FORESTRY IN COMMONWEALTH

Dominion, Volume 16, Issue 163, 28 March 1923, Page 4

FORESTRY IN COMMONWEALTH

A NEW ZEALANDER’S OPINION DOMINION HAS LITTLE TO LEARN Mr. Robert Nairn, of the Splwyn Plantation Board, and a forestry enthusiast, returned from Australia by Manuka yesterday. In Australia Mr. Nairn followed his bent by making . inquiries about progress in afforestation in the Commonwealth. On the whole, he. came away with the impression that New Zealand had nothing to learn from the Commonwealth. That was not because the Australians wero not alive to the value of afforestation. It was because of the less favourable conditions in Australia. New Zealand, said Mr. Nairn, was an ideal country -climatically, and should produce the best results in her afforestation work. In justice to the Australians it had to ba allowed that a great deal of their work was rendered futile by dry weather, and the consequent failure of plants to strike. That resulted in the loss -of a good deal of capital. Much, too, had been lost by fires —this year in Victoria, particularly. In that State Mr. Nairn visited the nursery at Urcswick, some twelve miles from Ballarat, where 7 there was a school of forestry. At that institution —-the only one of its kind in Australasia — they taught arboriculture, mathematics, and other allied subjects. The nursery turned out ab;;ut 1,000,000 plants every year, chiefly pinus insignis, which were the most reliable and adaptable trees for the Australian climate. They reared some pinus ponderosa, which was suitable only for moist conditions, and also went in for some American red woods, and Oregon pines. As the redwood took from 60 to 70 years t<> mature, it was conceded that the insignia had advantages over it for general utility. Macrocarpa' and all of the eucalyptus were also reared in the nursery. '

In Victoria the forestry work was vested in three commissioners; in New South Wales, in two commissioners; and in South Australia in a conservator. In the three States the pinus insignis was favoured for quick results under all conditions. The Governments in each instance, having to practise economy, had cut down the grants for afforestation, and consequently progress was checked, particularly as' so much capital was needed to replant districts where the trees had died of drought or been burnt out. There was a fear, too, that many of the districts that were being planted were too distant from the railway, and that the cost of transport would frustrate the intention of the Government to supply cheaper timber to the people. Future schemes were likely to concern areas nearer to the railway lines. By way of comparison, Mr. Nairn stated that the Governments of Victoria.. New South Wales, and South Australia were together planting 3,600,000 trees a year, whereas the .New Zealand Government was planting 4,000,000. The Selwyn Board alone was planting between 400,000 and 500,000 trees a year between the sea and the mountains in Canterbury.