WEALTH THROWN AWAY

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 143, 12 March 1919, Page 6

WEALTH THROWN AWAY

The lack of a sound forest policy in this country entails various penalties. One of them is illustrated to-day in the news that an outbreak of fire has done a, considerable amount of damage in Waipoua Kauri Forest, the best which remains to the Dominion; and that further damage is possible though it is hoped that the fire is in hand. In • comparison. with the total amount of timber standing at 'Waipoua—about 80,000,000 superficial feet of kauri, and more than 200,- | 000,000 superficial feet of other timbers, of an aggregate royalty value of over £500,000—the damage reported on the present occasion may not seem very important. But it is a serious state of affairs that the magnificent timber resources of this great forest should be neglected and exposed to the ravages of periodical fires when they might instead be worked with rich profit to tho Dominion. The Waipoua Forest stands in a very damp watershed, and in ordinary years the fire danger is not- serious. It becomes acute, however, in exceptionally dry years, and unless the forest is worked and developed as it ought to be there is every prospect that a great proportion of the vast body of wealth it contains will sooner or later be swept out of existence. The only way to safeguard Waipoua is to cut out the ripe timber and carry out the road-making and other works needed to raise it to the condition of a cultivated European forest. The Government has before it an authoritative report on Waipoua ,froni a highly-qualified scientific forester, Mb. D. E. Hutchins, in which it is urged to work and develop the forest with all possible speed.. Me. Hutohins points out that an annual loss of 'about £22,000 (interest on idle capital) is entailed in allowing the ripe timber in the forest to stand uncut. Gathering in )';he half-million of wealth which Waipoua immediately offers, the Government would open up a, great deal of employment for years to come, and would be, enabled not' only to road and develop the forest areJt itself, but to greatly benefit the whole surrounding .area of settlement. As to what would follow we may. quote from Mr. Hutchins's report: "When the Waipoua Forest has been relieved of its mature timber and rejuvenated, it may have a net revenue on some 30,000 acres, estimated approximately at £l ss. 4d., say, £37,500 yearly, taking an average growth figure over the 'transition period' of a hundred years. Then the normal forest becomes es-' tablished.. Theje will then be- a growth in the trees worth, net, . . . "£324,000 yeirly. . N . ." According to Mr. Hutchins's estimates, and _he speaks with unquestioned authority, this forest of 30,000 acres in the first place offers much employment for a number of years during which it would yield £500,000 c worth of timber. This, it should be noted, is only-the royalty value of the timber. Then during the period of ICO years needed to bring the forest into cultivation it would give occupation to as many families as cpiild take up dairying on the land if it were cleared. During this period the forest would give a better monetary return on a given acreage than 'is obtained from dairying in its neighAt the end of 100 years Waipoua Forest would afford permanent employment to about 400 families, and in addition would yield a net return to tho Slate of about £324,000 yearly. An'elementary sense of duty should impel the Government to develop the latent possibilities of this magnificent national asset, instead of leaving it to be periodically damaged, and perhaps ultimately destroyed, .by fire v Action on the right lines at Waipoua is the more to be desired since it would almost certainly pave the way for a comprehensive attempt to make the most of what is left of our sadly-depleted forest resources in all parts of the Dominion where they are still worth conserving, or restoring.