EROSION PREVENTION

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 282, 23 August 1940, Page 11

EROSION PREVENTION

Problem In New Zealand

GOVERNMENT CRITICIZED

The view that so far as erosion prevention was concerned New Zealanders had not profited by the selfevident errors of the past was expressed by the chairman of the council of the New Zealand Forestry League, Mr. A. Leigh Hunt, at the annual meeting. ”ln so far as the watersheds controlled by State departments are concerned we have a right to assume that in all activities in connexion therewith the effect on erosion is given fuii and paramount consideration and a policy laid down accordingly,” Mr. limit said. “If this is not so, and wo are aware of instances to the contrary, our duty is clear and unmistakable. ’

There was one aspect of the question that had exercised the minds of the council of the league for 20 years —the private ownership of steep, bush-clad sources of many important waterways. The issues waxed when a new Minister of Lauds displayed concern over such a vital matter and waned when he, in his turn, settled down to a policy of “keeping it steadily iu view.” Reflection on Statesmanship.

It was a serious reflection on New Zealand statesmanship. Those areas mostly useless for any other purpose but water conservation, should never have ‘been allowed to fall into private hands, and in nearly every instance the owner had many times wished that the State had retained its ownership of that which had spelt financial cmbarrassment to himself as present owner, as it did to those who preceded him.

“Repeated appeals have been made by' the league to successive Governments to schedule all such areas and acquire them while they are still bushclad, for once the covering is destroyed the consequent damage to the wealth-producing lands of the plains will be irremediable,” continued Mr. Hunt. ‘The owners of- the large numbers of such areas are not philanthropists, nor are they holding them intact ‘because of their scenic beauty. They arc but waiting some favourable opportunity to turn their holdings into money, and this chance usually comes when wool values are high, as they are at present. “Not that such lands will pay to farm, but the chances are that some foolish buyer will think they could be profitably farmed, and as a first step toward putting this belief into practice he would clear away the ‘protection forest,’ without a single thought to the consequences so far as floods and erosion are concerned. . . . It is, therefore, a form of national insanity to permit the clearance of such lands by any agency or for any purpose. They are, in fact, the most valuable type of forests that any country can possess. In almost every hilly district adjacent to settlement there are such privately-held lands which constitute a potential menace. There are many scores of such cases.” Waiopcliu Bloelf.

Within 50 miles of Wellington a very striking instance occurred. Waiopehu, a block of some 9000 acres, formed the watershed of the Otaki, Waitoliu, Waikawa and Ohan Rivers, and the lowlands through which those watercourses ran comprised some of the flnest dairying land in New Zealand. AU those rivers were at present, giving trouble through shifting courses or flooding; if another 9000 acres of forest were cleared hundreds of farmers would bo ruined by floods, and there would be a national loss that could never be made good. The watershed could be acquired for a few shillings an acre, but the only answer the league had been able to extract from successive Ministers was that there was no fund available for such a- purpose. Funds in plenty were found for all sorts of purposes of doubtful ‘benefit, and which, in any case, could not, by any stretch of political imagination, be compared to the expenditure of a comparatively trivial sum to insure aaginst heavy and irrecoverable national loss.