KAURI FOREST PRESERVATION

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23130, 31 August 1938, Page 17

KAURI FOREST PRESERVATION

Sir, —The welcome announcement of the Prime Minister as to the provision made by the Government for the pre- | scrvation of existing kauri forests —as also the regeneration of such in suitable localities—will be welcomed by all who desire to see these assets of New Zealand so conserved. Despite, however, the imposing areas included in the activities (as detailed in your issue of August 2."1), there is justification for still further extension. Much kauri forest still remains in private hands, and also owned by the Crown, on lands probably contemplated for settlement. Something might be done bv legislation to assume for permanent preservation such forested lands • action which would undoubtedly receive public -approval. It is nothing short of legalised vandalism to see these splendid monarchs of the forest being felled, and the areas on which they grew denuded, now the nursery of 'noxious weeds and permanently made a wilderness of no use to man or life of any kind. An example of such is the cutting out of kauri stands in the Waitakeres and also at the Great Barrier Island. The public looks on in disapproval, and the Crown takes no action. A disquieting feature of the Prime Minister's pronouncement is his reference to the Waipoua Forest. It is not generally known that this is still a State forest and as such can be operated on commercially if the Crown so decides. In fact, during the late Government's regime, it was proposed to allow "dead and dying kauri" to he taken from Waipoua, and only strong public protests prevented that. This forest should be definitely declared a sanctuary—and kept strictly as such. Dead and dying kauris have been in Waipoua for untold centuries of time, and the trees there to-day are the successors of those of past time. To. therefore, cut out "dead and dying" trees, on the pretence that such activities are to the advantage of the forest generally, is nothing short of camouflaged commercialism. In any case, who is going to decide what are "dead and dying" trees, and how in actual practice can any limit be assured against such activities? Only the declaration of Waipoua as a sanctuary and the strictest prohibition against timber-getting there, and in other such forested areas, will ensure their definite preservation to future time. Geo. Guaham.