OVERFLOW FROM MANGAHAO.

Shannon News, 12 June 1923, Page 3

OVERFLOW FROM MANGAHAO.

PROBLEM OF ITS DISPOSAL’.

In connection with tJne overflow from the Mangahao electric power scheme, which it is proposed to turn into the Otauru stream, a nieeung of the representative's of the Public Works Department, Shannon Borough Council, rimowneii'ita County Council, Buckley uiaiiittge Board, and Makerua Drainage tioaiu was neia m the Parish naii on rriday, June 8, the Mayor (Mr w. Mum.uciij oeing in the chair. Hal I'uuvero, niiguieer in unei of th b PujjUc works Department detailed the scnenie as mougnt icrwaru by his Department lor hanking tne Otauru -ii'eain to i-iKe the waste waiter iroin the Mangahao works. It was intenden he Sain, to erect a hank at the same level as those, proposed .by the Makerua Drainage Board and . the proportmnat cost o the work had been tenta*tiveiy allocated as follows-Buckley Diauiage Board £3OO, Horowhenua county Council £200; Makerua Drainage Board! £1000; Shannon Borough £SO ; and the Public Works Department £ISOO.

Under this proposal the Makerua board would effect a saving of £225, a® under thei scheme for the banking of the stream proposed by that body, an expenditure of £1225 was estimated'.

Mr R. Edwards, Shannon Borough Engineer expressed his sympathy with the scheme as ou/tlined by Mr .. Furkert, but said thait the Borough wished to retain access to the stream for the purpose of obtaining metal. He wouild suggest that the. bank he 1 kept back far enough to enable metal to be got out. Mr Furkert explained that within the Borough, the work would be under the control of the Borough, Council, and they could insure that the work was done to their satisfaction.

In answer to Mr Monk, chairman of the Horowhenua; County Council,, he staled that the amounts quoted as re-pre-enting the apportionment for the different bodies would be a fluctuating quantity but should not exceed these figures. Mr W. H. Gunning then moved 1 and Mr Law seconded: “That the scheme drawn up by-the Public Works Department and the allocations proposed be approved.” The motion was carried subject to the approval of. the local Sodies concerned.

Mr Furkert then referred! to the dredge owned by the Makerua Board, which it was expected would be employed in the erection of the banks along the Otauru stream. That board, he understood, was doing- its own undertaking at 7d per cubic yard.

LENDING THE. DREDGE. .. Mr Jickell: Yes, but you don’t expect us to lend the dredge for ai month without remuneration? Mr Furkrt ; But it pays, you at 7d a yard and that -is what we would pay you for it, Mr Liggins: There is interest on the plant; you! .should pay that. Mr. Furkert replied that that.would be included in the 7dL Mr Liggins wes of opinions that, this hoard would not consent to the pX(A posals. He .would he against lending

the dredge even for a week until they had completed their own banks. Mr Furkert. replied that the. hoard was= not being asked • tot lend the dredge; the price of 7d per yard! which .won hi' be .paid, covered the-whole .cpst to the board and in addition they would reeive £*22s' in the saving on the cost of the' bank. The actual cost of the work could, be worked.out, say, at ltd per yard, ,ahd the balance to make 7d, 24d, would be .paid for the use of the. dredgeMr R. T, Bell asked if Mr Furkert”s estimates ■'had been made .on the assumption that this machinery would be given. •. • • Chairman: I don’t doubt- that -the Makemai Drainage Board will' decide to lend the machinerv, when they have considered the Question. Mr Bell said that ais trustees of the Makerua, Drainage' Boardl he and Mr Liggins did not wish to commit themselves. When- they-had consulted their Board they might be in a position to agree to the proposals. , ; -. Mr R, W. Tlaylor asked if it was not the operations of the Makerua. Drainage Board that.necessitated'this. work. Mr Liggins: No, Mi&ngahao.

Voices; .No! No! That’s! not the case In answer to a question Mr Furkert said that'there ' wials no immediate hurry for this work, but it seemed a pity that when the dredge was working close to the spot as it shortly would bei thait it could not be got to Mr Edwards said that the Drainage Boards’ representatives had admitted •tha.t thev were going to confine with“be hmks Betas made flood **** which had previously over 70000 acres. It was this-water .which was raising the lev,el of this, stream.- . Mr Liatwe'- The work; being done is also affecting country lower down. Mr Furkert: Gentlemen, we -don want to raise contentious matter. T e people affected hlave a perfect right, drain their property. Mr Dinnie Engineer m Charge 01 . the Mangahao Electric Power Schcme, 9Md there was no reason why pe■ii cause the Drainage Board could do ! their own work at 7d per yard this should be the limit, of the amount paid i them in this case. A certain, amount should; he added for depreciation on Furkert : How much would that amount to? We are prepared to give you £2OO. HOW much did the' machinSttSt on that’for the are offering yori from what, you * l UwSi *ta support "the scheme, but ctanot speak for my V mSUTh'e’ri put ana ca, "t' answer to Mr Bell Mr FurUen •, said that the work would be carried iV out by the Makerua Drainage Board, V land the bridge, which the 'Scheme would necessitate, by the Horowhenua County Goulicil. +v ,„ Vflhe customary vote of thanks to tne chair concluded fb e meeting.