LAND TENURES IN OTAGO.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17089, 22 August 1917, Page 8

LAND TENURES IN OTAGO.

Sui, —I fear that an attempt to improve tho tenure- of lands in Otago by giving valuation for improvements would only make matters worse. Tho whole thing is wrong. Tho original idea vviis simply to grant licenses to uso the land for grazing until it was required for settlement. This seemed innocent enough, but tho effect of givmg' an influential class a direct interest in opposing settlement seems to have been quite overlooked. This influenco very soon became, apparent in opposition to opening land for settlement, and Anyone past middle ago can no doubt remember the difficulties encountered in getting splendid districts opened and tho extraordinary statements that were made as to the quality of tho land. Of course it could not bo expected that tenants holding land under this tenure would agitato for railways, roads, or anything to improve acces3 to the country. But for the discovery of gold it is doubtful if Central Otago would have been opened up at all. In spite of these obvious defects, the run system was adhered to, and the tenuro steadily improved from tho tenant's point of view, though certainly not for tho benefit of the country; and then, as now, the bait held out was that under an improved tenuro tho rims would bo better cared for It was urged truly enough that towards the end of his lease a tenant would ovorstock to tako the most out of the land, and at the same discourage opposition at the re-letting. I suppose it was to meet-this objection that the tenant was given tho right -to a renewal of his lease at valuation in the event of the run not being cut up, and the right to select one block without competition in the event of lts i being cut up. These two concessions, which were of enormous value to tenants, were given without consideration of any sort in many cases during the currencies of leases. What has been the effect of all these concessions in favour of the tenant? pan anyone say that there has been an improvement in the management, or indeed any change at all? On the contrary, the net result of all this pottering is that the hill country has deteriorated frightfully, and is now deteriorating faster than ever. Mr Hunt is struck with the smallness of the returns from the pastoral lands, but has he considered that the amount he states is only the Government's share of the rent and by no mea.ns the letting value of the land? _ In the case of runs balloted for and leases renewed without »competition and blocks selected by tenants in the event of tile subdivision of runs lately held by them, it is notorious that the rents faxed are absurdly low. Now, if no one could dispose of a lease this might not bo so bad, as wo would have tenants occupying the land at practically a peppercorn rent, but in a great many cases—probably in most—the successful applicant sells out at a large profit, the interest and sinking fund on this adding enormously to the rent. !Mr Hunt gives as a reason, for the much greater progress of the North Island that young men prefer the land tenure there, leaving it to be assumed that there is a difficulty in getting applicants for Government land here. Could anything be more absurd? At every small grazing run ballot there aro far more applicants than runs, and many young men have waited years on the chance of drawing a section. Should he decide to buy ono he finds that, with goodwill, his rent is enormously greater than that fixed by the Land Board The fact is that from the tenant's point of view the tenure is a really good one, although from the country's point, of view, as Mr Hunt says, it could not be wonse. The freehold is, I think, by far the best tenure, but it would be disastrous to give the freehold of runs as they are now bein°cut up and as the giving of concessions as to increased length of tenure and rights of renewal is practically giving the freehold, such a course would be equally disastrous. It is strange that the advocates of State ownership do not see how fast the actual freehold ia being given awav, and, in the case of the_publio lands, for next to nothing

If ohe people of Dunedin wish to have their back country really settled and worked so as to carry a fair population and do something towards increasing the prosperity of their town much more is required than simply mairing a few small runs out of one big one. The arable land must bo cultivated and all such land should be cut into really small blocks. Nearly all the runs even in the most mountainous country contain a good deal, and many of them a great deal, of this kind of land. We are every day hearing of applications to take up such_ small blocks, and always the objection is that taking it would epoil the run, the. rent of which is possibly fixed at a loss than the small piece -of arable land would have brought. There are many 6uch cases. Of course there are runs containing arable land, but in such out of the way places that small settlers would not now take them up. Such land should be kept distinct from the hill country and only yearly licenses to occupy'it be given. In a very few years settlers would be willing to take up_ these blocks if only to grow feed Required for neighbours on high country. I do not think any precautions are needed to prevent permanent deterioration of arable land. There will be no difficulty in regrassing it.

There remains the hill country, purely pastoral—a most valuable asset, the value of which will enormously increase as arable land is taken up and used for growing winter feed. It is this land which is being ruined permanently, as Mr Hunt says, and I „. am Sted. he advocates taking the stock oft it aa the only means of saving it. Possibly surface sowing may help a little in a few cases, but it would be useless whilt, sheep are on the ground. Experieuce has shown that two years absolutely without sheep on the land allow grasses to come again. A shorter time is no use, as sheep simply pull up the young grass. A longer time would be better. I fear a lot' of land will never recover. Loose, shingle has crept down as grass has died out or light soil has been washed or blown away, leaving bare rock or stones. Can anyone wonder at it? Sheep have been running continuously on it since colonising began. At first there were only a few, but the number gradually increased, until overstocking was reachod and deterioration became evident only after much damage had been done. Stock, ol course, had to be reduced, but it was often kept as near the starvation point 'as possible. The situation has now to be faced, and the "hole" Mr Hunt has chosen provides ample shelter for the tenant, but little, if any, for the country. I would suggest one with shelter on tho other side. My idea is simply to put in all pastoral leases a clause binding the tenant to fence his run in such a way that he can absolutely "spell" ono third for two years ;—at the end of two years another third to have two years' "spell," at the end.of that time the remaining third to have two years' "spell," and after that begin again, and so on. All land would thus have four years' grazing and two years' 'spell" in every sis years. Valuation should bo allowed for fencing on approved lines, and for approved buildings, but for nothing else. The carrying capacity of tho run would be reduced for two years, but in all probability would after that steadily increase. All these things would be considered in fixing the rent, and even if a small proportion of the. magnificent sum now received were lost for a time it would be a small price to pay for saving such an estate. Another point to remember is that the injury to tho hill country is caused by_ sheep, and that much easier conditions might bo stipulated where country is stocked with cattle or where both are carried.

. The difficulty as to tho preservation of mountain country is by no means a new one, and in some cases grazing sheep is absolutely prohibited, even on freehold land. In these cases tho damage caused to lower lands by the destruction of the grass on the mountain slopes, leading to heavy floods and scour, is the justification for the infcerferenee_ with private rights. Should any restrictive conditions in leases be introduced, it is most important that they should bo vigorously enforced, and that this should bo made clear before letting. Almost the only condition now imposed on Crown tenants is that they must keep down

rabbits. Yet this is evidently disregarded. There seems to be an idea that further concessions to tenants would lead to the preservation of the country. It has not done so in tho past, and hasty action now might make tho position very difficult when tho real settlement of tho country is tackled. I hope, therefore, tho people of Dunedin will consider tho subject carofully in all its aspects.—l am, etc., Look Well Before You Leap. Sir, —Dr Gordon Mac Donald says tho people made an irretrievable mistake in selling the freehold of their lands. Well, now, I am of tho opinion that the peoplo made no mistake at all in so doing, and that it would have been far better /or everybody concerned if the people had sold more of their lands instead of leasing, as has been done in Central Otago. I maintain thero is no argument or quibble about, tho land tenure question. The freehold is " out on its own," not only for tho farmer but for every other member of the community. The land Laws in the crofting counties of Sootland want amending in the respect that tho crofters should have the right to purchase and obtain the freehold of their holdings A trip through the North of Scotland a few years ago convinced me that there were worse places than New Zealand' for the small farmer. There you have leasehold under private landlordism; m Central Ota«o you havo it under the Stato Which is worse? —I am, etc., X. Y Z