IRRIGATION AT SEADOWN

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23361, 21 June 1941, Page 10

IRRIGATION AT SEADOWN

Problems of Drainage

MINISTER’S ANSWER TO SETTLERS

‘T have no intention! of deviating front, the Government’s policy df developing the. irrigable lands of Canterbury, simply beicause of an engineered agitation in the Levels Coiinty by settlers who are either politically biased or are unwilling to carry out their contracts,” the Minister for Public Works (the Hon. H. T. Armstrong) Said in an interview last evening. . 1: ■; '

The Minister admitted that some flooding had been caused by irrigation; but he denied that it was a main contributing factol in the area. The prQblem af drainage, he aaid, ;had : teen "a' live.- Pile in the district for the last 40 years.. Every irrigation scheme, from the geophysical as well as the engineering aspect was studied before the works were undertaken, the Minister added.

“Apparently this activity has , been engineered by a comparatively small number of farmers in the Sea.doWn area, who are making exaggerated and grossly unfair statements , about both the irrigation work constructed by the Government in the Levels County and the drainage work put into effect, in the Seadown district,” the Minister continued. “It seems to me that, notwithstanding the fact that a (Subsidy of £9 to £1 was offered and that so far the promise of £IOOO by the local body has not been honoured, the purpose of this extreme agitation is to force the Government to expend Still more money on the drainage works,” The need for drainage in the district was not new. For more than 40 years, agitatibn had been raised to improve the drainage of some 3000 acres, , extending from the Washdyke . laggon north-eastwards towards Arowhenua. A certain amount of work had been done by the local people, and in:later years use was made of men Available on relief schemes, but it was obvious that something more ■ substantial and comprehensively planned was. required. Improvement of Lands "In all those 40 years, my Government is the first to bring out a comprehensive drainage scheme for this district and to put it into effept," Mr Armstrong said “As the work of drainage proceeded by means Of mod l ern machinery, the effect was immediately noticed, and numerous persons who know the area w.ell have remarked on the improvement ; in the condition of the land, particularly it} the seaward and southern portion;" The Hon. R. Semple; agreed, when he was Minister for Public Works, to extend the drains towards the north; erly end of the district,. so as ,tp improve the area of high ground-water there, said Mr Armstrong. That extension was to cost £2500, in addition to £IO,OOO for the major work;, Mr Armstrong said he considered' it, only reasonable that the settlers should find one-fifth of the additional cost but it was not made conditional. However, on receipt of advice that the settlershad refused to find £IOOO originally promised, he had instructed that no further work was to be- done until the agreement was honoured. , : , "The position now is that the work is incomplete and I have no intention of authorising the completion until the finances have been satisfactorily arranged. The Government views the maintenance of work it constructs with the greatest concern, and until adequate steps have been taken to safeguard the, maintenance of the drainage channels which have been constructed there is no guarantee that the scheme, will function succssfully for any length of time. In fact, I am informed that many of the drains constructed in the last two years are badly in need of cleaning and with the exception of a few ..drains which the more far-sighted individuals have cleaned are rapidly deteriorating to the point where they will be inefffic; tive. Persons who fail to maintain the drains constructed by. the State fof their personal benefit should be regarded as saboteurs of the, national effort.” ■ ' , The Minister described as‘“manifestly absurd” the contention by. the settlers that all their drainage troubles were due to irrigation. Mr Semple had acknowledged that a certain amount of water reaching the low country Was attributable to irrigation—greater amounts at certain times of the year than others—but it was ridiculous tp say it was all due to irrigation or even that the proportion due to irrigatioh was anything like the 9 to 1 ratio of the subsidy offered by the Government,;He was as concerned for the people who needed drainage at Seadown and elsewhere in New Zealand, as, for those who benefited from irrigation and he intended to promote: drainage works wherever they were required and warranted. '• ■ ' ■■ ’ ’ “Will Not be Bludgeoned” “But I will not be bludgeoned into the execution of works, however necessary, without some contribution by the beneficiaries and a , guarantee of adequate maintenance either, by the settlers themselves of the local au- ■ thority,” the Minister gaid. , , : Commenting on- the photograph, published in "The Prfess” 'showing' farmers standing besides high.rushes, Mr Armstrong said he would like. to. know whether the rushes had grown in the last three years or whether they were part of a large area of rushes'.in the. Eermanent swamp near the sea which, e had seen for himself. He added that he had been informed thfet that swamp was being rapidly reclaimed, as a result of the large drams ,recently constructed. ~v

water channels tightened and eventually became almost impervious to seepage, In the Levels County, this was the experience, though since irrigation began 'at the end of 1936 the volume of water supplied to farmers for irrigation had increased each year. The Opihi, a so-called rain river, did not carry mud or silt except during floods and consequently ’it took longer to tighten the races than would be the case with .rivers like the ■ Bangitata and Rakaiai which during the summer and autumn, when the heaviest demands for irrigation were made, carried a large amount of fine material and could thus be expected to bring about a more rapid conditioning of irrigation races.

