No Estuary walkway

Press, 12 October 1979, Page 10

No Estuary walkway

Ihe Christchurch Drainage Board was being over-pro-tective, over-cautious and over-reactionary in fending off a proposed Estuary walkway near its sewage ponds, a board member has said. Mr I. G. B. Wilson said the walkway should at least be given a chance — but the construction and treatment works committee did not agree. There would be “no significant danger" to board property from a public walkway, Mr Wilson said. More trust should be shown in the general public.

The City Council s walkway sub-committee should be given a chance to have a six-month trial, he said. A report by engineers repeated arguments made last month about possible dangers to children and wildlife. In addition, it said that land reaching the Estuary frontage was used for sludge disposal. Because of possible health dangers from that material,: spread periodically on grass and land, past requests for public access to watch Estuary sports events had been refused. Because of erosion along the foreshore reserve, any

walkway would have to cross board land in several places. Concern about beard property was heightened by a> report that the remains of a small steer were found near the Estuary in late September. That was the first time, an animal had been stolen from the board’s farm. It had been killed and cutj up on the spot. The steer had been drenched the week , before, and so it should not have been eaten, according to instructions on the drench container. Individuals and groupshave been able to go into! the wildlife sanctuary in the i past, with the permission of| the treatment plant superin-' Itendent. The board's chairman (Mr! M. R. Carter) said that should continue, with groups supervised by a responsible ■ person. ■