PASTORAL RUNS

Evening Star, Issue 17328, 16 April 1920, Page 7

PASTORAL RUNS

COMMISSION OF INQUIRY. The Pastoral Runs Commission sat at Invercargill on Wednesday afternoon. The first witness heard was William Couser, a member of the Provincial Executive of the Southland Farmers' Union, I who stated that he had been farming in: the Mataura Island district'for 27 years. He' had nqfc had experience in purely pastoral farming, but had been engaged in mixed farming. He had stndind the tenures of pastoral lrfhds. and thought that to a great extent tlvey were very unsatisfactory. If* a man. did not receive any incentive to improve the country it wonld go back ; but if he was given a good tenure he would grass and improve it. The Chairman stated that at the present time on the expiry of a run, if suitable for subdivision, the present licensee had a right to select any of the subdivisions on the same tenns and conditions as the previous licensee, and also receivsd the value of improvements on the other subdivisions. If the land was not suitable for subdivision he had an absolute right of renewal on revaluation of rental.

Mr'Cousen What provision is made for regrassing? _ The Chairman: I£ he applies to the board to be allowed to surface-sow any portion of his run, it is accounted to him as an improvement, and, if consented to by the board, is inspected by the ranger to see that it has been done. Mr Coiiser: And lie has to bear tho full expense of the experiment. If It is a failure is he recouped in any way? Hie Chairman «stated that it remained to b3 seen on the expiry of the license whether the improvements were there. Mr Couser, in reply, stated that there ■were times vhen u man put in drains and grasses which proved a failure, and he received no valuation for them. He only received valuation for the successes; and, white the incoming tenant could not be expected to pay for the failure, there should be a margin left if ho failed to recoup him for it. The Chairman: The ranger that is sent to value the improvements values all he finds there. He puts the present-day value on them. Mr Gousar stated that it seemed to be too one-eided. A man could act on the best judgment and ba a failure. That was why he claimed the freehold. Freehold should be' given in limited areas. It depended on the class of land whether a man who held 20,000 acres should be allowed to acquire the freehold. If it would divide into two runs at the expiry of the lease, then it should be subdivided. In the case of a run suitable for subdivision, and for which the licensee had still several years to run. he did not pro-

pose to give the man the privilege of picking out a certain area of the run which would make it- absolutely impossible for subdivision amongst a suitable number of tenants. In such a case the licensee j should act in the best interests of "the LState. When land was not suitable for subdivision, and the former licensee had an absolute Tight of renewal on a reassessment of rental, he believed that the ; State should carry out. its contract, and that the man should be given the right to acquire. In regard to the leasehold, the tenures were not suitable; and not in the interests of the State or the tenant?. He advocated closer' settlement. Ho had not bcen/)ver "Southland vet, but- he .understood that in -common with parts of Otago and "Canterbury there had been a great depletion 'of the grass land. In some cases land had been ruined through burning tc-jsocks incautiously. Tussock should not bo destroyed, but preserved. In his district the tussock rotted more quickly in the spring thaa in winter. In bia opinion early a-jtumn was the best time to burn off, as the ground wne damp, and the lire would' not be naar the f eed. Tn bis district tussock woiJd be preserved if burnt hi the autumn, but if burnt in the spring it would be dons away with altogether.