NAPIER HARBOUR

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVII, Issue 209, 18 August 1927, Page 5

NAPIER HARBOUR

COMMISSION’S INVESTIGATIONS TO-DAY’S PROCEEDINGS. PILE DRIVER & DREDGER’S EVIDENCE. Continuing this morning, the Napier Harbour Commission heard evidence from Duncan Nicholson, builder, of West shore. He was foreman and leading carpenter for the Napier Harbour Board during the time that the Browning crane was being worked, he being in charge, working under instructions from the engineer, Mr. Finch. Witness built the jetty, and looked after the dredging. He started the jetty about 80 yards from thb entrance of the Inner Harbour. He started driving with 33ft. piles, leaving only about ten feet above water. Three piles were put in each row, the centre being driven plumb, while the two outside were driven at a slight angle towards the centre. The rows were Oft. apart. Dredging was started from the third row of piles. The work was finished up with 55ft. piles, nine of which were used, leaving about nine feet above water. Taking it right through it was easy driving. After doing the dredging, going further out, a pile was driven in quarter of an hour. Witness started dredging 39ft. out, the depth being about ten feet. Witness dredged down to 18ft., the material being chiefly stone with shingle combined. The stones would average from 501bs. to one cwt. Most of them were covered with mussels, and looked as if they had come from the breastwork. With the crane they were able to dredge out to between 40 and 50ft. from the jetty, according to the tide. The greater portion of the spoil was taken to the lagoon. Witness put down seven charges for blasting purposes. RESULTS MOST SUCCESSFUL. When at 15 feet, said witness, little trouble was experienced with the dredging, and the results were most successful. In that locality he went down to 26ft., the material at that depth being sand and shingle with a mixture of stone. Witness dredged out from the end of the jetty as far as it was safe, going down to 31ft. 6in., this being 30ft. from the end of the jetty. The material in the centre of the channel was* mostly stone with a mixture of sand. At the end it was fair dredging. The greatest depth dredged to was 33}ft., being on the inside of the jetty. The stones dredged from the end of the jetty were identical with those from the crib work. On the port side he could dredge shingle any time, but on the outside nothing but roek and mud. The shingle was splendid for any concrete work. Most of it, however, was carted to the lagoon. The largest boulder dredged was handled by two men. The dredging, as the depth increased, became easier. In reply to the chairman witness stated that the shingle was coming down the channel, not up it. Mr. Lusk: The dredging you did was on ths eastern side of the channel!—Yes. The current was pretty strong!— Roughly speaking about 4 knots. I could put a pile in position whether the tide was running in or out. From the time you commenced dredging till you finished you found stone!—No, it was boulders, sand, and shingle. You had trouble with your driving! —Only with one pile, when I fancy that it glanced on a stone. Did you have to do blasting when pile driving!—No. When you speak of going down 18ft. from what mark did you go!— From low-water mark. You spoke of mussels on the stone; were they alive! —Yes. You got practically the same material from start to finish!—Practically. The dredging varied but little. When you went down in depths, did you get the same materials!—Off and on. NO EVIDENCE OF A REEF. Mr. Grant: Did you ever notice any evidence of a reef!—No; but I am not an authority. Mr. Finch put the jetty out because he had heard talk of a reef. Did you put the charges down in one spot! No in three diffesent places. Mr. McKenzie: By the time you had finished dredging you dredged a hole 80ft. by 108 ft. averaging In depth from 10ft. to 33ft. 9in.—Yes. That would form a good trap for shingle!—Yes. When the tide was on the ebb you got gravel!—Yes. When it was running out then!— Yes, only then. Do you know which way the shingle travels between the Breakwater and the eastern pier?—No. Mr. Barton: Why did the work stop before that contemplated was finished P—l think it was because it interfered with navigation. HARBOUR MASTER’S EVIDENCE. Capt. Horace White-Parsons, har-bour-master at Napier, a position he had held for 13 years, said he had had 36 years’ experience at sea, which had been gained in various classes of vessel up }O 4,000 tons, lie was also a Lieut-Commander R.N.B. Before coming to Napier as harbourmaster he had had considerable experience in trading to Napier. He worked all New Zealand and Australian ports, being an exempt master. At Napier he had worked both ports. He had berthed vessels at the Breakwater of 5000 tons, having a draught, of 25ft. Such berthings had been in fine weather and without accidents. On account of stress bf weather he had had to move vessels out. He never took any risks and should heavy weather come up he would not hesitate to take a vessel out- He had berthed a vessel at the Oreakwater drawing 24ft during a westerly gale, there being no sea running. He had berthed ships there during a considerable easterly wind, there being just as much sea, he thought, that vessels could lie alongside with safety. The amount of the range during the seas referred to inside the Breakwater was about 3ft. The limit of scend to which a vessel could be kept at a berth depended on the vessel. The extension of the Breakwater to the Auckland rock, would, in his opinion, reduce th® TWp ......I'

