National Parks

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31279, 27 January 1967, Page 10

National Parks

Sir,—Your editorial on the report on national parks is particularly valuable for its support for the protection of seashores. This is a matter of great urgency in many parts of the country. One example of an area which is in danger is the fine stretch of coast between Greymouth and Westport, where ugly erections have mushroomed without apparent control. Another example is the magnificent shoreline of eastern Northland where the bays are being progressively despoiled. In America, areas have been purchased, at enormous expanse, after subdivision, in ordeY to restore some of the coast to the public. This must be forestalled in New Zealand. Even where the danger of subdivision is slight, the problem of access commonly remains. “National Coastal Reserves,” with reasonable public facilities, are essential, and lake shores need similar protection.—Yours, etc., R. P. SUGGATE. January 25, 1967.

Sir, —1 am pleased to note your continued interest in National Parks. Today, park boards are being asked to solve many complex problems and face up to controversial issues. Fortunately, the services of experienced officers of the Lands and Survey Department give a sound base to park administration, but 1 think the time has come for a cold, hard look at the members of park boards. No doubt these are appointed in good faith, but a lot of log rolling must go on behind the scenes when apopintments are made. There is nothing unusual in this, human beings being what they are, but the

trouble is that appointments are for life, so that park boards tend to become exclusive clubs with no influx of new ideas and enthusiasms. I am strongly of the opinion that a service limit, say of six years, be put on membership of park boards.—Yours, etc., T. January 26, 1967.