MANAWATU-OROUA RIVER BOARD

Manawatu Standard, Volume LII, Issue 269, 13 October 1932, Page 8

MANAWATU-OROUA RIVER BOARD

(To the Editor). Sir, —In view of the number of people who believe themselves qualified to speak on behalf of the ManawatuOroua River Board and who explain the attitude of the board, I thougnt it might not be out of place for the chairman of the board to make matters perhaps a little clearer. First, the River Board is only in opposition to work on Hamilton’s bend or any other work in the upper areas if, or when, such work, or the result of such work, is likely to damage or endanger any other portion of the board’s area; this surely is a reasonable attitude for the board to assume. Work of considerable magnitude in this locality has always been a part of any scheme proposed by the board. The board is of the opinion that to carry out work on tho higher areas which will accelerate the flow of water on to the lower areas, without making proper outlet provision for such accelerated water, is fundamentally wrong and must result jn any benefit to one area being at the expense and disadvantage of the other. Regarding the outlet, the compensation bogey is not so formidable m actual fact as has been represented; 170 acres will be severed, which the adjoining owner is prepared to take in exchange for a similar area adjoining the property from which it has been severed, so this should not cost much. ■ for compensation; the owner of the 40 acres is prepared and has offered to leave the valuation to a reputable valuer and accept his valuation. The Foxton Borough Council is not opposed to the scheme and lias notified the Minister to that effect. The Foxton Harbour Board is prepared to co-oper-ate with tho River Board in such manner as would certainly assist if the scheme were put in hand. The cutting off of this. six and ahalf miles of tortuous channel, at the outlet, would remove any obstacle to cutting off of bends, banking, etc., upstream and would eventually tend to the benefit of the whole area. All that is required is co-operation over the whole district, and had we practised this in the past I feel sure the Government would have done most of • the work required. Certainly I think it quite safe to say the board is absolutely opposed to drowning some of its ratepayers to benefit others, but its main purpose is to carry out work in co-operation with its ratepayers so that no settler is drowned out, and it can be done. The River Board is there, it cannot do anything if the ratepayers combine to block it, or if, as is now the case, those not vitally affected are more active publicly than those who are anxious for the work to proceed. They are too quiet and some think they are in a great minority, but their minority is mostly in sound—they prefer to be quiet than argue uselessly. Had all areas been fair to one another the present very awkward situation would not have arisen; by this 1 do not mean that reasonable criticism or objection to particular work is out of place, merely organised opposition to everything, however advantageous to the bulk of the area. If those who are in favour would. not allow themselves to bo unduly influenced by organised fluency I believe things would be improved; however, the matter is in the hands of those who pay the piper one way or the other. One can only hope that the cheapest and best course, which is not always the one which costs least at the outset, may be taken. As chairman of tho board I believe the Whirokino work of vital importance to tho whole district; if the majority disagree with me I shall be sorry but not inconsolable. “Man’s inhumanity to man makes countless thousands mourn.” —I am, etc., Y\ T ALTER S. CARTER, Chairman, Manawatu-Oroua River Board.

P.S. —Although it is my intention to offer my services to my own district at next election I shall not accept nomination for chairmanship.—W.S.C.