THE RIVER PROTECTION WORKS.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 513, 5 June 1869, Page 3

THE RIVER PROTECTION WORKS.

The late District Engineer, Mr. Lowe, in his report upon the public works necessary on the Nelson SouthWest G-oldtields, gives the following opinion on the proposed river protection works at "Westport:— Before closing the subject of harbor works, &c, I would venture to suggest a few remarks regarding the protection of the banks of the Buller Biver. I have the report of the Pro-

vincial Engineer thereon, as well aB those of Messrs. Woods and Balfour, on which I trust it will not be considered an impropriety in me to offer an opinion. On the* means proposed as a remedy for the existing evils, I should be entirely in favor of the former.

Mr. Woods proposes an economical scheme as an experiment, the plan being to re-open the channel at the back of the Island abreast of Packers 1 Point. This appears to me a mistaken view altogether. First it is demonstrable that, if it is even possible to do it, the cost would be enormous. It is proposed to clear the old channel at the upper end of the island. The main current of the river impinges on the island below this print, wherefore it is obvious, the mere clearing out of the said channel above can have no effect on that current. To cause the stream then to flow into this old channel, it would be necessary to turn it off the opposite bank on a much higher poiut, which would cost as much as the work proposed by Mr Blackett in another place. The difference being that Mr Blackett's work would complete the purpose in view, while Mr Woods' would be but one experimental step towards it.

Secondly, admitting the possibility of turning the river, or a large part of it, as proposed behind the island, it appears to me a remedy of so dangerous a nature, that it should receive the gravest consideration. I am myself convinced it would result in the destruction of the South Spit, to the irreparable damage of the port. I think, however, it is unnecessary to warn the Government against this course, as I am sure the proposed amount of £2OOO is utterly insufficient to accomplish it.

The true principle appears to be, to turn the stream off the injured part of the North bank by the' least possible deflexion from its wonted course, and that can only be attained by works on that side of the river, and about the spot indicated by the Provincial Engineer. Prom further investigation of the resources at hand, no doubt some modification in the details of the work will be found necessary, but such modification will not, I think, diminish the expense as estimated at £12,000.

The kiud of embankment proposed is, I believe, the only one capable of standing in the Puller, where any breakwater has to resist a body of water from 85 to 45 feet deep at a high velocity, and having nothing but a loose shingle bottom to rest upon. I have only one suggestion to make iu addition, to ask consideration of a question whether so large an expenditure as is required to protect the bank near the sea might not more advantageously be applied in opening and forming the streets of the town iu the upper part, as it was originally planned. A natural bank acts as a breakwater to protect the bank some distance below it, and though it is covered in floods it could be added to at a moderate expense. Wharfs could stand safely under the lee of the bank referred to, and there is ample draught of water for shipping.