The Castlecliff boat ramp: An asset, not a cash cow.
Public asset
It was reported (Chronicle, March 24) that councillors Helen Craig and Rob Vinsen queried council manager Rowan McGregor on why boaties were not charged boat ramp fees.
Mr McGregor was correct when he said the boat ramp facilities were not of a standard that charges could be made.
Ms Craig said the council had spent considerable money upgrading facilities.
However, I do not think sitting councillors are aware the council has had little input into the construction or financing of the boat ramp.
It was built by sea fishing club members from community grants, club fundraising raffles and working bees by members with minimal council input at that stage.
The council came to an agreement with the fishing club as to public use of the ramp and undertook to be responsible for keeping it navigable at all tides, for the use of emergency services such as the Coastguard.
This has not happened. Boats end up sitting on the mud at low tide and/or sucking damaging mud and debris through their motors.
The Coastguard, in an emergency, would be forced to launch at Putiki (another ramp built by volunteer labour), adding about another hour to the response time. I don't know, in the event of a fatality/disaster, how the council's lack of responsibility would be viewed under the Health and Safety Act, as councillors could be deemed "principals in the place of work".
The money council spent on the walkway was due to the port company undermining the embankment built by the fishing club, causing it to collapse. The port is a council holding company, therefore its responsibility.
As the mountains-to-the-sea cycle way goes past this area, I wonder how much the turning area improvements are a result of this.
If the council is to charge a fee for launching, the ramp area would have to be dredged regularly, a barrier to the surge put in place to stop damage to boats, and swimming in the ramp area stopped. If a fee were charged, I would presume damage to boats through council neglect re dredging or surge protection could lead to claims against the council.
Councillors should view this facility as a public asset and not some vague cash cow.
T. MULLINS
Whanganui
Hoodwinked
The power of averages in the hands of the unscrupulous can be very deceitful.
Wages, for example.
Take the top 10 per cent of wage, salary and professionals out of the equation who have been grossly mollycoddled by this Government, then you will find that the wage increases for the other 90 per cent will be artificially inflated, thereby cunningly concealing the small increases for the middle- and low-income careers hoodwinked by the power of averages -- and that's why our inequality gap is among the world's highest.
P.S. Is Bill English the National party's straw man?
LEN GOLDSACK
Gonville
Perches for all
Contrary to the assertion in your article "Feathers set to fly uncaged" (Chronicle, March 24) that only "two hens out of 60 can perch at a time" in a colony egg production system cage, I would like to point out that colony systems are designed so that every bird is able to perch at the same time.
This is a feature of all colony systems used around the world.
A number of international scientific studies show birds take full advantage of this. It is also worth noting that colony systems are endorsed by the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC), the panel of leading independent New Zealand animal welfare experts (which includes a member of the NZ Veterinary Association and of the SPCA), that drew up the Animal Welfare (Layer Hens) Code of Welfare 2012.
In their report accompanying the release of the Layer Hens Code of Welfare in 2012, NAWAC members stated unanimously that colony cage production systems offer "equivalent or superior overall welfare when compared to other egg production systems such as free-range and barn".
MICHAEL BROOKS
Executive director Egg Producers' Federation of New Zealand
Not facts, truths
A. Ellery letters, (March 15) correctly stated that science does not discriminate good from bad, then got bogged down trying to use the Bible as a science textbook to disprove the findings of scientists concerning evolution.
I would remind him the Bible tells us to love God with our whole mind (Mark 12:30) and that our minds function not only in a logical, analytical "left-brain" manner, but also in an associative, intuitive "right-brain" way. Further, Bible stories are based on the Judaic "right-brain" experience of the divine. In our culture we mostly think the logical "left-brain" way of scientific discovery and philosopher's logic. This is why our "left-brain" fundamentalist friends find evolution such a stumbling block.
The Judaic experience of God can only be imperfectly translated into the language of Western science and logic. When we realise this, we can recognise that our religion is an experience giving meaning to life, discriminating good from bad, but couched in a way that was never meant to be analysed by logic. Consequently it does not shed light on the facts of natural science but upon moral truths, a principal one being that God is love, and love creates our ordered, harmonious social world.
It can be a difficult spiritual journey to move on from the comfort of a literal but erroneous American interpretation of the Bible and towards the intuitive holistic Judaic experience of it, but once such a move has been made, scientific ideas such as the big bang and evolution are no longer barriers to oneness with the divine. As The Beatles endlessly reminded us, "all you need is love".
JOHN ARCHER
Ohakune
He lost an arm and a leg in a crash that killed three friends.