NATIONAL BOTANIC GARDEN

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20322, 2 February 1928, Page 7

NATIONAL BOTANIC GARDEN

DUNEDIN’S CLAIM DEFENDED. REPLY TO WELLINGTON EXPERT STATEMENT BY MR D, TANNOCK. Several points in the statement dealing with the proposed national botanic garden for-New Zealand, issued by Mr J. G. Mackenzie (director of the Wellington reserves), are contested by Mr D. Tannock (superintendent of Dunedin reserves), who claims that they are incorrect in fact, and do not fairly recognise Dunedin's claims. Interviewed yesterday, Mr Tannock said that he did not wish to make a detailed statement at the present juncture, i' view of the fact that Dr A. W. Hill (director of Kew Gardens) had not yet presented his report. There were, however, several inaccuracies in Mr Mackenzie’s remarks, and he was willing .to comment upon them. Mr Mackenzie had stated that the matter of a national botanic garden was at present being considered by the New Zealand Institute of Horticulture. He said : At present there were only two botanic gardens in New Zealand established by Act of Parliament. These were the Public Gardens in Wellington and Christchurch. Dunedin had very fine public Botanic Gardens, but this was on . land which, he believed, had been set aside by the early settlers of Otago, and Auckland, so far as he was aware, had mne at all. This, said Mr Tannock, was incorrect in so far as Dunedin was concerned. The Dunedin Botanic Gardens were situated on a domain and each year a report as to the wor’ carried out was required to be furnished to the Government. When the old Provincial Government was in existence in Otago it had taken over a ortio: of the Town Belt for the acclimatising of animalr birds, and plants. This was the land where the Botanic Gardens now stood, and in the lower portion a nursery had been formed for the distribution of plants to settlers. In later years the land had been taken over as a domain. In any case, this matter had no bearing on the principal question. The suitability of the site from the point of view of climatic and soil conditions was the determining factor. > Another portion of Mr Mackenzie’s statement was as follows: There was no doubt that 10 part of New Zealand would grov all New Zealand native plants. Dr L. Cockayne, in his book “ The Plants of N • Zealand,” had divided the Dominion into botanic districts, 10 in lumber. The New Zealand Institute of Horticulture had constituted a committee to investigate the question, and a very exhaustive examination of the situation had been begun. The committee was still working, but it had practically decided that no one part of New Zealand was suitable for a national botf.nic jarden, but that the gardens at ti c four centres, when established, should specialise in certain lines, and that they should be subsidised by the Government for carrying out wtrk on lines which might be indicated ly the Government. In reply to this, Mr Tannock observed, in the first place, that the j istitute of Horticulture was a Wellington body. He added that Dunedin had p~oved itself capable of growing every New Zealand plant from the Nikau palm ami kauri to the hardiest southern alpine ilant, in the open air. The Dunedr’ i Botanic Gardens were peculiarly situated, and did not get extremes of heat or cold, rain or drought.