considered that question purely parochial. If the river scheme were undertaken, the flood waters would get away more quickly and this would, he felt, tend to relieve the pressure in the drains. The big cut to the ocean would undoubtedly assist' the position. Cr. J- McKelvie pointed out that all the big floods had accrued at exceptional spring tides which backed up the river waters. Nothing could stop such floods. The chairman agreed that this was the case, but such floods were unusual and occurred periodically throughout the world. It was the higher country which suffered in such cases, but the low-lying country was still subject to flooding when the rivers were in flood and this, in his opinion, was due to the many bottle-necks in the Manawatu river. The proposed cut to the sea would, it was felt, relieve the situation.

The chairman did not think the council would do any harm by being represented on the deputation. Its object, by doing so, would be to obtain the fullest possible information from those directly interested in the land most subjected to flooding. The council would have closely to watch its interests to guard against liability for costly contingencies. Crs. Barber and Perrett were appointed to represent the county on the deputation, with power to support the request for a subsidy provided the council was not involved in any way to contribute towards the scheme.

KAiIRANGA COUNTY WILL NOT BE-PRESENT. The Kairanga County Council at Tuesday’s meeting decided that it would not appoint delegates to support the Manawatu-Oroua River Board in its request to the Government for a £1 for £1 subsidy towards the cost of the board’s modified scheme of flood control for the Manawatu and Oroua rivers. The Council decided to withhold its support on the grounds that tne scheme would affect only a small proportion of its rating and that any move in the matter lay with the ratepayers in the district concerned. Cr. P. G. Mildon in opposing the appointment of delegates stated that only a small proportion of the council’s ratepayers were involved in the scheme, and even then it was doubtful whether they were unanimous in its support. Under these •circumstances, he thought that, it these ratepayers wished to support the board’s scheme they could call a pubilic meeting and accord this support. Crs. M. A. Moody and C. Anderson supported 'Ck. Mildon, the former advancing a motion that the council should take no action in the matter. This motion received very general support, Cr. Anderson Observing that he viowed the modified scheme with suspicion, while Cr. Mildon expressed the opinion that the proposed deputation to the Government would probably mean another commission.