The Timaru Herald MONDAY, JUNE 10, 1935. THE VALUE OF TREES.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIX, Issue 20130, 10 June 1935, Page 6

The Timaru Herald MONDAY, JUNE 10, 1935. THE VALUE OF TREES.

From time to time facts and figures are ascertained to show that many of the world's resources are gradually and surely dwindling, and while some, such as oil and coal are irreplaceable, others can be manufactured or grown. Of these, timber is perhaps one of the world's important products. It is estimated that in 18-17, Krw Zealand had 27,600,000 acres of forest, a figure which reveals the fact that more than one-third of Hie Dominion's total area was covered with trees. By March 31, 1031, that huge forest area, in spite of efforts at afforestation and forest protection, had dwindled to 7,881,571 acres—about one-tenth of (he Dominion's area. If these figures are examined further, it is seen that the diminishing forest area coincided with the progress of settlement, and the increase in population. In fact, the conclusion Flint stands out from the records —really an obvious deduction—is that more people require more trees. Moreover, it is manifestly plain that in the future, not only New Zealand, but the whole world may be faced with a scarcity of timber unless afforestation work is greatly increased. Certainly steel " and reinforced concrete are rapidly entering into modern building construction, but nevertheless, when all the special qualities of well-grown timber are considered, it would seem to be obvious that trees, as a commercial proposition, will never be valueless. Moreover, the steady increase in the production of newspapers is making bigger and bigger demands on woodpulp producing countries. It is interesting to note, however, that it is now announced from London that dressed timber in future, to meet with importation requirements, will have to be stamped with the name of the country of origin. This provision should to some extent, in view of Britain’s tariff restrictions, be beneficial to the New Zealand 'timber trade, which like other industries has felt the blighting effect of passing economic difficulties. But apart from commerce, trees have another value, and that is the prevention of soil ei'osion. Many countries have found to their terrific cost that because land was denuded of forests to provide for settlement, some land lias been subsequently washed away through being exposed to tbe full force of tbe elemental forces of Nature. There is another aspect, too, that renders trees of high community value. We refer, of course to their aesthetic quality, for much of the Dominion’s attractiveness is related to the almost unsurpassed beauty of its trees. It does not seem out of place, therefore, because this fact is so obvious, or even when the commercial aspect is considered, to suggest that more native trees should be included in afforestation work. Certainly many of the native trees are of slow growth, but for beauty, protection and profit, they are well worth attention. In view of this fact, local bodies should remember the native trees when they are considering afforestation schemes. Tree-planting generally would seem still to be one of the best schemes for providing useful work for the unemployed; and in that connection, the value of organised afforestation should not Ibe overlooked. Throughout this district there is undoubtedly much waste land which, if it were planted in trees, would be gradually adding to the country’s wealth, and more than that, the presence of trees would give a measure of attractiveness to areas which are all too often clad with gorse and other useless and sometimes dangerous weeds.

BRITISH CABINET CHANGES Until an official pronouncement is furnished by the political leaders in the Homeland, it will not be possible to measure tbe significance of the drastic reshuffling of the Imperial Cabinet. It may lie noted in passing, however, that only six of the twentyone portfolio remain in the hands that held them before the reconstruction. The change in the Prime Ministership was generally anticipated and the c-hoiee of Mr Stanley Baldwin occasions no surprise. As a matter of fact, Sir Baldwin has for some months performed the main tasks of leadership because of the unsatisfactory health being experienced by Mr Ramsay Macdonald. Nevertheless, the disappearance of the Socialist Prime Minister of the United Kingdom may have more far-reacliing consequences than can at present be forecasted. It is realised, of course, that other changes in Cabinet appointments are as unexpected as they are significant. For example, it is difficult to discern the reasons which resulted in Sir Samuel Hoare transferring from Ministerial control of the India Office to become Minister of Foreign Affairs, in place of Sir John Simon, whose future Ministerial authority will be restricted to Home Affairs and the leadership of the House of Commons in the absence of Mr Baldwin. Doubtless the outstanding success of Mr Neville Chamberlain as Chancellor of the Exchequer assured his retention of that high office. Tlie same may be said presumably of Sir Bolton Iflyres-Monsell, who remains in charge of the Admiralty. But if I he reshuffling of

