Rakaia irrigation

Press, 19 April 1982, Page 20

Rakaia irrigation

Sir.—D. G. Watson again overlooks the facts regarding the Rakaia River and the proposed irrigation from it. His statement, "when the Central Plains scheme is granted its waler right." etc., gives rise to the question: is he party to information not made public on this very important issue? His next statement that the amount of water requested is less than one-third of the flow between September and April is also suspect. He assumes flow rates will never fall below 210 cumecs. Recent low flow rates give the lie to this assumption. He forgets to mention that. irrigation demands will be highest when flow rates are low. Much research is yet required before any responsible decision is made on the future of the Rakaia River, and I hope people who consider those with different views as selfish will play no part in that decision-making. — Yours, etc.,

(Mrs) L. F. TEALE.

■ April 16, 1982. Sir,—D. G. Watson is again having a go at correspondents for being selfish in wanting the Rakaia left untouched, and again claiming that his facts are the right ones. I doubt that many are fooled by his apparently even-minded' statements. He still carefully avoids the point that there is more than one proposed scheme for the Rakaia; he still chooses to ignore the effect of diversion groynes in the bed of the river; he has nothing to say about his association s application tor excessive amounts of water. The Central Plains scheme requires much less than the 70 cumecs applied for. He insists on talking about "negotiation,” which diverts the debate into one of comparing the dollars of agricultural production against the benefits of natural systems and the enjoyment they bring. It is also misleading to presume that all Cantabrians should benefit from use of the Rakaia. Whichever direction is taken in its use there will be loss of opportunities for somebody. — Yours, etc., < RICHARD JOHNSON. April 15, 1982.