THE HOKITIKA BRIDGE.

West Coast Times, Issue 2770, 16 February 1878, Page 2

THE HOKITIKA BRIDGE.

(To the Editor.) Sir, — Seeing in your issue of Wednesday an article on the site for the Hokitika river bridge, allow me to place a few more facts connected with it before your readers. It is true that a bridge at Kanieri would not cost quite as much as one within the town boundary, but the difference is not nearly so great as is supposed. The Co3t at Kanieri is estimated at £8000. The length of the punt wire being 13 chains, the bridge would be about the same length 5 possibly a chain less. The cost of erection is then £666 1 3s 4d per chain. We must also add compensation to the proprietors of the punt, who, a few months ago, were asking £2000 for their right. If, on the other hand, the bridge was erected opposite Davie-street, joining the protection works on each side of the river, the distance would not be more than nine chains, there being as good a foundation there as at Kanieri. It would not cost any more per chain, or £0000 to reach the south protective works. Thence to the main bank, an embankment costing about £3000 would he adequate for all requirements. Thus you will see the cost at Hokitika would be £9000, while at Kanieri it is £8000 with compensation to punt owners tacked on. What benefit will it be to us if the bridge be placed so far away ? I say none whatever. A few waggoners, coach drivers, and travellers will be the

only ones use it if erected at Kanieri. It is said that a good sandstone reef crosses the river at the Kanieri site, but this is a piecejof bunkum, mooted by the Kanierites, as the reef crosses the river diagonally much lower down stream, while it is a well known fact that the water has been as deep as thirty feet at the proposed site, varying according to the scour of different floods. If it is found too costly to take "Observer's" route for a road via Lake yMahinapua, a straight line for a road has nicen surveyed and reserved through the centre of the Native Reserve. This could he formed at a com nratively small cost to join the road to 1,..^ at Woodstoek, and the bridge at the site I propose. Thus hoth servi g the double purpose of connecting tin- bridge and opening up traffic on the soiuh >-v] „f the river, which has of iv (.- I), in closed. It would also she t.n rue road to Ross by a mile and a half. It is a well known fact that sheep and cattle drovers to and from the southern districts generally prefer to risk the lUea of their animals by swimming their flecks and herds across the river, and going by the heachto taking the more circuitous and hilly road made for j them. Then there is the benefit of the sawmills near the town. Each mill-owner even now pays over £200 per month among his employes, besides the advantages by bringing a large number of vessels to the port. It can easily be seen how important it is to Hokitika interests to make the timber on the other side ef the river available for export. It is thought by some that the Harbor Board will not at present protect the south side of the river, but as the conservation of the river is an absolute necessity at this point, that difficulty will not long remain. It is now high time this question was properly ventilated, as the people of Ilokitjka may wake up too late aud find that their lukewarmness in thia y_ matter has cost them dearly. With your permission, Mr Editor, 1 will again refer to tbia subject. Hoping I have not trespassed too much on youv space, I am, &c, Hokitika Hokitika, February 15th.