Kauri: management and ‘rape’

Press, 8 March 1984, Page 20

Kauri: management and ‘rape’

No increase in the amount of kauri harvested from State Forests is planned, Mr J. C. Halkett, of the Forest Service, has said in a letter to “The Press.” Mr Halkett commented on the “long-standing and commendable” interest in native forests shown by a regular correspondent, Mr Eric Bennett, of Wellington, and said that had early New Zealanders shown the same concern, the destruction of the kauri forests mentioned by Mr Bennett might not have been so severe.

However, Mr Bennett, and others, could be accused of blithely ignoring the rape of kauri forests of New Zealand’s Pacific neighbours, while suggesting that New Zealand should not manage its own kauri forests to meet timber demands—even though it had the technology to so manage them, Mr Hallett said. Between April and December

last year New Zealand imported, across the Auckland wharf alone, 2395 cubic metres of sawn kauri timber from the Pacific Islands, he said.

“This volume, representing almost 5000 cubic metres of logs, was taken from native forest where responsible management is not practised,” Mr Halkett said. Mr Halkett said that some of Mr Bennett’s comments directed at the recently-published “Kauri Forest Management Review” were not accurate, and he wished to clarify matters.

Mr Halkett was formerly in charge' of the kauri research unit, and he is now in the forest management division in the Forest Service head office, with responsibility for the management of indigenous forests. “There is no current proposal to increase the amount of kauri being harvested from State Forests. It

has been stated by the Forest Service that established procedures of public notification and consultation will be followed before areas, other than those already scheduled, are considered for log production, or any increase in the volume extracted, beyond the present prescribed cut, is contemplated,” Mr Halkett said.

Kauri grew in discreet stands, and usually occupied only a small part of the area of any so-called kauri forest—usually less than 20 per cent of it, Mr Halkett said.

“Talk of kauri monocultures is stretching the imagination somewhat.”

The tending qf regenerating, or second-crop, kauri forest would never produce pure kauri stands, he said, even though kauri was given preferential treatment on some sites. &■’ Timber production was not a

major aspect of forest management, Mr Halkett said. “A very substantial area of kauri forest has been set aside in scientific reserves, (38,357 hectares) reinforcing the fact that the principal function of management is, and will continue to be, to safeguard soil and water and biological values.

“Kauri forests will also continue to offer extensive opportunities for recreational pursuits, and have wide aesthetic appeal. Future management will also prescribe activities which will, in part, be motivated towards producing a small perpetual yield of timber.” New Zealanders had a responsibility to ensure that publicly-owned native forest was wisely managed, in line with the “conservation ethic” of sustainable land and resource for the society, Mr’Halkett said.