Showing posts with label Koo Wee Rup Swamp. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Koo Wee Rup Swamp. Show all posts

Saturday, February 20, 2021

Carlo advises Koo Wee Rup Swamp Village Settlers to push for annexation to the Shire of Buln Buln

As early as 1897 the Village Settlers on the Koo Wee Rup Swamp began agitating to have their area secede from the Shire of Berwick and become part of the Shire of Buln Buln (1). The  settlers felt that they had more in common with the Buln Buln Shire. As well, Drouin, where the Buln Buln Shire Offices were located was closer the the settlers than the Shire of Berwick Offices at Berwick and the Buln Buln Shire had cheaper rates. One report said that nine-tenths of the settlers preferred Buln Buln to Berwick (2).

Some of the settlers thought they were already in the Buln Buln Shire as the boundary was the Bunyip River. The South Bourke and Mornington Journal reported that up to quite recently it was understood by the Buln Buln council that the Bunyip River was the boundary, which of course, means the main drain; but it was quietly shifted to the parish and county boundary some time ago without the knowledge of the last-named council (3), The main drain was the canalised section of the Bunyip River, which was dug between 1889 and 1893, the scheme having been engineered by William Thwaites of the Public Works Department.


Map of the Koo Wee Rup East Parish, part of the Shire of Berwick - this is the area the settlers wanted annexed to the Shire of Buln Buln. Click on the image for a clearer version.
Victoria 1:63 360 cadastral maps. Department of Crown Lands & Survey, 1940.

To further their case, in August 1899 a deputation consisting of Messrs Leithhead, M'Namara, and Hill, representing the South Bunyip settlers, waited on the Public Works department, and in the course of a conversation with Mr. Catani, the engineer to the department, that gentleman advised them to apply to be annexed to a shire, as it would be greatly to their advantage. It was also suggested that the whole of the parish of Koo-wee-rup East could join Buln Buln Shire as new territory under section 46 of the Local Government Act, which gives the Governor in Council power to make orders for re-adjustment of boundaries of adjacent shires without any petition (4).

This was important advice from Carlo because the settlers had  an unusual problem. The Shire of Berwick had not yet began to levy rates on the settlers and under the Local Government Act only rate payers could petition for severance or annexation (5).

The newspaper report continued - Mr. Hill said that Mr. Catani stated that beyond the usual votes for roads to village settlements the Government would not do anything to the roads until the settlers became annexed to a shire. Any money voted for drainage works would be laid out at once....but any further monies for the road would have to be spent under the supervision of a shire council, which could get better value for work done than the department got. There was a lengthy conversation on this subject, and the speaker [Mr Hill] said that Mr. Catani appeared to think that it would be better for them to join the Buln Buln shire than allow Berwick to absorb them. The former being a fifth class shire got a subsidy on a higher scale, and the annual rate was also less. . . He pointed out that it was absolutely necessary to take steps that night, and appoint a deputation to interview the Buln Buln council the following day, and the initiative taken this month. He urged that the Berwick shire was making arrangements to rate the Swamp areas, and if once rated, a number of vexatious formalities would have to be gone through before they could be severed from Berwick and annexed to Buln Buln (6). 

It's not like me to criticise Carlo at all, but he was wrong on one fact - both Buln Buln and Berwick were both the same level of Shire - they were both in the second class (7).

The next month, September 1899, a deputation of settlers also met the Secretary for Public Works, Mr Martin who advised that the easiest way for the desired result to eventuate was for the the Berwick Shire to agree to severance and Buln Buln to agree to annexation (8).  In the same month, Mr Hill addressed a meeting of the Shire of Berwick. He did not get their support as the President moved that in view of the increased value land in the Koo-wee-rup East district it was not advisable that that portion of the shire should secede, and the request of the settlers be not granted; and suggested that the whole of the swamp area form a separate riding of the Shire of Berwick. - Seconded by Cr. a'Beckett and carried (9).

The issue surfaced occasionally in 1900, but it was not until 1901 when any hopes the settlers had of being annexed to Buln Buln were dashed. On May 31, 1901 the Iona Riding of the Shire of Berwick came into being which covered the entire Swamp area of the Shire (10). One of the settler's objections, that of the Shire Offices being too far away at Berwick, was also addressed, as from March 1902 all Council meetings were held in Pakenham, a more central location (11).


