CO129-503-1 Development of Hong Kong Harbour 6-12-1926 - 28-10-1927 — Page 50

50

5.

e presume that the Colonial Authorities are

satisfied that the dredgings proposed to be obtained can

be suitably used for the purpose of reclamation.

6. Dealing with the questions specifically set out

in paragraph 2 of your letter: -

(a) The deepening off Kowloon Point and the removal of

Belchers Shoal should not entail excessive maintenance dredging, especially in regard to Belchers Shoal. Recurring dredging might, however, be required from time to time in connection with the deepening off Kowloon Point.

(b)

(c)

(d)

The dredging of the proposed channel would no doubt promote a certain amount of scour through the channel itself, but it is doubtful if this would be sufficient to maintain the channel without maintenance dredging, especially as the proposed channel appears from the charts to be through mud.

The

general scouring action of the ebb tide in the Harbour would not, in our opinion, be affected to any appreciable extent.

(Note: The proposed channel is stated as being in a south-west direction. We think this should be south-east).

It is not likely that the dredging operations would detrimentally affect the tidal currents in the Harbour.

We could not offer an opinion as to this, more than to say that the sum of £150,000 referred to would be insufficient to carry out with advantage any portion of the deep water quays which have been contemplated.

We are, etc.,

for COODE, FITZMAURICE, WILSON AND MITCHELL.

(Sgd.) maurice F.J. Wilson.

Page 50Page 51