STATE FORESTS.

Auckland Star, Volume LXII, Issue 157, 6 July 1931, Page 5

STATE FORESTS.

MERGING OF DEPARTMENT.

A RETROGRADE STEP.

VIEWS OF LATE DIRECTOR

A letter from Mr. L. Macintosh Ellis, Director of Forestry in New Zealand from 1920 to 1928, appears in the "Dominion." Mr. Ellis comments on the recent announcement of the Prime Minister that the State Forest Service was to be absorbed by the Department of Lands. Mr. Ellis says:—

"I urge that this step be reconsidered, for it must inevitably cause irreparable losses to the national forest wealth and io the cause of forestry in the Dominion. A brief reflection on fundamentals tells ■why there ie a State Forest Service as an independent instrumentality. After, generations of cut, hack, burn, denudar tion, warnings of famine and advice, the Government of New Zealand in 1919, through that splendid Empire builder, Sir Francis Dillon Bell, brought into being a national forest policy which had for its principal objects the conservation, protection and wise use of its natural forest wealth. Vital reasons which actuated the Government in this forward move were the national safety in times of crisis, the assurance of adequate timber supplies to its peoples at all times, the safeguarding of water supplies and the rehabilitation of the steadily-increasing areas of waste lands throughout the Dominion. "Years of Darkness." "During the many previous years of darkness prior to the 1919 declaration of policy, the instrument of Crown and State forests administration was the Department of Lands. The progress of national forestry during these days of darkness was painfully slow and inadequate. This is not to be wondered at when one remembers that the Department of Lands, as the- 'land agent' of the Government, is primarily concerned only with the examination, classification, subdivision, sale and settlement of the Crown land resources. With the effluxion of time and Avhen these objects have been achieved this great department of State must disappear. The community therefore cannot expect the Lands Department, which is interested only in getting rid of the public domain as quickly as possible, to administer the State forest estate as does the forester with his long views and interest in the permanent future needs of the community.

I am sure it was an active appreciation of these principles that inspired SixFrancis Dillon Bell to create an instrument of action —the State Forest Service—wholly and directly responsible to a Ministerial head. Since 1919, through the- efforts of this service, New Zealand has come from an obscure position actually to be the acknowledged leader in forestry achievement throughout the British Empire, and the eyes of forest economists throughout the world are now centred on her. Not that that is of very much moment to the taxpayers of the Dominion, but it is in the fields of concrete forest regeneration, of timber revenue, and of use of the waste lands of the community that this service has rendered great good to the country. It is a matter of record that in no State of the British Empire have such adequate steps been taken as in New Zealand to conserve the natural forest wealth, to protect this wealth, to safeguard the water supplies- of the present and future, and to place to productive use half a million acres of waste lands through afforestation, and to institute and operate a most efficient system of timber sales and realisation —the envy of foresters and forest administrators throughout the Empire. "Disastrous Consequences." "It is now proposed to scrap this efficient machine and to return to the practice in vogue in the 'bad old days.' It cannot be for reasons of economy, for the operating staff of the service is not duplicated in any other Department of State; it cannot be for reasons of pounds, shillings and pence, because the 6ervice receives to-day three or four times over what it received for the same produce ten or fifteen years ago. Then, 'Why?' I ask! If the transfer to the Lands Department is consummated I predict that very disastrous consequences will result through the injudicious alienation of the public forest' domain, and the sacrifice of the forest heritage. The administration of national forest wealth by Lands Departments, in New Zealand or in any other country of the Empire, has never shown any genuine or real appreciation of national forestry. Surely it is not too late to review this proposal.

"Tho writer offers a suggestion. If for reasons of absolute economy it is necessary to consolidate the State Departments, why not associate the State Forest Service with that sister Department which is vitally related to primary production —the Department of Agriculture? Forest culture, broadly speaking, is concerned with the cultivation of the soil, and those who are engaged in administering the primary and agricultural policies of the State possess, as do the foresters, the same long views and scientific outlook. That great Department has on its etaff ecologists, biologists, chemists, economists and many others, all trained and concerned with primary production in kindred fields to forestry, and it controls ricJi sources of knowledge in its experimental farms, plant-breeding stations and laboratories. I suggest, therefore, in all earnestness, that eerious thought be wiven to the permanent fusion of these two Departments. If that is done, lam of the opinion, based on a lifetime and wo#ld-wide experience ill forest administration, that great benefits will ensue to the taxpayer."