Settler's House - Koo Wee Rup Village Settlement
Illustrated Australian News of November 8, 1894 http://handle.slv.vic.gov.au/10381/255107

The question remains, why was Carlo so adamant that the Swamp area should become part of the Shire of Buln Buln, rather than Berwick?  Was it only the practical matter of Buln Buln having cheaper rates and as he mistakenly thought had a different classification to Berwick?  Or was there something else? I'm sure there wasn't a personality clash, because Carlo was by all accounts genial and charming, so I  believe he was only looking after the best interests of the Village settlers on the Koo Wee Rup Swamp, by advising they go with a Council that would save them money by charging them lower rates.

Koo Wee Rup Swamp History - I have another blog devoted to the history of the Koo Wee Rup Swamp, https://kooweerupswamphistory.blogspot.com/

Trove list -  I have created a list of articles on this subject on Trove, access it here.

Footnotes
(1) Warragul Guardian, November 30 1897, see here.
(2) South Bourke & Mornington Journal, March 22 1899, see here.
(3) South Bourke & Mornington Journal, March 22 1899, see here.
(4) South Bourke & Mornington Journal, August 23, 1899, see here.
(5) The Age, September 12, 1899, see here.
(6) South Bourke & Mornington Journal, August 23, 1899, see here
(7) South Bourke & Mornington Journal, September 20, 1899, see here.
(8) The Age, September 12, 1899, see here.
(9) South Bourke & Mornington Journal, September 20, 1899, see here.
(10) From Bullock Tracks to Bitumen: a brief history of the Shire of Berwick (Historical Society of Berwick, 1962), p. 10
(11) From Bullock Tracks to Bitumen: a brief history of the Shire of Berwick, op. cit., p.11.

Monday, February 18, 2019

Carlo and the Bennett’s Stump Puller

A successful trial of the Bennett stump-puller was held last week at the Bunyip village settlement. It was arranged between Mr. Catani, C.E., of the Public Works department, and Messrs. J. Davies and Co. that a three days' test trial take place with a view of letting the settlers see the advantage of the stump-puller to clear the scrub. The objection against the old method was that it took a long time to clear, it being so heavily timbered, also that if any, of the root fibres were left in the ground they, would grow again. The puller was started at the back of Mr. Leithhead's store, in the presence of a great many settlers. The stumps were pulled clean out of the ground without grubbing. Some of the holes caused by pulling up the stumps were eight feet by four feet deep, thus showing the quantity of root fibres. The settlers were greatly pleased with the work done. The Government intend hiring the puller out to them at a very cheap rental, and the men who worked the puller at the trial put their names first on the list tor the use of the machine. Last Friday the Minister for Lands visited the settlement, and was greatly pleased with the puller. A couple of men can work it easily. The Government, we understand, intend ordering several of these machines.  (The Australasian February 3, 1894) 

A further report in The Age of the same day said that Mr Catani had accompanied the Minister for Lands, Mr M’Intyre and Mr Callinan, the chief surveyor on the visit. They had arrived by train to Bunyip where they then transferred to a very primitive but serviceable tram car which was drawn by a reinless horse over a tram line built by the settlers, with timber provided by the Government at the small cost of about £50 per mile. The car was loaded with bags of flour, boxes of provisions and eight passengers; and although the progress made was slow, it was safe and sure. At the end of a mile and a half we came to a locality known as the Bunyip Junction. It was at Bunyip Junction [at the Junction bridge] behind Mr Leithhead’s store that the Bennett’s Stump puller was demonstrated.


Advertisement for Bennett's Stump Puller
The Australasian November 18, 1893

The Bennett’s Stump puller which had clearly caught the eye of Carlo Catani, Chief Engineer of the Public Works Department,  had been advertised in Melbourne papers since late December 1892. It had been imported by John Davies & Co., Franklin Street, Melbourne.The first demonstration was carried out at Mr William’s orchard at Doncaster, here the puller was put on its trial and it extracted 20 stumps with the ease of a dentist drawing teeth with the aid of electricity. One of the stumps was 3ft 6in diameter, but as some of the party thought that a pull at a green stump would give more satisfactory results, a growing tree was cut down. The stump was double-rooted, but, nevertheless, It came up, when it was found that the sap root measured 10in, in diameter. Everybody was highly pleased with this test.(The Herald, December 2, 1892) It was later exhibited at Glen Farm in Clyde, the property owned by Mr Wadey.

John Davies & Co. displayed the machine at the Melbourne Agricultural Show in 1893 and The Argus of September 1, 1893 had this to say about how the machine was advertised -  The notice erected around it that one man can lift 20 tons attracts a great deal of notice, but such is the fact. They have a large piece of cast iron weighing 1½ tons suspended from the puller, and the smallest child can lift it. During the visit of His Excellency the Governor to the show he was shown the puller and was greatly pleased with it, and tried for himself the power of it. Five pounds weight on the lever will lift a ton.



