Waitaki Hydro-Electric Scheme
Part Played by the Railways

A remarkable analysis of transport costs has been made by Mr. R. H. Packwood, the Public Works Department's engineer in charge of tine construction of the Waitaki Dam, the £2 million hydroelectric scheme which ranks largest of its kind in the South Island. Mr. Packwood's statement clearly indicates the national value of the railway facilities in reducing transport costs to the Waitaki Dam by using the Kurow Branch railway. Whilst it is generally recognised that the railways have played a leading part in assisting national development, and that they have added values to land far in excess of their capital cost to the Dominion, actual figures to prove this are difficult to obtain, and without them, statements along these lines are necessarily somewhat unconvincing. Mr. Packwood's is perhaps the first fully detailed examination of road and rail costs in connection with a major project, and as the whole of the relevant information was available, his conclusions carry weight of a singularly impressive nature.

IN a letter to Mr. G. H. Mackley, the General Manager of Railways, Mr. R. H. Packwood, District Engineer of the Public Works Department, who was in charge of the construction of the Waitaki Power Scheme, now so successfully concluded, gives the following interesting facts regarding the value of the services rendered by the railway system in connection with this £2 million project.

“The position as at March 31st, 1934,” states Mr. Packwood, “was that the Railway Department had handled some 72,000 tons of material, on which railage charges amounting to £107,000 had been paid. The chief items were: 43 000 tons cement, railed from Burnside (near Dunedin) 124 miles distant; 9,000 tons timber railed from West Coast, etc., approximately 300 miles distant; 20,000 tons other material including heavy construction plant from as far afield as Auckland; also component parts of the permanent power plant (weighing up to 21 tons each) from Timaru, about 88 miles distant.

“I cannot attempt an estimate of the savings in cost due to the existence of the railway system as a whole, but for the present purpose will compare what would have been the position had there been no branch railway connecting Kurow with the nearest port, Oamaru, thus involving road transport for 40 miles. In passing, I might remark that two existing Government power schemes, Lake Coleridge and Waikaremoana, were each located at approximately that distance from the nearest rail-head, and in both cases the existing roads had to be reformed to a higher standard, and thereafter maintained as a direct charge to each scheme.

“In our case, the existing road from Oamaru to Kurow was of quite a high standard, but every bridge en route would have required strengthening and in some cases complete reconstruction, to safely carry the 21 ton concentrated loads. It is obvious, too, that no Local Body could reasonably be expected to meet the enhanced cost of maintenance due to such abnormal traffic, and that (in effect) the upkeep of the road for the full period of construction would have devolved on the Government. This view is amply confirmed by previous experience.

“On completion, the tonnage will amount to 80,000, on which railage charges amounting to £120,000 will have been borne by the Power Scheme. Over half of this rather formidable total is due to cement alone, 48,000 tons @ £1 5s. 8d. Beginning with this item, we find that railage is 2 1/2d. per ton mile, which was also the average figure for all goods handled by the railways during the last financial year. Now, from a lengthy personal acquaintance with road transportation, supported by actual costs borne by other schemes, I believe that haulage by road vehicles would have cost 10d. per ton mile. I am aware that this figure might be disputed, and that instances of cheaper rates can be quoted. But on examination one finds that such services have been operated at a loss, or that some special circumstances prevailed, such as favourable back-loading, which would not have been the case in this instance. I am convinced, therefore, that on cement haulage alone, the use of the railways saved us 7 1/2d. per ton mile, or 25/- per ton, a total of £60,000.

“The net cost of construction of the branch railway from Pukeuri Junction to Kurow (38 miles) at the 31st March, 1934, was £124,000. The striking fact emerges, therefore, that the total capital cost of this branch railway has been saved to the State in a direction never contemplated by its promoters—a specific instance of developmental value.

“Finally, I would mention another aspect of the subject—one that cannot be assessed in hard cash, but which nevertheless is appreciated in full by one who has experienced the worries of organising and maintaining a fleet of motor vehicles. I refer to the reliability of the railways, and particularly their ability to cope with peak loads at periods of maximum activity.

“Day and night the railway organisation is there to handle not only regular business, but ready at a few hours' notice to put on “specials” to cope with emergencies. In this connection, I desire to pay a tribute to the manner in which your officers, both district and local, have met the demands we have made upon them during our six years' association, and the knowledge that we could depend upon their courteous assistance at all times has been a big factor in the smooth running of our own organisation.”