DEPARTMENT REPLIES TO MANAPOURI LETTERS

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32217, 9 February 1970, Page 10

DEPARTMENT REPLIES TO MANAPOURI LETTERS

Measures to preserve scenery and recreational amenities have always been regarded as an essential part of the proposals for the Mana-pouri-Te Anau hydroelectric development, says the general manager of the New Zealand Electricity Department (Mr E. B. Mackenzie) in reply to two correspondents of “The Press,” Elsie Locke and A. I. McKerchar.

In a letter to the editor of "The Press” Elsie Locke says:—“l am prepared to look at Manapouri in the realistic light you advise, but you do not state your equation fairly. You say we must ‘try to balance the economic advantages against the extent of damage to the lake’ when you mean: to balance the economic advantages in electricity alone against the unspoiled lake alone. “The economic advantages of conservation should be thrown into the balance against the electricity. These include the use in perpetuity, for farming and otherwise, of the lowlying lands on the eastern shore. “Will you tell your readers the exact acreage? Include also the undamaged production of the Waiau Valley, the undamaged value of fish spawning grounds, and ' scientific values claimed by the D.S.I.R. Tourism and recreation have an economic side. “If our power bill costs ' more but our savings elsewhere are greater, any house-

> wife knows which is the best i buy.” In another letter to the 5 editor A, I. McKerchar I says:—“R. W. G. Blakely > hooks a good red herring in ’ talking about ‘economic hydro-electric potential;’ let ■ him keep fishing, but drowned , tree stumps will be his main . catch after raising the level I of Lake Manapouri. 1 “The real question- ! which society must de-' ijcide, and of which Mr /Blakeley seems to lose sight, I is whether the extra cost and pollution caused by the pro-, /duction of 50 m.w. of thermalj ipower is justified, in order! !that Manapouri may be kept riat its present level. ; “I would suggest that t the only New Zea- ; landers qualified to ani swer this question are those . who have sailed on, tramped i around, camped beside, . fished, and perhaps even 1 swum in this magnificent i lake.” • Mr Mackenzie replies:— “The matters mentioned by . both correspondents are among those covered by the - Ministry of Works in a report i which the Prime Minister re- > ferred to in his recent state- . ments regarding the setting ■ up of a special Cabinet com- > mittee and an independent, . three-man commission to coni sider all the implications of the proposals to raise the - level of Lake Manapouri. - “In these circumstances it I would not be appropriate for . me to discuss them in de- ' tail in the correspondence I columns of newspapers. > “However I enclose for . passing on to your corres- > pondents copies of the 1967 White Paper ‘Manapouri s Te Anau Hydro-electric De- • velopment.’ . “A study of the correspon-

I dence between the Government and the company shows : that measures to preserve r scenery and recreational r amenities have always been i regarded as an essential part : of the proposals. t “Clause five of the current I act requires the Minister of i Electricity before exercising I his powers to raise lake levels to consult the Minister i of Lands, on the measures to -Ibe taken with a view to pre- ■ serving natural scenery, and , the Minister of Internal I;Affairs, on measures to be! ■ ■ taken to minimise any adI‘verse effects on fishing. •I “The Government's attitude!

- is well summarised in the fol- ; lowing remarks made by the ; late Mr Shand in his preface I to the White Paper:— i “‘I turn finally to the quest tion of the effect of this work on the natural state of Lake t Manapouri, a matter that has : properly been the cause of ; some concern. That there will : be changes in existing fea- : tures is inevitable. The > Government is determined, -however, that every effort, I should be made to reduce to 1 the minimum, and to elimiijnate as soon as possible, any - disfiguring of the water line, that may temporarily follow, ■! the raising of the lake level.’ ”1