Bennett's Stump Puller
The Leader, December 10 1892.

How did the machine work? This description in The Leader of February 3, 1894 attempts at an explanation -  This appliance is in the form of an ordinary sledge, the two cross bars underneath being shod with a steel plate set to enter the ground like the edge of a plough share. The sledge being drawn forward acts upon the scrub and roots by means of the steel shoes. One of the selling points was that the  whole machine could be moved by one horse. The machine has been invented in the United States by Harwell L. Bennett and Russell B. Adams of Westerville,  Ohio and it was granted a U.S patent on February 27, 1894. Read the Patent application and see the original specifications, here. There is a photo of Bennett's manufacturing plant on a tour of Westerville's Industrial area, here.

I don’t know how Carlo got onto the Bennett’s Stump Puller but he was an innovative man and was obviously interested in machines that would make the work quicker, easier and more efficient. It was this same reason that he imported the Lubecker Steam bucket dredge to the Swamp in 1913.

If you are interested - John Davies, who imported the Bennett's Stump Puller, died on July 9,  1926, He was also an engineer and had worked on the construction of Princes Bridge. This is part of his obituary from the Emerald Hill Record, July 10 1926 -   Mr. Davies resided in Harold street, Middle Park, and was a close observer of the advancement of this municipality. He was a strong supporter of the  policy of teaching boys trades, and his enthusiasm for this important contribution to national development led tn his appointment to the council of the local technical school in October, 1919 (read full obituary, here  It is more than possible that Carlo and John Davies knew each other as they were both engineers and that is how the Bennett's Stump Puller came to Carlo's attention. Or perhaps Carlo had just read the reports in the paper of the wonderful Bennett's Stump Puller and decided to give it a trial.

I have created a list of articles from Trove, about the Bennett's Stump Puller. You can access it here.

Saturday, October 13, 2018

Koo Wee Rup Swamp Drainage history

Being born and bred on the Koo Wee Rup Swamp, I feel I always knew about Carlo as he was one of the Public Works Department engineers that worked on the drainage scheme and the town of Catani is right next door to Cora Lynn, where I grew up. This is the extended version of my history of the drainage of the Koo Wee Rup Swamp. If, by some extraordinary chance, you are not as enamoured by the history of Koo Wee Rup Swamp drainage as I am, then you can read the short version of this history on one of my other blogs, here.

I must acknowledge the books  From Swampland to Farmland: a history of the Koo Wee Rup Flood Protection District by David Roberts (Rural Water Commission, 1985)  and the chapter Draining the Swamp in The Good Country: Cranbourne Shire by Niel Gunson (F.W. Cheshire, 1968) in the preparation of this history. 


The Koo Wee Rup Swamp originally covered about 96, 000 acres (40,000 hectares) is part of the Western Port sunkland. Very non-scientifically, the land sunk thousands of years ago between the Heath Hill fault and the Tyabb fault, and the streams that originally drained straight to the sea, such as the Cardinia, Toomuc, Deep Creek, Ararat, Bunyip and Lang Lang now descended onto the flat sections of the sunkland, flowed out over the land and created the swamp conditions.

Small scale drainage projects on the Swamp began as early as 1857 when William Lyall (1821 - 1888) began draining parts of the Yallock Station to drain the excess water from the Yallock Creek. In 1867, Lyall and Archibald McMillan, owner of Caldermeade, funded a drain through the Tobin Yallock Swamp and created a drain to give the Lang Lang River a direct outlet to the sea. Lyall also created drainage around Harewood house (on the South Gippsland Highway Koo Wee Rup and Tooradin).

In 1875, landowners including Duncan MacGregor (1835 - 1916), who owned Dalmore, a property of over 3,800 acres (1,500 hectares) formed the Koo Wee Rup Swamp Drainage Committee. From 1876 this Committee employed over 100 men and created drains that would carry the water from the Cardinia and Toomuc Creeks to Western Port Bay at Moody’s Inlet. The Cardinia Creek outlet was eight metres at the surface, six metres at the base and 1.2 metres deep, so no mean feat as it was all done manually. You can still see these drains when you travel on Manks Road, between Lea Road and Rices Road - the five bridges you cross span the Cardinia and Toomuc Creek canals (plus a few catch drains)

It soon became apparent that drainage works needed to be carried out on a large scale if the Swamp was to be drained and landowners protected from floods. The construction of the Railways also provided a push to drain the Swamp. The Gippsland railway line, which straddled the northern part of the Swamp, was completed from Melbourne to Sale in 1879. The construction of the Great Southern Railway line through the Swamp and South Gippsland, to Port Albert, began in 1887. These lines, plus a general demand for farm land bought the Government into the picture.