lay about two miles from the Breakwater and did not offer it any protection. The completion of the western mole was an engineering matter but in his opinion it would reduce the scend. The course that captains had been using in approaching the Breakwater was the course that would be used when completed. The entrance course at present was between the five and six contour fathoms line. In bringing a ship' there during a north-east wind there would be plenty of room in which to handle it. In some parts of the entrance it would be a beam sea, but there would be no difficulty in making the entrance during a reasonable nor’-easter once the harbour was completed. During bad weather he had had experience of not being able to take vessels into either Sydney nor Wellington harbours. The question of the height of the Breakwater was one for engineers, but the water did not come over in quantities to interferewith the navigation. He did not think that the completion of the Breakwater harbour would increase the scend through the water coming over. He did not consider that the water coming over contributed toward the scend, which was caused by waves coming round the end of the Breakwater.

EXPERIENCE WITH OTHEII HARBOURS. When the western mole was completed he considered that even during an easterly sea the scend would not be extraordinary. That was his experience of other breakwater harbours that he had worked, including Timaru, New Plymouth, Oamaru, Capetown and others. The Breakwater harbour as resigned by Cullen & Keele, would in his opinion, afford ample protection to vessels and he would have no hesitation in berthing the vessels now using the roadstead. The number of moorings used on a vessel at the Breakwater depended on the range and the weather. On the Kaituna (2042 tons) five springs were used, besides an anchor being put down, the latter being used in assisting the vessel to moor. The anchor would tend to reduce the number of hawsers used. When the Breakwater was completed he did not consider that a tug would be necessary. He could not answer the question as to whether the shipping interests would have a say in the matttr. Tugs in most ports were remunerative, paying for themselves. If there was a wreck on the coast and a tug was required it would have to be sent from either Auckland or Wellington. A return was then put in showing the number of vessels that had worked the Port during the last two yearsSENT FROM THE BREAKWATER. Quoting from the return Capt. White-Parsons said that through stress qf weather 12 vessels were sent from the Breakwater. There had frequently been two large overseas vessels moored at one time to the Glasgow wharf. He could not say whether the wharf required strengthening as it was purely an engineering question. Last April he w.as called upon to report on the question of siltation at the Breakwater Harbour. In the course of his report Captain White Parsons stated that from 1919 to 1924 the soundings were taken by the resident engineer. The greatest accumulation and taken place beyond the navigating area, the depths at the berths remaining about the same. The winging basin of 1300 feet was sufficient room for a vessel coming in except when conditions were abnormal. The completed scheme would provide for four ocean berths, that being the present two and two more. It depended upon how the ships arrived as to whether this accommoda tion~ would be sufficient.' During the wool season he had seen five vessels in the roadstead. In regard to tlie costal vessels, if the berths were taken up by overseas vessels they would have to wait their turn. There was an average of five regular coastal vessels arriving every week. The average berthing required for the coastal service would be about 1300 feet. Trawlers would require additional wharfage. At present about 220 feet was being used in the Inner Harbour for the coastal services, lighters trawlers and the dredge, most of it being taken up by trawlers. When not in use and when necessary there were berthed two or three abreast. There was no accommodation provided in the outer harbour for these vessels. The greatest draught that could work the Inner Harbour at low water slack was about 15feet. No difficulty was experienced in bring in sueh vessels. With further deepening of the entrance channel and the berths a vessel drawing 18 feet in fiqe weather could be brought in. Assuming that the Inner Harbour channel could be widened and deepened to 31 feet between file moles the basing to 31ft a vessel drawing 26 reel with the assistance of a tug could be brought in under normal conditions. Under similar conditions no difficulty would be experienced in making the entrance to the Inner Harbour from the outer channel with the assistance of a tug. TUG NECESSARY. He was of the opinion that a tug would be necessary because in making the entrance channel from the outside there was a space of 600 feet in which to make the 300 navigable feet between the moles. If anything should go wrong there would be nothing with which the vessel could be manoeuvred. When bringing a vessel in at slack water there would be no current to be troubled with. He would take a vessel through at about three knots, wanting about two lengths to pull her up in. He was not prepared to say whether a vessel ebOiil be stopped within 1200 feet. A risk would have to be taken as a, re gular speed could not be kept up. When taking a ship into the Breakwater, if necessary he could drop an anchor and steam round but at the Inner Harbour there was not room to do so. An increase in the dredged area at the Inner Harbour would make it much easier. The water in the upper basin of the Inner Harbour was always still, being no current would make navigation there much easier. TIDES ABOVE EMBANKMENT. Dealing with the tides above the flfiibankfnent witness said that sueh informaffun would have to be obtained from the engineers. A strong easterly would make navigation to the Inner Harbour more difficult ikon is fhs PrusUy-si p r , hflyjng til©