Signing of Petition i “The statement is made that a large number of ’ irrigators in the Levels County . have asked that' the irrigation should be turn'ed off,” Mr Armstrong Said., “I- am informed that many of those who signed now consider that {he case was misrepresented to them and that letters, have been written to me asking that their names should be removed from the I have, already received one letter since I have been in; Christchurch, from a Kerrytown settler, telling me that when he Signed it he believed the, petition was for more, drainage. . i "The growing, record of increased of every sort of crop by numerous irrigators on the Levels iPlain is overwhelming evidence of the tremendous, benefit which irrigation will ultimately be to this province and !of the wisdom of the Government in promoting large-scale development in Mid-Canterbury. Incidentally, the iformer Government considered irrigation worth while, because the Levels irrigation scheme happened to be begun by it. That Government, however, used inadequate methods. A job which should ;haye been completed in one year took three years, and the ccst was much - more. than it would have ;beeh with modern equipment.” The Minister’s advice to the persons. he. blamed for “engineering the demonstration" was “to get busy and honour their agreement and make provision for systematic maintenance;” When they, did so, he was prepared to complete the work. ■ Answer to “The Press” The teadihg article which appeared in “The Press” of yesterday was referred to by' the Minister. He said the most, thorough examination by engineers and. geologists of every phase which could possibly influence drainage and irrigation was made before any work was commenced. There had certainly not been excessive haste In the preparatory work. When irrigation was first asked for, by the people : of South Canterbury, numerous meetings wqre held and the settlers pressed ,fOr. urgent action to relieve drought. Similarly in Mid-G!mterbury, the Government had to meet deputations asking fcr relief every time an unusually dry season was experienced. "The pressure of these requests, as well as the vast amouht of information from the very widespread researches, convincfes the Government df the sdundhess of irrigation develcpthent for , large parts of the Canterbury Plains,” concluded the Minister. “The works were not put in hand without that prior thorough investigation, but once authority, has been given, they have been carried forward with the greatest speed.” /

When ’ the drains there were being constructed, the draglines had to be operated on timber mattresses on account of the soggy nature of the country in matiy places. He was informed that some of those areas were now quite firm land and that sheep were grazing on land which a' few years ago was under a continuqus sheet of water. ■ ' ■ \

Dealing with the irrigation aspect at Seadown, the Minister., shid the main cause of the contribution, ,to ’groundwater by irrigation was pot'the: applir cation of the water to the land in the course of irrigation so inucll "as Seepage from irrigation channels .through the porous, sub-soil. Retards of the depth of the ground-tvater had been kept continuously at ground-water depth stations since 1935. . From these, it was apparent that the apibimt, of' irrigation water reaching’ the lower country was becoming' progressively less and that its effect lasted for a shorten time each season. That.Was attributed to the tightening up of the water races, which, at first. Were very poroift. It was a well-known fact, that

farmers’ Union DISCUSSION

MID-CANTBRBUBV EXECUTIVE

“A propaganda, visit against irrigation,” was the way Mr W. R'. Hammond, of Winchmore, described the inspection of flooded farm lands in - South Canterbury on Thursday, when he spoke at. the meeting of the Mid-Cartterbury Provincial Executive ,of the. Farmers’ Union at Ashburton yesterday. He said the farmers had been shown areas subject to tidal flooding, where springs were prevalent. They had not; been given the opportunity to see the outstanding improvements to other lands higher up' where the irrigation scheme was operating. ■ .The discussion arose when Mr H. L. CKisnaHjnadea formal report asthe union’s representative at the inspection, ; ... ' . Mr T. V. Wilkinson said millions of pounds’ worth of good might be done by irrigation, but other men might experience jUSt' ab great a loss. Mr G. H. B. LIU (WillOwby): If irrigation goes through, I’m 1 getting out of my property. He added that the coun-, try there was wet enough now, and irrigation, would undoubtedly mean: damaging seepage. ; : Several speakers mentioned how the late Mr XL T. Lill had been criticised for ,his opposition to 'the irrigation scheme,, and; added that his .view was being substantiated by the flooding seen. • • ‘

The president (Mr R; G. Gerard) said no .point' cpuld be gained from futther discuSsioh and it was decided to ask the Ashburton ‘County Council to act in the matter.■