The Chief Engineer of the Public Works Department, William Thwaites (1853 - 1907) is almost forgotten in Swamp history, and should get more credit than he does. Thwaites surveyed the Swamp in 1887 and his report recommended the construction of the Bunyip Main Drain from where it entered the Swamp, in the north, to Western Port Bay and a number of smaller side drains.


 This is the Main Drain (Bunyip River) - a 1940s postcard. That would be the road bridge at the front and the rail bridge at the back

There was a scientific background to this scheme - Lewis Ronald East, engineer with  and later Chairman of  the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission (SRWSC) , published a paper called Swamp Reclamation in Victoria in 1935. East writes that the drainage plan was based on the formula Q=CM3/4 - where Q was the discharge in cusecs, C a coefficient and M the area of the area of the catchment in square miles. 50 was adopted as the value of C for ordinary floods and 100 for extraordinary floods. The Scheme was worked out in detail to deal with ordinary floods, but for some unaccountable reason - possibly shortage of funds - it was recommended that the drains be constructed in the first instance to only 1/3 of the designed dimensions, but the reserves were to be of sufficient width to allow future enlargement. East says that the intention of the “Swamp Board” was to merely facilitate the removal flood waters and thus permit the use of land between floods.

A tender for works was advertised in 1889. In spite of strikes, floods and bad weather by March, 1893, the private contractors had constructed the 16 miles of the drain from the Bay to the south of Bunyip and the Public Works Department considered the Swamp was now dry enough for settlement. At one time over 500 men were employed and all the work was done by hand, using axes, shovels, mattocks and wheel barrows.

In spite of what seemed to be good progress - the Public Works Department had been unhappy with the rate of progress and took over its completion in 1893 and appointed our friend, Carlo Catani.

The 1890s was a time of economic depression in Australia and various Government Schemes were implemented to provide employment and to stop the drift of the unemployed to the city. One of these schemes was the Village Settlement Scheme. The aim was for the settlers to find employment outside the city and to boost their income from the sale of produce from their farms. It was in this context that Catani implemented the Village Settlement Scheme on the swamp. Under this Scheme, all workers had to be married, accept up to a 20 acre (8 hectares) block and spend a fortnight working on the drains for wages and a fortnight improving their block and maintaining adjoining drains. The villages were Koo Wee Rup, Five Mile, Vervale, Iona and Yallock.  The first 103 blocks under this scheme were allocated in April 1893.

Many of the settlers were unused to farming and hard physical labour, others were deterred by floods and ironically a drought that caused a bushfire. Many also relied on the wages they received for working on the drains, however this work finished in November 1897, so unless they could find other employment, or their farm was enormously successful they chose (or were forced by circumstance) to leave the Swamp.  The Village Settlement Scheme on the Swamp was abandoned in 1899 and the land was opened for selection in the regular way.

My great grandfather, James Rouse, a widower, arrived on the Swamp with his nine year old son Joe, in 1903. James, who had been a market gardener in England, was part of a second wave of settlers who were granted land as they had previous farming experience.  By 1904, over 2,000 people including 1,400 children lived on the Swamp. By the 1920s, the area was producing one quarter of Victorian potatoes and was also a major producer of dairy products. In fact, as we know, Koo Wee Rup remains an important potato growing area and the importance of the potato was celebrated by the Annual Potato Festival during the 1970s and 1980s. Today, 93% of all Australian asparagus is produced on the Koo Wee Rup Swamp.

The existing drainage works that we see on the Swamp today are really the result of a reaction to various floods. As East wrote in 1935 it was soon evident that the drainage provision made was quite inadequate.  There was a flood in 1893 and according to East the drains were enlarged by at least 50% in 1895 and then enlarged again in 1902, the catalyst being the 1901 flood.  The 1902 work had the objective to remove all floodwaters from a maximum flood within three days

There were some additional drains created in 1911 and by 1912 East says that the drainage scheme had cost £234,000 and the Government had recouped only £188,000. There were arguments over who should fund the scheme - many land owners were opposed to being charged for any work and it was not until after more floods in 1916 and 1917 they agreed in principle to an annual flood protection charge and the ‘Lower Koo Wee Rup flood protection district’ came into being. 

