page 3

Another Dam Silly Scheme

The Tararua Forest Park is being threatened by a number of small Power Authorities. This is part of the Electricity Department's plan to encourage local supply authorities to exploit the power of small rivers capable of economic development.

The Park is a unique area of relatively unspoilt native bush very close to a main centre. None of the other main centres have a comparable area as close as the Tararuas are to Wellington. Beacause of this an attempt should be made to preserve the Park as a recreational and scenic asset, rather than destroying it for doubtful financial returns.

The amount of power to be generated by the planned schemes is only very small and when this gain is compared with environmental and recreational loss, the benefit of the schemes is questionable.

At present the first hydro-electric project is being considered by the Horowhena Electric Power Board who propose to dam the Otaki River about 13 Km above the present road end, just below the junction of the Waitewaewae and Otaki Rivers. The scheme will flood about 6 Km of the Otaki and 3 Km of the Waitewaewae as well as putting an access road into the dam site.

The Power Board has announced, from investigations so far conducted, that the saving to the Board would be $60,000 per year. This represents a saving of only $3 per head for the consumers living in the area. This claim is also based on very vague figures. The cost of drilling the 7 Km long tunnel is difficult to estimate as has been demonstrated by other projects in this country, such as the Kaimai tunnel. The generating capacity of the river is also in some doubt as the river flow has been measured over a period of less than a year and the figures obtained have varied considerably from those calculated from rainfall statistics. The life of the scheme has been estimated at 50 years but the siltation problems occurring in the Tararuas under extreme climatic conditions are very difficult to assess. It seems likely that a storm such as that which occurred in this area in 1936 would considerably reduce the life of the project. This storm created 30 foot high log-jams which completely silted up in a short period.

Because of these uncertainties the actual saving to the power consumers is in some doubt.

Even the Forest Service recognises the need for some areas to be set aside for recreational and scenic reserves. In one of their publications. Beech Forests, which was an attempt to justify the Beech Utilisation scheme, it is stated "The Forest Service has recognised the recreational value of areas by creating State Forest Parks in both the North and South Islands. Beech forms most of the forests of the Kaimanawa, Kaweka, Tararua and Rimutaka State Forests"

The Forest Service has gone one step further and designated some areas as "wilderness". These are supposed to remain untouched by man as far as is possible, without interfering with recreational usage. The Upper Otaki and Waitewaewae catchments above the proposed dam comprises such an area, and the scheme involves flooding the lower part of this wilderness, as well as putting in a road to its boundary. This would mean the certain destruction of this area as a wilderness, as it would not have the buffer zone necessary to reduce the effect of man. Despite this the Forest Service has written a report supporting the scheme (according to the Evening Post, July 22).

The Preliminary Environmental Impact Report commissioned by the Power Board attempts to sidestep the destruction of this recreational asset. It claims to provide a beautiful mountain lake, ideally suited to such activities as swimming, power-boating, fishing, canoeing and picknicking. In doing so it appears to have overlooked a comparable scheme just a few miles North of the Otaki site. This is the Mangahao Power Scheme, which, in 1925, created two lakes, neither of which has provided any recreational attractions for the public or tramper The lake and shores are muddy and unsightly and only eels can survive in the siltladen water. The area above the lakes is swampy; below the lakes the river is slimy due to the sluggish flow of water. The access to this area is similar to that proposed for the Otaki dam; a long, steep, winding road, mostly single-laned, which is rarely used by the Sunday driver. Certainly it would require a brave man to tow his boat over such a road.

The Otaki project is similar to the Mangahao scheme and similar recreational usage could be expected - virtually none. Certainly the proposed scheme would not offer any recreational attractions not already present in the area. It therefore seems that the scheme's only effect on public usage of the Forest Park would be to ruin the most accessible and beautiful valley on the Western side of the range for the estimated 1000 people who tramp into the valley annually.

There are other factors which could prove to be undesireable if the scheme goes ahead. These include the effect on the bar at the mouth of the Otaki, which could cause flooding of low-lying areas: the reduction of sediment deposited in the lower Otaki, which at present supplies to shingle works (including much of the line balast for the North Island Railway); the effect on the coast to the South of the Otaki mouth; and most importantly the effect on the wildlife and ecology of the whole region. The "experts" employed by the Power Board in the research for the Preliminary Environmental Impact Report have come up with the incredible conclusion that "most animal populations in the area affected by the projects should benefit from the scheme. "This seems very unlikely with comparison with Mangahao.

As this is the first of several projects it is a test case, and opposition to the scheme must be voiced before the 8th. August when objections on the Preliminary Environmental Impact Report close. After this date, a decision on whether to spend $¼ million on further investigations will be made. If these investigations proceed the chances of stopping the scheme will be slight as the Power Board will have invested heavily in the Otaki.

Your objections should be addressed to the Commissioner of the Environment, Box 12042, Wellington; and a copy to your favourite M.P. would help as the final decision lies with the government. The more objections received, the better the chance of stooping the scheme.