Forest clearance

Press, 9 May 1984, Page 16

Forest clearance

Sir,—There is a policy called “The New Zealand Government Policy for Indigenous State Forests,” which, as it says, refers to State Forests. Mr Eric Bennett calls it the indigenous forest policy and says it has been violated in the Perseverance block. It has not. Possibly his error comes from thinking the block includes private land. If so, let us look at the private land. The Perseverance block has a large neighbour on the other side of the Paparoas—a favured, sheltered crescent of freehold overlooking what could have been called a beautiful stretch of coastline, framed by a backdrop of bush-clad ranges. If ever land cried out for good husbandry, this unfortunate crescent does. But who owns it and has done for several years? Mr Bennett’s kindred spirits, environmentalists, including Friends of the Fox Forests.—Yours, etc., ANNETTE KERR, Greymouth. May 3, 1984.

Sir,—Considering that 75 per cent of those Greymouth citizens approached signed the Maruia declaration forest conservation petition, the policies of the West Coast regional scheme are a coup for the local development lobby. The fact remains that West Coasters represent less than 1.5 per cent the

owners of our State forests. It is selfish tb reject outside views, as does J. R. O’Regan, of Reefton, while the region accepts State subsidies for forestry, farming developments and social services. Mr O’Regan should be pleased to know that despite Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Wildlife Service and public protests, most of the new reserves in north Westland had the best timber areas deleted by development-orientated committees before being gazetted. — Yours, etc., B. A. CALDER. May 7, 1984.