LOSS OF THE KAPONGA

Otago Witness, Issue 4085, 28 June 1932, Page 30

LOSS OF THE KAPONGA

HARBOUR MASTER AT FAULT WELLINGTON, June 24. The wreck of the collier Kaponga 01$ the Greymouth Bar on May 27 was entirely due to inaccurate information a 3 to the depth of water on the bar given by the harbour master at Greymouth td Captain W. A. Gray, of the Kaponga, according to the judgment of the court ofi inquiry delivered to-day. The court madd an order that the Greymouth Harbouij Board should pay the costs of the -inquiry, which were fixed at £47 ss, plu3 the assessors’ fees, and witnesses’ expenses. “ In our opinion there was no justly fication for the loss of this vessel,” thei judgment states. “There were no difficulties of wind, sea, current, or visibility; the area to be sounded was small, and there was ample time and opportunity for the harbour officials to have ascertained and supplied correct information as to the position of the bar and the depth of water thereon. The heavy south-westerly to westerly weather was calculated to cause the bar to silt up and to change its position and formation, but no adequate steps were, in oui? opinion, taken to ascertain such change. We have no reason to doubt that such, soundings as were taken were accurate, but, with vessels of the size of the Kaponga and Kalingo (each with a beam of over 40 feet, and with a draught descending to within a few feet of the known bottom) about to sail, soundings should, after such weather, have been made at considerably closer intervals over a substantially wider area. If these obvious steps had been taken the shoals would have been located, and the vessel would not have been lost.”

Holding the board responsible, the judgment said that the harbour master assured the master of the Kaponga that there would be 21 feet 3 inches of navigable water on the bar; in fact, there was less than 18 feet 6 inches. The information given by the harbourmaster was thus vitally inaccurate. In regard to the presence of the master of the Kaponga when the soundings were taken, the judgment said he was not entitled to interfere with the operations and his presence was to inform himself of the general conditions of weather, swell, set of tide, .and position of the bar, rather than to check or interfere with the sounding operations. The harbour master, with his intimate daily knowledge of the harbour, was the one to decide what soundings he needed to take. “We think that the master of the Kaponga was justified in relying on the information and advice given him by the harbour master. It is unfortunate that the master of the Kalingo did not ensure that an adequate whistle was given when his vessel touched the bar, and it is unfortunate that those who saw the signal that was given should have failed to communicate it to the master of the Kaponga, but in the court’s opinion the real and substantial cause of the loss of the vessel was due to the inaccurate information as to the depth of water on the bar given by the harbour master to the master of the Kaponga.”