THE KAIMATA DAM

Grey River Argus, 3 July 1937, Page 8

THE KAIMATA DAM

Statement by Engineer

“NO STRUCTURAL DEFECTSI”

In connection with the alleged state of unrest said to exist in Greymouth by Councillor Blanehfield owing to. fear of an accident, to the Arnold Dam, I have been asked to give a statement of the facts, s.ated the Engineer to the Grey Electric Power Board yes. terday in an interview with an “Ar, gus” representative. Firstly', there are no structural defects in the dam itself and no cause for alarm as to .the safety. of the struc'.ure, The- work going on at the dam consists of laying a new and longer apron ito replace the original apron which has .broken up. This apron is not part of the dam structure itself and contributes nothing to its stability, its sole purpose being prevent erosion of the river bed in front of .the flam from ,th e sheet of falling water. An apron is necessary on the Arnold dam owing to the river having a Papa rock bottom which will not stand up t 0 turbulent water and prelection is necessary' to ensur e ths safety of the dam structure. Those of the public who are ae. quainted with the Board’s headworks wi'l realise that the comparatively small amount of water impounded by the Arnold dam forms no menace to Greymouth in the event of its release. A sudden* discharge of this water would not produe e a decent fresh in the Grey River, and a little knowledge of the conditions or a visit to those headworks would, or should', con. vince Mr. Blanehfield that his fears of a serious .flood wiih havoc in Grey, mouth and B’aketown ar e the result; of his imagination. HoWever, damage to the Board’s dam resulting in the release of any considerable quantity o f water wonild seriously interfere with the electricity supp’y. Th e Board are fully aware of the serious consequences of any failure of power supply, and it is their busi. ness to maintain their plant and keep it in working order so far as it is humanly possible to do so, and that is what they are doing, without con. cealing facts or anything pertinent to t’li 6 operation of the works which the public are entitle® to know. H?he Board cannot, however, be responsible for ill-informed and sometimes mis. ehievous rumours which circulate from time to time in connection with varous phases of the Board’s activities.