wind and sea on the beam while at the latter it Would be more on the shoulder. He could not sav whether the Breakwater would have the effect of making an easterly sea a beam sea when entering the Breakwater harbour. It was a fact that small craft worked the Inner Harbour in most weathers. Only occasionally had they,to anchor out in the bay. He had never vet to semi a vessel out from the Inner Harbour because of weather conditions. Vessels which had been discharging at the Breakwater and obliged to leave on account of weather had gone inside and completed discharge. Mr Barton: You were served with a summons to appear here?—Yes. And 1 you have attended to give evidence in obedience to that command?—Yes.

Mr Lusk: Has the Breakwater proved satisfactory ? —ln its present state I think it has. If completed it would be a safe harbour?—l think it would. In your report of berthages over a period of several years vou stated that the Arahura called 388 times, not missing berthing?—that is so. Mr Lusk (after quoting other returns) : You think that satisfactory for an unfinished harbour ?—J do What is the greatest draught that you have berthed at the Breakwater? —26 ft 6in. You could have berthed practicallyal] the overseas vessels that come to the roadstead, even in its unfinished condition?—Yes. in tine weather. Could you have berthed the Tamaroa ?—lf the weather conditions were right. With a complete Breakwater vou would have no difficulty?—No. Is it not a fact that on the snot on the chart of soundings taken bv the consulting engineers showing 16ft 6in von berthed a vessel drawing over 18ft? —Yes. Mr Barton: What vessel was that ? —I think the Kaponga. You said that a large proportion of the siltation was against the Breakwater wall —Yes. outside the navigating area You said that the range was not caused by the water coming over the Breakwater? —No; the waves strike the apron and then work round 1 the end of the Breakwater. The Auckland Rock did assist the range to a certain extent. With Sie completion of the Breakwater to the Auckland Rock that range will be greatlv modified. The water going over the top only creates a iobble?—Yes, that is all. Mr Lusk: I presume that the passage into the open sea being restricted makes the entrance to the Inner Harbour more difficult than entering the Breakwater?—Yes. The only safe time to work the channel is at slack water?—Yes. That means that a vessel would need to be at the entrance in readiness?.? —No. If a few minutes late it would have to wait for six fiouis?—Yes. Only one ship could bo worked in the channel at once? —I wouldn't recommend any more. Do you think that such a harbour could be worked at night?—No, I don’t think so. What is the rise and fall of the tide —Abut 4 feet. Is there any considerable range running into the entrance of the Inner Harbour’s channel when a sea is on? —Yes. Would you, with a boat of 25ft draughl, bring her through the 36ft channel if there was any range!— No I would not. BATE OF CURRENT. What is Che rate of the current — About 3 to 6 krifiTs between the mole at neat tide and another knot at spring tide. Are hawsers used in the Harbour? —The vessels use their own. The Board doesn’t supply them. What are known as light lines are generally used. What is the affect of the range in the Inner Harbour!—The Ngatori, was lying at the wharf when a bit of range came in and it was found necessary to send to the Breakwater for some springs. She carried these away and then she was made fast with wire auil she pulled the posts out. Are strong westerly winds felt at the West Quay?—Yes, like they are anywhere else. Mr. Gray: 1 might take it that you express a decided preference ior the Breakwater?—l say that it would be safe and easier to work. Would there be occasions when the completed Breakwater could not >e worked?