WEST COAST HARBOURS

Press, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 25138, 20 March 1947, Page 8

WEST COAST HARBOURS

ENGINEERS’ REPORT

NO ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS From Our Own Reporter

GREYMOUTH, March 19. No alternative locations are recommended by overseas harbour engineers who visited New Zealand last year at the request of the Government to prepare reports on West Coast harbours, with particular emphasis on the ports of Greymouth and Westport. The consulting engineers. Messrs E. J. Buckton and A. J. Clark, were both of the opinion that any port on this coast was bound to be subject to delays because of bad weather and bar troubles, and that there was no Ate favourable for a centralised all-weather harbour to supersede the ports of Greymouth and Westport. The report, consisting of 88 pages, will be submitted to engineers, who will further report on work that should be accomplished forthwith. The engineers say that at Greymouth and Westport moderate improvements in bar conditions can be obtained by increasing the natural flow bv enlarging their internal tide compartments: but not so as to permit use by larger vessels than are at present engaged in traffic to these ports. Greater improvements in depth could be obtained only artificially at disproportionate recurrent cost. Greymonth Entrance The entrance at Greymouth needed widening to make it safer for ships entering or leaving in rough weather: but the entrance at Westport could, if necessary, be narrowed without affecting its safety. The consulting engineers do not consider it necessary or desirable to alter the direction of the entrances at Grevmouth or Westport as the disadvantages would outweigh anv advantage gained. Tn the case of Westport, they are unable to suuport the nronosal for a master groyne at Tauranga Point. and they consider the efficiency of the present bar dredging at this port should be thoroughlv investigated and proved before any scheme for intensive dredging with new dredges is contemplated. Widening of the entrance at the nort of Grevmouth. construction o f permanent gantries, extension of the rubble moles, and dredging and defining lagoons are estimated bv engineers to cost £444 non Westport Proposals The engineers attach primary importance to the enlargement of the tidal compartments at Westrort, and recommend this as the only sure means of obtaining a permanent improvement of depth over the bar at reasonable cost Referring to the gantrv and dredger proposed for Grevmouth in the form of a special dragline for dredging high patches on the bar within the gantrv distance, the'engineers recommend that experiments be made to develop a method dredging, and state that if such dredging is successfully developed, it could be carried out day and night, and in weather when dredging from floating plant was impossible. Tf gantrv dredging was successful at Greymouth, permanent gantries should be run out at Westport, and gantry dredging adopted. The deep-sea harbour scheme at Point Elizabeth is entirely rejected bv the overseas experts, as they consider a central harbour such as this is impracticable hecan«e of uhvsica] features of the West Coast, the scattered areas capable of development, and the difficulties of land communications ’FBev state that the land ar*»a at Point Elizabeth is noor and oossibih+ms for iqpd compumicafinn wptp riHi that of best, a harbour there could only take ♦he place o* For this purnose a small harbour was not feasible, as fh*» site necessitated a enclosure. and conseouentlv an expensive ore. Moreover it would be no morn from liftoral drift troubles th’p Grevmouth. 'Hie engineers also refer brieflv to o+h°r minor and harbour sites, sueb as Charleston. Lake Mahinapua Okarifn Bruce Bav. Karamea. and Little Wanganui, which they inspected.