FORESTS AND FORESTRY

Hokitika Guardian, 8 September 1923, Page 2

FORESTS AND FORESTRY

FURTHER NOTES ON THE DIRECTOR’S REPORT. NO. VI. In the matter of “Fire Protection”the Forest Service lias certainly given an effective lead. Yet it lias acknowledged quite properly that the favourable rainfall during the last fire season had reduced the number and volume of destructuro fires; and that “it was only with the generous co-operation ami assistance of settlers, sawmillers, loggers, travellers, tourists, trappers and others that the number of fires anil resultant damage was kept so low.” It will bo fully agreed that effective means should, if possible, be established for the prevention of forest fires, hut ono stands aghast at the recklessness with which the Forest Service now proposes to adopt an offensive policy towards those sawmillers whose “generous co-operation” would, if given fair dealing, be most invaluable in the protection of the national forests—as it has been given admittedly in the past. Under “Timber Sales” tho report seeks to show how the so-called, “£GS,(XX) gross revenue” has been acquired. As a matter of fact the amount shown in the account is £63,372 os 4d, but £1,600 or so is a bagatelle to the Service. It claims that it has not been gained at the expense of “other Government agencies, or by forcing higher prices from logging operators.” But it is obvious that in every case where it has received any of its so-called £65.(XX) from any source that would otherwise have been available to any other Government agency, (such for instance as the Lands and Mines Departments), such reeceipt has been at the expense of such other Government Department; ami in all those eases it is contended, that it has been less economically collected. On the other hand, it is hard to reconcile the statement made that it lias not forced “higher prices etc..” with the statement closely following, to the effect that it has sold standing timber at 16 per rent, above the prices obtained in 1921. Nor can it be seen that it is due to any accomplishment of flic Service, that, as stated in the report in respect to the price of sawn timber, “the average reduction lias been about 15 per cent, in the South Island and 10 per cent, in the North Island.” Such reduction lias evidently been made in spite of the 16 per cent, increase on the price of standing timber: and “publie interest,” in the matte) of cheaper homes, has evidently 7icon best served by others—the millers, rather than the Forest Service.

The report goes on to say:—“Competition is to-day, as it always was anil must continue to be. the best corrective and the life of trade.” That is, of course, a splendid motto for the one who is not in the strife, but. who, from some safe retreat, seeks to snatch away the laurels. The virtue of competition is only recognised, it is only stimulated, by the Service in so fur as it tends to increased prices for standing timber—the fact that such increases ultimately affect the consumers of sawn timber, is ignored. The Forest Service brooks no competition in its role of forest salesman—it seeks to hob the monopoly and confine all competition to its buyers! The report refer, to ibis process as “The economic lav. of supply anil demand!” YY'e have some recollection that when the prices of sawn timber hail an upward tendency, the Forest Service advocated the re-adjustment of royalty according to such upward moving prices. It is due to the deep regard for “public interest,” which the Service claims to have, that, when prices move downwards, it abandons its original policy as being obsolete—or is this only another instance of the insincerity, its humbug by the use of platitudes which stand for principles it does not. practice in its commercial i ?) methods!

In respect to the heading “Economy in Expenditure,” it is difficult, even with Hie aid of the accounts which are submitted in the report, to hum any idea as to what economy has really been effected, seeing that no specific indication is given as to the relative results from the money expended during the periods under comparison. A lessened expenditure, such as that claimed in tho report, is not tho tine measure of economy. It is the relative effectiveness that counts. The possibility of economy is not disputed, but any evidence on the subject is sadly lacking. In point of tact the accountancy of the Department is wanting in much useful detail. Audit office please note! The truth of tho statement that: “The new Forests Act is working splendidlv. and its operation is fitting smoothly anil effectively into the management and control of State forests, anil other, activities incident thereto” is certainly open to question. Me have everv reason to believe that no other Government Departments have, during the whole of their existence, created more opponents amongst those with whom they have to deal, than lias the State Forest Service during the short period in which it has been in power. This deplorable state, is we believe, due to the grossly inequitable, not to say unscrupulous, methods which it has advocated anil practised. As the Rangitikei Herald had it the other day. the Jnoks-Di-officc anil in control, by their irritating methods and predatory policy, are bringing a promising Service as regards possibilties uuilci reasonable direction, into contempt. Really the concern of the public should bo awakened to a sense of the menace the Forest Service is to the great industry of sawmilling, not only the principal industry'in this district, hut the greatest employer of labor in tbe Dominion.