A QUESTION AND A REPLY

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 74, 24 September 1936, Page 8

A QUESTION AND A REPLY

Is sawmilling invading high-alti-lude foresls (protection forests) that should be conserved for regulation of water-flow? Asked categorically in the Legislative Council yesterday whether "native forests 2000 ft and more above sea-level, which should be preserved in the national interests, were being destroyed by sawmillers and settlers," the Government Leader, the Hon. M. Fagau, gave what appears to be at first sight a complete denial, but the denial turns out to be only partial in its scope. Mr. Fagan is reported as saying that "it can be staled definitely that State forests 2000 ft or more above sea-level are not being destroyed by sawmillers and settlers." The answer covers Slate foresls, but the question covered all native forests. The question was possibly based on a statement by the New Zealand Forest and Bird Protection Society in "Forest and Bird," that not only are forests above 2000 ft being destroyed, but "bush 3000 ft above the sea is at this moment being cut down and sawn up for sale." It may of course be contended that altitude does not in itself determine the suitability or unsuitability of a forest either for,conservation or for commercial utilisation. But that contention does not discount the importance of the question asked. If it is a fact that any forests are being cut at 2000 ft and even 3000 ft, the fact has Parliamentary and public importance, apart from the question whether in certain localities the thing is right or wrong, and whether State forests are inside or outside the allegation.