Difficult choices over South Westland timber

Press, 31 May 1982, Page 16

Difficult choices over South Westland timber

By

OLIVER RIDDELL

,L in Wellington

It would be a mistake to believe that the controversy over the fate of the South Westland native forests has been settled; it is merely in abeyance. The decision by the Government last year that Waikukupa and South Okarito State Forests should be included in the Westland National Park dealt with only one among several contentious points. The others remain. Chief among the problems is the fate of the mill towns of Hari Hari and Whataroa. They are not absolutely dependent upon milling to survive, but milling is a vital component of their continuing existence. Other activities, such as servicing local farming communities and catering for the tourist trade, could not sustain the populations of the two towns at the present level,

Reduction in size of either town raises many questions about the quality of life in South Westland. Quality of life depends in part on'size of population. The rural depopulation of much of New Zealand has led to fewer and poorer quality services, with greater, distances needed to be travelled. The same fate threatens South Westland if anything happens to reduce Hari Hari or Whataroa. Yet it is hard to see how both mills can survive, and hard to see how any Government can countenance continued levels of milling that will enable both mills to survive. The Forest Service contracts with the mills run out in 1988, and that will be when the chickens come home to roost. There are four options:— First — the Forest Service could guarantee on into the future the supply of enough native timber to sustain both mills. Given that timber from Waikukupa and South Okarito will be denied the mills because it is incorporated within Westland National Park, where would the timber come from? It could only come from the forests outside established reserves. They could be milled as intensively as this to continue to provide timber for Hari Hari and Whataroa, but only for a few years. Then the timber would be cut right out and both mills would have to Close because there is virtually no exotic timber planted in South Westland, - . and "any planted in 1982 could not be

milled in quantity until nearly 2112.

Second — the Forest Service could probably supply enough timber to maintain one mill on a reduced basis permanently. With so little rimu and kahikatea being milled, the product from reduced milling ought to be very valuable, and so make up in quality what the mill might lose in quantity.

The Forest Service is keen to continue to manage the remaining’ forests under its control on a sustained yield basis. It believes it can do this permanently, as long as it does not have to cut faster than the resource is replaced. Third — because the quantities will be so small from sustained yield management, some conservationists believe all cutting should stop and natural regeneration be permitted for all the- remaining indigenous forests of South Westland.

This would involve closing both mills. For that reason it is unlikely to be politically acceptable, and would certainly deal a harsh blow to the economy of South Westland. It would reduce its population so much that the services there could hardly continue in their present form, unless something was done to give a quick and substantial boost to the tourist industry there. Fourth — a major exotic planting programme could begin while forests of native timber already cut over could be clear-felled. This would provide most of the timber needed to keep the mills going until enough exotic . timber was available.

■ Sadly, this quite sensible suggestion has one big drawback. It is true that many doubt that native forests already cut over can now be managed on a

sustaihed yield basis. The degree of windthrow and deterioration of the forests north of South Okarito is 'such that maybe it is sensible to mill them out.

The great drawback to this solution is the grave doubt that exists over the suitability of such a high rainfall area as South Westland, and also its occasional devastating flooding such as in February this year, for exotic trees. Silviculture experts within the Forest Service and allied to conservation groups see a number of possible ecological problems. It is known that the Forest Service generally favour? the second option — sustained yield management of the remaining indigenous forests to keep one mill going on a reduced output of high quality timber. If the Government eventually chooses this option, the big question will be — which mill?

A roughly similar situation already exists in the South Auckland area over supplies of exotic timber. There is a' greater mill capacity than there are supplies of exotic timber to fill it. The Forest Service has not tried to. regulate or allocate timber supplies. It has let market forces decide by putting the available wood up. for tender. It would be tempting to let the same policy apply in South Westland. But there will be so little timber available, and South Westland is such an under-developed region with so few job opportunities, that it will be tempting for the Government to decide which mill is to survive and make arrangements accordingly. Otherwise, Whataroa and Hari Hari may find themselves competing with each other for their survival.