Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Harbour pollution

Sir—The irony that the .Mount Herbert County chairman (November 5) should be address- , ing is massive pollution, from a port with little or no flushing

action (as confirmed by the Catchment Board), and its movement from the mouth to the head of the harbour acquiring contributions along the way. The “trickle” of coliforms attributed to Governor’s Bay is indistinguishable from indiscretions of grazing animals and the Board of Health is having second thoughts about the witch-hunt with which it has become involved. Recent dye tests at hypothetical 1.6 K outfall were visual testimony that the problem is a harbour basin one, shared by Wellington, Picton, Nelson, Oamaru, etc. Mount Herbert council has been granted greater subsidy consideration and time frame than the chairman cares to admit. How much have ratepayers already spent on a scheme they do not want and cannot afford? It is time for alternatives that modern technology and ratepayers demand. — Yours, etc., RALPH WOODWARD. Governor’s Bay, November 6, 1986.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19861110.2.117.8

Bibliographic details

Press, 10 November 1986, Page 20

Word Count
164

Harbour pollution Press, 10 November 1986, Page 20

Harbour pollution Press, 10 November 1986, Page 20