Ministerial portfolios have been determined by the measure of success attained by various members of the Cabinet, can it be said that Sir John Simon lias been forced to relinquish the control of the Foreign Office because of failure? It is nevertheless of some significance that Mr Anthony who some months ago was promoted from the post of Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs to become Lord of I’rivy Seal, has been given a place in the Cabinet without portfolio, but as British representative for what is now described ns “League of Nations Affairs”—an entirely new, but by no less important Ministerial position, because it is new. Three notable reappointments are those of Mr -T. H. Thomas, who remains in charge of the office of Dominion Affairs; Mr Walter Runciman, as President of the Board of Trade, although an ardent free Irader. has associated himself with Ihe fiscal policy of the National Government in its efforts not only to save British industry by a measure of prolection, but 1o create a tariff to be used in tiie main as a bargaining weapon; and Mr Walter Elliot, as Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries, It can be taken for granted, if the retention of these important portfolios in the hands of Mr Thomas, Mr Runciman, and Mr Elliot means anything, that the reconstruction of the Imperial Cabinet does not presage a change in tlie policy of the Homeland in relation to trade with the Dominions. One rather interesting appointment is that of tlie Marquis of Zetland, who becomes Ministerial head of the India Office. Doubtless some conjecture will be indulged in by the commentators who will attempt to seek some explanation for the change in the controlling hand in charge of Indian Affairs, particularly in view of the success of Sir Samuel Hoare in piloting the recently enacted difficult Indian legislation through the Imperial Parliament. Some difficulty would be found in securing a reason for the transfer of the control of the Air Ministry from the hands of the Marquis of Londonderry to Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister, particularly in view of the thoroughness with which the Marquis of Londonderry tackled the big task. Tint only of furnishing the Homeland with adequate air forces, but with creating that airmindedness that made possible the progress made in bringing Britain’s Air Force to within striking distance of the strength of European Air Forces. The appointment of Mr Malcolm Macdonald to the Ministerial control of the Colonial Office was generally anticipated; indeed, all who were privileged to meet the son of the retiring Prime Minister, during his short visit to New Zealand were so impressed with Mr Malcolm Macdonald’s qualities of earnestness, enthusiasm and knowledge of Britain overseas that they regarded his elevation to Cabinet rank as a certainty at the first reconstruction. Changes have also been made in the Ministerial control of Education, Health and Labour; but it is difficult, at this distance, to say whether tlie appointment of new Ministers in charge of Britain’s highly important social services suggests any change in policy. It is nevertheless worthy of note that a former Minister of Education, Lord Eustace Percy, has been taken into the Cabinet without a portfolio, while Lord Halifax who has not been in charge of education for many months, becomes Minister of War and is succeeded by Mr Oliver Stanley, who relinquishes the portfolio of Labour in favour of Mr Ernest Brown, while Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister, who becomes Minister of Air, hands over the portfolio of Healili to Sir Kingsley Wood, who relinquished the office of PostmasterGeneral (which does not carry Cabinet rank) to Major Tryon. It is suggested that the national character of the reconstructed British Cabinet lias been completely preserved, but it is clear that a preponderance of representation and influence belongs to the Prime Minister’s “side of tlie House.” “ EAT MORE FOOD.” It must be obvious to the most casual observer of tbe march of world affairs, that the Australian campaign in support of a plan to encourage the world to “eat more food,” really offers a solution of one of the world’s most pressing problems. Tlie cable messages from London report that Australia intends to initiate a world wide movement at Geneva next week aiming at greater consumption of food as part of an international policy to solve tbe problems of over-supply and under-consumption of healthgiving foods. Great Britain and several Continental countries will support the proposal, which will be further discussed by the League of Nations Assembly in September, after which it is expected, a League committee will inquire into tbe problem. Doubtless the reply will be made that producing countries would welcome the success of such a plan, and it is certain that the masses of the countries of Europe and Asia would be glad of more health giving food. But the problem confronting the world is the problem of distribution in face of tlie rapidly decreasing purchasing powers of the peoples of many countries, because of fhe wideproud nature of unemployment and (lie shattering decrease in world trade in a period of largely i nil-eased production.