THE RIVERS.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18108, 25 June 1924, Page 11

THE RIVERS.

DRAINAGE BOARD DEFENDED. A FIGHTING SPEECH. A vigorous fighting speech in defence of the Christchurch Drainage Board and its river policy was delivered by the chairman, Mr Walter Ilill, at the meeting of 'the Board last night. The Town Clerk wrote that at the meeting of the City Council on June 10th the question of improving the Rivers Avon and Heathcotc was discussed, and it was decided to approach the Drainage Board and the Harbour Board on the matter with a request that they each set up a small committee to confer with representatives of the Council and a few citizens who were interested in the improvement of the rivers. If the suggestion was adopted steps would be taken to arrange a conference at an early date. Mr J. W. Beanland said he objected to the forming of a new rating district to provide the cost of the improvement work. Mr H, G. Livingstone said the Board would have to consider the mattor, for there was considerable public opinion behind the idea that the rivers should be improved. The engineer of the Board was preparing a report on the cost of an adequate scheme. The Drainage Board had all the powers required, and could do something to remedy the present trouble so far as the rivers were concerned. The Board should at least make a start, even if a small one. The city should pay the largest proportion of the cost of the work, and would be willing to pay. Mr H. Holland said he had never said that the Board could do nothing in the matter, and at the recent conference ho had detailed what the Board could do. The Board was the controlling authority, and should make a start to improve the rivers. Mr H. J. Otley said that a number of blockages could be removed at little expense, but if that weio'donfc the Rowing Clubs would complain that no water was left. At present the engineer was too busily engaged on the sewerage extension scheme to devote time to river improvement. The chairman said lie did not object to the holding of a conference wit.h the representatives of other local authorities provided the matter was considered in a respectable manner. At the last meeting of the City Council a member of that body had used invective and abuse against the Board in the conduct of its affairs, and alleged that three eminent engineers consulted by the Board did not know their business. That member had made a number of grossly exaggerated statements regarding matters of which he could not know anything, for lie had had absolutely no experience. That member of the Council had sat for twelve months on the Drainago Board, and if he got much knowledge-he did not got it at Board meetings; A member: He did not exhibit it here. The chairman: As a result of his ■ oratory the Cit} r Council passed a resolution which I take is virtually one censuring the Board for neglecting its duties. Mr J. W. Beanland: His motion was lost. The. chairman: They listened to what lie had to say, and did not turn him down. As a result of that, and by listening to others, a public meeting was called by somebody. I don't know whom. Mr J. W. Beanland: I understand the public meeting tu called before the Council meeting. The chairman: Maybe so, but the samo member of tho City. Council I referred to had been busy with another gentleman. v Mr Beanland: Yes, quite right. The chairman: Further, the Mayor enr dorsed the action of the Council, and drew further criticism to the Board at the public meeting, and mado several statements to the effect that the Board were doing nothing and that the functions of the Board should be handed over to the City. Council. The remarks made at the meeting were very discourteous, and showed a want of senso of proportion. The Drainage Board had always been willing to co-operatc with any public body and listen to suggestions from any of them, but we have never yet sought to usurp the functions of any other body, and I hope that members of the Board will resent interference from other public bodies. Our work has not been carried through for the last 20 years by procrastination and neglect of duty, and yet that is what wo are being charged with. Most of those who spoke at the Council and at the public meeting admitted that the , Board had dono its duty as a Drai.i age Board, but the outcry was .for something beyond the activities of the Board. The first thing that happened was when a gentleman interviewed me regarding the £SOO put on the estimates for the purpose of improving the River Avon. In conversation he suggested that we should spend not less than £2500 on a plant and £2500 a year for the next five years. He did not get much sympathy from me. Fifteen thousand pounds he wanted me to rccom'mend tho Board to spend. He left me and wrote a long letter to the Press and made some sort of statement which I did not think worth while to contradict. The suggestions put forward amount to this —that the Board should stop all drains going into the rivers, deepen the rivers by dredging, carry out reclamation work, and close up all industries and factories on the banks of the rivers, and construct boulevards from the source of. the river to the sea. Those who made the suggestions forgot one thing—finance. There was a suggestion that an art union should provide the finance, but if I know anything about it the rates will have to pay, and the ratepayers ought to be asked before any large sums are spent-on any of the works sueeested. The Board's suggestion to spend £SOO to begin with on the rivers is to mv mind quite sufficient, but jou t» 'i>™> •r« n ,? aoo ,^ rivers without a scheme. I believe that every member of the Board is sincere in wanting to do something to impwe tho rivers. The Board was constituted primarily as a Drainage and Sewerage Board, and I challenge anyone to prove that it has failed in Us obhgations. The nature of the Board s -work does not bring members into the limelight, and consequently unthinking members of the community are apt to come to the conclusion that nothing is being done. Fully; 99 per cent, of the peoplo already think the rates are high enough without going further. What- will they say if the ' Board launches out on the fantastic schemes proposed. There is a limit to the amount of rates we can collect, and I think we have just about reached the limit.' While the Board has power for deepening and widening,' it has no power to rate for works not primarily for sewerage. It is suggested that the control of the rivers should lie vested in the City Council, but I think before ?be Council takes on any .more troupes it had better look to what it had got and* take'

