very much the same, and any reduction in the cost between summer and winter is the fuel reduction. It is necessary to keep the same staff. Perhaps Mr Trethowan has given you the figures in regard to that.

8838. By Mr. PAYNTER: If the farmer was doing the work, do you consider it would reduce the estimate of a 2,000-yard tank? - Yes, I was comparing the two propositions, and it was necessary to put a reasonable figure.

8839. Is this correct, "Brush roof, £150." Would it cost that? - It would cost very little indeed if the farmer did it in his own time. That is work which he can do. If a man could do it in his own time it would simply be the cost of his own labour, and if it were spare time there would be no capital charge.

8840. You put it down at 2s. a yard? - One and ninepence; the present price is 2s. 3d., but that is abnormally high. The figures as regards the construction of the dam and roofing can be very closely arrived at under any conditions of labour. The point on which we want some further trial and information is the catchment hardening. My idea is to put a mob of sheep on to the dam to puddle it.

8841. By the CHAIRMAN: The charge which the State is making to the settler of 4d. plus £5 holding fee is very generally objected to by settlers in all portions of the reticulated areas. Do you consider that objection justified or not? - That particular point does not come within my province, but I will give you my view if you like.

8842. As a man of wide experience? - Mr O'Brien is in charge of this matter; I do not think the 4d per acre is too heavy in connection with the farm that is in good operation, but I am of opinion if the charge could be made on a sliding scale so that the new settle could get it on easier terms, it would be less harsh.

8843. Can we take it that the charge practically covers the cost of the pipes, the water being a secondary consideration? - I believe that is so. You could obtain exact figures from Mr. Trethowan on that point, I think.

8844. Have you considered the application of a 4d. rate on third class land which is sold by the State at 3s. 9d. per acre payable on a 30 years' term, which is a little over 2d. an acre per year, country which will carry a sheep to 20 acres? - It would not be a working proposition to my mind.

8845. You think third class land should be treated on a different basis where a settler has a considerable area of third class land? - I think so.

8846. What depth of dam do you prefer for a 2,000 yard dam which you considered would be a two years' supply if properly constructed? - It would depend on the soil; it should go down at least 10ft. preferably built long and narrow.

8847. What batter would you have on the sides? - In almost any class of soil I should try a fairly steep batter on the sides because I think it would be most advantageous to keep the water covered as much as possible. Furthermore, with a steep batter there is a greater volume of deep water. With flat slopes there would be more evaporation.

8848. What is the steepest workable batter? - In stiff clay one and a half to one on the sides.

8849. By Mr. VENN: Would it not be easier to cover a dam if it is long and narrow? - It is much of a muchness; it is a question of so many squares. Posts put up right through and so many squares to cover.

8850. By the CHAIRMAN: Do you consider a 1,000 yard dam covered would make a permanent supply, say, eight or nine feet deep as a workable proposition for a farm? - No.

8851. It should be bigger? - Yes, I think my figures showed 2,000.

8852. The State's policy is to advance for a 1,000 gallon dam for a farm supply, do you consider that is too little? - It is too small for mixed farming, but until the mixed farming stage arrives, it is enough, but as soon as a farmer begins to keep sheep to any extent he would not have enough water, and would run the risk of running short. A 2,000 yard tank with the water properly conserved would be the minimum for a reliable supply on a thousand acre block.

8853. If you were called on to administer the wheat areas from the rabbit-proof fence eastward and expense was no object, would you legislate for a 2,000 yard dam or a 1,000 yard dam? - A 2,000 yard dam. The 1,000 yard dam has served its purpose in getting the settler on the land. In my opinion, there is little doubt before the wheat areas are thoroughly successful mixed farming will have to be carried out right through and if 2,000 yard tanks were available there would be a certain amount of supply to start the mixed farming on before the farmer had his own supply properly fixed up. That is shortly that the 1,000 yard tank establishes the wheat farmer and supplies him with water until he goes in for mixed farming, but it would be necessary to have a 2,000 yard tank for mixed farming.

8854. We have traversed the wheat areas, the district I have suggested east of the rabbit-proof fence particularly, and we have examined some 550 witnesses in various centres and we have found that with the 1,000 yard dam in November, December, January or February, they are either dry or nearly so. Without hesitation they have failed in this particular season. Bearing the fact in mind and considering that last winter was a fairly good winder for tank filling and that whenever these dams go dry the settlers have to cart water which is the most expensive operation on a farm, would you revise your opinion of the 1,000 yard dam in the light of what I have mentioned? - Regardless of expense I should say "Have a 2,000 yard dam."

8855. You would save the water carting when the 1,000 yard dam failed? - It would enable the farmer to put his labour into more uses. As regards last year, I found, although it was a very good wheat growing year, it was not a very good year from a run off point of view, for the reason there were very few heavy falls. In many places there was not a single registration as high as 100 points. I think last year was below the average. In fact, in connection with some of our bigger schemes, it was very much below the average. It was really the worst off flow that we have experienced.

8856. Would you consider it a year such as 1,000 yard tank would necessarily have to face in order to prove their usefulness or otherwise? - It was well below the average from the run off point of view. It was, however, not an extreme year.

8857. By Mr. VENN: You would prefer two 2in falls to say, 20 half-inch falls? - Yes.

8858. By the CHAIRMAN: You think it is