C—3a

23

The leasing system amounts to favoured monopoly, and, generally speaking, term leases hamper forest management, and preclude recognition of new applicants who might be entitled to range. There is everything to be said for the control of the grazing within forest boundaries by the Forest Service, and little against.

SECTION IV.—RECOMMENDATIONS (continued). A FOREST ACT. A progressive modern forest policy for New Zealand will require for its execution a simple, clear, and effective forest law, for the present laws and regulations in force are archaic, ambiguous, inelastic, and clumsy, and no efficient policy could function successfully under thorn. Legislative machinery should be provided to permit of a businesslike management of the State's forest resources and diverse timber interests. In framing a new Forest Act—a new orientation must bo made —all previous legislation and regulations should be repealed (at least so far as they conflict with a well-ordered administration), and a new forest law established along the following lines. There are three aspects concerned in formulation: they are —(I) The principles involved and on which the Forest Act should be based; (2) principles of organization; (3) principles determining the effectiveness of the Act and organization. Aspect No. (1) has been fully discussed in previous pages. In review, the principles to be chiefly considered are — (1.) State ownership of forest lands. (2.) Dedication to forest management of all State forests and limber lands of the Crown. (3.) The national interest in the fullest utilization and protection of its forest resources, whether public or private. (4.) Unless and until public lands can be more profitably employed for other purposes they should be used to produce forest crops. (5.) The ownership of forests, according to the histories of other and older countries, carries with it an obligation on the part of the Slate to see that mountains and plains are not laid waste, because forests affect fundamentally the economic welfare of communities and the nation. (6.) The participation in tree-growing by local bodies and private owners. (7.) The perpetuation of forest industries is of vital concern to the public. (8.) The State is entitled to a full and just share of the value of its forest resources, and as owner of the raw material is a copartner in forest industry. (9.) Incidence and burden of forest taxation. (10.) The administration and management of State parks, scenic reserves, climatic reserves, forest lands of the Native race, hunting, fishing, and game protection and culture is a proper function of a Forest Service. (11.) Local legislative bodies are entitled to participation in the net revenues accruing to the State through the management of State forests which may be situated within their areas (in lieu of local taxes which must be foregone through State ownership). Aspect No. (2) (principles of organization). —This Act should be one which will create one Service of the Government which is empowered and made responsible for — (a.) The state of the forest resources of the country; the protection of the public timber from fire, disease, and trespass; the management on the most progressive principles of all timber lands which have already been leased for milling purposes ; the sale of such timber as now remains in the hands of the Crown ; and the forest development and utilization of the State forests of New Zealand. (6.) The Act should also make provision for a consultative forest Board composed of from ten to fifteen members, representative of all interests directly and indirectly concerned with forestry. This Board should advise the executive directing head of the Forest Service. (This method of making up a versatile advisory body will practically eliminate the risk of hasty or poorly considered action or regulation.) (c.) It should provide for a directing head qualified by technical forestry training, applied experience, and executive organizing ability to administer and manage the activities of the Service. (d.) It should ensure ample delegation of authority and discretionary power to the Director of the Forest Service. It is impossible at this stage of forest development in New 'Zealand to indicate those detailed methods of Pores! administrative procedure and diverse form which should be framed into law Tt is a condition of success that " single responsibility of inspiration and unity of direction and control " be aimed at, rather than the loading-down of the Forest Act with ambiguous unworkable clauses, or the pernicious system of dual control so prevalent in bureaucracy. Divided authority, the writer submits, means failure. Tt is essential that the Director be left to work out gradually—after he has had time and opportunity —the methods of procedure. They can, if necessary, be readily incorporated as part of the Act. Provision should also be made for the Director to delegate, at his discretion, his power to subordinate officers.