the mote out of its own <fe. For more than 2o years the side channels and house slops have been draineu into the river. If there has been any silting up it is caused' by the side channels, and who is responsible? The City Council, not the Drainage Board. Tlie Mayor says that Christchurch without the Avon would be unthinkable. ' I say that without the Avon j used for drainage the city would be untenable. The Mayor also spoke about depreciation. It is not quite clear what the Mayor means by depreciation, for the capita! value of the Board's area has increased since 1900. from nine million sterling to twentythree million sterling. I think you can take credit as members of the Board in assisting in that appreciation in (value. The rivers ./are natural drains, and the Board hafl always used them as such, and will have to use them until storm water drains are provided by the local authorities, and even then the storm water drains will have to discharge into the lower reaches of the rivers. If we had to exercise our powers we woula stop all side channels goitig into the rivers and drain water sewers would have to be constructed. That would be the first start to stop silfing of the river. House slops would haira to go . on. to the streets or into backyards and with another 1918, you can imagine what might happen. The Board is warranted in allowing the house slops to go into the side channels and the side channels into the river until the drains are provided. A good deal has been made regarding the discharge of trade effluents into the Heathcote. Where the effluents are discharged the river is tidal, with a six foot rise and fall, and as each factory purifies its own effluent the pollution is comparatively small. The unsightliness of the Heathcote in the lower reaches is not caused by the factories, but/more by erosion and tidal effects. Continuing the chairman said that the Board's standard of purity for septic .tank effluents was quite sufficient to prevent nuisance arising, considering the amount of dilution available, and as far as trade effluents were concerned, the" tidal waters prevented any nuisance arising. The volume of trade effluent going into the Heathcote to-day, was no more than what it was twenty years ago, but the effluent was now treated before it entered the river. In 1918 the factory owners werd willing to share the cost of a special channel to convey trade effluents to the estuary, lbut the Health Department objected. An alternative scheme was found to be too expensive, and the Board then adopted a system of purification of effluent. A great deal was- spoken about progress, but v'hat progress could there be if industry was stifled? The works oi! 'Woolston paid out annually at least £75,000 in wages and the turnover yearly was nearly a million of money. The lower reaches of the rivers' could not be improved, except at a cost beyond the capacity of the community. Any silt in both rivers came from the sido channels, and tho City Council was responsible. At liudiey bridge there was not six inches of silt more than 30 years ago. The water, level was lower now in both rivers, and tho i consequence was . that surrounding | country was no longer swamp, bu: dry. 'Hie iow level of the water was an advantage from a drainage point of < view. To raise the level of the water now would lead to endless trouble. The Board did iiot. own the river banks, and . it was the duty of tho local bodies affected to look after their banks. The I Board, however, would be willing to ' co-operate with the other local authorities regarding the banks. At present the banks in place? were used by local authorities as dumping places for rubbish, yet the people who saw the silt in tho river never saw the j rubbish dumps on the bank. He was satisfied that the Board had done its- | duty in the matter, of drainage, and i if other local bodies had attended to | their works with as mucn efficiency, j there would not be much to complain of now. Regarding' the attitude, of the Acclimatisation Society he would plaoe wages and health before | fish, and if industry interfered with fish, then do without fish. The deepening of the rivers was not- an impossible proposition, but in 1916 the engineers who furnished a report ed that the cost would be ivery considerable and the money would very largely be wasted. IF dredging was started it would have to be continued permanently. He hoped that tlie j Board would resist any interference of ; the nature experienced lately, but he j would always be glad to assist in any j reasonable and practicable proposition ! relating to the rivers." | Mr H. Holland said that the banks in the lower reaches of the river could well be improved. Mr D. Rowse said the City Council were maintaining a rubbish dump on the bank of the river Heathcote near i the .tanks. ,

The Board appointed the chairman and the chairman of the Works Committee (Mr H. ,J. Otley) as its representatives at the proposed conference.