LETTERS

Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 12, Issue 565, 6 December 1994, Page 4

LETTERS

Carpark • With reference to Paul Scarf s plan for a carpark near the Mangawhero ri ver, I strongly object. This area is a public walkway and picnic area. The beauty and loveliness of this place should not be spoiled. The logical area for a carpark is by the railway line in Thames Street, the land owned by the W aitangi Tribunal. I suggestMr Scarf approach the Tribunal and endeavour to negotiate with them for his parking. Altemati vely there is land over the Old Station Road bridge on the right-hand side.

Kathleen

Goddard

• We note with dismay council's consideration of

providing or having provided car parks on the lawn belt opposite the Powderkeg. The lawn belt extends from Shannon Street to the ranger station and is an asset to Ohakune and tourism that must not be broken. That it is road reserve not parks and reserves is of no account, it belongs to the citizens of Ohakune and must not be vandalised. We read that "Mr Scarf had forced the situation - he was away before the council had a chance to act.' Now council wants to solve his problem at citizens loss of their green belt! Simple solution: restrict numbers in the complex he has built. The use for parking of Mangawhero Terrace

outside the Powderkeg has long been an accident waiting to happen and must be cleared of parking being as it is the access and egress from the skifield. Build a carpark on railway land or purchase land in Tyne Street - but don't use the green belt. Whilst on the subject isn' t it time to relocate the council' s planning staff to where it's all happening, in Ohakune. Only by doing so will these problems be resolved. They appear to have no appreciation of what planning a tourist town needs. Soon too the town plan to see us into Ohakune' s development will be published. We must band together and ensure that it is a blueprint for the future and will provide a worthwhile development and jobs for our children,

not this type of development and vandalism of our resources.

Concerned

citizens.

Dog control • The Bulletin reported on 29 November the Ruapehu District Councils decision on who should pay for the costs of dog control. This is a vexing problem that has bedevilled every ad hoc authority in New Zealand. I confess that I believed that all dog-owners should pay all of the costs in diferential registration fees properly levied by the Ruapehu District Council. Then ringmaster C Houston furnished a well-rea-soned explanation of the plans under discussion. In partnership with the council team he laboured to advance a solution that would be seen as a responsible

answer to this challenge. It would seem that council had very little input from the greater percentage of ratepayers ... this writer included! General manager Mr C Houston and councillors must be greatly relieved that we are an uncritical audience! I feel that those who debated this matter deserve to be commended for the decision reached. (Some may recall the old joke about the car fuel tank being half-full for the optimist and halfempty for the pessimist!). We have placed our trust in those who were elected and, in this case, a compromise that should please ratepayers has been achieved. In the spirit of the festive season, I trust that all of your readers will kindly join in a wish for a restful and enjoyable Yuletide season

to all workers in the Ruapehu District Council! Merry Xmas!

Jenny and Gordon

Mottram.

PS We have loved and owned dogs for many years but we now have none).

Conservation thanks •On Tuesday 29 November, several students from Ruapehu College helped weed and maintain the trees that were planted on the Jubilee Walkway over Conservation Week. The trees have done well, probably 95 per cent surviving the first five months. Every few months the trees need to be cleared of grass and weeds growing over them. Eventually the trees will outgrow the grass and require less and less care. Thanks to Donna, Tammy, Jemy, Scott, Shuan, Ben, Daniel, Jed,

Josh, Justin, Daniel and Angela. Also thanks to Murray and Michelle Swan.

Karen A

Hawke

Conservation Officer Ohakune

Income support • At 75 years of age I am unable to understand the purpose of this income support system which has the power to cut off an old age pensioner without reason, as we have to obey their requests for a report on how we use our pensions of which we have contributed to all our working life, only to be subjected to this act of our govemment. No members of our govemment are liable to this treatment and their income farexceedsmy $ 170a week. I thought income support was for the poor and the unemployed, not the oldies. I rest my case!

John Jellicoe

Waerea