Part 6

Page 417
image 80 of 98

This transcription is complete

unless there was a majority of them favourable to it. But they seem to forget when they were put in special consideration was extended thereby to the agricultural industry in the shape of keeping down the loading charges. For instance there is no charge to the agriculturalist against the extensions for any of the capital cost of the Mundaring Weird scheme. No charge is made for the main that carries the water to the point where it is connected. Hence you must bear in mind that these extensions should have carried a proportion of the Weir and of the main that carried the water to the point of connection. I think we charged for the water at the main 2s. 6d. per thousand. We took the capital cost of the main and endeavoured to keep down the cost of the main as much as possible. The price is regulated by the size of the main and consequently we endeavoured to have the main so that we could give to each consumer what he could consume and only put down such a main as would carry the water required. Having go the cost of the main we made the charge to the farmer fit in with the four penny rate as nearly as we could. Taking that in and out as laid down the four penny rate did not meet even the reduced charges or the total charges on the main. It has also been contended that special consideration is given to the Goldfields and that similar consideration should be extended to the agricultural industry. But that is the wrong way round. If that were done a big reduction would be made on the water on the Goldfields. I realised that we were starting something new in coupling up another industry to the Mundaring reservoir. There were of course other schemes suggested, but I wanted to have the charges so approximating those on the Goldfields that there would not remain an argument to justify any alteration in the price charged. In other words, I did not wish to give the Goldfields a chance of having their price reduced below that of the agricultural areas. It was a difficult problem and cause a great deal of anxiety at the time. Mr. Trethowan is an expert on this question and has the whole thing at his fingers' ends, and you will find if you question him that in comparison the Goldfields are paying more for their water than the farmers. Taking the one industry versus the other, I am prepared to admit that there is room for difference of opinion as to whether as were justified in extending those mains, but if you had an industry and the bulk of the people in that industry made a request, it is not the function of a Government to refuse what they are clamouring for, and the farmers clamoured for it and they got it. I think I read in the published evidence where one witness complained that the farmer paid as much as £30 a year for the water. I would like to say, speaking as a farmer, that I should like to secure it at that price if I could get it to the spot where I wanted it. Farmers put down dams but they seldom put them near the homestead, and the consequence is that they are perpetually carting from the dam to the homestead. Very few of them have their water and windmill near their homes. But if they were to count the cost of incessant carting in tanks and with horses to their homes they would find that it runs out far in excess of £30 a year. Personally I intend to lay mine on to the stables and homestead.

7766. What would it cost you for your dam, mill, and piping laid on, the capital cost?—My dam cost 1s. 6d. for 2,200 yards, making £165; the windmill and stand would mean another £40, and later on when the job is concluded, laying it on for 150 yards, there will probably be another £30, making £235 of a total.

7767. By Mr. PAYNTER: How long will the supply last you in a dry season?—It will see me through altogether once the dam is filled, but I do not propose to put all the stock on it, as I intend to have other dams. But I shall have no difficulty in keeping the stables and homestead constantly supplied. In addition, I have a number of big tanks, and I do not lose any of the rain water. Even now some of the stock are watered with rain water from those tanks. The dam is almost 10 feet in depth. Twelve feet was specified, but I was afraid of the bottom. On the whole, if the farmer were to take into consideration what it costs him indirectly for his own water supply, and compared that with the direct charge of the extension he would find that he would be penalising himself more than if he had the water direct from the extension.

7768. By the CHAIRMAN: How long has your dam been excavated?—It has recently been finished and I am now praying for the first thunderstorm.

7769. Are there any dams in your district which you would call permanent?—Yes, there is the Bungullipen Dam. At Christmas, 1910, when it was 1,000 yards capacity, it went dry, and remained so for a long time, but since then 3,000 yard of a dam has been constructed close to it, and there is abundance of water, and many settlers are drawing upon it constantly. It is about 10 feet in depth, and it saw through the 1914 drought. The water runs through the smaller dam, and fills the 3,000 yards dam.

7770. Do you think there should be legislation for a dam that will last for two years or only for one year?—I do not think it is a matter for the Legislature at all, but it should be the defined policy of the Agricultural Bank to see that in the eastern agricultural belt the farmer should have a two years' supply.

7771. What would you define as a two years' supply?—I think the Agricultural Bank should investigate every individual case, and take into consideration the number of stock depasturing and the area farmed. I think it would be better for the farmer to have one or two dams, but the Agricultural Bank should be so liberalised as to enable it to advance the money whereby every farmer could be guaranteed a two years' supply. In my own case the Agricultural Bank advanced 1d. 3d. a yard, but I think they ought to reduce the advances made for clearing. In the past they have done too much in the way of encouraging clearing. On the majority of the farms they are over cleared, and have too much land in proportion to their equipment cleared. It would be better to liberalise the Bank in connection with water conservation.

7772. In your district would a 2,000-yard dam 12 feet deep give an adequate supply?—I think it might suffice for a 1,000-acre farm, but, personally, I consider that I myself want three dams in different places.