POLICY QUESTION

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 131, 2 March 1928, Page 7

POLICY QUESTION

AKATARAWA RESERVE A SHARP DEBATE NEW WATER BOARD’S ATTITUDE An application for timber-cutting rights within the confines of the Akatarawa catchment area disclosed divided opinions on the new Water Board as to how the new area is to be handled. What some members of the board considered gross vandalism others considered reasonable exploitation. The board finally decided to call for tenders for certain milling rights.

At the second meeting of the City and Suburban Water Board on Wednesday an extremely lively debate developed upon the consideration of an application lor certain timber-milling lights over Block 6 of the Akatarawa catchment area, recently liandi d over to the Water Board by the Government. Prior to any debate, the chairman (Mr. G. A. Troup) called upon Mr. Ellis (Director of Forestry) to express his opinion as a guide, to the board in dealing with the matter. Mr. Ellis said that the Government hud handed over a considerable area of country, firstly, as a watershed lor the conservation of water, and, secondly, as an endowment trust, and in the spirit of the letter it was for the board to develop the natural resources of the place whence such action would not be inconsistent with water conservation. The conditions set out that the area was to be made useful, and he was astonished to learn that some members of the board were of the opinion that the area should be locked up, as that defeated the object of the trust. Milling could go on under certain conditions without interfering with water conservation. “Trees Only Grown to be Cut Down.” The chairman said that at the last meeting of the board the desire was expressed that the board should conserve as much of the timber as possible. The Government did not, however, expect the board to stand in the way of certain milling rights which had been under way with the Government before the board took over the area. He knew that there were some people who objected to the cutting down of a tree in any form, but if they never cut down a tree at all, they would always be dependent on outside supplies. Alter all. trees were grown , only to be cut down, so that there would be timber for carpentry and joinery. A Strong Objector. Mr. D. McKenzie (Mayor of Petone), said that first and foremost the Government had handed over the reserve in a conservation water supply area. In this reserve were certain large trees, fine, beautiful trees, but not so many, whose l destruction would only yield a paltry i pittance. The chairman : “£1200” I Mr. McKenzie asked what was that compared with the beauty and grandeur of these trees, which had probably taken 200 to 300 years to grow. He knew that timber was wanted for carpentry and joinery, but it could be obtained somewhere than in a water conservation area, where every tree was valuable. “To cut down these trees will be vandalism of the grossest type,” raid Mr. McKenzie What did the Director of Kew Gardens say only a few days ago?— preserve every tree you can, and be thankful you have them to preserve. All you can get out of it is. not worth it—not worth .£120(1. lAgain, if you cut down these trees you are going to increase the fire risk 10CO per cent., and the day we have a fire through this property is going to be a bad one for our future water supply. Mr. W. T. Strand took the view that if the right to mill timber in certain parts of the property were denied, the board would be committing a breach of trust and faith. Tt was never intended by the Government that the area was to be locked up for the one purpose only. The board had to bear in mind that, there were between 120X>(10 and 150.000 acres in the conservation area, and portions cf it could bo set aside to grow forest giants. They, too, must look for some revenue to plant the thousands of acres that should be planted. What should be done at once was to appoint a forest manager, under the control of the board, who would prepare a plan of the area, and the balance that, must be acquired, and enable the board to administer the reserve under strict forestry conditions, taking in water conservation, reafforestation, and working timber as the three chief things to be borne in mind. To say that the revenue likely to bo received was a paltry pittance was wrong. There were thousands of pounds to be earned out of this big estate, which would make it a valuable heritage for all time. But they were not going to do that by locking it up. The first thing was to appoint a forestry officer. Applications should he called at once, and the best man obtainable in New Zealand should be secured —an action regarded as even more important than gauging the streams. A Breeze. Mr. R. Semple said he was surprised to see all important matters of policy set aside' to discuss whether they would allow a group of men to chop down these trees. The dispute as to the cutting once had been on since 192 G. The Government had failed to come to an arrangement with these people, and had passed them on to the board. These people projiosed to pay 2s. 9d. per 100 super feet, yielding .£ll5O, if allowed to interfere with the block in question. It had been said that the board was a trust, with certain responsibilities to the Government, but ho had made inquiries from Mr. P. Fraser, M.P., who had worried the Bill through the House, who had stated that the board was under no obligation, not even a suggested obligation, to the Government, or anyone else; that it could shape its own policy ; and to say that not allowing this group of men to chop down the trees would be a breach of faith with the Government, was not fair and not true. Mr. Strand: "I object to this language.” The chairman: “You must not say it is not true.” Mr. Semple: Well, on the evidence I’ve got it is not true —I’ll say it is an extravagant statement! Continuing, Mr. Semple said that he agreed with Mr. McKenzie as to the wickedness of destroying young trees. Tie took the view that the land had been handed over to the board primarily and before all for wafer conservation purposes. and by letting a private company come in and chop down these trees thov would be faithless to their trust. Mr. W. Dyec said he felt constrained to follow the advice of the Director of Forestry. He did not think tho sawmillers were likely to bring about sn"li devastation as in years gone by. The reserve was a valuable gift for the board to use. Why not use it? Mr. P. Robertson, as one who urged that the Director of Forestry be called on to reoort, said that on his advice must be Based the guiding policy of the board. The catchment area of the Upper Hutt bad been twice milled through and no one would notice it. He thought they would be fortunate in getting 2s 9d. per 100 super, feet royalty when others in the district could only get2s. He moved that tenders be called fov the milling rights. Mr. A. W. Press seconded the motion. A Sanctuary. Mr. H. D. Bennett agreed very largely with (he views expressed by Mr. Semple, and urged that the policy of the board should be tn make the reserve a sanctuary. There were, however, other considera

tions presented in the case before the board, and they must face the tacts. First of all, when the trust was cieated certain negotiations were in and there were men, a will, and mater ial awaiting a decision. lie beh a good deal of hurt would be created if they lent a deaf ear to the appeal made. Referring to the Director of Forestry’s statement, Mr. Bennett if ttie Director intended to convey in bis state ment that tliv board should exploit the reserve for commercial purposes lis and the Director were going ‘o/lifl'ei The Mayor: He didn t say that—it. was apart from the conservation ol "Nevertheless, said Mr. Bennett, th o Director had expressed surprise at the attitude of some of the members of H e board who favoured locking up area “I am one of those, he said, -‘who want to lock the property up I’m all for the conservation of the forest as it is, and approve pt further planting rather than demolition, but 1 am prepared to listen to reason and am prepared to vote for this. proposal, whilst keeping a jealous eye on the reserve for the future. Mr. H. A. Huggins re-echoed Mr. Ben nett/s views calling for a fixed policy for the future. , Mr D. McKenzie suggested that they might have a report from the Director of Parks (Mr. J. G. MacKenzic) to give bis opinion as to the advisability or otherwise of the ‘‘spoliation of the term'Hiis was ruled out on the grounds that a forestry officer was to bo appointed. . _ . , The Motion Carried.

On the motion being put. it was carried, with two dissentient voices, those of Messrs. Semple and McKenzie, who desired their negative votes recorded. Mr. Semple: “Can I give notice of motion—in order to have the matter rediscussed ? The chairman: “You can."!

Mr. Semple. “It will ne a direct negative I suppose you would rule that out.” The chairman: “Yes. I would have to rule it out.” Mr. Semple: “I’ll give notice of motion, . . . This is a good thing to hop off with!”