KAURI GUM INDUSTRY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVI, Issue 17275, 26 September 1919, Page 9

KAURI GUM INDUSTRY.

NEW LEASING CONDITIONS. POSSIBILITIES OF OIL. DEBATE IN THE HOUSE. [BT TELEGRAPH.—SPECIAL REPORTER ] WELLINGTON. Thursday, When the Kauri Gum Industries Bill was considered in committee this evening the Minister for Lands, the Hon. D. H. Guthrie, said that one of the difficulties in developing the various gum industries had been that during the war it had not been possible to obtain machinery for the extraction of oil. It had become necessary to encourage the development of the industry, and this was the Drincipal reason for extending the term for which, leases could be granted. In reply to Mr. J. Payne (Grey Lynn) the Minister said the Government "had ample power to require that where the land had been elaborately trenched in the winning of gum it should be restored and surfaced again. Mr. F. Mander (Marsden) said that in the past the gum had been taken and nothing had been done to restore the land to a proper condition. In the past both gum and kauri timber to the value of many thousands of-pounds had been taken from the North and nothing left in their place. Owing to the existence of large areas of poor land prejudiced by gumdigging operations it was impossible for the local bodies to rate in a manner to produce sufficient revenue. It was important that this should be rectified. Mr. A. Harris (Waitemata) asked what was being done in the matter of leases to companies desiring to win oil from the peat swamps. An Auckland company had had some difficulty in obtaining a lease £pr this purpose, and, rightly or wrongly, the impression had grown that the Department was not sympathetic. The Minister said trie aim of th« Bill was to rectify this. Mr. R. Semple (Wellington South) suggested that the Government should reserve power to take back land again if necessary during the period of the lease. Mr. T. W. Rhodes (Thames) urged the claims of the .East Coast gum fields which, he said, had been neglected in the past. Answering questions bv Mr. V. H. Reed (Bay of Islands), Mr. Guthrie said that in leases for oil extraction both rent »nd royalty could be charged. No provision had been made for local bodies to receive a portion of the royalty, but he was sympathetic towards the proposition, ;»nd probably it could be arranged. Answering Mr. Semple. he said that where the land was worked out it reverted and became Crown land again. The land was leased for the one purpose. It must be worked in order to be held under the leases. Under the homestead provisions to be included in the new land legislation gum lands would be brought into cultiva-' tion after being worked out. Mr. Reed said he understood thai, in one of the methods employed for working the gam lanls the soil was distilled in a retort for the oil in it, and rendered absolutely unfertile. It was returned to the surface dead and barren. The Hon. J. G. Coates explained that in this process the material used was accumulated debris on the surface of peat swamps, and some of the peat was used tor fuel. There might be some difficultv in restoring the surface in these cases. He was confident, however, that this difficulty could be overcome. In the alternative process, where sluicing was the method utilised for winning gum, he was confident no such difficulty existed. Mr. Reed asked whether rates could be collected from land subject to these leases. The Minister assured him that the lands under lease were ratablefir. J. A. Young (Waikato) asked whether the limitation of 3000 acres applied to one person or pan vorto a lease. That is, could more than one lfase of 3000 acres be held? Mr. Guthrie said that the 3000 limit was upon leases. Mr. Young said the value of the land for gum extraction was such that it would not be necessary to lease large r.reas for that purpose, and he hoped that hat would be kept in mind bv the controlling boards. The Bill was reported to the House without amendments.