WAIWAKAIHO BRIDGE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 269, 21 December 1909, Page 4

WAIWAKAIHO BRIDGE.

To the Editor. Sir—The leading article in vour issue of Wednesday last, re W'aiwakailio Bridge, is open to some argument, anil somewhat takes the council to task for its hasty consideration at Monday's ■meeting. This matter concerning the bridge came u|i for discussion at the previous meeting, and the council, on account of the importance of the report of the engineers, did the very tiling that you are advocating. Both the chairman and myself advocated further expert advice, and that .Messrs. Or'bell and Mackay, who have hail considerable experience with bridge work for many yeans past, should report, and both reports were considered at Monday's meeting. The urgency of protection demanded that the council should take- steps, in case of Hood, to at once give protection to the piers, the plans and details to be at once forwarded through Mr. Okey, ALP., in order to be s'lihmitted to the railway engineers for their advice and approval, and with a view of subsidising the cost of any work agreed upon. 1 fail to see how the council could do any .more in the matter of expert advice. You seem, Air. 'Editor, to have your mind warped on a we\r. iWell, I have had about 25 years on local bodies, 18 year* of which J have represented the county,, and knowing the river from boyhood I feel I can take a commonsense view in connection with the reports. The weir, to my mind, as reported on, without a large expenditure, -would suffer the same fate as the one lately put down just below the ■bridge, where strong netted wire as proposed was filled with stales by an expert who had previously done a large amount of this work. The most important port was washed out in the first flood, from the fact that the force of the current over the weir swept the bed underneath the weir out,*which caused the weir to drop down and be 'broken through. Although heavy steel rails -were driven down and faced with strong puriri planks to strengthen the weir, the rails were torn out and bent double, which 'gives some idea of the force of the current we have to contend with. The proposed weir placed about four chains down stream would probably have to be 8 feet high to renew the bed of the river to its normal height and to give any protection to the piers. As it would take a considerable time to construct, and for the bed of the river to accumulate, it would not, afford any immediate protection to the piers. The large volume of water, when in flood, passing over the weir at that height above the river bed, would necessarily require a very large expenditure to protect ■ the same from scouring out. When the chairman said £IXO, I think probably £IOOO would be nearer the mark to battle with the fierce current of the Waiwakaiho when in flood. iN.ow we come to the question of cut-waters, the same as those protecting the railway bridge—only that they would be larger—which have given protection to the railway bridge for a very long time. I see no reason why they should not give the same protection to our county bridge, and the piers would be at once shouldered up with concrete to prevent further scouring, and would give immediate protection. You state that •from the .fact that large quantities of stone having been removed from the •bed of. the river below' the bridge the scour has been tremendously increased. I contend that it is the large amount of stone taken out above the bridge that has been the main cause of the scour, as it greatly increased the force of the current coming down against the piers; hence the scour from the foot of the piers has' taken place. 1 might here state that when Mr. Okey was chairman, I repeatedly spoke' about the amount of stone being removed, and held it would endanger the bridge sooner or later. 1! maintain that local bodies should have some control over the removal of stone from the rivers for the protection of their bridges and preventing erosions. J hope to move that we approach all other local bodies to assist us in getting power as desired. You further take the council to task for not consulting the l'itzroy Town lioaril. il, must bo remembered that it was arranged, when that part of the county wa3 brought under the direction of a town board, that the council should have control of the bridge. 1 can't very well see how we could consult them until we had determined on a report. The report has now been submitted to them for their approval. Surely that will give them .an opportunity to approve or suggest, any other course that will be effective in protecting the bridge. I am afraid, Mr. Editor, I have trespassed on your valuable spate, but the importance of the matter must be my excuse.—l am, etc., G. V. TATE,

Member for Waitara Riding.