DOMINION FORESTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LV, Issue 16894, 5 July 1918, Page 6

DOMINION FORESTS.

QUESTION OF CONSERVATION.

VIEWS OF MR, D. E. HUTOHINS. The question of timber conservation was discussed at the Northern Dairy Conference in Auckland on June 3, when resolutions were passed urging the Government to conserve timbers suitable for Butter-boxes and to undertake measures for the reafforestation ofthe timber. Mr. D. E. Hutchins, F.R.G.S., who was appointed by the Government to prepare a report on forestry in the Dominion, has written to the Herald on the subject, explaining that, as he is not resident in Auckland, the report of the conference has only recently reached him. H»j writes: —

In his opening address at the Dairy Conference, the chairman, Mr. A. Morton, said "Even conservation of the remaining forests woulc only defer the crisis." That view lo>ks on the native forests as a mino to be worked out and destroyed. That view is neither practical nor scientific. It is not practical because in South Africa this class of forest haa been worked and conserved for the last 35 years. It is not scientific, because tho teachings of scientific forestry in Europe show that forest can be worked and continually improved in the working, provided the working is in the hands of scientifically-trained foresters. Forests in Central. Europe during a man's lifetime have had their value and yield not doubled or trebled, but increased ninefold. - % Forest Demarcation.

To destroy good existing forests with one hand and to make now, sometimes I inferior, forests with the other, is not reasonable. Poplar generally wants good ■ land. Good land and labour for planting are both costly in New Zealand. Insignis pine is not equal to New Zealand white pine for butter-boxes. In South Africa recent official trials have shown that insignia pine is unsuitable for butterboxes. Reckless forest destruction— out the forest demarcation of other countries to settle whether land in each caso is better for forest or for farming— got New Zealand into a tight comer just now. Indiscriminate forest destruction should be stopped at once, and forest ; demarcation substituted; followed by just ; such planting as may be necessary f«: the, regeneration of the forests ; and just such ■ planting as may be necessary to carry over, with inferior but quick-grown Insignia pine, till supplies of good white j pine from the native forests again become j available; That period will- vary fromi 20 to 60 or 80 years, according to the! character of the forest. Where the; forest has a good supply of immature timber, foresters would take another crop of timber in 20 years or so. In sailing this, I refer mainly to the white pine growing in the "mixed" forests; the pine on the swamps with forest demarcation would nearly always go into, farm land. But let us not forget that some of the finest white pine is in the ordinary mixed forest. The tallest tree in New Zealand, of which the measurement has been accurately taken, was a white pine I photographed on the West Coast, south of Hokitika, 210 ft total height. ~ ... Of course the practical working of the forest would mean more than simply thinning out the mature timber. It would mean organisation to ensure that the forest timber rogrowth was not burnt, or grilled, or • dominated by worthless trees and bushes; in other words, it would mean the ordinary Forest Department of other countries. Such a Department might cost £10,000 or £15,000 a year., Would it be worth it? Where they have established such Forest Departments in Australia within recent- years, they have paid for themselves several times over. A Forest Department might take the place of soma of those redundant "Government jobs," nay, whole Departments, that have grown up during piping times of peace, Departments that are looked on as luxuries of administration in countries that have fully organised Forest Departments. Meeting the National Debt.

The waste and loss in the present working of the New Zealand " bush" is notorious. Though some £40,000 are being spent yearly on forestry in New Zealand this large expenditure is still without the technical direction and control seen in other countries—Europe, America, India, Japan, and now Australia. \ Where natural regeneration could not be obtained by the regulated thinnings of scientific forestry, there would have to he some inlerplanting of native or of introduced trees, according to the circumstances of each case. What would that interplanting mean? Not the planting of from 2000 to 4000 trees per acre, with the risk attending such planting, of exotic species, but, at the worst, 200 to 300 trees pw acre. And behind this lies the fact that simply to do as other nations and build up national forests, would eventually so far to liquidate tho whole, national indebtedness. My report on New Zealand forestry, now being printed, shows that at present priced half a million acres of restorable kauri forest would eventually pay all possible charces on the war debt; and half a million acres of restorable kauri forest could be obtained, by ft steadfast policy for a few years of forest demarcation .-'rid redemption.

It is not real.': 1 what, other countries are doing in forestry. Thn» while- New Zealand is spendine some fiIO.OOO a rear on forestry without skilled direction. South Africa is spending £194.000 during 1917-18. and has a fnllv organised Forest Department, with fnllv trained— university men—foresters directing the work. South Africa and New Zealand have about the samp " white." population.