Speed changes here to stay — get used to it

Rotorua Daily Post - - OUR PEOPLE -

I have read the three let­ters to the editor in re­cent days re­gard­ing the re­duc­tion in speed lim­its to the Ha­mu­rana Rd and side roads.

I would like to point out to David Car­man that he is in­cor­rect that there have been no deaths near the golf course.

There was a pedes­trian killed only a few years ago be­tween Kaska and Turner Rds (high vis­i­bil­ity ar­eas).

So I ask him why should that not hap­pen a lit­tle fur­ther along op­po­site the golf course and Ha­mu­rana Springs en­trance?

Per­haps he should leave 30 sec­onds ear­lier on his way into town to com­pen­sate for the lost 24 sec­onds (as Ian Guy said in his let­ter) or look for­ward to pay­ing the speed­ing tick­ets he will get if he trav­els over the limit.

Bryce Heard and the two other mem­bers of the Ru­ral Com­mu­nity Board in their July meet­ing were not happy with the re­duc­tion in speed from 70km/h to 60km/h, rec­om­mend­ing that the coun­cil should re­fer this to the Ha­mu­rana res­i­dents for pub­lic feed­back based on 60km/h and 80km/h op­tions.

There was a lot of feed­back give to the lo­cal ratepayer as­so­ci­a­tion, all in favour of a re­duc­tion to 60km/ h.

I might add that the ratepayer as­so­ci­a­tion has fought for this change for over a year and the Ro­torua Daily Post has writ­ten two ar­ti­cles on the sub­ject.

I to­tally agree with Ian Guy in his com­ments and thank him for his com­mon sense on the is­sue and sup­port of the change.

The changed.

So just live with it and stop bleat­ing. speed has Jerry Dou­glas Ha­mu­rana Ages ago I wrote about an un­used and van­dalised bus stop shel­ter on Mal­froy Rd, near the end of the No. 8 West­brook route, which was a relic of an­other, long-gone, bus ser­vice. This was in re­sponse to an ar­ti­cle about Ma­maku School chil­dren hav­ing to wait in the rain for their bus, and I sug­gested that this shel­ter could be re­paired and shifted there. Last Fri­day the shel­ter was still on Mal­froy Rd and still seem­ingly un­used but “they” were in­stalling new clear pan­els in it. Is this lo­cal or re­gional coun­cil folly? Ron­ald Mayes Ro­torua Martin Green points out that trout and salmon are in­tro­duced species.

Yes they are, and they were in­tro­duced with­out so much as a by-your-leave to the own­ers of the lakes and rivers.

Trout are an in­tro­duced pest that dev­as­tated the na­tive fresh­wa­ter fish.

Trout are noth­ing more than aquatic pos­sums or fer­rets.

Be­tween the in­tro­duc­tion of aquatic pests, habi­tat mod­i­fi­ca­tion, and short-sighted white baiters who in­sist on their “right” to harvest en­dan­gered species, there is a very real chance our na­tive fresh­wa­ter fish will go the same way as the moa.

New Zealand has al­ready lost one species of fresh­wa­ter fish, the grayling, and I do not want to see oth­ers go the same way.

As for the sup­posed tourism­re­lated ben­e­fits of trout, let us re­mem­ber that rock snot was in­tro­duced by for­eign an­glers. CC McDowall Ro­torua I to­tally op­pose Peter Wil­liams’ view on the na­tional an­them, “English should be dropped from the na­tional an­them”.

I think that it shouldn’t be­cause if you go back to 1840 when the Treaty was signed, we share a coun­try and our lan­guage.

So it is es­sen­tial and fair to have both Ma¯ ori and English in the song. Emma, 10

Ro­torua

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand

© PressReader. All rights reserved.