HARBOUR MATTERS.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12709, 21 March 1911, Page 8

HARBOUR MATTERS.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—-I am pleased to see that Mr. J. B. Murray has seen fit to express Tiimself upon this important matter, though he does not enlighten the public very much upon the policy the Harbour Board will bring before the a few., weeks from now. He deriys making the. "promise" attributed by me to Mr. Bassett and attributed bjf- Mr.. Allan Robinson to •Sfm/' Who iheii made this promise? Someone must "have for .many', who went to the meetings held by the remember this statement, being made, and it.was a point immediately •seized upon by those in opposition to the Board's platform. To make a long story short, Mr. Murray has to . admit that the results are not what lie had hoped for,, but he contends that the ■ extra construction work caused by .the erosion- of the South Spit and the. stranding of. the. Alexa have kept back progress. But as I have said previously the North and "South" Moles are now at the point the Board two years ago intended to construct them, as they did not anticipate then that they'would be able to «xte"nd them further with the money they had to work upon. The stranding of the Alexa I consider the worst of the two evils, impeding as it did the building of the stone work. The amount of stone which had perforce to. be placed as ftfr as the break does not seem very, much though, and lvould have, made little difference to \ the general value of the mole. To • my mind there is no need for any: - further, extension .of - the moles, or • rather there would be no need if the South Mole was a good- deal above ■high water level from beginhing to end. The South Mole is of far more importance than the North Mole and-for-that matter its' construction .should have been commenced years ago. .Many are the times I have noted ■the fact that when the tide commences to run out, and it runs out very fast now, the greater part of the - water appears to lose its scouring effect by pouring over the top of the Vwall, and is carried down the coast. If the wall was, comparatively speaking, watertight, a great deal of good ■would be done to the bar by this ■wasted water. I see that there is now IS feet of water on the bar. This correspondence seems to have stirred up the river just as much as^it has the Harbour Board. With regard to the loan, etc., Mr. Murray says the Board cannot go any faster than the legal formalities permit. Quite so. But would it not be advisable for the Board to be in a position to go through each step without any more delay than there had to be? Surely the members of the Board see what I have been driving at when I have been urging promptitude upon tliem. Mr. Murray has strange views upon dredging, and says that the Board fs carrying out what their Engineer has advised them to, and dredging does not form a part of this. I would just like to 1:now Mr. Reynolds' opinion as to the present necessity for the Board carrying out dredging, whether It be on the bar or the river channel. Mr. Murray speaks m a disparaging way upon the matter of dredging the bar, liking it to bailing out the ocean. I would like to know when Mr. Mui'ray expects the Wanganui River to be entirely rid of the "live sand" he speaks of. According to aim we might just as well give up the ghost straight away. Mr. Murray, it appears, is very much against the proposal to construct the floating T;>asin ~a.t Wanganui as Mr. Hatrick urges, consequent up the cost involved. I was pleased to see Mr. Meuli suggest that the dredge should be set upon the work of dredging a new channel from the end of the internal wall tffrough the present sand-banks and past the Heads Wharf. The last time he suggested this the Resident Engineer mentioned that the South Soft wharf would probably silt up. -Of course it is doubtful as to what the result of extending the wall would ' be, but it is the only means of keepIng the Htsads wharf clear otherwise'

than by dredging. The matter of lengthening the internal wall is a matter which the Board should give very serious attention to before de-ciding-to do the work. We have not had any large flood since the wail was completed, but it seems to me that in case we were to get a very heavy flood (which we are now liable to consequent upon the denuding of the forests on the banks of our river), and the wall now completed another 1000 feet, there would be vei'y great danger of a serious erosion in the river bank. I consider that it should be left as it is, and what Mr. Meuli suggests should be acted upon at once. There can be no doubt that once the channel was cut the wall would keep the river running in that channel. Traders to the port remember that in years gone by there was a navigable channel running from the Heads wharf through what are now sand banks to the Landguard Bluff, and .latest plans of the river still show what remains of this channel, which contains very little water now. The work of re-opening this could easily be commenced from the end of the internal wall, and the river would have a very -much straighter course to the sea than it has at present. It would run past the Freezing Works wharf, and the channel would always be clear. The large vessels would be able to go up to town with their general cargo and be able to drop down to Castlecliff to take in their frozen meat. Surely the Freezing Works people would not .want more than that their wharf should be kept open. Again, if the floating basin is con- . structed at. Castlecliff and the river is allowed to run in its. present course, the Castlecliff wharf will always require dredging, whereas if the ri'er was trained in such a way as Mr. Meuli suggests, the wharf would alwas's be clear. The straight run would help the bar considerably to maintain Its depth, and it is evident to all" that,.as the river at present runs it wastes itself-at-the bottom of 'Flagstaff Hill and does not get a fair /run out to sea. If we have now obtained 18 feet on the bar with the river running as it is now, what might we expect from the river having a straight run out? I hope Mr. Meuli will keep plugging at this, to my mind, most practicable suggestion. An ounce of practical knowledge is worth tons of theory. Yours etc., ELECTOR. " P.S.-^-So the Harbour Board has not got any further in regard to the policy it is to brings before the electors next month. Mr. Murray's letter in this morning's Chronicle in answer to Mr. Hatrick. shows that matters have not even reached the 'plan' stage which' I had hoped for. ■ Their Resident Engineer, it appears, has merely dnawn ud. some rough plans—which nevertheless show that the Board have in mind the construction of the floating basin'at Castlecliff—but these are for. the-information of the Board only and not for the information of -the Marine ■ Department.