—Yes, in rough weather. i suppose what happened in 1916 during the storm might happen again?—Yes, it might. Look at this photograph—that was undoubtedly a big sea. Having in regard possibility of a recurrence would the Breakwater afford sufficient protection?—l said that the water coming over had not interfered with navigation. What about the raising of the Breakwater; do you think it should be done?—That is an engineering question. Do you remember the heavy sea last August when two blocks were washed over th eßreakwater?—lf the secretary said they did there would be no doubt about it. You said that in your return of vessels at the Breakwater, the greatest draught was 26ft. 3in.?— Well, she touched, but there was plenty of water under her at the berth. When I went to board the captain said that she was drawing 24J feet, and 1 said I could guarantee 26 feet of water. When coming in I felt a slight tremble. if you had known that she was drawing that draught would you have brought her in?—No. You said - that you could have brought in the Tamaroa?—As far ’s the draught was concerned. Gould you have berthed her?—Yes. the berth is larger than the ship. You sav that if a ship is not nt the mole when slack water occurs the vessel will have to wait for six hours ? —Yes. that happens in any bar harbour. Slack water is onlv for a period < f about 10 minutes?—Yes. But you could work a vessel for a longer period than that?—Yes. in ordinary conditions for possibly three-quarters of an hour.

ATTITUDE OF COUNSEL

TENDENCY TO PARTY SPIRIT. MR. GRAY’s'cOMMENTS. Before the commission at Napier commenced proceedings this morning. Mr. A. Gray, K.C,. counsel for the Harbour Board, said that the atti-

tilde assumed by counsel before the commission bad a tendency for the inquiry to resolve into a party spirit. Mr. Lusk, he said, when the commission opened, read a letter from the Minister of Marine, in which he expressed the hope that the proceedings would be conducted with a nonparty feeling and with that expression he (Mr Gray) was fully in accord. With Mr. Grant, he would do his best to assist the commission and to lay before it all evidence possible. There seemed now to be a tendency to partv spirit appearing, especially in view of a cross-examination, and further in view of Mr. Lusk’s declaration yesterday afternoon to the Breakwater party. He would reaffirm his intention of submitting all evidence possible and to help the commission, and although he might call witnesses whose evidence might be more favourable to the Inner Harbour, he did not wish to be identified with that party. *MR. LUSK’S ATTITUDE. Mr. Lusk stated that he read a letter from the Minister to himself in which he desired that the commission should not be the arena for personal strife. The Department recognised that the Breakwater was the proper harbour, and he was there to advocate for it. “1 will say that the conduct of my very old friend, Mr. Gray, has been all though irreproachable," said Mr. Lusk. “Tile evidence given by Mr. Jull, Mr. Holmes and others has been in favour of the Inner Harbour. The fact cannot be denied that the evidence has been all one way and I cannot see any fault in the way I have conducted my case. Mr. Gray • The evidence has not been all one way. Mr, Higgins was called immediately following Mr. Jull. I did not know that you were advocating the Breakwater. I understood that the attitude of the Department was neutral. CHAIRMAN’S ASSURANCE. Mr. Barton; 1 agree that Mr. Gray's presentation of his case has been irreproachable. The case for the Inner Harbour will in no way suffer through continued presentations. The report of yesterday afternoon’s proceedings will be found on page 8.