The State Rivers scheme provided for substantial remodelling and enlargement of existing drains, new channels and additional drains next to the Main Drain to take the water from the converging side drains. Other work carried out at this time included giving the Lang Lang River a straight channel to the bay and at the western end of Swamp tapping the Deep Creek into the Toomuc Drain created in 1876. 

Before I go on to the devastating 1934 flood I am going to tell you about the LubeckerSteam dredge. Apparently Catani was interested in using machines on the Swamp in the 1890, but as this was a time of depression the Public Works Department felt that this would take away jobs so it wasn’t until 1913 that Catani could import his first dredge. It was the Lubecker Bucket Dredge, costing £4,716 which arrived in 1913 and started work on the Lang Lang River. When it finished there in 1916 it started on the Koo Wee Rup Swamp on the Main Drain, Cardinia Creek and the Yallock Drain. It weighed 80 tons and had a capacity of 80 cubic metres per hour. A labourer at the time dug about 8 cubic metres per day. It had nearly completed its useful life in 1935 when East wrote his report. 

 The now demolished Memorial Hall at Koo Wee Rup in the 1934 flood
Koo Wee Rup Swamp Historical Society photo

None of the existing works could prepare the swamp for the 1934 flood. In October of that year, Koo Wee Rup received over twice its average rain fall. November also had well above average rainfall and heavy rain fell on December 1 across the State. This rainfall caused a flood of over 100,000 megalitres or 40,000 cusecs (cubic feet per second) per day. This was only an estimate because all the gauges were washed away. The entire Swamp was inundated; water was over 6 feet (2 metres) deep in the town of Koo Wee Rup, exacerbated by the fact that the railway embankment held the water in the town; my grandparents house at Cora Lynn had 3½ feet of water through it and according to family legend they spent three days in the roof with a nine, five, three year old and my father who was one at the time. Over a thousand people were left homeless. This flood also affected other parts of the State, including Melbourne.

There was outrage after the 1934 flood, directed at the SRWSC and it was even worse when another flood, of about 25,000 megalitres (10,000 cusecs) hit in April, 1935. After this flood, 100 men were employed to enlarge the drains.

As a result of the 1934 flood, the SRWC worked on new drainage plans for the Swamp and these plans became known as the Lupson Report after the complier, E.J Lupson, an Engineer. A Royal Commission was also established in 1936. Its role was to investigate the operation of the SRWSC. The Royal Commission report was critical of the SRWSC’s operation in the Koo Wee Rup Flood Protection District in a number of areas.  It ordered that new plans for drainage improvements needed to be established and presented to an independent authority. Mr E. G Richie was appointed as the independent authority. The Richie Report essentially considered that the Lupson Report was ‘sound and well considered’ and should be implemented. Work had just begun on these recommendations when the 1937 flood hit the area. The 1937 flood hit Koo Wee Rup on October 18  and water was two feet (60cm) deep in Rossiter Road and Station Street. The flood peaked at 20,000 cusecs (50,000 megalitres) about half the 1934 flood volume.

The main recommendation of the Lupson / Ritchie report was the construction of the Yallock outfall drain from Cora Lynn, cutting across to Bayles and then essentially following the line of the existing Yallock Creek to Western Port Bay. The aim was to take any flood water directly to the sea so the Main Drain could cope with the remaining water. The Yallock outfall drain was started in 1939 but the works were put on hold during World War Two and not completed until 1956-57. The Yallock outfall drain had been originally designed using the existing farm land as a spillway ie the Main Drain would overflow onto existing farmland and then find its own way to the Yallock outfall drain. Local farmers were unhappy at this, as the total designated spillway area was 275 acres (110 hectares). They suggested a spillway or ford be constructed at Cora Lynn so the flood water would divert to the outfall drain over the spillway. The spillway was finally constructed in 1962.

There is on-going work on the Main Drain all the time - recreation of levee banks, removal of vegetation etc but the opening of the spillway was basically the last major engineering works to happen on the Swamp.

Today we look at Swamps as wetlands, worthy of preservation, but we need to look at the drainage of the Swamp in the context of the times. Koo Wee Rup was only one of many swamps drained around this time; others include the Carrum Swamp and the Moe Swamp. To the people at the time the drainage works were an example of Victorian engineering skills and turned what was perceived as useless land into productive land and removed a barrier to the development of other areas in Gippsland.



Construction of the Spillway at Cora Lynn, October 1962 - the Main Drain is on the right, separated by a soon to be removed levee bank from the spillway which is ironically underwater, due to a flood. Photo: Rouse family collection