The Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1888. TROUBLESOME RIVERS.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1804, 18 October 1888, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1888. TROUBLESOME RIVERS.

There are few things in this part'of the colony more difficult to deal with than the rivers. Year after year they' continue to spread and destroy valuable property, and yet so far very little has been done to remedy the evil of which they are the cause. Here and there River Boards have been formed, and they have done their best to protect property from; the incursions of rivers, but feeble indeed are their best efforts to cope with the great difficulties with which they find themselves face to face. In our opinion the legislature has not yet grappled with this question in the comprehensive and thorough manner which its importance necessitates. The view the River Boards Act takes of it is that only properties in the immediate vicinity of rivers shall be rated for the purpose of erecting protective works. It provides a sliding scale of rating, so that properties immediately adjoining rivers shall be rated more heavily than other properties lying further inland, and this is only reasonable and fair; but unfortunately practical experience shows that the Act is not in the majority of instances capable of being applied. As a general rule the man whose land adjoins the river is willing enough to form a Eiver Board, and pay heavy rates to protect his land, but the man behind him is quite indifferent on the matter. He knows his neighbor's land must all go before his own is touched, and an he does not expect that the river will reach him until after his tenure of the land haa expired by effluxion of time, he is perfectly satisfied to let things remain as they are. He has not the slightest objection to the erection of protective works to prevent the spreading of the river, but he has a whole-souled, fearful horror of being rated for such purposes. Now the Act gives this gentleman the whip-hand of the unfortunate man whose land grows smaller and smaller with each flood. It provides that no River Board shall be constituted until two-thirds of the ratepayers within a prescribed area shall have signed a petition praying for its establishment. As a general rule the amount of money required to carry out protective works is more than those whose land adjoins the river could possibly raise, and consequently it is useless for these to constitute River Boards. To enable them to cope with the river it is necessary for them t* get the assistance of their immediate neighbors, to which their neighbors very strongly object. The result is that it U impossible to get two-thirds to sign the petition, and consequently it remains unsigned, the Board is never formed, and the river continues to spread and destroy valuable land. Now to our mind the principal question is : Has the River Boards Act taken the proper view of the case? As we have already stated this Act contemplates that only properties immediately interested shall be rated for the purpose of getting protection from the river, but we really think that that is too narrow a view to take of the matter. Properties immediately concerned are certainly the most interested, and ought to pay most towards protective works, but at the same time it must be admitted that the advantages of confining rivers within their legitimate banks extends beyond the immediate vicinity. We are all interested in protecting our land from destruction. If a farmer on the bank* of the river Opihi, or Waihi, or Orari, loses an acre of land the whole County of Geraldine is one acre smaller. Its power of producing is one acre less; its rate-producing capabilities is less, and therefore the whole community has sustained a loss. The loss of the farmer on the bank of the river is of course the greater, and he ought to. contribute more than others to protect his own property, but that the whole district, nay, even the colony, has sustained ft Joss is beyond dispute, and consequently all ought to assist in preventing the spread of the river. It is evident that under present legislation very little work of practical utility can be 4Qne f

andtherefoyejtresh legislation becomes necessary. i : fWe cannot allow rivers to continue destroying year after year some of the best land of the colony, and in our opinion some new scheme for grappling with the difficulty ought to be devised. $Te are inclined tpj think that imall bodief can never do any good, and that before anything effective will be done the matter must be placed in the hands of County Councils. That body having 1 jurisdiction.ovar large areas could do what would be impossible to a few landowners on the bank of a river, and as all are interested , all. should help. The Council.,.could have powser to levy a rate" on properties. interested, and subsidise this from the general fund. The Council .could have {local committees of advice, with limited powers, who would make suggestions and report any threatened expansion of the river. This, we believe, is the only way to deal ; with this very important .question, and we hope' tjo lee the BchWe taWen up. . j