THE PINE CONTROVERSY.

Auckland Star, Volume LVI, Issue 292, 10 December 1925, Page 12

THE PINE CONTROVERSY.

(To the-Editor.) Sir, —May I add my observations to this discussion? While those two authorities, Mr. Geo. Green and Mr. D. Hay, have decisively and authoritatively pronounced that there exists a tree known as pintfs insignis and pinus radiata. other world authorities on arboreal -matters, as quoted from the ! State Forest Service reference library in the Press, aflirm that there is only one species, namely, pinus radiata. The writer has gone to some trouble to further investigate the perplexing subject, and with the following results:—Dr. Traprock, that distinguished American scientist, states that there exist no less than five sub-species, but, strangely enough, he does not recognise pinus radiata or pinus insignis as proper and correct names, but prefers the correct and only scientific designation, "pinus monterensis" (Melt.). The writer has successfully established the fact that the five sub-species of "pinus monterensis" described by Traprock in his monumental work, "The World Distribution of the Pineaceae" (year 1914), are to be found in the Auckland province, as follow:—Pinus monterensis, var. rubene, Waikato; var. Cockeii, Dargaville; var. .attenuata, Waitemata district; var. Jeffreyii, Waikato; var. Traprockiana, Auckland and environs—Kumeu. The writer lias further established the fact that there will likely prove to be defined at least nineteen more varietiesdue probably to hybridisation. The question should be referred to that eminent botanist, Dr. Jafphlet, who is now visiflng the Dominion. The writer .will, be more than happy to cooperate with others interested in these problems. —I am, etc., I, PAUL BUNYAN. 13, Exeter. Street. .