Debit and Credit

Forest and Bird, Issue 106, 1 November 1952, Page 9

Debit and Credit

By

MATAKITE

A FEW years ago a farmer called on the writer and in the course of casual business reported he had had a good “burn”. He referred to a blackened steep hillside from which columns of .smoke rose from burning embers long after the initial blaze. The previous night had been made somewhat terrifying to bird and beast as flames, sparks and smoke rose in spectacular billows and columns against the surrounding darkness. The writer asked if he could discuss the subject as he had a habit of analysing many things that might be otherwise taken for granted. The farmer was pleased to oblige and the conversation took approximately the following form. “What do you regard as a good burn?” “A clearance of fern and scrub from land that should be grazing sheep.” “But you burn the soil and roots of grass, and neither will respond too readily.” “If grass seed is sown, it will soon grow in the ashes especially after a shower of rain.” “A good deal would depend on the degree of burning and the quantity of rain. A heavy rain would wash it all off. Also you have the cost of the seed.” “But it will show a good return. I will be able to graze more sheep than formerly.” “That can be disputed. There must have been good picking among the ferns as you had previously sown grass. You will get no return this year and in all probability none next. The third and fourth years you may have a fair return. The fifth year will begin to show the fern, and in the sixth you will probably have another burn. After each burn the available soil is less and in twelve to twenty years you may have little soil remaining. The hillside is too .steep.” “You may be right but the lower pasture will benefit.” “To a large degree it will, but with a swift run-off from the high hillside you will find that much of it will wash across the lower pastures in channels and eventually reach the river.” “You are dead right there. I have noticed

those channels already but it did not occur to me they were taking the soil away.” “If you had left the fern the run-off would have been retarded. The lower pasture would benefit from each rainfall. You would be able to graze more sheep on the lower pasture each year and it would compensate for the lost (about four years in six) grazing on the high slope. You would more readily hold the soil which is a commodity that future generations will guard intensely.” “You certainly put a new angle on things.”

“Well, it is worth thinking about, and I believe that if the forest were encouraged to recover among the fern you or posterity would reap a greater benefit than from any other plan you may have.” “Maybe you are right” he said somewhat thoughtfully as he thanked the writer for the conversation. Actually, the above proved to be conservative. The hillside remained blackened or bare for four years. Two sowings of grass were lost through rain or drought. Not until the fifth year did the hillside show signs of pasture, and most of the charcoal and loose soil had gone. Many rocks and bare soil were visible from half a mile away.